Which is the more important statistic?

[silesian]

calm

You're kind of going off here on a tangent here that is quite frankly boring the hell out of me. If you read my original post I said shooting is an innate quality. That quality may be having the feel to hit shots from anywhere on the court like Kobe Bryant or it may also be the fact that you're 7'2" like Ostertag or have the ability to jump out of the gym like DeAndre Jordan. If you want to say your FG% varies depending on who your are and whatever type of apples to oranges comparison you're trying to make; that's fine. It still doesn't exclude my point because that's not the point I was trying to make.

If you want to say shooting has nothing to do with FG% - that's idiotic.

1. To my comment that FG% is "combination of being a good shooter and what shots a player is expected to take and chooses to take (shot selection)" candrew replies: "If you want to say shooting has nothing to do with FG% - that's idiotic" Well, there is something idiotic in there somewhere, I'll let you figure it out.

2. You say that shooting is innate, which means of course that it is something you are born with. The opposite of innate is acquired, learned, or a skill that must be developed with practice. Look at all the best shooters, I promise you that excel after extensive practice and thousands of shots (see Larry Bird, Reggie Miller). Any coach will tell you that shooting skills absolutely can be improved with extensive practice. You see it at every level of the game.

3. Finally, please try to be a bit more respectful and not so defensive, my post was not even in response to your earlier comments, yet you choose to emotionally lash out.

Peace brother.

 

[Darkwing Duck]

You're kind of going off here on a tangent here that is quite frankly boring the hell out of me. If you read my original post I said shooting is an innate quality. That quality may be having the feel to hit shots from anywhere on the court like Kobe Bryant or it may also be the fact that you're 7'2" like Ostertag or have the ability to jump out of the gym like DeAndre Jordan. If you want to say your FG% varies depending on who your are and whatever type of apples to oranges comparison you're trying to make; that's fine. It still doesn't exclude my point because that's not the point I was trying to make.

If you want to say shooting has nothing to do with FG% - that's idiotic.

You take a random player and look at his FG% and it will tell you NOTHING about how good a shooter he is, because you have no idea where those field goal attempts come from, and if you want to say that layups and dunks are "shots" that describes a "shooter," than Deandre Jordan, Shaq, Chamberlain, Howard, et al, are the best shooters in NBA history because they have the highest FG%.

 

[Hotdog]

You take a random player and look at his FG% and it will tell you NOTHING about how good a shooter he is, because you have no idea where those field goal attempts come from, and if you want to say that layups and dunks are "shots" that describes a "shooter," than Deandre Jordan, Shaq, Chamberlain, Howard, et al, are the best shooters in NBA history because they have the highest FG%.

Those players you named are good players and were dominant. Who cares where they shot the ball from. It still went in and counted and helped win games. The best players shoot around the rim a lot. Terrible players are the ones who chuck too many threes.

I don't understand where you are coming from.

A shot is a shot whether it was a dunk or an 18 footer.

It just seems like you are biased against players who shoot closer to the rim.

 

[Saint Cy of JFC]

Last I saw it, they pick the winner with the most points scored, not most boards grabbed.

Rebounding is very important. But there are various type of rebounds and for that matter, put back rebounds and the defensive ones that lead to assists or score from fastbreak are directly to the goal compared to second chances and defensive rebounds that lead to set piece offense.

Rebounding is cool coz the stats experts always consider it at a high level and it usually leads to double double which is another very very liked thingie. It determines whether if you have the ball or not.

But if you don't know what to do with it, what the hell is it for?

Field Goal Percentage.

Rebounding leads to more FGA though. You can shoot a great %, but if you aren't getting extra possessions through rebounding and keep the other team off the offensive glass, you are probably losing also.

 

[fishonjazz]

Just a fantastic thread btw

Kudos hack

This

Note the sarcasm.

How the **** did this thread last this long?

 

[Darkwing Duck]

Those players you named are good players and were dominant. Who cares where they shot the ball from. It still went in and counted and helped win games. The best players shoot around the rim a lot. Terrible players are the ones who chuck too many threes.

I don't understand where you are coming from.

A shot is a shot whether it was a dunk or an 18 footer.

It just seems like you are biased against players who shoot closer to the rim.

I wouldn't consider every field goal attempt a "shot" in the sense where you're trying to determine how good a "shooter" one is. I just named well known players. Andris Biedrins has a better FG% than Jordan, Kobe, and practically any other guard in the history of the NBA. No one would call him a better shooter than any guard in the history of the NBA.

 

[addictionary]

Rebounding leads to more FGA though. You can shoot a great %, but if you aren't getting extra possessions through rebounding and keep the other team off the offensive glass, you are probably losing also.

Team need to fulfill the necessary average not only in rebounding and FGP but almost all the other things on the stats sheet. If not, something else- some other stat column is working for them instead of the other if they are winning. Even FTP determines the winner many times. In the last Eurobasket even though the Turkish team sucked, they could have achieved more if they shot with a better FTP. It's about trying to find balance, to do your best to not get swept on board at least if you can't outboard them. To score enough points if you have more chances but shoot worse than them.

 

[Xsy]

Rebounding for bigs, fg% for wings.

Though a bad offensive big, or a wing that doesn't rebound is still a bummer.

 

[gregbroncs]

This

Note the sarcasm.

How the **** did this thread last this long?

It's the worst part of the off season. All the roster's are all but set and nothing is going on. There is no Football yet to distract us so we are all just waiting for something to happen.

 

[fishonjazz]

It's the worst part of the off season. All the roster's are all but set and nothing is going on. There is no Football yet to distract us so we are all just waiting for something to happen.

True

 

[Strutter]

If I were motivated, I could go to basketball reference and see which of the two stats correlated more with win percentage.

Maybe I'll look into it.

 

[gomretat]

No brainer. Both matter but definitely FG%