No Subject

[Joe Hironaka <j.hironaka@unesco.org>]

Alex wrote:
"you should multiply the three-point shooting percentage by 1.5 to
compare it with two-pointers."

****

Cool point.  Nice post in general, IMO.

BTW, I guess I'm siding with Kim on this debate (Mercer's overall game).
To start with, the NBA 3-pointer has become kind of a heave of a shot -
you really need to put a bit of your arm into it, which in turn takes a
little bit away from the normal shooting touch. IMO think both Walker
and McCarty suffered through awkward shooting mechanics (a kind of
sling-shot type of release) during parts of the season that could be
related at least in part to their devotion to the bomb. I mean, have you
all tried shooting a mechanically correct jump shot (a la Danny Ainge)
from NBA 3-point land lately?  It's really become a pretty difficult and
very specialized skill...

So, two opinions:

1) I think guys who get enamoured with the 3-pointer tend to lose a bit
of their confidence/aggressiveness in creating shots off the dribble,
notably leaning in the direction of the basket. Of course, the great
ones like Jordan will show you they can hit the three in big games, but
(besides his being a special case) my hunch is they pre-plan to employ
that shot before a specific game, in order to keep defences honest
throughout the 7-game series. In general, Jordan's total deadliness from
inside the arc comes at the expense of a dependable 3-pointer and, to
some extent, vice-versa for Reggie Miller. In the case of a guy like
Mercer - who is more athletic near the rim than Miller-  the best way to
play to his strengths would be to focus on his mid-range shooting and
air game, IMO.

2) According to Alex' logical formula, a player would need to hit around
35% from the arc in order to be considered a reasonably high-percentage
shooter (52%). As I've hinted above, consistent accuracy from the arc
IMO normally requires a nearly one-dimensional focus (Paxson, BJ
Armstrong, Sichting, Chris Ford). And so although a fair number of NBA
guys on paper hit 35% from that range, most 3-point specialists rarely
take contested shots (even contested 3 point shots) and thus you can
pretty much take them out of their game if you had to. In other words, a
good 3-point shooter is really only a big weapon if he/she is left
relatively open, thanks to having other players slashing for points and
fouls in the paint. In this sense, the Celtics frankly need their best
athletes (Mercer, Walker, Anderson) to slash at the hoop, attract an
extra defender, pass or draw fouls etc.,  particularly since I doubt
we'll ever have a half-court offense that revolves around the low-post.

    Whoa, I'm not sure what my point is anymore...  Okay, I guess I'm
saying that while I certainly don't mind if Ron Mercer develops a
credible 3-pt shot over the Summer, I would prefer that he focuses on
his open-court dribble, his actively creating shots in the half-court
game, his ego, his passing, his defense, his nastiness, his hatred
toward the Lakers etc.  That's already a lot of stuff to work on.

    Maybe I'm sort of simplifying the issue, but I say let Bowen and
Minor work on their 3-pointers instead. IMO, that would help the team
more. Above all, I don't care to see Ron Mercer develop the habit of
standing in a far corner calling for the pass, while other, lesser,
athletes struggle to create shot opportunities for him.


Take care everyone,


JoeH



P.S.  Since I doubt Greg Minor is in any way a tradeable commodity since
the SI story, I think we should drop the wishful thinking about
including him in various trade packages and just get used to keeping the
deadbeat for another year or so.

P.P.S.  Somebody please "Beat LA" !!


****