• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

2014 NBA Feb |OT| Stern retires after failed attempt to bring pro basketball to NY

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't think it's a fallacy. The math doesn't lie. a 33% 3pt shot is the equivalent of a 50% 2pt shot, a proposition that a midrange jump shot decidedly isn't, but that's more or less the symptom of the 22-foot pull up jump shot being the result of a disrupted possession. The point of offensive possessions is to manufacture high expected point totals, and a play that is designed to result in a semi-contested Dirk pull up is still a better proposition than Shane Larkin launching a 3.

wat
 

SephCast

Brotherhood of Shipley's
This is what I was talking about earlier... would that free up enough to take a run at melo?

Nope doesn't really help or hurt chances at that, but it clears playing time for Gibson and saves the Bulls about 20 million dollars (for Jerry to use on the White Sox). We don't want Boozer anymore anyways. Bulls could grab a pick out of it, though.
 
I don't think it's a fallacy. The math doesn't lie. a 33% 3pt shot is the equivalent of a 50% 2pt shot, a proposition that a midrange jump shot decidedly isn't, but that's more or less the symptom of the 22-foot pull up jump shot being the result of a disrupted possession. The point of offensive possessions is to manufacture high expected point totals, and a play that is designed to result in a semi-contested Dirk pull up is still a better proposition than Shane Larkin launching a 3.

I think it depends. A higher percentage shot leads to less possible fast breaks so it gives you time to arm a better defense. Of course a shot a feet from 3 is not very desirable, but midrange shots and shots around the key are desirable in my opinion.

Also having mid-shots in your arsenal during a game makes your game less predictable and mid-shots are great way to finish a play off the sideline.

And as an spectator is boring when teams either dunk or shoot 3, i would prefer to move away the 3 point line to bring more variety into the game. Old FIBA games where the 3 was at 6,25 were horrible to watch as they often threw just too many 3s.

The mid range shot is horrible because most people suck at them making it a very inefficient shot.

I totally agree. Its the player fault. The shot is ok.
 
Well, last night didn't end well, but it was probably the best game I've seen at the rose garden. Glad I got to see durant up close at this point in his career. His 36 was almost effortless. Nic played some great defense on him in the last few possessions, though.

I recorded a video of lma's final shot because I honestly believed lillard would be shooting, and that it would be a game winner. No idea why a guy who was ice cold all game got the green light to shoot, but whatever. Stotts gonna stotts.

Also, I feared the worst as soon as I saw freeland go down. Glad it's just a sprain.

9RxLxJS.jpg

1lfowjq.jpg
 

Rodeo Clown

All aboard! The Love train!
I hope Portland wins the championship. This era of basketball needs to end where people think it's either layups/dunks or 3 pointers. There is a middle ground and it's refreshing to see someone realize that.

The midrange jumper is the worst shot in basketball.
 
I think it depends. A higher percentage shot leads to less possible fast breaks so it gives you time to arm a better defense. Of course a shot a feet from 3 is not very desirable, but midrange shots and shots around the key are desirable in my opinion.

Also having mid-shots in your arsenal during a game makes your game less predictable.

And as an spectator is boring when teams either dunk or shoot 3, i would prefer to move away the 3 point line to bring more variety into the game. Old FIBA games where the 3 was at 6,25 were horrible to watch as they often threw just too many 3s.

I was just trying to argue that the whole point about "mid range jump shots are bad!" is that if you put 3 dudes who respectively shot league average from close to the basket, from the midrange, and from three, and just had them shoot those shots over and over again, the layup guy and the 3 point guy will eventually win because they have a higher expected point total. That's the entire thesis of the argument and I think it holds water.

Within the context of how an NBA team should run its offense though, it should be only 1 of many factors to consider.
 

giri

Member
Nope doesn't really help or hurt chances at that, but it clears playing time for Gibson and saves the Bulls about 20 million dollars (for Jerry to use on the White Sox). We don't want Boozer anymore anyways. Bulls could grab a pick out of it, though.

I think you mean, give up a pick.

And the suns have been linked to every team with a PF.

Suns would want noah, not Boozer. And that aint happening.
 
I thought the Bulls were shopping Gibson? Why in the world would the Suns want Boozer when they could trade for someone just as good with half the price tag in Gibson?
 
Most players don't suck at midrange jumpers, it's just extremely difficult/near impossible to make jumpshots in live game action over 50% of the time (which is the level you need to convert it at the rate needed to make it efficient). There's Dirk and ?
 

giri

Member
Most players don't suck at midrange jumpers, it's just extremely difficult/near impossible to make jumpshots in live game action over 50% of the time (which is the level you need to convert it at the rate needed to make it efficient). There's Dirk and ?

Durant and PG were very efficient there to start the season.

Not sure if that held up.

But there aint many of them.
 
Most players don't suck at midrange jumpers, it's just extremely difficult/near impossible to make jumpshots in live game action over 50% of the time (which is the level you need to convert it at the rate needed to make it efficient). There's Dirk and ?

Paging Vahagn right now...

Dirk is an anomaly because he shoots consistently well in every area of the court. Obviously he's got his favorite spots as well, but he's dangerous everywhere.

I think players like Timmy who aren't consistently good mid range shooters have found this one shot (the 18 foot bank shot from the left elbow in his case) that they can make on a consistent basis, and smart coaches will use that knowledge to manufacture that exact shot.
 
The mid range shot is important. You need to have guys that can hit that shot consistently enough when the clock runs down/plays run down.

A wide open mid range shot is also a good percentage shot. It's why Portland's offense is so good, because they generate a lot of open looks from mid range and from 3.

It's the long range non-3 that is terrible (a foot or so inside the line) and contested mid range shots (not end of clock) that are bad.

I'd rather have a lot of players shoot a wide open 18 foot shot than a semi-contested 3 (but not an open 3, of course). Thing is, there aren't many wide open 18 foot shots for decent shooters these days.
 
Last year was probably a fluke. I'm glad hes taking(and making) those threes now since he isn't god tier at the mid range this year.

doesn't he shoot 49% from mid-range?

The mid range shot is important. You need to have guys that can hit that shot consistently enough when the clock runs down/plays run down.

A wide open mid range shot is also a good percentage shot. It's why Portland's offense is so good, because they generate a lot of open looks from mid range and from 3.

It's the long range non-3 that is terrible (a foot or so inside the line) and contested mid range shots (not end of clock) that are bad.

I'd rather have a lot of players shoot a wide open 18 foot shot than a semi-contested 3 (but not an open 3, of course). Thing is, there aren't many wide open 18 foot shots for decent shooters these days.

this, it's just the fact that modern offenses and court spacing dictates that a three point shot is better due to the fact that it's consistently less contested than other parts on the floor

I think it's possible to be a deadly offensive team in todays NBA working primarily off of PNR and flare screens, but nobody is about that life anymore
 

giri

Member
The mid range shot is important. You need to have guys that can hit that shot consistently enough when the clock runs down/plays run down.

A wide open mid range shot is also a good percentage shot. It's why Portland's offense is so good, because they generate a lot of open looks from mid range and from 3.

It's the long range non-3 that is terrible (a foot or so inside the line) and contested mid range shots (not end of clock) that are bad.

I'd rather have a lot of players shoot a wide open 18 foot shot than a semi-contested 3 (but not an open 3, of course). Thing is, there aren't many wide open 18 foot shots for decent shooters these days.

Essentially.

It's easier to close out on an 18ft shot than a 24ft 3pta. A lot less distance to cover, and usually more bodies in the area.
 

Mik317

Member
The midrange shot is mainly bad because dudes settle for it.

If it comes off a kick out or pumpfake, then it's fine.

It's the Kome dribble into it when you could get to the rim or taking long 2s when you could step back a little for 3s.

It is a great shot to have for sure but too many people use it wrong or settle for it.
 

DY_nasty

NeoGAF's official "was this shooting justified" consultant
Hope I can watch the Brooklyn game tonight but goddamn my service is terrible out here
 

pilonv1

Member
EASTERN CONFERENCE

> Arron Afflalo, Orlando
> Bradley Beal, Washington
> Kyrie Irving, Cleveland
> Joe Johnson, Brooklyn

WESTERN CONFERENCE

> Marco Belinelli, San Antonio
> Stephen Curry, Golden State
> Damian Lillard, Portland
> Kevin Love, Minnesota


How Klay isn't in there IDK

Agreed, it's a farce. Same with Korver.
 
"Seattle is a wonderful market. It would be very additive to the league to have a team there," Silver said in an interview this week with ESPN. "But we're not planning on expanding right now, so it's not a function of price."

Blakeace am cry. :(
 

giri

Member
Minnesota/Milwaukee, take your pick. There's barely enough talent to fill the rosters of 30 teams.

Which raises and interesting quesiton, which franchises are up for sale?

I know the bucks might be.

Wolves aren't? there were some shenanigans going on a while ago but nothing I've heard indicates a sale now.

That's about it though?

I mean, i know a lot of teams changed hands over the last 3 or 5 years. Memphis, Pelicans, GSW, Kings, Hawks, Horncats, Wizards, Pistons, Nets.

But i'm not sure there are any really up for grabs at the moment?
 

Vic

Please help me with my bad english
I like Ed Davis, but he takes a lot of bad decisions on the offensive end. Needs to improve his decision making.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom