Knicks · Philly vs. New York: TANK BOWL I (page 6)

4th Qtr 7:51
PHI 73 NYK 78

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:Jason Smith another WIDE OPEN 16ft, he made it

i know, with the midrange. power forwards 6'10" with the midrange. could be a trend. still, smith is so soft.

so you're for that shot too? mid range jumpers?

you just need to agree with what he says even if it makes zero sense?

very strange.

no i agree with you... that in a pure math sense 33% from 3 is as good as 50% from 2.

however, you have to look what the opponent will do with 66% of shots missed versus 50% of shots missed. so far as i know we don't have a metric for that.

so in the meantime in a practical/intuitive sense i think that the cutoff point for a successful 3 point regimen is a few tenths shy of 40%.anything lower and i think diminishing returns really kick in.

still strange?

I think what he wanted you to say was

Smith should have passed up shooting the WIDE OPEN shot

Because of where his location was at on the floor

This is the pure definition of intelligence

But to add to what you say there's also the ROI on 2s vs 3s

Paid in the form of getting teams in foul trouble and in the penalty

Which can force rotations sooner than desired and create mismatches in favor of the offense

More FTA are generated from taking shots inside the arc

I better slow down don't want to make you become dumberer here

no what you say makes sense as you explained it. i see a meta development in that (1) offenses stressed the 3-ball in order to stretch the defense and create driving lanes; (2) defenses have been geared towards closing out on threes so much that midrange shots are more available; (3) power forwards that are not stretch 4s are being told to work on that midrange.

it isn't a stretch to say that coaching staffs study film and look for any opening to exploit.

adapt or die. humphries did it the other night against the nets, griffin did it on national tv last week, dudes like smith or doing it tonight.

Yeah me and Uptown discussed this the other day with him

I'm not totally opposed to mran's philosophy in maximizing efficiency[3s and paint pts]

But

Please stop referencing taking open shots[inside arc] as something stupid

Please stop saying uncontested midrange shots should not be a part of a team's offense

If a defender is not in your face and the defense is giving you

An open area on the court to do damage if by happen stance inside the arc then you take it

4th Qtr 5:38
PHI 77 NYK 82

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:Jason Smith another WIDE OPEN 16ft, he made it

i know, with the midrange. power forwards 6'10" with the midrange. could be a trend. still, smith is so soft.

so you're for that shot too? mid range jumpers?

you just need to agree with what he says even if it makes zero sense?

very strange.

no i agree with you... that in a pure math sense 33% from 3 is as good as 50% from 2.

however, you have to look what the opponent will do with 66% of shots missed versus 50% of shots missed. so far as i know we don't have a metric for that.

so in the meantime in a practical/intuitive sense i think that the cutoff point for a successful 3 point regimen is a few tenths shy of 40%.anything lower and i think diminishing returns really kick in.

still strange?

I think what he wanted you to say was

Smith should have passed up shooting the WIDE OPEN shot

Because of where his location was at on the floor

This is the pure definition of intelligence

But to add to what you say there's also the ROI on 2s vs 3s

Paid in the form of getting teams in foul trouble and in the penalty

Which can force rotations sooner than desired and create mismatches in favor of the offense

More FTA are generated from taking shots inside the arc

I better slow down don't want to make you become dumberer here

no what you say makes sense as you explained it. i see a meta development in that (1) offenses stressed the 3-ball in order to stretch the defense and create driving lanes; (2) defenses have been geared towards closing out on threes so much that midrange shots are more available; (3) power forwards that are not stretch 4s are being told to work on that midrange.

it isn't a stretch to say that coaching staffs study film and look for any opening to exploit.

adapt or die. humphries did it the other night against the nets, griffin did it on national tv last week, dudes like smith or doing it tonight.

Yeah me and Uptown discussed this the other day with him

I'm not totally opposed to mran's philosophy in maximizing efficiency

Please stop referencing taking open shots[inside arc] as something stupid

Please stop saying uncontested midrange shots should not be a part of a team's offense

If a defender is not in your face and the defense is giving you

An open area on the court to do damage if by happen stance inside the arc then you take it

well surely he is not saying to not take an open shot? a contested 2 i understand of course, but a wide open 2?

Moonangie wrote:LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE LOSE, ya bums!

WE GOT THIS!

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:

dk7th wrote:

mreinman wrote:

dk7th wrote:

F500ONE wrote:Jason Smith another WIDE OPEN 16ft, he made it

i know, with the midrange. power forwards 6'10" with the midrange. could be a trend. still, smith is so soft.

so you're for that shot too? mid range jumpers?

you just need to agree with what he says even if it makes zero sense?

very strange.

no i agree with you... that in a pure math sense 33% from 3 is as good as 50% from 2.

however, you have to look what the opponent will do with 66% of shots missed versus 50% of shots missed. so far as i know we don't have a metric for that.

so in the meantime in a practical/intuitive sense i think that the cutoff point for a successful 3 point regimen is a few tenths shy of 40%.anything lower and i think diminishing returns really kick in.

still strange?

I think what he wanted you to say was

Smith should have passed up shooting the WIDE OPEN shot

Because of where his location was at on the floor

This is the pure definition of intelligence

But to add to what you say there's also the ROI on 2s vs 3s

Paid in the form of getting teams in foul trouble and in the penalty

Which can force rotations sooner than desired and create mismatches in favor of the offense

More FTA are generated from taking shots inside the arc

I better slow down don't want to make you become dumberer here

no what you say makes sense as you explained it. i see a meta development in that (1) offenses stressed the 3-ball in order to stretch the defense and create driving lanes; (2) defenses have been geared towards closing out on threes so much that midrange shots are more available; (3) power forwards that are not stretch 4s are being told to work on that midrange.

it isn't a stretch to say that coaching staffs study film and look for any opening to exploit.

adapt or die. humphries did it the other night against the nets, griffin did it on national tv last week, dudes like smith or doing it tonight.

Yeah me and Uptown discussed this the other day with him

I'm not totally opposed to mran's philosophy in maximizing efficiency

Please stop referencing taking open shots[inside arc] as something stupid

Please stop saying uncontested midrange shots should not be a part of a team's offense

If a defender is not in your face and the defense is giving you

An open area on the court to do damage if by happen stance inside the arc then you take it

well surely he is not saying to not take an open shot? a contested 2 i understand of course, but a wide open 2?

Yes in this very game thread he most certainly all but said it

And-Or has stated it in past discussion, go back a page or two and you'll see

4th Qtr 3:55
PHI 81 NYK 85

4th Qtr 2:46
PHI 81 NYK 89

gunsnewing wrote:Come on Knicks tank harder with avengence

You Rang!!

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Those Tag Line Tho