Reply With Quote
That doesn't matter. The Thunder collectively shot 52.7% from 15-23 feet against San Antonio. That chart with individual numbers doesn't change that. Do you know how weighted-statistics work?
http://hoopdata.com/teamshotlocs.aspx
OKC was average at the 15-23 foot shot? They led the in NBA in efficiency from that area. If they're average at that type of shot, which team is good or great at that type of shot? Man, what a fluke. The best 15-23 foot shooting team in basketball winning a series with their 15-23 foot shots!
I don't know what to argue with you tbh. If you don't think a team that consistently shoots 42% going to 52% is a big jump, ok, we just disagree. If you don't think when looking at the guys who played the lions share of minutes (the chart) that having everyone of them shoot above their average for 4 straight games (when getting the same looks that put them down 2-0) including some astronomical % increases (Durant 20%, Harden 32%, Thabo 34% & Collison 34%) is at all fluky, again, ok, I just disagree.
And in the context of this thread, if they get those same "wide open" looks against MIA while not scoring in the paint and shooting less than their average in FTs, they will lose and those %'s will look fluky.
Oh, and sure enough, the Spurs during the regular season gave up the 2nd highest percentage from 15-23 feet
http://hoopdata.com/oteamshotlocs.aspx
So in a playoff series, the team most efficient at shooting 15-23 footers playing against the 2nd worst 15-23 foot shot defense goes off from 15-23 feet. Wow, what a in fluke that must be!
Definitely poorly worded. My entire point was they were taking a shot that is an inefficient shot - even if they were the best - by design. They shot an amazing clip for that type of shot.http://hoopdata.com/teamshotlocs.aspx
OKC was average at the 15-23 foot shot? They led the in NBA in efficiency from that area. If they're average at that type of shot, which team is good or great at that type of shot? Man, what a fluke. The best 15-23 foot shooting team in basketball winning a series with their 15-23 foot shots!
Oh, and sure enough, the Spurs during the regular season gave up the 2nd highest percentage from 15-23 feet
http://hoopdata.com/oteamshotlocs.aspx
So in a playoff series, the team most efficient at shooting 15-23 footers playing against the 2nd worst 15-23 foot shot defense goes off from 15-23 feet. Wow, what a in fluke that must be!
Well for starters, you said OKC was average at taking that shot when they led the NBA in efficiency from that area. You clearly just pulled the "average at that shot" label out of your ass for the sake of your argument.
When it's the best team in the NBA at shooting 15-23 ft. shots going up against the 2nd worst team at defending 15-23 ft. shots, I really don't think that's a big jump.
The Spurs gave up the 2nd highest percent on 15-23 foot shots in the entire NBA. Do you really think it's fluky that players shoot a higher % from 15-23 ft. against San Antonio than they do against other teams? It seems pretty self explanatory that their shooting percentage from 15-23 feet would go up when they're playing against one of the worst teams at defending it.
Oh, and sure enough, the Spurs during the regular season gave up the 2nd highest percentage from 15-23 feet
http://hoopdata.com/oteamshotlocs.aspx
So in a playoff series, the team most efficient at shooting 15-23 footers playing against the 2nd worst 15-23 foot shot defense goes off from 15-23 feet. Wow, what a in fluke that must be!
I hope you realize how silly that is. Who cares if you a highest percentage of an inefficient shot? That's the point - you force them to shoot that shot and even if the hit their average, you win. OKC being the best (you're acting like almost every team isn't lumped right in with each other with regards to that shot and the percentages, which is obviously intellectually dishonest) doesn't mean they were good or that they didn't play well abover their head.
Oh, and sure enough, the Spurs during the regular season gave up the 2nd highest percentage from 15-23 feet
http://hoopdata.com/oteamshotlocs.aspx
So in a playoff series, the team most efficient at shooting 15-23 footers playing against the 2nd worst 15-23 foot shot defense goes off from 15-23 feet. Wow, what a in fluke that must be!
You trying to diminish a 10% jump in the context of this shot doesn't make it any less silly - despite how many
Hi. I'm dpg. I'm never wrong, because even when I'm wrong I'm somehow right. My asshole is bleeding.
What happened the next 4 games? Oh and the Thunder had a 10 point lead in the 4th in game 1.
Poorly worded but my point throughout was consistent. It was an astronomic increase on a tough shot. You keep saying they "led the nba..." which in a bubble is true, but when you look at the league average of 38% compared to the "league best" 42%, you start to see my point - its an inefficient shot that no one shoots well (even the "best" team at it).
This is another clear case of being intellectually dishonest with the stats while at the same time downplaying the statistical jump that we saw.When it's the best team in the NBA at shooting 15-23 ft. shots going up against the 2nd worst team at defending 15-23 ft. shots, I really don't think that's a big jump.
The Spurs gave up the 2nd highest percent on 15-23 foot shots in the entire NBA. Do you really think it's fluky that players shoot a higher % from 15-23 ft. against San Antonio than they do against other teams? It seems pretty self explanatory that their shooting percentage from 15-23 feet would go up when they're playing against one of the worst teams at defending it.
The Spurs, despite being "the second worst at defending the 15-23 foot shot" still allowed a percentage lower than what OKC shoots. No one is saying it might not go up; the key is by how much and for how long.
I just showed you what happened. Also, spurs had a 20 point lead in game two and an 18 point lead in game 6.
I hope that whenever we hoop dpg doesn't pull up for a wide open 15 footer. All layups for you buddy or else I'm ing you out for taking "inefficient shots." I don't care that you're 5'4, no 15 footers.
DPG: "In order to admit one is wrong, you must stand tall. And since I am short, you can understand why I can't do that."
You aren't trolling.
There are the flukes. You did find em.
That makes no sense.
You are.
Yeah, how silly it is to think the best team at a certain shot draining it at a high rate against one of the worst teams at defending said shot is a fluke!
But teams don't hit their average from 15-23 feet against San Antonio. They hit above their average. The stats show San Antonio's defense concedes that shot at a higher % than all but 1 team. Given that good teams exploit defensive weaknesses better than bad teams do, it makes sense OKC got more of a boost from San Antonio's sub-par 15-23 foot shooting than another team did. They're better at the shot than anyone else and will make bad defense from that area pay more than anyone else.
So being the best at something means they're average at it? If OKC wasn't good at shooting 15-23 foot shots, which team was? OKC is nearly 2 standard deviations away from the regular season average of all teams.
It's also intellectually dishonest (and flat out wrong with respect to every way statistics are analyzed) to think that OKC shooting 4.5% better than the NBA average over a 66 game sample size is insignificant while a 10% jump over a 6 game sample size is. If I wasn't lazy I'd find the % OKC shot from that range in each game and find the standard deviation of that. I guarantee you 52% wouldn't be an "outlier" in that data given the small sample size.
That's hyperbole. While technically speaking what you say is true, it's an inefficient shot that no one shoots a good percentage at - even the best teams. Which is why you hear the adage "jump shooting teams don't win in the playoffs"
You are also acting like you dropped some bombs and keep repeating the "if one team is the best and one team is the worst!!!!" - that was in Timvp's thread, and already accounted for by me in the assessment.
Make them pay. I guess shooting a ridiculous percentage compared to not only what they shoot, but also the league is making them pay. My argument is its not sustainable.But teams don't hit their average from 15-23 feet against San Antonio. They hit above their average. The stats show San Antonio's defense concedes that shot at a higher % than all but 1 team. Given that good teams exploit defensive weaknesses better than bad teams do, it makes sense OKC got more of a boost from San Antonio's sub-par 15-23 foot shooting than another team did. They're better at the shot than anyone else and will make bad defense from that area pay more than anyone else.
The fact the league average allowed is 38% and the Spurs as "the 2nd worst team in the league!!!" allowed 40% illustrates exactly what I'm talking about.
Again you repeating that doesn't make it less intellectually dishonest. I told you that one statement was poorly worded, but in looking at what I typed I feel I made my point clear, even if I used a poor way to describe it for one sentence. OKC was the best at shooting the shot, but that doesn't make it a good/efficient shot. Thats like being the best FT shooter on your team at 70%, that doesn't mean you are a good FT shooter. In the context of the league okc was good at that shot, but ultimately its a tough shot and if you get a healthy amount of those it's normally an issue. And it was for 2 games until they dramatically jumped that percentage.So being the best at something means they're average at it? If OKC wasn't good at shooting 15-23 foot shots, which team was? OKC is nearly 2 standard deviations away from the regular season average of all teams.
It's also intellectually dishonest (and flat out wrong with respect to every way statistics are analyzed) to think that OKC shooting 4.5% better than the NBA average over a 66 game sample size is insignificant while a 10% jump over a 6 game sample size is. If I wasn't lazy I'd find the % OKC shot from that range in each game and find the standard deviation of that. I guarantee you 52% wouldn't be an "outlier" in that data given the small sample size.
So just as you said, "so okc hit 1 out of 10 shots extra...", what's the difference in the league average in allowing 38% on those shots and the Spurs being "the 2nd worst team in the league!" at 40% with regards to impact?
OKC shot 42.6% on average and going by the regular season games had a standard deviation of 11.55% (I got bored and figured it out). Given the standard deviation, the fact we're talking about such a small sample size, them going from 42% to 52% over a 6 game stretch against a team that already gave up 2.8% higher than the average during the regular season would not even remotely be considered an outlier in statistics. It would be above average or above what the statistics hypothesize it would be, but it wouldn't be an outlier or a fluke.
That they're one of the worst teams at defending the shot?
Calling OKC "average" at 15-23 foot shots wasn't poor wording, it was flat out wrong. When you're the best at something, you're not average at it. You're saying it was poorly worded to deny the notion that you had no idea OKC was the most efficient team from that range before I brought it up. The word average has a distinct meaning and did not in any way fit the context with which you now claim that you were trying to use it.
It's a tough shot that bad teams miss and good teams make. The Spurs' strategy of letting teams shoot it works till they run into a team that actually can.
In the 4 games OKC won, they were 41 of 75 from 15-23 feet. In order to shoot their regular season average, they woulda gone 31 of 75 rather than 41 of 75, so 10 shots over 4 games, or 2.5 shots a game. Of all the other reasons possible for why the Spurs lost to OKC, you're hyperfocusing on the claim that they shoulda made 2.5 less midrange shots a game during their 4 game winning streak even though San Antonio designed its defense around letting them take those shots, mostly uncontested, and all year has let teams shoot the shot more efficiently than average.
Last edited by DUNCANownsKOBE; 06-11-2012 at 04:39 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions