I think I have also heard Morey say this. It was something along the lines of "In clutch situations, everything goes out the window."
If you need 1 or even 2 points on a last shot of the game situation, than a midrange shot or post up with a 40% chance of going in is mathematically a better shot than a 3 with a 39% chance of going. Even though the expected return on a 39% 3 would give you more points you don’t need the extra points at that point. In my opinion, unless you have a midrange god, it’s the only time the midrange shot should really be something to go for. Throughout the rest of the game going for the better expected value shot over the higher percentage shot is just smarter.
I don't have an article, but @BaselineFade is right that Morey has said this before on some podcast. I couldn't tell you which one, some Zach Lowe or Bill Simmons I think, I just know I've heard him say it. That aside, it's also kind of obvious if you think about it. To give a super specific/simplistic example to make it the most obvious, imagine a game where you're up 2 points with ~30 seconds left. No matter what you do the game is essentially over if you make the shot, it doesn't really matter if you're up 4 vs up 5 other than some very unlikely situations with quick fouls and free throws etc. In this situation you'd rather take the shot that has the highest chance to go in, regardless of 3 or 2. You can back this up a bit and think about a game where you're up by 6-8 points with ~75 seconds left with the ball. Again, this is overly simplified, but would you rather take 3s or 2s in this spot? If you run this in a simulation 1000 times, you'll score more points on average if you take all 3s. But, the goal isn't to score the most average points, the goal is to win the game. If you shoot the 3s you'll also have a much higher chance of coming up empty on all those possessions. The chances of missing 3 3s in a row is way higher than the chance of missing 3 2s in a row (especially in clutch situations where percentages go down). And the only way you really lose this game is if you don't score at all, and the other team hits their shots. So the objective in this spot isn't "maximize my PPP on every play", what you're really trying to do is make sure you minimize your chances of missing EVERY shot.
Right, I got that. Your exactly right. My thing is, I just think for meta gaming purposes, Harden should take a few if the defense leave him open(just a few). So you can keep the defense honest, but then again teams like the Jazz with good defensive principles will continue to allow Harden to have that shot without adjusting. So I guess its a moot point. Hard for me to say though.
Right, I get it now. Maximizing your possessions to get the win right instead of increasing the score by the most amount. Thanks to you and @jordnnnn for explaining it for me.
Different era. Relative to the league at the the Jordan was quite efficient. Harden hasn't been efficient in the playoffs since 2015 so can't blame the warriors matchup 2015- .620 2016- .555 2016- .583 2017- .548 2018- .567 Big drops from the regular season.
I know people are going to bring up math, but there's too much variance in 3 pointer game to play math in the playoffs, especially you only need 4 games to lose or win. I'm going to use the OKC game as an example, Harden was getting blocked like 3 possessions in a row, and fouls not called on another. His 3 pointer was also stone cold. We were down double digits and desperately needs baskets to stop OKC's momentum. He turns down a wide open step back mid-range, dribbles back and bricks a contested 3 pointer. How does that make any sense. Harden is extremely streaky with his 3 pointers, we have seen him go stone cold in the playoffs from there where he misses double digits in a row across multiple games. In the playoffs you really don't have the sample size to shoot yourself out of slumps and play with math when you are in a cold streak. I think that's why his TS% takes a huge dip in the playoffs, because teams game plan for his drives and when he is bothered on his drives he defaults to chucking bad 3's out of rhythm. I don't see the math argument either, because frustrated Harden does not shoot his average percentage in the playoffs. My theory is pure eye test, but I can remember more games where Harden goes cold in the playoffs from 3 and losing games than the other way around. Didn't he miss something like 23 3's in a row in the warriors series, and I don't know how many 3's he missed in the Spurs series in game 5 and just kept shooting until we lose the series.
The math is not wrong. What's wrong is on court decision. Your play is stay in the pocket and pass to the open receiver. But if the pocket collapses, the blitzing linebacker is closing in, you don't just stay in the pocket just because that's the designed play. You scramble and get whatever you can get. You design your offense to create open 3s and layups. But when the play is broken, you don't have to insist on shooting a 3 just because your offense is designed to shoot 3. Get the best you can get before the shot clock runs out.
Your assumption here is that someone who is "cold" from 3 would not also be "cold" from 2. A lot of people don't believe that. If you don't believe that the two are separate, then it makes sense to play the way he does.
Harden three points these last 5 losses : 5-17 5-19 1-6 2-9 1-17 Could very well replace all those bricks with some mid range shot and post ups when his 3-point isnt falling, instead of this analytics crap of only shooting layups and 3-points. Durant, Kawhi and Klay all take mid-range, hell the Warriors had a mid-range specialist like Shaun Livingston to diversify the offense when Curry and Klay were shoting bricks. At the end of this season or the next we might end up with Dwight Howard, Pat Beverly and Lou Williams -all former Rockets- getting a ring before Harden...
What is exactly wrong with uncontested midrange shot? it is better than forced and guarded shot at the 3pt line, and is far better shot than contested layup which wont get called for a foul 8/10 as we seen in playoffs not only with Harden. I hate that the game of basketball is not at its 'full', this game is so beautiful with passing, post play, midrange shots, 3pt shots, fastbreaks, halfcourt sets.... and we ****ing go iso or pick and roll every time. it was cool while it was new and worked but everybody moved on and we look like **** most of the time so what is the purpose anymore. I mean if Harden feels it and wants to go for 40 shots with hot hand then great... but when he is 1/8 he should stop with stepback bs, if he is 1/12 he should be benched for playing for himself and at 1/17 the coach should be fired and there is no excuse for something like that
Hmmm. you have a last shot and you’re tied. Would you go for the 33% shot or the 48% shot.... not to mention the % for heavily contested 3s (as in late game) is even lower, but besides that it’s. Common sense. The fewer possessions you have , the higher variance you have (your n goes down). You want the shot with less variance, higher %.
Do you all remember a game earlier when we were down 1 point with about 7 seconds left? Harden had an opening to drive to the hoop to either get a layup, or get fouled, or throw an alleyoop to Capela. But he chose to shoot a 3 and missed. I was livid at that decision. I am not one who is against the 3pt shooting scheme. That is a valid scheme for a large number of shots. But it s situational. Some situation needs a higher percentage 2pt shot. If you are inches from the goal line on fourth down, you don't do an "efficient" shotgun passing play. You do an "inefficient" handoff running through the middle play.
The problem is that those who don't know advanced math just spew out what they hear is more efficient and then can't consider new variables. Yes, if everything else is the same, 3pt shots are better than mid-range shots. IF EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE SAME. The problem is when the defense knows what you'll do, and they don't guard the mid-range because they know you'll NEVER take them. They now only have to guard the 3 and lay-ups. Then the mid range actually becomes a good shot because of the lack of defense, and the 3 becomes a harder shot as they defend that more aggressively.
