So then when people respond, why reject their answer because it isn't the one you wanted? It reads like a super weird thread where you ask a question and then respond to all the answers with basically "no, I didn't want you to say that, you have to pick one to prove my point." It's kinda sad.
This has a ton of variables. I think this depends on who my primary scoring option is and what kind of offensive system established. If I have Luka Doncic as my guy, then I probably trust him more than anyone to get going and the law of averages to catch up on a bad shooting night. If I have Ja Morant as my guy, I would probably want him to take a step back and trust the team and offensive system. Am I running a motion offense with Luka? probably not but if I am running a motion offense I would trust the system to find the open looks its designed to create. Am I running an iso heavy PnR creation offense with Ja? probably not but if I am running a PnR heavy self creation offense to find open looks, I am going to continue trusting Ja to create. On this specific team? I want to find the open guy and take less shots, because no one is good enough on this team to trust continually jacking shots.
This isn't really a preference that can be applied generically. Harden and Halliburton are two of the best passers in the league so I'm fine with them deferring and getting guys involved. Tatum is not a passer so he should be chucking. It really just depends on who you are referring to.
I agree that good passers should concentrate more on playmaking if their shots aren't falling. For not-so-great passers, other than chucking, there's also the option of benching them and see if someone else can get hot.
I don’t think it’s about players making a conscious decision to not try to score on an off night. Players will try to score if they have an opening or opportunity. It’s also about game flow. If a player is locked down but has opportunity to make a play for others then they take that route. This is part of the reading defenses of basketball.
This is a thinly veiled backcourt issue thread. Now we probably get the Sengoon layup and FT issues thrown at us.
This almost feels like a sympathy for Jalen disappearing thread. They didn't hard double team him, they just shaded him with a second level defender - and Jalen didn't fight back. If he wasn't supposed to be the main offensive cog, that isn't so much of an issue, but he is supposed to be that main offensive cog. He has to find a way to impact games when teams shade or hard double him. He can't just let teams totally erase him from the game. What's worse is he got erased from the series by one of the weakest defenders in the entire league. That's unacceptable.
Sorry but this is simply not true. I posted what they did to him in game 3. They continued to do this in the series. I will post those at some point when I have time. Nevertheless he should have done better especially attacking and scoring in the paint. But to say he wasn’t trapped or doubled is not accurately representing what happened.
A competent shooter can have a bad shooting night because the default is good. The default for incompetent shooters, like our starting SG, is bad. For guys like that, if they aren't on a fluke hot shooting streak, they belong on the bench.
