3 point shooting as a measure of shooting skill

[90sgoat]

I am following a debate on another forum (you know which) in where a lot of people argue that being a good/great/goat shooters is all about how you hit from 3.

Let me argue against that. The answer should be quite obvious for those who have actually played the game. I say that as a guy who played 3 and D (with drives) before such a thing was popular, because it was the only way to hang with players who were better than I was.

The 3 point shot along with the FT shot is the easiest to practice and quickly become good at. Why is that? Because the FT line always has the same distance, the exact same position of the feet, the exact same motion.

With the 3 ball, the distance is also always the same, the placement of the feet, the look at the basket, almost always the same (not counting crazy Curry).

Basketball is all about eye hand coordination and balance. When you shoot a 3, you have a shot you have practiced in exact same distance, in exact same foot placement again and again.

On the other hand, the mid range shot is a much more varied shot. The distance to the basket and the angle at the basket varies with every shot. You do not have the privilidge of that 'motor memory' of the 3 point shot. The mid range jumpshot requires you to make a split second approximation of distance and angle and usually is contested more.

This means the mid range shot requires a greater improvisation and therefore requires a greater shooting skill, a greater feel for the ball.

Look at Ibaka, the man can't hit an open mid range to save his life, but can knock down 3s sort of consistently.

This is the truth most ballers know, that the 3 ball is easier to master than the 2 ball. Today most defenses sag off almost anyone that is open for a 2. I remember watching early 00s ball and that is when the lack of mid range became apparant. It was not because of rule changes or 3 is more than 2 nonsense, the other way around, players could no longer hit 2s at acceptable rate.

[bond10]

yes

[PP34Deuce]

Bruce Bowen couldn't hit a 20 foot jumpshot to save his life.

He was damn near automatic from that corner 3 though.

there's some truth to it. Klay Thompson has a great Midrange game. Dangerous and it makes him a huge nightmare to guard long stretches.

[Showtime80']

The post up started dying in the mid 90's, 8+ years any rule changes came around!

Hell Tim Duncan was the last true old school back to the basket big and he came around in 1997!!! The bigs like Webber, Wallace, Garnett and Nowitzki were already starting to face up and move away from the basket.

So the bigs started to move away from the post to shoot long jumpers and then the new generation of small to mid sized guards like Kobe, Carter, T-Mac, Francis, Marbury, Allen, Baron Davis etc... wanted to dunk and bomb away from deep!

There goes your post, mid range and the fast break game as well resulting in the HORRIBLE late 90's to mid 2000's NBA!!!

Make no mistake about it, the NBA WAS FORCED TO MAKE RULE CHANGES!!! Most of that 90's generation didn't have the skill, fundamental knowledge or high IQ level to play under the old rules and make the game WATCHABLE aside from the Lakers, Kings, Mavs and Nets for a brief period. That's 4 out of 30 teams!!!!

[90sgoat]

The post up started dying in the mid 90's, 8+ years any rule changes came around!

Hell Tim Duncan was the last true old school back to the basket big and he came around in 1997!!! The bigs like Webber, Wallace, Garnett and Nowitzki were already starting to face up and move away from the basket.

So the bigs started to move away from the post to shoot long jumpers and then the new generation of small to mid sized guards like Kobe, Carter, T-Mac, Francis, Marbury, Allen, Baron Davis etc... wanted to dunk and bomb away from deep!

There goes your post, mid range and the fast break game as well resulting in the HORRIBLE late 90's to mid 2000's NBA!!!

Make no mistake about it, the NBA WAS FORCED TO MAKE RULE CHANGES!!! Most of that 90's generation didn't have the skill, fundamental knowledge or high IQ level to play under the old rules and make the game WATCHABLE aside from the Lakers, Kings, Mavs and Nets for a brief period. That's 4 out of 30 teams!!!!

Well, the back to basket postup was one thing, but not the only arsenal of the power forward of the 80/90s. If you watch 'old' games from then, you can see EVERY player except center being able to hit the midrange, it was automatic! EVERY power forward hit that mid range like David West EVERY game.

Actually the back to basket is extremely difficult in real life, probably the most difficult to master of all basketball skills. Just feels very unnatural when you try it. Look at Lebron you can see he feels that awkwardness today too.

[SexSymbol]

The 3 point shot along with the FT shot is the easiest to practice and quickly become good at. Why is that? Because the FT line always has the same distance, the exact same position of the feet, the exact same motion.

Absolutely disagree on that one.
There's so much things to learn both physically and mentally on 3 pointers it's staggering how underrated shooters can be sometimes.
You have to either learn to let adrenalin of a coming defender fuel your shot or try to make the shot from physical memory, you have to learn the balance, to keep your head straight no matter what.
It's incredibly hard to coach a 40+ percent shooter that's not just a spot up shooter.
Same with FTs, because there's pressure and it's hard to beat that mentally for some players.

The easiest thing to learn and master is the layup

[Poetry]

There's only a small statistical sample available for Reggie's career, but the numbers suggest old man Reggie was overall a better shooter than Steph and Klay. Obviously Reggie was a better shooter when he was younger.

Reggie (2000-2005)
0-3 feet: .748
3-10 feet: .453
10-16 feet: .451
16<3: .439
3P: (.373 for 5 year sample) (career .395)

Klay (2011-2016)
0-3 feet: .666
3-10 feet: .321
10-16 feet: .397
16<3: .429
3P: .420

Steph (2009-2016)
0-3 feet: .644
3-10 feet: .404
10-16 feet: .448
16<3: .460
3P: .444

[iamgine]

I am following a debate on another forum (you know which) in where a lot of people argue that being a good/great/goat shooters is all about how you hit from 3.

Let me argue against that. The answer should be quite obvious for those who have actually played the game. I say that as a guy who played 3 and D (with drives) before such a thing was popular, because it was the only way to hang with players who were better than I was.

The 3 point shot along with the FT shot is the easiest to practice and quickly become good at. Why is that? Because the FT line always has the same distance, the exact same position of the feet, the exact same motion.

With the 3 ball, the distance is also always the same, the placement of the feet, the look at the basket, almost always the same (not counting crazy Curry).

Basketball is all about eye hand coordination and balance. When you shoot a 3, you have a shot you have practiced in exact same distance, in exact same foot placement again and again.

On the other hand, the mid range shot is a much more varied shot. The distance to the basket and the angle at the basket varies with every shot. You do not have the privilidge of that 'motor memory' of the 3 point shot. The mid range jumpshot requires you to make a split second approximation of distance and angle and usually is contested more.

This means the mid range shot requires a greater improvisation and therefore requires a greater shooting skill, a greater feel for the ball.

Look at Ibaka, the man can't hit an open mid range to save his life, but can knock down 3s sort of consistently.

This is the truth most ballers know, that the 3 ball is easier to master than the 2 ball. Today most defenses sag off almost anyone that is open for a 2. I remember watching early 00s ball and that is when the lack of mid range became apparant. It was not because of rule changes or 3 is more than 2 nonsense, the other way around, players could no longer hit 2s at acceptable rate.
I'm not sure mid range shooting is harder. What makes it hard is the dribbling beforehand since if you're shooting mid-range it's likely you have a defender on you and you'd have to create space/have some moves. The varied distance, I don't think makes it harder than the 3 point shot at all. At least I myself don't find the varied distance to be a problem.

Don't players still hit mid range at a higher percentage than 3s?

[90sgoat]

I'm not sure mid range shooting is harder. What makes it hard is the dribbling beforehand since if you're shooting mid-range it's likely you have a defender on you and you'd have to create space/have some moves. The varied distance, I don't think makes it harder than the 3 point shot at all. At least I myself don't find the varied distance to be a problem.

Don't players still hit mid range at a higher percentage than 3s?

Nope, see Poetry's great post above:


Reggie (2000-2005)
0-3 feet: .748
3-10 feet: .453
10-16 feet: .451
16<3: .439
3P: (.373 for 5 year sample) (career .395)

Klay (2011-2016)
0-3 feet: .666
3-10 feet: .321
10-16 feet: .397
16<3: .429
3P: .420

Steph (2009-2016)
0-3 feet: .644
3-10 feet: .404
10-16 feet: .448
16<3: .460
3P: .444

[3ball]

I'm not sure mid range shooting is harder. What makes it hard is the dribbling beforehand since if you're shooting mid-range it's likely you have a defender on you and you'd have to create space/have some moves. The varied distance, I don't think makes it harder than the 3 point shot at all. At least I myself don't find the varied distance to be a problem.

Don't players still hit mid range at a higher percentage than 3s?


2-point jumpshots are far more CONTESTED - defenders are much closer to the shooter on average - this is statistical fact.

NBA.com's stats show that over 80% of the league's 3-pointers are taken with 4+ feet of room, compared to only 30% of 2-pointers.

In Steph Curry's case, 70% of his threes are taken with 4+ feet of room - specifically, he attempted 11.3 threes per game this season, of which 5.2 of them were "open" (4-6 feet of room), and 2.7 were "very open" (6+ feet), per NBA.com's stats:



........................................0-2 ft (very tight).... 2-4 ft (tight)..... 4-6 ft (open).... 6+ ft (very open)

STEPH CURRY'S.
3-PT ATTEMPTS PER GAME ............0.4 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season).................... 2.9 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)..................5.1 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)..................2.7 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season) <-- nba.com

PERCENTAGE OF
TOTAL 3-PT ATTEMPTS .................0.4%................ 26.1%.............45.9%.............24.3%

[ClipperRevival]

Agree OP.

Here are just some ways to shoot a mid-range shot:

Pull up in trans
One dribble pull up
Two dribble pull up
Catch and shoot off a pick
Set shot
Fade away

The mid-range game REQUIRES that you master the footwork game. And footwork is such a huge and important part of bball.

I also watch the game today and :facepalm at how shocked some players look when they get the ball 15-17 feet from the basket and have no idea what to do. Here's a freaken idea, shot that thing. A wide open, mid-range jumper in rhythm is a high pct shot. At least it should be. Guys today just seem completely lost in the mid-range situation.

[3ball]

Well, the back to basket postup was one thing, but not the only arsenal of the power forward of the 80/90s. If you watch 'old' games from then, you can see EVERY player except center being able to hit the midrange, it was automatic! EVERY power forward hit that mid range like David West EVERY game.

Actually the back to basket is extremely difficult in real life, probably the most difficult to master of all basketball skills. Just feels very unnatural when you try it. Look at Lebron you can see he feels that awkwardness today too.



Midrange % from NBA.com (all shots inside the 3-point line but outside the paint)



JORDAN 1997:. 48.9%, 1202 fga
JORDAN 1998:. 43.2%, 1101 fga

CURRY.. 2015:. 41.1%, 285 fga
CURRY.. 2016:. 42.5%, 200 fga

DURANT 2014:. 44.4%, 509 fga


Durant is the closest I've seen to Jordan in terms of VOLUME, and his volume is nowhere near Jordan's.. Jordan's midrange shooting ability is probably drastically underrated all-time, given his efficiency and volume are goat - he led the league in scoring on mostly midrange.

Btw, Jordan had 89 dunks in 1998, which is twice as much as Westbrook gets - so just think how devastating his shot allocation and SELECTION was (goat midrange efficiency coupled with pinpoint drives) - that's why his per possession efficiency (ortg) was so high despite his involvement in so many possessions (usage)
.

[NBAGOAT]

I just don't think the empirical evidence is there. You mentioned ibaka but he takes 34% of his shots fro 16+feet inside the 3 pt line and makes 45% of them, he makes 48% of his shots from 10-16. He's better at knocking down the midrange shot actually, just made more 3's in the playoffs. There's also guys like Al Horford who are basically 50% midrange shooters(ik it's catch and shoot) but they're not nearly as good from 3 raw percentage wise after they try expanding their range.

[ralph_i_el]

I am following a debate on another forum (you know which) in where a lot of people argue that being a good/great/goat shooters is all about how you hit from 3.

Let me argue against that. The answer should be quite obvious for those who have actually played the game. I say that as a guy who played 3 and D (with drives) before such a thing was popular, because it was the only way to hang with players who were better than I was.

The 3 point shot along with the FT shot is the easiest to practice and quickly become good at. Why is that? Because the FT line always has the same distance, the exact same position of the feet, the exact same motion.

With the 3 ball, the distance is also always the same, the placement of the feet, the look at the basket, almost always the same (not counting crazy Curry).

Basketball is all about eye hand coordination and balance. When you shoot a 3, you have a shot you have practiced in exact same distance, in exact same foot placement again and again.

On the other hand, the mid range shot is a much more varied shot. The distance to the basket and the angle at the basket varies with every shot. You do not have the privilidge of that 'motor memory' of the 3 point shot. The mid range jumpshot requires you to make a split second approximation of distance and angle and usually is contested more.

This means the mid range shot requires a greater improvisation and therefore requires a greater shooting skill, a greater feel for the ball.

Look at Ibaka, the man can't hit an open mid range to save his life, but can knock down 3s sort of consistently.

This is the truth most ballers know, that the 3 ball is easier to master than the 2 ball. Today most defenses sag off almost anyone that is open for a 2. I remember watching early 00s ball and that is when the lack of mid range became apparant. It was not because of rule changes or 3 is more than 2 nonsense, the other way around, players could no longer hit 2s at acceptable rate.

Ibaka hasn't shot less than 40% from midrange any season of his career, and it's his most common shot. In 2012-13 he shot ~50% from midrange and it was 43% of his shots.

you are a moron.

[ralph_i_el]

There's only a small statistical sample available for Reggie's career, but the numbers suggest old man Reggie was overall a better shooter than Steph and Klay. Obviously Reggie was a better shooter when he was younger.

Reggie (2000-2005)
0-3 feet: .748
3-10 feet: .453
10-16 feet: .451
16<3: .439
3P: (.373 for 5 year sample) (career .395)

Klay (2011-2016)
0-3 feet: .666
3-10 feet: .321
10-16 feet: .397
16<3: .429
3P: .420

Steph (2009-2016)
0-3 feet: .644
3-10 feet: .404
10-16 feet: .448
16<3: .460
3P: .444


In his prime, Reggie was shooting half as many 3's as Curry.

[tpols]

I do believe that guys like Ibaka, Horford, Millsap, Scola, etc should have never went along with this 3 pt shooting style and just kept using their midrange .. but theyre trying to copycat the warriors / spurs style from a few years back. It's silly though because those guys, even if some are pretty good 3 pt shooters, they always choke them in the playoffs especially when it counts. Theyre not true knockdown shooters from that range. They should be like aldridge or KG or duncan and dominate midrange, but the current paradigm has hurt them specifically.

[NBAGOAT]

I do believe that guys like Ibaka, Horford, Millsap, Scola, etc should have never went along with this 3 pt shooting style and just kept using their midrange .. but theyre trying to copycat the warriors / spurs style from a few years back. It's silly though because those guys just arent good 3 pt shooters and in pressure situations never will be. They should be like aldridge or KG or duncan and dominate midrange, but the current paradigm has hurt them specifically.

I'm almost sure Aldridge will be taking 3's next year too. He took almost 2 a game in portland his last year and the spurs want to open up their offense again.

[tpols]

I'm almost sure Aldridge will be taking 3's next year too. He took almost 2 a game in portland his last year and the spurs want to open up their offense again.

eh, I dont like big stiff PFs doing that.. small agile ones like green and love is ok because they are much wquicker, and can drive better out of the triple threat, but I dont understand why these huge dudes moved away from their midrange.

[NBAGOAT]

eh, I dont like big stiff PFs doing that.. small agile ones like green and love is ok because they are much wquicker, and can drive better out of the triple threat, but I dont understand why these huge dudes moved away from their midrange.

I agree about aldridge but I'm still pretty sure it's gonna happen. The positive is you could somehow become the next channing frye even if it's unlikely.

[3ball]

.
Let's not act like good shooting is even NEEDED to be a top scorer in today's game - Lebron, Westbrook, Wade, Derozan and Butler have poor midrange (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12389778&postcount=41) and 3-point efficiency, but they're still top scorers because today's spacing and hands-off defense allows athletic players easier access to the rim.

MJ's athleticism would benefit the same way, except he was a goat midrange shooter, even better than Curry (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=12373019&postcount=26) - Jordan had Lebron/Westbrook athleticism but had better midrange shooting than Steph Curry.

[PP34Deuce]

I do believe that guys like Ibaka, Horford, Millsap, Scola, etc should have never went along with this 3 pt shooting style and just kept using their midrange .. but theyre trying to copycat the warriors / spurs style from a few years back. It's silly though because those guys, even if some are pretty good 3 pt shooters, they always choke them in the playoffs especially when it counts. Theyre not true knockdown shooters from that range. They should be like aldridge or KG or duncan and dominate midrange, but the current paradigm has hurt them specifically.

I also think the 3 ball can make them lazy. One of my favorite players and celtics Antoine Walker is prime example. The guy was a do it all poor mans Webber (20-10-4) Then he fell in love with the 3 pointer and got out of shape. Stopped running, etc.

Ibaka,Horford,Millsap all had midrange games and were bruisers in the post now they are allergic to it.

[Rake2204]

There's only a small statistical sample available for Reggie's career, but the numbers suggest old man Reggie was overall a better shooter than Steph and Klay. Obviously Reggie was a better shooter when he was younger.

Reggie (2000-2005)
0-3 feet: .748
3-10 feet: .453
10-16 feet: .451
16<3: .439
3P: (.373 for 5 year sample) (career .395)

Klay (2011-2016)
0-3 feet: .666
3-10 feet: .321
10-16 feet: .397
16<3: .429
3P: .420

Steph (2009-2016)
0-3 feet: .644
3-10 feet: .404
10-16 feet: .448
16<3: .460
3P: .444Out of curiosity, do you have a sample size for those averages (number of attempts)?

[Klay 3D]

The 3 point shot is more difficult plain and simple because it's further and requires muscles to work harder with usually more extension. Unless you want to argue about in game, it's not about the distance/type of shot...it's more about how you get those shots.

3pt shooters mainly depend on others to get them in position unless you have incredible footwork and balance ala Curry. 2pt shooters are also dependable too a la Lamarcus, [insert big man here], etc but it's less effective because of it being worth 2 points. The 2pt shot is more effective in crunch time though where a basket MUST be made so you go for the higher percentage shot. Like 1/3 from 3pt is the same as 1/2 from 2pt but there isn't enough time for an extra attempt. Anyway, you always try for a good looking 3 because it's more efficient in the long run and that's why midrange shooting bigs are moving back.

Now for the ball-handling midrange shooters, they're usually elite at getting to the basket which opens the midrange up more than normal players. If a defender stick, they're going around you and that's not a chance you take. Even if they shoot less than 50%, the chance of a foul is high enough to compensate for the extra point that a 3pt gives. You shoot the midrange to keep the defense honest or else you should focus on going to the hole. If your handles aren't that tight or you don't have that many moves to get underneath the basket, you're going to live with contested jumpers like Derozan does. Good thing that he's pretty good at drawing fouls.

All in all, I don't think it takes more skill to make a 2pt shot. However, it takes more all around skill to create a good one. If I put someone like Kobe at the top of the arc shooting 3s vs him constantly moving around in the midrange (in practice), I'm sure Kobe will knock down his midrange at a higher clip. I don't believe that split second eye coordination thingy. Every player has a hot spot they go to like 90% of the time. Wade is going to shoot going to his left but then again players still take away the right to prevent a drive. Can't just be one dimensional is all I'm saying. And I'm typing as I'm thinking so all of this is probably everywhere

[tontoz]

The 3 point shot along with the FT shot is the easiest to practice and quickly become good at. Why is that? Because the FT line always has the same distance, the exact same position of the feet, the exact same motion.

With the 3 ball, the distance is also always the same, the placement of the feet, the look at the basket, almost always the same (not counting crazy Curry).

Basketball is all about eye hand coordination and balance. When you shoot a 3, you have a shot you have practiced in exact same distance, in exact same foot placement again and again.



:facepalm

This is just nonsense. The 3 point line is a different distance in the corner than it is up top, and players aren't always taking their shots right behind the line. Sometimes they will be 2-5 feet behind the line.

As a side note historically foul shooting has been a very good measure of a players shooting ability even though it is always the same distance with no defense.

[CuterThanRubio]

Wow, great research and analysis, you discovered that set shots are easier to make than pull-up jumpers and defended turn around hooks and fadeaways!

Closer to the basket = less room for error because the ball travels a shorter distance = 2 pointers will always be easier to make even while contested, its simple physics!

You are RETARDED

It's funny how hypocritical you are, claiming all you did while playing ball was wait for someone to pass when the defenders sagged off since you were invisible on the court because you suck and chucking from distance, then you come on ISH and bash 3 point shooting and cry about the modern era, what a disgrace!

Stay salty!

:hammerhead:

[Poetry]

Out of curiosity, do you have a sample size for those averages (number of attempts)?

During Reggie's final five years, he averaged 10.7 attempts (.442 FG% and .373 3P%). Before those final five years he was shooting .480 FG% and .403 3P% on 13.3 FGA (age 22 to 34).

Klay has averaged 15.2 attempts and Steph has averaged 16.6 attempts.

[iamgine]

Nope, see Poetry's great post above:
That shows mid range is easier. Or at least very close.

[sundizz]

As a legit shooter I agree with this. I'm an amateur version of Curry - meaning I take dribble step back contested threes. I hit these at a better percentage than a midrange shot. When you are a certain distance you have the muscle memory on your shooting motion. Midrange is tougher since you can be anywhere from 10 to 19 feet out. However, a 10 footer to bank in is one of the easiest shots in the world. I hit 4-5 of those easily a game.

[90sgoat]

Wow, great research and analysis, you discovered that set shots are easier to make than pull-up jumpers and defended turn around hooks and fadeaways!

Closer to the basket = less room for error because the ball travels a shorter distance = 2 pointers will always be easier to make even while contested, its simple physics!

You are RETARDED

It's funny how hypocritical you are, claiming all you did while playing ball was wait for someone to pass when the defenders sagged off since you were invisible on the court because you suck and chucking from distance, then you come on ISH and bash 3 point shooting and cry about the modern era, what a disgrace!

Stay salty!

:hammerhead:

You've been melting down so hard these last weeks it's hilarious. It's the basketball equivalent of a child learning there is no Santa Claus, now you learned that there is no Santa Claus in the league and that the real Santa Claus only existed in the 90s.

[90sgoat]

As a legit shooter I agree with this. I'm an amateur version of Curry - meaning I take dribble step back contested threes. I hit these at a better percentage than a midrange shot. When you are a certain distance you have the muscle memory on your shooting motion. Midrange is tougher since you can be anywhere from 10 to 19 feet out. However, a 10 footer to bank in is one of the easiest shots in the world. I hit 4-5 of those easily a game.

See this is why people who actually play know ball.

Yes, the bank shot is easier and that is proven statistically. I've added a bank, low block bank to my game.

[3ball]

That shows mid range is easier. Or at least very close.


3-pointers are harder because of the distance, but 2-pointer are harder in a different way because they're far more CONTESTED - defenders are much closer to 2-point shooters on average - this is statistical fact.

NBA.com's stats show that over 80% of the league's 3-pointers are taken with 4+ feet of room (http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=404693), compared to only 30% of 2-pointers.

In Steph Curry's case, 70% of his threes are taken with 4+ feet of room - specifically, he attempted 11.3 threes per game this season, of which 5.2 of them were "open" (4-6 feet of room), and 2.7 were "very open" (6+ feet), per NBA.com's stats:



........................................0-2 ft (very tight).... 2-4 ft (tight)..... 4-6 ft (open).... 6+ ft (very open)

STEPH CURRY'S.
3-PT ATTEMPTS PER GAME ...............0.4 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season).................... 2.9 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)....................5. 1 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season)....................2. 7 (http://stats.nba.com/player/#!/201939/tracking/shots/?Season=2015-16&SeasonType=Regular%20Season) <-- nba.com

PERCENTAGE OF
TOTAL 3-PT ATTEMPTS ....................0.4%................ 26.1%...............45.9%...............24.3%