A lot of conversation lately regarding Terrence Ross has been regarding his inability to play at a consistent level. So I was wondering, what should be the normal level of "ups and downs"? Young players are known for fluctuating performance, and there is no one stat that can really be used to track performance. So while I would love to do a much more in depth analysis of multiple statistical categories for multiple players, that is simply beyond what I am willing to undertake at this point.
That said, one thing that a player can "control" regardless of everything else going on in the game, is their FG%. I looked at 3rd year wings, and tried to see how far from their season average, would a typical single game fluctuate. So using each player's season average as the baseline, I tracked how often their night's FG% would end up in one of four ranges: .050 below, .100 below, .050 above, .100 above (5% or 10%). The 5 players that I choose, all averaged more than 25 MPG in their 3rd year and all played the wing position. All of them were primarily starters, with James Harden being the lone bench guy.
Now since there would be some statistical overlap (5% is included in the 10% figures), I'm primarily focusing on the two "extremes" - a really good night and a bad night.
Based on the figure, Ross has a 20% chance of shooting 35.2% or worse, and a 15% chance of shooting 55.2% or better.
Ross - Season Avg FG% 45.2% (0.452)
50 Below: 40.00%
100 Below: 20.00%
~
50 above: 25.00%
100 above: 15.00%
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Harden came out with a perfect 27.42% (17 games of each) chance of either dropping or improving his FG% by 10%.
James Harden (3rd year - 62 games) Season Avg FG% 49.1%
50 below 32.26%
100 below 27.42%
~
50 above 38.71%
100 above 27.42%
~~~~~~~~~~~
Klay Thompson is 25.93% below by 10% and 22.22% above by 10%.
Klay Thompson (3rd year) Season Avg FG% 44.4%
50 below 35.80%
100 below 25.93%
~
50 above 34.15%
100 above 22.22%
~~~~~~~~~~~
Fournier (through 22 games) is an even 28.57% of either 10% change.
Evan Fournier (this year is his 3rd year) Season Avg FG% 43.8%
50 below 52.38%
100 below 28.57%
~
50 above 38.10%
100 above 28.57%
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Afflalo was an even 29.27% of either 10% change.
Afflalo (3rd year) Season Avg FG% 46.5%
50 below 39.02%
100 below 29.27%
~
50 below 34.15%
100 below 29.27%
So what do all these numbers really mean? Well, the evidence suggests that while Ross is the least likely to greatly exceed his normal shooting % (15% was the lowest amongst the compared players), he is also the least likely to greatly underperform (20% was the lowest). He is much more even keeled at this point, which is really the definition of consistency.
Now, this is a small sample size, but things so far seem more on track for consistent shooting than accomplished scorers like James Harden and Klay Thompson. Yes, there are other factors to consider (role, teammates, etc) but if a player can consistently shoot the ball, then everything else becomes easier.
**Of note, of the 5 players compared, Harden and Afflalo had better FG% than Ross (which means that Ross is shooting more efficiently than Klay Thompson did in his 3rd year).
So while Ross needs to consistently play defence, hustle, rebound, etc; it is at least reassuring to see that his shooting is very consistent and at a high level.
That said, one thing that a player can "control" regardless of everything else going on in the game, is their FG%. I looked at 3rd year wings, and tried to see how far from their season average, would a typical single game fluctuate. So using each player's season average as the baseline, I tracked how often their night's FG% would end up in one of four ranges: .050 below, .100 below, .050 above, .100 above (5% or 10%). The 5 players that I choose, all averaged more than 25 MPG in their 3rd year and all played the wing position. All of them were primarily starters, with James Harden being the lone bench guy.
Now since there would be some statistical overlap (5% is included in the 10% figures), I'm primarily focusing on the two "extremes" - a really good night and a bad night.
Based on the figure, Ross has a 20% chance of shooting 35.2% or worse, and a 15% chance of shooting 55.2% or better.
Ross - Season Avg FG% 45.2% (0.452)
50 Below: 40.00%
100 Below: 20.00%
~
50 above: 25.00%
100 above: 15.00%
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Harden came out with a perfect 27.42% (17 games of each) chance of either dropping or improving his FG% by 10%.
James Harden (3rd year - 62 games) Season Avg FG% 49.1%
50 below 32.26%
100 below 27.42%
~
50 above 38.71%
100 above 27.42%
~~~~~~~~~~~
Klay Thompson is 25.93% below by 10% and 22.22% above by 10%.
Klay Thompson (3rd year) Season Avg FG% 44.4%
50 below 35.80%
100 below 25.93%
~
50 above 34.15%
100 above 22.22%
~~~~~~~~~~~
Fournier (through 22 games) is an even 28.57% of either 10% change.
Evan Fournier (this year is his 3rd year) Season Avg FG% 43.8%
50 below 52.38%
100 below 28.57%
~
50 above 38.10%
100 above 28.57%
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Afflalo was an even 29.27% of either 10% change.
Afflalo (3rd year) Season Avg FG% 46.5%
50 below 39.02%
100 below 29.27%
~
50 below 34.15%
100 below 29.27%
So what do all these numbers really mean? Well, the evidence suggests that while Ross is the least likely to greatly exceed his normal shooting % (15% was the lowest amongst the compared players), he is also the least likely to greatly underperform (20% was the lowest). He is much more even keeled at this point, which is really the definition of consistency.
Now, this is a small sample size, but things so far seem more on track for consistent shooting than accomplished scorers like James Harden and Klay Thompson. Yes, there are other factors to consider (role, teammates, etc) but if a player can consistently shoot the ball, then everything else becomes easier.
**Of note, of the 5 players compared, Harden and Afflalo had better FG% than Ross (which means that Ross is shooting more efficiently than Klay Thompson did in his 3rd year).
So while Ross needs to consistently play defence, hustle, rebound, etc; it is at least reassuring to see that his shooting is very consistent and at a high level.
Comment