|
|
Post by mfpaul on Jan 23, 2013 11:06:51 GMT -8
I keep seeing in threads that we can't win if we don't hit our three pointers. I get it, 3 pointers are momentum shifters and when you get hot you can do a lot.
I also understand that when you're in a slump and you aren't hitting them, the only way out of that slump is to keep shooting them and eventually you'll start making them again.
But.........in the last two games we are 8-36 from behind the arc.
not all of those shots were put up to avoid violating the shot clock running out. many, in fact, were gunned in transition before we even had anybody underneath to even attempt an offensive rebound.
if we took half as many three point shots and instead tried to actually hit a higher percentage shot and rely on the three pointer off the screen or when time on the shot clock expires would potentially have given us 18 more shots (9 more per game) with a higher chance of scoring. if we only hit half of those additional "higher percentage" shots, then we'd have an additional 18 points on 9 baskets plus possible foul shot points as well.
we lost by 7 to UNLV and by 13 to Wyoming. we lost by 20 points total and had the potential to score 18 more plus free throws by actually driving and taking higher percentage shots.
I realize i'm no basketball genius but it seems to me if you can't hit your 3s, try to actually make shots that have a chance of going in. 2 points is better than no points. and if you're going to miss anyway, what's the harm?
|
|
|
|
Post by azteccc on Jan 23, 2013 11:11:50 GMT -8
I keep seeing in threads that we can't win if we don't hit our three pointers. I get it, 3 pointers are momentum shifters and when you get hot you can do a lot. I also understand that when you're in a slump and you aren't hitting them, the only way out of that slump is to keep shooting them and eventually you'll start making them again. But.........in the last two games we are 8-36 from behind the arc. not all of those shots were put up to avoid violating the shot clock running out. many, in fact, were gunned in transition before we even had anybody underneath to even attempt an offensive rebound. if we took half as many three point shots and instead tried to actually hit a higher percentage shot and rely on the three pointer off the screen or when time on the shot clock expires would potentially have given us 18 more shots (9 more per game) with a higher chance of scoring. if we only hit half of those additional "higher percentage" shots, then we'd have an additional 18 points on 9 baskets plus possible foul shot points as well. we lost by 7 to UNLV and by 13 to Wyoming. we lost by 20 points total and had the potential to score 18 more plus free throws by actually driving and taking higher percentage shots. I realize i'm no basketball genius but it seems to me if you can't hit your 3s, try to actually make shots that have a chance of going in. 2 points is better than no points. and if you're going to miss anyway, what's the harm? unlv - you are absolutely correct. there was a 5 or 6 minute stretch where we ran down the floor feeling like it was the first half against CSU and just jacking up shots. IMO that's the stretch that lost us the game... instead of taking a lead that was there for us after some defensive stops, we stayed behind by 7, 8, 10. wyoming - it didn't matter what we did or where we shot it from. yup, the threes weren't falling and there were a few ill advised shots, but even going towards the basket the calls weren't there and the layups were not falling (or getting swatted by the man leonard washington). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2013 11:25:18 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2013 11:47:30 GMT -8
I think a lot of our threes stem from the fact that we don't get "easy" baskets. Most of our shots are a struggle, they are shots that take a ton of effort. Jamaal's drives, while successful for the most part, take a ton of effort. Same with most of our other shots the team usually looks for. When the team isn't having success converting in these one on one opportunities they resort to desperation threes, shots that take less effort and have high return, however are much lower percentage shots.
The keys in my opinion to get away from this are Winston and defense. For as great as X is, his ability to set up teammates for easy looks is no where near the level that Winston is already at. Improving our defense should create fast break and secondary fast break attempts, which will provide better shots for the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by longtimebooster on Jan 23, 2013 11:48:30 GMT -8
It's not an issue that we're jacking up treys, hoping that we'll shoot our way out of a slump. It's an issue that the guys shooting all the treys aren't good 3-point shooters to begin with. They can shoot all they want, but that's not going to improve their percentages. Franklin and Shepard are 25% three-point shooters. They shouldn't be shooting treys ever, and certainly not 8 times per game like Franklin routinely does. Rahon has morphed into a 30% three-point shooter. He's not much better than Franklin or Rahon. The only two guys who should have the green light behind the arc are Tapley and Thames. They're both 45% three-point shooters. Not having X in the lineup has hurt our three-point shooting the last few games. When he gets back, JF and WS3 need to concentrate on their own inside shots, as well as setting up Tapley and X from outside.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jan 23, 2013 12:24:49 GMT -8
It's not an issue that we're jacking up treys, hoping that we'll shoot our way out of a slump. It's an issue that the guys shooting all the treys aren't good 3-point shooters to begin with. They can shoot all they want, but that's not going to improve their percentages. Franklin and Shepard are 25% three-point shooters. They shouldn't be shooting treys ever, and certainly not 8 times per game like Franklin routinely does. Rahon has morphed into a 30% three-point shooter. He's not much better than Franklin or Rahon. The only two guys who should have the green light behind the arc are Tapley and Thames. They're both 45% three-point shooters. Not having X in the lineup has hurt our three-point shooting the last few games. When he gets back, JF and WS3 need to concentrate on their own inside shots, as well as setting up Tapley and X from outside. ^^^^ This I wish Rahon received a fine for shooting |
|
|
|
Post by aztec10 on Jan 23, 2013 12:34:48 GMT -8
Rahon needs to get his confidence back in shooting threes. Chase and Thames need to take every open three they can.
Jamaal doesn't need to stop taking threes; he just takes crappy shots. Whenever he gets the ball beyond the arc I know what's going to happen, just like everyone else (on the team too).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 23, 2013 12:36:18 GMT -8
It's not an issue that we're jacking up treys, hoping that we'll shoot our way out of a slump. It's an issue that the guys shooting all the treys aren't good 3-point shooters to begin with. They can shoot all they want, but that's not going to improve their percentages. Franklin and Shepard are 25% three-point shooters. They shouldn't be shooting treys ever, and certainly not 8 times per game like Franklin routinely does. Rahon has morphed into a 30% three-point shooter. He's not much better than Franklin or Rahon. The only two guys who should have the green light behind the arc are Tapley and Thames. They're both 45% three-point shooters. Not having X in the lineup has hurt our three-point shooting the last few games. When he gets back, JF and WS3 need to concentrate on their own inside shots, as well as setting up Tapley and X from outside. Your overall point is correct, but neither X or Tapley are 45% shooters. |
|
|
|
Post by markyc on Jan 23, 2013 12:45:35 GMT -8
It's not an issue that we're jacking up treys, hoping that we'll shoot our way out of a slump. It's an issue that the guys shooting all the treys aren't good 3-point shooters to begin with. They can shoot all they want, but that's not going to improve their percentages. Franklin and Shepard are 25% three-point shooters. They shouldn't be shooting treys ever, and certainly not 8 times per game like Franklin routinely does. Rahon has morphed into a 30% three-point shooter. He's not much better than Franklin or Rahon. The only two guys who should have the green light behind the arc are Tapley and Thames. They're both 45% three-point shooters. Not having X in the lineup has hurt our three-point shooting the last few games. When he gets back, JF and WS3 need to concentrate on their own inside shots, as well as setting up Tapley and X from outside. Your overall point is correct, but neither X or Tapley are 45% shooters. Pretty close, they're both 41% 3pt shooters right now |
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jan 23, 2013 13:11:52 GMT -8
Rahon needs to get his confidence back in shooting threes. Chase and Thames need to take every open three they can. Jamaal doesn't need to stop taking threes; he just takes crappy shots. Whenever he gets the ball beyond the arc I know what's going to happen, just like everyone else (on the team too). Maal should stop taking stupid 3's. Rahon needs his eyesight checked. |
|
Todd
New Recruit
Posts: 31
|
Post by Todd on Jan 23, 2013 13:16:10 GMT -8
No major post threats means you can't go there, and teams are wise enough in conference play to understand that Jamaal is going to be the play creater for you team so they guard him tight. That leaves you with Tapley, Thames, Rahon and others open on the 3 point line. If you let Tapley open he'll burn you but the other players are all streaky and well you see the numbers.
SDSU while having size doesn't have scoring from them and it puts alot of strain on the offense to score add to it the pressure defense and it wears players out. Sometimes they choose the easy choice of just chucking up the 3's to save energy. It hurts because it puts more pressure to score on the shooters the next trips and then they fail and it sort of builds up.
Aztecs arn't built like they were a few years ago and that's fine but the players need to adapt and to do that they need to attack off the dribble and help create better looks.
|
|
|
|
Post by AztecBill on Jan 23, 2013 13:55:46 GMT -8
Last year even though we played 4 guards we attempted the 2nd fewest 3 point shots in the MWC. We need to work hard to not shoot 3 point shots.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdsustoner on Jan 23, 2013 14:07:57 GMT -8
Last year even though we played 4 guards we attempted the 2nd fewest 3 point shots in the MWC. We need to work hard to not shoot 3 point shots. This ^^^^ We also played much better defense. |
|
