I was never “wrapped up in the stats”, they only proved my observations.
If you want to get after somebody for patting me on the back, reply to SR or Jason…
I know exactly what I am talking about and it isn’t about thinking I know everything about the game, because I certainly don’t. But I do know what I theorized and I do know that it was proven true, in a big way.
End of story.
Just because his stats are down at end of games doesn’t mean he didn’t hit game winning shots or sinking free throws to put games away. He did many times. That’s what the stats don’t reveal. But, you emotionally come to that illogical conclusion. End of story 
Apparently you don’t understand the meaning of very specific statistics
Career Full game Senior Yr. Close Games (last 2 minutes)
FG 47.7% 19.0%
3pt 37.9% 10.0%
FT 88.3% 72.7%
These stats. are very specific to the exact thing I was talking about and the difference is rather significant. 48% FG is very good but 19% when it matters is terrible. 38% 3 pt. is also good, but 10% when it matters is not and the FT % dropping 16 points in close games? Not good.
Do you remember what they nicknamed Jerry West?
Jimmer was clutch, Tyler is not. He is a great player, just not clutch.
You can’t deny this, you can’t spin it, the numbers tell an important story. Unfortunately you won’t understand or accept it.
This is nothing other than manipulating the facts the way you want them to conclude towards your bias. For instance, part of the drop in the FTs was the Gonzaga game, in which we won. Poor FT shooting had no bearing on the final outcome of a win. The 72.7% free throw shooting did not tell how many games that the made free throws actually made the difference in the wins. Same with the 19% FG shooting. Perhaps every game that he shot that poorly won the games. And, every 47.7% FG shooting they lost the games. The statistics by themselves doesn’t prove a thing. And, as far as Jerry West is concerned, what was his last 2 minute statistics???
My logic is irrefutable
I’m sorry but I have to jump in here. Scott, you make almost no sense whatsoever. Honestly, Jim has given very specific stats that ABSOLUTELY show that Haws’ production slows down at the end of close games. Maybe we could see the stats for all games and see if there a difference in the last two minutes among all senior games. That would paint a more full picture.
However, your nonsense about whether or not it affected the end result of the game is off point and misleading. The point is that Haws, personally, just him and no one else included has worse production in the last two minutes than he does the rest of the time. Also, it shows that clutch players hit the shots when it matters. And why does it matter? I’m glad that we won that game against Gonzaga, but I can tell you that if he hits both shots then Gonzaga has much less confidence in those last few minutes. Yes, we won. But it would have been a whole lot easier had he hit those two shots. Thank goodness Andrus came through with his clutch FTs.
Just stay on point and stop trying to manipulate every conversation. You are always saying show me the stats, the facts, the emails the whatever the crap you demand for that day, but when the numbers are actually presented you complain and moan that Jim is manipulating the facts. You cant have it both ways.
And you are wrong. Haws is an amazing player and I want him on my team every single day. I do not, however, want him taking any shots at the end of the game unless they are FTs. Statistically he normally hits those FTs or at least one. That was an anomaly, but the other stats are drastic. You do not want to draw up a play for him to take the last shot of the game if you are Dave Rose. Statistics says he will miss.
I gotta think that everybody involved with the WCC wants to see a BYU vs Zag finals. If BYU loses early, then it makes Gonzaga’s lose to us look worse, and will possibly lower their seeding. Cougars vs Bulldogs is good TV and a good game. Zag wants another shot to prove it was a fluke, and we want one to prove it wasn’t. With the finals rematch the WCC is likely to get two teams into the tourney, otherwise the chances greatly drop for BYU and the conf with out that rematch, win or lose.
I have to believe that somewhere or some time in the past I have labeled you as the voice of reason or some similar thing because I know you will speak reasonably and accurately. It is probably one of the reasons that you have played in the FF leagues the last few years.
Something happens to Haws when the game is close. The game gets tight and so does he.
And once again, to further clarify, I believe Haws is a fantastic player… a scoring machine actually. There are times in a game where he just doesn’t miss and can’t be stopped. Unfortunately those times aren’t at the end of a close game.
It just is what it is.
Haws is a great player-everyone knows that-None dispute the fact. Imo Tyler is wound a little tight and honestly if I was banged around as much as he is, I would be wound a little tight also. Other more physical players are able to retaliate after a fashion 
Tyler isn’t really built that way so maybe it’s a little frustrating to him. I know one thing-you don’t take a terrific player like he is and then deviate totally in crunch time without something going on in your head. I hope he steps up in the tournament and plays lights out-beginning-middle-and end-ending his college career on the highest of notes-but in the end as JH says “it just is what it is”
There is no question, the statistics look bad. However, what is missing here is details. What did the author consider a close game? If he based it on the final score alone, does that exclude any games in which it was close up until late in the game and then Tyler Haws had a scoring burst that put the game away? Since they only considered games that occurred his senior year, how does that compare with games previous years? Additionally, how do the statistics change by increasing or decreasing the criteria for selecting the games? If there is a great swing by eliminating or adding one or two games from the pool considered, it is possible that the statistics were cherry picked to an extent. For example, the authors state that they only considered close games. If their criteria for close games is games won or lost by less than 20 points and the statistics change significantly if you only consider games won or lost by 10 points, the conclusion may be invalid. Conversely, if they only considered games won or lost by 5 points and considering games won or lost by 10 points gives a significantly different answer, the conclusion also may be invalid. An additional consideration would be, why limit it to the last two minutes? Do the statistics change greatly if we look at the last 3 minutes.
I’m not saying that the statistics are bad. Haws may very well struggle late in games. He certainly wasn’t at his best at the end of the last game. I have my opinion why and I have already expressed it. I am saying that just because you have a statistic does not mean that the conclusion you are drawing from that statistic is valid.
In looking at the article, I see that it does indicate the criteria. However, my issue is still valid. Since they only looked at games where the margin was less than 10, they exclude any that the margin was 10. Utah State comes to mind where Haws scored 35 points. Additionally, what happens if they only look at games less than 9? Also, I noticed that they did not indicate the number of attempts on free throws. Since we are only looking at 28 minutes of game time, and Haws averages .22 free throws per minute on the floor even assuming he takes 3 times his normal average during these late games, that would mean that he went 13/18 over those 14 games in the last 2 minutes of those games. That would also mean that he went 13/16 for all games except Gonzaga or 81%. However, if he only took twice as many free throws as his average per minute, that would mean that he was 9/12 over that stretch or 9/10 for games excluding the Gonzaga game. The fact is we don’t know and they did not tell us.
My comments stand and I am not going to change them until I see Haws display some late game heroics of some kind… anything honestly would be sufficient for me to change my opinion. This is not emotion based at all. I have no preference for one player over another, ie. Jimmer over Haws.
Forget the “statistics” completely, throw them out the window even though they happen to prove the theory. Let’s just evaluate the situation for what it is. There are fans who really understand the game, the little nuances and perceptions that many people don’t see or don’t understand. I know that those fans know exactly what I am talking about and concur.
There is just a certain group of fans who don’t get it regardless of how it is explained to them and there is another group that doesn’t care. If a person is completely honest, and I think Tyler himself would admit it, they will acknowledge that he struggles in crunch time or when the game is on the line. I will add that it probably drives him crazy trying to figure it out because he is so good the majority of the time.
That’s just the way it is, no big deal.
Yeah I would like to see this on a slider where I can adjust the score differential to change a “close game” or the end of all games or a few other things. If I had all the data in a spread sheet I could totally do this lol. I wonder where these guys get this stuff they work with?
So, I’m reading through this stuff and, having been away from Cougar Fan for several months, I’m wondering who this “grasshopper” is and why he is giving
level-headed poster Jim Hawks a hard time. Lo and behold, it is revealed that “grasshopper” is none other than SG! I feel like I’ve come home! While this isn’t the old Cougar Fan I knew and loved, this bit of back and forth makes the new surroundings a little more comfortable. Thanks to both of you.
SMC lost to Portland, what happened to them?
We struggled with them too. They have gotten better since two of their starters got back from injuries
I wish you could be as logical and reasonable when it comes to the gospel. We could see more eye to eye like this topic. Jim simply can’t come up with games where he can prove his point except the Gonzaga game which we won.
There have been others… as in games.
I’m just not going to spend the time trying to search for which specific games they were. I don’t need to do it and even if I did, I know what your reply would be.
Like more than one poster has commented… the level headed, logical poster me has stated his point, it has been proven by factual evidence and there is concurrence from other like minded level headed posters.
I’m right, you’re wrong… end of story.
Per Greg W. on ksl, Winder not playing tonight
Losing by 16 points with a 5 of us vs. 5 + 3 (refs) for GU doesn’t help. I got a kick out of the GU coaches after game comment, BYU is an NCAA team. If so, why didn’t the WCC refs call the game neutrally. This has apparently gone on for 17 years. This conference is a disgrace. If your jersey reads GONZAGA on the front you have a built in advantage in the men’s tournament. Why is it that this “great” GU team has never made it to the final four, perhaps they can’t go that far when the refs call a fair game with GU in it.
Interesting how KC Black, Floyd, Gavenman and some others bag on BYU about “not being a tournament type team”, yet here you have Gonzaga who is a perennial top 10 or top 20 team every year and they haven’t done squat in the ncaa tourney… in a LONG time.
BYU broke their home winning streak courtesy of some advantageous officiating but there wasn’t a chance in hades they were winning the wcc tourney at the risk of Gonzaga losing that #2 seed. Anybody with a brain can see that.
A person only needs to follow the money to find the root of all evil.