Three point shots and winning percentage

@Crow
A very good point to bring up. But at the same time, three point shooting would help that a lot. Let's say we tell Green that if he's going to take a shot outside 12 feet, it has to be a three pointer. Coincidentally, he shoots better from beyond the arc than from mid-range. What's more, even if he averages less shooting only threes (33% for argument's sake), the point total accrued would be equivalent to shooting 50% taking only two pointers.

For Westbrook I don't have a good option, since he's a poor shooter from everywhere outside the basket. But I think Westbrook can make a considerable jump in FG% overall from an intense offseason program with Green and Durant. Even if Westbrook never gets a consistent jump shot (we'd need a new SG), he could be a Monta Ellis/earlier Tony Parker type scorer who never settles for the jump shot. Assuming he learns where his teammates are on those drives, that may be just as good as picking up a PG with better vision.

Thanks for the article Joe.
(And the backup.)

The 3 pt / 2 pt comparison is helpful as is but if you separate inside shots from mid-range you find that the Thunder take the 4th highest percentage from mid-range 48% and are the absolute worst at shooting it at 36%. Half the shot attempts there is barely more than one chance in three of the ball going in the hoop. http://www.82games.com/0809/FGTEAM7.HTM

Westbrook and Green are both a bit below the team's weak average from mid-range, at least as of now. They probably get better and get wiser cutting down on them. I'd think but there is little sign that they are being heavily guided (enough) to avoid mid-rangers or at least heeding or successfully implementing that advice.

I can get a bit snippy in discussing his design priorities and progress to date for various reasons and maybe I take it too far or hit it too often or too soon but mainly I am just searching to understand and keep coming up with huge fundamental issues that I didn't expect to see from someone touted as highly from an organization that has good chemistry and has increasing gone to more 3 point shooting.

You don't have to emphasize 3 pt shooting but you either need to minimize mid-range shooting or be good at it or both. The Thunder aren't on the right side of either of these.

They are however 9th on inside shot percentage and 13th on inside FG% and Presti clearly is going for this element not wanting to be just a 3 pt shooting team but the mid-range frequency and low accuracy have a bigger impact and going for those inside shots is often times ending in those compromise bailout low quality mid-range shots. There is a dance between these elements and the Thunder overall have the lowest efficiency score.

Presti probably picks up more outside shooting sometime in the future of course but it just hasn't appeared a priority and space in the lineup is disappearing or it at least seems that way if the current cast is truly all long-term core. He is on a 4 or 5 year plan or more. There is still time but by this time next season you'd think it would be past these basic issues about overall shot distribution and how can play with whom decently and be more about fine-tuning and stepping up to playoff contention. A lot of ground has to be covered between now and then or at least end of year 4. If they aren't solid by end of year 4... things can happen.

Gordon would never get signed here - he's a bad seed and was involved in at least one major spat with his head coach . . . I'd rather go 0-82 first . . .

Anyone else want on the Nocioni bandwagon?

Channing Frye is a free agent after this year. He's a solid backup PF/C that can shoot the three.

@Bernard
Ben Gordon still thinks he's a starter. He's going to want more money than he is worth and will be rather outspoken about coming off the bench. What he does as a player makes him a fantastic backup option at the 1 or 2, but I just don't see it happening. As you mentioned, Gordon needs and takes a lot of shots. He's nearly useless unless he can be a volume shooter, and that's not what we're looking for.

what do you guys think aout picking Ben Gordon up?
according to this article we can will so much better, but yet will his defencive liabilities, and with him taking Durant's shot attempts hurt us?

To be fair, we all should know that the lineup doesn't really work. We aren't a contender or even a playoff team. Even if you stretch our 2009 record back to the beginning of the year, we are under .500.

That said, I have to wonder as well. Durant isn't AI 2.0, a player whose game necessitates everyone else not to try, but something isn't right. It has been mentioned before that Durant stands around a lot on offense, waiting to get the ball and do his thing. What is often overlooked is how little everyone else moves when Durant has the ball. The offense looks smoother with him out because everyone knows they have to work harder. While the lineup will certainly be changed as early as the offseason, I think the main issue is a coaching issue. All of our players need to give 100% all time if they want to be a good team.

I hate to really say this, but I don't think our current starting lineup works. I don't have the answers, but the numbers don't lie. I'm not sure I have the answers, but something just isn't clicking. The team played much better without Durant when he picked up his second foul and went to the bench.

@Kev
Since shooting generally takes time to really get up, I'd think we would look more for a veteran for a shooter. I don't think we're going to find someone in the draft that can come in right away and stretch the floor in quality minutes.

Not to mention, I expect at least one quality player (as in all-star potential) to find his way to OKC through a cap cutting trade. Whether it be a gamble on someone like Bosh or Amare, or if it's a young guy with a solid/specific role like Biedrins, I expect Presti to pull the trigger on someone who fits a need and significantly upgrades our talent base.

I'm looking forward to Thabo against Ray Allen.

@Keith

agreed - the top pick has to be used on a shooter - at either spot - I still say there will be a trade amongst the starters in the next 18 months . . . can't just look at the draft for shooting . . .

Walter Herrmann is going to be a free agent at the end of this season. Another option is Andres Nocioni. Since Sacramento is going in to, as Nocioni described it, save money mode, I'm sure that they would love to send him here in exchange for some expiring contracts.

Thabo, for all his great defense, cannot survive in the lineup unless Westbrook is replaced with a three point shooter, or vice versa. Of the two I'd rather keep Thabo in the lineup right now, but Westbrook has a lot of improvement he can make from his rookie year. However, it does a lot more for us to have a shooter at PG than SG simply because the PG has more opportunity to use the outside shooting (higher usage plus pick and rolls).

Our offense is easy to guard against because we have only one or two guys at a time who can consistently hit outside shots.

Crow :
I noted these basic trends Hollinger also notes at the APBRmetrics board weeks or months ago.
It speaks to the weakness of Presti’s design to date. And the coaching. They seem so obsessed with not taking poor 3 point shots they have chosen to take too many even worse mid-range shots.
You have to be counting on natural improvement if you go Westbrook-Sefolosha- Durant - Green and bring Weaver as the first perimeter guy off the bench. They need a major injection of 3 point shooting at the guard spots. And Durant has to increase his rate a lot.

Yep, that you did Crow. You've been mentioning it for months. What really opened my eyes was the math behind it, which I never really considered before. That even though you shoot it (the three) at a much lower percentage than most other shots, you benefit so much (unless you are unbelievably bad at it)because of the 50% bonus in points per shot. I never really considered it that way.

The math is inescapable. You've got to shoot the deep ball. It is like a baseball analogy, if you had a team that never swung for the fence, but instead just concentrated on hitting singles, you better be very very good at it. Because if you've got a guy or two or three on base and the guy hits the homerun, it is four, three or two runs scored; but if you just go for safe base hits, you've got to have a heckuva lot of them to move the guys around consistently and equal the big scoring punch from the one big swing.

3 pt makes are important directly and 3 pt attempts to important indirectly- more room to drive, easier to iso or post, probably easier to pass, maybe easier to rebound, probably easier to cover the backcourt.

You don't have to go for 3 pointers but if you don't you have to have other high powered offensive weapons. Sam has built mostly on dribble-drive. The key to dribble-drive is not to settle for or be forced to settle for the pullup and don't turn it over. The young guys do too much of each.

I noted these basic trends Hollinger also notes at the APBRmetrics board weeks or months ago.

It speaks to the weakness of Presti's design to date. And the coaching. They seem so obsessed with not taking poor 3 point shots they have chosen to take too many even worse mid-range shots.

You have to be counting on natural improvement if you go Westbrook-Sefolosha- Durant - Green and bring Weaver as the first perimeter guy off the bench. They need a major injection of 3 point shooting at the guard spots. And Durant has to increase his rate a lot.

Great article...I bet you could pull Kapono away from Toronto...(but would he be the new Peja?)

Oh also I thought about this today:

Lebron says he'll be in the dunk competition next year...They also take the best rookie dunker (well vote)....Lebron James vs Blake Griffin in next years Dunk Competition....Insane...

Good article - that speaks to the weaknesses in our roster - we need a pure point that can hit the three - say hello to Ty Lawson . . .

Green can also be traded for a shooter . . .

we've got a ways to go, unfortunately . . .