Mid-range Kawhi closing out 3Pt Efficient Mavs

[Marchesk]

Leanord 61 two-pointers made, about half mid-range compared to 10 three-pointers as series comes to the end.

EDIT: 60 not 61

[NBAGOAT]

what about the shot profiles of the rest of the clippers lol. Kawhi carried pretty hard but still wasnt all by himself

[scuzzy]

and 34 three-point attempts


or 6 attempts per game @ 28%


:applause:

[Marchesk]

10-34 3Pters, 60-96 2Pters

[tpols]

Doesn't really mean much with Zingis out. We're currently seeing the 2 pt thunder who were even odds getting ****ed up by the 3 pt rockets. Give Kawhi Tim Hardaway, maxi klieber for the bulk of looks and he wouldn't be winning shit either.

[LAmbruh]

and 34 three-point attempts


or 6 attempts per game @ 28%


:applause:

muh nostalgia :oldlol:

[Marchesk]

muh nostalgia :oldlol:

Jordan wouldn't be out there chucking 6 threes a game on 29.4%.

[ArbitraryWater]

Wow, he did so with 10+ pt lead in hand which his teammates created for him while playing an undermanned squad.


Whats wrong with posters these days? Lol its easy to shoot away with no pressure

[Kblaze8855]

All I’ve ever asked is not to let those skills atrophy or more importantly not develop at all. I want complete scoring young stars who are used to every aspect of offense and not a deer in headlights from 25-15-10 or at the rim. Specialize in 3s if that’s your role. Just...have the total package. I feel that’s reasonable to work towards.

[ELITEpower23]

Doesn't really mean much with Zingis out. We're currently seeing the 2 pt thunder who were even odds getting ****ed up by the 3 pt rockets. Give Kawhi Tim Hardaway, maxi klieber for the bulk of looks and he wouldn't be winning shit either.

Nailed it out of the park

[NBAGOAT]

All I’ve ever asked is not to let those skills atrophy or more importantly not develop at all. I want complete scoring young stars who are used to every aspect of offense and not a deer in headlights from 25-15-10 or at the rim. Specialize in 3s if that’s your role. Just...have the total package. I feel that’s reasonable to work towards.

nba teams dont want 95% of their guys to bother developing those skills however and dont think it will ever go the other unless big big rule changes happen. Exception are stars who cant score at the rim(cp3, mccollum types) or guys who cant expand to the 3 pt line for some reason(basically derozan)

[DMAVS41]

All I’ve ever asked is not to let those skills atrophy or more importantly not develop at all. I want complete scoring young stars who are used to every aspect of offense and not a deer in headlights from 25-15-10 or at the rim. Specialize in 3s if that’s your role. Just...have the total package. I feel that’s reasonable to work towards.

Totally agree.

I think our difference is in how many players are actually capable of developing that and reaching a level that warrants taking a lot of those shots on teams trying to win.

And as to the thread...you guys realize that players still matter...right? I've been harping on this lately with all the Rockets hate. I get it...I really do, but blaming the style for losses when the other teams clearly have better players is just silly. There is no universe in which this Mavs team without KP is beating these Clippers...doesn't matter what style you play. Almost for sure aren't winning with him, but the point is...the team with the best players has a big advantage and for some reason that gets lost when it comes to evaluating a game or series in which one team shoots a lot of threes.

[Marchesk]

Totally agree.

I think our difference is in how many players are actually capable of developing that and reaching a level that warrants taking a lot of those shots on teams trying to win.

Some young players like Ingram have a mid-range and can post up smaller players. They don't use it as much as they could in today's offenses. So hope isn't totally dead.

[Kblaze8855]

It’s just weird to me when so many guys obviously will never be great outside but also don’t work on other things. I’m well aware why you shoot from outside even if you shoot say...32%. Making one now and then forces you to be guarded and blah blah spacing and blah blah shots at the rim.

But having guys who can’t shoot outside well make no effort to see where perhaps they can become proficient from?

Not like only stars can get those shots and make a difference. The Warriors let Livingston 12 footer teams to end comebacks and sustain them with stars on the bench.

I just don’t see an upside to not developing it all. Have it in the chamber is what I want even if you aren’t gonna use it. Be prepared.

[AlternativeAcc.]

Stacked Clippers closing out Luka and G-leaugers in 6

Lol @ giving kawhit credit for anything.

[DMAVS41]

Honest question.

Who is in favor of not developing it at all? I mean, I know there is a limited amount of time to work on your game and you'll prioritize certain things, but I don't think any team is actively saying "don't work on your mid-range game"...

I think they probably say..."don't take that shot unless you are capable of making 45% of them...and you've made 35% of them the last two years...so get better at it or stop it"

I definitely would advocate working on it. Still think it is the most difficult shot to stop and good players shoot a higher percentage on them than 3's...so if I ran a team...I'd definitely want it developed. I just wouldn't let Andrew Wiggins, for example, go out there and brick a bunch of long 2's every night.

[Kblaze8855]

Totally agree.

I think our difference is in how many players are actually capable of developing that and reaching a level that warrants taking a lot of those shots on teams trying to win.


Youre the only one ever talking about a lot. Who is saying a team needs to post up a guard at 20 feet like 1997 28 times a night?


Have it as an option so you aren’t a deer in headlights with 4 seconds left on the clock.

Have every skill you can get. These players are incredibly talented. They can do multiple things. Many of them just lose it when asked not to. Like Mutombo and scoring or Dennis Scott forgetting how to handle when he used to be a point forward.

You can lose skills. And it doesn’t help anyone.

[LAL]

All I’ve ever asked is not to let those skills atrophy or more importantly not develop at all. I want complete scoring young stars who are used to every aspect of offense and not a deer in headlights from 25-15-10 or at the rim. Specialize in 3s if that’s your role. Just...have the total package. I feel that’s reasonable to work towards.

A lot to ask for, superstars more focused on all around stats and selling shoes. That's why most need complete control of the system, becoming ball handlers eating up every stat imaginable. Kawhi and KD not so much thanks to those attributes.

[Kblaze8855]

Honest question.

Who is in favor of not developing it at all? I mean, I know there is a limited amount of time to work on your game and you'll prioritize certain things, but I don't think any team is actively saying "don't work on your mid-range game"...

I think they probably say..."don't take that shot unless you are capable of making 45% of them...and you've made 35% of them the last two years...so get better at it or stop it"

You don’t get better at things by stopping. I suspect someone is begging Ben Simmons to accept that.

[DMAVS41]

Youre the only one ever talking about a lot. Who is saying a team needs to post up a guard at 20 feet like 1997 28 times a night?


Have it as an option so you aren’t a deer in headlights with 4 seconds left on the clock.

Have every skill you can get. These players are incredibly talented. They can do multiple things. Many of them just lose it when asked not to. Like Mutombo and scoring or Dennis Scott forgetting how to handle when he used to be a point forward.

You can lose skills. And it doesn’t help anyone.

We've been over this. Doing something in a game is not the only way to develop something.

You can't blame teams for not wanting Wiggins going out there shooting 32% on these shots on real volume in the hopes that one day he figures it out. I mean, I get it super early on...on a rebuilding team or something...but you sound like you are arguing for teams to knowingly play inferior offense and lose more games.

And teams aren't doing that in the NBA that are trying to win.

[DMAVS41]

You don’t get better at things by stopping. I suspect someone is begging Ben Simmons to accept that.

Get your ass in the gym and prove you should be allowed to shoot those in games that matter.

Who is preventing players from doing that?

Also, teams often do exactly what you are saying. They've just reduced the long 2's by roughly 50% or so broadly. You act as if nobody takes these shots...and that simply is not true.

Roughly 37% of shots in 1998 came from mid-range and long 2's...now roughly 18% do iirc.

It has dropped off a lot, rightfully so imo especially on the long 2's, but it isn't like the shot is extinct completely or something.

[Kblaze8855]

We've been over this.

Which is reason enough not to talk to me about it. But here you are doing it as if new points are to be made. There are like 5 issues you are content to repeat yourself about eternally and while I’m down to do it at length maybe...3 times? I don’t need to do it every time only to see 188 posts end in you pretending I secretly think you’re right for false closure and trying to get the last word with a snide remark and a “:cheers:“ while reminding everyone that something nobody gives a shit about “matters” because you say it does.


I don’t believe there’s a new way to word any of this but if I think of one I’ll return to do so.

[HBK_Kliq_2]

33 points 14 rebounds 7 assists 5 steals and 61% FG for Kawhi in closeout game. George shoots bricks all day, morris ejected, no Beverly. It doesn't matter when you have Kawhi.

[DMAVS41]

Which is reason enough not to talk to me about it. But here you are doing it as if new points are to be made. There are like 5 issues you are content to repeat yourself about eternally and while I’m down to do it at length maybe...3 times? I don’t need to do it every time only to see 188 posts end in you pretending I secretly think you’re right for false closure and trying to get the last word with a snide remark and a “:cheers:“ while reminding everyone that something nobody gives a shit about “matters” because you say it does.


I don’t believe there’s a new way to word any of this but if I think of one I’ll return to do so.



Now go ahead and not engage in the points made and grab some food...:cheers:

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Kawhi is BITW and employs the midrange more than any other superstar.

Damn.

The 3 point nut gaggers are sobbing :oldlol:

[NBAGOAT]

Kawhi is BITW and employs the midrange more than any other superstar.

Damn.

The 3 point nut gaggers are sobbing :oldlol:

well no no one uses it more than cp3(you can not count him as a superstar).

[Kblaze8855]

I only care about the points of people who aren’t repeating themselves. If I already know what you think and what you’re gonna say why talk to you? Once. Twice. Maybe even a time after that. Once that’s done I move on to see what other people think. I don’t mind hearing what you think. I mind repeating myself to you 4-5 dozen times on the same issues which you’re apparently happy...even enthusiastic to do. My long winded ness ends once I’m sure the person I’m talking to can no longer get clarity on my thoughts. So I’ll explain something I’ve explained before...but not to the same person....for the 7th time.

Id talk to you for 40 posts about like....defending bigs in a world of small ball. I’m not sure what you think about that. I couldn’t be more sure what you think of this and your other forever arguments. So I’ll talk to the void of ISH but no so much you specifically.

And I had food already. Golden Corral opened back up here and I was asked to go. Mistake. Not terrible food I just don’t want to be in a Golden Corral.

[DMAVS41]

Kawhi is BITW and employs the midrange more than any other superstar.

Damn.

The 3 point nut gaggers are sobbing :oldlol:

I really don't think this is the case.

For starters, Leonard took 6 threes per game in this series and that is hardly a small amount of his overall attempts.

But I don't think many people that favor the 3 would ever say Leonard shouldn't take a lot of 2's given how good he is at them. I know you are just trolling a bit, but I do think it is important to understand that even the all-in on 3's teams would not tell Dirk/Leonard/Bird/Paul/Jordan...etc...to stop taking long 2's. They just try to limit those with players that shoot them poorly and inconsistently.

[StrongLurk]

If you took 96-98 MJ and 96-98 Pippen and mix them...then you get Kawhi.

Also didn't Kawhi shoot like 60% from midrange this series vs the Mavs? Clearly if you can score at that level from midrange then it is an effective shot.

The whole 3 > 2 thing mostly applies to role players and the TEAM strategy.

No team is winning a chip in this era taking less than 20 threes a game.

[DMAVS41]

I only care about the points of people who aren’t repeating themselves. If I already know what you think and what you’re gonna say why talk to you? Once. Twice. Maybe even a time after that. Once that’s done I move on to see what other people think. I don’t mind hearing what you think. I mind repeating myself to you 4-5 dozen times on the same issues which you’re apparently happy...even enthusiastic to do. My long winded ness ends once I’m sure the person I’m talking to can no longer get clarity on my thoughts. So I’ll explain something I’ve explained before...but not to the same person....for the 7th time.

Id talk to you for 40 posts about like....defending bigs in a world of small ball. I’m not sure what you think about that. I couldn’t be more sure what you think of this and your other forever arguments. So I’ll talk to the void of ISH but no so much you specifically.

And I had food already. Golden Corral opened back up here and I was asked to go. Mistake. Not terrible food I just don’t want to be in a Golden Corral.

Like I've always said, you don't have to reply and I am never intentionally trying to annoy you. I see it a bit differently than you both in terms of the game (obviously) and our interactions. I don't think you actually address specific points, but it is cool...I don't really expect you to at this point.

I just respond and post on topics I find interesting. You don't need to feel obligated to respond, you can or not...makes no difference.

[tpols]

Golden Corral is a horrible choice whether you're hungry or not.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

I really don't think this is the case.

For starters, Leonard took 6 threes per game in this series and that is hardly a small amount of his overall attempts.

But I don't think many people that favor the 3 would ever say Leonard shouldn't take a lot of 2's given how good he is at them. I know you are just trolling a bit, but I do think it is important to understand that even the all-in on 3's teams would not tell Dirk/Leonard/Bird/Paul/Jordan...etc...to stop taking long 2's. They just try to limit those with players that shoot them poorly and inconsistently.

Not saying Kawhi doesn't take threes. But according to OP, half of his 2's made were from midrange. That's compared to 10 threes made the entire series.

I like to see a mixture of everything. Having MORE skill never hurt anyone :confusedshrug:


well no no one uses it more than cp3(you can not count him as a superstar).

Yeah don't think Paul is a superstar either, but I would agree. He uses it the most by far.

Every time he knocks one of them down? I think about the geek whose never picked up a basketball in their life, screeching about threes. Can't help but chuckle

[Kblaze8855]

Their steak was surprisingly good but yea....the rest was standard cafeteria level but with a thin coating of poor fat people residue everywhere. Now don’t get me wrong...I’ve known and befriended many poor far people . I just don’t need a light mist of them hovering in the air while I’m eating burbon chicken and hearing kids cry.

I wanted a pizza from this nice place by the house but she heard Golden Corral was back. She quickly admitted we shouldn’t take her ideas over mine in the future.

[Marchesk]

Golden Corral is a horrible choice whether you're hungry or not.

The Golden Trough

[Marchesk]

Not saying Kawhi doesn't take threes. But according to OP, half of his 2's made were from midrange. That's compared to 10 threes made the entire series.

I was just guessing. But I wouldn't be surprised if he took more midrange shots than threes. He certainly made more.


I like to see a mixture of everything. Having MORE skill never hurt anyone

And that's why the Rockets are painful to watch sometimes. Particularly when they're bricking. Also because Harden is capable of hitting midrange shots. Would the rockets force Kawhi or Durant to play that way?


I like to see a mixture of everything. Having MORE skill never hurt anyone

Exactly. Lebron and AD will take midrange shots.

[tpols]

I feel bad for yall down south a bit that dont know the pizza or subs we have. Then again buffets are closed down around here for probably a year or more due to the dems. I never frequented them though. I eat in small portions frequently rather than a lot at once. Can never get my money's worth.

[DMAVS41]

Not saying Kawhi doesn't take threes. But according to OP, half of his 2's made were from midrange. That's compared to 10 threes made the entire series.

I like to see a mixture of everything. Having MORE skill never hurt anyone :confusedshrug:



Yeah don't think Paul is a superstar either, but I would agree. He uses it the most by far.

Every time he knocks one of them down? I think about the geek whose never picked up a basketball in their life, screeching about threes. Can't help but chuckle

Yea, I agree. I love Leonard's mix...my main point is that most players are simply not capable of doing what he does...he's one of the best players ever.

His shot mix is awesome:

16% at the rim, 22% within 10 ft, 18% mid-range, 16% long 2's, 28% threes

I also think though that there is some confirmation bias here as Luka's shot mix this series was, at least through 5 games:

20% at the rim, 30% within 10 ft, 14% mid-range, 1% long 2's, 35% threes

I'm not arguing that Luka's is perfect or that he shouldn't develop more...but cutting out those long 2's in favor of more rim attacking and threes simply makes sense for him based on the math of the game and his skillset.

[Kblaze8855]

I feel bad for yall down south a bit that dont know the pizza or subs we have. Then again buffets are closed down around here for probably a year or more due to the dems. I never frequented them though. I eat in small portions frequently rather than a lot at once.

Ive been everywhere in America south of like Maine and east of the desert part of west Texas. I’ve not noticed especially great pizza any one place though being of Chicago I’m required to support deep dish. I don’t think I’ve really had a Sub on the road though unless you count a philly cheese steak. I’m not sure anything but bread could be a difference maker there.

[knicksman]

Its not really a surprise that dmavs hate these midrange specialist just like roundball hate these "scorers" coz they are the same poster. He just loves lebron and hates kobe. But it is what is. Effectiveness is more important than efficiency. Wilt is efficient but he shrinks which means hes not effective so lebrons efficiency really means nothing if he shrinks in the clutch. Kobe has 5 jordan has 6 while lebron couldnt win one without superteams. The results speaks for itself. No matter how much you hate on these guys but they have the most effective style. Theres a reason why players have kobe over lebron.

[DMAVS41]

Dirk is my favorite player ever and I've touted his dominance in the mid-range for over a decade here now. I love that part of the game of Kobe/Paul/Jordan/Leonard/Dirk...etc.

I am just willing to understand that taking a lot of contested long 2's for the majority of players is a really bad shot...and either taking a 3 or attacking is a better option.

And, as has been repeated to you time and time again, Dirk/Paul/KG/Nash...4 of the best ever at it...have a total of 2 titles between them. Perhaps basketball is a little more complicated in terms of winning than just shooting the mid-range well. It is almost as if the other players on the team matter.

Just a thought for you...

[knicksman]

the best in the clutch usually wins. And to be able to produce in clutch situations, you need that skill. Thats why its the most important skill in basketball. And you forgot kawhi/kobe/jordan have 13 titles combined.

As the saying goes, play smart instead of play hard. Focus on what matters. And what matters in basketball the most is being able to deliver in clutch situations. Thats why building around these type of players gives you the highest chance of success. Of course not everyone wins. Thats why cp3/nash werent able to deliver.

stamina is a limited resource. Trying to do other things spends stamina and thus giving you less chances of winning. Thats why focus your stamina on what matters and let others do the easier roles. Thats why jordan is the ideal player. Playing like him gives you less stats but spends less stamina. Thats why hes a winner.

[sdot_thadon]

So I'm a bit torn about the on going debate, on one hand I completely agree you should have as many skills in your repertoire as you can. Mid range still has a place in the game but it's nearly deformed into a specialist skill with the evolution of the game. On the other hand would the time spent developing your mid range, in theory be better spent trying to improve on the skill(3pt shooting) that will keep you in a playing rotation in the current league? If I'm a role player aiming to stay in the league I may be more inclined to try and be proficient from 3, because apparently if you can do that you can get a contract till you're damn near 40. If you depend on the mid range you're nearly useless offensively after a certain age as a role player, unless you land in that perfect situation to be utilized like the couple of guys the Warriors had a few years back.

[DMAVS41]

the best in the clutch usually wins. And to be able to produce in clutch situations, you need that skill. Thats why its the most important skill in basketball. And you forgot kawhi/kobe/jordan have 13 titles combined.

As the saying goes, play smart instead of play hard. Focus on what matters. And what matters in basketball the most is being able to deliver in clutch situations. Thats why building around these type of players gives you the highest chance of success. Of course not everyone wins. Thats why cp3/nash werent able to deliver.

It is just one of many factors. Leonard won on the Spurs scoring like 14 a game. His team around him was far more important than his mid-range shooting / scoring. Kobe had Shaq...which I think matters. Jordan, imo, is the best ever...but even he needed help.

Not sure what you are talking about with Paul...and I guess Dirk...they are two of the most clutch players ever. Paul was leading insanely good crunch time teams most of his career. I'm not even a big CP3 guy...but if you are telling me the formula for winning in the NBA is that you need a great mid-range game and you need to be clutch...if true...Paul should have way more success than he's had...Dirk as well. If you are combining clutch play and mid-range play...Paul and Dirk are probably top 5 of all time. They have 1 title between them...

Again, it isn't so simple. There are a ton of factors that go into winning.

[Marchesk]

Wilt is efficient but he shrinks which means hes not effective so lebrons efficiency really means nothing if he shrinks in the clutch.

https://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/173/580/Wat.jpg

[DMAVS41]

So I'm a bit torn about the on going debate, on one hand I completely agree you should have as many skills in your repertoire as you can. Mid range still has a place in the game but it's nearly deformed into a specialist skill with the evolution of the game. On the other hand would the time spent developing your mid range, in theory be better spent trying to improve on the skill(3pt shooting) that will keep you in a playing rotation in the current league? If I'm a role player aiming to stay in the league I may be more inclined to try and be proficient from 3, because apparently if you can do that you can get a contract till you're damn near 40. If you depend on the mid range you're nearly useless offensively after a certain age as a role player, unless you land in that perfect situation to be utilized like the couple of guys the Warriors had a few years back.

Carmelo is a good example of this from my point of view.

He spent most of his career taking a ton of mid-range shots and long 2's. In fact, roughly 42% of his career shots came from that area. He shot about 41% from there. I think that was a rather large mistake. I think he would have been a much more dynamic and efficient offensive player if he reduced that down to under 30% and took more threes. He's a career 35% three point shooter and I doubt he got the most out of that aspect of his game.

Simply put, even someone is skilled as Melo...struggled to score efficiently from those areas. Shooting 41% from there on such high volume...I won't call it "bad"...but it certainly isn't optimal.

[knicksman]

It is just one of many factors. Leonard won on the Spurs scoring like 14 a game. His team around him was far more important than his mid-range shooting / scoring. Kobe had Shaq...which I think matters. Jordan, imo, is the best ever...but even he needed help.

Not sure what you are talking about with Paul...and I guess Dirk...they are two of the most clutch players ever. Paul was leading insanely good crunch time teams most of his career. I'm not even a big CP3 guy...but if you are telling me the formula for winning in the NBA is that you need a great mid-range game and you need to be clutch...if true...Paul should have way more success than he's had...Dirk as well. If you are combining clutch play and mid-range play...Paul and Dirk are probably top 5 of all time. They have 1 title between them...

Again, it isn't so simple. There are a ton of factors that go into winning.

thats why its chances. It seems like you want a 100% correlation. If your star player is a kawhi type, youll have higher chances of winning. It depends now on how good the GM is.

[DMAVS41]

thats why its chances. It seems like you want a 100% correlation. If your star player is a kawhi type, youll have higher chances of winning. It depends now on how good the GM is.

Not at all.

I just wanted to you admit that there are a lot of other factors...and you just did.

[Doranku]

It is just one of many factors. Leonard won on the Spurs scoring like 14 a game. His team around him was far more important than his mid-range shooting / scoring. Kobe had Shaq...which I think matters. Jordan, imo, is the best ever...but even he needed help.

Not sure what you are talking about with Paul...and I guess Dirk...they are two of the most clutch players ever. Paul was leading insanely good crunch time teams most of his career. I'm not even a big CP3 guy...but if you are telling me the formula for winning in the NBA is that you need a great mid-range game and you need to be clutch...if true...Paul should have way more success than he's had...Dirk as well. If you are combining clutch play and mid-range play...Paul and Dirk are probably top 5 of all time. They have 1 title between them...

Again, it isn't so simple. There are a ton of factors that go into winning.

Finesse players like CP3, Dirk, Steph, Nash, etc. don't do well in the playoff because a.) their bodies break down and b.) they can't use physicality to their advantage to get easy buckets like Jordan, Bran, Bean, and most of the all-time great big men. Bird was the exception but his body was falling apart by the time he was in his early 30s.

[NBAGOAT]

Finesse players like CP3, Dirk, Steph, Nash, etc. don't do well in the playoff because a.) their bodies break down and b.) they can't use physicality to their advantage to get easy buckets like Jordan, Bran, Bean, and most of the all-time great big men. Bird was the exception but his body was falling apart by the time he was in his early 30s.

bird's got an obvious drop in playoff numbers though mostly due to durability issues. he was great and by no means bad in the playoffs but won 3 rings a lot because he was on incredible teams.

[DMAVS41]

Finesse players like CP3, Dirk, Steph, Nash, etc. don't do well in the playoff because a.) their bodies break down and b.) they can't use physicality to their advantage to get easy buckets like Jordan, Bran, Bean, and most of the all-time great big men. Bird was the exception but his body was falling apart by the time he was in his early 30s.

You'd have to really sell me on Dirk "not doing well" in the playoffs individually, but again...that wasn't my point.

My point was simply that there are a lot more factors that go into winning in the playoffs other than mid-range shooting...and your post is another way of making that point.

But you've got some absurd standards if Steph and Dirk aren't considered good enough to mark them as "doing well" in the playoffs.

[DMAVS41]

bird's got an obvious drop in playoff numbers though mostly due to durability issues. he was great and by no means bad in the playoffs but won 3 rings a lot because he was on incredible teams.

It is a good point.

How did Durant's shooting in those areas work out for him without all-time great help? Oh...he never won even though he had really good help and a great mid-range / long 2 game. Again...a lot goes into this stuff.

And I'm not saying it isn't important...I absolutely think it is. I think missing that part of the game is a real weakness for some.

But, I'll take a team with better players overall all day everyday. That matters way more.

[Doranku]

You'd have to really sell me on Dirk "not doing well" in the playoffs individually, but again...that wasn't my point.

My point was simply that there are a lot more factors that go into winning in the playoffs other than mid-range shooting...and your post is another way of making that point.

But you've got some absurd standards if Steph and Dirk aren't considered good enough to mark them as "doing well" in the playoffs.

I agree actually that Dirk doesn't belong on the list. He's more of an anomaly. But Steph? Sure he plays well in the playoffs, but his numbers really fell off in the playoffs from the regular season - especially before KD was there.

[DMAVS41]

I agree actually that Dirk doesn't belong on the list. He's more of an anomaly. But Steph? Sure he plays well in the playoffs, but his numbers really fell off in the playoffs from the regular season - especially before KD was there.

I think you are probably really only talking 16...and that is fair I guess.

But Curry gets under-rated as a playoff performer. He's at 27/5/6 61% TS for his career....and those numbers honestly don't do justice to his offensive impact. I think we just have to be careful ignoring just how good he's been to date.

I don't want to debate Kobe vs. Curry really, but I don't see any reason why Curry hasn't been as good or better offensively in the playoffs than Kobe was. So claiming one is great and the other doesn't do well is a bit much imo.

[Round Mound]

80s's and 90's had elite mid range and post scorers. And some say they couldn't play today :oldlol::facepalm

[DMAVS41]

80s's and 90's had elite mid range and post scorers. And some say they couldn't play today :oldlol::facepalm

Who actually says that?

That makes no sense. They'd have more room to operate in their sweet spots with the extra spacing on the court.

[AirBonner]

Missing porzingis which was feasting before he went down

[Bronbron23]

Most proponents of this era refuse to acknowledge the importance of the mid range because of how sub par most of todays stars mid range is.

Like somehow its just a coincidence that almost every chip won in the last 30 years was won by a player with an elite mid. Yeah they obviously have other attributes but an elite mid is almost always present. Same thing cant be said for the three.

[DMAVS41]

Most proponents of this era refuse to acknowledge the importance of the mid range because of how sub par most of todays stars mid range is.

Like somehow its just a coincidence that almost every chip won in the last 30 years was won by a player with an elite mid. Yeah they obviously have other attributes but an elite mid is almost always present. Same thing cant be said for the three.

Like 25 of those 30 years...there wasn't really a different option...it was dominant bigs and star wings winning...and nobody shot a lot of threes really. So I'm not sure how a style that isn't played is going to win.

I definitely agree with you that have an elite mid range player on your team is a huge asset for winning in the playoffs still. I just think too many ignore how rare that is and I also think there is lot of confirmation bias going on.

We really think Kobe wins less if he cuts down on his long 2's...in which he took a lot of and only made 40%...in favor of a few more 3's that he shot at higher efficiency. Nah...he'd win as much or more because he'd be a marginally better offensive player.

I just don't see this an either or thing...I don't think teams view it that way. I really don't think it is much more complicated than teams realizing that long 2's were being overshot and that a 3 was better in most, but not all cases.

Also, players still take these shots. Murray, for example, takes roughly 30% of his shots from the area you reference. In the past, that would likely have been 40% or so...yes, it is a big difference, but I don't think it is always as drastic as people argue.

Not all teams are the Rockets and not all players are Harden.

[aj1987]

Kawhi is BITW and employs the midrange more than any other superstar.

Damn.

The 3 point nut gaggers are sobbing :oldlol:

Debatable. IMO it's 2a/2b with Giannis and Kawhi.

But yeah, his midrange game is ridiculous. Dude makes some nasty AF shots from midrange.

[knicksman]

Not at all.

I just wanted to you admit that there are a lot of other factors...and you just did.

nah its you who cant admit that creating your shot aka midrange specialist is the most important skill in basketball.

[DMAVS41]

nah its you who cant admit that creating your shot aka midrange specialist is the most important skill in basketball.

I'm not so sure about that.

I mean...I think it is really important, but I'd go with dominant big or freak athlete over mid-range throughout NBA history.

This just reminds me of the people that want to claim that Lebron lost in 17 and 18 because of playing "Lebron ball"...

I'd say, ok...might be some truth to that...but maybe they lost more because of their team defense was terrible...maybe it wasn't the top 3 offense or whatever. Maybe it was more about having the 29th ranked defense.

Just not as clean as everyone wants these things to be.

[kuniva_dAMiGhTy]

Yea, I agree. I love Leonard's mix...my main point is that most players are simply not capable of doing what he does...he's one of the best players ever.

His shot mix is awesome:

16% at the rim, 22% within 10 ft, 18% mid-range, 16% long 2's, 28% threes

I also think though that there is some confirmation bias here as Luka's shot mix this series was, at least through 5 games:

20% at the rim, 30% within 10 ft, 14% mid-range, 1% long 2's, 35% threes

I'm not arguing that Luka's is perfect or that he shouldn't develop more...but cutting out those long 2's in favor of more rim attacking and threes simply makes sense for him based on the math of the game and his skillset.

Well most players arent able to do what Kawhi does period. Inside, out then you couple that with big hands and raw strength. Kawhi's midrange is just one of the many problems a defense is dealing with.

Luka though attempted 7 threes this past series and shot at a 34% clip. Down the road if that outside shot doesn't improve then he can explore the in-between stuff. I'm a big advocate on what works so Luka should do what he does best, and stick with it.

Long 2's are low efficiency for a reason. They're tough shots and aren't worth an extra point. Luckily midrange isn't just long 2's though.


Debatable. IMO it's 2a/2b with Giannis and Kawhi.

But yeah, his midrange game is ridiculous. Dude makes some nasty AF shots from midrange.

It is debatable.

We're only one playoff series down, but Kawhi has shown to be the best iso scorer. His defense still looks high impact too. I also think Kawhi outplays Giannis in a series just like he did last year.

Who is your #1? Bron?

[Bronbron23]

Like 25 of those 30 years...there wasn't really a different option...it was dominant bigs and star wings winning...and nobody shot a lot of threes really. So I'm not sure how a style that isn't played is going to win.

I definitely agree with you that have an elite mid range player on your team is a huge asset for winning in the playoffs still. I just think too many ignore how rare that is and I also think there is lot of confirmation bias going on.

We really think Kobe wins less if he cuts down on his long 2's...in which he took a lot of and only made 40%...in favor of a few more 3's that he shot at higher efficiency. Nah...he'd win as much or more because he'd be a marginally better offensive player.

I just don't see this an either or thing...I don't think teams view it that way. I really don't think it is much more complicated than teams realizing that long 2's were being overshot and that a 3 was better in most, but not all cases.

Also, players still take these shots. Murray, for example, takes roughly 30% of his shots from the area you reference. In the past, that would likely have been 40% or so...yes, it is a big difference, but I don't think it is always as drastic as people argue.

Not all teams are the Rockets and not all players are Harden.

Well i wouldn't say 25 of 30. In the early 90's teams were shooting 8 a game and by 2008 teams were shooting more than 3 times that many. So id say its more like 12 of the last 30 which is still a pretty good sample.

Lets loom at where the champs were in attempts for the the last 12 years:
08- celtics 13th
09-lakers 16th
10-lakers 9th
11- mavs 5th
12 heat 20th
13 heat 6rh
14 spurs 17th
15 warriors 3rd
16 cavs 3rd
17 warriors 5th
18 warriors 13th
19 raps 10th

There is absolutely no evidence that shooting more threes is better. A fat dude thats never played the game came up with this theory on why it makes sense and his team set it off and then the warriors followed and made it sexy and now everyone is shooting a shit ton. Dont get me wrong i think 8 a game like the 90's is definitely not enough but you dont need to shoot 30 plus either.

As far as kobe he'd absolutely win less. He was dominant and a nightmare because he had no weakness on the floor. It was the threat of the mid that helped make him what he was. Take that away and hes not the same guy. Take the mid away from kawhi and hes nowhere near the same guy. Same goes for mj.

[DMAVS41]

Well i wouldn't say 25 of 30. In the early 90's teams were shooting 8 a game and by 2008 teams were shooting more than 3 times that many. So id say its more like 12 of the last 30 which is still a pretty good sample.

Lets loom at where the champs were in attempts for the the last 12 years:
08- celtics 13th
09-lakers 16th
10-lakers 9th
11- mavs 5th
12 heat 20th
13 heat 6rh
14 spurs 17th
15 warriors 3rd
16 cavs 3rd
17 warriors 5th
18 warriors 13th
19 raps 10th

There is absolutely no evidence that shooting more threes is better. A fat dude thats never played the game came up with this theory on why it makes sense and his team set it off and then the warriors followed and made it sexy and now everyone is shooting a shit ton. Dont get me wrong i think 8 a game like the 90's is definitely not enough but you dont need to shoot 30 plus either.

As far as kobe he'd absolutely win less. He was dominant and a nightmare because he had no weakness on the floor. It was the threat of the mid that helped make him what he was. Take that away and hes not the same guy. Take the mid away from kawhi and hes nowhere near the same guy. Same goes for mj.

I definitely agree with the first part of the bold...which is my main point. I don't know the optimal amount, but I'd bet it is over 30 with the pace of the game now, but I'm open on that.

Really disagree about Kobe. He wouldn't be a worse player cutting out a percentage of his bad long 2's in favor of 3's...why would you think that?

I really think there is something misleading about the long 2 vs three thing and I can't understand it. Kobe took 27% of his shots on long 2's...he shot 40%. He took 21% of his shots from three...he shot 33%. Why would you think he'd be worse if he flipped those and started taking a couple more 3's per game instead of those bad long 2's.

On 100 shots, Kobe is producing 80 points on the 2's...and he'd produce 99 points on the 3's.

You are saying things like "take the mid away and he's not the same guy"...who is saying you'd take it away? Is taking 3 less bad long 2's a game in favor of 3's taking away that part of his game? Of course not...he'd still be taking like 35% of shots from that area.

This is what I'm getting at...this isn't an all or nothing affair. Why do you think that taking a couple more 3's a game takes away an entire aspect of the game from him?

[Bronbron23]

I definitely agree with the first part of the bold...which is my main point. I don't know the optimal amount, but I'd bet it is over 30 with the pace of the game now, but I'm open on that.

Really disagree about Kobe. He wouldn't be a worse player cutting out a percentage of his bad long 2's in favor of 3's...why would you think that?

I really think there is something misleading about the long 2 vs three thing and I can't understand it. Kobe took 27% of his shots on long 2's...he shot 40%. He took 21% of his shots from three...he shot 33%. Why would you think he'd be worse if he flipped those and started taking a couple more 3's per game instead of those bad long 2's.

On 100 shots, Kobe is producing 80 points on the 2's...and he'd produce 99 points on the 3's.

You are saying things like "take the mid away and he's not the same guy"...who is saying you'd take it away? Is taking 3 less bad long 2's a game in favor of 3's taking away that part of his game? Of course not...he'd still be taking like 35% of shots from that area.

This is what I'm getting at...this isn't an all or nothing affair. Why do you think that taking a couple more 3's a game takes away an entire aspect of the game from him?

in theory what you and guys like Daryl morey are saying makes sense. The problem is if you apply it the the game like say james harden and almost totally abandon the mid you become a little less versatile and easier to gaurd. All the defense has to do is run you off the line and have a big waiting down low to contest. They dont even have to defend the mid part of the floor.

Plus as a defender it would be much easier to predict what the offensive player is doing. Once you drive i know your not pulling up so im not even worrying about it. I'm just gonna ride you to the whole and wait to contest at the rim. Do you know how much harder it is to defend a guy who can pull up on a dime from mid? It just opens your game up more and allows you to score in situations where other guys cant.

So its not that im against threes. Threes are also important. I just dont agree with the 3 is better than 2 principle because it's extremely situational.

[Marchesk]

So its not that im against threes. Threes are also important. I just dont agree with the 3 is better than 2 principle because it's extremely situational.

Something the 3 > 2 crowd doesn't understand.

[Bronbron23]

Something the 3 > 2 crowd doesn't understand.

Yeah its pretty simple. Someone like kawhi can get crowded at the 3 point and instead of shooting a tough contested 3 or shot at the rim he can make a hard 2 dribble drive and pull up from 15-18 for an uncontested 2 due to him creating space on the drive.

Someone like Harden dosnt have or use that option. Because of the brainless 3>2 always approach they're gonna shoot the tough contested three or tough contested shot at the rim. Or if they get ran off the line and theres nothing at the rim they have to back it out and set up the offense all over which by that time there's probably not much time for.

Thats fine for the regular season and maybe even first couple rounds of the playoffs. Come conference finals and finals where the physicality is up and the trash defensive rules aren't as enforced its gonna be a whole lot harder to make those threes and finish at the rim consistently . Thats when the mid comes in handy.

[DMAVS41]

in theory what you and guys like Daryl morey are saying makes sense. The problem is if you apply it the the game like say james harden and almost totally abandon the mid you become a little less versatile and easier to gaurd. All the defense has to do is run you off the line and have a big waiting down low to contest. They dont even have to defend the mid part of the floor.

Plus as a defender it would be much easier to predict what the offensive player is doing. Once you drive i know your not pulling up so im not even worrying about it. I'm just gonna ride you to the whole and wait to contest at the rim. Do you know how much harder it is to defend a guy who can pull up on a dime from mid? It just opens your game up more and allows you to score in situations where other guys cant.

So its not that im against threes. Threes are also important. I just dont agree with the 3 is better than 2 principle because it's extremely situational.

That is my point though.

I'm not in favor of how Harden plays. That is too extreme...he's amazing at it...and I still don't think it is close to optimal.

I'll say it again...I'm in favor of reducing long 2's for most players (not all) because the 3 is usually a better shot. So when it comes to a guy like Melo or a guy like Kobe...yes, I'd rather see them take a few more threes per game than settle for long 2's they make at like 40%...which just isn't very good.

In no way have I ever argued players shouldn't take them at all. I think going from like 27% in the case of Kobe...to 15% or 20% would be better...and it certainly wouldn't be removing that from his game.

But for some guys, like Wiggins for example, he just can't be taking as many of those shots because he shoots them so poorly. I get early on, but you just can't have him taking that many long 2's when he shoots like 35%.

[Darius]

Thing is, playoff basketball is different.

The refs let A LOT more physical play go, especially in crucial end game situations.

In a grabbing/holding game, 3pt shots are harder to come by and finesse players suffer.

Having a reliable midrange shot is absolutely instrumental in closing out tough playoff games.

[scuzzy]

Mid-Range Kawhi closing out the series on 6-22 and 2-7 from 3 :applause:

[Marchesk]

Clippers 9-35 from three.

https://i.postimg.cc/mZ3j7kn6/Denver-Celebrating.png

[DMAVS41]

Mid-Range Kawhi closing out the series on 6-22 and 2-7 from 3 :applause:

:roll:

Yep...just maybe winning in the NBA is more complicated than shooting a bunch of mid-range shots. Was that Andrew Wiggins or Leonard out there tonight? Had the same impact...:rockon:

[NBAGOAT]

:roll:

Yep...just maybe winning in the NBA is more complicated than shooting a bunch of mid-range shots. Was that Andrew Wiggins or Leonard out there tonight? Had the same impact...:rockon:

turns out you can have bad nights from midrange too lol. it's funny reading realgm's poy thread, guys went from having kawhi as poy to having harden over him now in 3 games

[DMAVS41]

turns out you can have bad nights from midrange too lol. it's funny reading realgm's poy thread, guys went from having kawhi as poy to having harden over him now in 3 games

Now everyone can go back to ignoring all the great mid-range shooters that lose every single year. :oldlol:

[NBAGOAT]

Now everyone can go back to ignoring all the great mid-range shooters that lose every single year. :oldlol:

wonder if you could me about the great series demar derozan's had in the playoffs. Tough time finding one :oldlol: