PDA

View Full Version : Shooting from Downtown in MSG: A Case Study



mehmattski
02-02-2011, 12:03 PM
The idea for this thread came from a the SJU post-game thread, but I can't find the exact inspiration-- if it was you, speak up! Thesis: the terrible shooting on Sunday in MSG was more than just a "cold" afternoon from Nolan, Kyle, Andre, Seth, and Ryan.

Below, I present the shot charts from four example games in the 2010-2011 season, in four different arenas:http://lh3.ggpht.com/_qR7ksA-9iBw/TUmIozMuxWI/AAAAAAAABnE/u0XRsvDiTl0/s720/Duke%203-pt.jpg

In all four games, Duke took a very high percentage of shots from beyond the arc, just like against St. John's. These four games represent a pretty normal shooting pattern for Duke this season (post-Kyrie). By contrast, here's the shot chart from the St. John's game:

http://lh3.ggpht.com/_qR7ksA-9iBw/TUmIpffMAPI/AAAAAAAABnI/bUqyBhwgBsE/s800/Duke%20St%20John%27s%20Shot%20Chart.jpg

I think it is pretty easy to see where the NBA three point line would be on that shot-chart. I noticed this during the game, but the evidence here is pretty clear: Duke shot poorly from beyond the arc on Sunday because the presence of the NBA line affected their shot locations.

It turns out that Duke has played one other game this season with the NBA line on the court, the Oregon game in the Rose Garden. The shot chart for that game (see above) is more normal. However, as we've all heard endlessly since December 4, that was a different team in a blowout win. This (post-Kyrie) team was clearly affected by the second line, and caused Duke to start 1-22 on Sunday.

Many of you will reach different conclusions about this, but here's mine: It is unlikely we will see a shooting (lack of-)performance like Sunday's from Duke ever again this season. While the offense post-Kyrie has been more dependent on the three point shot, by my eye the shot selection has generally been acceptable. When career 40% 3pt shooters get an open look, they absolutely should take it. However, when they are taking those shots from 3-5 feet further than normal, it's going to affect the results.

Shot charts are from the game recaps on cbssportsline. You can get to them from Duke's schedule page, here (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/teams/schedule/DUKE/).

basket1544
02-02-2011, 12:18 PM
Very good point. I thought I saw Kyle and Seth specifically taking more of their shots from outside the NBA arc instead of the NCAA arc. This proves it.
Thanks!

Kedsy
02-02-2011, 12:22 PM
The idea for this thread came from a the SJU post-game thread, but I can't find the exact inspiration-- if it was you, speak up! Thesis: the terrible shooting on Sunday in MSG was more than just a "cold" afternoon from Nolan, Kyle, Andre, Seth, and Ryan.

In all four games, Duke took a very high percentage of shots from beyond the arc, just like against St. John's. These four games represent a pretty normal shooting pattern for Duke this season (post-Kyrie). By contrast, here's the shot chart from the St. John's game:

I think it is pretty easy to see where the NBA three point line would be on that shot-chart. I noticed this during the game, but the evidence here is pretty clear: Duke shot poorly from beyond the arc on Sunday because the presence of the NBA line affected their shot locations.

It turns out that Duke has played one other game this season with the NBA line on the court, the Oregon game in the Rose Garden. The shot chart for that game (see above) is more normal. However, as we've all heard endlessly since December 4, that was a different team in a blowout win. This (post-Kyrie) team was clearly affected by the second line, and caused Duke to start 1-22 on Sunday.

Many of you will reach different conclusions about this, but here's mine: It is unlikely we will see a shooting (lack of-)performance like Sunday's from Duke ever again this season. While the offense post-Kyrie has been more dependent on the three point shot, by my eye the shot selection has generally been acceptable. When career 40% 3pt shooters get an open look, they absolutely should take it. However, when they are taking those shots from 3-5 feet further than normal, it's going to affect the results.

Shot charts are from the game recaps on cbssportsline. You can get to them from Duke's schedule page, here (http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/teams/schedule/DUKE/).

Thanks for doing this. I was at the game and noticed them spotting up at the NBA line all game, and I mentioned it, but I think it was in the Maryland pre-game thread. It's good to know I didn't imagine it.

Billy Dat
02-02-2011, 12:25 PM
First off, excellent analysis...love the visual aids.

Any chance guys shoot from 3 when the line is on the court to show anyone watching that they have range out to that NBA distance?

I am inclined to believe the confusion argument, but I also consider the paranoid "impress the scouts" argument.

Kedsy
02-02-2011, 12:27 PM
First off, excellent analysis...love the visual aids.

Any chance guys shoot from 3 when the line is on the court to show anyone watching that they have range out to that NBA distance?

I am inclined to believe the confusion argument, but I also consider the paranoid "impress the scouts" argument.

I'd say no to this. If they'd taken half their shots from the NBA line then maybe. But they missed 21 of their first 22 threes and took almost all of them from the outer line. At some point you stop showing off and try to hit a shot.

basket1544
02-02-2011, 12:39 PM
I definitely think it is the scouting or even oneupmanship (if that's a word) and not confusion. They know where to shoot from.

ncexnyc
02-02-2011, 12:40 PM
I guess the only way to see if this theory is valid, would be for someone to do an analysis of our last few visits to MSG.

mehmattski
02-02-2011, 12:54 PM
I definitely think it is the scouting or even oneupmanship (if that's a word) and not confusion. They know where to shoot from.

On the other hand, Duke is on national TV for nearly every game, and NBA scouts undoubtedly attend games in areas wherever we play. It would make no sense to try and "impress" anyone against an unranked Big East team in January. Besides, if anyone on the coaching staff thought any one of the kids were "showing off," their behind would be touching bench faster than you can say "Greivis Vasquez."

I could go back and look at past years' games with the NBA line but I'm not sure they're comparable. For example, JJ Redick had way more range than either Kyle or Nolan.

devil84
02-02-2011, 01:13 PM
Many (most?) college courts and Duke's practice courts have two lines -- one for the men and one for the women. The men score threes from the far one. It's probably second nature to run down and pull up to shoot relative to the far line.

At MSG, there were also two lines -- college men and NBA. I'm sure Nolan and Kyle had some aspirations of sinking some NBA-style 3's. But when St. John's lead was getting larger and larger, did the frustration of their increasing lead cause our guys to use their instinct to find their spot to shoot relative to the far line, like they would on most any other court they've played on, instead going to the inner line?

I dunno. But I thought about that as shot after shot went up (but not in) from behind the NBA arc. Thanks, mehmattski, for the excellent anaylisis!

uh_no
02-02-2011, 01:39 PM
Just a criticism, when posting graphs like that, its better to make them all the same size to make comparisons more easily. :P

Other than that, I have to disagree with this analysis overall. Duke's phenomenal play in MSG and the meadowlands in the past does not support the claim that the 3 point line messes with the players. Also hurting your argument is that in the other game duke played on a court with the other line, they shot from a normal pattern. This indicates it is more likely that it can be attributed to St. John's high pressure defense, which did not allow duke players to even get as close to the line as they might like when they took their shots.

Wander
02-02-2011, 01:52 PM
Just a criticism, when posting graphs like that, its better to make them all the same size to make comparisons more easily. :P


Yeah, this is not trivial. The zooming in really messes with perceptions. It's not clear to me from those charts that the Oregon/St John's game have 3 point shots significantly farther out than the NCSU/FSU game. Unfortunately, there's no way to show what you want to show without crunching numbers (mean, median, and standard deviations of distance of 3 point attempts in all arenas with NBA lines vs all non-Cameron arenas without them).

All that said, my intuition from watching many Duke and non-Duke games is that I agree with you - college players are affected by the presence of an NBA line on the court.

UrinalCake
02-02-2011, 02:16 PM
I wonder if it's also that the defenses extend out a little farther due to the perception of the extra line

IrishDevil
02-02-2011, 02:19 PM
Other than that, I have to disagree with this analysis overall. Duke's phenomenal play in MSG and the meadowlands in the past does not support the claim that the 3 point line messes with the players. Also hurting your argument is that in the other game duke played on a court with the other line, they shot from a normal pattern. This indicates it is more likely that it can be attributed to St. John's high pressure defense, which did not allow duke players to even get as close to the line as they might like when they took their shots.

I have to agree here. Time and time again the Johnnies defense pushed our offense way beyond where we normally operate. One of the common comments during a strong defensive performance by Duke is that our pressure forces a team to initiate their offense almost at half court. In MSG, we were the ones opening our sets a step or two inside half court. Especially given the data from the Oregon game (team differences aside), it seems more likely that this same high pressure defense required our shooters to spot up farther from the basket in an attempt to get open looks, IMO.

mehmattski
02-02-2011, 03:00 PM
In response to the Desktop Design nazis, here are the shot charts all the same size:

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_qR7ksA-9iBw/TUm2CiDsupI/AAAAAAAABnM/jiZQk5KfiVk/s640/Duke%203-pt.jpg

I also added the last game from MSG, against Gonzaga. We didn't seem limited by the 3-point line then either. I don't think there's any alarming trend here, it was a one game-specific thing.

Defense could have something to do with it, but why aren't there any other games where the other team pushes Duke out like that? St John's isn't especially known for their three point defense (see: Kenpom (http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=St.%20John%27s) where they are 267th in 3pt defense). By my recollection, many of the 3s Duke took were uncontested.

If pressure defense along the 3-point line is the reason why Duke took (and missed) so many 3s on Sunday, then other coaches are bound to take that into consideration. If those who think it was defense are right, then Duke will start taking more of their shots from NBA range in all games. This would be especially troubling tonight, against a defense ranked #2 in the nation by kenpom.

On the other hand, if it was a one-time thing because of the added line, we should see the shots (made and misses) return to the college line starting tonight.

Billy Dat
02-02-2011, 03:39 PM
Watching the game, it was extremely frustrating how we failed to respond to their pressure. I thought back to the Baylor game when we stationed Zoubek at the foul line, kept feeding him the ball, and he would redirect it. The defense would collapse, and he was able to find shooters in rhythm. That same middle of the floor was open against the St. Johns pressure, yet we never adjusted to it. As a result, our perimeter was not squared to the basket, and whenever we got a second of daylight, we let it fly. Granted, we missed some ope shots where we were squared and our feet were set, but many of the shots were rushed. Credit their defense, but we also failed to adjust.

loran16
02-02-2011, 03:40 PM
First off, excellent analysis...love the visual aids.

Any chance guys shoot from 3 when the line is on the court to show anyone watching that they have range out to that NBA distance?

I am inclined to believe the confusion argument, but I also consider the paranoid "impress the scouts" argument.

I'm with the confusion argument. I was watching the end of the Nova-GTown game, which was at the Verizon center. Nova needed a 3 to tie. Nova player gets the ball, behind the college 3 point line with seconds left....but TAKES A STEP TO GET BEHIND THE NBA 3 POINT LINE BEFORE SHOOTING! (So a Nova player took a harder shot in a must make situation...had to be confusion).

Jeff Frosh
02-02-2011, 03:46 PM
In response to the Desktop Design nazis, here are the shot charts all the same size:

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_qR7ksA-9iBw/TUm2CiDsupI/AAAAAAAABnM/jiZQk5KfiVk/s640/Duke%203-pt.jpg

I also added the last game from MSG, against Gonzaga. We didn't seem limited by the 3-point line then either. I don't think there's any alarming trend here, it was a one game-specific thing.

Defense could have something to do with it, but why aren't there any other games where the other team pushes Duke out like that? St John's isn't especially known for their three point defense (see: Kenpom (http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=St.%20John%27s) where they are 267th in 3pt defense). By my recollection, many of the 3s Duke took were uncontested.

If pressure defense along the 3-point line is the reason why Duke took (and missed) so many 3s on Sunday, then other coaches are bound to take that into consideration. If those who think it was defense are right, then Duke will start taking more of their shots from NBA range in all games. This would be especially troubling tonight, against a defense ranked #2 in the nation by kenpom.

On the other hand, if it was a one-time thing because of the added line, we should see the shots (made and misses) return to the college line starting tonight.

What I find interesting is how few mid-range shots (2-point shots outside the paint) we took in the St. John's game. This year we have developed a pretty good mid-range game (Kyle, Nolan, Ryan and even Andre), which was non-existent against St. John's. Perhaps there is a correlation between the number of mid-range shots and our offensive efficiency. This is further supported by the fact that in our other loss we missed substantially all of our mid-range shots and missed all of them from the baseline.

devil84
02-02-2011, 03:57 PM
Yes, I'll agree with the fact that St. John's played aggressive, high pressure defense, that did alter shot selection. But there were still a number of shots where our guys could have positioned themselves a step closer. None of the St. John's shots were on the line -- only three are within what's probably a half-step of the line. Most make a nice arc what would be outside the NBA three point line.

When comparing to other arenas not dedicated to college sports, it appears the floor can change within the season. I looked through some pictures. The floor for the Duke-St. John's game in 2011 had white NBA and blue NCAAM 3 point lines, with the St. John's logo on the floor and Knicks logos at center court and behind the baselines. The most recent Big East tournament pictures showed a Big East logo at center court and the baselines. The 2009 Duke game in MSG had the Aeropostale Classic logos at center court and the baselines, but had two three point lines, both in white (not sure if they were NCAAM/NCAAW lines or NCAAM/NBA lines just from the few still photos I saw). The orange key is painted identically in all of them. Is it easier to confuse which line if they are different colors? If both are the same brightness (both white or both blue), would there be more visual cues to think about which line to use? In this case, the brightest line was the furthest out -- perhaps unintentionally reinforcing our long range shooters to pull up at the first line they see?

Oddly, though, Cameron is painted with the NCAAM line in blue and the NCAAW in white, which is why I think they may have shot at the farthest line. Why doesn't this affect other teams? Well, it's St. John's home court, for one. Secondly, many teams don't have an offense that relies on perimeter shooters.

This may all be hogwash, too. But you gotta wonder when so few shots were on or just a short step off the 3 point line and appearing to all be right up where an NBA line would be. Or the dude keeping the shot chart was recording them differently...who knows.

pfrduke
02-02-2011, 04:04 PM
What I find interesting is how few mid-range shots (2-point shots outside the paint) we took in the St. John's game. This year we have developed a pretty good mid-range game (Kyle, Nolan, Ryan and even Andre), which was non-existent against St. John's. Perhaps there is a correlation between the number of mid-range shots and our offensive efficiency. This is further supported by the fact that in our other loss we missed substantially all of our mid-range shots and missed all of them from the baseline.

This would surprise me, because the mid-range shot is the least efficient shot you can take in a game. 3-pointers and layups/dunks yield, roughly, the same number of points per attempt for an average team (with layups/dunks typically a bit higher). 2-point jump shots are always far below that; usually somewhere between 2/3 and 1/2 of the points per attempt as the other two. I would wager that our efficiency is higher when we increase our layups/dunks and 3s, and decrease our 2-point jumpers.

UrinalCake
02-02-2011, 04:23 PM
I would wager that our efficiency is higher when we increase our layups/dunks and 3s, and decrease our 2-point jumpers.

If you're playing HORSE that's true, but in an actual game the defenses are going to try to take away layups/dunks and three-pointers. The areas in between are often where you can get the most open looks. Nolan's runners and pull-up jumpers are probably the most "efficient" shots our team has because he hits them at such a high percentage.

davekay1971
02-02-2011, 04:24 PM
This would surprise me, because the mid-range shot is the least efficient shot you can take in a game. 3-pointers and layups/dunks yield, roughly, the same number of points per attempt for an average team (with layups/dunks typically a bit higher). 2-point jump shots are always far below that; usually somewhere between 2/3 and 1/2 of the points per attempt as the other two. I would wager that our efficiency is higher when we increase our layups/dunks and 3s, and decrease our 2-point jumpers.

While you're absolutely correct in your argument that 3 pointers and layups/dunks yield a higher expected points-per-attempt than do mid-range jumpers, keeping mid-range jumpers part of the offense and arsenal is important with regards to offensive variety and stretching the defense. If scouting reports indicate that a team focuses almost entirely on taking 3s and jumpers/dunks, it allows the defense to commit to defending those two zones, leaving soft spots in the mid-range areas that are not exploited. You want to make sure the defense feels the need to defend the entire scoring-third of the court, thereby stretching the defense and, hopefully, improving offensive efficiency from all areas.

As for the OP's point about the two lines: having played on courts with two 3 point lines, the 2nd line does make a difference. There's a natural instinct to spot up on a line. Even when the player isn't "confused" (meaning that they are spotting up on the NBA line thinking it's the college line), if they're trying to spot up just outside the college 3 point line, they will tend to spot up on the NBA line instead, which may draw them a foot or two further out than if they were on a court without the NBA line. The line serves as a natural visual reference point, and it does appear to have trended our shot selection (in this one game) out a bit from where we usually shoot. Was it the line alone, St. John's defense, some combination of those factors, or just a random variance? I don't know, but the OP has made an interesting observation.

pfrduke
02-02-2011, 04:51 PM
If you're playing HORSE that's true, but in an actual game the defenses are going to try to take away layups/dunks and three-pointers. The areas in between are often where you can get the most open looks. Nolan's runners and pull-up jumpers are probably the most "efficient" shots our team has because he hits them at such a high percentage.

Of course the defense is going to try to take away layups/dunks and three-pointers (although taking away both can be a difficult task). But it remains true that in an actual game (and not just in horse), teams score much more efficiently from layups/dunks and from 3s than they do from 2-point jumpers. At the risk of quoting myself, I actually looked at this in some detail (http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/forums/showthread.php?2540-Detailed-Player-Shooting-Stats) after the 2007 season. Notice our numbers - in that season, we had a 2:1 ratio of "efficient" shots (layups/dunks/3s) to "inefficient" shots; our opponents, by contrast, had only a 4:3 ratio, meaning they took a lot more 2-point jumpers than we did. We scored at an almost identical ratio on those shots as our opponents did - we got .675 points per 2-point jumper, opponents got .673 - that's ugly, inefficient scoring. But we ended up with 1.06 pps overall, while our opponents converted just .926 pps, in large part because we took more "efficient" shots and forced our opponents to take more "inefficient" shots.

Pomeroy did a similar look (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/a_little_something/) during NCAAT play in 2007. Shooting percentages on two-point jumpers tend not to be good - usually no better (and in some cases worse) than on 3-pointers, and you lose the 1-point bonus (although you increase, somewhat, your chances of getting fouled). 2-point jumpers are just low value shots.


While you're absolutely correct in your argument that 3 pointers and layups/dunks yield a higher expected points-per-attempt than do mid-range jumpers, keeping mid-range jumpers part of the offense and arsenal is important with regards to offensive variety and stretching the defense. If scouting reports indicate that a team focuses almost entirely on taking 3s and jumpers/dunks, it allows the defense to commit to defending those two zones, leaving soft spots in the mid-range areas that are not exploited. You want to make sure the defense feels the need to defend the entire scoring-third of the court, thereby stretching the defense and, hopefully, improving offensive efficiency from all areas.

This is true, but the mid-range game should (I think) be looked at as a means to an end, rather than as an end unto itself. That is, being able to at least keep people honest with the mid-range should open up better shots (better shots being 3s and layups/dunks). But under no circumstances (and I don't read you to be suggesting this) should the offense be designed to maximize 2-point jump shots. I agree, though, that a developed mid-range game can be a tool as part of an offense focused on maximizing more high-value shot attempts.

AZLA
02-02-2011, 04:58 PM
Cool discussion and great visuals. I could be wrong, but I seem to recall that the color of the NBA 3-point line appeared to be more prominent / brighter in color and the same color as the outline of the keys and baselines. Stark white. Whereas the traditional college three point line was dark and didn't catch the eye as much. Personally, I tend to think basketball players at this caliber are too smart not to know instinctually where they are on the floor at all times (even with their eyes closed). Couple that with memorable MSG games of the past, like when J.J. was bringing in can't-miss, long-range air support from near the middle of the floor against Texas, my first inclination is to think it's a little bit of both. But then that visual is a perfect overlay of the NBA line and (based on what someone wrote earlier) I'm more compelled to think it ultimately had more to do with St. John's press and pressure defense overall. Beyond the press, once over the half court, it appeared their game plan was to extend out the D and engage out beyond the NBA line. I recall a few turnovers where Nolan would attempt to run the offense sets at the top of the key, but the pressure was already there. Considering MSG is the location of all St. John's home games (outside of Carnesecca) -- maybe it's a specific strategy Lavin implements? Play tough man-to-man and engage beyond the NBA line. Only way to tell is to chart previous and upcoming opponent shot selections in MSG.

Kedsy
02-02-2011, 05:01 PM
But you gotta wonder when so few shots were on or just a short step off the 3 point line and appearing to all be right up where an NBA line would be. Or the dude keeping the shot chart was recording them differently...who knows.

I was at the game and watching for this, and the shots didn't just appear to be "where an NBA line would be," our kids were definitely spotting up a few inches beyond the NBA line. I can't say whether it was confusion or whatever, but they were clearly doing it, and it wasn't because they were closely defended. Andre and Seth took several wide-open NBA threes and shot them short.

To me, it seemed we figured this out in the last few minutes and were taking a few shots from inside the NBA line, and whether it was coincidence or not that's when we started hitting them.

mehmattski
02-02-2011, 05:49 PM
Cool discussion and great visuals. I could be wrong, but I seem to recall that the color of the NBA 3-point line appeared to be more prominent / brighter in color and the same color as the outline of the keys and baselines. Stark white. Whereas the traditional college three point line was dark and didn't catch the eye as much. Personally, I tend to think basketball players at this caliber are too smart not to know instinctually where they are on the floor at all times (even with their eyes closed). Couple that with memorable MSG games of the past, like when J.J. was bringing in can't-miss, long-range air support from near the middle of the floor against Texas, my first inclination is to think it's a little bit of both. But then that visual is a perfect overlay of the NBA line and (based on what someone wrote earlier) I'm more compelled to think it ultimately had more to do with St. John's press and pressure defense overall. Beyond the press, once over the half court, it appeared their game plan was to extend out the D and engage out beyond the NBA line. I recall a few turnovers where Nolan would attempt to run the offense sets at the top of the key, but the pressure was already there. Considering MSG is the location of all St. John's home games (outside of Carnesecca) -- maybe it's a specific strategy Lavin implements? Play tough man-to-man and engage beyond the NBA line. Only way to tell is to chart previous and upcoming opponent shot selections in MSG.

I thought you may be on to something. CBS has shot charts for only five St. John's home games. They have also completed their Home-and-Home with Notre Dame, so I included that chart:

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_qR7ksA-9iBw/TUndxMC6-OI/AAAAAAAABnY/5YU23um5kJE/s640/SJU%20opponents.jpg

I think it's pretty clear that Notre Dame changed their shot locations in MSG versus in South Bend. Notre Dame also takes a similar percentage of their shots from beyond the arc (37.5%) compared to Duke (37.1%). Georgetown takes a far fewer percentage of treys, and did not seem affected. Syracuse looks like they did chuck up a bunch from normal and NBA length. The Cincy game was played at Carnesseca, but I included it for symmetry.

If it was just St. John's defensive pressure, then ND would have taken a higher percentage of deep 3's at home too, right? There is the "desperation" angle-- ND won at home and had an offensive efficiency (http://kenpom.com/gameplan.php?team=Notre%20Dame) of 111.0, while in MSG they lost and had their worst offense of the season, a dismal 77.2.

Still, those two top charts paint a pretty interesting pattern!

AZLA
02-03-2011, 02:00 AM
Thanks for these charts, I see your point. Which brings me to something I've often wondered. Each of these charts indicate a dead zone, mid range, on either side of the free throw line (just outside the key). It's like no man's land. Hardly anyone ever takes a shot from those areas. It's either a three point, or dead center in the free throw circle, in the paint or on the posts. I never understood why more teams don't take advantage of the midrange shot more. I seem to remember Roshown Mcleod being adept in those shots and being pretty effective. Also, missed shots from these areas seem to generate better opportunities for offensive rebounds, especially for the shooter following up on his miss (compared to the ever popular three pointer). Thoughts?

Richard Berg
02-03-2011, 04:03 AM
Couple that with memorable MSG games of the past, like when J.J. was bringing in can't-miss, long-range air support from near the middle of the floor against Texas, my first inclination is to think it's a little bit of both.
The Texas game was at the Meadowlands, where we've had far greater success, historically. MSG has a similar "home game" feel but has been the site of some uncomfortable losses, like the first two games in fall '99.

So...anyone have a photo of the Izod court they wanna compare side-by-side?

sporthenry
02-03-2011, 09:23 AM
The Izod center court didn't have the NBA 3 point line on the court.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yaq-nJrRtG0

UrinalCake
02-03-2011, 10:13 AM
I noticed Dawkins taking (and making) a few shots from NBA range last night, even though there was no extra line.

MChambers
02-03-2011, 10:40 AM
Thanks for these charts, I see your point. Which brings me to something I've often wondered. Each of these charts indicate a dead zone, mid range, on either side of the free throw line (just outside the key). It's like no man's land. Hardly anyone ever takes a shot from those areas. It's either a three point, or dead center in the free throw circle, in the paint or on the posts. I never understood why more teams don't take advantage of the midrange shot more. I seem to remember Roshown Mcleod being adept in those shots and being pretty effective. Also, missed shots from these areas seem to generate better opportunities for offensive rebounds, especially for the shooter following up on his miss (compared to the ever popular three pointer). Thoughts?

See pfrduke's post above. A 15 foot shot just isn't an efficient shot for most players and teams.

davekay1971
02-03-2011, 11:12 AM
This is true, but the mid-range game should (I think) be looked at as a means to an end, rather than as an end unto itself. That is, being able to at least keep people honest with the mid-range should open up better shots (better shots being 3s and layups/dunks). But under no circumstances (and I don't read you to be suggesting this) should the offense be designed to maximize 2-point jump shots. I agree, though, that a developed mid-range game can be a tool as part of an offense focused on maximizing more high-value shot attempts.

Agreed completely! There are exceptions, of course, for individual players who have mastered certain mid-range shots (Kyle's sweet mid-range jumper off the baseline screen is an example that comes to mind), but your point is well taken that for most players, the statistics dictate a higher average of points per shot attempt on good looks from the 3 and on layups/dunks.