I ask LPH again if he thinks Trevor or Pat can shoot 50% on open two pointers in the midrange. I wish they could, but I doubt it.
and LPH needs to watch more Rockets games if he thinks all we do is come down the court and hoist threes without moving the ball. Most of our threes are set up after moving the ball. You think Trevor or Pat or anyone else other than James can create an open three for themselves? NO, they are created from ball movement. If Pat can get back up to a higher clip that he was earlier this season and Trevor can continue to raise his percentage, we would be so much better. and James could boost his assist numbers too.
/thread. This poster's thread has been defecated on enough. Now his argument has turned into... but..but ArIZA and BeWWERLY brick LoNG 2s.
When JVG was here, he had us run the ball run through Yao, and had an array of three pointer shooters, such as Wesley, Head, Alston parking outside. I didn't mind those threes, although the offense then was boring and predictable. The threes we are taking now are just lazy ones. Any team can get those shots if they put their mind to it like us. Maybe an over simplified statement, but that is how I feel about those threes we take.
Dude. This is the last time I'll take you seriously ok. Its not about giving them the ball and saying here go shoot 50% from the field. Its about running the offense so it caters to the players and puts them in a position to where they can shoot at a high clip. The 2s they take need to be high% 2s just as the 3s they take need to be high % 3s. These guys are NBA players, you think they are magically only good at shooting from 3 or shooting from the FT line? Hell, you don't even need NBA players to prove this. Go watch a JV game at your local high school and see how many times a player will miss an open midrange shot. Players are shooters, not "FT shooters" "3pt shooters" or "Midrange shooters". They can absolutely hit those shots at that clip, it depends on how balanced the offense is. It not being balanced leads to it being predictable and more contested shots. This applies to all shots.
That's EXACTLY what we are doing? Emphasizing corner threes, having players take their threes in more favorable positions, only when they are open, etc? Some of you weirdos have this idea that players are told NEVER to shoot midrange and to only shoot threes the second they get the ball or something? Beverly and Ariza do occasionally drive in as well, they're just not that good at it. They both are on the floor a ton of the time, and where they can help the team the most is from the three point line. Again, I want our interior players like D-Mo to be more agressive and shoot inside rather than always passing out.
Does anyone know what this means? May be the most meaningless group of words ever. The people that have it in their minds to be 'anti analytics' always post stuff like this, acting like analytics is some complex idea. It's just basketball and it's just common sense. It's trying to be smart about the way you play. To summarize again. Next time you are watching the game, and the Rockets go 6-18 from 3, just keep in mind what that number means. That's all this thread was about. Btw, just turned the Hawks game on and they took 16 threes in the first half. I think some of you need to look at the shot selection of other teams before you talk.
Since this is a math lesson thread. 0/0 =/= 100% Back to OP. The best team offensive rebounding % is 28.9%. The worst team defensive rebounding % is 71.5%. It is about 3 times more likely a missed shot is rebounded by the defense. If you miss 67% of your shots, instead of 50%, you are less likely to get rebounds than the other team.
That's not how that works. Whenever you miss a shot, defensive rebounds are always more likely. However, missed THREES are more likely to result in a offensive rebound. It's called a functional miss. It doesn't matter if you shoot 75% from the field of 25% from the field, the defensive rebound is always more likely.
http://courtvisionanalytics.com/where-do-rebounds-go/ Also, this one isn't specifically about threes, but if you haven't read it, it's a great read, and included in it is about how James Harden's misses lead to more offensive rebounds and points than anyone else's misses in the league: http://grantland.com/the-triangle/future-of-basketball-james-harden-daryl-morey-houston-rockets/
' In the NBA, 3-point shots are much better options than midrange shots for 2 reasons: 1) The decreased FG% is more than compensated by a higher reward in terms of points per attempt, and 2) not only do made 3-point shots obviously result in more points, missed 3-pointers are more likely to result in offensive rebounds than missed midrange jumpshots. Midrange jumpers kill possessions more and result in points less.'
Why don't you quote me in your replies lol, it's harder for other's to follow a discussion which is what CF is really about. Anyway, Patrick was shooting well from 3 for like a month or two? He is nothing special from 3. You can't dismiss the effectiveness of a good offensive system as simply as you are. We may not have a lot of weapons, but we definitely have enough to make things work. I'm not claiming to have the answer, but I know that we lost to the Clippers because of the 3-ball. And just about anytime we lose it's because of 3-ball. The concept of Live and Die by the 3 has never worked. And it never will, that's my only point, but you think that regardless of your weapons, you ought to just shoot 3's because it makes mathematical sense. Well it doesn't work like that, it's about the offense flowing and players understanding the tendencies of their teammates, and understanding where they should be at what point in a possession. Beverly shooting 3's has not positively affected us in a long time, and Ariza is extremely spotty from game to game. We ask them to shoot so many 3's that they end up missing a lot of them. If we asked them to shoot the 3 less than they usually do, their efficiency numbers will go up. That's a consistent trend in basketball, volume shooters shoot at lower inefficiencies. As for your question, just because they may not be able to shoot 50% from midrange doesn't mean that the only alternative is to shoot the 3. Basketball doesn't work like that. Brewer shot 0-2 last night from 3, he rarely took a midrange shot except for a couple of times. How was he effective? He moved around! If Bev and Ariza did something else besides sit on the arc and wait for Harden to pass them the ball, I guarantee you that our offense would be better. They can shoot the 3, and I really don't have a problem with that, as long as it's not 7 or 8 times in the game and its a good shot. But Ariza is not a bad slasher, and he can make cuts and finish at the rim at a decent rate. Brewer is still better at finishing at the rim, but Ariza isn't too bad and we should add him to our slashing attack. As for Beverely, he really can't do ****, but he can still catch and pass to an open man, so he could act as a swingman A lot of players on this team can finish at the rim and can slash, so that should be the main focus of the offense, not the 30 3PA. It ought to be about slashing and cutting.
I would question that. I WISH we had more players that could finish at the rim and slash. Do we? If we did our team would be a different team. Brewer is really the only one helping Harden in that area, and we have been using him to do exactly that. It's not like we haven't. Also, a big reason we lost against the Clippers recently was James had an awful game. We know this is why James is the clear MVP. If he has a bad game, we have no chance against a great team like LAC. Also - no Dwight against the Clippers is not going to be a winning situation for us.
Ariza is NOT a good slasher or finisher. He just isn't. All of us remember the 2009-10 Ariza and not much has changed for him in that arena.
I read missed corner 3s typically result in long rebounds away from the basket; Offensive rebounds away from the basket are not as good the ones resulted from missed 2s because those are close to the basket. I did not read anything that would lead to your point "missed THREES are more likely to result in a offensive rebound".
I don't think you get it either. OP is trying to say that 33% for 3P% is some kind of good statistic because it translates to 50% 2P%. We don't need to look at other stats to say how efficient this is in terms of TS% contribution. 33.3% 3P% (the league average 3P% is 35% btw) is 50% TS% with the assumption of negligible fouls on 3-point shots. The league TS% average is 54%+. That means it's a relatively inefficient shot as its weighted contribution to total TS% is lower than average. The irony is the values the OP gave give the exact opposite message of what he/she is trying to say. If the team wanted to score with more efficiency, they should actually be reducing the number of 3PA. My last contribution to the thread - feels like it's it's hard to get anywhere with some posters
This has to be a joke. What would 3PA be replaced with? The only way to get more efficient is to take more layups.
It's right in there: missed 3-pointers are more likely to result in offensive rebounds than missed midrange jumpshots.
False. He used to go to the rim a lot. He only started shooting a lot of 3's when he came to Houston in 2009. Before that, in LA and in Orlando he took majority of his shots within 3 feet of the basket. And he made a vast majority of those opportunities. Now he wasn't a big deal back then and he didn't shoot the ball very much on those teams, but he used to go to the rim, but when he came to Houston, he fell in love with the 3 and since then he rarely goes inside. I have the stats to support the data using basketball-reference if you want to see it, I'd be happy to post it.
