CSL Shooting Tendencies

[Marcos_Beck]

CSL Shooting Tendencies

Today we’re here to discuss a bit about CSL franchise’s shooting tendencies, how they compare to the NBA and hopefully provide a little bit of information for you guys to adjust however you want to

For this article, I’ll be using a recent study I did comparing NBA and CSL tendencies, which couldn’t be more different. In case anyone wonders how it was done, simply compared all shots during CSL’s most recent season and NBA’s most recent full season (21-22), which represented over 210000 shots for each league, a very respectable sample.

CSL basketball is played in a more old school way. There’s a lot of post ups and most of the shots are within 10 feet from the basket, which shows how post dominant the league is. Even point guards, who should be running the show from above the break, are taking more than half their shots either at the post or at the rim.
Also, it’s worth pointing out that league wide, shots from 3-10 ft are almost doubling attempts at the rim (0-3 ft), which is no good given conversion rate at the rim is much higher (58 to 43%, a 15% swing).

The mid range is indeed a lost art both at CSL and NBA. Jumpers represent no more than 20% total attempts in each league, with a very similar conversion rate. There’s not much to be said here as advanced stats have shown mid range shots, specially closer to the three point line (ranging from 16 to 23 fetter, the so called long two) is by far the least efficient shot in basketball, as it’s worth only two points, has a lower conversion rate than any other two pointer and also hardly generates any contact and free throw attempts. It’s still a great weapon that complements great scorers and makes them even more unpredictable, but you have to either shoot very well or use them as part of a much bigger scoring bag for them to be worth taking. In fact, if you look at role players, they barely take any shots from that distance, and this tendency should only grow as the importance of three point shooting and spacing grows around both leagues.

Talking about 3 point shooting, there has been an explosion of shots from further distance in the NBA which is yet to be seen in CSL. In fact, with roughly the same amount of shots analyzed (211k CSL to 217k NBA) real life teams have more than doubled our league rosters when it comes to attempts from downtown, which remains true even when you take away 6k threes from NBA to equal both league’s shot attempts. NBA FGA ratio for threes is also, much, much bigger than CSL (45% of shots taken in the NBA are threes, compared to 21% in the CSL). Our league has the upper hand in accuracy (37.5 to 34.5, a very respectable 3% difference) which should point out to more and more shots from deep with the snipers we have around here, but that doesn’t happen.

You don’t have to have a degree in maths to understand why NBA teams are taking more threes: 3 is worth more than 2. It’s also very easy to explain a 33.3% shooter from deep equals a 50% shooter in the paint (excluding free throws that can be more easily drawn for paint lovers), and that more shooters letting it fly provides more spacing for drives to the basket. That’s already been talked about over and over in many articles, yet CSL doesn’t go away from the post to a more actual, perimeter oriented style.

In fact, we can compare points per shot in the CSL and NBA and it’s another stat that points out to letting it fly more often from the perimeter. In CSL, every post shot (0-10 range) produces 0.96 point per shot. Every mid range shot (10-23 ft) accounts for 0.80 point per shot, while threes are worthy 1.12 points per shot. In the NBA, using the same ranges, post shots produces 1.15 point per shot, jumpers goes for 0.83 point per shot and threes are worth 1.03 point per shot.

All in all, due to improved spacing, much better rim / post ratio (while in NBA players shoot 24% of their shots at the rim to 19.5% from the post, in CSL players shoot almost twice more from the post, exposing a difficulty to reach the rim on drives) and way better finishing at the rim (68.7% to 57.2%), it’s actually worthy to go inside in the NBA, which makes defenses collapse and leads to more open threes, which increases volume.

But in the CSL, while it’s been proved that a three is really worth more than any kind of two, teams simply don’t instruct their players to take advantage of catch and shoot or pull up situations from the perimeter.

Comparing Lonzo Balls can show how big of a difference there is in both leagues and help explaining how NBA tops CSL in TS% by a full 5% margin.
Both Lonzos shot around 42% FG last season, however NBA’s Ball posted a 57.5 TS% (well above CSL’s average of 52.5%) while CSL’s couldn’t get above league average at around 48%. Three point volume, better finishing at the rim and a way lower number of post shots help explaining such big difference.

What can be done on those matters?

Maybe it’s time to surrender to the modern era and let it fly, creating more efficient offensive squads? Or will the old school basketball, just because being on the post teorically increases the number of shots taken, continue to rule the league?

With all that data provided (if you want more, shoot me a PM with questions and if I have the answer I’ll answer back), what can be done to bring modernity to CSL?

[Silogical]

Good data

You cant change pass pref/scoring or pass so you cant just make players shoot 3's unlike the NBA.

FG_MID is very low across the board so the game is ideally only played at the rim and behind the arc.

Its not that easy to get to the rim so we have to settle sometimes for the inefficient 3-10 foot shots.

Strategy wise the game would be better if FG_MID was better. It would be interesting to see the average floor locations for all players with 20+ minutes.

[Marcos_Beck]

Good data

You cant change pass pref/scoring or pass so you cant just make players shoot 3's unlike the NBA.

FG_MID is very low across the board so the game is ideally only played at the rim and behind the arc.

Its not that easy to get to the rim so we have to settle sometimes for the inefficient 3-10 foot shots.

Strategy wise the game would be better if FG_MID was better. It would be interesting to see the average floor locations for all players with 20+ minutes.

Basically what you mean is that if players (specially guards) had lower pass pref they could shoot more from deep?
Because we all know people are putting guards on the post so they shoot more often. Not that it’s efficient but at least it does help with scoring.

But if that’s a possible fix, what would it do to players instructed to post up? Would it end up in even more post shots? IDK, just thinking about it.

It does make sense that with lower pass pref, players could shot more threes, specially from above the break. However, how to not break the game with even more post play?

We’re in a tough situation bc post play isn’t efficient so it could be better yet it’s basically the meta (or the way to go) because it’s the only way to make players shoot….
So if you boost post play, you need to actually nerf how much it happens somehow lol
That’s really really tough

[Silogical]

Post = RA = efficient and easy to get volume
3-10 = not efficient and easy to get volume
mid = not efficient and easy to get volume
3's = efficient and not easy to get volume

looking at that it makes sense the game is nothing but post and as much 3's as you can get. The Heat in a nutshell.

Buffing 3-10 and Mid would give us more strategic options. Mid more so than 3-10, Mid is critical for balance.

[Dennis]

RA most guards suck as well and barely can shoot >50% in here. Culver is the legend of the league because he’s one who can shoot inside the arc out of the guards/wings we have.

[Silogical]

RA most guards suck as well and barely can shoot >50% in here. Culver is the legend of the league because he’s one who can shoot inside the arc out of the guards/wings we have.

The reason fox doesnt shoot as well from the rim as the other guards is because he takes almost twice as many shots as the other guards. Forcing shots inside reduces your %. Spreading it out like culver does increases your %. Fox has the potential to spread it out but he is forcing it inside. It is still way more efficient scoring at the rim than mid range.

The PG bug is gone or reduced so we should be allowed to lower our pass pref to as low as 70% if we want. That will solve a lot of problems, but that would be up to the admins. Also raise catch and shoot cap, its too low.

[bt]

I've mentioned this a few times before and I know not everyone agrees with me but allowing mass changes has messed up a lot of what's written above. I blame the game not being able to handle it but we still go with it, etc.

Unless you go to a simple set for each position (PG = max 10% post, SG = max 20% post, etc), it will always be skewed because we allow changes that the engine can't cope with. Send your PG to the post and bigs should eat them alive but the game engine can't handle that so small players can effectively get it done inside. Wish they were punished for going down low.

I wish Porter would have manhandled the 6'6" Bird during the Finals a lot more but game limitations and all that.

[hardenwithnod]

I believe Culver is shooting 50% plus is because he's one of the rare guards where he has a 47-49 paint/FGI rating, which relates to the 3-10 ft shooting range. He also has a high rim/FG_RA rating, and a high mid range rating as well. He's pretty much the ideal guard for this post focus engine.

I believe guys like Taylor, Fox, or any other previously "more efficient" guards don't translate as well is because they don't have that high FGI rating, instead they relied on high dunk in the previous engines.

[emplep7]

This is great Marcos and your work so far will contribute to any changes we would ever make towards the file, but as Ryan stated they would need to be tested heavily to see what impact they may have on the overall dynamic of the league since shooting ratings/preferences are the most powerful rating relationship that is built into the engine.

Great work so far Marcos!

[Silogical]

I wish Porter would have manhandled the 6'6" Bird during the Finals a lot more but game limitations and all that.

He averaged 35 against one of the best defenders in the league, that seems pretty good. Porter also has low post/post up, if he had max post/post up he probably wouldve manhandled him.

[bt]

6'6" with 74 defense, 74 steal, 77 discipline, 74 IQ, no blocking. That shouldn't slow him down and 35 is decent but he can do that on anyone really. I expect more from Porter or the engine even with his current floor range set to be honest but back to the point, I wish guards manhandled a little more in the engine if they decide to go inside.

[Dennis]

RA most guards suck as well and barely can shoot >50% in here. Culver is the legend of the league because he’s one who can shoot inside the arc out of the guards/wings we have.

The reason fox doesnt shoot as well from the rim as the other guards is because he takes almost twice as many shots as the other guards. Forcing shots inside reduces your %. Spreading it out like culver does increases your %. Fox has the potential to spread it out but he is forcing it inside. It is still way more efficient scoring at the rim than mid range.

The PG bug is gone or reduced so we should be allowed to lower our pass pref to as low as 70% if we want. That will solve a lot of problems, but that would be up to the admins. Also raise catch and shoot cap, its too low.

You can test offline that spreading the floor actions doesn’t help inside %s. Actually, preseason also showed that because many tested it there.

[Dennis]

I believe Culver is shooting 50% plus is because he's one of the rare guards where he has a 47-49 paint/FGI rating, which relates to the 3-10 ft shooting range. He also has a high rim/FG_RA rating, and a high mid range rating as well. He's pretty much the ideal guard for this post focus engine.

I believe guys like Taylor, Fox, or any other previously "more efficient" guards don't translate as well is because they don't have that high FGI rating, instead they relied on high dunk in the previous engines.

Yep, this

[Silogical]

You can test offline that spreading the floor actions doesn’t help inside %s. Actually, preseason also showed that because many tested it there.

Just did a test

your inside fox vs my perimeter fox

I gave my fox these shooting ratings
ra 45
itp 40
mid 40
cor 37
atb 37

your fox
22.9 pts/36 52.3 TS%
my fox
20 pts/36 54.8 TS%

only a 2.9 pt loss but more efficient. Im sure there is some in-between that would lead to the best results. Compare that to Simmons who was supposed to benefit from this engine.

simmons
26.1 pts/36 52.4 TS%

If fox gained just 3.3 points/36 he'd be better than Simmons.

[Dennis]

Did you rebuild the roster? It doesn’t help if you don’t have the full roster. As the post focus in the team determines FGA not the scr. Or to be precise, scr and pass pref only secondly.

And of course he will have a higher TS if he shoots more threes. We are talking about FG2% ITP though and not about TS%. I can also turn him into a 9pt dennis smith clone that only shoots 4 3s per game and checks out at 60*% TS. Won’t help scoring at all though. On top you re missing RIM and DUNK rate which are super important. Next to that fox is ~37/38 FGITP 40 is too high if looking at old database/scouts.

I can see why you are pushing for FGJ improvements. However, we barely had a guard/wing shooting >50% around the rim/layups etc. So I would even find it more unrealistic if we move up FGJ to 45%+ but guards cant hit the layup from 0-3 or a J/paint move from 3-10 in more than 40% of the cases. Current shootings are just really off.

[Silogical]

I just dont want to see 0-3 buffed. Its already correct to to get 5 players attacking the rim. Buff it more and team building will die. Tactics will be useless.

3-10 getting buffed would be fine.

So I would even find it more unrealistic if we move up FGJ to 45%+ but guards cant hit the layup from 0-3 or a J/paint move from 3-10 in more than 40% of the cases. Current shootings are just really off.

almost open lay-ups are being hit at 90%, lay-ups with a 7 footer trying to block your shot is being hit at 45-55%. I dont think guards should be taking 4+ shots from 0-3 but if they do they shouldnt hit more than 50%.

[Dennis]

I just dont want to see 0-3 buffed. Its already correct to to get 5 players attacking the rim. Buff it more and team building will die. Tactics will be useless.

3-10 getting buffed would be fine.

So I would even find it more unrealistic if we move up FGJ to 45%+ but guards cant hit the layup from 0-3 or a J/paint move from 3-10 in more than 40% of the cases. Current shootings are just really off.

almost open lay-ups are being hit at 90%, lay-ups with a 7 footer trying to block your shot is being hit at 45-55%. I dont think guards should be taking 4+ shots from 0-3 but if they do they shouldnt hit more than 50%.

Dont get me wrong. Not really looking for everybody to shoot 90%. Im more interested in guards/wings able to shoot better inside and overall again be more in the 45-50% FG range if they arent shooting too many 3s. Driving guards/wings are right now efficient when are at 41/42% FG% with mostly shooting inside.

I believe we are basically talking three different problems here.
1) Shot amount is linked to post usage. Hence, we see too many guards going to the paint -> potential solution: Can we change pass pref?
2) Inside 0-3 3-10 most guards/wings are shooting super inefficient (yet also too much, I agree). -> we need to boost Inside Shooting
3) FGJ area got completely abandonned because no one wants to get his guys there as barely a player can hit >40% and there it is the worst spot to be in on the court.

I think we have the same opinions here. Just are talking too many challenges at the same time so that we mix it up a bit.

[Dennis]

double post lol