Kelly Dwyer looks at Charlie Bell, and what he sees isn't pretty:
Quote:
As someone who has gobbled his fair share of Tums in the wake of Kirk Hinrich and Ben Gordon's inexplicable 2007-08 falloffs in terms of shooting percentage, I can understand just what it feels like to be frustrated with a once-promising player on the hometown ballclub who suddenly starts missing makeable shots for no apparent reason. And yet, I can't imagine what Milwaukee Buck fans are going through with hybrid guard Charlie Bell.
Bell shot 43.7 percent from the floor last year. He nailed 35.2 percent of his three-pointers, and made 78 percent of his free throws. He's a bit of a streak shooter, but he's also a bit of a good shooter.
His True Shooting percentage last season (a mark that takes into account free throws made and three-point percentage) was 53 percent; not outstanding, but right in line with what Mike Bibby and Baron Davis shot last season, and better than guys like Tracy McGrady and Mike James. At 28, the man is in his ostensible prime, and in the world of John Hollinger's advanced statistics, his most comparable season by age last year was Steve Kerr's 1992-93 run.
So what happened? Bell endured a bit of a soap opera last summer (as big a soap opera as backup point guards can possibly endure, I reckon) while trying to convince the Bucks not to match the offer sheet he signed with the Miami Heat, but by all accounts he had put his personal frustrations behind him by the time training camp came around, and (to these eyes) wasn't in any worse shape than his first two seasons in Milwaukee.
|
And he refers to the Bucks Blogg,
The Bratworst, for more detail.
Good stuff at the end of Dwyer's column - he looks at what Bogut can be searching for on google:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/blog/nba...?urn=nba,59643