Started By
Message
re: 15-16 AU Hoops Season Thread 11-20 (5-13) {we beat UK} Disaster over
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:04 am to GenesChin
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:04 am to GenesChin
quote:
However, there is some counter-intuitive evidence that players who have the mid-range jumper in their arsenal still help teams score more efficiently while on the court. Even after controlling for a player’s own rates of possession usage, shooting efficiency (as measured by effective field goal percentage, a stat that adjusts for 3-pointers being worth 1.5 times as many points as 2-pointers) and assists, the percentage of his FGA that came from 16-23 feet was actually a positive variable when predicting his impact on the team’s overall effective field goal percentage. That finding was also true when running the same test on team turnover percentage — the more of a mid-range game a player has, the more he helps his team avoid giveaways.Why might this be? One theory is that merely having the ability to score from the mid-range opens the floor up for a player’s teammates. According to 82games.com, just as 3-point attempts per minute is a positive predictor of offensive impact even after holding all other stats equal, players who can knock down shots from 16-23 feet force the defense to respect them from more places on the basketball court, which in turn creates precious space for other players. There’s value in keeping the defense honest
All you had to do was go one paragraph down....
1
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:04 am to jangalang
quote:
Stop dude. That analogy doesn't even make sense.
NYT's 4th down bot. How people keep doing things that aren't supported by historical data
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:09 am to jangalang
quote:
All you had to do was go one paragraph down....
Then maybe you should go one paragraph further too
quote:
What Paine is saying is if your team has a player who thrives in those areas like Dirk Nowitzki, Carmelo Anthony, Derrick Rose, Kevin Durant and more then the team can play around with their shot selection a bit more. However, not every team has those superior players.
Funny because 4/5 of those guys are post players (which I said I have no problem with). 4/5 of those guys are former NBA MVPs and all 5 have made multiple all star games. When a guy that talented starts playing for Auburn, I will concede that shooting midrange shots is not a bad decision
Even more to the point, we are talking about adding part of the game to Bryce Brown compared to guys listed above whose first weapon is the midrange
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 10:12 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:10 am to GenesChin
Well, did the robot predict Yeldon to get stuffed by a true freshman on 4th and one? And that's the reason why money ball coaching doesn't work.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:11 am to jangalang
quote:
Wrong. Some teams are gravitating toward that style of play. Not all of them. Some still run pick and roll offenses that require a mid range game.
Actually Gene is right. Most NBA teams are starting to go all in on analytics based coaching, scouting and drafting. Part of that is the "value" of a "mid-long range" 2 pt shot is very small. Basically the best 2 shots are the easy close range and the 3. That's what Gene is basically saying, and that is how most NBA teams are looking at it....even when running the pick and roll offense.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:14 am to jangalang
quote:
Well, did the robot predict Yeldon to get stuffed by a true freshman on 4th and one? And that's the reason why money ball coaching doesn't work.
Nothing says you don't understand probabilities and using statistics like pointing towards a statistical anomaly to prove your point. Especially one like the Yeldon stuff, a decision made after missing two FGs on 4th and short earlier in the game.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:14 am to jangalang
quote:
Well, did the robot predict Yeldon to get stuffed by a true freshman on 4th and one? And that's the reason why money ball coaching doesn't work.
I don't believe "analytics" has a major place in football like it does basketball and baseball. You can isolate a player's individual performance way more easily than you can in football because one blown assignment out of 11 can ruin a play for your side of the ball and that is tough to analyze.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:15 am to GenesChin
quote:
Funny because 4/5 of those guys are post players. 4/5 of those guys are former NBA MVPs and all 5 have made multiple all star games.
It's not funny at all. This is an NBA article that you posted. They could've just as easily named players like Jarret Jack or you could have just as easily posted a CBB article. Your argument is dumb.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:16 am to GenesChin
quote:
Nothing says you don't understand probabilities and using statistics like pointing towards a statistical anomaly to prove your point.
Failing on 4th and one isn't a statistical anomaly...
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:20 am to jangalang
quote:
Your argument is dumb.
You are the only one giving dumb arguments. Everything I have put forward in this thread is being adopted by NBA and CBB coaches + supported statistically. Look at this GOAT Golden State team, they shoot 3s and layups
quote:
not funny at all. This is an NBA article that you posted. They could've just as easily named players like Jarret Jack or you could have just as easily posted a CBB article. Your argument is dumb.
There are only two guards in the NBA this year with >45% FG from midrange. If they suck arse at that shot, why the frick would I want a college player shooting it? Especially when 1 step back gets you 3 points?
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 10:21 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:25 am to jangalang
quote:
Failing on 4th and one isn't a statistical anomaly
Conversion rate is near 70% for 4th & 1. The chances of failing on 3&1 and 4&1 is highly unlikely too. Saban made the right move
FG% from 40-49 yards from 2014 59.9% for the NCAA LINK Alabama K was shitty too clearly
ETA: You probably play the lotto too because you know some guy who won once so it can 'definitely happen'
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 10:29 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:33 am to GenesChin
quote:
Especially when 1 step back gets you 3 points?
We have been talking about 12 foot shots but you think one step back gets you three points. Not only that, you're throwing out NBA statistics so I'm assuming you meant an NBA range three points. And you say my arguments are dumb.
Using the GS Warriors team as the standard will help your argument. They have two of the best three point shooters in today's game. One is already the best ever. Their offense is unorthodox compared to the rest of the NBA. If anything they set the standard, not just meet the standard. I can point to teams to, though. The Spurs, Portland, Dallas, the Knicks, etc.
And if a player only shots 40% from the midrange, that's good enough to keep players honest.
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:40 am to jangalang
quote:
Not only that, you're throwing out NBA statistics so I'm assuming you meant an NBA range three points.
Because NBA statistics are more readily available. Considering the NBA game favors midrange shots compared to NCAA with the shorter 3pt, the fact that midrange is still a bad shot there is telling. That is despite the NBA having the elite midrange shooters in the world available to them. We don't have that type of talent at Auburn
quote:
And if a player only shots 40% from the midrange, that's good enough to keep players honest.
Again, who are you keeping honest in this situation? If we are talking about big men stretching their post defenders out, I completely agree.
For a guard like Bryce Brown, who we are discussing, he will not draw post players out to the elbow to defend him. There is no properly coached team that will move their rim protectors to the elbow to defend a 40% shot while giving up a sure layup
Statistically speaking shooting 30% from 3pt is a better shot than 40% from midrange. Offensive rebounding rate is higher for 3pt shots than midrange and you will average out to the same amount of points.
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 10:42 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:42 am to GenesChin
quote:
Conversion rate is near 70% for 4th & 1. The chances of failing on 3&1 and 4&1 is highly unlikely too. Saban made the right move
A kick six and converted Hail Marys could be considered anomalies, but failing on fourth and one is not. I'd argue that going for it on 4th and three and not punting( normal non-two minute drill circumstances) deviates from the norm a lot more than failing on 4th and one. Pick your poison.
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 10:51 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:48 am to GenesChin
quote:
Again, who are you keeping honest in this situation?
The on ball defender!! That should be obvious. A mid range jumper forces the player to stay tight on the offensive player allowing more layup opportunities.
A mid range jumper also helps against teams that play zone defense!!
quote:
Statistically speaking shooting 30% from 3pt is a better shot than 40% from midrange. Offensive rebounding rate is higher for 3pt shots than midrange and you will average out to the same amount of points.
Nope
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:49 am to jangalang
quote:
The on ball defender!! That should be obvious. A mid range jumper forces the player to stay tight on the offensive player allowing more layup opportunities.
Please explain your situation more clearly. There are zero times where Bryce Brown would be shooting a midrange jumper as a SG with a defender already in front of him.
Brown plays beyond the arc. If the defender isn't tight, he shoots a 3 which we want. If the defender plays tight the only way he gets to a midrange shot is if he drives past his defender already. At that point, why would he stop for a midrange shot when he can go for a layup. If the post player defends, he dishes to open man.
How would a midrange shot help at all?
This post was edited on 2/25/16 at 10:56 am
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:52 am to jangalang
quote:
Nope
Well then, I have thrown out all the statistics that support my claim. You have presented 0 statistics that suggest they are wrong.
Not sure what basis you are disagreeing with the stats
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:55 am to GenesChin
quote:
What exactly are you arguing? In order for there to be exactly say 70% conversion, there has to be 30% failures. No shite
You said failing 4th and one was an anomaly. Obviously if failing occurs 30 percent of the time, it's not an anomaly. Are you chasing your own tail or are you just lost?
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:57 am to jangalang
Oh look, it's you two again
Posted on 2/25/16 at 10:59 am to GenesChin
Man y'all have taken this so far. 
You can't live off of mid-range jumpers. Kids grow up now practicing threes and driving. It's somewhat of a lost art, especially for big men. My original point was that it'd serve Bryce well to be able to pull up and hit a jumper rather than taking it inside and getting nothing over and over again. Our guards have often gotten into situations late in the clock where they force it inside and get nothing out of it.
Even if they hit that shot 35-40% of the time, it's better than getting nothing. Obviously, I'm not talking about pulling up in situations where we have time to move the ball around. I don't want any of our guys isoing if they don't have to.
You can't live off of mid-range jumpers. Kids grow up now practicing threes and driving. It's somewhat of a lost art, especially for big men. My original point was that it'd serve Bryce well to be able to pull up and hit a jumper rather than taking it inside and getting nothing over and over again. Our guards have often gotten into situations late in the clock where they force it inside and get nothing out of it.
Even if they hit that shot 35-40% of the time, it's better than getting nothing. Obviously, I'm not talking about pulling up in situations where we have time to move the ball around. I don't want any of our guys isoing if they don't have to.
Page 191 of 209
Latest Auburn News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News