PDA

View Full Version : Is the Mid-Range Game Dying?



Tony_Starks
05-05-2014, 08:06 PM
Some say its a inefficient shot. Lots of college kids don't even practice it any more. It's pretty much three's or nothing. Is the long or mid range two gradually fading out?

Who are your current favorite mid range players?

I'm rolling with:

Lamarcus Aldridge
Joe Johnson
Derrick Rose
Kobe Bryant
Dwayne Wade

......

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 08:17 PM
it will never entirely die out, but yes, it is the most inefficient shot in the game, the "long" 2. Why on earth would you shoot a 19 footer, when you can back up a few feet and get another point, or get a closer shot at the rim?

Old School fans (I am 38, I am old school), need to realize, if they haven't already, that efficiency is the key.

Players do practice it, but even in 1991, when I was in 9th grade, my coach told me not to shoot a shot right inside the 3 point line, that doesn't make any sense.

THE MTL
05-05-2014, 08:29 PM
Why do ppl overrate Dwade's midrange game. Wade is a pure slasher. And smh at putting Drose on the list

Tony_Starks
05-05-2014, 08:33 PM
I fear that you are right, even though I don't agree with the thinking. I always felt like a good shot is a good shot, that's something stats can't really dictate, it's the flow of the game.

Hellcrooner
05-05-2014, 08:41 PM
Well is just one among other things that are dying like the hook shot, or the "blackboard" shoot.

chitownbulls
05-05-2014, 08:46 PM
Why do ppl overrate Dwade's midrange game. Wade is a pure slasher. And smh at putting Drose on the list

Rose was a very good mid range shooter before he decided to believe he was a three point shooter

Method28
05-05-2014, 08:51 PM
Chris Paul is a deadly mid range shooter. That's his bread and butter

P&GRealist
05-05-2014, 09:16 PM
it will never entirely die out, but yes, it is the most inefficient shot in the game, the "long" 2. Why on earth would you shoot a 19 footer, when you can back up a few feet and get another point, or get a closer shot at the rim?

Old School fans (I am 38, I am old school), need to realize, if they haven't already, that efficiency is the key.

Players do practice it, but even in 1991, when I was in 9th grade, my coach told me not to shoot a shot right inside the 3 point line, that doesn't make any sense.

Mid range and long 2 are not the same thing.

Mid range is like 12-16/17 feet. Long 2 is 18-20/21 ft.

crewfan13
05-05-2014, 09:16 PM
On paper it is a really inefficient shot, but in reality, it can be a weapon. Would you take an open three over an open 19'? Of course anyone would rather back up a couple steps and get the extra point, but that's not the entire story. Especially in the playoffs, when teams actually start to defend, is an open mid range jumper by a good shooter really a more inefficient shot than an out of control layup or contested 3.

I've always been a fan of the midrange, because that's where I lived in high school. I've seen the charts and understand the concepts of efficiency of shots, but a good mid range game can be deadly, especially in the playoffs.

THE MTL
05-05-2014, 09:18 PM
Why do ppl overrate Dwade's midrange game. Wade is a pure slasher. And smh at putting Drose on the list

Rose was a very good mid range shooter before he decided to believe he was a three point shooter

I agree but nowadays Rose def doesnt look towards his midrange game. And also considering he has played 10 games in 2 years, I wouldnt put him top 5 in anything

Bruno
05-05-2014, 09:23 PM
this comes down to predictability. why is Kobes % under what you would expect in closing seconds of ball games? because everyone knows he's getting the ball and the defenses adjust accordingly. same deal with these threes, when a defense knows a team is excessively bullish on threes and has a philosophy that preaches against mid range shots, it makes the threes easier to defend because it becomes a bigger point of focus. the key to efficiency is keeping defenses guessing and not allowing them to be able to predict your offense.

not dying but is being marginalized at the moment. we have a generation of players who played video games where you tried to dunk it or go for three. we have an analytics movement that emphasizes efficiency; call it the experimental era, it'll stick around if it proves to be successful. the midrange game will never disappear because properly reading what the defense is giving you and going with the natural flow of the game will keep it around. teams gauge their defenses to defend the paint and the three point line. that leaves the mid range available and open. the mid range game is like spearing a knight under the arm where the armor is weak. there's nothing inefficient about a wide open 15 foot basket when you are a shooting ace. Steve Nash tony parker and dozens of other elite players have made a career out of it.


the houston rockets and golden state warriors are first round busts, two teams oriented around three's and paint baskets exclusively.

it'd be hard to convince me that reading defenses, exploiting what they give you, and having a reliable mid range game will ever not have a place in the NBA. ideally you balance your game and have players who allow you to be a well rounded basketball team that can spread the floor, hit open jumpers and attack the basket. force feeding 3's when they defend the three point line well isn't efficient basketball either.

jerellh528
05-05-2014, 09:32 PM
It has been since 1979

Crackadalic
05-05-2014, 09:43 PM
No it's not. Yes the long 2 is the most inefficient shot but it's still a weapon that can still be utilize

If your team is 10/32 from 3 compare to a team that's 15/26 from 2 then I'm picking the later. Yes you get 10 extra points from the 3 ball but your most likely giving the other team more opportunities to score because team A is missing so many 3 point shots

ManRam
05-05-2014, 09:45 PM
Moreyball.

It will never die, but I think teams and even players are realizing that it's not always the most efficient shot.

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 09:45 PM
I fear that you are right, even though I don't agree with the thinking. I always felt like a good shot is a good shot, that's something stats can't really dictate, it's the flow of the game.

yeah but stats do dictate it. I realize in the flow of the game, the midrange shot will never be gone, but players are being hounded now that it just isn't a great shot to take.

NYJ - NYY
05-05-2014, 09:48 PM
I wanna say melo crushes it from mid range

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 09:48 PM
Mid range and long 2 are not the same thing.

Mid range is like 12-16/17 feet. Long 2 is 18-20/21 ft.

which is why the midrange game won't ever die. Its fine to take a 8-15 footer if you are capable. Anything from 16-22 feet I would not really want to see. There are a few players who are high level from this area, but most are not. So it's the worst shot in basketball.

Chavacano
05-05-2014, 09:48 PM
Yup. It's either layups or 3s. Rather than the mid-range, the fundamentals are dying. It's either you're athletic or not.

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 09:50 PM
No it's not. Yes the long 2 is the most inefficient shot but it's still a weapon that can still be utilize

If your team is 10/32 from 3 compare to a team that's 15/26 from 2 then I'm picking the later. Yes you get 10 extra points from the 3 ball but your most likely giving the other team more opportunities to score because team A is missing so many 3 point shots

well duh, but that isn't the case most the time. If you shoot that percentage from 2, it means you lived in the paint 99% of the time.

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 09:53 PM
Yup. It's either layups or 3s. Rather than the mid-range, the fundamentals are dying. It's either you're athletic or not.

fundamentals are dying? Why? Players still practice as much as ever, they just are starting to specialize to a degree.

And anyone who doesn't think players shoot a TON of shots in shooting drills from everywhere is stupid. But, come game time, it just isn't the best shot to take, that 17-22 footer. It's not worth it long term, unless you are one of the handful of players who thrives in that area. But those are not common.

Crackadalic
05-05-2014, 09:56 PM
well duh, but that isn't the case most the time. If you shoot that percentage from 2, it means you lived in the paint 99% of the time.

That was like a best case Senerio lol

I'm just putting light on how a mid range game is still just as important. Like a poster said the rockets and warriors who rely on the 3 ball shot are already out of the 1st round.

I just think a more diverse offense is more important no matter how efficient the 3 ball is. Look at my knicks last year shut down in the playoffs outside the 3

Hellcrooner
05-05-2014, 09:57 PM
fundamentals are dying? Why? Players still practice as much as ever, they just are starting to specialize to a degree.

And anyone who doesn't think players shoot a TON of shots in shooting drills from everywhere is stupid. But, come game time, it just isn't the best shot to take, that 17-22 footer. It's not worth it long term, unless you are one of the handful of players who thrives in that area. But those are not common.

they are.
There are many players in the league right now that dropped out of ncaa at 19 and rely basiscally on being athletic freaks that wouldnt have found a roster spot in the 80s first 90s out of their absaolute lack of fundamentals.

there are some even dubbed as stars today that would have been just " chocolate thunder" back then.

SportsFanatic10
05-05-2014, 10:00 PM
Why do ppl overrate Dwade's midrange game. Wade is a pure slasher. And smh at putting Drose on the list

wade's midrange game is actually very solid when his knees are feeling right hence why it hasn't been as good the last few years as before for the most part. but wade has that nice floater and right hook as well as a variety of stepbacks and shots off the dribble that he's usually very efficient with. but he needs to have his knees feeling ok to have the lift in his shot or else it gets flat, lebron even said he can tell how wades doing health wise by the way he shoots his jumper.

and even if you don't consider his midrange game to be elite, he looks so smooth with all his shots that you should be able to see why he'd be among someone's favorites to watch go to work.

Hellcrooner
05-05-2014, 10:16 PM
Anyway there are players that actually shoot a bit better from right after the 3p line than at Ft line distance.

beyourself
05-05-2014, 10:21 PM
It seems like the almost all the notable mid range players are in their 30s. Vince Carter, Jamal Crawford, Melo, Caron Butler, Bryant, etc. It's clearly dying out with the new wave of players.

We just don't care about volume scoring anymore, it's just that simple. How many points you score is basically irrelevant these days. It's so easy to settle for a mid range shot.

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 10:26 PM
they are.
There are many players in the league right now that dropped out of ncaa at 19 and rely basiscally on being athletic freaks that wouldnt have found a roster spot in the 80s first 90s out of their absaolute lack of fundamentals.

there are some even dubbed as stars today that would have been just " chocolate thunder" back then.

you kill your own point though. Putting 19 year olds against BETTER competition furthers their ability even more. This is a statistical fact.

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 10:27 PM
That was like a best case Senerio lol

I'm just putting light on how a mid range game is still just as important. Like a poster said the rockets and warriors who rely on the 3 ball shot are already out of the 1st round.

I just think a more diverse offense is more important no matter how efficient the 3 ball is. Look at my knicks last year shut down in the playoffs outside the 3

the midrange game, as long as its from 8-15, will always be huge. But the long 2's are going to continue to disappear. Just a fact.

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 10:28 PM
Anyway there are players that actually shoot a bit better from right after the 3p line than at Ft line distance.

Bruce Bowen says stfu!

beyourself
05-05-2014, 10:32 PM
I believe with the decreased emphasis on volume scoring the mid range game has started to die, but I think we are finally moving a little away from everybody wants to be Jordan.

Remember when an entire league of wing players just jacked right after Jordan after the second 3peat? That's not happening anymore.

BALLER R
05-05-2014, 11:04 PM
Derozan makes a living from that range

Crackadalic
05-05-2014, 11:10 PM
the midrange game, as long as its from 8-15, will always be huge. But the long 2's are going to continue to disappear. Just a fact.

Definitely agree

D-Leethal
05-05-2014, 11:10 PM
Fundamentals are dying. Its not just the mid range game, its also the post game. Its the footwork game. Its the fake + move + counter move game. The game has been simplified because of the changes in the rules over the years. Its a pick and roll + 3 ball league at the moment and thats just the era were in.

Hawkeye15
05-05-2014, 11:18 PM
Fundamentals are dying. Its not just the mid range game, its also the post game. Its the footwork game. Its the fake + move + counter move game. The game has been simplified because of the changes in the rules over the years. Its a pick and roll + 3 ball league at the moment and thats just the era were in.

because post isolation has statistically been proven to not be a great offense.

Everything will continue to adjust to its statistical trends going forward. No way around it.

slashsnake
05-05-2014, 11:19 PM
Surprising to see no love for Chris Bosh here. Melo has a great midrange, shoots 44% from 16' out to the three point line. Chris Bosh is over 50% there the past couple years.

I know he doesn't get the pressure others get out there, but I think this says it all:

http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=2547

Dirk Nowitzki of course.. this one is pretty stunning considering he's a focal point

http://stats.nba.com/playerShotchart.html?PlayerID=1717

MrfadeawayJB
05-05-2014, 11:27 PM
Yes because advance stats say it's a poor shot.

Shammyguy3
05-06-2014, 12:32 AM
It's involuting that's for sure

slashsnake
05-06-2014, 01:15 AM
Yes because advance stats say it's a poor shot.

Good point there. You have to hit it exceptionally consistently well to make it a good option. It doesn't give you the same points as a three, and doesn't have the success rate/chance of drawing the foul as in the paint buckets.

It definitely has its part in the game, stretch 4 has become a big position due to the effect that the threat of the shot can have. Do you collapse on Lebron/Wade, or stay with Bosh where he's going to burn you again and again. Spurs love those midrange shooters and its done well for them also. Do you collapse on Parker on the pick and pop, or stay with Bonner?

JasonJohnHorn
05-06-2014, 01:23 AM
Advance stats has impact coaching to focus on long-range shots and shots near the basket that are higher percentages and can draw fouls, but the bottom line is that the truly great players will need to have a mid-range jumper to be more effective and cause issues for the defenses.


I'm not sure if it is less common, but it is an element of the game that will stay, even if it isn't used as much as it once was.

And defenses, good defenses, force teams into taking those shots.

kobe4thewinbang
05-06-2014, 01:26 AM
Who are your current favorite mid range players?I don't think the mid range game is dying. Look at Lamarcus Aldridge, who tore apart the Rockets with his mid range game. If you have a good stroke, you can be deadly from mid range without sacrificing % by straying out to the 3-PT line. If Westbrook took more mid range shots, he'd be much more efficient. There are too many 3-PT chuckers these days, especially in NCAA. By having a mid range game, bigger guys can space the floor and open up the lane for teammates by dragging the defense out there.

My favorite mid range players, past and present:

Dirk Nowitzki - such a pretty stroke, killed the Heat with it in the Finals last time around, and that fadeaway!
Paul Millsap
KG in the old days - watch him in the 2003 All-Star Game, love his stroke
Kobe, of course
MJ
T-Mac
Zydrunas Ilgauskas
Pau Gasol & Marc Gasol
Tony Parker
Luis Scola

Tony_Starks
05-06-2014, 01:37 AM
Fundamentals are dying. Its not just the mid range game, its also the post game. Its the footwork game. Its the fake + move + counter move game. The game has been simplified because of the changes in the rules over the years. Its a pick and roll + 3 ball league at the moment and thats just the era were in.

This is true, I think the Euro style ball also plays a huge role in this. No bigs want to be a beast on boards and kill people in the paint now. It's not sexy. Everybody wants to be Dirk, nobody wants to be Al Jefferson. No guards want to face up and hit people with the 15-20 footer anymore. It is what it is, takes a lot of skill.

The crazy part is if you have great footwork and basic fundamentals and a mid range J you can carve out a long career. Like Jermaine Oneal. Nice J, face up mid range game, very solid D...... for like 20 years!

kobe4thewinbang
05-06-2014, 01:40 AM
This is true, I think the Euro style ball also plays a huge role in this. Nobody wants to be a beast on boards and kill people in the paint now. It's not sexy. Everybody wants to be Dirk, nobody wants to be Al Jefferson. It is what it is.

The crazy part is if you have great footwork and basic fundamentals and a mid range J you can carve out a long career. Like Jermaine Oneal. Nice J, face up mid range game, very solid D...... for like 20 years!I hope we get some old school mentality guys soon. There are a couple now, but it would help the "soft" stigma of the league. I want to see these height giants banging, not flinging. Am I right? Guys like DMC, Dwight, Duncan, DeAndre Jordan, Blake Griffin...

NoahH
05-06-2014, 02:23 AM
IMO in my men's league / past HS experience everyone is either driving it right to the hoop or shooting a 3

mngopher35
05-06-2014, 03:10 AM
Well it is "dying" in the sense that people now try to attack more and go for 3's because they are more efficient options generally. I don't think we ever have to worry about it really going away completely or anything.

As Bruno mentioned a mid-range game is needed because the more diverse your skillset and offense is the more off balance the defense will be. So while you might not go to the mid range game as often, great teams and players will still utilize it.

Dirk, KG, CP3, Durant, Kobe, Melo all have good mid range games that are/were fun to watch and it helps them be great scorers (well maybe not so much kg, but the others are known for it). Aldridge put on a clinic to start the first round of the playoffs and it helped his team advance to round 2. I think James Harden should get more of a mid-range game to help him more come playoff time when defenses know whats coming from him.

It might not be as prevalent but it won't completely disappear either.

Goose17
05-06-2014, 04:44 AM
Unfortunately what people see is you can shoot 33% from deep and get the same result as shooting 50% from mid range.

I love the mid-range game, and I don't even know if he's in the league anymore but Charles Jenkins who played for the Warriors had a very sweet mid range stroke, so much so that Curry dubbed him "Mr Mid-range"


Anyway, I'm going to go with Aldridge, I love his game and I love his mid range ability.

Also got to give credit to Duncan, Dirk, Nash and CP3 etc

Goose17
05-06-2014, 04:47 AM
And for as long as Hornacek coaches, the mid range game will remain a part of the league.

Storch
05-06-2014, 05:37 AM
paul pierce and dirk nowitzkii says hi

Tblaze
05-06-2014, 08:53 AM
I think the interesting thing about having a deadly midrange game is the ineffectiveness of double teaming. Aldridge in the past series was a prime example of that, if you're going to double a guy 18 feet out, you're gonna leave the bucket completely open..

There is actually quite a few players with a decent mid range game, mainly being stretch 4's. But players like Chris Bosh, Melo should definantly be mentioned too.

If you take a look at the past 10 championships, nearly every team seemed to include a mid-range player:

Bosh, Nowitzki, Garnett, Parker, Sheed..

MonroeFAN
05-06-2014, 09:48 AM
I miss Rip Hamilton.

valade16
05-06-2014, 10:06 AM
I think saying a mid- range shot is more inefficient than a 3 point shot is rather simplistic. What about contested or uncontested?

You're telling me analytics say you should take a contested 3 point shot over a wide open mid range shot?

slashsnake
05-06-2014, 10:30 AM
I think saying a mid- range shot is more inefficient than a 3 point shot is rather simplistic. What about contested or uncontested?

You're telling me analytics say you should take a contested 3 point shot over a wide open mid range shot?

No, I think it has its purpose for sure. Teams do still have to defend it. But from a pure numbers view, it isn't a great shot. No extra point like the three, and not the high percentage or chance of drawing a foul like a 2. It's what it creates outside the shot that hurts. Collapse in the paint all day long and Bosh is going to put up 50 on you. So you are stuck with making that choice of collapsing or playing him or rotating and him kicking it out. If you asked me which shot I would want to see my team give up most to a wide open shooter, a layup to Lebron, a 3 to Ray Allen, or a 20 footer to Bosh, we are talking Bosh. Bron's is a 100% chance. Bosh's chance is better but not 33% better, which it needs to be for me to choose that option.

mngopher35
05-06-2014, 12:17 PM
I miss Rip Hamilton.

Right after my earlier post I was mad I forgot to mention him. He made a living off the mid range jumper.

BobbyHillSwag
05-06-2014, 12:22 PM
I miss iverson's midrange game. I've been watching the games wondering why players can't create midrange shots.

D-Leethal
05-06-2014, 01:11 PM
because post isolation has statistically been proven to not be a great offense.

Everything will continue to adjust to its statistical trends going forward. No way around it.

I don't agree at all, analytics or not, the league will continue to change and evolve. This current era won't stay here forever. And how efficient you score is not all that telling - it doesn't portray any impact that efficient scoring has on the other 4 guys on the floor. Its usually against 1v1 coverage, doesn't illustrate anything about getting doubled or opening up shots for shooters or cutters.

Can you name me a championship squad outside of the current (last 3-4 years) Miami all star team that didn't heavily utilize the post and the mid range (even though they began to with LeBron in the post, Bosh in the mid range)? Thats how you draw double teams, thats how you dominate the opponent offensively and put the defense in the most vulnerable positions. I haven't heard of any title team that didn't have stars who dominated in the mid range or the post. You won't see a team like Houston win much of anything until they do.

Efficiency of the 3 ball over the mid range doesn't even come remotely close to painting a full picture. And the rule changes is just as big a reason we have seen the demise of the mid range and the rise of the spread offense just as much as these advanced metrics (which result in conclusions that are a direct product of the rule changes).


This is true, I think the Euro style ball also plays a huge role in this. No bigs want to be a beast on boards and kill people in the paint now. It's not sexy. Everybody wants to be Dirk, nobody wants to be Al Jefferson. No guards want to face up and hit people with the 15-20 footer anymore. It is what it is, takes a lot of skill.

The crazy part is if you have great footwork and basic fundamentals and a mid range J you can carve out a long career. Like Jermaine Oneal. Nice J, face up mid range game, very solid D...... for like 20 years!

Oakley had a few good quotes about this the other day. He believes Stern had to make the game soft, get rid of defensive physicality in the paint, make the game more free flowing, more "Face up", more finesse in an effort to globalize the game and attract the Euro's. It sounds accurate to me.


I think the interesting thing about having a deadly midrange game is the ineffectiveness of double teaming. Aldridge in the past series was a prime example of that, if you're going to double a guy 18 feet out, you're gonna leave the bucket completely open..

There is actually quite a few players with a decent mid range game, mainly being stretch 4's. But players like Chris Bosh, Melo should definantly be mentioned too.

If you take a look at the past 10 championships, nearly every team seemed to include a mid-range player:

Bosh, Nowitzki, Garnett, Parker, Sheed..

Bingo. Every title team utilizes the "non efficient" parts of the floor because thats where you force doubles in 1v1 coverage. Thats the first domino to becoming unguardable as a unit on offense.

D-Leethal
05-06-2014, 01:16 PM
No, I think it has its purpose for sure. Teams do still have to defend it. But from a pure numbers view, it isn't a great shot. No extra point like the three, and not the high percentage or chance of drawing a foul like a 2. It's what it creates outside the shot that hurts. Collapse in the paint all day long and Bosh is going to put up 50 on you. So you are stuck with making that choice of collapsing or playing him or rotating and him kicking it out. If you asked me which shot I would want to see my team give up most to a wide open shooter, a layup to Lebron, a 3 to Ray Allen, or a 20 footer to Bosh, we are talking Bosh. Bron's is a 100% chance. Bosh's chance is better but not 33% better, which it needs to be for me to choose that option.

Trying to point out quality of shots in a vacuum, absent of defenders, absent of steps leading up to the shot in question, is a completely useless exercise. Your never going to be able to accurate break down the game of basketball into a series of isolated incidents devoid of context, devoid of teammates impact on the shot in question, devoid of game situation around the shot in question, devoid of defensive position leading to and during the shot in question. Its not gonna happen - its stupid to try and break it down that way.

Theres a reason Morey has a hardon for Melo - its because you need somebody to dominate in between the lines because the gimmick ball isn't gonna get it done in the playoffs. Your pick and rolls will get frozen, you won't be gifted ticky tack fouls every time you get sneezed on a drive, you won't be able to get wide open 3s galore. Your gonna need to get easy baskets outside of those two options (pick and roll or 3). Your gonna need a star who can force multiple defenders in isolation. Always have, always will, regardless of what your black and white colorless stats say about the most efficient shots in basketball.

D-Leethal
05-06-2014, 01:26 PM
The advanced metrics do nothing but reflect the style of play that is encouraged via the rule changes over the past 20 years, not vice versa.

Chronz
05-06-2014, 01:50 PM
Just joining in, hope it hasn't been beaten to death but the value of ANY shot is dependent on its expected outcome. A created set shot from deep is the most ideal outlet option, so much so that coaches today are teaching their bigmen to look for open shooters off of offensive rebounders just as much, if not more than they are trained to put it back up.

In a vacuum, you want to get an open shot, ideally as close to the rim as you possibly can but if/when you kick it out, the ideal jumpshot is an open 3. Obviously game time decisions effect this, as does reputation, if you have a struggling Ray Allen and a hot Bosh, who are you going to trust to make the next open shot? Couldn't blame you either way but that doesn't change the fact that over the long haul, its pretty damn hard to be less efficient if your teams making more 3's and getting more ft's. Thats some what a product of the math heads figuring the game out and it has come at the demise of the mid range game, thats not the same as not being able to dominate with a mid-range game player tho. Its about the attention they attract, and if that mid range guy is actually helping your team get more shots from the most efficient areas on the floor, then hes helping your teams overall cause. Look at the Blazers, LMA is their mid range specialist but the TEAM takes and makes a **** ton of 3's. League wide, its the desired outcome, but its always about the balance.

Chronz
05-06-2014, 01:56 PM
The advanced metrics do nothing but reflect the style of play that is encouraged via the rule changes over the past 20 years, not vice versa.

So whats the argument and why cant it be both? Rule changes played their role, understanding these rule changes are aided by visual AND statistical breakdowns, which continue speed up the evolution of the game.

slashsnake
05-06-2014, 02:12 PM
Trying to point out quality of shots in a vacuum, absent of defenders, absent of steps leading up to the shot in question, is a completely useless exercise. Your never going to be able to accurate break down the game of basketball into a series of isolated incidents devoid of context, devoid of teammates impact on the shot in question, devoid of game situation around the shot in question, devoid of defensive position leading to and during the shot in question. Its not gonna happen - its stupid to try and break it down that way.

Theres a reason Morey has a hardon for Melo - its because you need somebody to dominate in between the lines because the gimmick ball isn't gonna get it done in the playoffs. Your pick and rolls will get frozen, you won't be gifted ticky tack fouls every time you get sneezed on a drive, you won't be able to get wide open 3s galore. Your gonna need to get easy baskets outside of those two options (pick and roll or 3). Your gonna need a star who can force multiple defenders in isolation. Always have, always will, regardless of what your black and white colorless stats say about the most efficient shots in basketball.

I think we have the same exact point here. I was just pointing out the vacuum where the advanced metrics do say that the long 2 is the worst shot around. And that's why you don't see a guy all alone on the fast break pull up at the free throw line for a jumper. But my point was in games, suck off Bosh all game and he'll blow you up for 50 if you give him that midrange all day. I agree NBA isn't played in that vacuum. And that's where this comes. It's like saying in football that the average pass goes 7.5 yards and the average run goes 4.5 yards so teams should never ever run. In a vacuum sure. But running effectively helps the pass game be more effective.

Kind of like FG%. The higher FG% doesn't always mean the better scorer. Catch and shoot guys vs. guys who can create their own shots (Ibaka vs. Durant). Guys who get doubled vs. guys who cut to the rim when their man doubles someone else (Lebron vs. Birdman). Ibaka and Birdman aren't going to win you games creating his own shot like Durant and Lebron can.

kobe4thewinbang
05-06-2014, 09:18 PM
I miss Rip Hamilton.+1

How did I forget Rip? He was great from mid range, would run his defender ragged, rise up and splash it in.

More players need to get themselves open like Rip.

Sandman
05-06-2014, 09:20 PM
I agree but nowadays Rose def doesnt look towards his midrange game. And also considering he has played 10 games in 2 years, I wouldnt put him top 5 in anything

lol Rose nowadays

b@llhog24
05-06-2014, 10:40 PM
I don't care necessarily if it's inefficient. Just whether or not you're good at it. Like I'd never tell Dirk not to shoot midrange jumpers. Guys like Brandon Jennings however.....

NBA_Starter
05-06-2014, 10:45 PM
Kemba Walker can get an open mid-range look anytime he wants and he is finally starting to figure that out.

Chronz
05-06-2014, 11:27 PM
+1

How did I forget Rip? He was great from mid range, would run his defender ragged, rise up and splash it in.

More players need to get themselves open like Rip.

Yea but at the same time, imagine if Rip could get open like Ray Allen/Reggie Miller in their primes.

torocan
05-07-2014, 09:40 AM
It's not as simple as how many 3's vs 2's you shoot as opposed to the types of shots that you're attempting.

Open lay up > Open 3 > open mid-range 2 > open long 2 > contested lay up > contested 3 > contested mid-range 2 > contested long 2

If you have a really good offensive system up against most defenses, you're going to have a lot of open lay ups and open 3's. Against Elite defenses, they're going to guard either lay ups and/or 3's more effectively, which means fewer open shot opportunities at the rim or behind the arc. It's in those scenario's that you go to the open mid-range 2's.

So yes, you see Tony Parker shoot a lot of mid-range 2's... but those are WIDE OPEN mid-range 2's, and he typically only takes them when he doesn't have an open lay up or an wide open 3 point shooter available as an outlet.

Parker would still rather pass the ball to a 3 point shooter that is wide open like Bellinelli than take a wide open mid-range jumper. However, in the play offs those shots will be better defended so you go to the next best shot.

Analytics isn't about a mid-range jumper being an inherently good or bad shot. It's about selecting the best possible shot for the situation and your personnel. If your guys can't hit a 3 pointer to save their lives, you wouldn't have them shooting 3's nearly as often. And if your guys are terrible mid-range shooters, you don't let them take that shot nearly as often.

Situation + personnel.