Last year

What would be perceived as a better game

Is it better to be 5/10 with 10pts or 6/20 with 20pts obviously with free-throws and 3's to get to the number, I feel there is too much hype and praise given to players for getting a large amount of points at low percentages

Topic #48017 | Report this topic

Last year

What's the average conversion rate?

Let’s say 35-40% conservative and taking into account threes, You’d be wanting 6/7 minimum out of 20 otherwise those shots are better taken by someone that is a better shooter.

Reply #829467 | Report this post

Last year

I feel like this is something that has been addressed in how modern basketball has adapted. In the past (especially 90s and 00s) you had volume scorers averaging 25-30ppg but shooting under 45% from the field. guys like McGrady, Kobe, Stackhouse, Iverson etc. Scoring was more difficult then (or is perceived to be at least) so lower shooting % was acceptable.

These days though, with virtually everybody on the court a 3 point threat, if you're shooting a low % from the field, you're not gonna get the 20-25 attempts a game you're used to.

Reply #829471 | Report this post

Last year

Even in junior basketball the guys that never seen a shot they don't like and get more points are the players that get the credit. You need quality scores but I’ve always preferred players that play team and defence even if they score slightly less.
Casper is a fantastic player but has always had fairly average shooting %, his first game this season being a classic example, shoot before pass. His last game where he took good shots and passed up bad shots and his % went up. Good coaching from Forde and the team for getting him open looks.

Reply #829475 | Report this post

Last year

tbh, doesnt really matter unless the stats win or lose you a game.

Efficiency is over rated. Provided youre not shooting 20% all year and yet still leading your team in attempts.

Enjoy the game, shoto good shots and dont stress over analytics. odds are youre not playing at a level where it matters.

Reply #829480 | Report this post

Last year

5/10 is better than 6/20. If they are on the same team the player shooting 6/20 needs to shoot less and 5/10 more. But stats are misleading, maybe some of the 6/20 shots were taken in real pressure, end of qtr, end of shot clock, double teamed etc, etc. It only really matters in the context of the game as to what sort of shot attempts are being taken and under the instruction of the coach and also the normal conversion rate as maybe the player shooting 5/10 had an exceptional game and normally goes 2/10.

Reply #829485 | Report this post

Last year

In terms of stats and asking 'what is efficient?' You can go all day, for example there’s basic field goal percentage, but there’s also effective field goal percentage which (I could be wrong) values 3s as being harder so therefore they’re worth more I think, and then there true shooting percentage I think it’s called.
At the end of the day it’s perhaps best to operate off the old fashion eye test

Reply #829487 | Report this post

Last year

If you assume all other variables are the same (same team with all other stats being equal), the guy (team) shooting 6/20 will win more games.

Reply #829492 | Report this post

Last year

Seen a lot happen at junior ball and was just trying to get peoples general consensus nothing to do with myself.

I tend to agree you have volume shooters that might go 12/14-20 then go 5-20, do you tell players to shoot out of slumps like that or get them to pass more that game, i.e. if the player is at 3-14 do you start telling them to slow down on the shots and try look for other shooters even if other option is a consistant 50% shooter but takes minimal shots i.e. 6-12 range

Reply #829493 | Report this post

Last year

"If you assume all other variables are the same (same team with all other stats being equal), the guy (team) shooting 6/20 will win more games."
... at the expense of the other guys around him.

Unless he's the only proven shooter on the team, it may be better for THE TEAM if some of those shots were taken by others under less pressure, for a higher TEAM total.

When the other players feel they have to just give the ball to one or two studs, that's when you start getting pissed-off teammates who are losing their own skills and recognition (and money down the track). Sure, they're professionals paid to do whatever the team needs, but they need the chance to improve and contribute - they won't become better shooters by not shooting. NY Knicks and Linsanity being the obvious example - Knicks became a better and more effective TEAM when Carmelo was injured

Reply #829496 | Report this post

Last year

It's an interesting conversation because on the weekend when I saw the Kings box score, from memory, Casper had the same points output as Martin on half the shots.

Reply #829500 | Report this post

Last year

In all honesty, it really depends on what is driving those stats.

First off, have to make sure we're comparing apples. There are centres with high percentage and low shots, purely because they have no range and only attempt shots under the bucket.

Is the guy with high percentage a pass-first team player, who sacrifices his own opportunities to get his teammates into the game?
Or could he be a low-confidence type who will only take wide-open shots with his feet set?
Or worse, a guy who zealously protects his famed %, by refusing to take difficult shots?

On the flip side, is the low % high volume guy a selfish idiot who plays hero ball?
Or is he the goto guy, whom after wasting 23 seconds of the clock his teammates always seek him out to make difficult shots under pressure.

Reply #829503 | Report this post

Last year


The higher team total will be achieved with the 6/20 shooter taking more shots, and they will win more games. Simple math, based on the limited data provided...

Like I said - relying on all other variables being the same... but that data isn't provided - so I "assume it’s the same"

So I’ll take the 6/20 guy every day, because we will score a higher total - and win more games... relative the the 5/10 guy in this specific example... if there’s other players data on the team, sure it will change, but out of those two, 6/20 is statistically going to end up in a higher team total.

Reply #829509 | Report this post

Last year

It's a good question and whilst you might ideally favour 5/10, percentages can be miscued if a player is getting up 3 shots around the basket and grabbing his own rebound so in this possession he(or she) has 2 points, 2 offensive rebounds on 1/3 shooting and they may not touch the ball for a few more offensive possessions.

Ideally you'd like to have everyone involved and confident but that will lead to bad shots also being taken and the potential of oversharing the ball in other instances.

If this was a computer game and my stud was playing like a dud then I'd be looking for others to score for my team.

Reply #829512 | Report this post

Last year

I was assuming that starting with one player on 5/10 and letting other players take the other 10 shots, you'd be bound to get more than 1 basket out of them unless they’re total duds, leading to a total of more than 6 out of 20

Reply #829518 | Report this post

Last year


In his initial post - 5/10 for 10 points... 6/20 for 20 points. So they'd need to make more than "1 basket" to get to the same 20 points.

Like I said - I was assuming all other variables were equal. So ignoring your “shot selection” argument, ie both players are taking “good shots within the offense and keeping everyone happy”.

Simply - the “numbers”, based on the 2 examples in the initial post, the 6/20 guys team will score approximately 4-5 points per game more. Depending on the other numbers that aren’t stated...

Reply #829551 | Report this post

Last year

But every shot you take is a shot nobody else gets to take. So all else can never truly be equal.

Reply #829552 | Report this post

Last year

If the player who shoots 6/20 ends up -10 and the guy who shoots 5/10 ends 0 I know who I'm taking and I think coach Kelly made that decision in games end today.

Reply #829559 | Report this post

Last year

You need to look at the stats from both sides. Basketball is not just what happens when you have the ball. A missed shot is also an opportunity for the opposing side, you are just giving the ball away. The 6/20 guy is giving the ball to the opposition 14 times, some of these will be like stupid turnovers so will turn into transition offence for the other team leading to layups so he could be giving up between 15-20pts with his missed shots.
If you keep giving the ball to the 6/20 their is a fair chance you will not win games, you will lose them as the opponent outscores you or controls tempo of the game.

Reply #829581 | Report this post

Last year

Of course, stats can be misleading and players can engage in stat padding. But - what the heck - if I was asked what single stat indicator matters most - it would have to be - the change in the difference in team points when a player is on the court. Not a standard stat i realize - as it requires a team to track subs and the team point score. But still quite do-able. And from that you can break it down into offense points gain Vs points conceded, and from that reference to standard stats on rebounds, turnovers etc.

Reply #830309 | Report this post

Last year

Not quite certain what you are saying red84,

let's take last nights game Adelaide won by five and most people would say Johnson played very well. He ended up minus 8. Teams go on run offensively and defensively and if you are on or off the court at the wrong time it can hurt your plus minus. It’s way overrated stat and one that most euro competitions don’t use. You can be minus 15 but if you have an index of 20 and that’s the best index from your team, you get player of the game.

Reply #830312 | Report this post

Last year

Thanks 312 "Teams go on run offensively and defensively and if you are on or off the court at the wrong time it can hurt your plus minus."
Yes, I agree. As you know, the indicator value of many stats improves when more cases are compiled. In the context of a single game, I can see your point.

However, a reason many coaches have an aversion to showy players who take a lot of risk when scoring and are not all that interested in defending, is that teams with these sorts of players are more prone to having large scoring runs against them.

So it is good to know if the presence of a certain player is associated with such weakness.

The other thing is the importance of the quality of work done off the ball, stuff that does not attract a standard stat. Here I'm thinking the quality of screens set, the box out, the drawing of defenders to create space for shooters. The change in points difference - over many games - will reflect this.

I can't comment on whether this stat is over rated or is used/not used by euro clubs.

Reply #830319 | Report this post

You need to be a registered user to post from this location. Register here.

Close ads
Beam Orders - a quick, simple order and payments site for your business.
Punch - insightful time tracking
College Consulting - including eligibility, subject selection, transcript and scholarship advice

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 8:48 pm, Mon 24 Jan 2022 | Posts: 910,715 | Last 7 days: 598