https://www.facebook.com/ualrbasketball?fref=nf

Shooting from just INSIDE the arc? What will they think of next?

(06-02-2015 08:38 PM)MICHAELSPAPPY Wrote:  https://www.facebook.com/ualrbasketball?fref=nf

Shooting from just INSIDE the arc? What will they think of next?

He was hitting them, but I see one fundamental flaw. He gets the pass about chest high, and brings the ball down below his waist
e, then goes back up for the shot, giving the defense another step to get in his face. A post player that has to bounce it one time before going up for the shot. Those are two habits that are hard to break.

I like the idea of shooting from just inside the arc, though. With today's mindset, that ought to be one of the least guarded spots on the floor.

It's a good thing to have in the arsenal, for sure. But if you can get closer for the higher percentage shot that's better, and if you have to take a long shot, it might as well be for three points. Still, to have that to take advantage of soft spots is a plus. Presumably, if you can shoot the three you can hit those as well.

What's really great is a post player who can hit those shots. Then you're really burning their candle at both ends.

(06-02-2015 11:43 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  It's a good thing to have in the arsenal, for sure. But if you can get closer for the higher percentage shot that's better, and if you have to take a long shot, it might as well be for three points. Still, to have that to take advantage of soft spots is a plus. Presumably, if you can shoot the three you can hit those as well.

It appears to me, just logically, that with the total fixation everyone has on the 3-point arc these days, the one place other teams would NOT expect you to shoot would be from just inside the arc. As you said, a soft spot.

(06-02-2015 11:43 PM)eh9198 Wrote:  It's a good thing to have in the arsenal, for sure. But if you can get closer for the higher percentage shot that's better, and if you have to take a long shot, it might as well be for three points. Still, to have that to take advantage of soft spots is a plus. Presumably, if you can shoot the three you can hit those as well.

A 20 foot shot requires a different touch than a 16 footer. Every three point shooter isn't a great mid range shooter. It's like in golf. There are non professionals who can hit the ball 300 yards, but put them 30 yards out, and they're terrible. It requires touch instead of brute strength. There are some players who are deadly inside the arc, but can't shoot the three. Chastity Reed fit that description. Wasn't a three point shooter but could consistently hit that 15-16 foot jump shot. Two different animals. If someone can do both, then you have a real winner.

While the three pointer and the dunk are exciting, I think they both hurt the game. I'd love to see both outlawed, then bigs would have to work on shooting instead of just flushing it, and we'd have the perimeter shooters shooting the 15-20 foot shots.

The reason I prefer baseball over basketball and football, is the little man has a better chance of playing it and playing well. Football and basketball are sports where normally the bigger or taller you are, you have the advantage over the smaller guy.

Taking away the dunk and three point shot would equalize the game for the smaller guy .

I agree with taking away the dunk, but I believe the three point shot helps level the playing field for the smaller guy. I say "get rid of the dunk" but maybe move the three point line out to the pro distance. That would open up the middle even more, and only the really good three point shooters would be taking those shots.

(06-03-2015 10:27 AM)LRTrojan Wrote:  While the three pointer and the dunk are exciting, I think they both hurt the game. I'd love to see both outlawed

Absolutely. Couldn't agree more. But ESPN would never allow those to be reversed.