tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

TKF: As you said before, people interpret "tone" on the internet/email/text wrongly all the time. Everyone is different and writing styles can sometimes give some people the impression one is being rude, dismissive, angry, what have you. You said you were not angry or whatever in an earlier post and I'll take you for your word on that. SO, I was definitely misinterpreting your posts. Apologies for that and for crafting replies tailored for someone who I was interpreting as being dismissive/etc. Going forward now I now your not posting that way so I won't make the mistake again. Cheers.

Back to the topic: I think at least with me you were misinterpreting that I was trying to give you a "lesson". Def not my intention. You said you understand the math so I believe you. My main point was simply in the case of Kevin Love, I want him taking as many open threes and good look threes as possible. Of course, I also want him taking as many shots close to the rim as well. So I essentially agree with the close to the rim/out beyond the arc ONLY, or, as much as possible philosophy.
So you think 6 3's is too much I think if he can shoot more he should. That's it.

I see what your saying though and why you think it's wrong and why he shouldnt tailor his play that way but concentrate more on the style you are advocating. I simply disagree. So, that's basically it. I could wrong and you could be right, or, I could be right and you could be wrong or it could be some combination of both or something else entirely that is optimal. I respect your opinion though, and while I don't agree as long as you weren't and don't craft replies that are intentionally rude (which you said you weren't) then cool!

Again, cheers.

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

H1AND1 wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

TKF: As you said before, people interpret "tone" on the internet/email/text wrongly all the time. Everyone is different and writing styles can sometimes give some people the impression one is being rude, dismissive, angry, what have you. You said you were not angry or whatever in an earlier post and I'll take you for your word on that. SO, I was definitely misinterpreting your posts. Apologies for that and for crafting replies tailored for someone who I was interpreting as being dismissive/etc. Going forward now I now your not posting that way so I won't make the mistake again. Cheers.

Back to the topic: I think at least with me you were misinterpreting that I was trying to give you a "lesson". Def not my intention. You said you understand the math so I believe you. My main point was simply in the case of Kevin Love, I want him taking as many open threes and good look threes as possible. Of course, I also want him taking as many shots close to the rim as well. So I essentially agree with the close to the rim/out beyond the arc ONLY, or, as much as possible philosophy.
So you think 6 3's is too much I think if he can shoot more he should. That's it.

I see what your saying though and why you think it's wrong and why he shouldnt tailor his play that way but concentrate more on the style you are advocating. I simply disagree. So, that's basically it. I could wrong and you could be right, or, I could be right and you could be wrong or it could be some combination of both or something else entirely that is optimal. I respect your opinion though, and while I don't agree as long as you weren't and don't craft replies that are intentionally rude (which you said you weren't) then cool!

Again, cheers.

good post, and yes there are just going to be some things we disagree on, and that is fine.. thanks for the response..

cheers!!

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

JR Smith said you just gave him the green light.

dk7th wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

JR Smith said you just gave him the green light.

you must be joking.

he has never shot over 40% from 3 in his career save once. that was 2007-2008 where he actually reached 60%TS. he should not be taking more than 4 of them per game.

I guess you round down when he shot 39.7% and last year he shot 39.4% so he he just missed 40% so I guess he doesn't get the your "green Light".

Yes, I was joking hence the smiley face. However, I would give him the green light on catch and shoot attempts or hand off attempts. He would not take any off the dribble threes unless it is late in the clock.

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

I don't get it. Is there any logic to this numbers in relation to eFg?

I think players should only dunk 3.5 times a game ... really?

if a player is taking shots and hitting them at a high eFg then he should take as many of them as he can without affecting his efficiency.

A player should shoot more 2's at 50% than 3's at 57%? That does not make any sense.

Any open 3 or any open look near the basket are good shots, minimize all mid range shots.

think about it in terms of diminishing returns when a player shoots less than 40% from 3.

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

I don't get it. Is there any logic to this numbers in relation to eFg?

I think players should only dunk 3.5 times a game ... really?

if a player is taking shots and hitting them at a high eFg then he should take as many of them as he can without affecting his efficiency.

A player should shoot more 2's at 50% than 3's at 57%? That does not make any sense.

Any open 3 or any open look near the basket are good shots, minimize all mid range shots.

think about it in terms of diminishing returns when a player shoots less than 40% from 3.

There is no diminishing returns.

If a player shoots 37.6 from three then he is at 57% efg. Is that good? Would you rather he take "other" shots that lower his efg?

Also, please don't discount the fact that a big who can shoot the 3 opens up the floor.

yes it works out mathematically as you say. as you know i like math. i also know that the real world does not abide euclidean geometry. euclid's geometry is beautiful, elegant... and abstract.

similarly i don't think it makes sense to look at the numbers in a vacuum, ie in the abstract. there are other variables in a basketball game. do you want someone to miss more than 60% of his shots, going 3 for 8 for instance?

i wonder if, as you go further in the playoffs, the 3-point shot becomes less viable as the defensive pressure increases? this may be the ne plus ultra issue with the three-point shot.

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

I don't get it. Is there any logic to this numbers in relation to eFg?

I think players should only dunk 3.5 times a game ... really?

if a player is taking shots and hitting them at a high eFg then he should take as many of them as he can without affecting his efficiency.

A player should shoot more 2's at 50% than 3's at 57%? That does not make any sense.

Any open 3 or any open look near the basket are good shots, minimize all mid range shots.

think about it in terms of diminishing returns when a player shoots less than 40% from 3.

There is no diminishing returns.

If a player shoots 37.6 from three then he is at 57% efg. Is that good? Would you rather he take "other" shots that lower his efg?

Also, please don't discount the fact that a big who can shoot the 3 opens up the floor.

yes it works out mathematically as you say. as you know i like math. i also know that the real world does not abide euclidean geometry. euclid's geometry is beautiful, elegant... and abstract.

similarly i don't think it makes sense to look at the numbers in a vacuum, ie in the abstract. there are other variables in a basketball game. do you want someone to miss more than 60% of his shots, going 3 for 8 for instance?

i wonder if, as you go further in the playoffs, the 3-point shot becomes less viable as the defensive pressure increases? this may be the ne plus ultra issue with the three-point shot.

3 for 8 from three is perfect! Who cares about the percentage of misses? You should care about the number of points per possession.

The three is crucial in the playoffs. Miami lives and dies by it and so does SA.

The three ball opens up the rest of the game. If you are not hitting it, the defense collapses and the team is stifled.

I feel like you probably agree with me you just can't concede the point.

i'd be happy to concede the point but for me i would have to see the man play-- and i haven't so it remains theoretical. are all the threes he takes good shots, viable shots? or does he take some bad shots in there and regularly.

also i am not sure that both miami and sa live and die by the three. where do you get that notion?

also please give me a link to points per possession.

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

I don't get it. Is there any logic to this numbers in relation to eFg?

I think players should only dunk 3.5 times a game ... really?

if a player is taking shots and hitting them at a high eFg then he should take as many of them as he can without affecting his efficiency.

A player should shoot more 2's at 50% than 3's at 57%? That does not make any sense.

Any open 3 or any open look near the basket are good shots, minimize all mid range shots.

think about it in terms of diminishing returns when a player shoots less than 40% from 3.

There is no diminishing returns.

If a player shoots 37.6 from three then he is at 57% efg. Is that good? Would you rather he take "other" shots that lower his efg?

Also, please don't discount the fact that a big who can shoot the 3 opens up the floor.

yes it works out mathematically as you say. as you know i like math. i also know that the real world does not abide euclidean geometry. euclid's geometry is beautiful, elegant... and abstract.

similarly i don't think it makes sense to look at the numbers in a vacuum, ie in the abstract. there are other variables in a basketball game. do you want someone to miss more than 60% of his shots, going 3 for 8 for instance?

i wonder if, as you go further in the playoffs, the 3-point shot becomes less viable as the defensive pressure increases? this may be the ne plus ultra issue with the three-point shot.

3 for 8 from three is perfect! Who cares about the percentage of misses? You should care about the number of points per possession.

The three is crucial in the playoffs. Miami lives and dies by it and so does SA.

The three ball opens up the rest of the game. If you are not hitting it, the defense collapses and the team is stifled.

I feel like you probably agree with me you just can't concede the point.

miami and the spurs have guys shooting the threes who are actually good at it... they don't have guys shooting in the 30% range taking 7 threes.. note. ray allen went 4-4 from three, HUGE difference from 3-8

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

dk7th wrote:

tkf wrote:

mreinman wrote:TKF,

43 is beyond amazing and if he had the opportunity to get more off I am sure that he would. Trust me, he does not pass up any open 3's.

And I still don't get why you assume that Love can get up 100 more shots. Who says they are available? Some come on the break, some on pick and rolls, some on guard penetration / breakdown etc ...

I think what you are suggesting maybe is that he should play in the post more and they should run more of these sets. That all depends on offensive design put in place by the coach. A more spread out offense are what teams are being successful with.

Minny's problem is not Love but overall, their outside shooting is terrible and you can't win with awful shooting/shooters. If their shooters were better then Love would have even a higher pct from 3 since he would be more open.

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

What we can probably agree for Love (and most players) is that the mid range is the worst and lowest efficient shot in the game. They still need to be taken sometimes if that is what the defense is giving you and you need to keep them honest but offenses are pretty much being designed to eliminate these so called "sh1t shots".

ARE you telling I should then assume he shoots more threes because he can't get more shots inside? I am saying he is already taking a good amount in the paint, why not take more.. look around the league at the PF's guys like Blake griffin are getting over 700 shots there, now i know blake gets a lot of dunks but come on... those shots or attempts can be had... I have hard time belving a player like love is being FORCED to the perimeter.. and even if the defense has to adjust, then even the better for his team..

now his team does lack good shooters..but this is the type of data you use to build a team.. they need to add shooters...

My main point here is that you can't look at a shot chart and assume (especially right at the basket) that a player can get more clean looks. A player needs to take a variety of efficient shots and that often depends on the offensive system and the defense they are playing against.

sure there are other variables.. just like I asked should he be shooting that many threes.. do you know he is top 6 in attempts in the league...the other 5 players are guards...

my point is when I asked that question,it wasn't to say love should not take threes, or for you guys to try to give me a lesson on addition.. trust me I clearly understand the statistics... but it was to see what would be a good breaking point for love.. so just like you say you can't look at a shot chart and assume a player an get more clean looks.. we should not assume that because a player who shoots 37% from three is as good as 50% from two, he should be taking that many threes... in the end, it is whats best for the team first... right?

a 3-point shooter should always shoot in even numbers. if love shoots 6.6 he needs to consider cutting back to 6 shots or perhaps even 4 shots a game... so far as this is possible.

the last time kevin love shot over 40% from three or the only time was when he took less attempts, i think a bit over 4... right now he shoots more threes than any NON-wing man in the league.. he is 6th in the league in attempts.. for him and his team, I don't think 4 is a bad number at all..

right-- so folks need to look at how well a player shoots the three and calibrate the number of shots accordingly. just for argument's sake, i will suggest:

34%+ to 36% 2 shots from 3
36%+ to 38% 4 shots from 3
38%+ to 40% 6 shots from 3
anything over 40% a shooter should have a green light since he is likely a specialist.

the risk/reward on a 40% shooter from 3 is worth having said shooter put up anywhere from 6 shots on up. 3 for 7 is 42% and 3 for 8 is 37% but with a 40% shooter he could just as easily make 4 of 8.

I don't get it. Is there any logic to this numbers in relation to eFg?

I think players should only dunk 3.5 times a game ... really?

if a player is taking shots and hitting them at a high eFg then he should take as many of them as he can without affecting his efficiency.

A player should shoot more 2's at 50% than 3's at 57%? That does not make any sense.

Any open 3 or any open look near the basket are good shots, minimize all mid range shots.

think about it in terms of diminishing returns when a player shoots less than 40% from 3.

There is no diminishing returns.

If a player shoots 37.6 from three then he is at 57% efg. Is that good? Would you rather he take "other" shots that lower his efg?

Also, please don't discount the fact that a big who can shoot the 3 opens up the floor.

this goes back to what I said earlier... How well did Bargnani's three point shooting open up for the floor for the knicks.. and he shot what some of you consider efficient from three..I think it was 35%..

what i do find is that unless you are really accurate from three, most teams won't chase bigs off the three point line with other bigs... I guess they figure, if you shoot 50+% from the field and you want to stand out there and launch threes at 37% then go ahead.. because any smart team will continue to take their high percentage shots vs your lower percentage shots.. and believe me, when you shoot less than 40% from three there are a lot of games you are not making any threes at all... go look at kevin loves game logs...

Bargs shot 27% from three this past season. Which is horrible. Just saying.

Bargs is such a bum he'd probably have trouble opening up a can of beans at this point. Gawd watching that dude is painful.