Other Team Mid-Range and Crazy Shots

[nelsonmuntz]

I know its a fun game to play the contrarian, but those shots are undefended because the "stats nerds" have determined via reasonable analyses that these are the lowest EV shots for teams to take.

I highly doubt many coaches would say that "we want to shoot contested 3's" is their gameplan. They WILL say that they want to run offensive sets that result in the highest +EV looks for their players. This means quality open 3s and layups. Whether the players execute that plan in-game is a whole different situation.

Oh, so just take more wide open 3's? Why didn't I think of that? How about uncontested layups and dunks? Since we are talking about magical thinking, why not just play with 10 people on our side and 1 player on theirs?

By this logic, what is the point of playing defense? All the matters is where the shot is taken from, right? You trying to shoot a 3 over Clingan is a higher percentage shot than Steph Curry wide open from 15 feet? Got it.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I imagine that I am not the only one who believes that our losses to date this season haven't been purely due to luck.

There are things that the advanced metrics that so many are falling in love with these days happen to miss, starting with the reality that we lost last night due to play on both ends in the part of the court (mid-range two point shots) that allegedly is the worst place to pay attention to if you want to win.

One major point on the missed open three point shots that we've missed at a far higher rate in our losses than the statistics would expect: if a player has been harrassed by the defense consistently, if he has had far fewer shot attempts than normal, if he has been taking shots at a more stressful situation than he had when his percentages were more to the "norm", there is a strong likelyhood that even if he is open for the stray attempt, he may rush the shot, he may be off on his mechanics, his rhythm or even his confidence. The defense that we faced in our losses (also in some brief stretches in a couple of wins) have made it more difficult for us to score than what we saw when we were steamrolling pretty solid teams earlier in the season.

I see the biggest concern being our guards don't respond well to being pressured early in the possession.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Ah yes, Synergy. A company of rando stats nerds with no track record. No wait, they're used by literally every single coaching staff and NBA team in the country.

I find these "contested shot" analyses always seem to find every 2 pointer contested but a strikingly large percentage of 3 pointers to be open, even though most defenses do not defend the mid-range at all anymore. Hmmm. But you are right, they don't have an agenda.

 

[bigknight3]

Because some rando stats nerd with an agenda says so? Sure.

Stats don't have an agenda... That's math

 

[cullaville]

Someone posted that they hit 24 of 32 two point shots last night (after any that weren't blocked).. Hard to defend against that..

Perhaps getting on your man and defending would be effective defense

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

Last night felt like a little bit of luck and a little bit of just a good scout by Shaka. That’s the thing we’ve seen over and over since BE play started - these are some very good, smart coaches that will work really hard to find what works against UConn and try to exploit it.

Which makes it even more surprising that McDermott decided to not double Sanogo all game.

That’s kind of the concerning thing right now. Since teams have found what works, we haven’t adjusted to be able to win one game when a team uses that gameplan.

Creighton was a mix of them shooting terribly and McDermott either being arrogant or stupid to not follow what’s been working.

We have to find a counter for what these teams are doing.

 

[Conndog]

I imagine that I am not the only one who believes that our losses to date this season haven't been purely due to luck.

There are things that the advanced metrics that so many are falling in love with these days happen to miss, starting with the reality that we lost last night due to play on both ends in the part of the court (mid-range two point shots) that allegedly is the worst place to pay attention to if you want to win.

One major point on the missed open three point shots that we've missed at a far higher rate in our losses than the statistics would expect: if a player has been harrassed by the defense consistently, if he has had far fewer shot attempts than normal, if he has been taking shots at a more stressful situation than he had when his percentages were more to the "norm", there is a strong likelyhood that even if he is open for the stray attempt, he may rush the shot, he may be off on his mechanics, his rhythm or even his confidence. The defense that we faced in our losses (also in some brief stretches in a couple of wins) have made it more difficult for us to score than what we saw when we were steamrolling pretty solid teams earlier in the season.

I see the biggest concern being our guards don't respond well to being pressured early in the possession.

Luck? Offense certainly could be better, but defense needs improvement too- and luck doesn't play much of a role in defense.

 

[JustbrewitMan]

Oh, so just take more wide open 3's? Why didn't I think of that? How about uncontested layups and dunks? Since we are talking about magical thinking, why not just play with 10 people on our side and 1 player on theirs?

By this logic, what is the point of playing defense? All the matters is where the shot is taken from, right? You trying to shoot a 3 over Clingan is a higher percentage shot than Steph Curry wide open from 15 feet? Got it.

One of the Top 5 things I love about the Boneyard is when Nelson replies to a post with a hilarious strawman argument.

You have the total package...can go from well-thought-out analytical posts to ridiculous strawmans. Appreciate it. I truly do. (not throwing shade)

 

[superjohn]

Am I the only one who feels like teams hit shots they never hit when they play us? Found this tweet really interesting. Marquette hit more mid-range shots last night than they had hit in the last 12 games COMBINED! Even when we win feel like teams hit crazy shots (Georgetown game especially). First couple games teams hit crazy shots against us, it's bad luck - but now, I'm not sure how to explain for it.

When something happens over and over again it's not luck/bad luck.

 

[JustbrewitMan]

I imagine that I am not the only one who believes that our losses to date this season haven't been purely due to luck.

There are things that the advanced metrics that so many are falling in love with these days happen to miss, starting with the reality that we lost last night due to play on both ends in the part of the court (mid-range two point shots) that allegedly is the worst place to pay attention to if you want to win.

One major point on the missed open three point shots that we've missed at a far higher rate in our losses than the statistics would expect: if a player has been harrassed by the defense consistently, if he has had far fewer shot attempts than normal, if he has been taking shots at a more stressful situation than he had when his percentages were more to the "norm", there is a strong likelyhood that even if he is open for the stray attempt, he may rush the shot, he may be off on his mechanics, his rhythm or even his confidence. The defense that we faced in our losses (also in some brief stretches in a couple of wins) have made it more difficult for us to score than what we saw when we were steamrolling pretty solid teams earlier in the season.

I see the biggest concern being our guards don't respond well to being pressured early in the possession.

Yep, the intangible human factor. "Toughness", "ice in the veins", whatever phrase you want to call it.

Our players (guards mostly) have just not played well at all in a hostile away Big East environment against a quality opponent.

 

[Billy Jack]

But they’re making them “at such a high rate” only if you ignore the blocks. Our guys had 11 blocks last night. That’s a lot of blocks. Really a lot. We have been stopping .

Sorry for the typo. The last word should be “shores”.

 

[Tenspro2002]

Look at the 2nd tweet in the series.


Yes, they made more shots than expected considering the defense and location and player averages. We played the best defense against them of anyone all season.

Same thing against NMSU last year. It happens, though seemingly more to us than others. Maybe we just remember the bad luck more.

On the other side, I suspect Creighton was well below their expected shot value against us on Saturday.

 

[HailUConn]

this makes me miss RIP more and more. I wish some one on this team such as Hawk or Ajax develop some killer mid range shots. So far we ride or die on 3 or paint.

 

[Deadrody]

Because some rando stats nerd with an agenda says so? Sure.

I suppose you think this of "analytics" in every sport, right ?

 

[HailUConn]

Am I the only one who feels like teams hit shots they never hit when they play us? Found this tweet really interesting. Marquette hit more mid-range shots last night than they had hit in the last 12 games COMBINED! Even when we win feel like teams hit crazy shots (Georgetown game especially). First couple games teams hit crazy shots against us, it's bad luck - but now, I'm not sure how to explain for it.

There is no such thing as coincidence. This, as the other poster alluded, has to do with our defense scheme that get exposed against our league teams once the non conf play period is over. Our man to man is too rigid and our guards always chase the player under screen or around screen, and our defense against P&R also sucks, and this attributes to the high percentage shots for opposing team over and over again. We don’t we just switch?

 

[Deadrody]

I find these "contested shot" analyses always seem to find every 2 pointer contested but a strikingly large percentage of 3 pointers to be open, even though most defenses do not defend the mid-range at all anymore. Hmmm. But you are right, they don't have an agenda.

Yeah, they do have an agenda - to get paid. And they get paid because the analysis they provide is accurate. If not, they wouldn't get paid, would they ?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Yeah, they do have an agenda - to get paid. And they get paid because the analysis they provide is accurate. If not, they wouldn't get paid, would they ?

You guys ever been in a meeting with one of the market research firms? They are masters of telling you exactly what you want to hear. THAT is how they get paid.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

One of the Top 5 things I love about the Boneyard is when Nelson replies to a post with a hilarious strawman argument.

You have the total package...can go from well-thought-out analytical posts to ridiculous strawmans. Appreciate it. I truly do. (not throwing shade)

It is not meant to be a strawman. This board engages in magical thinking all of the time. "Take more 3's" or "attack the rim more" is idiotic. Does everyone realize that basketball occurs with TWO teams on the court, reacting to each other in real-time? If your opponent knows you are only going to take 3's or attack the basket, what are they going to do? Not a rhetorical question, what do people think the defense will do if we only take two kinds of shots?

 

[Get a Job]

this makes me miss RIP more and more. I wish some one on this team such as Hawk or Ajax develop some killer mid range shots. So far we ride or die on 3 or paint.

To you, but unfortunately not only you: Richard Hamilton's nickname was Rip, not RIP. The only thing RIP had to do with Hamilton is that it's what you would wish to any opponent who had to defend him.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Stats don't have an agenda... That's math

Whether a shot went in or not is a statistic. Whether the shot was "closely contested" is an opinion.

 

[Hoophound]

They said in pregame that Shaka has guys working on shooting off the glass in practice. They then proceeded to eat us up with effortless “difficult” shots off the glass.

 

[auror]

When something happens over and over again it's not luck/bad luck.

It's not luck that teams shoot better at home and worse on the road, no. But that's why we have to not freak out about road losses to good teams.

 

[auror]

Whether a shot went in or not is a statistic. Whether the shot was "closely contested" is an opinion.

Sure. And these guys are professionals used by all 30 NBA teams in business for almost 30 years. I trust their opinion.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Sure. And these guys are professionals used by all 30 NBA teams in business for almost 30 years. I trust their opinion.

So by this logic, despite the fact that every defense is designed to stop 3's and protect the rim, once the games starts, the players are defending mid-range shots instead. Just want to make sure I understand what you and they are saying.

 

[navery12]

Same thing against NMSU last year. It happens, though seemingly more to us than others. Maybe we just remember the bad luck more.

On the other side, I suspect Creighton was well below their expected shot value against us on Saturday.

You'd be correct, didn't see the actual numbers but they did tweet this