More 3's, the math (is a 30 footer a terrible shot?)

[thecampster]

So its come out that Quin wants the guys shooting more 3's and rather than have people think they know what that means, I'll give it my best shot.

The Hawks had 101.6 possessions per game last season.

The Hawks shot 48.3% from 2 on 92.4 attempts of those 30.5 3PA at 35.3%.

The average team loses 4 possessions per games to a blocked shot.

there are lost possessions in the mix, for the purposes of counting, of shots attempted that result in a shooting foul resulting in FTA. This is why the possessions never match the split out totals.

 

Basically there's about 17 possessions a game that result in a turnover or blocked shot.  I can't pull it now but stats show that most turnovers happen in the last 10 seconds of the shot clock. Every extra pass, every screen set, every rushed shot under the basket is an opportunity to lose a possession.

Stats also show that 3 point attempts lead to more run outs, more transition attempts.  you have a 13% lower chance to convert a 3 pointer (leading to a longer rebound)(25 percent of makes).

Stats also show that 3 point attempts later in the clock are converted at a higher rate due to more bad rotations being open.  

 

So the trade off, I shoot earlier and from 3 at a lower conversion rate and more runouts vs less turnovers (totally lost possession) and less blocked shots but at the cost of total free throws attempted.

 

 

So given the above, is Trae or any other player taking a 3 as soon as its open worth the risk to avoid the risk of turnover or block to?

 

If we sign an arbitrary percentage of 30% to the number of 3's converted when less than optimal and we recognize every turnover/block/transition is most likely to lead to .3 points more for the other team (difference between points per possession off transition vs points per possession out of bounds).

 

Math is something like: 10 quick 3/ranged 3 attempts = 9 points at the cost of 7 x .3 (2.1) more points  (net + 6.9) for the other squad minus the normal chance of scoring possession which is 1.15 points per 10 possessions x .84 (penalized for potential lost possessions) vs 1.6 x .3 (.48 more points)  (net +9.18). 

 

There are assumptions in there but it looks like the net difference of letting your 3 flag fly is -2.28 points per game.

 

However, how much does the more aggressive play loosen up the defense for more scoring efficiency the other 90 plays a game?  The math gets deep but I'll open it up for discussion.  This is a weak first crack at this off the top of my head.

[theheroatl]

So what is the real fundamental reason for taking more 3’s for an average 3 point shooting % team?

Is the rational that the extra 1 point makes up for the shooting percentage over a period of time?

For an average % 3 point shooting team does it matter to take a rushed 3 or a 3 later in the clock? As long as a 3 is launched isn’t that the point?

Edited October 30, 2023 by theheroatl

[thecampster]

9 minutes ago, theheroatl said:

So what is the real fundamental reason for taking more 3’s for an average 3 point shooting % team?

Is the rational that the extra 1 point makes up for the shooting percentage over a period of time?

For an average % 3 point shooting team does it matter to take a rushed 3 or a 3 later in the clock? As long as a 3 is launched isn’t that the point?

There's a couple of ideas.  Shooting 3's stretches the defense increasing the efficiency of 2's, leading to more fouls (farther a defender travels to defend, the more apt he is to foul). Things like that. Easier to sneak offensive rebounds, makes passing lanes wider, etc.

 

 

[AtLaS]

6 minutes ago, thecampster said:

There's a couple of ideas.  Shooting 3's stretches the defense increasing the efficiency of 2's, leading to more fouls (farther a defender travels to defend, the more apt he is to foul). Things like that. Easier to sneak offensive rebounds, makes passing lanes wider, etc.

 

 

Ehh, not sure taking more threes leads to more fouls.  But you are correct it stretches the D and can open up the lanes a bit more.  There is one big downside though.  Missing threes often leads to fast breaks/quick buckets on the other end before you can get fully back on D.  

I would love to see defensive stats after a made bucket, vs after a missed bucket.  The more threes you take, the more shots you will miss overall.  When the opposing team has to take the ball out of the net, everyone is back on D and fully setup ready to defend.  Not the case when you brick a long 3

[Peoriabird]

Plus the quality of the 3 matters the most

[AHF]

56 minutes ago, theheroatl said:

For an average % 3 point shooting team does it matter to take a rushed 3 or a 3 later in the clock? As long as a 3 is launched isn’t that the point?

I'm not sure I understand this.  When you dig into the numbers, you will find varying %s tying out to different types of shot opportunities. 

* Uncontested corner 3's are going to be the best and you want all of those shots you can get just like you want every dunk or layup you can get. 

* Shots with the clock expiring are ones that you have little choice about and are usually terrible (but don't lend themselves to a better alternative). 

* All other shots are going to be a situation where we should have a strategy around how to get good looks and which ones we'd want to take or not.  A contested 3pt attempt early in the clock is going to be both a lower % shot and is going to mean you closed the door on better shots you could have taken in the alternative had you continued to run your offense for longer so you absolutely want to very few if any of those.  In contrast, open 24' looks in the flow of the offense are shots that you are going to generally want to take whenever they arise as long as you aren't talking about Clint, etc.  If you don't take them, it hurts spacing and open 24' looks tend to lead to good outcomes. 

 

I am sure one of the high priorities for Quin is figuring out how to maximize the number of "good" looks from 3 (regardless of the results figuring they will stabilize over time) and minimize the number of undesirable "bad" looks.

[theheroatl]

17 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

Plus the quality of the 3 matters the most

Perhaps only quality 3’s have positive impact vs defensive stops on misses

[theheroatl]

4 minutes ago, AHF said:

I'm not sure I understand this.  When you dig into the numbers, you will find varying %s tying out to different types of shot opportunities. 

* Uncontested corner 3's are going to be the best and you want all of those shots you can get just like you want every dunk or layup you can get. 

* Shots with the clock expiring are ones that you have little choice about and are usually terrible (but don't lend themselves to a better alternative). 

* All other shots are going to be a situation where we should have a strategy around how to get good looks and which ones we'd want to take or not.  A contested 3pt attempt early in the clock is going to be both a lower % shot and is going to mean you closed the door on better shots you could have taken in the alternative had you continued to run your offense for longer so you absolutely want to very few if any of those.  In contrast, open 24' looks in the flow of the offense are shots that you are going to generally want to take whenever they arise as long as you aren't talking about Clint, etc.  If you don't take them, it hurts spacing and open 24' looks tend to lead to good outcomes. 

 

I am sure one of the high priorities for Quin is figuring out how to maximize the number of "good" looks from 3 (regardless of the results figuring they will stabilize over time) and minimize the number of undesirable "bad" looks.

I would counter that a rotational offense that is looking for open 3 corner shots followed by other subsequent open 2’s would be better than forcing the idea of 3 3 3 3 anywhere 

 

Figure statically the highest scoring shots by player and rotate the possession to find them in order.

a corner 3 by Bogi or Dre is more of a priority than a hook shot from CC

 

1. Corner 3

2. Trae Floater

3. DJM midrange

4. JJ PNR

Edited October 30, 2023 by theheroatl

[AHF]

48 minutes ago, AtLaS said:

I would love to see defensive stats after a made bucket, vs after a missed bucket.  The more threes you take, the more shots you will miss overall.  When the opposing team has to take the ball out of the net, everyone is back on D and fully setup ready to defend.  Not the case when you brick a long 3

Agree.  Any type of holistic evaluation would need to take that into account because made baskets absolutely lead to better defensive results just as defensive stops lead to better offense on the other end. 

The % of offensive rebounds on 3's and long 3's is something you'd need to factor in as well.  Clearly, the NBA as a whole has proven that the tradeoff is well worth it in terms of moving from the ratio of 3's to non-3's from where it was back in the 90's to where it is today.  

[AHF]

1 minute ago, theheroatl said:

I would counter that a rotational offense that is looking for open 3 corner shots followed by other subsequent open 2’s would be better than forcing the idea of 3 3 3 3 anywhere 

 

Figure statically the highest scoring shots by player and rotate the possession to find them in order.

If that was the case, we'd see teams play more like 90's teams and I can't think of a championship team that played like that in the last decade.  Even the teams that are not among the leaders absolutely do not play like that.  For example, the Lakers title was won with a team that took 36% of their total shots from 3 and only a small portion of those are corner 3's.  And they finished 23rd in the league in 3pt attempts.  

Every team that played the way you are talking about by prioritizing like below has gone the way of the dinosaur:

1) dunks

2) corner 3's

3) all other open 2's

over 

open non-corner 3's

[AHF]

My prediction is that last year's Hawks team will be the closest you will see anyone philosophically to what you are talking about anywhere in Atlanta for the foreseeable future.  (Where the team makes a conscious decision to eschew the 3 and emphasize the 2 even though that is still miles away from earlier 2pt centric offenses that probably better embody what you are talking about.)

[JeffS17]

I think the ceiling is way higher for the type of offense we're running right now.  Under Nate, we had very few turnovers, which was great, but we also had a more difficult shot selection.  The emphasis was on getting more possessions through offensive boards and low turnovers.  It was a much different approach -- the goal to not necessarily shoot more efficiently (3>2) but to maximize the amount of possessions/opportunities to score versus the other team.  Quin is taking a more modern approach where we optimize for the most efficient types of shots (fast break points, dunks/points in paint, and 3 pointers) with less of an emphasis on keeping turnovers down and "winning matchups".  Quin doesn't look at individual matchups to the same degree Nate does and looks holistically at how the whole lineup matches up with the other team and creates team opportunities.  And his defensive scheme looks way better -- it requires more effort but when it's clicking (last night) you can really tell how effective communicative team defense can be with timely help and rotations.

 

In short, I think Nate was running a very conservative, old school, offense that we basically peaked under.  We found a local max of how good we could be and there was not a lot of upside without changing scheme.  Now, we will probably have more variability in the short term, but once this offense gets clicking like it did last night, on a routine basis, we're going to be very hard to stop.  And as a side note, if it was not for Trae, Nate's offense would have looked much, much, worse.

[Gray Mule]

Capela shoots perhaps one of the highest % of any Hawk.  Think on this while discussing the 3 point shooting.  Problem is, most all of Capela's made shots are within 2 feet of the basket.

Also, a missed three is no guarantee that your opponent will get a fast break dunk.  

I'll bet the difference in the % of two's and three's will be a lot closer to the same if you eliminate layups and dunks.  When Atlanta is taking two's and making them and our opponent is taking and making three's, soon we will be far behind.  We all know that a team cannot survive taking only three point shots.   We also know we can't survive unless we take and make our share of the long ball.

There is no guarantee that you will not be fouled when attempting a three.  

Just some things to think about.

[AHF]

Here is an article on it from a couple years ago with interesting stuff.

https://www.thespax.com/nba/the-increasingly-popular-deep-three-point-shot/

 

[Diesel]

The whole board has been spewed with this topic.  I just want to state my understanding of one phase of it. 

To me... The Trae 30 footer is something that he does to get the defenses attention. 

What I mean is that in previous offenses, we ran primarily the 1-5 or 1-4 PNR.   In those times, when Trae's man stayed under or went with the pick player, Trae would step back and hit the three. 

To me, I hated the shot but I could stomach it because without it, teams would just crowd the paint and kill all of Trae's other offense.

His other offense is the GOAT FLOAT and the Alley opp.   Trae becomes most dangerous when his man is on his heels backing up and can't make a move to defend the floater.  It gives Trae all the power. 

When a team doesn't have to worry about the three pointer, they can sit in the paint and designate a player to run out at Trae while the others defend the paint.    That's what Miami did in the playoffs that year.   They countered Trae by basically establishing a Triple team.  One guy to run out and two more players shading him on the drive and covering his inside passing lanes.  That left Dre and JC Wide open.   At that point, OO was not Clint and didn't have the skill to finish the PNR.   JC's finger was done and his feet too.  And Dre did prosper in the final game because he always had an open drive to the basket.   But when Trae would go back, Gabe or Lowry was with him on the 30 footer.   When he would run past them, Bam and Butler would pick him up in the lane. 

That's when somebody said, we should get a second PG or an OG to play beside Trae.   Make sense... it's Steve Nash answer.   I still believe that Spyda would have been better than DJ offensively because Spyda is a better shooter.   But we needed to cover defense too.   So Barbosa and Raja Bell and Diaw are out of the league now...  DJ is a good choice. 

With DJ... the 30 footer still has the same place... it opens his game. 

That's why these first three games, we have seen the 1-5 PNR a few times.. Snyder didn't erase them from the book because it works for Trae.  But there's a whole lot of other plays and sets that we run now. It's going to be hard for teams to game plan us.   As we continue, our scoring has gotten better.   51, 61, 68...  Those are our first half scoring for the last three games.  It's tremendous.   It says our offense is getting things together.   Familiarity.   You see it with every player.   Especially Hunter and JJ.   Just wait!!!

BUT..........

Spoiler

Trae's offense is going to be noneffective vs. Wimbey....   This dude is amazing.   He can recover and make up ground better than anybody in the History of the game and he's only played a few.  He blocked a Wiggins three pointer..... He met the ball at 9 feet.   He was standing about 5 feet away from wiggins.   Trae's Floater has no chance against this guy. 

 

 

[bird_dirt]

Anyone who wants Trae to stop shooting from 30+ feet is crazy. 

 

[TheNorthCydeRises]

2 hours ago, bird_dirt said:

Anyone who wants Trae to stop shooting from 30+ feet is crazy. 

 

 

I keep telling people this, but they think it's such a horrible shot.

He's fully concentrating and taking his time, when he shoots the logo 3.  Common sense would lead you to believe that it is a low % shot.  But not for Trae.

The dude shoots far worse on 3s closer to the line, because he's trying to get the shot off as quick as he can.  Especially when he has the ball in his hands.

Now in this new offense, maybe more open looks can be created for him.  But even with that, the 30 footer ( in rhythm ), is a good shot for him.

 

There is a video talking about points per shot or FG%s, and they talked about Trae's long 3.  I thought it was posted on here by someone, but I may have seen it somewhere else.

[JayBirdHawk]

15 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

keep telling people this, but they think it's such a horrible shot.