I have been wondering what is the key helping us this season than last one. In the begining of this season, there was a discussion about how we should take 3-points. Many fans including myself like to take more 3-points as long as we have above 33.3% shooting. Surprisingly, it works, Here is the 3-point results for this two years 3-point 2005-2006 2006-2007 M 5.7 8.8 A 17.2 23.7 Pct 33.2 37.2 two point 2005-2006 2006-2007 M 33.0 35.3 A 76.2 79.2 Pct 43.3 44.6 We are taking 5.5 3-points more than last season per game, and get 9.3 points more from 3-point shooting than in last year. This helps a lot for the paint and is the main reason why we are still good with injuries this season.
yes we are taking 5.5 more 3's per game but we're also taking 3 more 2's per game. that's an extra 8.5 shots per game from last season. that fact that we are able to take that many more shots from last year (even with all of the injuries from last season) is a strong indicator of how much we've improved, but not the season itself. you can't just decide to shoot more shots. you have to keep TO's down, force more TO's from your opponents, and rebound the ball better. that's how you get more shots. so the root of our increased shot attempts is the fact that we are taking care of the ball, rebounding and playing defense. when you put it like that, it's a no brainer that we're playing better.
Three point shooting *can* be a good thing, but there are other things to consider. Yes, if you attempt more three pointers and shoot a decent percentage, your efficiency from the field will likely increase. However, you will also tend to draw less fouls, which means less trips to the foul line. You also will usually have less second chance points. Further, I think it's probably easier for the other team to fast break off a missed outside shot than a missed inside shot. I think I'll look into these trends a little more at some point and post the results here. I expect 3PA/FGA correlates well with eFG% (efficiency from the field), but not as well with Offensive Efficiency (points scored per possession).
I think you're right, but I would add that the team has made a point of getting their shots earlier in the shot clock. They famously practiced from the beginning of camp with an 18-second clock instead of 24. Over the course of a game, this adds up to more shots as well. It's a combination of things, like you said.
of course that is a factor as well. faster pace = more shots. the problem is that both teams get more shots, so you don't gain an advantage. my main point was that shots come from somewhere. TO's and REB's determine how many shots a team will gain or lose. dominate those stats and you will out shoot your opponents. out shooting your opponents usually means outscoring them as well. all season we've been a very good rebounding team which has led to our success. with experience we will learn how to control TO's better, but i like that we are forcing more TO's (that equals taking shots away from our opponent).
Hey, based on last year's shot numbers, we would have increased our PPG by 4 points just by shooting a higher percentage.
I looked at the following team metrics for the last 5 seasons (including this one): 3PA%: 3PA / FGA eFG%: efficiency from the field FT-r: FTM / FGA oreb%: oreb / (oreb + Opp_dreb) Off_eff: points scored / offensive poss Def_eff: points allowed / defensive poss I standardized them to make the comparisons across seasons fair. Here's how they all relate to 3PA% (closer it is to 1 or -1, the stronger the relationship; closer to 0 the weaker the relationship): eFG%: 0.477 FT-r: -0.293 oreb%: -0.435 Off_eff: 0.344 Def_eff: -0.061 As expected, it usually helps your efficiency from the field. However, teams generally won't score as often from the line, and they don't offensive rebound as well. Overall, there seems to be a clear positive relationship with offensive efficiency though. Almost no relationship to defensive efficiency. I also decided to divide the sample based on 3p%: For 3p% >= 36%, eFG%: 0.608 FT-r: -0.371 oreb%: -0.428 Off_eff: 0.498 Def_eff: 0.029 For 34% <= 3p% < 36%, eFG%: 0.220 FT-r: -0.135 oreb%: -0.270 Off_eff: 0.142 Def_eff: -0.043 For 3p% < 34%, eFG%: 0.242 FT-r: -0.231 oreb%: -0.468 Off_eff: 0.042 Def_eff: -0.192 Not surprisingly, it looks like it helps the offense less and less as the 3P% goes down, but even looking at teams shooting less than 34% from beyond the arc the relationship doesn't become negative.
That probably means I did a poor job explaining it. There's not much really surprising about it. In a nutshell, last 5 years teams that attempt a lot of threes tend to be better offensively overall, and in particular they tend to be more efficient from the field. On the other hand, they tend to not offensive rebound as well, and they don't benefit as much from the free throw line. It basically confirms what common sense would tell us. One thing that is a bit strange is that the relationship between frequency of 3PA and efficiency from the field doesn't drop when you examine teams that shot below 34% compared to teams that shot between 34% and 36%. Maybe it's a sample size quirk.
It is not difficult to understand, 34% 3Point equals to 50% 2Point. In this season, there is no single team could shot above 50%, Suns is 49.9% right now.
I never understand these posts as well but I failed algebra. Durvasa, whats the bottom line with so called three point shooting teams, do they win? What teams have been the leaders in 3 point attempts, 3 point % in the past five years?
its obviously battier...he's like a bowen on steroids ...the bowen that played on the championship squad on the spurs...not the scrub thats on the spurs now..battier is bigger, stronger, faster, and can shoot 3's not only on the baseline..but at the wings and at the top of the key
