Does it strike anyone else as a bit loopy to talk about shots per 100 possessions and offensive rebound rate as if they are not effectively one and the same? If you're grabbing more offensive rebounds (and not subsequently throwing the ball away), you're getting up more shots per possession and thus increasing the shots per 100 possessions stat. Actually, it makes me think that "shots per 100 possessions" could become a very meaningless stat without the proper context.
And if you think about that analysis of our "offense" you start to realize that it really isn't an offense at all. Any system that is mainly predicated on not turning the ball over and grabbing offensive boards to generate points really underscores Nate's whole plan to win games, "Just scrap, we need more scrappiness" That isn't to say they shouldn't try to get offensive rebounds, because they are important. The real issue for me isn't shots per 100 possessions, but having an offense that generates more points per 100 possessions than it currently does -- and for me that means higher percentage shots and getting at least 10 fast break points per game or making an attempt to score inside
Agreed. The shots per 100 possessions thing seems to bastardize the importance of maximizing possessions and points, rather than just prolonging possessions.
I don't think you're right. The Sony decision, as far as I know, allows time-shifting of television broadcasts. "Private, noncommercial time-shifting in the home satisfies this standard of noninfringing uses both because respondents have no right to prevent other copyright holders from authorizing such time-shifting for their programs, and because the District Court's findings reveal that even the unauthorized home time-shifting of respondents' programs is legitimate fair use." Ed O.
