| . |
 |
I have no problem with Ingram's iso pull up jumper game. He can outjump anyone and his stroke is pure. It's a good shot for him. Not to mention he can finish through contact with it. No one lambasted Jordan for his mid range game because he was absolutely elite with it.
For someone like Zo it's a terrible shot
Last edited by AusPel; 10-27-2019 at 01:04 AM.
This isn't a problem with you specifically, but this comment just reminded me, so I figured I'd clarify this position.Originally Posted by AusPel
Whenever someone talks about midrange shots being less desirable than threes and shots at the rim, someone always crawls out of the woodwork to say ''BUT JORDAN! BUT KOBE! BUT JORDAN! BUT KOBE!'', and it's a really common argument and it's so... damn... bad.
The first issue with it is this: Jordan was better at the midrange than almost anyone else. What's a good shot for Jordan, who was unusually good at the midrange is not an equally good shot for like, Justin Jackson or someone. The exact tracking data doesn't exist for Jordan's prime, but I wouldn't be surprised if he shot close to 50% from the midrange during his prime, which is absolutely as good as anyone gets at that and which makes it far more acceptable.
The second issue is that Jordan played in a different generation. Hardly anyone took threes back then at any real volume, and even fewer people were good at it. In 1991, the year of Jordan's first championship, the Denver Nuggets led the league with 12.9 three point attempts per game. For comparison, Steph Curry alone averages about 11 threes a game these days. 12.9 threes is almost half the number of the Spurs last season, and they were last in the NBA in three point attempts.
So if everyone is collectively taking 2s, and the three point shot is almost a none-factor, then yes, being good at the midrange is good enough because nobody is going to heavily outscore you from three. Your expected shot value is lower, but it's lower for everyone, so if everyone is taking low value shots, whoever is best at making them will end up looking the best: that's your Michael Jordan effect.
But we don't live in 1991. We've had the 3 point revolution. If you tried replicating the '91 Bulls exactly today, they'd get shot off the floor pretty quickly because the offensive efficiency of modern NBA offenses is so optimised by comparison that there's no real debate. You have to change with the times: everyone is shooting 3s now, so you have to switch up because if you don't you will get left behind.
Again, that is not saying that nobody should ever shoot midrange jump shots. Kevin Durant and Kawhi Leonard still take midrangers and they're top 10 players. It's just saying that the days of using the mid-ranger as your primary offensive priority are over, and that it's best used as a skill to be deployed when needed (to produce baskets in pass-denial situations, 5 seconds or less on the shotclock, when you've shaken your man for a wide open shot, etc) rather than as the first port of call.
Basketball.
Also, I guess while the subject of efficiency is in the air:
Davis Bertans just scored 23 points on 125% True Shooting.
What a night.
Even with 0-3 start of the season I just LOVE our team heart. We need a win badly , the guys earned one for sure.
He'd be nice instead of Moore right now.
I always get weirded out when I see True Shooting percentages above 100 because of the mathematical impossibility of it all. Then I just have to remind myself that True Shooting is actually just a percentage-ised version of Points Per Scoring Attempt, and it all makes sense again.
And yeah, he'd be nice, not least cause he's 6'9 (I think).
4th Q collapses are rough.
First win should finally come on Monday vs Golden State. They not the same passionate, aggressive team as they was when KD and Klay was in the lineup. Their depth is gone. I don’t even think GS is as good as Dallas right now. Pels have to control that game Monday from start to finish with a dominant effort. Can’t let the Golden State game be another close game just to collapse in the 4th
Historically... Curry is bad match up for us. I wouldn’t be surprised if he scores 40
Curry can give us 40, Draymond can put up 12, D-lo can put up 25, and then that's it. So that's maybe 80 points. Then they have nothing.
Not saying they can't win, of course they can, but what they get outside of those three is very very very game-to-game.
lonzo will deal with curry...and if by any means curry score 40 on us then it will be because he shot a lot of 3s from half court or in the stands and made them all lol....
Harden is such a **************.
Hart is familiar with his idiocy.
glass half full were actually pretty close to being 3-0 it's not like we're getting blown out
Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk
Watching Warriors vs Thunder now. Our next opponent looks... If I say pathetic it will be an understatement.
shut down curry or shut down everyone else and we should get this one
Sent from my SM-S903VL using Tapatalk
Not sure why there is such arguing over Ingram's mid-range game. He has done really well from 3 thus far and his mid-range is very good. Points are points. I would much rather someone be solid from mid-range than shoot 20% from 3 but keep forcing it. Let's just admit he is playing well and put our past biases behind. Let him play his game and see how it works.
I've been trying to say something like this the whole time, but couldn't find the words lol. Not sure why people are down on mid range, it's an easier shot to make and points are points like PELICANSFAN said.
Besides, the mid range game is Ingram's bread and butter. I'd rather not take that away from him. If he keeps the mid range, while getting exponentially better from 3, then the guy is going to be unstoppable.
There's an argument about it because I made a post where I praised him heavily and then briefly mentioned that his shot profile isn't ideal, and people like to get mad about the stuff they disagree with rather than find common ground in the opinions they share, so obviously it was the brief criticism that drew all the attention rather than the fawning praise that came before
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote