LST, Let me just throw out a bunch of numbers here in terms of the Wolves and their shot distribution and efficiency relative to the rest of the NBA:
Shot distribution:
0-3 feet - 28% of shots (ranks 20th in the NBA)
3-10 feet - 16% (11th)
10-16 feet - 11% (13th)
16 - < 3pt - 26% (1st)
3 Pt - 19% (30th)
Shot efficiency:
0-3 feet - 63% (9th)
3-10 feet - 41% (7th)
10-16 feet - 37% (26th)
16 - < 3pt - 40% (14th)
3 pt - 33% (26th)
Overall efficiency:
eFG% (combines 2s and 3s) - 48% (23rd)
TS% - (2s, 3s, and FTMs) - 53% (20th)
We obviously are strong when it comes to shots near the basket and by no means should we be discouraging the likes of Wiggins and Shabazz from getting to the rim. Yet we lead the league in long 2s, so why is it so difficult to re-distribute some of those shots we hit at a 40% rate to beyond the arc, where we shoot 33% (50% eFG%)? It's not like Sam isn't allowing jump shots because obviously we take a ton of them in the dreaded 16 to < 3pt range.
Shooting
-
Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
- Posts: 13844
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Shooting
....by the way, this was the exact same issue as last year, so Mitchell is definitely no different than Flip in this regard.
As for Tim's comment on being able to only be great in a few areas, I agree. The issue isn't about trying to turn us into Golden State or to get away from getting to the basket. It's about moving into the current century of offense and go from dreadful to at least passable as a 3-point shooting team. That means instead of popping to 20 feet, KAT should be popping to 23 feet. They are both off the same play and designed to get him an outside shot. One is just worth 50% more points than the other. It's not a hard change to make!
As for Tim's comment on being able to only be great in a few areas, I agree. The issue isn't about trying to turn us into Golden State or to get away from getting to the basket. It's about moving into the current century of offense and go from dreadful to at least passable as a 3-point shooting team. That means instead of popping to 20 feet, KAT should be popping to 23 feet. They are both off the same play and designed to get him an outside shot. One is just worth 50% more points than the other. It's not a hard change to make!
-
SameOldNudityDrew
- Posts: 3127
- Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Shooting
Enjoy this thread, guys.
The best parts of this discussion focus less about individuals and more about team issues.
Can somebody tell me the story of this Penberthy guy? He was Rubio's shooting coach for a while right, and for the team as a whole? And I thought he left for another team or something. Was there any noticeable improvement in our shooting corresponding to when he was around? Anybody know if/how much our guys practice with a shooting coach?
The best parts of this discussion focus less about individuals and more about team issues.
Can somebody tell me the story of this Penberthy guy? He was Rubio's shooting coach for a while right, and for the team as a whole? And I thought he left for another team or something. Was there any noticeable improvement in our shooting corresponding to when he was around? Anybody know if/how much our guys practice with a shooting coach?
Re: Shooting
SameOldDrew wrote:Enjoy this thread, guys.
The best parts of this discussion focus less about individuals and more about team issues.
Can somebody tell me the story of this Penberthy guy? He was Rubio's shooting coach for a while right, and for the team as a whole? And I thought he left for another team or something. Was there any noticeable improvement in our shooting corresponding to when he was around? Anybody know if/how much our guys practice with a shooting coach?
Penberthy was offered to stay on as shooting coach but he declined because he wanted to stay close to his family and wanted to keep working with other players as well. He is still working with a number of wolves players regularly as a consultant.
Re: Shooting
LST you should look at Zach's per minute 3 point attempts in his freshman year at UCLA and I think you will see It compares very favorably to the rate of guys you claim were such higher volume 3 point shooters coming out of college.
I do think personnel has contributed to the lack of 3 point shooting but I think Q's point he has brought up over and over against for years now about how is it this team can't have guys shoot the 3 well whether is vets or young players is a good point. Think about some guys Kahn brought in Wes Johnson Webster Ellington Budinger Beasely AR Flynn Rubio even Hummel those younger players all had some level of success or upside to shoot 3's and basically none of them lived up to what you could reasonably hope. Of course some of that was due to injury for a number of those guys but you would think at least one of those dudes would have busted out and been a guy that rained down some 3's but it didn't happen. Ellington had solid percentages but he was sadly so streaky you couldn't rely on him hitting them game to game. Meanwhile teams like the Spurs take guys that had little to no success in shooting 3's and they become good. Sure it's the Spurs but why can't the Wolves at least get lucky or something on one young player over a multi year period. It's bizarre. Unfathomable. Head scratching. On top of that a number of vets struggled over their short career shooting that shot for the Wolves.
There has to be a multitude of factors over time since there really isn't much of anything constant for more than maybe 3 years at most during the past 6+ years. This team represents a new era but it's still not getting up 3's or finding guys with good looks despite only having 2 players on the entire roster that can't or won't shoot a 3 in Andre Miller and Pek and the later hasn't even played a game yet this year.
One thing people seem to leave out when talking about shooting 3's is it certainly is a double edged sword. You come down jack up a bunch of three's long rebounds lead to translation jackets for the other team and suddenly you are getting run out of the building. I know nobody is asking for that type of 3 point offense but the 3 point shot can be a bad thing if players use it too much ad at the wrong times.
The reality is most of us don't really like the offense in general we see regardless whether they take 3 point shots or not. I've seen some signs especially early in games in recent games of what good ball movement this team might be capable of and what this coaching staff might be preaching. It can take time. Sam has talked about teaching guys individual habits. Maybe he has concentrated more on those things at times than team offensive flow. Idk I am not in practice but I do think sometimes we expect a little too much from this team because it is talented. It has one vet under the age of 32 (Pek hasn't played yet) that's played in more than 3 seasons (Rubio) and he has his own issues including coming off a major injury. Some people point to Orlando and yeah they have a young team too but they also have young guys with at least a year more experience than the Wolves young guys. Their prime young vet Vucevic is a pretty good guy to lean on. Everybody would agree Skiles has a strong reputation of getting teams to play well right away and has done it more times than Sam. It would be surprising for a Skiles team really suck. My point is that I do think there should be a little more patience at this point but I get why there isn't.
As for 3 point shooting I look at Payne and Bazz ready and willing to fire up 3's and he fact that Sam wants Belly to shoot and score the ball as indicators he wants guys to let it fly. Of course the question many of us ask is if the coaching staff are putting guys in the right positions to do that is the bigger question. To me at this point with a lot to consider with the situation we are in with this team and franchise I think it's a bit too nuanced to say for sure. It's an interesting discussion as always.
Note: I am not saying Sam and his staff are doing great or Do I fully endorse them this year or beyond this year but I think it's possible they are doing a solid job considering the situation they are in and possibly doing an above average job of developing the young players.
I do think personnel has contributed to the lack of 3 point shooting but I think Q's point he has brought up over and over against for years now about how is it this team can't have guys shoot the 3 well whether is vets or young players is a good point. Think about some guys Kahn brought in Wes Johnson Webster Ellington Budinger Beasely AR Flynn Rubio even Hummel those younger players all had some level of success or upside to shoot 3's and basically none of them lived up to what you could reasonably hope. Of course some of that was due to injury for a number of those guys but you would think at least one of those dudes would have busted out and been a guy that rained down some 3's but it didn't happen. Ellington had solid percentages but he was sadly so streaky you couldn't rely on him hitting them game to game. Meanwhile teams like the Spurs take guys that had little to no success in shooting 3's and they become good. Sure it's the Spurs but why can't the Wolves at least get lucky or something on one young player over a multi year period. It's bizarre. Unfathomable. Head scratching. On top of that a number of vets struggled over their short career shooting that shot for the Wolves.
There has to be a multitude of factors over time since there really isn't much of anything constant for more than maybe 3 years at most during the past 6+ years. This team represents a new era but it's still not getting up 3's or finding guys with good looks despite only having 2 players on the entire roster that can't or won't shoot a 3 in Andre Miller and Pek and the later hasn't even played a game yet this year.
One thing people seem to leave out when talking about shooting 3's is it certainly is a double edged sword. You come down jack up a bunch of three's long rebounds lead to translation jackets for the other team and suddenly you are getting run out of the building. I know nobody is asking for that type of 3 point offense but the 3 point shot can be a bad thing if players use it too much ad at the wrong times.
The reality is most of us don't really like the offense in general we see regardless whether they take 3 point shots or not. I've seen some signs especially early in games in recent games of what good ball movement this team might be capable of and what this coaching staff might be preaching. It can take time. Sam has talked about teaching guys individual habits. Maybe he has concentrated more on those things at times than team offensive flow. Idk I am not in practice but I do think sometimes we expect a little too much from this team because it is talented. It has one vet under the age of 32 (Pek hasn't played yet) that's played in more than 3 seasons (Rubio) and he has his own issues including coming off a major injury. Some people point to Orlando and yeah they have a young team too but they also have young guys with at least a year more experience than the Wolves young guys. Their prime young vet Vucevic is a pretty good guy to lean on. Everybody would agree Skiles has a strong reputation of getting teams to play well right away and has done it more times than Sam. It would be surprising for a Skiles team really suck. My point is that I do think there should be a little more patience at this point but I get why there isn't.
As for 3 point shooting I look at Payne and Bazz ready and willing to fire up 3's and he fact that Sam wants Belly to shoot and score the ball as indicators he wants guys to let it fly. Of course the question many of us ask is if the coaching staff are putting guys in the right positions to do that is the bigger question. To me at this point with a lot to consider with the situation we are in with this team and franchise I think it's a bit too nuanced to say for sure. It's an interesting discussion as always.
Note: I am not saying Sam and his staff are doing great or Do I fully endorse them this year or beyond this year but I think it's possible they are doing a solid job considering the situation they are in and possibly doing an above average job of developing the young players.
-
longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
- Posts: 9432
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Shooting
Q12543 wrote:LST, Let me just throw out a bunch of numbers here in terms of the Wolves and their shot distribution and efficiency relative to the rest of the NBA:
Shot distribution:
0-3 feet - 28% of shots (ranks 20th in the NBA)
3-10 feet - 16% (11th)
10-16 feet - 11% (13th)
16 - < 3pt - 26% (1st)
3 Pt - 19% (30th)
Shot efficiency:
0-3 feet - 63% (9th)
3-10 feet - 41% (7th)
10-16 feet - 37% (26th)
16 - < 3pt - 40% (14th)
3 pt - 33% (26th)
Overall efficiency:
eFG% (combines 2s and 3s) - 48% (23rd)
TS% - (2s, 3s, and FTMs) - 53% (20th)
We obviously are strong when it comes to shots near the basket and by no means should we be discouraging the likes of Wiggins and Shabazz from getting to the rim. Yet we lead the league in long 2s, so why is it so difficult to re-distribute some of those shots we hit at a 40% rate to beyond the arc, where we shoot 33% (50% eFG%)? It's not like Sam isn't allowing jump shots because obviously we take a ton of them in the dreaded 16 to < 3pt range.
Great stuff, q. Where do you get this, and do they have similar information broken down by individual?
Re: Shooting
Those numbers that Q posted can be found at least from basketball-reference.com and yes they have them also on individual level.
-
longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
- Posts: 9432
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Shooting
Mikkeman wrote:Those numbers that Q posted can be found at least from basketball-reference.com and yes they have them also on individual level.
Thanks Mikkeman...I've never noticed the distance shooting stats by player there before, and it's very informative. First of all, my impression that Towns makes about 70% of his jumpers beyond 10 feet is way off...he's closer to 50%. So that's still an efficient shot, but Q's point is well taken...he only needs to move back a few feet and hit 33.5% of those shots to be equally efficient. Gorgui is also efficient on the mid-rangers at 50%, and hasn't shown an abiillty to move back yet. KG and Tay are also efficient from 16 feet to the line at 47% and 52% respectively.
But where Sam is rippable is the number of shots he is allowing Wig, Zach and Ricky to take between 16 feet and the line. Wig and Zach take a quarter of their shots in that zone and Ricky 39% of his shots from there, but their success rate is only 35%, 35% and 37 % respectively (who knew that Zach and Wig were worse than Ricky mid-range!). As Q and others have pointed out, Zach and Wig's emphasis should be on getting to the basket and 3-pointers, with mid-rangers a distant third.
So mid-rangers aren't inherently evil, it's a question of who is taking them. I'll be cringing tonight every time Wig and Zach take one!
Re: Shooting
You will be cringing right away, LST. 90% chance that the Wolves opening play is a mid-range jumper by Wiggins. Happens almost every time, and is usually a brick.
-
longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
- Posts: 9432
- Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am
Re: Shooting
60WinTim wrote:You will be cringing right away, LST. 90% chance that the Wolves opening play is a mid-range jumper by Wiggins. Happens almost every time, and is usually a brick.
Ha, you mentioned that before, tim, and I've started to notice it...almost overy game starts with a missed 16 footer by Wig. The reason I think the Wolves are so effective coming out of timeouts is that Sam usually designs a play that allows Wig to come off a couple screens and get to the basket. I'd like to see them start the game with that...much more effective.