Watching a team shoot 70 3 pointers in a game is absurd

[The_Hater]

It's basketball, not entertainmentball.

Its completely entertainment ball. Thats the NBAs Mo

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

It's an Andrea Bargnani joke.

I used to think this way, but watching games of the past again players universally were better at creating their own shot in the midrange..

I don’t think that’s actually true. Tons of players can still create their shot in the midrange, but basic mathematics told coaches and players this was a bad offensive decision so most of them have stopped shooting them at such a high rate. Math is our friend.

Could be true. Never know unless players just stopped taking 3's.

It actually worked in reverse, players used to rarely shoot 3’s and over the past 40 years coaches eventually figured out that 3 points was worth more than 2 points.

During the current season NBA players shoot, on average 35.5% from the arc. NBA players also shoot, on average, 38.3% from 16-23 feet. Factoring in the extra point and it’s not difficult to see which shot is better for your team. And this doesn’t even factor in the the additional spacing an offense gets by spreading the floor, defenders need to cover more area, lanes to the basket are wider, double teams are harder to apply.

Its no longer a ‘maybe, maybe not’ situation, the math isn’t even close.

[Time for Change]

It has been happening in the G-League for a while. I’m surprised it took this long to transition to the NBA. The 2 point shot is an endangered species.

[Gooner]

It's a circus, basketball is not mathematics. You have to take those mid range shots to control the rhytm of the game. You have teams like Indiana and Spurs, that take many mid range shots, and they are succesfull.

[Kabookalu]

Its completely entertainment ball. Thats the NBAs Mo

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk

It's an Andrea Bargnani joke.

I don’t think that’s actually true. Tons of players can still create their shot in the midrange, but basic mathematics told coaches and players this was a bad offensive decision so most of them have stopped shooting them at such a high rate. Math is our friend.

Could be true. Never know unless players just stopped taking 3's.

It actually worked in reverse, players used to rarely shoot 3’s and over the past 40 years coaches eventually figured out that 3 points was worth more than 2 points.

During the current season NBA players shoot, on average 35.5% from the arc. NBA players also shoot, on average, 38.3% from 16-23 feet. Factoring in the extra point and it’s not difficult to see which shot is better for your team. And this doesn’t even factor in the the additional spacing an offense gets by spreading the floor, defenders need to cover more area, lanes to the basket are wider, double teams are harder to apply.

Its no longer a ‘maybe, maybe not’ situation, the math isn’t even close.

I'm not talking about what's more effective, but whether or not players generally were better mid range creators as opposed to now.

[sikma42]

They should to change how they call illegal screens and allow some version of handchecking again.

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

[The_Hater]

It's an Andrea Bargnani joke.



Could be true. Never know unless players just stopped taking 3's.

It actually worked in reverse, players used to rarely shoot 3’s and over the past 40 years coaches eventually figured out that 3 points was worth more than 2 points.

During the current season NBA players shoot, on average 35.5% from the arc. NBA players also shoot, on average, 38.3% from 16-23 feet. Factoring in the extra point and it’s not difficult to see which shot is better for your team. And this doesn’t even factor in the the additional spacing an offense gets by spreading the floor, defenders need to cover more area, lanes to the basket are wider, double teams are harder to apply.

Its no longer a ‘maybe, maybe not’ situation, the math isn’t even close.

I'm not talking about what's more effective, but whether or not players generally were better mid range creators as opposed to now.

Ok. But that leads us back to where we started, why would players/coaches want to create more mid range shots? In fact, most teams are letting players fire away from 16-23 feet because 38.3% works quite sharply in favour of the defense. If you’ve had a good defensive possession, that’s the shot you give up. Players don’t even have to try and create that look, it’s handed to them on a platter.

[dhsilv2]

It's a circus, basketball is not mathematics. You have to take those mid range shots to control the rhytm of the game. You have teams like Indiana and Spurs, that take many mid range shots, and they are succesfull.

Well yes basketball is mathematics at the most element levels. Why people have a problem with sports being best measured in terms of math and game theory is beyond me.

[cuyankees]

There must be balance and foresee NBA decreasing the 3 pt area.

[The_Hater]

It's a circus, basketball is not mathematics. You have to take those mid range shots to control the rhytm of the game. You have teams like Indiana and Spurs, that take many mid range shots, and they are succesfull.

That’s a bit simplistic. There are still good shots and bad shots available in every possession, ignoring math completely just increases the likelihood of a bad decision and puts you well behind the other 29 teams.

As it is, Indiana ranks only 15th on offense, they win because of their 2nd ranked defense.

And San Antonio actually leads the entire league in 3FG%. It’s been a huge weapon for them.

Who’s dead last in 16-23 foot shots? Houston and their 2nd ranked offense. Who’s 2nd last in attempts and dead last in percentage? Denver. 5th ranked on offense.

[Gooner]

It's a circus, basketball is not mathematics. You have to take those mid range shots to control the rhytm of the game. You have teams like Indiana and Spurs, that take many mid range shots, and they are succesfull.

Well yes basketball is mathematics at the most element levels. Why people have a problem with sports being best measured in terms of math and game theory is beyond me.

No, basketball is about rhytm, and there are many examples that prove that. There have been many playoff series where teams that didn't shoot many threes durign the season, beat their opponents that shot the 3 much more.

[sikma42]

I dont think people have a problem with it. It's just not even close to having any predictive value.



Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

[Collymore]

There must be balance and foresee NBA decreasing the 3 pt area.

Decrease the 3 pt area to limit the number of long balls?

[Gooner]

It's a circus, basketball is not mathematics. You have to take those mid range shots to control the rhytm of the game. You have teams like Indiana and Spurs, that take many mid range shots, and they are succesfull.

That’s a bit simplistic. There are still good shots and bad shots available in every possession, ignoring math completely just increases the likelihood of a bad decision and puts you well behind the other 29 teams.

As it is, Indiana ranks only 15th on offense, they win because of their 2nd ranked defense.

And San Antonio actually leads the entire league in 3FG%. It’s been a huge weapon for them.

That's the point, they take good threes. It's about rhytm and efficiency, not about volume threes.

[Kabookalu]

It actually worked in reverse, players used to rarely shoot 3’s and over the past 40 years coaches eventually figured out that 3 points was worth more than 2 points.

During the current season NBA players shoot, on average 35.5% from the arc. NBA players also shoot, on average, 38.3% from 16-23 feet. Factoring in the extra point and it’s not difficult to see which shot is better for your team. And this doesn’t even factor in the the additional spacing an offense gets by spreading the floor, defenders need to cover more area, lanes to the basket are wider, double teams are harder to apply.

Its no longer a ‘maybe, maybe not’ situation, the math isn’t even close.

I'm not talking about what's more effective, but whether or not players generally were better mid range creators as opposed to now.

Ok. But that leads us back to where we started, why would players/coaches want to create more mid range shots? In fact, most teams are letting players fire away from 16-23 feet because 38.3% works quite sharply in favour of the defense. If you’ve had a good defensive possession, that’s the shot you give up. Players don’t even have to try and create that look, it’s handed to them on a platter.

I don't even know what we're talking about anymore. My original point was that I find mid range scoring generally more entertaining because it's easier for defenders to recover to them since it's a shorter distance to recover to, so they're not as open and need to create their shot more, as opposed to almost every 3 pointer being open or semi open in today's game.

3 point shooters nowadays don't work nearly as hard as players in the past did and earn more for less, but I just find it boring compared to players absolutely needing to dip deeper into their skillbase. I'm not advocating that players suddenly abandon shooting 3 pointers.

But again it does go back to your point whether or not players today are just as good or better mid range shooters than in the past, and it's harder to know since 3 point shooting affords them spacing players in the past didn't have.

[The_Hater]

It's a circus, basketball is not mathematics. You have to take those mid range shots to control the rhytm of the game. You have teams like Indiana and Spurs, that take many mid range shots, and they are succesfull.

That’s a bit simplistic. There are still good shots and bad shots available in every possession, ignoring math completely just increases the likelihood of a bad decision and puts you well behind the other 29 teams.

As it is, Indiana ranks only 15th on offense, they win because of their 2nd ranked defense.

And San Antonio actually leads the entire league in 3FG%. It’s been a huge weapon for them.

That's the point, they take good threes. It's about rhytm and efficiency, not about volume threes.

Maybe. Houston decided to test that exact point and have ranked 1st or 2nd on offense for 3 straight seasons now. The two seasons prior to that they ranked 7th and 12th. So perhaps the teams you have applauding for not taking as many 3’s would be better on offense if they increased that ratio? And apparently the teams that have abandoned the mid range shot appear to be benefiting as well.

[dhsilv2]

It's a circus, basketball is not mathematics. You have to take those mid range shots to control the rhytm of the game. You have teams like Indiana and Spurs, that take many mid range shots, and they are succesfull.

Well yes basketball is mathematics at the most element levels. Why people have a problem with sports being best measured in terms of math and game theory is beyond me.

No, basketball is about rhytm, and there are many examples that prove that. There have been many playoff series where teams that didn't shoot many threes durign the season, beat their opponents that shot the 3 much more.

It is still math. You can scream to the roof top, but it is always probability, percentages, and game theory driving it all. Players have good and bad shooting nights, but that all falls into understanding patterns and again math.

If you don't think basketball in these terms at all, you'll miss what is happening on the court or worse yet you'll be overwhelmed and unable to process it.

[nate33]

When most teams launch a lot of threes, they're still generated via ball movement. People drive and kick, swing the ball, the defense rotates, the ball moves again, and eventually someone gets a clean look. That's aesthetically pleasing to me. Watching Golden State, or even Brooklyn, is fun. That type of basketball is infinitely better than late 90's bully ball or 60's era run-and-chuck pull-up 15 footers.

Houston is the notable exception. Most of their three's are either isolation step-backs, or drive-and-kicks involving just one pass. It's boring. There's no player movement and minimal ball movement. But don't make the mistake of assuming Houston's method is where the league is headed. They are leveraging the fact that they have perhaps the greatest isolation scorer of all time on their roster. Nobody else can effectively do what Houston does.

[Plutonashfan]

The thread is perfect example of the youth on realgm. People calling post play slow,podding,old never saw someone like Hakeem (Akeem) Olajuwon work in the post. The Dream shake was a thing of beauty. Or Shaq straight wrecking dudes down low. I miss bully ball. I can assure you they weren't pounding the ball for 15 seconds while doing these things.

[Gooner]

Well yes basketball is mathematics at the most element levels. Why people have a problem with sports being best measured in terms of math and game theory is beyond me.

No, basketball is about rhytm, and there are many examples that prove that. There have been many playoff series where teams that didn't shoot many threes durign the season, beat their opponents that shot the 3 much more.

It is still math. You can scream to the roof top, but it is always probability, percentages, and game theory driving it all. Players have good and bad shooting nights, but that all falls into understanding patterns and again math.

If you don't think basketball in these terms at all, you'll miss what is happening on the court or worse yet you'll be overwhelmed and unable to process it.

No, if you are not able to see deeper level of basketball, that's about rhythm and psychology, then you'll miss what is happening on the court, or be unable to process it. You can use stats as guidance, or as a tool, but there is always something intangible behind those stats.

You have to have a feel for rhytm of the game, and play instinctively on the court. If mid-range shot favors your skill set, and gives you a good rhytm, it's a good shot. Once again, there have been many teams that won playoff series, even though they shot way less 3's than the opponent.

All those teams and players from the past, who shot a lot of mid-range shots, were not stupid, they knew what they were doing. It wasn' that long ago either, this 3 point revolution really started with Golden State, and then Rockets took it to another level.

[The_Hater]

When most teams launch a lot of threes, they're still generated via ball movement. People drive and kick, swing the ball, the defense rotates, the ball moves again, and eventually someone gets a clean look. That's aesthetically pleasing to me. Watching Golden State, or even Brooklyn, is fun. That type of basketball is infinitely better than late 90's bully ball or 60's era run-and-chuck pull-up 15 footers.

Houston is the notable exception. Most of their three's are either isolation step-backs, or drive-and-kicks involving just one pass. It's boring. There's no player movement and minimal ball movement. But don't make the mistake of assuming Houston's method is where the league is headed. They are leveraging the fact that they have perhaps the greatest isolation scorer of all time on their roster. Nobody else can effectively do what Houston does.

For every Hakeem, who probably had the greatest footwork in a post player who ever played the game, we also got to see Shaq, Howard and countless others slowly back there man down on the block using little more than brute force and strength. Of course there are exceptions, Kevin Mchale was another, but for the most part post play is not and was not ascetically pleasing.

It should also be noted that post play is far from dead, just like mid range shots it’s just used in greater moderation now. The distribution of shots has changed because teams are trying to get higher percentage looks.