Well that’s a relief, can’t take another year like the present. In the words of Kramer, we have a bunch of chuckers....
I guess it depends on the definition of Chuckers. I see a chucker as a guy that shoots, no matter what. Given how good our guys are at attacking the rim/paint, it is easy to view any perimeter shot as a lost opportunity to attack the rim, and thus we have "chuckers." I don't see it that way. I have seen very very few "bad" shots. Even those taken early in the position were, by and large, good looks. We are getting a lot of good looks at three because we aren't hitting them. And because teams would prefer to guard the paint as much as possible. But if they are going to give us wide open threes, we have to take them.
.
Some folks here seem to be of the opinion that a way to cut down on three point misses would simply be to take far, far few of them. Which would be effective in cutting down on misses, to be sure. But after a few games of not taking many threes, there would be 3-4 defenders in the paint at all times, RJ and Zion are great, but that many defenders would cut down on passing lanes, there would be that many more hands bothering drives, and that many more defenders contesting passes. Zion is at his best when he has to take 1, or zero, dribbles. If the opposing teams can restrict the paint enough, they will make Zion catch the ball further out, and he'll be less effective vs a more crowded lane. Ditto RJ.
.
There is no other fix (such that one is needed on this team). We don't need to take fewer threes. We have taken very few selfish or stupid threes. Most have barely been guarded. We'd have been thrilled to see Grayson, or Luke, or Tatum, or Ingram get this many open looks. So our guys are taking shots that are good looks.
.
We simply have to start making a higher percentage of them on a consistent basis. That will keep defenses from loading up on the paint.
