Let me tell you something about basketball that took me years to understand - consistency isn't just about showing up, it's about showing up with the same level of performance night after night. I've watched countless players come through various leagues, and the ones who truly master the game understand that shooting slumps and hot streaks are part of the journey, but what separates the good from the great is how they manage their core strategies throughout these fluctuations.

Take Perez's recent performance, for instance. In Game 3, he managed to put up 12 points, which looks decent on paper until you dig deeper into that 4-of-12 shooting from the field. I've seen this pattern so many times in my career - players who can explode for big numbers one night but struggle to find their rhythm the next. What fascinates me about Perez's situation is that he's demonstrating exactly why shot selection and mental preparation matter more than raw talent. When I was coaching college ball, we used to track these shooting patterns meticulously, and players like Perez often need to work on their pre-shot routine and decision-making under pressure. The difference between taking good shots versus forced shots might seem minimal to casual observers, but for those of us who've been in the game, it's everything.

Then there's Trollano's dramatic shift from his game-high 22 points in Game 2 to struggling with his three-pointers, missing all four attempts and finishing with just 10 points. This kind of performance swing drives coaches crazy, believe me. I remember working with a player who had similar fluctuations, and we discovered through video analysis that his foot positioning was inconsistent when shooting under defensive pressure. For Trollano, it might be something entirely different - perhaps fatigue, defensive adjustments by opponents, or even just one of those nights where the basket seems to have a lid on it. What I've learned over the years is that players need to develop what I call "foundational resilience" - the ability to contribute meaningfully even when their primary weapon isn't working. If the three-point shot isn't falling, maybe it's time to drive to the basket, draw fouls, or create opportunities for teammates.

Lassiter's situation really hits home for me because I've been there myself as a player. Being only 1-of-7 from his favorite spot in the series, including 0-of-3 in Game 3 - that's the kind of slump that can mess with your head. I'll never forget this one season where I couldn't buy a basket from my sweet spot for what felt like an eternity. The more I forced it, the worse it got. What finally broke the slump wasn't technical adjustment but mental - I stopped thinking about shooting and started focusing on the process. For Lassiter, he might need to simplify his approach or temporarily shift his offensive role until he regains confidence. Sometimes the best strategy is to acknowledge when something isn't working and adapt accordingly rather than stubbornly sticking to what's familiar.

What these three examples reveal about mastering basketball's core strategies is that adaptability and self-awareness are just as important as technical skills. In my experience, the most successful players aren't necessarily the most talented ones but those who understand their games deeply enough to make real-time adjustments. They know when to push through slumps and when to change approaches. They recognize patterns in their performance and develop contingency plans. This strategic flexibility, combined with relentless fundamental work, creates the consistency that defines elite players.

The truth is, basketball at its core is a game of decisions as much as physical execution. When I analyze games now, I look less at the outcome of shots and more at the decision-making process that led to those shots. Was it within the flow of the offense? Was it the right shot for that particular player at that moment? Did the player have alternatives? These questions matter more than whether the ball went through the net because they speak to sustainable strategies rather than temporary outcomes.

Looking at Perez, Trollano, and Lassiter's recent struggles, I'm reminded of something my first coach told me: "The box score doesn't tell the whole story, but it tells you where to start looking." Their shooting percentages - 33% for Perez in Game 3, 0% from three for Trollano, 14% from his favorite spot for Lassiter in the series - these numbers aren't just statistics. They're clues pointing toward deeper strategic adjustments needed. Maybe Perez needs to work on his off-ball movement to get cleaner looks. Perhaps Trollano should incorporate more mid-range game to counter aggressive close-outs. Lassiter might benefit from using his shooting threat to create driving opportunities.

What I've come to appreciate over years of studying and playing this game is that mastering basketball isn't about eliminating bad games entirely - that's impossible. It's about minimizing their frequency and impact through sound strategic foundations. The players who last in this game, the ones who become truly reliable assets to their teams, are those who build their games on adjustable strategies rather than fixed skills. They understand that today's weakness can become tomorrow's strength with the right approach, and that sometimes the best way to fix your shot is to stop thinking about it altogether and just play basketball.