The science of shooting a basketball

[forevershockerfan]

There is nothing but money preventing players from seeking outside assistance. A shooting coach could work with individuals outside of the WSU framework if they have the money to pay for the extra training.

Kung WU and FSF could do a gig on how Not to shoot a basketball? I know that's right. Can we shoot around with your famous Basketball sir? Muhahahaha!!! We know that answer.

[Kung Wu]

Kung WU and FSF could do a gig on how Not to shoot a basketball? I know that's right. Can we shoot around with your famous Basketball sir? Muhahahaha!!! We know that answer.

Haha, no that bad boy is safely put away. But we could do a CLINIC on how not to shoot a basketball! We'd SO rock that out. Free!

[ShockerAlum93]

Jamaal Wilkes ... Anybody remember his shot, especially from the free throw line?

[shock]

Well I would hire that guy that trains Dirk.

[shockmonster]

I was listening to PJ Karliesemo last night talking about who he would take No. 1 in the draft and he said that the thing he didn't like about Simmons was that he was not a good shooter. However, he didn't say that he would not take him #1. I don't think that PJ is a "guru" but he was a good NBA coach for a long time. He went on to say that Simmons could develop into a better shooter. He also said that Lebron didn't have a good shot when coming out of high school and he has developed into a better shooter. Nothing about who his "guru" is though. Maybe he takes one with him. :)

[asiseeit]

You don't get to the D1 level at the 1/2/3 positions without good shooting mechanics. After that,
its shot selection, rythem and confidence

[Cdizzle]

You don't get to the D1 level at the 1/2/3 positions without good shooting mechanics.

I'm not sure I buy this.

In fact, I am sure I don't buy this.

[ShockdaWorld]

I'm not sure Tekele knew what a jump shot was when he got to the D1 level, but could be lethal by the time he left.

[shockmonster]

You don't get to the D1 level at the 1/2/3 positions without good shooting mechanics. After that,
its shot selection, rythem and confidence

Watch this guy shoot the basketball. A lot was off and he was a #1 Pick.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Matthew+kidd+gilchrist+youtube+basketball+shooting&view=detail&mid=A667BE4C9A6582AA6776A667BE4C9A6582AA6776&FORM=VIRE

[asiseeit]

exceptions to every rule I guess

[tempshock]

I believe Frankamp and Baker's primary problem is pretty simple. With very little inside scoring presence, a defense can concentrate more on them. Also, Frankamp shoots better off the dribble, and in this system he is getting most of his shots from passes.

I agree with the general premise that a lot of college players could stand to have a good shooting coach. I always felt there is an optimal height (which varies by distance) to shoot the ball. A lot of guys are taught to put a lot of arc on the ball, but for every foot higher you shoot it, you add two feet to the distance it travels one foot higher up, one foot further down) lessening the chances of making it. When defended you have to put more arc on the ball. I used to study Larry Bird, and he clearly varied the height of his shot depending on how closely he was guarded. His shot was much flatter when wide open. Many, if not most guys try to put the same arc on each shot (and usually more than necessary). You hear guys talk about shooter's roll, and having a soft touch. Those guys generally shoot the ball only as high as necessary, so when it does hit the rim it hits it softly. When you shoot higher than necessary, gravity speeds the descent the farther down it travels. Those balls don't land softly. I first figured that out shooting free throws. I reached the point where I could consistently hit 97 or 98 out of 100 (granted in non game situations...in game situations I would drop to low 90%'s due to tired legs, I assume.)

[WillieJeffJeffries]

I believe Frankamp and Baker's primary problem is pretty simple. With very little inside scoring presence, a defense can concentrate more on them. Also, Frankamp shoots better off the dribble, and in this system he is getting most of his shots from passes.

I agree with the general premise that a lot of college players could stand to have a good shooting coach. I always felt there is an optimal height (which varies by distance) to shoot the ball. A lot of guys are taught to put a lot of arc on the ball, but for every foot higher you shoot it, you add two feet to the distance it travels one foot higher up, one foot further down) lessening the chances of making it. When defended you have to put more arc on the ball. I used to study Larry Bird, and he clearly varied the height of his shot depending on how closely he was guarded. His shot was much flatter when wide open. Many, if not most guys try to put the same arc on each shot (and usually more than necessary). You hear guys talk about shooter's roll, and having a soft touch. Those guys generally shoot the ball only as high as necessary, so when it does hit the rim it hits it softly. When you shoot higher than necessary, gravity speeds the descent the farther down it travels. Those balls don't land softly. I first figured that out shooting free throws. I reached the point where I could consistently hit 97 or 98 out of 100 (granted in non game situations...in game situations I would drop to low 90%'s due to tired legs, I assume.)

Bingo, The Shox have no one down low that forces the defense to "double down" and free up the shooters. Also Baker drifts quite a bit on his shot which also causes some of his inconsistency.