Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Blackwatch

Interesting CP3 Quote about "Mid-range game"

Recommended Posts

After the Suns swept the Nuggets, Chris Paul noted in the post game interview that he had a career night because of how the Nuggets, and the league for that matter, played the pick and roll. He noted, " a couple of years ago, the league started going to this 'drop defense' against the pick and roll. So, I started developing my mid range game more to take advantage of it. Tonight was the fruit of my hard work to refine my game and incorporate more mid-range shots." This is Grizz related because that was the Grizz strategy against the PnR, drop the big defender into the lane on the roll and allow the guard to drive to the mid-range area or the lane. This tries to take advantage of the fact that guards have no mid-range game anymore because analytics say that mid-range jump shots are terrible "inefficient" shots, so don't take them, even if they are wide open. But, as you see, CP3 crushed the Nuggets that night with 37 pts, not with a bunch of 3's or dunks, but mid range jumpers. He took advantage of a seriously flawed way of playing basketball. If you defend a team by banking on them either not taking or not being able to make a 15 ft. jump shot, you're sunk if they just so happen to say "screw analytics, we're taking and making wide open 15-20' jump shots". 

The Grizz looked so bad against the Jazz not because the Jazz were that much better than them talent wise (though Mitchell was the best player on the floor every night), but because they were lost defensively. Applying analytics and ignoring the mid-range game is not only what doomed the Grizz in the playoffs, but it's killing the league in general. The game is almost becoming unwatchable with all of the bricked 3's and fouls on drives to the lane. Teams really are hamstrung on the defensive end and you have to have a mega star to get calls. Analytics suck !!! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mr. Grizzle said:

Careful, you’re going to trigger all the Valanciunas apologists...

No need to apologize for our most productive player. 

The anti Jonas mob should have their own chapter in a Sigmund Freud book. Bet they all liked Justise too? Lol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Blackwatch said:

 

The Grizz looked so bad against the Jazz not because the Jazz were that much better than them talent wise (though Mitchell was the best player on the floor every night), but because they were lost defensively. Applying analytics and ignoring the mid-range game is not only what doomed the Grizz in the playoffs, but it's killing the league in general. The game is almost becoming unwatchable with all of the bricked 3's and fouls on drives to the lane. Teams really are hamstrung on the defensive end and you have to have a mega star to get calls. Analytics suck !!! 

I was kind of sorted with you up to this point. You really believe in your heart of hearts that the Jazz are not "that much better than the Grizz talentwise"? Really? You truthfully and honestly believe that a #9 seed has pretty much the same talent level as the overall #1 seed that had the best record in the NBA despite missing Mitchell for several games? We don't have anyone close to Mitchell's talent level on our team. then you add in Gobert who is a 3x DPoY and multiple All-NBA Defense first team, we have no one close to anyone like that. So those are 2 players who are much better than anyone we have right now. Statswise Ja may have better stats than Conley but Conley is a much smarter and savvier player than Ja. So at best, we're kind of even right there. The Jazz are one of the best shooting teams in the league with Ingles and Bogdonavic. Jordan Clarkson is much better than anyone we can bring off of our bench. How are they not that much better? They are a very complete team. No, they don't have a LeBron or KD, but they are a very complete team from top to bottom. Something we are not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Blackwatch said:

After the Suns swept the Nuggets, Chris Paul noted in the post game interview that he had a career night because of how the Nuggets, and the league for that matter, played the pick and roll. He noted, " a couple of years ago, the league started going to this 'drop defense' against the pick and roll. So, I started developing my mid range game more to take advantage of it. Tonight was the fruit of my hard work to refine my game and incorporate more mid-range shots." This is Grizz related because that was the Grizz strategy against the PnR, drop the big defender into the lane on the roll and allow the guard to drive to the mid-range area or the lane. This tries to take advantage of the fact that guards have no mid-range game anymore because analytics say that mid-range jump shots are terrible "inefficient" shots, so don't take them, even if they are wide open. But, as you see, CP3 crushed the Nuggets that night with 37 pts, not with a bunch of 3's or dunks, but mid range jumpers. He took advantage of a seriously flawed way of playing basketball. If you defend a team by banking on them either not taking or not being able to make a 15 ft. jump shot, you're sunk if they just so happen to say "screw analytics, we're taking and making wide open 15-20' jump shots". 

The Grizz looked so bad against the Jazz not because the Jazz were that much better than them talent wise (though Mitchell was the best player on the floor every night), but because they were lost defensively. Applying analytics and ignoring the mid-range game is not only what doomed the Grizz in the playoffs, but it's killing the league in general. The game is almost becoming unwatchable with all of the bricked 3's and fouls on drives to the lane. Teams really are hamstrung on the defensive end and you have to have a mega star to get calls. Analytics suck !!! 

Yes, but.

The flaw isn't to use the drop defense itself (or to take more 3s than 2s), but the coaches' inability to read a game and adjust (and by extension, the FOs' inability to build rosters that can play in more than one way). Drop defense may be the best option to defend 25 out of 30 teams, it doesn't matter if you need to go through one of the other 5 in the way to a championship.

Analytics are fine when used correctly. Using analytics for every minute decision and then doubling down when the outcome is not what's expected is stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, fanboyslim said:

Yes, but.

The flaw isn't to use the drop defense itself (or to take more 3s than 2s), but the coaches' inability to read a game and adjust (and by extension, the FOs' inability to build rosters that can play in more than one way). Drop defense may be the best option to defend 25 out of 30 teams, it doesn't matter if you need to go through one of the other 5 in the way to a championship.

Analytics are fine when used correctly. Using analytics for every minute decision and then doubling down when the outcome is not what's expected is stupid.

Agreed. I meant to make this same comment as well but got caught up in the OP thinking there's not much difference between the Grizz and Jazz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ole Dirty Klondike said:

I was kind of sorted with you up to this point. You really believe in your heart of hearts that the Jazz are not "that much better than the Grizz talentwise"? Really? You truthfully and honestly believe that a #9 seed has pretty much the same talent level as the overall #1 seed that had the best record in the NBA despite missing Mitchell for several games? We don't have anyone close to Mitchell's talent level on our team. then you add in Gobert who is a 3x DPoY and multiple All-NBA Defense first team, we have no one close to anyone like that. So those are 2 players who are much better than anyone we have right now. Statswise Ja may have better stats than Conley but Conley is a much smarter and savvier player than Ja. So at best, we're kind of even right there. The Jazz are one of the best shooting teams in the league with Ingles and Bogdonavic. Jordan Clarkson is much better than anyone we can bring off of our bench. How are they not that much better? They are a very complete team. No, they don't have a LeBron or KD, but they are a very complete team from top to bottom. Something we are not.

I noted that Mitchell was the best player on the floor in that series. Gobert is a DPOY, But, the depth the Grizz, a strength all year, was neutralized by how Jenkins shrunk the rotation. By taking Clarke and Winslow out for Allen and JV (when clearly JV was too limited to get that much playing time, especially considering he wasn't scoring and rebounding against Gobert like he was in the regular season), the talent of the Grizz wasn't fully utilized. I didn't say the Grizz were as talented, just not that much less talented (not to get "gentlemen's swept" by a Jazz team that relies on 3's so heavily). All year, the Grizz counter acted other teams' talent advantages with their depth. The problem in the Playoffs is that the inexperience of Jenkins was exposed. Winslow was a better option against Clarkson and they need to trap the PnR , not "drop" against it. Clarke and Tillman would have been better options than JV against the PnR.

Again, I am not saying the Grizz should have won the series, there was no answer on the Grizz for Mitchell, but it should have been more competitive, which would have given the Grizz more confidence going into the off season and more data about what to do with Winslow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, fanboyslim said:

Yes, but.

The flaw isn't to use the drop defense itself (or to take more 3s than 2s), but the coaches' inability to read a game and adjust (and by extension, the FOs' inability to build rosters that can play in more than one way). Drop defense may be the best option to defend 25 out of 30 teams, it doesn't matter if you need to go through one of the other 5 in the way to a championship.

Analytics are fine when used correctly. Using analytics for every minute decision and then doubling down when the outcome is not what's expected is stupid.

Analytics ignores one vital cog in the game, the personnel on the roster. It doesn't matter that if 3's are more efficient than 2's if you don't have the shooters to hit 3's consistently enough. In reality, in order for the analytics to be meaningful, you need shooters like Dame , Steph, Mitchell, KD and Harden. They can only be on 1 team at a time. The Grizz have good to great shooters , especially if the team is playing ball with any common sense. They had two or 3 players that hit 3's over 40% (Dieng was cut). They had the leading rookie 3 point shooter. That is more than enough shooting. They also had players like Ja, Melton, Winslow, Clarke, and KA that were hitting drives in the lane. They led the league in paint scoring and fast break scoring. They had a complete team, if but they didn't try to shoot 20 3's a game. That's 12-14 wasted shots/possession a  game (they hit like 35% of their 3's). Couple that with flawed defense against good teams (they lost 34 gms in the reg season and they were 2-28 when the other team scored 120 pts, not to mention they lost every game against the Jazz when the Jazz scored 120 pts) and you get what happened to this team. Any other year, a team that lead the league in paint scoring and fast break points is near the top of their conference. Not in the age of analytics. If they actually played the PnR by observing what was going on and making the common sense play rather than doubling down on analytics when it obviously was not the play for that moment.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Blackwatch said:

I noted that Mitchell was the best player on the floor in that series. Gobert is a DPOY, But, the depth the Grizz, a strength all year, was neutralized by how Jenkins shrunk the rotation. By taking Clarke and Winslow out for Allen and JV (when clearly JV was too limited to get that much playing time, especially considering he was scoring and rebounding against Gobert like he was in the regular season), the talent of the Grizz wasn't fully utilized. I didn't say the Grizz were as talented, just not that much less talented (not to get "gentlemen's swept" by a Jazz team that relies on 3's so heavily). All year, the Grizz counter acted other teams' talent advantages aby their depth. The problem in the Playoffs is that the inexperience of Jenkins was exposed. Winslow was a better option against Clarkson and they need to trap the PnR , not "drop" against it. Clarke would have been a better option than JV against the PnR.

Again, I am not saying the Grizz should have won the series, there was no answer on the Grizz for Mitchell, but it should have been more competitive, which would have given the Grizz more confidence going into the off season and more data about what to do with Winslow. 

We are much less talented. That's why we were the 9th seed despite over achieving all year and only got in because of the play-in. Fans need to realize this team needs serious upgrades if we want to compete. I will say that more experience helps as well, but we are lacking talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CP3 quote  can help to explain why Ja and DB averaged so many points.   Neither one of them were prolific from 3pt range but kept getting to their spots in the mid-range(DB) and paint (Ja Floaters).   

If NBA teams are gonna keep on pressing the "Analytics driven defense" then DB can continue to exploit that and become a more efficient scorer going forward.    Dillon loves the midrange pull up.   its also good that Bane is a decent mid range jump shooter as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Blackwatch said:

After the Suns swept the Nuggets, Chris Paul noted in the post game interview that he had a career night because of how the Nuggets, and the league for that matter, played the pick and roll. He noted, " a couple of years ago, the league started going to this 'drop defense' against the pick and roll. So, I started developing my mid range game more to take advantage of it. Tonight was the fruit of my hard work to refine my game and incorporate more mid-range shots." This is Grizz related because that was the Grizz strategy against the PnR, drop the big defender into the lane on the roll and allow the guard to drive to the mid-range area or the lane. This tries to take advantage of the fact that guards have no mid-range game anymore because analytics say that mid-range jump shots are terrible "inefficient" shots, so don't take them, even if they are wide open. But, as you see, CP3 crushed the Nuggets that night with 37 pts, not with a bunch of 3's or dunks, but mid range jumpers. He took advantage of a seriously flawed way of playing basketball. If you defend a team by banking on them either not taking or not being able to make a 15 ft. jump shot, you're sunk if they just so happen to say "screw analytics, we're taking and making wide open 15-20' jump shots". 

The Grizz looked so bad against the Jazz not because the Jazz were that much better than them talent wise (though Mitchell was the best player on the floor every night), but because they were lost defensively. Applying analytics and ignoring the mid-range game is not only what doomed the Grizz in the playoffs, but it's killing the league in general. The game is almost becoming unwatchable with all of the bricked 3's and fouls on drives to the lane. Teams really are hamstrung on the defensive end and you have to have a mega star to get calls. Analytics suck !!! 

Analytics are rear-view strategies. They can look  at how defenses were guarding the mid-range game and say that makes those shots inefficient. Offense change to reflect this new knowledge. Defenses change to reflect what the offenses are doing and so teams start to look to exploit what the defenses are leaving open to defend the paint and the perimeter. It's a constant game of switches and adjustments. It doesn't mean analytics suck. It just means teams are reacting to what the analytics tell them faster now that they aren't ignoring what they say. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chipc3 said:

Analytics are rear-view strategies. They can look  at how defenses were guarding the mid-range game and say that makes those shots inefficient. Offense change to reflect this new knowledge. Defenses change to reflect what the offenses are doing and so teams start to look to exploit what the defenses are leaving open to defend the paint and the perimeter. It's a constant game of switches and adjustments. It doesn't mean analytics suck. It just means teams are reacting to what the analytics tell them faster now that they aren't ignoring what they say. 

And Kawhi's shot bounces 4 times and goes in. And Masai looks like a savant. 

AD re-injures his knee, and the Suns get by the Lakers. If AD stays healthy and Lakers knock out the Suns, we're talking about CP3 not advancing in the playoffs again.

A lot of this is luck. E.g., Kleiman gets to draft Ja. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Game 1, Jazz shot 12-47 from 3 - 25.5%. We won by 3.

Game 2, Jazz shot 19-39 from 3 - 48.7%. We lost by 12.

Game 3, Jazz shot 19-43 from 3 - 44.2%. We lost by 10.

Game 4, Jazz shot 17-34 from 3 - 50%. We lost by 7.

Game 5, Jazz shot 17-44 from 3 - 38.6%. We lost by 16.

Our defense had its flaws, but we weren't hurt as much by the mid-range game as our complete inability to effectively guard the 3-point line. There was one game where, if I'm recalling correctly, we fouled a 3-point shooter four times. The only game we won is the only game the Jazz went completely cold from 3.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, chipc3 said:

Analytics are rear-view strategies. They can look  at how defenses were guarding the mid-range game and say that makes those shots inefficient. Offense change to reflect this new knowledge. Defenses change to reflect what the offenses are doing and so teams start to look to exploit what the defenses are leaving open to defend the paint and the perimeter. It's a constant game of switches and adjustments. It doesn't mean analytics suck. It just means teams are reacting to what the analytics tell them faster now that they aren't ignoring what they say. 

There was nothing ever wrong with mid-range shots, especially if you can hit them. Analytics said stop trying to hit them and shoot more 3's, a lower percentage shot. I assure you there are more players in the league that can hit mid-range shots than "logo 3's". Teams are adjusting on the fly now because it was dumb to go the way from the mid-range game in the first place. There is a place for understanding shot selection efficiency and such, but its a leap too far to try and make every player on the floor a 3 point shooter, when there are so many other ways to build a good team with players with other skill sets and ways to score. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ACGrizz said:

Game 1, Jazz shot 12-47 from 3 - 25.5%. We won by 3.

Game 2, Jazz shot 19-39 from 3 - 48.7%. We lost by 12.

Game 3, Jazz shot 19-43 from 3 - 44.2%. We lost by 10.

Game 4, Jazz shot 17-34 from 3 - 50%. We lost by 7.

Game 5, Jazz shot 17-44 from 3 - 38.6%. We lost by 16.

Our defense had its flaws, but we weren't hurt as much by the mid-range game as our complete inability to effectively guard the 3-point line. There was one game where, if I'm recalling correctly, we fouled a 3-point shooter four times. The only game we won is the only game the Jazz went completely cold from 3.

 

I never said the Jazz won because of mid-range game. I said they way  the Grizz defended the PnR was not working because the "Drop D" strategy was a product of the analytics that said give up the mid-range. But you are correct, the Grizz did the Drop- D strategy and couldn't defend the 3. The Jazz swung the ball after they drove the lane rather than take mid-range shots. either way, the Passer was never pressured, and it was killing the Grizz. They couldn't guard the 3 because after the PnR, their scramble D was horrendous. There were times during the season when the Grizz players were picking each other on the PnR. Literally, when the players tried to go under the screen, the other Grizz defender would literally be in the way and effectively picked his teammate on the PnR. No way can they justify that strategy as a pro team. Real Washington General level defense.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Blackwatch said:

I never said the Jazz won because of mid-range game. I said they way  the Grizz defended the PnR was not working because the "Drop D" strategy was a product of the analytics that said give up the mid-range. But you are correct, the Grizz did the Drop- D strategy and couldn't defend the 3. The Jazz swung the ball after they drove the lane rather than take mid-range shots. either way, the Passer was never pressured, and it was killing the Grizz. They couldn't guard the 3 because after the PnR, their scramble D was horrendous. There were times during the season when the Grizz players were picking each other on the PnR. Literally, when the players tried to go under the screen, the other Grizz defender would literally be in the way and effectively picked his teammate on the PnR. No way can they justify that strategy as a pro team. Real Washington General level defense.  

We don't need analytics to tell us the defense crumbled under the pressure of one of the best offenses in the league. It doesn't mean analytics were wrong. By your own admission, it just means we weren't good enough. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, chipc3 said:

We don't need analytics to tell us the defense crumbled under the pressure of one of the best offenses in the league. It doesn't mean analytics were wrong. By your own admission, it just means we weren't good enough. 

Coaching adjustments weren't there though.

So many times, high pick and roll. JV drops, guard chasing to recover because we don't switch, pass to screener who is open because two men covering handler, rotation to screener from somewhere, kick to open man, swing around until open 3.

We never freaking stopped it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think sweating over the lost art of the mid range game is overblown.  Most of stars of the league and even secondary scorers have potent midrange games.  It makes sense for most of the role players stick to threes and layups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had to bench JV and coach Jenkins refuse it was that simple.

Gobert plays drop coverage and so does Jaren and Tillman on our team but atleast they have a chance to recover on 3 point shooters something JV just can't do.

Jokics the MVP suffers the same issue during the regular season no one really cares but come playoff time elite coaches and players TARGET this guys defensively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ACGrizz said:

Game 1, Jazz shot 12-47 from 3 - 25.5%. We won by 3.

Game 2, Jazz shot 19-39 from 3 - 48.7%. We lost by 12.

Game 3, Jazz shot 19-43 from 3 - 44.2%. We lost by 10.

Game 4, Jazz shot 17-34 from 3 - 50%. We lost by 7.

Game 5, Jazz shot 17-44 from 3 - 38.6%. We lost by 16.

Our defense had its flaws, but we weren't hurt as much by the mid-range game as our complete inability to effectively guard the 3-point line. There was one game where, if I'm recalling correctly, we fouled a 3-point shooter four times. The only game we won is the only game the Jazz went completely cold from 3.

 

 

Sometimes, teams just make their 3 point shots, and some games they don't. Of course, sometimes that is because the way the defense contests the shot.  

This Grizzlies team is the most immature developmentally of all the playoff teams, and it isn't really even close. They could try to guard the 3 point line or the lane, but they just weren't good enough to do both, or maybe a more accurate way to put it is that Utah made more 3 pointers per game this season than any other team in NBA history.  The Jazz were good, and the Grizzlies were young.

Honestly, the defensive center the Grizzlies paid over $16 mm for this year was the one that should have played in this playoff series was playing for the Spurs at the end of the season.

This team was/is built still for development and isn't going to knock out a team like the Jazz from a playoff series.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Analytics says don't take mid range shots unless you're really good at them. Most people don't take them because they're trash at it. Elite mid range jumpshooters like Kawhi/Kobe are only around 45% from midrange in some of their best seasons, which is the equivalent points of mediocre 3 point shooter. 

The value of the mid range is your star being able to score from all three levels when you need a bucket. Which is why I'm not that excited by Brooks' middy since you probably aren't calling isolations for him during important moments

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ItIsWhatItIs said:

Analytics says don't take mid range shots unless you're really good at them. Most people don't take them because they're trash at it. Elite mid range jumpshooters like Kawhi/Kobe are only around 45% from midrange in some of their best seasons, which is the equivalent points of mediocre 3 point shooter. 

The value of the mid range is your star being able to score from all three levels when you need a bucket. Which is why I'm not that excited by Brooks' middy since you probably aren't calling isolations for him during important moments

I kinda figured it out:  analytics say that 3’s are worth more than 2, BUT in the heat of a big time playoff game “TWO POINTS IS TWO POINTS”.

In my opinion it’s been an awesome playoffs and the best brand of basketball since like 1992-1996 aka the heart of the 1st and 2nd set of MJ/Pippen Bulls trilogy titles with the Hakeem/Original Small Ball 3point Spam Fest Houston Rockets.  The Shaq/Penny and Kemp/Payton also-rans were fun to watch too.  And Charles Barkley’s ‘93 Suns may have been one of the top 5 or 6 teams of the decade.   
 

As I predicted, small ball has peaked with “5 guard lineups” going the way of the dinos.  I actually spoke “5 guard lineups” into existence (I think) 10 years ago when Josh Pastner installed his famous/infamous 4 guard lineups.  I was like, heck, just play FIVE guards.  Ironically we could have done it:  we had Joe Jackson, Will Barton, Geron Johnson, Chris Crawford, Wesley Witherspoon, DJ Stephens and guys like that.  
 

Bigs are back.  People talk about the Hakeem/Ewing/Admiral/Shaq/Zo/Mutombo era but that could have been a one-off.  This era of center is great too.  Those two eras rivaled only by the Russell/Wilt/Kareem Post-Stone Age Era.  
 

The guards are flammable and the 3’s are flying but I think we have reached the upper limits on dribble/drive munchkin guard play and 3 point Spam Mania.  
 

Thus, teams, especially in the playoffs, are again gravitating to the mid-range game (and even post ups). 

Yeah... best brand of basketball and blend of styles that I have seen in 30ish years of watching the NBA.  And I followed the NBA as a kid for a few years before that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bigs are not back.

Almost all the non mobile bigs have been eliminated so far because they can't keep up on defense.

Including our guy who got embarrassed in the first round.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



×