Half-Court Offense Style?

[BeerPoisoning]

Coach K has taken a strong liking to positionless basketball and has practically said that’s how our program will operate from here on out — This makes me a little concerned with Tre returning this year and Jeremy Roach announcing his commitment for the 2020 class. Tre will be starting next year and it’s likely that Roach will takeover his duties the following year. IMO, they resemble each other... Both are pure playmakers and seemingly perform best at penetrating, creating, mid-range shooting. Also great defenders. Both are average speed and athleticism.

I think we all mostly agree that our half-court offense this year was pretty miserable. I won’t purely blame it on us operating positionlessly, but I think it played a huge role and led to heavy ISO which ultimately didn’t pan out. Why go positionless when we have a true playmaker can put the car in drive to start every half-court possession? Why not utilize it? I’m cool with the big dogs getting some ISO possessions, but why not give the true PG the keys to set these guys up? Positionless style naturally leads to more ISO, which makes us more easily scoutable.

Of course it’s easy to say it now, but I think we would have tremendously benefitted from letting Tre run (or at least start up) the show this past year. Yeah, he might of brought the ball up... but every half-court possession seemingly started with a swing pass to Z or RJ to run things. As talented as they both were, they aren’t really creators for anyone other than themselves. I’m by no means calling them selfish. RJ just wasn’t a playmaker and Z didn’t have the handles to be a penetrating creator for others. Maybe I’m just traditionally minded, thoughts?

 

[RanDEVILman]

I dont know that our half court offense this past year was miserable. For a time (prior to some of the injuries in the second half of the season) I seem to remember it was ranked very high in efficiency. I know some of that, maybe a lot of that, was due to some fast break scoring, but the offense was never bad, even on half court ratings. The problem I think most people had, myself included, is that it was pretty ugly. You mention the ISO stuff that we ran through RJ or Zion. That is not beautiful to watch, but it was efficient aside from one or two games, even late in the year. Its like saying the Houston Rockets have a miserable offense. They don't, its just ugly as sin.

Now to your bigger point. I agree that a more "traditional" offense would probably fit this team better. I think you can play "positionless" basketball and still run the offense through Tre. Also, when you really watch Duke last year they ran a lot of sets. Simple stuff, but it wasn't free-lance motion or anything. I think this team being older will be more able to adjust and play lots of different styles, allowing the athletes to ball at times, or putting the ball in Tre's hands an letting him be the guy.

 

[Liftee]

Although the metrics indicated our half court offense was effective, considering the lack of shooting and foul shooting ability, it was not as appealing as the days when Duke ran pure motion offense. I'm guessing that Coach K and staff see the efficiency of some of our players in certain positions on the court and want them with the ball in those locations. Given that in the OAD era we've had a few players who were almost unstoppable in certain places on the court, we may continue to see that even though we pine for the days of motion offense.

 

[politicsasusual21_rivals176516]

When you have no real shooters your offense is going to be vulnerable, no matter what offense you run

 

[HuffyJB]

When you have no real shooters your offense is going to be vulnerable, no matter what offense you run

This X1000.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

Although the metrics indicated our half court offense was effective, considering the lack of shooting and foul shooting ability, it was not as appealing as the days when Duke ran pure motion offense. I'm guessing that Coach K and staff see the efficiency of some of our players in certain positions on the court and want them with the ball in those locations. Given that in the OAD era we've had a few players who were almost unstoppable in certain places on the court, we may continue to see that even though we pine for the days of motion offense.

Transition opportunities (credit to good D) and offensive rebounding is what made the offensive efficiency “appear” to be good. KenPom doesn’t count Oboards as fresh possessions, so we finished 7th in his rankings. Where as calculating Oboards as a new possession, I believe we ranked around 20th. That ranking would have been substantially lower if it weren’t weighted heavily by tons of transition points primarily in the first half of the season. Our last 10 games we barely, just barely averaged 1 point per possession, that’s about 200th. If you look at those final 10 games, there’s very very few transition scores.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

When you have no real shooters your offense is going to be vulnerable, no matter what offense you run

Fair... We weren’t a good shooting team, but we also didn’t have many good shot selections nor did we work to find an open man (besides Tre being left alone) everything was just so ISO-heavy. Great shooting has never handicapped a team but it’s not mandatory to hang a banner. RJ (IMO) was a good 3pt shooter but he took way too many errant/contested attempts for his % to reflect it. AOC never moved to get open, nobody did. Everyone stood still. The only guy that rotated and moved was Tre... unfortunately our worst shooter.

 

[dukehokie]

Fair... We weren’t a good shooting team, but we also didn’t have many good shot selections nor did we work to find an open man (besides Tre being left alone) everything was just so ISO-heavy. Great shooting has never handicapped a team but it’s not mandatory to hang a banner. RJ (IMO) was a good 3pt shooter but he took way too many errant/contested attempts for his % to reflect it. AOC never moved to get open, nobody did. Everyone stood still. The only guy that rotated and moved was Tre... unfortunately our worst shooter.

The lack of shooting didn’t fit K’s vision. He and Scheyer even said multiple times, they never imagined this team would shoot so poorly based on what they were seeing in practices. When it became evident that it wouldn’t “click,” the team went straight ISO, to their detriment. Even just having one reliable shooter (the thought was Cam), would’ve been a game changer for that team, but alas it never happened.

I have no doubts that this team will shoot better. That will absolutely fit K’s vision. I think we’ll get a truer measure of whether K is right or wrong about how to play this game with this team.

 

[christophero]

For most teams, a lot has to go right, not wrong, to reach the Elite Eight.

 

[dukehokie]

For most teams, a lot has to go right, not wrong, to reach the Elite Eight.

Exactly. This team had one killer flaw. Most every other aspect was amazing. It just stunk that we couldn’t find transition opportunities anymore to counterbalance the lack of shooting.

 

[RanDEVILman]

I get what you are saying about the way offensive rankings take certain stats into account etc. What I would say is that things like Offensive Rebounding are a part of half court offense. Playing big, standing guys neat the lane, attacking the rim (even when done in an ugly manner) are all elements of developing a half court offense.
The transition thing can skew those numbers too, but its not like anyone is really bad in transition. Theres a reason fast break points are highly sought after, everyone converts them at a high level, so I wonder how much that moves the needle? Idk honestly. Anyways, this years team will be very different to say the least, hopefully more aethetically pleasing.

 

[2 skerz 3_rivals208847]

Exactly. This team had one killer flaw. Most every other aspect was amazing. It just stunk that we couldn’t find transition opportunities anymore to counterbalance the lack of shooting.

Our tempo vs MSU was Virginiaesque

 

[christophero]

I like a line up of Tre, Moore, Baker, Hurt and Carey. Baker and Hurt can shoot it (I know Baker didn't this year but he will) and we can spread the floor nicely. Let Alex be a shooter off the bench. We have nice options with this team, esp. if a senior comes back.

 

[SwatX1]

When you have no real shooters your offense is going to be vulnerable, no matter what offense you run

Bingo

 

[QC Dukie]

The pick and roll and dribble drive would have offset our lack of shooting.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

The pick and roll and dribble drive would have offset our lack of shooting.

Yep. Any kind of movement would have offset the poor shooting... We played statue basketball in the ACC/NCAA T

 

[dukesince91]

Anyways, this years team will be very different to say the least, hopefully more aesthetically pleasing.

I thought Zion's dunks and overall play was aesthetically pleasing.

 

[christophero]

Zion yes. Everyone else, no.

 

[hart2chesson]

The pick and roll and dribble drive would have offset our lack of shooting.

Ipsy would be all over it QC!!! OFC

 

[BeerPoisoning]

The lack of shooting didn’t fit K’s vision. He and Scheyer even said multiple times, they never imagined this team would shoot so poorly based on what they were seeing in practices. When it became evident that it wouldn’t “click,” the team went straight ISO, to their detriment. Even just having one reliable shooter (the thought was Cam), would’ve been a game changer for that team, but alas it never happened.

I have no doubts that this team will shoot better. That will absolutely fit K’s vision. I think we’ll get a truer measure of whether K is right or wrong about how to play this game with this team.

I know Coach K likes his teams to fire off those 3’s heavy and he envisioned them shooting way better... But we shot piss poor all year. The first half of the season we looked like the Titanic prior to hitting the iceberg. The ACC/NCAA T games we had hit the iceberg. Got lucky and landed on a lifeboat for a few games but it was ugly.

First half we moved really well as a team in the half-court. There were a lot of ISO possessions but most were designed. RJ, Cam and Z would run a weave at the top of the key. They would hand the ball off to each other and screen defenders hoping for a forced D-switch that created a good mismatch. If defenses decided to pack after the weave there would be a nice up-screen set by whoever was at the 5 spot. That helps in attacking the basket because it clips the defender and gives our ISO guy a step on his man. We also ran a pretty sweet dive-style offense which corrupted pack-line. Zion would post up, that demands double team, RJ would come off an off-ball screen and Z would hit him with a pass at the right time. This gives RJ an open lane opportunity against a broken defense scrambling to return to its base set. Stopping RJ forces quick D communication as everyone is so scrambled. Even if they managed to stop him, that usually left Z unboxed and in perfect O-board position. We had a couple other nice tricks up our sleeve as well.

When I watch all of our ACC/NCAA T games, I didn’t see any of that. I don’t disagree with the camp about poor shooting being a huge factor. But nobody in January thought we wouldn’t win because we couldn’t shoot. We looked amazing regardless of those shooting woes. Can’t say the same about those tournament games.

 

[dukehokie]

I know Coach K likes his teams to fire off those 3’s heavy and he envisioned them shooting way better... But we shot piss poor all year. The first half of the season we looked like the Titanic prior to hitting the iceberg. The ACC/NCAA T games we had hit the iceberg. Got lucky and landed on a lifeboat for a few games but it was ugly.

First half we moved really well as a team in the half-court. There were a lot of ISO possessions but most were designed. RJ, Cam and Z would run a weave at the top of the key. They would hand the ball off to each other and screen defenders hoping for a forced D-switch that created a good mismatch. If defenses decided to pack after the weave there would be a nice up-screen set by whoever was at the 5 spot. That helps in attacking the basket because it clips the defender and gives our ISO guy a step on his man. We also ran a pretty sweet dive-style offense which corrupted pack-line. Zion would post up, that demands double team, RJ would come off an off-ball screen and Z would hit him with a pass at the right time. This gives RJ an open lane opportunity against a broken defense scrambling to return to its base set. Stopping RJ forces quick D communication as everyone is so scrambled. Even if they managed to stop him, that usually left Z unboxed and in perfect O-board position. We had a couple other nice tricks up our sleeve as well.

When I watch all of our ACC/NCAA T games, I didn’t see any of that. I don’t disagree with the camp about poor shooting being a huge factor. But nobody in January thought we wouldn’t win because we couldn’t shoot. We looked amazing regardless of those shooting woes. Can’t say the same about those tournament games.

Love the breakdown.

The NCAA became simply, sag off of Tre. That adds an extra defender not allowing any opposite ball counters the offense might throw your way. Duke got lucky that Tre went Seth Curry from 3 against Tech. When Duke needed the transition game the most, it was non-existent (post-Zion injury).

At the end of the season, when the staff has no true time to scout, you have to have a calling card to fall back on. In 2001, it was 3 point shooting. If they miss 3-4 more of those threes against Maryland, they lose. In 2010 it was offensive rebounding and a version of the packline defense that no one had seen. In 2015, two guys who weren’t on the scouting report for most defenses (Grayson and Tyus) stepped up and carried the team for long stretches. Couple that with what became a very good defensive team and there you go. 1991 and 1992 had a nice combo of 3 of some the greatest college basketball players ever known and a super versatile roster. They’d played the game in a way most teams had never seen before.

This team started with a signature of being able to attack at will and get on the break better than any college basketball team in the past 20 years, if not longer. Every team has a weakness, but if your strength can take over, you can win it all. This team lost it’s best strength somewhere along the way and it was unfortunate.

 

[RanDEVILman]

Love the breakdown.

The NCAA became simply, sag off of Tre. That adds an extra defender not allowing any opposite ball counters the offense might throw your way. Duke got lucky that Tre went Seth Curry from 3 against Tech. When Duke needed the transition game the most, it was non-existent (post-Zion injury).

At the end of the season, when the staff has no true time to scout, you have to have a calling card to fall back on. In 2001, it was 3 point shooting. If they miss 3-4 more of those threes against Maryland, they lose. In 2010 it was offensive rebounding and a version of the packline defense that no one had seen. In 2015, two guys who weren’t on the scouting report for most defenses (Grayson and Tyus) stepped up and carried the team for long stretches. Couple that with what became a very good defensive team and there you go. 1991 and 1992 had a nice combo of 3 of some the greatest college basketball players ever known and a super versatile roster. They’d played the game in a way most teams had never seen before.

This team started with a signature of being able to attack at will and get on the break better than any college basketball team in the past 20 years, if not longer. Every team has a weakness, but if your strength can take over, you can win it all. This team lost it’s best strength somewhere along the way and it was unfortunate.

I would agree with a lot of that. I would argue that this team had a strength, it was in individual ability to score out of iso situations. It is "ugly" ball but it was a legit strength. All those other teams also had some fortunate bounces which are necessary for championships. Im no expert on the '91 team, but the UNLV game was a little fluky in a few ways. The '92 team had the shot, which as awesome as it was, its a less than 50% proposition, even with the greatest ever doing the shooting. The '01 team had the miracle comeback that doesn't happen without some great bounces. The '10 team had the last shot not going in, (can't forget the easy bracket lol), then the '15 team had one of the cleanest journeys I can remember that still required late game heroics from Tyus. Had RJ made some FT's, or Allen's shot rolled in, we'd possibly (likely?) be holding these last two teams in much higher regard. Not to say we should, but its possible that they were only a bounce or two from being remembered for "something".

 

[dukehokie]

I would agree with a lot of that. I would argue that this team had a strength, it was in individual ability to score out of iso situations. It is "ugly" ball but it was a legit strength. All those other teams also had some fortunate bounces which are necessary for championships. Im no expert on the '91 team, but the UNLV game was a little fluky in a few ways. The '92 team had the shot, which as awesome as it was, its a less than 50% proposition, even with the greatest ever doing the shooting. The '01 team had the miracle comeback that doesn't happen without some great bounces. The '10 team had the last shot not going in, (can't forget the easy bracket lol), then the '15 team had one of the cleanest journeys I can remember that still required late game heroics from Tyus. Had RJ made some FT's, or Allen's shot rolled in, we'd possibly (likely?) be holding these last two teams in much higher regard. Not to say we should, but its possible that they were only a bounce or two from being remembered for "something".

Well it would be crazy if this past team wasn’t remembered for “something,” but I do get your point. You don’t run the NCAA gauntlet without luck which is true.

You made the point about ISO ball. While I do agree that at times, that was a strength with this team, it was also their undoing. The thing that was lacking at the end of the season was transition. Transition ball played into everyone’s hands except maybe Ques.

IIRC, Duke had 0 fast break points against MSU and they somewhere around 14 or so. I’m no expert, but a team that averaged about 10-12 points a game in that category getting 0 is a BIG step back.

So for all of the lamenting over poor shooting and tactics, one fast break by the team that is one of the best to ever do it, and Duke wins by 1. Approach your season average, and you win going away.

As revisionist as that is, it’s a part of the identity this team created and they went away from it down the stretch.

 

[timo0402]

Well it would be crazy if this past team wasn’t remembered for “something,” but I do get your point. You don’t run the NCAA gauntlet without luck which is true.

You made the point about ISO ball. While I do agree that at times, that was a strength with this team, it was also their undoing. The thing that was lacking at the end of the season was transition. Transition ball played into everyone’s hands except maybe Ques.

IIRC, Duke had 0 fast break points against MSU and they somewhere around 14 or so. I’m no expert, but a team that averaged about 10-12 points a game in that category getting 0 is a BIG step back.

So for all of the lamenting over poor shooting and tactics, one fast break by the team that is one of the best to ever do it, and Duke wins by 1. Approach your season average, and you win going away.

As revisionist as that is, it’s a part of the identity this team created and they went away from it down the stretch.

We talked all year OTPC about the strength of this team was it’s ability create turnovers and score easy buckets in transition. The exact opposite happened in the elite 8, we had 17 Turnovers and zero transition baskets. We lost by 1.

 

[Liftee]

Most years when Duke wins the championship they are improving right through the tournament. This team peaked early and didn't improve on defense, on half court offense and of course shooting.

The other thing is no one stepped up as the season went on to give that extra surge of energy. Goldwire did a few times on defense but was too challenged offensively. White got worse on offense. AOC was too inconsistent. Javin only took what the defense allowed him to have. We didn't get that Grayson type shot of adrenaline because nobody stepped up. Sad.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

Love the breakdown.

The NCAA became simply, sag off of Tre. That adds an extra defender not allowing any opposite ball counters the offense might throw your way. Duke got lucky that Tre went Seth Curry from 3 against Tech. When Duke needed the transition game the most, it was non-existent (post-Zion injury).

At the end of the season, when the staff has no true time to scout, you have to have a calling card to fall back on. In 2001, it was 3 point shooting. If they miss 3-4 more of those threes against Maryland, they lose. In 2010 it was offensive rebounding and a version of the packline defense that no one had seen. In 2015, two guys who weren’t on the scouting report for most defenses (Grayson and Tyus) stepped up and carried the team for long stretches. Couple that with what became a very good defensive team and there you go. 1991 and 1992 had a nice combo of 3 of some the greatest college basketball players ever known and a super versatile roster. They’d played the game in a way most teams had never seen before.

This team started with a signature of being able to attack at will and get on the break better than any college basketball team in the past 20 years, if not longer. Every team has a weakness, but if your strength can take over, you can win it all. This team lost it’s best strength somewhere along the way and it was unfortunate.

Defenses sagging off of Tre definitely made an impact, you’re right. I get that having an extra loose defender makes it harder on the other guys but there’s ways to combat that and nothing was done. I guess that’s just my main point - We did nothing other than pure ISO with no “design” in it. Z and RJ are good, but they aren’t the NBA superstars that do it consistently well. Z has that level of talent, but not the ball-control to make it efficient IMO. I agree with everything you’re saying. We simply didn’t have enough scorers, but at the same time we had plenty of guys capable of scoring who just didn’t step up to provide that help.

I still can’t wrap my head around our lack of transition offense in those tournament games. Our defense was lazy. It LOOKED good because fundamentally we were defending well straight up, but there was no intensity for the gambling style that won us our transition offense. I think Jack played a big role (prior Z injury) in pumping the team up with his defense. He was good at being our momentum guy as weird as it sounds. His injury hurt us more than anyone has admitted.

 

[RanDEVILman]

Well it would be crazy if this past team wasn’t remembered for “something,” but I do get your point. You don’t run the NCAA gauntlet without luck which is true.

You made the point about ISO ball. While I do agree that at times, that was a strength with this team, it was also their undoing. The thing that was lacking at the end of the season was transition. Transition ball played into everyone’s hands except maybe Ques.

IIRC, Duke had 0 fast break points against MSU and they somewhere around 14 or so. I’m no expert, but a team that averaged about 10-12 points a game in that category getting 0 is a BIG step back.

So for all of the lamenting over poor shooting and tactics, one fast break by the team that is one of the best to ever do it, and Duke wins by 1. Approach your season average, and you win going away.

As revisionist as that is, it’s a part of the identity this team created and they went away from it down the stretch.

True. The transition stuff did die off. I think a lot of that early in the year was because our defense forced "true" fast break points. K has never really been a "secondary break" coach, so its not like transition offense was really our ID, it was more about the fact that our defense forced a lot of turnovers...but I don't really have those stats.

As to why that style of offense fell off, we both know that every year the NCAAT slows down the pace of the game. Unless you are a team that truly runs a high-paced offense (like the light blue boys some years) then you will play a slowed down game in the NCAAT. Also, the fact that you generally play better teams the further you go, means that turnovers will happen less. That coupled with the "weaker" team purposely trying to limit possessions, which may not have been their focus early in the season, all makes transition fast break points tougher to come by. In the end the real question to ask is: should a team be worried if they depend on transition points heavily going into the tournament? Just something to ponder.

 

[DukeRulesBasketball]

I like a line up of Tre, Moore, Baker, Hurt and Carey. Baker and Hurt can shoot it (I know Baker didn't this year but he will) and we can spread the floor nicely. Let Alex be a shooter off the bench. We have nice options with this team, esp. if a senior comes back.

I think Cassius will ultimately be starting at the 2 when the season starts IMO.

Tre Jones
Cassius Stanley
Wendell Moore
Matthew Hurt
Vernon Carey

That would be my projected starting lineup.

 

[dukehokie]

True. The transition stuff did die off. I think a lot of that early in the year was because our defense forced "true" fast break points. K has never really been a "secondary break" coach, so its not like transition offense was really our ID, it was more about the fact that our defense forced a lot of turnovers...but I don't really have those stats.

As to why that style of offense fell off, we both know that every year the NCAAT slows down the pace of the game. Unless you are a team that truly runs a high-paced offense (like the light blue boys some years) then you will play a slowed down game in the NCAAT. Also, the fact that you generally play better teams the further you go, means that turnovers will happen less. That coupled with the "weaker" team purposely trying to limit possessions, which may not have been their focus early in the season, all makes transition fast break points tougher to come by. In the end the real question to ask is: should a team be worried if they depend on transition points heavily going into the tournament? Just something to ponder.

Couldn’t agree more.

 

[dukehokie]

I think Cassius will ultimately be starting at the 2 when the season starts IMO.

Tre Jones
Cassius Stanley
Wendell Moore
Matthew Hurt
Vernon Carey

That would be my projected starting lineup.

I tend to think this is the lineup we see. Especially if Ques and/or Jav leave. If both come back, we may see either one as a starter, pushing Matt to the 3 and Wendell to the 2.

 

[nets on nets on nets]

I think Cassius will ultimately be starting at the 2 when the season starts IMO.

Tre Jones
Cassius Stanley
Wendell Moore
Matthew Hurt
Vernon Carey

That would be my projected starting lineup.

Pretty safe bet to say this is it. My worry would be 3 point shooting, however that could be remedied by bring AOC and Baker as the first guys off the bench.
If AOC makes "the leap," I could see him starting at the 2, would help with our shooting. However, after last season, I wouldn't bank on it.

 

[dukehokie]

Pretty safe bet to say this is it. My worry would be 3 point shooting, however that could be remedied by bring AOC and Baker as the first guys off the bench.
If AOC makes "the leap," I could see him starting at the 2, would help with our shooting. However, after last season, I wouldn't bank on it.

Hurt, Carey and Moore should all be capable three point shooters. Cassius and Tre are the wild cards here. If Tre improves even a little, shooting should be vastly improved from last season.

 

[nets on nets on nets]

Hurt, Carey and Moore should all be capable three point shooters. Cassius and Tre are the wild cards here. If Tre improves even a little, shooting should be vastly improved from last season.

Is Moore viewed as a strong shooter? I've always been under the impression he is more of a slasher and the closest guy we have had to Justise Winslow.

I understand Justise made the 3's when they counted most and he shot 41% from there (jesus, that's amazing actually), but I never felt comfortable when he shot the 3.
If Moore can be 40%, that is a huge plus I must say.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

Is Moore viewed as a strong shooter? I've always been under the impression he is more of a slasher and the closest guy we have had to Justise Winslow.

I understand Justise made the 3's when they counted most and he shot 41% from there (jesus, that's amazing actually), but I never felt comfortable when he shot the 3.
If Moore can be 40%, that is a huge plus I must say.

He’s not a strong shooter. Great defender with an offensive slashing mentality. I think he will have the green light for open 3’s (he’s capable of shooting / making them) but he’s not known for his shot so he won’t be a guy just pulling them up... I don’t think Winslow is a bad comparison, but he was more polished all-around coming in.

Winslow had that mid-season cold stretch if I remember correctly... I think that had all of us holding our breath when he threw it up from deep.

 

[dukehokie]

He’s not a strong shooter. Great defender with an offensive slashing mentality. I think he will have the green light for open 3’s (he’s capable of shooting / making them) but he’s not known for his shot so he won’t be a guy just pulling them up... I don’t think Winslow is a bad comparison, but he was more polished all-around coming in.

Winslow had that mid-season cold stretch if I remember correctly... I think that had all of us holding our breath when he threw it up from deep.

False. Moore is a good shooter. Is he the strongest of shooters? No. Could he shoot in the high 30’s? Yes. Does that make him a strong shooter? IMO it does.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

False. Moore is a good shooter. Is he the strongest of shooters? No. Could he shoot in the high 30’s? Yes. Does that make him a strong shooter? IMO it does.

Hmm. I thought I read that he has the range to shoot from 3 but he lacks consistency big time. Maybe I misread.

 

[dukehokie]

Hmm. I thought I read that he has the range to shoot from 3 but he lacks consistency big time. Maybe I misread.

Whoever wrote that only watched his highlights. He is more than capable as a shooter. I was even wrong about that until I saw him play a few times. He will be a reliable shooter. No Seth Curry or anything, but he’ll be similar to what Justise gave us.

His biggest strength absolutely is the way he uses angles to get the perfect shot on his drives and he uses his strength and body so well. He’s not a jump out of the gym athlete by any stretch. He may have single digit dunks this season. But he will have a high percentage inside the arc.

 

[BeerPoisoning]

Whoever wrote that only watched his highlights. He is more than capable as a shooter. I was even wrong about that until I saw him play a few times. He will be a reliable shooter. No Seth Curry or anything, but he’ll be similar to what Justise gave us.

His biggest strength absolutely is the way he uses angles to get the perfect shot on his drives and he uses his strength and body so well. He’s not a jump out of the gym athlete by any stretch. He may have single digit dunks this season. But he will have a high percentage inside the arc.

I haven’t seen him play. It was a review of the Nike Hoops Summit, but I can’t remember who wrote the article. I read it a couple weeks ago. I’ll take your word on it.

 

[LouisiAaron]

As long as we don’t have Tre pass to the wing and go stand in the corner, we will be fine.