Why don't more players catch the ball instead of swatting it on defense?

A lot of it has to to with positioning and timing (obviously). Just off my personal experience, trying to grab the ball midair kind of throws you off latterly and often feels like you're giving the offensive player better positioning to blow by you. Blocking a shot (or in the 'normal stance' of getting ready to contest it) I often feel like I can recover quicker than if I were to go up with both hands.

Might not be why more players don't 'catch the ball' but it's something in my subconscious when I'm playing defense. Angles are definitely vital, see here: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJriDpfgQNs[/url]

[QUOTE=Smoke117]Because everything you say is idiotic and pointless. Even this thread...why don't players catch the ball instead of swatting it away...I don't know maybe because that's that not god damn easy? You think it has never come across players minds to try to catch the ball instead of swat it away? Also don't don't compare future Blake Griffin's defense to Karl Malone's please...that's insulting to Karl. Maybe try Larry Johnson as that would be more appropriate[/QUOTE]

The beauty of sports is the gamble. You say Larry Johnson.. I saw Malone.. in 10 years we can talk about it. Until then.. your negative opinions don't mean a thing to me. BTW if this was so idiotic.. why has it been a repeated basketball topic among writers, forums and all sorts of fans on controlled blocks/catches vs swats. Even one of the contributors to this thread.. posted an article on it.

If it's something you find stupid why even post in here and just troll me? I don't care if you like me or not... but you don't think it's a bit pointless to post in here with the attitude you have? PM me if you just want to argue for the hell of it. I'll entertain it.

[QUOTE=catch24]A lot of it has to to with positioning and timing (obviously). Just off my personal experience, trying to grab the ball midair kind of throws you off latterly and often feels like you're giving the offensive player better positioning to blow by you. Blocking a shot (or in the stance of getting ready to contest it) I often feel like I can recover quicker than if I were to go up with both hands.

Might not be why more players don't 'catch the ball' but it's something in my subconscious when I'm playing defense. Angles are definitely vital, see here: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJriDpfgQNs[/url][/QUOTE]

This is definitely part of it. I agree you're more off balance if you catch the ball rather than just a quick swat and recovery. I just think it's worth the risk here and there. Besides intimidation.... swatting shots has 0 purpose. I have to give DeAndre and McGee props because this year after Flip and Vinny talked to them about controlling blocked shots, both got noticeably better. DJ started swatting to teammates instead of out of bounds and McGee started blocking shots softer to recover the ball.. and going for catch blocks. Obviously in some situations like blocks from behind you can't really control it.

[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]This is definitely part of it. I agree you're more off balance if you catch the ball rather than just a quick swat and recovery. I just think it's worth the risk here and there. Besides intimidation.... swatting shots has 0 purpose. I have to give DeAndre and McGee props because this year after Flip and Vinny talked to them about controlling blocked shots, both got noticeably better. DJ started swatting to teammates instead of out of bounds and McGee started blocking shots softer to recover the ball.. and going for catch blocks. Obviously in some situations like blocks from behind you can't really control it.[/QUOTE]

Well, blocking shots to your teammates and doing it with both hands are two different things. It honestly just depends on your positioning. You generally see more two-hand stuffs on fast breaks than you do in the half court where players take more time to operate (and have more time to think with/without the basketball).

Keeping the ball in bounds is the best option though. I've watched a lot of Clipper games, and you're right, the guy does have a knack for keeping them in-bounds. Good catch. Like I said though.... going up with two hands is strictly situational; more often than not you're going to feel uncoordinated doing so, lol.

[QUOTE=DuMa]the first time is fine. sends a nice message to the other team and the ball shooter.
.[/QUOTE]

Idk someone catching my shoot from mid-air would send more of a message to me then throwing it out of bounds.

the reason is that it is extremely difficult to do.

feck posteed in the wrong thread

A jumpshot is near impossible to grab as a defender. A lay-up is still like 8-12 feet high and it goes up vertically, you gotta time your jump perfectly if you wanna catch that ball.

If we rarely see interceptions in a football game then don't expect "interceptions" in a basketball.

I think this is a valid question because catching the ball or at least try to swat it to a teammate provides obvious advantage.

However, just look at what Howard says:

[QUOTE][I]

[QUOTE=iamgine]Does Howard not understand the obvious value of grabbing the shot instead? Of course he does. But he finds that swatting it gives his team more advantage psychologically. Hey, who are we to argue, he's the NBA superstar right?[/QUOTE]

So, essentially, no one should ever question any decision an NBA player makes on the court because they're NBA players and we're not, is what you're saying?

[QUOTE=ThaRegul8r]So, essentially, no one should ever question any decision an NBA player makes on the court because they're NBA players and we're not, is what you're saying?[/QUOTE]
Not quite. More it's been questioned and answered. We can disagree all we want but we're not the ones out there doing it.

Do you actually play basketball? If you go for a full speed swing at the shot, you'll get to the shot quicker as opposed to a timed 'catch' or 'pat' to a team mate

I don't see any choice in this, you do whatever you can at the time to stop the shot.

I've seen this topic before, and with respect, I'm still curious as to how one can believe this type of play should be happening so much more frequently than it already does. I see comparisons to catches made in football. And truthfully, if goaltending was legal, meaning players like McGee and Howard (and Garnett) could attempt to catch the ball with one hand whenever the hell they wanted, then yes, we'd be seeing a lot of plays that'd remind us of the one-handed catch in football. So, in football, how many one handed interceptions do we see when the ball is only on its way up?

As it stands, there is only a split second during a shot at which time a player may attempt to complete a block. It's a bang-bang play for which the defender must reach and extend instantaneously to see if they're able to get a fingertip on the ball before it begins its downward descent. And for the most part, defenders are not going to be able to dictate which type of block they're going to be able to perform. The goal is to block the shot, period.

As KevinNYC mentioned, actively attempting to catch a shot takes a different approach than simply trying to block the shot. And in my experience, a blocked shot in most cases is way too quick of a sequence for a defender to rise into the air only [i]then[/i] to decide he wants to catch it. However, there are certain "catching" hotspots, where a player may be able to play the percentages and know quite well that a catch is a possibility before takeoff. I'd say the most common scenario I've seen for a pre-determined catch is when an offensive player is attempting to finish a one-on-one fast break with a low-vert, contested layup attempt (essentially, just tossing it up there). Often, if a bigger defender is trailing the one-on-one fast break battle, that's where an opportunity may arise (like the Dang highlight, and Wizards' Jordan).

Otherwise, catches seem to have to be more or less happenstance, where a defender happens to have their arm so far above the shot attempt, they're able to only semi-intentionally cuff the ball and reel it in (McGee on Matthews or LaPhonso Ellis on Brian Davis).

The truth, really, is exactly as KevinNYC put it. Players struggle and scrape for all the blocks they can get to begin with (2.4 bpg to be exact). They can't afford to decide how they want their blocks to be. They're just going to do whatever they can to get their hands on it, period. To constantly attempt to catch a shot would lower a player's likelihood of blocking shots at all.

I know you may think KevinNYC's tone was poor (from a 3rd person point of view I didn't think it was) and I say this with respect, but I honestly think he's been exactly on point on every post he's laid down thus far.


[QUOTE=knightfall88]Do you actually play basketball? If you go for a full speed swing at the shot, you'll get to the shot quicker as opposed to a timed 'catch' or 'pat' to a team mate

I don't see any choice in this, you do whatever you can at the time to stop the shot.[/QUOTE]
I think that's the long and short of it. Under most circumstances, players are just going to do what they can to get to the ball. I think it'd help to think about playing the game ourselves, and what we do when we go to block a shot. A lot of shot-blocking is about going and getting, in which case, our arms are not going to be in catching positions. Personally, I'm not a big shot blocker, even among local crews, but when the opportunity arises, I don't really have time to decide whether I want to extend my hand toward the shot slowly in order to tap it to a teammate (let alone catching it). If I block it hard, it's because I attacked the offensive player aggressively, and was able to get a lot of my hand on the ball. If I block it softly, where it ends up in the hands of my teammates just a few feet away, it means I attacked the offensive player aggressively, and was able to only get a little bit of my hand on the ball. And if I caught the shot, it's because I'm dreaming.

[QUOTE=iamgine]I think this is a valid question because catching the ball or at least try to swat it to a teammate provides obvious advantage.

However, just look at what Howard says:

Does Howard not understand the obvious value of grabbing the shot instead? Of course he does. But he finds that swatting it gives his team more advantage psychologically. Hey, who are we to argue, he's the NBA superstar right?
[/QUOTE]
I know I have no idea what Howard's really thinking, but from that quote, it sort of feels like he's feeding the media a line. I feel if he could catch more shots, he would. To be truthful, that quote also sounded a little bit like he may want people to believe he's good enough to do it more often, but then just chooses not to. Of course, I'm not saying it's definitive. Rather, I am just not ready to accept every line that comes from a player to be gospel. I don't mean this negatively, but I've heard Dwight giddily insist he could do things before that he could not follow through on.

Regarding touching the top of the backboard:
[quote]"I can. I've never heard of anyone else that can do it but I can get up there. I did it in high school when I was seventeen for the first time. Now, I can't grab stuff off of it but I can get up there."

When we asked to see it, Dwight politely begged off but said he'd do it for me later. He told me to set it up with the Magic. So, a week later, I called the team and they said my trip would be unnecessary; they had all kinds of great video with Howard leaping, including Dwight touching the top of the backboard. For the first time in the history of basketball we were going to have documentation.

Well, the footage ended up being bunk. On the video Dwight ended up touching somewhere just north of the square on the backboard a couple of times.[/quote]

[url]http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/4307/james-white-vs-a-jumping-myth[/url]

Again, not saying anything for sure, but sometimes there does to seem a little craving for validation there.

Attempting to catch a lay-up is not a natural basketball skill. Your reach is higher when you jump with one hand than 2 hands and when you are contesting the ball, you want your reach to be as high as possible and going up with 2 hands is taking away from that. And also, even with the quickness, athleticism, coordination, etc. that these professional athletes have, it's still extremely difficult to catch a layup. It's like a successful 4 point play. Sure, it's possible, and it sounds practical because 4>3/2, but you don't see players go for 4 point play attempts on every possession. You might see one successful 4 point shot per season, just like "catchblocks". Clipperfan86: Go to the rec and start a pick-up game with people that are shorter than you and maybe you'll answer your own question.

[COLOR="White"]You're also making a really bad name for Clipper fans you fakkit[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]I was just thinking about how we always see guys swat shots.. or block them in general... but half of the time.. they could of probably just grabbed and held onto the ball and controlled it rather than sending it out of bounds to the other team. Why don't more players just catch the ball? I know super athletic bigs like DJ, McGee and Dwight could easily do this. DeAndre got good this year at swatting it to teammates but why not just catch it?

I understand swatting into the 10th row gets the crowd and team going.. but it's also not a really smart basketball play.[/QUOTE]

you must not have played basketball. its easier to block a shot with one arm then try to jump with both arms trying to catch a basketball.

1. because you get better reach with one hand and priority #1 is to stop the shot......
2. because if you gamble going for a steal of the shot with two hands (its much easier to catch it with two hands)... you might regret it because you failed to even touch it as the ball went a little higher than u expected and u know u could have touched it/deflected it with one hand....
3. because its better to be on the safe side and get maximum reach... you have a higher reach with one hand at specific direction...
4. because you need to time it...
5. because grabbing it with one hand is hard to do and control afterwards, especially with opponents around u , its better to just get rid of it...
6. because you want a block on your statsheet and not a steal maybe lol...
7. because blocking looks more kewler....

[QUOTE=pauk]1. because you get better reach with one hand and priority #1 is to stop the shot......
2. because if you gamble going for a steal of the shot with two hands (its much easier to catch it with two hands)... you might regret it because you failed to even touch it as the ball went a little higher than u expected and u know u could have touched it/deflected it with one hand....
3. because its better to be on the safe side and get maximum reach... you have a higher reach with one hand at specific direction...
4. because you need to time it...
5. because grabbing it with one hand is hard to do and control afterwards, especially with opponents around u , its better to just get rid of it...
6. because you want a block on your statsheet and not a steal maybe lol...
7. because blocking looks more kewler....[/QUOTE]

Um... This? [COLOR="White"]I'm freaking out to the fact that I'm agreeing with this fakkit[/COLOR]

[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]I was just thinking about how we always see guys swat shots.. or block them in general... but half of the time.. they could of probably just grabbed and held onto the ball and controlled it rather than sending it out of bounds to the other team. Why don't more players just catch the ball? I know super athletic bigs like DJ, McGee and Dwight could easily do this.
[/QUOTE]

Nobody can easily do that. I am plenty tall, jumped plenty high in my youth and we used to practice that, with people letting us try and grab it out of the air, catching it 1-10 times is an accomplishment.

What players should try to do is what Russell did and not hit it as hard and push it in the direction of a teammate.

[QUOTE=G.O.A.T]Nobody can easily do that. I am plenty tall, jumped plenty high in my youth and we used to practice that, with people letting us try and grab it out of the air, catching it 1-10 times is an accomplishment.

What players should try to do is what Russell did and not hit it as hard and push it in the direction of a teammate.[/QUOTE]

I think using words like easily led people to misunderstand me and it's my fault for poor wording. In a following post I mentioned even one every 4 or 5 games. That's not unrealistic. I posted multiple block videos showing you guys times when players got the ball clearly with their entire hand and they were in a position to grab it with one hand. BTW the people saying stupid crap like "Did you ever play basketball?" need to suck it. I was a pretty damn good player and this isn't rocket science.

It's the same concept as grabbing a board with 1 hand and bringing it to the second hand to secure it. It's fundamentals. You do this in any sport that requires catching. I used a football example earlier because it's valid. I understand the NFL probably has better athletes than the NBA but if they can jump 3+ feet off the ground and catch a 70 MPH ball with 1 hand while off balance and secure it before hitting the floor... NBA players can catch something much easier. I altered the original OP which was an exaggeration... because one a game is unrealistic. Why don't we even see 10 of these over the entire NBA season though???

Ask a football player, would his rate of success gone up dramatically if he's just required to swat the ball instead of catching it?

[QUOTE=iamgine]Ask a football player, would his rate of success gone up dramatically if he's just required to swat the ball instead of catching it?[/QUOTE]

Well I'm talking about on offense... but yes. Swatting a ball is easier on defense than intercepting it. Thing is interceptions in the NFL are way more common than catch blocks in the NBA and the NBA is a much more uptempo sport with WAY more total possessions of the ball. Think about it. Some games a team may only be on defense 10 times or less. So if they get 2 interceptions... that's the 1 out of every 5 ratio I mentioned in my subsequent post.

Like I said before... people are going all over the place with such a simple concept. Catch the ball or control it to yourself once in a while... rather than smashing it out of bounds.

Yeah, both on offense and defense. Ask a football player, would his rate of success gone up dramatically if he's just required to swat the ball instead of catching it?

[QUOTE=iamgine]Yeah, both on offense and defense. Ask a football player, would his rate of success gone up dramatically if he's just required to swat the ball instead of catching it?[/QUOTE]

You're arguing something that I already agreed with though so what's the point of the question? Nobody here is in denial about success rates. I understand it might only be possible to do it once every 5 games... but wouldn't it be wiser that one time to grab it instead of swatting it out of bounds and giving the ball to the other team? We should all know by now how much of a difference one great possession can make in sports.

One great defensive play or one great shot... can shift the momentum of a game. I'm saying if the entire NBA combines for thousands and thousands of blocks... why didn't we have at least 50 catch blocks this year? That's a MUCH lower percentage than I suggested and we didn't even see that. Is 50 out of 11,000 total blocks really a big deal?

You guys are making it seem like I'm expecting something preposterous. I was when I said one every game.. but I changed it because it was clearly unrealistic.

Also ask an NFL player what a bigger play to make is on defense. An interception or swatting the ball to the floor? 10/10 will say an interception. Very few NFL players go for a swat unless they have zero chance to intercept. NBA players should have a similar mentality. Only swat a shot if you CAN'T control it somehow. Whether that's controlling the block to a teammate or yourself... or just catching it.

However, you can't turn it on and off. If you're going for catch, then you go for catch every time. Then blocks would have lower success rates.

[QUOTE=iamgine]However, you can't turn it on and off. If you're going for catch, then you go for catch every time. Then blocks would have lower success rates.[/QUOTE]

This is a cop out. ;x.... these guys are paid up to 20+ million a year. They are in top physical and mental condition. It's a mindset change and you can have multiple functions stored in muscle memory. You're telling me players can be reactive all game long on offense but not on defense?? You can't make a split second decision to catch/control a block rather than swat into stands? That's BS. Maybe they need to practice catch blocks.. and make them become an instinct.. but to imply these players have no control is crazy.

If you watch the history of the blocked shot... watch guys like Russell and Wilt to Dwight now. You'll see back then way more controlled and catch blocks happened. Now it's about the flashy swat to the 4th row block. Players have the wrong mindset defensively.

Watch this dude. Bill Russell the art of the blocked shot.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWFsL4Y8RVA[/url]

Watch how many of his blocks are intelligent blocks. Blocking to teammates, controlling a block to himself... catch blocks etc. No flashy crap of swatting it into the stands 3 times a game. Every single block has a purpose. I didn't see one that didn't stay in bounds and end up in a teammates hands really.

To block and catch require much narrower angle than block only, thus much lower success rate.

[QUOTE=iamgine]To block and catch require much narrower angle than block only, thus much lower success rate.[/QUOTE]

This has already been agreed upon by me. Watch the Bill Russell video please. It's not long.

So if you would go for block n catch, you'd always try to position your body in a more difficult position a lot of the time, thus lowering your block success rate.

About Russel, it was a different game back then. He was much better and much more athletic compared to everyone else. There's much more parity now.

I do it in 2K11 with my player all the time. :lol

[QUOTE=iamgine]So if you would go for block n catch, you'd always try to position your body in a more difficult position a lot of the time, thus lowering your block success rate.

About Russel, it was a different game back then. He was much better and much more athletic compared to everyone else. There's much more parity now.[/QUOTE]

Okay then watch Hakeem or David Robinson. Now watch Dwight and McGee. Watch it get progressively worse. Blocks are getting less and less intelligent.

[QUOTE=nightprowler10]I do it in 2K11 with my player all the time. :lol[/QUOTE]

I didn't even know you could in 2K11. Is it random?

why is this even a discussion?, the answer is simple. now STFU

[QUOTE=nathanjizzle]why is this even a discussion?, the answer is simple. now STFU[/QUOTE]

Why are you so angry? I've never even seen you around here before little man.

[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]Okay then watch Hakeem or David Robinson. Now watch Dwight and McGee. Watch it get progressively worse. Blocks are getting less and less intelligent.[/QUOTE]
Because players are getting more and more equal.

Besides, we comparing Mcgee to Hakeem now?

[QUOTE=iamgine]Because players are getting more and more equal.

Besides, we comparing Mcgee to Hakeem now?[/QUOTE]

I'm taking the arguable best shot blockers from their eras and asking you to compare the way shots were blocked. Not directly comparing any of them. You honestly believe centers right now are close to equal to Dwight? 2 straight years in the top 3 I believe for MVP votes... 3 straight DPOY awards. Who do you think is equal to Dwight?

You honestly think Robinson and Hakeem didn't have competiton?? Zo, Shaq, Mutombo etc? The 90's had the deepest era of centers in NBA history, not even close. If anything there is WAY more of a gap in competition right now.. so it should be easier to blocks shots.

Isn't blocked shots coming more from perimeter players, not big men?

[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]This is a cop out. ;x.... these guys are paid up to 20+ million a year. They are in top physical and mental condition. It's a mindset change and you can have multiple functions stored in muscle memory. You're telling me players can be reactive all game long on offense but not on defense?? You can't make a split second decision to catch/control a block rather than swat into stands? That's BS. Maybe they need to practice catch blocks.. and make them become an instinct.. but to imply these players have no control is crazy.[/QUOTE]
You continue to question why certain skilled players don't catch the ball more often. What is your belief on the matter? Why do you believe it doesn't happen more often? Do you believe players just don't understand catching it would be beneficial? Or do you believe players know they could catch blocks all the time but instead choose to slap them into the crowd because it feels more awesome?

It's always been my understanding that catching someone's shot is the definition of ultimate domination on defense. Is it more badass when LaPhonso Ellis swatted a dunk or when he caught it outright? I feel the answer is obvious. What made Jordan's block on Ron Mercer so legendary? The fact he caught it in mid-air. Suffice to say, the catch-block has sick street cred. On the block ladder of awesomeness, I feel many will agree it generally could go:

1. Tip/Deflect Block: Kind of Awesome
2. Swat: Pretty Awesome
3. Pinned on the backboard: More Awesome
4. Catching a Shot: Bad as Hell.

So, if you believe people like the satisfaction that comes with catching an offensive player's shot and you believe they're not retarded enough to not understand the concept of gaining possession through completing an awesome play, then what other reason would there be for the catch block not happening more often other than the fact that it's really hard to pull off?

I have found this topic to be a difficult one to discuss at times just because it's sort of dumbfounding. The simple and obvious answer (that a catch block is very difficult to pull off) doesn't seem to be a satisfactory explanation, even though I feel like that should be the long and short of it. It's like asking, "Why don't more people tip-dunk more often? I know Vince Carter averaged multiple offensive rebounds per game in his prime. Why didn't he tip-dunk more of them? Doesn't he understand he'll get two points right away instead of having to reset the offense?"

I acknowledge the "have you ever even played basketball" line of reasoning is a little lame. And I definitely see how it could sound insulting. However, I think at least a couple of posters are just asking that question because it seems the answer to your query (why don't catch blocks happen more often?) would seem abundantly clear to anyone who's played the game for an extended period of time.

And to be clear, even when playing against 5th graders, you or me trying to catch shots isn't going to be the same as JaVale McGee trying to catch shots. He's way above the goal and his paws are huge. I think it'd be a more comparable scenario if we lowered the basket down to 8.5 feet and played against people our age using one of those mini-basketballs often handed out as prizes at county fairs. I've done it. And even on lowered rims with small basketballs, catching a shot attempt (without goaltending) is not a completely natural play to execute. It take a very unique set of circumstances to pull off.

And sure, you're saying, "Well of course it's not going to happen often for you. You're obviously not an NBA player with the hops and ability and general fundamental wherewithal of a Dwight Howard, JaVale McGee or DeAndre Jordan." At which point, I'd have to agree with you, which would then solidify my point. Even for athletic freaks, catching a blocked shot is very hard to come by, not to mention inefficient. Imagine the drop in Dennis Rodman's rebound rate if all he did was crash the glass and attempt a tip-dunk each play. Now imagine all the shots these big men wouldn't be able to reach or tip in the first place if they just spent the whole game looking to catch a shot.

Have you ever, really, [i]really[/i] rejected someone before? As in, you blocked them so bad you had your entire wrist on the ball, or at least your entire hand? If so, did you ever stop to think about why, in retrospect, you didn't just grab the ball out of air with two hands instead? Or maybe cuffed it right there between your hand and your wrist? You were just trying to block the shot by any means, right? You weren't really worried about how you were blocking the shot as much as you were worried about whether you were going to block the shot at all, period.

This topic intrigues me because the concept appears so simple. It's like asking why the sky is blue.

[QUOTE=Rake2204]You continue to question why certain skilled players don't catch the ball more often. What is your belief on the matter? Why do you believe it doesn't happen more often? Do you believe players just don't understand catching it would be beneficial? Or do you believe players know they could catch blocks all the time but instead choose to slap them into the crowd because it feels more awesome?

It's always been my understanding that catching someone's shot is the definition of ultimate domination on defense. Is it more badass when LaPhonso Ellis swatted a dunk or when he caught it outright? I feel the answer is obvious. What made Jordan's block on Ron Mercer so legendary? The fact he caught it in mid-air. Suffice to say, the catch-block has sick street cred. On the block ladder of awesomeness, I feel many will agree it generally could go:

1. Tip/Deflect Block: Kind of Awesome
2. Swat: Pretty Awesome
3. Pinned on the backboard: More Awesome
4. Catching a Shot: Bad as Hell.

So, if you believe people like the satisfaction that comes with catching an offensive player's shot and you believe they're not retarded enough to not understand the concept of gaining possession through completing an awesome play, then what other reason would there be for the catch block not happening more often other than the fact that it's really hard to pull off?

I have found this topic to be a difficult one to discuss at times just because it's sort of dumbfounding. The simple and obvious answer (that a catch block is very difficult to pull off) doesn't seem to be a satisfactory explanation, even though I feel like that should be the long and short of it. It's like asking, "Why don't more people tip-dunk more often? I know Vince Carter averaged multiple offensive rebounds per game in his prime. Why didn't he tip-dunk more of them? Doesn't he understand he'll get two points right away instead of having to reset the offense?"

I acknowledge the "have you ever even played basketball" line of reasoning is a little lame. And I definitely see how it could sound insulting. However, I think at least a couple of posters are just asking that question because it seems the answer to your query (why don't catch blocks happen more often?) would seem abundantly clear to anyone who's played the game for an extended period of time.

And to be clear, even when playing against 5th graders, you or me trying to catch shots isn't going to be the same as JaVale McGee trying to catch shots. He's way above the goal and his paws are huge. I think it'd be a more comparable scenario if we lowered the basket down to 8.5 feet and played against people our age using one of those mini-basketballs often handed out as prizes at county fairs. I've done it. And even on lowered rims with small basketballs, catching a shot attempt (without goaltending) is not a completely natural play to execute. It take a very unique set of circumstances to pull off.

And sure, you're saying, "Well of course it's not going to happen often for you. You're obviously not an NBA player with the hops and ability and general fundamental wherewithal of a Dwight Howard, JaVale McGee or DeAndre Jordan." At which point, I'd have to agree with you, which would then solidify my point. Even for athletic freaks, catching a blocked shot is very hard to come by, not to mention inefficient. Imagine the drop in Dennis Rodman's rebound rate if all he did was crash the glass and attempt a tip-dunk each play. Now imagine all the shots these big men wouldn't be able to reach or tip in the first place if they just spent the whole game looking to catch a shot.

Have you ever, really, [i]really[/i] rejected someone before? As in, you blocked them so bad you had your entire wrist on the ball, or at least your entire hand? If so, did you ever stop to think about why, in retrospect, you didn't just grab the ball out of air with two hands instead? Or maybe cuffed it right there between your hand and your wrist? You were just trying to block the shot by any means, right? You weren't really worried about how you were blocking the shot as much as you were worried about whether you were going to block the shot at all, period.

This topic intrigues me because the concept appears so simple. It's like asking why the sky is blue.[/QUOTE]


I agree with a lot of this but remember.... I expanded the original idea. Not only lowered the standards tremendously... but mentioned controlled blocks. Let's not only focus in on catch blocks because my idea has shifted. I just noticed like I said after watching Wilt and Russell and even 90's centers footage.. that players have become quite frankly... stupid shot blockers. They are constantly going for the 5th row swat.... and rarely control it to themselves or a teammate. Back in earlier eras they ALWAYS controlled it because that was the original point of a block.

[QUOTE=iamgine]Isn't blocked shots coming more from perimeter players, not big men?[/QUOTE]

Are you messing with me lol?

[QUOTE=Clippersfan86]I agree with a lot of this but remember.... I expanded the original idea. Not only lowered the standards tremendously... but mentioned controlled blocks. Let's not only focus in on catch blocks because my idea has shifted. I just noticed like I said after watching Wilt and Russell and even 90's centers footage.. that players have become quite frankly... stupid shot blockers. They are constantly going for the 5th row swat.... and rarely control it to themselves or a teammate. Back in earlier eras they ALWAYS controlled it because that was the original point of a block.[/QUOTE]
I'm still in the process of watching the Russell video. But in terms of 90's shotblockers, Hakeem and Robinson destroyed their fair share of shots too, not to mention Shaquille O'Neal. They definitely weren't just possession controlling "tappers". Sometimes it can appear that way, but light blocks are often more of a result of a player's inability to get more of a hand on the ball than anything they mentally chose to do.

It's an interesting notion to wonder why people can't just be like Bill Russell aka perhaps the greatest shot-blocker of all-time. His style was certainly unique in the manner with which he was able to afford to "hook block" attempts in certain situations. That is, he was great enough in comparison to his competition that he was able to accept a forthcoming block as a foregone conclusion and instead worry about [i]where[/i] he wanted to block it.

I've always found the "block into the 3rd row" epidemic to be vastly overrated. Every single blocked shot by modern players is not an out-of-bounds violation. The truth is, even when Russell "tapped" blocks, there was not a guarantee his team was going to gain the rebound. Further, he swatted shots at times too (the chasedown on West in your clip at 1:25).

I have found there to be two extreme ways of thought that seem to go hand-in-hand regarding this subject. One thought is that every great shot-blocker in the 60's [b]always[/b] controlled his blocks and [b]always[/b] ensured his team would garner possession. The second thought is that every "great" shot-blocker today nearly always blocks shots into the 3rd row and his team [b]never[/b] gains possession. Gaining possession doesn't have to occur only after a weak block:

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3guuPba-I0[/url]

Further, here's a full Ben Wallace mixtape (it's labeled Top 5 blocks but it's not). Having watched Ben for the duration of his career, I don't think I'm alone in acknowledging that he blocked shots with supreme force. My question would be, in these limited clips, how many of these monster blocks end up in the Pistons' possession? And no, it doesn't count to watch his first block sail back to an opponent and assume the rest of them are going to as well.

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QuivG44plqQ[/url]

The results of Ben's rejections, as different as the blocks may look in comparison to Bill Russell's, are quite often the same. Can the argument be made that Bill kept even more in play than Ben and was able to aim even more to his teammates than Ben? Obviously. But it's not as if today's defensive world has come crumbling down to the point where top defenders appear to go out of their way to purposely provide their opponent with another possession.

Edit: I'll say this though, there's a lot more substance to your current question than there was when discussing the whole "catching" thing. The ideas of "catching" and "not blocking so hard" are terribly different from one another.