[QUOTE=Normmm;384420]It is the same thing. The fruitless possession isnāt true. The other team gets the ball back whether we make the basket or not. It doesnāt change that we would still either be 6 for 18 or 9 for 18.
In other words, if we go 9 for 18 from 2, the defense still gets the ball after a made possession. The defense would get roughly 18 possessions, 9 from rebounds and 9 from in bounds after made basket. The offense has 18 points. If we go 6 for 18 from 3, the defense still gets roughly 18 possessions, 12 from rebounds and 6 from in bounds after a made basket. But the offense still has 18 points.
This does assume the defense always gets the rebound. It is hard to determine how this affects offensive rebounds. Many believe the rebound from a 3 point shot can actually benefit the offense as it general causes a long rebound. Where as the 2 point bucket causes a shorter rebound, where the defense is in better rebounding position than they may be on the perimeter.[/QUOTE]
Maybe if those 12 misses were with the offense set in the flow of the game and not run and guns.
I think their point is if you make a basket, theoretically, the team is able to set up on defense. A missed basket, especially long distance shots that turn into long rebounds, can and likely turn into run outs or transition baskets for the other team. Then factor in the way this team rebounds, and/or follows their shots (most teams are horrible at this).
Also, shooting 9-18 for 2 instead of 6-18 for three would likely suggest more highly contested shots that could result in fouls in your favor. Iām sorry but Iād prefer my team to be going 9-18 from inside the arc any day over 6-18 from 3 due to the above mentioned reasons. To each his own though.
I agree that it can affect the defense and the potential for a traditional 3 point play. Iām mostly referring to the comments about how we should abandon the 3 point shooting because this team is so much better going inside and because it leads to āfruitlessā possessions. Thatās where the going 6 for 18 equals going 9 for 18 holds true.
I agree that it can affect the defense and the potential for a traditional 3 point play. I'm mostly referring to the comments about how we should abandon the 3 point shooting because this team is so much better going inside and because it leads to "fruitless" possessions. That's where the going 6 for 18 equals going 9 for 18 holds true.
I agree. You need the three. Hell this team would be awesome using it as a decoy since EVERYONE expects us to shoot it from there. Why teams have just started placing 4 guys around the perimeter and one to stay home amazes me.(joke)
