OK.. So that data by Benis DOES show that 3pt percentage is unchanged while number of 3 pt shots goes down.

So, I guess the next discussion should be what would someone expect and why.

One could argue that playing a +5 means you are trying to TAKE AWAY the 3pt shot by playing defense a specific way (which it does).

One could also argue that while guarding the outside shot more, and forcing you to take less 3pt shots, your actual effectiveness at playing defense doesn't change based on forcing a shot closer or further from the basket.. But by your actual attributes. That is not what I expected that +5 meant (I figured it would reduce effectiveness of 3pt shots as well).

So I guess part of the discussion would be .. Does that make sense and is that what we want. By setting +5 you are forcing a team to shoot a different shot than they want to take. Your ability to defend the 3 (ie, force a lower percentage) is based solely on your defender's ability (his attributes) and you don't get any better (or worse) at playing defense based on your positioning .. You just change where a player can take an open shot.

So playing a zero means you are not trying to change where the other team takes shots and playing a - 2 means you are trying to force the other team to take less inside and more outside shots. Playing a +2 means you are trying to force them to take more inside shots. +5 and - 5 are just more pronounced attempts by you to force the other teams shot selection (inside or outside shots .. Closer or further from the basket).

Again, not what I expected.. But is that good or bad?

Well yeah its bad for the reason Mully already stated. When the other team goes into quick shot, they ignore the +5 and jack 3s which makes the setting worthless and it doesn't influence anything. They should be driving into the paint to get a quick bucket instead.

Posted by hughesjr on 5/9/2018 3:06:00 AM (view original):
OK.. So that data by Benis DOES show that 3pt percentage is unchanged while number of 3 pt shots goes down.

So, I guess the next discussion should be what would someone expect and why.

One could argue that playing a +5 means you are trying to TAKE AWAY the 3pt shot by playing defense a specific way (which it does).

One could also argue that while guarding the outside shot more, and forcing you to take less 3pt shots, your actual effectiveness at playing defense doesn't change based on forcing a shot closer or further from the basket.. But by your actual attributes. That is not what I expected that +5 meant (I figured it would reduce effectiveness of 3pt shots as well).

So I guess part of the discussion would be .. Does that make sense and is that what we want. By setting +5 you are forcing a team to shoot a different shot than they want to take. Your ability to defend the 3 (ie, force a lower percentage) is based solely on your defender's ability (his attributes) and you don't get any better (or worse) at playing defense based on your positioning .. You just change where a player can take an open shot.

So playing a zero means you are not trying to change where the other team takes shots and playing a - 2 means you are trying to force the other team to take less inside and more outside shots. Playing a +2 means you are trying to force them to take more inside shots. +5 and - 5 are just more pronounced attempts by you to force the other teams shot selection (inside or outside shots .. Closer or further from the basket).

Again, not what I expected.. But is that good or bad?

People are conflating a few different issues here.

The Benis data doesn’t show that setting doesn’t affect effectiveness. It’s comparing different teams, different players, etc. It certainly does show that it strongly affects tendency, which I suspect a lot of us already knew. Year over year data doesn’t really address the core of mully’s complaint, which is a +5 setting doesn’t dramatically reduce effectiveness.

Is it good or bad? Neither. It’s the game that exists.

You can argue that a +5 defense should encourage players to drive for quick buckets. The problem is that human opponents also set late game tendencies. If your opponent has late game settings to jack 3s when down by x with y minutes to go, then that’s what it’s going to do. If everyone set their offensive late game setting to 0 in those situations, a +5 defense would certainly produce more drives than deep bombs.

Right. But what we don't know is what impact, if any, your defense positioning actually plays in quickshot mode. What I mean is.. During end of game when they hit quickshot offense, there may be a different defense too. Or, while +5 may not impact the defense at normal times.. Maybe it does at end of game in the quickshot If it doesn't, maybe it should.