The real advantage GMAC had vertically was in his jump shot. He had tremendous lift. Joe has almost none. GMAC would shoot over guys that were taller than him.
Joe doesn’t take those shots, he just backs up farther.
Yeah, you’re probably right. UConn and Pitt really roughed him up though. Knight and Price were tough defenders. I’m not sure Joe has faced that kind of pressure 5-6 games in a season.I'd add ball handling isnt close either. I rewatched the Big East tourney games vs UConn and GTown recently. The way he created open looks off basically pushing the ball, stopping and popping was amazing.
Yeah, you’re probably right. UConn and Pitt really roughed him up though. Knight and Price were tough defenders. I’m not sure Joe has faced that kind of pressure 5-6 games in a season.
Lift is a factor. I think as big a factor is GMac’s release point. His arms were very high. Joe has a little bit more conventional, comparatively lower, release point.
I think Joe’s a good rebounder because of his football days. He doesn’t shy away from contact and he can be aggressive.
Then wouldn't that help him finish better?
You can google pictures of him taking a normal jumper where he has to be 24-28 inches off the ground with perfect form.So I don't have film on it but my HS buddy and classmate was 6-6 and had a 7-1 wingspan while also a good athlete /solid vertical. We played in the same level of Hoops as Bishop Hannan and thus played GMacs team twice on the season. In the game on our court, which we won because he had foul trouble and an ankle issue in the 4th, Gerry was bringing it up and my buddy D'd him up as we played a 3/4 court press and he beat the two guards. Gerry had options but instead wanted the shot. All of 6-0 he came straight up and lifted up and over even with my buddy getting a decent jump to bury a deep 3. The whole damn gym had their jaws on the floor. The lift on his jumper was just ridiculous. I've been to a lot games at all levels and maybe have seen up close that kind of lift on a deep 3 a handful of times.
If you watch the state semifinals/finals he had a couple more similar shots that reminded me of that. Still can't get over that play.
I think Joe has a better approach and I bet gmac would do it the same way if he were 20 years younger. Players these days are releasing the ball on the way up, the jump is just to give you a little more power on longer shots and letting it go earlier helps get the shot off before you need to get it over somebody. I read a book recently where the guy talks about european players doing what he called an elevation shot - cross between a set shot and jump shot (adam filippi, he thanks boeheim in the book)The real advantage GMAC had vertically was in his jump shot. He had tremendous lift. Joe has almost none. GMAC would shoot over guys that were taller than him.
Joe doesn’t take those shots, he just backs up farther.
Then wouldn't that help him finish better?
no way to prove this but his runners were terrible shots. too low percentage. i blame the drop in 3 pt shooting on fatigue. his actual skill shooting them didn't decline.GMac chucked up a lot of shots out of necessity in his junior and senior seasons because that class of 03 took a long time to get started (if they ever did)
I would argue that is why his numbers went down after his soph season. And I would assume that Girards best year vs gmacs best year are not overly similar.
gmac 89% ft, shooter joe 85%Both had to play PG and would have been much more productive playing off the ball. If Edelin is around for all 4 years, GMACs shooting pct is probably 4-5 points higher.
Joe gets more rebounds because his supporting cast were terrible rebounders. But I also think he seeks them more as well.
Gerry’s shooting Pct are worse because his supporting cast were terrible shooters. Gerry never had a season where he was the third option from deep. He would have been lights out if he had as many open looks as Joe got last year.
But having watched them both….there is no comparison in my book. GMACs game sense and defense were so much higher. And as we all know….down three, final possession…GMAC is #1 years on just about everybody’s list of who you want taking it in SU modern history.
gmac 89% ft, shooter joe 85%
i still think that's the best way to judge shooters. takes away a million confounding variables. if you look at the nba top 50, it sure likes like a list of the best shooters
old espn article talking about elevation shot, launch angle for lack of a better term and one motion vs two motion shooting
basically shoot over people by shooting faster with a higher arc which makes the basket appear bigger from the perspective of the ball
NBA: Breaking down Curry's perfect shot
In ESPN The Magazine's One Day One Game Issue, David Fleming writes that Golden State's Stephen Curry is short, skinny, deadly -- and he's reinventing shooting before our eyes.www.espn.com
Don't agree. I think Tyus was one of my least favorite lead scorers in probably the last 20 years (certainly biased because they were also some of the worst offensive squads).No doubt about it. I would put Tyus Battle as the second most clutch player of the Boeheim era.
I'm talking just clutch moments, specifically. Besides GMac, I can't think of another player that has the volume of huge shots in the last 20-30 seconds of ballgames than Battle.Don't agree. I think Tyus was one of my least favorite lead scorers in probably the last 20 years (certainly biased because they were also some of the worst offensive squads).
Attempted? Or made?I'm talking just clutch moments, specifically. Besides GMac, I can't think of another player that has the volume of huge shots in the last 20-30 seconds of ballgames than Battle.
Definitely made.Attempted? Or made?
I think Sherm was about 95% on those floaters from the right elbow in late game situations. But yeah, the number of players with multiple game-winning or game tying baskets is small.I'm talking just clutch moments, specifically. Besides GMac, I can't think of another player that has the volume of huge shots in the last 20-30 seconds of ballgames than Battle.