Rudy Gay's about to show the world he's on Durant's level

Did T-Mac get into the second round?

 

If you're not on the playoff roster then no, you didn't make the playoffs. Rudy Gay has yet to play a playoff game in his first 5 seasons in the NBA.

 

The Grizz seem to play better with ZBo instead of Gay.

Why is that?

 

So, how many minutes did Rudy Gay play in the playoffs?

 

Well, I think the Phil Jackson's triangle offense worked really well mostly because of the great players he had. The triangle has failed miserably with lesser players.

Of course, I agree that players who excel at the mid-range game (like Kevin Johnson or Steve Nash or Michael Jordan or Kobe Bryant) can make a huge difference to an offense. But I think targeting the midrange jump shot for the bulk of your scoring is not a sound offensive strategy at the team level. If you've got shot-creators who can excel in the midrange, that forces defensive attention towards them at many different spots on the floor which can then open up more efficient scoring opportunities for teammates (near the basket or at the 3-point line). That's the advantage of a great mid-range jump shooter, IMO.

But I didn't want to take this for granted. Using the team shot location stats at hoopdata.com which covers 06-07 season up to the present, we can look at how overall team offensive efficiency correlates to shot attempts by distance. Your theory that good offenses will either attempt more mid-range shots or get more of their points from mid-range shots can be evaluated from this sample (a total of 180 team-seasons). This won't prove what's the best strategy, but it will reflect where the more effective offensive teams in recent years have been taking their shots.

For every team over this stretch, I took their eFG% (standardized, relative to league average) and their overall offensive rating (also standardized). I related that to (1) where their attempts came from, and (2) where there points came from (which is dependent on makes).

Here's a summary of the results:

Spoiler

First of all, there's little difference between the %attempts and %points data. Meaning, the relationship between team offensive efficiency and where you're shooting is about the same as team offensive efficiency and where you're getting your points.

Second, you can see that teams who shoot a lot of threes were more likely to be good offensively. And with the long 2, we see the opposite effect. OK, next you might argue that this is looking at tendencies for every team, but we should only care about the good teams. I mean, who cares what strategy will take a bad team to an average team, right? What's more important is how you go from average to great. I think that would be a fair point, so limiting the sample to above average offensive teams, what is the relationship between where they shoot the ball and how good they are?

Spoiler

Now, we see that there is no clear trend that (amongst good offensive teams) shooting threes makes for better offense. It does tend to yield higher efficiency from the field (in terms of eFG%), but for overall offense there is no clear relationship. However, the same holds true for the other shot distances. No clear indication that shooting a lot of mid-range jumpers leads to better offenses either.

 

Why don't you try watching the game next time before you start typing and making yourself look silly again like you did in the Chandler/Dalembert thread?

 

Is "what" Ric bucher?

The guy who thinks Rose > Lebron, and Westbrook > Durant.

 

Great graphs durvasa. I know this thread has been derailed many time, so I'm going to say this. I don't dislike the 3 pt shot, I think its a bailout play a lot of times.its a lot easier to just chunk up a 3 and become a specialist vs being a well rounded offensive player. Like gay has the range and if he wanted to, he can be a above average 3pt shooter. I'm not crazy about a long 2 either. To me a long 2 is 18ft and out, not the made up 16-22 feet as some might suggest. 16ft is basically a ft. When yao used to shoot from the baseline, those were 12 ft shots. I don't think gay shoot a lot of 18 ft shots. Most times, he's right at that point, but those are good shots. A contested shot to watchers is a little different than a contested shot to a pro. Tbh, when you've played at a certain level, when you shoot, you don't even see the defender. You're focus is on the rim, nothing else.

 

There are some exceptional players who can routinely hit contested shots, but I don't think any player will be totally unaffected by a shot contest. NBA teams track this stuff because they know contesting shots are important. Contesting a jump shot is just about the most important activity for a defense, I think.

Edit:

For more on the value of contesting a shot, check out this video presentation ("The Importance of Being Open: What Optical Tracking Data Can Say About NBA Field Goal Shooting") by Sandy Weil at SSAC last year:

http://www.sloansportsconference.com/?p=661

His findings (summarized here):

[rquoter]
For the most part, his results confirmed conventional wisdom, but it's handy to put numbers behind some of our intuition. A tightly contested shot (with a defender three feet or closer to the shooter) drops percentages by 12 percent (i.e. from 50 percent to 38 percent). The second threshold Weil found for defense was within five feet of the shooter. This seems to conform nicely to our language about contesting shots. Nobody within three feet is "open," while nobody within five feet is "wide open."

After accounting for defensive pressure, Weil found that shooting percentages dropped by 1.5 percent for each additional foot from the basket. In practice, we see that shooting percentages are fairly similar anywhere behind about three feet from the hoop. That tells us that teams tend to contest shots just enough so they are about equally viable.

Weil also found that, even accounting for the other factors, players shot better off the pass than off the dribble and that a quick release tended to produce higher percentages. One interesting practical result was Weil's finding that players shoot a low percentage on tips, making it wise to come down with a rebound and go back up instead.
[/rquoter]

 

because z bo is a better player?

 

how do i know you've lost an argument

yeah, we missed out on a talent but he's not in the playoffs

 

Did I say Rudy isn't a talent?

 

Gay is a talented athlete, but it does not translate on the court. If you cannot pass, turn the ball over and don't go to the line, you better be a shut down defender. Essentially Gay does nothing especially well other than score when given a heavy dose of shots.

This has been debated over and over, Gay won't be an all star caliber player until he goes to the line 3-4 more times a game. Even then you are dealing with a monster contract. Happy his production and contract are not a worry of the Rockets. He was a value on the rookie contract, but not at near max money.

 

Rudy gay with a nice first half against the spurs tonight

 

Admitidly, I am watching the Rockets, and not the Grizz, but I am sure his play is much better then the stats suggest.

 

Looking at the box score only, I think Rudy has to be hurt. So far he's 0-6, 1 point in 32 minutes.

 

Kevin Durant had twice the offensive output in 43 seconds than Rudy Gay did in 34 minutes, 36 seconds.