| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Rubio is a valuable and underrated player but if you don’t see why many feel Lonzo projects to be much better I think you’re ignoring the facts. Lonzo is a much better shooter than 2nd year Rubio. He’s shooting 32% from 3 on 4 per game while Rubio shot 29% on 1.6 per game. Lonzo also has a higher FG% and considerably higher efg% than second year Rubio. They are comparable players right now, in a few years Lonzo will more than likely far surpass him. Who’s a better defender is very debatable though, I agree with that part. I prefer Zo because of his ability to pick up full court and guard multiple positions but Rubio is one of the few guys in the NBA with as quick of hands as him and manages to get more steals while gambling less. I’m a Rubio fan which is part of the reason I’m such a big Lonzo fan. A second year player who’s already on par with him as a player and has far more physical gifts projects to be much better and a damn good NBA player. Rubio is his floor. |
I think the differences (very very slight) that you're quoting for 2nd year Lonzo and Rubio are due much more to today's pace of play and analytics driven league.
Lonzo better have a much better eFG% today. |
The 3 point shooting is not a slight difference let alone a very slight difference. 2.5% better on over twice as many attempts infers he’s a considerably better shooter. |
Yeah, all depends how you look at it.
Rubio 1st year - 34.0%
Rubio 2nd year - 29.3%
Lonzo 1st year - 30.5%
Lonzo 2nd year - 31.8%
It all depends on how you look at it to come up with "Lonzo's a considerably better shooter" |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
oaktown_dimond
Star Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 1358
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
what's Nash up to these days? can he teach Lonzo how to play basketball? 
they only worked out together once, right? ... with Lavar rambling that Nash has nothing to offer his son. Yeah, he does... he has to undo all the bad habits you taught Zo! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Rubio is a valuable and underrated player but if you don’t see why many feel Lonzo projects to be much better I think you’re ignoring the facts. Lonzo is a much better shooter than 2nd year Rubio. He’s shooting 32% from 3 on 4 per game while Rubio shot 29% on 1.6 per game. Lonzo also has a higher FG% and considerably higher efg% than second year Rubio. They are comparable players right now, in a few years Lonzo will more than likely far surpass him. Who’s a better defender is very debatable though, I agree with that part. I prefer Zo because of his ability to pick up full court and guard multiple positions but Rubio is one of the few guys in the NBA with as quick of hands as him and manages to get more steals while gambling less. I’m a Rubio fan which is part of the reason I’m such a big Lonzo fan. A second year player who’s already on par with him as a player and has far more physical gifts projects to be much better and a damn good NBA player. Rubio is his floor. |
I think the differences (very very slight) that you're quoting for 2nd year Lonzo and Rubio are due much more to today's pace of play and analytics driven league.
Lonzo better have a much better eFG% today. |
The 3 point shooting is not a slight difference let alone a very slight difference. 2.5% better on over twice as many attempts infers he’s a considerably better shooter. |
Yeah, all depends how you look at it.
Rubio 1st year - 34.0%
Rubio 2nd year - 29.3%
Lonzo 1st year - 30.5%
Lonzo 2nd year - 31.8%
It all depends on how you look at it to come up with "Lonzo's a considerably better shooter" |
Attempts matter quite a bit IMO. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PartyMan
Starting Rotation
Joined: 29 Jan 2016
Posts: 963
Location: The Dark Side of the Moon
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| oaktown_dimond wrote: | what's Nash up to these days? can he teach Lonzo how to play basketball?
they only worked out together once, right? ... with Lavar rambling that Nash has nothing to offer his son. Yeah, he does... he has to undo all the bad habits you taught Zo! |
Last I heard he had a role with the Warriors.
_________________
We pour this booze and we drink this booze because we think it's yummy. YUMMY! So over the tounge and down the throat to party in our tummys.
DOWN THE HOLA BITC*OLA!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Rubio is a valuable and underrated player but if you don’t see why many feel Lonzo projects to be much better I think you’re ignoring the facts. Lonzo is a much better shooter than 2nd year Rubio. He’s shooting 32% from 3 on 4 per game while Rubio shot 29% on 1.6 per game. Lonzo also has a higher FG% and considerably higher efg% than second year Rubio. They are comparable players right now, in a few years Lonzo will more than likely far surpass him. Who’s a better defender is very debatable though, I agree with that part. I prefer Zo because of his ability to pick up full court and guard multiple positions but Rubio is one of the few guys in the NBA with as quick of hands as him and manages to get more steals while gambling less. I’m a Rubio fan which is part of the reason I’m such a big Lonzo fan. A second year player who’s already on par with him as a player and has far more physical gifts projects to be much better and a damn good NBA player. Rubio is his floor. |
I think the differences (very very slight) that you're quoting for 2nd year Lonzo and Rubio are due much more to today's pace of play and analytics driven league.
Lonzo better have a much better eFG% today. |
The 3 point shooting is not a slight difference let alone a very slight difference. 2.5% better on over twice as many attempts infers he’s a considerably better shooter. |
Yeah, all depends how you look at it.
Rubio 1st year - 34.0%
Rubio 2nd year - 29.3%
Lonzo 1st year - 30.5%
Lonzo 2nd year - 31.8%
It all depends on how you look at it to come up with "Lonzo's a considerably better shooter" |
Attempts matter quite a bit IMO. |
Which is interesting. Do you want someone shooting a low % to shoot more? Would Lonzo be an even better shooter if he was attempting 10 3pt fga? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Rubio is a valuable and underrated player but if you don’t see why many feel Lonzo projects to be much better I think you’re ignoring the facts. Lonzo is a much better shooter than 2nd year Rubio. He’s shooting 32% from 3 on 4 per game while Rubio shot 29% on 1.6 per game. Lonzo also has a higher FG% and considerably higher efg% than second year Rubio. They are comparable players right now, in a few years Lonzo will more than likely far surpass him. Who’s a better defender is very debatable though, I agree with that part. I prefer Zo because of his ability to pick up full court and guard multiple positions but Rubio is one of the few guys in the NBA with as quick of hands as him and manages to get more steals while gambling less. I’m a Rubio fan which is part of the reason I’m such a big Lonzo fan. A second year player who’s already on par with him as a player and has far more physical gifts projects to be much better and a damn good NBA player. Rubio is his floor. |
I think the differences (very very slight) that you're quoting for 2nd year Lonzo and Rubio are due much more to today's pace of play and analytics driven league.
Lonzo better have a much better eFG% today. |
The 3 point shooting is not a slight difference let alone a very slight difference. 2.5% better on over twice as many attempts infers he’s a considerably better shooter. |
Yeah, all depends how you look at it.
Rubio 1st year - 34.0%
Rubio 2nd year - 29.3%
Lonzo 1st year - 30.5%
Lonzo 2nd year - 31.8%
It all depends on how you look at it to come up with "Lonzo's a considerably better shooter" |
Attempts matter quite a bit IMO. |
Which is interesting. Do you want someone shooting a low % to shoot more? Would Lonzo be an even better shooter if he was attempting 10 3pt fga? |
No I’m not talking about what kind of shots I want a player to take. I’m acknowledging that when a player takes less shots they almost always are taking less of the more difficult ones. More shots also correlates to more of a willingness to take tougher ones which will hurt the %. We saw that with Ingram last year when he shot 39% because he only took about 2 a game. He only took easy ones and so his % indicated a far better shooter than he actually is.
I think Lonzo takes a pretty good amount. Enough to keep the D honest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
saetarubia
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 6208
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^^
Depends. Shooting 30% from 3 on high volume can be equally valuable as 45% from 2 PT.
30/100 from 3P = 90 points
45/100 from 2P = 90 points.
Both 100 possessions. So 32% from 3P on high volume more valuable than 45% FG from a guard who barely shoots three.
_________________
Showtime 2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| saetarubia wrote: | ^^
Depends. Shooting 30% from 3 on high volume can be equally valuable as 45% from 2 PT.
30/100 from 3P = 90 points
45/100 from 2P = 90 points.
Both 100 possessions. So 32% from 3P on high volume more valuable than 45% FG from a guard who barely shoots three. |
More valuable is a relative term.
Is it more valuable for Lonzo to shoot more threes at 31.8% or is it more valuable to shoot less and pass it on to Svi, or Hart, or Kuzma?
No team is ever going to win shooting 31.8% from 3s.
Atlanta is the worst 3pt shooting team in the league at 31.6%
OKC and Detroit are tied for 2nd worse at 31.9%.
Shooting a high volume of 3s at 31.8% can never be described as "valuable" much less "more valuable" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | saetarubia wrote: | ^^
Depends. Shooting 30% from 3 on high volume can be equally valuable as 45% from 2 PT.
30/100 from 3P = 90 points
45/100 from 2P = 90 points.
Both 100 possessions. So 32% from 3P on high volume more valuable than 45% FG from a guard who barely shoots three. |
More valuable is a relative term.
Is it more valuable for Lonzo to shoot more threes at 31.8% or is it more valuable to shoot less and pass it on to Svi, or Hart, or Kuzma?
No team is ever going to win shooting 31.8% from 3s.
Atlanta is the worst 3pt shooting team in the league at 31.6%
OKC and Detroit are tied for 2nd worse at 31.9%.
Shooting a high volume of 3s at 31.8% can never be described as "valuable" much less "more valuable" |
More valuable doesn’t mean valuable. It’s a different adjective from very. Shooting 45% from 2 isn’t valuable but it’s more valuable than shooting 25% from 3. Shooting 31.8% from 3 is more valuable than shooting 45% from two because it yields more points. Neither are valuable in a general sense but one is more valuable than the other. It’s just math. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
saetarubia
Star Player
Joined: 06 Jul 2014
Posts: 6208
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | saetarubia wrote: | ^^
Depends. Shooting 30% from 3 on high volume can be equally valuable as 45% from 2 PT.
30/100 from 3P = 90 points
45/100 from 2P = 90 points.
Both 100 possessions. So 32% from 3P on high volume more valuable than 45% FG from a guard who barely shoots three. |
More valuable is a relative term.
Is it more valuable for Lonzo to shoot more threes at 31.8% or is it more valuable to shoot less and pass it on to Svi, or Hart, or Kuzma?
No team is ever going to win shooting 31.8% from 3s.
Atlanta is the worst 3pt shooting team in the league at 31.6%
OKC and Detroit are tied for 2nd worse at 31.9%.
Shooting a high volume of 3s at 31.8% can never be described as "valuable" much less "more valuable" |
Kuzma is shooting 5.7 3s per game at 32% so not really different this season in terms of results from beyond the arc. Rockets had this theory of attempting more threes than other teams last season and it worked for them even with average efficiency. Obviously didn't work when they missed like 15 in a row in game 7. This season other teams have caught up and they are not standout anymore.
_________________
Showtime 2.0 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | More shots also correlates to more of a willingness to take tougher ones which will hurt the %. |
Yeah, I'm going to disagree on this. I think as you get better at shooting 3s, you take more shots.
Blake Griffin, when he first came into the league - shot 29.2% on 0.3 attempts.
Now, he's shooting 36.2% on 6.3 attempts. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| saetarubia wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | saetarubia wrote: | ^^
Depends. Shooting 30% from 3 on high volume can be equally valuable as 45% from 2 PT.
30/100 from 3P = 90 points
45/100 from 2P = 90 points.
Both 100 possessions. So 32% from 3P on high volume more valuable than 45% FG from a guard who barely shoots three. |
More valuable is a relative term.
Is it more valuable for Lonzo to shoot more threes at 31.8% or is it more valuable to shoot less and pass it on to Svi, or Hart, or Kuzma?
No team is ever going to win shooting 31.8% from 3s.
Atlanta is the worst 3pt shooting team in the league at 31.6%
OKC and Detroit are tied for 2nd worse at 31.9%.
Shooting a high volume of 3s at 31.8% can never be described as "valuable" much less "more valuable" |
Kuzma is shooting 5.7 3s per game at 32% so not really different this season in terms of results from beyond the arc. Rockets had this theory of attempting more threes than other teams last season and it worked for them even with average efficiency. Obviously didn't work when they missed like 15 in a row in game 7. This season other teams have caught up and they are not standout anymore. |
Kuzma is shooting bad at 3s. No denying. If he stays at 32% he should shoot less. The thinking is, he's going to bring it up, so we want him to keep shooting. But if it turns out he's a career 32% shooter, he needs to be shooting less of them.
Let's see what the Rockets avg efficiency was last year - 36.2%
My guess is, if Lonzo was on the Rockets shooting 31.8%, D'Antoni probably tells him to shoot less, not more 3s
Last edited by LongBeachPoly on Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:56 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike@LG
Moderator
Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 65135
Location: Orange County, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Rubio is a valuable and underrated player but if you don’t see why many feel Lonzo projects to be much better I think you’re ignoring the facts. Lonzo is a much better shooter than 2nd year Rubio. He’s shooting 32% from 3 on 4 per game while Rubio shot 29% on 1.6 per game. Lonzo also has a higher FG% and considerably higher efg% than second year Rubio. They are comparable players right now, in a few years Lonzo will more than likely far surpass him. Who’s a better defender is very debatable though, I agree with that part. I prefer Zo because of his ability to pick up full court and guard multiple positions but Rubio is one of the few guys in the NBA with as quick of hands as him and manages to get more steals while gambling less. I’m a Rubio fan which is part of the reason I’m such a big Lonzo fan. A second year player who’s already on par with him as a player and has far more physical gifts projects to be much better and a damn good NBA player. Rubio is his floor. |
I think the differences (very very slight) that you're quoting for 2nd year Lonzo and Rubio are due much more to today's pace of play and analytics driven league.
Lonzo better have a much better eFG% today. |
The 3 point shooting is not a slight difference let alone a very slight difference. 2.5% better on over twice as many attempts infers he’s a considerably better shooter. |
Yeah, all depends how you look at it.
Rubio 1st year - 34.0%
Rubio 2nd year - 29.3%
Lonzo 1st year - 30.5%
Lonzo 2nd year - 31.8%
It all depends on how you look at it to come up with "Lonzo's a considerably better shooter" |
Attempts matter quite a bit IMO. |
Which is interesting. Do you want someone shooting a low % to shoot more? Would Lonzo be an even better shooter if he was attempting 10 3pt fga? |
Yes. There are articles that high shot volume behind the arc = shot gravity moreso than actual accuracy.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
https://lakersdraft.substack.com/
I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike@LG wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | The God Particle wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | Rubio is a valuable and underrated player but if you don’t see why many feel Lonzo projects to be much better I think you’re ignoring the facts. Lonzo is a much better shooter than 2nd year Rubio. He’s shooting 32% from 3 on 4 per game while Rubio shot 29% on 1.6 per game. Lonzo also has a higher FG% and considerably higher efg% than second year Rubio. They are comparable players right now, in a few years Lonzo will more than likely far surpass him. Who’s a better defender is very debatable though, I agree with that part. I prefer Zo because of his ability to pick up full court and guard multiple positions but Rubio is one of the few guys in the NBA with as quick of hands as him and manages to get more steals while gambling less. I’m a Rubio fan which is part of the reason I’m such a big Lonzo fan. A second year player who’s already on par with him as a player and has far more physical gifts projects to be much better and a damn good NBA player. Rubio is his floor. |
I think the differences (very very slight) that you're quoting for 2nd year Lonzo and Rubio are due much more to today's pace of play and analytics driven league.
Lonzo better have a much better eFG% today. |
The 3 point shooting is not a slight difference let alone a very slight difference. 2.5% better on over twice as many attempts infers he’s a considerably better shooter. |
Yeah, all depends how you look at it.
Rubio 1st year - 34.0%
Rubio 2nd year - 29.3%
Lonzo 1st year - 30.5%
Lonzo 2nd year - 31.8%
It all depends on how you look at it to come up with "Lonzo's a considerably better shooter" |
Attempts matter quite a bit IMO. |
Which is interesting. Do you want someone shooting a low % to shoot more? Would Lonzo be an even better shooter if he was attempting 10 3pt fga? |
Yes. There are articles that high shot volume behind the arc = shot gravity moreso than actual accuracy. |
So you want Lonzo shooting more than what he's shooting currently? It'll make him even more valuable as a player?
So Lonzo's issue right now is he's not shooting enough 3s? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike@LG
Moderator
Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 65135
Location: Orange County, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
So you want Lonzo shooting more than what he's shooting currently? It'll make him even more valuable as a player?
So Lonzo's issue right now is he's not shooting enough 3s? |
Actually, what he's doing right now is perfect. He's not hesitating when he's open and is on the edge of forcing some of those shots with a defender on him.
But in response to drawing gravity, if you want more driving lanes for LeBron, hypothetically Lonzo at 7 attempts is better than Kuzma averaging 2-3 attempts.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
https://lakersdraft.substack.com/
I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: |
So you want Lonzo shooting more than what he's shooting currently? It'll make him even more valuable as a player?
So Lonzo's issue right now is he's not shooting enough 3s? |
Actually, what he's doing right now is perfect. He's not hesitating when he's open and is on the edge of forcing some of those shots with a defender on him.
But in response to drawing gravity, if you want more driving lanes for LeBron, hypothetically Lonzo at 7 attempts is better than Kuzma averaging 2-3 attempts. |
Let's say this is theoretically true. Wouldn't the opposing team adjust though in a series?
Because if Lonzo shooting at 31.8% is creating driving lanes for LeBron, shouldn't the opponent adjust and say - don't gravitate towards Lonzo anymore. Let the dude shoot at 31.8%.
31.8% won't hurt us.
Isn't that what Phil did to Rondo? Isn't that how GS beat Memphis when they were down 2-1 in that series?
They just let Tony Allen shoot?
Last edited by LongBeachPoly on Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:05 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | More shots also correlates to more of a willingness to take tougher ones which will hurt the %. |
Yeah, I'm going to disagree on this. I think as you get better at shooting 3s, you take more shots.
Blake Griffin, when he first came into the league - shot 29.2% on 0.3 attempts.
Now, he's shooting 36.2% on 6.3 attempts. |
Shooting less 3s is easier to shoot a higher percentage and players shoot more when they shoot better. It’s not a one or the other situation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tox
Franchise Player
Joined: 16 Nov 2015
Posts: 17880
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: |
So you want Lonzo shooting more than what he's shooting currently? It'll make him even more valuable as a player?
So Lonzo's issue right now is he's not shooting enough 3s? |
Actually, what he's doing right now is perfect. He's not hesitating when he's open and is on the edge of forcing some of those shots with a defender on him.
But in response to drawing gravity, if you want more driving lanes for LeBron, hypothetically Lonzo at 7 attempts is better than Kuzma averaging 2-3 attempts. |
Let's say this is theoretically true. Wouldn't the opposing team adjust though in a series?
Because if Lonzo shooting at 31.8% is creating driving lanes for LeBron, shouldn't the opponent adjust and say - don't gravitate towards Lonzo anymore. Let the dude shoot at 31.8%.
31.8% won't hurt us. |
Well aside from people not being perfect (it's instinct to cover an open 3 point shooter), there's also the possibility he shoots higher than 31.8% when he's wide open. According to nba.com, he's shooting 37.5% on "wide open" 3s (6+ feet of distance between him and the nearest shooter). So in theory if you leave him that open, he'll end up hitting enough to hurt your team. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | More shots also correlates to more of a willingness to take tougher ones which will hurt the %. |
Yeah, I'm going to disagree on this. I think as you get better at shooting 3s, you take more shots.
Blake Griffin, when he first came into the league - shot 29.2% on 0.3 attempts.
Now, he's shooting 36.2% on 6.3 attempts. |
Shooting less 3s is easier to shoot a higher percentage and players shoot more when they shoot better. It’s not a one or the other situation. |
Do you shoot? What's your experience? I feel I'm a shooter and if I only shoot one 3 per game, I feel my % would suffer.
I feel I need around 5-6 per game to get a feel. Once I get that feel, I want to shoot more and more.
1 per game - there's no rhythm at all. I think that's why Svi struggles. Not enough attempts.
So for a shooter, I'm going to have to disagree with you that less is better for the %.
Whatever Curry is shooting right now (50%), I don't know if you can say he'll shoot a better % if he only took 1 per game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike@LG
Moderator
Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 65135
Location: Orange County, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: |
So you want Lonzo shooting more than what he's shooting currently? It'll make him even more valuable as a player?
So Lonzo's issue right now is he's not shooting enough 3s? |
Actually, what he's doing right now is perfect. He's not hesitating when he's open and is on the edge of forcing some of those shots with a defender on him.
But in response to drawing gravity, if you want more driving lanes for LeBron, hypothetically Lonzo at 7 attempts is better than Kuzma averaging 2-3 attempts. |
Let's say this is theoretically true. Wouldn't the opposing team adjust though in a series?
Because if Lonzo shooting at 31.8% is creating driving lanes for LeBron, shouldn't the opponent adjust and say - don't gravitate towards Lonzo anymore. Let the dude shoot at 31.8%.
31.8% won't hurt us. |
Well aside from people not being perfect (it's instinct to cover an open 3 point shooter), there's also the possibility he shoots higher than 31.8% when he's wide open. According to nba.com, he's shooting 37.5% on "wide open" 3s (6+ feet of distance between him and the nearest shooter). So in theory if you leave him that open, he'll end up hitting enough to hurt your team. |
Ding.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
https://lakersdraft.substack.com/
I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike@LG
Moderator
Joined: 10 Apr 2001
Posts: 65135
Location: Orange County, CA
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | More shots also correlates to more of a willingness to take tougher ones which will hurt the %. |
Yeah, I'm going to disagree on this. I think as you get better at shooting 3s, you take more shots.
Blake Griffin, when he first came into the league - shot 29.2% on 0.3 attempts.
Now, he's shooting 36.2% on 6.3 attempts. |
Shooting less 3s is easier to shoot a higher percentage and players shoot more when they shoot better. It’s not a one or the other situation. |
Do you shoot? What's your experience? I feel I'm a shooter and if I only shoot one 3 per game, I feel my % would suffer.
I feel I need around 5-6 per game to get a feel. Once I get that feel, I want to shoot more and more.
1 per game - there's no rhythm at all. I think that's why Svi struggles. Not enough attempts.
So for a shooter, I'm going to have to disagree with you that less is better for the %.
Whatever Curry is shooting right now (50%), I don't know if you can say he'll shoot a better % if he only took 1 per game. |
NBA level is somewhere around 5-8 3-point attempts per game before the percentages start dropping. The trick is to optimize good shot attempts with volume. Not everyone is Curry.
_________________
Resident Car Nut.
https://lakersdraft.substack.com/
I am not an economic advisor nor do I advise economic strategies or plans. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BigGameHames
Star Player
Joined: 24 May 2015
Posts: 7982
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | More shots also correlates to more of a willingness to take tougher ones which will hurt the %. |
Yeah, I'm going to disagree on this. I think as you get better at shooting 3s, you take more shots.
Blake Griffin, when he first came into the league - shot 29.2% on 0.3 attempts.
Now, he's shooting 36.2% on 6.3 attempts. |
Shooting less 3s is easier to shoot a higher percentage and players shoot more when they shoot better. It’s not a one or the other situation. |
Do you shoot? What's your experience? I feel I'm a shooter and if I only shoot one 3 per game, I feel my % would suffer.
I feel I need around 5-6 per game to get a feel. Once I get that feel, I want to shoot more and more.
1 per game - there's no rhythm at all. I think that's why Svi struggles. Not enough attempts.
So for a shooter, I'm going to have to disagree with you that less is better for the %.
Whatever Curry is shooting right now (50%), I don't know if you can say he'll shoot a better % if he only took 1 per game. |
Yea I could shoot and was often tasked with having to make tough ones if my team was struggling. It hurt my %. Of course you wanna get a rythym but if you pass up semi contested 3s and only take open ones, you’re gonna shoot a better %. I can’t imagine you’d argue that, and that’s my point. Take less shots, you’re gonna cut out the tougher ones first. More easy shots, higher %. It’s why I think Lonzos finishing is a much bigger issue than shooting despite what the %s say. He only takes easy ones in those situations. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tox wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | Mike@LG wrote: | | Quote: |
So you want Lonzo shooting more than what he's shooting currently? It'll make him even more valuable as a player?
So Lonzo's issue right now is he's not shooting enough 3s? |
Actually, what he's doing right now is perfect. He's not hesitating when he's open and is on the edge of forcing some of those shots with a defender on him.
But in response to drawing gravity, if you want more driving lanes for LeBron, hypothetically Lonzo at 7 attempts is better than Kuzma averaging 2-3 attempts. |
Let's say this is theoretically true. Wouldn't the opposing team adjust though in a series?
Because if Lonzo shooting at 31.8% is creating driving lanes for LeBron, shouldn't the opponent adjust and say - don't gravitate towards Lonzo anymore. Let the dude shoot at 31.8%.
31.8% won't hurt us. |
Well aside from people not being perfect (it's instinct to cover an open 3 point shooter), there's also the possibility he shoots higher than 31.8% when he's wide open. According to nba.com, he's shooting 37.5% on "wide open" 3s (6+ feet of distance between him and the nearest shooter). So in theory if you leave him that open, he'll end up hitting enough to hurt your team. |
1) instinct to cover an open 3 pt shooter - that's why I mentioned in a series. In a long season where you play 82 games and you play a team once and move onto the next team another night - yeah, you just do what you do. But in a series, that's when you make adjustments.
2) Him shooting 37.5% - that's what you live with. You make him beat you 4 times in a series. Remember the premise that we're working with though - he's there to draw gravity to open up lanes for LeBron. So, we're saying that's working for the Lakers. Lonzo shooting at a low % and opening up lanes for LeBron which is working for the Lakers. So you'd have to adjust to that. Pick your poison.
We know LeBron's a proven commodity. Wouldn't teams rather leave Lonzo open to see if he can beat them in a series? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laker50
Star Player
Joined: 07 Mar 2014
Posts: 2140
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I have noticed is that Lonzo has gone back to his old form.
He starts from his left and shoots from the right. You have to get the right angle to catch this.
The conventional form is start from center and remain in center.
So Lonzo will have a trajectory that goes to the right with this movement.
Not judging or anything but has anyone else noticed it.
I would seriously recommend that the Lakers or Lonzo get a shooting coach to fix his form or at least grove his present form.
This will be the difference between an all star or being the second Kendall Marshall as he is right now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LongBeachPoly
Franchise Player
Joined: 14 Jul 2012
Posts: 16162
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2018 4:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | LongBeachPoly wrote: | | BigGameHames wrote: | | More shots also correlates to more of a willingness to take tougher ones which will hurt the %. |
Yeah, I'm going to disagree on this. I think as you get better at shooting 3s, you take more shots.
Blake Griffin, when he first came into the league - shot 29.2% on 0.3 attempts.
Now, he's shooting 36.2% on 6.3 attempts. |
Shooting less 3s is easier to shoot a higher percentage and players shoot more when they shoot better. It’s not a one or the other situation. |
Do you shoot? What's your experience? I feel I'm a shooter and if I only shoot one 3 per game, I feel my % would suffer.
I feel I need around 5-6 per game to get a feel. Once I get that feel, I want to shoot more and more.
1 per game - there's no rhythm at all. I think that's why Svi struggles. Not enough attempts.
So for a shooter, I'm going to have to disagree with you that less is better for the %.
Whatever Curry is shooting right now (50%), I don't know if you can say he'll shoot a better % if he only took 1 per game. |
Yea I could shoot and was often tasked with having to make tough ones if my team was struggling. It hurt my %. Of course you wanna get a rythym but if you pass up semi contested 3s and only take open ones, you’re gonna shoot a better %. I can’t imagine you’d argue that, and that’s my point. Take less shots, you’re gonna cut out the tougher ones first. More easy shots, higher %. It’s why I think Lonzos finishing is a much bigger issue than shooting despite what the %s say. He only takes easy ones in those situations. |
I've never played a game where I only had 1 easy look the entire game. You?
I've never seen any good shooter limit themselves to 1-2 looks a game. Never seen it.
Players that shoot 1-2 times per game - those players can't shoot. If you're shooting 1-2 threes per game, you're passing up hard shots and a bunch of easy shots as well.
If you're playing 30 min + a game, you're getting more than enough good looks per game.
This theory that Ingram is passing up all the hard looks and just taking easy looks by shooting 1-2 threes a game, I don't buy it. If he was a good shooter, he'd be shooting more.
He's passing up alot of good looks as well as hard looks. He's just not pulling the trigger, period because of lack of confidence.
---------------------
And re: your shooting, how many 3pt fga did you shoot per game?
When I didn't have a 3pt shot, you know how many I shot a game? Zero. Then I developed a 3pt shot and I started to shoot a bunch. Now, I need to shoot a certain amount to find my rhythm. And once I found my rhythm for that game, every shot became "easy" ones.
So I can't really relate to shooting 1 per game. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
