Live and die by the 3 association. Target practice. Sad.
NBA is now officially 3 Point Basketball Association
- Thread starter onewoof
- Start date
Timme is 6'10, while Sanogo and Tshiebwe are 6'9. There aren't a lot of NBA teams looking for centers that small.
Damn. Somebody do the math. What's better, 28% from 3 or 38% from 2? Or is that an inaccurate / stupid question?
They’d all be power forwards in the NBA. Problem is, PF’s don’t really exist anymore. 10-15 years ago, they’d all have the athleticism to play that position extremely well…..possibly at an All-Star level. But none of them can shoot NBA 3’s, and the skills they do have are no longer valued by the NBA.
Yet more examples of how analytics has completely ruined every single sport out there. Its terrible.
curios if the analytics will will say going back the the bigs is a better offense after every team only shoots 3’s for a few years.
If the NBA moved the 3 pt line back to around half court, I may start watching again. They could even call it a 4 pt bucket. 1’s, 2’s and 4’s. They might get me back as a fan for a game or two a year…. **
Not likely. The only thing that can force that is a profound change to the rules to make it either just as efficient or more efficient to shoot 2’s as it is to shoot 3’s. Right now, a 35% three point shooter’s points per shot if they took nothing but 3’s is way higher than a 50% shooter from 2 point range taking nothing but 2’s. That’s just ridiculous when you think about it. Just for reference, a 35% three point percentage would not have even been Top 50 in the NBA in the 2022-2023 season.
The concept that made the most sense was to go from a 3 point / 2 point model to a 4 point / 3 point model. All current 2 point shots are worth 3 points, and all current 3 point shots are worth 4 points. This was applied to actual results over several seasons, and was proven to balance the expected PPS for all shots so that there wasn’t some huge advantage to only taking one type of shot. Of course the low attention span contingent of critics gave their normal complaint that it slows the game down and extends the game because of all the added free throws (1+1 becomes 1+1+1, double bonus becomes triple bonus, etc.).
The problem isn’t the analytics. Can’t blame players, coaches, and GM’s from playing the game as smart as they can. It’s the lack of response from leagues who have the power to change the rules to counterbalance the analytics that has 17ed everything.
Archimedes and math remain undefeated in the long run. I see all these people complaining about Timme not being picked but he is a turnstile on defense in college, against NBA big men it would be embarrassing on the defensive end. Varnado had a better NBA chance than Timme.
If I could find a way to post my new 3 pt. line, I'd do it. It would eliminate the corner shots altogether. And move the big arc out to almost the half court line.....maybe 5-8 feet short of it. I think that would help a lot or they could widen & lengthen the court by about 6 feet in both directions to allow for a real long shot to make a 3. I also have a problem with MLB and College D1 baseball teams playing with such short fences that allow weakling infielders to hit HRs on basically what really should amount to popup outs. My field would be minimum 350' down both lines, 390' power alleys, and about 415' to dead center with at least a 10' wall all the way around the outfield perimeter fence.
Better yet, eliminate it altogether.
Maybe, defensive strategies may change creating a bigger gap between the percentages. Who knows. I’ll continue not losing sleep over it.
This is all about TV money, which has become the opiate of modern sports. The belief is that rapid scoring and high totals mesmerize audiences, rather than strategy and discipline.
Only problem with this take is the MVP and nba champion was led by the best center play arguably in NBA history, especially the playoffs.
How about giving defense a point? So if a team prevents the other team from scoring on their time down the court, that defense gets a point. This would make 55% 2s more valuable than 35% 3s.
Over 100 shots, its worth 5 more points. And its only worth the points on a game by game basis.
So its higher, but definitely not way higher.
I'd also like to see a breakdown of teams with the players who actually play. So say a team averages 8 players getting minutes. What does the 2 point vs 3 point scoring break down to be with the players on the team actually playing and shooting.
5 years old but interesting. Maybe the 3-point shot isn’t that big of a difference maker.
www.nbcsportsphiladelphia.com
Lies, damned lies and statistics: The confusing analytics of the NBA's 3-point obsession
Let’s say you’re an NBA coach after a loss. You plop down in your office chair. You’re stewing. You’re sweaty. Your vocal chords feel like someone gently massaged them with a cheese grater. An intern hands you the final box score. You look down and can’t wait to find out: What cost you the...
www.nbcsportsphiladelphia.com
Using actual numbers...
This past season the 2pt fg% across the league was 54.8%. The 3pt fg% across the league was 36.1%.
So 109.6 points scored off of 100 2pt shots.
And 108.3 points scored off of 100 3pt shots.
The whole analytics thong really comes into use when you consider who you want shooting which shots. Curry at 42.7% from deep means 128.1 points per 100 shots. For a 2pt only shooter to match that, they need to average 64% shooting, and only Jokic averaged a 2pt % above that within the top 50 ppg scorers last season.
So basically give it to Curry over and over, that's the conclusion drawn.
Any way to get those stats for just a half court offense? Would be interesting to see them without fast breaks included (which is more a defense statistic in my opinion). Pace has to be considered as well. Can your team simply produce more 3PA than 2PA in a half court game? If so, volume of type of shot in a game becomes a factor. Not sure if that would ever be significant but seems like lane penetration and passing towards traffic could lead to turnovers and a lost 2PA. If perimeter passing is less risky you could argue it makes sense to get down court and produce a high volume of 3PA and not go through the effort and risk of creating a 2PA where more defenders are.
The art of it is quickly identifying 2PA that is executable and you win it asap (see 1960s offense where they had insanely high pace). But if it's not there you are probably better off getting your 3PA up instead of eating clock while searching for the right 2PA opportunity. That's what happened in the late 90s / early 2000s when offense was boring.
Yeah, I'm probably in the minority, but I absolutely loved the Lowder vs Skenes pitching dual matchup. That was magnificent.
The further point though is that 2pt % is that high because nobody is attempting 2’s that aren’t layups, dunks, or short floaters anymore. Turnaround 10 footers and midrange jumpers are gone. Those use to be staples for the best PF’s out there.
And other rule changes have made it crappy for big men, too. The defensive 3 seconds being one example.
How about 3 points for in the paint, 4 for a dunk and 2 outside the arc and 1 for a midrange. Seems like you should be rewarded more for getting past 5 defenders and finishing at the rim.
Well right now there shouldn’t be any reward at all for it. Teams are willing to give up those looks more and more while keeping their perimeter defense on more of a lock down.
Yes, a reduction in the lower % 2pt shot areas will result in a higher 2pt %. Very true.
During the 05-06 season which I picked at random since its far enough back in time where the 3ball 2ball debate hadnt yet happened but modern players were still in the league, the 2pt fg% was 47.8% and the 3pt fg% was 35.8 leaguewide.
So 95.6 points were scored on 100 2pt shots and 107.4 points were scored on 100 3pt shots.
09-10 had 49.2% for 2pt fg% and 35.5% for 3pt fg%. So even with a higher 2pt % and lower 3pt %, it still comes out to 98.4 points scored on 100 2pt shots and 106.5 points scored on 100 3pt shots.
This data, and more from other years, is what was then used to decide shot selection should be adjusted to 3pt and in the paint shots.
With all that said, the midrange shot is still very much alive for a handful of players that have the greenlight to shoot it, and it is really cool to watch them play since it is now so unconventional.
KD, Booker, Butler, Paul, MIddleton, DeRozan, etc are just lethal in that midrange.
He also happened to be a really good 3 point shooter.... not to mention an excellent passer and rebounder. His nickname should be Triple Double.
Latest posts
-
-
-
Kirk Cousins with 500 yards passing tonight.
- Latest: DesotoCountyDawg
-
Get unlimited access today.