Shot selection...

[Michael Joseph Byrnes <mbyrnes@leland.Stanford.EDU>]

Alex Wang wrote:

> 
> I'll claim that statement. Really if you read what I said, the
> idea was that if Walker shot 45% he'd be doing pretty decently
> and we'd say his shot selection is decent.  Let's make it 50% 
> to further illustrate my point. He's currently shooting 20 shots 
> at 40%. Say he shoots 50% which everyone will agree is a very good 
> percentage for someone who is also shooting three-pointers. 
> This means he hits two two-point shots that he is currently missing. 
> This translates to exactly four points per game. If we allow the
> 45% figure it's two points per game. You can further adjust it because
> really, a missed shot can be rebounded so isn't a total loss.
> 
> So I'm saying, his poor shot selection rather than average or even
> good shot selection costs 2-4 points per game. Instead of gauging 
> lost points by counting hits instead of misses, we can say, instead
> of taking four bad shots at about 20% accuracy, he passes to a teammate
> for 60% accuracy. This is pretty generous because it's not like the
> rest of the Celtics are that great. Again his shooting percentage 
> would go up to 50% due to fewer shots. The expected number of points 
> the Celtics gain is 3.2 points.  

Your analysis is too simplistic.  All shots are not created equal.  The
point of offensive basketball is to create the highest percentage shot
possible every time down the floor.  A team with better shooters can very
easily lose to a worse shooting team that is committed to creating high
percentage opportunities for itself.

Let's say Walker pulls down a rebound and the Celtics have a chance for a
fast break.  If Walker gives the ball to Kenny Andreson, the Celtics
probably have a 90% chance of scoring on the play (and Walker has a very
good chance to be the guy getting the easy shot).  Instead, Walker tends
to keep the ball in these situations, and try to take it to the hole
almost every time, regardless of how many defenders are in his way, and
how many teammates are open for better shots.  A 90% chance of scoring a
basket is probably converted to a 10-20% chance of scoring.  That is going
to add up in the long run.  

Does Walker refuse to pass the ball because he is selfish, or because he
doesn't have the skills/vision to find and hit the open man?  The future
should answer that question.

Or, in the halfcourt offense, every time Walker throws up a quick shot
from outside, he is taking away any chance the Celtics might have had to
work for a better one.  Any time he goes against a double or triple team
in the post, there is an open man somewhere who has a much better chance
of scoring on the play.

That is what made Larry Bird such a great player.  During Bird's career,
I'll bet there were few if any teams that got as many uncontested shot
opportunities as the Celtics got.  Unlike Bird, Antoine Walker's game does
not make his teammates better.  In fact, at times his game may actually
detract from his teammates (like when he refuses to give up the ball on
the break).  

Michael Byrnes
mbyrnes@stanford.edu