Pistons vs Mavericks 7:30pm

[Invictus88]

ChipButty is not making much sense. Monroe has improved from 8-16 feet. He hasn't shown improvement from 16-24 feet. I am unsure why CB is arguing.

Additionally, Greg is not the atrocious defender some pretend that he is. Does he need to improve certainly? Is he the worst defensive big in the league like some claim? Certainly not.

I am trying to increase the cherry picked sample size of 42 shots, which imo is totally useless.

The stats show a decrease in shooting percentage beyond 10 feet and his jump shot percentage has decreased. Isn't this an area you were hoping to see improve with Monroe sliding to PF? Not sure what isn't making sense.

Your stats in response to HKs stat postings show a decrease in percentage beyond 16 feet. They don't show anything about shots shorter than that range.

BTW, there is nothing cherry-picked about it. 8-16 feet happens to be the range zone used on all of those fancy shot charts on NBA.com and others. I'd assume that the length boundaries were chosen for a useful reason but I guess you can claim they were specifically designed to cherry pick Monroe's stats if you want

[Invictus88]

ChipButty is not making much sense. Monroe has improved from 8-16 feet. He hasn't shown improvement from 16-24 feet. I am unsure why CB is arguing.

Additionally, Greg is not the atrocious defender some pretend that he is. Does he need to improve certainly? Is he the worst defensive big in the league like some claim? Certainly not.

I am trying to increase the cherry picked sample size of 42 shots, which imo is totally useless.

The stats show a decrease in shooting percentage beyond 10 feet and his jump shot percentage has decreased. Isn't this an area you were hoping to see improve with Monroe sliding to PF? Not sure what isn't making sense.

Your stats in response to HKs stat postings show a decrease in percentage beyond 16 feet. They don't show anything about shots shorter than that range.

BTW, there is nothing cherry-picked about it. 8-16 feet happens to be the range zone used on all of those fancy shot charts on NBA.com and others. I'd assume that the length boundaries were chosen for a useful reason but I guess you can claim they were specifically designed to cherry pick Monroe's stats if you want

OK, now I think I know what is going on here. ChipButty is using the length ranges listed in the shooting stats on NBA.com whereas HK and I were using the ranges from shot charts listed on the same site. Unfortunately they ARE different and both sort of paint a very different picture.

Looking at BOTH of the number sets what I see is that it looks like Monroe's shots fall off a cliff beyond 16 feet.

He's 12-17 from 8-9 feet (59%)
He's 7-20 from 10-14 feet (35%)
He's 2-4 from 15-16 feet (50%)
He's 10-45 from >16 feet to 19 feet. (22%)

I can see how viewing both of these disparate sets of numbers in isolation could cause confusion.

[ChipButty]

I am trying to increase the cherry picked sample size of 42 shots, which imo is totally useless.

The stats show a decrease in shooting percentage beyond 10 feet and his jump shot percentage has decreased. Isn't this an area you were hoping to see improve with Monroe sliding to PF? Not sure what isn't making sense.

Your stats in response to HKs stat postings show a decrease in percentage beyond 16 feet. They don't show anything about shots shorter than that range.

BTW, there is nothing cherry-picked about it. 8-16 feet happens to be the range zone used on all of those fancy shot charts on NBA.com and others. I'd assume that the length boundaries were chosen for a useful reason but I guess you can claim they were specifically designed to cherry pick Monroe's stats if you want

OK, now I think I know what is going on here. ChipButty is using the length ranges listed in the shooting stats on NBA.com whereas HK and I were using the ranges from shot charts listed on the same site. Unfortunately they ARE different and both sort of paint a very different picture.

Looking at BOTH of the number sets what I see is that it looks like Monroe's shots fall off a cliff beyond 16 feet.

He's 12-17 from 8-9 feet (59%)
He's 7-20 from 10-14 feet (35%)
He's 2-4 from 15-16 feet (50%)
He's 10-45 from >16 feet to 19 feet. (22%)

I can see how viewing both of these disparate sets of numbers in isolation could cause confusion.

Well, the main reason I didn't like focusing on the 8-16ft number was the sample size. That is why I went to look for more data. Plus, as you point out, his success at 8-9ft warps the overall 8-16ft number and I'd argue that he's only effective up to 9ft, which is what I told HK at the top of this page.

So far, he's less effective shooting the jumper outside of 10ft than he was last year although the stats are close enough for me to call it even.

Last Year: 60/192 31.25%
This Year: 20/73 27.39%

Anyway, I still think it's a reach to claim that he is moving his effectiveness out to 16ft, just because the 8-16ft number looks good.

[Invictus88]

Your stats in response to HKs stat postings show a decrease in percentage beyond 16 feet. They don't show anything about shots shorter than that range.

BTW, there is nothing cherry-picked about it. 8-16 feet happens to be the range zone used on all of those fancy shot charts on NBA.com and others. I'd assume that the length boundaries were chosen for a useful reason but I guess you can claim they were specifically designed to cherry pick Monroe's stats if you want

OK, now I think I know what is going on here. ChipButty is using the length ranges listed in the shooting stats on NBA.com whereas HK and I were using the ranges from shot charts listed on the same site. Unfortunately they ARE different and both sort of paint a very different picture.

Looking at BOTH of the number sets what I see is that it looks like Monroe's shots fall off a cliff beyond 16 feet.

He's 12-17 from 8-9 feet (59%)
He's 7-20 from 10-14 feet (35%)
He's 2-4 from 15-16 feet (50%)
He's 10-45 from >16 feet to 19 feet. (22%)

I can see how viewing both of these disparate sets of numbers in isolation could cause confusion.

Well, the main reason I didn't like focusing on the 8-16ft number was the sample size. That is why I went to look for more data. Plus, as you point out, his success at 8-9ft warps the overall 8-16ft number and I'd argue that he's only effective up to 9ft, which is what I told HK at the top of this page.

So far, he's less effective shooting the jumper outside of 10ft than he was last year although the stats are close enough for me to call it even.

Last Year: 60/192 31.25%
This Year: 20/73 27.39%

Anyway, I still think it's a reach to claim that he is moving his effectiveness out to 16ft, just because the 8-16ft number looks good.

I really think this argument is largely based on the eyes of the beholder.

I would say that including the extra shots from 16+ to 19 feet doesn't increase the sample size either. You don't get any more shots at the closer ranges. You just add on a bunch from longer distance.

I think we would both agree that the only way to get anything close to conclusive evidence would be if Monroe shoots more. Now whether people want that or if that's even a reality with Cheeks at the helm is another story.