I agree but you failed to mention one thing. Field goal percentage is not efficiency, and it's a common misconception or lack of knowledge that the two are equal. If 2 teams played and one team went 55/100 from the field (55% fg) all dunks and another team went 37/100 (37% fg)but made all threes the second team would win 111-110 shooting significantly worse from the field. this is a wild hypothetical but it shows how much more efficient threes are as a shot. so we have to look at not only eye test but what types of shots are being taken because they're not equal. 40% from three is 60% from 2
That’s a great point you bring up. But even a little past that, bc Allen Iverson wasn’t a heavy three point shooter. Neither Kobe. And they still both found success with their respective play style (Especially Kobe). So I believe the point still holds true. And i agree that the type of shots one takes is important to look at. Which kinda ties into the eye test.
Interesting video, but I disagree. You bring up A.I. as an example of a great player with a "bad" FG%, then you say that that's partly the case because the "other team had to play to stop Allen Iverson." So, his FG% is partly explained by his opponent's attention on defending him. But there is no one in the world that drew more attention from defenses in the early 2000's than Shaquille O'Neal. The entire league was scrambling to find a way to stop this guy, yet his FG% was always above 57%. It's a bit different now, with how many three's are taken, but you still want to have higher percentages to lessen the defensive rebounds for the other team. Not trying to be an asshole here, just giving my take. I just think guards get a kind of "free pass" on having lower field goal percentages compared to bigs
First of all, no need to apologize i made this video to have this debate. My main point is that success can come with low FG% and when people discredit players just off that it's unfair. "kobe shot 44.7% for his career", well he's also had a lot more success than many players who shot over 50%. So stats DON'T tell the whole story. And secondly I believe Guards shoot lower FG% than bigs mainly because a lot of their shots come from further out. While bigs take mostly layups and close basket shots. The top 20 highest career FG% is a list of basically all big men.
I agree but you failed to mention one thing. Field goal percentage is not efficiency, and it's a common misconception or lack of knowledge that the two are equal. If 2 teams played and one team went 55/100 from the field (55% fg) all dunks and another team went 37/100 (37% fg)but made all threes the second team would win 111-110 shooting significantly worse from the field. this is a wild hypothetical but it shows how much more efficient threes are as a shot. so we have to look at not only eye test but what types of shots are being taken because they're not equal. 40% from three is 60% from 2
saying this to say yes, there are scenarios in which id rather have a player shoot 40% fg rather than 50% fg
That’s a great point you bring up. But even a little past that, bc Allen Iverson wasn’t a heavy three point shooter. Neither Kobe. And they still both found success with their respective play style (Especially Kobe). So I believe the point still holds true. And i agree that the type of shots one takes is important to look at. Which kinda ties into the eye test.
I like the hypothetical you bring up. I should’ve included something along these lines in this video.
Interesting video, but I disagree. You bring up A.I. as an example of a great player with a "bad" FG%, then you say that that's partly the case because the "other team had to play to stop Allen Iverson." So, his FG% is partly explained by his opponent's attention on defending him. But there is no one in the world that drew more attention from defenses in the early 2000's than Shaquille O'Neal. The entire league was scrambling to find a way to stop this guy, yet his FG% was always above 57%. It's a bit different now, with how many three's are taken, but you still want to have higher percentages to lessen the defensive rebounds for the other team. Not trying to be an asshole here, just giving my take. I just think guards get a kind of "free pass" on having lower field goal percentages compared to bigs
First of all, no need to apologize i made this video to have this debate. My main point is that success can come with low FG% and when people discredit players just off that it's unfair. "kobe shot 44.7% for his career", well he's also had a lot more success than many players who shot over 50%. So stats DON'T tell the whole story.
And secondly I believe Guards shoot lower FG% than bigs mainly because a lot of their shots come from further out. While bigs take mostly layups and close basket shots. The top 20 highest career FG% is a list of basically all big men.