The Gradey Dick Thread Part 3

[Scase]

Ah looks like you're right, thanks for pointing that out. Do they not they have a way to filter out the percentage of a specific shot type based on it's "openness"?

Not sure exactly what you're looking for but there's the FG column which shows all of his shots. 36.4% of them were open or wide open with us. 44.9% with the Knicks. But about ~10 of that difference being more 3's. There was some very well done analysis this year of Barrett's new shot diet with the Raps leading to significantly better efficiency. Essentially taking a lot less threes, and a lot more downhill driving to the hoop leading to a lot high efficiency numbers.

I'm trying to see the absolute percent of how open each shot type is.

So say X% of 2/3p FGs were tight/open/wide open etc. The NBA one I was looking at (and the one you linked) show, as you mentioned, the percentage of all his shots that were tight/open/wide open 3's. I'm looking to have it broken down by shot type, not overall diet of shots. I hope that makes more sense!

[Fairview4Life]

Ah looks like you're right, thanks for pointing that out. Do they not they have a way to filter out the percentage of a specific shot type based on it's "openness"?

Not sure exactly what you're looking for but there's the FG column which shows all of his shots. 36.4% of them were open or wide open with us. 44.9% with the Knicks. But about ~10 of that difference being more 3's. There was some very well done analysis this year of Barrett's new shot diet with the Raps leading to significantly better efficiency. Essentially taking a lot less threes, and a lot more downhill driving to the hoop leading to a lot high efficiency numbers.

I'm trying to see the absolute percent of how open each shot type is.

So say X% of 2/3p FGs were tight/open/wide open etc. The NBA one I was looking at (and the one you linked) show, as you mentioned, the percentage of all his shots that were tight/open/wide open 3's. I'm looking to have it broken down by shot type, not overall diet of shots. I hope that makes more sense!

Numbers seem to be all there - can do it with the %'s or attempts per game (some rounding with both makes the numbers slightly different - 3.7 (open or wide open attempts per game) / 3.8 (total attempts per game) = 97% of his threes with us were open or wide open. With the Knicks it was 4.7 / 4.8 = 98%.

There's also a lot more detail here if you want to do the date filtering to split the year:
https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1629628/shooting

[Scase]

Not sure exactly what you're looking for but there's the FG column which shows all of his shots. 36.4% of them were open or wide open with us. 44.9% with the Knicks. But about ~10 of that difference being more 3's. There was some very well done analysis this year of Barrett's new shot diet with the Raps leading to significantly better efficiency. Essentially taking a lot less threes, and a lot more downhill driving to the hoop leading to a lot high efficiency numbers.

I'm trying to see the absolute percent of how open each shot type is.

So say X% of 2/3p FGs were tight/open/wide open etc. The NBA one I was looking at (and the one you linked) show, as you mentioned, the percentage of all his shots that were tight/open/wide open 3's. I'm looking to have it broken down by shot type, not overall diet of shots. I hope that makes more sense!

Numbers seem to be all there - can do it with the %'s or attempts per game (some rounding with both makes the numbers slightly different - 3.7 (open or wide open attempts per game) / 3.8 (total attempts per game) = 97% of his threes with us were open or wide open. With the Knicks it was 4.7 / 4.8 = 98%.

There's also a lot more detail here if you want to do the date filtering to split the year:
https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1629628/shooting

Yeah I guess that makes sense, I was hoping to be lazy and just have NBA.com spit it out for me

Appreciate the info, looks like there wasn't really much difference in the openness of our shots vs his, yet a huge uptick in efficiency here. Likely the post trade/playing at home boost. Hopefully it holds up, him shooting 39% would be massive for us, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Fairview4Life]

I'm trying to see the absolute percent of how open each shot type is.

So say X% of 2/3p FGs were tight/open/wide open etc. The NBA one I was looking at (and the one you linked) show, as you mentioned, the percentage of all his shots that were tight/open/wide open 3's. I'm looking to have it broken down by shot type, not overall diet of shots. I hope that makes more sense!

Numbers seem to be all there - can do it with the %'s or attempts per game (some rounding with both makes the numbers slightly different - 3.7 (open or wide open attempts per game) / 3.8 (total attempts per game) = 97% of his threes with us were open or wide open. With the Knicks it was 4.7 / 4.8 = 98%.

There's also a lot more detail here if you want to do the date filtering to split the year:
https://www.nba.com/stats/player/1629628/shooting

Yeah I guess that makes sense, I was hoping to be lazy and just have NBA.com spit it out for me :lol:

Appreciate the info, looks like there wasn't really much difference in the openness of our shots vs his, yet a huge uptick in efficiency here. Likely the post trade/playing at home boost. Hopefully it holds up, him shooting 39% would be massive for us, but I'm not holding my breath.

The second link I posted shows a whole lot more layups and dunks with us and making them at a higher %, for example. Just looking at this year though, I just don't care enough to go back and look at previous Knicks years. It also might be misleading (the totals, not %'s) because 2 months of the season vs. 4 or whatever. It would all require some digging to get into really detailed stuff. But at the end of the day the Raps seem to have changed where he shoots from and have him doing a lot more driving to the hoop and he is scoring a lot more often because of that. This season anyway.

[ConSarnit]

Not sure exactly what you're looking for but there's the FG column which shows all of his shots. 36.4% of them were open or wide open with us. 44.9% with the Knicks. But about ~10 of that difference being more 3's. There was some very well done analysis this year of Barrett's new shot diet with the Raps leading to significantly better efficiency. Essentially taking a lot less threes, and a lot more downhill driving to the hoop leading to a lot high efficiency numbers.

I'm trying to see the absolute percent of how open each shot type is.

So say X% of 2/3p FGs were tight/open/wide open etc. The NBA one I was looking at (and the one you linked) show, as you mentioned, the percentage of all his shots that were tight/open/wide open 3's. I'm looking to have it broken down by shot type, not overall diet of shots. I hope that makes more sense!

Numbers seem to be all there - xan do it with the %'s or attempts per game (some rounding with both makes the numbers slightly different - 3.7 (open or wide open attempts per game) / 3.8 (total attempts per game) = 97% of his threes with us were open or wide open. With the Knicks it was 4.7 / 4.8 = 98%.

I would add onto this: while his % of open 3's was the same, they are not the same type of shot.

Catch and Shoot 3's

NYK: 4.6/5.3 = 86%

TOR: 3.7/3.8 = 97%

We basically cut out bad shots from RJ's shot diet. He's not taking off the dribble 3's here so it stands to reason his 3pt% will be higher (if he maintains that type of shot selection).

We've seen similar stats from midrange. In NYK RJ was taking 1 midrange attempt per game. In TOR he was taking 0.2.

We are basically no longer allowing RJ to dribble into a shot unless it is at the rim. As such, he fg% has increased. He's probably not a 39% 3pt shooter but I don't think it's unreasonable for him to be a 36-37% 3pt shooter as long as he doesn't regress back to his Knick ways.

[JB7]

Complaining lol? I'm saying it's absurd to base a players performance off of 32 games vs 300. Meanwhile you're suggesting we throw out 300 games because "it was at the beginning of his career". And I'm the one who can't be objective? You're selectively picking and choosing what stats you want to believe based on a clear and apparent bias.

With a conveniently placed cut off of 19-22 being thrown out, but would you look at that, we need to count 23-26, cause he's...let me check my notes here, ah yes, 23 now. Yes he's young, yes, he will very likely get better, no that doesn't discount FIVE YEARS OF DATA. Unreal.

What I'm saying is he is just 23. Let's not base our full perspective of what he is going to be for the rest of his career based on the first 300 games of his career, which he started at age 19.

[Fairview4Life]

I'm trying to see the absolute percent of how open each shot type is.

So say X% of 2/3p FGs were tight/open/wide open etc. The NBA one I was looking at (and the one you linked) show, as you mentioned, the percentage of all his shots that were tight/open/wide open 3's. I'm looking to have it broken down by shot type, not overall diet of shots. I hope that makes more sense!

Numbers seem to be all there - xan do it with the %'s or attempts per game (some rounding with both makes the numbers slightly different - 3.7 (open or wide open attempts per game) / 3.8 (total attempts per game) = 97% of his threes with us were open or wide open. With the Knicks it was 4.7 / 4.8 = 98%.

I would add onto this: while his % of open 3's was the same, they are not the same type of shot.

Catch and Shoot 3's

NYK: 4.6/5.3 = 86%

TOR: 3.7/3.8 = 97%

We basically cut out bad shots from RJ's shot diet. He's not taking off the dribble 3's here so it stands to reason his 3pt% will be higher (if he maintains that type of shot selection).

We've seen similar stats from midrange. In NYK RJ was taking 1 midrange attempt per game. In TOR he was taking 0.2.

We are basically no longer allowing RJ to dribble into a shot unless it is at the rim. As such, he fg% has increased. He's probably not a 39% 3pt shooter but I don't think it's unreasonable for him to be a 36-37% 3pt shooter as long as he doesn't regress back to his Knick ways.

That's interesting, so basically with us his 3point diet is almost all open or wide open catch and shoot. And his 2 diet is a lot more getting to the rim.

[ConSarnit]

Numbers seem to be all there - xan do it with the %'s or attempts per game (some rounding with both makes the numbers slightly different - 3.7 (open or wide open attempts per game) / 3.8 (total attempts per game) = 97% of his threes with us were open or wide open. With the Knicks it was 4.7 / 4.8 = 98%.

I would add onto this: while his % of open 3's was the same, they are not the same type of shot.

Catch and Shoot 3's

NYK: 4.6/5.3 = 86%

TOR: 3.7/3.8 = 97%

We basically cut out bad shots from RJ's shot diet. He's not taking off the dribble 3's here so it stands to reason his 3pt% will be higher (if he maintains that type of shot selection).

We've seen similar stats from midrange. In NYK RJ was taking 1 midrange attempt per game. In TOR he was taking 0.2.

We are basically no longer allowing RJ to dribble into a shot unless it is at the rim. As such, he fg% has increased. He's probably not a 39% 3pt shooter but I don't think it's unreasonable for him to be a 36-37% 3pt shooter as long as he doesn't regress back to his Knick ways.

That's interesting, so basically with us his 3point diet is almost all open or wide open catch and shoot. And his 2 diet is a lot more getting to the rim.

Pretty much. Here are his % of FGA by distance with the Raptors:

0-3ft: 43% (career high)
3-10ft: 29% (career high)
10-16ft: 3% (career low)
16-3pt: <1% (career low)
3pt: 24% (career low)

[disoblige]

I would add onto this: while his % of open 3's was the same, they are not the same type of shot.

Catch and Shoot 3's

NYK: 4.6/5.3 = 86%

TOR: 3.7/3.8 = 97%

We basically cut out bad shots from RJ's shot diet. He's not taking off the dribble 3's here so it stands to reason his 3pt% will be higher (if he maintains that type of shot selection).

We've seen similar stats from midrange. In NYK RJ was taking 1 midrange attempt per game. In TOR he was taking 0.2.

We are basically no longer allowing RJ to dribble into a shot unless it is at the rim. As such, he fg% has increased. He's probably not a 39% 3pt shooter but I don't think it's unreasonable for him to be a 36-37% 3pt shooter as long as he doesn't regress back to his Knick ways.

That's interesting, so basically with us his 3point diet is almost all open or wide open catch and shoot. And his 2 diet is a lot more getting to the rim.

Pretty much. Here are his % of FGA by distance with the Raptors:

0-3ft: 43% (career high)
3-10ft: 29% (career high)
10-16ft: 3% (career low)
16-3pt: <1% (career low)
3pt: 24% (career low)

Because they he was running the phoenix offense. Which the current Detroit coach Monty and Darko created in Phoenix. No iso and midrange is last option.

How to understand this. Rule 1> Rule 2



Proof:
https://www.sportingnews.com/ca/nba/news/raptors-coach-darko-rajakovic-philosophies-what-toronto-needs/riigtkkybgdhuupatxehvnsa

[ConSarnit]

That's interesting, so basically with us his 3point diet is almost all open or wide open catch and shoot. And his 2 diet is a lot more getting to the rim.

Pretty much. Here are his % of FGA by distance with the Raptors:

0-3ft: 43% (career high)
3-10ft: 29% (career high)
10-16ft: 3% (career low)
16-3pt: <1% (career low)
3pt: 24% (career low)

Because they he was running the phoenix offense. Which the current Detroit coach Monty and himself created. No iso and midrange is last option.



https://www.sportingnews.com/ca/nba/news/raptors-coach-darko-rajakovic-philosophies-what-toronto-needs/riigtkkybgdhuupatxehvnsa

Maybe, but it definitely seems more concentrated on Barrett. Both Barnes and Quickley's midrange attempts are up from last year (could be a usage thing). The Knicks and Raptors both took exactly 9.2 midrange attempts per game this year. The Raptors specifically altered Barrett's shot selection to remove self-created offense that isn't a shot at the rim.

RJ iso freq:

TOR: 3.9%
NYK: 3.0%

RJ pnr ball handler freq:

TOR: 11.5%
NYK: 18.4%

RJ's ft freq also doubled as a pnr ball handler and in iso which I would guess is a result of him driving more and not taking off the dribble jumpers (from both midrange and 3).

[disoblige]

Pretty much. Here are his % of FGA by distance with the Raptors:

0-3ft: 43% (career high)
3-10ft: 29% (career high)
10-16ft: 3% (career low)
16-3pt: <1% (career low)
3pt: 24% (career low)

Because they he was running the phoenix offense. Which the current Detroit coach Monty and himself created. No iso and midrange is last option.



https://www.sportingnews.com/ca/nba/news/raptors-coach-darko-rajakovic-philosophies-what-toronto-needs/riigtkkybgdhuupatxehvnsa

Maybe, but it definitely seems more concentrated on Barrett. Both Barnes and Quickley's midrange attempts are up from last year (could be a usage thing). The Knicks and Raptors both took exactly 9.2 midrange attempts per game this year. The Raptors specifically altered Barrett's shot selection to remove self-created offense that isn't a shot at the rim.

RJ iso freq:

TOR: 3.9%
NYK: 3.0%

RJ pnr ball handler freq:

TOR: 11.5%
NYK: 18.4%

RJ's ft freq also doubled as a pnr ball handler and in iso which I would guess is a result of him driving more and not taking off the dribble jumpers (from both midrange and 3).

The raptors hotzones is showing we were not shooting midrange.
I think they were higher because of usage. They were 1st and 2nd option here.

[ItsDanger]

There is one player on this team that can consistently come off curls and hit mid range shot: its Gradey.

That shot guideline is just that, a guideline. The most underrated part is after 8 seconds, anything goes? That's not good enough. Promoting a drive and kick strategy doesnt utilize your strengths, it just simplifies your offense. But its a weak strategy against better shooting opponents.

[Scase]

I'm trying to see the absolute percent of how open each shot type is.

So say X% of 2/3p FGs were tight/open/wide open etc. The NBA one I was looking at (and the one you linked) show, as you mentioned, the percentage of all his shots that were tight/open/wide open 3's. I'm looking to have it broken down by shot type, not overall diet of shots. I hope that makes more sense!

Numbers seem to be all there - xan do it with the %'s or attempts per game (some rounding with both makes the numbers slightly different - 3.7 (open or wide open attempts per game) / 3.8 (total attempts per game) = 97% of his threes with us were open or wide open. With the Knicks it was 4.7 / 4.8 = 98%.

I would add onto this: while his % of open 3's was the same, they are not the same type of shot.

Catch and Shoot 3's

NYK: 4.6/5.3 = 86%

TOR: 3.7/3.8 = 97%

We basically cut out bad shots from RJ's shot diet. He's not taking off the dribble 3's here so it stands to reason his 3pt% will be higher (if he maintains that type of shot selection).

We've seen similar stats from midrange. In NYK RJ was taking 1 midrange attempt per game. In TOR he was taking 0.2.

We are basically no longer allowing RJ to dribble into a shot unless it is at the rim. As such, he fg% has increased. He's probably not a 39% 3pt shooter but I don't think it's unreasonable for him to be a 36-37% 3pt shooter as long as he doesn't regress back to his Knick ways.

This is the kind of stuff that can swing me to be more hopeful of him on the team, not just people wildly saying "Well he's young, so he's gonna get better". I still dont think he's a long term solution for the team, but I'll be happy with him keeping up more efficient numbers for sure!

[MEDIC]

I get the whole ignorance is bliss thing, but I can't shut my brain off enough to reach these levels of absurdity.

Do you give any credence to the fact that maybe a different situation can maximize a players strengths, make up for some of his deficiencies. Or with more responsibility & leadership comes with better play?
Or he had Randle operating in his spots as a lefty big posing as a wing.

I don't think anyone is disregarding what RJ was in new York. But writing off a 23 yr old because he has nearly 400 games under his belt isn't meeting in the middle either.
It won't kill you to operate from an optimistic outlook that's all.

My guy, I was referring to someone literally disregarding what RJ was in NYC lol

as for rj, imho, what he did with the knicks is no longer relevant.

all that matters is what he does for us.

I'm not saying he isn't doing better in a different situation, I think he's definitely doing better having a lot more of his points assisted on, but that doesn't change who or what he is as a player. He's not going to magically improve his lateral quicks, he's not going to suddenly become a very good 3pt shooter etc. I fully expect him to improve on some aspects of his game, but to completely disregard 300 games of evidence, to assume 30 is what you should trust, is just silly lol.

You aren't a fan of his game....I get it.

I am approaching it from the same angle djsunyc is. It's a blank slate for me.

I don't think NYK was the ideal situation for him.

[YogurtProducer]

There is one player on this team that can consistently come off curls and hit mid range shot: its Gradey.

That shot guideline is just that, a guideline. The most underrated part is after 8 seconds, anything goes? That's not good enough. Promoting a drive and kick strategy doesnt utilize your strengths, it just simplifies your offense. But its a weak strategy against better shooting opponents.

How would better shooting opponents change what we do offensively?

[Scase]

Do you give any credence to the fact that maybe a different situation can maximize a players strengths, make up for some of his deficiencies. Or with more responsibility & leadership comes with better play?
Or he had Randle operating in his spots as a lefty big posing as a wing.

I don't think anyone is disregarding what RJ was in new York. But writing off a 23 yr old because he has nearly 400 games under his belt isn't meeting in the middle either.
It won't kill you to operate from an optimistic outlook that's all.

My guy, I was referring to someone literally disregarding what RJ was in NYC lol

as for rj, imho, what he did with the knicks is no longer relevant.

all that matters is what he does for us.

I'm not saying he isn't doing better in a different situation, I think he's definitely doing better having a lot more of his points assisted on, but that doesn't change who or what he is as a player. He's not going to magically improve his lateral quicks, he's not going to suddenly become a very good 3pt shooter etc. I fully expect him to improve on some aspects of his game, but to completely disregard 300 games of evidence, to assume 30 is what you should trust, is just silly lol.

You aren't a fan of his game....I get it.

I am approaching it from the same angle djsunyc is. It's a blank slate for me.

I don't think NYK was the ideal situation for him.

If you want to put less emphasis on his NYC years that's fine, but acting like 5 years of experience never happened, I'm sorry but that's just stupid.

It happened, it shaped his game and his mentality, and will absolutely and unequivocally have an impact on his career path moving forward. It's not any sort of guarantee that it's all he will ever be, but there is no reasonable way you can ignore 5 years of experience in the league and pretend it didn't happen just because he's on a different team.

[OakleyDokely]

It should really all be about asset accumulation at this point. If you can build RJ into an efficient scorer whose posting 60TS seasons, he's going to have value on the trade market.

In the back of our minds, we knew guys like DD, Val etc weren't going to be key parts of a championship core, but they were valuable enough to bring in championship parts.

RJ may never be part of a championship core, but hopefully he can be part of package that brings back a key piece and he will only do that playing well.

[ConSarnit]

It should really all be about asset accumulation at this point. If you can build RJ into an efficient scorer whose posting 60TS seasons, he's going to have value on the trade market.

In the back of our minds, we knew guys like DD, Val etc weren't going to be key parts of a championship core, but they were valuable enough to bring in championship parts.

RJ may never be part of a championship core, but hopefully he can be part of package that brings back a key piece and he will only do that playing well.

I tend to agree with this. If this team gets better (and RJ gets moved down the pecking order) his skillset isn’t ideal for that. If he’s only taking wide open c&s 3’s that’s going to be on low volume for his position. He’s also not that great of a defender. Maybe he makes improvements in those areas but if we can keep him in-line (no self created stuff) and his efficiency stays high maybe we can sell him for a better fitting piece. In the meantime he’s still useful, especially at putting pressure on the rim.

[JB7]

My guy, I was referring to someone literally disregarding what RJ was in NYC lol




I'm not saying he isn't doing better in a different situation, I think he's definitely doing better having a lot more of his points assisted on, but that doesn't change who or what he is as a player. He's not going to magically improve his lateral quicks, he's not going to suddenly become a very good 3pt shooter etc. I fully expect him to improve on some aspects of his game, but to completely disregard 300 games of evidence, to assume 30 is what you should trust, is just silly lol.

You aren't a fan of his game....I get it.

I am approaching it from the same angle djsunyc is. It's a blank slate for me.

I don't think NYK was the ideal situation for him.

If you want to put less emphasis on his NYC years that's fine, but acting like 5 years of experience never happened, I'm sorry but that's just stupid.

It happened, it shaped his game and his mentality, and will absolutely and unequivocally have an impact on his career path moving forward. It's not any sort of guarantee that it's all he will ever be, but there is no reasonable way you can ignore 5 years of experience in the league and pretend it didn't happen just because he's on a different team.

It is not about ignoring the numbers from the first 4.5 years, but understanding the context in which they occurred. The fact those 4.5 years were his first in the league, on a team with a specific structure, helped influence the results that RJ experienced. On a new team, with a new offensive structure, and the growth/maturity he has gained, it is not unreasonable to think is production could improve, and the production he saw in Toronto could be closer to what to expect going forward if the environment remains the same.

[douggood]

i came in to this thread to see if there was something new about gradey, turns out its an RJ thread now.

all i will add to the RJ talk is in all his seasons with the knicks they were worst or near worst in assists per game
raptors 23-24 5th best

knicks 23-24 2nd worst
knicks 22-23 2nd worst
knicks 21-22 worst
knicks 20-21 2nd worst
knicks 19-20 4th worst