How did the offense perform vs. your expectations?

[Hards Alumni]

It isn't more difficult.  It is less efficient. 

Exactly.  I'm not breaking new ground here.  The math has been done.

Simply look at scoring charts.  The further away from the basket a player is, the less efficient a shot is, until they get to the 3 point line where the efficiency goes back up because the shot is worth 1 additional point (1/3 more efficient).

College kids are also much worse shooters than NBA players... generally speaking.

[ATL MU Warrior]

We missed 68.2% of our three pointers this season. The average NBA team misses about 56% of their mid-range.

If we shot 100 3Pers at 31.8%, we would score about 96 points.

If we shot 100 mid range shots at 44% we would score 88 points.

Given that we are a college team and not an NBA team, we would hit a lot less than 44% of our mid-range shots.

As Hards said, math is hard for some people.

Now do the difference between the shitty forced layup attempts that result in 0 points versus midrange attempts converted at whatever percent you choose. 

[CountryRoads]

Now do the difference between the shitty forced layup attempts that result in 0 points versus midrange attempts converted at whatever percent you choose. 

Whenever I hear the "midrange" talk, I always just assumed people wanted more midrange shots instead of highly contested layup attempts. That is more nuanced from an analytics perspective. I thought it was obvious by now that all teams want to take as many open 3s as possible.

[ATL MU Warrior]

Whenever I hear the "midrange" talk, I always just assumed people wanted more midrange shots instead of highly contested layup attempts. That is more nuanced from an analytics perspective. I thought it was obvious by now that all teams want to take as many open 3s as possible.

Exactly.  And I get that it's hard to tell in the heat of the moment that the layup you are trying to take might not be a high quality shot...but that's where the mid-range should come in to play.  There should be cues (defender is running full speed side by side with you, a gigantic mofo is standing there waiting for you, etc.) that a pull up is a higher probability outcome. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I am basketball dumb so help me out - making a 10ft shot is harder than making a 23ft shot?

It is easier. But not so much easier that it makes up for the difference in value.

NBA teams shoot 44% from mid range and just under 36% from 3. So a mid range shot is 8% easier to make but worth 33% less points.

If you shoot 100 mid range shots at 44%, you score 88 points.

If you shoot 100 3Ps at 36%, you score 108 points.

[tower912]

Exactly.  And I get that it's hard to tell in the heat of the moment that the layup you are trying to take might not be a high quality shot...but that's where the mid-range should come in to play.  There should be cues (defender is running full speed side by side with you, a gigantic mofo is standing there waiting for you, etc.) that a pull up is a higher probability outcome. 

At that point, seek and finish through contact.   That is a difference I see between MU guards and Sparty guards.  As the Spartan guards go to the basket, they make sure they jump into the defender, drawing contact, trying to get the foul call in addition to the point blank shot.   MU guards haven't done that consistently in a decade or more.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Now do the difference between the shitty forced layup attempts that result in 0 points versus midrange attempts converted at whatever percent you choose. 

Youre asking to value something at 0 based on a result.  Reality is that that no shot has a 0% possibility before it is shot, not even a Caedin 75 footer. Forced layups still likely have a higher efficiency than mid range shots especially given that their much more likely to result in fouls than a mid range shot.

[Its DJOver]

The thing is, the math has been explained so many times, that those that do not get it are choosing to not get it and just want something to complain about.  They understand it, they just want to point to a "smoking gun" that caused a loss, and have fixated on shot selection.

[Shooter McGavin]

I'm a proponent of adding a five point shot from half court and essentially relegating the three point shot to the midrange category. 

[Hards Alumni]

The thing is, the math has been explained so many times, that those that do not get it are choosing to not get it and just want something to complain about.  They understand it, they just want to point to a "smoking gun" that caused a loss, and have fixated on shot selection.

Cognitive bias is very difficult for some people to overcome.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

I am basketball dumb so help me out - making a 10ft shot is harder than making a 23ft shot?

🙄

[Vander Blue Man Group]

The thing is, the math has been explained so many times, that those that do not get it are choosing to not get it and just want something to complain about.  They understand it, they just want to point to a "smoking gun" that caused a loss, and have fixated on shot selection.

I'm really not so sure they all actually understand it, sadly.

[Uncle Rico]

I'm really not so sure they all actually understand it, sadly.

https://youtu.be/eqs8wOiBLhc?si=w1oxUao5ZBa7_1Gs

[Hards Alumni]

https://youtu.be/eqs8wOiBLhc?si=w1oxUao5ZBa7_1Gs

Lemme help you, boomer

[Vander Blue Man Group]

https://youtu.be/eqs8wOiBLhc?si=w1oxUao5ZBa7_1Gs

Someone needs to send this to Shaka and Nevada immediately. 

[TallTitan34]

Lemme help you, boomer

I generally consider myself bad at basketball. 

Whenever I see video like this, it makes me think I could have been legit back then.

[ATL MU Warrior]

At that point, seek and finish through contact.   That is a difference I see between MU guards and Sparty guards.  As the Spartan guards go to the basket, they make sure they jump into the defender, drawing contact, trying to get the foul call in addition to the point blank shot.   MU guards haven't done that consistently in a decade or more.

Let me know when we start doing this.  We have way too many supposedly good shots that are really just empty possessions. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Let me know when we start doing this.  We have way too many supposedly good shots that are really just empty possessions. 

We were 51st in the country (86th percentile) for 2P%. We really didn't have that many empty possessions inside the arc. Our issue on offense was 38th in the country for 3Ps taken but 236th in 3P%.

[burger]

Is this a trick question????

[PointWarrior]

It is easier. But not so much easier that it makes up for the difference in value.

NBA teams shoot 44% from mid range and just under 36% from 3. So a mid range shot is 8% easier to make but worth 33% less points.

If you shoot 100 mid range shots at 44%, you score 88 points.

If you shoot 100 3Ps at 36%, you score 108 points.


Understood, but when your team is 4/20 from 3 -

It is easier. But not so much easier that it makes up for the difference in value.

NBA teams shoot 44% from mid range and just under 36% from 3. So a mid range shot is 8% easier to make but worth 33% less points.

If you shoot 100 mid range shots at 44%, you score 88 points.

If you shoot 100 3Ps at 36%, you score 108 points.

It is easier. But not so much easier that it makes up for the difference in value.

NBA teams shoot 44% from mid range and just under 36% from 3. So a mid range shot is 8% easier to make but worth 33% less points.

If you shoot 100 mid range shots at 44%, you score 88 points.

If you shoot 100 3Ps at 36%, you score 108 points.

It is easier. But not so much easier that it makes up for the difference in value.

NBA teams shoot 44% from mid range and just under 36% from 3. So a mid range shot is 8% easier to make but worth 33% less points.

If you shoot 100 mid range shots at 44%, you score 88 points.

If you shoot 100 3Ps at 36%, you score 108 points.

It is easier. But not so much easier that it makes up for the difference in value.

NBA teams shoot 44% from mid range and just under 36% from 3. So a mid range shot is 8% easier to make but worth 33% less points.

If you shoot 100 mid range shots at 44%, you score 88 points.

If you shoot 100 3Ps at 36%, you score 108 points.

It is easier. But not so much easier that it makes up for the difference in value.

NBA teams shoot 44% from mid range and just under 36% from 3. So a mid range shot is 8% easier to make but worth 33% less points.

If you shoot 100 mid range shots at 44%, you score 88 points.

If you shoot 100 3Ps at 36%, you score 108 points.

This all makes sense except when your team often goes 4/20 from three. 

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

This all makes sense except when your team often goes 4/20 from three. 

Yes, a bad shooting night will make for a bad offensive performance more times than not. If you have a way of predicting if a shot is going in before it is launched,  you should find a way to sell that

[wisblue]

I've said this before, but one thing I think would help MU's offense is getting a few true jump shooters who can get shots off more quickly and with less separation from the defense than the set shooters the team had this year.

That would include being able to pull up and take a jump shot in the "midrange" when that opportunity presents itself.

As you watch the NCAA games note how many players there are (and they aren't all All Americans) that have this ability.

[Hards Alumni]

[BM1090]

Goose was big on the Gold-will-be-an-NBA-guy thesis. I said back then it was possible but unlikely ... and now, after 3 full seasons, I think it's even less likely.

Gold is slight like Novak. And like Novak, he plays smaller than his height. He would be a defensive liability whether matched up with a 5, 4 or 3 at the next level.

So Gold's only chance is if he proves he can be an ELITE shooter of the NBA-distance 3 - like Novak. Ben certainly hasn't shown that yet.

And I say this all as a guy believes Gold has had value as a college player. And also as a guy who won a bet that Sam Hauser would have an NBA career.

Hey, maybe we'll see Ben become very good next season. That would be fan-freakin-tastic!

I don't believe that's his only path. He could also develop a solid post game and become a bit more diverse offensively. He's 6'11 and he does play small, but that's due to his attitude and preferences rather than lack of athleticism. He's 10x more athletic than Novak and laterally quicker.

We'll see. It starts with confidence with him. If he doesn't gain confidence in the post and off the bounce, then yes he'd need to be a sharpshooter. But the tools are there.

[Jay Bee]

Dodds claimed Gold was as one of the team's top 4 most important players... heading into the season THREE YEARS AGO. lol