Watson

[Norm Peterson]

 

Dakich hammered on the analytics thing last night, but I would like to see Watson break up with the 21' jumper where his heels are on the 3 point line.

 

I missed the broadcast. What exactly did he say?

The analytics + my eyes tell me that Watson has a rythym jumper that he has a lot of confidence in but overall he takes a lot of low percentage shots that he doesn't make. Thus, having watched him at the end of games make enough of those shots there is no one else I'd rather take the last shot including White and Shields because I know he can get it off and that there is a good chance it goes in.

 

Almost everything else about him is above average to exceptional. If he ever develops that shot, he's going to be a difference maker. If not, he's Mike Gessell with the clutch gene which isn't too shabby.

 

Oh, he is clutch, isn't he?  Man.  He's hit some big shots this year as a true freshman.

[49r]

Glynn Watson watches the ESPN App:

 

[uneblinstu]

 

Dakich hammered on the analytics thing last night, but I would like to see Watson break up with the 21' jumper where his heels are on the 3 point line.

 

I missed the broadcast. What exactly did he say?

The analytics + my eyes tell me that Watson has a rythym jumper that he has a lot of confidence in but overall he takes a lot of low percentage shots that he doesn't make. Thus, having watched him at the end of games make enough of those shots there is no one else I'd rather take the last shot including White and Shields because I know he can get it off and that there is a good chance it goes in.

 

Almost everything else about him is above average to exceptional. If he ever develops that shot, he's going to be a difference maker. If not, he's Mike Gessell with the clutch gene which isn't too shabby.

 

I don't remember the exact language, but Tirico was talking about how the analytics say the mid-range jumper is an inefficient shot. Dakich roughly said they can go jump in a lake, more or less. Just the old school notion that analytics are over-valued.

[Norm Peterson]

They said something about analytics with regard to Shavon's mid-range jumper, which he promptly made.

[hhcmatt]

They said something about analytics with regard to Shavon's mid-range jumper, which he promptly made.

 

He's hitting 39.1% of his 2pt jumpers this year, which isn't too shabby.

However, when you look at his 70.8% make rate at the rim and 35.2% 3pt rate (52.8 eFG%) one can see why anayltics guys hammer on shots in the paint or at the 3.

[uneblinstu]

 

They said something about analytics with regard to Shavon's mid-range jumper, which he promptly made.

 

He's hitting 39.1% of his 2pt jumpers this year, which isn't too shabby.

However, when you look at his 70.8% make rate at the rim and 35.2% 3pt rate (52.8 eFG%) one can see why anayltics guys hammer on shots in the paint or at the 3.

 

But not only that, if you're taking shots a foot inside the three point line, just take the 3 pointer. If it's 50% more valuable than a 2, and he shoots 34.7% from 3, he's have to shoot 52% on that jumper before it becomes as efficient as the 3. I don't know how close to the rim he has to get to that mark, but that's the whole analytics argument. Dakich doesn't like it. That's his perogative, I guess. There are nuances to this argument I'm leaving out, I get that, but the shot that he likes so much where he takes a step inside the arc (and White does it a lot, too) isn't a wise one, IMO...

[hhcmatt]

 I get that, but the shot that he likes so much where he takes a step inside the arc (and White does it a lot, too) isn't a wise one, IMO...

 

Agreed. I've griped about it much of the season.

[AuroranHusker]

 

 I get that, but the shot that he likes so much where he takes a step inside the arc (and White does it a lot, too) isn't a wise one, IMO...

 

Agreed. I've griped about it much of the season.

 

 

Analytics do not 'make' baskets, though. If AW-III and GW2 make the 19' shot, it's a good thing. If AW-III and GW2 miss that nearly the same 20' shot, then no bueno. The players are not trying to shoot a 19.5' shot rather than a 19.75' shot. Players play. This topic seems like paralysis by analysis to some.

[Handy Johnson]

The sky's the limit with this kid, LOVE his game...

[hhcmatt]

 

 

 I get that, but the shot that he likes so much where he takes a step inside the arc (and White does it a lot, too) isn't a wise one, IMO...

 

Agreed. I've griped about it much of the season.

 

 

Analytics do not 'make' baskets, though. If AW-III and GW2 make the 19' shot, it's a good thing. If AW-III and GW2 miss that nearly the same 20' shot, then no bueno. The players are not trying to shoot a 19.5' shot rather than a 19.75' shot. Players play. This topic seems like paralysis by analysis to some.

 

 

I'll mark you down for team Dakich

[uneblinstu]

 

 

 I get that, but the shot that he likes so much where he takes a step inside the arc (and White does it a lot, too) isn't a wise one, IMO...

 

Agreed. I've griped about it much of the season.

 

 

Analytics do not 'make' baskets, though. If AW-III and GW2 make the 19' shot, it's a good thing. If AW-III and GW2 miss that nearly the same 20' shot, then no bueno. The players are not trying to shoot a 19.5' shot rather than a 19.75' shot. Players play. This topic seems like paralysis by analysis to some.

 

If you want to take and evaluate it on an individual shot basis, maybe, but in a conversation about the larger picture, I don't think it's much of a debate. It's no different than practicing any other skill. It will take a little while for them to adjust to a new way of thinking (that's what the offseason is for...) but they're good enough to make that adjustment successfully. I'm not even saying it needs to disappear completely, but I think it should be significantly reduces. Especially a guy like AW3 that shoots it above 40% from 3. No more shots a step inside the arc.

[AuroranHusker]

 

 

 

 I get that, but the shot that he likes so much where he takes a step inside the arc (and White does it a lot, too) isn't a wise one, IMO...

 

Agreed. I've griped about it much of the season.

 

 

Analytics do not 'make' baskets, though. If AW-III and GW2 make the 19' shot, it's a good thing. If AW-III and GW2 miss that nearly the same 20' shot, then no bueno. The players are not trying to shoot a 19.5' shot rather than a 19.75' shot. Players play. This topic seems like paralysis by analysis to some.

 

If you want to take and evaluate it on an individual shot basis, maybe, but in a conversation about the larger picture, I don't think it's much of a debate. It's no different than practicing any other skill. It will take a little while for them to adjust to a new way of thinking (that's what the offseason is for...) but they're good enough to make that adjustment successfully. I'm not even saying it needs to disappear completely, but I think it should be significantly reduces. Especially a guy like AW3 that shoots it above 40% from 3. No more shots a step inside the arc.

 

 

I'm talking shot-by-shot during the course of a game. Not the "big picture" that you speak of. I get the analytics of it all (I really do). In game, though, is a much different animal than a bunch of stats on a desk IMHO.

[AuroranHusker]

 

 

 

 I get that, but the shot that he likes so much where he takes a step inside the arc (and White does it a lot, too) isn't a wise one, IMO...

 

Agreed. I've griped about it much of the season.

 

 

Analytics do not 'make' baskets, though. If AW-III and GW2 make the 19' shot, it's a good thing. If AW-III and GW2 miss that nearly the same 20' shot, then no bueno. The players are not trying to shoot a 19.5' shot rather than a 19.75' shot. Players play. This topic seems like paralysis by analysis to some.

 

 

I'll mark you down for team Dakich

 

 

In-game shooting is about making buckets, not seeing where your toes are. lol - Generally, though, I agree with the analytics as a working theory. It makes perfect sense from an effective shooting percentage: A 34% three-point shooter is better than a 50% two-point shooter with equal number of attempts.

[uneblinstu]

I'm talking shot-by-shot during the course of a game. Not the "big picture" that you speak of. I get the analytics of it all (I really do). In game, though, is a much different animal than a bunch of stats on a desk IMHO.

I don't think it is. The big picture can and should inform the shot making in the games. Analytics help reveal weakness, strength and pattern. Give the guys the information and education and expect them to utilize it, it will improve the way the pay the game. It's happening all across the sport.

[HoiBall]

It's kind of ironic that Miles takes stock in analytics, yet his best players the past few years have been guys with games that don't necessarily translate well to high percentage basketball (Petteway, Shields, Watson, White)

[Norm Peterson]

 

I'm talking shot-by-shot during the course of a game. Not the "big picture" that you speak of. I get the analytics of it all (I really do). In game, though, is a much different animal than a bunch of stats on a desk IMHO.

I don't think it is. The big picture can and should inform the shot making in the games. Analytics help reveal weakness, strength and pattern. Give the guys the information and education and expect them to utilize it, it will improve the way the pay the game. It's happening all across the sport.

 

Only problem is those shots at the rim or just beyond the arc aren't always available.  Defenses know that whole analytics thing, too.  So, they're trying to take away the highest epercentage looks.  But Shavon and Glynn have this somewhat unique ability to hit mid-range pull-up Js.  If that forces a defense to respond, you might get better looks from those higher value spots.

 

So you probably can't just ignore the mid-range game.

 

Now, White stepping a foot inside the arc?  What's that all about?  Different issue.

[uneblinstu]

 

 

I'm talking shot-by-shot during the course of a game. Not the "big picture" that you speak of. I get the analytics of it all (I really do). In game, though, is a much different animal than a bunch of stats on a desk IMHO.

I don't think it is. The big picture can and should inform the shot making in the games. Analytics help reveal weakness, strength and pattern. Give the guys the information and education and expect them to utilize it, it will improve the way the pay the game. It's happening all across the sport.

 

Only problem is those shots at the rim or just beyond the arc aren't always available.  Defenses know that whole analytics thing, too.  So, they're trying to take away the highest epercentage looks.  But Shavon and Glynn have this somewhat unique ability to hit mid-range pull-up Js.  If that forces a defense to respond, you might get better looks from those higher value spots.

 

So you probably can't just ignore the mid-range game.

 

Now, White stepping a foot inside the arc?  What's that all about?  Different issue.

 

Right, which is why I said they probably can't disappear. But I do think they should be reduced. Getting another shooter on the floor would help, too.

[Norm Peterson]

This discussion reminds me of my argument that you can't just have the best shooter on the team take all the shots.  In other words, you can't say to have White shoot all the threes because he's best at it.

 

He might be best at it, but he'll never get an open look if there aren't other guys on your team that the opposing D has to account for.

 

I think you saw a little of that last night.  White was almost NEVER open for a catch-and-shoot rhythm jumper.  And maybe you can leave the word "almost" out of that last sentence.

 

You might need to have a lower-percent shooter take some shots just to open things up for your higher percent guy to get some decent looks.

 

And so it is with shots at the rim and threes.  Yeah, those are nice and all, and the analytics shows those are the best.  But when defenses are doing their level best to take those options away, it's nice that we have a couple of guys who can hit mid-range buckets fairly reliably.

 

Would you rather miss from mid-range or have a shot clock violation because you can't otherwise get an open look?

[hhcmatt]

It's kind of ironic that Miles takes stock in analytics, yet his best players the past few years have been guys with games that don't necessarily translate well to high percentage basketball (Petteway, Shields, Watson, White)

 

Which part of White's 58.5% eFG percentage doesn't translate into what you're referring to?

[HoiBall]

 

It's kind of ironic that Miles takes stock in analytics, yet his best players the past few years have been guys with games that don't necessarily translate well to high percentage basketball (Petteway, Shields, Watson, White)

 

Which part of White's 58.5% eFG percentage doesn't translate into what you're referring to?

 

He shoots a high percentage, but I'm not sure his shot selection is what analytic guys would call high percentage 

[Norm Peterson]

 

 

It's kind of ironic that Miles takes stock in analytics, yet his best players the past few years have been guys with games that don't necessarily translate well to high percentage basketball (Petteway, Shields, Watson, White)

 

Which part of White's 58.5% eFG percentage doesn't translate into what you're referring to?

 

He shoots a high percentage, but I'm not sure his shot selection is what analytic guys would call high percentage 

 

He's taking the only looks he's getting, game in and game out.  Back in the non-con, he had better options.  In conference, he's having to take almost all of his perimeter shots off the dribble.  Conference defenses are taking away any kind of catch-and-shoot opportunity where he'd have his feet set.  He didn't get those at all last night. 

[HoiBall]

 

 

 

It's kind of ironic that Miles takes stock in analytics, yet his best players the past few years have been guys with games that don't necessarily translate well to high percentage basketball (Petteway, Shields, Watson, White)

 

Which part of White's 58.5% eFG percentage doesn't translate into what you're referring to?

 

He shoots a high percentage, but I'm not sure his shot selection is what analytic guys would call high percentage 

 

He's taking the only looks he's getting, game in and game out.  Back in the non-con, he had better options.  In conference, he's having to take almost all of his perimeter shots off the dribble.  Conference defenses are taking away any kind of catch-and-shoot opportunity where he'd have his feet set.  He didn't get those at all last night. 

 

And I'm fine with the shots he's taking, he's our best shooter and if he's not shooting we are in real trouble. 

[uneblinstu]

This discussion reminds me of my argument that you can't just have the best shooter on the team take all the shots.  In other words, you can't say to have White shoot all the threes because he's best at it.

 

He might be best at it, but he'll never get an open look if there aren't other guys on your team that the opposing D has to account for.

 

I think you saw a little of that last night.  White was almost NEVER open for a catch-and-shoot rhythm jumper.  And maybe you can leave the word "almost" out of that last sentence.

 

You might need to have a lower-percent shooter take some shots just to open things up for your higher percent guy to get some decent looks.

 

And so it is with shots at the rim and threes.  Yeah, those are nice and all, and the analytics shows those are the best.  But when defenses are doing their level best to take those options away, it's nice that we have a couple of guys who can hit mid-range buckets fairly reliably.

 

Would you rather miss from mid-range or have a shot clock violation because you can't otherwise get an open look?

It's always a more nuanced conversation than simply this vs. that.

 

How much has having Benny take a few more shots open things up? Some, maybe, but not a ton. If it did, it didn't lead to more wins.

 

Is it a coaching problem? Are then not running an offense conducive to getting players open looks? Do they need to run more plays actions to get AW3 open or just run what they already do better?

 

Of course I'll take a mid-range jumper over a shot clock violation, don't be ridiculous. But, I would rather work to get an open look or (closer) to the rim, than take a shot a step inside the arc with 20 seconds left.

 

And it's not a rim and arc or nothing argument. It's reducing shots just inside the arc.

[hhcmatt]

 

 

It's kind of ironic that Miles takes stock in analytics, yet his best players the past few years have been guys with games that don't necessarily translate well to high percentage basketball (Petteway, Shields, Watson, White)

 

Which part of White's 58.5% eFG percentage doesn't translate into what you're referring to?

 

He shoots a high percentage, but I'm not sure his shot selection is what analytic guys would call high percentage

 

 

18.5% at the rim, 29.6% jumpshot, 51.9% 3pt. That's pretty good.

[Red Rum]

Dude, that Watson kid is pretty good at basketball you guys.......(I left my calculator at home)