lola needs to work with the staff on her shooting mechanics before she receives any significant playing time in the rotation

I've brought up her mechanics before. What do yu see is wrong with her mechanics. We can compare notes.

at this point in her development lola does not square up to the basket with verticality on her outside jumper with a consistent release point which results in wayward shots that usually got too much elevation...the missed 3 pointers for great shooters like lulu & ionna tend to be short or long, lola's misses (which is also an issue with zhara king) are right or left which is a red flag on splatter charts that significant work on shooting fundamental mechanics is necessary...just getting healthy is not the solution

My biggest complaint is she starts the shot from her left side and brings it to the middle. Her release is too high. but i don't think she got to be the Hawian player of the year by not scoring. J Brown had a very high arc her freshman year. But her accuracy improved. She still had a hgh arc but not as hig. Remember Purvis Short of the Warriors. He had a high arc.

wvitbear said:

---

My biggest complaint is she starts the shot from her left side and brings it to the middle. Her release is too high. but i don't think she got to be the Hawian player of the year by not scoring. J Brown had a very high arc her freshman year. But her accuracy improved. She still had a hgh arc but not as hig. Remember Purvis Short of the Warriors. He had a high arc.

---

Agreed, that left side thing makes it look like she's shooting a screwball. Makes you wonder what percentage of her points in high school came from drives as opposed to outside shots. Coming from the weak side hand seems like it would be hard to improve on. OTOH, Ioanna's shot kind of does the same thing but it comes from the strong side hand. Sometimes her shot looks like a "curve ball", but obviously there's no need to fix it.

agreed that the pre shot shifting of the ball is not fundamentally sound & not only eliminates a quick release like lulu & ionna but also significantly impacts her accuracy, this is correctable but gonna take some work

great players in high school can bully their way to the bucket for 25+ points per game against 5'6" defenders, that **** is not gonna work in the acc

Fixing it is definitely Lola's assignment for the summer.

lola & zhara need to start working on their shot mechanics now

Don't see much with Zhara's mechanics. Can hit the three. did you watch the practices where you can see her shoot 40 threes. And she can drive. but she is reckless, and that is where I see her problem.

zhara king is 14 of 25 on free throws (that's 56% on an unguarded 15 foot shot) & 3 of 10 (30%) on 3 pointers this season

unfortunately in actual basketball games u don't get to shoot 40 3s in a row to find ur groove

king's shooting mechanics are not fundamentally sound nor is her lack of defensive intensity

Shocky1 said:

---

zhara king is 14 of 25 on free throws (that's 56% on an unguarded 15 foot shot) & 3 of 10 (30%) on 3 pointers this season

unfortunately in actual basketball games u don't get to shoot 40 3s in a row to find ur groove

king's shooting mechanics are not fundamentally sound nor is her lack of defensive intensity

---

don't mean to pile on Zhara because she definitely has potential, but from what I've seen, when she drives to the hoop she seems to make up her mind a bit too early about putting the ball up when sometimes dishing is the better option. I would think with some work this is fixable.

zhara is not really a distributing/facilitating point guard, that's why she's been playing the 2 this season as her strength at this time is attacking the basketball/creating her own bucket which is a valued skillset offensively...not a fan of her body language on the bench, lola is exemplary with her genuine team spirit/enthusiasm

kamryn mafua needs to relentlessly work on her quick twitch +1 athleticism in the s&c program

gabby just gotta keep listening to the coach, luv her high intensity hustle/energy (she runs back on d faster than some guards)...abigor's upside is unreal & she's more coachable/less stubborn than michelle in her 1st year in berkeley

freshmen gotta develop but the time to start working on their games is now

I thought we were talking about mechanics. Watching her shoot is how you determine her mechanics.

wvitbear said:

---

My biggest complaint is she starts the shot from her left side and brings it to the middle. Her release is too high. but i don't think she got to be the Hawian player of the year by not scoring. J Brown had a very high arc her freshman year. But her accuracy improved. She still had a hgh arc but not as hig. Remember Purvis Short of the Warriors. He had a high arc.

---

From where I sit, when she warms up and I watch her shoot from the corner, it's a very awkward looking shot. Might be even start from the middle & shoot from the right. I know she probably grew up shooting like this but just doesn't look smooth.

Significant improvement at the college level is rare, but possible.

Of course players will get better around the margins, simply with physical maturity and experience. But quantum leaps are a different story.

Mechanics: Most P4 players have been playing year round since age 10. Their shooting mechanics got locked in during middle school, when they basically quit growing in height. To change those mechanics after many years is an arduous, one-step-forward-two-steps-back process that takes a lot of time and patience (from the coaches too) and is not guaranteed. Players have a ceiling in shooting, as in everything else, and it may be how good they are with the mechanics that got them to P4 is as good as they can be. Or they can't improve enough to move the needle.

Is it worth the effort? If you're not playing, it is. And Olivia Miles of Notre Dame went from 27% threes to 40% so it can happen. But it's a roll of the dice.

Quickness, athleticisim, explosion: I can't think of very many players, if any, who managed to change these fundamental physical attributes enough to matter. (Starting way overweight and losing it will do it sometimes, but I don't think that's the case here.) That's why some college coaches will tell you they can see if a player fits at the next level by watching the layup line.

Turnovers, mental game: The ability to process what's happening on the court very quickly comes with experience but it's also natural talent. Draymond Green is the classic example of a positive; the many, many players with all the necessary skills and athleticism who simply can't perform in the rapid pace of elite basketball are proof that it's really hard to try to learn this. (The G League is full of these players.)

In short, for the vast majority of players, what you see as freshmen is what you get. Yes, years in the weight room and experience will add value, but a great leap forward is unusual and can't really be counted on.

Which is why college sports is and always been about recruiting, recruiting and more recruiting. You need to bring in players who are good right now because it's unlikely someone who isn't good enough today will somehow become good enough down the road. They might, of course, so there's always hope, but the odds are the odds.

ClayK said:

---

Significant improvement at the college level is rare, but possible.

Of course players will get better around the margins, simply with physical maturity and experience. But quantum leaps are a different story.

Mechanics: Most P4 players have been playing year round since age 10. Their shooting mechanics got locked in during middle school, when they basically quit growing in height. To change those mechanics after many years is an arduous, one-step-forward-two-steps-back process that takes a lot of time and patience (from the coaches too) and is not guaranteed. Players have a ceiling in shooting, as in everything else, and it may be how good they are with the mechanics that got them to P4 is as good as they can be. Or they can't improve enough to move the needle.

Is it worth the effort? If you're not playing, it is. And Olivia Miles of Notre Dame went from 27% threes to 40% so it can happen. But it's a roll of the dice.

Quickness, athleticisim, explosion: I can't think of very many players, if any, who managed to change these fundamental physical attributes enough to matter. (Starting way overweight and losing it will do it sometimes, but I don't think that's the case here.) That's why some college coaches will tell you they can see if a player fits at the next level by watching the layup line.

Turnovers, mental game: The ability to process what's happening on the court very quickly comes with experience but it's also natural talent. Draymond Green is the classic example of a positive; the many, many players with all the necessary skills and athleticism who simply can't perform in the rapid pace of elite basketball are proof that it's really hard to try to learn this. (The G League is full of these players.)

In short, for the vast majority of players, what you see as freshmen is what you get. Yes, years in the weight room and experience will add value, but a great leap forward is unusual and can't really be counted on.

Which is why college sports is and always been about recruiting, recruiting and more recruiting. You need to bring in players who are good right now because it's unlikely someone who isn't good enough today will somehow become good enough down the road. They might, of course, so there's always hope, but the odds are the odds.

---

Since you brought up Draymond Green (men's game) I will bring up two big time Cal men players. Jason Kidd and Jaylen Brown. Remember the way these guys shot the three when JK was a freshman and in Jaylen's only year? Yes, I realize these were extraordinary talented guys, but the fact remains that moving forward they were able to fix their three point shots.

LeLan and Lulu fixed their shots in one year.

wvitbear said:

---

LeLan and Lulu fixed their shots in one year.

---

My thoughts exactly.

wvitbear said:

---

LeLan and Lulu fixed their shots in one year.

---

Many others have not.

The percentage of players who suddenly make that kind of jump is pretty small. Jason Kidd only did so late in his pro career after years of work.

How many players, at how many levels, have seen promising careers derailed because they cannot learn to shoot threes? A lot more, sadly, than the number of those who have learned to shoot threes.

It's not an easy game.

The NBA has scores of layers who fixed their shot. Including James.

CalFanatic said:

---

Even minimal improvements by Donez and King bode well for us next year. Talk about a plethora of riches at guard when looking at the 2025-2026 roster.

We'll need to hit the portal hard for posts. It's just Gabby next year...

---

there's just one proven guard in lulu & an elite upside incoming point guard in puff, there's no "plethora of riches" if the goal is to become a top 16 program

agreed the portal will need to be necessary to recruit at least 1 big if marta returns, really wishing natalia had another season of eligibility & hoping that claudia's heart is still in playing basketball despite all the injuries/rehabs

wvitbear said:

---

The NBA has scores of layers who fixed their shot. Including James.

---

nba scouts like richard midgley will tell u otherwise, pure shooters are born not created in a lab

wvitbear said:

---

LeLan and Lulu fixed their shots in one year.

---

totally different deals, they refined not fixed their shooting mechanics

The odds may be low. But not trying and not working on it makes no sense at all. Anyone with side spin release and side spin on their shot has to be shown how to eliminate that and to work on it.

annarbor, 100%, it's kinda like trying to change the shot shapes of golfers, very few ever change from a fade to a draw (or vice versa)...as clay k says ur shot mechanics are ingrained thru a decade of shooting /stroking the ball

rooting for both lola & zara but the staff is gonna have to hit the portal hard for pure shooters in the portal

As a scratch golfer who played on a college team, i changed my fade into a hook in a few short weeks. I've gone back and forth.

In basketball, i was a pretty good shooter but it came naturally. Having small hands also came naturally and stopped me from other aspects of basketball. I always considered sports divided into two aspects. Rhythm sports like golf, shooting a basketball, bowling and such. Then there is athleticism, which will help you in rebounding and defense. And if you have both then you are a star.