Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Same person I'd want shooting at any other point in the game - Lebron. He can create his own shot and hits 57% of the time.

Lebron because he is good in the clutch or because he is overall efficient?

So if you knew that a player who shoots at a very high pct does badly in clutch moments would you still want them to take the shot?

It could easily just be random variation if he does badly in clutch moments. You're probably talking about a sample of 20 shots over a career (basically equal to one bad game). I know people like to glorify and demonize those who do great or badly in the final seconds but it's probably just the peak of human misunderstanding of statistics.

As of 2009, Lebron was 17-50 with the game on the line (34%)

"Game on the line" is vague but regardless, I'm sure Jordan, Magic and all the greats had many 50 shot stretches where they made 17 or fewer

Because you weigh the first shot of the game the same as the last shot of the game when the score is tied?

Its not the same. FG percentage for the league in those moment is < 30 percent. Those pressure shots where they are must haves are not easy.

Even if we accept that it's not the same, it doesn't mean a sample of 50 shots is meaningful. Likewise, even if FG% is lower in the closing seconds, it doesn't mean that those shots are more important than the shots before them. I'm not opposed to the idea of studying which players are clutch but I don't think listing percentages of a couple dozen shots is useful. What separates the guys at the top from the bottom of the list is probably about 5 made shots spread over 10 years.

There are very few chances during a career that a player has the opportunities to take these shots. Kobe took 115 of them and hit 36. That is a ton of shots in this category.

With so few opportunities to affect the final outcome of the game, we must rely on the smaller sample sizes.

Alan Iverson took 68 shots with the game on the line and hit 21 of them.

MrBigshot is something like a 16% shooter in these moments. FAR FROM EARNING THE MONIKER.

82games had this study back in 2009 but they also starting tracking the last 5 minutes of a game since then.

Or we must conclude that we have insufficient data

it is sufficient enough to start making decisions.

Was it smart to allow Kobe to decide the outcome of the final possessions of 115 games shooting that badly?

Didn't Horry get his reputation on just a few shots?

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Same person I'd want shooting at any other point in the game - Lebron. He can create his own shot and hits 57% of the time.

Lebron because he is good in the clutch or because he is overall efficient?

So if you knew that a player who shoots at a very high pct does badly in clutch moments would you still want them to take the shot?

It could easily just be random variation if he does badly in clutch moments. You're probably talking about a sample of 20 shots over a career (basically equal to one bad game). I know people like to glorify and demonize those who do great or badly in the final seconds but it's probably just the peak of human misunderstanding of statistics.

As of 2009, Lebron was 17-50 with the game on the line (34%)

"Game on the line" is vague but regardless, I'm sure Jordan, Magic and all the greats had many 50 shot stretches where they made 17 or fewer

Because you weigh the first shot of the game the same as the last shot of the game when the score is tied?

Its not the same. FG percentage for the league in those moment is < 30 percent. Those pressure shots where they are must haves are not easy.

Even if we accept that it's not the same, it doesn't mean a sample of 50 shots is meaningful. Likewise, even if FG% is lower in the closing seconds, it doesn't mean that those shots are more important than the shots before them. I'm not opposed to the idea of studying which players are clutch but I don't think listing percentages of a couple dozen shots is useful. What separates the guys at the top from the bottom of the list is probably about 5 made shots spread over 10 years.

There are very few chances during a career that a player has the opportunities to take these shots. Kobe took 115 of them and hit 36. That is a ton of shots in this category.

With so few opportunities to affect the final outcome of the game, we must rely on the smaller sample sizes.

Alan Iverson took 68 shots with the game on the line and hit 21 of them.

MrBigshot is something like a 16% shooter in these moments. FAR FROM EARNING THE MONIKER.

82games had this study back in 2009 but they also starting tracking the last 5 minutes of a game since then.

Or we must conclude that we have insufficient data

it is sufficient enough to start making decisions.

Was it smart to allow Kobe to decide the outcome of the final possessions of 115 games shooting that badly?

Didn't Horry get his reputation on just a few shots?

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Same person I'd want shooting at any other point in the game - Lebron. He can create his own shot and hits 57% of the time.

Lebron because he is good in the clutch or because he is overall efficient?

So if you knew that a player who shoots at a very high pct does badly in clutch moments would you still want them to take the shot?

It could easily just be random variation if he does badly in clutch moments. You're probably talking about a sample of 20 shots over a career (basically equal to one bad game). I know people like to glorify and demonize those who do great or badly in the final seconds but it's probably just the peak of human misunderstanding of statistics.

As of 2009, Lebron was 17-50 with the game on the line (34%)

"Game on the line" is vague but regardless, I'm sure Jordan, Magic and all the greats had many 50 shot stretches where they made 17 or fewer

Because you weigh the first shot of the game the same as the last shot of the game when the score is tied?

Its not the same. FG percentage for the league in those moment is < 30 percent. Those pressure shots where they are must haves are not easy.

Even if we accept that it's not the same, it doesn't mean a sample of 50 shots is meaningful. Likewise, even if FG% is lower in the closing seconds, it doesn't mean that those shots are more important than the shots before them. I'm not opposed to the idea of studying which players are clutch but I don't think listing percentages of a couple dozen shots is useful. What separates the guys at the top from the bottom of the list is probably about 5 made shots spread over 10 years.

There are very few chances during a career that a player has the opportunities to take these shots. Kobe took 115 of them and hit 36. That is a ton of shots in this category.

With so few opportunities to affect the final outcome of the game, we must rely on the smaller sample sizes.

Alan Iverson took 68 shots with the game on the line and hit 21 of them.

MrBigshot is something like a 16% shooter in these moments. FAR FROM EARNING THE MONIKER.

82games had this study back in 2009 but they also starting tracking the last 5 minutes of a game since then.

Or we must conclude that we have insufficient data

it is sufficient enough to start making decisions.

Was it smart to allow Kobe to decide the outcome of the final possessions of 115 games shooting that badly?

Didn't Horry get his reputation on just a few shots?

Reputation and a quarter are worth a gumball.
The first statement is just conjecture.
It's not at all clear to me, when making future decisions about who gets the ball in the final seconds, that you should give more (or any) weight to a player's career clutch % rather than to his overall career shooting %. If I had more time, I'd see what research has been done on this topic. I'd be open to any possibilities but I wouldn't start from the assumption that the much smaller sample (often 50 vs. 15,000 shots) should be given significant weight.

stats are sliced and dices often into small pieces and can offer very small samples of data that can be monitored and sometimes utilized.

I think that where we disagree is that you think that a point is a point and thats it where I do value shots that are taken in different more difficult situations.

I you have a player that you let shoot the final shot and he goes 0-30 in these situations yet he was an efficient shooter overall, would you not start thinking about not putting the ball in his hands in these situations?

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Same person I'd want shooting at any other point in the game - Lebron. He can create his own shot and hits 57% of the time.

Lebron because he is good in the clutch or because he is overall efficient?

So if you knew that a player who shoots at a very high pct does badly in clutch moments would you still want them to take the shot?

It could easily just be random variation if he does badly in clutch moments. You're probably talking about a sample of 20 shots over a career (basically equal to one bad game). I know people like to glorify and demonize those who do great or badly in the final seconds but it's probably just the peak of human misunderstanding of statistics.

As of 2009, Lebron was 17-50 with the game on the line (34%)

"Game on the line" is vague but regardless, I'm sure Jordan, Magic and all the greats had many 50 shot stretches where they made 17 or fewer

Because you weigh the first shot of the game the same as the last shot of the game when the score is tied?

Its not the same. FG percentage for the league in those moment is < 30 percent. Those pressure shots where they are must haves are not easy.

Even if we accept that it's not the same, it doesn't mean a sample of 50 shots is meaningful. Likewise, even if FG% is lower in the closing seconds, it doesn't mean that those shots are more important than the shots before them. I'm not opposed to the idea of studying which players are clutch but I don't think listing percentages of a couple dozen shots is useful. What separates the guys at the top from the bottom of the list is probably about 5 made shots spread over 10 years.

There are very few chances during a career that a player has the opportunities to take these shots. Kobe took 115 of them and hit 36. That is a ton of shots in this category.

With so few opportunities to affect the final outcome of the game, we must rely on the smaller sample sizes.

Alan Iverson took 68 shots with the game on the line and hit 21 of them.

MrBigshot is something like a 16% shooter in these moments. FAR FROM EARNING THE MONIKER.

82games had this study back in 2009 but they also starting tracking the last 5 minutes of a game since then.

Or we must conclude that we have insufficient data

it is sufficient enough to start making decisions.

Was it smart to allow Kobe to decide the outcome of the final possessions of 115 games shooting that badly?

Didn't Horry get his reputation on just a few shots?

Reputation and a quarter are worth a gumball.
The first statement is just conjecture.
It's not at all clear to me, when making future decisions about who gets the ball in the final seconds, that you should give more (or any) weight to a player's career clutch % rather than to his overall career shooting %. If I had more time, I'd see what research has been done on this topic. I'd be open to any possibilities but I wouldn't start from the assumption that the much smaller sample (often 50 vs. 15,000 shots) should be given significant weight.

stats are sliced and dices often into small pieces and can offer very small samples of data that can be monitored and sometimes utilized.

I think that where we disagree is that you think that a point is a point and thats it where I do value shots that are taken in different more difficult situations.

I you have a player that you let shoot the final shot and he goes 0-30 in these situations yet he was an efficient shooter overall, would you not start thinking about not putting the ball in his hands in these situations?

The idea that a point is a point may or may not be true. Even if it's false, it doesn't mean you can make meaningful predictions from a sample of 50 shots. It could be the case that (a) shots in closing seconds are in some way fundamentally different from all other shots, and yet (b) we'll never have enough data for an individual person to make useful predictions. Or it could be that a sample of 50 shots in the final seconds actually is more important than the 10,000 shot career sample. There are many other possibilities and we're just guessing right now as to which is right.

Here are some interesting studies and articles:

82games study from 2009:
http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm

Henry Abbott's great piece on Espn:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/24200/the-truth-about-kobe-bryant-in-crunch-time

The data should all be used. I do think that the clutch stats for the last 5 minutes of a game is a more useful.

See the last 6 years of clutch shooting (5 minutes, game within 5 points)
http://www.82games.com/index.htm

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

mreinman wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:Same person I'd want shooting at any other point in the game - Lebron. He can create his own shot and hits 57% of the time.

Lebron because he is good in the clutch or because he is overall efficient?

So if you knew that a player who shoots at a very high pct does badly in clutch moments would you still want them to take the shot?

It could easily just be random variation if he does badly in clutch moments. You're probably talking about a sample of 20 shots over a career (basically equal to one bad game). I know people like to glorify and demonize those who do great or badly in the final seconds but it's probably just the peak of human misunderstanding of statistics.

As of 2009, Lebron was 17-50 with the game on the line (34%)

"Game on the line" is vague but regardless, I'm sure Jordan, Magic and all the greats had many 50 shot stretches where they made 17 or fewer

Because you weigh the first shot of the game the same as the last shot of the game when the score is tied?

Its not the same. FG percentage for the league in those moment is < 30 percent. Those pressure shots where they are must haves are not easy.

Even if we accept that it's not the same, it doesn't mean a sample of 50 shots is meaningful. Likewise, even if FG% is lower in the closing seconds, it doesn't mean that those shots are more important than the shots before them. I'm not opposed to the idea of studying which players are clutch but I don't think listing percentages of a couple dozen shots is useful. What separates the guys at the top from the bottom of the list is probably about 5 made shots spread over 10 years.

There are very few chances during a career that a player has the opportunities to take these shots. Kobe took 115 of them and hit 36. That is a ton of shots in this category.

With so few opportunities to affect the final outcome of the game, we must rely on the smaller sample sizes.

Alan Iverson took 68 shots with the game on the line and hit 21 of them.

MrBigshot is something like a 16% shooter in these moments. FAR FROM EARNING THE MONIKER.

82games had this study back in 2009 but they also starting tracking the last 5 minutes of a game since then.

Or we must conclude that we have insufficient data

it is sufficient enough to start making decisions.

Was it smart to allow Kobe to decide the outcome of the final possessions of 115 games shooting that badly?

Didn't Horry get his reputation on just a few shots?

Reputation and a quarter are worth a gumball.
The first statement is just conjecture.
It's not at all clear to me, when making future decisions about who gets the ball in the final seconds, that you should give more (or any) weight to a player's career clutch % rather than to his overall career shooting %. If I had more time, I'd see what research has been done on this topic. I'd be open to any possibilities but I wouldn't start from the assumption that the much smaller sample (often 50 vs. 15,000 shots) should be given significant weight.

stats are sliced and dices often into small pieces and can offer very small samples of data that can be monitored and sometimes utilized.

I think that where we disagree is that you think that a point is a point and thats it where I do value shots that are taken in different more difficult situations.

I you have a player that you let shoot the final shot and he goes 0-30 in these situations yet he was an efficient shooter overall, would you not start thinking about not putting the ball in his hands in these situations?

The idea that a point is a point may or may not be true. Even if it's false, it doesn't mean you can make meaningful predictions from a sample of 50 shots. It could be the case that (a) shots in closing seconds are in some way fundamentally different from all other shots, and yet (b) we'll never have enough data for an individual person to make useful predictions. Or it could be that a sample of 50 shots in the final seconds actually is more important than the 10,000 shot career sample. There are many other possibilities and we're just guessing right now as to which is right.

Here are some interesting studies and articles:

82games study from 2009:
http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm

Henry Abbott's great piece on Espn:
http://espn.go.com/blog/truehoop/post/_/id/24200/the-truth-about-kobe-bryant-in-crunch-time

The data should all be used. I do think that the clutch stats for the last 5 minutes of a game is a more useful.

See the last 6 years of clutch shooting (5 minutes, game within 5 points)
http://www.82games.com/index.htm

Yeah, I've seen those. They give you the data for each player but don't indicate whether the data are important in terms of predictive value.

They do not deem it conclusive. Its still quite interesting.

Its also interesting that polling the nba gms's 79 percent of them voted that Kobe should be the one that they want taking the final shot.

Also interesting:

In that player poll, Chauncey Billups got the second-most votes as the preferred go-to crunch-time scorer. Billups is 3-of-27 with the game on the line over the past five seasons (2011 and back). Dead last in the NBA among those who have attempted at least 15 shots.

And we certainly have enough data to know that the league average for final shots (24 seconds tied or withing 1 to 2 points) is about ~29%.

Jordan is 33 for 58 - 56.9% in the regular season and 9 for 18 – 50% in the playoffs when it pertains to being clutch

That is always why he will be the greatest NBA player to ever play the game, his WILL and DRIVE to WIN

IronWillGiroud wrote:

mreinman wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:CHAUNCEY, YOU WANTS ME!

Mr Big Shot actually was terrible in these moments

what about horry

What about Pekovic. That's my pick!

Don't think it is fair that Lebron is the list because of his physical abilities, although he isn't the greatest shooter or even one of the clutch shooters, he is by far the NBA's #1 physical talent EVER to play the game, his ability to finish with contact, draw triple teams, facilitate, and with his strength/athleticism/size/speed just isn't "fair"

On the list, in their primes of course

1- Billups (MR BIG SHOT, for a reason, he had always a consistent shooter with ultimate range, SUPER CLUTCH in his earlier years in Detroit, and was under rated with his IQ and Smarts

2- Ray Allen (shot is just so smooth and consistent)

3- Kobe - he has certainly mastered the off balanced/bad shots but he was perfected it

4- Allen Iverson's ability to finish penetrate (get fouls and or finish, or draw multiple defenders for a wide open for a team mate to players like Aaron McKie, Matt Geiger, Larry Hughes, Tyrone Hill, George Lynch, and many role players that would have sucked on other teams

5- KG, in his Twolves days he was MONEY from inside the 3pt line, and as a 7footer with great wingspan, athleticism, speed/quickness, all round skills, not many players can contest his shot

Melo, is willing to take many bad % shots, when he first got in the league, he tried to master the turn around baseline to be one of his GOTO MOVES, he has rarely done that as a Knick
With that said, I don't trust him, whether it is on the Coach's Iso plays that do not work or the lack of talent around him to spread the floor effectively
He can get HOT but he could also go COLD, however, he NEVER tries to do OTHER things like concentrate on DEFENSE, FACILITATING, REBOUNDS, SETTING PICKS OFF THE BALL to free up players
Instead constantly feeling the need to prove he is the #1 goto man and play HERO BALL instead of

Some players left off the list

Harden and Durant? If Lebron is the list, why exclude them?

Hakeem
Tim Duncan
Shaq

Dirk

Robert Horry *SUPER CLUTCH GENE*
Larry Bird

Peja Stojakavic (though he seemed to never be consistent in the play offs in pressure, except for his Championship year with Tyson on the Mav's as a 9th man)

Mitch Richmond
Steve Smith
Glen Rice

Karl Malone
Hornacek

Brent Price
Steve Kerr
Paxson
Ron Harper
Jon Barry