RealGM

After ten games, the Raptors are 5th in the NBA in three-point shooting percentage (39.1%) and 5th in opponent three-point shooting percentage (32.9%). That's a delta of 6.2% - the third largest difference in the NBA.

1. Houston Rockets (43.3% vs 35.5%, +7.8% difference)
2. Minnesota T'Wolves (41.9% vs 34.7%, +7.2% difference)
3. Toronto Raptors (39.1% vs 32.9%, +6.2% difference)

Is this something? Any concern about a regression to the mean?

I think we have to look at how the data compares to what we see with our eyes. And we are generating tons of wide open looks and we aren’t giving up a ton of wide open looks (in our wins anyway). And I don’t know what the stats say but it feels like we are forcing teams to shoot most of their threes from above the break.

I don't think it's a deep concern as we're neither a big 3PT volume team offensively or defensively. The Rockets are probably playing with fire as they don't shoot 3s and they give up a lot of them.

Looking through nba.com's FG%3PT+ column, only Scottie (+8.6) sticks out as someone that will eventually come back down to earth (of the major players, obv Mamu and Shead will drop.

So, imo probably shouldn't accept the Raptors as a top 10 half court offense, but also don't think they are due to crash.

The other piece I would add is that we haven’t seen consistent performances from Gradey. He’s someone who should in theory bolster our shooting. The same applies to IQ. So if there’s regression from Shead and Mamu there should be positive regression to the mean for Gradey and IQ.

I don't think there is any doubt that this level of shooting is not sustainable from about 5 guys. Then again, there are 5 guys that should shoot better. As a team its probably 2-3% too high, and gets reflected playing vs top 5 defenses. Just looking at last years team rates.

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/shots-general?Season=2024-25&dir=D&sort=FG3_PCT

Johnny Bball wrote:I don't think there is any doubt that this level of shooting is not sustainable from about 5 guys. Then again, there are 5 guys that should shoot better. As a team its probably 2-3% too high, and gets reflected playing vs top 5 defenses. Just looking at last years team rates.

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/shots-general?Season=2024-25&dir=D&sort=FG3_PCT

The Raptors shooting will probably correct, but not drastically. What I am more concerned about is opponent 3PT %. No idea if that is a product of our defence (maybe?) or if that will course correct as well.

I think the depth is the strength. If someone isn't feeling it, he'll stop chucking or get subbed (Agbaji).

With more continuity of the roster, there is more trust that if you pass up a sort of open shot for a wide open shot, the other guy will hit it.

Troubadour wrote:

Johnny Bball wrote:I don't think there is any doubt that this level of shooting is not sustainable from about 5 guys. Then again, there are 5 guys that should shoot better. As a team its probably 2-3% too high, and gets reflected playing vs top 5 defenses. Just looking at last years team rates.

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/shots-general?Season=2024-25&dir=D&sort=FG3_PCT

The Raptors shooting will probably correct, but not drastically. What I am more concerned about is opponent 3PT %. No idea if that is a product of our defence (maybe?) or if that will course correct as well.

No, it's not a product of our defense. A percentage that low is highly unlikely to stick, iirc it's mostly due to abnormally low shooting against the bench. A wild swing to worst percentages would be meaningful, but an average swing wouldn't change the outcomes significantly.

HiJiNX wrote:I think we have to look at how the data compares to what we see with our eyes. And we are generating tons of wide open looks and we aren’t giving up a ton of wide open looks (in our wins anyway). And I don’t know what the stats say but it feels like we are forcing teams to shoot most of their threes from above the break.

?s=46&t=PK_PTsLkYYyXkyf21hlLzg

Well I guess I got one part right.

On that front IQ leads the team by a fair margin and is shooting poorly on wide open 3s. That will change, but some of that is just him being so trigger happy he'll shoot before he's ready. I think the criticism that he doesn't shoot enough volume should probably be adjusted. We really don't need him pulling up from 3 in transition. Some of these attempts look like 3s for the sake of 3s.

We also have a fair share of guys that don't have shooting reputations and they get left alone (Scottie, CMB, RJ, Shead). To the opposition, those guys are more dangerous attacking a closeout than shooting from 3. They're all pretty low to middling volume, so I'm not sure a regression there is going to mean more than Ingram, IQ, Ochai, JaKobe shooting better than they have.

HiJiNX wrote:I think we have to look at how the data compares to what we see with our eyes. And we are generating tons of wide open looks and we aren’t giving up a ton of wide open looks (in our wins anyway). And I don’t know what the stats say but it feels like we are forcing teams to shoot most of their threes from above the break.

Teams are giving us wide open looks because our roster has bad shooters. May change as we knock them down more consistently.

game 11 already brought the difference down
now shooting 37.8% and allowing 33%

raptors were also good last year at allowing a low 3pt% opponent shooting, were 4th best at 34.9

The NBA has valued the 3 massively for a while now. Was curious if we were gonna see teams buck the trend this year (particularly the Raps, since distance shooting isn't this roster's strength). Rockets, Pistons, Lakers and Nuggets all take some of the fewest 3s in the league, and they're having early success. Wonder if it'll continue.

Let's say we drop by 3%. Assuming we take 30 threes a game that is 1 less shot made per game or 3 points lost in a game.

It's not a massive impact as long as we defend at the same rate. We can compensate for that.

Edit: we were 12-31 against Cavs, exactly 39% lol. So even with one less made 3 we would've had roughly the same outcome. I think bad reffing has way more impact than this stat. It had in this game anyways as it kept Cleveland in the game.

I mean also consider this:

1) Quickley is our best shooter and he missed 50 games last year.
2) Ingram is a very good 3 point shooter and commands a lot of attention which is giving teammates open looks. We have not had a guy this efficient from mid-range since Kawhi.
3) Barnes seems to have improved his shooting.
4) Barrett last year shot well from deep and is continuing that.

And of course our bench production is good, Shead got better, Dick and Walters are already good shooters coming out of College, and Battle is a good shooter.

Everybody apart from Poeltl is capable of shooting from deep.

Raptors aren't a live and die by the 3 type of team....they can win games shooting 30% from 3. In 4 of their 7 wins they shot 32% or less.

You look at the top 3 players (Barnes, Ingram, RJ) and their strength is operating in the paint and midrange.

I think we as a team are emphasizing on attacking the basket. Maybe this open up the space on the perimeter.

This is true but we're also 22nd in REB% because Jak has missed 1/3rd of the games and been a stiff in several of the ones he has played. Is that going to continue? I'm betting we start to rebound more of our regressed misses as well as some of other teams misses that were previously leading to even more misses.

VanWest82 wrote:This is true but we're also 22nd in REB% because Jak has missed 1/3rd of the games and been a stiff in several of the ones he has played. Is that going to continue? I'm betting we start to rebound more of our regressed misses as well as some of other teams misses that were previously leading to even more misses.

Any idea what sort of shots are most frequently generated on Orebs? Seems to me they're mostly putback attempts at the basket, or kick outs for 3pt shots.

I'm liking that we can watch and enjoy and see seeming improvement from multiple guys each game. Nobody has been overdoing it either - they complement each other better than most expected and are just now starting to jell. Having the big money guys all locked up must make it easier to ask them to just play together and win, regardless of who leads the way. Great things can be done when nobody is worried about getting the credit.

ATLTimekeeper wrote:
No, it's not a product of our defense. A percentage that low is highly unlikely to stick, iirc it's mostly due to abnormally low shooting against the bench. A wild swing to worst percentages would be meaningful, but an average swing wouldn't change the outcomes significantly.

I think the defense is definitely a big part of it but there are a lot of factors at play and it's more how defense interplays with the game at large.

There is naturally some variance to it - the sample size isn't that big. But the Raps are giving up a bit of rebounding position in order to push teams to spots on the arc they don't want to shoot from (and the rebounding stats themselves sre suffering from variance and a rather unhealthy Poeltl for several games). Also, the depth of the team allows them to play more consistently high energy on both sides of the floor which takes the legs out of opposing teams making their 3s just a little less likely to fall. I tend to think this last bit is pretty key as multi-tool offenses that emphasize defenses seem to do pretty well with respect to 3p variance, at a glance.