The triple threat is not important to me as it is for most coaches. First, I do not believe that players who use the triple threat are truly a threat to dribble, pass, or shoot. Second, when players receive the pass with a small advantage, and move to a triple threat position, they forfeit their advantage and must create a new advantage.
When players receive a pass with an advantage, they should shoot or drive. Once they hold the ball, they become passers. Most plays or continuity offenses are based on this idea: Players pass and hold, pass and hold, until the designated player catches and shoots. Therefore, players need a position in which to hold the ball while waiting for a teammate to get open, and we can this position the triple threat, although the player is really a passer.
I want players who receive the pass with an advantage to shoot or drive. Once they hold the ball (>2 seconds), and give away the advantage, I do not want them to shoot. I always have believed that these are poor shots, and Nylon Calculus presented some proof:
— Ian Levy (@HickoryHigh) January 19, 2016
Now, if I had a player such as Dirk Nowitzki or Al Horford, I would change my philosophy to fit their skill set, but these are low efficiency shots.
In general, these attempts tend not to be a very efficient choice — yielding a league average effective field goal percentage of 39.0 percent so far this season, as compared to 40.5 percent for pull-ups and 51.9 percent for catch-and-shoot.
With the players who I have coached, I do not want catch and hold shots. When we catch and hold, the player becomes a passer or waits for a ball screen, typically, as I do not want players trying to go 1v1 with jab step after jab step or multiple dribble moves. The key to our offense is not the triple threat position, because that stops the ball. We want the ball to move, which means attacking once the advantage is created, and not allowing the defense to return to neutral. For more, see SABA: The Antifragile Offense.