Connect with us

Wisconsin

Perimeter defense shines for Wisconsin men’s basketball but shot selection cancels it out

Published

on

Perimeter defense shines for Wisconsin men’s basketball but shot selection cancels it out


University of Wisconsin men’s basketball coach Greg Gard said he wasn’t going to give away any secret formulas, but Purdue — simply by the sheer lack of significant separation it was able to muster all throughout the Badgers’ 75-69 loss Sunday at the Kohl Center — made it obvious: It will dominate inside, but 3-pointers remain a necessary function.

Those 3-pointers weren’t there for Purdue. Boilermakers guard Lance Jones had three makes on seven shots. The rest of Purdue attempted just four all game.

People are also reading…

Advertisement

That’s part of what made Badgers guard Max Klesmit’s side-stepping 3-pointer in transition with Wisconsin trailing 39-36 with 16 minutes, 57 seconds left in the game so crucial. Both at that point and throughout the game, the Badgers just needed a few of those to fall.

Klesmit’s shot didn’t. Purdue went on a 9-2 run and Wisconsin (16-6, 8-3 Big Ten) never hit a 3-pointer again. Even with all the attention and doubles it threw toward reigning national player of the year Zach Edey, Wisconsin defended the 3-point line better than it has perhaps all season. The Boilermakers are a daunting team to face off against from the perimeter, connecting on 40.4% of its 3s (fourth in the country). They’ve connected on more than 10 3s eight times this year, and have never fired less than 15 in a game this season entering Sunday.

Advertisement

Yet at a 3 for 11 clip, a Wisconsin team that has allowed opponents to shoot 35.7% from 3 held Purdue to season lows in both categories. The issue for the Badgers, though, was the offense didn’t have perimeter success in return.

Wisconsin shot 3 of 19 from 3-point range, its own season-low output from the perimeter — a glaring look as the Badgers outscored the Boilermakers (21-2, 10-2) 44-34 in the paint yet couldn’t capitalize from the level above, where its 34.9% 3-point shooting hasn’t quite won it many games this year. 

“Some of them were good, some of them weren’t so good, I think in the shot selection (on 3-pointers),” Wahl said, “but when we get into post and draw two, we got to be able to make some plays.”

Wisconsin forward Steven Crowl said he isn’t surprised that the Badgers were able to outpace the Boilermakers on the interior. After all, he said, that is what they do best. Gard acknowledged that shot selection was an emphasis after Thursday’s collapse against Nebraska, where Gard felt Wisconsin was too reliant on jump shots. He alluded that the Badgers have discussed something along those lines all season long.

Advertisement





Wisconsin’s AJ Storr shoots the ball against Purdue’s Lance Jones in the second half Sunday at the Kohl Center.

Advertisement




Yet Wisconsin, coupled with some paint touches early, was able to get some open 3s early. Three of Wisconsin’s first six looks from there fell, and perhaps like it did against Nebraska, the Badgers looked there a bit more.

Though 3-point shooting hasn’t been a huge plus for Wisconsin this year, it hasn’t allowed its 3-point shooting to take it out of games much. After a 5-for-20 3-point shooting game against Providence on Nov. 14, 2023 — the last time Wisconsin experienced back-to-back losses — the Badgers only missed 15 3-pointers in a game twice more over a 15-4 stretch.

Some early success from deep can change things for the Badgers, which they’ve shown in the last two games. So Sunday, sophomore AJ Storr forced a few shots and a few others started to look from that distance.

Advertisement

When the misses piled up, Purdue coach Matt Painter said he understood why the Badgers struggled to shoot out of it. He’s seen it on his own sideline, too: players can tighten up when they’re missing, whether they’re open or not.

“A couple of those are: you do a good job, you contest it, they get a miss,” Painter said. “Then you have a defensive breakdown and they’re wide open and they miss them (too). So there’s a handful of them in there that we were very fortunate when they missed it.”

Klesmit, who hit both of his first-half 3s, was among the Badgers who fell victim to the 11 second-half misses by contributing two. But Klesmit was also among the reasons Wisconsin had a chance against the Boilermakers had his or his teammates’ 3s fallen through.







Max Klesmit blocks Lance Jones

Advertisement

Wisconsin guard Max Klesmit blocks the shot of Purdue’s Lance Jones in the second half Sunday at the Kohl Center.




He held Purdue’s Fletcher Loyer, who has connected on 42 3s this season, to zero attempts. The Badgers just didn’t have the responses to counter that. 

It’s the continuation of a theme for Wisconsin over its last two losses in a row: The Badgers have shown varying areas of elite play throughout the season, yet they’re not immune to weaknesses. And in back-to-back games, the weakness of its shot selection has shown itself in a way winning would never allow. With poor second-half jump shooting to match hot first-half jump shooting against Nebraska and the 3-point defense to its 3-point shooting Sunday, Wisconsin has canceled itself out.

Advertisement

“I’ll let a few heat-check shots go if the shots before then have gone down,” Gard said, “but when were heat checking and we haven’t gotten any heat, then we can’t heat check.”

Of course, Wisconsin — as good teams do — was able to make things interesting at the end, though. Klesmit stayed involved in the game, drawing an offensive foul on an inbounds play with the Badgers trailing 74-69 with 9.2 seconds left. The Badgers, off a good inbounds play, got an open 3 for freshman forward Nolan Winter.

Winter’s shot looked good, and even if it was too late, at least looked like it could give the Badgers chance. But its clank off the rim sealed Wisconsin’s fate: It wasn’t going to win with the 3 earlier in the game, and it certainly wasn’t going to at the end.

Advertisement



Source link

Wisconsin

These Wisconsin swing voters say Trump’s war in Iran wasn’t worth it

Published

on

These Wisconsin swing voters say Trump’s war in Iran wasn’t worth it


Vessels are anchored along the Strait of Hormuz.

Amirhossein Khorgooei/ISNA/AFP via Getty Images


hide caption

Advertisement

toggle caption

Amirhossein Khorgooei/ISNA/AFP via Getty Images

The war in Iran was a costly blunder, according to swing voters in the battleground state of Wisconsin.

NPR observed two online focus groups on Tuesday featuring voters who supported Joe Biden in 2020 and then Donald Trump in 2024.

Advertisement

President Trump had just announced a framework agreement to end the war, which he signed on Wednesday.

Yet among the focus groups’ 13 participants, no one said they thought the conflict with Iran was “worth it,” and nine said they felt that the U.S. is coming out of this conflict weaker than before.

Corey M., a 33-year-old independent voter, said he is concerned that the U.S. expended “so much financially and so much of our arsenal,” with little to show for it. (All participants agreed to be part of the focus groups on the condition that they be identified by their first name and last initial only.)

“We essentially got nothing out of it,” he said. “It’s hurt our economy and increased expenses for the everyday American, and it accomplished the square root of nothing.”

Focus groups are not scientifically significant like polling. But they provide insight into how Americans are thinking about what they see in the news.

Advertisement

These focus groups — made up of 10 self-described independents, two Democrats and one Republican — were conducted by messaging and market research firms Engagious and Sago as part of the Swing Voter Project. NPR is a partner on the project.

Rich Thau, president of Engagious, moderated the focus groups. He has been asking voters in key states about this conflict since March. And he said voters have been consistent.

“They were never on board,” Thau said. “Not the beginning. Not in the middle. And as we just learned, not at the end either, judging from what we heard from Wisconsin swing voters.”

Sam M., a 30-year-old independent, said from what he read about the deal, it wasn’t leaving the U.S. in a better position than before the war. In fact, he said he thought the Iran nuclear deal brokered by the Obama administration — which Trump backed out of — was a better deal for the United States.



Source link

Continue Reading

Wisconsin

President of Wisconsin’s largest mosque released from ICE custody

Published

on

President of Wisconsin’s largest mosque released from ICE custody


A federal judge has ordered the release of the president of Wisconsin’s largest mosque, after finding that immigration officials probably detained him in retaliation against his public advocacy for Palestinian rights, suppressing his first amendment rights in the process.

The US district judge James Patrick Hanlon’s order on Thursday marked a sharp rebuke against Trump officials, including the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who had tried to paint Salah Sarsour as a national security threat.

“Salah Sarsour, who has lived in this country for more than three decades and served as a core pillar in his community without any issues, should never have been detained in the first place,” his legal team wrote in a statement. “While we continue to fight these baseless claims in court, today is about celebrating a family being reunited. It is also a sober reminder that, if the government can target Mr Sarsour, everyone’s free speech rights are at risk.”

Sarsour describes himself as a stateless Palestinian, according to the order. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) says that he is a Jordanian citizen. He has lived in the United States for more than three decades, becoming a legal permanent resident in 1998. Immigration officials approved Sarsour’s citizenship application decades ago, though he did not naturalize.

Advertisement

Sarsour has garnered public attention as a champion for Palestinian rights, and serves as a board member of an advocacy group called American Muslims for Palestine.

But Rubio personally signed off on a memo to the DHS last year describing Sarsour as deportable despite his green card, because “his actions undermine US foreign policy to combat antisemitism around the world”. The memo, cited in Hanlon’s order, accuses Sarsour’s group of being “found to have been involved in activities providing funds to Hamas”.

A group of plainclothes ICE officers from at least 10 unmarked vehicles swarmed Sarsour on 30 March of this year, arresting him and putting him in deportation proceedings. ICE ultimately detained him in Clay county jail in Indiana.

Sarsour lost 30lb while detained, the order says. His lawyers told the court that he was “at constant risk of developing serious complications from diabetes given that the medical staff only checks his blood-sugar levels once a month”. Tightly controlling diabetes typically requires multiple glucose checks daily.

Hanlon’s order says that homeland security officials and Rubio probably trampled on Sarsour’s first amendment right to free speech and appeared to have arrested him in retaliation for his Palestinian rights advocacy.

Advertisement

The order cited a New York Times story and the website for the Heritage Foundation, the conservative thinktank that dreamed up Project 2025,

The Heritage Foundation presented the White House with the idea to present prominent foreign-born Muslims and Palestinian rights leaders as terrorists in order to sue them, deport them or pressure employers to fire them, the order says, citing reporting from the Times and Heritage’s own website. Sarsour was probably among the targets of that campaign, the order says.

The federal government, through its lawyers, contended that Sarsour should be deported based on two convictions from more than three decades ago in Israel – one for throwing a molotov cocktail and the other for attempting to store weapons and ammunition.

Sarsour denies having committed those crimes.

But Hanlon viewed those crimes as a non-issue for justifying his incarceration, noting that the federal government knew about them since the 1990s and approved his legal permanent residency and his citizenship application anyway.

Advertisement

Sarsour’s speech on Palestinian rights “is core political speech and squarely within the scope of the First Amendment”, the order says. “Mr Sarsour has submitted evidence allowing a reasonable inference that his protected speech was ‘at least a motivating factor’ in Respondents’ decision to detain him.”

A spokesperson for homeland security described Sarsour as a “terrorist”, citing the convictions from his youth in Israel.

Government lawyers had argued that Sarsour did not have the same first amendment rights as US citizens. If he were released, they said, he should have to pay a $25,000 bond, wear an ankle monitor, check in routinely with ICE and remain confined to his house.

Instead, Hanlon ordered his release on personal recognizance, meaning that Sarsour does not have to pay a cash bond to compel him to show up in court again. The order, however, requires him to remain in the state of Wisconsin.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Wisconsin

Couple asks Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear Brewers 50-50 raffle prize dispute

Published

on

Couple asks Wisconsin Supreme Court to hear Brewers 50-50 raffle prize dispute


(WLUK) – A couple challenging the decision not to award them a 50-50 raffle prize at a Milwaukee Brewers game asked the Wisconsin Supreme Court to take the case, calling it one of “statewide importance.”

Matthew and Annette Flynn purchased ten raffle tickets at the July 7, 2023, game, and held the winning number which was originally selected for $13,000. According to court records, the raffle rules in effect at the time required the winning ticket holder to claim the prize at a designated 50-50 table by the end of the top of the seventh inning. Flynn said she did not see the winning number displayed or hear it announced and was directed by stadium personnel to another location before making her way to the claim table. Officials determined she did not arrive before the deadline and selected a new winning ticket.

The Flynns sued, but the circuit and appeals courts ruled the raffle’s rules gave the foundation sole discretion to determine the official winner and that the rules clearly stated a participant who failed to claim the prize within the specified time would be disqualified.

In a petition to the Wisconsin Supreme Court filed Wednesday, the Flynn’s asked the high court to take the case, saying the decision “affects not only the parties to this action but potentially every Wisconsin resident who participates in charitable raffles and similar gaming activities.”

Advertisement

“This case presents significant questions concerning contractual discretion, discovery, judicial review of charitable gaming decisions, and the treatment of digital evidence within Wisconsin’s appellate system. For these reasons, Petitioners respectfully request that this Court grant review of the decision of the Court of Appeals,” the petition states.

The high court does not have to take the case. At some point, it will vote on if to take it. If it does, a months-long process to review the issues will begin. If it does not, the appeals court ruling would stand.

According to the rules posted on the Milwaukee Brewers’ website, the deadline to claim the prize is no longer during the game the tickets were purchased.

Comment with Bubbles

BE THE FIRST TO COMMENT

Advertisement

“The Participant in possession of the Raffle ticket with the potential winning number may claim the Prize at the 50/50 Table located on the Loge (2nd) level concourse behind Sections 216/217 until such time as the Ballpark officially closes to fans after the end of the game. If the Participant in possession of the Raffle ticket with the potential winning number does not claim the Prize by the time the Ballpark closes to fans after the end of the game, that Participant may still claim the Prize within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the Raffle Period for the respective baseball game by contacting the Raffle hotline (414-902-4334). A Prize that is not claimed within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of the Raffle Period will be awarded in compliance with applicable regulations,” the site states.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending