Mali 3%

[Millhouse]

It's been posted many times that you need to hit 33.3% to match 50% on two point shots. I made the point that 33.3% produces more rebounds and the defense usually gets those and someone had a link where they figured out the real break-even point is 35%. So anyone shooting below 35% should be finding other ways to score besides just jacking up three pointers.

often times the choice isn't between a 3 pointer and a coin flip two pointer. it's often a choice between a 33% three pointer and a 40% 18 footer.

boeheim has such incredible intuition, he is brilliant. and before better data was ubiquitious, that intuition gave him a huge advantage.

i worry a little that teams might know who should shoot from where better than we do now.

 

[CusefanATL]

It's been posted many times that you need to hit 33.3% to match 50% on two point shots. I made the point that 33.3% produces more rebounds and the defense usually gets those and someone had a link where they figured out the real break-even point is 35%. So anyone shooting below 35% should be finding other ways to score besides just jacking up three pointers.

Fair point, but I would guess 3's create more offensive rebounds than 2's do. Long rebounds are easier for people not in box out position than short rebounds.

 

[SWC75]

Fair point, but I would guess 3's create more offensive rebounds than 2's do. Long rebounds are easier for people not in box out position than short rebounds.

I assume that was computed into the 35% stat.

 

[AlaskaSU]

often times the choice isn't between a 3 pointer and a coin flip two pointer. it's often a choice between a 33% three pointer and a 40% 18 footer.

boeheim has such incredible intuition, he is brilliant. and before better data was ubiquitious, that intuition gave him a huge advantage.

i worry a little that teams might know who should shoot from where better than we do now.

It's been posted many times that you need to hit 33.3% to match 50% on two point shots. I made the point that 33.3% produces more rebounds and the defense usually gets those and someone had a link where they figured out the real break-even point is 35%. So anyone shooting below 35% should be finding other ways to score besides just jacking up three pointers.

Forward this to JB.

 

[CusefanATL]

I assume that was computed into the 35% stat.

Getting more offensive rebounds would lower the threshold, not raise it.

 

[SWC75]

Getting more offensive rebounds would lower the threshold, not raise it.

The defense would still get more of them.

 

[SWC75]

Getting more offensive rebounds would lower the threshold, not raise it.

The defense would still get more of them.

 

[CusefanATL]

The defense would still get more of them.

Sure, but if you get more offensive rebounds say 35% vs 25% (just making these up) it still helps your cause, not hurts your cause to shoot 3's vs 2's.

So again it would LOWER the 33.3, probably not much - but will lower it. and it will definitely NOT raise it.

 

[AlaskaSU]

often times the choice isn't between a 3 pointer and a coin flip two pointer. it's often a choice between a 33% three pointer and a 40% 18 footer.

boeheim has such incredible intuition, he is brilliant. and before better data was ubiquitious, that intuition gave him a huge advantage.

i worry a little that teams might know who should shoot from where better than we do now.

Back in the Stone-age JB's knowledge was advantageous, but in the computer age JB might be at a disadvantage. Any old computer would tell you how to allocate three pointers.

 

[bozophobe]

I wonder how the percentages break down regarding what kinds of shots are taken from outside (instant pull-up, feet set and passed to first, time left on shot clock, etc.)

 

[jgeorge322]

Definitely disagree about his form being the prettiest. Clearly you've never seen Dell Curry shoot a jump shot, for example. Or hell, his son has a pretty perfect stroke as well.

Atl is clearly riding the hyperbole train tonight. let it ride

 

[longtimefan]

Sure, but if you get more offensive rebounds say 35% vs 25% (just making these up) it still helps your cause, not hurts your cause to shoot 3's vs 2's.

So again it would LOWER the 33.3, probably not much - but will lower it. and it will definitely NOT raise it.

I think SWC is saying that whoever did the sabrmetric research on this included both offensive and defensive rebounds in the calculations, and came up with a break-even point 35%.

 

[orangehomer]

Walking triple double? Who exactly is a walking triple double to you (in the history of basketball)? I'd love to know how you feel G fails to stack up to the very best players in basketball history.

I did some quick research, the career mark for triple doubles in NCAA history is 8 by a BYU kid who is a senior, Kyle Farnsworth. The previous career mark was 6, 6 triple doubles was the all time record for an NCAA athlete held by Shaquuille O'Neal and Clyde Drexler before Farnsworth did that in a single season last year.

Last year there were 8 Triple Doubles in all of men's NCAA basketball, with only Farnsworth getting more than 1 (he had 6!) Forgive me if I give G a pass for not being a "walking triple double" at this stage of his basketball career, playing out of position as a PG on a mediocre team, and still leading us In points, assists, PER and just about any other key statistic.

nice anger, and way to go taking a comment completely out of context.

 

[orangehomer]

It's been posted many times that you need to hit 33.3% to match 50% on two point shots. I made the point that 33.3% produces more rebounds and the defense usually gets those and someone had a link where they figured out the real break-even point is 35%. So anyone shooting below 35% should be finding other ways to score besides just jacking up three pointers.

or, they are good players playing on bad teams that are trying to find ways to win.

 

[longtimefan]

the crazy thing about silent G is his FT%. He is such a good 3 pt shooter and such a bad FT shooter.

This is his best FT% year and he is only at 71%. For a bit last year his 3% was higher than his FT% which has to be unheard of for anyone who has taken more than 1 or 2 threes.

He was terrible from the free throw line for the first two-thirds of last season. He then changed his routine--no more dribbling. His numbers improved greatly. This year, he has been quite good, with the exception of a couple of games. Take out the 2 for 8 vs UConn and Wis, and he's shooting 77%.

 

[orangehomer]

Richardson could be the 3rd most talented player on this team. There's a big drop off after the top two.

you lose credibility after virtually everything you post. big drop off after the first two? what in god's name are you talking about? Richardson is easily the most talented player on the team.

 

[longtimefan]

Walking triple double? Who exactly is a walking triple double to you (in the history of basketball)? I'd love to know how you feel G fails to stack up to the very best players in basketball history.

I did some quick research, the career mark for triple doubles in NCAA history is 8 by a BYU kid who is a senior, Kyle Farnsworth. The previous career mark was 6, 6 triple doubles was the all time record for an NCAA athlete held by Shaquuille O'Neal and Clyde Drexler before Farnsworth did that in a single season last year.

Last year there were 8 Triple Doubles in all of men's NCAA basketball, with only Farnsworth getting more than 1 (he had 6!) Forgive me if I give G a pass for not being a "walking triple double" at this stage of his basketball career, playing out of position as a PG on a mediocre team, and still leading us In points, assists, PER and just about any other key statistic.

Mmm..Oscar Robertson.

 

[orangehomer]

yep! the difference between small percentages isn't obvious to people. maybe it would be better flip the numerator and denominator.

This year, Cooney takes 3 three point shots to make one
Gbinije takes 2.09 threes to make one
Lydon 2.08
Richardson 3.67

the difference is much clearer

in conference play Cooney attempts a whopping 3.53 three pointers for everyone he makes.

cooney is what, 23? Richardson is what, 19? lydon should shoot a lot more.

 

[OrangeDW]

PG - Joseph/ Howard (or maybe the other way)
SG- Richardson/ Cooney (split it and ride the hot hand)
SF - Gbinije
PF - Lydon/Roberson
C - Coleman/Lydon

Lets go.

 

[RF2044]

you lose credibility after virtually everything you post. big drop off after the first two? what in god's name are you talking about? Richardson is easily the most talented player on the team.

The only credibility I'm losing stems from engaging you in this dopey exchange.

Honestly, sometimes I don't know what the F you are watching, because it sure isn't our games if you think Mali is the most talented player on our team. Richardson isn't anywhere close to the best player on this team, no matter how you try to rationalize or split hairs trying to define what that means. Claiming that he is is borderline comical by any objective standard. Holy christ...

 

[pearl31]

you lose credibility after virtually everything you post. big drop off after the first two? what in god's name are you talking about?

What is it with the tone of your posts? Does everything have to be contentious hot-takes? good grief Oh Lord

 

[RF2044]

What is it with the tone of your posts? Does everything have to be contentious hot-takes? good grief Oh Lord

Pretty simple: lack of substance + indefensible off the wall analysis = surly hot take demeanor.

Cue the "like" on his last post from FrancoPizza in 3... 2...

 

[orangehomer]

It's beyond clear that you lose credibility after literally everything you post.

Honestly, sometimes I don't know what the F you are watching, because it sure isn't our games if you think Mali is the most talented player on our team. Richardson isn't anywhere close to the best player on this team, no matter how you try to rationalize or split hairs trying to define what that means. Claiming that he is is borderline comical by any objective standard. Holy christ...

you keep changing the premise of the argument, i am talking about talent, upside. not who is the best player today. i didnt say richardson is the best player today, i said he has the most talent. do you intentionally miss the point so that you can act reactionary?

 

[orangehomer]

Pretty simple: lack of substance + indefensible off the wall analysis = surly hot take demeanor.

Cue the "like" on his last post from FrancoPizza in 3... 2...

oh come on.

 

[RF2044]

you keep changing the premise of the argument, i am talking about talent, upside. not who is the best player today. i didnt say richardson is the best player today, i said he has the most talent. do you intentionally miss the point so that you can act reactionary?

Your premise is wrong, and easily debated. I don't care how many times you state something that is inaccurate - Malachi Richardson is at best the third most talented player on this team, and possibly the third highest long term potential player on the team. Now, tell me why you believe otherwise.

If you disagree, provide a rationale. Don't continue to state opinion as if it is a statement of fact.