3 point shooting needs to improve

[Cusefan0307]

Loyola, Nova, and Kansas all shoot 40% or better from 3. Michigan is slightly below that. They all have won at least 32 games and are in the FF. I know some traditionalists hate it, but its the key to winning. We can talk about Bazley and Carey all we want, but they still need to make shots. I really hope Hughes is a good shooter.

 

[Brooky03]

You have to have three legitimate 3 point shooting threats on the court at all times. Any more than that is just gravy. There are lots and lots of recent Final Four teams and champions that didn't put 4 shooters on the court consistently or have more than 1 elite 3 point shooter.

 

[longislandcuse]

You have to have three legitimate 3 point shooting threats on the court at all times. Any more than that is just gravy. There are lots and lots of recent Final Four teams and champions that didn't put 4 shooters on the court consistently or have more than 1 elite 3 point shooter.

I disagree. Your 4 (or 5) has to be able to step out and be a threat from deep.

Every team in this years Final 4 has that.

Our more recent Final 4 teams all had that. Southerland and Lydon.

 

[Alsacs]

You need atleast 3 players who can shoot the 3 atleast 35%.

Look at Villanova that Freshman Omari Spellman he is the same age and class as Matthew Moyer.
They are similar bodies but Spellman is a stretch 4.
We need more shooting.
Bazley is a nice player but he isn't a shooter.

Hughes numbers as a Freshman suggest the same as well.
Buddy is the shooter in this class.

 

[NineOneSeven]

Look how different the game was during our 2002-2003 season. We had 3 capable shooters out there in Gmac, Melo, and Kueth, but then we brought in two guards who literally could not, or did not, shoot much outside the paint. It's amazing.

Look at Kansas. Hinrich was the best shooter, but other than him, Langford and Miles were slashers/paint guys, and their other deep threat Lee did not shoot much.

Texas had a capable 3pt shooting team (outside of their star PG, Ford), which is what kept them in that game in the F4 in the first half. Marquette also had capable outside shooters/multiple NBA guys, and their best player D Wade was not even one of them.

Funny to see how Kansas and SU ended up in the title game. I guess that is what happens when you have a handful of NBA guys out there.

 

[Brooky03]

I disagree. Your 4 (or 5) has to be able to step out and be a threat from deep.

Every team in this years Final 4 has that.

Our more recent Final 4 teams all had that. Southerland and Lydon.

Two of the Final Four teams last year (UNC and South Carolina) were far from special from deep and rarely, if ever, had 4 legitimate deep threats on the court at any time. Kansas was an inch away from losing to a Duke team that had largely non-shooters at the 4 and 5 and a PG who couldn't shoot at all.

 

[IthacaMatt]

We need more shooting.
Bazley is a nice player but he isn't a shooter.

Hughes numbers as a Freshman suggest the same as well.
Buddy is the shooter in this class.

Actually, Bazley looks more like a 3 to me than a 4. He's got a pretty decent outside shot. Maybe not elite, but enough to be a threat. But generally I agree that we need more shooting. That's why the 2017 team should have been so much better.

 

[longislandcuse]

Two of the Final Four teams last year (UNC and South Carolina) were far from special from deep and rarely, if ever, had 4 legitimate deep threats on the court at any time. Kansas was an inch away from losing to a Duke team that had largely non-shooters at the 4 and 5 and a PG who couldn't shoot at all.

You don't need to be special, or elite, you just need the offensive spacing 4 shooting threats provide.

 

[Alsacs]

Actually, Bazley looks more like a 3 to me than a 4. He's got a pretty decent outside shot. Maybe not elite, but enough to be a threat. But generally I agree that we need more shooting. That's why the 2017 team should have been so much better.

Put Gillon's shooting into Howard's body you have the perfect Syracuse player.

If 2017 SU had 2018 Chukwu its a tournament team. It sucks we have the pieces each year but miss a piece that makes us a complete team.
Like if 2018 team had Lydon it has enough scoring to beat Duke and Kansas in the tournament.

Bazley is Lamar Odom on the Lakers. He is a 3rd option next year but has elite playmaking skills who can do a little of everything. However he isn't going to dominate. I have watched a lot of his games. He can't be the guy next year or we are in trouble.

 

[Brooky03]

You don't need to be special, or elite, you just need the offensive spacing 4 shooting threats provide.

North Carolina and South Carolina didn't have that last year either. When UNC had Luke Maye on the court, he was the 3rd shooter, not the 4th because he'd usually be paired with a non-shooting forward or guard.

Like I said, you need 3 guys on the court at all times who are threats from deep. More than that is nice. But putting in a 15ppg interior scorer at PF is at least just as valuable as a 15ppg shooter at PF, given the typical tradeoffs that come with that. A 'tradional PF' (long an athletic, not fat and slow) can usually defend the paint better, finish better at the rim, rebound better, etc. compared to a stretch 4. Typically. If we're saying we need a PF who does all the above, then we're having a useless argument, cuz duh.

 

[kuethstheman]

3 point shooting needs to improve

Ya think?

 

[Cusefan0307]

If you had UNC's bigs or Duke's bigs this year you can get away with being an average to below average shooting team. Duke needed to play like UNC this year. Allen took way too many shots for them and it hurt them. We haven't had many seasons where we had elite scoring bigs. Rak's senior year and when Jackson/Onuaku were here.

We've seen how hard it is to score when you can't shoot and have no bigs who can score. This year and 2014 are the main examples.

 

[rrlbees]

Actually, Bazley looks more like a 3 to me than a 4. He's got a pretty decent outside shot. Maybe not elite, but enough to be a threat. But generally I agree that we need more shooting. That's why the 2017 team should have been so much better.

I know Doelzaj did a nice job late in the season at the foul line when teams zoned us, but when teams zone us next year, I see Bazley being a gem at that spot. Can turn and shoot it, savvy enough passer to make the right play, and can pump fake and go around his man to the basket.

 

[longislandcuse]

North Carolina and South Carolina didn't have that last year either. When UNC had Luke Maye on the court, he was the 3rd shooter, not the 4th because he'd usually be paired with a non-shooting forward or guard.

Like I said, you need 3 guys on the court at all times who are threats from deep. More than that is nice. But putting in a 15ppg interior scorer at PF is at least just as valuable as a 15ppg shooter at PF, given the typical tradeoffs that come with that. A 'tradional PF' (long an athletic, not fat and slow) can usually defend the paint better, finish better at the rim, rebound better, etc. compared to a stretch 4. Typically. If we're saying we need a PF who does all the above, then we're having a useless argument, cuz duh.

Yes, you "can" make a run without 4 shooters but it's far more likely to make a run with 4 shooters than it is 3.

If we had a 4th shooter, we're Top 25 all year and a Final 4 team. We didn't, and we almost made it when Marek at least developed a mid-range shot in the tourney.

I think that gap will grow more and more as time goes on. Traditional 4's and 5's are dinosaur ball.

 

[Brooky03]

If you had UNC's bigs or Duke's bigs this year you can get away with being an average to below average shooting team. Duke needed to play like UNC this year. Allen took way too many shots for them and it hurt them. We haven't had many seasons where we had elite scoring bigs. Rak's senior year and when Jackson/Onuaku were here.

We've seen how hard it is to score when you can't shoot and have no bigs who can score. This year and 2014 are the main examples.

So you're really just saying you can't have a non-scoring PF on the court?

 

[Brooky03]

Yes, you "can" make a run without 4 shooters but it's far more likely to make a run with 4 shooters than it is 3.

If we had a 4th shooter, we're Top 25 all year and a Final 4 team. We didn't, and we almost made it when Marek at least developed a mid-range shot in the tourney.

I think that gap will grow more and more as time goes on. Traditional 4's and 5's are dinosaur ball.

We had 4 shooters when we had White, Lydon, Gillon and Battle. We kind of sucked that year.

 

[Alsacs]

Yes, you "can" make a run without 4 shooters but it's far more likely to make a run with 4 shooters than it is 3.

If we had a 4th shooter, we're Top 25 all year and a Final 4 team. We didn't, and we almost made it when Marek at least developed a mid-range shot in the tourney.

I think that gap will grow more and more as time goes on. Traditional 4's and 5's are dinosaur ball.

Put Lydon on this team in the tournament its playing next weekend.

His stretching the floor puts another shooter on the floor and when our guards go ISO an outlet on their penetration.

You need shooting nowadays. It doesn'tmean teams that shoot well aren't going to go cold. Villanova went cold yesterday in the second half but their team was so diverse in scoring ability they were able to win.

North Carolina last year had Justin Jackson, Kennedy Meeks, Isiah Hicks, and Tony Bradley down low with Luke Maye as their 5th big option. They still had shooting in Nate Britt, Theo Pinson, and Joel Berry.

That team didn't need as much shooting because they offensively rebounded so many of their misses. Teams nowadays don't keep their bigs as much as UNC did. They were atypical. We had Derrick Coleman and Billy Owens play 2 years together and didn't have much shooting on those teams but because they could rebound our scoring was fine.

Nowadays teams turnover their rosters so much if you want to be good long term you need to recruit shooting.

 

[Cusefan0307]

We had 4 shooters when we had White, Lydon, Gillon and Battle. We kind of sucked that year.

You still need to play defense. South Carolina and UNC were recent FF outliers.

We can't get away with Roberson's playing PF anymore. You seem to argue this every offseason.

 

[Alsacs]

We had 4 shooters when we had White, Lydon, Gillon and Battle. We kind of sucked that year.

If that team switched Roberson with this year's Chuwku its a scary good team. We had no interior defense last year and Gillon was so small the zone was shredded.
It didn't cover the ground a typical Syracuse zone can.
That team also beat Virginia, Duke, Florida State at home last year. All top 25 teams.

 

[Trueblue25]

Howard and Brissett will markedly improve if surrounded by other competent offensive threats.

I think a title run, if possible, hinges on how much attention Hughes and Carey can draw from defenses.

 

[Brooky03]

You still need to play defense. South Carolina and UNC were recent FF outliers.

We can't get away with Roberson's playing PF anymore. You seem to argue this every offseason.

So we need more scorers, which we agree on. I'm happy with a Hakim Warrick type at PF. You'd rather have a Tyler Lydon type.

The idea that your PF has to step behind the arc for a better offense or for better spacing just doesn't ring true, imo. Teams managed to space themselves out just fine for 1 billion years with 3 shooters on the court. m2m defense hasn't changed in 2 billion years. So I don't know why the spacing would be any different.

 

[Cusefan0307]

So we need more scorers, which we agree on. I'm happy with a Hakim Warrick type at PF. You'd rather have a Tyler Lydon type.

The idea that your PF has to step behind the arc for a better offense or for better spacing just doesn't ring true, imo. Teams managed to space themselves out just fine for 1 billion years with 3 shooters on the court. m2m defense hasn't changed in 2 billion years. So I don't know why the spacing would be any different.

The problem is we have Chukwu. Hard to play a non shooting 4 with someone who can't score at the 5. The game has changed. More teams are shooting more 3's. You want to play a 1990's offense. That doesn't seem smart.

 

[Brooky03]

If that team switched Roberson with this year's Chuwku its a scary good team. We had no interior defense last year and Gillon was so small the zone was shredded.
It didn't cover the ground a typical Syracuse zone can.
That team also beat Virginia, Duke, Florida State at home last year. All top 25 teams.

And lost to St. John's, among other atrocious teams. That's the kind of inconsistency you tend to see with teams that rely on the deep ball. Can beat anyone, can lose to anyone.

Teams that rely on 3 point shooting tend to defend poorly. We see that with the current crop of Final Four teams. It's a trade-off. Are there outliers? Of course, but a PF who shoots 3's is usually small and mediocre at a handful of other things. Usually.

It isn't a requirement to have positions 1-4 shoot the ball well from behind the arc. It's a requirement to have 4 capable scorers on the court. A PF doesn't need to be proficient from deep to be an offensive powerhouse. And PF's who are adept interior scorers are more common than PF's who are strong outside shooters also capable of doing other things at an acceptable level.

 

[Knicks411]

So we need more scorers, which we agree on. I'm happy with a Hakim Warrick type at PF. You'd rather have a Tyler Lydon type.

The idea that your PF has to step behind the arc for a better offense or for better spacing just doesn't ring true, imo. Teams managed to space themselves out just fine for 1 billion years with 3 shooters on the court. m2m defense hasn't changed in 2 billion years. So I don't know why the spacing would be any different.

Part of it is because every other team is shooting more 3's. The average team take 37.5% of their shots from 3 now, when we won the title in 2003, it was 32.1%. Average offensive efficiency in 2003 was 102.1, it's 105.2 now. Teams are scoring more, you gotta keep up.

The problem is we have Chukwu. Hard to play a non shooting 4 with someone who can't score at the 5. The game has changed. More teams are shooting more 3's. You want to play a 1990's offense. That doesn't seem smart.

That's really the key. Obviously there's no hard and fast rule like you need x guys to shoot the 3 at y%, but the game continues to trend toward more and more shooting/spacing. Playing 2 guys who don't really have much of a game outside 10 feet is one thing when they are two lotto picks like Bagley and Carter (and btw, Bagley was 23-58, 39.7% from 3 and Carter was 19-46, 41/3%. not huge volume but they can make it) and something else when one of them literally looks to pass out when he catches the ball and cna't dunk it right away (and sometimes even looks to pass when he can)

 

[Brooky03]

The problem is we have Chukwu. Hard to play a non shooting 4 with someone who can't score at the 5. The game has changed. More teams are shooting more 3's. You want to play a 1990's offense. That doesn't seem smart.

That's just not true. The PF has to be able to score, as I've said. He just doesn't have to do that scoring from behind the arc. That's not to imply he needs to be a post-up specialist.