When did Bradley become a chucker?

[huzy]

As Forsberg explains, Bradley's most effective shot is the midrange jumper. The big problem with that is that it is going away from the en vogue statistical notion that the "long two point shot" is inefficient. I think Stevens allowing KO and Sully to shoot 3s reflects our coaching staff's belief in the "a 3 is better than a long 2" philosophy.

Avery being an above average mid range shooter and below average 3 point shooter, especially for his position, goes against the modern philosophy of shot efficiency that I suspect our coaching staff adheres to...

[Drucci]

I'm fine with the midrange jumper as long as it's not just under the 3 point line : I cringe everytime I see Bradley coming off screen to shoot from there, it's a terrible shot, even if he makes it.

I'm fine with him taking a lot of shots though : he has made most of them in these last games and it's not like he is taking shots away from teammates (see Wallace, whose passivity is detrimental to the team).

[kozlodoev]

I think Stevens allowing KO and Sully to shoot 3s reflects our coaching staff's belief in the "a 3 is better than a long 2" philosophy.

It only reflects that our coaching staff either fails at basic math, or have turned their brains off. A three is "better than a long two" only when you can make it with some semblance of regularity.

In the particular case of Sullinger, he shot 40% on two-point shots outside of 10 feet last season (26 for 65). He's currently shooting 25% from the three for his career (7 for 28).

A simple calculation shows that Sullinger will score 8 points per 10 long two-pointers taken, and 7.5 per 10 three pointers taken.

[Fafnir]

Right because Sullinger can never improve as a 3 point shooter so why should he try, after all 28 shots is a definitive sample. Furthermore spacing the floor from 3 point range has zero value I guess.

[fairweatherfan]

I think Stevens allowing KO and Sully to shoot 3s reflects our coaching staff's belief in the "a 3 is better than a long 2" philosophy.

It only reflects that our coaching staff either fails at basic math, or have turned their brains off. A three is "better than a long two" only when you can make it with some semblance of regularity.

In the particular case of Sullinger, he shot 40% on two-point shots outside of 10 feet last season (26 for 65). He's currently shooting 25% from the three for his career (7 for 28).

A simple calculation shows that Sullinger will score 8 points per 10 long two-pointers taken, and 7.5 per 10 three pointers taken.

I think the factor you're not accounting for is that their shooting could get better.  If they don't, or if they fall in love with the shot and stop going low, then yup, this kind of shot selection isn't sustainable.  If they do, it can become a very useful weapon for us.  And that's without getting into the effect Rondo could have on getting them better looks in a better rhythm.

Given that this is basically a lost season I'm more than happy to let them try and get better.  Sully in particular will be a very versatile offensive weapon with legit 3-point range. 

[Chris]

Bradley was always a chucker at heart.  I remember an interview with Doc when Bradley started breaking out in his second year, and he was saying that one of the reasons Bradley didn't play as a rookie was that he just wanted to be a scorer.  He thinks he is Monta Ellis with better defense.   

[BballTim]

As Forsberg explains, Bradley's most effective shot is the midrange jumper. The big problem with that is that it is going away from the en vogue statistical notion that the "long two point shot" is inefficient. I think Stevens allowing KO and Sully to shoot 3s reflects our coaching staff's belief in the "a 3 is better than a long 2" philosophy.

Avery being an above average mid range shooter and below average 3 point shooter, especially for his position, goes against the modern philosophy of shot efficiency that I suspect our coaching staff adheres to...

  Going into the season Avery was a career 34% shooter on threes, the average for his position is around 36%.

[kozlodoev]

Right because Sullinger can never improve as a 3 point shooter so why should he try, after all 28 shots is a definitive sample. Furthermore spacing the floor from 3 point range has zero value I guess.

Right, all those other players who can't shoot threes are only in this situation because they haven't chucked it into oblivion in games.

I wonder why Garnett never spaced the floor all the way to the three. Oh, right, because he's a .280 career three-point shooter. Shame on his coaches for never forcing him to chuck 5 three pointers per game, imagine the improvement he may have had.

For the record, two-point shooting can improve too. And even if Sullinger ends up shooting .450 on long jumpers, and .300 from the three, which is a completely reasonable expectation, three pointers will still not be a better weapon for him.

[Fafnir]

Right because Sullinger can never improve as a 3 point shooter so why should he try, after all 28 shots is a definitive sample. Furthermore spacing the floor from 3 point range has zero value I guess.

Right, all those other players who can't shoot threes are only in this situation because they haven't chucked it into oblivion in games.

I wonder why Garnett never spaced the floor all the way to the three. Oh, right, because he's a .280 career three-point shooter. Shame on his coaches for never forcing him to chuck 5 three pointers per game, imagine the improvement he may have had.

For the record, two-point shooting can improve too. And even if Sullinger ends up shooting .450 on long jumpers, and .300 from the three, which is a completely reasonable result, three pointers will still not be a better weapon for him.

Sullinger is 21 years old, he's just developing his NBA game and shot range.

Kevin also had multiple years where he deliberately tried to shoot more threes and develop that range. Nothing wrong with Sullinger doing the same.

[kozlodoev]

Given that this is basically a lost season I'm more than happy to let them try and get better.  Sully in particular will be a very versatile offensive weapon with legit 3-point range.

You get better by shooting 1,000 three-pointers a day in practice, not by hoisting 5 in a game. I thought that much was obvious.

[Fafnir]

Given that this is basically a lost season I'm more than happy to let them try and get better.  Sully in particular will be a very versatile offensive weapon with legit 3-point range.

You get better by shooting 1,000 three-pointers a day in practice, not by hoisting 5 in a game. I thought that much was obvious.

So how is Celtics practice going these days? Do you enjoy rebounding for Sullinger during his shooting drills? I can only assume you're there and know that Sullinger doesn't practice 3s.

Beyond that, there is no substitute for doing something in game. Dwight Howard shot 80% from the free throw line in practice in both Orlando and LA. Rondo can drain threes in practice too.

[fairweatherfan]

Given that this is basically a lost season I'm more than happy to let them try and get better.  Sully in particular will be a very versatile offensive weapon with legit 3-point range.

You get better by shooting 1,000 three-pointers a day in practice, not by hoisting 5 in a game. I thought that much was obvious.

Didn't you post this a few days ago to make exactly the opposite point - that shooting in practice doesn't translate to shooting in games?

Hitting 63% of your wide open 3s in practice is probably what most in-game 30% shooters can do.  I'm inclined to give KO and Sully some more time, but success in shooting drills doesn't always translate to the actual game.

That is all.

[kozlodoev]

Given that this is basically a lost season I'm more than happy to let them try and get better.  Sully in particular will be a very versatile offensive weapon with legit 3-point range.

You get better by shooting 1,000 three-pointers a day in practice, not by hoisting 5 in a game. I thought that much was obvious.

Didn't you post this a few days ago to make exactly the opposite point - that shooting in practice doesn't translate to shooting in games?

I don't see how this is an "opposite point". This photo clearly demonstrates that being a good shooter in practice is a necessary (albeit not sufficient) condition to be a good shooter in games.

[Chris]

Given that this is basically a lost season I'm more than happy to let them try and get better.  Sully in particular will be a very versatile offensive weapon with legit 3-point range.

You get better by shooting 1,000 three-pointers a day in practice, not by hoisting 5 in a game. I thought that much was obvious.

You have to do both.  You need to start with practice, you are right.  And by all accounts, Sully has been working on that shot for a while, and spent a ton of time on it this summer.  But, even once you have perfected it in practice, you need to then get the reps in during games.  There is just a whole different timing when you are shooting in a game, and that takes some adjustment too.  I think the fact that he has improved in the last few games over earlier in the season shows that he is getting more comfortable with it.  But it takes a lot of work.

[Chris]

For the record, two-point shooting can improve too. And even if Sullinger ends up shooting .450 on long jumpers, and .300 from the three, which is a completely reasonable expectation, three pointers will still not be a better weapon for him.

I disagree.  Because it is not just about shooting percentages, it is about getting the shots, and floor spacing for the team.  If Sully becomes a decent three point shooter, it is going to open up the floor for him inside, and for the rest of his teammates.  It is an incredibly valuable skill to have that goes well beyond simple numbers.  Just ask Kevin Love.  He didn't make the leap just because his three point shooting gave him more points, he made the leap because his three point shooting opened up the rest of the game, and made teams defend him wherever he was on the floor.  That is why Stevens is pushing Sully to shoot that ball.  If he doesn't shoot it, then defenses can ignore him.