Where did you get that data?  Can you include offensive systems?

Posted by dahsdebater on 6/1/2012 5:56:00 PM (view original):
Where did you get that data?  Can you include offensive systems?

Players  Ratings -> D3 -> PF (C), sort via per. All these players have per higher than 40. Logic dictates that 3pt% with per at 35-40 would be even lower.

I'm not disputing having your PF/C shoot 3s have worked for you on several occasions (just as some of the guys I listed have shot .350+, with one guy shooting in the .400s on volume), but its an ineffective way to run an offense. 

Yep, would totally agree, tianyi.

Tianyi, isn't efficient shooting a function of your alternatives, 2pt% vs 3pt% you said that .35 from 3 point range is borderline efficient for you which would translate to .525 from 2; if someone doesn't shoot near either of those numbers do you cut their distro?

I once had a defensive stopper at center who had a PER around 20 or 30. His LP was 1. This freakish talent set was optimized by going with a distro of "0" but at +2. He ended his career shooting just above 30% from 3 on very very few attempts. But it was still a higher percentage than his put-back bricks. I'm guessing he was far sighted.

Here's an interestingly different d3 PF ...

http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/GameLog.aspx?tid=3043&pid=2088339

http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Stats.aspx?tid=13675&pid=2086591

Posted by bakerbarnett on 6/2/2012 12:12:00 PM (view original):
Tianyi, isn't efficient shooting a function of your alternatives, 2pt% vs 3pt% you said that .35 from 3 point range is borderline efficient for you which would translate to .525 from 2; if someone doesn't shoot near either of those numbers do you cut their distro?

It's not nearly that simple; field goal percentage isn't a terribly good indicator of efficiency. Shooting a 3p won't draw a foul, which impacts not only the individual player's efficiency, but team efficiency as well (getting into the bonus faster and more frequently, etc.)

That isn't to say that shooting the 3 can't be quite valuable, only that looking at the way you suggest above doesn't supply an accurate picture of efficiency.