What's new
By:

Jazz's 3-Point Shooting Philosophy.

JJAS said:
I thought this was an interesting little write-up with respect to the Jazz's three point shooting and horrible integration of it into the offense. Corbin better get his act together. I think it also sheds light on why the Spurs have great three point shooting across the board even from shooters like Kawhi Leonard, who shot 25% in college from three but .376 in the NBA.

https://www.slcdunk.com/2012/5/12/3016908/the-jazz-have-more-3-point-problems-than-not-having-3-point-shooters#storyjump
Click to expand...

It is exacltly what i been saying during the playoff.
people called my statement bullcrap when i said spurs take shots during practice, 1000 of shots. then get the ball in certain spot wide open so shootinbg becomes easy. but half of you called ******** other half didnt react
 
It's not just 3 point shooting, it's also spacing. Spacing is why San Antonio won us. That's why the 2-3 zone works so well against the Jazz.
 
GVC said:
Yep. The Jazz use the 3 as a last option, so most teams know they can pack the paint and wait to rotate, and then run hard at shooters (since there won't be time for the Jazz to swing the ball to other shooters). Compare that strategy to the one employed by the Spurs, where opposing defenses have to stay close to everyone because the Spurs will utilize every spot on the court at any time. With the size and speed of today's NBA players, time and space to get shots off is hard to come by, especially as you get closer to the basket. You have to stretch the defense a little bit to get good shots.
Click to expand...

We'll figure this out...by the 22nd century!!! - CJ
 
carolinajazz said:
.....well, I think it was obvious to even the most casual observer, that when the Jazz had Stockton and Malone and then Deron and Boozer on the pick and roll, Sloan went with the higher percentage shot and limited the 3 point shooter to a bare minimum. I remember Bobby Knight saying that the 3 point shot is not the best shot for his team to take, but since he had 2 of the 3 best three point shooters in college, he would use them wisely! The Jazz have never really had even good outside shooters let alone 3 point shooters. We pounded the ball inside and took the higher percentage shots most of the time. If we can get good 3 point shooters then I'm all for using that method of scoring.....but good ones don't grow on trees.
Click to expand...
They seem to for the Spurs. Getting a shot where you expect it. With your feet already in position. Within the framework of a set offense would increase the % of makes from even average 3 pt shooters. That is not how the Jazz have ever treated the 3pt shot. They treat it as a desperate attempt when the offense failed.

It is no coincidence than Harris' and Haywards % rose when they were getting their attempts within the offense later in the season. Everybody acts like they just got on a role. But the improvement happened when Al started passing out of the block and they were getting that shot in the offense.

That is not enough though. The Spurs were able to take those plays away because it was basically one play. The Spurs have a multitude of ways to get guys open for 3pt shots. And that is why they turn average shooters into good and bad shooters into average shooters.
 
zbone said:
Hornacek, Okur, Korver don't qualify as good outside shooters let alone 3 point shooters? Why?
Click to expand...

...true dat, but all three were defensive liabilities to the 10th degree! That's generally true with most 3 point shooters, but not all. Fact is, we need good 3 point shooters, but we need a better system, defensive players, coaching....and Stockton and Malone!
 
You can't be a good 3-pt shooting team unless you're committed as an organization. From front office, to coaching. The Jazz haven't been committed, and I'm pretty sure that that may be the single-largest impediment to the Deron-era going farther, and likely will be the same ingredient that stalls the growth of this team.
 
5. Let every 3 point shooter go in the name of acquiring Big Al, all to piss off your top 10 player D.W.

6. ,..should I continue?
 
I liken the Jazz to the old, old school football teams that ran the T-formation and exclusively ran the ball. Then one day the forward pass became popular, however this was viewed as a gimmick and ignored. Today, the best teams in football, college or pro, depend on passing the ball.

This pretty much sums up the Jazz philosophy regarding the 3-point line. Most of the NBA has adapted, while the Jazz are still in the stone ages...
 
NUMBERICA said:
You can't be a good 3-pt shooting team unless you're committed as an organization. From front office, to coaching. The Jazz haven't been committed, and I'm pretty sure that that may be the single-largest impediment to the Deron-era going farther, and likely will be the same ingredient that stalls the growth of this team.
Click to expand...

Agreed. They pick up too many guys that are known to be poor shooters: watson, tinsley, carroll, howard, ronnie brewer, etc etc. You can have one small guy like that, a Carroll, who makes up for that with defense, but not as many as the Jazz do. This years roster had zero shooters who would scare a defense, not one. They even knew that the guy who hit them the best, Bell, was only going to take one or two per game.
 
akirac73 said:
I liken the Jazz to the old, old school football teams that ran the T-formation and exclusively ran the ball. Then one day the forward pass became popular, however this was viewed as a gimmick and ignored. Today, the best teams in football, college or pro, depend on passing the ball.

This pretty much sums up the Jazz philosophy regarding the 3-point line. Most of the NBA has adapted, while the Jazz are still in the stone ages...
Click to expand...

Its the tradition of Ol' Jer, who thought the 3 ball was a commie plot to steal our precious bodily fluids.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top