Is Shaun Livingston a bad shooter? A liability on Offense?

[The4thHorseman]

A Warriors fan recently argued with me on the main board that Livingston's a bad shooter and is a liability on Offense cause he doesn't shoot the 3 ball. I think the notion is ridiculous and say his mid-range game is money. He's a career 48% shooter and shooting 50% over the last 3yrs.

Thanks for voting.

[FNQ]

He's not a bad shooter, he has limited range. And that definitely puts a cap on his abilities. But because of his + size, he has 2 aspects of his game that most PGs (especially backups) cannot do - he has an excellent post-up game and he can switch between 1-3 defensively, seamlessly.

Limited as a shooter and not much of a liability on offense, but to some degree he is. But when you put up TS%s of .581 and .568 the past 2 years, its really hard to argue that he's hurting the offense. If anything, his offensive impact went down this year because we had more handlers on the court as we essentially traded Barnes for Durant, thus taking the ball out of his hands a bit more than previous years, as noted in a small drop in usage.

[Coxy]

Not at all. He brings a unique mid-range and post game that creates a different element to the lineup. When he's on with the 1st unit, his post game is money as defenders need to stick to their man on the perimeter as he's a great passer, which allows him to work the post mid-range. He's also a great bail out option late in the clock as he can get that turnaround shot off anytime as the release is sky high. He's also a good slasher to the hole and cutter.

Another note to add to Livingston, which I am HUGE on, is locker room presence. Shaun is just a consummate professional that has been to hell and back with injuries that almost finished him. He's a pro's pro, and from all reports is extremely trusted and respected by his peers. He's a major part of the core and it's winning culture on and off the court which is usually not even thought about by fans. Coach's know the value of high character guys to set the tone for a franchise, Shuan is one of them.

[FrigginFalcon]

A more fundamental argument has been the periodic call to get a "back-up Steph," which we currently do not have. Nick Young may be closer than Shaun, but he seems more like a "back-up Klay" to me. The fact is, Kerr does not try to run the same kinds of sets with the key starters on the bench as he does with them on the floor. We have some excellent reserves, Shaun being one of them, but they do not plug in one-for-one with any of the starters. Kerr and his staff need to work out substitution patterns and offensive sets for a huge number of possible combinations. Shaun for Steph takes away the 3-point threat almost entirely, but it also almost always gives him a height advantage he can exploit to generate mid-range jumpers off post-up moves, and his shooting % off that is excellent.

(My HS team had the same problem. A decent bench, but almost no direct substitutes for the first string, especially for our three top players. Eventually, the Coach just decided to give us (yes, I was part of that group) one Quarter per game AS A UNIT. We played the end of the First Quarter and the beginning of the Second, with the Assistant Coach running the game. Head Coach would huddle with the starters, who would get a long break and a good chance to talk strategy. Same thing across the 3rd/4th Quarter break. With the extra rest, the starters stayed fresher, had less foul trouble, and had fewer periods of bad results due to a lack of coaching corrections. For the second team, we knew we only had 8 minutes on the floor, so we played our asses off, sometimes against weary starters. and though we didn't keep Plus/Minus stats in those days, I KNOW we had a better Plus/Minus than the starters more often than not. Our W/L results improved dramatically -- .500 with positional substitution, undefeated with the "two team" approach, and vs. essentially the same competition, since most of our season was home & away vs. one group of teams.)

I've often wished Kerr would try something like that. If he would let, say, Iggy + Young + Livingston + Casspi + McGee develop AS A UNIT, then just plug them all at once, let Brown run the game while he huddles with the starters, and tell them to play their asses off, that could be very tough for other teams to handle. In that line-up, BTW, Livingston would become the Small Forward, which is where I think he could fit nicely with a "Death Line-up." I like him as a player, but not necessarily as a Point Guard.

[BdeRegt]

Livingston does not have any type of range as a shooter but that does not make him hurt the offense as he is a smart passer and is actually one of our better iso scorers (all through post ups pretty much). He plays excellent defense on multiple positions and is very good in the death lineup when Iguodala rests as he can be the one inside threat. Warriors basically run a 4 out offense around him a lot of times.

I think the confusion a lot of people have about Livingston is that he isn't really Curry's sub. Yes, he would probably be starting PG if Curry was out for a long period of time but in a regular game, he does not sub for Curry. He is more of a sub for Klay/KD. Clark was the sub for Curry and I think this role will be taken by a combination of Young/McCaw.

[Mylie10]

Livingston killed us.....we should have swept the Cavs! Horrible signing.

#greenfont

[Onus]

I wouldn't say that Livingston is a liability on offense but he does have real limitations. Not being able to spread the floor as a wing player isn't really what offenses are looking for now a days. I would never describe him as a shooter though, perhaps a midrange shooter but never just the designation shooter.

There is a guy that continually claims that Livingston is the only reason why Curry has such large impact stats. However, if you look at nbawowy with Livingston on and Curry off the warriors score 1.026 ppp, which is exactly how the Warriors score when Curry is off without controlling for Livingston. Surrounding Livingston with Klay and Durant (Curry still off) the Warriors score 1.108 ppp, although Klay and Durant without Livingston or Curry only score 1.103 ppp. So Livingston isn't necessarily tanking the offense or a liability there.

[and1GS]

He's not a bad shooter, he has limited range. And that definitely puts a cap on his abilities. But because of his + size, he has 2 aspects of his game that most PGs (especially backups) cannot do - he has an excellent post-up game and he can switch between 1-3 defensively, seamlessly.

Limited as a shooter and not much of a liability on offense, but to some degree he is. But when you put up TS%s of .581 and .568 the past 2 years, its really hard to argue that he's hurting the offense. If anything, his offensive impact went down this year because we had more handlers on the court as we essentially traded Barnes for Durant, thus taking the ball out of his hands a bit more than previous years, as noted in a small drop in usage.

It's also worth noting that a couple years ago there was chatter he worked on his corner 3 a ton. He took a few to start the year and then went away from it for the rest of the season after not hitting his shots.

I see him as an extremely smart player. He knows he doesn't have a natural shooting motion and touch from all over the floor, so he focused on getting next-level great at a couple things. Pull up short mid ranger and turn around low post jumper over a small defender.

It would be more of an issue if we expected him to also cover the skillset that Barbosa, Clark and now Young bring to the table.

[FNQ]

I think the confusion a lot of people have about Livingston is that he isn't really Curry's sub. Yes, he would probably be starting PG if Curry was out for a long period of time but in a regular game, he does not sub for Curry. He is more of a sub for Klay/KD. Clark was the sub for Curry and I think this role will be taken by a combination of Young/McCaw.

It's pretty equal, but you're right to a degree. Curry is usually subbed out before the end of Q1, Durant would not be usually. Livingston's job was to come in to start Q2.. so while he's in, he's taking the lead ballhandling role, but he doesnt directly sub in for Curry. This is because KD and Green tend to finish Q1 a lot, or Iguodala comes in (usually for Zaza), so Livingston's skillset isnt really needed.

w/Steph: 632 min (47%)
w/o Steph: 713 min (53%)

w/Klay: 840 min (62%)
w/o Klay: 505 min (38%)

w/KD: 561 min (42%)
w/o KD: 784 min (58%)

Ian Clark, 1137 minutes:

w/Steph: 410 (36%)
w/o Steph: 727 (64%)

One other note: people tend to think McCaw is the heir apparent to Iguodala.. I disagree. I think he's the heir to Livingston..

[BdeRegt]

I think the confusion a lot of people have about Livingston is that he isn't really Curry's sub. Yes, he would probably be starting PG if Curry was out for a long period of time but in a regular game, he does not sub for Curry. He is more of a sub for Klay/KD. Clark was the sub for Curry and I think this role will be taken by a combination of Young/McCaw.

It's pretty equal, but you're right to a degree. Curry is usually subbed out before the end of Q1, Durant would not be usually. Livingston's job was to come in to start Q2.. so while he's in, he's taking the lead ballhandling role, but he doesnt directly sub in for Curry. This is because KD and Green tend to finish Q1 a lot, or Iguodala comes in (usually for Zaza), so Livingston's skillset isnt really needed.

w/Steph: 632 min (47%)
w/o Steph: 713 min (53%)

w/Klay: 840 min (62%)
w/o Klay: 505 min (38%)

w/KD: 561 min (42%)
w/o KD: 784 min (58%)

Ian Clark, 1137 minutes:

w/Steph: 410 (36%)
w/o Steph: 727 (64%)

One other note: people tend to think McCaw is the heir apparent to Iguodala.. I disagree. I think he's the heir to Livingston..

Confused with your notes of Warriors rotation. Unless there is something with injury, foul trouble, or something funky, Curry plays the whole 1st quarter resting the start of the 2nd quarter and 4th quarter. By the end of the year and I would expect next year, Durant did same. The start of 2nd quarter and 4th quarter units when in rotation was Livingston/Klay/Iguodala/Draymond/West with Clark often getting minutes in this rest time for Iguodala or Livingston as he had good chemistry with West but hurt the defense.

[FNQ]

I think the confusion a lot of people have about Livingston is that he isn't really Curry's sub. Yes, he would probably be starting PG if Curry was out for a long period of time but in a regular game, he does not sub for Curry. He is more of a sub for Klay/KD. Clark was the sub for Curry and I think this role will be taken by a combination of Young/McCaw.

It's pretty equal, but you're right to a degree. Curry is usually subbed out before the end of Q1, Durant would not be usually. Livingston's job was to come in to start Q2.. so while he's in, he's taking the lead ballhandling role, but he doesnt directly sub in for Curry. This is because KD and Green tend to finish Q1 a lot, or Iguodala comes in (usually for Zaza), so Livingston's skillset isnt really needed.

w/Steph: 632 min (47%)
w/o Steph: 713 min (53%)

w/Klay: 840 min (62%)
w/o Klay: 505 min (38%)

w/KD: 561 min (42%)
w/o KD: 784 min (58%)

Ian Clark, 1137 minutes:

w/Steph: 410 (36%)
w/o Steph: 727 (64%)

One other note: people tend to think McCaw is the heir apparent to Iguodala.. I disagree. I think he's the heir to Livingston..

Confused with your notes of Warriors rotation. Unless there is something with injury, foul trouble, or something funky, Curry plays the whole 1st quarter resting the start of the 2nd quarter and 4th quarter. By the end of the year and I would expect next year, Durant did same. The start of 2nd quarter and 4th quarter units when in rotation was Livingston/Klay/Iguodala/Draymond/West with Clark often getting minutes in this rest time for Iguodala or Livingston as he had good chemistry with West but hurt the defense.

I dont have in front of me right now, but @ Cal we have a Q#F stat (quarter # finished) and Curry didn't finish a lot of Q1s. That's likely to give an extended break between the quarters, as a lot of teams do that. The stat doesnt have a qualifier - if there's a deadball with 0.1s on the clock and Curry's subbed out, he doesnt finish the quarter. But distinctly remember Durant at the top of the list in terms of Q1F. Iguodala was right behind him.

[BdeRegt]

It's pretty equal, but you're right to a degree. Curry is usually subbed out before the end of Q1, Durant would not be usually. Livingston's job was to come in to start Q2.. so while he's in, he's taking the lead ballhandling role, but he doesnt directly sub in for Curry. This is because KD and Green tend to finish Q1 a lot, or Iguodala comes in (usually for Zaza), so Livingston's skillset isnt really needed.

w/Steph: 632 min (47%)
w/o Steph: 713 min (53%)

w/Klay: 840 min (62%)
w/o Klay: 505 min (38%)

w/KD: 561 min (42%)
w/o KD: 784 min (58%)

Ian Clark, 1137 minutes:

w/Steph: 410 (36%)
w/o Steph: 727 (64%)

One other note: people tend to think McCaw is the heir apparent to Iguodala.. I disagree. I think he's the heir to Livingston..

Confused with your notes of Warriors rotation. Unless there is something with injury, foul trouble, or something funky, Curry plays the whole 1st quarter resting the start of the 2nd quarter and 4th quarter. By the end of the year and I would expect next year, Durant did same. The start of 2nd quarter and 4th quarter units when in rotation was Livingston/Klay/Iguodala/Draymond/West with Clark often getting minutes in this rest time for Iguodala or Livingston as he had good chemistry with West but hurt the defense.

I dont have in front of me right now, but @ Cal we have a Q#F stat (quarter # finished) and Curry didn't finish a lot of Q1s. That's likely to give an extended break between the quarters, as a lot of teams do that. The stat doesnt have a qualifier - if there's a deadball with 0.1s on the clock and Curry's subbed out, he doesnt finish the quarter. But distinctly remember Durant at the top of the list in terms of Q1F. Iguodala was right behind him.

I don't have the stat in front of me but common knowledge that Curry likes to finish quarter. He gets subbed out a lot for the final possession if we are going to be on defense so that might explain why that stat is misleading. Kerr's standard rotation by end of year was to bring out the center first then Klay and finally Draymond letting Curry and KD play whole first quarter as they prefer. Klay and Draymond start the 2nd quarter anchoring bench unit with West/Iguodala/Livingston with sometimes Clark getting minutes here as well. KD/Curry will come in anywhere between 4 and 6 minutes into the quarter. Klay will often get a breather at some point in the quarter finishing with the small ball lineup. This basically repeats in the 2nd half unless a blowout, foul trouble, or something is really clicking where Kerr rides a hot hand sometimes.

[Quazza]

his pull up jumper in the paint, along with his turnaround jumper from the post, are things of beauty

[FNQ]

Confused with your notes of Warriors rotation. Unless there is something with injury, foul trouble, or something funky, Curry plays the whole 1st quarter resting the start of the 2nd quarter and 4th quarter. By the end of the year and I would expect next year, Durant did same. The start of 2nd quarter and 4th quarter units when in rotation was Livingston/Klay/Iguodala/Draymond/West with Clark often getting minutes in this rest time for Iguodala or Livingston as he had good chemistry with West but hurt the defense.

I dont have in front of me right now, but @ Cal we have a Q#F stat (quarter # finished) and Curry didn't finish a lot of Q1s. That's likely to give an extended break between the quarters, as a lot of teams do that. The stat doesnt have a qualifier - if there's a deadball with 0.1s on the clock and Curry's subbed out, he doesnt finish the quarter. But distinctly remember Durant at the top of the list in terms of Q1F. Iguodala was right behind him.

I don't have the stat in front of me but common knowledge that Curry likes to finish quarter. He gets subbed out a lot for the final possession if we are going to be on defense so that might explain why that stat is misleading. Kerr's standard rotation by end of year was to bring out the center first then Klay and finally Draymond letting Curry and KD play whole first quarter as they prefer. Klay and Draymond start the 2nd quarter anchoring bench unit with West/Iguodala/Livingston with sometimes Clark getting minutes here as well. KD/Curry will come in anywhere between 4 and 6 minutes into the quarter. Klay will often get a breather at some point in the quarter finishing with the small ball lineup. This basically repeats in the 2nd half unless a blowout, foul trouble, or something is really clicking where Kerr rides a hot hand sometimes.

But if Curry is in all the way through the 1st, doesnt Livingston pretty much directly sub for him, as he almost always started the 2nd?

I only said 'technically no' because Curry was in the middle of the pack (32) Q1F and Livingston got shockingly few Q1 minutes, so technically Livingston doesnt come in for Curry in the majority of cases.. but if we're going to round him up to the end of Q1, then Livingston basically does directly sub in for Curry..

[FNQ]

Another test from NBAwowy:

Minutes w/o Steph or Livingston on court: 384 out of a possible 3936, 9.8% (majority of which occurred in garbage time, FWIW. If I sub out Q4 and non close games, those minutes shrink to 178 out of 3611, which is 4.9%)

Minutes w/o Klay or Livingston on court: 555 out of a possible 3936, 14.1% (garbage time stats factored out: 514 of 3611, 14.2%)

Minutes w/o Durant or Livingston on court: 787 out of a possible 3936, 19.9% (garbage time stats factored out: 717 of 3611, 19.9%)

So it seems to stand to reason that since we played the least amount of minutes with both Steph and Livingston off the court, Livingston has a healthy slant towards backing up Curry primarily, at least by the #s. Direct subs might be different though

[SinceGatlingWasARookie]

To me Livingston is the back up iguodalla. Livingston doesn't make a bunch of mistakes but except for for when he gets hot shooting short mid range over smaller guards Livingston does not add much to the offense. Livingston does not automatically get hot just because he is defended by a small guard.

I think Klay defends point guards better than Livingston does.
Livingston keeps the ball moving. Livingston is dangerous cutting to the basket when the defense breaks down and the defense breaks down a lot when the Warriors starters are on the floor. Livingston doesn't beat people off the dribble. Livingston does see and understand defensive mistakes and takes advantage of mistakes quickly.

On defense Livingston knows where to rotate and how to adjust to whatever gambles his teammates may be making on defense. Livingston is a smart player. He is moderately athletic but definitely does not have point guard or even fast off guard speed.

Continuity is good. Livingston would not be as valuable on a team that he did not know.

I don't think Livingston would be able to maintain his efficient FG% if he was asked to increase the volume of his shooting. Those broken defense layups help his FG%. I don't think Livingston would be able to keep his turnover numbers down if he was asked to create more offense from drive and kick or from fancier passing.

I would love for Livingston to stay but McCaw may eventually be an upgrade on Livingston.

[FrigginFalcon]

Excellent analysis across the board!

[lars_rosenberg]

His shooting is ok, he has a signature move that's very effective.
What I find odd is his low assist number, he averaged less than 2 assists per game last season (3.7 per36) which is ridiculously low for a point guard.

[Warriorfan]

Livingston is not a liability on offense it's just that is a bonus if he contributes. His advantages will ave well and we are lucky he stayed.

[East Bay Sports]

To me Livingston is the back up iguodalla. Livingston doesn't make a bunch of mistakes but except for for when he gets hot shooting short mid range over smaller guards Livingston does not add much to the offense. Livingston does not automatically get hot just because he is defended by a small guard.

I think Klay defends point guards better than Livingston does.
Livingston keeps the ball moving. Livingston is dangerous cutting to the basket when the defense breaks down and the defense breaks down a lot when the Warriors starters are on the floor. Livingston doesn't beat people off the dribble. Livingston does see and understand defensive mistakes and takes advantage of mistakes quickly.

On defense Livingston knows where to rotate and how to adjust to whatever gambles his teammates may be making on defense. Livingston is a smart player. He is moderately athletic but definitely does not have point guard or even fast off guard speed.

Continuity is good. Livingston would not be as valuable on a team that he did not know.

I don't think Livingston would be able to maintain his efficient FG% if he was asked to increase the volume of his shooting. Those broken defense layups help his FG%. I don't think Livingston would be able to keep his turnover numbers down if he was asked to create more offense from drive and kick or from fancier passing.

I would love for Livingston to stay but McCaw may eventually be an upgrade on Livingston.

Livingston is similar to Dala but how do you consider him his "backup" when they are generally on the floor together? They are the bench buddies. They play together perfectly on both ends. They are like a great tag team. They are like the Legion of Doom or The Steiners. They are just much better together