As I was gameplanning for tonight's game I began to think about tempo and a question popped into my head regarding shooting %'s for each tempo.
I was wondering if shooting percentages increased as you slowed down the tempo.
I don't have any data to support one way or another, ( maybe I will see what I can find on the subject,) I was just curious if one was better than the others.
It is my understanding that tempo only has to do with how deep into the shotclock a team takes it before they shoot the ball. And that this has no bearing on the quality of shot that is taken. So by this logic it would be reasonable to assume that no tempo has a better shooting % than any other.

Curious at to other peoples thoughts on the matter.

If you have a deep team, your shooting percentage should not be affected too much. However, if you have a short bench, STA is going to come in to play, and the quality of your players shots on the floor is going to really take a hit late in the game with uptempo. At least, that's my experience. I don't have any stats to prove it, but my experience is that the team will suffer late in games with a high tempo and lower stamina.

Posted by pajamainc on 2/23/2011 5:39:00 PM (view original):
As I was gameplanning for tonight's game I began to think about tempo and a question popped into my head regarding shooting %'s for each tempo.
I was wondering if shooting percentages increased as you slowed down the tempo.
I don't have any data to support one way or another, ( maybe I will see what I can find on the subject,) I was just curious if one was better than the others.
It is my understanding that tempo only has to do with how deep into the shotclock a team takes it before they shoot the ball. And that this has no bearing on the quality of shot that is taken. So by this logic it would be reasonable to assume that no tempo has a better shooting % than any other.

Curious at to other peoples thoughts on the matter.

the CS line was that tempo did not affect fg%. but i think that was largely misinterpreted by the user base, its probably where you got the misconception that tempo has no bearing on the quality of shot taken.

i am almost positive that what CS meant is, on average, tempo does not affect fg%, they were trying to simplify tempo for people. but in reality, they meant that on average, tempo does not affect fg% because opposing effects balance out. uptempo leads to more fast break opps, which are high fg% shots. this balances the decrease in fg% in the half court. i paid a lot of attention to this in the old engine when i cared, and it was clear to me my opponents fg% went down when they played uptempo. my team had great speed, which really limited their positive effect from fast break points, and great defensive capabilities, which greatened the effect of their rushing the shots. i *loved* for teams to play uptempo against me, because i completely tore them apart, in general it halved the other team's chance of winning. but things may have changed a lot in the new engine. it seems to me uptempo holds up better fg% wise than it used to, i really am not that sure though, its a subtle thing and i haven't watched it closely enough to say anything for sure.

In fact, my (admittedly anecdotal) experience with uptempo -- and this was mostly with the old engine -- seemed quite significant and repeatable:
--lower FG%
--more TO
--fewer assists
--more offensive rebounds

Despite admin's constant insistence that uptempo did not affect the quality of the shot whatsoever, time and again that seemed to me to be completely false.  The pattern I see is of a team trying to get a shot off faster, leading to fewer passes before shots (lower assists), worse shots (lower FG%), and more scrambling below the hoop by teams not necessarily set on offense/defense (more off. rebs).  The increase in TO's may just have been from more possessions, though it may have also been due to trying to get off a shot that maybe you shouldn't have and getting stripped, double-dribbling, etc.  At least under the old engine, this seemed clear to me not just game after game, but year after year.