@Jaleel Og Facts. And most people forget that the Warriors dynasty was built on defense. Steph and Klay were the shiny pieces but they had a team full of defenders. Klay Dray Iggy Harrison Bogut Livingston. KD became an elite defender when he joined as well
@@moretothegame true and their “small ball” wasn’t really small ball because draymond could clamp centers. The Celtics kinda have small ball today but as we saw Theis (taller than draymond) got destroyed by adebayo
@@bilindabutcher8913 All championship teams are great defensively. That’s what people don’t realize. The year that the Rockets almost beat the Warriors they were stifling on defense with their switches taking away the Warriors off ball actions.
@@moretothegame true. Ariza and PJ Tucker we’re doing amazing defensively that series + CP3 and Capela are both great defenders for their positions. Even harden was stepping up in some moments defensively
Man I've always said something similar....you can have 3 point range but not be a 3 point shooter...just because you can hit a 3 don't make you a 3 point shooter...Jordan had 3 point range but he wasn't a 3 point shooter! Lebron has 3 point range but he ain't a 3 point shooter...there are only a few Ray allens!
@@mhill311 as long as you can shoot 33 percent or better from 3 you are better off taking 3s, unless you can hit your 2 pt FGs at 50+ percent, which is rare outside of Rim shots. Layups and dunks are 100 percent more valuable than 3s, but mid range? The best in the league like Kd and Demar and CP3, they basically make mid range shots at the equivalent of a 33 percent 3 point shooter. A KD mid range is equal to a John Wall career 3 pointer basically. Lol.
Lol I say this all the time, the GSW are complete outliers. They literally drafted two top ten shooters of all time in back to back drafts, drafted defensive player of the year in the second round, then the cap went up by an unprecedented amount because of the new TV deal so they could sign KD. No team will ever be able to repeat that.
@@Yannis_S_ LMAO Damn it, there was a skit on SNL last week about spelling unprecedented wrong, that's when I knew someone would eventually come for me about the spelling in my comment. I was a Chemistry and Math major so I never focused much on spelling.
@@shadow_realm47 Rockets was far from what the Warriors is. Rockets is centric offense, Warriors has Curry and Klay playing off-ball a lot with Draymond playmaking. What makes them great is the gravity they have so they could have a lot of drives, not 3pt scoring alone.
Curry is the best but I have 2 players: James Harden and Damian Lillard. Curry had the best average 3-point made per game in 2018 and 2019 but Harden is 3-Pointers Made Leader during the same years (he played more games) and in 2020, The Beard is the best 3-point shooter in NBA in terms of statistics with the absence of Chief Curry. And Lillard is hot, this season proved it with a 3-point average of 4.1 made per game, the same average as Stephen Curry in 2017 (and a better average than Steph in 2015).
This is why the Lakers organization deserves respect. They created a team that has a different identity than everyone else in the league. They got a team that can switch up and mimic anyone their playing and beat them at their game while having better defense because their a defense first team. Their defense is better than their offense that's how they won the chip when they went full power on defense it was a blow out on one of the most unstoppable offenses in the league. Lakers do not impress me on offense and they don't really care too much about it. If I was Lakers I would not look to sign Lillard I would look to sign Cp3 because he's better on defense. I would have all my 2 yr contract players opt out and resign for less and drop guys like antetokoumpo and thorton and bring in cheap defensive guys that can get a good 8 points each
@@soundofgod5501 Lillard is waaaaay better option than cp3, and everybody act like avery Bradley ain't got the same contract he had before he opted out of the bubble......
Moses malone was the ultimate possessions multiplier with his offensive rebounding capability. Creating foul problems , setting defenses , forcing substitutions , getting into the bonus , and burning opponents timeouts, while punishing opponents at the free throw line. Rodman did similar . Without the ft %
@@deandrepage1048 Danny Green played great defense and rebounded very well for his size. He actually impacted the game in other ways besides shooting 3s which shows you dont need the 3point shot as much as people think you do
@@Oddssss Game 5 loss, with the Lakers in Black Mamba jerseys. Danny Green blows yet another 3-pointer. 😑😑😑 This one was different because it would have won the NBA Championship in Game 5 instead of the eventual win in Game 6. Yes, Danny Green contributes in other ways besides making 3-pointers. That's why the head coach refused to DEMOTE Danny Green in favor of fan-favorite Alex Caruso. 😅😅😅 If you can't make the same 3-pointers Danny Green is missing, you gotta stay on the 2nd Unit with your claim, "I do other things besides shoot 3-pointers. " Danny Green has already stolen that narrative from you.
@@Oddssss You need to be a FLOOR SPACER = respected by the defense as a true threat to make 3-pointers because of the poor Floor Spacing with 2 BIGS = Twin Shot-blockers 1st Unit. 😅😅😅 It's not whether you make the shot or not, it's that the defense respects you enough as a "true threat," so they have to extend their defense out to the 3-point line. Creates more space for Anthony Davis to score in the low post area. You screw up the Floor Spacing for Anthony Davis and slasher-style Lebron James if YOU ARE NOT RESPECTED BY YOUR DEFENDER as 3-point shooter. That's why Coach Vogel refused to promote anybody else in Danny Green's spot.
The most hilarious thing about analytics is exactly what Earl said. You can make anything true. For instance, the threes and layups only people probably overlooked the fact that the Warriors were actually ranked I think 4th in 2017 or 2018 in midrange jump shooting percentage I recall reading. Great article on that if you do a little google searching. So sure the Warriors could hit three-pointers and they could hit layups, but nowhere did they ever actually cut out midrange jump shots. Houston cut out that concept and it definitely hasn't worked. The reason they are better is that, although those are "bad attempts," they're good at them. Like gil said. Sure that's great to play like them, but they're good at shooting from anywhere. If you don't have that, you have to find a way to play to your strengths. The other hilarious thing? Kawhi Leonard. Kevin Durant. Jimmy Butler. Those are three of the best midrange shooters in the league and, to nobody's surprise, they've all been to the finals and/or won and they are all top 5 small forwards. How's that a bad shot if the best players in the league are making it?
Here is the thing people gloss over. The best friend to 3-ball and layups (attacking the hoop) happens TO BE a very effective mid range game. Every championship team had that kind of balance (along with great defense) on offense and its hard for teams to match up. I can go back to the 2011 Mavs where they had their fair share of perimeter players along with guys who can handle the ball and score. But the glue that held that together was Dirk's ability to work from the mid range, work the stanky leg fade away or aggressively go inside and get a bucket and a foul. In 2019 that Raptors team was also balanced as hell. Kawhi was your midrange ISO monster who can get calls and flanked with him were multiple players who can handle the ball to shoot and score (Lowry/Siakam/Vleet) and 3-ball catch and shooters (Danny Green/Vleet). If anything the very effective mid range game is an elite skill that definitely separates the men (the 3 guys you mentioned) and players like Demar DeRozan who is also limited in his shot making but his mid range offense can't take over games.
Y'all are exactly right. James Harden averages 35, but I have no doubt he could average 40+ if he replaced 5 of those difficult 3s with 5 easier midrange jumpers\pullups. He gets offensive fouls because the defense KNOWS he's going all the way once he crosses the 3 point line. There's no threat of him pulling up for the midrange like the players mentioned. The analytics say mid range is a "bad" shot, and that's total nonsense. I'll take the open 2 over the contested 3 any day and twice on Sunday. A lot of these guys don't have 22-foot range. They are shooting below 30% from 3 when if they operated in that 16-20 foot range they'd be well above 50%.
Yes i read that article. I think it was on espn by Zach Lowe if i'm not mistaken. Curry and KD especially shot like 60% from 2pt range which made that aspect of their offense valuable and lethal.
gilbert your stupid. why people keeps on taking 3s not because of analytics. it because of 2-3 zone. jordan era zone defense is illegal. and whats wrong with mimicking greats. That's why you have to study players who are better than you. in basketball shooting is the most important thing. the defense will change drastically and you can easily fake blow by your defender if you are a great shooter. now i now the reason why you dont have a ring.
if you are telling this straight facts then you are stupid. what did they say to jordan and lebron when they came to the league. can they shoot the ball that is the question.? see by asking this question means that they want to change jordan and lebron to be a better player. thats what these coaches trainer or any analytics tells to this guys. shoot 3s cause it will make you a better player. you know why popovich change the game. its not steph and gsw who changes it. it was spurs. and the nba officially announce zone defense when they lost in the olympics. their opponent just zone them out. its not shooting more 3. its making your self a better overall player. who can shoot 3s drive and blow by. stupid peoples
@@prancerjohnponce6889 Why are yo calling people stupid when you aren't making any logical points? It sounds like you don't understand the actual game of basketball at all.
Kinda takes the joy out the game bc of what stats say to do and also causes a lot of players to decline cuz they don’t have the skill set equipped for whatever style of play that the analytics are pointing towards
@@showtimesportsmedia6906 Yes but for teams without that versatility should go with what works for them like the nuggets. They didn’t hoist 3’s all the time. They had a systematic offense that worked best for them that worked for their Stars,starters,6th men,role players.
@@kenshinhimura8708 naw I’m not saying you wrong I’m just saying that’s how these gms think now. Darryl Morey was a prime example of that, it just so happens that he ran into a team that was better equipped to take those blows and fight back.
Analytics never, ever said Kobe was a bad player until he was very old and injured. At his peak he was a star player who didn’t always have the best shot selection and efficiency compared to his superstar MVP peers.
just saying this from the outside but i feel like a lot of nba players today are getting held back in their game by being forced out of midrange. i look at players like ben simmons and giannis right now and think how dominant they could be if they had a decent midgame or a like a nice elbow jumper. but i think their teams are constantly trying to force them to practice 3's and be only layups and 3's like he said. guys like kawhi and durant have the clout to do what they think is best and keep the midrange going but for the younger/less established players on some of these teams i bet its tough.
I slightly disagree with you on the Giannis & Simmons point. They are playing guard positions, it only benefits them 2 be able 2 score at all levels on the floor. Currently, their best shot is a dunk 2nd a layup other than that its a crap shoot whenever they take a shot. As an observer/lover of the game its frustrating to see that in crunch time the team cant count on either of them score. Its embarrassing 2 see 2 of the biggest ball handlers ever not have a consistent post up game. Oh how i wish i could be their trainers 4 1 summer. Develop touch, left & right turn around jumpers from the post. 20 feet & out [catch & shoot, catch pump pump fake shoot, catch pump fake 1 dribble left & shoot, catch pump fake 1 dribble right & shoot]. Free throws. With their physical they spend way 2 much energy when scoring...all they need is refinement & learning where & when 2 attack defenses. But, off season they need 2 build foundation & patent a go-to move or 2 or 4.
@@kevinwilson1218 no back to the basket game from both you mentioned and it makes them easier to scheme against in the playoffs. From what you said I wish you did get to train them. I also think some of these Billionaire Franchise Ownerships should empathetically help these guys get better at free throws by simplifying their technique. I don't think a lot of these organizations go that extra mile to get the best help money can buy and instead influence narratives the media can use which ultimately impact their teams chemistry in the long run. Why not instead offer them HUGE incentives for shooting a decent percentage and then (crazy thought!) hire a retired player to help these guys out with both the free throws.
@@n9nesoldecodes642 some of these guys cant handle pressure Giannis exploded upwards under J Kidd he hasnt really progressed like that since then. Another issue is some of these guys dont love it the just do it for the $$$. To just love shooting & strategies of the game would make you a better player. Studying your game, what u do good & your flaws you learn how be effective. Then study your teammates the same way.
@@andisar98 facts his shot was way better looking when he first came in the league, now it’s funky and his mechanics suck he has no confidence in it anymore
I've been hearing similar sentiments come from different talking circles. NBA to a degree is a copycat league but what front offices/execs fail to see is that you can only do so much based on your personnel. The Rockets wanted to take small ball to an extreme level than what the Warriors tried to do but the problem is they failed to realize that they are not a good 3-ball shooting team. The Celtics on the other hand are a better 'smaller' wing based team (with Kemba as the only real short perimeter player) because they can actually shoot 3s. The Lakers successfully managed to play big man ball this season en route to a championship because they have the luxury of having two talented big players in Lebron whose the offensive facilitator and Davis who is one of the best swiss army knife defenders come playoff time who can play the 4/5. So analytics at times do want to trend for stuff but a team can only do so much with the talent that they have.
@Patrick Morgan The midrange works for guys who can actually shoot it. All of you keep pointing to elite level players who can already score at all three levels as examples of it being a good shot. You should never be working to get this shot. And it will almost always be a contested shot, whereas you can get open three's regularly. I'd rather have an average 3 point shooter shooting wide open shots as opposed to an average midrange shooter taking contested ones.
@Patrick Morgan Right, but late in the clock or in the game, I want the ball in my best player's hands to begin with, so if they are taking that shot, it already has a better chance than my more average players. Just like in Moneyball, the analytics help maximize those average and fringe players. I don't want guys who can't get their own shot working in the midrange and given how fast teams play today, trying to iso repeatedly likely won't be a winning strategy long term.
Analytics was never meant to figure out how to play your current roster but unfortunately it has gone that way. Analytics are useful when making roster changes to determine what types of players does your team need to bring in. If the analytics say 3s count more than 2s that doesn't mean jack up more threes with your current roster if they cannot shoot threes. What that says is next free agency or if your going to trade then you need to add players that are reliable three point shooters to your team. This is how analytics is meant to be used, not to try play a way or style that will not work with your current roster strengths and weaknesses.
This is why i love what the Lakers did , they played to their strengths as a team which was more mid range and scoring at the rim along with offensive rebounds. The teams with great shooters should shoot 30-40 threes a game but everyone else needs to play to their strengths. I hope the Lakers change the league mentality.
Exactly. The Lakers absolutely dominated Miami in first game with Dwight & Davis bullying in the paint. They had 1 game where they had a hot 3-point streak & they abandoned their advantage, for 3-point strategy. That lead to them losing 2 games The games they dominated Miami was when they returned to mostly driving the ball in the paint with layups
@@00tuoyo When’s the last time you seen dominance in the paint like the Lakers did this year ? I say 10 years ago when the Lakers beat the celtics in 7. Every team that won the chip since 2010 has won through perimeter scoring.
@@Jason09_ This has nothing to do with my comment. My comment is about teams playing to their Strengths, instead of going with Analytics & trying to Copy the trend (Shooting from 3s) Lakers lacked consistent shooters in the playoffs. They dominated offensively when they played to their strengths against Miami (size difference, driving the ball in the to the rim). They lost or did worse against Miami, when they went with a 3-point heavy, offense strategy.
@@00tuoyo relative to their shot totals, they shot very few shots in the midrange. You can see it on their shot charts. They focused on the paint & on 3’s. It is not a good shot, idk why people are trying to wish it into being one. Some guys are really good at it, but they are good at all aspects of basketball.
Rockets are the dumbest team to follow analytics 😂going small ball without any interior defenders and continuing to shoot 3s when not everyone is a sharp shooter...
Grizzlies ball with Randolph and Gasol, in and out style, was hard for other teams to beat but it was boring under today's standards. Grizzies were last in 3's but went to the playoffs every year and to the conference finals one year. But analytics said fire coach and speed up the Grizzlies.
The slower you play, the more efficient you have to be. The second they play a good defensive team that can play faster than them, they will be in trouble.
Analytics is supposed to be a tool used to SUPPLEMENT basketball, in the same way a food supplement is supposed to supplement a good diet and a healthy lifestyle. There is no way you can use purely analytics to solve problems in basketball. I say this as a Data scientist, there are nuances (that many have mentioned in thee comment section already) that analytics and data science cannot pick up, no matter how complex or flexible the techniques used. Not to mention, the analysts themselves have to understand basketball at a very high level for it to be truly effective long term.
Also it isn't analytics that is bad, it's how it is used. What Arenas and Watson are doing in this video is analytics too. It's not all computers and algorithms
The problem with analytics is it doesn't work in the playoffs. Everything changes in the playoffs and your sample size isn't big enough to make predictions the way you want it to. Also coaches dig deep to pull out schemes that they normally wouldn't run. I've said this before and I'll say it again. You have regular season coaches (Dantoni, Budenholzer, Stevens, etc) and then you have championship coaches (Phil Jackson, Gregg Popovich, Nick Nurse, etc.) These dudes have secret schemes and plays that do not come out until needed. No amount of analytics can counter the variables that genius coaches spit out on the fly. Again you need a big enough sample size but you can't get enough of a sample size when the series is best of 7. The game becomes chess instead of checkers. Nerds and engineers will never understand this one fact.
Nope! The problem is people don't know what analytics really are. REAL analytics works best in the playoffs when you can totally analyze every individual consistently.
@@JaySee5 You can only use analytics to get tendencies. It's a balance of every little factor, it can't be one dimensional. That's why the players are humans, because there are intangibles which cannot be accounted for by metrics.
@@badxgrass Wrong on everything. Analytics is never 1-dimensional. To get true useful data you use as many factors as possible and dig into the data to get the true facts and probabilities. If a 30pts a game player tends to drive right and scores 60% driving right, you might say force left, but a true analytics guy is going to dig deeper and see he makes 50% of his 3s when forced left above the 3 point line. A smart coach would see that and say during a game play him straight above the 3 and force left inside, but if it's the last shot of the game and you're up 1 with him above the 3, force him left because in that situation 50% is lower than 60% and the 1 extra point means nothing.
@kostas pap Great coaches in the playoffs want to engage in constant adaptation based on their personnel. For anyone with free time please rewatch Spo just own Budenholzer coaching wise in the Heat-Bucks series. Heat didn't run zone and Spo was daring Bud to try beat the 'big wall' strategy to keep Giannis out. Bud had a plan or two but he never really expanded on it and in the end got beat badly. The Celtics-Raps series with STevens vs Nurse was also great as it was a back and forth in how to expose each others weaknesses while hiding them at the same time. In the end of that series it also showed the flaw that Stevens at times is too slow to try some dynamic approach on offense to change things as oppose to Nurse. That would come full circle between Heat-Celtics where Spo asked if Stevens had a counter to the zone. Stevens didn't have one for about 5 games and the Celtics paid dearly for it, being out of funk for most of the series until they finally got beat.
I was really frustrated in particular watching Bam just keep passing up wide open midrange shots. But at the same time I can't say it doesn't work, Heat are extremely effective passing up everything but layups and threes.
@@nelsondu2333 I hated that too, he didn’t pass em up during the Celtics series though i know AD is a great defender but he didn’t even challenge AD or make him guard him outside the paint
There needs to be a balance. You need analytics but you can’t put all your eggs in one basket. For example the midrange shot is not dead, look at your last 4 champions. BUT long twos are absolutely dead those 22 footers are just dumb when you can get closer or take a step back and get an extra point. That’s where the balance comes in. What you need to truly be successful are old school guys who embrace the new school and incorporate it. Or the new age guy that can build upon the past and keep good aspects. Too far in either direction is probably gonna fail spectacularly.
2:27 "Shooting 20-30 more 3 pointers per game, but only averaging 4 points more per game" WOW. The 3 is definitely my favorite, but its truly killing the game. Unless they make a 4 point shot, with all this Curry/Lillar/trae Young range
This is getting old... Guys, analytics isn't simply saying shoot more threes or layups no matter what. This is what is called a "straw man argument". You make up an argument the other side never actually made, argue against it, and than claim you have won the debate because you successfully refuted an argument the other side never made. What analytics try to maximise, is efficiency. The assumption is the a more efficient team, offensively and defensively, will be more successful. What makes a team efficient? They use stats to calculate that. That's how the figured out, that if you have a player that shoots 45% midrange, and 35% from three, he's better off shooting more threes, as long as shooting more threes doesn't result in a lower shooting % than 30%. That's simple math, but before analytics, no one thought of it that way. You have a problem with it? Make the three point line further away. Obviously, if you don't have decent three point shooters, even analytics guys won't recommend shooting more threes, because it doesn't create a more efficient offense.
The problem is that the announcers & commentators have such disdain for analytics while simultaneously refusing to learn what they are. People pick up on it & just run with it, so now all they think it is is just shooting 3's as opposed to maximizing value of possessions.
Analytics(statistics) is a tool to help decision making. It should not be the decision maker. Example: Use analytics to look for the most efficient shooter in a free agency that you can afford. Combine that with scouting (eye test) . Then GM decide whether to sign him or not. Analytics should never be used to dictate how teams should play
He’s wrong lmao from 2000-2002 team average points per game was about 95. In 2019-2020 it’s 111 ppg. If you want to adjust a bit more for pace, in 2000-2003 pace was about 91. In 2013- 2014 pace was about 94 and teams were averaging 100ppg (regular season stats)
Gil numbers may have been off but his statement is true. From 2000-2002 the average 3 pt attempts was 14, 15 and 15 respectively. This season it was 34. That’s a lot of bricks to gain 16 points.
Wade Pahi 16 points is 16 points. I’ll take an additional 16 points if it just means I have the shoot more 3s than 2s. Statistically it would only be a bad stat if team’s were scoring fewer points with less 3s (pace of play adjusted)
@@wade4917 there were actually more bricks from 2000-2003 than now. League average FG % was about 44.3%. From 2017-2020 the league average fg% is 46%. Not only that, but teams are taking more threes, and still shooting at a similar efficiency 2000-2003 3pt% ≈ 35%. 2017-2020 3pt% ≈ 35.8%
@@bilindabutcher8913 Something seems off about this if teams are scoring more points now then in the early 2000s and I'm going to get to the bottom of it 🥸Let's go Scoob 🐕
I agree to Gil and Earl Watson's take on Analytics but I don't think it must be used that way. This is how analytics is an advantage from the movie *Moneyball* and here's the quote: _"It's about getting things down to one number. Using stats to reread them, we'll find the value of players that nobody else can see. People are over looked for a variety of biased reasons and perceived flaws. Age, appearance, personality. Bill James and mathematics cuts straight through that. Billy, of the twenty thousand knowable players for us to consider, I believe that there is a championship team of twenty five people that we can afford. Because everyone else in baseball under values them. Like an island of misfit toys"_ _"Okay. People who run ball clubs, they think in terms of buying players. Your goal shouldn't be to buy players, your goal should be to buy wins. And in order to buy wins, you need to buy runs. You're trying to replace Johnny Damon. The Boston Red Sox see Johnny Damon and they see a star who's worth seven and half million dollars a year. When I see Johnny Damon, what I see is... is... an imperfect understanding of where runs come from. The guy's got a great glove. He's a decent leadoff hitter. He can steal bases. But is he worth the seven and half million dollars a year that the Boston Red Sox are paying him? No. No. Baseball thinking is medieval. They are asking all the wrong questions. And if I say it to anybody, I'm-I'm ostracized. I'm-I'm-I'm a leper. So that's why I'm-I'm cagey about this with you. That's why I... I respect you, Mr. Beane, and if you want full disclosure, I think it's a good thing that you got Damon off your payroll. I think it opens up all kinds of interesting possibilities."_ _"Billy, this is Chad Bradford. He's a relief pitcher. He is one of the most undervalued players in baseball. His defect is that he throws funny. Nobody in the big leagues cares about him, because he looks funny. This guy could be not just the best pitcher in our bullpen, but one of the most effective relief pitchers in all of baseball. This guy should cost $3 million a year. We can get him for $237,000."_
Blaming analytics itself is a bit short-sighted. Deep data has a lot of value, blame the over-reliance on the numbers and poor interpretation of what the data infers. Analytics is definitely one facet that can and has been used to improve gameplay and results but greater nuance and context needs to be applied, as well as understanding that game knowledge and other factors are still just as important
This a thousand times over. You have to base your teams attack off the pieces you have, not try to cookie cutter it. Once teams realize this and we start to see different styles clash the NBA will be SOOOO much more exciting. I want to see a team with a center thats the focal point scoring...Whether it's in the style of finesse like Wilt, or power like Shaq go against a team with a center that likes to shoot 3s all day...Or shiet maybe even a team where Zion, or a player similar to him roams the area a Crnter normally would, and either tries to score from the post or sprints out towards the 3 like the Spanoulis play. While a tall 7 foot guy lingers around the 3pt line for 3s. Or drives as the Zion type sprints out.
this take is both true and false. what Gill isnt taking into consideration is that analytics forced NBA players to become better shooters. yes, the 2018 Warriors are an anomaly, but it doesnt mean you cant play like the 2016 Warriors who only had step and Klay. No team will ever have a steph and klay but they can make up for it by having 2-5 guys who can take and make 3's. The 2022 celtics are a great example. they had 4-6 guys who can shoot 3's and they build a great defensive team as well. Shooting is a force multiplier. the more shooters you have the easier it makes it for your mid range guys, your post up guys and your players who want to drive. it opens up the court and makes offense much much easier. 3 point shooting is to the NBA what passing is to the NFL. there was a time in the NFL when teams passed the ball 10-20 times in a game. now, its 50/50 run pass. the NBA will be a 50/50 league as well. 50% threes and 50% all other shots. Basketball fans were in essence watching 1960's NFL for the past 30+ years.
Math and science can solve and result in championships. Data can be calculated to increase probabilities in every facets. Analytics is going to drive success.
He’s already a limited offensive player. He’s out there for defense & floor spacing. He gets open shots and had the best shooting percentage on corner 3’s in the league.
@@FlawdaBoy4 He's open because he's playing center and the opposing team's center doesn't want to get that far out of the paint because there won't be any rim protection for Harden/Westbrook drives. They set him up in the corner since it's the shortest 3 point shot. You saw the exact same thing when Houston put Jeff Green at center against OKC. Adams would be in trouble if he went out that far, so Green was always open, shooting 46.5% from 3. The Lakers had enough length & versatility to counter it & he only shot 27% from 3. You'll notice Howard was completely useless in that series as well.
@@bigwilly43729 my original point is non 3 point shooters jacking up 3s is a recipe for disaster. I don't believe in PJ getting the same amount of 3 pt attempts as a JJ, Robinson, etc
@@FlawdaBoy4 That's why they put him in the corner. It's a shorter shot and limits his deficiencies while maximizing the value of the possession when he shoots it. It doesn't matter how many attempts he's getting because he's not out there as a primary or secondary scoring option. He doesn't have to be as good as JJ if he's always getting a quality, uncontested shot, which he will almost always get with Harden & Westbrook. He's there to pull the center away from the rim and/or force the other team to go small, which will level out the Rockets rebounding issues in most cases. And he's a switchable defender.
Analytic trends are more for GMs so they can have a big picture plan and construct teams by looking for specific talents and hire a coach who can execute the plan. Players see that's what GMs and coaches are looking for, so they work on specific skills to be more desirable and land a spot on the roster.
He's not really deep thinker. He just described a scenario where a team scores enough points to cover the average win margin as a philosophical L 🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️
I honestly came here because Gill had on a Sonics Jersey in the thumbnail. Then l recognized # 25 was Earl Watson's number before l even recognized Earl Watson's face.
sidenote... Gilbert hitting that game winner and turning around with the shot still in mid air BY FAR has to be the best intro for a Basketball game period. 2k or Live, dont matter
People that hate analytics need to understand what it's saying is if you pump fake a close out from the three point line, it's a better shot to side dribble into a three than to dribble past and take a 2pt shot that's 1 to 2 ft inside the line. The traditional way of thinking was to dribble past and take the uncontested two, the analytics is saying side dribble and take the uncontested 3. JJ Redick talks about in one of his podcast and that change in thinking extended his NBA career.
Attack, attack, Skip, attack, attack aka A.A.S.A.A offense Which was created by Vance walhberg when he was at Clovis west high school in the late 90s early 2000s is the offense that says “ ONLY 3s and layups” I think this system works very well for people who have the correct personnel
With analytics you can make numbers tell the story you want. But statistical methods don't allow you to just make stuff up. There are mechanisms in place to keep statisticians honest, and not manipulate the numbers to prove them right. Although in the science community it does happen all the time, people will do anything to save their job or increase their reputation.
Teams shooting 20 more 3pts but only averaging 4 more points than the teams in the 2000s is the reason for bad basketball. When most players shoot 30% from 3pt and back in the day the mid range shot had players avg 38% fg. I want to see Earl coach the Pels.
The answer lies somewhere in the middle. There's a need to study tendencies, but, there's a human element involved too. The finest players and coaches are able to use both to their advantage.
Role players , and rules changes, the league wants points but defense is devalued . The recent lakers capitalized by not only using these no touch rules but getting rim protectors LBJ and AD who are like MacAdoo clones for corner 3s.
I would also say Melo, he was a paint scorer and a deadly mid range shot creator, then when he got to NY it was all about jacking 8 3's a game and then his shot % eroded quickly because he stopped practicing the close shots and easy mid buckets and then couldn't do anything right because all he does is either a low 30% 3 shot or a low 45% fade away mid. But yea Rudy gay had the skill set for everything like donovan mitchell. Could do it all. Kevin love too. Gotta have them stretch 4s out there shooting 35% from 3
Analytics in pro sport is really good for hindsights in why and how a team loses or won during a limited period of time(sample) because it's bread and butter is historical data; using it to scheme surefire playbooks for future games is like using the same lines on all the girls you meet in the hope it will automatically work because it worked a couple of times. Predictive analytics only work when the conditions for an event to happen are all known quantities but anyone knows that life, dating or sport don't work like that, except for sport execs and ’analysts' who love using analytics to hide their ignorance and give their jobs an air of expertise.
That's why you GET players that can make 3's. They don't have to be as good as Stef and Klay, they just have to be able to make some. Mid range still has its uses but not like it use too.
The lack of fundamentals which in turns turns the game into a jumping show and excessive 3pt shooting is what the league wants. It's all about putting asses in the seats 1st, and and actual competition 2nd.
Analytics are great, but you can't solely rely on them. Teams like the rockets strive for inside and 3pt shots only, and cut out the mid range, because all they see are the analytics of teams like the warriors and the fact that 2 is more than three and a layup is easier than a mid range. What teams don't realize is that the mid range can be absolutely deadly, open up more possibilities to score on offense, and can keep the offense unpredictable when you have an elite mid range shooter on your team. People forget, or are blind to the fact, that the warriors had an elite mid range threat in Steph curry and then later Kevin Durant who both had elite pull up mid range jumpers. Say your guy is playing tight on the perimeter, well for a guy like Steph or KD its not hard to get past him and make a run towards the rim, but what if the paint isn't entirely open and there aren't any clear open guys for a three pointer to dish out to, easy answer, mid range pull up. Anyone in the paint isn't going to have the time to react, and your defender is either already out of position, or in a position vulnerable to a step back or stop and pop as he's trying to chase you down. Even off the catch if the defender is closing out hard, if you can't catch him off a fake behind the line, you can drive in taking advantage of his momentum, and get an easy open mid range. those are just two examples of how the mid range game can seriously benefit an offense. By cutting out the mid range, you reduce your opportunities to score. The more opportunities to score you allow yourself to have at your disposal, the harder it's going to be for a defense to keep up by making them have to guard more spots on the floor. Teams can't lock down the three ball, the mid range, and the paint consistently, particularly in the playoffs when 99% of the game is played in the half court.
Yup it’s like telling a team to play 1 style when they could prosper using tactics that match the play styles of the players they have. You cannot re create a curry or a klay it should be obvious but I digress
Gilbert Arenas does know he was that guy that was lighting it up from the logo and sometimes taking those shots he’s talking about. He was Harden and the other guys before they were household names. He was that style of basketball that people started to mimic.
So true. In the Philippines we have PBA and it's freakin hard to watch coz these teams attempt so many 3's thinking they're the GSW. I'm like what the hell are they doing???
And one of the worst shooting teams from 3 just won the title in 2020. Size, defense and ball movement matter in the playoffs. People forget that the Warriors had Iggy, Barnes, Thompson, Green, and Bogut when they won the first chip. That’s a world class defensive lineup right there. Running and gunning doesn’t win championships. You have to lock your opponent down, exploit mismatches, and create high percentage shots to win in the playoffs
Teams that try to imitate this will not necessarily find this works for them unless they can combine a durant with an equally gifted tall shooter because that skill set is not that common.
True but to me its ownership giving players to much money over paying NBA needs to start impowering coaching and allowing for more basketball decision made based on talent and system . if you a bad team and you draft a center for example develop say embid make decision to surround them both system and talent that match and be forward thinking about it. If you want embid to post up make that clear not an option . Whether your coach is a former champion first time or in the middle there needs be Good physical training staff Medical Head coach who is a manager of men and xoxo gotta have system. Like football you gotta have your positional coaches guaurds forward center development team and strategy based on talent available.
earl watson asks where are the 30 3s going to come from. and what hes saying makes sense... but he says book can shoot ten if i tell him to. and he also says that brandon night is a rythm shooter... I have a theory that there are other guys out there like james harden. you can just let them get in a rythm and shoot a ton of threes. but you have to take the chance on them. and let them have 10, 20 or 30 games of complete freedom and see if they can be like harden. so when watson asks where the other 20 threes coming from... well your team isnt doing so well. why not roll the dice? you might lose your job is a reason why. but your team is trash. roll the dice and maybe lose a little worse or get a LOT better.
stats is cool to look at what u can improve on in general. other than that cant really analyze a sport that has so amny outside factors affecting the stats.
Mid range is a ghost town now. Either everyone is living on the 3point line or....no...that’s it. Mid range and the paint is a Ghost town. I hate it that in a fast break everyone runs to the 3 point line.
Analytics is just copying gamers. They’ve been doing this for years because it’s the most efficient way to play. In a couple of years football will follow suit, going for more 4th and 1, etc. Who punts in madden?
Their argument sounds good but old school centers are actually getting played off the court and the skill level has improved dramatically for bigs. Not everyone has Steph and Klay but they did lead an evolution in skill for all these new cats
As Charles Barkley pointed out years ago, Golden State‘s style only worked because you have two of the best shooters of all-time (Klay, Steph) on one team.
The Heat are a great, I guess, "example" against OBSESSIVE analytics. The heat use analytic But they based their model off of THEMSELVES and were defense first They created and had players that could shoot the but when that was shut dowm, they easily won in the east by midrange, and driving in with Jimmy, Goran, Bam that could score from Mid Range especially during momentum shifts or close games ...which then ultimately led back to more open shots from the three. And if anything! The idea was to ALWAYS open up the floor first with Duncan or get into the bonus early by using the 3 as a distraction
People hating on analytics really don't understand them. Analytics dont have a personal preference all they show are INEFFICIENCIES. So as the league takes more three people are gonna go over screens more, drop less in pick and roll defense, stay closer to shooters relocating without the ball. All that shit opens up other aspects of the game. There's a balance. And if you don't think analytics is doing anything then why is the league avg offense the highest it's ever been and the league average efficiency the highest it's ever been?
Analytics is invaluable - *if* an actual domain expert can interpret the insights. i.e. probably a player. You cant work around paying and valuing these player their dues.
Yes but it can also lead to good basketball. I dont get why analytics is vilified. It is a TOOL that you use to plan ahead how your team will approach the game. It's not the end all and be all of basketball. Any tool can ruin you if you dont use it properly.
That’s straight facts. Everyone can’t play the same because skill sets vary!
@Jaleel Og Facts. And most people forget that the Warriors dynasty was built on defense. Steph and Klay were the shiny pieces but they had a team full of defenders. Klay Dray Iggy Harrison Bogut Livingston. KD became an elite defender when he joined as well
@@moretothegame true and their “small ball” wasn’t really small ball because draymond could clamp centers. The Celtics kinda have small ball today but as we saw Theis (taller than draymond) got destroyed by adebayo
@@bilindabutcher8913 All championship teams are great defensively. That’s what people don’t realize. The year that the Rockets almost beat the Warriors they were stifling on defense with their switches taking away the Warriors off ball actions.
@@moretothegame this. The simplest form is that defense is the deciding factor, especially in the playoffs when the game slows down.
@@moretothegame true. Ariza and PJ Tucker we’re doing amazing defensively that series + CP3 and Capela are both great defenders for their positions. Even harden was stepping up in some moments defensively
I can listen to Gil all day...
when you have players that are not Ray Allen, taking "Ray Allen" shots, you have bad basketball... #FACTS
Man I've always said something similar....you can have 3 point range but not be a 3 point shooter...just because you can hit a 3 don't make you a 3 point shooter...Jordan had 3 point range but he wasn't a 3 point shooter! Lebron has 3 point range but he ain't a 3 point shooter...there are only a few Ray allens!
@@mhill311 as long as you can shoot 33 percent or better from 3 you are better off taking 3s, unless you can hit your 2 pt FGs at 50+ percent, which is rare outside of Rim shots. Layups and dunks are 100 percent more valuable than 3s, but mid range? The best in the league like Kd and Demar and CP3, they basically make mid range shots at the equivalent of a 33 percent 3 point shooter. A KD mid range is equal to a John Wall career 3 pointer basically. Lol.
honestly midrange is still a good shot especially in playoffs it is extremely important
Highly agree! I wish more players implemented it
I agree. They damn near ran Melo out of the league for shooting them.
Ad was killing them with his mid range game during all the playoffs
Especially cause my jumper wet
It’s not a good shot if you’re a role player and you have the option to shoot a three. It depends on what the defense gives you.
Lol I say this all the time, the GSW are complete outliers. They literally drafted two top ten shooters of all time in back to back drafts, drafted defensive player of the year in the second round, then the cap went up by an unprecedented amount because of the new TV deal so they could sign KD. No team will ever be able to repeat that.
Un-presidented lmfao
@@Yannis_S_ LMAO Damn it, there was a skit on SNL last week about spelling unprecedented wrong, that's when I knew someone would eventually come for me about the spelling in my comment. I was a Chemistry and Math major so I never focused much on spelling.
Top 5 at the minimum. Argument for top 3.
@djangus brownstone rockets did that, did it work?
@@shadow_realm47 Rockets was far from what the Warriors is. Rockets is centric offense, Warriors has Curry and Klay playing off-ball a lot with Draymond playmaking. What makes them great is the gravity they have so they could have a lot of drives, not 3pt scoring alone.
3:11 "We have to shoot 30 threes a game. And I said 'With who?'" lolol. The way he looks around.
"Gotta do it. Okay, let's go! We 'bout to get the top pick."
Curry is the best but I have 2 players: James Harden and Damian Lillard.
Curry had the best average 3-point made per game in 2018 and 2019 but Harden is 3-Pointers Made Leader during the same years (he played more games) and in 2020, The Beard is the best 3-point shooter in NBA in terms of statistics with the absence of Chief Curry. And Lillard is hot, this season proved it with a 3-point average of 4.1 made per game, the same average as Stephen Curry in 2017 (and a better average than Steph in 2015).
This is why the Lakers organization deserves respect. They created a team that has a different identity than everyone else in the league. They got a team that can switch up and mimic anyone their playing and beat them at their game while having better defense because their a defense first team. Their defense is better than their offense that's how they won the chip when they went full power on defense it was a blow out on one of the most unstoppable offenses in the league. Lakers do not impress me on offense and they don't really care too much about it. If I was Lakers I would not look to sign Lillard I would look to sign Cp3 because he's better on defense. I would have all my 2 yr contract players opt out and resign for less and drop guys like antetokoumpo and thorton and bring in cheap defensive guys that can get a good 8 points each
@@soundofgod5501 the lakers literally have one of the best players ever and anthony davis. that’s why they’re good
@@soundofgod5501 Lillard is waaaaay better option than cp3, and everybody act like avery Bradley ain't got the same contract he had before he opted out of the bubble......
Moses malone was the ultimate possessions multiplier with his offensive rebounding capability. Creating foul problems , setting defenses , forcing substitutions , getting into the bonus , and burning opponents timeouts, while punishing opponents at the free throw line. Rodman did similar . Without the ft %
I'm glad the Lakers won the chip so everyone can get back to attacking the paint and then shooting 3s if nothing occurs.
Lakers better add 2 SHARPSHOOTERS. 😀😀😀
Coach Vogel refused to bench a struggling Danny Green because the fan-favorites can't make 3-pointers either.
@@deandrepage1048 Danny Green played great defense and rebounded very well for his size. He actually impacted the game in other ways besides shooting 3s which shows you dont need the 3point shot as much as people think you do
@@Oddssss Game 5 loss, with the Lakers in Black Mamba jerseys.
Danny Green blows yet another 3-pointer. 😑😑😑
This one was different because it would have won the NBA Championship in Game 5 instead of the eventual win in Game 6.
Yes, Danny Green contributes in other ways besides making 3-pointers. That's why the head coach refused to DEMOTE Danny Green in favor of fan-favorite Alex Caruso. 😅😅😅
If you can't make the same 3-pointers Danny Green is missing, you gotta stay on the 2nd Unit with your claim, "I do other things besides shoot 3-pointers. " Danny Green has already stolen that narrative from you.
@@Oddssss You need to be a FLOOR SPACER = respected by the defense as a true threat to make 3-pointers because of the poor Floor Spacing with 2 BIGS = Twin Shot-blockers 1st Unit. 😅😅😅
It's not whether you make the shot or not, it's that the defense respects you enough as a "true threat," so they have to extend their defense out to the 3-point line. Creates more space for Anthony Davis to score in the low post area.
You screw up the Floor Spacing for Anthony Davis and slasher-style Lebron James if YOU ARE NOT RESPECTED BY YOUR DEFENDER as 3-point shooter. That's why Coach Vogel refused to promote anybody else in Danny Green's spot.
@@deandrepage1048 you sound alot like Skip 🤣🤣🤣🤣
The most hilarious thing about analytics is exactly what Earl said. You can make anything true. For instance, the threes and layups only people probably overlooked the fact that the Warriors were actually ranked I think 4th in 2017 or 2018 in midrange jump shooting percentage I recall reading. Great article on that if you do a little google searching.
So sure the Warriors could hit three-pointers and they could hit layups, but nowhere did they ever actually cut out midrange jump shots. Houston cut out that concept and it definitely hasn't worked. The reason they are better is that, although those are "bad attempts," they're good at them. Like gil said. Sure that's great to play like them, but they're good at shooting from anywhere. If you don't have that, you have to find a way to play to your strengths.
The other hilarious thing? Kawhi Leonard. Kevin Durant. Jimmy Butler. Those are three of the best midrange shooters in the league and, to nobody's surprise, they've all been to the finals and/or won and they are all top 5 small forwards. How's that a bad shot if the best players in the league are making it?
Here is the thing people gloss over. The best friend to 3-ball and layups (attacking the hoop) happens TO BE a very effective mid range game. Every championship team had that kind of balance (along with great defense) on offense and its hard for teams to match up. I can go back to the 2011 Mavs where they had their fair share of perimeter players along with guys who can handle the ball and score. But the glue that held that together was Dirk's ability to work from the mid range, work the stanky leg fade away or aggressively go inside and get a bucket and a foul. In 2019 that Raptors team was also balanced as hell. Kawhi was your midrange ISO monster who can get calls and flanked with him were multiple players who can handle the ball to shoot and score (Lowry/Siakam/Vleet) and 3-ball catch and shooters (Danny Green/Vleet). If anything the very effective mid range game is an elite skill that definitely separates the men (the 3 guys you mentioned) and players like Demar DeRozan who is also limited in his shot making but his mid range offense can't take over games.
Y'all are exactly right. James Harden averages 35, but I have no doubt he could average 40+ if he replaced 5 of those difficult 3s with 5 easier midrange jumpers\pullups. He gets offensive fouls because the defense KNOWS he's going all the way once he crosses the 3 point line. There's no threat of him pulling up for the midrange like the players mentioned. The analytics say mid range is a "bad" shot, and that's total nonsense. I'll take the open 2 over the contested 3 any day and twice on Sunday.
A lot of these guys don't have 22-foot range. They are shooting below 30% from 3 when if they operated in that 16-20 foot range they'd be well above 50%.
Yes i read that article. I think it was on espn by Zach Lowe if i'm not mistaken. Curry and KD especially shot like 60% from 2pt range which made that aspect of their offense valuable and lethal.
Exactly but when melo did it it was an issue in Houston 😂😂
James Harden is very good in the mid range. It's so wild they don't want him to use it
straight factsss and its kinda ruining the game
gilbert your stupid. why people keeps on taking 3s not because of analytics. it because of 2-3 zone. jordan era zone defense is illegal. and whats wrong with mimicking greats. That's why you have to study players who are better than you. in basketball shooting is the most important thing. the defense will change drastically and you can easily fake blow by your defender if you are a great shooter. now i now the reason why you dont have a ring.
if you are telling this straight facts then you are stupid. what did they say to jordan and lebron when they came to the league. can they shoot the ball that is the question.? see by asking this question means that they want to change jordan and lebron to be a better player. thats what these coaches trainer or any analytics tells to this guys. shoot 3s cause it will make you a better player. you know why popovich change the game. its not steph and gsw who changes it. it was spurs. and the nba officially announce zone defense when they lost in the olympics. their opponent just zone them out. its not shooting more 3. its making your self a better overall player. who can shoot 3s drive and blow by. stupid peoples
@@prancerjohnponce6889
Why are yo calling people stupid when you aren't making any logical points? It sounds like you don't understand the actual game of basketball at all.
Not only basketball but football/soccer too
Kinda takes the joy out the game bc of what stats say to do and also causes a lot of players to decline cuz they don’t have the skill set equipped for whatever style of play that the analytics are pointing towards
I'm liking Earl Watson more and more
“Aight we finna get a top pick” has me rolling. Man knew he was working for idiots
They set him up for failure off the rip. Wow. 30 threes. This why u got centers and power forwards launching 3s now
Versatility is key
@Reese B You must have the right personnel/role players for it,otherwise you’re better off just tanking.
@@showtimesportsmedia6906 Yes but for teams without that versatility should go with what works for them like the nuggets. They didn’t hoist 3’s all the time. They had a systematic offense that worked best for them that worked for their Stars,starters,6th men,role players.
@@kenshinhimura8708 naw I’m not saying you wrong I’m just saying that’s how these gms think now. Darryl Morey was a prime example of that, it just so happens that he ran into a team that was better equipped to take those blows and fight back.
@@kenshinhimura8708 nuggets one of the best 3 point shooting teams in the nab lol
When analytics started telling me Kobe Bryant wasn't a good player I stopped believing in that bs
facts
Analytics never, ever said Kobe was a bad player until he was very old and injured. At his peak he was a star player who didn’t always have the best shot selection and efficiency compared to his superstar MVP peers.
just saying this from the outside but i feel like a lot of nba players today are getting held back in their game by being forced out of midrange. i look at players like ben simmons and giannis right now and think how dominant they could be if they had a decent midgame or a like a nice elbow jumper. but i think their teams are constantly trying to force them to practice 3's and be only layups and 3's like he said.
guys like kawhi and durant have the clout to do what they think is best and keep the midrange going but for the younger/less established players on some of these teams i bet its tough.
I slightly disagree with you on the Giannis & Simmons point. They are playing guard positions, it only benefits them 2 be able 2 score at all levels on the floor. Currently, their best shot is a dunk 2nd a layup other than that its a crap shoot whenever they take a shot. As an observer/lover of the game its frustrating to see that in crunch time the team cant count on either of them score. Its embarrassing 2 see 2 of the biggest ball handlers ever not have a consistent post up game.
Oh how i wish i could be their trainers 4 1 summer. Develop touch, left & right turn around jumpers from the post. 20 feet & out [catch & shoot, catch pump pump fake shoot, catch pump fake 1 dribble left & shoot, catch pump fake 1 dribble right & shoot]. Free throws.
With their physical they spend way 2 much energy when scoring...all they need is refinement & learning where & when 2 attack defenses. But, off season they need 2 build foundation & patent a go-to move or 2 or 4.
@@kevinwilson1218 no back to the basket game from both you mentioned and it makes them easier to scheme against in the playoffs. From what you said I wish you did get to train them. I also think some of these Billionaire Franchise Ownerships should empathetically help these guys get better at free throws by simplifying their technique. I don't think a lot of these organizations go that extra mile to get the best help money can buy and instead influence narratives the media can use which ultimately impact their teams chemistry in the long run. Why not instead offer them HUGE incentives for shooting a decent percentage and then (crazy thought!) hire a retired player to help these guys out with both the free throws.
@@n9nesoldecodes642 some of these guys cant handle pressure Giannis exploded upwards under J Kidd he hasnt really progressed like that since then. Another issue is some of these guys dont love it the just do it for the $$$. To just love shooting & strategies of the game would make you a better player. Studying your game, what u do good & your flaws you learn how be effective. Then study your teammates the same way.
Funny thing is that Giannis actually had a good shooting form in his rookie year, but then lost it because he had to change his playstyle
@@andisar98 facts his shot was way better looking when he first came in the league, now it’s funky and his mechanics suck he has no confidence in it anymore
“Steph Curry, Dame Leonard”
😂😂😂
Thk u
I've been hearing similar sentiments come from different talking circles. NBA to a degree is a copycat league but what front offices/execs fail to see is that you can only do so much based on your personnel. The Rockets wanted to take small ball to an extreme level than what the Warriors tried to do but the problem is they failed to realize that they are not a good 3-ball shooting team. The Celtics on the other hand are a better 'smaller' wing based team (with Kemba as the only real short perimeter player) because they can actually shoot 3s. The Lakers successfully managed to play big man ball this season en route to a championship because they have the luxury of having two talented big players in Lebron whose the offensive facilitator and Davis who is one of the best swiss army knife defenders come playoff time who can play the 4/5. So analytics at times do want to trend for stuff but a team can only do so much with the talent that they have.
At this point I'm convinced he really thinks his name is Damian Leonard
You mean like Greek the Freak 😂😂😂
💀💀💀💀
Greek the Freak, Karl Kuzma (like KD says too) 😂😂
Had a co worker that made the same mistake repeatedly too 😂
Yo that’s fucking hilarious
I knew analytics was bad when they said the mid range was a bad shot.
Exactly
@@RoriesWorld 💯
That’s because it is.
@Patrick Morgan The midrange works for guys who can actually shoot it. All of you keep pointing to elite level players who can already score at all three levels as examples of it being a good shot. You should never be working to get this shot. And it will almost always be a contested shot, whereas you can get open three's regularly. I'd rather have an average 3 point shooter shooting wide open shots as opposed to an average midrange shooter taking contested ones.
@Patrick Morgan Right, but late in the clock or in the game, I want the ball in my best player's hands to begin with, so if they are taking that shot, it already has a better chance than my more average players.
Just like in Moneyball, the analytics help maximize those average and fringe players. I don't want guys who can't get their own shot working in the midrange and given how fast teams play today, trying to iso repeatedly likely won't be a winning strategy long term.
Analytics was never meant to figure out how to play your current roster but unfortunately it has gone that way. Analytics are useful when making roster changes to determine what types of players does your team need to bring in. If the analytics say 3s count more than 2s that doesn't mean jack up more threes with your current roster if they cannot shoot threes. What that says is next free agency or if your going to trade then you need to add players that are reliable three point shooters to your team. This is how analytics is meant to be used, not to try play a way or style that will not work with your current roster strengths and weaknesses.
This is why i love what the Lakers did , they played to their strengths as a team which was more mid range and scoring at the rim along with offensive rebounds. The teams with great shooters should shoot 30-40 threes a game but everyone else needs to play to their strengths. I hope the Lakers change the league mentality.
The Lakers shot 30+ 3's a game and it's likely to increase next season if they get better shooters.
Exactly. The Lakers absolutely dominated Miami in first game with Dwight & Davis bullying in the paint.
They had 1 game where they had a hot 3-point streak & they abandoned their advantage, for 3-point strategy. That lead to them losing 2 games
The games they dominated Miami was when they returned to mostly driving the ball in the paint with layups
@@00tuoyo When’s the last time you seen dominance in the paint like the Lakers did this year ? I say 10 years ago when the Lakers beat the celtics in 7. Every team that won the chip since 2010 has won through perimeter scoring.
@@Jason09_ This has nothing to do with my comment. My comment is about teams playing to their Strengths, instead of going with Analytics & trying to Copy the trend (Shooting from 3s)
Lakers lacked consistent shooters in the playoffs. They dominated offensively when they played to their strengths against Miami (size difference, driving the ball in the to the rim). They lost or did worse against Miami, when they went with a 3-point heavy, offense strategy.
@@00tuoyo relative to their shot totals, they shot very few shots in the midrange. You can see it on their shot charts. They focused on the paint & on 3’s.
It is not a good shot, idk why people are trying to wish it into being one. Some guys are really good at it, but they are good at all aspects of basketball.
Man i love this...the first thing people do these days is point to stats and analytics..understanding your skill and your team is not in the stat book
Rockets are the dumbest team to follow analytics 😂going small ball without any interior defenders and continuing to shoot 3s when not everyone is a sharp shooter...
Grizzlies ball with Randolph and Gasol, in and out style, was hard for other teams to beat but it was boring under today's standards. Grizzies were last in 3's but went to the playoffs every year and to the conference finals one year. But analytics said fire coach and speed up the Grizzlies.
The slower you play, the more efficient you have to be. The second they play a good defensive team that can play faster than them, they will be in trouble.
They just needed a perimeter player to really take it to the next level.
Analytics is supposed to be a tool used to SUPPLEMENT basketball, in the same way a food supplement is supposed to supplement a good diet and a healthy lifestyle. There is no way you can use purely analytics to solve problems in basketball. I say this as a Data scientist, there are nuances (that many have mentioned in thee comment section already) that analytics and data science cannot pick up, no matter how complex or flexible the techniques used. Not to mention, the analysts themselves have to understand basketball at a very high level for it to be truly effective long term.
Also it isn't analytics that is bad, it's how it is used. What Arenas and Watson are doing in this video is analytics too. It's not all computers and algorithms
"We gotta shot 30 3's a game, with who?" 🤣🤣🤣 oh we bout to get a top pick 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣💀💀💀💀💀
The problem with analytics is it doesn't work in the playoffs. Everything changes in the playoffs and your sample size isn't big enough to make predictions the way you want it to. Also coaches dig deep to pull out schemes that they normally wouldn't run. I've said this before and I'll say it again. You have regular season coaches (Dantoni, Budenholzer, Stevens, etc) and then you have championship coaches (Phil Jackson, Gregg Popovich, Nick Nurse, etc.) These dudes have secret schemes and plays that do not come out until needed. No amount of analytics can counter the variables that genius coaches spit out on the fly. Again you need a big enough sample size but you can't get enough of a sample size when the series is best of 7. The game becomes chess instead of checkers. Nerds and engineers will never understand this one fact.
Nope! The problem is people don't know what analytics really are. REAL analytics works best in the playoffs when you can totally analyze every individual consistently.
@@JaySee5 You can only use analytics to get tendencies. It's a balance of every little factor, it can't be one dimensional. That's why the players are humans, because there are intangibles which cannot be accounted for by metrics.
🎯
@@badxgrass Wrong on everything. Analytics is never 1-dimensional. To get true useful data you use as many factors as possible and dig into the data to get the true facts and probabilities. If a 30pts a game player tends to drive right and scores 60% driving right, you might say force left, but a true analytics guy is going to dig deeper and see he makes 50% of his 3s when forced left above the 3 point line. A smart coach would see that and say during a game play him straight above the 3 and force left inside, but if it's the last shot of the game and you're up 1 with him above the 3, force him left because in that situation 50% is lower than 60% and the 1 extra point means nothing.
@kostas pap Great coaches in the playoffs want to engage in constant adaptation based on their personnel. For anyone with free time please rewatch Spo just own Budenholzer coaching wise in the Heat-Bucks series. Heat didn't run zone and Spo was daring Bud to try beat the 'big wall' strategy to keep Giannis out. Bud had a plan or two but he never really expanded on it and in the end got beat badly. The Celtics-Raps series with STevens vs Nurse was also great as it was a back and forth in how to expose each others weaknesses while hiding them at the same time. In the end of that series it also showed the flaw that Stevens at times is too slow to try some dynamic approach on offense to change things as oppose to Nurse. That would come full circle between Heat-Celtics where Spo asked if Stevens had a counter to the zone. Stevens didn't have one for about 5 games and the Celtics paid dearly for it, being out of funk for most of the series until they finally got beat.
THE GAME IS DEAD NOW JUST A THREE POINT SHOOTING CONTEST!!!
Facts
I was really frustrated in particular watching Bam just keep passing up wide open midrange shots. But at the same time I can't say it doesn't work, Heat are extremely effective passing up everything but layups and threes.
@@nelsondu2333 Heat were passing up layups too. Smh
If you TRULY think that then I would never take your opinion seriously on basketball
@@nelsondu2333 I hated that too, he didn’t pass em up during the Celtics series though i know AD is a great defender but he didn’t even challenge AD or make him guard him outside the paint
There needs to be a balance. You need analytics but you can’t put all your eggs in one basket. For example the midrange shot is not dead, look at your last 4 champions. BUT long twos are absolutely dead those 22 footers are just dumb when you can get closer or take a step back and get an extra point. That’s where the balance comes in.
What you need to truly be successful are old school guys who embrace the new school and incorporate it. Or the new age guy that can build upon the past and keep good aspects. Too far in either direction is probably gonna fail spectacularly.
any mathematical model is as good as its assumptions
"All models are bad some are useful"
2:27
"Shooting 20-30 more 3 pointers per game, but only averaging 4 points more per game"
WOW. The 3 is definitely my favorite, but its truly killing the game. Unless they make a 4 point shot, with all this Curry/Lillar/trae Young range
This is getting old... Guys, analytics isn't simply saying shoot more threes or layups no matter what. This is what is called a "straw man argument". You make up an argument the other side never actually made, argue against it, and than claim you have won the debate because you successfully refuted an argument the other side never made. What analytics try to maximise, is efficiency. The assumption is the a more efficient team, offensively and defensively, will be more successful. What makes a team efficient? They use stats to calculate that. That's how the figured out, that if you have a player that shoots 45% midrange, and 35% from three, he's better off shooting more threes, as long as shooting more threes doesn't result in a lower shooting % than 30%. That's simple math, but before analytics, no one thought of it that way. You have a problem with it? Make the three point line further away. Obviously, if you don't have decent three point shooters, even analytics guys won't recommend shooting more threes, because it doesn't create a more efficient offense.
The problem is that the announcers & commentators have such disdain for analytics while simultaneously refusing to learn what they are. People pick up on it & just run with it, so now all they think it is is just shooting 3's as opposed to maximizing value of possessions.
Analytics(statistics) is a tool to help decision making. It should not be the decision maker.
Example: Use analytics to look for the most efficient shooter in a free agency that you can afford. Combine that with scouting (eye test) . Then GM decide whether to sign him or not.
Analytics should never be used to dictate how teams should play
Gil spitting fire if the average points per game have only increased by ~4 pts over the last 10 years.
He’s wrong lmao from 2000-2002 team average points per game was about 95. In 2019-2020 it’s 111 ppg. If you want to adjust a bit more for pace, in 2000-2003 pace was about 91. In 2013- 2014 pace was about 94 and teams were averaging 100ppg (regular season stats)
Gil numbers may have been off but his statement is true. From 2000-2002 the average 3 pt attempts was 14, 15 and 15 respectively. This season it was 34. That’s a lot of bricks to gain 16 points.
Wade Pahi 16 points is 16 points. I’ll take an additional 16 points if it just means I have the shoot more 3s than 2s. Statistically it would only be a bad stat if team’s were scoring fewer points with less 3s (pace of play adjusted)
@@wade4917 there were actually more bricks from 2000-2003 than now.
League average FG % was about 44.3%.
From 2017-2020 the league average fg% is 46%.
Not only that, but teams are taking more threes, and still shooting at a similar efficiency
2000-2003 3pt% ≈ 35%.
2017-2020 3pt% ≈ 35.8%
@@bilindabutcher8913 Something seems off about this if teams are scoring more points now then in the early 2000s and I'm going to get to the bottom of it 🥸Let's go Scoob 🐕
I agree to Gil and Earl Watson's take on Analytics but I don't think it must be used that way. This is how analytics is an advantage from the movie *Moneyball* and here's the quote:
_"It's about getting things down to one number. Using stats to reread them, we'll find the value of players that nobody else can see. People are over looked for a variety of biased reasons and perceived flaws. Age, appearance, personality. Bill James and mathematics cuts straight through that. Billy, of the twenty thousand knowable players for us to consider, I believe that there is a championship team of twenty five people that we can afford. Because everyone else in baseball under values them. Like an island of misfit toys"_
_"Okay. People who run ball clubs, they think in terms of buying players. Your goal shouldn't be to buy players, your goal should be to buy wins. And in order to buy wins, you need to buy runs. You're trying to replace Johnny Damon. The Boston Red Sox see Johnny Damon and they see a star who's worth seven and half million dollars a year. When I see Johnny Damon, what I see is... is... an imperfect understanding of where runs come from. The guy's got a great glove. He's a decent leadoff hitter. He can steal bases. But is he worth the seven and half million dollars a year that the Boston Red Sox are paying him? No. No. Baseball thinking is medieval. They are asking all the wrong questions. And if I say it to anybody, I'm-I'm ostracized. I'm-I'm-I'm a leper. So that's why I'm-I'm cagey about this with you. That's why I... I respect you, Mr. Beane, and if you want full disclosure, I think it's a good thing that you got Damon off your payroll. I think it opens up all kinds of interesting possibilities."_
_"Billy, this is Chad Bradford. He's a relief pitcher. He is one of the most undervalued players in baseball. His defect is that he throws funny. Nobody in the big leagues cares about him, because he looks funny. This guy could be not just the best pitcher in our bullpen, but one of the most effective relief pitchers in all of baseball. This guy should cost $3 million a year. We can get him for $237,000."_
Blaming analytics itself is a bit short-sighted. Deep data has a lot of value, blame the over-reliance on the numbers and poor interpretation of what the data infers. Analytics is definitely one facet that can and has been used to improve gameplay and results but greater nuance and context needs to be applied, as well as understanding that game knowledge and other factors are still just as important
This a thousand times over. You have to base your teams attack off the pieces you have, not try to cookie cutter it. Once teams realize this and we start to see different styles clash the NBA will be SOOOO much more exciting.
I want to see a team with a center thats the focal point scoring...Whether it's in the style of finesse like Wilt, or power like Shaq go against a team with a center that likes to shoot 3s all day...Or shiet maybe even a team where Zion, or a player similar to him roams the area a Crnter normally would, and either tries to score from the post or sprints out towards the 3 like the Spanoulis play. While a tall 7 foot guy lingers around the 3pt line for 3s. Or drives as the Zion type sprints out.
I'm a lifelong wizards fan...Gil was one if the earlier pioneers of this style of play..AND he started the playing I'm low tops...now look at the game
this take is both true and false. what Gill isnt taking into consideration is that analytics forced NBA players to become better shooters. yes, the 2018 Warriors are an anomaly, but it doesnt mean you cant play like the 2016 Warriors who only had step and Klay. No team will ever have a steph and klay but they can make up for it by having 2-5 guys who can take and make 3's. The 2022 celtics are a great example. they had 4-6 guys who can shoot 3's and they build a great defensive team as well.
Shooting is a force multiplier. the more shooters you have the easier it makes it for your mid range guys, your post up guys and your players who want to drive. it opens up the court and makes offense much much easier.
3 point shooting is to the NBA what passing is to the NFL. there was a time in the NFL when teams passed the ball 10-20 times in a game. now, its 50/50 run pass. the NBA will be a 50/50 league as well. 50% threes and 50% all other shots. Basketball fans were in essence watching 1960's NFL for the past 30+ years.
i love this man's insight and view of the game
I would love to see Gilbert talk to zach Lowe or Bill Simmons or ryen russillo
When Myplayer used to let us upgrade individual attributes, the first thing I maxed out was mid range
This entire pod was a great conversation
Math and science can solve and result in championships. Data can be calculated to increase probabilities in every facets. Analytics is going to drive success.
I want the midrange shot to be back, there's some beauty in it that I like and it's more efficient than a three.
Me and boy been having this same convo about analytics for years...how does PJ Tucker types get 8 three ball attempts per game now
He’s already a limited offensive player. He’s out there for defense & floor spacing. He gets open shots and had the best shooting percentage on corner 3’s in the league.
@@bigwilly43729 he's open for a reason. Teams know PJ is not going to light them up night in and night out
@@FlawdaBoy4 He's open because he's playing center and the opposing team's center doesn't want to get that far out of the paint because there won't be any rim protection for Harden/Westbrook drives. They set him up in the corner since it's the shortest 3 point shot. You saw the exact same thing when Houston put Jeff Green at center against OKC. Adams would be in trouble if he went out that far, so Green was always open, shooting 46.5% from 3. The Lakers had enough length & versatility to counter it & he only shot 27% from 3. You'll notice Howard was completely useless in that series as well.
@@bigwilly43729 my original point is non 3 point shooters jacking up 3s is a recipe for disaster. I don't believe in PJ getting the same amount of 3 pt attempts as a JJ, Robinson, etc
@@FlawdaBoy4 That's why they put him in the corner. It's a shorter shot and limits his deficiencies while maximizing the value of the possession when he shoots it. It doesn't matter how many attempts he's getting because he's not out there as a primary or secondary scoring option. He doesn't have to be as good as JJ if he's always getting a quality, uncontested shot, which he will almost always get with Harden & Westbrook. He's there to pull the center away from the rim and/or force the other team to go small, which will level out the Rockets rebounding issues in most cases. And he's a switchable defender.
Analytic trends are more for GMs so they can have a big picture plan and construct teams by looking for specific talents and hire a coach who can execute the plan. Players see that's what GMs and coaches are looking for, so they work on specific skills to be more desirable and land a spot on the roster.
Its a stupid approach.
Analytics are important because they give you more of a gauge on how good someone is. But it will never beat the eye test.
He's not really deep thinker. He just described a scenario where a team scores enough points to cover the average win margin as a philosophical L 🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️
I honestly came here because Gill had on a Sonics Jersey in the thumbnail. Then l recognized # 25 was Earl Watson's number before l even recognized Earl Watson's face.
sidenote...
Gilbert hitting that game winner and turning around with the shot still in mid air BY FAR has to be the best intro for a Basketball game period. 2k or Live, dont matter
1:53 no chill Gil 😹😹😹
People that hate analytics need to understand what it's saying is if you pump fake a close out from the three point line, it's a better shot to side dribble into a three than to dribble past and take a 2pt shot that's 1 to 2 ft inside the line. The traditional way of thinking was to dribble past and take the uncontested two, the analytics is saying side dribble and take the uncontested 3. JJ Redick talks about in one of his podcast and that change in thinking extended his NBA career.
Attack, attack, Skip, attack, attack aka A.A.S.A.A offense Which was created by Vance walhberg when he was at Clovis west high school in the late 90s early 2000s is the offense that says “ ONLY 3s and layups”
I think this system works very well for people who have the correct personnel
I’m fucking glad people are fucking finally figuring this shit out
With analytics you can make numbers tell the story you want. But statistical methods don't allow you to just make stuff up. There are mechanisms in place to keep statisticians honest, and not manipulate the numbers to prove them right. Although in the science community it does happen all the time, people will do anything to save their job or increase their reputation.
Thank you Gilbert !!
"That's bad basketball"
"Need to do it! "
"Ok... we about to get a top pick..."😂
Teams shooting 20 more 3pts but only averaging 4 more points than the teams in the 2000s is the reason for bad basketball. When most players shoot 30% from 3pt and back in the day the mid range shot had players avg 38% fg.
I want to see Earl coach the Pels.
Awesome take
Gil and Earl is like Pun and Joe straight bars
Totally agree with him in this 💯
The answer lies somewhere in the middle. There's a need to study tendencies, but, there's a human element involved too. The finest players and coaches are able to use both to their advantage.
Role players , and rules changes, the league wants points but defense is devalued . The recent lakers capitalized by not only using these no touch rules but getting rim protectors LBJ and AD who are like MacAdoo clones for corner 3s.
Rudy Gay is the best example of playing career got destroyed because of analytics... 2010 he was near all star then he gone
I would also say Melo, he was a paint scorer and a deadly mid range shot creator, then when he got to NY it was all about jacking 8 3's a game and then his shot % eroded quickly because he stopped practicing the close shots and easy mid buckets and then couldn't do anything right because all he does is either a low 30% 3 shot or a low 45% fade away mid. But yea Rudy gay had the skill set for everything like donovan mitchell. Could do it all. Kevin love too. Gotta have them stretch 4s out there shooting 35% from 3
Saying they take 20 more 3's but only score 4 more points is a bad argument lol.
Love it! All facts!!!
Gilbert looks like his overload of basketball knowledge wont let him sleep
Analytics in pro sport is really good for hindsights in why and how a team loses or won during a limited period of time(sample) because it's bread and butter is historical data; using it to scheme surefire playbooks for future games is like using the same lines on all the girls you meet in the hope it will automatically work because it worked a couple of times. Predictive analytics only work when the conditions for an event to happen are all known quantities but anyone knows that life, dating or sport don't work like that, except for sport execs and ’analysts' who love using analytics to hide their ignorance and give their jobs an air of expertise.
That's why you GET players that can make 3's. They don't have to be as good as Stef and Klay, they just have to be able to make some. Mid range still has its uses but not like it use too.
THANK YOU
Gilbert Arenas is an expert on bad basketball.
Exactly.....he right about this shit...analytics fucked te game up
The lack of fundamentals which in turns turns the game into a jumping show and excessive 3pt shooting is what the league wants. It's all about putting asses in the seats 1st, and and actual competition 2nd.
Analytics are great, but you can't solely rely on them. Teams like the rockets strive for inside and 3pt shots only, and cut out the mid range, because all they see are the analytics of teams like the warriors and the fact that 2 is more than three and a layup is easier than a mid range. What teams don't realize is that the mid range can be absolutely deadly, open up more possibilities to score on offense, and can keep the offense unpredictable when you have an elite mid range shooter on your team. People forget, or are blind to the fact, that the warriors had an elite mid range threat in Steph curry and then later Kevin Durant who both had elite pull up mid range jumpers.
Say your guy is playing tight on the perimeter, well for a guy like Steph or KD its not hard to get past him and make a run towards the rim, but what if the paint isn't entirely open and there aren't any clear open guys for a three pointer to dish out to, easy answer, mid range pull up. Anyone in the paint isn't going to have the time to react, and your defender is either already out of position, or in a position vulnerable to a step back or stop and pop as he's trying to chase you down. Even off the catch if the defender is closing out hard, if you can't catch him off a fake behind the line, you can drive in taking advantage of his momentum, and get an easy open mid range. those are just two examples of how the mid range game can seriously benefit an offense. By cutting out the mid range, you reduce your opportunities to score. The more opportunities to score you allow yourself to have at your disposal, the harder it's going to be for a defense to keep up by making them have to guard more spots on the floor.
Teams can't lock down the three ball, the mid range, and the paint consistently, particularly in the playoffs when 99% of the game is played in the half court.
This needs more views
Yup it’s like telling a team to play 1 style when they could prosper using tactics that match the play styles of the players they have. You cannot re create a curry or a klay it should be obvious but I digress
That's the thing about Analytics, you have to have the personnel or it won't work
Gilbert Arenas does know he was that guy that was lighting it up from the logo and sometimes taking those shots he’s talking about. He was Harden and the other guys before they were household names. He was that style of basketball that people started to mimic.
So true. In the Philippines we have PBA and it's freakin hard to watch coz these teams attempt so many 3's thinking they're the GSW. I'm like what the hell are they doing???
People that don’t like “analytics” don’t know or understand what they are.
Here is the top level issue...
Question: What is a "good shot"?
Answer: Shots you can make at a high clip.
Lol 😂 Gill talking about Scott Brooks
Trying coach wizards like he got golden state
And one of the worst shooting teams from 3 just won the title in 2020. Size, defense and ball movement matter in the playoffs. People forget that the Warriors had Iggy, Barnes, Thompson, Green, and Bogut when they won the first chip. That’s a world class defensive lineup right there. Running and gunning doesn’t win championships. You have to lock your opponent down, exploit mismatches, and create high percentage shots to win in the playoffs
That's why denver is so exciting to watch with the cuts and passes
"We about to get a top pick" - great summary ;)
Teams that try to imitate this will not necessarily find this works for them unless they can combine a durant with an equally gifted tall shooter because that skill set is not that common.
True but to me its ownership giving players to much money over paying
NBA needs to start impowering coaching and allowing for more basketball decision made based on talent and system . if you a bad team and you draft a center for example develop say embid make decision to surround them both system and talent that match and be forward thinking about it. If you want embid to post up make that clear not an option .
Whether your coach is a former champion first time or in the middle there needs be
Good physical training staff
Medical
Head coach who is a manager of men and xoxo gotta have system.
Like football you gotta have your positional coaches guaurds forward center development team and strategy based on talent available.
earl watson asks where are the 30 3s going to come from. and what hes saying makes sense... but he says book can shoot ten if i tell him to. and he also says that brandon night is a rythm shooter... I have a theory that there are other guys out there like james harden. you can just let them get in a rythm and shoot a ton of threes. but you have to take the chance on them. and let them have 10, 20 or 30 games of complete freedom and see if they can be like harden. so when watson asks where the other 20 threes coming from... well your team isnt doing so well. why not roll the dice? you might lose your job is a reason why. but your team is trash. roll the dice and maybe lose a little worse or get a LOT better.
They need 30 threes a night they suck lmaaaaa9
stats is cool to look at what u can improve on in general. other than that cant really analyze a sport that has so amny outside factors affecting the stats.
Definitely agree with them
Mid range is a ghost town now. Either everyone is living on the 3point line or....no...that’s it. Mid range and the paint is a Ghost town. I hate it that in a fast break everyone runs to the 3 point line.
Analytics is just copying gamers. They’ve been doing this for years because it’s the most efficient way to play. In a couple of years football will follow suit, going for more 4th and 1, etc. Who punts in madden?
2:25 how much Gilbert smoke before this interview? In 2020, teams were scoring over 15 points more per game than 01, 02, or 03.
Their argument sounds good but old school centers are actually getting played off the court and the skill level has improved dramatically for bigs. Not everyone has Steph and Klay but they did lead an evolution in skill for all these new cats
As Charles Barkley pointed out years ago, Golden State‘s style only worked because you have two of the best shooters of all-time (Klay, Steph) on one team.
Well the raptors took a lot of 3s and won the title, lakers also took 30+ 3s a game the same amount as the 2016 warriors. So clearly it’s not a fad
The Heat are a great, I guess, "example" against OBSESSIVE analytics. The heat use analytic
But they based their model off of THEMSELVES and were defense first They created and had players that could shoot the but when that was shut dowm, they easily won in the east by midrange, and driving in with Jimmy, Goran, Bam that could score from Mid Range especially during momentum shifts or close games ...which then ultimately led back to more open shots from the three. And if anything! The idea was to ALWAYS open up the floor first with Duncan or get into the bonus early by using the 3 as a distraction
People hating on analytics really don't understand them. Analytics dont have a personal preference all they show are INEFFICIENCIES. So as the league takes more three people are gonna go over screens more, drop less in pick and roll defense, stay closer to shooters relocating without the ball. All that shit opens up other aspects of the game. There's a balance. And if you don't think analytics is doing anything then why is the league avg offense the highest it's ever been and the league average efficiency the highest it's ever been?
If u think about it The Lakers & The Heat were a well balanced offensive team this year
Analytics is invaluable - *if* an actual domain expert can interpret the insights. i.e. probably a player. You cant work around paying and valuing these player their dues.
Yes but it can also lead to good basketball. I dont get why analytics is vilified. It is a TOOL that you use to plan ahead how your team will approach the game. It's not the end all and be all of basketball. Any tool can ruin you if you dont use it properly.