ComboGuardCity wrote:He shot 33% last year...not terrible. Honestly this whole 3pt shooting thing is being blown out of proportion. Rip wasn't a 3pt shooter. Sheed was not much more of a threat than Smith. Prince wasn't a gunner. If he can be had for Stuckey you do it.
See, I don't think its overblown. You need guys on your team that can do things far away from the basket. That doesn't always have to come in the form of 3 point shooting but it certainly tends to on many successful teams.
Show me ONE team that has reached the finals in the last 15-20 years that didn't have 3 point shooting as a significant part of their rotation. The closest I could find were the Nets/Sixers teams of the early 2000s who ruled the most pathetic conferences in NBA history, would not have been top 5 in the other conference and were never considered serious threats to win it all. Before that, you gotta go back to the 1993 Knicks. Get much earlier than that and you're at a point in NBA history where 3 point shooting wasn't utilized to the extent it is now. Point is, teams without strong spacing that have real success are the exception rather than the rule.
I honestly don't see why this is such a controversial idea, here. If most of your scorers do their best work close to the basket you're going to be an easy team to defend. The farther away from the basket your shooters operate, the more space your slashers and post players get.
And believe me, I understand the expectation isn't to reach the finals next year. But spacing has been demonstrated to be a necessary component of contending level teams, and we should be at least trying to move in the direction of having some.
We already have our probable 3 biggest minute players lacking not only in 3 point range but even in a reliable mid range game to speak of. Henderson can do some mid range stuff, but he's a below average range player by the standards of his position.
