Elevation on a jumpshot

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

Getting your legs under you doesn't mean you have to jump as high as you can. It doesn't even mean you have to jump. As evidenced by the fact that nobody jumps when they shoot free throws. Everyone uses their legs when they shoot free throws, but nobody jumps. And why is that? Because jumping adds an extra variable that you don't want to add unless you have to do so. So as I said, "getting your legs into your shot" doesn't mean "jump as high as you can to shoot."

There are certainly times when you HAVE to jump. Most notably when a defender is right there in your face. But there is a reason why guys don't jump on free throws. And there is a reason why guys don't typically jump more than a couple of inches when they take wide open shots. And it is jumping high adds more variables to the equation. From a pure shooting perspective, the best is a set shot; second best is a shot just as your feet leave the ground. Anything more than that is only adding value if there is a defender right in your face.

Also, you don't have to exert your arms or wrists to shoot without jumping. It's a flick of the wrist combined with the support of your legs (again, support doesn't inherently mean jumping). I can shoot a set shot from three point range with minimal effort and no loss of form - same as my free throw stroke but with just a little more legs. Actually, the longer you wait in the air on a jumpshot, the MORE you have to use your arms (because as I said previously, you start losing momentum the moment your feet leave the floor). So the argument that you should jump as high as you can to shoot in order to save your arms and your form is exactly counter to reality.

The OP asked about jumping “higher,” not “as high as you can.” I don’t think there is (or should be) any debate that elevation on a jump shot is generally a good thing. When my son barely gets his feet off the ground, his shooting % drops markedly. When he focuses on getting a little more lift, he can drain 3s at an impressive clip.

[CDu]

The OP asked about jumping “higher,” not “as high as you can.”

The example the OP gave was Michael Jordan, so I think the context was generally jumping as high as you can. But the same point applies to jumping somewhere in between. To a smaller degree, but still the same point. It makes it harder.

I don’t think there is (or should be) any debate that elevation on a jump shot is generally a good thing.

You might not think it, but the exact opposite is true. Which is why guys take set shots or very small jumps when they shoot open shots. If it was beneficial to jump higher to take those shots, guys would be jumping higher to take those shots.

When my son barely gets his feet off the ground, his shooting % drops markedly. When he focuses on getting a little more lift, he can drain 3s at an impressive clip.

I have no idea how old your son is. I can only speak to what I did as a high school player, what I understand of basic physics, and what we observe of college and pro players. And each of those 3 things points to the opposite conclusion to what you are suggesting.

Hence the OP's question as to why guys don't jump more on their shots. And the answer is simple: because it creates extra variance in their shot that is totally unnecessary and reduces their make percentage.

[Saratoga2]

It's mainly because it adds an extra variable to the shot that isn't necessary. It's easier to shoot a set shot consistently than it is to shoot a jumpshot. It's why free throw shooters basically never jump. They are able to remove that variable entirely. And the higher you jump on average on your jumpshot, the more room for variance there is in the shot. Similar to the more you move forward/fade away/to either side, the more room for variance there is on a shot. All of these are mitigated the less you jump.

Of course, it's a tradeoff. If you only shoot set shots, it's much harder to get your shot off against a set defense. So players have to make a choice between how much they want (or need) to elevate to get their shot off against how much they want to control the variables of their shot attempt. Redick would really elevate if he was coming off a screen. But if he was in a straight catch and shoot situation, he would usually not jump very much.

On top of that, it simply takes more work to jump to shoot. So if you don't have to, there's little reason to do it. So guys usually only elevate if they have a guy right on them.

Many years ago when I played, I found releasing a jump shot at the point of highest elevation was the best way to reduce the shot variance. Avoiding a block and releasing at the top of the jump seems like the best idea when one has to jump.

[CDu]

That would be the only situation in basketball where you're worried about exactly where you're feet land. Lots of shooters land their feet slightly forward where they initially jumped, so that would be a weird thing to train yourself to jump straight up and down, making sure you didn't move forward an inch. So, yes, of course it's possible to jump straight up and down, but there would be significant risk of landing on the line unless you moved back substantially, which would distance yourself from the basket.

You're really overthinking this. The answer has been given as to why they choose not to do what you've suggested. The entire sport takes their open shots with minimal or no jump. The obvious reason why is because it's easier to make the shot that way. If jumping higher improved shooting percentages, guys would always jump higher. But the opposite is true: jumping higher reduces shooting percentage. With the exception of the case as noted: if a defender is right there on you, you need to do something to avoid getting blocked. Either take a step-back, or jump higher.

But the reason guys don't jump higher on uncontested shots is because it's easier to make the shot with less or no jump.

[CDu]

Many years ago when I played, I found releasing a jump shot at the point of highest elevation was the best way to reduce the shot variance.

And when I played (organized ball up through high school was a couple of decades ago; but city leagues up through about 5 years ago), I felt the exact opposite. Jumping to the highest elevation before shooting robs you of all upwards momentum generated by your legs, requiring more arm/wrist action to replace the lost force. Thus more variance. On open shots, I would take at most a 2-3 inch hop, and would release as my feet were leaving the floor. Because every inch that I elevate is losing momentum for the shot. And I didn't need much of a leap anyway because I wasn't shooting 40 footers.

Avoiding a block and releasing at the top of the jump seems like the best idea when one has to jump.

As has been noted, this is an entirely separate case. If a guy has his hand right in your face, obviously you can't just shoot a set shot. In the case where a defender is right on you, obviously you have to do something to create separation from the defender. Either use the dribble to create separation, or you have to try to elevate over them.

[Dr. Rosenrosen]

You're really overthinking this. The answer has been given as to why they choose not to do what you've suggested. The entire sport takes their open shots with minimal or no jump. The obvious reason why is because it's easier to make the shot that way. If jumping higher improved shooting percentages, guys would always jump higher. But the opposite is true: jumping higher reduces shooting percentage. With the exception of the case as noted: if a defender is right there on you, you need to do something to avoid getting blocked. Either take a step-back, or jump higher.

But the reason guys don't jump higher on uncontested shots is because it's easier to make the shot with less or no jump.

I’m literally shaking my head. What on earth are you talking about? You’re staking out a virtually indefensible position. Here, just watch this JJ highlight reel and tell me that height on a jumper is somehow a bad thing.

https://www.google.com/search?q=jj+r...id:XWHMgYYbwiY

Or go check out Ray Allen highlights. Or even Steve Kerr, a predominantly set shot guy. They get off the floor pretty well on their shots.

[kako]

Speaking of elevation on a shot, here's an article about Tyler Travelin' Hansbrough were he talks about THAT PLAY with GHenderson. Hopefully not hijacking the thread, just don't think Hansbrough deserves his own thread.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/exclusive...100000521.html

To wit:

Q: In 2007, Gerald Henderson broke your nose on a hard foul with 14.5 seconds left in a game in which UNC was leading Duke by 12 points. Describe the play.

A: We had a pretty good lead going late and I was fouled and went to the free throw line. I missed the second one and was able to get my own rebound. I gathered, pump-faked, went up and was hammered.

I went on the ground and had no clue what happened. And then I reached for my nose and realized I was bloody, and somebody had just hit me in my nose. So my first instinct was to try to go after somebody. ... I didn’t realize how bad it was until (medical staff) told me I broke my nose. There was a ton of blood. I watched the replay, and I thought it was a cheap shot.

Gerald’s a great guy. I’m over it.

But that was a cheap shot, and it’s hard to deny that.

It just fueled me even more and I had this vendetta where I was going to get Gerald at some point. NBA or whatever — the next time I saw him.

But that never really panned out. We’re past that. Gerald’s a great dude and we kind of laugh about it now, how many people mention it to him, and to me.

Tyler_Hansbrough_Gerald_Henderson_Elbow.jpg

9F

[CDu]

Or even Steve Kerr, a predominantly set shot guy. They get off the floor pretty well on their shots.

Dell Curry, great shooter. When he was wide open, did he take a big jump? No. Larry Bird, great shooter. When he was wide open, did he take a big jump? No. John Stockton, great shooter. When he was wide open, did he take a big jump? No. Steph Curry. Klay Thompson. Peja Stojakovic. All took little jumps on their shots when wide open.

All of these guys were willing to jump to shoot if they had to, most often if they were catching it on the move or taking a shot off the dribble. Because it's unnecessary and counterproductive to elevate to shoot unless you need to for extenuating circumstances.

[ClemmonsDevil]

I've been thinking a lot about this as someone who was a good jump shooter. I'm 49 years old and I still make between 18 and 22 high school dostance three-point shots out of 25 when I shoot them every day.

Honestly jump shots should be broken down into three distinct areas in my opinion. Three point or distance shots, free throws and what I would call non-traditional jump shots (I did and do shoot a ton of off balance fade-away jump shots when I play). The thing they all have in common is what happens with your shoulders and hands. Your upper body is generally doing the same thing on all of these shots. The difference is what's going on with your lower body. Other variables involved are upper and lower body strength. I think upper body strength has more to do with it, or at least it has yielded the best results for me.

3 point/distance: this is all about energy transfer. I can shoot the same jump shot from 20 ft out to about 26 ft. From 26 to 30 ft I need to do a little bit more work. I take a hop on my jump shot about three to four inches off the ground. Now you could argue that is as high as I can jump, but how dare you. Also maybe true. But the distance shot is energy transfer from getting a little bit of knee bend and transferring that into a bit of upwards or forwards motion depending on the shooter. Guys who have more of a slight build frequently have a bit of a slight to exaggerated slingshot action where they have to generate force in their upper body. Think Sam Perkins and to a lesser extent Steph Curry. Both cock their arms back at least somewhat before going into their shooting motion. It generates force. Those two are arm shooters. I'm a leg shooter from distance so the slight knee bend and the ball never gets pulled back towards my body or shoulder but goes straight up and then out towards the basket. I do find as I have aged that when I'm squaring up from really deep like out to 28 to 30 ft I have to jump higher and put in a little bit of a hip turn, which I stole from JJ Redick. He jumped way higher than I ever did on his jump shot. I will have an argument for why that works so well for him in the non-traditional jump shot part.

Free throws: to me these are purely rhythm shots. It is replication and release. Some slight energy transfer but most good shooters just have a technique and a replicable release. Kids were taught to stare at the center rung on the front of the rim but I found that didn't help me. I stared at the back middle rung as a free throw shooter. I do agree that the reason you don't jump on free throws is the jump is the least replicable part of your shot. The free throw is the shot that is most easily replicable because it's the same distance shooting at the same height with absolutely no defense in every gym. I was a 90% free throw shooter in high school and I absolutely missed two pressure free throws that cost us the conference championship my sophomore year. Somehow the goal does get a bit smaller when you're 15 and absolutely terrified playing on the road.

Non-traditional jump shots: these are shots that I would define as on the move or fading away. If you watch Jordan, Kobe and even JJ shoot jump shots, they shot a lot of jumpers on the move. I'm short and without overwhelming athletic ability but I'm a little stronger than average so I shot an absolute ton of fade-away jump shots. These require higher jumping because you are working against gravity on fadeaways or drifting from opponents as you shoot. If you watch JJ in the nba, he shot an absolute ton of jumpers off the curl screen where he never got his feet set and he was drifting. MJ and Kobe shot a ton of fade-away jump shots or pull up jumpers over 7-footers. These shots require you to leap higher and they are the most difficult jumper to master. But the great shooters are doing lots of drifting or fading and jumping at odd angles with their lower bodies, but watch videos of JJ shooting in the NBA. His shoulders are always square and his upper body is generally in the same plane as it is on a set jumper or free throw. It's his lower body that is operating differently than it is on his normal set shot or three pointer. I mentioned his hip turn, and this was his method for generating strength on his jump shot while fading or moving. It's like a coiled spring. After watching him I started to incorporate that on really deep shots out to about 30 ft because it allowed me to keep my normal jumping height and form like I was using on a 20 foot shot but generated a bit more power.

So this is my diatribe on jump shots and why I think they exist in three realms. Normal distance threes which are a set shot, free throws which are rhythm shots and non-traditional jump shots which I do think require a lot more leg action either for strength as you fade or height to score over taller opponents on pull-ups.

[CDu]

So this is my diatribe on jump shots and why I think they exist in three realms. Normal distance threes which are a set shot, free throws which are rhythm shots and non-traditional jump shots which I do think require a lot more leg action either for strength as you fade or height to score over taller opponents on pull-ups.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, I think I agree with this completely if I'm reading correctly.

If wide open, a normal 3pt shot for me was (I basically stopped playing at 40) basically a set shot, which requires minimal-to-no lift. I usually took mine with about 2-3 inches of lift, releasing the ball a split second after I left the floor. I could certainly have taken them standing still like a free throw (at least out to just a tad over 20 feet; the college line was still 19'9" when I played) and just getting up on my toes, and made the same percentage. But that would look really lazy, and style matters . But it definitely didn't take more than a small hop. And while you are being modest and self-deprecating, my max vertical was a fair bit more than 2-3 inches (as was yours in the old days at least!).

If it isn't a normal shot - either on the move, or because a defender is in your face, or whatever - it can be necessary to take a bigger jump. Nontraditional for me might include 25+ ft shots. My tiny-hop shot worked out to about 25 feet. Beyond that, I still shot it fairly early in my jump, but I jumped harder to get that launch. I probably wound up jumping 6-8 inches on those, but released the ball before I reached the apex of that jump. My arm motion and wrist flick would be the same for both shots.

If I had to really elevate to try to beat a defender, that required more arms on distance shots. So I tended to shoot fewer of those unless absolutely necessary, and I definitely shot a lower percentage on those. Instead, my elevated jumpers were pull-ups of 12-15 feet. At that range, because less force was needed, it was fine to elevate because I could still generate the force with my wrists despite waiting until the top of my jump (which robbed me of power from my legs). But I needed that elevation to steer clear of stray hands defensively. I also didn't take a lot of those to be completely honest, because as a 5'11" guy there weren't a ton of situations where that shot would get me over the defender anyway.

[-jk]

I've been thinking a lot about this as someone who was a good jump shooter. I'm 49 years old and I still make between 18 and 22 high school dostance three-point shots out of 25 when I shoot them every day.

Honestly jump shots should be broken down into three distinct areas in my opinion. Three point or distance shots, free throws and what I would call non-traditional jump shots (I did and do shoot a ton of off balance fade-away jump shots when I play). The thing they all have in common is what happens with your shoulders and hands. Your upper body is generally doing the same thing on all of these shots. The difference is what's going on with your lower body. Other variables involved are upper and lower body strength. I think upper body strength has more to do with it, or at least it has yielded the best results for me.

3 point/distance: this is all about energy transfer. I can shoot the same jump shot from 20 ft out to about 26 ft. From 26 to 30 ft I need to do a little bit more work. I take a hop on my jump shot about three to four inches off the ground. Now you could argue that is as high as I can jump, but how dare you. Also maybe true. But the distance shot is energy transfer from getting a little bit of knee bend and transferring that into a bit of upwards or forwards motion depending on the shooter. Guys who have more of a slight build frequently have a bit of a slight to exaggerated slingshot action where they have to generate force in their upper body. Think Sam Perkins and to a lesser extent Steph Curry. Both cock their arms back at least somewhat before going into their shooting motion. It generates force. Those two are arm shooters. I'm a leg shooter from distance so the slight knee bend and the ball never gets pulled back towards my body or shoulder but goes straight up and then out towards the basket. I do find as I have aged that when I'm squaring up from really deep like out to 28 to 30 ft I have to jump higher and put in a little bit of a hip turn, which I stole from JJ Redick. He jumped way higher than I ever did on his jump shot. I will have an argument for why that works so well for him in the non-traditional jump shot part.

Free throws: to me these are purely rhythm shots. It is replication and release. Some slight energy transfer but most good shooters just have a technique and a replicable release. Kids were taught to stare at the center rung on the front of the rim but I found that didn't help me. I stared at the back middle rung as a free throw shooter. I do agree that the reason you don't jump on free throws is the jump is the least replicable part of your shot. The free throw is the shot that is most easily replicable because it's the same distance shooting at the same height with absolutely no defense in every gym. I was a 90% free throw shooter in high school and I absolutely missed two pressure free throws that cost us the conference championship my sophomore year. Somehow the goal does get a bit smaller when you're 15 and absolutely terrified playing on the road.

Non-traditional jump shots: these are shots that I would define as on the move or fading away. If you watch Jordan, Kobe and even JJ shoot jump shots, they shot a lot of jumpers on the move. I'm short and without overwhelming athletic ability but I'm a little stronger than average so I shot an absolute ton of fade-away jump shots. These require higher jumping because you are working against gravity on fadeaways or drifting from opponents as you shoot. If you watch JJ in the nba, he shot an absolute ton of jumpers off the curl screen where he never got his feet set and he was drifting. MJ and Kobe shot a ton of fade-away jump shots or pull up jumpers over 7-footers. These shots require you to leap higher and they are the most difficult jumper to master. But the great shooters are doing lots of drifting or fading and jumping at odd angles with their lower bodies, but watch videos of JJ shooting in the NBA. His shoulders are always square and his upper body is generally in the same plane as it is on a set jumper or free throw. It's his lower body that is operating differently than it is on his normal set shot or three pointer. I mentioned his hip turn, and this was his method for generating strength on his jump shot while fading or moving. It's like a coiled spring. After watching him I started to incorporate that on really deep shots out to about 30 ft because it allowed me to keep my normal jumping height and form like I was using on a 20 foot shot but generated a bit more power.

So this is my diatribe on jump shots and why I think they exist in three realms. Normal distance threes which are a set shot, free throws which are rhythm shots and non-traditional jump shots which I do think require a lot more leg action either for strength as you fade or height to score over taller opponents on pull-ups.

Nice tutorial, son-of-coach Clem!

-jk

[Southgate0809]

You're really overthinking this. The answer has been given as to why they choose not to do what you've suggested. The entire sport takes their open shots with minimal or no jump. The obvious reason why is because it's easier to make the shot that way. If jumping higher improved shooting percentages, guys would always jump higher. But the opposite is true: jumping higher reduces shooting percentage. With the exception of the case as noted: if a defender is right there on you, you need to do something to avoid getting blocked. Either take a step-back, or jump higher.

But the reason guys don't jump higher on uncontested shots is because it's easier to make the shot with less or no jump.

The idea that jumping higher adds another variable is a good answer and is completely valid. But that moreso answers the question "Why would it be a bad idea to jump higher?" I gave the example of Zion. We actually don't know why he doesn't elevate more on a jump shot, so I don't know that you can see it's why HE doesn't jump higher. He's likely been shooting that way since high school. I wouldn't expect most adolescents and teenagers to have the basketball knowledge that jumping high on a jump shot could be a bad thing, so perhaps he was taught that by coaches and instructors. But what you're not accounting for is the real possibility that no one ever taught him to shoot that way. It's just how he does it. Some might balk at the idea that a young man could make it to Duke and the NBA with that shot form if there was a way to do it better, but it does happen. Austin Rivers, son of an NBA coach, came to Duke with a horrendous shot form, and it wasn't fixed by the time he left us.

Again, your answer of why it could be disadvantageous to jump higher is valid. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it seems like you expect the discussion to end there. I think there is room to discuss possible advantages of jumping higher. Yes, one clear disadvantage is that it adds an extra variable. I also don't think that avoiding shot blockers isn't the only potential advantage.

Your statement that "if jumping higher improved shooting percentages, guys would always jump higher" is not logical statement in my mind. If I asked the question "Why don't NFL coaches use their timeouts more efficiently at the end of halves and games," the answer of "if it was possible to use timeouts more efficiently, they'd be doing it already" doesn't suffice. NFL coaches, who are professionals and the best in the world at what they do, mismanage timeouts all the time and leave their teams with less time on the clock than they could have had in a 2-minute drill. I'm not claiming to be a basketball whiz and generally think professionals are infinitely more knowledgeable than me, but it is possible to explore the idea that some more elevation can help, especially when you look at guys who struggle shooting from the outside like Zion who have great leaping ability but barely leave the floor.

My eye test says it tends to be bigger guys who don't shoot well who barely leave the floor when they shoot set 3's. That could be because they've been working on their shot and knowing that jumping high just adds another variable, they want to simplify things for themselves as much as possible. It could also be that those guys who struggle to shoot, in part, struggle because the don't have the right use of their legs and upward motion in their shot. That could maybe be fixed without elevating and just using your legs differently. It could also possibly be helped by jumping a little higher.

I think Ray Allen was a perfect mention. He had a real bounce to his shot. He wasn't jumping as high as Jordan during one of his game winning shots, but I wasn't suggesting that should be the norm for everybody on every shot. It was just a picture of him that made me think about this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1eE1wpf9fw - Kid can really shoot. He's clearly had some instruction and lots of practice. He makes a clear effort to leap every time he shoots. It's consistent, and he seems to have prevented that variable from being a variable, as his jumps look the same each time. He's not leaping with maximum effort - I'm sure he can leap higher than that, but I certainly wouldn't call it barely leaving the floor. If staying on the floor could increase his shooting percentage, I'd really like to see what he could do in the 3 point contest after that! I'm also not suggesting that Zion jump as high as he possibly can on a jumpshot; although, I'd like to watch.

[rsvman]

True, read that backwards. Still, there's no bad reason not to share that photo.

Curiously, you got it wrong again. I am pretty sure you meant to say that there is no bad reason to share the photo, rather than there is no bad reason not to share the photo. That would imply that all reasons for not sharing the photo were good, and thus sharing the photo would be bad.

I think. 😁

[Southgate0809]

Curiously, you got it wrong again. I am pretty sure you meant to say that there is no bad reason to share the photo, rather than there is no bad reason not to share the photo. That would imply that all reasons for not sharing the photo were good, and thus sharing the photo would be bad.

I think. 😁

haha correct, but I could care less.....

[accfanfrom1970]

Ask Chip Engelland. Whatever he says goes.

[ClemmonsDevil]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1eE1wpf9fw - Kid can really shoot. He's clearly had some instruction and lots of practice. He makes a clear effort to leap every time he shoots. It's consistent, and he seems to have prevented that variable from being a variable, as his jumps look the same each time. He's not leaping with maximum effort - I'm sure he can leap higher than that, but I certainly wouldn't call it barely leaving the floor. If staying on the floor could increase his shooting percentage, I'd really like to see what he could do in the 3 point contest after that! I'm also not suggesting that Zion jump as high as he possibly can on a jumpshot; although, I'd like to watch.

Oh that's interesting. I would call that a slight hop. So maybe we actually agree more than we think about the amount of hop. Just differ in description. Either way, good post.

[CDu]

The idea that jumping higher adds another variable is a good answer and is completely valid. But that moreso answers the question "Why would it be a bad idea to jump higher?" I gave the example of Zion. We actually don't know why he doesn't elevate more on a jump shot, so I don't know that you can see it's why HE doesn't jump higher. He's likely been shooting that way since high school. I wouldn't expect most adolescents and teenagers to have the basketball knowledge that jumping high on a jump shot could be a bad thing, so perhaps he was taught that by coaches and instructors. But what you're not accounting for is the real possibility that no one ever taught him to shoot that way. It's just how he does it. Some might balk at the idea that a young man could make it to Duke and the NBA with that shot form if there was a way to do it better, but it does happen. Austin Rivers, son of an NBA coach, came to Duke with a horrendous shot form, and it wasn't fixed by the time he left us.

Again, your answer of why it could be disadvantageous to jump higher is valid. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it seems like you expect the discussion to end there. I think there is room to discuss possible advantages of jumping higher. Yes, one clear disadvantage is that it adds an extra variable. I also don't think that avoiding shot blockers isn't the only potential advantage.

Your statement that "if jumping higher improved shooting percentages, guys would always jump higher" is not logical statement in my mind. If I asked the question "Why don't NFL coaches use their timeouts more efficiently at the end of halves and games," the answer of "if it was possible to use timeouts more efficiently, they'd be doing it already" doesn't suffice. NFL coaches, who are professionals and the best in the world at what they do, mismanage timeouts all the time and leave their teams with less time on the clock than they could have had in a 2-minute drill. I'm not claiming to be a basketball whiz and generally think professionals are infinitely more knowledgeable than me, but it is possible to explore the idea that some more elevation can help, especially when you look at guys who struggle shooting from the outside like Zion who have great leaping ability but barely leave the floor.

My eye test says it tends to be bigger guys who don't shoot well who barely leave the floor when they shoot set 3's. That could be because they've been working on their shot and knowing that jumping high just adds another variable, they want to simplify things for themselves as much as possible. It could also be that those guys who struggle to shoot, in part, struggle because the don't have the right use of their legs and upward motion in their shot. That could maybe be fixed without elevating and just using your legs differently. It could also possibly be helped by jumping a little higher.

I think Ray Allen was a perfect mention. He had a real bounce to his shot. He wasn't jumping as high as Jordan during one of his game winning shots, but I wasn't suggesting that should be the norm for everybody on every shot. It was just a picture of him that made me think about this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1eE1wpf9fw - Kid can really shoot. He's clearly had some instruction and lots of practice. He makes a clear effort to leap every time he shoots. It's consistent, and he seems to have prevented that variable from being a variable, as his jumps look the same each time. He's not leaping with maximum effort - I'm sure he can leap higher than that, but I certainly wouldn't call it barely leaving the floor. If staying on the floor could increase his shooting percentage, I'd really like to see what he could do in the 3 point contest after that! I'm also not suggesting that Zion jump as high as he possibly can on a jumpshot; although, I'd like to watch.

McCain definitely doesn’t make an effort to leap on those shots in my opinion. He is getting like 4-6 inches of elevation. He is barely jumping at all. His vertical is probably a good 25-30 inches higher than what he is doing there. It is a nice, easy motion. He jumps a little higher than I did or Clem did as a player, but he is still barely jumping. It is a hop.

That said, I think Clem’s post is a good summary. There are absolutely situations where guys need to elevate to shoot. Those just aren’t set shots. When guys have to elevate to shoot, they do so. When they don’t need to, most don’t. Because it is easier to make a shot with less moving parts.

Guys like Kerr and Redick elevated on lots of shots. But that was not typical on their set shots. Redick elevated coming off screens to get that extra separation from the defender, and he would rotate into his shot. But that was because he HAD to do so. On the rare occasions where he had a wide open look, he would barely jump. But because he was such a good shooter, those set shot opportunities were few. But Redick was such a great shooter that he could still make those shots. It is just that if he had the opportunity to take the easier set shot, he wouldn’t jump like that. Those guys adapted to the environment, which didn’t allow them many easy looks.

Even Jordan (not a super shooter, but still) didn’t typically jump like the image you mention in the OP when he had a set shot. He would jump about 6 inches or so. He only elevated in traffic when he needed to avoid a defender.

[jimmymax]

Speaking for myself, elevating on a jumpshot has never been an issue.

[Southgate0809]

To.me, McCain seems to get average or slightly above average height on his jump. This is such a subjective term, but there's good bounce to it. Zion has no bounce and seems like he's in the 1st percentile for vertical leap on his set shots. And to add more subjectivity, his lower body looks stiff and unbouncy.

[CDu]

As for the comments about big guys not getting lift and not shooting well, I don’t think it has anything to do with lack of lift. Those guys are also usually bad FT shooters too. Lots of reasons why big guys don’t shoot well: bigger hands (try shooting a softball) and longer arms, less practice at it, etc.