Explanation for low shooting percentages in early NBA

Like real basketball, as well as basketball video games? Talk about the NBA, NCAA, and other professional and amateur basketball leagues here.

Explanation for low shooting percentages in early NBA

Postby dwayne2005 on Mon Jan 14, 2019 10:01 am

Average FG% per year in the first few seasons in the BAA/NBA:

1946-47: 27.9%
1947-48: 28.4%
1948-49: 32.7%
1949-50: 34.0%
1950-51: 35.7%
1951-52: 36.7%
1952-53: 37.0%
1953-54: 37.2%
1954-55: 38.5%
1955-56: 38.7%

Any number of theories: talent pool (there is some evidence to suggest this as FT shooting increased from 64.1% to 74.5% during the same stretch), lack of a jump shot so hands in the face had more impact, more physical, poorly run plays, lack of shot clock caused less of a rhythm, even a notion that players shot from greater distances with footage from the '30s showing some players lobbing it up casually from back court before there was a mid court rule because an offense used up the entire court. But when looking over the stats for korfball, another idea came to me. Korfball is an early 20th century basketball derivative. It is like a faster paced and slightly more entertaining netball with some additional intrigue including significant play area behind the basket, fade away jumpers, layups, and mixed genders (so you can meet some girls and some of them look pretty good to me). It was my first time looking up korfball stats. I expected to see 10 columns of stats but I think I saw something like 3, with one appearing to show goals. There were no shot attempts, no shooting percentages. This is pretty much like how stats were kept in basketball before the NBA: they didn't care about shooting percentages, how many goals players and teams got was all that mattered. The efficiencies in how the sports were played were largely immaterial.

Could the use of stats have changed the game? 1947-48 was probably the first time any of them had seen their shooting percentages. A 10% difference in field goal shooting to us is huge, but an eye test has to be fine tuned to 1 more miss or hit every 10. Worse if you're looking at efficiencies of 5%, which requires us to detect which players are scoring 1 shot more or less in every 20 attempts. A general perception could easily be wrong and led to the wrong filtering of talent. Better shooters may have been overlooked because biases of prejudices took over so percentages may have resulted in a slow, but gradual improvement (and also explained the increase in free throw shooting).

It is also possible the game ball may have been a factor. Molded balls were invented in 1942 but it seems (unless this source is incorrect) they weren't officially adopted until the 1949-50 season. So stitching may have affected shooting or affected dribbling which in turn affected shooting.
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:00 pm

Re: Explanation for low shooting percentages in early NBA

Postby Andrew on Wed Jan 16, 2019 5:59 pm

I think it's safe to say that they didn't really care about field goal percentages. The object is to put the ball in the basket and they attempted to do it, efficiency be damned as long as it went in more often than their opponent. I'd also suggest the sport was still developing and evolving, especially as a professional spectator sport.
NLSC Webmaster/Administrator
Contact: Email | Twitter
Release Topics: NBA Live 08 | NBA Live 07 | NBA Live 06 | NBA Live 2005 | NBA Live 2004
Story Topics: NBA 2K19 | NBA 2K13 | NBA Live 06 (Part 2) | NBA Live 06 (HOF) | NBA Live 2004 (HOF)
NLSC: Podcast | The Friday Five | Monday Tip-Off | Wayback Wednesday | 20th Anniversary of NBA Live | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube

Support The NLSC Hosting Fund: Patreon | GoFundMe

Like my work? Want to help out with the NLSC Hosting Fund? Please consider leaving a tip!
User avatar
The One Admin
Posts: 106909
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2002 8:51 pm
Location: Australia

Re: Explanation for low shooting percentages in early NBA

Postby dwayne2005 on Thu Jan 17, 2019 5:50 am

Jumpin' Joe Fulks was one of the ballsiest go getters (read: ball hoggers) inefficient players. He set early milestones, including I believe 63 points in a game that lasted for about 10 years before Elgin Baylor and then Wilt Chamberlain broke it. I don't believe that 63 point game was inefficient (he was 27/56 from the field, so just below 50% which at the time must've seemed more like 70%).

FG% (FGA p/game)

1946-47: 30.5% (26.0)
1947-48: 25.9% (29.3)
1948-49: 31.3% (28.2)
1949-50: 27.8% (17.8)
1950-51: 31.6% (20.6)
1951-52: 31.2% (17.7)
1952-53: 34.6% (13.7)
1953-54: 26.6% (3.8)

His numbers broadly didn't keep up with changes with shooting in the league. In fact, it is perhaps evidence the league started to take into account efficiencies as his attempt rate decreased, not necessarily because he shot less (first minutes per game were kept in 1950-51 when it was low 30's, at a time a lot of star players were seeing 40 minutes and sometimes more per game). He was the best example of a badly played first few seasons. He is a bit of the symbol of the whole thing to me.
Posts: 263
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 2:00 pm

Return to NBA & Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: [Q], Exabot [Bot] and 1 guest