Analytics Nerds watching CP3 and Booker destroy Denver with the Mid-Range

[Professor Emeritus]

I don’t remember people championing CP3 as the goat like you are doing.

I can only speak for myself, I can't help if other people are slow to the truth.


These posts are all from 2016-2020:

Don't know how OP is forgetting Oscar Robertson, Wilt Chamberlain, David Robinson, Tim Duncan, Chris Paul (most complete player ever under 6'4"), and Kobe.

A hell of a lot more than Stockton, who some people put there instead.

He's arguably the most complete point guard ever. One of the purest shooters in NBA history (maybe the best midrange shooter ever), one of the best passers in NBA history, one of the top bball-IQs in NBA history, and one of the top defensive players among star point guards in history. 8 All-NBA teams including 4 All-NBA 1st-teams, 9 All-Defensive teams including 7 All-Defensive 1st-teams, 7 times finishing top-10 in MVP voting including a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and 5th-place finish, with the 2nd-place finish on a relatively close vote that a lot of people thought he deserved. Repeatedly leading the league in assists and steals with one of the best assist-turnover ratios in the league while also being a 20ppg scorer and a bulldog defender. Some incredible playoff performances in tight spots (the huge Game 7 against the Spurs in 2015, the closeout game against the Jazz in 2017, some of his crazy-good games against the Mavs and the Spurs back when he was in NO). And he balled out for four different teams with four completely different offenses.

His only weakness is that he's 6'0", and there's only so much a smaller player can do to determine the outcome of the game. He's still a 1st-ballot Hall of Famer no questions asked.

Strong 3pt shooter, one of the great mid-range shooters of all time, one of the GOAT passers, among elite players was the best defensive point guard of his era, can even finish efficiently in the paint when he goes there...what are the holes in his game?

9 All-Defensive teams, 6 years leading the league in steals, 4 years leading the league in assists, averaged as much as 23ppg and will finish a top-50 scorer of all time, one of the top assist-to-turnover ratios of all time, and damn near had a 50-40-90 season.

Some guys might beat him on one thing but no one is as consistent across the board. Magic wasn't a shooter and was average at best at defense. Stockton wasn't a scorer. Payton was fantastic but his jump shot was a weakness. Isiah Thomas wasn't a 3pt shooter and was a strong defender but not as elite. Kidd wasn't a scorer. What's CP3's biggest weakness? Whatever it is, everyone else has one that is more glaring.

Then you saw that he's literally the most-often mentioned player in the entire thread.

He's one of the most complete players of all time. Elite scorer for a point guard, GOAT-level midrange shooter, GOAT-level passer, GOAT-level IQ, and elite defender.

In 2008 he was absolutely ridiculous with:

21.1ppg (1st among all point guards by a large margin) on nice shooting #'s (49/37/85)
11.6apg (1st among all players)
2.7spg (1st among all players)
2nd-team All-Defensive
1st-team All-NBA
2nd in MVP voting
1st or 2nd in every single advanced stat (Offensive Rating, Win Shares, PER, Box Plus/Minus, and Value Over Replacement)

Led the Pelicans to 56 wins with David West as the #2 and Morris Peterson in the starting lineup.

In the playoffs that year he averaged 24-5-11 on 50% shooting and led all players in steals, just ran into a Spurs team that had more experience and more elite talent than they did.



2009 was a great argument too. Averaged 24-6-11 on 50% shooting while again leading the league with 2.8 steals and earning 1st-team All-Defensive honors. Only issue was that team won just 49 games but for 20 games they were starting Rasual Butler, Hilton Armstrong, and Julian Wright next to CP3 and West.

7 All-NBA Defensive teams, including 5 1st-team All-Defense

7-time league leader in steals and 6th all-time in the NBA in steals/game

Doc Rivers: "I think he's the best defender at the point guard I've seen--maybe ever" - obviously hyperbole, but nothing you would ever say about someone who can't defend.

"According to Franks and Miller, Chris Paul is the best perimeter defender in the NBA. They have empirical evidence that the Clippers point guard suppresses and disrupts shot activity as much or more than any other guard in the league."

A few more broken-down opinions of Paul's overall defense now in his later career:

Department of Defense
How Good is Chris Paul Defensively?


It's possible to make an argument that Chris Paul is an overrated defender. But there's clearly way too good a case for his defense out there for it to be countered with something dumb like he "couldn't shut down a computer".

We're 5 pages in and no one has mentioned a single weakness in CP3's point guard skill set.

Better 3pt shooter than Payton.
Better midrange shooter than Payton.
Better passer than Payton.
Better ballhandler than Payton.
Better bball IQ than Payton.
Better team leader than Payton.
Elite defender, one of the greatest of his era.
Solid and efficient finisher at the rim.
And tough as hell.




I mean come on now, what else do you want your point guard to do?

Nah breh, you on crack if you putting CP3 fifth in that group.

CP3 been All-NBA at point guard 8 times, including 4 first-teams and 3 second-teams
Westbrook has also been All-NBA 8 times, but just 2 first-teams
Dame has only been All-NBA 4 times, and only 1 first-team
Kyrie has only been All-NBA 2 times, and never first-team

 

[Bigblackted4]

Bron was a decent midrange shooter in his prime. His 2012 Game 6 against Boston, 2013 Game 7 against San Antonio, and 2018 Game 3 against Toronto were won with a bunch of midrange jumpers. He shot about 43% from midrange on Miami, which is decent for a primary scorer. It's just that he limited those shots due to their inefficiency, only pulling it out when the situation demanded.

Yep, I always question in a different era does Bron actually become a good midrange shooter like he become a much improved 3 point shooter in the middle of his career.

 

[Bigblackted4]

@Rhakim i seen you say something about Devin Booker shooting more shots from short midrange than long midrange and that’s also important. Being able to shoot from all over the court is obviously important but you don’t want to take many shots in that long range but you want that foul line type mid range which can be shot very efficiently, see CP3, Nash, MJ and other guards. That’s the shot you want in half court besides a layup or wide open 3.

 

[wire28]

The theme of this thread seems to be, don’t shoot the mid if you are bad at it. No shyt.

its more complex than that. lets make up 50 different statistical acronyms and pay some guy 6 figures to make this same point

 

[Cynical Thoughts]

You can't simultaneously claim the analytics guys aren't saying anything new and then claim they've changed the game. Like I just pointed out, Booker has CLEARLY changed his game since his first two seasons. Rookie season he shot 10% of his shots 10-16 and 22% of his shots 16-23. Four years later he's shooting 21% of his shots 10-16 and just 11% of his shots 16-23. He more than doubled the shorter midrange while cutting his long midrange in half. That's what analytics does.

And it's much more fine-tuned than that too. They're likely zeroing in even on exact spots of the floor for him, like they do for many players. Again, if it wasn't changing how players play then you wouldn't have anything to complain about.






You're trying to make a meaningless argument on semantics. I don't care what the fukk you call the shot, the point is that he's reducing the less-successful shots and taking the more-successful shots, which is what EVERY player should do, which is all analytics is telling you to do. Who cares what you call the shot?

This is Booker's shot chart from last night:

Notice how tight those makes are. He wasn't hitting threes well last night (still got 6 points on 8 shots tho, same as going 3-8 midrange which is a normal night), but he still helped his team cause he was nailing those jumpers in the 5-15 foot range, a very nice area for him where he shoots 50%. He was 8-12 in the key, 16 points on 12 shots. How'd he do in the 16-23 foot range? Not good at all, just 1-4 (2 points on 4 shots), but it didn't hurt his team cause he didn't shoot many of them.




How about the Lakers game?

Notice very similar shot selection. Once again he shoots a ton of threes, only this night he's on so he gets 24 points off just 10 shots (literally could never happen on long midrange). Once again he's efficient inside the key, going 4-7 there. He's better on the long midrange on this night, going 3-5 (6 points on 5 shots) instead of 1-4, but either way it's a limited part of his game. He knows he ain't gonna shoot 60% from there on a regular basis when he's usually closer to 42% from that range, there's little to gain from shooting more of those and a lot to lose.



What works best for Booker isn't what works best for everyone. Each player has individual tendencies. But one of many things that analytics changed is that it showed that a LOT of players around the league were settling for those long 2s too many times, and they were better off either stopping an extra step back and going for 3pt, or working inside for a better shot.

“Close range long range shot” is your seemingly juelz’n word.

you typed all that just to say, shoot where you have a higher percentage.

I really don’t see the argument. I feel like you are upset that I said paying attention to a players successful spot on the court and imploring him to shoot there more often is something only analytics guys can find for YOU.

that’s not hard for me to figure out.

I have no problem with the mid range, 3ball or at the rim. I simply stated you was down playing the mid when someone pointed out how it was working. It’s spooky because you wasn’t exactly praising it like you are now.

I been hearing JVG complain about long 2s for over a decade. You ever played 2k, they been had those analytics charts years before the analytics craze

we both love the mid as long as the player shoots from his spot

 

[Yuzo]

@Rhakim i seen you say something about Devin Booker shooting more shots from short midrange than long midrange and that’s also important. Being able to shoot from all over the court is obviously important but you don’t want to take many shots in that long range but you want that foul line type mid range which can be shot very efficiently, see CP3, Nash, MJ and other guards. That’s the shot you want in half court besides a layup or wide open 3.

the foul line pull up is the next best shot in basketball after the layup because its a wide open shot from the next closest area to the basket that the defense will allow. when a guard comes off a screen, the big has to make a decision to step up or lay back.

heres a guard coming off a screen with the big laying back on him.

since the big was laying back he gets a wide open foul line pull up. if the big steps up he can contest that shot, but he lets the roller have a clear path to the basket, and because bigs are bigger and slower than guards, by stepping up he risks a blow by. so that if he lays back he can then stop the roller from having a layup line to the basket or the guard from getting blow by, but he has to give the guard a foul line pull up and dare him to make it.

if that sounds like a bad idea its because it is. but since the layup is the best shot in basketball, you have to take it away first, and simply hope the other player doesnt make the second best shot in basketball.

 

[UpAndComing]

Guess Utah Jazz didn't read this thread

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Guess Utah Jazz didn't read this thread

Jazz scored 63 points on 44 three-point shots. Shot 48% from three. We're talking a squad with O'Neale, Gobert, and an almost useless injured Conley starting scored 119 points on a team full of strong defenders, do you seriously think they could have done better than that?

The issue was the Jazz got killed on defense. It would be wild to expect the to score over 120 points with that lineup, but they needed to hold the other team to less than 120 points and that didn't happen.


edit: Let me point out that an injured Conley went 1-8 with 6 turnovers. So they somehow managed to score almost 120 points even with their starting PG shytting away a dozen possessions. Rest of team was 21-39 from 2pt and 20-38 from 3pt. Shooting too many threes was NOT the problem.

 

[Cave Savage]

Happened again today

Booker hit a ton of midranges and won the game

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Happened again today

Booker hit a ton of midranges and won the game

Booker is taking the right shots for Booker. On the other hand, Bridges-Crowder-Ayton-Payne-Johnson-Craig damn near went the entire game without even considering a midrange shot.

Funny that this thread was upped after both the Utah and Phoenix games when Utah and Phoenix scored the exact same # of points. Utah lost because they let the Clippers shoot 57% from the field and 51% from 3pt, it had nothing to do with Utah shooting too many threes (which they actually hit at a nice clip).

Also funny that no one pointed out Terrance Mann's huge game-winning come out party was 37 points solely off of corner 3's and shots at the rim, or that Reggie Jackson, Nicolas Batum, and Pat Beverly had pretty much the same shot charts too, yet the four of them combined for 94 points to carry the Clippers to the win.

 

[Cave Savage]

Booker is taking the right shots for Booker. On the other hand, Bridges-Crowder-Ayton-Payne-Johnson-Craig damn near went the entire game without even considering a midrange shot.

Funny that this thread was upped after both the Utah and Phoenix games when Utah and Phoenix scored the exact same # of points. Utah lost because they let the Clippers shoot 57% from the field and 51% from 3pt, it had nothing to do with Utah shooting too many threes (which they actually hit at a nice clip).

Also funny that no one pointed out Terrance Mann's huge game-winning come out party was 37 points solely off of corner 3's and shots at the rim, or that Reggie Jackson, Nicolas Batum, and Pat Beverly had pretty much the same shot charts too, yet the four of them combined for 94 points to carry the Clippers to the win.

I don't think the Jazz-Clippers game was relevant to this thread, other than the fact that the Jazz's reliance on 3s hurt them at the end.

 

[UpAndComing]

Booker is taking the right shots for Booker. On the other hand, Bridges-Crowder-Ayton-Payne-Johnson-Craig damn near went the entire game without even considering a midrange shot.

Funny that this thread was upped after both the Utah and Phoenix games when Utah and Phoenix scored the exact same # of points. Utah lost because they let the Clippers shoot 57% from the field and 51% from 3pt, it had nothing to do with Utah shooting too many threes (which they actually hit at a nice clip).

Also funny that no one pointed out Terrance Mann's huge game-winning come out party was 37 points solely off of corner 3's and shots at the rim, or that Reggie Jackson, Nicolas Batum, and Pat Beverly had pretty much the same shot charts too, yet the four of them combined for 94 points to carry the Clippers to the win.

Analytics Logic

- Mid Range is singular for only a certain player
- Jacking up 3 pointers, no matter how off you are that day, are for everyone

You don't think if Joe Harris considered a mid-range shot, the Nets would be in the Eastern Conference Finals right now?

 

[Cave Savage]

Analytics Logic

- Mid Range is singular for only a certain player
- Jacking up 3 pointers, no matter how off you are that day, are for everyone

You don't think if Joe Harris considered a mid-range shot, the Nets would be in the Eastern Conference Finals right now?

That's why Devin Booker's shot selection is so good. The other night against the Lakers, he shot a lot of 3s as he was hitting them at 80%

The 3 wasn't really going for him today so he kept hitting those elbow jumpers with ease. And honestly could have got a few more of them in the 4th but tried to get his teammates involved instead

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Analytics Logic

- Mid Range is singular for only a certain player

No, that's not analytics logic. Analytics logic is that every player should increase the plays that are are most efficient for their own game.

- Jacking up 3 pointers, no matter how off you are that day, are for everyone

Also not analytics logic. You shouldn't jack a 3pt if it's not a good shot for you or if it interferes with other aspects of your game.

You don't think if Joe Harris considered a mid-range shot, the Nets would be in the Eastern Conference Finals right now?

Unlikely. A player who is bricking open 3s isn't going to suddenly hit contested 2s unless it's a more comfortable shot for that player. And Joe Harris isn't much of a midrange shooter (1-7 midrange this series). On top of that, an unathletic player like him tends to struggle with those more contested 2pt shots, since it's easier for the defense to close and recover to contest the shot.

One of the funniest aspects of this is that analytics is 100% about being familiar with an individual person's game, while people who hate analytics will come in just saying shyt while being completely clueless about a player's strengths or history.

 

[Darealtwo1]

Analytics Logic

- Mid Range is singular for only a certain player
- Jacking up 3 pointers, no matter how off you are that day, are for everyone

You don't think if Joe Harris considered a mid-range shot, the Nets would be in the Eastern Conference Finals right now?

nikka JOE HARRIS WAS TRASH EVERYWHERE ON ALL 3 LEVELS

AT THE RIM

MID RANGE

3

Y'ALL DIDN'T WATCH THE SERIES I SWEAR