Started By
Message
Next step for analytics
Posted on 2/22/25 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 2/22/25 at 6:38 pm
The efficiency of deep fallaway three point shots. If deep twos are no nos then what logic says say 3 pt shot 5 feet behind the line off balance is ok? Maybe eliminate 8-10 of those for better shots and you might could reach optimal analytic-ish.
1
Posted on 2/22/25 at 6:40 pm to JamalMurry27
Inside the line there's more defense.
I'm not even a basketball expert.
What's your next question?
I'm not even a basketball expert.
What's your next question?
Posted on 2/22/25 at 9:17 pm to deeprig9
A mid range J is easier than a 35 foot off balance 3. I know they are made sometimes but the logic doesn’t make sense. The whole point is the further away the harder the shot so if shooting long twos is bad….then why arent long 3s….?
Posted on 2/22/25 at 9:59 pm to JamalMurry27
Is a midrange two an easier shot, even if it’s contested or well guarded? Is a 26’ three a more difficult shot if it’s wide open? Just legitimate questions.
Obviously shooting percentages will increase proportionally as distance to the basket decreases, but that isn’t necessarily the only consideration. Is the percentage so significant that a shooter is statistically better taking an 15-18’ than a 22’ shot?
Programs that rely heavily on analytics (and even those that don’t) have entire organizations run these numbers for them. It’s not like a coach is in his office calculating shot values. And the guys that are actually determining shot values have access to more than enough data to emphatically support it statistically.
Obviously shooting percentages will increase proportionally as distance to the basket decreases, but that isn’t necessarily the only consideration. Is the percentage so significant that a shooter is statistically better taking an 15-18’ than a 22’ shot?
Programs that rely heavily on analytics (and even those that don’t) have entire organizations run these numbers for them. It’s not like a coach is in his office calculating shot values. And the guys that are actually determining shot values have access to more than enough data to emphatically support it statistically.
Posted on 2/22/25 at 10:10 pm to CaptainMorgan
A wide open 3 is perfect for analytics i think when discussing the theory of threes and layups there is an assumption that the threes are mostly spot up on the line and semi open when that isnt even close to the case. A contested mid range shot is for sure easier (assuming you have the athletic ability and arent a foot shorter than broome for example) than a contested falling sideways deep 3 IMO. Bama has taken a lot of these lately and made some of them granted but have badly missed more of them. We have managed to secure the boards a lot but to me the next "evolution" in the analytic theory would be mapping out these really bad threes. I am not even a big fan of the analytics in sports at all to be honest but with oats and alabama it has worked without question but i feel they get a bit extreme (the crazy 3s) and if those were nore efficient possessions it could take the team to the next level. But at the end of the day what oats has done is unreal so who am i to give tips. However grant nelson should be scoring and dominating on the block
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News