Quotes from Glen Miller (ESPN Insider)

[Matrim55]

Funny you should bring him up...This is quick and dirty, but it's something to chew on until you realize that a 7 footer should not (by and large) be outside the key (Dirk is listed as 6-11, as is Kevin Garnett, and Kaminsky, which probably means they are all barely touching 6-9.).

For his college career, Kaminsky is shooting 58% from 2 point range and has taken 347 shots (hitting 201) for 402 points.
For his college career, Kaminsky is shooting 38% from 3 point range and has taken 98 shots (hitting 37) for 111 points.

Disregarding flow of the game, shot selection, and historic eye test, if Kaminsky (on average) hit 58% of his 3 point attempts from 2 point range, he would have scored 114 points, not to mention the occasional and 1, which would have netted a non-zero, positive number.

114>111 all day long.

That's not how analytics work. Many of Kaminsky's 2s come when he cuts from beyond the arc into the area for quick hits as the defense rushes out to stop him. If he wasn't a threat from 3, they wouldn't be rushing out - they'd be containing him and increasing the difficulty of every 2 pointer he (and his teammates) took.

Being a threat from distance bends the defense towards you, opening up passing and cutting lanes for yourself and your teammates. It's called "gravitational pull," and it's why someone like Love - even if he only shoots 35% from three this year - will be such an asset for LeBron.

 

[bmayuc]

Funny you should bring him up...This is quick and dirty, but it's something to chew on until you realize that a 7 footer should not (by and large) be outside the key (Dirk is listed as 6-11, as is Kevin Garnett, and Kaminsky, which probably means they are all barely touching 6-9.).

For his college career, Kaminsky is shooting 58% from 2 point range and has taken 347 shots (hitting 201) for 402 points.
For his college career, Kaminsky is shooting 38% from 3 point range and has taken 98 shots (hitting 37) for 111 points.

Disregarding flow of the game, shot selection, and historic eye test, if Kaminsky (on average) hit 58% of his 3 point attempts from 2 point range, he would have scored 114 points, not to mention the occasional and 1, which would have netted a non-zero, positive number.

114>111 all day long.

The outcome is the exact same for his junior year.

I think he is going to be a force on par with Hasheem Thabeet, but there is no reason in for Amida Brimah (with his whole 5 years of basketball experience) to start a set play outside the foul line - extended, in Ollie's offense and he ain't pulling up on a fast break.

This is the the single dumbest piece of "analysis" i've ever seen. Please stop, this is a preposterously stupid argument.

 

[Husky25]

That's not how analytics work. Many of Kaminsky's 2s come when he cuts from beyond the arc into the area for quick hits as the defense rushes out to stop him. If he wasn't a threat from 3, they wouldn't be rushing out - they'd be containing him and increasing the difficulty of every 2 pointer he (and his teammates) took.

Being a threat from distance bends the defense towards you, opening up passing and cutting lanes for yourself and your teammates. It's called "gravitational pull," and it's why someone like Love - even if he only shoots 35% from three this year - will be such an asset for LeBron.

Ever hear the quote regarding Lies, damned lies, and statistics?

It's a way of making facts say anything I want.

Amida Brimah will never have what you call, "gravitational pull," especially coming off shoulder surgery. The o/u for 3FGA this year is what 3? 3.5? If it's anywhere over 1.5, I'll take the under, thank you.

Jeezus, talk about losing the forest for the trees.

 

[Husky25]

This is the the single dumbest piece of "analysis" i've ever seen. Please stop, this is a preposterously stupid argument.

Waaahhhh. Skip it then, because that isn't my argument.

My argument is a 3 pointer by a 7 footer is not a good shot. There are, by and large, better uses for their natural talents.

 

[pj]

This is the the single dumbest piece of "analysis" i've ever seen. Please stop, this is a preposterously stupid argument.

Why? The point is he gets more points per possession when he takes 2 point attempts than 3 point attempts.

What this means is another question. It probably means that Wisconsin lacked other good 3 point attempts, so they had to make a mediocre 3 point shooter the core of their offense.

Bo Ryan is probably right that that was the way for Wisconsin to be most effective -- he's a quality coach -- but that doesn't mean that Kaminsky would be allowed to shoot so many 3's on another team.

 

[intlzncster]

What this means is another question. It probably means that Wisconsin lacked other good 3 point attempts, so they had to make a mediocre 3 point shooter the core of their offense.

Bo Ryan is probably right that that was the way for Wisconsin to be most effective -- he's a quality coach -- but that doesn't mean that Kaminsky would be allowed to shoot so many 3's on another team.

Or it could really open up the interior for those short less athletic perimeter players to get in for easy layups. It's not a bad strategy.

 

[bmayuc]

Waaahhhh. Skip it then, because that isn't my argument.

My argument is a 3 pointer by a 7 footer is not a good shot. There are, by and large, better uses for their natural talents.

That's fine, except that you are ignoring things like floor spacing, the inverted offense Bo Ryan employs, modern basketball strategy, etc, etc. The game has become increasingly positionless, and being a 3 point shooter at ANY size is almost incalculable to helping the overall offense function for a million reasons.

Its just, such outdated thinking, which is why it is nonsense.

 

[bmayuc]

Why? The point is he gets more points per possession when he takes 2 point attempts than 3 point attempts.

What this means is another question. It probably means that Wisconsin lacked other good 3 point attempts, so they had to make a mediocre 3 point shooter the core of their offense.

Bo Ryan is probably right that that was the way for Wisconsin to be most effective -- he's a quality coach -- but that doesn't mean that Kaminsky would be allowed to shoot so many 3's on another team.

I'm not going to get in to deep with people arguing that because you are tall you shouldn't shoot, because its just objectively a dumb argument.

But has it ever occured to you that what you are saying is not, you know, how people play basketball? you cannot simply take those 100 3 point shots and transport Kaminski into prime scoring position. And undoubtedly he got many excellent scoring chances specifically BECAUSE he is versatile and threatens the defense at the perimeter.

 

[Husky25]

That's fine, except that you are ignoring things like floor spacing, the inverted offense Bo Ryan employs, modern basketball strategy, etc, etc. The game has become increasingly positionless, and being a 3 point shooter at ANY size is almost incalculable to helping the overall offense function for a million reasons.

Its just, such outdated thinking, which is why it is nonsense.

Did I not say I was disregarding flow of game? Did I not say it was quick & dirty? I know it was somewhat flawed.

Look. It's flawed merely because the 2pt FG area extends from the rim to 20'-9". The 3pt area begins at that point and beyond. I also did not bring Kaminsky into this thread, nor did I say that he hits 58% from 19' to 20'-9" .

I said, "I don't ever want to see a 7 footer take a 3 pointer. I don't care if it goes in. It's a bad shot no matter what," in clear reference to UConn's own 7 footer. That is a fact. Just because there is one guy or three who can hit a 21 foot jumper with semi-regularity is called anecdotal and not relevant to my statement, especially when those shots taken inside the arc may yield a higher point total and there are typically better positions for a 7 footer to be in rather than 21 feet away from the basket.

 

[pj]

But has it ever occured to you that what you are saying is not, you know, how people play basketball? you cannot simply take those 100 3 point shots and transport Kaminski into prime scoring position. And undoubtedly he got many excellent scoring chances specifically BECAUSE he is versatile and threatens the defense at the perimeter.

Yes, of course. An offense is a system. It's quite possible that Kaminsky shooting 3s helps Wisconsin - but only if (a) their defense is good enough that 1.05 points per possession is winning for them, and (b) they don't have better offensive alternatives. Both (a) and (b) probably were the case for Wisconsin. But it suggests a team that was somewhat limited offensively.

 

[jazyj]

I don't ever want to see a 7 footer take a 3 pointer. I don't care if it goes in. It's a bad shot no matter what.

kevin love, Durant, bosh , etc.?????

 

[Husky25]

kevin love, Durant, bosh , etc.?????

Who are three NBA players who have never been in my kitchen?

Did I win Final Jeopardy, Alex?

Durant is 6'-9" and is not a PF or C and I don't want Kevin Love anywhere near the 3pt line, college or otherwise. That is not where his strength lies.

 

[Matrim55]

Yes, of course. An offense is a system. It's quite possible that Kaminsky shooting 3s helps Wisconsin - but only if (a) their defense is good enough that 1.05 points per possession is winning for them, and (b) they don't have better offensive alternatives. Both (a) and (b) probably were the case for Wisconsin. But it suggests a team that was somewhat limited offensively.

Kaminsky's ability to make 3-pointers doesn't only effect Wisconsin's offensive efficiency on possessions in which he attempts a 3-pointer.

 

[Walker11]

Durant is 6'-9"

I won't pick at your argument because enough people have. But I love to nitpick. KD is more like 6'11. He is like KG in that he doesn't want to be listed as tall as he really is.

 

[Gurleyman]

The fact that he shows that range in practice doesn't mean he'll be out there in games. Think of it like swinging a weighted bat. You swing it in the on deck circle so you'll have a quicker bat when you have to swing for real. When you work on 3-point range in practice, the 15-footer you shoot in a game will feel closer and easier.

In practice, you always want your bigs to do some shooting further out than their comfort level in games.

 

[Walker11]

I don't want Kevin Love anywhere near the 3pt line, college or otherwise. That is not where his strength lies.

You have already admitted that you don't watch the NBA and this post proves it. Out of your element.

 

[joober jones]

Don't know about you guys, but I'm In the Mood for hoops.

And s'mores. I haven't had those in quite a while.

 

[James]

Kevin loves greatest strength is his three point shooting ability. without that he would be a nice double double 20//10 guy, but not the top 5-10 player he is today.

 

[pj]

Kaminsky's ability to make 3-pointers doesn't only effect Wisconsin's offensive efficiency on possessions in which he attempts a 3-pointer.

I know that. My point was that you can't judge the value of Kaminsky shooting 3 pointers from Kaminsky's stats alone, you need to take into account the capabilities of the other players. I'm not really disagreeing with most of the posters here.

In fact, points per possession was similar on 2-pt and 3-pt attempts for Kaminsky which suggests he was making good decisions. If he overdid the 3s, he would have significantly fewer ppp on 3s than 2s.

 

[joober jones]

I loved watching Manute Bol sink threes back in the day.

 

[CL82]

And let's give it up to Glen Miller for making it big time, his quotes are considered ESPN Insider worthy

Me thinks Glenn learned a bit about preseason hyperbole from Coach Calhoun.

 

[bmayuc]

Who are three NBA players who have never been in my kitchen?

Did I win Final Jeopardy, Alex?

Durant is 6'-9" and is not a PF or C and I don't want Kevin Love anywhere near the 3pt line, college or otherwise. That is not where his strength lies.

Dude you are a mess, lol. Kevin Love is a premier 3 point shooter. I would hope you are not coaching!

 

[Husky25]

You have already admitted that you don't watch the NBA and this post proves it. Out of your element.

You not only lost the forest for the trees, you are also looking at the shrubs.

Kevin Love was a McDAA, 1st team All-American, One & Done, and a 3x NBA All Star. There is debate whether Brimah will even be drafted at this point, let alone rise to the level of Hasheem Thabeet (career, not draft position). And that goes for all the other individual NBA Players that others have mentioned. They are the outliers.

Kevin loves greatest strength is his three point shooting ability. without that he would be a nice double double 20//10 guy, but not the top 5-10 player he is today.

Really? That's his greatest strength? On second thought. you're right. That's exactly why Love has a $14 Mil/year contract. It's definitely the first thing I think of when the conversation turns to Kevin Love.

 

[Husky25]

Dude you are a mess, lol. Kevin Love is a premier 3 point shooter. I would hope you are not coaching!

So a 25 year old 3x NBA All-Star is not the outlier?

 

[caw]

Really? That's his greatest strength? On second thought. you're right. That's exactly why Love has a $14 Mil/year contract. It's definitely the first thing I think of when the conversation turns to Kevin Love.

Love is very good at three things for a PF: Rebounding, passing (outlet passing) and shooting.

Those are the three main reasons he is being paid that much. Many would probably list shooting as his top skill for his position and overall, others would mention one of the other two. He def is an outlier in the NBA but you are also talking NBA range, not college range. He shot 37.6 percent on 505 attempts last season from three. Career he is 440-1215 or 36.2%.

Hopefully Brimah won't take many college threes and zero NBA threes, but if he can, hopefully that means he has a good midrange game also.