And I'll still contend that shooting over 60% from 3 at volume is not sustainable no matter how much confidence you have walking into a building, even when the shots are wide open (which by the way, most weren't that Minnesota made). As I said, in the game thread, you are more than free to disagree with me, but if shooting over 60% from three was as easy and repeatable as feeling confident when you enter the building, there'd be a hell of a lot of 60+% 3pt shooting teams.
And while I love LaTulip, prior to this game we actually had better 3pt defense in B10 games than Purdue has. Does that mean when teams play Purdue they walk into Mackey super confident they're going to torch down the nets from 3? In our last 8 games, we've allowed 33.0% shooting on 3pt shots. That's 3rd best in the B10. Okay but what about our last 5 games? 33.3%. That's 4th in the B10. Fine, but what about our past 3 games? 33.3% again. That can't be right... That doesn't quite fit the narrative, does it?
And I know the narrative of we can't play defense is a strong one, and there is much statistically to agree with that, but saying our 3pt defense before this game is terrible and everyone thinks they can walk in and shoot over 60% from 3 on us is absurd. Or if they do think that, they sure haven't put it into practice against us until today. Makes you wonder why that is when teams are so confident they can, doesn't it? I mean, maybe it could be because it's extremely difficult to shoot anywhere close to 60% at volume from 3 in a live action game? Just maybe? But hey, what do I know, I'm probably just making excuses for a bad defense. If Minnesota felt so confident from 3 with us giving up 33% from 3 the past month, Wisconsin likely has so much confidence now seeing Minnesota shoot 70%, it's going to be impossible for them to shoot anything under 140% from 3, isn't it? I mean that's how this works, right?