Reeves once again saved the Lakers, with 35 points in the game and 9 points in the fourth 11 penalty and 13 points in a single section. It was the “superstar” who relied on the line at the critical moment when the Lakers won “. It is no exaggeration to say that without Reeves, the Lakers should win at least 3 games less after all-stars. If so, the play-off will definitely be out of the question.
Reeves had such an outbreak, but it was still a little omen. I once said that Reeves was “the right man”, and he had a good mind to make choices at both ends of attack and defense, it can maintain ultra-high efficiency (the real hit rate exceeds 70% in 4 months this season and the help-loss ratio exceeds 2 in 5 months). Although it is the first time in my career to increase the round share to more than 30% like today, Reeves does not need to digest a lot of ball rights when he is in a team with no shortage of ball resources, it was his own job to do things well in the right way and delicately. When “super giant” saves the life of the core dog, it is just a small business hobby.
The increase of ball rights and the increase of team trust must be one of the reasons why Reeves released his potential. Last season, Reeves held the ball for 2.53 seconds at a time, with 1.75 games, and this season increased to 3.37 seconds and 2.48 games. By March this year, these two data increased to 4.70 seconds and 4.38 seconds. What is this concept? Reeves’s position was upgraded from a ball-free point that occasionally dealt with the ball to the guard level, giving him more time to think and make decisions.
Of course, this is not the focus of everyone’s attention.
The discussion about Reeves will inevitably divide into two directions. Most people will accept one thing:
Reeves is a smart young player who has learned the skills of making fouls smoothly. He can not only frequently go to freethrow line, but also feed back other offensive methods, then he developed his mediocre physical talent to the extreme. Everyone will agree with this.
The dispute occurs after the above conclusion is approved:
So, how much of this is affected by the “misjudgment?
First, the conclusion is as follows:
Depending on the position, it is impossible to discuss the results.
Data can indeed help us make judgments to some extent. On January 28, 2023, the number of penalty shots for the Lakers changed in this way:
Before January 28, the Lakers were punished for 24.6 hundred rounds, and the Lakers were punished for 21.7 hundred rounds;
After January 28, the Lakers received 27.5 penalty for one hundred rounds and 19.2 penalty for one hundred rounds.
The Lakers own 100 rounds of free throws rose 2.9 times, and the opponent’s free throws dropped 2.5 times.
Did you find enough evidence?
The answer is No. The reason is that there are too many factors that affect the number of free throws. It is not that we can draw a conclusion simply by controlling variables. Has the defense configuration, defense strategy and execution, attack mode and players’ ability to make free throws changed before and after? There are too many variables for yourself, opponents, and it is difficult to consider them all.
In addition, taking January 28 as the boundary, 76 people took 24.4 free throws in the previous 100 rounds, and then increased to 28.9, an increase greater than that of the Lakers. Since then, the Nuggets opponent has taken 24 free throws in the previous 100 rounds and 21.3 free throws later, with a larger drop than that of the Lakers. It can be seen that in a single season, it is not the Lakers’ own phenomenon that the free throw numbers of themselves and opponents rise and fall. However, the Lakers accounted for both, and the Celtics’s opponents were very suitable. After January 28, more than 3.6 goals were fined in 100 rounds, which would make people feel that things were not that simple.
We don’t have enough time to analyze the situation of all teams one by one, only talking about the Lakers. Here are three important differences that cannot be ignored:
Before January 28, heavy eyebrows attended 27 games and missed 23 games. After January 28th, heavy eyebrows attended 20 games and only missed 3 games. The attendance rate was much better than before. Judging from the past resume, heavy eyebrows have a significant impact on the number of fouls at both ends of the attack and defense. Considering the defense style of the Lakers, which is the second-to-last defense style of the league with the ability to make mistakes this season, it seems that it can further explain that the Lakers have less free throws;
Although James’s attendance before January 28 was much better than that after, his influence on foul-related figures was not strong;
Reeves received 2.9 free throws per game before January 28, and 5.6 free throws per game after January 28, with 2.7 differences per game. In fact, the difference in the number of free throws alone basically determines the difference in the number of free throws before and after the Lakers.
So, what is the relationship between the match with Celtic and Reeves’s free throw number? Did the misjudgment public opinion on that day cause Reeves’s free throws to soar, or did his personal free throws soar cause the illusion that the Lakers made profits after January 28?
This is a chicken or egg.
To be sure, making free throws was originally Reeves’s stunt. Last season, the frequency of his shooting fouls exceeded 95% of the players in the same position. This season, his authority has been continuously improved with the deepening of the season, which is what we mentioned earlier. Positioning upgrade is the premise that free throws cannot be ignored.
But Reeves’s current 20.1% shooting foul frequency is indeed ridiculously high, which is comparable to Butler’s level. If you only look at the level of 3 months, you will be slightly ahead of Butler-note, butler’s free throws in March were already at the burst level-in fact, Reeves was the king of free throws in March, and he could get 0.828 free throws per shot. Among the players who shot more than 20 times in March, he is the first.
Is Reeves really strong to this extent?
If you don’t recognize the free throw performance handed over by Rives in the recent period, you can verify it like this:
Study all the shooting foul videos obtained by Reeves (see which month you want to find out) and Circle those parts that you think are problematic;
Strictly identify according to NBA shooting foul blowing penalty standards;
This is just the beginning.
The blow penalty in the game occurs in an instant, but the actual time required to ensure the accuracy of the blow penalty is much longer. You can refer to the time spent by the challenge to look back at the video. Then, wrong judgment and missed judgment almost necessarily exist and exist in large quantities, and the referee report in the last 2 minutes of the competition is not enough at all. If you want to confirm whether the penalty is fair, you can’t just look at whether the shooting is really foul, but whether the accuracy of the penalty is consistent for both sides in a game. That is to say, if you want to study Reeves’s free throws, you must study the penalty for each blow of all Lakers matches. This takes a lot of time.
After the study, you cannot simply sort out a statistical result, because no one can confirm whether your result is false. You need to sort out a long “blow penalty report” and sort out the relevant pictures, rules and your analysis and interpretation into the report. Since this report will not be officially admitted by NBA, the fans have no time to look at it carefully, and the fans who look at it have different understanding of the rules. As a result, in addition to proving that you have used your heart, when quarrelling online, you can make a louder voice, but you still can’t get credible results.
This is why most Ball reviews rarely talk about whistle. Even if you realize some problems with years of experience in studying videos and data, you can’t find enough evidence, so you have to “never have any suspected crime”, the analysis is based on the assumption that NBA games are relatively fair under large samples. In fact, whether it is fair or not is not a problem to be solved at this level.
So, after writing so much, what is the truth to prove?
Let’s look at a set of data:
12.6,11.8,11,10.8,8.5
What is this?
This is a possible free throw for a 5-player group this year. They are ranked 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 9th in the average free throw list this season. The 9th Buddy is usually regarded as a whistle and has many free throws. I can’t imagine that he is just a younger brother in this combination. In the 20-21 season, the league averaged 21.9 free throws in 100 rounds. After adjusting the scale, the number stabilized at 22.1 times in the 21-22 season. This season, the number has risen to 23.7 times. The league made up its mind to rectify the atmosphere. The effect just made everyone more familiar with the rules and practiced the posture of making free throws more standard.
The reality is that it is good to make free throws, and it is difficult for you to restrict people from thinking about it. Inspired by the demonstration of top stars, this skill will become more and more important. For many stars, this is already a link in their offensive logic chain that cannot be hidden. Without this link, their logic chain is not closed.
When I arrived at Reeves, the biggest shock was that the threshold of “building” was further lowered. The number of free throws that O’Neal could hand over in the past, a white handsome guy with no difference in running, jumping, body shape and confrontation, can also be realized by the threat of the CIC and the sense of timing. Therefore, as an important component of aggressiveness, “building”, together with the CIC and passing ball, constitutes the closed logical chain of Reeves. “pull open and let me” will no longer become the privilege of gifted men.
If I have a choice, I prefer a league where “Free throws are only violated because of shooting” rather than “shooting for freethrow line. There is also an undeniable fact that the historical giants who are still active in the alliance became famous first because they have a historical skill, instead of just assembling a set of commendatory keywords of modern basketball on the assembly line. For top stars, even if the ground was full of sixpence, they should look up at the moon.
But for a talent show that tries its best to gain a firm foothold in the league, what posture do you care if it can be mixed up?
This is good.