Ingram Looking for Fulfilling Basketball Experience With Tar Heels

[andrew jones]

TarHeelIllustrated - Ingram Looking for Fulfilling Basketball Experience With Tar Heels

Harrison Ingram transferred to UNC from Stanford to have a very different basketball experience, which he's getting.

northcarolina.rivals.com

 

[andrew jones]

Sponsored by: @Andy MyPerfectFranchise.Net**

*Hate your job?

*Hate your boss?

*Ready to take control of your career?

Call Andy Luedecke to learn more. Consultation is FREE, and he can help you find your perfect franchise. He did it for himself. Dumpster & porta potties are two of his franchises, and so many different things can be yours.

Find Your Perfect Franchise at MyPerfectFranchise.Net. Contact Andy Luedecke anytime at aluedecke@myperfectfranchise.net or (404) 973-9901.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

I love the quote, "“Everything you think it’s like, it’s like that times it by five,” Ingram said about the status that comes with being a Tar Heels basketball player."

This should be the recruiting mantra for the next 10 years! He found his Family and is getting the experience he has always wanted, now lets fulfill that last bball wish!

 

[DSouthr]

I love this kid's size and strength for a kid I think not only can but should play at the 3, I have 2 concerns however. First, I know he has worked on it all summer and my view is from the scrimmage and a couple clips so it is by far not enough to frame this as a major concern but his jump shooting does look a bit forced, a bit mechanical, as opposed to free flowing. Second, he seems a touch to comfortable outside of the spot light, as if he may be more comfortable deferring than stepping in to the spot light. That is a bit of a tricky thing, to much is to much but not enough is not enough, it is finding that right mix where he can produce within his comfort zone without having to force something he is not comfortable with. I want him to be an able scorer so that he has to be respected by defenses and to do that he has to hit his open clean looks, a bit like Kenny Williams had to do in his time with us, maybe not a go to scorer but a guy that will hit the open look and is not afraid to take it.

Again, this is just my quick glimpse at a much larger picture, I do need to see more to garner a more conclusive opinion. I do wonder if maybe football may have been his better sport, kid looks to me like a natural TE.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Exactly, I have always said he should start at 3 and Withers should start at 4, but I can't see them sitting Ryan down to accommodate it!

I can't wait to see Cadeau, RJ, Ingram, Withers, and Bacot get some run together!

 

[DSouthr]

Exactly, I have always said he should start at 3 and Withers should start at 4, but I can't see them sitting Ryan down to accommodate it!

I can't wait to see Cadeau, RJ, Ingram, Withers, and Bacot get some run together!

TP, as you know I am very much agreement, have shared MANY times I want Ingram and Withers to start with Ingram at the 3. But....LOL, I am gonna take some of my own advice and realize, who starts doesn't make that much a difference, it is about who gets playing time. And who will get PT is the guy best able to handle the position and either way they BOTH will get big time minutes as will Withers, as will Jalen, as I think 5 guys off our bench will, some more than others.

As I have shared, me, I would not have a single player averaging over 25mins a game, I think we would be much better if Hubert agreed thou I am not expecting that.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

If Hubs starts to play his bench liberally, you know the peanut gallery will soon cry that he is ruining momentum and scream for him to contract the bench! But it is clear to me he wants to play fast with open driving lanes. It is clear he values good D, and both these things require a deep bench, so I am very optimistic!

 

[ChiShankCity]

If Ingram starts at the 3, and can’t shoot it well, it’s important that whoever starts at the 4 can be a 3pt threat. If Ingram starts at the 4, and can’t shoot it well, it’s important that whoever starts at the 3 can be a 3pt threat. If Ingram starts at the 3, can’t shoot and Withers starts at the 4 and can’t shoot… it isn’t going to matter how many bench players play and how many minutes our starters are limited to.

Our upside becomes limited if our entire starting frontcourt can’t shoot (like last year’s team).

Don’t get me wrong. I like Ingram. His playmaking ability will help us a lot. But he’s a career 61-62% FT shooter, which is an indicator that he will likely he an unreliable perimeter shooter.

I’ve said over and over that we probably need 3 high volume good 3pt shooters on our roster to win anything serious. I would prefer starting 2 of them that we’re pretty confident in (RJ and Ryan). Then hopefully Cadeau or Withers (or both) are reliable shooters.

But we need some shooting. That’s just a fact. We’ve seen how bad UNC teams can be when they can’t shoot. And it would be a pleasant surprise if Ingram became one of those shooters. Ingram also takes FOREVER to shoot the ball. Often times a sign of a poor shooter.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Most likely starting lineup: EC, RJ, Ryan, Ingram, Bacot-plenty of shooting and very smart. My preferred lineup: EC, RJ, Ingram, Withers, Bacot-enough shooting/scoring + rebounding/rim protection AND Ryan comes off the bench for a change of pace either replacing Ingram or moving him to 4! Jalen Washington can also be +shooter at 4 even though I don't think 4 ever has to be a 3 pt threat! But as D says, as long as they play starter level minutes, it doesn't matter who actually starts! It does matter who finishes games though!

 

[DSouthr]

If Ingram starts at the 3, and can’t shoot it well, it’s important that whoever starts at the 4 can be a 3pt threat. If Ingram starts at the 4, and can’t shoot it well, it’s important that whoever starts at the 3 can be a 3pt threat. If Ingram starts at the 3, can’t shoot and Withers starts at the 4 and can’t shoot… it isn’t going to matter how many bench players play and how many minutes our starters are limited to.

Our upside becomes limited if our entire starting frontcourt can’t shoot (like last year’s team).

Don’t get me wrong. I like Ingram. His playmaking ability will help us a lot. But he’s a career 61-62% FT shooter, which is an indicator that he will likely he an unreliable perimeter shooter.

I’ve said over and over that we probably need 3 high volume good 3pt shooters on our roster to win anything serious. I would prefer starting 2 of them that we’re pretty confident in (RJ and Ryan). Then hopefully Cadeau or Withers (or both) are reliable shooters.

But we need some shooting. That’s just a fact. We’ve seen how bad UNC teams can be when they can’t shoot. And it would be a pleasant surprise if Ingram became one of those shooters. Ingram also takes FOREVER to shoot the ball. Often times a sign of a poor shooter.

First, don't create a negative and then base your argument on your own creation. Next, oh my, how did we ever win a game with Theo or Leaky? LOL UNC has not always had great shooters at the 3 and really, outside of Manek, we have not really had big time shooters from distance at UNC at the 4. How did Dean and Roy BOTH make the HOF without having great stretch 4s? LOL

Red flag alert, when ever a poster says "don't get me wrong, I like X player", that poster is about to tell you why he does not like X player, he is about to try to put a velvet glove on his hammer! LOL Jung shows you how that is done, does he not! LOL

What you do have to have is 3 efficient scorers no matter if it is from the 3 or 2 range, I call it the 3 legged stool, 3 legs the stool does not tip over, with only 2 it does. Now of course, as long and the other 2 guys chip in time to time, take good shots, their scoring is gravy but you have to haver good efficiency from your 3 top scorers. That is where we fell apart last season, the lack of efficient scoring from Love and Nance not off setting that. When your highest shot taker is as extremely inefficient as Caleb was last season, you make it double hard to win.

 

[ChiShankCity]

First, don't create a negative and then base your argument on your own creation. Next, oh my, how did we ever win a game with Theo or Leaky? LOL UNC has not always had great shooters at the 3 and really, outside of Manek, we have not really had big time shooters from distance at UNC at the 4. How did Dean and Roy BOTH make the HOF without having great stretch 4s? LOL

Red flag alert, when ever a poster says "don't get me wrong, I like X player", that poster is about to tell you why he does not like X player, he is about to try to put a velvet glove on his hammer! LOL Jung shows you how that is done, does he not! LOL

What you do have to have is 3 efficient scorers no matter if it is from the 3 or 2 range, I call it the 3 legged stool, 3 legs the stool does not tip over, with only 2 it does. Now of course, as long and the other 2 guys chip in time to time, take good shots, their scoring is gravy but you have to haver good efficiency from your 3 top scorers. That is where we fell apart last season, the lack of efficient scoring from Love and Nance not off setting that. When your highest shot taker is as extremely inefficient as Caleb was last season, you make it double hard to win.

UNC's records with Leaky starting:
2019-20: 14-19 (obviously not Leaky's fault, but a team that couldn't shoot it)
2020-21: 18-11 (269th in 3PT percentage)
2021-22: 29-10 Runners Up (65th in 3PT percentage... Manek, RJ, Love were all 36% high volume 3PT shooters)
2022-23: 20-13 (329th in 3PT percentage)

Idk, seems somewhat correlated to me. The year we shot it better with Leaky on the roster, we at least had some upside to that team and they played that way for like a 10 game stretch at the end of the season. We honestly didn't win much apart from that 10 game stretch with Leaky. Unless you consider 20-12 seasons acceptable.

I don't connect Theo and Ingram since I think they play different positions, at least as starters. And those Final Four teams didn't have my preferred 3 high volume shooters. But they always had 2 dudes who shot a lot and made a good percentage of 3's. And Theo's senior year, we had 4 high volume quality 3PT shooters.

And I don't think it's a coincidence that Justin Jackson's game took off once he improved from a 0 shooter to a really good shooter. But that is more an exception IMO. Dudes usually don't improve like that.

This isn't even controversial. Basically ever good UNC team over the last 20 years shot pretty well from 3 excluding the 2015-16 team. And almost all of those good teams had some combination of at least 3 high volume quality 3PT shooters.

If you think we can beat teams with efficient 2 point scorers, then we just view basketball differently.

And I do like Harrison Ingram. I just think the way to get the most out of him is if you surround him with shooting.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Nobody said you don't need any 3 pt shooters! Are you capable of making an argument without using ridiculous extremes? The point is you can win with some + shooters as long as you have either + rebounders/defenders OR good mid-range or in-close shooters. There simply isn't only one way to play and that should be obvious!

 

[ChiShankCity]

Nobody said you don't need any 3 pt shooters! Are you capable of making an argument without using ridiculous extremes? The point is you can win with some + shooters as long as you have either + rebounders/defenders OR good mid-range or in-close shooters. There simply isn't only one way to play and that should be obvious!

I don't believe that relying on mid-range shooting is the most reliable way to win consistently. So if that's part of your formula, then I'll simply disagree. That's the most inefficient shot in basketball and I don't want really any part of the offense to be designed for that, unless it's like Jalen Washington who probably doesn't have consistent 3PT range.

There are obviously a variety of ways you can win games. And if I was ONLY about the 3 ball, I wouldn't want Harrison Ingram anywhere near this team. But if we're limited from 3 and part of our solution is shooting more mid-range jumpers, then I'll have concerns about the offense.

Unless we're awesome at defending the 3 from a percentage and attempts basis. But that's something that UNC hasn't done well going back 20 years now.

Also, I'm not using ridiculous extremes. Saying I think we need 3 high volume quality 3PT shooters isn't an extreme, lol.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

Wow! "If you think we can beat teams with efficient 2 point scorers, then we just view basketball differently." This is what I was referring to since it was so hard to comprehend. And we don't need 3 high volume 3pt shooters to win! We need 2 shooters who have to be honored and peeps who can score otherwise. The game has changed but not to the point that you have to have 3 3pt shooters on the court to win. It is fine if you have 2 (which we always will) and some on the bench AND some good rebounders/defenders. Last year we had 1 reliable shooter; we had some indifferent defenders, and we had peeps who rebounded when they wanted to. This team has everything you need to win. Let's see if they put forth the effort to match their talent and if the coaches put them in the best situations to succeed! BTW anybody who says they wouldn't want someone like Ingram on any team reveals a lot about themselves and the great flaw in metrics based bball. Ingram is the epitome of the whole being greater than the sum of his parts!

 

[DSouthr]

Wow! "If you think we can beat teams with efficient 2 point scorers, then we just view basketball differently." This is what I was referring to since it was so hard to comprehend. And we don't need 3 high volume 3pt shooters to win! We need 2 shooters who have to be honored and peeps who can score otherwise. The game has changed but not to the point that you have to have 3 3pt shooters on the court to win. It is fine if you have 2 (which we always will) and some on the bench AND some good rebounders/defenders. Last year we had 1 reliable shooter; we had some indifferent defenders, and we had peeps who rebounded when they wanted to. This team has everything you need to win. Let's see if they put forth the effort to match their talent and if the coaches put them in the best situations to succeed! BTW anybody who says they wouldn't want someone like Ingram on any team reveals a lot about themselves and the great flaw in metrics based bball. Ingram is the epitome of the whole being greater than the sum of his parts!

First I want to say I ABSOLUTELY 100% view basketball MUCH differently than shun does. I do NOT believe the game hinges on having great 3pt shooters, it revolves around having solid shooting efficiency and that means taking and making good shots. Basketball is not all that complicated when you boil it all down, simply take better shots than you let the other team have. Rj & Ryan, if they have a clean open look from 3 take it, that is a good shot for them, either having a fall away, hands in the face 35ft shot should pass it, not a good shot for anyone. Caleb Love was our team leading shot taker and he was either pumping a trey or driving in to 2 and 3 defenders, both bad shots, he shot 29% from 3 last season.

Folks like shun seem to feel that if it works in the NBA then bring it to college and now all the sudden folks no longer feel the need for a back to the basket big man that makes a strong % of his 2 pt shot takes. Dean Smith knew a little bit about this game, not sure if Shun knows who Dean was and if he does he surely does not seem to realize how Dean considered the 3pt shot. Dean coached shooting efficiency, shooting easier to make shots and then trying to keep the other team from getting those easy shots. I watch it all the time in the college game, I don't watch the NBA, teams will come down, especially in a close game where what they really need is to score, even 1 of the free throws, just some score, yet they come down pump up a trey the other teams gets the rebound and we have that empty trip off the heat check trey miss. They go down and make a shot and it is a 4 or 5 pt swing?

I don't hate the 3pt shot, I hate BAD SHOTS and that is defined as hard guarded shots but lots of teams will guard you hard, if given the choice between a guy like Bacot in close working against multiple defenders or a guard out front with a hand in his face taking a trey, give me Bacot in close and frankly, anyone that does not agree with that should NEVER EVER try to coach the game or act as if they know the game.

As for Ingram he is that big time glue guy, he isn't great at any one thing but he is very good at most aspects of the game (on both end I should add). Is he a great shooter, no but does he have to be? Not really, what he has to do to open the game up for himself is to hit a decent % of open clean looks from 2 or 3. Now you can point back to Stanford and say he did not shoot for a great %, well considering that not only was the kid the main facilitator on that team, where he at times played as their point, he faced multiple defenders every game because he was considered that teams #2 scorer. Is there anyone out there that considers Ingram to be our #2 scorer for this up coming season, how about it shun, do you? Pay attention now shun, don't want you to miss this next statement, if he is not going to be tapped as our second leading scorer then it is not hard to realize that he will not be defended as hard or as close as he was at Stanford, means he will get many more clean looks as opposed to multiple defenders hassling him all over the court. How can it be a stretch then to realize that his shooting efficiency should go way up as a function of his taking easier shots? LOL But no, shun is entranced with the stats for his play at Sanford last season and does not seem to understand his role is very different now that should allow him to score much more efficiently. Withers is as well much the same...

Leaky Black was a absolute awful 3pt shooter, simply put he should have never camped out behind the 3pt line and took those shots, defenses dared him to take them. BOTH Dean and Roy were well known to say there is a reason they left you wide open. For the life of me I will never understand why Leaky was not operating way more in the mid range and looking to post up defenders that could not match his length? He should have pump faked the shot and drove, defenders had to pick him up when he did that else he drove all the way to the cup.

You want the formula for UNC winning the natty this season, have 4 guys on the court beside Bacot that all are scorers enough that defenses can not double Bacot inside, then pump the ball inside and let Bacot operate. The other 4 have to score efficiently to demand defenders to stay on them and not double off. That means stop with the bad shot nonsense that sunk us last season, hopefully that can happen as the biggest culprit of this is now playing for Arizona.

 

[2DDIMOND]

First I want to say I ABSOLUTELY 100% view basketball MUCH differently than shun does. I do NOT believe the game hinges on having great 3pt shooters, it revolves around having solid shooting efficiency and that means taking and making good shots. Basketball is not all that complicated when you boil it all down, simply take better shots than you let the other team have. Rj & Ryan, if they have a clean open look from 3 take it, that is a good shot for them, either having a fall away, hands in the face 35ft shot should pass it, not a good shot for anyone. Caleb Love was our team leading shot taker and he was either pumping a trey or driving in to 2 and 3 defenders, both bad shots, he shot 29% from 3 last season.

Folks like shun seem to feel that if it works in the NBA then bring it to college and now all the sudden folks no longer feel the need for a back to the basket big man that makes a strong % of his 2 pt shot takes. Dean Smith knew a little bit about this game, not sure if Shun knows who Dean was and if he does he surely does not seem to realize how Dean considered the 3pt shot. Dean coached shooting efficiency, shooting easier to make shots and then trying to keep the other team from getting those easy shots. I watch it all the time in the college game, I don't watch the NBA, teams will come down, especially in a close game where what they really need is to score, even 1 of the free throws, just some score, yet they come down pump up a trey the other teams gets the rebound and we have that empty trip off the heat check trey miss. They go down and make a shot and it is a 4 or 5 pt swing?

I don't hate the 3pt shot, I hate BAD SHOTS and that is defined as hard guarded shots but lots of teams will guard you hard, if given the choice between a guy like Bacot in close working against multiple defenders or a guard out front with a hand in his face taking a trey, give me Bacot in close and frankly, anyone that does not agree with that should NEVER EVER try to coach the game or act as if they know the game.

As for Ingram he is that big time glue guy, he isn't great at any one thing but he is very good at most aspects of the game (on both end I should add). Is he a great shooter, no but does he have to be? Not really, what he has to do to open the game up for himself is to hit a decent % of open clean looks from 2 or 3. Now you can point back to Stanford and say he did not shoot for a great %, well considering that not only was the kid the main facilitator on that team, where he at times played as their point, he faced multiple defenders every game because he was considered that teams #2 scorer. Is there anyone out there that considers Ingram to be our #2 scorer for this up coming season, how about it shun, do you? Pay attention now shun, don't want you to miss this next statement, if he is not going to be tapped as our second leading scorer then it is not hard to realize that he will not be defended as hard or as close as he was at Stanford, means he will get many more clean looks as opposed to multiple defenders hassling him all over the court. How can it be a stretch then to realize that his shooting efficiency should go way up as a function of his taking easier shots? LOL But no, shun is entranced with the stats for his play at Sanford last season and does not seem to understand his role is very different now that should allow him to score much more efficiently. Withers is as well much the same...

Leaky Black was a absolute awful 3pt shooter, simply put he should have never camped out behind the 3pt line and took those shots, defenses dared him to take them. BOTH Dean and Roy were well known to say there is a reason they left you wide open. For the life of me I will never understand why Leaky was not operating way more in the mid range and looking to post up defenders that could not match his length? He should have pump faked the shot and drove, defenders had to pick him up when he did that else he drove all the way to the cup.

You want the formula for UNC winning the natty this season, have 4 guys on the court beside Bacot that all are scorers enough that defenses can not double Bacot inside, then pump the ball inside and let Bacot operate. The other 4 have to score efficiently to demand defenders to stay on them and not double off. That means stop with the bad shot nonsense that sunk us last season, hopefully that can happen as the biggest culprit of this is now playing for Arizona.

I think you meant SJung, not shun. Shun is 100% a Tar Heel, none of us are sure if SJung is. Speaking of that, hope shun1 is ok, haven't heard from him in a while.

 

[ChiShankCity]

Good lord, lol. No idea how it's become controversial to say we need a few guys (I prefer 3) who can make a good percentage of 3's and take a good amount of them too.

 

[ChiShankCity]

I think you meant SJung, not shun. Shun is 100% a Tar Heel, none of us are sure if SJung is. Speaking of that, hope shun1 is ok, haven't heard from him in a while.

Damn... Well let me know what percent of a Tar Heel I am so I can work harder for your approval!

 

[2DDIMOND]

Damn... Well let me know what percent of a Tar Heel I am so I can work harder for your approval!

I'm flattered

 

[alabamaheel]

Damn... Well let me know what percent of a Tar Heel I am so I can work harder for your approval!

Dude I love how you live rent free in so many minds. You must have some strong mojo. Lol.

 

[alabamaheel]

First I want to say I ABSOLUTELY 100% view basketball MUCH differently than shun does. I do NOT believe the game hinges on having great 3pt shooters, it revolves around having solid shooting efficiency and that means taking and making good shots. Basketball is not all that complicated when you boil it all down, simply take better shots than you let the other team have. Rj & Ryan, if they have a clean open look from 3 take it, that is a good shot for them, either having a fall away, hands in the face 35ft shot should pass it, not a good shot for anyone. Caleb Love was our team leading shot taker and he was either pumping a trey or driving in to 2 and 3 defenders, both bad shots, he shot 29% from 3 last season.

Folks like shun seem to feel that if it works in the NBA then bring it to college and now all the sudden folks no longer feel the need for a back to the basket big man that makes a strong % of his 2 pt shot takes. Dean Smith knew a little bit about this game, not sure if Shun knows who Dean was and if he does he surely does not seem to realize how Dean considered the 3pt shot. Dean coached shooting efficiency, shooting easier to make shots and then trying to keep the other team from getting those easy shots. I watch it all the time in the college game, I don't watch the NBA, teams will come down, especially in a close game where what they really need is to score, even 1 of the free throws, just some score, yet they come down pump up a trey the other teams gets the rebound and we have that empty trip off the heat check trey miss. They go down and make a shot and it is a 4 or 5 pt swing?

I don't hate the 3pt shot, I hate BAD SHOTS and that is defined as hard guarded shots but lots of teams will guard you hard, if given the choice between a guy like Bacot in close working against multiple defenders or a guard out front with a hand in his face taking a trey, give me Bacot in close and frankly, anyone that does not agree with that should NEVER EVER try to coach the game or act as if they know the game.

As for Ingram he is that big time glue guy, he isn't great at any one thing but he is very good at most aspects of the game (on both end I should add). Is he a great shooter, no but does he have to be? Not really, what he has to do to open the game up for himself is to hit a decent % of open clean looks from 2 or 3. Now you can point back to Stanford and say he did not shoot for a great %, well considering that not only was the kid the main facilitator on that team, where he at times played as their point, he faced multiple defenders every game because he was considered that teams #2 scorer. Is there anyone out there that considers Ingram to be our #2 scorer for this up coming season, how about it shun, do you? Pay attention now shun, don't want you to miss this next statement, if he is not going to be tapped as our second leading scorer then it is not hard to realize that he will not be defended as hard or as close as he was at Stanford, means he will get many more clean looks as opposed to multiple defenders hassling him all over the court. How can it be a stretch then to realize that his shooting efficiency should go way up as a function of his taking easier shots? LOL But no, shun is entranced with the stats for his play at Sanford last season and does not seem to understand his role is very different now that should allow him to score much more efficiently. Withers is as well much the same...

Leaky Black was a absolute awful 3pt shooter, simply put he should have never camped out behind the 3pt line and took those shots, defenses dared him to take them. BOTH Dean and Roy were well known to say there is a reason they left you wide open. For the life of me I will never understand why Leaky was not operating way more in the mid range and looking to post up defenders that could not match his length? He should have pump faked the shot and drove, defenders had to pick him up when he did that else he drove all the way to the cup.

You want the formula for UNC winning the natty this season, have 4 guys on the court beside Bacot that all are scorers enough that defenses can not double Bacot inside, then pump the ball inside and let Bacot operate. The other 4 have to score efficiently to demand defenders to stay on them and not double off. That means stop with the bad shot nonsense that sunk us last season, hopefully that can happen as the biggest culprit of this is now playing for Arizona.

I think you agree with him more than you want to see. He just puts more stock into saying three point shooting and you just want better shots. Problem is Dean ain’t walking through that door and Roy will but it’s not to coach. He was the closest thing we had to Dean in coaching and I truly believe that’s why he hung it up. The game has changed. You have to put more stock into the deep ball. That’s todays game and it translates to the NBA, which is the ultimate goal for these kids. I loath watching the game change so much but it has to evolve along with coaching. I’m just hoping Hubert can get it figured out on the court this year. Idc if they all shoot granny shots lol. Just want wins.

 

[DSouthr]

I think you meant SJung, not shun. Shun is 100% a Tar Heel, none of us are sure if SJung is. Speaking of that, hope shun1 is ok, haven't heard from him in a while.

Oh heck yeah, I would NEVER argue with Shun, such a wonderful man! Thank you so much for catching that mistake on my part, I humbly apologize if Shun saw that and felt I was talking to or about him. I have NOTHING but respect for that gentleman!

 

[alabamaheel]

Oh heck yeah, I would NEVER argue with Shun, such a wonderful man! Thank you so much for catching that mistake on my part, I humbly apologize if Shun saw that and felt I was talking to or about him. I have NOTHING but respect for that gentleman!

I have missed him. Hope he’s ok.

 

[DSouthr]

I think you agree with him more than you want to see. He just puts more stock into saying three point shooting and you just want better shots. Problem is Dean ain’t walking through that door and Roy will but it’s not to coach. He was the closest thing we had to Dean in coaching and I truly believe that’s why he hung it up. The game has changed. You have to put more stock into the deep ball. That’s todays game and it translates to the NBA, which is the ultimate goal for these kids. I loath watching the game change so much but it has to evolve along with coaching. I’m just hoping Hubert can get it figured out on the court this year. Idc if they all shoot granny shots lol. Just want wins.

Not really nor will I agree that tilting your offense to becoming trey-centric (just invented a new word) is the best way to play the game from a team aspect. I am not a fan of the Alabama offense, in no way aimed at you, I don't want my center camped outside of the trey arch, I did NOT like Nance camped out last season. As I said, I am not opposed to 3pt shooting but when I see someone say the mid range shot is the worst shot a player can take there is going to be an argument from me. I am 100% focused on taking good shots, open 3pt shots from a solid shooter is a good shot, open 3pt shots from a Leaky Black level shooter is not a good shot. A good shot is a shot taken by a guy that is comfortable and confident that it will go in, that is not defined as having a hand in your face and well past the trey arch. Understand, bad shots do at times go in but making a bad shot most times is a trap because the shooter feels he can make then consistently so 1 heat check begets more heat checks and the % say that is a losing proposition, for proof see Love, Caleb...

Jungs problem is that he is to in tuned with the NBA and for now the NBA is engaged in the 3pt shooting fad, it is for a couple reasons. First, teams have used that approach and it worked for those teams but there simply are not a lot of Seth Currys out there but you could call this era of NBA ball the Curry era because everyone is looking to copy cat. Just as there was a time when most college football teams ran either a wishbone or some form of veer offense because the belief then was you had to run a version like that to be able to win, now days how many wishbones do you see, it was a fad that passed. Now the center position in basketball has been devalued, now Bacot could be NCAA POY and not be drafted, that boggles my mind. IN addition, the NBA seems to need to find a way to focus on individual players in a team game, sure, why not have your guy that craves the spotlight take high volume treys? Last I heard basketball was a team game not a collective of individuals game. So ball movement and player movement has been replaced with run to this spot, see spot run... (and I do realize many do not know what "see spot run" is) LOL.

 

[2DDIMOND]

Oh heck yeah, I would NEVER argue with Shun, such a wonderful man! Thank you so much for catching that mistake on my part, I humbly apologize if Shun saw that and felt I was talking to or about him. I have NOTHING but respect for that gentleman!

Charles Brown gave me the heads up on the discrepancy. Lol

 

[DSouthr]

I have missed him. Hope he’s ok.

As have I, I sincerely hope all is well with him, PLEASE someone let us know he is OK, he has a way of grounding me when I get a bit out of the box, which I can easy do if not kept in check and all Mr Shun has to do is tell me to smile and no matter what I may be feeling at the time, I smile and I am over what ever I was fired up about. He means more to me than he will ever know.

 

[DSouthr]

Charles Brown gave me the heads up on the discrepancy. Lol

Ah dude, OK, you nailed me one that one! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL🤣

 

[alabamaheel]

Not really nor will I agree that tilting your offense to becoming trey-centric (just invented a new word) is the best way to play the game from a team aspect. I am not a fan of the Alabama offense, in no way aimed at you, I don't want my center camped outside of the trey arch, I did NOT like Nance camped out last season. As I said, I am not opposed to 3pt shooting but when I see someone say the mid range shot is the worst shot a player can take there is going to be an argument from me. I am 100% focused on taking good shots, open 3pt shots from a solid shooter is a good shot, open 3pt shots from a Leaky Black level shooter is not a good shot. A good shot is a shot taken by a guy that is comfortable and confident that it will go in, that is not defined as having a hand in your face and well past the trey arch. Understand, bad shots do at times go in but making a bad shot most times is a trap because the shooter feels he can make then consistently so 1 heat check begets more heat checks and the % say that is a losing proposition, for proof see Love, Caleb...

Jungs problem is that he is to in tuned with the NBA and for now the NBA is engaged in the 3pt shooting fad, it is for a couple reasons. First, teams have used that approach and it worked for those teams but there simply are not a lot of Seth Currys out there but you could call this era of NBA ball the Curry era because everyone is looking to copy cat. Just as there was a time when most college football teams ran either a wishbone or some form of veer offense because the belief then was you had to run a version like that to be able to win, now days how many wishbones do you see, it was a fad that passed. Now the center position in basketball has been devalued, now Bacot could be NCAA POY and not be drafted, that boggles my mind. IN addition, the NBA seems to need to find a way to focus on individual players in a team game, sure, why not have your guy that craves the spotlight take high volume treys? Last I heard basketball was a team game not a collective of individuals game. So ball movement and player movement has been replaced with run to this spot, see spot run... (and I do realize many do not know what "see spot run" is) LOL.

Man I’m with you as is everyone who wants good shots. The game and spacing has changed in basketball as a whole. I miss the days where it didn’t matter if our best players were not nba guys. Hans was ok in the league but an all time great in college. Berry was stellar and couldn’t even get on the court in the league. We’ve had several that played out that way. Great for our beloved UNC for sure but things are looked at differently now. I want it now, I want it easy, and dadburnit I can shoot 30footers too lol. That’s the thought and I hate. I’m with ya man and I think that’s the hardest thing to navigate in the college game. Roy, Jay, and even K to some extent up and quit because of all the crap imo.
And to ad this, I really don’t care how it’s done as long as it’s legal and somewhat resembles Carolina basketball. I want wins. And if we have to give up a few things we’ve known and seen to work, that’s ok.

 

[ChiShankCity]

Jungs problem is that he is to in tuned with the NBA and for now the NBA is engaged in the 3pt shooting fad, it is for a couple reasons. First, teams have used that approach and it worked for those teams but there simply are not a lot of Seth Currys out there but you could call this era of NBA ball the Curry era because everyone is looking to copy cat. Just as there was a time when most college football teams ran either a wishbone or some form of veer offense because the belief then was you had to run a version like that to be able to win, now days how many wishbones do you see, it was a fad that passed. Now the center position in basketball has been devalued, now Bacot could be NCAA POY and not be drafted, that boggles my mind. IN addition, the NBA seems to need to find a way to focus on individual players in a team game, sure, why not have your guy that craves the spotlight take high volume treys? Last I heard basketball was a team game not a collective of individuals game. So ball movement and player movement has been replaced with run to this spot, see spot run... (and I do realize many do not know what "see spot run" is) LOL.

The fact that the NBA places more significance on the 3 isn’t a fad. It’s because it gives you a major mathematical advantage over a 2, especially a 2PT jump shot. It’s worth 50% more than a 2. And a 45% mid range shooter is considered well above average. That equates to a 30% 3PT shooter, which is considered well below average. So the shot is just worth more so you need to be able to use it offensively and you need to be able to defend it defensively.

And the traditional big guy being devalued in the NBA isn’t just a 3PT offensive thing. The NBA is a ball screen centric offense. Traditional big guys struggle more with that than big guys that can play on the perimeter. If dudes like Bacot want an NBA future, get really freaking good at defending guards on switches. If he does, he’ll make a damn comfortable living and have a long career in the NBA.

And my focus on the 3 is mainly because there’s typically a direct correlation for UNC teams that underperform and their inability to make 3’s at an average level.

I completely understand it’s more layered than “we have to just shoot more 3’s.” But if people are going to get comfortable with dudes shooting mid range and long 2’s because they’re comfortable shooting those, get ready for a limited offense.

The “a good shot is defined by confidence and comfort” becomes dangerous if your offense becomes partially reliant on mid range jumpers.

The worst shot we took during those Kendall years were those Dexter Strickland mid range jumpers. When you have Zeller, Henson, Bullock, and Barnes, idgaf how confident a 0 3PT shooter is from 17 feet. That’s a bad shot.

It’s weird to me, lol. I’m not saying we need our offense centered around 3’s. In college, I think your offense should mostly be centered around your big guy if he’s good and getting to the free throw line. My point though is you need a few players who can take 3’s and make a good percentage of them. No idea why that’s turned into what it has here, lol.

But after last year and Roy’s last year, I do think how we shoot the 3 will be a determining factor in how successful we will be this season.

 

[TPFKAPFS]

SDung,
Once you manage to bring your opinions down from Mt Ridiculous, most of them aren't controversial! (they are also seldom complimentary toward the Heels and often misguided, but...).
Ergo:
1. You must have 3 + 3pt shooters on the court to win is ridiculous!
2. You need a few players who can take and make a good % of 3's is reasonable!
3. Implying you cannot win with efficient 2 pt shooters is silly too
4. Saying relying on long 2s isn't good is reasonable!

The only acceptable % for being a True Tar Heel is 100% BTW! Anything less and you are a pukie like SDung!

SDung does have a weird super power in that he inspires unreasoned rage with so few words! (your rent is past due!) He also seems to think that bball can be won using some kind of arcane algorithm!

(I don't give a flip what BarktoviPom thinks of my Heels!)

 

[DSouthr]

"The “a good shot is defined by confidence and comfort” becomes dangerous if your offense becomes partially reliant on mid range jumpers". But keep in mind " I’m not saying we need our offense centered around 3’s"? LOL

I love when folks feel the need to try to give me a math lesson, yes 3 is more than 2, news flash, 2 is more than ZERO, even 1 is better than ZERO! At the end of the day it has always and will always come down to making more shots, that is called shooting efficiency. And how do you get shooting efficiency you take good shots. Shooting efficiency is simply a open shot by a guy comfortable and confident in taking that shot. That can be a 3 but it as well is as mid range or a deep in the paint shot, meaning it comes from ALL and I repeat ALL levels on the court considering who the shooter is. I didn't like Leaky throwing up treys, he was actually pretty solid scoring in the mid range, it is kinda why defenses guarded him in the mid range but left him wide open for 3s. By his love affair with the trey jung clearly LOVED Leaky taking those treys, appears to have loved Caleb taking those fall away 40' shots with a hand in his face as well, why, simply because they were threes and according to him taking threes is all you need to do, no matter if there is a better shot available with the extra pass. I swear I expect him next to say that a missed trey is better than a made mid range 2, that is exactly how I take what he is saying. I want RJ, Ryan, and Pax to take treys when they are open, I want Ingram taking them when he is open, I would prefer to not see Bacot take a trey unless we are up big, don't want to see RJ post up a center deep in the paint either.

 

[ChiShankCity]

The math between 3 vs 2 is relevant because you can shoot a 3PT shot and a 2PT shot in live action. "Shooting efficiency is simply a open shot by a guy comfortable and confident in taking that shot." Ok, sweet definition but that gets into a ton of subjective feelings and I prefer to look at the numbers. I think efficiency is what kind of shot gives you the best chance to score at the highest rate possible. And every year, those are the same:

1. Free throws
2. Dunks/layups
3. 3's

And where the hell did you get that Leaky was a good mid-range jump shooter last year? BartTorvik tracks them and tracked Leaky at 26.8% last year (15-56) from mid-range. Leaky's 3PT% was 32.6%, so just on a raw percentage basis, Leaky's 3PT shots were what... 25% more efficient? Obviously significantly more efficient when you factor in effective FG percentage. Unless their tracking was wrong (wrong by like 75%), then I have no idea where you got it that he was a solid mid-range shooter.

As for last year, I thought our best offense was the Nance-Bacot high-low. If you want to run that, Leaky has to camp out on the corner or wing to have some space for Bacot. So in that regard I understood Leaky being on the perimeter. I also think Leaky was an offensive 0 in college. So I don't think posting him up would've lead to a more efficient offense. The best offense is for Leaky to be a ball mover and the possession not to finish with the ball in his hands. Hard to design offense for us last year.

Of course I didn't like Caleb shooting impossible 3's. If the question is would I rather have posted up Leaky, have Leaky shoot more mid-range shots than Caleb chucking up contested 3's.... Honestly, I would have to think about it, lol. That's how much of a 0 I viewed Leaky's offensive game.

And for this year. The offense needs to go through Bacot. For that to happen at its best potential, we need a few guys who can take and make a good amount of 3's. That's basically all I'm saying. Offense is going to be hard if we're really inconsistent from 3 and have to manufacture 2PT jumpers while trying to get the ball inside to Bacot. And no, Bacot should not be shooting 3's. He's positioned well if he finishes the season with more offensive 3-second violations than 3PT attempts.

 

[ChiShankCity]

SDung,
Once you manage to bring your opinions down from Mt Ridiculous, most of them aren't controversial! (they are also seldom complimentary toward the Heels and often misguided, but...).
Ergo:
1. You must have 3 + 3pt shooters on the court to win is ridiculous!
2. You need a few players who can take and make a good % of 3's is reasonable!
3. Implying you cannot win with efficient 2 pt shooters is silly too
4. Saying relying on long 2s isn't good is reasonable!

The only acceptable % for being a True Tar Heel is 100% BTW! Anything less and you are a pukie like SDung!

SDung does have a weird super power in that he inspires unreasoned rage with so few words! (your rent is past due!) He also seems to think that bball can be won using some kind of arcane algorithm!

(I don't give a flip what BarktoviPom thinks of my Heels!)

I bet I'm less of a "pukie" than you are since I really don't care about Duke one way or another unless we're playing them. They're not important to me at all. They seem to be pretty important to you though! Also, it's a you problem if you get angry from my message board comments. lol.

Don't know what BartTorvik or KenPom has to do with any of this. They're just 2 websites that track numbers.

Aside from that. I'll argue the points you made.
1. You must have 3 + 3pt shooters on the court to win is ridiculous!
I'm mainly following history on this one, specifically UNC history. 2005, we had 5 guys who shot above 35% from 3 and 3 of the 5 averaged more than 3 attempts. 2009 we had 3 guys average more than 3 attempts and all shot over 40% from 3. 2017, we had 3 guys average more than 3 attempts, 2 shot at least 37% and Kenny Williams shot 34%. Mainly following history. And I never said must. But 3 is my preferred number. And none of those years were we 3PT dependent at all. But it certainly helped a lot to have a couple dudes that could shoot em and make em!

3. Implying you cannot win with efficient 2 pt shooters is silly too
I don't think I ever said you can't win. It would've silly for me to. The 2016 runner up team finished 268th in 3PT percentage and in the 300's in 3PT makes and attempts per game. But if you choose that route, you have to get that production from somewhere else whether that's offensive rebounding, protecting the basketball more, shooting FT's really well. I also think you would agree that a big reason we finished the job in 2017 was Justin Jackson improved significantly as a perimeter shooter that year.

 

[DSouthr]

The math between 3 vs 2 is relevant because you can shoot a 3PT shot and a 2PT shot in live action. "Shooting efficiency is simply a open shot by a guy comfortable and confident in taking that shot." Ok, sweet definition but that gets into a ton of subjective feelings and I prefer to look at the numbers. I think efficiency is what kind of shot gives you the best chance to score at the highest rate possible. And every year, those are the same:

1. Free throws
2. Dunks/layups
3. 3's

And where the hell did you get that Leaky was a good mid-range jump shooter last year? BartTorvik tracks them and tracked Leaky at 26.8% last year (15-56) from mid-range. Leaky's 3PT% was 32.6%, so just on a raw percentage basis, Leaky's 3PT shots were what... 25% more efficient? Obviously significantly more efficient when you factor in effective FG percentage. Unless their tracking was wrong (wrong by like 75%), then I have no idea where you got it that he was a solid mid-range shooter.

As for last year, I thought our best offense was the Nance-Bacot high-low. If you want to run that, Leaky has to camp out on the corner or wing to have some space for Bacot. So in that regard I understood Leaky being on the perimeter. I also think Leaky was an offensive 0 in college. So I don't think posting him up would've lead to a more efficient offense. The best offense is for Leaky to be a ball mover and the possession not to finish with the ball in his hands. Hard to design offense for us last year.

Of course I didn't like Caleb shooting impossible 3's. If the question is would I rather have posted up Leaky, have Leaky shoot more mid-range shots than Caleb chucking up contested 3's.... Honestly, I would have to think about it, lol. That's how much of a 0 I viewed Leaky's offensive game.

And for this year. The offense needs to go through Bacot. For that to happen at its best potential, we need a few guys who can take and make a good amount of 3's. That's basically all I'm saying. Offense is going to be hard if we're really inconsistent from 3 and have to manufacture 2PT jumpers while trying to get the ball inside to Bacot. And no, Bacot should not be shooting 3's. He's positioned well if he finishes the season with more offensive 3-second violations than 3PT attempts.

LOL, actually, as I have shared so many times, I get the math jung, I don't struggle with math, I have never needed a tutor for math, so your continued explanation of math is applying for a job that has not been offered! LOL

"The math between 3 vs 2 is relevant because you can shoot a 3PT shot and a 2PT shot in live action. "Shooting efficiency is simply a open shot by a guy comfortable and confident in taking that shot." Ok, sweet definition but that gets into a ton of subjective feelings and I prefer to look at the numbers" If you can not understand that wanting a solid shooter taking jump shots they are comfortable with is simply common sense then I would ask why you are attempting to even have a discussion? How anyone could have watched last season's games and not understand that a good shot for 1 player is not a good shot for all and some shots are just bad shots no matter who takes them. Great deal of difference between RJ Davis taking a open trey vs Leaky Black and I nor anyone else needs to look at a single number to realize that. Not a single person here could have watched last season and not realize that Caleb Love taking a fall away trey with a hand in his face is a bad shot, I do not need a calculator to figure that out. You say defining who is a good shooter is to subjective that you look at the numbers. What actually IS EXTREMELY SUBJECTIVE is the numbers because they do not reflect WHY, they don't discern any difference between a long fall away hand in face jumper and a wide open look yet the difference is actually HUGE.

How about put the math book down and actually watch a game for a change, you may learn something about the game you seem to love to comment on...

 

[ChiShankCity]

How about put the math book down and actually watch a game for a change, you may learn something about the game you seem to love to comment on...

Nah, I'm good. If I watched the games and thought Leaky Black was a solid mid-range shooter, then I'd much prefer to just look at the math book that tells me what Leaky Black actually shot from mid-range.

In fact, maybe I'll watch 0 seconds of UNC basketball this year but look a the box score for 2 hours/game instead!

 

[1heel4life]

First, don't create a negative and then base your argument on your own creation. Next, oh my, how did we ever win a game with Theo or Leaky? LOL UNC has not always had great shooters at the 3 and really, outside of Manek, we have not really had big time shooters from distance at UNC at the 4. How did Dean and Roy BOTH make the HOF without having great stretch 4s? LOL

Red flag alert, when ever a poster says "don't get me wrong, I like X player", that poster is about to tell you why he does not like X player, he is about to try to put a velvet glove on his hammer! LOL Jung shows you how that is done, does he not! LOL

What you do have to have is 3 efficient scorers no matter if it is from the 3 or 2 range, I call it the 3 legged stool, 3 legs the stool does not tip over, with only 2 it does. Now of course, as long and the other 2 guys chip in time to time, take good shots, their scoring is gravy but you have to haver good efficiency from your 3 top scorers. That is where we fell apart last season, the lack of efficient scoring from Love and Nance not off setting that. When your highest shot taker is as extremely inefficient as Caleb was last season, you make it double hard to win.

Jung is a fool, plain and simple!!!!!!!!