Vmart wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I don't get how these scrubs are raking in the big bucks. Less than 42% shooting is all I need to know to not give any player big contracts.

FG% is all you need to know? What does that say about Melo's .417 career post-season FG% then?

He actually says it about Melo but this thread needed another Melo mention. Anything under 50% is bad according to vmart

For some reason, I thought VMart was part of the hardcore Melo defending crowd. My bad then.

I'm a Melo fan who thinks he can do better and elevate his game to a higher level of play. For me it all starts with 50% FG. I consider Melo to be a good player but not a great player. The great ones shoot a good high percentage.

FG% should apply to those players who only shoot 2 point shots, which is basically the dying breed of post players.

TS% is the measure that includes a combination of 2 and 3 pointers (eFG% accounts for just 2s and 3s but that would not apply either) and then folds in free throws too.

if melo is ever to become a great scorer he needs to not merely raise his FG% from it's mediocre level but he needs to substantially raise his TS% to 58% and higher.

last year he was at 44.9 FG and 56 TS. those numbers did not bode well for him come big boy season. so--

playoffs were even worse and telling: 40.6 FG and 49.7 TS. that's awful for a so-called "elite scorer."

Vmart wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I don't get how these scrubs are raking in the big bucks. Less than 42% shooting is all I need to know to not give any player big contracts.

FG% is all you need to know? What does that say about Melo's .417 career post-season FG% then?

He actually says it about Melo but this thread needed another Melo mention. Anything under 50% is bad according to vmart

For some reason, I thought VMart was part of the hardcore Melo defending crowd. My bad then.

I'm a Melo fan who thinks he can do better and elevate his game to a higher level of play. For me it all starts with 50% FG. I consider Melo to be a good player but not a great player. The great ones shoot a good high percentage.

DurzoBlint wrote:

dk7th wrote:

Vmart wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

yellowboy90 wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I don't get how these scrubs are raking in the big bucks. Less than 42% shooting is all I need to know to not give any player big contracts.

FG% is all you need to know? What does that say about Melo's .417 career post-season FG% then?

He actually says it about Melo but this thread needed another Melo mention. Anything under 50% is bad according to vmart

For some reason, I thought VMart was part of the hardcore Melo defending crowd. My bad then.

I'm a Melo fan who thinks he can do better and elevate his game to a higher level of play. For me it all starts with 50% FG. I consider Melo to be a good player but not a great player. The great ones shoot a good high percentage.

FG% should apply to those players who only shoot 2 point shots, which is basically the dying breed of post players.

TS% is the measure that includes a combination of 2 and 3 pointers (eFG% accounts for just 2s and 3s but that would not apply either) and then folds in free throws too.

if melo is ever to become a great scorer he needs to not merely raise his FG% from it's mediocre level but he needs to substantially raise his TS% to 58% and higher.

last year he was at 44.9 FG and 56 TS. those numbers did not bode well for him come big boy season. so--

playoffs were even worse and telling: 40.6 FG and 49.7 TS. that's awful for a so-called "elite scorer."

Well, maybe if the 100 million dollar piece of statuary called Amare were able to produce, Melo wouldn't have to work so damn hard. There is a lot that goes into it. Amare went from the number 3scorer in the league to a bench warmer. Few players would shoot well when your supporting cast sucks and teams ONLY HAVE to game plan for Melo.

Haters need to get off his nuts and let him live. I like Melo, don't see him as great. He is what he is and people expecting him to change to fit their idea of what he should be are unrealistic.

melo and stat straight up sucked together so your point is misdirection at its finest.

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:i think it takes something like 36% shooting from three to break even

Breaking even would mean shooting the same percentage as your opponent, wouldn't it? In a simplified game with no 3s and no FTs, if you both shoot 40 for 100, you're even.

it's just that this 36% figure, this is cited somewhere on the internet as the break even point

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:i think it takes something like 36% shooting from three to break even

Breaking even would mean shooting the same percentage as your opponent, wouldn't it? In a simplified game with no 3s and no FTs, if you both shoot 40 for 100, you're even.

it's just that this 36% figure, this is cited somewhere on the internet as the break even point

I'd have to see an explanation of that. It doesn't sound right.

here we go, a brief mention:

You may remember from Tuesday's piece that the "break-even" percentage on three-pointers compared to two-pointers on a league scale is 32 percent. That is, shooting 32 percent on three-pointers is better than shooting league average (47 percent) on twos.

http://www.sbnation.com/2012/9/5/3293457/nba-three-point-shooters-kobe-bryant-stephen-curry-hook

'tuesday's piece':

http://www.sbnation.com/2012/9/4/3290879/nba-three-pointers-stan-van-gundy-hook

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:i think it takes something like 36% shooting from three to break even

Breaking even would mean shooting the same percentage as your opponent, wouldn't it? In a simplified game with no 3s and no FTs, if you both shoot 40 for 100, you're even.

it's just that this 36% figure, this is cited somewhere on the internet as the break even point

I'd have to see an explanation of that. It doesn't sound right.

here we go, a brief mention:

You may remember from Tuesday's piece that the "break-even" percentage on three-pointers compared to two-pointers on a league scale is 32 percent. That is, shooting 32 percent on three-pointers is better than shooting league average (47 percent) on twos.

http://www.sbnation.com/2012/9/5/3293457/nba-three-point-shooters-kobe-bryant-stephen-curry-hook

'tuesday's piece':

http://www.sbnation.com/2012/9/4/3290879/nba-three-pointers-stan-van-gundy-hook

Yeah, that's on 3 pointers. I didn't realize you were referring to 3 pointers. By their reasoning, the break even point for 2 pointers would be 47%.

so can we go with this? can we roll with 32/47?

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

IronWillGiroud wrote:i think it takes something like 36% shooting from three to break even

Breaking even would mean shooting the same percentage as your opponent, wouldn't it? In a simplified game with no 3s and no FTs, if you both shoot 40 for 100, you're even.

it's just that this 36% figure, this is cited somewhere on the internet as the break even point

I'd have to see an explanation of that. It doesn't sound right.

here we go, a brief mention:

You may remember from Tuesday's piece that the "break-even" percentage on three-pointers compared to two-pointers on a league scale is 32 percent. That is, shooting 32 percent on three-pointers is better than shooting league average (47 percent) on twos.

http://www.sbnation.com/2012/9/5/3293457/nba-three-point-shooters-kobe-bryant-stephen-curry-hook

'tuesday's piece':

http://www.sbnation.com/2012/9/4/3290879/nba-three-pointers-stan-van-gundy-hook

Yeah, that's on 3 pointers. I didn't realize you were referring to 3 pointers. By their reasoning, the break even point for 2 pointers would be 47%.

so can we go with this? can we roll with 32/47?

Yeah, that's breaking even, or what you'd expect from an adequate but not great player.

so if a guy is dropping treys at 33%, can i say that he is a good three point shooter? what other things would you consider?

tkf wrote:

Bonn1997 wrote:

Vmart wrote:I don't get how these scrubs are raking in the big bucks. Less than 42% shooting is all I need to know to not give any player big contracts.

FG% is all you need to know? What does that say about Melo's .417 career post-season FG% then?

for real.. LOl.. but while I would like to see George improve his FG% the guy is only taking 14 shots per game, not 21, so I can deal with that.. what I like is his rebounding, assist and most of all his elite level defense.. put that whole package together and you can live with his few flaws..

only a slight disagreement TK. I think if we switched him for Melo, his shots would go up and his percentage would likely drop. Just saying :)