Dame's long 3 is a good shot

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
B

bobf

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2008
Messages
3,959
Likes
3,142
Points
113
I often see criticism of Dame bombing a 3 point shot early in the shot clock. I did some simple analytics to see if it's really a bad shot.

I took a look at Dame's 3 point shooting from 28+ feet. I limited that to 34 feet or less to exclude desperation heaves. Dame's is a career 77/222 or 34.7% from that distance. http://nbasavant.com/apps/compare.php

Let's see what that works out to in points per possession. 34.7% of a made 3 is 1.04 points per shot. But on a miss there is about 20% chance of an offensive rebound. That yields an extra 0.13 possessions. Conservatively that is worth another 0.13 points. That's 1.17 points per possession.

How good is that? Warriors and Rockets are at around 1.12 points per possession. Blazers are at 1.03. Blazers in a half-court set are surely even worse than that. Extrapolating to 100 possessions that's 117 to 103.

You could argue that Dame's long 3 hurts transition defense. Maybe. Maybe not. There are pluses and minuses. Long 3's take a long time to reach the basket. That gives the offense a bit more time to prepare for defense. Dames quick 3 has 0% chance of a TO. TO's are terrible for transition D. Missed layups and paint shots often leave the shooter under the rim. Sometimes on their back. That results in 5 on 4's, dunks and wide open 3's the other way. Personally, my observation is that 3 point shots do not hurt team D.

Really, what is overlooked about that shot is that it has no chance of a TO. When you factor TO% (probably at least 10%) into "working the ball for a higher percentage shot" it starts to make more sense why that can be a good shot.
 
interesting take ...not sure I fully agree but I usually see a brick as a brick....if you don't have offensive rebounding...I think it's an anomaly that it turns into a longer possession
 
riverman said:
interesting take ...not sure I fully agree but I usually see a brick as a brick....if you don't have offensive rebounding...I think it's an anomaly that it turns into a longer possession
Click to expand...

I was looking for something that would give me some idea of the offensive rebound rate of long shots compared to close-in shots. All I could find was this (from 2003) :

http://www.82games.com/comm13.htm

Jumpers vs inside shots the ORB% is not so different and quick shots were better.

Jumper 28.5%
Close Up 34.4%
Dunks 29.6%

0-10 seconds 33.6%
11-15 seconds 27.0%
16-20 seconds 27.7%
21+ seconds 30.2%
 
Contrary to popular wisdom, 3-point shots have a lower ORB% than other shots. Totals from 2010-2014
ORB% on Layups 42%
ORB% on 2-Pointers 33%
ORB% on 3-Pointers 31%
ORB% on Free Throws 15%
https://kenpom.com/blog/offensive-rebounding-data-dump/

Those numbers are oldish. Recent NBA philosophy favors getting back on defense over crashing the boards. ORB% is down by as much as 5%. Even then, that gives 3 pointers a 26% ORB rate. So my 20% assumption for Dame's long 3 seems conservative.
 
Im gonna take this a step further this evening. I was thinking about this for a while now. Im willing to bet if you shoot the league average in 3pt% you will score more and win more than shooting the league average in twos. Ill put the numbers together after the game tonight.
 
Orion Bailey said:
Im gonna take this a step further this evening. I was thinking about this for a while now. Im willing to bet if you shoot the league average in 3pt% you will score more and win more than shooting the league average in twos. Ill put the numbers together after the game tonight.
Click to expand...

I believe that's probably true too. For sure making 1/3 of your 3's is better than making 1/2 of your 2's all else being equal.
 
Did you look up his shooting% on all the long 3s, including the one when he's wide open and set, or just those that are early in the shot clock, pull up with a guy in his face (those that most on this board dislike) ?

Oh, that's what I thought
 
What throws these stats out the window is the shot clock....desperation chucks are a big part of 3 pt stats...seems a lot of those come from 3pt range to avoid shot clock violations
 
SIeepwalker said:
Did you look up his shooting% on all the long 3s, including the one when he's wide open and set, or just those that are early in the shot clock, pull up with a guy in his face (those that most on this board dislike) ?

Oh, that's what I thought
Click to expand...

When Dame shoots 4+ feet behind the arc, he's usually open. I agree that a contested shot from there is not a good shot, I'm not arguing that.
 
Interesting analysis, but I have a hard time believing the data is accurate. More than a third such shots are makes? Doesn't pass the eye test.

However, I used that link and ran the same numbers (28-34', all years) and got different results:

93 of 285 = 32.6%

More importantly, it shows the league average (assuming that's what "LA" stands for) being 34.9%. So, not only does the long-3PT% appear questionable on the surface, it indicates Dame is below average in that category. I find that equally hard to believe.
 
handiman said:
Interesting analysis, but I have a hard time believing the data is accurate. More than a third such shots are makes? Doesn't pass the eye test.

However, I used that link and ran the same numbers (28-34', all years) and got different results:

93 of 285 = 32.6%

More importantly, it shows the league average (assuming that's what "LA" stands for) being 34.9%. So, not only does the long-3PT% appear questionable on the surface, it indicates Dame is below average in that category. I find that equally hard to believe.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... I didn't see the "All Years" option so I did each year and summed them. I still get the same results as before.
4/15 (2012/13)
11/23 (2013/14)
15/51 (2014/15)
19/60 (2015/16)
28/73 (2016/17)
77/222 (Total)

But yeah, when I choose "All Years" it gives your numbers. Maybe its buggy?
 
bobf said:
But yeah, when I choose "All Years" it gives your numbers. Maybe its buggy?
Click to expand...

I suspect so. I have no familiarity with that site and the accuracy of its data, but the numbers looked fishy on the surface.
 
I tried another site https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/shot_finder.cgi which includes this season too. I get
4/15 2012-2013 27%
10/20 2013-2014 50%
13/45 2014-2015 29%
15/48 2015-2016 31%
29/78 2016-2017 37%
17/65 2017-2018 26%
Total 88/271 32.5%

If he's only gonna make 26% of them, that is a bad shot. But at his career rate of 32.5% it's a good shot at 1.11 points per possession.
 
bobf said:
Hmmm... I didn't see the "All Years" option so I did each year and summed them. I still get the same results as before.
4/15 (2012/13)
11/23 (2013/14)
15/51 (2014/15)
19/60 (2015/16)
28/73 (2016/17)
77/222 (Total)

But yeah, when I choose "All Years" it gives your numbers. Maybe its buggy?
Click to expand...

Does All Years include playoffs?
 
bobf said:
I often see criticism of Dame bombing a 3 point shot early in the shot clock. I did some simple analytics to see if it's really a bad shot.

I took a look at Dame's 3 point shooting from 28+ feet. I limited that to 34 feet or less to exclude desperation heaves. Dame's is a career 77/222 or 34.7% from that distance. http://nbasavant.com/apps/compare.php

Let's see what that works out to in points per possession. 34.7% of a made 3 is 1.04 points per shot. But on a miss there is about 20% chance of an offensive rebound. That yields an extra 0.13 possessions. Conservatively that is worth another 0.13 points. That's 1.17 points per possession.

How good is that? Warriors and Rockets are at around 1.12 points per possession. Blazers are at 1.03. Blazers in a half-court set are surely even worse than that. Extrapolating to 100 possessions that's 117 to 103.

You could argue that Dame's long 3 hurts transition defense. Maybe. Maybe not. There are pluses and minuses. Long 3's take a long time to reach the basket. That gives the offense a bit more time to prepare for defense. Dames quick 3 has 0% chance of a TO. TO's are terrible for transition D. Missed layups and paint shots often leave the shooter under the rim. Sometimes on their back. That results in 5 on 4's, dunks and wide open 3's the other way. Personally, my observation is that 3 point shots do not hurt team D.

Really, what is overlooked about that shot is that it has no chance of a TO. When you factor TO% (probably at least 10%) into "working the ball for a higher percentage shot" it starts to make more sense why that can be a good shot.
Click to expand...

GeeZ!!!

I vividly remember a playoff series where he was like 6 for 37 from three.
 
All this is good. I get the PPS argument, but misses from these shots are momentum killers. Analytics doesn't take into account being "hot," and especially the case in streaky shooters like Dame.

Dame shooting a 30' shot with 20 on the clock after no passes on a night when he's cold as hell is a bad shot. I have no problem with it if he's been making them
 
GrandpaBlaze said:
Does All Years include playoffs?
Click to expand...

I think "All Years" includes this year and playoffs. That site didn't have 2017-18 in the drop down so this year wasn't included in my original numbers. Using basketball-reference.com and including playoffs:
2017-2018 17/65 26%
2016-2017 32/86 37%
2015-2016 19/63 30%
2014-2015 15/51 29%
2013-2014 11/22 50%
2012-2013 4/15 27%
Total 98/302 32.5%
 
bobf said:
I tried another site https://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/shot_finder.cgi which includes this season too. I get
4/15 2012-2013 27%
10/20 2013-2014 50%
13/45 2014-2015 29%
15/48 2015-2016 31%
29/78 2016-2017 37%
17/65 2017-2018 26%
Total 88/271 32.5%

If he's only gonna make 26% of them, that is a bad shot. But at his career rate of 32.5% it's a good shot at 1.11 points per possession.
Click to expand...

I'm more inclined to believe those numbers, and they also highlight the question I almost asked initially, which you sort of answered with the previous breakdown by year: has he trended down as the eye test would indicate? The answer is a resounding yes, with his second year at 50% setting lofty expectations that he has never come close to since. Take that year out of the equation and he's pretty consistent in the high-20's to low-30's, with a 31% avg. Not terrible, not great.
 
handiman said:
I'm more inclined to believe those numbers, and they also highlight the question I almost asked initially, which you sort of answered with the previous breakdown by year: has he trended down as the eye test would indicate? The answer is a resounding yes, with his second year at 50% setting lofty expectations that he has never come close to since. Take that year out of the equation and he's pretty consistent in the high-20's to low-30's, with a 31% avg. Not terrible, not great.
Click to expand...

I would just chalk that up as variance for now. He shot 37% last year which I think is great. This year he is shooting way more long 3's, but he's down to 26%. If he stays down there for a whole season, then that's another story.

Dame's long 3's are around 1.11 PPP assuming a pessimistic 20% ORB rate. By comparison - on 2-point shots from 6+ feet - Dame is a career 40.4%. That works out to only 0.93 PPP using the same ORB rate. That doesn't count possible free throws, but it also doesn't count turnovers either.
 
illmatic99 said:
All this is good. I get the PPS argument, but misses from these shots are momentum killers. Analytics doesn't take into account being "hot," and especially the case in streaky shooters like Dame.

Dame shooting a 30' shot with 20 on the clock after no passes on a night when he's cold as hell is a bad shot. I have no problem with it if he's been making them
Click to expand...
I get the PPP argument as well. I just disagree with the offensive rebound assumption, & the resulting transition defense.
 
Okay. SO Per:

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats.html

The NBA league average 2pt% is .468%

The NBA league average 3pt% is .364%

Lets say team "A" only shoots twos and team "B" only shoots threes and each team is able to get up 100 shots in a game (simple math)

team A makes 47 shots for a total if 94pts.

team B makes 36 shots for a total of 108.


Now lets narrow it down some more. How many 3pt shots does the average team take? 28.8....so 29.

So now in reality, team A would be shooting 71 twos and 29 threes. This would equate to the following:

71 twos at 47% shooting = 33 shots made for 66 pts. 29 threes on .36% shoot = 11 shots made for 33 points.

This gives Team A a total of 99 points. They STILL lose to a team that only shoots 3's and can shoot the league average.

This doesn't account for the TO's that our defense would provide as well as us probably getting up many more shots than the other team because of us shooting quick threes and them taking time to get it to the rim more.

So with these numbers? What am I missing? What is the point of even getting to the rim?
 
Orion Bailey said:
So with these numbers? What am I missing? What is the point of even getting to the rim?
Click to expand...

Good luck shooting 36% in a theoretical game where you only shoot from outside the line, resulting in the defense only having to guard the perimeter.
 
handiman said:
Good luck shooting 36% in a theoretical game where you only shoot from outside the line, resulting in the defense only having to guard the perimeter.
Click to expand...

This. Also

Orion Bailey said:
us probably getting up many more shots than the other team because of us shooting quick threes and them taking time to get it to the rim more.
Click to expand...

What's your point ? If you shoot in 5 seconds, then the other team shoots in 20, three times in a row, you still have both team shooting 3 times
 
SIeepwalker said:
This. Also



What's your point ? If you shoot in 5 seconds, then the other team shoots in 20, three times in a row, you still have both team shooting 3 times
Click to expand...

Okay, but we still won by 9?

NO. I'm not stupid enough to think a team should only shoot threes. Their percentage would drop into the teens. But it surely makes sense mathematically to have it as a strong suit to your arsenal, rather than an after thought, no?

Point being Stotts is correct in his offensive game plan, putting emphasis on the three?
 
I havent got to see a game yet this season but id be more willing to let dame heave 34 footers every possesion than give meyers leonard playing time
 
rasheedfan2005 said:
I havent got to see a game yet this season but id be more willing to let dame heave 34 footers every possesion than give meyers leonard playing time
Click to expand...

You must think Aminu should get 15 minutes, too, huh? ;)
 
illmatic99 said:
Dame shooting a 30' shot with 20 on the clock after no passes on a night when he's cold as hell is a bad shot. I have no problem with it if he's been making them
Click to expand...

This.
Against Houston Lillard had 9 three pointers made, some from pretty deep.
However I remember specifically watching his first couple of three pointers being great wide open looks from 24ft and it gave him a rhythm.
After that, the next couple were from the practice center and he was rolling all game.

I still firmly believe Lillard would take less 30 footers if there were better players around him who demanded they be defended.
However there are times during the game that Lillard passing to x player is just as bad as if Lillard misses an 30 footer.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Shooter
The wide-open 3-pointer
Replies
27
Views
3K
tlongII
tlongII
B
Value of One and Bonehead Plays
Replies
20
Views
2K
Dan Marang
Dan Marang
illmatic99
This series is huge for Dame's legacy
Replies
21
Views
1K
illmatic99
illmatic99
Natebishop3
  • Poll Poll
Which shot was bigger for you?
2
Replies
52
Views
4K
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
Natebishop3
Dame's career arc
2 3
Replies
75
Views
5K
Minstrel
Minstrel

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top