We've shot the 3 horribly no doubt. Yet we're still 9th in offense. What does that tell you about the system? That's the whole point. The advantage of a 2 vs a 3 is so great that even if you arent shooting well it's still more efficient than midrange.
The Rockets are really good at creating open 3 point shots. We do that better than anyone. It's the advantage that we have over GSW. They shoot it better but they cant generate as many open 3s. That's been our equalizer with them. The statistical advantage of 3s is a mathematical thing. It isnt dependent on knowing something or valuing something that others dont as does Moneyball. Who are the bad 3 pint shooters that should be shooting midrange instead? Do we have any of those?
an easier shot is an easier shot... there may be guys that can shoot an open 3 pointer at a higher % than an open 6-8 footer... but I'd have to think thats an anomaly... or possibly just muscle memory for practicing a set shot so many times... but by and large I have to believe that the shorter the shot the better the results... Obviously you factor in 3>2 and varying degrees of defense... but apples to apples on defense i gotta believe the closer the shot is a better % by and large... If u dont mind, throw me the link on those stats on open shots (1st/9th)... I'd have to look at that bc something doesnt seem right there... idk... 20.4% of Hardens shots are a 3pt with tight coverage (2-4') which he shoots 33.3%... .99 per attempt... 27.2% of hardens shots are 2 pt with tight coverage (2-4") which he shoots 55.2%... 1.1 per attempt... Gordon 5.8% of shots are tight coverage 3s, resulting in 27.8% made CP3 6.3% = 31.3% made GG 15.9% = 28.6% A brick 2 = a brick 3... no benefit in shooting one over the other... I think people have a misconception about the 3 pt shot based on the past... A lot of times teams didnt/dont get out and cover the 3 effectively... they were either lazy or concerned with guys going around them for an easier mid range shot or getting to the rim... resulting in a high % of open 3's which resulted in 3's being made at a higher clip... defenses are adjusting to this - esp with us. If defenses are getting out and camping on the 3 point line - you gotta make em pay.... you either get around them and take it to the rim... or if they have someone lying back as a rim protector, you gotta be able to make that short jumper at an effective clip... If guys cant make that 6-8 foot shot efficiently - then they need to work on it... defenses adjust - and you need to adjust your offense accordingly...
Honestly, I dont wanna talk about this too much, cause im really miffed. But like...those 2 point percentages you are posting also account for lay ups.
Overall the philosophy is OK , it's just that it's too static , too predictable . And when guys are cold there is no adjustment . We need to set up a way for our shooters to get in rhythm . Some cuts to the basket to get that easy layup or ft's
nothin to get miffed about, dude... just a free exchange of ideas and perspectives in pursuit of mutual understanding and acceptance... I realize the 2pt % includes layups... just included it to show that the 'need for the 3' isn't necessarily a no brainer - its actually a lower pt per shot than his 2 pt efficiency - given equal defense... plus thats with both being 'tight coverage' as opposed to 'open 2' vs 'contested 3' which was my initial contention... now i'm not sayin 1 should be abandoned for the other - its still about a balance... and to show that 20% of Hardens 3's are with tight coverage - since you asked "how many contested 3's do you think we take?" - welp, 20% of Hardens shots... jus sayin...
Oh it's not about this..it was about the game we chocked away. You're a cool guy, so discussing with you is fun haha.
