I'll bet that Memphis really gave Beno a talking to about those 20 inefficient points he scored yesterday. Nothing personal, but good lord, that "least efficient shot in basketball" is tired, old and stupid. All of the great point guards use the mid-range game to open up the other shots in their arsenal.
I think about this often actually, and I thought about it last night. Dame's "floater" isn't very consistent, but his pull-up mid-range shot is money. He just doesn't go to it, opting for threes and drives. But thinking about it, isn't that Stotts' overriding basketball philosophy, on both sides of the ball: Shoot threes and layups, and make the other team shoot from mid-range? That's why we get killed from mid-range, and maybe why Dame doesn't do it more? I wish he would, especially because it could get him into a better shooting rhythm for the three ball. Oh, and two points is better than no points. So there's that. (Edit: OIC. I guess I was a little late to this observation.)
No worries and no offense. And Dame will be a great one but he isn't there yet. Beno had years to practice that shot and guess what? He was not great at it when he came in the league.
Dame's open mid-range shot is deadly but I don't think his pull up jumper is at all at this point. In fact I would say it is one of the weaker parts of his game. Roy was deadly at the pull up jumper but not as good on open jumpers off screens. Dame is about completely opposite. It is good to have things to improve on though.
This whole "least efficient shot in basketball" thing I thought applied to shots within a couple of feet of the three point line, which is usually a low percentage shot (LaMarcus shoots them a bunch). I don't get why some people would apply that to shots that are essentially open free throws, which you and I can make, and oh BTW, so can BeanBoy Udrih.
I'm having a bit of a cognitive dissonance problem at the moment though, considering, Stotts thinks mid-range shots are inefficient, but the focal point of his offense is having LaMarcus shoot 20 of them a game? And turn-around contested ones at that? Color me confused.
A big silver lining is this team is playing a series against a true playoff style team. This will be a humbling and learning experience for the guys. Last season we played a rockets team that in all reality like us is a regular season style team, then we played the Spurs who couldn't miss a three if they tried. There wasn't a moment where we could say "they're just far more physical than us".
Luckily pull up jumpers and floaters are some of the easiest shots to get good at. So much space to work with usually.
In order to get a good mid-range shot off Dame first needs a good screen. However, he only gets shitty screens so he doesn't have enough space to stop-n-pop - if he did his man would block the shot from behind.
Thank you! This has been my biggest gripe with Stotts ever since he was first hired. It is cognitive dissonance, pure and simple. I don't understand how he's able to make it work in his mind. It is the definition of mind boggling.
It's really simple if you think about it: Let's say you're a coach with a bad first stint who gets a second chance at coaching a team, and the team's best player tells you flat out: "I'm not playing down low. I hate it. I'm going to shoot mid-range jumpers. That's my game. Don't like it? Fuck you." And so you go to your boss, the Front Office, and they tell you: "He's our best player, make him happy so he can re-sign with us, because our boss The Owner will be damned if he has to sit through another rebuilding period." So what do you do? You lie to the public and say the best player is The Exception That Makes The Rule with regards to midrange jumpers, and you'll let him shoot from wherever he wants to despite your statistical analysis saying he'd be better down low or taking threes. Why? Because this is basketball, not a fight against a fascist regime... a job is a job. It's not the end of the world if you let the best player on the team do whatever he wants. Lord knows every coach does that anyway.
If we're to take this as the reason for Stotts' poor coaching (at least as it concerns LMA's shot selection), then shouldn't we all be wanting to dump LMA for being a prima donna who doesn't allow his coach to do his job? I know it happens in the league, but it shouldn't happen on good Playoff teams, and I always felt like Portland fans are even more against this type of inmate-running-the-asylum attitude than your average basketball fan. I do think there could be something to your scenario - LMA has never had a coach who has held him accountable. Honestly, I think it'd be in LMA's best interest to go to another team where he won't be kowtowed to. You can bet that Pops would turn LMA into a defensive monster. He wouldn't allow LMA to stick to his man like glue while watching a guard come in for an uncontested lay-up.
Sentimentality, emotion, and familiarity. Some fans do want him to leave. Most see LMA scoring way more points than other players on our team and are either in support of that happening for many more years (because individually he'll be the greatest Blazer of all time), or are scared of what would happen if he leaves (who will score all those points? We're just starting to make the playoffs regularly again!)... And no player (save for maybe Tim Duncan) has ever been perfect. Certainly no top tier Blazer has ever been perfect. Having a player like LaMarcus is the closest the team has had to a true franchise player in two decades. There's an entire generation of fans that ae graduating from high school that have been watching LaMarcus since grade school. He's practically an institution on a team that has had a dearth of consistency since 1996. I don't care what kind of player LaMarcus might become on another team. I don't care about your agenda against Stotts. I have a feeling that these two are not suited for each other, and that might bear out in a year or two when one or the other is likely gone.
I could imagine marazul trying to coach. The players would be having "what?!?!" Moments when he tried explaining things like he does in here. His communication skills would be hard to understand if they are anything like how he writes on this board.
