AYC wrote:I agree with kjb; players aren't any less fundamentally sound than they used to be. The mid-range jumper has died because team's realize it's an inefficient shot.
Not to change the subject but I have thought a lot about the mid-range jumper lately, particularly since the finals. While I won't dispute that it is a statistically inefficient shot I do actually believe that it is a very valuable weapon that more players should work on. In the NBA playoffs games often come down to the last few minutes when defenses focus harder on chasing the other teams star off the 3 point arc and/or preventing his penetration. Thus guys who are very good mid-range jump shooters tend to be very valuable late in games. For example, Dirk was the best mid-range shooter in the league last year. Also, Kobe's mid-range numbers dipped a bit last year but in the seasons before that he was always at or near the top. In fact most of the recent championship teams were led by players that tend to be almost automatic from mid-range, Duncan, Garnett, Allen, etc. It seems to me that most really good closers are also really good from 15-18 feet.
I have the link to the site I use that has shot by distance stats on my home computer, I’ll post it a little bit later.
Evan, very interesting stuff, thanks. I've actually never heard that result about shots coming off an assist being more likely to go in. It definitely does make sense though.
noypi wrote:
aren't you at least curious as to why some of the best white players in the NBA are from Europe or South America, not in the U.S.?
No.
The only thing I'm curious about is why you're curious about this. Why does this matter? What point are you trying to make?
American basketball culture need to go back to basics--fundamentals over flash and dunks. Black American basketball players need to stay in college for at least 3 years. White American players need to be more fundamentally sound since they can't jump. They need to be more assertive on the court and not be intimidated. I hope in the new collective bargaining agreement it raises the age limit to 20 or 21.
Last edited by noypi on Sat Jul 23, 2011 4:36 am, edited 2 times in total.
AYC wrote:I agree with kjb; players aren't any less fundamentally sound than they used to be. The mid-range jumper has died because team's realize it's an inefficient shot.
Not to change the subject but I have thought a lot about the mid-range jumper lately, particularly since the finals. While I won't dispute that it is a statistically inefficient shot I do actually believe that it is a very valuable weapon that more players should work on. In the NBA playoffs games often come down to the last few minutes when defenses focus harder on chasing the other teams star off the 3 point arc and/or preventing his penetration. Thus guys who are very good mid-range jump shooters tend to be very valuable late in games. For example, Dirk was the best mid-range shooter in the league last year. Also, Kobe's mid-range numbers dipped a bit last year but in the seasons before that he was always at or near the top. In fact most of the recent championship teams were led by players that tend to be almost automatic from mid-range, Duncan, Garnett, Allen, etc. It seems to me that most really good closers are also really good from 15-18 feet.
I have the link to the site I use that has shot by distance stats on my home computer, I’ll post it a little bit later.
you need to have a good midrange jumper (off the dribble, turnaround j) to be an effective scorer, not just a spot up 3pt shooter from the corners. @kjb
Last edited by noypi on Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:50 am, edited 1 time in total.
Looking briefly for guys who would typically get the leader / star label (20+ points per game scorers), I find that the number of white stars dramatically declined after the early 70s. There has not been much more decline from then to the 80s, 90s and 2000s. The number of white American players scoring over 20 pts per game has been under 10% of that total since the late 70s after being at least 30% in the early 70s and much higher before then. In the 80s it was an average of just 2-3 per year. The 90s and 2000s saw a bit lower average (1-2 per year) but it is still just a very few and not enough of a recent decline to require a broad, speculative explanation of recent change.
The late 70s, 80s and 90s all look much more like the 2000s than they do the 50s, 60s or early 70s. If society had been different with more equal opportunity to train and compete for the NBA earlier, more NBA jobs and star roles in the 50s, 60s and early 70s probably would have gone to blacks then too and there would be no elevated level of white American star frequency to slip from because of cultural decline or fundamentals decline or versatility decline or any other offered speculation. Reported genetic advantages on average in quickness and jumping ability by top black athletes may play some significant role (along with high drive & strong talent) given how rapidly and dramatically player selection changed once the league opened up the opportunity.
That white players from the rest of the world has contributed more top white stars recently than the US is worth noting; but that could be significantly affected by there being probably about 4-5 times as many white people of European descent in the rest of the world's talent pool combined as whites in the US. There are differences in the scale and quality of the development systems but maybe top stars are more about the rare individual than the system.
Using WinShares, the top 5 white stars (from within the top 30 guys in the league) include 4 non-American white stars (Gasol, Nowitzki, Nash, Ginobili) and 1 all-white American (Love; didn't count Griffin). The number of white Americans are the very top is granted quite low; but given the relative population / talent pool bases, it is still about even for top stars American vs non-American on a simple per capita talent pool basis.
(From there, it is about 50 / 50 American vs. not for the larger set of NBA players in the top half of WS performance. Stated another way, that is a still large per capita advantage to the white Americans over the non-Americans among guys playing significant roles in the lineup & rotation.)
From a population base of 1 billion or more, the country of origin of the very few white top stars could also fluctuate from one half-decade or decade to another without necessarily being a trend needing a sweeping explanation. The 2000s were the first and so far only decade with a full handful of non-American white top stars at the very top, so let's see what happens in coming decades. For now, one could mainly just give congratulations to those other countries for doing well with and / or being very lucky with their very top recent white players (and other countries with their black players too). However, there is no large / obvious / certain set of young white international guys ready to become the next wave of non-American white leaders / very top stars. One could find ways where they are not as strong as the very best players here too.
Overall my understanding at this point will be based mainly on the long-term league trends and the reality now of a large non-American white talent pool being actively drawn upon by the NBA along with other talent pools. The black American talent pool is the dominant source of players and stars, as it has been since the 70s. Their long-term success and the recent success of a few top non-American whites doesn't require a recent and broad cultural weakness or fundamentals or versatility failure explanation for white American players, in my view.
From a population base of 1 billion or more, the country of origin of the very few white top stars could also fluctuate from one half-decade or decade to another without necessarily being a trend needing a sweeping explanation. The 2000s were the first and so far only decade with a full handful of non-American white top stars at the very top, so let's see what happens in coming decades. For now, one could mainly just give congratulations to those other countries for doing well with and / or being very lucky with their very top recent white players (and other countries with their black players too). However, there is no large / obvious / certain set of young white international guys ready to become the next wave of non-American white leaders / very top stars. One could find ways where they are not as strong as the very best players here too.
basketball wasn't that popular outside the US in the 60s, 70s and 80s. The First Dream Team and Jordan helped sell the game to the world. Which led to the first wave of good int'l national players coming to the US in the late 90s.
P.S. I wouldn't consider Kevin Love a star. More like a role player.
I certainly wouldn't call Love a superstar at this point (given his neutral RAPM), but I wouldn't call him just a role player either. Star seems like a decent compromise for a guy who put up a 20 pts / 15 rebounds per game season and at a young age (in fact the 3rd youngest, only about 2 months older than the youngest). Only 50 such seasons by 14 guys ever in the NBA and all but 2 of those guys are in the Hall of Fame. 59% TS% and 42% FG% from 3 pt are impressive too.
Walton got close to 20pts / 15 rebs per game in 2 seasons but never did it. Of course he had blocks & general defense too.
Crow wrote:I certainly wouldn't call Love a superstar at this point (given his neutral RAPM), but I wouldn't call him just a role player either. Star seems like a decent compromise for a guy who put up a 20 pts / 15 rebounds per game season and at a young age (in fact the 3rd youngest, only about 2 months older than the youngest). Only 50 such seasons by 14 guys ever in the NBA and all but 2 of those guys are in the Hall of Fame. 59% TS% and 42% FG% from 3 pt are impressive too.
Walton got close to 20pts / 15 rebs per game in 2 seasons but never did it. Of course he had blocks & general defense too.
kevin love has a role player's mentality. i know he has gaudy numbers, but shawn marion had them too in the past and i never consider the Matrix an alpha dog leader/star.
Love is an excellent rebounder, but his defense is poor and he has a difficult time scoring inside against bigger defenders. He gets his shot blocked a lot. He has difficulty creating his own offense (same problem with Marion, even though he had 20+/game seasons). His offense mainly consists of spot up shooting.
noypi wrote:how will white american guards get the respect if they only end up as spot up shooters in the nba?
I'll try once more. What point are you trying to make? Why does a player's ethnicity or skin color make any difference at all?
Where is the evidence to support your theory that a) fundamentals have declined; b) that black players are lacking in these fundamentals; and c) that whites are any better at these "fundamentals" than blacks?
I'll try once more. What point are you trying to make? Why does a player's ethnicity or skin color make any difference at all?
if you're bothered with the issue of the lack of good white american players in the NBA today, then you're being way oversensitive. Or you just refuse see the reality. it's not an exaggeration to say that dan majerle was the last legit white american NBA star player at the guard position. the rest that came after him were either backup pgs, spotup shooters, or journeymen type guards.
Where is the evidence to support your theory that a) fundamentals have declined;
american players back to the basket game have declined. american players are not as good with their midrange game--many have become spot shooters from behind the 3pt line. white american guards don't even have the confidence to take it to the hole (altho i see some promising guards/swings like gordon hayward and chase budinger...)