Minnesota Sports Forum

Q12543 wrote:Abe, I think FG% is still a valid number - especially from various spots on the floor - because it helps determine where a player's strengths and vulnerabilities are as an offensive threat. So 3 pt FG% is a hugely important number for Rubio in my opinion. It helps us understand the risk equation of an opposing defense collapsing on a Wiggins drive or doubling-up KAT in the low post. Do they concede the open Rubio 3 in order to get the ball out of KAT or Wiggins' hands on a 2-point shot? If Rubio is knocking down his open 3's at a decent rate, doubling up on KAT or Wiggins becomes a very shaky proposition. If that in turn leads to a defender staying home on Rubio, all the more room is available to operate for the others. The defense will have to pick their poison.

I like TS% as a comprehensive scoring efficiency metric, but by itself, it won't help answer the type of question I mentioned above.

(by the way, to your earlier point on Rubio's numbers in March and April of 2014, those were his two best months in TS% too. So there is definitely something to be said about the correlation between sustained health and shooting efficiency with Rubio).

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Abe, I think FG% is still a valid number - especially from various spots on the floor - because it helps determine where a player's strengths and vulnerabilities are as an offensive threat. So 3 pt FG% is a hugely important number for Rubio in my opinion. It helps us understand the risk equation of an opposing defense collapsing on a Wiggins drive or doubling-up KAT in the low post. Do they concede the open Rubio 3 in order to get the ball out of KAT or Wiggins' hands on a 2-point shot? If Rubio is knocking down his open 3's at a decent rate, doubling up on KAT or Wiggins becomes a very shaky proposition. If that in turn leads to a defender staying home on Rubio, all the more room is available to operate for the others. The defense will have to pick their poison.

I like TS% as a comprehensive scoring efficiency metric, but by itself, it won't help answer the type of question I mentioned above.

(by the way, to your earlier point on Rubio's numbers in March and April of 2014, those were his two best months in TS% too. So there is definitely something to be said about the correlation between sustained health and shooting efficiency with Rubio).

I was being facetious. Rubio's FG % has been routinely dismissed in the past when it didn't serve a pro-Ricky argument.

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Abe, I think FG% is still a valid number - especially from various spots on the floor - because it helps determine where a player's strengths and vulnerabilities are as an offensive threat. So 3 pt FG% is a hugely important number for Rubio in my opinion. It helps us understand the risk equation of an opposing defense collapsing on a Wiggins drive or doubling-up KAT in the low post. Do they concede the open Rubio 3 in order to get the ball out of KAT or Wiggins' hands on a 2-point shot? If Rubio is knocking down his open 3's at a decent rate, doubling up on KAT or Wiggins becomes a very shaky proposition. If that in turn leads to a defender staying home on Rubio, all the more room is available to operate for the others. The defense will have to pick their poison.

I like TS% as a comprehensive scoring efficiency metric, but by itself, it won't help answer the type of question I mentioned above.

(by the way, to your earlier point on Rubio's numbers in March and April of 2014, those were his two best months in TS% too. So there is definitely something to be said about the correlation between sustained health and shooting efficiency with Rubio).

I was being facetious. Rubio's FG % has been routinely dismissed in the past when it didn't serve a pro-Ricky argument.

Right and it's a fair point. It shouldn't be dismissed because clearly if he was a much more dynamic scoring threat, it would make him all the more dangerous. That being said, we've proven time and again how, despite his limitations, he's been able to quarterback top-flight offensive units. And part of the reason he's successful is because he doesn't jack up too many shots, thus limiting the damage of his low FG% while enabling his more gifted team mates to flourish.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Abe, I think FG% is still a valid number - especially from various spots on the floor - because it helps determine where a player's strengths and vulnerabilities are as an offensive threat. So 3 pt FG% is a hugely important number for Rubio in my opinion. It helps us understand the risk equation of an opposing defense collapsing on a Wiggins drive or doubling-up KAT in the low post. Do they concede the open Rubio 3 in order to get the ball out of KAT or Wiggins' hands on a 2-point shot? If Rubio is knocking down his open 3's at a decent rate, doubling up on KAT or Wiggins becomes a very shaky proposition. If that in turn leads to a defender staying home on Rubio, all the more room is available to operate for the others. The defense will have to pick their poison.

I like TS% as a comprehensive scoring efficiency metric, but by itself, it won't help answer the type of question I mentioned above.

(by the way, to your earlier point on Rubio's numbers in March and April of 2014, those were his two best months in TS% too. So there is definitely something to be said about the correlation between sustained health and shooting efficiency with Rubio).

I was being facetious. Rubio's FG % has been routinely dismissed in the past when it didn't serve a pro-Ricky argument.

Right and it's a fair point. It shouldn't be dismissed because clearly if he was a much more dynamic scoring threat, it would make him all the more dangerous. That being said, we've proven time and again how, despite his limitations, he's been able to quarterback top-flight offensive units. And part of the reason he's successful is because he doesn't jack up too many shots, thus limiting the damage of his low FG% while enabling his more gifted team mates to flourish.

Yeah, not refuting any of that.

I was just trying to add some levity by pointing out a stat that's been dismissed in the past is now possibly being championed.

Pretty much the same argument I make about the RPM stat. There are dozens of metrics to use. Some of us give certain ones more legitimacy than others. As long as we're consistent with them, it's all good.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Q12543 wrote:Abe, I think FG% is still a valid number - especially from various spots on the floor - because it helps determine where a player's strengths and vulnerabilities are as an offensive threat. So 3 pt FG% is a hugely important number for Rubio in my opinion. It helps us understand the risk equation of an opposing defense collapsing on a Wiggins drive or doubling-up KAT in the low post. Do they concede the open Rubio 3 in order to get the ball out of KAT or Wiggins' hands on a 2-point shot? If Rubio is knocking down his open 3's at a decent rate, doubling up on KAT or Wiggins becomes a very shaky proposition. If that in turn leads to a defender staying home on Rubio, all the more room is available to operate for the others. The defense will have to pick their poison.

I like TS% as a comprehensive scoring efficiency metric, but by itself, it won't help answer the type of question I mentioned above.

(by the way, to your earlier point on Rubio's numbers in March and April of 2014, those were his two best months in TS% too. So there is definitely something to be said about the correlation between sustained health and shooting efficiency with Rubio).

I was being facetious. Rubio's FG % has been routinely dismissed in the past when it didn't serve a pro-Ricky argument.

TeamRicky wrote:Ricky gets criticized for his shooting, but he actually had a better TS% than the following players last year: Marc Gasol, Tim Duncan, Zach Randolph, Dywane Wade, John Wall and Porzingis.