Why won't Woodson MAKE SMOOVE quit shooting jumpshots!

[niremetal]

LOL @ calling a 33% 3 point shooter "a sharpshooter". If the shooting in the NBA is at a point in which GMs are calling 33% 3FG guys "sharpshooters", then it just proves just how much good shootng has disappeared in the NBA. You did prove that people may not think that 33% is bad though, so I have to give you props on that.

So let me ask you this? Would you add a 33% 3FG shooter to the Hawks lineup, as opposed to a 6-11 guy who could shoot 50% FG?

LOL . . in other words, would you bring Salim Stoudamire back?

There's a difference between 50% FG% and 50% 2P%. And yes, I would rather have have no preference between a 33% 3FG shooter than a 50% 2P shooter if I were picking blindly and knew nothing about the team's needs. Beyond that, it's case by case. The point of all this is simple: The mid-range jumper is less efficient than the 3 pointer. You called that a lie. And now you're just bobbing, weaving, and generally sounding foolish trying to keep up the argument.

Keep LOLing all you want. You have nothing but bluster and your anecdotes about the "good ol' days" to back up your argument that the mid-range jumper isn't the least efficient shot in the game.

Edited January 8, 2010 by niremetal

[TheNorthCydeRises]

There's a difference between 50% FG% and 50% 2P%. And yes, I would rather have have no preference between a 33% 3FG shooter than a 50% 2P shooter if I were picking blindly and knew nothing about the team's needs. Beyond that, it's case by case. The point of all this is simple: The mid-range jumper is less efficient than the 3 pointer. You called that a lie. And now you're just bobbing, weaving, and generally sounding foolish trying to keep up the argument.

Keep LOLing all you want. You have nothing but bluster and your anecdotes about the "good ol' days" to back up your argument that the mid-range jumper isn't the least efficient shot in the game.

Wow.

Both JJ and Crawford KILL PEOPLE when they take midrange jumpers

Kobe Bryant makes a living from midrange. So does Dirk. so does Brandon Roy. So does Deron Williams.

Carmelo is a lethal scorer based off of his midrange prowess.

Rip Hamilton's entire offensive game is the midrange jumper.

Zach Randolph, a guy that used to jack up his share of 3's, is now a midrange MONSTER.

If Iggy had a midrange shot, he'd be better than JJ.

Monta Ellis, Chris Bosh, Luou Deng . . .

Wow . . . seriously? You devalue the midrange jumper that much, even though you watch JJ night in and night out pretty much kill people with it?

[niremetal]

You devalue the midrange jumper that much, even though you watch JJ night in and night out pretty much kill people with it?

Ok, since you mentioned him twice, I just looked up JJ:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Joe%20Johnson

Here is the ranking of his eFG% by spot on the floor:

At rim - 57%

<10ft - 55.2%

3pt - 51.0%

10-15ft - 49.2%

15-23ft - 39.0%

And here is the ranking of where he scores his points, in descending order:

3pt - 4.8ppg (1.6 x 3)

At rim - 4.2ppg (2.1 x 2)

<10ft - 3.8ppg (...)

16-23 - 3.6ppg

10-15ft - 1.8ppg

And it was the exact same order last year. So if mid-range is the area of the floor where JJ scores the least points and shoots the lowest effective percentage, how exactly does he "kill people" from there? It sounds like that is where JJ is LEAST effective.

Thanks for proving my point.

Edited January 8, 2010 by niremetal

[dlpin]

Wow.

Both JJ and Crawford KILL PEOPLE when they take midrange jumpers

Kobe Bryant makes a living from midrange. So does Dirk. so does Brandon Roy. So does Deron Williams.

Carmelo is a lethal scorer based off of his midrange prowess.

Rip Hamilton's entire offensive game is the midrange jumper.

Zach Randolph, a guy that used to jack up his share of 3's, is now a midrange MONSTER.

If Iggy had a midrange shot, he'd be better than JJ.

Monta Ellis, Chris Bosh, Luou Deng . . .

Wow . . . seriously? You devalue the midrange jumper that much, even though you watch JJ night in and night out pretty much kill people with it?

You are simply wrong on almost all accounts, which normally is a very hard thing to do. Niremetal already took care of the JJ issue:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Joe%20Johnson

Kobe

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Kobe%20Bryant

Dirk:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Dirk%20Nowitzki

Roy:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Brandon%20Roy

Williams:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Deron%20Williams

Melo:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Carmelo%20Anthony

Zach Randolph

http://www.hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Zach%20Randolph

The ONLY players of all of these to have a better efg% from mid range jumpers than 3 point are Kobe (but it is only barely so and he is still much better at the rim) and Randolph (but only this season). And the only player to score a majority of his fgs from mid range jumpers is Dirk.

Everyone else is better and scores more at either the rim or 3 point. You say that Zach Randolph is a "midrange monster?" The guy hits 28.9% from 10 to 15ft and 46% from 16-23 feet.

Melo a lethal scorer based on his "mid range prowess?" The guy hits 1.1 shots per game from 10-15ft, and 2.8 from 16-23 (7.8ppg) . Meanwhile he hits 5.1 shots at the rim, and 0.8 from the three point line (12.6 ppg).

And if you still refuse to see this, here's the league averages:

http://hoopdata.com/shotstats.aspx

NBA average:

at the rim: 60.3efg% 3.2 points

<10 feet: 44.1 efg% 0.8 points

10-15ft: 40efg%, 0.6 points

16-23ft: 39.7 efg%, 1.6 points

3 point: 52.4efg%, 2.1 points

Your points have been shown completely false by the data available. If this isn't enough to convince you, I don't know what is. The data shows you are wrong, the way NBA teams play defense shows you are wrong, every columnist thinks you are wrong. There is a reason good defensive teams emphasize preventing penetration and 3 point shots.

[Buzzard]

Wow.

Both JJ and Crawford KILL PEOPLE when they take midrange jumpers

Kobe Bryant makes a living from midrange. So does Dirk. so does Brandon Roy. So does Deron Williams.

Carmelo is a lethal scorer based off of his midrange prowess.

Rip Hamilton's entire offensive game is the midrange jumper.

Zach Randolph, a guy that used to jack up his share of 3's, is now a midrange MONSTER.

If Iggy had a midrange shot, he'd be better than JJ.

Monta Ellis, Chris Bosh, Luou Deng . . .

Wow . . . seriously? You devalue the midrange jumper that much, even though you watch JJ night in and night out pretty much kill people with it?

You really need to check yourself with this proclamation. These guys make their living at the rim, in the paint, at the free throw line, and some from the 3pt line just as much as from 12 to 16 ft. In fact why these players are who they are is what ever part of their game you try and shut down, they have multiple options to go to. I really do not even know why this is a important argument when it comes to Woodys inability to get Smoove to stop shooting jumpers. I guess you will get around to making this prove some kind of point in Woody and Smooves defense...still waiting northcyde.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Ok, since you mentioned him twice, I just looked up JJ:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Joe%20Johnson

Here is the ranking of his eFG% by spot on the floor:

At rim - 57%

<10ft - 55.2%

3pt - 51.0%

10-15ft - 49.2%

15-23ft - 39.0%

And here is the ranking of where he scores his points, in descending order:

3pt - 4.8ppg (1.6 x 3)

At rim - 4.2ppg (2.1 x 2)

<10ft - 3.8ppg (...)

16-23 - 3.6ppg

10-15ft - 1.8ppg

And it was the exact same order last year. So if mid-range is the area of the floor where JJ scores the least points and shoots the lowest effective percentage, how exactly does he "kill people" from there? It sounds like that is where JJ is LEAST effective.

Thanks for proving my point.

And that's my beef with the eFG%. You know good and well that you can't figure in the eFG% anywhere but on 3 point shots. So why not tell what JJ REALLY SHOOTS from 3 point range?

He's a 35% shooter.

So he actually shoots a worst perxentage from 3 point range. Of course the value is greater, because it's a 3 point shot. But why bump it up to 51%, to may like he's making 1 out of every 2 shots from that range? Why "effectively" lie about his 3 point prowess?

Misses shots are missed shots.

It's funny though. If you make a 3, it counts as 1.5 FGs. But if you miss a 3, it's just one miss. Maybe guys should be "effectively" pentalized for jacking up 3's and missing. A 1.5 FGA penalty if you miss.

I fully understand the intent and the purpose of the eFG%. But if people are going to put big time stock in the number, some parameters need to be given to show what is a good eFG% and what isn't a good eFG%.

As far as what is a midrange jumper, I consider shots from 12 feet on out to be midrange. But if you want to use the 16 - 23 feet parameter, I'm not going to fight you on that.

I need to see something though. I need to compare the eFG% of a bad 3 point shooter, to that of a great 3 point shooter. So I wonder if I looked up Smoove's shooting in the 08 - 09 season, compared to . . .um . . Steve Nash, how much of a disparity in the 3 point eFG% would I see?

Yeah, let me check that out.

[dlpin]

How can you not understand the math? How can you not understand that a 3 point shot is worth more than a 2 point shot? How can you not understand that shooting 35% from three points gives you the same points per possession as shooting 52.5% from 2 points?

[AHF]

LOL @ calling a 33% 3 point shooter "a sharpshooter". If the shooting in the NBA is at a point in which GMs are calling 33% 3FG guys "sharpshooters", then it just proves just how much good shootng has disappeared in the NBA. You did prove that people may not think that 33% is bad though, so I have to give you props on that.

So let me ask you this? Would you add a 33% 3FG shooter to the Hawks lineup, as opposed to a 6-11 guy who could shoot 50% FG?

LOL . . in other words, would you bring Salim Stoudamire back?

You frame that in a pretty loaded way. A similar question is:

Ray Allen shoots 35.7% from 3pt range

Tony Allen shoots 52% from 2pt range

Who do you want trying to score for your team? Ray for 3 or Tony for 2?

Another:

Who is the better weapon?

Kendrick Perkins for 2 (64.5 FG%)

or

Paul Pierce for 3 (46.9% 3p%)

* * *

Personally, I don't see much difference between a guard shooting a 3 at a 33.3% success rate and an interior player shooting a 2 at a 50% success rate. If your team is a good offensive rebounding team, you probably want to see the 3 so you have more chances for a rebound. If your opponent has a good fast break offense, you probably want to see the 2 because the long rebounds off the 3s are more likely to lead to easy fast break baskets for your opponent. There is no difference as far as scoring efficiency, though.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

And that's my beef with the eFG%. You know good and well that you can't figure in the eFG% anywhere but on 3 point shots. So why not tell what JJ REALLY SHOOTS from 3 point range?

He's a 35% shooter.

So he actually shoots a worst perxentage from 3 point range. Of course the value is greater, because it's a 3 point shot. But why bump it up to 51%, to may like he's making 1 out of every 2 shots from that range? Why "effectively" lie about his 3 point prowess?

Misses shots are missed shots.

It's funny though. If you make a 3, it counts as 1.5 FGs. But if you miss a 3, it's just one miss. Maybe guys should be "effectively" pentalized for jacking up 3's and missing. A 1.5 FGA penalty if you miss.

I fully understand the intent and the purpose of the eFG%. But if people are going to put big time stock in the number, some parameters need to be given to show what is a good eFG% and what isn't a good eFG%.

As far as what is a midrange jumper, I consider shots from 12 feet on out to be midrange. But if you want to use the 16 - 23 feet parameter, I'm not going to fight you on that.

I need to see something though. I need to compare the eFG% of a bad 3 point shooter, to that of a great 3 point shooter. So I wonder if I looked up Smoove's shooting in the 08 - 09 season, compared to . . .um . . Steve Nash, how much of a disparity in the 3 point eFG% would I see?

Yeah, let me check that out.

08 - 09 season:

NASH - 66% eFG from 3

SMOOVE - 45% eFG from 3

Interesting. And the league average is supposed to be 52% eFG from 3?

Which means that a horrible shooter like Smoove was a lot closer to the league average, than a great shooter like Nash was.

I just trust my eyes when watching games folks. If the league average on 3 point eFG is 52%, that's basically saying that the average 3 point shooter is a 33 - 34% actual shooter. This means that a guy known for his horrible shot selection, Jamal Crawford, was the average 3 point shooter.

i.e. - a Streak Shooter from hell

When JJ goes 2 - 6 from three, people aren't happy. Why? Because 33% three point shooters ( oh . . excuse me . . . ) 50% eFG three point shooters . . are inconsistent shooters who might shoot you out of a game in short stretches. Isn't that excactly what JJ and Jamal do when they settle for long jumpers, whether they be 3s or 21 footers?

So for Josh Smith last year, he either should've been going to the rim, or jacking a ton of threes, with a 45% eFG from three.

[Buzzard]

How can you not understand the math? How can you not understand that a 3 point shot is worth more than a 2 point shot? How can you not understand that shooting 35% from three points gives you the same points per possession as shooting 52.5% from 2 points?

He does but what bothers him is the number of posessions given to the opponent.

I get it.....if you shoot 1 out of 3 from the 3pt line and take 21 threes...you are giving your opponent 7 possesions after made shots and 11 possesions after missed shots assuming 3 offensive rebounds off 14 missed shots.

Now if you take 21 2pt shots and make 52% you have 11 possesions after made shots and only 8 possesions after missed shots assuming 2 offensive rebounds.

The 3pt shooting team gets 21 pts off of 7 made three pointers and their opponent gets 18 possesions.

The 2pt shooting team gets 22 pts off made shots and their opponent gets 19 possesions.

I know the offensive rebounds are not accounted for on the points list...but I really just wanted to show the logic in number of possesions and points scored.

It really is a wash. But for a player like Smoove who only shoots 23% from the beyond 15 ft to 18 ft., now we are starting to lean toward Smoove jacking up jumpers becoming more like a turnover. And a long two as AHF has said a million times, is the dumbest shot in basketball.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Buzzard

[AHF]

So for Josh Smith last year, he either should've been going to the rim, or jacking a ton of threes, with a 45% eFG from three.

You hit the head on the nail with the "should've been going to the rim" part but the other part about jacking threes doesn't make sense.

Josh Smith never gets fouled on a 3 so his TS% from 3pt range was 44.85%. That sucks for a PF's TS%.

He should not have been jacking a ton of threes.

[Buzzard]

08 - 09 season:

NASH - 66% eFG from 3

SMOOVE - 45% eFG from 3

Interesting. And the league average is supposed to be 52% eFG from 3?

Which means that a horrible shooter like Smoove was a lot closer to the league average, than a great shooter like Nash was.

I just trust my eyes when watching games folks. If the league average on 3 point eFG is 52%, that's basically saying that the average 3 point shooter is a 33 - 34% actual shooter. This means that a guy known for his horrible shot selection, Jamal Crawford, was the average 3 point shooter.

i.e. - a Streak Shooter from hell

When JJ goes 2 - 6 from three, people aren't happy. Why? Because 33% three point shooters ( oh . . excuse me . . . ) 50% eFG three point shooters . . are inconsistent shooters who might shoot you out of a game in short stretches. Isn't that excactly what JJ and Jamal do when they settle for long jumpers, whether they be 3s or 21 footers?

So for Josh Smith last year, he either should've been going to the rim, or jacking a ton of threes, with a 45% eFG from three.

Yes the average is 33 to 35% but the average 2pt % is not 50%. Which is what makes a three point shooter such a find for most GMs; especially for the 1st or 2nd person off the bench. What you need to understand is the average has to be at least 33% or the shot selection starts favoring the other team. Which is the problem with Smoove.

3 out of 6 is 6pts off of 50% 2pt fg%. 2 out of 6 is 6pts off of 33% 3pt fg%.

Not many players in the league can shoot at a 50% rate but there are plenty that hit 33% of their threes. But note if said 3pt shooter misses just one of his needed three pointers (I am talking to you Smoove) instead of 6 pts we have only 3pts off of six possesions which is a crappy ratio.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Buzzard

[TheNorthCydeRises]

How can you not understand the math? How can you not understand that a 3 point shot is worth more than a 2 point shot? How can you not understand that shooting 35% from three points gives you the same points per possession as shooting 52.5% from 2 points?

I understand it. But I also understand basketball.

I understand that a 35% three point shooter is streaky as hell, and that it may be in his best interest to take the jumper that he'll make a higher percentage of.

If the game is coming down to the wire, and we're down 1 . . . and we're planning to run JJ off of a screen to free him for a jumper, I don't want him taking a 3, because the eFG says that he's a 51% eFG shooter from 3.

No

He's actuallty a 35% shooter from that range.

I want him taking the higher percentage shot . . . even if that means it's a 20 footer that he only makes 39% of the time.

39% is higher than 35%.

That's REAL MATH.

LOL . . the next time I'm in chat during a game, and JJ or Crawford is 1 - 5 3FG . . . and everybody is bytching and crying about one of them continuing to shoot long jumpers . . . I'll remind people to not worry . . . because if he hits his next 3, he'll be 2 - 6 3FG . . . "effectively" a 50% shooter.

[Buzzard]

I understand it. But I also understand basketball.

I understand that a 35% three point shooter is streaky as hell, and that it may be in his best interest to take the jumper that he'll make a higher percentage of.

If the game is coming down to the wire, and we're down 1 . . . and we're planning to run JJ off of a screen to free him for a jumper, I don't want him taking a 3, because the eFG says that he's a 51% eFG shooter from 3.

No

He's actuallty a 35% shooter from that range.

I want him taking the higher percentage shot . . . even if that means it's a 20 footer that he only makes 39% of the time.

39% is higher than 35%.

That's REAL MATH.

LOL . . the next time I'm in chat during a game, and JJ or Crawford is 1 - 5 3FG . . . and everybody is bytching and crying about one of them continuing to shoot long jumpers . . . I'll remind people to not worry . . . because if he hits his next 3, he'll be 2 - 6 3FG . . . "effectively" a 50% shooter.

A one point lead, end of game, sure take the 39% shot; or better try and find Horf who is our true 50% 2 pt shooter.

But real math is also real volume. Points per possession and number of possessions is why our offense is rated so high. We play your way and give up the 33 to 35% 3 ball for the 46 to 48% 2pt shot; our offense goes down hill quick.

[dlpin]

I understand it. But I also understand basketball.

I understand that a 35% three point shooter is streaky as hell, and that it may be in his best interest to take the jumper that he'll make a higher percentage of.

If the game is coming down to the wire, and we're down 1 . . . and we're planning to run JJ off of a screen to free him for a jumper, I don't want him taking a 3, because the eFG says that he's a 51% eFG shooter from 3.

No

He's actuallty a 35% shooter from that range.

I want him taking the higher percentage shot . . . even if that means it's a 20 footer that he only makes 39% of the time.

39% is higher than 35%.

That's REAL MATH.

LOL . . the next time I'm in chat during a game, and JJ or Crawford is 1 - 5 3FG . . . and everybody is bytching and crying about one of them continuing to shoot long jumpers . . . I'll remind people to not worry . . . because if he hits his next 3, he'll be 2 - 6 3FG . . . "effectively" a 50% shooter.

Too bad that the game isn't made only of last second shots to score 1 point, but of several shots to score several points.

And in any case, in a last second situation down by one the best shot is a lay up or dunk. You only take the long two if the defense blocks you from doing that.

Edited January 8, 2010 by dlpin

[dlpin]

So for Josh Smith last year, he either should've been going to the rim, or jacking a ton of threes, with a 45% eFG from three.

No, because for Josh Smith last year,his efg% at the rim was 69%.

In other words, he should always be going to the rim.

Now, if the choice is between shooting a 3 and shooting a long 2, he should shoot the three. His fg% for long 2s was 34% last year.

So, for Josh Smith:

going to the rim>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>3 point shot>long 2 point shot.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

You hit the head on the nail with the "should've been going to the rim" part but the other part about jacking threes doesn't make sense.

Josh Smith never gets fouled on a 3 so his TS% from 3pt range was 44.85%. That sucks for a PF's TS%.

He should not have been jacking a ton of threes.

Oh I agree with you. No way you want Smith taking 3s. I was just saying that, because that's the logic that was being used for JJ's 51% eFG from three. Smith, however, didn't take or make enough threes to even justify shooting from that area.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

You are simply wrong on almost all accounts, which normally is a very hard thing to do. Niremetal already took care of the JJ issue:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Joe%20Johnson

Kobe

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Kobe%20Bryant

Dirk:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Dirk%20Nowitzki

Roy:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Brandon%20Roy

Williams:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Deron%20Williams

Melo:

http://hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Carmelo%20Anthony

Zach Randolph

http://www.hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Zach%20Randolph

The ONLY players of all of these to have a better efg% from mid range jumpers than 3 point are Kobe (but it is only barely so and he is still much better at the rim) and Randolph (but only this season). And the only player to score a majority of his fgs from mid range jumpers is Dirk.

Everyone else is better and scores more at either the rim or 3 point. You say that Zach Randolph is a "midrange monster?" The guy hits 28.9% from 10 to 15ft and 46% from 16-23 feet.

Melo a lethal scorer based on his "mid range prowess?" The guy hits 1.1 shots per game from 10-15ft, and 2.8 from 16-23 (7.8ppg) . Meanwhile he hits 5.1 shots at the rim, and 0.8 from the three point line (12.6 ppg).

And if you still refuse to see this, here's the league averages:

http://hoopdata.com/shotstats.aspx

NBA average:

at the rim: 60.3efg% 3.2 points

<10 feet: 44.1 efg% 0.8 points

10-15ft: 40efg%, 0.6 points

16-23ft: 39.7 efg%, 1.6 points

3 point: 52.4efg%, 2.1 points

Your points have been shown completely false by the data available. If this isn't enough to convince you, I don't know what is. The data shows you are wrong, the way NBA teams play defense shows you are wrong, every columnist thinks you are wrong. There is a reason good defensive teams emphasize preventing penetration and 3 point shots.

Just tell the real truth is all I'm saying.

JJ: ( 10 - 15 ) - 49% . . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 39% . . . ( 3pt ) - 35%

Kobe: ( 10 - 15 ) - 49% . . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 45% . . ( 3pt ) - 32%

Dirk: ( 10 - 15 ) - 46%. . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 46% . . . ( 3pt ) - 39%

Roy: ( 10 - 15 ) - 47% . . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 43% . . . ( 3pt ) - 34%

Deron: ( 10 - 15 ) - 32% . . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 49% . . . ( 3pt ) - 38%

Melo: ( 10 - 15 ) - 45% . . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 38% . . . ( 3pt ) - 36%

Zach: ( 10 - 15 ) - 29% . . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 46% . . . ( 3pt ) - 25%

If you're going to tell what these guys shoot from a certain range, tell the real numbers. I have no problem with you guys telling how many points they get from each area. But just tell the truth about the shooting.

And let me drive home my point about Jamal Crawford: ( 10 - 15 ) - 50% . . . ( 16 - 23 ) - 45% . . . ( 3pt ) - 35%

Jamal is basically a mid-range terrorist. I mean, look at those percentages from 10 - 23 feet. That's as good as Dirk or Kobe. But what messes him up? His love for the 3 pointer. His 4.7 attempts from 3, is .1 more than his combined attempts from 10 - 23 feet. ( 4.6 )

And you guys wonder why he's so streaky? You guys wonder why people say he has horrible shot selection?

But . . wait. His eFG from 3 is 51.3%. So I guess that justifies Jamal to continue to jack up 3s.

Trust your eyes folks. Don't get blinded by what the eFG tells you.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

A one point lead, end of game, sure take the 39% shot; or better try and find Horf who is our true 50% 2 pt shooter.

But real math is also real volume. Points per possession and number of possessions is why our offense is rated so high. We play your way and give up the 33 to 35% 3 ball for the 46 to 48% 2pt shot; our offense goes down hill quick.

Very true.

Now answer this . . .

Why do people hate our offense?

[Buzzard]

Very true.

Now answer this . . .

Why do people hate our offense?

Are you sure you watch us play? If we are hitting our jumpers we are golden ( who isn't ) . But if not and we are also getting out rebounded we are being routed. We do not have a plan B low post offense if our jump shooting offense is not working. And we do need one; you know this and everyone on this board should know this.

It is becoming really simple for agressive teams, no matter what their record is, to cause us problems. Simple formula: play the ball straight up, contest the ouside shot ( not Smooves or Horfs of course), and dare us to beat them inside.

This is how Orlando beats us everytime. I am sure Van Gundy and company laugh their asses off everytime they talk about playing us and giving Smoove wide open shots from 15 ft and out. Smoove really does make it easy for his defender to lay off him when he is hanging out 20ft and beyond. As far as they are concerned, it might as well be Ben Wallace, Dennis Rodman, or Shaq standing out there.

Edited January 8, 2010 by Buzzard