Purdue Midrange Game

[BoilerDaddy]

I see that Purdue is up to 4th nationally in adjusted effective field goal percentage per Bartorvik despite a stretch where the open threes aren’t falling. I think what makes this team unique given the way that college basketball is played today is that the midrange game is next level. TKR and Loyer are 2 of the best at shooting floaters that I have seen in years and Braden’s fadeaway pull-up is amazing to watch. In this era where everything is analytics driven, the midrange is out of favor, but I think that’s what makes it so hard to defend. I think that it is a relatively easy shot to get off under duress without a turnover and one thing that I have noticed, particularly with Loyer, is that the shot is so soft that it seems to lead to a lot of offensive rebounds.

I also truly believe that this is a good three point shooting team that is going through a collective slump and when the threes start falling at a better clip, Purdue will be one of, if not the, hardest teams to defend in the country.

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

Pardon the intrusion from a rival fan, here, but Purdue is one of the best midrange shooting team in the country, yet is only averaging 47%. You’re also among the best at the rim and at 3, btw, and those are more productive shots, earning greater than one point per attempt.

Ergo, being good at midrange is not an optimal strategy. You’re an elite offense despite taking too many of them, not because of it.

 

[tjreese]

I see that Purdue is up to 4th nationally in adjusted effective field goal percentage per Bartorvik despite a stretch where the open threes aren’t falling. I think what makes this team unique given the way that college basketball is played today is that the midrange game is next level. TKR and Loyer are 2 of the best at shooting floaters that I have seen in years and Braden’s fadeaway pull-up is amazing to watch. In this era where everything is analytics driven, the midrange is out of favor, but I think that’s what makes it so hard to defend. I think that it is a relatively easy shot to get off under duress without a turnover and one thing that I have noticed, particularly with Loyer, is that the shot is so soft that it seems to lead to a lot of offensive rebounds.

I also truly believe that this is a good three point shooting team that is going through a collective slump and when the threes start falling at a better clip, Purdue will be one of, if not the, hardest teams to defend in the country.

This is true for other teams and was true a few years ago as well. How else do you counter pressure over many situations. Remember, you have a clock that makes you score in a few seconds. This was real a few years ago when people were only talking the three ball and that the mid range was inefficient, which it is if only considering points versus shooting percentages, but as we know...teams are staying at home and not helping out if they want to defend the 3 ball on the perimeter...and if they do help out they try to be in a position where their location allows them to defend the 3 ball. Shoot, Purdue still chases over the top on screens on the perimeter to try to defend better the three ball. What you have said is indicative of why so many thought that Trey playing the 4 last year would be a mistake...that focus on the 3 ball in isolation to the rest of the game

 

[Schmedly_Whiplash]

Pardon the intrusion from a rival fan, here, but Purdue is one of the best midrange shooting team in the country, yet is only averaging 47%. You’re also among the best at the rim and at 3, btw, and those are more productive shots, earning greater than one point per attempt.

Ergo, being good at midrange is not an optimal strategy. You’re an elite offense despite taking too many of them, not because of it.

Nope. But please keep on keeping on thinking that.

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

Nope. But please keep on keeping on thinking that.

Care to explain?

For me, it's simple math. At the rim, PU is over 67% which is 1.34 points per attempt. From 3, you're 37.5%, which is 1.13 point per attempt. Midrange at 47% is 0.94 points per attempt. It is inarguably the least efficient shot you can take, even for the best team in the country at them. Yet PU takes about a third of their shots from midrange - a lot more than most.

What am I missing?

 

[tjreese]

Care to explain?

For me, it's simple math. At the rim, PU is over 67% which is 1.34 points per attempt. From 3, you're 37.5%, which is 1.13 point per attempt. Midrange at 47% is 0.94 points per attempt. It is inarguably the least efficient shot you can take, even for the best team in the country at them. Yet PU takes about a third of their shots from midrange - a lot more than most.

What am I missing?

focusing on the numbers are good, but doesn't tell the whole story since Purdue is ahead on the Big. As I already posted, the D today for most teams eliminate the number of good looks behind the arc leaving the teams that can score effectively with the mid range game an advantage over those hunting shots behind the arc unless someone has that magic game. The three ball never punishes the opposition other than an extra point. You do NOT remove pieces or players with the three ball...you do not make players with foul trouble as timid and are at the mercy in a closing game where the other team is in trouble and not wanting to foul, but you are more than willing to score should they foul with the clock stopped. Lastly, in many games the 3 is not needed in the closing seconds and then what are the percentage of makes at the two and at the line versus behind the arc?

The three ball is important and that is why the mid range game is crucial as well IMO

 

[RossMackey]

Purdue has had a frustrating tendency lately to miss far too many of the WIDE OPEN threes our motion offense consistently generates when we set good screens and move the ball efficiently.

IMO Braden’s facility in draining those fadeaways andTKR’s (and Fletch’s) excellent soft- touch runners help make those wide- open 3-ball looks possible….

You take points where you can get them—part of what makes this team such a joy to watch is its ability to adapt, and score in a variety of ways.

No sane Purdue fan would argue against more MADE threes, but chucking a ton more bad threes to attain some arbitrary, amorphous percentage parity standard creates more problems than it solves!

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Purdue has had a frustrating tendency lately to miss far too many of the WIDE OPEN threes our motion office generates.

IMO Braden’s facility in draining those fadeaways andTKR’s (and Fletch’s) excellent soft- touch runners help make those wide- open 3-ball looks possible….

You take points where you can get them—part of what makes this team such a joy to watch is its ability to adapt, and score in a variety of ways.

No sane Purdue fan would argue against more MADE threes, but chucking a ton more bad threes to attain some arbitrary, amorphous percentage parity standard creates more problems than it solves!

💯

And paint is very well aware of all of these numbers (as we all know 😂)

 

[boilerzz]

Care to explain?

For me, it's simple math. At the rim, PU is over 67% which is 1.34 points per attempt. From 3, you're 37.5%, which is 1.13 point per attempt. Midrange at 47% is 0.94 points per attempt. It is inarguably the least efficient shot you can take, even for the best team in the country at them. Yet PU takes about a third of their shots from midrange - a lot more than most.

What am I missing?

As a numbers guy, I get the argument but think it's too simplistic. The fact that Braden Smith is willing to take those midrange jumpers opens up the passing lane for him to get those passes to TKR, thereby improving our success at the rim. I think there is a very clear cause and effect so it's hard to discern an impact should Purdue shoot less midrange shots.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Care to explain?

For me, it's simple math. At the rim, PU is over 67% which is 1.34 points per attempt. From 3, you're 37.5%, which is 1.13 point per attempt. Midrange at 47% is 0.94 points per attempt. It is inarguably the least efficient shot you can take, even for the best team in the country at them. Yet PU takes about a third of their shots from midrange - a lot more than most.

What am I missing?

What your data doesn’t state is how deep in the shot clock is each shot taken. Based on observation, I would say that a high percentage of Purdue’s midrange shots come relatively late in the shot clock when there is no guarantee that Purdue will be able to get a layup or a clean look at a 3.

 

[RossMackey]

What your data doesn’t state is how deep in the shot clock is each shot taken. Based on observation, I would say that a high percentage of Purdue’s midrange shots come relatively late in the shot clock when there is no guarantee that Purdue will be able to get a layup or a clean look at a 3.

Yep.

Data without context.

Roughly the difference between a Purdue degree, and a badger sheepskin😎

 

[boilerzz]

Yep.

Data without context.

Roughly the difference between a Purdue degree, and a badger sheepskin😎

No need to be douchey to a courteous visitor

 

[tjreese]

No need to be douchey to a courteous visitor

I took it as a joke, but I also like outsider comments that are sincere and the poster seemed to be sincere

 

[RossMackey]

No need to be douchey to a courteous visitor

"Douchey" ?? you clearly disagree, but IMO that's about as mild a jab for an uninformed take as you'll ever see on this board !

I also freely admit I've not gotten over either the Orton missed facemask fumble, or the Elite Eight loss to UW that kept Geno from his Final Four.

If that is considered "douchey" then color me guilty.

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

No need to be douchey to a courteous visitor

S'alright - I won't be giving it back.

Going back to the original post, you said that the midrange might lead to more offensive rebounds - that would make them more worthwhile. But, I'm seeing PU being in the 150s for ORebs.

You also said that the use of midrange makes PU unique, and I would agree with that. Looks like Iowa and Michigan are pretty bunched up with PU regarding eFG%, and both of those teams shoot a much lower percentage of their shots from midrange.

Wisconsin is kinda far back in eFG% compared to the three mentioned (at least rankings-wise - it's a small amount in absolute numbers), but is right there with you for overall offensive efficiency. I think the difference in shooting gets made up by UW's low turnover %.

BTW, you're our next game - I know you have a big one tomorrow and I hate the boys in blue. Or maize. We never win in Mackey, so chalking it up as an L, but I hope we can learn something.

 

[RossMackey]

I took it as a joke, but I also like outsider comments that are sincere and the poster seemed to be sincere

It totally WAS a joke.

apologies if the sunglasses emoji was insufficient for some....

 

[Tommaker]

S'alright - I won't be giving it back.

Going back to the original post, you said that the midrange might lead to more offensive rebounds - that would make them more worthwhile. But, I'm seeing PU being in the 150s for ORebs.

You also said that the use of midrange makes PU unique, and I would agree with that. Looks like Iowa and Michigan are pretty bunched up with PU regarding eFG%, and both of those teams shoot a much lower percentage of their shots from midrange.

Wisconsin is kinda far back in eFG% compared to the three mentioned (at least rankings-wise - it's a small amount in absolute numbers), but is right there with you for overall offensive efficiency. I think the difference in shooting gets made up by UW's low turnover %.

BTW, you're our next game - I know you have a big one tomorrow and I hate the boys in blue. Or maize. We never win in Mackey, so chalking it up as an L, but I hope we can learn something.

I'd love to see the figures with foul shots factored in. Assuming around the rim produces the most foul shots, I'd say mid range is a close second? If you factor in how many "and 1's" Fletch gets or 2 made on a miss, that probably bumps those numbers up. defense is a lot more willing to foul on those mid range (as opposed to 3's) and it also adds in another factor, putting the D in foul trouble either by player or over bonus.

 

[proudopete]

The shots the big 3 take in the midrange are by design. Purdue is undersized and less athletic compared to most teams in the league. Being able to get these shots off and make them is Purdues answer to that problem. All 3 players practice these shots and make them at a good percentage.

Lately we have seen CJ and Gicarri take and make these same shots so it’s definitely by design. Smiths fall away is deadly. Loyer and TKR’s runners are also deadly and all three open up the 3 point game by drawing defenders into the lane.

 

[boilerzz]

S'alright - I won't be giving it back.

Going back to the original post, you said that the midrange might lead to more offensive rebounds - that would make them more worthwhile. But, I'm seeing PU being in the 150s for ORebs.

You also said that the use of midrange makes PU unique, and I would agree with that. Looks like Iowa and Michigan are pretty bunched up with PU regarding eFG%, and both of those teams shoot a much lower percentage of their shots from midrange.

Wisconsin is kinda far back in eFG% compared to the three mentioned (at least rankings-wise - it's a small amount in absolute numbers), but is right there with you for overall offensive efficiency. I think the difference in shooting gets made up by UW's low turnover %.

BTW, you're our next game - I know you have a big one tomorrow and I hate the boys in blue. Or maize. We never win in Mackey, so chalking it up as an L, but I hope we can learn something.

Technically, other people said what you attributed to me. I said our midrange game makes us more efficient at the rim because it forces defenses to make a decision.

 

[boilerzz]

"Douchey" ?? you clearly disagree, but IMO that's about as mild a jab for an uninformed take as you'll ever see on this board !

I also freely admit I've not gotten over either the Orton missed facemask fumble, or the Elite Eight loss to UW that kept Geno from his Final Four.

If that is considered "douchey" then color me guilty.

Oh, I knew it was a joke. I just felt it was an unnecessary one given the OP's message.

Of course, I wrote that as one who wishes more rival fans would stop by and discuss basketball with candor (and yes, that includes the occasional IU fan). It makes our boards a lot more interesting. It's perhaps why I spend more time on the national board than I do here.

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

The shots the big 3 take in the midrange are by design. Purdue is undersized and less athletic compared to most teams in the league. Being able to get these shots off and make them is Purdues answer to that problem. All 3 players practice these shots and make them at a good percentage.

Lately we have seen CJ and Gicarri take and make these same shots so it’s definitely by design. Smiths fall away is deadly. Loyer and TKR’s runners are also deadly and all three open up the 3 point game by drawing defenders into the lane.

But I would argue not really to the bolded. TKR is at 50%, Loyer 48%, and Smith 45%. Those are extremely good percentages for midrange shots - no argument there. Just compare those to their overall eFG% of 61%, 57%, and 54% - as a defense, I'd say let'em shoot those midranges and you'll come out way ahead.

Now if you told me that the offense rebounds the midranges > than other parts of the floor, I could be convinced otherwise.

 

[proudopete]

But I would argue not really to the bolded. TKR is at 50%, Loyer 48%, and Smith 45%. Those are extremely good percentages for midrange shots - no argument there. Just compare those to their overall eFG% of 61%, 57%, and 54% - as a defense, I'd say let'em shoot those midranges and you'll come out way ahead.

Now if you told me that the offense rebounds the midranges > than other parts of the floor, I could be convinced otherwise.

Purdue takes what the defense gives. Having Smith allows us to go against the analytics and still have success. Teams play drop and Smith eats. Double Smith and TKR eats.
Painter knows the numbers as he is an analytics guy. Once again though he knows that his team has to find ways to score against bigger and more athletic players. The mid range game is that answer.

 

[boilernuke]

I'd love to see the figures with foul shots factored in. Assuming around the rim produces the most foul shots, I'd say mid range is a close second? If you factor in how many "and 1's" Fletch gets or 2 made on a miss, that probably bumps those numbers up. defense is a lot more willing to foul on those mid range (as opposed to 3's) and it also adds in another factor, putting the D in foul trouble either by player or over bonus.

Well if a foul shot is needed, all you need to do is get the ball to Caleb Furst.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

S'alright - I won't be giving it back.

Going back to the original post, you said that the midrange might lead to more offensive rebounds - that would make them more worthwhile. But, I'm seeing PU being in the 150s for ORebs.

You also said that the use of midrange makes PU unique, and I would agree with that. Looks like Iowa and Michigan are pretty bunched up with PU regarding eFG%, and both of those teams shoot a much lower percentage of their shots from midrange.

Wisconsin is kinda far back in eFG% compared to the three mentioned (at least rankings-wise - it's a small amount in absolute numbers), but is right there with you for overall offensive efficiency. I think the difference in shooting gets made up by UW's low turnover %.

BTW, you're our next game - I know you have a big one tomorrow and I hate the boys in blue. Or maize. We never win in Mackey, so chalking it up as an L, but I hope we can learn something.

My point isn’t that the midrange game is the only way to achieve success. A year ago, Purdue had much less need to rely on the midrange game, for example, because it featured the most dominant low post player in the country. My point is that the midrange is something that this specific team does very well and it is contributing to a very successful season, particularly since the beginning of January.

As far as the offensive rebounding numbers, you have to consider the Purdue plays a line-up that is relatively small and not particularly athletic. My argument isn’t that Purdue is a dominant offensive rebounding team as much as I am observing that Purdue appears to rebound well off of midrange shots, in part because of the help that they tend to draw.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

But I would argue not really to the bolded. TKR is at 50%, Loyer 48%, and Smith 45%. Those are extremely good percentages for midrange shots - no argument there. Just compare those to their overall eFG% of 61%, 57%, and 54% - as a defense, I'd say let'em shoot those midranges and you'll come out way ahead.

Now if you told me that the offense rebounds the midranges > than other parts of the floor, I could be convinced otherwise.

You can’t compare to their overall efg% unless you think that they are passing up good shots elsewhere. Fletch never passes up an open 3. If Braden is able to get to the rim he’s going to take the layup every time. If TKR gets into position for a layup or dunk, he’s going to take it every time.

 

[tjreese]

My point isn’t that the midrange game is the only way to achieve success. A year ago, Purdue had much less need to rely on the midrange game, for example, because it featured the most dominant low post player in the country. My point is that the midrange is something that this specific team does very well and it is contributing to a very successful season, particularly since the beginning of January.

As far as the offensive rebounding numbers, you have to consider the Purdue plays a line-up that is relatively small and not particularly athletic. My argument isn’t that Purdue is a dominant offensive rebounding team as much as I am observing that Purdue appears to rebound well off of midrange shots, in part because of the help that they tend to draw.

I think two years ago a bit more freedom for Braden to have taken a midrange shot might have helped reduce some turnovers and enhanced scoring opportunities even if not as effective as today. He was pretty much the only ball handler and teams would put pressure on him as he waited for Zach to get open while trying to absorb the pressure and yet pass at the exact time that was needed when Zach got open. It was a lot of pressure to put on a freshman that couldn't counter in a natural way to loosen the pressure.

Your comment on offensive rebounding enhanced by the other team being in help and therefore perhaps not in the best position creating rotation problems, I share as well, but I'll raise you one. The offensive movement away from the ball also makes it harder for the opposition to block out just due to the movement.

 

[qazplm]

Care to explain?

For me, it's simple math. At the rim, PU is over 67% which is 1.34 points per attempt. From 3, you're 37.5%, which is 1.13 point per attempt. Midrange at 47% is 0.94 points per attempt. It is inarguably the least efficient shot you can take, even for the best team in the country at them. Yet PU takes about a third of their shots from midrange - a lot more than most.

What am I missing?

This is the problem with blindly looking at stats as if they tell 100 percent of the story 100 percent of the time.

By stats, you should never ever take a midrange shot. By actual reality, there are plenty of possessions where a wide open midrange is a better shot than a contested three or an interior shot from a lesser talented player.

Sure, by the numbers it's one way, in actual gameplay it's less a law and more of a general guideline.

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

You can’t compare to their overall efg% unless you think that they are passing up good shots elsewhere. Fletch never passes up an open 3. If Braden is able to get to the rim he’s going to take the layup every time. If TKR gets into position for a layup or dunk, he’s going to take it every time.

Well, respectfully, why not? I am not assuming they're passing up good shots elsewhere - of course, not. I am saying that a defense wants you to take a midrange instead of giving up the Smith drive, the TKR layup or the Loyer 3.

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

This is the problem with blindly looking at stats as if they tell 100 percent of the story 100 percent of the time.

By stats, you should never ever take a midrange shot. By actual reality, there are plenty of possessions where a wide open midrange is a better shot than a contested three or an interior shot from a lesser talented player.

Sure, by the numbers it's one way, in actual gameplay it's less a law and more of a general guideline.

I don't disagree. Sometimes the midrange is the best shot because that's what the defense gives you. But that's good defense. It's still the lowest payoff shot.

 

[qazplm]

I don't disagree. Sometimes the midrange is the best shot because that's what the defense gives you. But that's good defense. It's still the lowest payoff shot.

It's not lower than a contested three.

 

[Schmedly_Whiplash]

Care to explain?

For me, it's simple math. At the rim, PU is over 67% which is 1.34 points per attempt. From 3, you're 37.5%, which is 1.13 point per attempt. Midrange at 47% is 0.94 points per attempt. It is inarguably the least efficient shot you can take, even for the best team in the country at them. Yet PU takes about a third of their shots from midrange - a lot more than most.

What am I missing?

Confidence in the shot.
But you have to be smart enough to grasp such concepts.

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

I don't disagree. Sometimes the midrange is the best shot because that's what the defense gives you. But that's good defense. It's still the lowest payoff shot.

It's not lower than a contested three.

Correct. That's why I say sometimes it's the best shot. It's good defense to make that lower payoff shot the best shot.

 

[Schmedly_Whiplash]

Correct. That's why I say sometimes it's the best shot. It's good defense to make that lower payoff shot the best shot.

so clueless.
Please continue.

 

[qazplm]

Correct. That's why I say sometimes it's the best shot. It's good defense to make that lower payoff shot the best shot.

It's also good offense to take the best available shot each possession

 

[BadgerInSpartyland]

It's also good offense to take the best available shot each possession

If the best shot available is a midrange where you average 0.94 points per shot? Good D.

 

[tjreese]

I don't disagree. Sometimes the midrange is the best shot because that's what the defense gives you. But that's good defense. It's still the lowest payoff shot.

Rarely does a coach experience things as planned. When the ball is tossed (and poorly anymore) the game has a life of its own and it goes very fast. Every team and the opposition of every team has variables continuously changing as to who should take shots and where, because players are not like video games where some stat is what will happen. None of this says that a three that is open for the right shooter at the right time of the game should not be taken. Coaches know this as do smart players.

Most thought Purdue would be very good behind the arc with Braden, Fletch, Myles and Cam returning and thinking Gicarri and CJ could shoot it as well, but the results have not been as good as believed. It could happen in any game though. When does a 2 pt shot equal a three when the 2 isn't successful 60% or the three 40% of the time...particularly when opposition player fouls and team fouls are crucial? Players know when they feel it, when they are comfortable...or should know. If you look at team shooting, does that hold for every player equally, and doesn't the opposition know who are more consistent shooters and play D different on them as individuals and help D in general?

Teams improve at different rates and the shooting percent for a player and team is based upon older data out of different populations unless you believe all D will be played the same by all players with the same abilities and effort in all games. If there were not variables in play everybody wants to hit 3s at a high rate, but rarely does that happen and ole Steven who shoots five threes a game at 40% doesn't always hit 2 out of 5. Sometimes he may hit 1 out of 5 one game and 3 out of 5 another. Perhaps the 1 out of 5 one leads to a loss and the 3 out of 5 more than needed for a win whereas 40% in both games would lead to a win in both games. Obviously the percent average success is heavily weighted by certain games where the 3 ball is shot more than in other games. The reason for it could be a good game or a bad games.

I like averages because they are the best metric, but it does lose track of the individual data which reminds me of telling an attorney about a peasant hunter. The hunter scared up a cock and took a shot and shot 3 feet behind the peasant and quickly shot again shooting 3 feet in front of the peasant. On the average, the peasant was dead, but reality only scored a complete miss. Lot of variables in the game to try to reduce the variables down to a general area that is the key to success. THAT said, there is more truth to the statistic today than years ago due to more similar skill sets and a clock that creates attempts more closely aligned than without a clock

 

[tjreese]

Well, respectfully, why not? I am not assuming they're passing up good shots elsewhere - of course, not. I am saying that a defense wants you to take a midrange instead of giving up the Smith drive, the TKR layup or the Loyer 3.

Sometimes that clock makes you do what you have to do

 

[BoilerDaddy]

I don't disagree. Sometimes the midrange is the best shot because that's what the defense gives you. But that's good defense. It's still the lowest payoff shot.

Not necessarily. As a defense, if I have played 25 seconds of stifling defense only to see TKR get one of his 8 foot floaters, I don’t feel good about that. I would much rather see a desperation 3 or a forced post feed turnover.

One of the reasons that Purdue is having a lot of success in Big Ten games is that it is getting a quality shot on a high percentage of possessions.

 

[proudopete]

If the best shot available is a midrange where you average 0.94 points per shot? Good D.

According to Brian, TKR is shooting 56% when shooting his runner, averaging 1.13 ppp.

The thing is the defense is trying to take away your best shot. Most teams don’t score when their best shot is take away but if you can flip the script and make the bad shot at a point per possession then that’s a plus. I know you’re trying to make it a win by the defense but our guys have practiced and hit theses shots to the point where it’s still a win for the offense. Purdue has the 7th rated offense in the country while shooting these shots so I think they are doing something right.