Here's the thing: part of being a better shooter is taking better shots. If a player's shooting percentage goes up because he's being more selective, that MAKES HIM A BETTER SHOOTER. A huge part of the skill of shooting is maintaining consistent mechanics; that proposition becomes much easier when you take better (more open/less rushed) shots. That IS becoming a better shooter. ILcommenter is missing the point by creating a false distinction.
Illinois 88, NC State 74 POSTGAME
- Status
It's also very clear his shooting form is much improved. He used to have a very flat trajectory, much more arc on the shot now.
I don't want anyone taking contested shots unless we have a second left on the shot clock.
This link has been posted before btw:
http://www.startribune.com/pomeroy-...have-much-control-over-opponent-3p/140012983/
I agree once we see stiffer defenses I'd like to see JCL take more minutes at the 2. His 3 pt shot is and will almost certainly always be better than TA. I'm not a huge fan of the TA and JCL backcourt duo though. They are both meh ball handlers, but I can see it becoming a great combo given TA toughness and BBIQ. I think that is what needs to be ironed out. Not if TA should be playing the 2, but if TA and JCL can play well together. They haven't seen a ton of time together, but they will need to if we are gonna depend on them. Right now, the TJL and TA show has been pretty great, but like you said, once stiffer D's (no pun intended) come to play, not sure we will be such of a threat with more pressure in their faces.
One thing I've noticed is TA does have issues with contested shots. Maybe just because he's rarely taking contested 3 pters unless its late in the shot clock, but he tends to lose a lot of his form when he does. JCL however takes at least two contested three pters each game and while the result isn't perfect, he looks just as good shooting those as he does any other time.
Foggy's response to the analogy wasn't about competition, it was about quality of shot. Taking a good quality shot is like finding the wide open shortcut when 405 is in gridlock. Tracy has improved both his quality of shot and his shooting mechanics. That makes him a serviceable 2G and gives us the opportunity to play a pure PG along side him. Now, nobody should be saying he takes all of JCLs minutes, but that starting him (for his leadership/defense/heart/intangibles) while still getting that bonus of better shooting is a great idea. He can play 10-15 at 2G and 10-15 at PG. JCL can come in off the bench for either TA or TJL and it still works.
Also, your idea that once we see better competition, the real Tracy will come out and he won't be able to hit many 3s is way too premature.
Tracy has shot .333/.304/.222 against the cupcake part of the season his Fr/Sph/Jr years respectively. He is now shooting .733 with a couple cupcakes left on the schedule. His percentages for "good teams/conference play" are .250/.266/.299. His junior year he actually improved once we hit the "heart of the season." This year in the first 3 "tough" games he is shooting .364. If he trends like his junior year, he will actually hold serve and have a good, if not great, shooting year. If he does regress (which we all think he will) and his regression is around 35% from the field, you take that every day from your bulldog slasher combo guard.
For reference, JCL shot .424 against the cupcakes and .231 against the good competition. So I think it's fair for folks to say that Tracy can take some time at the 2G and we can still be successful until JCL gets back on track and shooting over 40%.
Not sure I'd call it weak but it sure was way more roundabout than it should be. After the fake back to the top, he had the guy clearly beat. Gotta go straight at it there; you either draw the contact foul or you get to the hoop faster, with the perimeter defender helpless and less time for any help to appear. As it turned out here, their help guy actually looked about like our big's helping.
The initial poster's take with which you vehemently disagree was in a sentence which contained the two words "right now". The poster was not arguing that Abrams should be the starting 2 the rest of the year; he was saying that based on TA's shooting so well and JCL's shaky performances, you can't argue with the way things have transpired to date -- Abrams logging a lot of minutes at the 2. The argument needn't have devolved into whether TA's shooting percentage will revert back to the mean, whether Abrams has or hasn't improved his shooting from practicing it in extended downtime, whether Ray Rice did or didn't improve his percentage and why or why not, etc.
You might have responded to the original poster that yes, TA's shooting well now but in your opinion he'll get increasingly more difficult looks and the percentage will likely go down, and that JCL is therefore the guy who should be our starting 2. But you said "I can", then created a different argument. The next guy's unfortunate "obviously mediocre" post wouldn't have been made to set you off on what, in my opinion, was a series of well-stated arguments on your part that unfortunately and unnecessarily each ended with snark. The response to the "obviously mediocre" poster could have been to clarify the discussion but the "go read a book" add-on got the snark show going until 3 or 4 pages later, when most posters were able to identify (and pretty much agree with) your actual position.
That's my take on today's digression anyway. Congrats on being in your 2nd year, exactly 40 years after my 2nd year there. You're halfway home. Don't take the following as a lecture; you may in fact already know this just as well as I do. You will find when you get out that, no matter how much you're tempted to drop snark, sarcasm, etc. into written legal arguments, you will be much better-served by training yourself to avoid doing so. I'd posit that our forum might be a good place to start, but that's obviously your call. Maybe develop a rule that you take one unwarranted dig for free, and don't respond with your own until the same guy does it a second time?
It still looks flat to me. Of course that could be, partially, a 6'2" TViewer evaluating a 6'10" shooter.
I'm gonna agree with WVC. It's one of the first things I noticed about Tracy's improved shot, and even (gasp!) Rayvonte a couple years ago.
Ransom Stoddard
Ordained Dudeist Priest
- Bloomington, IL
TA's a combo guard. If we have a solid PG, there's no reason he can't or shouldn't be at the 2. He's a solid defender and while his shot is still falling he's a great option to have on the floor because of his leadership and decision making.
The whole controversy in this thread was whether or not his shot would continue to fall and whether or not his stats from 2012-2014 are an indicator of his stats in 2016-2017.
Big part of his increase must be the fact we weapons all over the court and bench now. I always felt like he try to do too much.
It's probably that plus he doesn't move as well as he used to so he's learned his limitations over the sit out time. I thought he was moving well, and his speed and jumping numbers were better than ever coming in to the year. But then I watched some of the Miami tournament game on YouTube, and you can see the difference in his ease of movement and bounce back then.
- Status