Shot Selection & Analytics

The revolution starts with one number: expected points per shot = (points × make rate). A 35% three yields 1.05 points per attempt; a 45% long two yields 0.90. The 'worse' shooter taking threes produces more points than the 'better' shooter taking long twos.

That's why modern shot charts concentrate on the rim, the free-throw line, and the three-point arc — and why the long mid-range shot became a shot defenses happily concede. (Nuance survives: a great mid-range shooter beats a bad three every time. The math ranks *your* options, not a dogma.)

Dean Oliver's Four Factors explain winning better than any stat line:

1. Shooting (effective FG%: eFG% = (FGM + 0.5×3PM) / FGA — it credits threes properly)

2. Turnovers (turnover rate — possessions thrown away)

3. Rebounding (offensive rebound % — extra possessions)

4. Free throws (getting to the line)

…each measured for offense and defense. Teams that win three of the four factors almost always win the game.

Raw points mislead: a fast team scores 85 by playing more possessions, not by being efficient. Serious analysis is per-possession: offensive rating (points per 100 possessions), defensive rating, and pace. A 'high-scoring' team can have a bad offense; a 'low-scoring' one can be elite.

For a coach, analytics answers questions film can't: *what shots do we actually generate? whom should we foul? which lineups defend?* But numbers propose — film disposes. You'll see both sides in the Scouting topic next.