Mobley's FG% since Jan 15

Interestingly enough, back when he was shooting 38%, he had the best shot of any of our guards. How? Many of his shots were three's and he went to the line a bunch (and made his free throws)

At the time, he was knocking down about 1.24 points for every shot he jacked up. The only players who had a better point average per shot were our paint players who by the very nature of their positon score high percentage-wise (put backs, dunks, lots of fouls). Nobody in the backcourt scored as well as Mobley.

Now, he's no longer the best "money" shot in the backcourt. Both Shandon and Moochie score more points per attempt--1.288 and 1.314, respectively. Don't put to much stock in FG%; it's one stat that leaves quite a bit to be desired in judging ones scoring ability.

Mobley may "look" better to you now, but he was pretty darn good back then too.

------------------
stop posting my damn signature

 

I feel Field Goal attempts don't tell the whole story about a player, because times they go up and get fouled aren't considered attempts.

If you look at the box score and say "Man, Francis put up 24 shots, while Mobley only got 18" if Francis didn't have any FTs, and Mobley got 12, the story is a bit different....

Points per shot....interesting. But does that count the times he shoots and get fouled, and gets 2 points without a FGA?

------------------
Rockets fans wanted at hoopsboards.com

Draft Chat, NBA Chat, Team Chat, and more!

 

Pole,

I may be missing the intent of your post, but are you saying that Mobley had a bad field goal percentage when he was shooting 38% because a lot of his shots were 3's? If so, I have to disagree; three point attempts are not included in field goal percentage calculations. If you're shooting 38% according to NBA stats, you're shooting 38% from inside the 3 point arc. Mobley was a brick-fest in motion unless he was driving back then. Your point about him getting to the line is true, though. If I misunderstood you, then please explain.

No offense to anyone in this thread, but I've banged my head several times trying to figure out what the perfect stat is to see how good a player is offensively. What Pole pointed out about using FG% as a pure indicator is correct, and it's something I've thought about, but consider this : in the 97-98 season Michael Jordan's pts/fga ratio was 1.245. Moochie's this year is 1.314, Francis' is 1.231, Mobley's is 1.254, Shandon's is 1.288. I don't know about you guys, but with those guys running nose-to-nose with Jordan, what does the stat really tell you? It may be more of an efficiency rating rather than a true player performance or "money player" rating.

I think a better indicator of player performance may be a "Points Created" or "Points Accountable For" type stat. This stat would include assists and FT's as well. This would account for Mobley's ability to get to the line and also to convert at an 85% clip.

------------------
<this space for rent>

 

You did misunderstood me, and you're slightly mistaken about three-point percentage also.

FG% includes ALL field goals--both inside the arc and out. The best way to prove it is to go look at a players current stats; we'll take Mobley's for instance:

His 42.857 current shooting percentage is made up of 414 made for 966 attempts. His current three-point percentage of 34.892 is made up of 97 made for 278 attempts, and his current free throw percentage of 84.615 is made up of 286 made for 338 attempts. If you multiply his 414 made FG shots by their point value of 2, you get 828. If you add the single point value of each free throw to that number, you get 1114. If you subtract that 1114 from his total points of 1211, you get 97--the exact number of three pointers that he made. What does that mean? It means that 97 of those 414 FG shots he made were actually three pointers. In other words; three pointers are included in FG percentage.

My point about Mobley is that he has ALWAYS been good. He may not always LOOK good, but he is still doing damage. When his shot percentage was low, he was still making lots of points because some of those shots he was making were three's and he was going to the line a lot.

Of course, this is just a statistical argument, but I guarantee NBA coaches look at percentages. In fact, they would have given a weighted score to all the points he scored at the line which would make Mobley even more statistically dangerous. Never underestimate the power of getting your opponent in foul trouble. If I have a point, it's this: if your gonna dog Mobley, don't use stats, 'cuz statistically, he's awesome!


------------------
stop posting my damn signature

 

Yikes... stupid mistake on my part. Not sure what I was thinking. You are correct on the FG% calc!

------------------
<this space for rent>

 

All these stats are interesting, however,

WHAT IS THE ROCKETS RECORD?


The only real stat that matters.

DaDakota

------------------

 

Pole,

I disagree with your FG% theory.

Just because you make most of your FTs or get to the line often does not make up for bricking most of your shots.

Also, relying on FTs is like relying on refs to make calls. And, I for one am not about to rely on a ref. I'd much rather rely on a play hitting a shot.

What about 3-pt plays. Plays in which he didn't miss and he still got to shoot a FT? Or technical FTs?

I'd prefer for Mobley to continue shooting FTs well, and shoot around 45%+ from the floor.

Jordan shot 50% from the floor in his career. But, maybe he's not the greatest example, because he was a very talented player. And, because many of his shots were lay ups and dunks, because he had the ability to beat defenders.

Hmmmmm so who else can I use for an example?

How about John Stockton. There's an under the rim type player if there ever was. His career FG% is .518. He even shot 57.4% in a season where he played in 82 games. But, maybe Stockton's not a great example, because he's one of the top five PGs of all-time.

My point is FG% is important.

If there is a player who shoots for a low FG%, then he must be able to do something else very well: rebound, defend, pass, etc in order for that person to stay in the league.

------------------
I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem.

 

Lookout CBA, here comes Mobley

 

So DREAMer, what would you prefer?

Player A: Shoots 50% from the floor and scores 100 points for every 100 shots he jacks up, or

Player B: Shoots 10% from the floor and scores 310 points for every 100 shots he jacks up?


And before you hastily reply, yes "player B" is a statistical improbability, but NO, he is not an impossibility.



------------------
stop posting my damn signature

 

Pole,

Before I say who I'd prefer, tell me who would be more likely to even BE in the NBA...

------------------
I have a dream.........his name's Hakeem.

 

Neither, actually. They are both just two extremes used to illustrate a point.

We have two games left in the season, so stats aren’t likely to change a whole lot now. At this point, the numbers really don’t lie.

Mobley’s FG% has improved dramatically, but his scoring efficiency has only improved a little. Why? He may be taking less three pointers, but I suspect that it mostly has to do with the fact that players have been coached to avoid fouling him.




<strong>Scoring Efficiency</strong> - Goes a step further, and factors in free-throw
shooting. You may also see this formula called &quot;Points per Shot Attempt&quot;, with
the resulting number being exactly 2X ScoEff, but that's a bit of a misnomer. Shot
Attempts is imprecise, where this formula is not - whether a player's free-throw attempts
comes from a fouled shot, a technical foul, or continuation play, their performance at the
line is absolute - they either make or miss. </p>

------------------
stop posting my damn signature

 

I agree with Dreamer for the very reasons he states. You can't predict the effect of missing a shot. When you say Mobley was missing shots, but getting to the line, you are ignoring the fact that his misses may lead to opponent fast breaks. Many of the shots he was taking early in the season were wild shots with no one under the basket or 3 pt bombs that resulted in long rebounds for the opposition. Bad FG% may just mean you're giving opposing teams more fast break points. I still say hitting your shots and points created is a much more reliable stat. Also, Mobley is hitting his shots now which makes him a much better threat than he ever was earlier in the year. Now he can drive even more effectively simply because people will respect his shot.

Re : the comment about player A vs. player B... I guarantee you will not find an example of player B in the NBA. However, quite a few examples of Player A (or at least something very close to him) do exist.

You're saying Player A has a 1:1 correlation between points scored and FG's attempted and has a FG% of 50%. This basically amounts to guys that shoot around 50% and don't get to the line much. The players coming closest to this that I've casually found are :

Shawn Bradley 1.15 : 1, 47%
Chucky Brown 1.01 : 1, 45%
Terrell Brandon 1.16 : 1, 47%
P.J. Brown 1.14: 1, 48%
Mark Bryant 1.22: 1, 50%

And heck, that's just the B's...


------------------
&lt;this space for rent&gt;

 

Yeah but Pole using your tally: 5 Moochie
Norris's are better offensively than 5
Michael Jordans, per shot attempt?.

Bottom line is 5 guys shooting 38 percent
is almost never going to beat 5 guys
shooting 47 percent.

[This message has been edited by Dreamshake (edited April 17, 2000).]

 

Ok, I finished my taxes and to celebrate, I did some number crunching. Using Access to import tab-delimited data and weilding the geek-power of SQL, I ran a query that, in English, said the following :

Give me all players in the NBA who have attempted more than 100 FG's, shoot > 45% and have a points scored to field goals attempted ratio between .85 and 1.15. Based upon the latest data I could get, I came up with 24 players. If you moved the ratio up to 1.20, that number nearly doubles to 45. So, in essence, players of similar output to player A do exist.

With the stupid mistake I made above regarding FG% calc's hopefully I did this one right. If somebody catches something wrong, let me know.

FYI, the players were :

augmon,stacey
brown,p.j.
buckner,greg
coles,bimbo
delnegro,vinnie
doleac,michael
ellis,laphonso
finley,michael
foyle,adonal
gugliotta,tom
howard,juwan
jamison,antawn
johnson,avery
longley,luc
lynch,george
marion,shawn
nesterovic,rados
olajuwon,hakeem
parks,cherokee
phills,bobby
polynice,olden
smits,rik
taylor,maurice
trent,gary

<this space for rent>

[This message has been edited by Dr of Dunk (edited April 17, 2000).]

 

HP:
I'm glad you brought this topic up, because I remember many posters attacking Mobley & his below 40% FG. I'm also one of Cats supporters as well and I can't tie down why his % increased so much either. I think a small part is shot selection, he doesn't take quite as many wild shots now. But overall I think it may just be confidence. Cat was trying to score for the first few months, but he had never done so before in the NBA. Now he has figured out how to do it. Also Mobley is a streaky shooter and it seems like to me when he is hot he takes alot of shots and when he isn't hitting he is more likely to limit his shots. Basically a little maturity on his part.

But overall 47% is very good for a big man, much less a SG. Go Mobley!

------------------

 

Jesus H. Christ! people. HOW BLACK AND WHITE DO I HAVE TO MAKE THIS FOR YOU!!

We only have two friggin games left in the season. I'm pretty sure we have enough data for a sample. If it makes you feel any better, I'll wait until Thursday morning to give you a final tally.

Rest assured the numbers won't change that much. Say all you want about opponents fast break points and I'll counter with the effect of getting your opponent in foul trouble--but still, I've only mentioned the foul trouble; I have NOT allowed for it in these computations. It doesn't friggin matter because the numbers don't lie: Mobley scores close to 1.26 points for every shot he jacks up, and although his FG% has improved dramatically, he really isn't scoring all that much more per shot attempt.

The only one of you who has been close to being on the same page with me is DREAMer who sort of mentioned the fact that Mobley shoots all the T's when he's on the floor--this helps his numbers (both then and now), but NOT THAT MUCH!

This isn't a friggin theory yall are arguing with. There's no IFs, ANDs, or BUTs about it. Yall are arguing with some very basic math.

------------------
stop posting my damn signature

 

And Dr. of Dunk, didn't mean to diss all of your hard work in SQL.

Although neither Player A nor B are likely to exist, I'm sure Player A is at least one standard deviation closer to reality than B.

None of that is the point though--my point is simply that Mobley is still jacking up a lot of shots, but he really isn't scoring a whole lot more than he used to. Rudy knows Mobley is a high percentage offensive threat now, and he knew it then. This thread was moving away from the point, and nobody can take a thread farther off topic than Dreamshake when he doesn't like the content. I simply wanted to get things back on track.

------------------
stop posting my damn signature