Shooting: What do you do, mid-game, to improve it?

[dukestheheat]

Clearly, our longer shots (3 balls) were not falling up at Michigan. We got many open looks and it just wasn't happening. I do not think that Michigan's defense tied up Duke so much as we just couldn't get the shot down.

So much of shooting a basketball is mental. It's like a game within a game. You see this on the free throw line all the time!

So my question is this: when you can see that your team isn't hitting the long shot, what can you do to help with that? It's not a lack of effort on the part of the shooter, I don't think, or is it? (We gave the effort needed, I think, most of the game, on offense and on defense).

Also, I actually felt good about being down by 2 at the half; I knew we were 2/18 on 3s and we usually hit 1/3 of them (shooting 32% from 3 range), so missing 12 points that we'd normally have and only being down like we were, especially not getting to the free throw line, I just didn't worry about Duke at the half.

So what do you do to help other guys on the team start hitting what we'd normally hit? More picks? Screens? Closer shots? What?

curious,

dukestheheat

[Cdog923]

Get to the free throw line. Just watching shots fall increases confidence.

[elvis14]

I say take shorter shots. This includes taking the ball strong to the hoop and getting to the foul line. If the 3's aren't falling shoot something else.

[ohioguy2]

Unfortunately the defense is almost always opposed to giving shorter shots to you as an option to improving your shooting. This, of course, is one of the reasons teams play zone--make you shoot from outside. Getting to the free throw line is also a good goal and really is a good way to gain confidence for some shooters. Again, however, zone defenses seldom allow penetration enough to put you on the line a significant amount. The conventional wisdom of zone breaking includes getting the ball down the floor quickly enough to attack before the zone sets up, or moving the ball quickly enough (reversing or skip passing) to break the zone down allowing you to attack the basket(perhaps getting you to the line).

Breaking shooting slumps mid game is tough--in practice I always told my players that they needed the Larry Bird mindset--I explained the "eye of the assassin" look that Bird always had. Many shooters have fragile mind sets--if they start thinking too much or hesitating things go poorly. :(

[OZZIE4DUKE]

Many shooters have fragile mind sets--if they start thinking too much or hesitating things go poorly. :(

And you could see the hesitation in several of our players as the game wore on, not taking open shots that normally they would have, shots K encourages them to take.

At least they started falling late. Too late to save that game, but in plenty of time to save the next game.

[jlear]

I have alway thought the motion offense with drives to the basket was the best offense, too much reliance on the 3 (as bread and butter) will kill you sooner or later. Remember when Jason Williams teams struggled on offense? Jason drove the ball striaght to the rim for a layup to get the offense going again.

We have guys that can drive and finish strong, even in traffic. Sure we will get some blocked and take some charges, but we will also get to the line to take some practice shots that count. Taking a lot of outside shots is a passive offensive, in my opinion, attack the rim. Our defense is as aggresive as possible, how about an offense to match.

[dukelifer]

So what do you do to help other guys on the team start hitting what we'd normally hit? More picks? Screens? Closer shots? What?

curious,

dukestheheat

Seems like if coaches could figure that out- there would not be off nights. Part of the problem is that often the bad threes can lead to easy shots on the other end and the pressure mounts. It seems as if players shoot better when they don't think- but I am not sure this has ever been really analyzed. The drive and kick out seems to be more effective than the wide open shot in the corner with a ton of time too shoot. You also tend to see more efficient shooting in the waning moments of a game when players do not have much time. I would bet that the Duke players are more effective in the drive and kick-but I do not know if there are any data to support that.

[miramar]

European players can throw up threes at any time, but Americans do it as part of a motion offense. When the threes aren't dropping, it's often because the offense isn't working properly, which seemed to happen against Michigan. Rather than working for a good shot, Duke seemed to be rushing their threes. Better ball movement, especially with the skip pass, usually helps.

The difference between the two Michigan games was pretty stark. In the first game, Duke was able to beat the 1-3-1 trapping defense and find the holes in the zone with good passes. In the second game, Michigan seemed to be swarming the perimeter and Duke had trouble penetrating that first line of defense.

[Devilsfan]

Nothing at half time. How about all summer? There must be some more two guards like Davidson has somewhere on the planet.

[RelativeWays]

I don't like that we've been shooting a lot of threes as our 1st offensive option, I'd really rather see the ball be moved around some before the trigger is pulled. I know the 1-3-1 is supposed to stop the dribble drive because the middle is clogged, but the baseline and top of the key are vulnerable. Perhaps more of a motion offense would help free up people not just on the baseline, but 15 footers as well.

[Kfanarmy]

I simply have a hard time believing that Michigan's interior defense was overwhelming in the interior...when you are shooting more than 65%, as I remember they did, from inside, the defense isn't preventing scoring...it was tough to get in there and guys simply stopped going in, relying on what were wide open threes...the 3's didn't fall and the team didn't force themselves inside where they were shooting a pretty high percentage...whatever happened to taking 8-12' shoots anyway? if Duke shoots 35% from three the team runs away with this game, for some reason it didn't happen and I gotta believe Coach K had it right, they were overly impacted by the academic schedule...if you're going to fall, meeting a good academic curriculum is as good a reason as I can think of...though I had hoped Sophs and Jrs would have been a bit more energetic.

[Mike Corey]

So what do you do to help other guys on the team start hitting what we'd normally hit? More picks? Screens? Closer shots? What?


It depends on who is missing shots.

If it's one of your most reliable perimeter shooters, then the answer tends to be, "Keep shooting!"

If it's one of your slashers, then the answer tends to be, "Keep shooting! But attack the basket and make something happen!"

If it's one of your post players, then the answer tends to be, "Keep shooting! But attack the basket so either you can score or open up things for our perimeter players!"

It's not unlike the situation for a football team that is having a hard time passing the football. That doesn't mean you stop passing. But you can open up the passing game by successfully running the football. You force the opposing team to commit more consciously to stopping you from moving the ball on the ground, which means they have to commit less energy to stopping the pass...which hopefully makes it easier to move the ball in the air.

In Duke's case against M*chigan, the Wolverines protected against us attacking the basket or scoring quick buckets in transition.

Our shooters kept shooting. But our slashers and post players didn't attack the basket enough--or succesfully enough--nor did our shooters hit the open shots that our slashing/passing oft-made available. It happens.

As many people here and elsewhere have noted--and as Jay Bilas observed during the game--we weren't shooting free throws Saturday. (Nor was M*chigan.)

But Duke's success in the K era has always relied in considerable part on free throw shooting. More specifically, it's relied on making more free throws than our opponents have taken.

Saturday, we were 4 of 6 from the line. M*chigan was 18 of 22.

Prior to Saturday, we were 180-242 from the line.

Our opponents were 115-166 from the line.

[Lord Ash]

A lot of folks (and Jay really seemed to mention this a lot during the Michigan game, even at times when I wasn't sure it was accurate) think that simply getting near the hoop and getting the guys a few easy buckets, just to see the ball go through the hoop, will help with the mental game. It sounds a little simple to me, but people smarter than I am have suggested it:)

[greybeard]

I didn't watch, did my man Marty get a chance?

Mostly, when one's shot isn't falling, one looks to do something to control the game in some other way. Bill Bradley, who ran around on offense like a mad man anyway (think rip Hamilton on uppers), would put it in overdrive. Wear people down, make them defend him on cuts, etc, and, when a teammate scored and Bradley's guy wasn't there to help, score one for Bradley too. Then you fit back into the rhythm of the game.

Mostly, my guess is Duke guys try to impact more on defense, to make a few plays on that end. Here, and I'm guessing because I didn't see the game, Beilein's offensive preparation might have taken that route away, so a guy who might have been off was unable to make the kind of defensive play that would recapture a sense of control, rhythm for him. Just a guess, like I said.

I'd like to see Marty get a chance in such circumstances. The kid has the potential to come off the bench blazing. He knocks down a few, and tosses a few high passes with touch that allows Z to make an athletic play and follow through to the rim, and voila, the zone loses its shape and outward focus. They no longer can give what they were giving, and must adjust to Duke's having figured it out. Potential momentum shifter. Who knows. Like I said, circumstances prevented me from watching.

[gep]

A lot of folks (and Jay really seemed to mention this a lot during the Michigan game, even at times when I wasn't sure it was accurate) think that simply getting near the hoop and getting the guys a few easy buckets, just to see the ball go through the hoop, will help with the mental game. It sounds a little simple to me, but people smarter than I am have suggested it:)

I thought it was Larry Bird (or someone talking about Bird) who said it.. when his outside shot is not falling, he tries to get fouled, so he can get to the line and "feel" the ball going through the hoop... which then supposedly helps his outside shot again:rolleyes:

[Jeffrey]

I didn't watch, did my man Marty get a chance?

I'd like to see Marty get a chance in such circumstances. The kid has the potential to come off the bench blazing.

Hi,

Yes, he did, and, no, he didn't.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

[dukelifer]

At least that is what Stephen Curry did tonight. Couldn't buy a bucket for 37 minutes and then takes over. Great shooters just keep shooting.

[loran16]

At least that is what Stephen Curry did tonight. Couldn't buy a bucket for 37 minutes and then takes over. Great shooters just keep shooting.

Gotta agree here. What you dont' do is force shots out of frustration when you're not open.

But UM left us wide open a large amount of the time. There was no problem with TAKING those shots. Missing them was another story.

Curry's game tonight is a prime example. He couldn't hit the side of a barn for half the game. But he kept trying, and eventually he led his team for the win.

[elvis14]

Hi,

Yes, he did, and, no, he didn't.

Best regards,
Jeffrey

Marty came off the bench. He played 4 minutes, made 1 of 3 shots (all 3's). Considering how others were playing in this game, I would have liked it if Marty got more PT. So no he wasn't "blazing" but he did well enough to stay out there longer than he did (you can cut and paste a comment about shortening the bench in close games here!).

[miramar]

Marty was gunning the threes, but he was open and he was active on offense. He probably deserved some PT in the second half. Plus, as we know, Marty doesn't foul.

[jv001]

Marty was gunning the threes, but he was open and he was active on offense. He probably deserved some PT in the second half. Plus, as we know, Marty doesn't foul.

Yes Marty was 1 for 3 from 3 point territory and that's 33%. If we shoot 33% for the game as a team we win. I also would like to have seen Marty play a little more in that game, but pt is earned in practice. Go Duke!

[tele]

They're called high percentage shots for a reason.

[DukeDevilDeb]

I didn't watch, did my man Marty get a chance?

I'd like to see Marty get a chance in such circumstances. The kid has the potential to come off the bench blazing. He knocks down a few, and tosses a few high passes with touch that allows Z to make an athletic play and follow through to the rim, and voila, the zone loses its shape and outward focus. They no longer can give what they were giving, and must adjust to Duke's having figured it out. Potential momentum shifter. Who knows. Like I said, circumstances prevented me from watching.

Marty came in, played for a minute or two, then tossed up a brick of a three just like the others had been doing. All told in his 4 minutes, Marty shot 3 3s and made 1. Yes, that's 33% shooting, but it wasn't enough to get us moving again.

Given the number of 3s Kyle missed, I would really have liked him to try to go inside. And it hurt in the first half that G was on the bench in foul trouble. Kyle was 6 for 17 overall and 1 for 9 from outside the circle. Seems to me that somewhere around the 4th miss from 3 point range, it would have occurred to him that a different strategy might be more effect!:(

[greybeard]

My Georgetown guy says the way GT beat Beilein's 1-3-1 was by configuring so that the little in the back was on his own against a GT big situated near the basket and to throw it high to the big.

I still think that it is possible that Duke as a team is reluctant to throw it inside unless they see a stable presence. Z, I think, functions best in a stance of instability; he does not seal and hold, at least not very long. But, from his upright stance, he does let you know where he wants the ball and I think it likely that he has a plan to take it from there. Maybe his teammates should let him call the plays, which means trusting him because the windows of opportunity he creates are relatively small. Perhaps the windows are illusory, but I'd give him a chance. As of yet, I do not see that happening enough. I see the guy with the ball waiting until he assessed whether he agreed with Z's read. At which point my old basketball coach would scream, "he who hesitates is lost." "But coach, I thought . . .", the kid would start to reply, only to be interrupted with, "Don't think, you ain't built for it." The ball went inside.

[greybeard]

My Georgetown guy says the way GT beat Beilein's 1-3-1 was by configuring so that the little in the back was on his own against a GT big situated near the basket and to throw it high to the big.

I still think that it is possible that Duke as a team is reluctant to throw it inside unless they see a stable presence. Z, I think, functions best in a stance of instability; he does not seal and hold, at least not very long. But, from his upright stance, he does let you know where he wants the ball and I think it likely that he has a plan to take it from there. Maybe his teammates should let him call the plays, which means trusting him because the windows of opportunity he creates are relatively small. Perhaps the windows are illusory, but I'd give him a chance. As of yet, I do not see that happening enough. I see the guy with the ball waiting until he assessed whether he agreed with Z's read. At which point my old basketball coach would scream, "he who hesitates is lost." "But coach, I thought . . .", the kid would start to reply, only to be interrupted with, "Don't think, you ain't built for it." The ball went inside.

Ain't that right Matt!