Do we live on 3pt?

[spursbird]

I always have an impression that we live on 3pt shooting cause we have too many outstanding shooters. Manu, Hill, Neal, Bonner, Jefferson and Anderson. Even Parker and Duncan can sometimes make one:rolleyes.
But after I look into the data, I found that maybe I'm wrong. Our team is very efficient in 3pt shoot, but we don't rely on it unlike the previous season imo. We shot 1185 balls from beyond the arc, while some of our main opponents shot more than us.
Mavs 1217
Nuggets 1240
Magic 1513
And forget about the Rockets, Suns and the NYC.
Why can we reach 103 pts a game? It's because of the FTs imo. We got 1425 FT attempts, which is a little less than the Lakers(1457) and the Magic(1482), much more than the Mavs(1289). The teams with the most FTA are both top teams(Thunder and Heat)
So what do you guys think? If Bonner went MIA in the playoffs, are we still unbeatable?

[Cessation]

cool story bro

[TE]

Yeah.

[UnWantedTheory]

Yeah, huh, & what?

[boutons_deux]

A better analysis is 3G % and 3G PTs in games won vs lost.

iow, do the Spurs depend on 3Gs to win?

[vander]

yeah, but luckily 3 pointers are worth 50% more points than 2 pointers.

[spursbird]

yeah, but luckily 3 pointers are worth 50% more points than 2 pointers.
I've thought about the question of who is better between 33% 3pt or 50% 2pt. From the result they get the same points, but if you shoot 3pt too much you cannot draw fouls. Glad Manu can draw as many fouls as his 3pt attempts.

[spursbird]

A better analysis is 3G % and PTs in games won vs lost.

iow, do the Spurs depend on 3Gs to win?
THX. I've changed my title.

[Em-City]

i think that on offense, we depend waaaay more on @TP9network's penetration

[Rummpd]

Spurs 2nd in offensive efficiency and 4th-5th in effective FG% depending on source

http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats/_/sort/effectiveFGPct

http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2011.html

Spurs only make despite the highest percentage of % 5th most in NBA so NO they are not shooting 3 too much and maybe not enough!:http://www.thespread.com/stats/nba/offstats?div=&season=2011&sortby=3fg&teamid=

#1 team in 3 point % 0.401 http://www.nba.com/statistics/

[ChuckD]

I've thought about the question of who is better between 33% 3pt or 50% 2pt. From the result they get the same points, but if you shoot 3pt too much you cannot draw fouls. Glad Manu can draw as many fouls as his 3pt attempts.

Strange that you would arbitrarily pick 33% for your comparison, as it is a few points below the league average of 36%, and way below the Spurs 3 point shooting percentage of 40%.

[Obstructed_View]

It's two more attempts per game than last year, and the percentage is way up. Free throw attempts are down from last year, as is the percentage. Those stits imply that the Spurs are indeed living off threes, but it doesn't tell the whole story. Steals are up, and they're deliberately pushing the pace, which increases the number of easy baskets. Think of the lower free trhows from a standpoint of wear-and-tear; they simply aren't getting beat up as much as last year.

[Mel_13]

It's two more attempts per game than last year, and the percentage is way up. Free throw attempts are down from last year, as is the percentage. Those stits imply that the Spurs are indeed living off threes, but it doesn't tell the whole story. Steals are up, and they're deliberately pushing the pace, which increases the number of easy baskets. Think of the lower free trhows from a standpoint of wear-and-tear; they simply aren't getting beat up as much as last year.

Actually, FT attempts are up slightly and FT % is up significantly. The OP had a point. Increased FTs account for half of the increased scoring compared to last season.

The increased pace is overstated now. They were playing at a substantially faster pace earlier this season, but they've slowed down. For the season as a whole, they average slightly less than one additional possession per game compared to last season.

[xellos88330]

The great thing about this years Spurs is that the three isn't used to keep them in the game anymore. It now breaks games open. I am loving the efficiency as well. If you are a fan of an opposing team, you can only hope that the Spurs are having an off night from downtown. Then and only then will their team have a chance. :toast

[Solid D]

Do we (Spurs) live on 3pt?

Pretty much, yeah. Good defense defuses that somewhat as a weakness.

[Dex]

Both the Spurs offensive and defensive tendencies are built about one simple concept: taking the best shots available, while forcing opponents into the worst.

Since it's statistically proven that the most inefficient shot in basketball is the long two, the Spurs try to omit as many of these as possible (unless it's a gimme like Tim/Dice's midrange jumper). This means that the majority of their shots are going to come from one of two places: the paint, or behind the arc. So yes, the Spurs do depend on the 3pt goal to be successful, because that's part of the system they have in place. It's the same reason they run opponents off the three-point line and will allow them to fire away midrange jumpers all game: statistically, it's the right thing to do.

That being said, the Spurs are really only taking threes at a slightly higher rate than they have in years passed, but they are also shooting more in general. They are also putting the ball in the hands of Tony, Manu, and their other shooters more; shots that used to be consumed by Tim in the post. Considering the results....I find it kind of hard to argue.

[Mel_13]

Both the Spurs offensive and defensive tendencies are built about one simple concept: taking the best shots available, while forcing opponents into the worst.

Since it's statistically proven that the most inefficient shot in basketball is the long two, the Spurs try to omit as many of these as possible (unless it's a gimme like Tim/Dice's midrange jumper). This means that the majority of their shots are going to come from one of two places: the paint, or behind the arc. So yes, the Spurs do depend on the 3pt goal to be successful, because that's part of the system they have in place. It's the same reason they run opponents off the three-point line and will allow them to fire away midrange jumpers all game: statistically, it's the right thing to do.

That being said, the Spurs are really only taking threes at a slightly higher rate than they have in years passed, but they are also shooting more in general. They are also putting the ball in the hands of Tony, Manu, and their other shooters more; shots that used to be consumed by Tim in the post. Considering the results....I find it kind of hard to argue.

:tu

Nice post.

I've looked for statistical evidence to support the notion that the Spurs shoot too many 3s or that they're overly dependent on shooting well from beyond the arc. It's not there.

Taking the second point first and comparing the Spurs to the Lakers and the Mavs, I found that:

1. The Spurs have fewer poor shooting games from 3 point range than either the Lakers or the Mavs.

2. The Spurs win a substantially higher percentage of those poor shooting games than either the Lakers or the Mavs.

On the first point, the notion that the Spurs hurt themselves when they take "too many 3s", the game logs indicate otherwise:

22 or more 3P Attempts (21 games): 17-4

18-21 3P attempts (21 games): 18-3

17 or fewer 3P attempts (16 games): 13-3

[xmas1997]

The short answer is "no".
The long answer is "noooooooooooooo!"

[Solid D]

Some good points, however, it is difficult to ignore that in 7 of the 10 losses, the Spurs have shot below their .401 average from behind the arc. Games like the Mavs, Celtics and Bulls, the 3-point shot wasn't a factor. The Spurs just got out-executed and out-played, particularly down the stretch. The Blazers beat the Spurs from the FT line.

Loss to Hornets 6-26 .231
Loss to Mavs 7-19 .368
Loss to Clippers 9-30 .300
Loss to Magic 8-22 .364
Loss to Knicks 5-18 .278
Loss to Celtics 9-22 .409
Loss to Hornets 4-15 .267
Loss to Blazers 8-18 .444
Loss to 76ers 3-17 .176
Loss to Bulls 7-14 .500

[Mel_13]

Some good points, however, it is difficult to ignore that in 7 of the 10 losses, the Spurs have shot below their .401 average from behind the arc. Games like the Mavs, Celtics and Bulls, the 3-point shot wasn't a factor. The Spurs just got out-executed and out-played, particularly down the stretch. The Blazers beat the Spurs from the FT line.

Loss to Hornets 6-26 .231
Loss to Mavs 7-19 .368
Loss to Clippers 9-30 .300
Loss to Magic 8-22 .364
Loss to Knicks 5-18 .278
Loss to Celtics 9-22 .409
Loss to Hornets 4-15 .267
Loss to Blazers 8-18 .444
Loss to 76ers 3-17 .176
Loss to Bulls 7-14 .500

See my post above. All teams struggle to win when they shoot poorly from beyond the arc. The Spurs do it with less frequency, and less harm, than their primary conference rivals.

Record when shooting 33.3% or lower from 3 PT range:

Spurs: 12-5
Mavs: 11-9
Lakers: 15-15

[TampaDude]

The only stat that matters is: 48-10 :toast

[Solid D]

See my post above. All teams struggle to win when shoot poorly from beyond the arc. The Spurs do it with less frequency, and less harm, than their primary conference rivals.

Record when shooting 33.3% or lower from 3 PT range:

Spurs: 12-5
Mavs: 11-9
Lakers: 15-15

Good stats to support your argument. :tu

[mathbzh]

I posted that early in february using last year Suns as a reference.



I just checked our record split by 3p%

Under 25%: 1-2
25-30%: 5-2
30-35%: 7-1
35-40%: 8-2
40-45%:9-2
over 45%: 18-1

While making 3s helps it does not look like we desperately need it.

Phoenix last year (after 50 games):
Under 25%: 1-3
25-30%: 2-1
30-35%: 4-6
35-40%: 6-3
40-45%: 3-5
over 45%: 13-3

So we are 28-8 when shooting under 45% and 16-0 when above. Phoenix was 16-18 and 13-3. (note we have very similar distribution of shooting %)


Edit: updated with last 6 games for Spurs.
If I have time I'll check it for the Suns 82 games.
In the 7 more loss they had, they shoot 33%, 22%, 26% 53%, 28%, 35%, and 37%... I think it is safe to say they were highly dependent on 3pt

[Solid D]

The Spurs do live a lot out on the 3pt line though. They average 25.2% of the shots from the arc, whereas their opponents average 18.6% of their shots from 3-point land versus the Spurs. The Spurs take 5 more 3s per game than their opponents.

[Obstructed_View]

Actually, FT attempts are up slightly and FT % is up significantly. The OP had a point. Increased FTs account for half of the increased scoring compared to last season.

The increased pace is overstated now. They were playing at a substantially faster pace earlier this season, but they've slowed down. For the season as a whole, they average slightly less than one additional possession per game compared to last season.

I must have fucked up when I was researching. Whoops.

The increased pace has been overstated, but is in no way overstated by me, because I didn't use it to reference ppg. They've worked much harder this year to get turnovers and run off them, as well as running off missed baskets. Easy baskets are better than grind it out baskets.

[Obstructed_View]

The Spurs do live a lot out on the 3pt line though. They average 25.2% of the shots from the arc, whereas their opponents average 18.6% of their shots from 3-point land versus the Spurs. The Spurs take 5 more 3s per game than their opponents.

They also are right at the top of the league in limiting opponents' three attempts, so that might not be the best use of those stits.

[Mel_13]

I must have fucked up when I was researching. Whoops.

The increased pace has been overstated, but is in no way overstated by me, because I didn't use it to reference ppg. They've worked much harder this year to get turnovers and run off them, as well as running off missed baskets. Easy baskets are better than grind it out baskets.

The opponent's turnovers also slowed down considerably since the early part of the season. They were among the league leaders in turnovers forced % early in the season. They're tied for 19th now and much closer to the bottom 5 than to the top 5.

Clearly, they've looked for early scoring opportunities more frequently this season than in many years. I don't have stats (don't know where to look), but my calibrated eye says that they've continued to run off missed baskets as much as early in the season. They definitely continue to look for easy baskets. The stats I can find say that they're not forcing turnovers at nearly the same rate as early in the season (they're also committing fewer).

[Mel_13]

They also are right at the top of the league in limiting opponents' three attempts, so that might not be the best use of those stits.

Yep. That's how it's possible that they are 11th in FG % allowed and 23rd in 3pt % allowed, yet 9th in effective FG % allowed.

[underdawg]

Spurs 3pt % is up this year, but so is the 3 pt% of their opponents

While the rebounding for the Spurs about the same as last year (just a hair down,) but their opponents' rebounding is up - not sure how that's related to 3's, but interesting with Blair's emergence and Dice playing better.

[Obstructed_View]

I just found an interesting stat. In 2004 the Spurs were second in the NBA in opponent three point attempts with 951 (11.6 per game). Last year the Spurs were first in the same category with 1200 (14.6 per game). I'm not a good enough stat researcher, but I'm guessing that everyone's living on the three relative to ten years ago because the shooters are so much better.

[Solid D]

Orlando really lives by the three. Over 32% of their FG attempts are 3s. The statistics presented here by Mel and others have pretty well convinced me that the Spurs don't "live by the 3" as much as it seems.

I will say, though, that against the Grizzlies Sunday night, it was the five 3-pointers (4 by Bonner and 1 by Jefferson) and a foot on the line 2 by Manu that brought the Spurs back from down 7... to up by 1. Then after they went back down by 4, Manu nailed a huge 3 to bring them back to 74-73 and make it close the rest of the game.

[024]

they need to move the 3pt line back.

[MannyIsGod]

Damn some nice stats review in this thread. :tu

[Obstructed_View]

they need to move the 3pt line back.

I'd be interested in seeing them play a preseason with no three point line. I've had a theory that the three point line is fool's gold and that scoring would actually go up without it.

[TD 21]

People just won't stop looking for major deficiencies or downfalls with this team. When the Suns or Magic were burying teams from deep, it was recognized as a weapon. When the Spurs do it, it's "they live and die by the three", even though there's statistical evidence to the contrary. They were actually more reliant on it in their championship seasons, because of the inability of anyone outside of the big three to create and the lack of a transition game.

The reality is, this is a complete, explosive and lethal offensive team. They've got slashers, post play, shooters galore, a transition game, they're one of the best passing teams in the league and they execute their stuff better than anyone.

It's past time that people just accept that this is the most complete team in the league. Since the debacles in Boston and New York, their defensive field goal (they're now top 10 and ahead of the supposed defensive juggernaut Mavs) and three-point percentage have dropped considerably. Make any excuse you want about the competition in that time, we're talking well over a month now. At the moment, no one can call those two areas major problems. The latest talk is about the supposed lack of rebounding, but they're 11th in differential and 8th in total rebounds. I agree that they should be a better rebounding team than they are, because the have the capacity to be top five, like they were last season, but it's not like they're the Celtics, either. Also, you got to realize, they're not going to be excellent in every major category simultaneously.

[Solid D]

People just won't stop looking for major deficiencies or downfalls with this team. When the Suns or Magic were burying teams from deep, it was recognized as a weapon. When the Spurs do it, it's "they live and die by the three", even though there's statistical evidence to the contrary. They were actually more reliant on it in their championship seasons, because of the inability of anyone outside of the big three to create and the lack of a transition game.

The reality is, this is a complete, explosive and lethal offensive team. They've got slashers, post play, shooters galore, a transition game, they're one of the best passing teams in the league and they execute their stuff better than anyone.

It's past time that people just accept that this is the most complete team in the league. Since the debacles in Boston and New York, their defensive field goal (they're now top 10 and ahead of the supposed defensive juggernaut Mavs) and three-point percentage have dropped considerably. Make any excuse you want about the competition in that time, we're talking well over a month now. At the moment, no one can call those two areas major problems. The latest talk is about the supposed lack of rebounding, but they're 11th in differential and 8th in total rebounds. I agree that they should be a better rebounding team than they are, because the have the capacity to be top five, like they were last season, but it's not like they're the Celtics, either. Also, you got to realize, they're not going to be excellent in every major category simultaneously.

I'm not sure I see how you get "major deficiencies" from this thread. I see some excellent reasoning-through a question, based on statistical analysis, about what merely seems to be a tendency.

[TD 21]

I'm not sure I see how you get "major deficiencies" from this thread. I see some excellent reasoning-through a question, based on statistical analysis, about what merely seems to be a tendency.

You would. I see the typical "I found the reason the Spurs aren't legit contenders, time to hit the panic button" thread.

You know what "seems to be a tendency"? The Spurs winning at an 83% clip. Only they could do that and supposedly have 37 problems.

[Obstructed_View]

I think you're overthinking it. A team winning at an 83% clip needs to bust their ass to Peak After March.

[DesignatedT]

People just won't stop looking for major deficiencies or downfalls with this team. When the Suns or Magic were burying teams from deep, it was recognized as a weapon. When the Spurs do it, it's "they live and die by the three", even though there's statistical evidence to the contrary. They were actually more reliant on it in their championship seasons, because of the inability of anyone outside of the big three to create and the lack of a transition game.

The reality is, this is a complete, explosive and lethal offensive team. They've got slashers, post play, shooters galore, a transition game, they're one of the best passing teams in the league and they execute their stuff better than anyone.

It's past time that people just accept that this is the most complete team in the league. Since the debacles in Boston and New York, their defensive field goal (they're now top 10 and ahead of the supposed defensive juggernaut Mavs) and three-point percentage have dropped considerably. Make any excuse you want about the competition in that time, we're talking well over a month now. At the moment, no one can call those two areas major problems. The latest talk is about the supposed lack of rebounding, but they're 11th in differential and 8th in total rebounds. I agree that they should be a better rebounding team than they are, because the have the capacity to be top five, like they were last season, but it's not like they're the Celtics, either. Also, you got to realize, they're not going to be excellent in every major category simultaneously.

:tu

[spursbird]

I see the typical "I found the reason the Spurs aren't legit contenders, time to hit the panic button" thread.


And I think you misunderstand my point. Read the thread once more. I'm not hit the panic button. I imply from the stats that we don't rely on 3pt, and our wins come from more of the FTA. But our 3G% is really high so that I just want to make a discussion about it.

[spursbird]

I'd be interested in seeing them play a preseason with no three point line. I've had a theory that the three point line is fool's gold and that scoring would actually go up without it.
In that situation the Heat would go 72-10. And there will be much more slashers than shooters.

[Obstructed_View]

In that situation the Heat would go 72-10. And there will be much more slashers than shooters.

How exactly does the three point line contribute to defense?

[spursbird]

How exactly does the three point line contribute to defense?
What do you mean?

[Solid D]

And I think you misunderstand my point. Read the thread once more. I'm not hit the panic button. I imply from the stats that we don't rely on 3pt, and our wins come from more of the FTA. But our 3G% is really high so that I just want to make a discussion about it.

Exactly. Thanks for clarifying it for him and others that 1)did not see your intent or 2)tried to read too much into it.

[Obstructed_View]

What do you mean?

If an undersized heat team that's full of three point shooters suddenly gets better without a three point line, it must be because teams suddenly can't play defense against them. I'm interested how you think that's so.

In my estimation, the only change without a three point line is you have fewer guys shooting threes that shouldn't, and you have guys shooting outside shots based on the position of the defenders, which will actually spread the floor and increase the percentage of shots taken. In short, scoring would go up, which the NBA has been trying to make happen for a long time.

[Em-City]

i think that on offense, we depend waaaay more on @TP9network's penetration

Ok, let's see how things change now

[Solid D]

BUMP

Seeing how this series has gone so far with Memphis, being down 2 games to 1...if the Spurs don't live on 3-point shots, they certainly could use them about now.

The Spurs have several problem areas right now, but hitting their 3 point shots certainly would help to make up for some of the difficiencies.

Conversely, it has been the 3-point shot in the last minute of games 1 and 3 that secured the 2 victories for the Grizzlies.

Not having a 3 point shot to rely on has been somewhat discombobulating.

[Amuseddaysleeper]

Especially when you factor in that a lot of the 3's the Spurs have been getting are wide open. Neal and Jefferson are the worst at wide open 3 balls.

[Solid D]

Even Parker has been regularly missing open corner 3s, after hitting them at a high percentage earlier this season.