West Liberty Hilltopper Basketball

[Columbuseer]

Fyi
sports illustrated's list of players to watch in pa in alpha order.
wlu's maddox bennett is listed.

https://www.si.com/high-school/penns...n-01kb2weyfgsw

[boatcapt]

It will be interesting to see if Mike is able to keep the players he signs. Previous regime seemed to struggle in that category. Seemingly every year the stud signed in November would have a great senior year and we'd release him from his contract so he could sign with one of the D1 dangling offers in front of him.

[Ship69]

After 4 games last season wlu was averaging 27.2 % from three. Their high during that period was 11-28 39.3% Against West chester and the lowest was 7-35 20% against shepherd. They finished last season at 36.6%.There always seems to be wide variation from game to game.

Since its inception, the three-point shot has totally transformed college BB. So many games now are basically decided by whether a team has a hot shooting night or not. In its opener at Frostburg this season, Ship was blitzed when Frostburg hit 50-some percent of their 3s and barely missed a free throw. The next night, Frostburg made fewer than a third of their 3s and missed a bunch of free throws while losing to Seton Hill. When I was a young guy, a double-digit lead was a tough thing to overcome in basketball. Now a 12-point lead can vanish in the blink of an eye. Teams such as West Liberty that bring in a raft of good shooters will find a lot of success, but you can also die with the three-pointer on any given night.

[Columbuseer]

Since its inception, the three-point shot has totally transformed college BB. So many games now are basically decided by whether a team has a hot shooting night or not. In its opener at Frostburg this season, Ship was blitzed when Frostburg hit 50-some percent of their 3s and barely missed a free throw. The next night, Frostburg made fewer than a third of their 3s and missed a bunch of free throws while losing to Seton Hill. When I was a young guy, a double-digit lead was a tough thing to overcome in basketball. Now a 12-point lead can vanish in the blink of an eye. Teams such as West Liberty that bring in a raft of good shooters will find a lot of success, but you can also die with the three-pointer on any given night.

Excellent points.
Somewhat surprisingly, the current wlu coaches do not want their players to fall in love with the three and settle for excessive three-point shots when they can get a higher % shot with teammates in rebounding position by being more patient. This is especially true on this year's team, which has some strong inside players.

A mixture af threes and twos also keeps the defense off-balance.

A disadvantage of threes is that it reduces the number of fouls by opponents, which reduces the likelihood of getting an opponent's star player in foul trouble. It can also result in long rebounds, which can help opponents.

[boatcapt]

By individual game, had WLU taken no 3 point shots and instead shoot 2 point shots at the same game percentage, we would have scored:

Clarion 56.41% non-3 point shooting percentage. 91.38 (2 point score)+16 (free throws) = 107.38 (change from actual score +5.38)
Cal 65.62% 81.37+12=93.37 (+9.37)
VA Union 68% 81.6+10=91.6 (+3.6)
Shepherd 52.17% 82.42+11=93.42 (+4.42)

We would be averaging 96.44 PPG vs the 90.8 we are averaging now (+5.64 PPG)

Straight line math says that the break even point for 3 point shooting percentage needs to be 33.3% to be worthwhile (assuming 50% 2 point shooting).

I've said for a long time that at 40% 3 point shooting, WLU becomes virtually unbeatable. As that percentage declines, we become much easier for opponents to game plan for and to beat us. Granted, we are only four games into it but on the season we are sitting at 31.4% from 3 and have seemed to be a very beatable team. Used to be that at any given moment, WLU could turn on a spurt where they coupled two or three pressure induced steals with 3 or 4 spot-up, nothing but the bottom of the net 3 pointers to push a 5 point lead to 15+ over the course of about 60 seconds. Thus far, we don't seem to have that.

So the question is, is this a temporary glitch and our bevy of 3 point shooters is primed for a breakout or is this who we are from 3 point land? If I where a betting man, i'd put money on something in the middle (33-34%). At that percentage we will probably win most of our games but we will be susceptible every night to a hot shooting team or the nights when we are particularly cold.

[boatcapt]

That was more like it ..112-67. Decent 3 point shooting across both halves. That said, we need to consider who they played! Not exactly a top there program!!! Need to whoop up on the tomato cans so our stats look good and we can win the Stat National Championship!

[Scrub]

That was more like it ..112-67. Decent 3 point shooting across both halves. That said, we need to consider who they played! Not exactly a top there program!!! Need to whoop up on the tomato cans so our stats look good and we can win the Stat National Championship!

It's true that last night looked better. It's also true that it was a weak opponent. But to be honest, that's the kind of performance you're supposed to have against Salem. So I'm reasonably heartened that they did exactly that. It would much more worrisome if they had a squeaker against Salem. Beat the teams you're supposed to beat (and by a margin you're supposed to beat them), and that's step one of putting together a good season.

Gotta keep that rolling when a winless Point Park comes in here on Saturday night. Gotta keep beating the beatable opponents and gather strength for the stronger ones.

[boatcapt]

It's true that last night looked better. It's also true that it was a weak opponent. But to be honest, that's the kind of performance you're supposed to have against Salem. So I'm reasonably heartened that they did exactly that. It would much more worrisome if they had a squeaker against Salem. Beat the teams you're supposed to beat (and by a margin you're supposed to beat them), and that's step one of putting together a good season.

Gotta keep that rolling when a winless Point Park comes in here on Saturday night. Gotta keep beating the beatable opponents and gather strength for the stronger ones.

Yep...Beat the teams you're supposed to beat by the amount you're supposed to beat them by. WLU used to play easy OOC games the first few of the season and treated them almost like scrimmages where Crutch would tinker with player combinations and offensive sets. It also gave the players valuable game experience.

Now, lets see if they can do it in back to back games. Point Park is struggling so it should be pretty easy.

[Columbuseer]

FYI

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU vs Salem University 12/03/25 WLU 112 – Salem 67

Salem (SU) Game Plan
SU is a well-coached team with excellent, athletic, 1-on-1 players who are good scorers and who are comfortable in aggressively attacking the basket. The Three is not their game as they average around 25% 3FG and only 5 three attempts as a team. Their two highest scorers are 6-7 #14 Lamal at 20 ppg and 35 min per game, and 5-10 #1 Fallen at 17 ppg. Two other players average near double figures. They are more of a dribble drive team, averaging only 11 assists. They come into the game at 3-1. They are strong in 1-on-1 defense.

The SU strategy seemed to be:
• PASSED – In the half-court offense, attack WLU on the dribble drive with their quick guards and talented #14 Lamal.
• PASSED – Play tight half-court defense. They caused some WLU shot clock violations, but fatigue ultimately caused them to get a step slow on their defense.
• FAILED – Avoid an up-and-down game with WLU. When they break the press, their strategy was to set up offense and only attack the rim in transition when they have a numbers advantage or a clear path to the rim. However, when they got behind 17-4, they started to panic and play much faster and take shots with no one in rebounding position.
• FAILED – Limit turnovers. SU had 27 turnovers, leading to 44 WLU points.
• FAILED – Keep the WLU score under 80 as Salem only averages less than 70 ppg. IMHO, they were fortunate that WLU only scored 112.
• FAILED – Dominate the boards. WLU won the rebounding battle 45-37 and dominated offensive rebounds 20-11.
• FAILED – Avoid playing starters heavy minutes. They played eight players over 12 minutes, with two players playing 37 and 33 minutes, respectively. However, IMHO, the issue is that SU played their starters too long without subbing, which hindered their recovery from fatigue. For example, in the first half, Salem had 8 instances of players playing more than 5.8 minutes without a break. WLU had zero.

Keys to the WLU Game
From the opening tip, it was apparent that WLU was playing with greater efficiency in all phases of the game on offense, defense, rebounding, and their press. The Thanksgiving break has proven to be beneficial. WLU’s offensive rating was 133 (pts per 100 possessions) compared to just 78 for SU. WLU’s effective shooting % was 56% to just 43% for SU. Their true shooting % was 58% for WLU to just 48% for SU (this stat takes in account FT shooting).

WLU played with great effort, subbing frequently in an effort to tire out SU. This strategy became effective in the last 10 minutes of the half and in the second half.
• IMHO, the difference in the game was West Liberty’s pressure, which wore out SU. SU started taking shots with no one even attempting to crash the boards, allowing WLU to control the rebounds and limiting second shots.
• WLU forced 27 turnovers on 31% of SU’s possessions, of which 70% were live ball turnovers on 19 steals.
• WLU shared the ball well. WLU had 57% of goals from assists to only 45% for SU. 90th percentile for D1 is 59.8%.
• WLU shot very well from three, averaging 37.8% for the game. Seven players shot 50% or greater from three.
• WLU greatly improved foul shooting, at 92% on 11-12.
• It is becoming apparent that WLU has quality depth. WLU played many different combinations of lineups, with no apparent drop-off in production. The three freshmen are making solid contributions, which is very unusual for WLU freshmen.
• WLU used better judgment in limiting inside fouls, with no WLU player with more than 3 fouls. It is important for our big men to stay out of foul trouble.

Areas for Improvement for WLU
• WLU needs to continue focus on getting the ball inside and reducing reliance on threes. By getting the ball inside, WLU can draw fouls and possibly get key opponents in foul trouble. It also increases the likelihood for offensive rebounds. Although they have improved, there were some short periods where WLU fell in love with the three. Fifty percent of their 90 FGA were threes. In their defense, when SU got tired, they packed the defense inside and were leaving players wide open threes. Also, WLU did make an effort to get the ball inside, which led to shot clock violations on occasion, so they are making an effort.

[Columbuseer]

FYI

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU vs Point Park 12/6/25 WLU 104 – Point Park 71

Point Park (PP) Game Plan
PP comes into the WLU game at 0-4. They average 75 points a game, but are losing by an average of 14 points per game. They shoot 36% from Three on about 26 3FG attempts per game. They shoot 44% overall FG and 79% of their FT. Rebounding and defense has been an issue, as they have been out-rebounded 42 to 25 on average. They have taken care of the ball, with only 8.5 Turnovers and 13.5 assists per game. Their two highest scorers are 6-5 #11 Anderson at 19.5 ppg (32.5 min per game), and 5-10 #3 Welch (33.5 min) at 17 ppg. #00 Warner averages 10.5 ppg (24.5 mins) and #4 Williams averages 9.3 ppg (23 min). They share the ball, averaging about 50% assist to FGM ratio.

The PP strategy seemed to be:
• PASSED – In the half-court offense, attack WLU on the dribble drive with their quick guards. This seems to be a recent trend among WLU opponents.
• PASSED – Dominate the boards. PP won the rebounding battle 36-27 and dominated offensive rebounds 16-8.
• PASSED – Play tight half-court defense. fatigue ultimately caused them to get a step slow on their defense.
• FAILED – Avoid an up-and-down game with WLU. When they break the press, their original strategy was to attack WLU at the rim. However, they had to abandon this strategy in the second half due to fatigue.
• FAILED – Limit turnovers. Although PP only averaged 8.5 turnovers, PP collapsed against the WLU pressure, committing 32 turnovers, of which 20 were steals. WLU scored 44 points off turnovers.
• FAILED – Keep the WLU score under 80 as PP averages 75 ppg. IMHO, they were fortunate that WLU only scored 104, due to cold shooting in the first half.
• FAILED – Avoid playing starters heavy minutes. They played six players over 22 minutes, with two players playing 29 and 28 minutes, respectively. However, IMHO, the issue is that PP played their starters far too long without subbing, which hindered their recovery from fatigue. For example, in the first half, PP had 7 instances of players playing more than 5.8 minutes without a break. WLU had zero. In the second half, PP had 7 instances of players more than 5.8 continuous minutes. Two players played 11 and 14 continuous minutes! WLU had zero. This fatigue led to many mental mistakes and easy scores for WLU.

Keys to the WLU Game
From the opening tip, it was apparent that WLU was playing with great intensity. They were making PP work very hard on defense and also against the press. WLU’s offensive rating was elite at 123 (points per 100 possessions) compared to just 85 for PP. WLU’s effective shooting % was an outstanding 61% to just 49% for PP. Their true shooting % was 67% for WLU to just 53% for PP (this stat takes in account FT shooting). This is even more impressive, considering that WLU only shot 10% from three on 1-10 shooting in the first half. In the second half, WLU was 9-15 from three, or 60%.

WLU played with great effort, subbing frequently in an effort to tire out PP. This strategy became effective in the last 10 minutes of the first half and in the second half.
• IMHO, the difference in the game was West Liberty’s pressure, which wore out PP. PP played like an athletic AAU team that had never seen a trapping, full-court press before. WLU had 20 steals. PP threw many passes out of bounds.
• WLU forced 32 turnovers on 38% of PP’s possessions, of which 62% were live ball turnovers on 20 steals.
• WLU shared the ball well. WLU had 43% of goals from assists to only 31% for PP. 90th percentile for D1 is 59.8%. However, the seemingly low WLU stat is deceiving in that many of the steals result in unassisted layups, which lowered the assist numbers.
• WLU shot very well from three, averaging 40% for the game, despite a horrendous first half. Six players shot 50% or greater from three. Muldowney was 3-4 and Lattos was 1-2. Davis was 2-2, Landon and Max Butler were both 1-2 and Kent was 2-3.
• WLU has quality depth. WLU played many different combinations of lineups, with no apparent drop-off in production. The three freshmen are making solid contributions, which is very unusual for WLU freshmen.
• WLU used much better judgment in contesting shots, with no WLU player with more than 3 fouls. They avoided fouling when they were out of position. It is important for our big men to stay out of foul trouble.
• WLU is improving in scoring two-point field goals. They are increasing their focus on getting the ball inside, either on passes to big men or by guards exploiting openings to attack the rim. This game will give opponents one more thing to worry about, especially since our big men can also shoot threes.

Areas for Improvement for WLU
• Although much improved from the start of the season, WLU still has room to grow in their half-court offense in getting the ball inside.
• Some of the 15 turnovers were unforced by errant passes due to teammates zigging instead of zagging. As they play more together, these issues will decrease.

[Columbuseer]

FYI

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU at Univ. Charleston (UC) 12/10/25 WLU 82 – UC 65


Univ. Charleston (UC) Game Plan
UC comes into the WLU game at 4-3, They were the 2md best shooting team in the country, with an effective FG % of 63%. They are 12Th in 3FG % at 41.58%. They have many players who are elite 3FG shooters – #11 Rivens 57%, #14 Nicol 52%, #01 Robertson 50%, #02 Jacobs 50%, #00 Chapman 41%, and #05 Campbell 38%. They share the ball, ranked 20TH in assists at 18.6. They average 82 points a game. This season they have won the rebounding battle. Their vulnerability appears to be turnovers, as they average 17 turnovers a game. Their two highest scorers are #22 Hailey at 14 ppg (25.3 min per game), and #32 Shelton (23.6 min) at 13 ppg. #00 Chapman averages 12 ppg (24.1 mins) and #13 Nicol averages 7.5 ppg (22.9 min). They have a deep bench, with 9 players averaging over 12 minutes and no one playing more than 25 minutes. They share the ball very well, averaging about 57% assist to FGM ratio. UC seems to have built a team roster that was designed to mitigate the effects of the WLU style.

The UC strategy seemed to be:
• PASSED – In the half-court offense, attack WLU on the dribble drive or in the post. If help defense comes, kick the ball out for an open three by their deadly shooters.

• PASSED – Dominate the boards. UC won the rebounding battle 39-32 and won offensive rebounds 14-10.

• PASSED – Substitute frequently to mitigate effects of fatigue – No one played over 27 minutes, and 9 players played at least 14 minutes.

• PASSED – Play tight half-court defense. Fatigue ultimately caused them to get a step slow on their defense in the second half.

• PASSED– Avoid an up-and-down game with WLU. When they broke the press, they did not attack the rim when they had numbers, deciding instead to set up the offense.

• FAILED – Shoot their average 3FG %. UC was 5-21 and 24% 3FG, far below their 41.58% season average.

• FAILED – Limit turnovers. Although turnovers have been an issue with UC at 17 per game, UC collapsed against the WLU pressure, committing 30 turnovers, of which 17 were steals. WLU scored 32 points off turnovers to only 13 for UC.

• FAILED –Keep the WLU score under 80 as UC averages 82 ppg. In the first half, they succeeded with WLU leading only 31-24. However, WLU scored 51 in the second half, as the mental fatigue affected UC.

Keys to the WLU Game
From the opening tip, it was apparent that WLU was playing with great intensity. They were making UC work very hard on defense and also against the press. On offense, WLU was making a determined effort to get the ball inside. They were very patient in rapidly passing the ball, until they got the interior shot that they wanted, even as the shot clock was winding down (it reminded me of the NW Missouri State offense under McCollum). They were making a conscious effort to run the offense through their big men inside. WLU’s offensive rating was a mediocre (for WLU) 105 (points per 100 possessions) compared to just 81 for the high-powered UC offense (which is a testament to the WLU pressure). WLU’s effective shooting % was 53% to just 46% for UC. Their true shooting % was 58% for WLU to just 50% for UC (this stat takes in account FT shooting). For the game, WLU shot 37.5%% (6-16) from Three. The 16 3FG attempts show the restraint WLU was using on taking an early three, as they had been averaging over 30 attempts a game.
WLU played with great effort, subbing frequently and putting severe mental stress on UC, even though UC was subbing also. This strategy became disruptive to UC, as they committed 20 turnovers in the second half
• IMHO, the difference in the game was West Liberty’s pressure forcing turnovers and the disruption in the focus of UC players. UC was totally unprepared for the pressure, and the pressure seemed to distract them even when they got into their half-court offense. The effect was mental fatigue as much as physical fatigue. At times, I thought UC was more concerned about protecting the ball and wondering where the next WLU player was coming from instead of running their offense. UC lacked cohesion as a team.

• WLU forced 30 turnovers on 37% of UC’s possessions, of which 65% were live ball turnovers on 17 steals.

• WLU shared the ball well. WLU had 45% of goals from assists to only 35% for UC. 90th percentile for D1 is 59.8%. However, the seemingly low WLU stat is deceiving in that many of the steals result in unassisted layups, and WLU was focusing on getting the ball inside, either on the dribble or on passes into the post, which lowered the assist numbers.

• WLU shot very well from three, averaging 37.5% for the game, despite a subpar 25% 3FG for the first half. Four players shot 50% or greater from three. Landon Butler was 1-1, Spadafora was 1-2, Montgomery was 1-2. And Davis was 1-2. The point is that WLU has very deep 3FG shooting roster.

• WLU has quality depth. WLU played many different combinations of lineups, with no apparent drop-off in production. The three freshmen are making solid contributions, which is very unusual for WLU freshmen.

• WLU is improving in getting the ball inside on the half-court offense scoring two-point field goals. They are patient in getting the ball inside, either on passes to big men or by guards exploiting openings to attack the rim. This game will give opponents one more thing to worry about, especially since our big men can also shoot threes.

Areas for Improvement for WLU
• Some of the 17 turnovers were unforced by errant passes in attempting to get the ball inside in traffic or due to teammates zigging instead of zagging. As they play more together, these issues will decrease.

• On occasion, WLU tried difficult, off-balance shots inside and either got the shots blocked or missed the shot. Good learning experience for the younger players.

[Scrub]

One more area for improvement might be free throw shooting. There were a lot of key missed front ends.

But perhaps the biggest question coming out of the UC game is Spadafora's health. He went down late with what seemed like a bad ankle sprain, but it didn't look great. Here's hoping it was just a twist to the ankle and some basic rest will do the job. He'd be a hard one to replace. I do love Montgomery's energy (he's a bit of a mini-Spadafora), but WLU really needs Dante's leadership right now. Hope he'll be ready to go for the next one!

[Columbuseer]

One more area for improvement might be free throw shooting. There were a lot of key missed front ends.

But perhaps the biggest question coming out of the UC game is Spadafora's health. He went down late with what seemed like a bad ankle sprain, but it didn't look great. Here's hoping it was just a twist to the ankle and some basic rest will do the job. He'd be a hard one to replace. I do love Montgomery's energy (he's a bit of a mini-Spadafora), but WLU really needs Dante's leadership right now. Hope he'll be ready to go for the next one!

Great points Scrub. It is puzzling that the variation in FT % from game to game is so high.
I agree that montgomery's energy is much like Spadafora's. Davis seems to be high energy too.

[boatcapt]

Great points Scrub. It is puzzling that the variation in FT % from game to game is so high.
I agree that montgomery's energy is much like Spadafora's. Davis seems to be high energy too.

Almost as puzzling as our high variance in 3 pt shooting.

[Columbuseer]

Fyi

A Dummy’s Observations on WLU vs WV Wesleyan (WVW) 12/17/25 WLU 101 – WVW 65

WV Wesleyan (WVW) Game Plan
WVW comes into the WLU game at 0-9. They have had 2 close losses, but the rest have been decisive losses.They are mediocre shooters, averaging 42% FG and 31% on about 21 threes per game. However, they have some elite 3FG shooters in Janciauskas 47%, Foster 42%, Harkins 37% and Baptiste 36%. Besides shooting, they are turnover prone at 19 turnovers per game. They only average 11 assists per game. Their vulnerability appears to be turnovers, and lack of quality depth, even though no one plays over 30 minutes a game and 10 players average over 13 minutes.

The WVW strategy seemed to be:
• PASSED – In the half-court offense, attack WLU on the dribble drive or in the post. If help defense comes, kick the ball out for an open three by their deadly shooters.
• PASSED – Substitute frequently– No one played over 25 minutes, and 9 players played at least 13 minutes.
• PASSED – Play tight half-court defense. Fatigue, despite frequent subbing, ultimately caused them to get a step slow on their defense in transition and in the last 10 minutes of the first half and the second half.
• PASSED– Avoid an up-and-down game with WLU. When they broke the press, they did not attack the rim when they had numbers, deciding instead to set up the offense. Sometimes they did take a wide-open three point shot in transition.
• FAILED – Breakeven on the rebounding stats. WLU won the rebounding battle 45-30 and won offensive rebounds 18-9.
• FAILED – Shoot above their average 3FG %. WVW shot right at their average was 5-16 and 31% 3FG, and 42%FG.
• FAILED – Limit turnovers. Although turnovers have been an issue with WVW at 19 per game, WVW collapsed against the WLU pressure, committ ing 30 turnovers, of which 16 were steals. WLU scored 43 points off turnovers to only 4 for WVW.
• FAILED –Keep the WLU score under 80 as WVW averages 71 ppg. WLU scored 101 points on 89 possessions.

Keys to the WLU Game
From the opening tip, it was apparent that WLU was playing with great intensity. They were making WVW work very hard on defense and also against the press. On offense, WLU was making a determined effort to get the ball inside. They were very patient in rapidly passing the ball, until they got the interior shot that they wanted. They offensive rating was a good 115 (points per 100 possessions) compared to just 71 for WVW. Many of WLU’s turnovers were unforced, as many were committed trying to make interior passes through tight windows. WLU’s effective shooting % was 54% to just 46% for WVW. Their true shooting % was 57% for WLU to just 47% for WVW (this stat takes in account FT shooting). For the game, WLU shot 25% (10-40) from Three. Nearly all of the threes were wide open looks, so it was just an off-shooting night.

WLU played with great effort, subbing frequently and putting severe mental stress on WVW, even though WVW was subbing also. This strategy became disruptive to WVW, as they committed 30 turnovers.

• IMHO, the difference in the game was West Liberty’s pressure forcing turnovers and the disruption in the focus of WVW players. WVW was totally unprepared for the pressure, and the pressure seemed to distract them even when they got into their half-court offense. The effect was mental fatigue as much as physical fatigue.
• WLU forced 30 turnovers on 33% of WVW’s possessions, of which 61% were live ball turnovers on 16 steals. WLU scored 1.43 points per opponent turnover, compared to 0.22 for WVW. WLU scored 43 points off turnovers to just 4 for WVW.
• WLU shared the ball very well. WLU had 59% of goals from assists to only 41% for WVW. 90th percentile for D1 is 59.8%.
• WLU was subpar from three, averaging 25% for the game, despite getting many open looks. Only two players shot 50% or greater from three. Abdullah was 1-2, and Davis was 2-4.
• WLU has quality depth. WLU played many different combinations of lineups, with no apparent drop-off in production. The three freshmen are making solid contributions, which is very unusual for WLU freshmen.
• WLU is improving in getting the ball inside on the half-court offense scoring two-point field goals. They are patient in getting the ball inside, either on passes to big men or by guards exploiting openings to attack the rim. This strategy will give opponents one more thing to worry about, especially since our big men can also shoot threes.
• WLU shot an outstanding 13-16 or 81% Free Throws.

Areas for Improvement for WLU
• Some of the 18 turnovers were unforced by errant passes in attempting to get the ball inside in traffic or due to teammates zigging instead of zagging. As they play more together, these issues will decrease. Players are learning that interior passes in traffic are much more challenging than perimeter passes.
• At times, the offense seemed to stagnate and WLU settled for 3-point shots early in the shot clock, even though they were open looks. IMHO, 40 attempts are probably too many attempts.