---

     LeBron James is the best player in the world. That may be obvious to
     anyone who has watched basketball over the past few years, but for some
     reason it's hard to find many statistics to support this claim. Back
     when Michael Jordan ruled the NBA, he would commonly lead the league in
     points per game; Chamberlain and Russell put up insane rebounding
     numbers; Kareem Abdul-Jabbar is the league's all-time leading scorer.



     James recently joined those giants as one of the five NBA players to win
     four MVP awards. Despite that impressive feat, his dominance is not
     reflected in conventional basketball stats. Somehow a vast majority of
     the game's most oft-cited statistics obscure the greatness of the game's
     greatest player. James shines in terms of Win Shares and PER, but those
     stats only vaguely describe what makes him so good. They fail to
     highlight any particular element of James's performance. In fact, many
     of our most common metrics imply that other players are more effective
     or more efficient than James.



     Last season, DeAndre Jordan led the NBA in field goal percentage.
     However, consider the following ridiculous statistical couplet:

     上一季，DeAndre Jordan在投籃命中率上領先全聯盟。然而，思考一下下面兩個誇
     張的數據。

     No player scored more points close to the basket than LeBron James last
     season.

     上一季LeBron James的籃下得分是全聯盟最多。

     No player converted a higher percentage of his shots near the basket than
     LeBron James last year.

     上一季LeBron James的籃下命中率是聯盟最佳。

     http://ppt.cc/TdTq

     Think about that. Not only did he outscore every player in the entire
     league within the NBA's most sacred real estate, he converted his shots
     at the highest rate, too. As a whole, the NBA made 56 percent of its
     shots in that area last season; James made a staggering 72 percent of his
     637 attempts there. Despite this unreal scoring prowess, James trails
     inferior interior scorers in field goal percentage.



     Few people would argue that Jordan is a more efficient scorer than James,
     but according to field goal percentage, that's exactly what he is. Jordan
     led the NBA in that category, shooting 64 percent, while James managed
     only 57 percent.1 Although it can be useful to know which players convert
     field goal attempts at the highest and lowest rates, that doesn't really
     tell us much about scoring effectiveness.



     Some players, like Steve Novak, shoot lots of 3s; others, like Kevin
     Garnett, rely on 18-footers; DeAndre Jordan works almost exclusively in
     the paint. Players like Jordan almost always lead the league in field
     goal percentage. The problem is that while NBA players have different
     roles and different shooting habitats, almost all of our shooting
     evaluations ignore that.



     http://ppt.cc/TKj2

     Anybody who has ever played H-O-R-S-E can tell you that some shots are
     easier than others; a layup is easier than a free throw, which is easier
     than a corner 3. This basic tenet is almost entirely overlooked by our
     most popular shooting metrics. Similarly, NBA players are all special,
     and over the course of a season each player generates his own unique
     "constellation" of shot locations. This is also overlooked; the graphic
     above demonstrates that the LeBron James constellation is considerably
     different from the DeAndre Jordan constellation.


     Jordan的投籃區域有著巨大的差異。

     We can improve our shooting metrics by accounting for court space and the
     unique natures of players' shot constellations.


     Jordan's was 2.8 feet. Essentially, through the hazy lens of FG
     percentage, James is penalized for having a jump shot, while Jordan is
     rewarded for not having one. Despite being a very good 3-point shooter,
     a good midrange shooter, and the most dominant interior scorer in the
     game, James trailed players like DeAndre Jordan and JaVale McGee in a
     crucial scoring metric.



     What the hell?

     搞屁阿！

     While it's tempting to claim that our stats are "advanced" now, think
     about these two basic questions:
       1. Who is the best shooter in the NBA?
       2. What metrics would you use to justify your answer to this question?

     雖然稱呼我們的數據為「進階數據」是件誘人的事，先想想這兩個基本問題：
       1. 誰是NBA現役最強得分手？
       2. 你用什麼去來證明你的答案是對的？

     When it comes to shooting stats, one would think there would be a
     spreadsheet somewhere on the Internet that delineates "great shooters"
     like Stephen Curry and Kevin Durant near its top, and "bad shooters"
     like Monta Ellis and Josh Smith at the bottom. But there's not. We still
     rely on hunches and vague reputations to make our assertions about "pure
     shooting" skill in the NBA. Amid the chatter of an ongoing revolution in
     basketball statistics, the notion that we still can't effectively measure
     shooting ability is troubling — but it's also correctable.



     The issue is, almost every NBA player's overall FG percentage will always
     have more to do with where he shoots than how well he shoots.


     The inconvenient truth is that every NBA field goal attempt has its own
     level of difficulty that's determined by several factors, including the
     shooter's location on the court. Even though previous approaches have
     mostly ignored this thorny reality, thanks to relatively new forms of
     NBA data we can now begin to understand it.



     Last year, NBA players took just about 200,000 shots. The league's
     collective shot chart reveals the spatial nature of the NBA's average
     shooting efficiency. By itself, the chart shows the stark relationship
     between court space and expected points per shot — that's why 3-point
     shots are rapidly increasing in popularity while midrange shots are
     diminishing.



     http://ppt.cc/O8ms

     But this chart also provides a useful baseline that we can use to
     evaluate individual shooting performances. By overlaying players' shot
     constellations, we can estimate the expected total number of points that
     an average NBA shooter would produce, based on where he took his shots;
     then we can compare a particular player's actual yield against it.



     For example, last season LeBron James attempted 1,354 shots. Using that
     league-wide baseline as our guide, if an average NBA shooter attempted
     this exact same set of 1,354 shots, he would produce a yield of 1,397
     total points.

     舉例而言，上一季LeBron James出手1,354球。以聯盟基準來看，假如是一位NBA平
     均的球員出手這1,354球，他總共會得到1,397分。

     http://ppt.cc/PatG

     James actually yielded 1,628 points from that constellation, 231 more
     than expected. No player accumulated more points than expected than
     James. By accounting for the fundamental relationship between court
     space and NBA shooting averages, we can see which players scored the
     most and least points above expected levels in the NBA. And we can
     figure out which players are actually the most effective scorers in
     their native shooting habitats.



     Along with Ashton Shortridge, a professor at Michigan State, I did this
     analysis for every player who took at least one shot during the 2012-13
     regular season. We refer to the difference between a player's actual
     point yield and his expected yield as ShotScore. For good shooters this
     number is positive; for bad shooters it is negative.

     和一位Michigan州大的教授Ashton Shortridge一起，我作了至少投了一球的每位
     。好的得分手的數字會是正值，反之差的得分手是負值。

     James came out on top, and is joined in the top three by a pair of elite
     shooters.Highest ShotScores in the league:

     James最優，和另外兩位優質射手成為排行榜前三位。聯盟最佳ShotScore：


     These are three very different players with unique scoring strengths.
     Each accrues point surpluses in different spaces. Unsurprisingly, most
     of James's gigantic surplus comes close to the basket, where he puts up
     those freakish numbers.

     這三位不同的球員有著獨特的得分特長。每位都能在不同區位產生分數剩餘。不意
     外的，多數James的大量剩餘來自於他產生變態數據的籃下，

     http://ppt.cc/XGdW

     Kevin Durant is also quite good near the basket, but he's more active
     and even more deadly from the outside than James. In a normal era, Durant
     would likely be the most effective scorer in the league, but we're not in
     a normal era — we're in the LeBron era. Still, Durant is an elite
     shooter from virtually every spot on the floor.



     http://ppt.cc/TpSu

     He is so good that the weaknesses on his shot chart are the spots where
     he's only slightly above NBA average. That's crazy. Curry is a better
     perimeter shooter than both James and Durant, but he can't match their
     abilities near the basket, where he's actually a below-average NBA
     scorer. Still, thanks to his insane jump shot, Curry accumulates points
     at unusually effective rates.



     http://ppt.cc/RBUz

     Calculating ShotScore for outside shots only (eliminating the inside
     shots) reveals the great "pure shooters" in the NBA. It should come as
     no surprise that Curry comes out on top. Last season, the Warriors guard
     took 1,120 shots outside of 7.5 feet; these shots resulted in 1,247
     points, or 195 more points than expected. League-wide, in terms of
     ShotScore for outside shots, Curry leads a top five that also includes
     Kevin Durant, Jose Calderon, Kyle Korver, and Dirk Nowitzki.



     These are players who already enjoy great reputations as shooters, but to
     this point there hasn't been a metric that has certified their superior
     status.

     這些球員已經是以射手著名，但至今還未有數據證明他們高人一等的地位。

     Controlling for the number of total shots taken helps further refine the
     idea. Jose Calderon had the highest ShotScore per outside shot. Calderon
     led the league with a +25 ShotScore per 100 outside shots, indicating
     that he accumulates 25 percent more points than would an average NBA
     shooter for every 100 outside shots he takes. This is especially
     impressive considering Calderon was playing for a pair of middling teams
     last season.



     As it turns out, of the 162 NBA players who attempted at least 300
     outside shots last season, only three of them accrued more than 20 points
     above expected values per 100 shots: Calderon, Kyle Korver, and Steve
     Nash, who despite his broken-down body still managed to put together
     great shooting numbers. Interestingly, many of the names on the list
     below are not frequent shot creators, but when they do get shots they
     are extremely accurate relative to their peers.



     Top 10 Outside Shooters Per 100 Shot Attempts
     每一百次外線出手最佳10位射手


     So does this mean that Jose Calderon is the best shooter in the NBA? No,
     it means that when Calderon shoots it's a beautiful thing. We all know
     that the NBA isn't just a catch-and-shoot league; it's also very much a
     create-your-own shot league. Some NBA players, like Novak, only thrive
     in those catch-and-shoot scenarios, while others, like Stephen Curry,
     Dirk Nowitzki, and Kevin Durant, constantly create their own chances off
     the dribble or in the post. These differences are reflected partly in
     the volume of shots guys take every year, and relative to players like
     Curry, Nowitzki, and Durant, Calderon is not a very creative shooter.



     I find it interesting that Jeff Van Gundy likes to refer to Novak as the
     "best pure shooter" in the NBA. The numbers don't back up that claim.
     Suggesting that a player like Novak is a better shooter than Curry,
     Durant, or Nowitzki is just as foolish as saying that DeAndre Jordan is
     a more efficient scorer than LeBron James.



     How efficient would Curry or Durant be if they just camped out on the
     perimeter and took catch-and-shoot jumpers a few times per night?
     Unfortunately for their efficiency numbers, these guys also toil inside
     the arc and take tons of shots off the dribble. Conversely, how bad
     would Steve Novak be if he tried to do this at the end of a playoff game?



     NBA shooting prowess involves much more than just spotting up.


     We have to consider more than just field goals made versus field goals
     missed. The ShotScore approach begins that process by introducing the
     fundamental role of court space into the equation, but it by no means
     ends it. I am not suggesting that this is the most important new
     statistic in the NBA, but I do believe it clarifies which players
     regularly make or miss baskets at higher rates in their native scoring
     zones. Emerging data sets will enable this process further. For example,
     the SportVU data set allows us to additionally consider the openness
     of a particular shot attempt; after all, a wide-open 15-foot jump shot
     is a lot easier than that identical shot with Larry Sanders lunging at
     you.



     One of the hallmarks of good NBA teams like the Heat and the Spurs is
     their ability to regularly create wide-open looks; many great shooters
     in the league aren't fortunate enough to play in such a scheme, and
     their numbers suffer as a result. For instance, there's no question that
     Danny Green has made great strides as a spot-up shooter, and his
     performance in the 2013 NBA Finals was incredible. But how much of his
     emergence is due to that beautiful Popovichian orchestra down in San
     Antonio? He wasn't getting those looks back in Cleveland when he was
     released.



     This is an exciting time for basketball analytics, but as is often the
     case, deep explorations into performance often provoke more questions
     than answers. It's still tempting to assert that NBA analytics are
     advanced now, but the truth is that we will look back at the current
     state of affairs the same way baseball nerds look back at the batting
     average and RBI era. These players give us so much; the least we can do
     in return is come up with an accurate way of appreciating them.




原文網址－
http://tinyurl.com/qf3ett4



心得：

      相當優質的數據文
      前文撲梗的道理其實大家都懂－命中率的謬誤
      作者提供一個相當棒的方法來更接近真實的比較

      裡面最讓人覺得奇妙的就是Curry
      最讓人期待也是他
      能想像他將三分線內的出手選擇和命中率再提升的話
      那會是多可怕的事!!!!

      不意外的榜上有名的都是知名射手
      上季38的Nash還能維持這種手感真令人佩服

      必須要再強調說這篇文真的很優質
      因為作者很強調出手方式不同會導致這數據被錯用
      即使可以引用這數據不同進攻模式的球員還是不能一起比較
      而不同戰術體系的影響亦很重要
      但我想這個問題很難用數據解決

      除了作者提到的「被防守干擾」與否外
      我自己認為這個數據如果能在配上「受助攻」與否來看的話
      將會更提升!!!!


      (歡迎轉載，但轉至站外請標明原作者和出處，感謝)


--
新手NBA外電翻譯+數據分析部落格

http://mola79321.pixnet.net/blog

歡迎來討論!!!

--
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 124.218.28.55

想請問文意理解上的錯誤在哪，麻煩你指正了
畢竟錯誤百出讓我有點訝異

你的耐心指正是我進步的最大動力


謝謝ioms大耐心給建議
另位關於他實在...那句其實我想過很多，也對照Curry數據看
我認為他的意思是
「Curry三分太誇張了，所以他其他弱項其實不慎突出，居然只超過聯盟平均一點
，就有第三名的ShotScore」
不只到理解有沒有問題
我也覺得我那句翻很爛XDDDD


果然也有人覺得是承接Durant，我當初看也是這樣覺得!!!
可是這樣擺段落真的很怪XDDDD

※ 編輯: idiotsmart      來自: 124.218.28.55        (10/12 08:22)

--