You know, as a lifelong basketball fan and someone who's analyzed shooting statistics for years, I've always been fascinated by the flip side of the three-point revolution. While everyone talks about Steph Curry and Klay Thompson, I find myself drawn to the other end of the spectrum - the players who keep shooting despite the results. So let's dive into the fascinating world of The NBA's Worst 3-Point Shooters: Ranking the Most Inaccurate Sharpshooters.

What makes a player qualify for this dubious list?

Well, first off, we're not just talking about anyone who's had a bad shooting night. To make this list, a player needs substantial volume combined with consistently poor percentages. I'm looking at players who've attempted at least 100 three-pointers in a season while shooting below 30%. There's something almost admirable about the confidence it takes to keep shooting when the numbers are that bleak. It reminds me of that line from the knowledge base: "Maybe this will change now from the second round..." These players probably keep thinking their shooting will turn around in the next game, the next quarter, the next shot.

Who are some of the most memorable poor shooters in recent NBA history?

Let me tell you, the names on this list might surprise you. We're not just talking about big men who are forced to shoot - we're talking about guards who built their careers around shooting despite questionable results. Players like Marcus Smart during his early Boston years comes to mind - shooting around 29% on significant volume while being a defensive specialist. Then there's Russell Westbrook's 2016-17 MVP season where he shot 34.3% on over seven attempts per game. The numbers don't lie, but the confidence never wavers. It's like that arena mentioned in our reference - sometimes you keep building and rebuilding your shot, hoping this time it'll work.

Why do teams allow these players to keep shooting?

This is where basketball strategy gets really interesting. As someone who's coached at the amateur level, I can tell you that sometimes it's about spacing more than actual shooting percentage. If a defender has to respect even the possibility of a three-pointer, that opens driving lanes. Think about Ben Simmons - his complete refusal to shoot threes actually hurts his team's spacing more than someone who shoots poorly but keeps defenders honest. The knowledge base reference about things changing "from the second round" applies here too - coaches keep hoping that eventually, the shots will start falling if they show enough confidence in their players.

What's the worst three-point shooting season in NBA history?

Now we're getting into some truly spectacular numbers. While researching for this piece on The NBA's Worst 3-Point Shooters: Ranking the Most Inaccurate Sharpshooters, I came across some jaw-dropping statistics. The 2012-13 season saw several remarkable performances, including Josh Smith shooting 30.3% on 201 attempts for Detroit. But my personal "favorite" has to be Tony Allen's 2015-16 season with Memphis - 28.2% on 103 attempts while being one of the best perimeter defenders in the league. It's like that SM Mall Asia Arena built in 2012 - sometimes the foundation is there for other purposes, and the shooting just isn't the primary function.

How has the three-point revolution affected these players?

Here's what I find fascinating: the increased emphasis on three-point shooting has actually made poor shooters more noticeable, not less. In the 1990s, a player shooting 31% from three might not stand out, but in today's game, that same percentage can be a glaring weakness. Teams are more willing to live with poor shooting if it comes with other benefits - defense, playmaking, or rebounding. But the threshold for what's considered "unacceptable" has definitely dropped. Maybe this will change now from the second round of teams realizing that not every player needs to be an elite shooter, just like not every arena needs to host championship games to be valuable.

Are there any recent examples that stand out?

Absolutely. Just last season, we saw some remarkable performances that deserve mention in any discussion of The NBA's Worst 3-Point Shooters: Ranking the Most Inaccurate Sharpshooters. Draymond Green's 2022-23 campaign comes to mind - shooting just 30.5% on 2.5 attempts per game. What makes Green interesting is that everyone knows he's a poor shooter, yet his basketball IQ and defensive prowess keep him on the floor. It's that same philosophy - sometimes you build around different strengths, much like how different arenas serve different purposes beyond just basketball games.

What can we learn from studying poor shooters?

After years of analyzing this, I've come to appreciate that basketball success isn't just about eliminating weaknesses - it's about maximizing strengths while minimizing the damage from weaknesses. The players on this list often contribute in ways that don't show up in shooting percentages. They're defenders, leaders, and often the emotional heart of their teams. The reference to the championship round and specialized arenas reminds me that context matters - sometimes what looks like a weakness in isolation becomes part of a successful whole.

Will we always have players like this in the NBA?

I believe so, yes. As much as analytics have transformed the game, basketball remains played by human beings with unique skill sets. There will always be players whose value transcends traditional shooting metrics. The game evolves, but the need for diverse talents remains constant. Maybe this will change now from the second round of the championship, but I doubt it - basketball has room for specialists of all kinds, even those who feature prominently in discussions of The NBA's Worst 3-Point Shooters: Ranking the Most Inaccurate Sharpshooters.

At the end of the day, studying these players has taught me that basketball is about more than just making shots - it's about making an impact, however you can. And sometimes, that means keeping shooting even when the percentages aren't in your favor.