Well at some point the bad shot is so bad it isn't worth it. I mean if it's a 30% shot then yes, 10% then no
Yes but what op is saying is that we have opportunity for better shots even within the 2 for 1 constraints
If this were such a math no-brainer, then why don't teams do 2-1 on less than good 20-30% shots at the end of the game, in tie games? In a tie game and you have the ball dribbling up the court with 35 seconds, hardly any team will rush a 2 for 1, just to be guaranteed the ball back with like 5 seconds left. With 40-45 seconds left, yes, they run a good play and try to shoot with 30 seconds left. But the rush 2 for 1, I just don't see it happen that much at the end of close games.
Funny, I was just thinking about the same thing. This would be a math problem. What percentage of a shot is worth taking for a 2 for 1 situation that on average will beat having taken only one shot in that situation?
Your post didn't specify but certainly came off as advocating for going for 1 better shot over 2 lower percentage. If not well then nothing else to see here on that end I guess. Although I would add that in my opinion most of the time Harden executes the 2 for 1 pretty effectively. Definitely not every time and there was a pretty bad one recently where he tried to force it with no where near enough time, but for the most part I feel like his first shot is going in or getting rebounded in the 30-36 second range.
Harden taking a contested J 25 feet away is not a basketball play no matter how efficient he is jacking it up IMHO.
Since the philosophy is in place now (trying for 2-for-1s), then it's almost certain Morey has pretty solid data to back it up. Because one of you is bound to be thinking it: "Yeah, but should we really let a computer dictate the team's on-court play?" The computer is merely processing the data, not coming up with it from scratch. And if the data show we get, say, 1.5 points on average out of a 2-for-1 as compared to the 1.123 we get on a single possession, then yes, we should let that data dictate the on-court play.
I think real-time situation is much more complicated though. You can look at those numbers retroactively, but the question is always should you take that shot at that moment? There are so many different things taking place. Intuitively, you just go oh no you don't take that shot then a lot of times when Harden jacks it up. Kobe did take those 2 for 1 shots also. To those guys, it's like not matter what I am getting two shots in the last 30 seconds. On the other hand, many teams like the Spurs don't rush for it.
it is hard to get a good shot at the end of a quarter anyways. let's say the "good shot" can give you a TS% of 60% = 1.2 pts vs. a crappy 30% three + another crappy 30% three = .9 + .9 = 1.8 even at 20% three + 20% three you get 1.2 pts.
Let's take crappy threes and get more possessions. Those long rebounds too. So simple. Lol. Is this what we are doing?
The thing everyone misses on the '2 for 1' is you might not get that second shot... if the other team misses and pulls down the offensive board, they will probably hold for the last shot... and you ain't getting that second bite of the apple... What i think it boils down to is getting a good shot - period. If you can get off a good shot within the parameters of the 2 for 1 you do it... but don't chuck up a hurried shot on the basis of getting an extra possession...
Funny people are kind of talking about this . because it seems like this is the ONLY time Harden and the crew play like some people want Taking a shot quickly 12~15 seconds on the clock 48 Seconds of less left on the clock. They try to take a shot around 32~35 seconds. giving the other team less than 10 seconds to try their own 2 for 1 or leaving them selfs 7-10 seconds ASSUMING A REBOUND OR MAKE Rocket River
Well, if the two shots have 30% chance of scoring, then the chances of missing both is 0.7 x 0.7 = 0.49. 51% is pretty good. 30% --> 51% 25% --> 44% 20% --> 36% 10% --> 19% I'd say if the percentage is higher than 25%, it's worth it.
Harden can make that shot. Harden has made that shot Let beard ball, he obviously know what he's doing. I'm fine with it personally. And honestly how many times over the years a Harden contested jumper was our go to play and it's worked. Y'all are way too deep.
how is 2 not better than 1.... id rather get one bad shot which has a chance of going in..... and a really good one after that any day then just one... you cant score if you dont shoot.
hmmm this kinda answered it for me except for my eye test that opponent often gets a better shot than they deserve and we dont even get an opportunity for 30% shot on the second shot(more like 5-10% shot) but this may be well subjective or recency bias or small sample
Basketball is so simple by this logic. Taking as many shots as you could. Let's just launch it half court. Try having more shots than your opponent. 5 second offense guarantees you a win.
i think it doesn't translate to the whole game because you always get only one shot more than the opponent
