Shot Analytics - What's Wrong With Syracuse

[bcuse19]

Tweeted by Sean Keeley, great read on our slump.

http://shotanalytics.com/2014/03/06/whats-wrong-syracuse/

 

[bballbeadle]

It's a good analysis of what, but doesn't explain why. Perhaps for that, we need a psychologist?

 

[NineOneSeven]

Good article.

Cooney needs to get it together, goodness.

 

[bcuse19]

Well there's a discussion about how not having Grant at full strength hurts our offensive capabilities. But we knew that.

To be honest I think the explanation may be the most simple one, all our scorers are in shooting slumps at the same time, plus Grant is hurt.

 

[DonLightfoot]

Interesting article, thanks for sharing.

 

[44cuse]

Great find. Was talking to some other folks about finding something like this last week. Thanks for posting.

44cuse

 

[swish7]

Seems interesting, but they don't explain what their little septagons mean. The chart is meaningless to me.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

Seems interesting, but they don't explain what their little septagons mean. The chart is meaningless to me.

It's a combination of volume (smaller dot is lower volume, larger higher volume of shots in that shot) and make percentage (bluer color is cold/lower percentage of makes, redder color is hot/higher percentage of makes from that spot).

It basically shows we suck from every spot on the floor over the past 6 games. It's a detailed analysis of our suck-a-tood from every spot on the floor.

 

[TinyManInside]

The Cooney shot chart is the most worrisome. Brandon Triche-esque.

The team numbers in the paint over the last 6 games are atrocious. Can't win much if you're making less that 45% combined inside the paint.

 

[pearl31]

weird how TE's makes were mostly coming from the left side of the floor the first 24 games and hasn't really shot from the left side the last 6 games

 

[AZOrange]

It's a good analysis of what, but doesn't explain why. Perhaps for that, we need a psychologist?

Because streaks happen...because the law of averages works...I mean when cooney was 50 percent from 3 what did people expect would happen?

 

[TinyManInside]

Because streaks happen...because the law of averages works...I mean when cooney was 50 percent from 3 what did people expect would happen?

I was hoping his slump would be 30-35%, instead of 18%.

 

[OttoinGrotto]

Eegads.

 

[Cusefannotindc]

What the charts fail to answer, is SU taking worse shots or just not making the shots they were before.

 

[HoustonCuse]

The Cooney shot chart is the most worrisome. Brandon Triche-esque.

You mean the winningest player in the 100+ year history of the program? Just checking.

 

[Millhouse]

You mean the winningest player in the 100+ year history of the program? Just checking.

This post is the opposite of analytics

 

[SaltLakeOrange]

What the charts fail to answer, is SU taking worse shots or just not making the shots they were before.

For me they are saying two things:

1) we are getting similar shots and not making them.

2) we are getting less in the paint (this may be due to item 1). As we miss shots, teams pack it in more and more.

 

[Fly Rodder]

Because streaks happen...because the law of averages works...I mean when cooney was 50 percent from 3 what did people expect would happen?

That maybe he was the best 3pt shooter SU has had in a long time? That SU got a 2G that was a deadeye shooter from 3 like Reddick or Stauskas (that kid is ridiculous). Or was that too much to ask from a "Blue Blood" program?

I hope every kid in the program blows up to be a first rounder, I know it won't happen, but when someone comes into a program and statements like "best pure shooter I ever saw" float around, I don't think 47% is out of the realm of possibility.

 

[ImperialOrange]

It's a good analysis of what, but doesn't explain why. Perhaps for that, we need a psychologist?

I think it does. Look how many different spots we had in the first 24 games for high volume shots vs how few in the past 6 games. Not only is our offense predictable with whom will be taking the shots but defenses also know exactly where players will shoot from and where they likely will not.

 

[Knicks411]

I never saw "best shooter I've seen" out of Cooney. Not that people didn't say it, just that Cooney didn't strike me as that type.

I also think another takeaway from this is that it's hard when your #1 offensive weapon takes so many mid range jumpers. Some of this is obviously hindsight, since he took a lot earlier and the offense was very good, but mid range jumperd are the least efficient shot in the game.

 

[AZOrange]

That maybe he was the best 3pt shooter SU has had in a long time? That SU got a 2G that was a deadeye shooter from 3 like Reddick or Stauskas (that kid is ridiculous). Or was that too much to ask from a "Blue Blood" program?

I hope every kid in the program blows up to be a first rounder, I know it won't happen, but when someone comes into a program and statements like "best pure shooter I ever saw" float around, I don't think 47% is out of the realm of possibility.

47 percent from 3? Lol...how many guys do that? Reddick was a career 40 percent. Steph curry who is the best I've seen in 20 years was 44 percent. Even with his horrific streak cooney is 39 percent. GMAc was 35 by comp. expectations are just absurd on here.

 

[Quazzum69]

The comparison between the first 24 games and last six is pretty useless and is misleading.

The hexagons are raw numbers so the pictures of the shots of the first 24 games will be have much larger hexagons and more widely distributed than shots from only six games. They should have averaged them or something instead of just a count to get an average distribution. If you took the right hand side and multiplied by 4 (moving the spots a little in random directions) you would get the same graph as on the left.

And what is the average? Average of all NCAA shots from the region? How much further below average is lighter blue than just light blue???

Is volume raw numbers? Is it adjusted to possessions?

 

[AlaskaSU]

Pace is slowing down and that is also killing us. Not only are we missing but we get less attempts. Even if we out rebound it will not make enough of a difference given the combination of low % and slow pace. It also seems like we are getting less fast break points. If we were deeper I'd recommend using more of the court for defensive pressure.

 

[SWC75]

That was a great analysis. it looks like Ted Williams' hitting charts. I'm sure other teams look at charts like that to prepare for us. They've got to be pretty confident looking at those "last 6 games" charts.

I certainly don't agree that the mid range jump shot is the least efficient shot in basketball. A two pointer that goes in is worth more than a three pointer that doesn't and the movements you need to make to get an open two pointer makes the defense move- and move laterally- more than the movements they need to make to cover three pointers and dunks- the favored shots of the modern player. I think the three point line is a the major reason why scoring has gone down and the games are so ugly. When they were all two pointers, players just looked to get open. They didn't care how far from the basket they were. Lawrence Moten made a career out of just working to get an open shot- any open shot. And he's our all-time leading scorer.

 

[Knicks411]

I didn't say the mid range jumper has no place in the game. It does. But from a pure percentage basis; just look at the numbers.


I'll use the NBA since I can get the data easier

For last season, the league average shooting% at the rim was 64.7%
From 3-9 feet it was 39.9%
From 10-15 feet it was 41.9%
From 16-23 feet it was 38.4%
From 3 point it was 36.8%. Except you get the extra point, so the effective FG% was 54.1.

Shots at the rim and from the 3 point line are the most efficient in the game. At the rim is the best since you have a much better shot of drawing fouls. But from 3 feet out to 23 feet, the NBA shoots roughly 40%.

You've got like every good defensive mind in the NBA building their defense towards allowing mid range jumpers as well.