The NBA Draft Thread

[junglejim]

Here's my list based on very limited research and current 3 pt% (Around 70% FT% or less was my cutoff :

Zach Lavine           38.7%

Avery Bradley         39.0%

Patrick Patterson    37.2%

Vince Carter            37.8%

Rajon Rondo            37.6%

Jimmy Butler           36.7%

Lou Williams            36.5%

Lebron James          36.3% (had to go back to his HS stats, 67% FT shooter)

Jason Kidd

Andre Iguoldala        36.2%

Victor Oladipo          36.1%  (shot 61% from FT his freshman year)

Iman Shumpert        36.0% (shot 65.6% his Freshman year)

Otto Porter              43.4%  (shot 70% from FT his freshman year)

But at this point im sick of looking at this.

 

[100027]

Here's my list based on very limited research and current 3 pt% (Around 70% FT% or less was my cutoff :

Zach Lavine           38.7%
Avery Bradley         39.0%
Kawhi Leonard        38.0% (was a 72% FT shooter his freshman year)
Patrick Patterson    37.2%
Vince Carter            37.8%
Rajon Rondo            37.6%
Jimmy Butler           36.7%
Lou Williams            36.5%
Lebron James          36.3% (had to go back to his HS stats, 67% FT shooter)
Jason Kidd
Andre Iguoldala        36.2%
Victor Oladipo          36.1%  (shot 61% from FT his freshman year)
Iman Shumpert        36.0% (shot 65.6% his Freshman year)
Otto Porter              43.4%  (shot 70% from FT his freshman year)



But at this point im sick of looking at this.

What's the criteria for the players you picked? There's a mix of good and bad NBA shooters on here. If this is my best case scenario list I think I am still concerned.

Repped for pulling the data though

 

[junglejim]

Bradley was a really good shooter in high school tho right?

And rondo? Really?

Dunno, but Bradley shot 54% from FT in college and 37% from 3.  But apparently Josh Jackson having damn near identical stats means he will not be a passable shooter in the NBA.

 

[junglejim]

What's the criteria for the players you picked? There's a mix of good and bad NBA shooters on here. If this is my best case scenario list I think I am still concerned.

Repped for pulling the data though

Some of it is players who shot terrible from the FT line their freshman year in college (like of alot of the players we are comparing here) but most of them are people who shot like 70% or below from FT in college at some point.  I tried to highlight the ones that I used Freshman stats for (since many of these players are freshman).

But in general, it is players who shoot more than 36% from threes in the NBA but shot 70% or less from FT's at some point in college.

Im sure I can find a ton more over 33% but I dont really feel like spending the time to look.

 

[100027]

Some of it is players who shot terrible from the FT line their freshman year in college (like of alot of the players we are comparing here) but most of them are people who shot like 70% or below from FT in college at some point.  I tried to highlight the ones that I used Freshman stats for (since many of these players are freshman).

But in general, it is players who shoot more than 36% from threes in the NBA but shot 70% or less from FT's at some point in college.

Im sure I can find a ton more over 33% but I dont really feel like spending the time to look.

One thing about this list is that a LOT of these guys were held back by shooting earlier in the careers even when they did get better. I wouldn't consider any of them deadeye shooters.

 

[junglejim]

I lied im back

Tim Hardaway Jr.   35.7%

Kelly Olynyk          35.4% (shot 59.6% his freshman year)

Al Horford              35.5%

Gerald Henderson  35.3% (shot 62.7% his freshman year)

Maurice Harkless   35.1%

Kentavious Caldwell Pope 35.0% (shot 65% his freshman year)

Kent Bazemore     34.7%

Trevor Ariza          34.4%

Russell Westbrook 34.3%  (shot 54% his freshman year)

Demarre Carroll      34.1%

There is more but at some point im going to get into 3 pt shooters who are meh.

 

[100027]

 
I lied im back

Tim Hardaway Jr.   35.7%

Kelly Olynyk          35.4% (shot 59.6% his freshman year)

Al Horford              35.5%

Gerald Henderson  35.3% (shot 62.7% his freshman year)

Maurice Harkless   35.1%

Kentavious Caldwell Pope 35.0% (shot 65% his freshman year)

Kent Bazemore     34.7%

Trevor Ariza          34.4%

Russell Westbrook 34.3%  (shot 54% his freshman year)

Demarre Carroll      34.1%

There is more but at some point im going to get into 3 pt shooters who are meh.

All of these guys are like cringe when they shoot cheer when it goes in type of guys 

 

[junglejim]

 
All of these guys are like cringe when they shoot cheer when it goes in type of guys 

Ball dont lie though, it goes in the hoop.  I will give you that a lot of these players were held back early in their careers because of shooting, but to say that a player almost never becomes a decent shooter based on FT% is kind of a stretch.  It may be a better predictor than college 3 pt%, but its all a crap shoot in the end.  At the end of the day it is about putting the work in to become better.   

 

[ballinsam23]

They're all streaky but definitely respectable shooters though.

Look at Jae Crowder, 68% FT shooter in college.

 

[junglejim]

They're all streaky but definitely respectable shooters though.

Look at Jae Crowder, 68% FT shooter in college.

I definitely missed people as well.  I was legit just clicking on names of people who I either knew were really crappy shooters in college or just seemed to be inconsistent in the NBA.  That list above is by no means all inclusive.  These are just players I thought would potentially fit that bill.

 

[100027]

They're all streaky but definitely respectable shooters though.

Yeah, that's accurate.

 
Ball dont lie though, it goes in the hoop.  I will give you that a lot of these players were held back early in their careers because of shooting, but to say that a player almost never becomes a decent shooter based on FT% is kind of a stretch.  It may be a better predictor than college 3 pt%, but its all a crap shoot in the end.  At the end of the day it is about putting the work in to become better.   

I wouldn't say its a crap shoot.  I will agree with you that the players you listed show you can improve.  But you better have the right teaching environment and be able to be patient/not need a shooter right away.  Also the guy has to have the right type of work ethic.  I think it depends  a lot on what you think of your development + how long you're willing to wait.

 

[ValarMorghulis]

Shooting debate every freaking year.

I'd like to look at the past 3 draft threads and see right/wrong

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Ball dont lie though, it goes in the hoop.  I will give you that a lot of these players were held back early in their careers because of shooting, but to say that a player almost never becomes a decent shooter based on FT% is kind of a stretch.  It may be a better predictor than college 3 pt%, but its all a crap shoot in the end.  At the end of the day it is about putting the work in to become better.   

Strawman.


I Never said this, no one in this thread said this.



All I said was ft% is better than looking at 3p%, of course it's still a crap shoot.

You combine the numbers with the eye test and josh jackson looks pretty bad by both accounts.



I have no idea if Josh Jackson will learn to shoot or if he won't, I'm just saying it's probably not likely and I think that's a pretty fair estimation.

 

[P C H]

close.

but Austin was a pretty prolific off the dribble shooter in high school and even at duke.


His unorthodox mechanics seem to break down on spot ups.

Not sure I follow what do you mean his mechanics break down on spots up?

As in they become a bit more natural?

Either way I'd say he's an anomaly I was just being facetious. It's weird how he's become a really good 3pt shooter in the league, an even better spot up guy from 3, while still being Shaq from the line

 

[BIG LEEMELONE]

I always wondered about the merit of that free throw/3 point theory

 

[osh kosh bosh]

Not sure I follow what do you mean his mechanics break down on spots up?

As in they become a bit more natural?

Either way I'd say he's an anomaly I was just being facetious. It's weird how he's become a really good 3pt shooter in the league, an even better spot up guy from 3, while still being Shaq from the line

I mean his mechanics got worse/less fluid when he's spotting up.

his mechanics always looked smoother pulling up off the dribble.



he seems to have fixed that though. Let's see if it lasts.

 

[mgrand15]

Strawman.


I Never said this, no one in this thread said this.



All I said was ft% is better than looking at 3p%, of course it's still a crap shoot.

You combine the numbers with the eye test and josh jackson looks pretty bad by both accounts.



I have no idea if Josh Jackson will learn to shoot or if he won't, I'm just saying it's probably not likely and I think that's a pretty fair estimation.

It's fair to say but it seems like people are just ignoring his 3pt% because of his FT%. Yes, three pointers are likely to have more variance with a small sample size than FTs. He still deserves credit for turning himself into a good spot up shooter at the collegiate level after an ice cold start. Its enough evidence to make me think he'll be a decent corner 3pt shooter at worst.

I'd be more concerned with his percentage on midrange pullups than his FT%. Especially if he has any chance of being a 2nd or 1st option.

 

[MVP]

I think it's pretty intuitive to see why the 3pt% isn't the best indicator since it's a shorter line than the NBA 3. Exhibit A on my Lakers, D'Lo and Ingram who both shot 40% from 3 in college but struggled so far with the NBA 3.

 

[junglejim]

I think it's pretty intuitive to see why the 3pt% isn't the best indicator since it's a shorter line than the NBA 3. Exhibit A on my Lakers, D'Lo and Ingram who both shot 40% from 3 in college but struggled so far with the NBA 3.

He shot 35% from 3 in year two.  Sorry he isnt shooting 45% like Steph Curry.

 

[100027]

I think it's pretty intuitive to see why the 3pt% isn't the best indicator since it's a shorter line than the NBA 3. Exhibit A on my Lakers, D'Lo and Ingram who both shot 40% from 3 in college but struggled so far with the NBA 3.

Also when you consider the type of volume and the way that players get the shot in the NBA vs. college, in addition to the line distance, its a totally different shot that's being compared.  Not apples to apples.

 

[junglejim]

 
Also when you consider the type of volume and the way that players get the shot in the NBA vs. college, in addition to the line distance, its a totally different shot that's being compared.  Not apples to apples.

I would agree with this, but its not like free throws are the same type of shot and distance either.  

 

[P C H]

I think it's pretty intuitive to see why the 3pt% isn't the best indicator since it's a shorter line than the NBA 3. Exhibit A on my Lakers, D'Lo and Ingram who both shot 40% from 3 in college but struggled so far with the NBA 3.

D'Lo did shoot really well on spot up and open 3's though. Near 40% iirc

I think there's a shooter there. Bad teammates have made him shoot more bad 3's thus making him an average 3pt shooter.

 

[100027]

 
I would agree with this, but its not like free throws are the same type of shot and distance either.  

I believe the theory exists because there's a statistical correlation.  But aside from that I guess the idea is that free throws are a good representation of players' true shooting form.  On the NBA level its true that many of the best free throw shooters of all time (Nash, Curry, Peja, Ray) were also some of the best three point shooters ever, and vice versa.

Exception I can think of is Bruce Bowen, but he could only shoot 3s from the corner anyways.

 

[junglejim]

 
I believe the theory exists because there's a statistical correlation.  But aside from that I guess the idea is that free throws are a good representation of players' true shooting form.  On the NBA level its true that many of the best free throw shooters of all time (Nash, Curry, Peja, Ray) were also some of the best three point shooters ever, and vice versa.

Exception I can think of is Bruce Bowen, but he could only shoot 3s from the corner anyways.

I'd honestly be interested in reading that.  The only time I have heard this is on NT.  I've read a couple of articles from analytical type guys and they basically said that 3 pt% and ft% are roughly the same in terms on NBA 3 pt% indicators, but neither are really a good, accurate judge.  I've got a rep waiting for whoever posts the article, im honestly curious.

http://fansided.com/2015/05/25/projecting-draft-prospects-three-point-percentages/

 

[mgrand15]

All of these guys are like cringe when they shoot cheer when it goes in type of guys 

ALL of them? Maybe Harkless and Westbrook (more due to shot selection) Everyone else is at least a respected shooter. Most are good just not elite You serious?