PDA

View Full Version : How do you feel about the emphasis on 3-point shots?



McKeyFan
12-11-2007, 03:23 PM
Like others on this board, I have held the opinion over the years that the 3-point shot is "fool's gold," as Larry Brown calls it.

Nevertheless, despite my early concerns, I've certainly warmed up to it at this point in the season. There is no doubt that a three takes the wind out of the opponents' sails. Also, I have been pleasantly surprised to see Dun and Granger effectively hit the three this season, in general.

So, tonight, I'm fired up to watch the Ps play, and to see some of our players drain some threes and rev up the offense.

Do I worry that it will catch up with us as the season goes on, and into the playoffs? Yes. I feel strongly that last year Detroit--especially with Billups--saw Larry Brown's prediction of fool's gold coming back to haunt them. But they were red hot the first half of the year.

And yet, Obie went to the semi-finals with this strategy a few years back.

So, I've got mixed emotions about our vulnerable strategy of jacking up the three whenever it's open. But I'm certainly enjoying it.

Naptown_Seth
12-11-2007, 03:46 PM
I think Brown is wrong about it being fool's gold. I suppose it can be, but it's not about the % of shots from 3, it's how you get them. Passing around the arc before a chuck is terrible, but going into the post and then opting for a wide open arc look from a solid 3pt guy, that's not just gold, that's diamonds.

Winning ball is about sticking with a strategy. The fool's gold part comes in when teams start to focus on the wrong aspects of a strategy or stop working the total package.

The Suns might not have won it all, but it sure as heck isn't because they make a ton of 3s. If you can hit the 3 and D up, you can win.

Having said all that, right now the Pacers are NOT a good offensive team. They are 21st in points per possession. They are also 21st in 3P% and Adjusted FG% (which JOB points to as defense for shooting the 3).

It's their 10th ranked defense that's giving them a chance.

One problem with that combo is a bad number in the FTAs department where they are well behind the competition. They D up tight and foul more, and their own jumpers aren't drawing as many fouls.


Returning to the 3P% for just a second, the team is at .343 (ugh, opponents are at .373). Why?

Well above that line we have (all taking at least 3 a game):
Dun .414
Danny .367 (but not as high as you'd think or want)
Shawne .358 (see DG)
Troy .367

And below:
Tins .313 (4 per game)
Rush .300 (1.7 per, but limited GP)
Diener .235 (2.3 per, see Rush)
Quis .308 (0.8 per)


And combine that with poor 2P% from some guys and look at the line for Adj. FG%, .479 for the team.

Below (taking at least 5 FG per night):
JO .415
Tins .443
Troy .462
Quis .463

So to me there are some serious execution issues, primarily with those 4 players. Each needs to be scoring better than that on their Adj FG%, and I'm 100% certain JOB agrees.

The offensive strategy isn't great, it never had Boston or Philly ranked as a top offensive team (per possession), but it can be better than it has so far. The Pacers really could have used either Rush or Diener (still could I should say).

Putnam
12-11-2007, 08:23 PM
The Pacers are averaging 22.2 3PA per game, just a couple more than their opponents (20.5 per game).

They are only 4-8 in games where they take more 3PA than their opponents.

The Pacers are 6-3 in games when they shoot a higher 3P% than their opponent.

Here's the most surprising fact: The Pacers are 9-0 in games where they shoot a higher overall FG% than their opponent.

The Pacers have outscored their opponent in the paint 14 times, versus only 12 games when they took more 3 attempts.

These figures lead me to say what I would say anyway. As a preferred weapon, the 3 is not a reliable way to win. But as a means of mixing up the attack and forcing the opponent to defend the whole floor, the 3 is a great tool. Our players aren't deadly from outside, but they are good enough to force the defense to come out to them.

Naptown_Seth
12-14-2007, 03:47 PM
Yeah, I think what we are seeing is what many of us suggested in the summer. This is not JOB's Celtics, they aren't loaded with 3pt offense, and if it wasn't for Dunleavy it might be downright ugly from long range at this point.

The motion that works the best has been the cutting. That's the one offensive aspect that looks better with JOB than it did with Rick. Otherwise I'm often painfully reminded of how lacking the toolbox was for Rick on offense.

Tinsley is sloppy and quite the chucker at times, but the offense struggles so much that his freewheeling style is by far the best option most of the time. I thought that was true the last few years as well.


I will say that in defense of JOB's system, many guys are seeing good 3pt chances. If you could get a Dennis Scott/Nick Anderson set of bombers rolling from out there you could see them really start to hurt teams. I guess Dun is doing his part toward that. But that Magic combo MADE 5 a game at something like 42%. Dun doesn't take enough and Danny doesn't make enough to come close to that, let alone anyone else on the team.

Dr. Goldfoot
12-14-2007, 04:11 PM
.365 puts you in the top 100 in three point career accuracy of all-time. If you're anywhere in that vicinity you're doing okay by me. Even if it's only for a season.

Danny .368
Mike .436
Troy .365
Shawne .368


Jamaal .326
Marquis .313
Kareem .300
Travis .229

I'll assume Rush and Diener will even out over the course of the season and Jamaal has looked pretty good lately ( .354 in the last 15 games).

BillS
12-14-2007, 04:45 PM
These figures lead me to say what I would say anyway. As a preferred weapon, the 3 is not a reliable way to win. But as a means of mixing up the attack and forcing the opponent to defend the whole floor, the 3 is a great tool. Our players aren't deadly from outside, but they are good enough to force the defense to come out to them.

I agree with this.

I think the best effect of the 3pt focus is that it is successfully drawing defenders out of the paint. We were terrible at that last year and I blame it for everything from JO's knee health to global warming.

They key is that we are still using the inside presence while denying it to opponents. If it takes a 3pt mentality to get to the right side of that balance, that's what I want to see.

Young
12-14-2007, 05:48 PM
I don't like living and dying by the 3, especially with the team we have. Because we won't live long.

I don't mind the three ball. Just as long as they come in rhythm. I think that at least in the beginning of the games it is really important to get as many layups as you can. It can really help a players confidence I think.

I like though how Jim wants guys to shoot. He doesn't want them to be afraid to fail. At the same time, the 3 point shot is such a low % shot that you can't live by it.

I think we will continue to see a lot of 3s. If we can get a lot of possessions it won't be a big deal to me.

JayRedd
12-14-2007, 05:56 PM
Mike .436

This is exceeding my wildest dreams.

Well, no, I guess not all my dreams...you perverts.

McKeyFan
12-15-2007, 02:36 PM
I don't like living and dying by the 3, especially with the team we have. Because we won't live long.

I don't mind the three ball. Just as long as they come in rhythm. I think that at least in the beginning of the games it is really important to get as many layups as you can. It can really help a players confidence I think.

I like though how Jim wants guys to shoot. He doesn't want them to be afraid to fail. At the same time, the 3 point shot is such a low % shot that you can't live by it.

I think we will continue to see a lot of 3s. If we can get a lot of possessions it won't be a big deal to me.

Good points.

However, thanks to Quinn Buckner, the phrase in bold is totally worn out and tiresome.

:whoknows:

NapTonius Monk
12-15-2007, 03:06 PM
I don't mind. What I don't get though is how opposing teams come in here and shoot lights out...and then the guys on our team who are supposed to be able to shoot all of a sudden can't shoot. Diener and Rush puzzle me, and Danny's inconsistency is frustrating, to say the least. I'm not shocked about Dunleavy, because his mechanics are sound. His issue, I'm convinced, was a confidence issue. Maybe, hopefully, it's the same with these other guys. And Murphy, I would send him down the hall to report for Bowser duty. Let him wear that puppy uni..and let him chuck away at halftime to his heart's content.

CableKC
12-15-2007, 03:35 PM
I think that it's good in the 1st 3 QTRs.....but not as good when we need to maintain a lead....we need to pull back on the throttle and start taking more high-percentage close-range/mid-range jumpshots. If we have a solid lead....we need good defenders on the floor and execute on all of our possessions.

IMHO...that means that players that can't defend and/or has good shot selection high percentage shots ( yes, I'm speaking about Murphy ).

BlueNGold
12-15-2007, 04:50 PM
3pt shooting should be part of the strategy...I think it's a must...but not in the top 3 concerns on a team...unless you want mediocrity. Even the Suns with a spectacular offense and perhaps better talent than anyone in the league, generally struggle in the playoffs in comparison to their regular season. Same with Dallas. Both have been as good or better than San Antonio in the regular season, but y'all know what happens come May.

Defense is and will always be the #1 way to win games, particularly in the playoffs. Long, quick, defensive minded players win championships.
Good shooters are important, but in the playoffs you need guys who can score...when it's tough to get a bucket. Look at Billups. Better yet, look at Rip Hamilton. He is a scorer...rarely going for the 3....but very, very effective in the playoffs. Look at Peja. A complete bust in the playoffs.

San Antonio has it all, but even they go to the rack and play an all around great defensive game. They define success and I think they are worthy to emulate. Defense, ball movement, chemistry...