Stephan A Smith is crazy

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by CadBane

Bullshit.

So first you call Dirk a bad rebounder, and compare his rebounding to Amare's.

I disprove both lies, and you come back with what? He's a bad offensive rebounder? So what.

The fact is, Dirk was a very good rebounder, period. He was an elite defensive rebounder. Top 5 in DRR% twice.

Looking at Dirk's raw rebound numbers this year is irrelevant. His minutes are way down. His DRR% is still HIGHER than Aldridge, Amare, and Bosh. So yes, even this year he is an average rebounder.

First of all, I didn't call Dirk bad at rebounding you dumbass.

You can call bullshit all you want but facts are facts. He was a very good defensive rebounder and a very, very bad offensive rebounder (one of the all time worst when you compare the ratios). Amare is no where near the poor rebounder you make him out to be, as was pointed out in my last post.

And no, looking at Dirk's raw numbers this year is not in any way irrelevant. He is playing 34.5 MPG and should be doing a LOT better than 6.6 RPG. And don't compare his defensive rebounding numbers to others - compare his overall rebounding numbers to others. Where does his 6.6 stack up currently?

[CadBane]

His offensive rebounding numbers are irrelevant because that's not part of his game. Most offensive rebounds are the result of guys missing their own shots to begin with. If offensive rebounds were so important, then people would have been shelling out 15 mill a year to Danny Fortson. Defensive rebounding is the sign of a good or bad rebounder. Dirk has always been a significantly better defensive rebounder than Amare (22% career to Amare's 19.8%).

Lets not even get into the asinine defense remark you made, comparing the two as equal defensively, which is LAUGHABLE. Actually, lets not let you off the hook there since you said it.

The Knicks give up SEVEN MORE points per 100 possessions with Amare on court defensively.

The Mavs EIGHT LESS points per 100 possessions with Dirk on court defensively.

That's a MASSIVE 15 point swing, because Amare, despite flashy blocks, is a horrible defender. One of the worst starting PFs, just a notch above Love. While Dirk is actually a good defender.

So you want to field that one, dumbass?

[mavs777]

Both defensive and offensive rebounding matter, the reason its not a part of his game is because he is bad at it? So I guess free throws don't matter for Dwight 2?

[CadBane]

Originally Posted by mavs777

Both defensive and offensive rebounding matter, the reason its not a part of his game is because he is bad at it? So I guess free throws don't matter for Dwight 2?

You wonder why people don't take you seriously. Let me explain an apparently elusive concept to you. When a player's offensive game tends to develop farther from the basket, their likelihood of offensive rebounds dwindles.

What Dwight Howard being a poor free throw shooter has to do with that, I haven't the foggiest. Sure, offensive rebounds matter. But you have to contextualize them. Moses Malone was notorious for purposely padding his offensive rebound numbers. Defensive rebounds, on the other hand, are a necessity. Could Dirk get more offensive rebounds? Sure. Would it hinder the Mavs offense if he made such an endeavor a priority? Absolutely.

[fluid.forty.one]

I get the feeling that CadBane made some great points in this thread with legitimate statistical evidence, but I just can't read it through all the insults, sarcasm and the I'm-better-than-you tone dripping off the screen.

[FINtastic]

Um, if offensive rebounds aren't important, why would defensive rebounds be? This doesn't exactly follow logically.

There are two sides to rebounding here and both are important because they are both pointed towards the same goal - getting more second chance opportunities than your opponent. Anyone arguing otherwise isn't looking at the game correctly.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by CadBane

His offensive rebounding numbers are irrelevant because that's not part of his game. Most offensive rebounds are the result of guys missing their own shots to begin with. If offensive rebounds were so important, then people would have been shelling out 15 mill a year to Danny Fortson. Defensive rebounding is the sign of a good or bad rebounder. Dirk has always been a significantly better defensive rebounder than Amare (22% career to Amare's 19.8%).

Lets not even get into the asinine defense remark you made, comparing the two as equal defensively, which is LAUGHABLE. Actually, lets not let you off the hook there since you said it.

The Knicks give up SEVEN MORE points per 100 possessions with Amare on court defensively.

The Mavs EIGHT LESS points per 100 possessions with Dirk on court defensively.

That's a MASSIVE 15 point swing, because Amare, despite flashy blocks, is a horrible defender. One of the worst starting PFs, just a notch above Love. While Dirk is actually a good defender.

So you want to field that one, dumbass?

No, that isn't typically the result of offensive rebounds. Offensive rebounds are all about desire and want-to off of all misses - your own and otherwise. Considering Dirk is one of the most efficient players in the NBA he doesn't put up a ton of shots. That means there are a lot of other shots on offense he could pull down. He doesn't. To pass that off as irrelevant and then drop Danny Fing Fortson as your reasoning is just retarded. And I'm talking Rain Man retarded (you know, good with stats but no Fing common sense). Of course, if the shoe fits, right?

Now, regarding defense, while I never said that Dirk and Amare were actually equal defensively (that is the 2nd time you suggested I said something I didn't you moron - read please) please understand that the PP100P stat takes into account other defenders as well. What does that mean you ask? Well, when Dirk is on the court, considering he is a starter, he also played frequently with Butler (while healthy), Chandler, Kidd, etc... He is also paired up a good bit with Marion. When he sits? Yeah, mostly Barea, Terry, etc... Same with Stoudemire. He has always been on poor defensive clubs with poor coaching. Phoenix never had great defenders and NY isn't a top notch defensive club either (though they do have a few good individual defenders).

Amare's biggest problem is Dan Tony but my point is that with that stat it isn't just about one guy. Raymond Felton, fellow NY Knick for example, is considered a good defender but he is currently giving up TWELVE more points per 100 possessions using Basketball-Reference.com's DRtg stat. Likewise, Ronny Turiaf is another good defender on the Knicks that is giving up that same SEVEN more points per 100 possessions. Dirk using that stat? 5 more points per 100 possessions - a difference of 2 vs. Amare - with a defensive minded coach and with better individual defenders around him. Again, I am not saying Amare is Dirk's equal defensively, but suggesting they are light years apart is just stupid.

Please keep coming with your ignorance - beating you aside your head with "NBA for Dummies" is actually entertaining during this slow weekend.

[jthig32]

I've actually seen some interesting statistical analysis projects come to the conclusion that offensive rebounds are significantly more valuable than defensive rebounds, because a very large majority of defensive rebounds are simply being taken away from team members, rather than the opposition.

However, it's also true that offensive rebonds for scorers like Amare generally result in boosting their own production, so when you credit them for offensive rebonds you're almost giving them double credit (i.e. A player scores 20 points and pulls down 12 boards, but three of those boards were putbacks that directly resulted in six extra points for the player, so should the points AND the rebounds be considered in some sort of analysis of his production?)

It's kind of a murky grey area. I, personally, would argue that an elite offensive player that is an elite defensive rebounder and a terrible offensive rebounder is more valuable than an elite offensive player that is a good rebounder on both sides of the ball. Because the lack of offensive rebounds are only hurting the offense, and if he's already an elite offensive player, how much are you losing?

I dunno, it's an interesting concept and discussion.

Regardless, I just want to reiterate that I think Amare and Carmelo are great players, I just think the're a bit overrated.

[LonghornDub]

Originally Posted by fluid.forty.one

I get the feeling that CadBane made some great points in this thread with legitimate statistical evidence, but I just can't read it through all the insults, sarcasm and the I'm-better-than-you tone dripping off the screen.

Standard operating procedure.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by jthig32

I've actually seen some interesting statistical analysis projects come to the conclusion that offensive rebounds are significantly more valuable than defensive rebounds, because a very large majority of defensive rebounds are simply being taken away from team members, rather than the opposition.

However, it's also true that offensive rebonds for scorers like Amare generally result in boosting their own production, so when you credit them for offensive rebonds you're almost giving them double credit (i.e. A player scores 20 points and pulls down 12 boards, but three of those boards were putbacks that directly resulted in six extra points for the player, so should the points AND the rebounds be considered in some sort of analysis of his production?)

It's kind of a murky grey area. I, personally, would argue that an elite offensive player that is an elite defensive rebounder and a terrible offensive rebounder is more valuable than an elite offensive player that is a good rebounder on both sides of the ball. Because the lack of offensive rebounds are only hurting the offense, and if he's already an elite offensive player, how much are you losing?

I dunno, it's an interesting concept and discussion.

Regardless, I just want to reiterate that I think Amare and Carmelo are great players, I just think the're a bit overrated.

As for the bolded, I'm not sure I follow here. An offensive rebound followed by a putback is turning a miss into two points. That's an incredibly valuable thing for your offense, especially if it's coming off another player's miss (instead of the Danny Fortson scenario). So in situations like the Phoenix game where TC pulled that offensive board and scored it, I sure don't mind him getting double credit in that scenario because that was an incredibly important play.

I think I generally agree with your conclusion, but I don't have too much time to get into it. I'm speculating here, but I think a super efficient scorer has more of an impact on your offensive efficiency than a great offensive rebounder so you'd probably take the great scorer/defensive rebounder over the alternative. But this is something I'd kind of want to look into deeper whenever I get the free time to do so because I do think it's very interesting.

Btw, post these interesting statistical projects for the rest us when you come across them!

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

As for the bolded, I'm not sure I follow here. An offensive rebound followed by a putback is turning a miss into two points. That's an incredibly valuable thing for your offense, especially if it's coming off another player's miss (instead of the Danny Fortson scenario). So in situations like the Phoenix game where TC pulled that offensive board and scored it, I sure don't mind him getting double credit in that scenario because that was an incredibly important play.

It is incredibly important, I agree. But the ultimate end result for the team was that they got two more points, and those contributions are already shown via the points scored column.

It's almost like getting an assist on your own basket. If an assist were given out for every basket, and an isolation play resulted in points AND an assist for that player, do you think that would be valuable? If a player scored 5 isolation buckets, we'd say he had 10 points AND five assists. Great right? But those five assists led directly to his OWN points, which we already gave him credit for in evaluating his output.

That's kind of how I view offensive rebounds that lead directly to points for the player that got the rebound. So I think they clutter the statistical evidence.

If you could somehow distinguish between offensive rebounds that led to points for teammates and ones that led to self points, I think that would give more clarity to the discussion.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by jthig32

It is incredibly important, I agree. But the ultimate end result for the team was that they got two more points, and those contributions are already shown via the points scored column.

It's almost like getting an assist on your own basket. If an assist were given out for every basket, and an isolation play resulted in points AND an assist for that player, do you think that would be valuable? If a player scored 5 isolation buckets, we'd say he had 10 points AND five assists. Great right? But those five assists led directly to his OWN points, which we already gave him credit for in evaluating his output.

That's kind of how I view offensive rebounds that lead directly to points for the player that got the rebound. So I think they clutter the statistical evidence.

If you could somehow distinguish between offensive rebounds that led to points for teammates and ones that led to self points, I think that would give more clarity to the discussion.

Help me understand though how it is more beneficial for the team to have a guy grab a rebound and reset the offense and, potentially end up with a jump shot over a talented offensive player going and fighting for someone else's miss (or even his own at times), coming down with the board, and then putting up a much higher-percentage shot. To me, the fact that you are getting a much higher-percentage shot out of that situation due to that players hustle and offensive abilities makes him even more valuable.

I dunno - I think you are splitting hairs a bit here. It isn't double-dipping to me. It is crediting a player for getting a rebound and for scoring a bucket. He did in fact do both of those things.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by Male29Dan

Help me understand though how it is more beneficial for the team to have a guy grab a rebound and reset the offense and, potentially end up with a jump shot over a talented offensive player going and fighting for someone else's miss (or even his own at times), coming down with the board, and then putting up a much higher-percentage shot. To me, the fact that you are getting a much higher-percentage shot out of that situation due to that players hustle and offensive abilities makes him even more valuable.

I dunno - I think you are splitting hairs a bit here. It isn't double-dipping to me. It is crediting a player for getting a rebound and for scoring a bucket. He did in fact do both of those things.

I would say the put back is more valuable, for sure. That's not what I'm getting at.

Let's try to get at this from a different direction. Amare is averaging 26 points a game, and 3 offensive rebounds a game (with rounding). Let's assume (perhaps incorrectly) that two of those offensive rebounds every game leads to 4 points for Amare.

So if someone were comparing Dirk and Amare, someone might say "Amare scores 26 a game AND grabs three offensive boards a game, he's awesome". And my point is that by saying this, you're giving him double credit. If he doesn't grab three offensive rebounds a game, he doesn't score 26 points.

So based on this concept, I would say that the value of those offensive rebounds (in the context of evaluating performance, not in the game itself) have to be negated somewhat.

On the other hand, as I already mentioned, there's even more evidence that the value of defensive rebounds are inflated in traditional analysis.

Bottom line, though, I'll take the elite offensive player that is an elite defensive rebounder and a terrible offensive rebounder.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by jthig32

It is incredibly important, I agree. But the ultimate end result for the team was that they got two more points, and those contributions are already shown via the points scored column.

It's almost like getting an assist on your own basket. If an assist were given out for every basket, and an isolation play resulted in points AND an assist for that player, do you think that would be valuable? If a player scored 5 isolation buckets, we'd say he had 10 points AND five assists. Great right? But those five assists led directly to his OWN points, which we already gave him credit for in evaluating his output.

That's kind of how I view offensive rebounds that lead directly to points for the player that got the rebound. So I think they clutter the statistical evidence.

If you could somehow distinguish between offensive rebounds that led to points for teammates and ones that led to self points, I think that would give more clarity to the discussion.

Hmmm, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. The two points scored after an offensive rebound should be viewed as a separate entity in my book. I don't see it mattering much whether it came from the person who snagged the rebound, or it got kicked around to someone else who scored it. They key point is that the offensive rebound indicates that a possession which should have died out was suddenly given new life. So obviously it's important to note this on the stat sheet. Who scores off this resurrected possession doesn't matter much to me and seems to be a pretty separate question from where I'm standing.

I don't think this amounts to statistical clutter. The reason that you mark down offensive rebounds is that it gives clarity to why a team can shoot worse and still score more points. It's because they manage to grab their own misses and get points out of those possessions (and keep the other team from doing likewise). So a player that keeps the possession alive, and then somehow figures out a way to get the ball in the basket isn't being unfairly rewarded in my book. To me that's a pretty valuable skill to have.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

Hmmm, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. The two points scored after an offensive rebound should be viewed as a separate entity in my book. I don't see it mattering much whether it came from the person who snagged the rebound, or it got kicked around to someone else who scored it. They key point is that the offensive rebound indicates that a possession which should have died out was suddenly given new life. So obviously it's important to note this on the stat sheet. Who scores off this resurrected possession doesn't matter much to me and seems to be a pretty separate question from where I'm standing.

I don't think this amounts to statistical clutter. The reason that you mark down offensive rebounds is that it gives clarity to why a team can shoot worse and still score more points. It's because they manage to grab their own misses and get points out of those possessions (and keep the other team from doing likewise). So a player that keeps the possession alive, and then somehow figures out a way to get the ball in the basket isn't being unfairly rewarded in my book. To me that's a pretty valuable skill to have.

You're looking at this from a slightly different angle. I was simply trying to discuss offensive rebounds and how they relate to evaluating two players.

Let's see if a non-real world hypothetical helps:

Players A scores 30 points every single game, hitting 15-30 shots. He grabs no rebounds and contributes no assists.

Players B scores 30 points every single game, hitting 15-30 shots. He grabs five offensive rebounds every game, which he converts into 10 points (accounting for five of his shots every game) and contributes no assists.

At the end of the season, here are their stat lines:

Player A: 30ppg, 0Rpg, 0Apg
Player B: 30ppg, 5Rpg, 0Apg

If you asked a hundred different fans who they'd rather have, who are they going to pick? But did Player B actually contribute more than Player A? No.

This, I think, illustrates my point well.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by jthig32

You're looking at this from a slightly different angle. I was simply trying to discuss offensive rebounds and how they relate to evaluating two players.

Let's see if a non-real world hypothetical helps:

Players A scores 30 points every single game, hitting 15-30 shots. He grabs no rebounds and contributes no assists.

Players B scores 30 points every single game, hitting 10-30 shots. He grabs five offensive rebounds every game, which he converts into 10 points and contributes no assists.

At the end of the season, here are their stat lines:

Player A: 30ppg, 0Rpg, 0Apg
Player B: 30ppg, 5Rpg, 0Apg

If you asked a hundred different fans who they'd rather have, who are they going to pick? But did Player B actually contribute more than Player A? No.

This, I think, illustrates my point well.

Which is why stats like TS% needs to be factored into the discussion if you are comparing two players like this. You are right that for the average NBA fan who uses points, rebounds, and assists to judge a player's worth are going to come to a flawed conclusion, but this just shows the flaws in evaluating a player solely by these three metrics.

But if we were going to give them the same shooting percentage, then Player B is the superior player. Because he allowed his teammates to get away with five missed shots and still get points out of them. If offensive rebounding were truly double dipping, this shouldn't be the case. Actually this is looking at it a little too simplistically, but I still think my conclusion holds when you go more in depth.

This example shows the importance in not hiding statistics like TS% in evaluating players, but I don't think it shows that scoring points off of your own offensive rebounds isn't a big deal.

[jthig32]

Originally Posted by FINtastic

Which is why stats like TS% needs to be factored into the discussion if you are comparing two players like this. You are right that for the average NBA fan who uses points, rebounds, and assists to judge a player's worth that offensive rebounds are like double dipping, but this just shows the flaws in evaluating a player solely by these three metrics.

But if we were going to give them the same shooting percentage, then Player B is the superior player. Because he allowed his teammates to get away with five missed shots and still get points out of them. If offensive rebounding were truly double dipping, this shouldn't be the case.

Check out my edit, I screwed up the hypothetical at first.

They would have the exact same TS%.

He did give them five extra possessions, but those extra possessions resulted in the exact same output as that of Player A. Thus, they're identical....I think.

I might need to think about this a little more, but I think the conclusion is sound.

[FINtastic]

Originally Posted by jthig32

Check out my edit, I screwed up the hypothetical at first.

They would have the exact same TS%.

He did give them five extra possessions, but those extra possessions resulted in the exact same output as that of Player A. Thus, they're identical....I think.

I might need to think about this a little more, but I think the conclusion is sound.

Yeah, I need to think about this more myself because I think my response post could use a little more thinking through. Unfortunately I have stock club meeting tonight and even though this is tons more fun to work on, I really need to work on prepping for that now.

[Male30Dan]

Originally Posted by jthig32

You're looking at this from a slightly different angle. I was simply trying to discuss offensive rebounds and how they relate to evaluating two players.

Let's see if a non-real world hypothetical helps:

Players A scores 30 points every single game, hitting 15-30 shots. He grabs no rebounds and contributes no assists.

Players B scores 30 points every single game, hitting 15-30 shots. He grabs five offensive rebounds every game, which he converts into 10 points (accounting for five of his shots every game) and contributes no assists.

At the end of the season, here are their stat lines:

Player A: 30ppg, 0Rpg, 0Apg
Player B: 30ppg, 5Rpg, 0Apg

If you asked a hundred different fans who they'd rather have, who are they going to pick? But did Player B actually contribute more than Player A? No.

This, I think, illustrates my point well.

I see where you are trying to go here, but I just don't personally agree with your suggestion.

Look, I would absolutely rather have Dirk the player, but that is not at all what this was about. There are maybe 3-5 guys I would trade Dirk for right now (and that takes his rebounding decline and age into consideration). He is a stud. That said, he has weaknesses and other players that I wouldn't trade him for are not THAT far behind his capabilities, despite some feeling that they are overrated and an entire tier behind him. That was the primary point being made by me.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

I don't see how anyone who watches Carmelo play can say he's overrated. I just don't see it. You can bring up any stat you want but if you watch this guy play the guy can score from ANYWHERE on the court. Whether he's a top 5 player or not I don't know but he sure is a top 5 talent. Carmelo can go on any team in the league and make them a contender. That's not overrated.

This is the reason hes overrated. Everyone talks about how good he is from all over the court but hes only really a threat from 15 feet in. His efg/ts on jumpers is worse than Lebrons by a ton. Melo cant shoot and hes never been able to. What he can do is post and get to the rim. The smartest thing to do guarding him would be to put a 4 on him and play 3 feet off of him.

[Dtownsfinest]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

This is the reason hes overrated. Everyone talks about how good he is from all over the court but hes only really a threat from 15 feet in. His efg/ts on jumpers is worse than Lebrons by a ton. Melo cant shoot and hes never been able to. What he can do is post and get to the rim. The smartest thing to do guarding him would be to put a 4 on him and play 3 feet off of him.

Man Melo would burn any 4 you put on him. That would be the worst decision IMO. Can you imagine Dirk or KG having to stick him at mid range?

And let's factor in who Lebron plays with. He plays with Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade. Melo plays with Billups and the inconsistent JR Smith. Unless you are referring to what Lebron did last season I don't see how you can compare the two.

And Melo can't shoot? He's not a great 3 point shooter but he has 3 point range. But that's not his game. His game is around the mid range and he dominates in that area. You won't find a better 3 in the league. I think he and Dirk compliment each other greatly. I think Dirk's game compliments just about any star in this league since he's such a accurate shooter.

But you say Melo is overrated because of the notion that he can score all over the floor? Are you saying he can't?

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Man Melo would burn any 4 you put on him. That would be the worst decision IMO. Can you imagine Dirk or KG having to stick him at mid range?

And let's factor in who Lebron plays with. He plays with Chris Bosh and Dwayne Wade. Melo plays with Billups and the inconsistent JR Smith. Unless you are referring to what Lebron did last season I don't see how you can compare the two.

And Melo can't shoot? He's not a great 3 point shooter but he has 3 point range. But that's not his game. His game is around the mid range and he dominates in that area. You won't find a better 3 in the league. I think he and Dirk compliment each other greatly. I think Dirk's game compliments just about any star in this league since he's such a accurate shooter.

But you say Melo is overrated because of the notion that he can score all over the floor? Are you saying he can't?

You are proving my point. Hes a bad shooter on midrange jumpers too. If hes past 15 feet, hes not a threat. Ask yourself why would a guy whos so good at getting to the rim and posting still shoots 45%? because he cant shoot.

I didnt mean everyone should put a 4 on him but an athletic 4 giving him room? Id take my chances

[Dirkadirkastan]

If you want to be right about anything basketball related, just take what Dtownsfinest says and state the opposite.

[Five-ofan]

http://www.82games.com/0809/FGSORT7.HTM

Just shows that Melos terrible shooting isn't just a this year thing. Had an EFG of .379 in 08/09 on 2 pt jumpers. I cant find 09/10 shooting numbers but he again has a total jumper EFG of .401 on jumpers this year which means his 2pt jumpers are probably even worse.

[Mav Addict]

Who is Melo again?

[Dtownsfinest]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

http://www.82games.com/0809/FGSORT7.HTM

Just shows that Melos terrible shooting isn't just a this year thing. Had an EFG of .379 in 08/09 on 2 pt jumpers. I cant find 09/10 shooting numbers but he again has a total jumper EFG of .401 on jumpers this year which means his 2pt jumpers are probably even worse.

Does that site have shooting percentage from 2 point land for this season?

[Dtownsfinest]

Originally Posted by Dirkadirkastan

If you want to be right about anything basketball related, just take what Dtownsfinest says and state the opposite.

You stay on my nuts harder than any female i've ever had relations with. Goodness. I think all you do is search my posts and reply. Now I know how Dirk feels. Cadbane gives him no room to breathe either.

[Dtownsfinest]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

You are proving my point. Hes a bad shooter on midrange jumpers too. If hes past 15 feet, hes not a threat. Ask yourself why would a guy whos so good at getting to the rim and posting still shoots 45%? because he cant shoot.

I didnt mean everyone should put a 4 on him but an athletic 4 giving him room? Id take my chances

Just from watching Melo play I notice he takes a lot of bad shots. He and JR Smith. He's never seen a bad shot in his life. He'll shoot anything and I think that type of play is tough to do when you're the only person the opposing team gameplans for. I actually didn't know his EFG was that poor though. That's by far worse than anyone in the tops in scoring. I'm not even sure how you even have a EFG% of 44% when you're of the caliber as Melo is.

[Five-ofan]

Originally Posted by Dtownsfinest

Does that site have shooting percentage from 2 point land for this season?

If you go to his Player page it will give you his efg on dunks, close, inside and jump shots. Given that his efg on 3s should be around 45% and his efg on jumpers total is 401. Its safe to guess his 2pt jumpers efg is a out the same

[EricaLubarsky]

Originally Posted by Five-ofan

http://www.82games.com/0809/FGSORT7.HTM

Just shows that Melos terrible shooting isn't just a this year thing. Had an EFG of .379 in 08/09 on 2 pt jumpers. I cant find 09/10 shooting numbers but he again has a total jumper EFG of .401 on jumpers this year which means his 2pt jumpers are probably even worse.

08/09 = 37.9%
09/10 = 41.0%
10/11 = 40.1%

Yeah so pretty consistently low