2019-20 Season

[glazedandconfused]

1 hour ago, Littlebill said:

Literally neither of the stats you cited are mid range shots

Edit - as a junior (the same season you referenced, which was not his "best season" of POY as a senior), he shot 40.9% from mid range - http://barttorvik.com/playerstat.php?year=2013&p=Jordair Jett&t=Saint Louis

Isn't 40.9% from mid-range pretty bad? Same with the 44.9% for Perkins this year? It's Perkins least efficient shot by a decent margin.

[ACE]

1 hour ago, Littlebill said:

Literally neither of the stats you cited are mid range shots

Edit - as a junior (the same season you referenced, which was not his "best season" of POY as a senior), he shot 40.9% from mid range - http://barttorvik.com/playerstat.php?year=2013&p=Jordair Jett&t=Saint Louis

Interesting site, I always thought Jett was a pretty reliable mid-range shooter his last couple of seasons. If he got a step or two inside the three point arc and pulled up for a shot, I thought it was  a good shot for him. Anything outside the three point line, he was terrible.

As a point of comparison, I looked up Goodwin because the eye test was telling he has improved his mid-range game this year - it's true, his 32%, while not as good as Jett, is an improvement over last year - which was 27%. Goodwin was a brutal 17% as a freshman, so he is improving in this aspect of his game over the course of his career.

[Littlebill]

5 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Isn't 40.9% from mid-range pretty bad? Same with the 44.9% for Perkins this year? It's Perkins least efficient shot by a decent margin.

I'm not saying that we should continue shooting these (I agree with you on this) - we were speaking about who has been a good shooter from mid range. These are decent percentages from mid range - that's precisely why the shot is going away

[NH]

36 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Isn't 40.9% from mid-range pretty bad? Same with the 44.9% for Perkins this year? It's Perkins least efficient shot by a decent margin.

At a very simplistic level, yes. But fg% for a binned stat like that really isn't good analytics, and I would hope the coaching staff isn't relying on it too much. A better question would be how often are we running plays specifically designed to get a midrange jumper for Perkins and what is the points/possession on those plays. The headline field goal % is going to be all screwed up by things like shot clock, game clock, whether or not he got fouled on the shot, etc.

[slufanskip]

2 hours ago, Basketbill said:

Perkins has been on fire from three as well.  Since the first Dayton Game he is 20/37 for 54% from three.  Prior to that he was hitting at a 22% clip.  I am hoping this is a sign of becoming acclimated to the speed of play as well as understanding the offense.    Jacobs is almost at 40%, so next year we will have three players to cover at the three point line opening things up in the lane.  Give Yuri a summer to work on his 3 point shot along with his developing mid range game and we have some shooters...

and a good 40% in conference play. 

[slufanskip]

1 hour ago, glazedandconfused said:

What do we honestly think Perkins shoots from mid-range? He's shooting 47% from 2 on the season and 50% in conference play. So probably slightly worse than that after taking away dunks/layups? Either way shooting in the 45% range from mid-range is not effective, efficient or desirable.

I understand you need to take some given the flow of a game and it helps open up other things, but there's a reason mid-range isn't present in the games of really good teams.

EDIT: That being said, Perkins jumpers from the FT line are probably a good shot for this team, he's probably somewhere just north of 50% on those and I'll take that.

45% from mid range is certainly good.  

[glazedandconfused]

5 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

45% from mid range is certainly good.  

Thats 0.9 points per possession. Or the equivalent of 30% from 3 or 45% from FT line with 2 FTs. He may be good compared to other mid-range shooters, but still not an efficient offense.

 

14 minutes ago, NH said:

At a very simplistic level, yes. But fg% for a binned stat like that really isn't good analytics, and I would hope the coaching staff isn't relying on it too much. A better question would be how often are we running plays specifically designed to get a midrange jumper for Perkins and what is the points/possession on those plays. The headline field goal % is going to be all screwed up by things like shot clock, game clock, whether or not he got fouled on the shot, etc.

And yes that's somewhat true, but that same condition should be placed on 3 pt % or % at shots at the rim and he still is way more efficient from the 3 pt line or at the hoop. If you're running a lot of plays designed to get mid-range jump shots, you are going to have a ceiling on how good your offense can be. 

 

 

[NH]

8 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Thats 0.9 points per possession. Or the equivalent of 30% from 3 or 45% from FT line with 2 FTs. He may be good compared to other mid-range shooters, but still not an efficient offense.

 

And yes that's somewhat true, but that same condition should be placed on 3 pt % or % at shots at the rim and he still is way more efficient from the 3 pt line or at the hoop. If you're running a lot of plays designed to get mid-range jump shots, you are going to have a ceiling on how good your offense can be. 

 

 

That’s not how I would look at it. You don’t compare it to 3-point % or at the rim %. We already know the answer to those. That’s not helpful analytics. What would be helpful would be to compare the points/possession on a play that involves Javonte coming off a pin down and catching at the elbow to a play that is designed to get Hasahn a post up. 

[RUBillsFan]

11 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

45% from mid range is certainly good.  

Perkins at 44.9% from "far 2pt range" is 54th in the nation for guys who have made at least 40 "far 2 pt shots" according to this (http://barttorvik.com/playerstat.php?link=y&sIndex=41&maxht=0&minmidmade=40&minmidper=0.44&year=2020&top=353&start=20191101&end=20200501)

I'd say that's at least pretty good if not elite. 

Whether or not the mid-range shot is a good shot or not is a different argument that @glazedandconfused is trying to make.  I'm generally in agreement with the math that it is not a good shot, but in an actual you have to actually take some mid-range shots.

Also of note that Perkins is (by my count) 35/69 on far 2s during conference play.  Just like all his other %s that is becoming more efficient.

[slufanskip]

11 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Thats 0.9 points per possession. Or the equivalent of 30% from 3 or 45% from FT line with 2 FTs. He may be good compared to other mid-range shooters, but still not an efficient offense.

 

And yes that's somewhat true, but that same condition should be placed on 3 pt % or % at shots at the rim and he still is way more efficient from the 3 pt line or at the hoop. If you're running a lot of plays designed to get mid-range jump shots, you are going to have a ceiling on how good your offense can be. 

 

 

The problem is you can't look at it like that. It's the combination of all shots together. If you just shot 3's, very few teams if any would shoot at even 33%. If you only shot inside you'd have 15 shot clock violations as you just can't work the ball inside enough for a decent shot if you have no midrange or 3 point game. You also can't compare F/T's as you don't just begin the game with free throw attempts in hand. If a coach had his choice he'd shoot free throws on every possession even at 57%.  Without Perkins ability to hit a mid range jumper at 45% he wouldn't get to the rim as often. To be an effective offense you generally have to score at all 3 levels and yes the mid range jumper is the least efficient in the game. It is For Perkins and virtually every other player in the game. It's why you see less and less of them, but it still a needed skill. 

[slufanskip]

11 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

Perkins at 44.9% from "far 2pt range" is 54th in the nation for guys who have made at least 40 "far 2 pt shots" according to this (http://barttorvik.com/playerstat.php?link=y&sIndex=41&maxht=0&minmidmade=40&minmidper=0.44&year=2020&top=353&start=20191101&end=20200501)

I'd say that's at least pretty good if not elite. 

Whether or not the mid-range shot is a good shot or not is a different argument that @glazedandconfused is trying to make.  I'm generally in agreement with the math that it is not a good shot, but in an actual you have to actually take some mid-range shots.

Also of note that Perkins is (by my count) 35/69 on far 2s during conference play.  Just like all his other %s that is becoming more efficient.

That's correct. The less levels you're able to score on, the easier you are to defend.  

[slufanskip]

Also time is limited in a game. If you pass up a good look, you may not get a better one. 

[glazedandconfused]

23 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

The problem is you can't look at it like that. It's the combination of all shots together. If you just shot 3's, very few teams if any would shoot at even 33%. If you only shot inside you'd have 15 shot clock violations as you just can't work the ball inside enough for a decent shot if you have no midrange or 3 point game. You also can't compare F/T's as you don't just begin the game with free throw attempts in hand. If a coach had his choice he'd shoot free throws on every possession even at 57%.  Without Perkins ability to hit a mid range jumper at 45% he wouldn't get to the rim as often. To be an effective offense you generally have to score at all 3 levels and yes the mid range jumper is the least efficient in the game. It is For Perkins and virtually every other player in the game. It's why you see less and less of them, but it still a needed skill. 

I agree that sounds good in theory, but Dayton pretty much never shoots a shot outside of the paint and within the 3 point arc. Obviously we don't have the horses they do, but that's part of the reason they are arguably the best offense in the country.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't be taking any. Obviously plays break down and you take that over nothing, but to design a ton of plays to get mid-range shots is foolish. 

[RUBillsFan]

31 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

I agree that sounds good in theory, but Dayton pretty much never shoots a shot outside of the paint and within the 3 point arc. Obviously we don't have the horses they do, but that's part of the reason they are arguably the best offense in the country.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't be taking any. Obviously plays break down and you take that over nothing, but to design a ton of plays to get mid-range shots is foolish. 

Per the website everyone has been referencing, Dayton has taken 309 "far 2 pt" shots during the 2019-20 season so far.  http://barttorvik.com/team.php?team=Dayton

For reference, SLU has taken 419.  Poking around the A10 a bit, Davidson has only taken 262.  Most teams seem to be in the range from 250 - 450.

Dayton may shoot less mid-range shots than SLU, but it is not "pretty much never."

[glazedandconfused]

6 minutes ago, RUBillsFan said:

Per the website everyone has been referencing, Dayton has taken 309 "far 2 pt" shots during the 2019-20 season so far.  http://barttorvik.com/team.php?team=Dayton

For reference, SLU has taken 419.  Poking around the A10 a bit, Davidson has only taken 262.  Most teams seem to be in the range from 250 - 450.

Dayton may shoot less mid-range shots than SLU, but it is not "pretty much never."

No it's pretty much never. See last game. Far in the barttorvik website does not equal mid-range. It means not at the rim. 

 

[NH]

40 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

I agree that sounds good in theory, but Dayton pretty much never shoots a shot outside of the paint and within the 3 point arc. Obviously we don't have the horses they do, but that's part of the reason they are arguably the best offense in the country.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't be taking any. Obviously plays break down and you take that over nothing, but to design a ton of plays to get mid-range shots is foolish. 

I guess my question would be what do you want to see us change in our offense to make it more efficient? More post ups for Hasahn? More pnr with Yuri or J-Good? It’s not like we have a lot of options.
 

If you’re point is more generally that mid-range jumpers are less efficient than getting to the rim, the free throw line or shooting a 3... I don’t think anyone here is arguing with you. 

[slufanskip]

40 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

I agree that sounds good in theory, but Dayton pretty much never shoots a shot outside of the paint and within the 3 point arc. Obviously we don't have the horses they do, but that's part of the reason they are arguably the best offense in the country.

 

I'm not saying we shouldn't be taking any. Obviously plays break down and you take that over nothing, but to design a ton of plays to get mid-range shots is foolish. 

I don't want to design a ton of plays either. I doubt we do. 

[glazedandconfused]

15 minutes ago, NH said:

I guess my question would be what do you want to see us change in our offense to make it more efficient? More post ups for Hasahn? More pnr with Yuri or J-Good? It’s not like we have a lot of options.
 

If you’re point is more generally that mid-range jumpers are less efficient than getting to the rim, the free throw line or shooting a 3... I don’t think anyone here is arguing with you. 

One thing I don't think we've seen a ton of is a Perkins PNR with a big. I'd love to see Perkins get some more mismatches and continue to work. Defenses can't go under screens as much with JP as they can with JG and YC. It forces opposing bigs to make some tough decisions and come out and defend. A lot of times that'll get you Perkins guarded by a big and Hasahn guarded by a wing if run well.

[NH]

3 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

One thing I don't think we've seen a ton of is a Perkins PNR with a big. I'd love to see Perkins get some more mismatches and continue to work. Defenses can't go under screens as much with JP as they can with JG and YC. It forces opposing bigs to make some tough decisions and come out and defend. A lot of times that'll get you Perkins guarded by a big and Hasahn guarded by a wing if run well.

I like that idea, and would be down to see a us run more that it. But I think the irony is that is a play which would likely lead to some open mid-range jumpers for Perkins (check out the St. Joes game for a couple of examples of French/Perkins pnr leading to open jump shots for Javonte). I still really like the play, it just highlights that in an offense as limited as ours is, you kind of have to take what the defense gives you. 

[slufanskip]

9 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

One thing I don't think we've seen a ton of is a Perkins PNR with a big. I'd love to see Perkins get some more mismatches and continue to work. Defenses can't go under screens as much with JP as they can with JG and YC. It forces opposing bigs to make some tough decisions and come out and defend. A lot of times that'll get you Perkins guarded by a big and Hasahn guarded by a wing if run well.

If he doesn't shoot the mid range jumpers they can go under screens lol.  

[glazedandconfused]

Just now, slufanskip said:

If he doesn't shoot the mid range jumpers they can go under screens lol.  

1. Screens are often set at or around the 3 point line. So if they go under screens he would be shooting a 3. No one sets screens at the FT line lol

2. I've said 3 times already I'm ok with him shooting some mid-range, but play sets that are designed to get a 16 footer are foolish. A PNR is designed to get a defensive mismatch and space for perkins to operate. 

[slufanskip]

Just now, glazedandconfused said:

1. Screens are often set at or around the 3 point line. So if they go under screens he would be shooting a 3. No one sets screens at the FT line lol

2. I've said 3 times already I'm ok with him shooting some mid-range, but play sets that are designed to get a 16 footer are foolish. A PNR is designed to get a defensive mismatch and space for perkins to operate. 

Screens are set all over. But seriously, I was just trying to make light of the discussion hence the lol. 

[glazedandconfused]

5 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Screens are set all over. But seriously, I was just trying to make light of the discussion hence the lol. 

Haha you're fine but my overall point is that the idea that a fair amount of mid-range shots being necessary sounds good in theory, but there is some evidence to contradict it. A lot in the NBA and its coming to cbb.

 

I posted Dayton Duquesne shot chart and here's the rest of them.

 

https://public.tableau.com/profile/thebackpassrule#!/vizhome/DaytonRhodeIslandShotChart/RhodeIslandHome

 

[slufanskip]

1 minute ago, glazedandconfused said:

Haha you're fine but my overall point is that the idea that a fair amount of mid-range shots being necessary sounds good in theory, but there is some evidence to contradict it. A lot in the NBA and its coming to cbb.

 

I posted Dayton Duquesne shot chart and here's the rest of them.

 

https://public.tableau.com/profile/thebackpassrule#!/vizhome/DaytonRhodeIslandShotChart/RhodeIslandHome

 

You're not going to convince me based upon a Dayton shot chart that the mid range game doesn't need to be part of an effective offense for 95% of the teams.  

[ARon]

Analytics will almost always say the mid range shot is not a good option.  Hence: