Post#562 » by Mirotic12 » Mon Mar 26, 2018 7:57 pm
As to this argument from some here that you judge a player's shooting ability solely by their shooting percentage, and that the NBA 3 point line being further than the one in EuroLeague, automatically means a player will shoot a lower percentage in the NBA....
About 3 years ago, they did a survey in Europe, where they asked the coaches in EuroLeague and EuroCup, and also major national leagues, who was the best shooter in Europe.
The result was Navarro and Spanoulis, and I can't remember who was first and second, but they got together something like 88% of the entire vote, with all other players getting 12% combined.
If you were to look at just percentages, and base everything about shooting, solely on a percentage, with zero context, then neither of them would even have gotten a single vote. But yeah, amazingly, head coaches actually understand that raw stats with zero context can be rather useless.
I never take posts seriously, when they rate a player's shooting ability solely on their shooting percentages. It's ridiculous, because it assumes the shots of every player happen in an equal kind of vacuum or something, with all shots being of exact same type and circumstance, which is just ridiculous.
For a good EuroLeague example (since Doncic is in EuroLeague), take Nick Calathes, a horrible shooter (maybe the worst guard in Europe in terms of shooting), and he is shooting almost every single 3 pointer being left wide open by the defense. Because he can't shoot, so they leave him wide open. His nickname through most of Europe is even "Nick The Brick".
But then take someone like Spanoulis, who is trapped and doubled the whole game, and almost never gets an open look, or catch and shoot. By percentages strictly, they would look not much different as shooters, when in reality, it's one of the best shooters in Europe, versus one of the worst shooters in Europe.
A person judging solely by percentages, would claim they were not much different, in terms of shooting.
Same with NBA comparisons....someone could claim Rubio or Giannis wasn't that much of a worse 3 point shooter than Kobe, going simply by percentage. When in reality, Kobe was light years a better shooter, but he could be framed as being a bad shooter, simply with this "shooting ability is based only on percentages".
You simply can't argue with someone that doesn't understand something like that, and that simply looks at shooting percentage to judge.
The same with the 3 point line distance. It's a totally illogical argument, that simply because the top of the key distance is further in NBA, that it means a lower percentage of shots will be made. First, the distance is virtually the same on the sides of the court. It's really only at the top of the key that there is a difference.
Second, that further distance at the top of the key, allows for more floor spacing, making offense and screen roll easier in the NBA. And it also makes it harder for the defense to recover and to close out to shooters, which means the looks are more open, with the shooters having more time and space to shoot. These factors easily mitigate a difference of 15 inches, which is basically just slightly more than one step of distance anyway.
In reality, it's easier to have the further 3 point line. It gives more spacing for offense, and it gives more space and time to the shooter. And again, the distance is basically the same at the sides. Never mind it's about a step of distance anyway, which is almost a non-factor for professional level players anyway.
So to argue that somehow the difference in the 3 point line, means Doncic will shoot worse in the NBA, is really 100% pure speculation and personal conjecture. There is nothing factual in such comments - it's just pure personal opinion.
That would only matter if the players were just practice shooting in the gym, or it was a 3 point contest or something like that, or if the leagues had exactly the same rules and defense, which they don't.
Looking for reasons outside of those I can find my self.
