PockyCandy wrote:I'm not sure how to phrase this thought, but I was wondering something while reading the AD shooting 3s thread.
So the philosophy of most modern NBA teams goes something like this:
Even if a super elite mid-range shooter hits 50% of his midrange shots (A guy like Al Horford), that's still not as efficient as shooting 34% from three, which most guards can do. And since most players only shoot in the high 30's from midrange and the mid 30s from three, there's even less of a reason to shoot those shots. So basically, I've heard the many people say that you should never shoot mid-range shots, because 3 > 2, that a shot 17 feet from the rim is still only worth 2 points but is harder to make, and that the only shots taken should be shots at the rim and 3 pointers.
It makes perfect sense................but don't some of you kind of wish that teams would still tell their players to take some shots from that area if your open (as long as it's not within one or two feet of the line, because even I hate those shots), just for variety. I mean, it's kind of boring watching the same high PnR with the result being either a shot at the rim or a shot 25 feet away (Obviously, there are exceptions like SA, ATL, Memphis, etc.).
Sorry for the long and rambling post.
Heck, that's all Washington's backcourt seems to shoot. I know Beal ends up with a lot of threes, but all my memories seem to be of him and Wall stopping inside the 3 point line and shooting a long two (frequently an open one but still . . . ). Used to think it was Sam Cassell's influence but now realize Randy Wittman is just counterprogramming against the current trends.
To be fair, in the playoffs, there was more modern 4 out basketball being played.
“Most people use statistics like a drunk man uses a lamppost; more for support than illumination,” Andrew Lang.