Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="champs99and04, post: 2733492, member: 488"] I think the whole "try something else when the three isn't falling" philosophy sounds good, but to my knowledge it's been disproven by research. I just think it's tricky to pinpoint the exact moment at which you're "not feeling it" from deep, especially when those attempts are scattered across a half-dozen players. Is James Harden supposed to stop shooting threes because he's missed four in a row? When he's a 37% shooter on the year? Is that how great shooters think? Is that how you break out of a slump? I think it depends who you ask. It's not always fun to watch, I'll say that. And it has to take a toll on a player to miss that many shots in a row. Human nature tells you to hunt an easier shot, and basic psychology can only be separated from math for so long. Players want to see the ball go in the basket and so do fans. When you're hunting a three and everybody else in the building knows you're hunting a three, they become extremely difficult shots. I don't care to sift through every attempt and qualify them by difficulty, but if you're trying to differentiate between variance and skill, that's probably what you have to do. The quality of Golden State's attempts were obviously far better than Houston's. Is that the difference between 41% and 16%? Probably not. Are their methods validated if they shoot 25% from three instead of 16%? I don't know. There are so many competing variables at every given point in time that it's damn near impossible to isolate the hypothesis you're trying to prove. Usually when the wrong team wins it means the better team lost. After seven games of that, I've come to the conclusion that the wrong team won despite being noticeably better. CP3 or not, the Warriors outscored the Rockets by 63 points in that series. Four of those games were played without Andre Iguodala and as many were played on Houston's home floor. They conceivably could have won four of the five games Paul did play, and their bizarrely bipolar approach gave you the sense they were just toying with Houston all along. It's no surprise that they open as significant favorites against Cleveland; more so, certainly, than Houston would have been. But it felt like Houston deserved it more. They had less depth, even when the Warriors were without Iguodala and Paul was healthy, and when it came time to close the series with a strong second half, it felt like Houston's players had given all they could. It was like watching a prideful, well-coached FCS program hang with Bama for three quarters before their quarterback got hurt and their defense wore down. Nothing about the final result was satisfying. [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach

Forum statistics

Threads: 164,410

Messages: 4,394,732

Members: 10,208

Latest member: jskwrite