Old School Big men who could shoot 3s

[UZER]

Off the top of my head:

Bill Laimbeer
Sam Perkins
Sabonis (newer old school)

[GAustex]

Off the top of my head:

Bill Laimbeer
Sam Perkins
Sabonis (newer old school)
Sikma?

[lefty]

Divac sometimes
Manute Bol had 6 threes in a game

[davethedope]

Bol. Period. Next question.

[UZER]

Divac is a good one.

[daslicer]

Ewing and Alonzo hit them every now and then.

[phxspurfan]

Larry Johnson
Cliff Robinson
Schrempf

[daslicer]

Brad Miller

[UZER]

Larry Johnson
Cliff Robinson
Schrempf

I though of Schremp but wasn’t sure if he’d qualify as a big. But that’s a good one.

[MultiTroll]

Channing Frye .403 career. :wow

[phxspurfan]

Antoine Walker :lol

[Jonnyblue19]

Rasheed Wallace would shoot a 3 and then back you down in the post. If he wasn't so damn lazy he could have been one of the best ever he was that talented.

[timvp]

Ewing and Alonzo hit them every now and then.

Only in the baby three-point line two-year era, tbh.

[lefty]

Only in the baby three-point line two-year era, tbh.
Ewing hit a few in the playoffs and 1 in the Finals before the shortened 3 pt era

[R. DeMurre]

It's funny how quickly conventional wisdom melts away when systemic changes occur. In this era, everybody should work on the three point shot as a fundamental basketball skill. So many people over the past 40 years sincerely believed the concept that bigs couldn't/shouldn't shoot threes. Bird was an anomaly, Dirk was a weird Euro guy... A guy like Brook Lopez has transformed himself from a mediocre high usage rate center to a valuable low usage rate center by simply shooting 6 threes a game at a respectable rate.

[Kurgan]

Troy Murphy and Mehmet Okur.

[ambchang]

Dan Issel
Robinson shot a few during the Lucas years

[JoeTait75]

Brad Lohaus

Zydrunas Ilgauskas (not sure if he qualifies as old school)

Bob McAdoo could shoot from deep although he played most of his career prior to the three-point shot.

[Seventyniner]

I-Q7i1gz9ks

tbh :wakeup

[spurraider21]

It's funny how quickly conventional wisdom melts away when systemic changes occur. In this era, everybody should work on the three point shot as a fundamental basketball skill. So many people over the past 40 years sincerely believed the concept that bigs couldn't/shouldn't shoot threes. Bird was an anomaly, Dirk was a weird Euro guy... A guy like Brook Lopez has transformed himself from a mediocre high usage rate center to a valuable low usage rate center by simply shooting 6 threes a game at a respectable rate.
conventional logic was to have bigs down low to create an inside-out game and free up other shooters, and keeping bigs in for offensive rebounds. but its pretty valuable having them shoot 3's because you pull opposing bigs out of the paint (and long rebounds make for a good wildcard that could generate offensive rebounds) plus allowing the center to get back in transition D

[R. DeMurre]

conventional logic was to have bigs down low to create an inside-out game and free up other shooters, and keeping bigs in for offensive rebounds. but its pretty valuable having them shoot 3's because you pull opposing bigs out of the paint (and long rebounds make for a good wildcard that could generate offensive rebounds) plus allowing the center to get back in transition D


Yeah, one thing I think Popovich and others recognized was how some people overvalued offensive rebounding, and how getting back on D could set you up for more success than crashing the offensive boards. It's less exciting for highlights, but more conducive to wins. Having a big beyond the top of the key gives him a 20' headstart on getting back defensively compared to a traditional post player.

[ambchang]

I-Q7i1gz9ks

tbh :wakeup

Suns are so stupid. The spurs need a three to tie. So they kept following manu in the paint with two guys draped over him and leaving duncan wide opened.

[spurraider21]

Suns are so stupid. The spurs need a three to tie. So they kept following manu in the paint with two guys draped over him and leaving duncan wide opened.
yeah how dare they leave a career, 18% 3 point shooter (14% in playoffs) with no real history of taking regular attempts from 3

[R. DeMurre]

yeah how dare they leave a career, 18% 3 point shooter (14% in playoffs) with no real history of taking regular attempts from 3

Classic D'Antoni defense. They were up three, so double teaming Manu in the paint only increases the chance that they foul him and give the Spurs a chance at a 3 point play if he doesn't pass out to a wide open Duncan. It's just a bad defensive decision. Parker was also wide open for a three, meaning the Suns left two guys wide open for threes in a game they led by three with only a few seconds left to play-- why? To have four guys packing the paint to stop a two?

[LkrFan]

Baby Drew, but Phil was a hater :lol

[ambchang]

yeah how dare they leave a career, 18% 3 point shooter (14% in playoffs) with no real history of taking regular attempts from 3

If you actually know math, you would know scoring two points when down three points will give you 0% chance of winning.

Oh since it’s you, 14% > 0%, in case you need that explained.

[spurraider21]

If you actually know math, you would know scoring two points when down three points will give you 0% chance of winning.

Oh since it’s you, 14% > 0%, in case you need that explained.
it wasnt a buzzer beater. manu could have made a layup with ~5 seconds left. ample time to foul and get another attempt. spurs still had timeouts.

[ambchang]

it wasnt a buzzer beater. manu could have made a layup with ~5 seconds left. ample time to foul and get another attempt. spurs still had timeouts.

The chance of a player making a contested layup is about 65% or so. This will make it a 1 pt game.

The suns inbound to Nash who’s a 90% shooter. The chances of him missing one of two is 19% and missing both is 1%. So now the spurs have a 13% chance of it being a two point game a 0.6% of it being a one point game. The spurs will have to then score either a two or three pointer which takes another 50% and 80% off.
Even if suns cannot inbound to Nash and get to a random player. Say a player shooting 75%, the chances are about 16% being a two point game and a 4% of being a one point game. Then the spurs will have a 50% chance of getting a two or about a 35% chance of a three. Or an 8% chance to tie or 6% chance to win.

All are less than 14%.

Not to mention this gives up the control to the spurs to win or lose the game.

Of course this is to ignore the cases of the suns getting an offensive rebound after a missed ft, or committing a to on the inbound, or the spurs getting a steal.

[daslicer]

Derrick Coleman.

[basquetbol]

I-Q7i1gz9ks

tbh :wakeup

When that shot was made and one of the announcers mentioned it was the only three pointer Duncan attempted all year and he made it, I automatically knew the Suns were losing the series, they can do everything right but they'll still lose, it wasn't meant to be for that Suns team.

[Dirks_Finale]

Kukoc

[Dirks_Finale]

Antoine Walker :lol

Reporter: Why do you shoot so many 3's?

AW: Because there isn't a 4 point shot

[lefty]

Kukoc