3 Point Settings Topic

girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
Posted by bow2dacowz on 2/27/2012 12:44:00 PM (view original):
well since we are talking about making these decisions on an individual player basis and not a full team basis and tweaking one crappy FT shooting, high PER player from 0 to +1 i think the one oversimplifying is you. i dont think that one move for one player who might now take a couple more 3's is going to blow up your pound it inside strategy.
I'm not saying that's a strategy I want to execute. That was a response to a different post to make a point.

Let's break it down:

Let's say with the tweak in 3pt frequency, a guy gets two more ft attempts in a game. He's a 78% shooter. So his expected additional scoring on ft's is 1.56 pts.
Now let's say you executed the same strategy with a guy who is only a 65% shooter. His expected additional scoring on ft's is 1.3 pts.
So the expected difference between the good ft shooter and the weaker one is 1/4 of one point.

My point (in response to your original take) is that the difference in executing that strategy with a better ft shooter is very small. So I see no reason why such a small difference should dictate strategy,

(And further, while you are gaining an expected 1/4th of a pt, you are likely losing more than that by basing your decision on a small factor rather than the more important factors like shooting ability, type of defense, how good the defense is on the perimeter, etc. etc. etc. This is why I said initially that I wouldn't base my 3pt settings on the ft factor unless the decision is otherwise a toss-up and the ft is the tiebreaker.)
2/27/2012 2:41 PM (edited)
cornfused
Posts: 1492 (0)
Hall of Famer
2 235 11
Prospect
What I do, on a macro level (every ten games or so) is compare the expected points from a 3-point shot and the expected points from a 2-point shot.  If I'm giving up more than about a third of a point, I tweak the player's 3-pt settings.  I'm with girt in that the FT shooting shouldn't be anything but a tiebreaker.
2/27/2012 2:42 PM
bow2dacowz
Posts: 1135 (0)
Hall of Famer
20 40 415 1 1
Prospect
Posted by girt25 on 2/27/2012 2:41:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bow2dacowz on 2/27/2012 12:44:00 PM (view original):
well since we are talking about making these decisions on an individual player basis and not a full team basis and tweaking one crappy FT shooting, high PER player from 0 to +1 i think the one oversimplifying is you. i dont think that one move for one player who might now take a couple more 3's is going to blow up your pound it inside strategy.
I'm not saying that's a strategy I want to execute. That was a response to a different post to make a point.

Let's break it down:

Let's say with the tweak in 3pt frequency, a guy gets two more ft attempts in a game. He's a 78% shooter. So his expected additional scoring on ft's is 1.56 pts.
Now let's say you executed the same strategy with a guy who is only a 65% shooter. His expected additional scoring on ft's is 1.3 pts.
So the expected difference between the good ft shooter and the weaker one is 1/4 of one point.

My point (in response to your original take) is that the difference in executing that strategy with a better ft shooter is very small. So I see no reason why such a small difference should dictate strategy,

(And further, while you are gaining an expected 1/4th of a pt, you are likely losing more than that by basing your decision on a small factor rather than the more important factors like shooting ability, type of defense, how good the defense is on the perimeter, etc. etc. etc. This is why I said initially that I wouldn't base my 3pt settings on the ft factor unless the decision is otherwise a toss-up and the ft is the tiebreaker.)
and i'd like to also state that i never stated that was the sole setting that i base anything off rather that it is something i look hard at when making a decision about what to set my guys at. in addition i also take into account things like expected distro, PER rating, BH rating, etc.  i dont know if that is what constitutes a "tiebreaker" but that's how i do it.  and then like corn i use observation to judge what is working and what isnt every so often throughout the season and make tweaks as necessary.

i try not to turn this game into a big math problem as for me that would take away a lot of the enjoyment.  if thats what works for you, then so be it.
2/27/2012 3:12 PM
girt25
Posts: 2136 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 122 1 1
Rookie
I actually use almost no math at all, no spreadsheets, etc. I'd wager less than just about any top coach (guys like OR, billyg, iguana, etc. that really have the #'s down). It's really all feel. I worked that math out for you on the fly simply to illustrate my point -- which is that making ft percentage a significant part of the equation in determining 3pt frequency was a mistake.

The OP asked how to determine where to set 3p settings. And your simple answer was that "you looked hard at ft". I understand you didn't mean that you looked solely at ft. But my point was that to look hard at ft -- i.e. to make it a major factor in the decision -- was a mistake, and like it or not, when pushed I showed you the math to back up my point.
2/27/2012 4:08 PM
bow2dacowz
Posts: 1135 (0)
Hall of Famer
20 40 415 1 1
Prospect
sorry dude you can produce math to back up any points you want that doesn't mean that your way is the right way or the only way.

if you're talking adjustments that lead to extra free throws and expected points produced then you also have to look at points potentially lost by those same adjustments leading to fewer 3 pointers attempted or vice versa.  there is no perfect math or data to use in this situation to create a one size fits all solution because of all the factors you and I and others mentioned previously...opponent strength, expected +/- def settings, distro, and on and on. 

but that doesn't mean its not a factor that is useful to consider...and you certainly haven't proven it not to be.

your way works for you, and thats great.  my way works for me, and thats great.  other people have other ways, and thats fine too. let them make their own decisions rather than telling them that something is wrong and you've provided all the data when there is really no way to prove or disprove either side as being better in any given stuation. 
2/27/2012 4:19 PM
johnner26
Posts: 12 (0)
Hall of Famer
67 1
Prospect
Math or no math, it basically comes to how much control we want over the settings, IMHO.
I usually do +1, but sometimes too many shots end up going up that I probably didn't want to.
Even at 0, the results are sporadic so its hard to come to a clean conclusion.
2/27/2012 4:33 PM
rednation58
Posts: 630 (0)
Hall of Famer
53
Rookie
I've noticed that I can set certain players with the same distribution to +1 or 2 and some guys just flat out take more threes than others. I have heard that the players ratings come into play a bit when the type of shot taken is considered. If a player has 85 PER and 2 LP if he's on +2 he will jack up threes. If another player has 85 PER and 70 LP, on +2 he won't jack up as many threes because of his skill set. Idk if this is right but I have seen it to some degree work this way on my teams. 
2/27/2012 6:39 PM
bow2dacowz
Posts: 1135 (0)
Hall of Famer
20 40 415 1 1
Prospect
Posted by rednation58 on 2/27/2012 6:39:00 PM (view original):
I've noticed that I can set certain players with the same distribution to +1 or 2 and some guys just flat out take more threes than others. I have heard that the players ratings come into play a bit when the type of shot taken is considered. If a player has 85 PER and 2 LP if he's on +2 he will jack up threes. If another player has 85 PER and 70 LP, on +2 he won't jack up as many threes because of his skill set. Idk if this is right but I have seen it to some degree work this way on my teams. 
that is absolutely 100% true.
2/27/2012 9:04 PM
◂ Prev 12
3 Point Settings Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.