What happened to Duncan Robinson?

[sixerswillrule]

The large sample says he's a high volume, 40+% 3 point shooter that had a slow start to the year.

Yeah, 1200 threes attempted from the previous two seasons is a pretty huge sample size.

What makes you think so?

What makes me think 1200 attempts is a lot of attempts? The fact that just is clearly is. 250 made threes is the minimum for being on the NBA career 3P% list. Duncan already had 520 made threes from those 1200 attempts. 1200 attempts is a very big sample size. Is there any player in history whose 3P% over a 1200 attempt sample size ended up being a big outlier compared to the rest of his career, i.e. he ended up being much worse? That's my point.

[bstein14]

As a Pistons fan, I'd take Duncan + #27 for Olynyk + Cory Joseph.

Gets Miami out of that bad contract and gives them two decent bench role players for a title run next season.

[Ice Trae]

Poster who said Strus is goona get 25+ mill per year made me chuckle

[ArtMorte]

Sounds harsh, but honestly I think Robinson was just bubble-inflated guy. Shooting crazy %'s in gyms with no fans.

His career shooting percentages are higher than his bubble percentages, but thanks for the theory.

This is false.

Bubble Duncan Robinson: 45%/40.64%/91%

Non-Bubble Duncan Robinson:43%/40.57%/82%

However, I'll admit I wasn't including pre-bubble stats when I made my original statement. When you look at that, the 3P% drop off is negligible. Post-bubble is where the drop off across the board has come:

Post Bubble Duncan Robinson: 42%/39%/82.4%.

Feel free to actually look yourself. Includes reg season & playoffs. Sweet one-liner though.

His 3P% in the bubble playoffs (39,6%) was lower than his career average (40,6%), if you include the handful of bubble regular season games his bubble 3P% is identical to his career percentage. Drawing a "shooting crazy %'s in gyms with no fans" conclusion from that simply doesn't hold water.

[Chronz]

Yeah, 1200 threes attempted from the previous two seasons is a pretty huge sample size.

What makes you think so?

What makes me think 1200 attempts is a lot of attempts? The fact that just is clearly is. 250 made threes is the minimum for being on the NBA career 3P% list. Duncan already had 520 made threes from those 1200 attempts. 1200 attempts is a very big sample size. Is there any player in history whose 3P% over a 1200 attempt sample size ended up being a big outlier compared to the rest of his career, i.e. he ended up being much worse? That's my point.

Well statistically, Duncan Robinson himself hasn't maintained his insane efficiency of 44% from his breakout year and has lost a significant chunk every year since. I remember this debate back in the old apbr forum about just when exactly do we know a guys shooting skill enough to model into team projections. I don't remember what the consensus was, so I was hoping you could expand on the "it just is", reminds me of Tod Howard boasting "it just works".

He's obviously a great shooter and his gravity is well known but there are levels to this. Put it this way, do you think he'll ever again touch that elite 122 ortg from that magical season?

[Baski]

He went from being an absolutely scorching shooter to just a really great one? Some of you in here are nuts with the exaggerations. Did you expect him to never have a down shooting year or something?
Miami has such great depth that they can afford to bench him for multiple better options. Doesn't mean his contract is "horrible" unless you think he'd be getting DnPs on most teams, which is crazy. I know at least 2 teams that would love to start him.

[sikma42]

Hearing clips of him on the podcast, it sounds like he has gotten comfortable and isn’t working as hard as he did previously


Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[TheGOATWill]

I think OP is James Harden.

[sixerswillrule]

What makes you think so?

What makes me think 1200 attempts is a lot of attempts? The fact that just is clearly is. 250 made threes is the minimum for being on the NBA career 3P% list. Duncan already had 520 made threes from those 1200 attempts. 1200 attempts is a very big sample size. Is there any player in history whose 3P% over a 1200 attempt sample size ended up being a big outlier compared to the rest of his career, i.e. he ended up being much worse? That's my point.

Well statistically, Duncan Robinson himself hasn't maintained his insane efficiency of 44% from his breakout year and has lost a significant chunk every year since. I remember this debate back in the old apbr forum about just when exactly do we know a guys shooting skill enough to model into team projections. I don't remember what the consensus was, so I was hoping you could expand on the "it just is", reminds me of Tod Howard boasting "it just works".

He's obviously a great shooter and his gravity is well known but there are levels to this. Put it this way, do you think he'll ever again touch that elite 122 ortg from that magical season?

I figured that 250 made threes being the minimum to qualify for the CAREER 3P% leaders, and we're talking a sample size of more than double that (520 made / 1200 attempts), would be enough right there. 1200 attempts. I mean I didn't think I needed to go super into depth about why that is a **** ton of attempts and a big sample size.

I think the 42.7% he shot over those 1200 attempts is likely a good indication of the shooter he is. That's all my point is. Might he really only be a 40-41% shooter? Possibly. But almost definitely not the 37% he is this season. Would love to know if there is any shooter who had a decline like that over the rest of his career. Something like:
42% over first 1000+ attempts, then
37% over next 2000+ attempts
Or 40% to 35%, anything like that. But that's probably never happened and probably never will, because 1200 attempts is a huge sample size.

[HollowEarth]

Sounds harsh, but honestly I think Robinson was just bubble-inflated guy. Shooting crazy %'s in gyms with no fans.

His career shooting percentages are higher than his bubble percentages, but thanks for the theory.

This is false.

Bubble Duncan Robinson: 45%/40.64%/91%

Non-Bubble Duncan Robinson:43%/40.57%/82%

However, I'll admit I wasn't including pre-bubble stats when I made my original statement. When you look at that, the 3P% drop off is negligible. Post-bubble is where the drop off across the board has come:

Post Bubble Duncan Robinson: 42%/39%/82.4%.

Feel free to actually look yourself. Includes reg season & playoffs. Sweet one-liner though.

A 0.07% change in 3 point shooting percentage is not statistically significant. Also, the sample size for free throws is small, just 50 shots.

[USWAY]

His career shooting percentages are higher than his bubble percentages, but thanks for the theory.

This is false.

Bubble Duncan Robinson: 45%/40.64%/91%

Non-Bubble Duncan Robinson:43%/40.57%/82%

However, I'll admit I wasn't including pre-bubble stats when I made my original statement. When you look at that, the 3P% drop off is negligible. Post-bubble is where the drop off across the board has come:

Post Bubble Duncan Robinson: 42%/39%/82.4%.

Feel free to actually look yourself. Includes reg season & playoffs. Sweet one-liner though.

A 0.07% change in 3 point shooting percentage is not statistically significant. Also, the sample size for free throws is small, just 50 shots.

Negligible - "so small or unimportant as to be not worth considering; insignificant."

I think you skipped the whole bottom half of my post my guy.

[HollowEarth]

This is false.

Bubble Duncan Robinson: 45%/40.64%/91%

Non-Bubble Duncan Robinson:43%/40.57%/82%

However, I'll admit I wasn't including pre-bubble stats when I made my original statement. When you look at that, the 3P% drop off is negligible. Post-bubble is where the drop off across the board has come:

Post Bubble Duncan Robinson: 42%/39%/82.4%.

Feel free to actually look yourself. Includes reg season & playoffs. Sweet one-liner though.

A 0.07% change in 3 point shooting percentage is not statistically significant. Also, the sample size for free throws is small, just 50 shots.

Negligible - "so small or unimportant as to be not worth considering; insignificant."

I think you skipped the whole bottom half of my post my guy.

Right, but then those stats don't support this assertion: "Shooting crazy %'s in gyms with no fans."

[USWAY]

A 0.07% change in 3 point shooting percentage is not statistically significant. Also, the sample size for free throws is small, just 50 shots.

Negligible - "so small or unimportant as to be not worth considering; insignificant."

I think you skipped the whole bottom half of my post my guy.

Right, but then those stats don't support this assertion: "Shooting crazy %'s in gyms with no fans."

Look, in the same post I've already admitted that I looked at his past two seasons when I initially said what I said. I don't consider his drop off since the bubble across the board (3P/FG/FT) to be insignificant. A 45%/41%/90% guy? I think that's the difference between someone like him getting $90M or getting a contract that actually fits his worth. This past season alone he shot 37% from 3.

So yeah, I do think that has something to with it. But honestly I'm only still responding because some guy tried to call me out for being one of those **** posters who just say things without actually looking at the supporting statistics LOL. Those posters annoy me too, so I gotta defend my Real GM honor