I gotta admit the more i hear, the less i'm liking Stevens

[GreenWarrior]

Least accurate shot in basketball sounds scary. Of course if you said "second most efficient shot in basketball" that'd sound better, because that's what a three point shot is. Only thing that beats it is a layup/dunk at the rim.

Stevens knows this because he is a numbers guy.

uggh. yeah I meant least effient.

If that's what you meant then you are factually incorrect. 3 point shots are not inefficient if you achieve even baseline competancy at them.

not being a "numbers guy". but I do know the best someone is going to shoot from 3 pt. range is 35%, or close to that. it just seems like a waste of time to me.

and if it's to "increase his value"? i'll laugh at the return. 

[Fafnir]

Least accurate shot in basketball sounds scary. Of course if you said "second most efficient shot in basketball" that'd sound better, because that's what a three point shot is. Only thing that beats it is a layup/dunk at the rim.

Stevens knows this because he is a numbers guy.

uggh. yeah I meant least effient.

If that's what you meant then you are factually incorrect. 3 point shots are not inefficient if you achieve even baseline competancy at them.

not being a "numbers guy". but I do know the best someone is going to shoot from 3 pt. range is 35%, or close to that. it just seems like a waste of time to me.

and if it's to "increase his value"? i'll laugh at the return.

50% * 2 = 1 expected point

35% * 3 = 1.05 expected point

Do you think a player shooting 50% from the field is a waste of time? Others have spelled this out as well already in this thread too, the three point shot is very efficient.

[Rondo9]

Least accurate shot in basketball sounds scary. Of course if you said "second most efficient shot in basketball" that'd sound better, because that's what a three point shot is. Only thing that beats it is a layup/dunk at the rim.

Stevens knows this because he is a numbers guy.

uggh. yeah I meant least effient.

If that's what you meant then you are factually incorrect. 3 point shots are not inefficient if you achieve even baseline competancy at them.

not being a "numbers guy". but I do know the best someone is going to shoot from 3 pt. range is 35%, or close to that. it just seems like a waste of time to me.

and if it's to "increase his value"? i'll laugh at the return.

Do you want Bass gone or not? If Bass hits a 3pt shot with consistency then it'll be much easier to move him.

[Lucky17]

Least accurate shot in basketball sounds scary. Of course if you said "second most efficient shot in basketball" that'd sound better, because that's what a three point shot is. Only thing that beats it is a layup/dunk at the rim.

Stevens knows this because he is a numbers guy.

uggh. yeah I meant least effient.

If that's what you meant then you are factually incorrect. 3 point shots are not inefficient if you achieve even baseline competancy at them.

not being a "numbers guy". but I do know the best someone is going to shoot from 3 pt. range is 35%, or close to that. it just seems like a waste of time to me.

and if it's to "increase his value"? i'll laugh at the return.

A power forward that can knock down 35% of his 3 point attempts can be extremely valuable in today's NBA. For sake of comparison, Paul Millsap knocks down 36% of his attempts from long-range.

[mgent]

I was calling for this all of last year.  I mean, if we think about it for a second, Bass is much better shooter from mid-range than Sully.  So while that doesn't necessarily mean he can shoot 3s worth a lick, CHANCES are that he's at least as good as Sully from back there.  The two shots are typically somewhat proportional.

I think NickAgneta and I had a decent sized debate about this at one point during the season.

My feeling is that it was probably demoralizing for Bass to see all those bricks that Sully, Olynyk, and Vitor were told to throw up, when none of them had even established themselves from closer in yet.

[fairweatherfan]

Least accurate shot in basketball sounds scary. Of course if you said "second most efficient shot in basketball" that'd sound better, because that's what a three point shot is. Only thing that beats it is a layup/dunk at the rim.

Stevens knows this because he is a numbers guy.

uggh. yeah I meant least effient.

If that's what you meant then you are factually incorrect. 3 point shots are not inefficient if you achieve even baseline competancy at them.

not being a "numbers guy". but I do know the best someone is going to shoot from 3 pt. range is 35%, or close to that. it just seems like a waste of time to me.

Over 100 players with enough attempts to qualify shot over 35% from 3 last year.  26 were over 40%.

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/3-points/sort/threePointFieldGoalPct

[LooseCannon]

My feeling is that it was probably demoralizing for Bass to see all those bricks that Sully, Olynyk, and Vitor were told to throw up, when none of them had even established themselves from closer in yet.

Last season, Sullinger shot 45.6% on two-point shots 16 feet and further compared to 38.5% for Bass.  Of course, Bass had a huge advantage in the 10- to 16-foot range, hitting 56.2% vs. Sullinger's 34.8%.  The season before, Sullinger hit 53.3% from 10 to 16 and 36.0% from 16+, compared to 45.9% and 45.2% for Bass, so Sullinger at least has an established track record of having a competent mid-range jumper.

[Evantime34]

I think Bass shooting 3's is great. Since 3's are worth more than two's it is in fact one of the most efficient shots in the NBA, especially from the corner where it is closer.

Having Bass in the corner spreads the floor more than him getting the ball at the elbow. Teams love 3 point shooting bigs, if he's able to shoot 35%+ then his value skyrockets.

[billysan]

So is Zeller next? Why not??

[mgent]

My feeling is that it was probably demoralizing for Bass to see all those bricks that Sully, Olynyk, and Vitor were told to throw up, when none of them had even established themselves from closer in yet.

Last season, Sullinger shot 45.6% on two-point shots 16 feet and further compared to 38.5% for Bass.  Of course, Bass had a huge advantage in the 10- to 16-foot range, hitting 56.2% vs. Sullinger's 34.8%.  The season before, Sullinger hit 53.3% from 10 to 16 and 36.0% from 16+, compared to 45.9% and 45.2% for Bass, so Sullinger at least has an established track record of having a competent mid-range jumper.

So Sullinger has had 1 good year and 1 horrible year from 10-16 plus 1 good year and 1 horrible year from 16-23, and that's an established track record of competent mid-range shooting?  Okay.  It certainly was never consistent on any level near Bass.

[GreenWarrior]

I just think a player going into what his 10th season? who just "recently found his 3 pt. shot" is a recipe for disaster.

if he shoots 35% then ok I guess. but i'm just old school and believe bigs should be grabbing rebounds and stay under the 3 pt. line regardless of the state of the game. I just think most bigs don't shoot the 3 well enough consistently for it to be a worthwhile shot for them to be taking. I don't care if the numbers show it to be otherwise.

if a big is making 2/3 a game i'm perfectly fine with that. but if it ends up being 2/3 one night and 0/6 the next 2 games it's not effective enough for me.

and if we're expecting bass to be dirk this season i'm certainly not ok with it.

[twistedrico]

I like Brad Stevens and believe that he knows what he's doing and this team will be back in the playoffs...

[fairweatherfan]

I think Bass shooting 3's is great. Since 3's are worth more than two's it is in fact one of the most efficient shots in the NBA, especially from the corner where it is closer.

Having Bass in the corner spreads the floor more than him getting the ball at the elbow. Teams love 3 point shooting bigs, if he's able to shoot 35%+ then his value skyrockets.

I think opening the paint up for the other bigs - Sully/Zeller in the post and KO's drives - would be a huge asset to the offense too.  It'd give Rondo more room to operate as well.

[GreenWarrior]

I think Bass shooting 3's is great. Since 3's are worth more than two's it is in fact one of the most efficient shots in the NBA, especially from the corner where it is closer.

Having Bass in the corner spreads the floor more than him getting the ball at the elbow. Teams love 3 point shooting bigs, if he's able to shoot 35%+ then his value skyrockets.

I think opening the paint up for the other bigs - Sully/Zeller in the post and KO's drives - would be a huge asset to the offense too.  It'd give Rondo more room to operate as well.

except sully shoots 3's more than he takes 2's.

[fairweatherfan]

I think Bass shooting 3's is great. Since 3's are worth more than two's it is in fact one of the most efficient shots in the NBA, especially from the corner where it is closer.

Having Bass in the corner spreads the floor more than him getting the ball at the elbow. Teams love 3 point shooting bigs, if he's able to shoot 35%+ then his value skyrockets.

I think opening the paint up for the other bigs - Sully/Zeller in the post and KO's drives - would be a huge asset to the offense too.  It'd give Rondo more room to operate as well.

except sully shoots 3's more than he takes 2's.

A.  No he doesn't - he took 208 3s and 691 2s last year.  He even took more shots at the rim (279) and from 3-10 ft (220) than from 3.  How many wrong statements are you gonna make before you start looking things up?

B.  I and a lot of other fans would prefer he work more in the post and less from 3 than he did last year, because his percentage on those 208 was terrible.