Mathis Back

[Boo Harvey]

Actually that would help move the needle a lot. If we go to his stats right this year and change his 3 point percentage from mid 20's to lower 30's and change his free throw percentage from low 60's to low 70's that alone probably is enough to change the outcome of 2-3 games, which is probably difference in them making the tournament or being a high seed in the NIT instead of sitting at home watching like they are now. A lot of times a season come down to a missed shot or free throw here or there. The late game missed free throws and the wide open airballed 3 pointer from Champ this year against Villanova is clear evidence of that. 1 made shot could have changed the complete outcome of this season, so don't say a few more made shots here or there won't move the needle.

Also, on a scouting reports teams are going to respect the shot of someone who shoots in the 30's from three rather than the 20's. Most teams are going to let a 20% guy just shoot and pack the paint on them, the better your shot, the more respect it gets, the more open the lane is for guys to drive and get shots at the rim.

I respectfully disagree that Mathis shooting a couple of percentage points higher from three would have salvaged this season. You’re conclusion assumes that those additional made shots would have come in the games we lost and would have altered the outcome. I think that’s a bridge too far. And let’s not forget, we were many wins away from making the NCAA tournament.

But my larger point was that Mathis has not been a shooter for four years in college and I don’t think that will change next year. If he shoots a few percentage points higher next year (likely on fewer shots) I don’t think the defense will honor him. Agree with you that I would like to see his free throw shooting improve. Not counting on it though.

 

[MakingPlays]

I respectfully disagree that Mathis shooting a couple of percentage points higher from three would have salvaged this season. You’re conclusion assumes that those additional made shots would have come in the games we lost and would have altered the outcome. I think that’s a bridge too far. And let’s not forget, we were many wins away from making the NCAA tournament.

But my larger point was that Mathis has not been a shooter for four years in college and I don’t think that will change next year. If he shoots a few percentage points higher next year (likely on fewer shots) I don’t think the defense will honor him. Agree with you that I would like to see his free throw shooting improve. Not counting on it though.

And I respectfully disagree that they were several games away. The NET was 69 when the season ended. You take away the bad Pitt Loss, win the Villanova game on neutral court in the BE tournament, and win that OT game against UConn and home, I think they would have made it in. That would have eliminated the only bad loss on the resume and gave them 2 more Q1 wins, NET would have been in the 40's in that scenario. But, that's for another topic.

As far as Mathis, I'm not saying he's a shooter, I'm saying just marginal improvement on his free throw shooting and three point shooting could make a big difference. I think it would have made a big difference this year, there were several games that came down to the final possesions where 1 or 2 shots would have sealed the game.

Some of you guys get too caught up into shooters, everybody loves seeing 40% three point shooters, but what else are they contributing? Arkansas had 0 40% 3 point shooters and their best player that shot the most 3's on the team shot 29%, and they made the elite 8. You win games with defense and having guys that can make shots at the free throw line to close games. You look at St. John's off-season last year, they brought in Coburn and Smith who were shooters, both came in shooting 40% from 3 and everybody loved it in the off-season, but both contributed less than Mathis did. I'm taking guys with high major experience, good defense, and proven winners at that level over just a guy that shoots the 3 well.

 

[Amaseinyourface]

And I respectfully disagree that they were several games away. The NET was 69 when the season ended. You take away the bad Pitt Loss, win the Villanova game on neutral court in the BE tournament, and win that OT game against UConn and home, I think they would have made it in. That would have eliminated the only bad loss on the resume and gave them 2 more Q1 wins, NET would have been in the 40's in that scenario. But, that's for another topic.

As far as Mathis, I'm not saying he's a shooter, I'm saying just marginal improvement on his free throw shooting and three point shooting could make a big difference. I think it would have made a big difference this year, there were several games that came down to the final possesions where 1 or 2 shots would have sealed the game.

Some of you guys get too caught up into shooters, everybody loves seeing 40% three point shooters, but what else are they contributing? Arkansas had 0 40% 3 point shooters and their best player that shot the most 3's on the team shot 29%, and they made the elite 8. You win games with defense and having guys that can make shots at the free throw line to close games. You look at St. John's off-season last year, they brought in Coburn and Smith who were shooters, both came in shooting 40% from 3 and everybody loved it in the off-season, but both contributed less than Mathis did. I'm taking guys with high major experience, good defense, and proven winners at that level over just a guy that shoots the 3 well.

With all due respect I remember last off season suggesting that we had gotten worse from a shooting perspective and it would hurt us. You disagreed then and then this year I think (could be wrong) you were saying our lack of shooting was hurting us. In general I agree with your premise that shooting as an exclusive skill doesn’t make someone a good player, but there is a huge middle ground between a guy like Mathis and just a capable shooter. Think Paris Horne.

 

[Boo Harvey]

And I respectfully disagree that they were several games away. The NET was 69 when the season ended. You take away the bad Pitt Loss, win the Villanova game on neutral court in the BE tournament, and win that OT game against UConn and home, I think they would have made it in. That would have eliminated the only bad loss on the resume and gave them 2 more Q1 wins, NET would have been in the 40's in that scenario. But, that's for another topic.

As far as Mathis, I'm not saying he's a shooter, I'm saying just marginal improvement on his free throw shooting and three point shooting could make a big difference. I think it would have made a big difference this year, there were several games that came down to the final possesions where 1 or 2 shots would have sealed the game.

Some of you guys get too caught up into shooters, everybody loves seeing 40% three point shooters, but what else are they contributing? Arkansas had 0 40% 3 point shooters and their best player that shot the most 3's on the team shot 29%, and they made the elite 8. You win games with defense and having guys that can make shots at the free throw line to close games. You look at St. John's off-season last year, they brought in Coburn and Smith who were shooters, both came in shooting 40% from 3 and everybody loved it in the off-season, but both contributed less than Mathis did. I'm taking guys with high major experience, good defense, and proven winners at that level over just a guy that shoots the 3 well.

I am not one of those who is hung up on percentages. Julian shot in the low 30s from three this year, for instance, but he is a good shooter who kept the defense honest.

Not all looks are created equal. Because Julian had to work for his shots one would expect his percentages to suffer. Mathis is not a good shooter, period. His mechanics are off and he often bricks wide open shots. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect his shooting to win games for us next year or to keep defenses honest. That’s not to say he can’t be a valuable contributor but only to say that we will need shooters, regardless of percentages.

As for our performance this year, we’ll have to agree to disagree. There were a lot of teams that lost close games. Should’ve, could’ve, would’ve. At the end of the day, we weren’t close to getting a bid and there’re no arguing that.

 

[capmaker]

I am not one of those who is hung up on percentages. Julian shot in the low 30s from three this year, for instance, but he is a good shooter who kept the defense honest.

Not all looks are created equal. Because Julian had to work for his shots one would expect his percentages to suffer. Mathis is not a good shooter, period. His mechanics are off and he often bricks wide open shots. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect his shooting to win games for us next year or to keep defenses honest. That’s not to say he can’t be a valuable contributor but only to say that we will need shooters, regardless of percentages.

As for our performance this year, we’ll have to agree to disagree. There were a lot of teams that lost close games. Should’ve, could’ve, would’ve. At the end of the day, we weren’t close to getting a bid and there’re no arguing that.

When Mathis shoots a 3-ball, his chance of success is so low that his attempts are almost turnovers. His range is about 3' and in at best.

 

[MakingPlays]

With all due respect I remember last off season suggesting that we had gotten worse from a shooting perspective and it would hurt us. You disagreed then and then this year I think (could be wrong) you were saying our lack of shooting was hurting us. In general I agree with your premise that shooting as an exclusive skill doesn’t make someone a good player, but there is a huge middle ground between a guy like Mathis and just a capable shooter. Think Paris Horne.

I'm not sure what I said off-season about shooting percentages, if you could refresh my memory on what exactly was said, then I can answer that better. Only thing I remember speaking about frequently last off-season was I thought on paper this year's team was a significant upgrade all the way around. I still think they were, even though the results didn't show it.

But, as far as this season and shooting, I've been pretty consistent in saying I didn't think shooting hurt the team this year, I thought this season was a tale of missed free throws, missed layups, and poor late game execution. So many games were lost at the free throw line and simply missing defensive assignments to close the game. Only players I thought were playing good on defense the entire year was Posh, Mathis, Champ (at times), and Wusu (at times). It took Soriano, Nyiwe, Wheeler, Stanley, and Smith, over half a season before they picked it up. Coburn never picked it up, he had a couple games where he was decent, but he was really bad overall defensively if you really watched him, that's why he didn't get as many minutes as some thought he should even though he could shoot. Pinzon was also not great, but he missed a whole lot of time due to Covid, so that's expected.

And I'm not saying you don't need shooters, I'm more or less referring to the posters that don't want guys like Curberlo because he's not a great shooter and criticize Mathis for not being a great shooter as well. IMO, you take guys like Mathis and Curberlo and give them minutes over the Stef Smiths and Tariq Coburns. Thing about basketball there's always going to be somebody that can shoot on each team, you never heard a coach on a scouting report say don't guard the 3 point line because this team doesn't have any shooters. But, you have heard coaches say, keep attacking the rim, because these guys can't stop us. That's why I said I'm looking for the defensive impact guys, I watched every St. John's and every Arkansas game, when you got guys that are dogs on the defensive end and guys that can attack the rim you have a chance to win every single game, no matter how bad you shoot the ball from the field.

 

[MakingPlays]

I am not one of those who is hung up on percentages. Julian shot in the low 30s from three this year, for instance, but he is a good shooter who kept the defense honest.

Not all looks are created equal. Because Julian had to work for his shots one would expect his percentages to suffer. Mathis is not a good shooter, period. His mechanics are off and he often bricks wide open shots. I don’t think it’s realistic to expect his shooting to win games for us next year or to keep defenses honest. That’s not to say he can’t be a valuable contributor but only to say that we will need shooters, regardless of percentages.

As for our performance this year, we’ll have to agree to disagree. There were a lot of teams that lost close games. Should’ve, could’ve, would’ve. At the end of the day, we weren’t close to getting a bid and there’re no arguing that.

Correct me If I'm wrong but what your saying is you'd rather have a guy like Julian shooting a bunch of 3's in the low 30's rather than a guy like Mathis who only takes occasional 3's and shoot in the low 30's? You do realize that makes no sense right, if your goal is to win games. I love Julian, but he shot the team out of some games this year trying to find his rhythm behind the 3 point line. If you're going to take as many shots as Julian and want your team to win you need to make a good percentage of those shots or be brilliant at drawing fouls and getting to the free throw line a lot and shooting a high percentage there. Just having a good looking stroke and shooting from the 3 point line for the heck of it serves absolutely no purpose.

 

[Boo Harvey]

I'm not sure what I said off-season about shooting percentages, if you could refresh my memory on what exactly was said, then I can answer that better. Only thing I remember speaking about frequently last off-season was I thought on paper this year's team was a significant upgrade all the way around. I still think they were, even though the results didn't show it.

But, as far as this season and shooting, I've been pretty consistent in saying I didn't think shooting hurt the team this year, I thought this season was a tale of missed free throws, missed layups, and poor late game execution. So many games were lost at the free throw line and simply missing defensive assignments to close the game. Only players I thought were playing good on defense the entire year was Posh, Mathis, Champ (at times), and Wusu (at times). It took Soriano, Nyiwe, Wheeler, Stanley, and Smith, over half a season before they picked it up. Coburn never picked it up, he had a couple games where he was decent, but he was really bad overall defensively if you really watched him, that's why he didn't get as many minutes as some thought he should even though he could shoot. Pinzon was also not great, but he missed a whole lot of time due to Covid, so that's expected.

And I'm not saying you don't need shooters, I'm more or less referring to the posters that don't want guys like Curberlo because he's not a great shooter and criticize Mathis for not being a great shooter as well. IMO, you take guys like Mathis and Curberlo and give them minutes over the Stef Smiths and Tariq Coburns. Thing about basketball there's always going to be somebody that can shoot on each team, you never heard a coach on a scouting report say don't guard the 3 point line because this team doesn't have any shooters. But, you have heard coaches say, keep attacking the rim, because these guys can't stop us. That's why I said I'm looking for the defensive impact guys, I watched every St. John's and every Arkansas game, when you got guys that are dogs on the defensive end and guys that can attack the rim you have a chance to win every single game, no matter how bad you shoot the ball from the field.

I hear you Making Plays, but balance is key. We need athletic guys who can play defense and complement our pressing style, but we also need guys who can create off the dribble, shoot, and make buckets in the half court. One of the reasons this team lost close games (in addition to the issues you mentioned) is that we didn’t have a player who could consistently create off the dribble in the half court and hit a clutch shot. In close games during crunch time, half court sets are frequently critical and we really struggled.

Some of our struggles I attribute to the staff not recruiting the right players and some I attribute to the staff not making the correct adjustments to suit the players strengths and weaknesses. There were games when we needed Smith and/or Coburn’s offense and perhaps the staff should have adjusted/switched up the defense (at least at times) to hide these players’ weaknesses.

 

[MainMan]

I think what you see is what you get with Mathis.

He reminds me a lot of Willie Glass - a guy who pretty much started and ended his career with pretty much the same game with the same holes.

But I also thought that of Dom Pointer who surprised the hell out of me his senior year.

 

[Boo Harvey]

Correct me If I'm wrong but what your saying is you'd rather have a guy like Julian shooting a bunch of 3's in the low 30's rather than a guy like Mathis who only takes occasional 3's and shoot in the low 30's? You do realize that makes no sense right, if your goal is to win games. I love Julian, but he shot the team out of some games this year trying to find his rhythm behind the 3 point line. If you're going to take as many shots as Julian and want your team to win you need to make a good percentage of those shots or be brilliant at drawing fouls and getting to the free throw line a lot and shooting a high percentage there. Just having a good looking stroke and shooting from the 3 point line for the heck of it serves absolutely no purpose.

This is my last post on this, promise. My point about Champagnie is that percentages often don’t tell the true story. If he were on the transfer market, schools would be salivating over him bc of his shooting prowess, among other attributes. Champagnie certainly missed a number of makable shots this year but few question his shooting ability.

In fact, I would argue he largely struggled bc creating his own shot is not his forte and he was too often required to be the focal point of the offense, a role for which he is not well-suited.

Make no mistake that, notwithstanding his shooting percentage, the opposition focused on stopping him from outside. Put simply, guys like Champagnie space the floor.

Mathis, on the other hand, does no such thing. To the contrary, defenses sag off of him and clog the lane. And that won’t change even if he takes a few less shots and makes a few more.

Now if you said to me that if Champagnie increased his three point percentage by three to five percent, that would be impactful, I’d be right there with you. But short of Mathis becoming a volume shooter — God forbid — I think the value in him raising his three point shooting percentage a few points is relatively minimal.

 

[NCJohnnie]

Making Plays,

I agree with you that defense and drawing and making foul shots wins games and we were a horrible foul shooting team. However, Arkansas aside, if you look at the teams that are still playing, 3 of the 4 had 3 or more starters who shot 36% or better from three and the only one who didn't (Duke) had 2 starters shooting over 40% from three. I am happy to have Mathis back and agree that if he finishes at the rim better and hits at least 2/3 of his free throws that will be a big plus. But we need to add at least one excellent three point shooter who plays major minutes or we will struggle big time.

 

[matmi03]

I'm glad to see him back. He knows the system and that will be a plus. He's a flawed and sometimes frustrating player but can certainly be useful in this system.

 

[NCJohnnie]

Nova's ability to play tough defense, make foul shots and hit open threes is what is keeping them in the game despite being outmanned with no bench.

 

[MakingPlays]

Making Plays,

I agree with you that defense and drawing and making foul shots wins games and we were a horrible foul shooting team. However, Arkansas aside, if you look at the teams that are still playing, 3 of the 4 had 3 or more starters who shot 36% or better from three and the only one who didn't (Duke) had 2 starters shooting over 40% from three. I am happy to have Mathis back and agree that if he finishes at the rim better and hits at least 2/3 of his free throws that will be a big plus. But we need to add at least one excellent three point shooter who plays major minutes or we will struggle big time.

The teams that are all playing are blue bloods as well that can literally go to the transfer portal and/or any high school campus and have a great shot at landing just about any kid they want, so they can get the complete package in most of their players. If St. John's also had that luxury this conversation we're having right now wouldn't exist.

And I'm not saying you don't want shooters, not saying that at all. If you can find a guy that scores at all 3 levels and is great defender by all means go get him, I'll be the first person rooting to land him. My responses in this thread are directed at the people are criticizing Mathis shooting and questioning if it can work with him and Posh in the back court unless other shooters are added around them. I'm just saying you can still win big without "shooters" and gave an example of a team and how they did it. You don't have to be a great 3 point shooting team if your team defends well and know how to get to the rim on offense and coverts at the line. There's more than 1 way to win a basketball game. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

Some people think you just throw 3 point shooters out there it gives you a better chance to win, you look at game day threads on here, Coburn would make a 3, then give up buckets on the defensive end by missed assignments and get taken out of the game, and you'd have people on here asking "why isn't Coburn going back in the game, we need 3's." That's not how you win games.

 

[Dan V]

Sucks that he can’t shoot but the more guys that come back the better. Less guys to teach and he fits the defensive philosophy.

 

[SLYFOXX1968]

The teams that are all playing are blue bloods as well that can literally go to the transfer portal and/or any high school campus and have a great shot at landing just about any kid they want, so they can get the complete package in most of their players. If St. John's also had that luxury this conversation we're having right now wouldn't exist.

And I'm not saying you don't want shooters, not saying that at all. If you can find a guy that scores at all 3 levels and is great defender by all means go get him, I'll be the first person rooting to land him. My responses in this thread are directed at the people are criticizing Mathis shooting and questioning if it can work with him and Posh in the back court unless other shooters are added around them. I'm just saying you can still win big without "shooters" and gave an example of a team and how they did it. You don't have to be a great 3 point shooting team if your team defends well and know how to get to the rim on offense and coverts at the line. There's more than 1 way to win a basketball game. That's the only point I'm trying to make.

Some people think you just throw 3 point shooters out there it gives you a better chance to win, you look at game day threads on here, Coburn would make a 3, then give up buckets on the defensive end by missed assignments and get taken out of the game, and you'd have people on here asking "why isn't Coburn going back in the game, we need 3's." That's not how you win games.

I was a Coburn fan and mildly disagree about his weaknesses . I would say a majority of this Board felt he never got enough playing time . He shot well in most games he played but , CMA had him on a short leach . He could shoot the 3 as well as anyone on this team and our defensive lapses were not always Coburn . He had lots of help . As for exchanging 3’s for 2’s , it’s a good idea if you can make them . Lots of teams are willing to sacrifice a little bit on defense , for the player who can drain them regularly . And , a good Coach should be able to change Defenses to suit the players on the Court .