Analytics: 3pt shot and distance from nearest defender

[GIF REACTION]

http://www.sloansportsconference.com...-Open-Shot.pdf

Good read and gives a real good insight into how deep analytics in the modern game has gone...

This isn't really telling us anything that we don't already know (Open shots will be made at a higher %)

But it is interesting to see some stats behind it, especially the 3pt shot, to which so many old school minded posters on this forum don't see the value in...

There are some graphs on the start of page 2, showing 3pt FG% and distance from nearest defender...

Figure 1. (a) As the distance of the nearest defender to the shooter increases, so does the 3-point shooting percentage. When
the defender is [COLOR="Red"]more than 6 feet away[/COLOR], the shooting percentage is [COLOR="Red"]40%[/COLOR], and [COLOR="Blue"]increases to over 43% when the defender is more
than 9 feet away[/COLOR] at the release point. (b) Conversely, when the defender is closer to the defender the shooting percentage
drops. When a defender is within 6 feet, the shooting percentage is approximately 32.5%. However, when a defender is
within 6 feet 0.6 seconds before the shot it drops to 26.6%

Open 3 pointers are absolutely lethal, it's no wonder why pretty much all of the top offenses of recent have shot so many of them... It is a wonderful tool in an offense, and we do not need all 5 players on the court being "fundamental" as Showtime80' would put it. These elite offenses are hitting quality looks at upwards of 40%+ which is simply lethal efficiency

[fpliii]

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing.

Somewhat related, you hear a lot from fans how they hate how short the corner three is, and how they wish the line was extended to a full semi-circle. This article from awhile back illustrates that it's not about the shorter distance, but the fact that the corner three is on average going to be more open of a shot:

http://nyloncalculus.com/2014/11/01/...nce-corner-3s/

[3ball]

[COLOR="Red"]Open 3 pointers[/COLOR] are absolutely lethal, it's no wonder why pretty much all of the top offenses of recent have shot so many of them...

That's why pace is so much slower today than the 2-pointer basketball of previous eras - 3-point shots need to be OPEN, otherwise their efficiency craters... Accordingly, you need to run more offense to get open 3-point looks - that's the point of running offense - to get good looks.

But midrange and paint shots are different - their efficiency DOESN'T crater when contested - a good midrange or paint player is accustomed to making shots with defenders draped all over - contested shots is the nature of 2-point shooting, so less offense needs to be ran..

That's why previous eras ran less boring, structured offense that slowed the pace down - they just ran up and down and took contested shot after contested shot - they played off of basketball instincts and true skill, rather than manufactured offense created on a clip board.. When you don't need to run a bunch of boring, predictable offense to get open shots, the game is more free-flowing and instinctive, rather than organized, boring and marching-band-looking..
.

[GIF REACTION]

Interesting stuff, thanks for sharing.

Somewhat related, you hear a lot from fans how they hate how short the corner three is, and how they wish the line was extended to a full semi-circle. This article from awhile back illustrates that it's not about the shorter distance, but the fact that the corner three is on average going to be more open of a shot:

http://nyloncalculus.com/2014/11/01/...nce-corner-3s/

Good article



After seeing stuff like this, I can see why they teams are so crazy about the 3 today

[GIF REACTION]

That's why pace is so much slower today than the 2-pointer basketball of previous eras - 3-point shots need to be open, otherwise their efficiency craters... Accordingly, you need to run more offense to get open 3-point looks - that's the point of running offense - to get good looks.

But midrange and paint shots are different - their efficiency DOESN'T crater when contested - a good midrange or paint player is accustomed to making shots with defenders draped all over - contested shots is the nature of 2-point shooting, so less offense needs to be ran.. That's why previous eras ran less structured offense that slowed the pace down - they just ran up and down and took contested shot after contested shot - they played based more on basketball instincts and true skill, rather than manufactured offense created on a clip board.. When you don't need to run a bunch of boring, predictable offense to get open shots, the game is more free-flowing and instinctive, rather than organized, boring and marching-band-looking..

you layers are ACCUSTOMED to ttaak midrange and paint shots back when the 3-point line wasn't used,

Can you provide evidence for this? I HIGHLY doubt it

[3ball]

Can you provide evidence for this? I HIGHLY doubt it

The efficiency of any shot will decline when contested, but midrange and paint shots don't decline nearly as much as 3-pointers.. There is data on this - but just think about it - Most paint shots ARE contested.. Midrange too.

The closer a shot is to the hoop, the more it can withstand a contest without the efficiency dropping as much... Anyone - and I mean ANYONE who has played basketball will tell you this.. And anyone that isn't keenly aware of this has simply NOT played basketball and honestly, has a very shallow understanding of the game.

Btw, I wanted to add to what I said before - as I said, less offense needs to be run to obtain midrange and paint shots... However - in addition - since defenders aren't guarding the 3-point line, they run to the PAINT in transition, so transition shots were more contested - watch any old game - they're running up and down and taking contested shots in transition over and over.
.

[GIF REACTION]

An open shot and a contested shot from 18 feet is still going to dip quite a bit in %

[3ball]

An open shot and a contested shot from 18 feet is still going to dip quite a bit in %

The closer a shot is to the hoop, the more it can withstand a contest without the efficiency dropping as much

There's data on this, but it's not even necessary - just think about it - most paint shots ARE contested.. Midrange too... And anyone - and I mean ANYONE who has played basketball will tell you that shots closer to the basket can handle constests better... And anyone that isn't keenly aware of this has simply NOT played basketball and honestly, has a very shallow understanding of the game.

Btw, I wanted to add something to what I said before - as I said, less offense needs to be run to obtain midrange and paint shots... However - in addition - since defenders aren't guarding the 3-point line, they run to the PAINT in transition, so transition shots were more contested - watch any old game - they're running up and down and taking contested shots in transition over and over.

[fpliii]

Somewhat related, check this link out guys:

http://www.vantagesports.com/story/V...shot-selection

[GIF REACTION]

18 feet is a long way out

For reference

Corner 3 is 22 feet

And funny enough, in the 2014 season corner 3's were made at a higher % than 22 feet 2 pointers

A mid range shot from 16+ ft is still going to crater significantly when contested

[GIF REACTION]

Somewhat related, check this link out guys:

http://www.vantagesports.com/story/V...shot-selection

That is very nice

Pretty much everything there

[3ball]

That is very nice

Pretty much everything there

Most paint shots (which includes midrange) are highly contested - they're far more contested than three-pointers, yet their fg% is much higher than 3-pointers.

That proves paint and midrange shots handle contests better than 3-pointers.. If 3-pointers were as contested as paint shots, players would shoot 16% from three or something ridiculous like that.

Again, the 22 three-pointers attempted by today's teams slows the game down tremendously, since those looks have to be FAR more open than paint and midrange shots, so more boring offense needs to be ran to get those open looks.. [COLOR="Navy"]Trust me - if the 3-point line were removed, teams would start running up and down again, taking contested shot after contested shot like the old days.[/COLOR]

[GIF REACTION]

What are you suggesting?

It really isn't that simple, winning is the most important factor...

An increase in pace is usually an increase in turnovers, which gives your opposition more net possessions

[3ball]

Somewhat related, check this link out guys:

http://www.vantagesports.com/story/V...shot-selection

what constitutes a "contested shot"

the catch-and-shoot midrange shots are more contested than catch-and-shoot 3-pointers.

[GIF REACTION]

what constitutes a "contested shot"

the catch-and-shoot midrange shots are more contested than catch-and-shoot 3-pointers.

Probably, seeing as it is closer relatively to the basket

I'm not sure if they make the "guarded" and "contested" categories based on specific closest defender distance?