Down one point with about five seconds remaining, Tyrese Haliburton crossed halfcourt with the ball in his hands and I found myself yelling at the TV like a college basketball broadcaster in March, “You don’t need a three here!”
Haliburton drove right and pulled-up just inside the three-point arc for a 22-foot jump shot. If the time remaining or scoreboard had looked different, this might have been a bad shot. Long pull-up 2s just inside the three-point line were among the first shots to be excised when the nerds took over the sport. But in this specific case, his shot selection was good.
The most profound insight that basketball analytics has uncovered to date is that 3 points are worth more than 2. This radical truth has led to a transformation in shot selection across the league. This year, the NBA set a new record for three-point attempt rate, reaching above 40 percent for the first time in history.
As the volume of threes has risen, so too has the league’s overall efficiency. In basketball, efficiency is measured by points per possession (PPP). And while maximizing PPP should be every team’s goal at the macro level, there are certain end-of-game situations where treating PPP as your North Star will get you lost.
Take, for instance, the following end of game situation between the Miami Heat and Detroit Pistons from the regular season. The Heat found themselves in a near-identical situation to the one the Pacers were in last night: down one, with the ball, and less than five seconds to go.
Instead of driving inside the arc for a more makeable shot, Tyler Herro danced with the ball and launched a 29-foot stepback three, which did not go in.
If Haliburton had tried to maximize PPP last night he might have yeeted a step-back three like Herro did vs. the Pistons. It could have gone in. Haliburton is capable of making that kind of high-wire shot. But Haliburton understood the objective, in last night’s specific situation, was to look for a shot that maximized field goal percentage — not PPP or style points. Long 2s might be less efficient in the long run, but they go through the net more often in the short run. Which is all that matters when you’re down one and you only have one shot to finish with more points than your opponent.
Over the last three years, when trailing by one point and less than ten seconds remaining, teams attempted roughly an equal number of above the break threes and midrangers. But they converted on 12 percent of their above the break threes compared to 27 percent of their long 2s1. Which is to say, the league outside of Indiana is probably not enough long twos in these specific end-of-game situations.
It’s worth noting the difference between last night’s situation from the one Haliburton and the Pacers found themselves in against Cleveland and New York in the earlier rounds of the playoffs. In those earlier cases, the Pacers were down two points with the ball. A long 2 might have been more likely to go in, but the best case scenario in those situations would have led to overtime, which is typically seen as a 50-50 proposition. A three on the other hand, would win the game in regulation2, which is why they were more than appropriate in those two instances.
It might not be reasonable to expect teams to fully abandon the three when they’re down by one at the end of the games. Sometimes, that is the best shot you can get when the defense is impenetrable. But I’ve seen enough situations like the one Herro found himself in against the Pistons that I’ve begun to wonder if some players have become so conditioned to hunt threes throughout the course of the game that they’re uncomfortable taking the much maligned long 2 when the situation calls for it.
Perhaps it is not a coincidence that the Pacers ranked 27th in long midrange rate — meaning they took the 4th most long 2s relative to all their shots. It seems plausible to me they were better prepared to execute this specific end-of-game situation than most other teams would have been.
Whatever it was, last night Haliburton and the Pacers demonstrated an understanding that the goal is not just to score the most points possible. It’s just to finish the game with more points than your opponent. Even if it’s just by one more.
the alternative to a midrange attempt isn’t just any three in these situations. midrange attempts are disproportionately self-created so the alternative is more likely to be a self-created three, which disproportionately tend to come from above the break.
the shot against New York was called a two and the Pacers won in overtime
Who the heck is Robert Horry?