Praise for RK and our team from Luke Winn

[wilson]

If you don't regularly read Luke Winn's work at SI.com, I highly recommend that you start. His is among the most incisive statistical and tactical commentary out there (I wish he'd try his hand at broadcast sometime, because I think he'd make a great color analyst). In this week's SI power rankings, he makes the case that "calling [Ryan] Kelly a game-changer isn't hyperbole," and that "he completely alters the way Duke opponents can play help defense (or double-team) in the post." Typically solid analysis from one of my favorite college hoops writers out there.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20130306/college-basketball-power-rankings/#ixzz2MrwPDZl2

[Mudge]

If you don't regularly read Luke Winn's work at SI.com, I highly recommend that you start. His is among the most incisive statistical and tactical commentary out there (I wish he'd try his hand at broadcast sometime, because I think he'd make a great color analyst). In this week's SI power rankings, he makes the case that "calling [Ryan] Kelly a game-changer isn't hyperbole," and that "he completely alters the way Duke opponents can play help defense (or double-team) in the post." Typically solid analysis from one of my favorite college hoops writers out there.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-basketball/news/20130306/college-basketball-power-rankings/#ixzz2MrwPDZl2

Your kudos to Luke Winn are well-founded-- the analysis in that article is top-rate... the screen shot pictures analyzing the difference in Miami trying to defend Duke and Mason Plumlee with and without Ryan Kelly on the floor were outstanding-- talk about a picture being worth a 1000 words!

On a separate topic, after reading the rest of Winn's analysis of various players on other Top 16 teams, I wonder what Luke Winn's "radar plot" for Josh Hairston's shots would look like-- I have a feeling that it would show a distribution dominated by long two-point shots (and not just long ones-- reeeeaaaallly long ones-- virtually all of them with Hairston's feet straddling the three-point arc), and virtually no actual three-point shots... one wonders why Hairston has chosen to (try to) master the shot which Rick Pitino long ago called "the worst shot in basketball"... it's not as if Hairston is particularly good at it, or anything-- he just seems to prefer spotting up on the floor exactly six inches too close to get the benefit of the extra point, in the event that he actually does make the shot (a rare occurrence, I know, but still, at least try to maximize the expected points/shot attempt). Ideally, I'd prefer that Hairston took no long shots at all (meaning more than three feet from the basket, for him), and confined himself to issuing his de rigueur primal scream, as he elevates two to four inches off the floor, underneath the basket in frustrated pursuit of another rebound.

[Kedsy]

On a separate topic, after reading the rest of Winn's analysis of various players on other Top 16 teams, I wonder what Luke Winn's "radar plot" for Josh Hairston's shots would look like-- I have a feeling that it would show a distribution dominated by long two-point shots (and not just long ones-- reeeeaaaallly long ones-- virtually all of them with Hairston's feet straddling the three-point arc), and virtually no actual three-point shots... one wonders why Hairston has chosen to (try to) master the shot which Rick Pitino long ago called "the worst shot in basketball"... it's not as if Hairston is particularly good at it, or anything-- he just seems to prefer spotting up on the floor exactly six inches too close to get the benefit of the extra point, in the event that he actually does make the shot (a rare occurrence, I know, but still, at least try to maximize the expected points/shot attempt). Ideally, I'd prefer that Hairston took no long shots at all (meaning more than three feet from the basket, for him), and confined himself to issuing his de rigueur primal scream, as he elevates two to four inches off the floor, underneath the basket in frustrated pursuit of another rebound.

Some players have better court vision than others, meaning they can see or instinctively know where their teammates are at all (or at least at most) times. This isn't Josh's best skill, however. I believe he takes those long shots because (a) when he gets the ball he can't necessarily see a pass that would lead to a score; and (b) let's face it, he's usually wide open. Perhaps what he needs to do is set up to receive a pass further in toward the basket, or maybe realize that if he gets the ball 18 feet from the basket and he doesn't see a pass that would lead to a score, he can just reset and pass the ball around the perimeter instead of shooting every time (even if he is wide open). Having said all that, my guess is he makes that shot a lot in practice, and if the coaching staff really didn't want him to take it they'd tell him so and if he persisted he wouldn't play as much as he does.

Also, thanks to Wilson for linking the Luke Winn article. I always enjoy reading his stuff.

[roywhite]

Your kudos to Luke Winn are well-founded-- the analysis in that article is top-rate... the screen shot pictures analyzing the difference in Miami trying to defend Duke and Mason Plumlee with and without Ryan Kelly on the floor were outstanding-- talk about a picture being worth a 1000 words!

On a separate topic, after reading the rest of Winn's analysis of various players on other Top 16 teams, I wonder what Luke Winn's "radar plot" for Josh Hairston's shots would look like-- I have a feeling that it would show a distribution dominated by long two-point shots (and not just long ones-- reeeeaaaallly long ones-- virtually all of them with Hairston's feet straddling the three-point arc), and virtually no actual three-point shots... one wonders why Hairston has chosen to (try to) master the shot which Rick Pitino long ago called "the worst shot in basketball"... it's not as if Hairston is particularly good at it, or anything-- he just seems to prefer spotting up on the floor exactly six inches too close to get the benefit of the extra point, in the event that he actually does make the shot (a rare occurrence, I know, but still, at least try to maximize the expected points/shot attempt). Ideally, I'd prefer that Hairston took no long shots at all (meaning more than three feet from the basket, for him), and confined himself to issuing his de rigueur primal scream, as he elevates two to four inches off the floor, underneath the basket in frustrated pursuit of another rebound.

A little rough on Josh. I admit to yelling at him from my couch during games and wish that he had more skill.
Still, his effort, enthusiasm, and regard for his teammates are terrific.

As he got more playing time during Ryan's absence, Josh got more comfortable in some respects. I don't mind the jump shot of 15' or so; it's an open shot, and if he hits one or two of them, the defense has to play him more honestly. Yeah, not crazy about the 19-ft jump shot. Josh also hits the offensive boards pretty well sometimes. His tip-ins have been very positive plays for us.

[MCFinARL]

A little rough on Josh. I admit to yelling at him from my couch during games and wish that he had more skill.
Still, his effort, enthusiasm, and regard for his teammates are terrific.

As he got more playing time during Ryan's absence, Josh got more comfortable in some respects. I don't mind the jump shot of 15' or so; it's an open shot, and if he hits one or two of them, the defense has to play him more honestly. Yeah, not crazy about the 19-ft jump shot. Josh also hits the offensive boards pretty well sometimes. His tip-ins have been very positive plays for us.

Agree with this. Relying solely on the eye test, I think Josh has as many tip-ins as anyone on the team this year, and several of them have come at important times in games.

[The Gordog]

Your kudos to Luke Winn are well-founded-- the analysis in that article is top-rate... the screen shot pictures analyzing the difference in Miami trying to defend Duke and Mason Plumlee with and without Ryan Kelly on the floor were outstanding-- talk about a picture being worth a 1000 words!

On a separate topic, after reading the rest of Winn's analysis of various players on other Top 16 teams, I wonder what Luke Winn's "radar plot" for Josh Hairston's shots would look like-- I have a feeling that it would show a distribution dominated by long two-point shots (and not just long ones-- reeeeaaaallly long ones-- virtually all of them with Hairston's feet straddling the three-point arc), and virtually no actual three-point shots... one wonders why Hairston has chosen to (try to) master the shot which Rick Pitino long ago called "the worst shot in basketball"... it's not as if Hairston is particularly good at it, or anything-- he just seems to prefer spotting up on the floor exactly six inches too close to get the benefit of the extra point, in the event that he actually does make the shot (a rare occurrence, I know, but still, at least try to maximize the expected points/shot attempt). Ideally, I'd prefer that Hairston took no long shots at all (meaning more than three feet from the basket, for him), and confined himself to issuing his de rigueur primal scream, as he elevates two to four inches off the floor, underneath the basket in frustrated pursuit of another rebound.

That's just mean. And not at all true.

[Son of Jarhead]

Having said all that, my guess is he makes that shot a lot in practice, and if the coaching staff really didn't want him to take it they'd tell him so and if he persisted he wouldn't play as much as he does.

That has been my take on Josh's taking of those jump shots, too. He must have shown that he can hit them in practice and his coaches & teammates have told him to take them with confidence. Not once have I seen any coach or player get on him when he has taken that shot. If they have faith in him, so should we. The more he played (in Ryan's absense), the more comfortable and into the flow of the game he got, and then he actually hit a few of them. His form is not bad, but with Josh, I think it is a matter of confidence and comfort out on the court.

[gam7]

That has been my take on Josh's taking of those jump shots, too. He must have shown that he can hit them in practice and his coaches & teammates have told him to take them with confidence. Not once have I seen any coach or player get on him when he has taken that shot. If they have faith in him, so should we. The more he played (in Ryan's absense), the more comfortable and into the flow of the game he got, and then he actually hit a few of them. His form is not bad, but with Josh, I think it is a matter of confidence and comfort out on the court.

He's hit those long jumpers in seasons past too. If I recall, people seemed surprised at how consistent he was with that shot considering that it's pretty flat. Only this season, when he hasn't been hitting it as consistently are people questioning it. It's not a terrible shot for him.

[Li_Duke]

That has been my take on Josh's taking of those jump shots, too. He must have shown that he can hit them in practice and his coaches & teammates have told him to take them with confidence. Not once have I seen any coach or player get on him when he has taken that shot. If they have faith in him, so should we. The more he played (in Ryan's absense), the more comfortable and into the flow of the game he got, and then he actually hit a few of them. His form is not bad, but with Josh, I think it is a matter of confidence and comfort out on the court.

I doubt Coach K puts Josh in for his offense. When he is in there for offense, he needs to be able to at least somewhat space the floor (otherwise we're just playing 4 on 5). So while I agree that the long 2s aren't the most efficient shots in the game, I'm pretty sure having Mason shoot while double-teamed is even less efficient.

I agree with BuschDevil that he must be hitting them in practice, and he has the backing of his coaches/teammates on taking them. Who knows, maybe this shooting from further and further out is designed so that eventually he'll be an effective enough 3pt shooter. I can remember us cringing whenever Thornton shot the ball the past 2 years, but he's developed enough that we're ok with it now. Same with Lance Thomas his senior year (Butler dared him to shoot long 2s multiple times in the championship game and he drained them).

[Mudge]

He's hit those long jumpers in seasons past too. If I recall, people seemed surprised at how consistent he was with that shot considering that it's pretty flat. Only this season, when he hasn't been hitting it as consistently are people questioning it. It's not a terrible shot for him.

But that's exactly Pitino's point-- it IS a terrible shot-- for ANYONE: If you are going to step out 19 feet from the basket, and suffer the attendant drop in shooting percentage that this move necessarily implies, then at least have the good sense to step out 19.5 feet (or whatever the exact current three-point line distance is), in order to give yourself a chance at three points, instead of only two, from virtually the same distance (and thus, virtually the same likely success rate)... if you're not going to do that, then at least close the distance down to something inside 15 feet (which Hairston could often do, without losing his wide-open status), so that you have a higher probability of making that two-point shot.

I think Pitino used to take guys out, if they persisted in shooting two-point shots on or just inside the three-point line.

[captmojo]

And Pitino is nuts.
Every player has their own comfort range. Some at 22ft, others at/or within 10ft, while some may be most comfortable at 19ft. That's just the way it is. You either accept it and their habits, or you disallow their shooting of the ball. Do you require, for example, other drivers on the highway to be forced to operate at 10mph over the posted limit? Or, even require them to be on the same road as you are traveling? Any physical activity that takes one away from their comfort zone forces them to change long held habits. This is a recipe for disaster and failure until new habits become instincts.

It's not like Josh is tossing up airballs or bricks. He's actually pretty decent at his range. His misses appear to be on target, just with a bit of arc/spin miscalculation. I've noticed his misses usually bounce straight over or more often, right back toward him. He can hit that shot. He has proven he can. POINTS IS POINTS. Two additional points to the total, whether from 2 ft out or 19.

Let his teachers work with the proper fit for him. That's their job. Personally, I sometimes feel better to see him take the 19 rather than see layups during a game, from a player that doesn't use the backboard.

[Mudge]

And Pitino is nuts.
Every player has their own comfort range. Some at 22ft, others at/or within 10ft, while some may be most comfortable at 19ft. That's just the way it is. You either accept it and their habits, or you disallow their shooting of the ball. Do you require, for example, other drivers on the highway to be forced to operate at 10mph over the posted limit? Or, even require them to be on the same road as you are traveling? Any physical activity that takes one away from their comfort zone forces them to change long held habits. This is a recipe for disaster and failure until new habits become instincts.

It's not like Josh is tossing up airballs or bricks. He's actually pretty decent at his range. His misses appear to be on target, just with a bit of arc/spin miscalculation. I've noticed his misses usually bounce straight over or more often, right back toward him. He can hit that shot. He has proven he can. POINTS IS POINTS. Two additional points to the total, whether from 2 ft out or 19.

Let his teachers work with the proper fit for him. That's their job. Personally, I sometimes feel better to see him take the 19 rather than see layups during a game, from a player that doesn't use the backboard.

Yeah, Pitino is nuts-- a Hall of Fame coach, with one of the best winning percentages in the game (not far off of Coach K's numbers) who would probably be neck and neck with Coach K for games won, had he not taken two sojourns in the NBA-- and who won one championship with his players, and had most of those same players (all of whom he recruited) win another championship for Tubby Smith, and taken three different schools to the Final Four-- he's pretty darn good, and pretty darn smart... so NO, you don't accept Hairston shooting from 19 feet-- under your guidelines, then yes, I'd disallow Hairston shooting the ball (as noted, I'd like to do that anyway)... this isn't some long-held, entrenched habit-- Hairston barely used to shoot at all, before this year-- I'd say "too bad" to Hairston's comfort zone, and force him to change by 6 inches, or stop shooting. Because he's made a couple recently, suddenly, he's "pretty decent" at that range? I'd like to see what his longer-range shooting accuracy is for the season-- heck, what is his shooting accuracy overall, including bunnies and layups? I doubt he is shooting 40%, even including the chippies.

[Kedsy]

...heck, what is his shooting accuracy overall, including bunnies and layups? I doubt he is shooting 40%, even including the chippies.

Josh is shooting 47.2% on two-pointers for the season (34-72), and is 0 for 1 on threes for the season. So it's not nearly as bad as you believe.

That said, I agree with you that a shot half a step inside the three-point line is not a good shot for anybody. If you're comfortable from 19 feet than you should be able to develop comfort behind the three point line. Otherwise, take a few steps in and take an easier shot.

[Mudge]

Josh is shooting 47.2% on two-pointers for the season (34-72), and is 0 for 1 on threes for the season. So it's not nearly as bad as you believe.

That said, I agree with you that a shot half a step inside the three-point line is not a good shot for anybody. If you're comfortable from 19 feet than you should be able to develop comfort behind the three point line. Otherwise, take a few steps in and take an easier shot.

I stand corrected, at least on his overall shooting percentage-- obviously, it's higher than I would have guessed... that said, I doubt his longer range (call it outside 5 feet) percentage is nearly that good.

As an aside, do shot statistics include shots that are blocked? I assume they do, since it would seem that it has to be counted as a shot, if it is going to be counted as a blocked shot for an opponent... I just started wondering, because Hairston has a lot of shots blocked inside, due to his (modest) quickness and jumping ability-- and if those are not counted in his "missed shot" totals, then it would be artificially inflating his shooting percentage.

[jimsumner]

I stand corrected, at least on his overall shooting percentage-- obviously, it's higher than I would have guessed... that said, I doubt his longer range (call it outside 5 feet) percentage is nearly that good.

As an aside, do shot statistics include shots that are blocked? I assume they do, since it would seem that it has to be counted as a shot, if it is going to be counted as a blocked shot for an opponent... I just started wondering, because Hairston has a lot of shots blocked inside, due to his (modest) quickness and jumping ability-- and if those are not counted in his "missed shot" totals, then it would be artificially inflating his shooting percentage.

A blocked shot is a missed shot. Statistically.

[dball]

Hairston barely used to shoot at all, before this year-- I'd say "too bad" to Hairston's comfort zone, and force him to change by 6 inches, or stop shooting. Because he's made a couple recently, suddenly, he's "pretty decent" at that range? I'd like to see what his longer-range shooting accuracy is for the season-- heck, what is his shooting accuracy overall, including bunnies and layups? I doubt he is shooting 40%, even including the chippies.

To be fair, Pitino probably originally made this comment with the line at 19'9''. With the line moving back a few years ago, shooting at around 19 ft would require a step back of nearly two feet. Now, if Josh is shooting from 20 feet, 3 inches.......... :)

[Dukeface88]

And Pitino is nuts.
Every player has their own comfort range. Some at 22ft, others at/or within 10ft, while some may be most comfortable at 19ft. That's just the way it is. You either accept it and their habits, or you disallow their shooting of the ball. Do you require, for example, other drivers on the highway to be forced to operate at 10mph over the posted limit? Or, even require them to be on the same road as you are traveling? Any physical activity that takes one away from their comfort zone forces them to change long held habits. This is a recipe for disaster and failure until new habits become instincts.

It's not like Josh is tossing up airballs or bricks. He's actually pretty decent at his range. His misses appear to be on target, just with a bit of arc/spin miscalculation. I've noticed his misses usually bounce straight over or more often, right back toward him. He can hit that shot. He has proven he can. POINTS IS POINTS. Two additional points to the total, whether from 2 ft out or 19.

Let his teachers work with the proper fit for him. That's their job. Personally, I sometimes feel better to see him take the 19 rather than see layups during a game, from a player that doesn't use the backboard.

And sometimes that job involves telling players "I don't care that this is a habit, because it's a bad habit and you need to stop doing it". To use your car analogy, we don't allow people to drive 35 mph on the interstate, or drive on the left side of the road, regardless of whether that's their "comfort zone". If they can't do that, then they ought to pull over and let someone else drive (read: pass the ball so someone else can take a higher value shot).

As for proving he can hit that shot and points being points: Sean Dockery proved he could from half court vs. Virgina Tech. That didn't mean shooting from there should have been made part of his regular repertoire.


Josh is shooting 47.2% on two-pointers for the season (34-72), and is 0 for 1 on threes for the season. So it's not nearly as bad as you believe.

That said, I agree with you that a shot half a step inside the three-point line is not a good shot for anybody. If you're comfortable from 19 feet than you should be able to develop comfort behind the three point line. Otherwise, take a few steps in and take an easier shot.

47% is still the second lowest of our bigs (Marshall being the lowest at 1-8).

Don't get me wrong, I like Josh as a player, but I'm baffled as to why he continues to take that shot, and why the coaches allow him to. It's a bad shot even if you can make it semi-consistently - and Josh doesn't.

[Mudge]

To be fair, Pitino probably originally made this comment with the line at 19'9''. With the line moving back a few years ago, shooting at around 19 ft would require a step back of nearly two feet. Now, if Josh is shooting from 20 feet, 3 inches.......... :)

That's why I originally posted "whatever the three-point distance is currently"-- I know that the distance has been moved out twice from its original distance... the point here is that Hairston straddles the current line regularly-- so he IS shooting from 20+ feet, if the distance is now 21 feet.

Can you imagine what it would be like, if the NCAA still had that initial ~17-foot three-point arc that they originally had, when they first introduced the three-point shot? Nobody would ever take a shot inside the arc, except for dunks, layups, and putbacks...

[Kedsy]

Can you imagine what it would be like, if the NCAA still had that initial ~17-foot three-point arc that they originally had, when they first introduced the three-point shot? Nobody would ever take a shot inside the arc, except for dunks, layups, and putbacks...

Yeah, Chip Engelland shot 55.4% on threes that first season.

[dball]

Can you imagine what it would be like, if the NCAA still had that initial ~17-foot three-point arc that they originally had, when they first introduced the three-point shot? Nobody would ever take a shot inside the arc, except for dunks, layups, and putbacks...

17'9"---3 feet closer in!! That was crazy close and the ACC scrapped after the one season. Couple of years later, NCAA standardized at 19'9" until the move back for 08-09 season. Interior line on the court is for the women's three (which didn't move back so it's also the "old" line).

Oddly enough, there weren't that many teams who took big advantage of it. Of course, that was a time when the ACC had guys like Ralph Sampson, Brad Daugherty and Thurl Bailey playing as well so it wasn't just the close in shots. Duke's best player was more of a slasher and didn't shoot that many threes. Though, as I recall and it's amusing to think of it today, Coach K wasn't a big fan of the shot. Better thing that happened was the ACC instituted a 30 second shot clock along with the new line.

[-jk]

As I recall, pretty much every center in the ACC could hit the experimental three. Way close. And a good crop of shooting centers.

And i think ncsu won their championship on a play built around that three, got pushed a bit out, but was in position for the rebound/put-back anyway. The rest is history.

-jk

[Mudge]

As I recall, pretty much every center in the ACC could hit the experimental three. Way close. And a good crop of shooting centers.

And i think ncsu won their championship on a play built around that three, got pushed a bit out, but was in position for the rebound/put-back anyway. The rest is history.

-jk

Even Bilas? Think of the revisionist history-- Jay Bilas, outside shooter.

[wilson]

Only on this board do high compliments for one of our best players and a bright assessment of our team's postseason chances so quickly degenerate into questions of why our backup PF doesn't shoot more threes.

[Phoenix22]

Only on this board do high compliments for one of our best players and a bright assessment of our team's postseason chances so quickly degenerate into questions of why our backup PF doesn't shoot more threes.

After reading this, I wish there was a like button on this board.

/Like

[juise]

Only on this board do high compliments for one of our best players and a bright assessment of our team's postseason chances so quickly degenerate into questions of why our backup PF doesn't shoot more threes.

Excellent point. It's time for the mods to step in and fix this. Thread title change coming right up! ;)


(P.S. - I love Winn's column and I constantly bemoan Josh's long range shots when discussing games with my former Duke roommate.)

[tele]

Josh is shooting 47.2% on two-pointers for the season (34-72), and is 0 for 1 on threes for the season. So it's not nearly as bad as you believe.

That said, I agree with you that a shot half a step inside the three-point line is not a good shot for anybody. If you're comfortable from 19 feet than you should be able to develop comfort behind the three point line. Otherwise, take a few steps in and take an easier shot.

47.2 is very good percentage for a back up power forward. Since he is only taking around 2.5 shots a game, it would probably help the team in the post season it he would shoot more often from midrange. I've never seen him shoot off the dribble or make a step back move, so moving back for a three or dribbling in a little probably aren't very sound ideas. Josh really stepped up for the team when Kelly was out, have to appreciate all his hard work on defense and battling on the boards against some taller and bulkier players. So if he gets an open easy shot... fire away Josh you earned it!!!

[91_92_01_10_15]

Don't get me wrong, I like Josh as a player, but I'm baffled as to why he continues to take that shot, and why the coaches allow him to.

I think the coaches are allowing him to shoot it because, if he makes one, the benefit is more than just the two points. If a defender has to come out to guard him, we realize some of the offensive spacing benefits that Kelly generates. This was obviously even more important when Kelly was out.

[Monmouth77]

I think the coaches are allowing him to shoot it because, if he makes one, the benefit is more than just the two points. If a defender has to come out to guard him, we realize some of the offensive spacing benefits that Kelly generates. This was obviously even more important when Kelly was out.

I think that's right. I mean, we aren't running plays to affirmatively give Josh that shot-- it's just where we space our PF in the flow of our offense. Now, when Kelly's in there, he spots up behind the three-point line because he's a dead-eye, and it's an effective shot. But Hairston accomplishes the same thing spacing wise by setting up where he does (a few feet inside the line).

Yes, when he gets a pass at that spot on the floor he could make a quick move to the basket for a shorter shot (which is what Jefferson tries to do with mixed results) or he could set up behind the 3 pt line. But apparently that shot is his comfort zone and it is always wide open.

Seeing as how he takes it less than twice in any given game (now that Ryan is back) and seeing as how the main point is to keep the floor spaced (and keep the defense honest), I think it serves its purpose just fine.

[davekay1971]

I think the coaches are allowing him to shoot it because, if he makes one, the benefit is more than just the two points. If a defender has to come out to guard him, we realize some of the offensive spacing benefits that Kelly generates. This was obviously even more important when Kelly was out.

1) Agreed with Luke Winn that Kelly is critically important to Duke at both ends of the court and I'm ecstatic to have him back.
2) Agreed with the consensus that Winn's column is regularly excellent reading.
3) In defense of Josh's shot selection:

Imagine for a moment you're Josh Hairston. You hustle, you rebound, you defend. You know perfectly well that, when you're on the court, you're the fifth offensive option unless you're putting back an offensive rebound or getting a sweet feed from Quinn right under the basket because you're man went to help off of you. But, every once in a while, you get the ball and you're 18 feet from the basket.

The pass comes to you and you immediately see the following: your man backs off to guard against the drive because he knows that you're not a great jump shooter; everyone else's man sticks to them like glue to guard against the pass. What do you do? You have options:

1) Shoot the open 18 foot jumper - you're not great at it, but you don't suck at it either
2) Drive to the hole despite the fact that your man is backed off, guarding against just that, and you know you're not a great ball handler
3) Pass to a closely guarded teammate
4) Hold it hoping a teammate gets open
5) Dribble back out and look for help.

Options 2, 3, and 5 are just begging for a turnover. Option 4 maybe okay for about 2-3 seconds, but if someone doesn't break open fast, you're going to have to do something else. So option 1 is, in that situation, the best option.

Keep in mind that Josh doesn't give himself the ball at that position - he simply receives the pass and has to make a decision regarding what to do with it. And, knowing that as the PF, on the court with a classic back-to-the-basket 5, he's going to be in the high post alot, Josh has probably worked on that medium range jumper to try to make it a realistic threat. Because, as 91_92_01_10 noted, if he's able to make that shot one the defense has to respect, it has tremendous benefits for the whole team.

[killerleft]

And sometimes that job involves telling players "I don't care that this is a habit, because it's a bad habit and you need to stop doing it". To use your car analogy, we don't allow people to drive 35 mph on the interstate, or drive on the left side of the road, regardless of whether that's their "comfort zone". If they can't do that, then they ought to pull over and let someone else drive (read: pass the ball so someone else can take a higher value shot).

As for proving he can hit that shot and points being points: Sean Dockery proved he could from half court vs. Virgina Tech. That didn't mean shooting from there should have been made part of his regular repertoire.



47% is still the second lowest of our bigs (Marshall being the lowest at 1-8).

Don't get me wrong, I like Josh as a player, but I'm baffled as to why he continues to take that shot, and why the coaches allow him to. It's a bad shot even if you can make it semi-consistently - and Josh doesn't.

It has been discussed that probably Josh takes that shot because he has been told to take it by the coaches - if he never takes shots nobody has to guard him. And he does make it semi-consistently.

edit- I see someone else has covered this.

[jv001]

I would like to see Josh move a little closer with an angle to shoot a bank shot. With is line drive arc he just might have a better chance of making the mid-range shot. The bank shot has become a lost art and I think there's still a place for it. Like I said, my two cents. Now back to Ryan Kelly and what he does for our team. Ryan not only makes us better offensively, he makes us much better defensively. In the last two games he stepped up and finished defensive plays. It pains me to see us get a stop on defense and then lose the rebound. If we do a better job of this, we will be a much better team the rest of 2013. GoDuke!

[Kedsy]

I've never seen him shoot off the dribble or make a step back move, so moving back for a three or dribbling in a little probably aren't very sound ideas.

I agree with you it wouldn't be a great idea for Josh to step back or dribble forward for his shot. I think it would be a good idea for him to set up in a slightly different spot before he receives the pass. It's a pretty basic concept that when you're not covered on offense you should go to the spot where you're comfortable taking a high-percentage shot. Obviously Josh is comfortable with the 19 footer, but Mudge is right that it's not a particularly high percentage shot, nor a great shot to take.


I think the coaches are allowing him to shoot it because, if he makes one, the benefit is more than just the two points. If a defender has to come out to guard him, we realize some of the offensive spacing benefits that Kelly generates. This was obviously even more important when Kelly was out.


I think that's right. I mean, we aren't running plays to affirmatively give Josh that shot-- it's just where we space our PF in the flow of our offense. Now, when Kelly's in there, he spots up behind the three-point line because he's a dead-eye, and it's an effective shot. But Hairston accomplishes the same thing spacing wise by setting up where he does (a few feet inside the line).

I think what you both are saying would be right if Josh taking that shot actually spread the floor. But when Ryan was out, the opponents game-planned to leave Josh unguarded. They weren't going to abandon that plan if he made one 19 footer. My guess is he would have had to make 3 or 4 such shots before anybody bothered to guard him. So he doesn't space the floor or force anybody to guard him. All he does with that shot is take an open 19 footer.


Yes, when he gets a pass at that spot on the floor he could make a quick move to the basket for a shorter shot (which is what Jefferson tries to do with mixed results) or he could set up behind the 3 pt line.

Amile shoots 53.3% on those shots (and he even shot a little better while Ryan was out -- 54.0%). His offensive rating is 116.9, which is pretty good (Josh's oRating is 101.3; Mason's is 112.8, albeit with a much higher usage rate). I think while filling in for Ryan, Amile has performed much better than "mixed results," at least on offense. I think his defense needs some work, but that's normal for freshmen.



3) In defense of Josh's shot selection:

Imagine for a moment you're Josh Hairston. You hustle, you rebound, you defend. You know perfectly well that, when you're on the court, you're the fifth offensive option unless you're putting back an offensive rebound or getting a sweet feed from Quinn right under the basket because you're man went to help off of you. But, every once in a while, you get the ball and you're 18 feet from the basket.

The pass comes to you and you immediately see the following: your man backs off to guard against the drive because he knows that you're not a great jump shooter; everyone else's man sticks to them like glue to guard against the pass. What do you do? You have options:

1) Shoot the open 18 foot jumper - you're not great at it, but you don't suck at it either
2) Drive to the hole despite the fact that your man is backed off, guarding against just that, and you know you're not a great ball handler
3) Pass to a closely guarded teammate
4) Hold it hoping a teammate gets open
5) Dribble back out and look for help.

Options 2, 3, and 5 are just begging for a turnover. Option 4 maybe okay for about 2-3 seconds, but if someone doesn't break open fast, you're going to have to do something else. So option 1 is, in that situation, the best option.

I hear what you're saying here, but I don't think it's entirely accurate. I've been watching Josh closely for two years on these plays. He catches and shoots. He generally doesn't hesitate for a moment. He doesn't look to drive or pass. He's open so he shoots.

Having said that, I don't mind it if the coach's don't mind it. But personally I think he should (a) try to set up either behind the 3-point line or from 15 feet and in -- he'd still be open and they're both better shots than the shot he's been taking lately; and (b) try your option 5 occasionally -- he usually wouldn't even have to dribble, just turn to the side a little -- all three perimeter guys are being covered by a single guy and at least one of them can and will be open to receive a pass and re-start the offense.

Josh does a lot of good things for Duke. Especially with Ryan back, he's a very credible backup big. So it's not my intent to be mean or unduly criticize him. But my observation of him is that when he touches the ball on offense he almost always shoots, probably a higher percentage of shots per touch than any other player on Duke's team. Is that a good thing with the other offensive options we have on the floor? I don't know, but my guess is we could do a little better.

[Bojangles4Eva]

Given the fact that Josh shoots that mid-range jumper without hesitation, and does not ride pine immediately afterwards suggests that the coaching staff strongly encourages him to take that open shot, as they should. For all we know he nails it 9/10 times in practice, but once it's game time he may psych himself out, lowering his percentage. Not saying that is the case, but it’s not all that uncommon for players to not perform at the level they do in practice because of anxiety (see Plumlee, Miles).

I think Josh has great hustle but sometimes his mind is just going at light speed when he is in games. I remember distinctly one time this year where he got an offensive rebound, and while still in mid-air tried to throw up a flailing, spastic pump fake, landed, then went up with hulk strength and missed the easy put-back. If he had just been a little more relaxed, he could have easily made the play, and those types of plays seem to happen a lot with Josh on both offense and defense. That being said, I think its good that Josh take that mid-range shot without hesitation (which is a shot he is perfectly capable of hitting at a good clip) because the more he does it in games, the more familiar he will get with taking it in game-pressure situations. In the long run, familiarity will lead to a calming of the nerves, and he may be able to eventually hit those shots at a higher percentage.

[toooskies]

Count me in the group that hopes Josh takes that shot from a few feet deeper. Next year, I suppose; too late to change habits now.

More on-topic, it's great to watch games and see the kinds of plays out of RK that the rest of the team hasn't made. It's a breath of fresh air to see someone consistently and successfully play help defense.

[BigWayne]

After reading this, I wish there was a like button on this board.

/Like

Well, there is of a sort, it's that green/red smiley/frowny thing in the lower left corner.

[BigWayne]

As I recall, pretty much every center in the ACC could hit the experimental three. Way close. And a good crop of shooting centers.

And i think ncsu won their championship on a play built around that three, got pushed a bit out, but was in position for the rebound/put-back anyway. The rest is history.

-jk

It was my contention that part of the reason NCSU won that year was because of the short 3 pointer and 30 second clock. Because we were the only league with that rule combination that year, ACC games were like cranking the speed on your turntable up to 45 or 78 compared to the rest of the country at 33 1/3. The ACC teams were in better shape and more prepared to play quickly under pressure at the end of games.

[tele]

The article by winn has some nice graphics; like the springlike pastel colors. And on a related point, happy n=30 for all the stat-heads into college games. As most teams are at or near this mark, should celebrate, even if it isn't strictly tres geeykay anymore to recognize the milepoint of 30 for stats analysis. But for those who still honor old conventions, may all your standard deviations be uniform and smooth, your underlying assumptions support your methods and models, and many happy correlations in return. :) Somewhat sad that it comes as the season it at it's end, but there is always baseball, nba or even strike shortened hockey to provide for greater scope for inferences and conclusions, now that things are back to normal.

[Newton_14]

After reading this, I wish there was a like button on this board.

/Like

uh, actually there is...

[dball]

As I recall, pretty much every center in the ACC could hit the experimental three. Way close. And a good crop of shooting centers.

-jk

Probably could hit it but they didn't take many shots. Sampson and Bilas didn't take any. (Alarie took 2 for comparison.) Daugherty had one. Other than Thurl Bailey, can't think of any who were shooting that shot and Bailey averaged less than one a game (though like all his shots, his percentage was very good). Granted haven't looked up all the schools so maybe, but I remember this more of a "guard" shot (but I do recall Doh hoisting a few for uncch).

[JNort]

Shows him getting hurt, trying to rehab, the game he came back and the locker room after the game ended. Loved the way the guys cheered for Ryan after the game. One of my favorite DukeBluePlanet videos to date.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a6PwT3BUCo4

[CDu]

47.2 is very good percentage for a back up power forward. Since he is only taking around 2.5 shots a game, it would probably help the team in the post season it he would shoot more often from midrange.

And if he actually took midrange jumpers (instead of 18-20 footers), I'd agree. But he takes very few 12-15 footers. In fact, I doubt he's taken more than a couple all season.


I've never seen him shoot off the dribble or make a step back move, so moving back for a three or dribbling in a little probably aren't very sound ideas.

No one is suggesting Hairston take stepback 3s. The suggestion is that, if he's going to take 18-20 foot jumpers, he might as well take the step back before he gets the ball and shoot 20'9" jumpers. His percentage wouldn't likely drop much (since he's not hitting that many anyway), but any makes would be worth 50% more.


Josh really stepped up for the team when Kelly was out, have to appreciate all his hard work on defense and battling on the boards against some taller and bulkier players. So if he gets an open easy shot... fire away Josh you earned it!!!

And there's the key word: "easy." The open 18-20 foot jumper is the worst percentage play in basketball. It's virtually as difficult as an open 20'9" jumper. But it's worth 33% less. It's not an easy shot, nor is it a good shot. And this is not specific to Hairston - it's true of anyone.

Either Hairston should set up a step further out (and shoot an open short 3) or a step further in (and shoot an open midrange jumper). Or he probably shouldn't shoot. Splitting the difference and shooting an 18-20 footer is the worst of 4 possible alternatives.

[Mudge]

and if he actually took midrange jumpers (instead of 18-20 footers), i'd agree. But he takes very few 12-15 footers. In fact, i doubt he's taken more than a couple all season.



No one is suggesting hairston take stepback 3s. The suggestion is that, if he's going to take 18-20 foot jumpers, he might as well take the step back before he gets the ball and shoot 20'9" jumpers. His percentage wouldn't likely drop much (since he's not hitting that many anyway), but any makes would be worth 50% more.



And there's the key word: "easy." the open 18-20 foot jumper is the worst percentage play in basketball. It's virtually as difficult as an open 20'9" jumper. But it's worth 33% less. It's not an easy shot, nor is it a good shot. And this is not specific to hairston - it's true of anyone.

Either hairston should set up a step further out (and shoot an open short 3) or a step further in (and shoot an open midrange jumper). Or he probably shouldn't shoot. Splitting the difference and shooting an 18-20 footer is the worst of 4 possible alternatives.

^^^^^ ThIS!!!!^^^^^