Is Smoove Regressing under Drew?

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Ex . . what do you consider to be a good eFG%?

[exodus]

Ex . . what do you consider to be a good eFG%?

Just off the top of my head i would guess that 45% is roughly average for a perimeter player. Closer to 50 would be good. Over 50 would be very good. I don't think JJ has ever been over 50%. Crawford had a career year least year and was at 49.4%.

[AHF]

Ex - Let me see if I am correct in understanding your views here:

(1) You think that Josh Smith has improved his shot selection culminating in a career low 36% of shots being jumpers last season but that he still has problems in shot selection.

(2) You think that Ron Artest has improved his shot selection to the benefit of his team but still has problems in shot selection.

Is that right?

[AHF]

Just off the top of my head i would guess that 45% is roughly average for a perimeter player. Closer to 50 would be good. Over 50 would be very good. I don't think JJ has ever been over 50%. Crawford had a career year least year and was at 49.4%.

JJ has been over 50% efg% 3 times -

2004-05, 2006-07 and 2009-10.

(He was also .499 in 2005-06).

[exodus]

Ex - Let me see if I am correct in understanding your views here:

(1) You think that Josh Smith has improved his shot selection culminating in a career low 36% of shots being jumpers last season but that he still has problems in shot selection.

(2) You think that Ron Artest has improved his shot selection to the benefit of his team but still has problems in shot selection.

Is that right?

If you want to put it that way that is correct. However that is like saying a paper cut is similar to a compound fracture in that both will hurt.

I have never seen a player in NBA history who takes as many jump shots as Smith and shoots them worse. Even last year Smith shot selection sucked, it just wasn't as bad as it was previously.

Artest's shot selection last year was not bad at all.

Edited November 1, 2010 by exodus

[exodus]

JJ has been over 50% efg% 3 times -

2004-05, 2006-07 and 2009-10.

(He was also .499 in 2005-06).

I meant with the Hawks. I should have been more specific.

However i am not sure where you are getting your numbers for the Hawks. 82games.com has him at 49.8% in 06/07 his best year.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

AHF . . Ex is talking about his eFG% on jumpers only, not his overall eFG%. The guys who shoot a ton of 3s, and can make a good percentage, are more than likely going to have a relatively high eFG% number.

[AHF]

I meant with the Hawks. I should have been more specific.

However i am not sure where you are getting your numbers for the Hawks. 82games.com has him at 49.8% in 06/07 his best year.

northcyde is right that I pulled the total efg% rather than limiting it to jumpers. I thought you meant that his jump shooting dragged his total efg% down below 50%. I don't think he has hit > 50% efg% on jumpers alone during his time with the Hawks.

On Artest, half of the articles I cited to complaining about his shot selection were from this last year while he was with the Lakers. As you know, the following was from the NBA Finals with the Lakers:

Game 2

Yahoo Sports - Ron Artest(notes) shot 1-for-10 in Game 2, scoring six points, turning the ball over three times and fouling out in the process. It wasn't just that he shot miserably in a game that should have been a notch in his belt (holding Paul Pierce(notes) on the other end to 2-of-11 shooting), but it was the way he put up those 10 shots. Terrible looks, mostly uncalled-for, seriously team-crippling.

Game 5

Slam Online - Moments before bedlam erupted at Staples Center last night, I tweet/joked that Ron Artest would soon be starring in a remake of “Escape from L.A.” His horrific shot selection down the stretch had turned all Laker fans against him.

NBC Sports - Artest goes from goat to hero with winner

Forward’s poor shot selection nearly costs Lakers victory over Suns

Even Phil Jackson publicly questioned Artest's shot selection and judgment there:

"But you have to talk to your players about judgment. At that time of the game, it's not a good play."

Shot selection remains a significant issue in his game.

Edited November 1, 2010 by AHF

[exodus]

northcyde is right that I pulled the total efg% rather than limiting it to jumpers. I thought you meant that his jump shooting dragged his total efg% down below 50%. I don't think he has hit > 50% efg% on jumpers alone during his time with the Hawks.

On Artest, half of the articles I cited to complaining about his shot selection were from this last year while he was with the Lakers. As you know, the following was from the NBA Finals with the Lakers:

Game 2

Game 5

Even Phil Jackson publicly questioned Artest's shot selection and judgment there:

Shot selection remains a significant issue in his game.

If you want to go on an individual game basis i can make the exact same argument about JJ and Crawford. It just so happens that Artest had his relapse on a big stage. Looks to me like nothing but nerves and overexcitement which is not a great combination for someone like Artest.

But over the course of the entire season his shot selection was not an issue. Feel free to quote Phil's comments about Artest's season long shot selection.

Edited November 1, 2010 by exodus

[AHF]

If you want to go on an individual game basis i can make the exact same argument about JJ and Crawford. It just so happens that Artest had his relapse on a big stage. Looks to me like nothing but nerves and overexcitement which is not a great combination for someone like Artest.

But over the course of the entire season his shot selection was not an issue. Feel free to quote Phil's comments about Artest's season long shot selection.

Here you go, a quote from Jackson about struggling to reign in bad shot judgment from Artest and Odom:

“We usually tell Ron and Lamar, ‘There’s a reason why you’re open,’ ” Jackson said, referring to Artest and Lamar Odom. “We believe you can hit them, but you have to have good judgment when you do.”

Asked how well Artest was doing, Jackson said with a grin: “Not very well. There’s still room for improvement.”

[exodus]

Here you go, a quote from Jackson about struggling to reign in bad shot judgment from Artest and Odom:

Where is your link? I want to see when this was said.

While you're at it I would still like to know how Artest improved his EFG on jumpers by 10%. Your theory that Artest greatly improved his jumper isn't backed up by the numbers.

I find it interesting that Phil says "there is a reason why you are open" which, correct me if i am wrong, seems to imply they aren't good shooters. I find this a bit inconsistent with your contention that Artest's jumper is so greatly improved from his Indy days. If his jumper was so much better then i would think Phil wouldn't have a problem with him taking open jumpers.

FYI Odom's EFG on jumpers was 41.8%.

Edited November 1, 2010 by exodus

[AHF]

Where is your link? I want to see when this was said.

This was an article on his enigmatic season with the Lakers written last May.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/sports/basketball/29lakers.html

Somewhere along the way, the villain became the eccentric. Ron Artest morphed from unpredictably dangerous to merely unpredictable. His soundtrack is no longer the Darth Vader theme, but Looney Tunes.

One moment, Artest is sinking his team’s fortunes with impulsive, ill-advised jump shots. The next, he is sending the Los Angeles Lakers into delirium with a game-winning layup.

Around here, they treat Artest like a wacky uncle — odd but harmless, sometimes infuriating yet still lovable. Just do not ask anyone to explain him.

“I certainly can’t,” Coach Phil Jackson said Friday, the day after Artest’s improbable, buzzer-beating shot gave the Lakers a 3-2 lead in the Western Conference finals.

“Unique,” forward Pau Gasol said.

When the Lakers talk about Artest, the brawny, 30-year-old small forward, they are invariably smiling, their expressions conveying both warmth and chagrin. Artest is beloved by teammates and coaches for his ferocity, his loyalty and his deep sense of commitment. There is nothing he would not do to win.

Also, there is nothing he would not do, period.

The Lakers have seen Artest attempt shots that defy reason. They have seen him board the team bus in his underwear, carrying his breakfast. On Friday, with the city still abuzz over his Game 5 heroics, Artest arrived 90 minutes late to practice. Jackson promptly fined him.

As Jackson put it, Artest “has a penchant for little things tripping him up in the process,” like reading a schedule incorrectly and showing up late. “So he is kind of dogged by his own nature.”

It has been this way throughout Artest’s 11-year career with the Chicago Bulls, the Indiana Pacers, the Sacramento Kings, the Houston Rockets and the Lakers. He is fierce but flaky, dependably undependable. And, in his worst moments, frighteningly impulsive.

Artest forever tarnished his reputation when he incited a player-fan brawl at the Palace of Auburn Hills in November 2004. He earned a 73-game suspension and a permanent place in the pantheon of sports rogues.

All indications are that Artest has left his troubles in his past. In his last two stops — Houston and Los Angeles — he has been a model citizen on and off the court. His temper is under control, although his game often is not.

Late Thursday night, in a typical Ron-being-Ron moment, he launched two straight jump shots — both misses — with nearly the entire arena groaning in protest. The Lakers were leading the Phoenix Suns by 3 points with about a minute left and needed to make smart plays.

Artest is a fantastic defender and occasionally a decent 3-point shooter, but his shot selection is suspect, a fact that Lakers fans know all too well. Opponents do, too, which is why the Suns have been leaving Artest open, daring him to shoot.

“We usually tell Ron and Lamar, ‘There’s a reason why you’re open,’ ” Jackson said, referring to Artest and Lamar Odom. “We believe you can hit them, but you have to have good judgment when you do.”

Asked how well Artest was doing, Jackson said with a grin: “Not very well. There’s still room for improvement.”

Artest is shooting 39 percent from the field in the playoffs, and 24.4 percent on 3-pointers.

Of his two late misses Thursday, the second was the more befuddling. The shot clock had been reset by Artest’s first miss, and the Lakers could have run another 20 seconds or so off the game clock. Instead, he launched the 3-point try.

When TNT interviewed Artest about that shot after the game, he gave a typically obtuse explanation.

“Well, you know, just playing basketball,” he said, shrugging his shoulders. “I mean, there was a point in time when I shot 40 percent from the 3. I got to play, you know.”

Before ending the interview, Artest gave a shout-out to Queensbridge, the poor section of Queens where he was raised. Then he asked the TNT reporter, Craig Sager, to do the same. “Queensbridge,” Sager said, to Artest’s delight.

The interview nearly did not happen. After hitting the game-winner — by catching Kobe Bryant’s long air ball and flipping it back to the basket — Artest celebrated with teammates, then sprinted to the locker room, by himself.

“I just wanted to go to the locker room and move on to Game 6,” he said.

Artest used some version of the phrase “move on” a dozen times Thursday and Friday, saying he did not want to spend much time dwelling on the moment, although it was surely a career highlight.

“When I was young, I would stay in the moment, I would stay in the past,” he said. “I wish I could enjoy it more, but there’s nothing to enjoy.”

Perhaps it is because of his upbringing in the projects of Queensbridge, or because so many other moments in Artest’s career were best left in the past. As he said, “Good or bad, move on.”

Now, Artest has a permanent place in Lakers playoff lore, next to Magic Johnson’s baby hook, Robert Horry’s 3-pointers and Derek Fisher’s 0.4 shot. For the second time in his career, Artest is on a constant replay loop, but this time as the good guy.

“Well, you know, I don’t mind being in the outhouse, I don’t mind being the goat, I don’t mind being the villain, hated,” Artest said. “I’ve been that my whole career.”

Determined to stay in the moment, Artest said he had not dared to imagine what it would feel like to win his first championship, a goal that is now five victories away. But if he gets there, he just might let himself enjoy it.

“I think so,” he said. “I think if God blesses me, if he allows me to have that, I will.”

[TheNorthCydeRises]

Winner: AHF

Ex doesn't lose many arguments, but he lost this one. It's pretty much common knowledge that Artest has bad shot selection at times, despite his 47% eFG on jumpers last year.

When you jack up as many threes compared to 2 pt jumpers last year, I definitely see how he shot 47% eFG on his jumper, but still has very questionable shot selection.

That .5 "extra credit" that is given to made 3 point shots, has people believing that a 33% shooter from 3 is acceptable, because it's equal to 50% when you factor in the eFG%.

One of these stat sites need to do a breakdown of shooting percentages of guys when they're wide open, as opposed to their shooting when covered. The true non-shooters would be exposed then, if their shooting percentages were still low when wide open.

And that's my concern about Marvin as a shooter. He must make the wide open looks, to be a viable cog in this offense.

[exodus]

This was an article on his enigmatic season with the Lakers written last May.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/29/sports/basketball/29lakers.html

Pretty funny that you go to a New York paper to find a review of Artest's season with the Lakers. How many Lakers games do you think the author saw? If it was a season long problem i would think Phil would have mentioned it before may 29.

You want to look at what Crawford and JJ did in the playoffs? How do you think the Laker fans/press would have reacted to Crawford's 4/18 night against the Bucks, or JJ's 8-24 night in game 6. Better yet what about JJ's 30% shooting in the second round? Playoff basketball is a different animal and brings out the best in some, the worst in others. Look at what happened to Lebron last year.

You are still avoiding the issue. If we take Phil's words and accept that Ron isn't a good shooter, (which you apparently disagree with) they why was his EFG only 3% less than JJ's career best? How did he improve his EFG by 10% when his 3 point percentage has only improved by 2%?

FYI JJ shot 37% on long 2s during the 08/09 season. I guess his shot selection must have really sucked too since it was only 1% better than his 3 point percentage.

The numbers don't lie and numbers are conspicuously absent from your posts.

[AHF]

Pretty funny that you go to a New York paper to find a review of Artest's season with the Lakers. How many Lakers games do you think the author saw? If it was a season long problem i would think Phil would have mentioned it before may 29.

You want to look at what Crawford and JJ did in the playoffs? How do you think the Laker fans/press would have reacted to Crawford's 4/18 night against the Bucks, or JJ's 8-24 night in game 6. Better yet what about JJ's 30% shooting in the second round? Playoff basketball is a different animal and brings out the best in some, the worst in others. Look at what happened to Lebron last year.

You are still avoiding the issue. If we take Phil's words and accept that Ron isn't a good shooter, (which you apparently disagree with) they why was his EFG only 3% less than JJ's career best? How did he improve his EFG by 10% when his 3 point percentage has only improved by 2%?

FYI JJ shot 37% on long 2s during the 08/09 season. I guess his shot selection must have really sucked too since it was only 1% better than his 3 point percentage.

The numbers don't lie and numbers are conspicuously absent from your posts.

I know you understand the difference between bad shooting and bad shot selection but somehow you possibly expect to divine good or bad shot selection purely from raw numbers? That is impossible. His own coach questions his decision-making on offense, the fans of every team he has played for question his shooting, and the people paid to cover the sport for a living question his shot selection.

Did you watch him so much last year that you think you know better than they do?

There is nothing I can say to convince when the above quotes aren't enough. Jackson questions him and you want seasonal quotes. You get seasonal quotes replete with criticisms of his shot selection from the NBA writer and that isn't enough because the NY Times isn't a reputable source for you.

I can pull a million quotes like this:

Posted by: bronxlakerfan | June 18, 2010 at 04:15 AM

In the end the debate between Ariza and Artest is moot. Because what we have now is Queensbridge and we're sporting a ring with him.

Ron isn't flashy, the things he does on the floor more often than not will frustrate you (whether you're the offensive player he's guarding, or the fan that's having to suffer through his shot selection) but at the end of the day what he brings is so much more than points, rebounds, stats.

You can pull quotes from the LA Times if you prefer:

Jackson admitted before Game 5 of the Lakers-Oklahoma City first-round series that the coaching staff had started imposing limits on his shot selection

Thursday was a postcard of that season, Phoenix fighting back from an 18-point deficit to pull within three in the final minute, Artest holding the ball after having made one of six shots in this game, 11 of 32 shots in the last three games combined, and seven of 25 three-pointers in the series.

So what does he do? Naturally, he shot. And, just as naturally, he missed, at which point the normally smart Pau Gasol grabbed the rebound and made the second-dumbest play of the night.

He threw it back to Artest. And, just three seconds into the shot clock, standing beyond the three-point line, Artest flung it up there again. It turns out, a season of frustration with a new system morphed into one desperate heave.

"There's a new system for me . . . I'm trying to somehow, you know, make it work for the team," said Artest, who was brought here to replace last year's postseason hero, Trevor Ariza. "So that's kind of why I took that shot."

It was such a dumb shot, seemingly the entire Staples Center crowd literally shouted, "No!" when it left his hands.

"It's not always a good shot, but nobody's perfect," Artest said. "We were up three. I was hoping to go up six."

It was such an awful decision that, after it clanked and Phoenix took possession, Jackson spent part of the ensuing timeout scolding Artest, who frowned like a reprimanded child and looked in the other direction.

"He was trying not to listen to me, very hard," Jackson said.

It was such a horrific play at such a terrible time, that, after the Suns then tied the score with a crazy banked three-pointer by Jason Richardson with 3.5 seconds remaining, Jackson nearly yanked him.

"I don't know why I left him in the game," Jackson said. "I actually questioned myself when I put him out there on the floor."

Meanwhile, Artest, averaging 13 points and shooting 38% -- about what you'd expect with his shot selection

etc.

[AHF]

I doubt I can find as many quotes in the media on Josh Smith's problems with shot selection.

[exodus]

I doubt I can find as many quotes in the media on Josh Smith's problems with shot selection.

You don't need any quotes. His 28% EFG (which hasn't improved since his rookie year) tells the story.

But if he played for the Lakers you would be able to find all of the regular season quotes you could want, assuming Jackson let him shoot which is very doubtful. Funny how you seem to be drawing a blank on artest before the playoffs started.

And in the fateful Suns game which you quote over and over Artest had taken only 6 shots in the game leading into the end sequence. if his shot selection was so bad then why had he taken only 6 shots up to that point?

Funny how yet again you dodge Artest's 10% improvement in EFG. I guess the leave-it -alone-and-maybe-it-will-go-away defense is your new tactic.

I know you understand the difference between bad shooting and bad shot selection but somehow you possibly expect to divine good or bad shot selection purely from raw numbers? That is impossible.

No it is not, if you are looking an entire season instead of just a few games. Over the course of a season it is not hard to tell when a player is consistently taking shots that they can't make at a respectable clip.

If you are only looking at a handful of games then yes looking at numbers won't tell the story.

Edited November 2, 2010 by exodus

[LetsGoHawks]

After all the preseason games, the thing that is bothering me most is the fact that Smoove doesn't seem to be buying into LD's new offensive system at all. Everyone else, even JJ, seems

to be trying to get into it, but Smoove seems to be going backwards. He is back to taking long jumpers..even a 3 with lots of clock left and is actually playing worse that while under Woodson.

Is he perhaps trying to send LD a message that he will do "what he likes"? It is troubling that Smith still thinks he is a good jump shooter and if LD lets him eget away with this now, it will be

tough to fix later. IMO, he should put his foot down now and yank Smoove off the floor the next time he does it. You dont see ANYONE else jacking up long jumpers that shouldn't be and I don't

know why this can't be corrected?

I would like to know what others thoughts are on this.

[Joker]

It's hard to pull Smith because he keeps the opponent from dominating by slashing to the basket. Say what you like but as long as Bibby or Crawford is in the game, Smith is needed.

[AHF]

I gave you quotes about specific games, I gave you quotes about the entire season. I gave you quotes from midseason; I gave you quotes from the post-season; I gave you quotes from the preseason, I gave you quotes from LA, from Houston, from Indiana. I gave you quotes from bloggers, fans, the media, even his GM and his Coach.

With respect to your 10% argument:

I am not seeing your big improvement:

http://www.hoopdata.com/player.aspx?name=Ron%20Artest

Ron Artest fg% from 16-23 feet:

2006-07 38%

2007-08 42%

2008-09 36%

2009-10 36%

On the stat issue, I will just say I fundamentally disagree. If a guy is taking bad shots, it will lower his fg% from his base but you can't tell very much from looking solely at the fg% since you have no baseline of perfect shooting judgment to base that against.

Here are RealGM Lakers fans on Ron Artest a month after the season:

Play_Smart! - Artest's shot selection is terrible.

The Skyhook - I'm talking about Ron and how he is so trigger happy at times. With Ron you never know what you are going to get on offense.

I'm always puzzled as to why Ron hesitates to take a wide open shot. When guys on these boards had those Better fit for Lakers: Ariza vs Ron threads they were swarmed with guys saying Ron will dribble and then shoot. He will do it at times even when he has a wide open look and it really bothers me about his offense.

ComeAtMeBro - With Artest, this has always been the problem. He complicates things and trys too hard at times. He's a genuine guy, but he tends to really show no awareness.

DrMJ - Artest now scores only about as much as Battier scores, and he does even that with terrible efficiency, and with moans from Laker fans about him shooting when he shouldn't be.

Troll - Artest is clueless on offense passes up open shots over-dribbles that results in a horrible shot.

Excellence - I'm really tired of Artest's consistently bone-headed plays too.

Freerider - His offense leaves so much to be desired because of his poor decision-making and insecurity whenever he gets the ball.

Illmatic21 - It's not just that Artest isn't a good offensive player... he is a TERRIBLE offensive player who has no bball IQ on that side of the ball whatsoever. Even when his teammates freeze him out (we've seen Phil tell the other Lakers not to pass Ron the ball) he somehow still goes out of his way to screw things up.

Ballings7 - The only wrench is Ron at times will take questionable or bad shots

etc.