<div class="quote_poster">HiRez Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">32.6% in 3P% is not horrible, it's equivalent to about 49% in 2P%. For example, you shoot 100 3-pointers at 32.6% and you have 98 points. You shoot 100 2-pointers at 49% and you also have 98 points.</div> I think it's unimportant at this stage because it really matters about Baron's posessions down the stretch. He needs to share the ball some. Shot selection in the most important moments of a close game is so crucial. You play 4 quarters only to play the real game in the final two or half dozen last posessions. Baron could be shooting 3 of 9 from downtown for 33% shooting each game, but of those 6 misses from 3-point territory, he could have gotten something better from midrange or to set up a teammate and run a play. The long, flat missed threes only help fuel the other team's break against us. Plus those kinds of shots, they only communicate to the other Warriors to not even get open when Baron has the ball in his hands. Typically, one shouldn't shoot three pointers in volume these days unless they are at least 37% and limiting attempts to maybe 6 (between 2 of 6 and 3 of 6 each night). But, it totally depends on the situation like in the final moments of the game. You launch a three in a 1-2 point difference game, you better make it. Otherwise, you lose by something stupid like 1 or 2 points before all the intentional fouls. Plus, our transition D is just so shtty, a missed three can kill us like that because we have hardly any offensive rebounders with Biedrins always getting in foul trouble and Pietrus being kind of dumb and Murphy standing too far away from rebounding position. Guys aren't even hitting back iron when they fire a 3 most of the time in 4th quarters. They hit front iron tipping down to the big guys camping the paint. It just sucks to have our guys lose their legs that much running and gunning. But we just cannot shoot right when other teams zone up on us instead of us zoning on them and we have no energy in the 4th.
<div class="quote_poster">custodianrules2 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Typically, one shouldn't shoot three pointers in volume these days unless they are at least 37% and limiting attempts to maybe 6 (between 2 of 6 and 3 of 6 each night). But, it totally depends on the situation like in the final moments of the game.</div> I'd like to expand, CR2. From a coach's standpoint, it isn't so much about the quantity of shots taken; it's about the quality of shots. And most coaches will agree: you want the majority of your threes to be catch-n-shoot. This is the NBA. Guys can shoot. It isn't that you want to limit any one type of shot; it's that you want to get good shots. In my opinion, the only good three is a catch-n-shoot three. Of course there are exceptions, but this is the general rule. If you are open, and catch a good pass in rythm, as a coach I actually want you to shoot that shot, even if you've already taken 10 of them; it's a good shot. That's what good teams do; work for good shots, whether it be threes, jumpers, dunks, layups, bank shots, or even foul shots -- you work to get the good shot. Phoenix takes alot of threes, but the majority are good threes because they are stationary, open shots, set up by a good pass. I don't mind Murphy from the top of the key. I love Pietrus from the corner. I'll take JRich from the wing any day. They practice those shots over and over. What is crap is when you are shooting that three out of rythm, trying to force the shot or create it off the dribble. Unfortunately, the majority of Baron's outside shots lately are NOT within the flow of the offense, IMO. One reason is that rarely does he catch a pass -- because rarely does he not have the ball in his hands!!!! If he'd give it up more, he have more opportunities to catch set-up passes and thus get better shots. You can create off the dribble going to the hole, but only superstars like Kobe and TMac can create the outside shot off the dribble. Even then as a coach you cringe until it goes in. Baron isn't a good shooter. However, that doesn't mean I mind him taking a good shot. If it's open and in the flow, off a good pass, he better damn well shoot it,even if he's 0 for 10 on the night. What pisses me off is when he denies his teammates the same opportunity. As a point guard, his job is to create good shots for his teammates. He needs to make quick passes to set guys up or continue the play. Then move without the ball and get open. What is garbage is when he -- or any point guard -- pounds the ball for 20 seconds and then jacks a lazy outside shot. That is sh!t and any good coach or player will tell you so. As good as Baron is, he has to know better. I don't care if Baron shoots 20 threes if they are wide open, within the flow of the offense, and the majority are catch-n-shoot shots off good passes. The problem is that it's the point guard's job to make sure the team gets good shots. It starts with Baron. If he's taking crap shots, there's no way the team is going to win.
<div class="quote_poster">AlleyOop Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">I'd like to expand, CR2. From a coach's standpoint, it isn't so much about the quantity of shots taken; it's about the quality of shots. And most coaches will agree: you want the majority of your threes to be catch-n-shoot. This is the NBA. Guys can shoot. It isn't that you want to limit any one type of shot; it's that you want to get good shots. In my opinion, the only good three is a catch-n-shoot three. Of course there are exceptions, but this is the general rule. If you are open, and catch a good pass in rythm, as a coach I actually want you to shoot that shot, even if you've already taken 10 of them; it's a good shot. That's what good teams do; work for good shots, whether it be threes, jumpers, dunks, layups, bank shots, or even foul shots -- you work to get the good shot. Phoenix takes alot of threes, but the majority are good threes because they are stationary, open shots, set up by a good pass. I don't mind Murphy from the top of the key. I love Pietrus from the corner. I'll take JRich from the wing any day. They practice those shots over and over. What is crap is when you are shooting that three out of rythm, trying to force the shot or create it off the dribble. Unfortunately, the majority of Baron's outside shots lately are NOT within the flow of the offense, IMO. One reason is that rarely does he catch a pass -- because rarely does he not have the ball in his hands!!!! If he'd give it up more, he have more opportunities to catch set-up passes and thus get better shots. You can create off the dribble going to the hole, but only superstars like Kobe and TMac can create the outside shot off the dribble. Even then as a coach you cringe until it goes in. Baron isn't a good shooter. However, that doesn't mean I mind him taking a good shot. If it's open and in the flow, off a good pass, he better damn well shoot it,even if he's 0 for 10 on the night. What pisses me off is when he denies his teammates the same opportunity. As a point guard, his job is to create good shots for his teammates. He needs to make quick passes to set guys up or continue the play. Then move without the ball and get open. What is garbage is when he -- or any point guard -- pounds the ball for 20 seconds and then jacks a lazy outside shot. That is sh!t and any good coach or player will tell you so. As good as Baron is, he has to know better. I don't care if Baron shoots 20 threes if they are wide open, within the flow of the offense, and the majority are catch-n-shoot shots off good passes. The problem is that it's the point guard's job to make sure the team gets good shots. It starts with Baron. If he's taking crap shots, there's no way the team is going to win.</div> Thanks for adding to this, Oop. I agree. Moving the ball around, finding the openings, good floor spacing, good fundmental skills, and teamwork will win games. Not this one-on-one low % crap. Save that for guys like Dwade or Lebron or somebody that can do it well and in high% fashion and actually pass it to somebody when there is the opportunity. If guys aren't moving, well the point guard should lead them! I mean c'mon the point guard is the extension of the head coach on that bench.
The main point was, the 3 was at the end of the game when they were down 1, why take the low percentage 3 when a higher percentage 2 was available? The only consistent high percentage shooters from 3 on the dribble seem to be Kobe and Ray Allen. They stroke it like its effortless. Everyone else seems to leave something to be desired (although Wade was amazing last year in the playoffs.)
<div class="quote_poster">philsmith75 Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">The main point was, the 3 was at the end of the game when they were down 1, why take the low percentage 3 when a higher percentage 2 was available? The only consistent high percentage shooters from 3 on the dribble seem to be Kobe and Ray Allen. They stroke it like its effortless. Everyone else seems to leave something to be desired (although Wade was amazing last year in the playoffs.)</div> I agree phil. Unless guys are better off shooting by not picking up their dribble. I know Fisher, everytime he moves it in, he misses. I'd rather a guy like Fisher take the three, than dribble in and then shoot for two. Plus, time left and floor spacing is a factor. The best shot is plenty of time, right in rhythm, and don't have to do any additional movement.
Did anybody watch this game? http://www.nba.com/games/20061215/GSWPHX/boxscore.html Another loss...but it ended close. I didn't get to see it though to tell anyone what happened.
Yes -- GS was down by 25 in the 2nd quarter. Then they came all the way back totake the lead in the 3rd!! But, on the back to back, against Phoenix, they gassed in the 4th. It was close to the very end, though. Which made it all the more painful to watch
Turnovers killed the team in the fourth. Going into the third they had a +6 advantage on TO's. That shrunk to +2 at the end of the game. Not to mention that they are terrible at finishing quarters. End of the second they are down 2 then let PHO score 5 straight. Then they had an 8 point lead late in the third and ended up down 2 entering the fourth.
Yeah those turnovers were costly. And that back to back were Monta got called for charging while Nash was just flopping. He can't stick with him on D so he just flops. I thought we had it in the bag..but man high hopes for this team just leads to disaster
Does this explain why there's no Phoenix game thread? Dang. It must have been terrible to watch. I guess the most positive thing we can say about the Warriors is that they must have did okay considering they were short handed and tired. It's really hard to play when we're facing against another running team.
Well, it was actually an awesome game. Phoenix came out on fire, and -- like most any other team in the league -- GS had no answer for the Suns. But, they kept battling. In the second, they were down by 25, and I was ready to turn it off (luckily I recorded the game on DVR and just fastforwarded a bit). Suddenly, the Warriors pushed, and were within 10!! Then, by halftime, they were nearly tied, and in the 3rd quarter, they took the lead! It was an epic comeback. It was mainly because the Warriors went from man-to-man to zone, and the zone started causing a gang of turnovers. The zone-D is really the greatest strength of this team. The guards on the wings and Barnes at the top really pressured the ball. I'm sure Nelson was reluctant to try it because Phoneix is such an awesome perimeter shooting team, but he had to try something to shake it up, and luckily Phoenix went cold. For the game they shot something like 25% from three. Raja Bell alone was 1-10 from three, lol. But in the 4th that hustle-bussle Zone-D that was sparking the Warriors just gassed. Suddenly the players weren't flying around to fill the rotation, and the guards weren't jumping out on every perimeter swing pass. They were tired, and I don't blame them. But down to the end, it was a well fought game with many lead changes. IT was tough to watch because I was so excited after the comeback that the loss was a letdown, but it really showed me something about this team. Last year's team would have been pointing fingers and hanging heads, IMO. Not this year. I look forward to the eastern road trip now.
<div class="quote_poster">AlleyOop Wrote</div><div class="quote_post">Well, it was actually an awesome game. Phoenix came out on fire, and -- like most any other team in the league -- GS had no answer for the Suns. But, they kept battling. In the second, they were down by 25, and I was ready to turn it off (luckily I recorded the game on DVR and just fastforwarded a bit). Suddenly, the Warriors pushed, and were within 10!! Then, by halftime, they were nearly tied, and in the 3rd quarter, they took the lead! It was an epic comeback. It was mainly because the Warriors went from man-to-man to zone, and the zone started causing a gang of turnovers. The zone-D is really the greatest strength of this team. The guards on the wings and Barnes at the top really pressured the ball. I'm sure Nelson was reluctant to try it because Phoneix is such an awesome perimeter shooting team, but he had to try something to shake it up, and luckily Phoenix went cold. For the game they shot something like 25% from three. Raja Bell alone was 1-10 from three, lol. But in the 4th that hustle-bussle Zone-D that was sparking the Warriors just gassed. Suddenly the players weren't flying around to fill the rotation, and the guards weren't jumping out on every perimeter swing pass. They were tired, and I don't blame them. But down to the end, it was a well fought game with many lead changes. IT was tough to watch because I was so excited after the comeback that the loss was a letdown, but it really showed me something about this team. Last year's team would have been pointing fingers and hanging heads, IMO. Not this year. I look forward to the eastern road trip now.</div> Wow, sounds like it could have gone either way more so than the Rox game.
