Heart!!!!

[Obstructed_View]

I don't disagree with all you are saying but you are making it sound a bit simple. It is the NBA, not a rec league.

Basketball is a simple game. It's no different in the rec league or the NBA. The ball needs to go into the basket in order for you to get points. Human psychology doesn't change at any level. Basketball coaches at every level will tell you that seeing the ball go in can get you out of a slump, and taking a higher percentage shot is always a better option if you're not hitting.

If you are open, stepping in to shoot the long 2PT shot isn't always the best option.

I agree. The Spurs took 32. Manu attempted 10 by himself, many of them step-backs. I'm not saying they should have taken 32 long twos. At the same time, I'm sure you can't possibly defend that many three point shots, open or not.

Players that don't take a lot of long two's are usually more efficient shooting the 3PTer as it something that is normal for them. Especially somebody like Bonner or Neal who look all at sea trying to create for themselves. I'm sure if you looked at the %'s, somebody like Bonner would shoot a much higher % on 3PTers than on jumpshots 18-22 feet. That extra time it takes to step in and take the longer two allows the defense more time to challenge. These are NBA athletes. Corey Brewer will get in your face out of nowhere if you waste time fiddling around when you are open.

Probably true. See my point above about Manu shooting a third of the Spurs' three point attempts. You and I both know he was settling for those far too often, and that spread to the rest of the team. If Corey Brewer isn't even bothering to look your direction when you're standing outside the arc, then bricking five more isn't going to get him to come out to you. You have to start making them before he's going to stay at home. The whole goal is to spread the floor, right?

Also, passing up the open 3PT shot is one of the most annoying things for a bigman. It leads to 3 in the key calls and removes offensive predictability which makes it more difficult to read the ball on offensive rebounds. Upfaking and driving around a defender that is closing out hard is a different story because teammates can see that happening and developing and adjust accordingly. Being predictable to your teammates is perhaps the most important part of an offense like the Spurs that is predicated on execution, passing, misdirection and ball movement and not sheer physical advantages.

The Spurs have a big man on the perimeter shooting those threes much of the time, and Manu's teammates are more likely to expect him to try to get to the basket instead of stepping back and jacking up yet another three. Misdirection, passing and ball movement don't really mean much if it's not working to get a shot closer to the basket the overwhelming majority of the time. Again, one out of every three shot attempts the Spurs had was a three pointer.

Proper offense is about playing to your teams strengths and abusing the weak areas of the oppositions defense. I'm sure the Spurs would love to take every shot in the paint, but is just doesn't work like that. I don't think anybody can complain about the Spurs offensively this season, even with a horrendous night from behind the arc, they still dropped 110+ on the road (albeit against a weak team).

No team wins consistently relying on jumpers, let alone three point jumpers. No team has ever won a le that way, and it's not likely that one ever will. What that many long range attempts will get you is a double-digit defecit to a last-place team. Nobody is suggesting the Spurs take every shot in the paint, but if the Spurs go forward thinking this is anything but a lesson in what NOT to do, they're going to be in trouble.

The Spurs are going to jack up a lot of 3's against LA because that is one of the main weapons in beating that frontline. They may as work on that against all teams...

Yeah, I suppose, if you've had your fill of winning. Becoming the early 90s Mavericks would be one certain way to avoid the Lakers.

You can't beat size with anything but size, unless your hope is that the team with size starts relying on outside shots too.

[Man In Black]

My only critique of the 3 point shot vs a long 2 is the spacing issue it creates. That 6-36 inch spacing a guy takes to make it a shorter shot also makes it easier for the defender to cover more area. In essence, he doesn't have to commit one way or the other and can actually area guard more effectively as opposed to what Pop wants, have that defender commit. We saw it time and again in last year's playoffs when RJ wasn't able to shoot the 3 from the corners. He would step in, as some have suggested, and we would watch defenders collapse on him and yet, still have time to defend when the ball would rotate out. It was because SPACING wasn't at maximal distance.

[Obstructed_View]

additionally, a long two is the worst shot in the game, the expected return is far lower than a three pointer.

When you're in a shooting slump, you need to make a basket. The worst shot in the game is the one that doesn't go in and doesn't help you to make the next one.

[slayermin]

I saw something special tonight. I don't know if it means anything but that was a great game.

[itzsoweezee]

The most inefficient shot in basketball is the one you aren't making. Again, your shooting percentage goes up the closer you get to the basket.

I'm having trouble believing that you're defending a strategy that resulted in an overtime win against the third worst team in the NBA.

Uh, you do understand that a 3 point field goal is worth more than a 2 point field goal, right? Simple arithmetic makes is crystal clear that taking a slightly higher percentage 2 pointer is nowhere near as good as taking a 3 pointer. Think about it for a second, maybe it'll come to you.

[Obstructed_View]

Uh, you do understand that a 3 point field goal is worth more than a 2 point field goal, right? Simple arithmetic makes is crystal clear that taking a slightly higher percentage 2 pointer is nowhere near as good as taking a 3 pointer. Think about it for a second, maybe it'll come to you.

Uh, you do understand that a missed 3 point field goal is worth the exact number of points as dribbling the ball off your foot out of bounds, but without the long rebound by the opponent, right? You cannot possibly be defending the practice of settling for outside jumpshots, no matter the fools-gold promised by 50 percent more potential points.

Funny how the percentage of threes went up when the Spurs started to hit some twos in the second half, where in the second quarter especially they were either getting layups or missed three attempts. That's why there's value in guys like Antoine Carr and Doc Rivers and Glenn Robinson and Antonio McDyess and Tony Parker who can hit a midrange jumper at a reliable rate. It settles a team down when they're in a shooting funk.

[Drachen]

When you're in a shooting slump, you need to make a basket. The worst shot in the game is the one that doesn't go in and doesn't help you to make the next one.

I understand what you are trying to say here, but if we shot every shot from three and hit them at the rate of our three point shooting (a considerably bad 31.3 %), we would have scored more than we ended up scoring by mixing some twos at a higher percentage. You really have to be shooting historically bad at 3 pointers for it to make sense to step in to take a long two. Over the game, the expected point value is far lower for the long two than the three.

[SenorSpur]

Don't forget Neal with the clutch free throws to tie the game in regulation...

Neal > Mason

[Drachen]

Basically what it boils down to is you do NOT pass up an open three for an open long two. If you are hitting 30% of your threes (admittedly bad), over 100 shots, you would have to hit 45% of your long twos (admittedly pretty good) in order to equal the same amount of points. You pass up wide open threes for two reasons: to mix it up and not be predictable and for much closer and higher percentage shots (i.e. 50%+)

p.s. also so you can draw more fouls and get more freebies which are generally much higher percentage shots as well.

[EricB]

Shooting that many threes is a very rare game.

Its usually followed by an 8 threes attempted game.

[Obstructed_View]

I understand what you are trying to say here, but if we shot every shot from three and hit them at the rate of our three point shooting (a considerably bad 31.3 %), we would have scored more than we ended up scoring by mixing some twos at a higher percentage. You really have to be shooting historically bad at 3 pointers for it to make sense to step in to take a long two. Over the game, the expected point value is far lower for the long two than the three.

They were 1-16 from three point range. I don't know how much worse you have to be to qualify as "historically bad". Again, I haven't said that the Spurs should have abandoned three point shots altogether, but when you take that many, it's a near-certainty that many of them are poor shot selection, and mixing in a few twos just to get the ball going through the hoop is a good idea.

Someone talked about the Spurs putting up so many points on Minnesota, when in truth it took overtime for them to get to their average against a really bad team.

[TampaDude]

They were 1-16 from three point range. I don't know how much worse you have to be to qualify as "historically bad". Again, I haven't said that the Spurs should have abandoned three point shots altogether, but when you take that many, it's a near-certainty that many of them are poor shot selection, and mixing in a few twos just to get the ball going through the hoop is a good idea.

Someone talked about the Spurs putting up so many points on Minnesota, when in truth it took overtime for them to get to their average against a really bad team.

Yup...but in the end, the Spurs WON. That's all that matters.

[Obstructed_View]

Yup...but in the end, the Spurs WON. That's all that matters.

Agreed. It's a whole lot more fun to pick at their performance after a win, too.

[Leonard Curse]

i mean its crazy guys !!!! were all on cloud 9 here to see our boys get half the respect they deserve. I think manu is the engine driving this team while timmy is the driver and parker is the in the passenger seat!!
oh and bonner of course ...yup the ugly step child in the back seat along with grandpa(dice)bahahaha. splitters the co pilot that got left at the gas station with his annoying sidekick princess

[Leonard Curse]

no but seriously manu is driving this team i could almost say WILLING our team to crazy victories when we shouldnt have them. manu shows so much loyalty/heart/fearlessness/ and composure all @ the same time and is setting the tone for our new players

[SA210]

this team is on a mission, thay have heart and killer instinct

[all_heart]

Did somebody say heart?! Cuz I'm all_heart MFers!

Great win streak for sure but at the end of the road, we just want a
Having said that I hope they can squeak out a couple more wins against the Mavs and NO. It would be great for confidence and so their fans can kiss our ass!

[Obstructed_View]

Just a note: In the 4th quarter, the Mavericks were 1-3 from three point range and 5-6 on long inefficient jumpers. If they're such rotten shots, I wonder why Dirk Nowitzki has become such a dominant scorer since he stopped shooting so many threes.

[Ice009]

Just a note: In the 4th quarter, the Mavericks were 1-3 from three point range and 5-6 on long inefficient jumpers. If they're such rotten shots, I wonder why Dirk Nowitzki has become such a dominant scorer since he stopped shooting so many threes.

Well to be fair Dirk is one of the best shooters in the game, but you've still proved your point quite nicely.

I'll also add does anyone watch Kobe hit mid range jumpers? I guess someone should tell him he is wasting his time shooting those and he should be shooting threes .

It's absolutely idiotic taking this many threes and expecting to get anywhere.

[Ace]

Heart skipped a beat?