Jump to content

What does it take to be a good shooter?


The Wiz

Recommended Posts

There have been a number of threads on the boards talking about shooters.  This guy is a great shooter...this guy is decent...So and so can't shoot.  What does it all mean?

Not sure...so I decided to run some numbers and then put them to grades. I won't list all the permutations but enough to give you a good idea of what constitutes a good shooter.  My numbers will seem a little high because I am using data from "main" players...starters and first off the bench players. Minimum criteria are as follows.....FG%....100 made....3pt%....25 made....FT%....50 made. during a season. To get an A slash line doesn't mean you have to get those exact numbers.....A player could be a B  FG%  shooter  and an A in 3P% and a C in FT%....Most players will be a mix and match which is why I also list a total slash. There will be some players who will receive an NA in certain parts of the slash because they don't shoot enough 3's  or maybe they only shoot 3's or maybe they are so bad at shooting in a particular category they can't make the required number of " mades" .  In addition, I am only going to list  A, B and C categories. My feeling is we should not recruit below a B anyway.....Any gaps you see between numbers  are the pluses and minus that would normally go with the grades ....Just trying to give a general idea rather than real exacting.  Finally , I have talked about the 180 player in past threads. Needless to say the 180 guy is an A+ player who barring any major negatives you can recruit sight unseen. And last , this is D-1 data...you can use it as a very general guideline for HS prospects if they have a decent number of made shots. ...remembering that data from HS and Com Coll isn't always real accurate.  Generally though if a kid can shoot...he can shoot....which is why you have to  " see the kids play"

Hope this post clarifies what it takes to be a good shooter....

A =  48.9 / 39.8 / 78.5

B = 47.1/ 37.1/ 75.4

C= 45.2/ 35.6 / 73.2

Slash totals

A+ = 180+

A= 176

B = 164

C = 155

 

TheDude likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, The Wiz said:

There have been a number of threads on the boards talking about shooters.  This guy is a great shooter...this guy is decent...So and so can't shoot.  What does it all mean?

Not sure...so I decided to run some numbers and then put them to grades. I won't list all the permutations but enough to give you a good idea of what constitutes a good shooter.  My numbers will seem a little high because I am using data from "main" players...starters and first off the bench players. Minimum criteria are as follows.....FG%....100 made....3pt%....25 made....FT%....50 made. during a season. To get an A slash line doesn't mean you have to get those exact numbers.....A player could be a B  FG%  shooter  and an A in 3P% and a C in FT%....Most players will be a mix and match which is why I also list a total slash. There will be some players who will receive an NA in certain parts of the slash because they don't shoot enough 3's  or maybe they only shoot 3's or maybe they are so bad at shooting in a particular category they can't make the required number of " mades" .  In addition, I am only going to list  A, B and C categories. My feeling is we should not recruit below a B anyway.....Any gaps you see between numbers  are the pluses and minus that would normally go with the grades ....Just trying to give a general idea rather than real exacting.  Finally , I have talked about the 180 player in past threads. Needless to say the 180 guy is an A+ player who barring any major negatives you can recruit sight unseen. And last , this is D-1 data...you can use it as a very general guideline for HS prospects if they have a decent number of made shots. ...remembering that data from HS and Com Coll isn't always real accurate.  Generally though if a kid can shoot...he can shoot....which is why you have to  " see the kids play"

Hope this post clarifies what it takes to be a good shooter....

A =  48.9 / 39.8 / 78.5

B = 47.1/ 37.1/ 75.4

C= 45.2/ 35.6 / 73.2

Slash totals

A+ = 180+

A= 176

B = 164

C = 155

 

Numbers seem about right, although 73% for ft being a C might be a little high. I would be thrilled with this team if we could even hit 70%. Thanks for posting......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

70% as a team for FT shooting is fine but for an individual it should only be avg or slightly above.  We have been such a poor FT shooting team these past few years that we would be happy if the team shot 70% as an avg. for the season.  Good shooters have to be able to shoot in the 80% to really be doing well at the charity line.  How many games have we lost by 6-8 points and we shot 55% -60% from the line - more than I care to remember.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cheeseman said:

70% as a team for FT shooting is fine but for an individual it should only be avg or slightly above.  We have been such a poor FT shooting team these past few years that we would be happy if the team shot 70% as an avg. for the season.  Good shooters have to be able to shoot in the 80% to really be doing well at the charity line.  How many games have we lost by 6-8 points and we shot 55% -60% from the line - more than I care to remember.  

Definitely have to address this in the off season. SLU was an impressive 16th in the nation in ft attempts per game (particularly impressive in that we played a slow paced game), but were  only 55th in fts made per game. We averaged 15 made fts a game where as if we had shot them at a nominal rate we would have been around 17 or 18 made a game. Additionally, this is not even factoring the number of front end shots on 1and 1's that were missed.......

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/free-throws-attempted-per-game

 

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/free-throws-made-per-game

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following my report cards all season that we are a horrible shooting team....not just FTs but the whole slash line. We finished with  a F+ / F /  F-  slash  which led to an F in PPG....There are no Final Fours with that report card.  .  The only thing that saved us was good defense.  Had we come in at even a C offense we would have seen some post season play.  Next year's mantra....Hold onto the Defense...improve the Offense (shooting)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-Wiz, if you could clarify for me, your slash figures and the totals listed to be A, B, C don't agree and do you have a player distribution for how many are in each category? for instance, are 3% of the players A+ shooters, 10% A's, etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just thinking about your deffinitions.  When I think of a good shooter in today's game, I think of a player who can hit 3 point shots at about the 75th percentile  and higher.  A player who gets the vast majority of his points within 8 feet of the basket, may be a prolific post player, but that doesn't make him a good shooter.  A good shooter stretches the floor.  David Forman is an example of a player with a high fieldgoal percentage, but I wouldn't call him a good shooter.  If a player isn't in the 75th percentile or higher in free throw percentage, I wouldn't consider them a good shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Cowboy said:

-Wiz, if you could clarify for me, your slash figures and the totals listed to be A, B, C don't agree and do you have a player distribution for how many are in each category? for instance, are 3% of the players A+ shooters, 10% A's, etc

I think what you are referring to is the individual letter slash lines don't add up to the  total slash lines.  They are not supposed to.  For instance the numbers in the A line are all independent of one another ...the idea being  48.9 is an A shooter...37.1 is a B  3pt shooter and 73.2 is a C  FT shooter...So your graded slash on a 49/ 37/ 73....would be A/ B / C ...adding the slash together makes 159 ....or a C+ shooter.

As for distribution.....it is a modified curve...ie  a flatter curve...that roughly breaks down as follows...all of A ...15%...all of B... 22%...all of C...28%...D 22%...F 15%....Remember these are "main " players ....Players who have made at least...100 FGs....25  3pt...50 FTs.....not all players ....  I  don't think most fans are as interested in "end of the bench " players not to mention the small sample sizes are not meaningful representations of what an every day player could do.

Hope this clarifies things a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Aquinas said:

Just thinking about your deffinitions.  When I think of a good shooter in today's game, I think of a player who can hit 3 point shots at about the 75th percentile  and higher.  A player who gets the vast majority of his points within 8 feet of the basket, may be a prolific post player, but that doesn't make him a good shooter.  A good shooter stretches the floor.  David Forman is an example of a player with a high fieldgoal percentage, but I wouldn't call him a good shooter.  If a player isn't in the 75th percentile or higher in free throw percentage, I wouldn't consider them a good shooter.

I think we are pretty much in agreement.  In the original post I mentioned I don't think we should actively recruit  players below B.....If you look at my response above to Cowboy....you will see that B falls into that category on the curve...the actual spread for Grade B is 22-30%...so the 75 percentile is right there . Coincidentally , a 75% FT  shooter is just about a 75 percentile shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, The Wiz said:

I think what you are referring to is the individual letter slash lines don't add up to the  total slash lines.  They are not supposed to.  For instance the numbers in the A line are all independent of one another ...the idea being  48.9 is an A shooter...37.1 is a B  3pt shooter and 73.2 is a C  FT shooter...So your graded slash on a 49/ 37/ 73....would be A/ B / C ...adding the slash together makes 159 ....or a C+ shooter.

As for distribution.....it is a modified curve...ie  a flatter curve...that roughly breaks down as follows...all of A ...15%...all of B... 22%...all of C...28%...D 22%...F 15%....Remember these are "main " players ....Players who have made at least...100 FGs....25  3pt...50 FTs.....not all players ....  I  don't think most fans are as interested in "end of the bench " players not to mention the small sample sizes are not meaningful representations of what an every day player could do.

Hope this clarifies things a bit.

-got it, thank you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cowboy said:

-got it, thank you

I would like to add 1 more thing to my above post to you.....

One of the purposes of having a total slash is to smooth things out....so for instance if you have a player who has a slash  of  53/36/91...That would be ....A+/ C / A+...His total slash would be 180...a player you would want to have.   But here is what a truly great and balanced shooter looks like.....50.3 /  41 / 79.6....falling short of the magic 180 but ringing up a slash of A+/ A+ / A+...definitely a player you would want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 A+ are really high.  The first 3 names that popped into my head were H Waldman, Scott highmark and Roland Gray.  I took a quick look and it appears that Gray was close.  I would like to see who the top shooters in billiken history are using your standards?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Aquinas said:

3 A+ are really high.  The first 3 names that popped into my head were H Waldman, Scott highmark and Roland Gray.  I took a quick look and it appears that Gray was close.  I would like to see who the top shooters in billiken history are using your standards?

Here are all the  players through history that got an A+ for at least 1 season....

The Wiz Hall of Fame

FG%....at least 100 made...50.9%....Shaver, Burns, Dobbs, Henderson, Claggett, Bonner, Vouyoukas, Evans, Hackman, Robinson, Reed, Ed Macauley, Gray, Williams, Douglas, Baniak, French

3P%...at least 25 made...41% ...Gray, Brown, Carlos McCauley, Waldman, Love, Claggett, Drejaj, Diener, Cobbin, McBroom, Liddell, Bartley, Lisch

FT%...at least 50 made....79.6%...Singletary, Burden, Fisher, Newberry, Cobbin, Glass, Alcorn,  Bryant, Lisch, Ellis, Meyer, Rogers, Niemann, LaTodd Johnson, Gardinar, Paradiski, McCall, Waldman, McBroom, Claggett, Craig, Crawford.

It looks to me as though Claggett is the only player in Bills history to get 3 A+ though they were not in the same year. 

And yes the numbers are high which is why it is an A+. 

Tip o' the cap to those players who had what it takes to be a great shooter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let's look at this year's Bills team...and let's grade them

First there was only 1 player on the team who qualified in all 3 categories. ...Roby

Plus there were 4 others who qualified in 2 categories.

Here is what the individual scoring report card looked like.....

Bess.....F-/ NA/ B

Goodwin....F- / NA / F+

Roby..........F- / B / D+

French......A+ / NA/ F-

Johnson......NA/ A- / A-

Overall the team was  F+/ F / F-...and remember overall team grades are slightly lower than individual player stats. P PG was also an F.....

Looks like next year will be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've got to be nuts Bilikid, included an apparently encrypted piece in your  post with a link entitled "get the attachment." Mods can anyone scan the attachment this guy just posted and see if it contains bad stuff or is a phishing attempt of any kind? I would lock this file unless it can be shown it is a clean and benign attachment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We used a lot of zone last year. While that was done out of necessity,[short bench,JJ ]the zone gives up a lot of corner 3's. Hopefully we won't be forced to play as much zone next year. I agree it's the easiest and best shot in the game that's not a dunk. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...