Flip Returning As Head Coach?

[Dewey]

http://www.awolfamongwolves.com/2015/08/flip-saunders-feelings-arent-numbers-the-3-point-debate-rolls-on-and-on-and-on-and-on-and-on/

Flip is about taking good shots, regardless, if your 1' or 25' from the basket. The writer and others who actually believe this talk about Flip not liking 3's are simply naive. Good shots include the right players - in the right place - at the right time. This all entails other players able to be in position to react to rebounding opportunities, cherry picking, dribble drive penetration, and drawing fowls, etc..

[urinesane]

Sounds like those tweets fit a lot of people here regarding Flip and 3 pointers

For good reason. I can buy that Flip likes and values 3s. Who wouldn't? 3 > 2 is very simple math, and the goal of an offense is always to score more points. However, there's a clear disconnect between what Flip is saying and what his teams do. There's no getting around the fact that Flip's teams generally seem to take a lot of long 2s that could easily be 3s.

In general, 3s over 2s is simple math. A 33% 3-point shooter will score the same amount of points per shot that a 50% 2-point shooter scores. In practice, it's not quite that simple for a lot of reasons. One reason is that if both shooters shoot at their percentage, then the 2-point shooter will only need 2 shots to get that 1 PPS, while the 3-point shooter needs 3. That leaves the 2-point shooter a whole extra shot to do something with. The problem is, though, that guys shooting long-2s rarely, if ever, shoot them at a 17% higher rate than they shoot 3s. Generally, they make 18-22 footers at about the same rate as 3s.

On top of that, there were reports last year that Flip was actively coaching away from shooting 3s. One rumor was that if guys missed a 3 in practice, they would have to run a lap. That's not necessarily a problem; it incentives guys towards driving to the rim. Unfortunately, though, there was no such rumors about guys missing long 2s. Ideally, if they miss a 3, they run a lap, and if they miss a long 2, they run 2 laps.

Here is a good reply from someone named gjk on that article:

Now we know that Flip’s on vacation.

Anyway, I pulled some stats about 3 point attempts per 100 possessions with guys who played for Flip to see how many more/fewer they took when he was their coach. Most of the Wizards’ stats are small sample sizes due to injuries/gun suspensions/being traded halfway through a season, so I included the 3 bigger ones.

Chauncey Billups: 6.5 (Flip in MN), 7.5 (Flip in Detroit), 7.6 (career average).
Rasheed Wallace: 7.5 (w/Flip), 4.8 (career average)
Tayshuan Prince: 3.4, 2.8
Rip Hamilton: 2.7, 2.8
Lindsey Hunter: 7.3, 6.9
Mike Miller: 5.0, 7.4 (also was at 5.0 in his lone season with the Wolves when he refused to shoot them)
Randy Foye: 5.7, 8.1
Nick Young: 7.1, 7.4
Wally Szczerbiak: 1.8, 2.2
Sam Cassell: 3.6, 3.6
Fred Hoiberg: 5.6, 5.1
Latrell Sprewell: 3.3, 3.3
Troy Hudson: 7.2, 6.2
Terry Porter: 6.3, 4.7
Anthony Peeler: 6.2, 6.2
Kevin Martin: 7.5, 7.1 (NBA career), 8.7 (Rockets and Thunder)
Gary Neal: 6.0, 8.5
Mo Williams: 7.5, 6.3
Corey Brewer: 3.5, 4.6

So there’s some glaring problems, some surprises that contradict the narrative, and a lot of similar numbers with and without Flip. So much emphasis is placed on his strategy as opposed to his rotations or the personnel decisions that left him with mid-range shooters or non-shooters at perimeter positions (Brandon, Cassell, Sealy, Bobby Jackson, Rod Strickland, Sam Mitchell, Sprewell, Kendall Gill, Hamilton, Prince, Rubio) along with guys who should’ve been high-volume 3-point shooters but never were no matter who they played for (Szczerbiak). In all the names listed above, their attempts went up with more experience, which could mean something for a very young core group. And this conversation gets so exaggerated about him hating 3s and being an idiot that it becomes a counterproductive exercise. Either way, he has to do more to prove that he’s more like Popovich than Collins, but it mainly matters regarding this team’s ceiling. The emphasis on mid-range shots isn’t exactly keeping Randy Wittman out of the playoffs.

This 3 point thing really has been overblown by fans/media. It's not like Flip has a bunch of 3 point snipers to work with on this roster (outside of Martin). The numbers above, which are with Flip as their coach vs their career average, show that Flip disliking 3's or limiting 3 point shooters is false.

[AQuintus]

This 3 point thing really has been overblown by fans/media. It's not like Flip has a bunch of 3 point snipers to work with on this roster (outside of Martin). The numbers above, which are with Flip as their coach vs their career average, show that Flip disliking 3's or limiting 3 point shooters is false.

Once again, though, the problem isn't the number of 3s his teams take, necessarily. The problem is the proportion of long 2s (18-22 footers) that his guys take that could have been 3s. You don't have to be a 3-point sniper for the 3 to be the better shot since guys generally convert the 3 at about the same rate as the long 2.

[urinesane]

This 3 point thing really has been overblown by fans/media. It's not like Flip has a bunch of 3 point snipers to work with on this roster (outside of Martin). The numbers above, which are with Flip as their coach vs their career average, show that Flip disliking 3's or limiting 3 point shooters is false.

Once again, though, the problem isn't the number of 3s his teams take, necessarily. The problem is the proportion of long 2s (18-22 footers) that his guys take that could have been 3s. You don't have to be a 3-point sniper for the 3 to be the better shot since guys generally convert the 3 at about the same rate as the long 2.

What good are 3 pointers if you don't have players that can hit them anywhere close to consistently?

I understand the aversion to long two's, but you have to stretch the floor somehow and even though it's a worse shot statistically, last year's roster had players more capable of making those shots than 3's.

I agree with Flip's concept of not having a young developing roster fall in love with the 3 early in their careers. I thought he did a great job of developing Wiggins and others from the inside out, which will help them a lot in the future.

If you let young players chuck from 3 early in their career it can be detrimental to their overall game in the future (and create bad habits that need to be broken later).

Even if they had shot a ton of 3's last year, it's not like they were going to win more games. I'd rather have these young guys building their inside game first and then moving it out to 3 point range later.

That being said, I don't want the young guys settling for long 2's either and neither does Flip (imo) since he challenged Wiggins to start driving/posting up more, rather than settling for midrange jumpers (like he was early in the season).

[AQuintus]

What good are 3 pointers if you don't have players that can hit them anywhere close to consistently?

3 > 2. If they're going to shoot the 3 and the long 2 at about the same rate, then they should be taking the shot that awards an extra point.

I understand the aversion to long two's, but you have to stretch the floor somehow and even though it's a worse shot statistically, last year's roster had players more capable of making those shots than 3's.

That's the point, though, they really didn't.

According to NBA.com's sortable player stats:

Wiggins - 31.9% on 2.6 FGA from 15-19 feet. 32.7% on 1.9 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Budinger - 38.8% on 0.8 FGA from 15-19 feet. 36.1% on 1.5 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Martin - 31.9% on 2.6 FGA from 15-19 feet. 32.7% on 1.9 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Muhammad - 42.2% on 4.4 FGA from 15-19 feet. 40.6% on 4.0 FGA from 20-24 feet.
LaVine - 40.5% on 1.5 FGA from 15-19 feet. 32.0% on 2.2 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Neal - 47.2% on 3.3 FGA from 15-19 feet. 41.4% on 2.6 FGA from 20-24 feet.

The NBA 3-point line is at 22 feet (edit: at the corners, 23.75 feet at the top of the arch), so here's a breakdown of mid-range shots vs 3-point shots:

Wiggins - 32.1% on 5.2 FGA from mid-range. 31.0% on 1.5 FGA from 3-point range.
Budinger - 36.7% on 1.2 FGA from mid-range. 36.4% on 2.1 FGA from 3-point range.
Martin - 42.0% on 7.4 FGA from mid-range. 39.3% on 4.9 FGA from 3-point range.
Muhammad - 30.5% on 2.5 FGA from mid-range. 39.2% on 1.3 FGA from 3-point range.
LaVine - 34.9% on 3.1 FGA from mid-range. 34.1% on 2.2 FGA from 3-point range.
Neal - 43.3% on 5.3 FGA from mid-range. 35.5% on 2.8 FGA from 3-point range.

For every one of those guys, they would have scored more points if those mid-range shots were 3s instead.

I agree with Flip's concept of not having a young developing roster fall in love with the 3 early in their careers. I thought he did a great job of developing Wiggins and others from the inside out, which will help them a lot in the future.

Again, though, the problem is that he let them fall in love with the long 2, which is objectively worse than letting them fall in love with the 3.

If you let young players chuck from 3 early in their career it can be detrimental to their overall game in the future (and create bad habits that need to be broken later).

The same is true of letting them chuck the long 2. The difference is that chucking the 3 can win games in the modern NBA.

I'd rather have these young guys building their inside game first and then moving it out to 3 point range later.

So would I. The problem is that they didn't do this. They didn't replace those 3s with a lot more drives to the rim. They replaced those 3s with a lot more 15-19 footers.

I wouldn't mind disincentivising the 3 if Flip was also disincentivising the long 2 just as much, if not more. Thus my saying that if they have to run a lap for a missed 3, they should have to run 2 laps for a missed 15-21 footer.

[guest81]

I think a perfect example of the 3 point argument is the Celtics. Top half in 3 point attempts despite shooting it worse then even the Wolves. Also happen to be in the top half as far as offenses go. Didn't have a single player shoot over 33% over the season in 3's. Seems relevant to also point out that Brad Stevens is considered to be one of the top coaches in the league, and also happened to make the playoffs last year.

So the whole Flip never had any shooters argument doesn't hold much merit

[Klomp]

What good are 3 pointers if you don't have players that can hit them anywhere close to consistently?

3 > 2. If they're going to shoot the 3 and the long 2 at about the same rate, then they should be taking the shot that awards an extra point.

I understand the aversion to long two's, but you have to stretch the floor somehow and even though it's a worse shot statistically, last year's roster had players more capable of making those shots than 3's.

That's the point, though, they really didn't.

Spoiler:

According to NBA.com's sortable player stats:

Wiggins - 31.9% on 2.6 FGA from 15-19 feet. 32.7% on 1.9 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Budinger - 38.8% on 0.8 FGA from 15-19 feet. 36.1% on 1.5 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Martin - 31.9% on 2.6 FGA from 15-19 feet. 32.7% on 1.9 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Muhammad - 42.2% on 4.4 FGA from 15-19 feet. 40.6% on 4.0 FGA from 20-24 feet.
LaVine - 40.5% on 1.5 FGA from 15-19 feet. 32.0% on 2.2 FGA from 20-24 feet.
Neal - 47.2% on 3.3 FGA from 15-19 feet. 41.4% on 2.6 FGA from 20-24 feet.

The NBA 3-point line is at 22 feet, so here's a breakdown of mid-range shots vs 3-point shots:

Wiggins - 32.1% on 5.2 FGA from mid-range. 31.0% on 1.5 FGA from 3-point range.
Budinger - 36.7% on 1.2 FGA from mid-range. 36.4% on 2.1 FGA from 3-point range.
Martin - 42.0% on 7.4 FGA from mid-range. 39.3% on 4.9 FGA from 3-point range.
Muhammad - 30.5% on 2.5 FGA from mid-range. 39.2% on 1.3 FGA from 3-point range.
LaVine - 34.9% on 3.1 FGA from mid-range. 34.1% on 2.2 FGA from 3-point range.
Neal - 43.3% on 5.3 FGA from mid-range. 35.5% on 2.8 FGA from 3-point range.

For every one of those guys, they would have scored more points if those mid-range shots were 3s instead.

I agree with Flip's concept of not having a young developing roster fall in love with the 3 early in their careers. I thought he did a great job of developing Wiggins and others from the inside out, which will help them a lot in the future.

Again, though, the problem is that he let them fall in love with the long 2, which is objectively worse than letting them fall in love with the 3.

If you let young players chuck from 3 early in their career it can be detrimental to their overall game in the future (and create bad habits that need to be broken later).

The same is true of letting them chuck the long 2. The difference is that chucking the 3 can win games in the modern NBA.

I'd rather have these young guys building their inside game first and then moving it out to 3 point range later.

So would I. The problem is that they didn't do this. They didn't replace those 3s with a lot more drives to the rim. They replaced those 3s with a lot more 15-19 footers.

I wouldn't mind disincentivising the 3 if Flip was also disincentivising the long 2 just as much, if not more. Thus my saying that if they have to run a lap for a missed 3, they should have to run 2 laps for a missed 15-21 footer.

From straight on, Wiggins was 31.3% from long 2s and 9.1% from 3s. You're right, that extra step back clearly makes no difference in a player making that shot. Attempting from a place he shoots 9% is a much smarter shot.

[Klomp]

Seems relevant to also point out that Brad Stevens is considered to be one of the top coaches in the league

Since when?

[guest81]

Seems relevant to also point out that Brad Stevens is considered to be one of the top coaches in the league

Since when?

past 2 years or so. You seem to be out of the loop

[AQuintus]

From straight on, Wiggins was 31.3% from long 2s and 9.1% from 3s. Your right, that extra step back clearly makes no difference in a player making that shot. Attempting from a place he shoots 9% is a much smarter shot.

9.1%? Where are you getting that from? NBA.com says that he shoots 28% on above the break 3s, and 31.1% from mid-range.

[Klomp]

From straight on, Wiggins was 31.3% from long 2s and 9.1% from 3s. Your right, that extra step back clearly makes no difference in a player making that shot. Attempting from a place he shoots 9% is a much smarter shot.

9.1%? Where are you getting that from? NBA.com says that he shoots 28% on above the break 3s, and 31.1% from mid-range.

http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/1801/andrew-wiggins/shotchart/

Click on shot zones

[AQuintus]

http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/1801/andrew-wiggins/shotchart/

Click on shot zones

On 11 attempts. From everywhere else, according to the shot chart, he is better off shooting from 3.

Edit:

And when you look at everyone else's shot charts, instead of straw manning my argument by hyper-focusing on one zone of one player's shot chart, you see that they're all better of shooting from 3 instead of the long 2.

LaVine: http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/1802/zach-lavine/

Budinger: http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/891/chase-budinger/

Martin: http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/887/kevin-martin/

Muhammad: http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/1581/shabazz-muhammad/shotchart/

Neal: http://vorped.com/1-nba/2014-2015/player/1140/gary-neal/shotchart/

With only a few exceptions (shooting zones, not players), they would have all scored more points per shot from 3 than they would have from long 2, even with the lower FG%.

Edit 2:

Those shot charts don't appear to be correct, either.

For example, they have Gary Neal shooting 35.5% overall and 29.8% from 3. According to BB reference, Neal shot 42.9% overall and 35.5% from 3.

They have Wiggins shooting 43.5% overall and 30.3% from 3. BB Reference has Wiggins shooting 43.7% overall and 31% from 3.

They have LaVine shooting 42.2% overall and 33.3% from 3. BB Reference has LaVine shooting 42.2% overall and 34.1% from 3.

Something is off.

[C.lupus]

I think a perfect example of the 3 point argument is the Celtics. Top half in 3 point attempts despite shooting it worse then even the Wolves. Also happen to be in the top half as far as offenses go. Didn't have a single player shoot over 33% over the season in 3's. Seems relevant to also point out that Brad Stevens is considered to be one of the top coaches in the league, and also happened to make the playoffs last year.

So the whole Flip never had any shooters argument doesn't hold much merit

Boston played at the 5th fastest pace. When looking at points scored per 100 possessions, they fall to 18th in the league.

And Brad Stevens is not one of the top coaches in the league. He's one of the top young up and coming coaches but that is different.

[Feilong]

[Sugarless]

Denial at its finest.

[Feilong]

I agree with Aquintus on this matter.
The question is if your coach favors long 2s or 3s.
We will see very quickly if what Flip says is true or not. The answer will be KAT's shooting.
If he starts shooting long 2s like Bennett then you know the answer.
KAT should post his opponents, run pick&rolls, and occasionally shoot 3s. He should rarely shoot long 2s and only in pick&pop situations when he is completely alone.

[Vindicater]

If KAT starts shooting long 2's I will be so pissed off.

[horaceworthy]

I don't think I saw KAT hit the rim on an attempt from long distance in summer league, so I'd have a tough time being too surprised or upset if he started out shooting from a distance he feels more comfortable. Not sure he's the best canary to use in this particular coal mine.

[Klomp]

I don't think I saw KAT hit the rim on an attempt from long distance in summer league, so I'd have a tough time being too surprised or upset if he started out shooting from a distance he feels more comfortable. Not sure he's the best canary to use in this particular coal mine.

No, it's much better to airball 3s than to make long 2s.

[Mattya]

Yea, can we please actually see how he shoots first before people get pissed.