Detroit Game Thoughts

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

I don't know, q...I think Sam's offense plays to his players' strengths. While the Wolves rank 26th in 3-point shooting, they rank 12th in overall shooting percentage because they are so efficient in their 2-point shooting. And because Sam's offense leads to a lot of iso situations where his athletes are adept at drawing fouls, they lead the league in free throws made. And the result is that they rank 9th in the league in points per shot, with mostly only the elite teams ahead of them. I think points per shot is one of the best measures of the efficiency of a team's offense, and I have to conclude the coach is playing chess (not checkers) if his team ranks in the top ten.

Flip has given Sam great athletes, but not many guys who have been successful in their previous job at 3-point shooting...and Sam has to work with what he was given. And the data tells me it is working. One big exception is Bjelica, who had a reputation as a very good 3-point shooter in Europe. At the start of the season, Sam directed his PG's to run a lot of plays designed to give Belly open looks beyond the arc, and it worked well. But his shot has been broken ever since he got hurt, and he only made 5-22 3-pointers in the month of December. They were all open looks, so that's on Belly...not Sam.

Although KAT is deadly on the 15 foot pick and pop, you may have a good point on asking why Sam doesn't ask him to position himself beyond the line on that play. Someone can look up KAT's success on the pick and pop 15-footer (it seems like 70% to me). If it is 70%, he would have to make 47% of his threes to generate the same efficiency. I'm not saying he can't do that, and would like to see Sam encourage him to try. But then again, we don't know that Sam isn't already encouraging KAT to step back. But NBA players are going to spot up where they are most comfortable, and you can see why KAT may not want to mess with what is working so well.

[MikkeMan]

LST, points per shot is one of the most flawed stats I have ever seen since it doesn't take into account that you need a possession for free throws too. Offensive rating is the most reliable single stat in comparing teams offensive efficiency since it considers also the effect that offensive rebounds and turnovers have for offensive efficiency. Wolves rank currently 24th in offensive rating, which is well below average.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

LST, We're actually 20th in the league in 2 pt% and 23rd in eFG% which combines both 2-pointers and 3-pointers into one accuracy-based stat.

The bottom line is that Sam's offense needs to translate those long 2's into 3's. Running pin downs and pick and pops for 20-footers is exactly what a defense loves to see. They will gladly give us those shots.

[longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]]

Q, eFG% completely ignores free throws I believe, and an athletic team like the Wolves thrives on getting to the line and actually leads the league in free throws made We're not built to look good with that stat...we need a stat that factors in field shooting and free throw shooting to give an accurate picture of efficiency (there is such a stat, isn't there?).

I'm also generally not a fan of the long 2-point shot, but the Wolves seem to have a few guys who excel at it. KG has made a career out of it, and KAT is showing that he can be effective also with it. And Gorgui's 53% rate on twos seems to incorporate a lot of open 15-footers. But in general, I don't want us relying on it too much. I don't have the stats on this, but don't the Wolves take more shots within 5 feet of the basket than they do long 2's? It seems to be a staple of Wiggins, Zach, and Bazz, and they are three of our most prolific shooters. Our athletes are very good at getting to the basket and drawing fouls, and that aspect of their games is ignored in eFG%.

Mkkeman, I read your post and suspect there may be some wisdom in it...I have to admit that the math in the concept you're postulating is beyond my intelligence level :) . I do note that the best teams in the league generally are represented in the top ten in points per shot, and it's nice to have the wolves in that kind of company regardless of the validity of the stat.

[Coolbreeze44]

Interesting list cool. I like shaka too but I don't think he's ready yet, and he just took the Texas job.

Yeah, all of these guys have multiple ingredients that I would be looking for in our next coach. I could make a case for any one of them. I'm particularly enamored with Jensen, Boylen and Ollie. But all 7 of them have characteristics that could work really well here.

[mjs34]

Q, eFG% completely ignores free throws I believe, and an athletic team like the Wolves thrives on getting to the line and actually leads the league in free throws made We're not built to look good with that stat...we need a stat that factors in field shooting and free throw shooting to give an accurate picture of efficiency (there is such a stat, isn't there?).

I'm also generally not a fan of the long 2-point shot, but the Wolves seem to have a few guys who excel at it. KG has made a career out of it, and KAT is showing that he can be effective also with it. And Gorgui's 53% rate on twos seems to incorporate a lot of open 15-footers. But in general, I don't want us relying on it too much. I don't have the stats on this, but don't the Wolves take more shots within 5 feet of the basket than they do long 2's? It seems to be a staple of Wiggins, Zach, and Bazz, and they are three of our most prolific shooters. Our athletes are very good at getting to the basket and drawing fouls, and that aspect of their games is ignored in eFG%.

Mkkeman, I read your post and suspect there may be some wisdom in it...I have to admit that the math in the concept you're postulating is beyond my intelligence level :) . I do note that the best teams in the league generally are represented in the top ten in points per shot, and it's nice to have the wolves in that kind of company regardless of the validity of the stat.

I think your looking for TS% LST.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIN/2016.html

You can find that under advanced stats, and also you'll find the shooting percentages for specific ranges, and also the percentage taken in those range. KAT is actually a wash between long 2's and 3's, but I doubt that lasts. Bennett was shooting a really high percentage at the start of last season, and that fell off a cliff.

I am in complete agreement with Q on the pin downs for long 2's. It seems as if the majority of the plays we run are for inefficient shots. Those misses also result in long rebounds that hurt us on the other end as well.

[Phenom]

Q, eFG% completely ignores free throws I believe, and an athletic team like the Wolves thrives on getting to the line and actually leads the league in free throws made We're not built to look good with that stat...we need a stat that factors in field shooting and free throw shooting to give an accurate picture of efficiency (there is such a stat, isn't there?).

I'm also generally not a fan of the long 2-point shot, but the Wolves seem to have a few guys who excel at it. KG has made a career out of it, and KAT is showing that he can be effective also with it. And Gorgui's 53% rate on twos seems to incorporate a lot of open 15-footers. But in general, I don't want us relying on it too much. I don't have the stats on this, but don't the Wolves take more shots within 5 feet of the basket than they do long 2's? It seems to be a staple of Wiggins, Zach, and Bazz, and they are three of our most prolific shooters. Our athletes are very good at getting to the basket and drawing fouls, and that aspect of their games is ignored in eFG%.

Mkkeman, I read your post and suspect there may be some wisdom in it...I have to admit that the math in the concept you're postulating is beyond my intelligence level :) . I do note that the best teams in the league generally are represented in the top ten in points per shot, and it's nice to have the wolves in that kind of company regardless of the validity of the stat.

I think your looking for TS% LST.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/MIN/2016.html

You can find that under advanced stats, and also you'll find the shooting percentages for specific ranges, and also the percentage taken in those range. KAT is actually a wash between long 2's and 3's, but I doubt that lasts. Bennett was shooting a really high percentage at the start of last season, and that fell off a cliff.

I am in complete agreement with Q on the pin downs for long 2's. It seems as if the majority of the plays we run are for inefficient shots. Those misses also result in long rebounds that hurt us on the other end as well.

Running that action so much is Jr high level where there physical maturity dictates taking many mid range shots. I'm sure the players are quite comfortable running it but I would hope Sam is trying to expand the players horizons. I want a coach who will push them to their limits.

[Monster]

Good conversation here on offense.

I don't want to defend Sam or Flip's system too much but it seems some of those Long 2's could also be opportunities to attack the rim. I know bother he last 2 seasons we have been frustrated with various players do just letting it fly at times instead of attacking. I think both Flip and Sam want/ed more attacking but how much of the long 2's are they ok with or endorse? Oddly it's tough to really discourage Dieng and KAT and lately KG from taking those long shots and yeah KAT should probably space out more (it seems he has a little bit more lately) but damn those guys knock it down at a crazy rate all things considered. I don't think those guys are going to fall off the cliff like Bennett did last year. At least we haven't seen Payne take those type of shots he has gotten out to the 3 point line. That's good.

[Monster]

Sam Mitchell is an average assistant coach. I shuddered the day Flip brought him in here, and my worst fears were confirmed when he eventually got the head gig by circumstance. As a Wolves fan I should have expected it, but it still sucked that it worked out that way. He is the worst thing that could have happened to our young players, who are not developing as they should. I just hope the damage isn't so great that we can't recover for the long term. There are so many bright basketball minds out there, it's just embarrassing that Sam is running our NBA franchise. If you can't see that we are outcoached on a nightly basis, you can't be paying attention.

Cool, who would you like us to go after in the offseason? I'm a JVG fan myself, but the Lakers job is more attractive to him as I'm sure it will be open next year.

I'll float a few names for you: Sam Cassell, Shaka Smart, Tyronn Lue, Alex Jensen, Jim Boylen, Bill Self, Kevin Ollie.

Thanks for putting that list out there Cool. I like all those guys but nobody really jumps out. I agree with your idea that this list and the guys you mentioned in a later post that have some things you want from the next guy. It's so tough because legit top level coaches especially ones that could guide a still young teams are pretty hard to come by so you have to take a chance on somebody. I just don't have quite enough confidence in any of those guys or anyone else I can think of with this group. Who the next guy as the coach is going to be a big deal. It's a little scary.

[Lipoli390]

Sam Mitchell is an average assistant coach. I shuddered the day Flip brought him in here, and my worst fears were confirmed when he eventually got the head gig by circumstance. As a Wolves fan I should have expected it, but it still sucked that it worked out that way. He is the worst thing that could have happened to our young players, who are not developing as they should. I just hope the damage isn't so great that we can't recover for the long term. There are so many bright basketball minds out there, it's just embarrassing that Sam is running our NBA franchise. If you can't see that we are outcoached on a nightly basis, you can't be paying attention.

Cool, who would you like us to go after in the offseason? I'm a JVG fan myself, but the Lakers job is more attractive to him as I'm sure it will be open next year.

I'll float a few names for you: Sam Cassell, Shaka Smart, Tyronn Lue, Alex Jensen, Jim Boylen, Bill Self, Kevin Ollie.

Thanks for putting that list out there Cool. I like all those guys but nobody really jumps out. I agree with your idea that this list and the guys you mentioned in a later post that have some things you want from the next guy. It's so tough because legit top level coaches especially ones that could guide a still young teams are pretty hard to come by so you have to take a chance on somebody. I just don't have quite enough confidence in any of those guys or anyone else I can think of with this group. Who the next guy as the coach is going to be a big deal. It's a little scary.

I'd add Coach Cal to the list. And Thibs. My top choice is JVG.