Post Game Playoffs - Vegas League vs Blazers

Found out my local sushi place has NBA TV.  Damn.  There goes my food budget this year...

1.  Too bad about Smart.  Probably won't need surgery (I hope) but he's done for the summer.  That's a good thing.  It gives Thornton etal more minutes.  I thought we played better after Smart left too.  He made some nice drives for layups, I liked those a lot, but he went back to his chucking 3 pointer ways soon after.  We were in cruise mode and his long distance heaves gave them the opportunities to close the gap.

2.  Rozier showed me something last night.  He's been showing me his speed, his crossover and his defense all along, but last night he showed me he could be Mr. Clutch.  His last 7 points were ice water in his veins.  He drove his man back on a half penetration on the left side and then stepped back for the 14' jumper.  He knew where he was going and how to get his man where he wanted him the whole time.  Then, after seeing that worked, he came back and did the exact same play again.  His last three points were a heavily contested 3 pointer.  He wanted the ball, he took the shot without fiddling around with it too much, without taking too much time off the clock and sank them all.  Those were BIG shots, real momentum breakers.  He also was 7-8 from the line.  He hasn't played like a classic point guard, so far, but he has played better and better every game he has been in.

3.  Whenever there was a time out I'd go out to the Game On thread and read what others were saying (it's a pain writing long stuff from my phone, so I usually don't even try).  People were pointing out RJ Hunter's court vision, which is excellent, but his shooting was very bad last night and, what is MUCH worse his man, Ra'shad James, scored 20 points in 20 minutes.  James is 6'1", so I cannot explain why Micah Shrewsberry had Hunter guarding him (Rozier was locked up with Frazier) but James was taking off on every Celtic shot and was getting fast break layup after layup after layup.  RJ could not, did not, keep up with him.  Not in the front court neither.  A clear mismatch there that was not taken advantage of by Hunter by taking the much smaller James inside.  Once again I ask "lack of strength and weight by Hunter?".  9 points on 1-8 by Hunter.  Ugh.  He was the team high assist man with 4, so he was floor generaling, but 3 TOs too.  I'm more concerned with his failure to mark James than I am with his shooting.  We all know, by now, the kid can shoot and every shooter has off nights.  Ray Allen set an NBA record for 3 pointers in a Finals game and then couldn't throw the ball in the Pacific from the Santa Monica pier the next game.

4.  The last time we played Portland Noah Vonleh didn't play and I didn't like that because I wanted to see how Mickey went up against real talent and last night we got it.  I thought he was doing ok until I saw Vonleh had 20 points.  He also had 6 fouls.  Mickey had 13 points and 11 boards and 1 block.  He was on the plus side of ball handling, with 2 assists and only 1 TO, while Vonleh was the opposite.  Vonleh, surprisingly, had zero blocks.  Tough matchup for Mickey, against the taller (6'10" vs 6'7"), longer (9'0" standing reach vs 8'10"), heavier (248 lbs vs 238#) Vonleh, but that's what he's going to be looking at night-in-and-night-out in the regular season.  All in all, not bad against someone who was a #9 crap shoot pick and has a year of NBA experience under his belt.  It's easy to rave about filet mignon when you've been dining on ham and eggs, it's another to still feel good about it when you're comparing it to a comparable or even better cut of meat. Early on, Mickey just flat out laid Pat Connaughton out on a pick, I mean, he just dropped him flat. Connaughton might want to reconsider his decision to play basketball instead of baseball (he was drafted by the Orioles). He might get hit with a 95 mph fastball, but he went down like Mickey was a Louisville Slugger. If Cowens was watching the game and saw that he probably started giggling uncontrollably. I know I did, and I was in a restaurant. The sushi chef kept looking over his shoulder at the TV to see what could be SO funny about a basketball game. You know how much smaller the players are, in general, in summer league when 6'4" Pat Connaughton looks big enough to be a forward. NOT a good night for Connaugton.

5.  For a guy who is supposed to be such a great shooter James Young is one horrible shooter.  Another wasted opportunity for Young to prove he belongs, not just on the Celtics but in the NBA.

6.   Rozier and Hunter together took more ftas, 15, than the entire Portland Trailblazer team, and they were 13-15.  After repeatedly projectile vomiting throughout the playoffs at the poor free throw shooting (not just Jordan and Howard but Iggy and Marcus Smart and the usually extremely reliable Brandon Bass) I like seeing people hitting playoff free throws, and this is the playoffs for these newbies.

7.  A quiet night for Holmes and Fair.  Holmes had 6 fouls (not that it matters in summer league) and never got it going.  5-12 combined for those two.  

Nope, it was the Terry Rozier show last night, with Mickey valiantly trying to hold the fort down low.

There's an old truism (which I could have made up myself a long time ago) that says that "the better your summer league team is, the worse your regular roster is, and vice versa".  The idea behind it being that teams that are already good, like the Spurs, don't need to audition good talent because they don't have any roster openings while lousy teams need to find help.  If this is true, then the Boston Celtics are going to suck next year because this summer league team is pretty good.  I think this is going to be the year where "the exception proves the rule" will kick in.


bob


.

Great write-up. Just a few thoughts:

Holmes had a quietly good game. 2-2 from 3, raising his 3pt% to somewhere around 60% for summer league, or something nuts. 2 steals and a block also, but 6 fouls.
8 points on 5 shots, and a +/- of +24 in the game.

Young redeemed his poor shooting by getting to the FT line 5 times and making 4. 9 points on 8 shots is solid enough. He looked pretty comfortable out there which was a relief. +/- was +5 in the game, as opposed to RJ Hunter's minus 19 for the game.

Celtics were minus 2 before Smart went down with injury. He did start missing some 3s, but he hit his first one as part of his 7 point scoring barrage to start the game.

Thornton actually didn't play point guard in college, so despite looking fairly solid in a PG role in Summer League, he's basically playing out of position. Which is impressive, because he still has a lot of room to grow as a pg. It just might be in Europe this year.

film clip courtesy of rambone:






bob



.

I actually thought Young didn't look comfortable out there. The one time he tried to go to the hoop, he got swallowed up and heaved a very wild shot.

+/- means virtually nothing when evaluating an individual player. There's no way of determining how much of the +/- is due to the other four players in the combinations he played with. +/- has value only in evaluating 5-man combinations.

It's true that this may have been Hunter's worst game since #2 of the Utah Summer League. Obviously 1-8 is not a good shooting night. And he did get beaten several times on defense by James. But I was more impressed with his floor game than at any other point in either Summer League. And I was equally impressed about how he was a contributing part of the unit that closed out the game.

How do four made three throws "redeem" Young's 2-8 shooting any more than six made free throws and some outstanding floor play redeem Hunter's 1-8 shooting?

I still like Thornton. Neither he nor anyone else who played PG for the Celts last night collected many assists. But, based on what you say about his position in college, and on watching his instincts on the floor, I'm optimistic in his ability to learn the position. I like a PG who is always in attack mode, and that describes both Rozier and Thornton. They don't race down the floor only to stop and dally at the arc.

Sam

Sam wrote:How do four made three throws "redeem" Young's 2-8 shooting any more than six made free throws and some outstanding floor play redeem Hunter's 1-8 shooting?

Sam, I'd turn that question around and ask you how Hunter's 1-8 shooting redeems him any more than Young's 2-8 shooting and much more solid defense.

They both got to the FT line and redeemed their bad shooting nights. That's what getting to the FT line and making the freebees does. It increases the production and efficiency of players who may or may not be shooting well from the field.

A big burst of Young's production happened when NBATV was interviewing Evan Turner, with the split screen making it harder to I.D. players. In the game thread you mistakenly attributed a very savvy move by Young to Rozier. Young pump faked, got his man in the air, and jumped into him and drew two FTs. You praised the play, but thought it was Rozier. Then the next time up the court, Young had a really nice lefty floater that went in, though it happened during split screen and was difficult to identify the player.

You mentioned the drive Young had when he seemingly put up a wild fading layup, but that play easily could have been called a foul and put Young at the FT line. So while it was a bit wild, it was aggressive, and that aggressiveness helped him get to the FT line 5 times.

I'd say an average game for Young, but that's better than we've seen from him, and it's definitely a step in the right direction.

Young didn't get repeatedly torched defensively like Hunter did, and while Hunter had some highlight passes, he also turned the ball over 3 times.

I'd say the play between the two players was a draw at best for Hunter, though it was probably Hunter's worst game and Young's best. Hunter is still clearly the better player to my eye.

Young, like Hunter, was on the floor down the stretch, and he was the one who passed the ball to Rozier for the big 3.

bobheckler wrote:film clip courtesy of rambone:






bob



.

At 2:05 is Young's nice floater

here's a crappy video of the last couple minutes of the game


James Young actually caused a turnover defending the inbounds pass, but it was quickly overturned, wrongly in my opinion.

FTs help redeem a bad shooting night the same way 3 pointers can help redeem a bad FG%. If a guy shoots a lousy 3-12, but the buckets he made were all 3 pointers, then his 9 points on 11 shots isn't disastrous.

And if another night he shoots 0-12 but makes 10 free throws, that's an even better night than the three 3 pointers night. And that 10 points on FTs while going 0-12 from the field is no worse than shooting 5-12 for 10 points. In each case, it's 10 points on 12 shots. If anything, it's better to get those 10 points on FTs, because it puts other players and the opposing team in foul trouble.

PPS (points per shot) is a pretty good way to measure overall scoring efficiency. Here's the NBA leaderboard:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/field-goals/sort/scoringEfficiency/count/41

Here's what Terry Rozier did after the game.  He made his 'special sandwich' on ESPN.

Not sure I'd want him designing my menus.






bob



.

Terry Rozier vs Trail Blazers at Las Vegas Summer League - 19 pts

Rambone,

First, reread my post and you'll see that I never said or intimated that Hunter's free throws redeemed (I prefer the rd "offset") his missed field goal attempts.

The reason I'd disagree with the theory that free throws offset poor field goal shooting is that a lot of missed field goal attempts have dire consequences that extent beyond the absence of two or three points.  Long rebounds frequently lead to opponents' fast breaks.

Moreover, free throws don't replace missed field goals.  They're not taken instead of missed field goals.  They are made in addition to missed field goals.  It could be argued that, if Young had made three more of the field goals he missed, he'd have wound up with 15 points rather than 9.  That's a net loss of points. The six field goals Young missed, and the seven field goals Hunter missed represented (aside from the possibility of offensive rebounds) six or seven empty possessions respective. Empty possessions, with all their implications, can't be made up for by free throws taken later.

And I agree; I hate those split screen interviews.

Sam

rambone wrote:FTs help redeem a bad shooting night the same way 3 pointers can help redeem a bad FG%. If a guy shoots a lousy 3-12, but the buckets he made were all 3 pointers, then his 9 points on 11 shots isn't disastrous.

And if another night he shoots 0-12 but makes 10 free throws, that's an even better night than the three 3 pointers night. And that 10 points on FTs while going 0-12 from the field is no worse than shooting 5-12 for 10 points. In each case, it's 10 points on 12 shots. If anything, it's better to get those 10 points on FTs, because it puts other players and the opposing team in foul trouble.

PPS (points per shot) is a pretty good way to measure overall scoring efficiency. Here's the NBA leaderboard:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/player/_/stat/field-goals/sort/scoringEfficiency/count/41

I dont quite agree since 2 FTs are generally (unless it is and 1) the same as another shot/possession. So 0-12 + 10/10 from FT is generally speaking more like a 5/17. This is assuming they dont count shots that dont go in when being fouled (which I dont think they do but I might be wrong).

Your "Offset", vs my "helped redeem", sounds like you're splitting hairs. What are we debating?

Call it "helped redeem" or call it "offset", who gives a shit? The guy just scored two points, while giving the other player and team a foul.

Sam wrote:The six field goals Young missed, and the seven field goals Hunter missed represented (aside from the possibility of offensive rebounds) six or seven empty possessions respective.

You put offensive rebounds in parenthesis, but obviously offensive rebounds happen to what, 25-30% of shots, right? That's more than a parenthetical detail.

Calling a missed shot basically an empty possession (aside from offensive rebounds) is like calling a blocked shot a change of possession (aside from the times when it isn't).

By framing things, you can pick your favorite player in any given game, state that he had an outstanding game, and then put everything else in parentheses.

In the first summer league game, I believe it was, Smart scored 26 points on 20 FGAs, but you wanted to discount the quality of his game by emphasizing his low FG% while discounting that he got to the FT line like 13 times and made like 12 of them.

But let's look at this FG vs FT comparison.

A missed FG is only an empty possession some of the time. A made FT is a productive possession 100% of the time.

Player A shoots 5-10 from the field and finishes with 10 points.

Player B shoots 0-10 from the field but 10-12 from the FT line.

Who had the better game? Did either have a bad game? Did either have a good game?

It probably depends on how good of an offensive rebounding team you have. A quick check seems to indicate that the best offensive rebounding teams get 29-30% of their missed shots, while the worst rebound about 20% of missed shots. In either case, a significant fraction, and not just a parenthetical possibility.

Player A missed 5 out of 10 shots. Let's say for simplicity that he plays for the worst offensive rebounding team, and that his team only gets one of those rebounds. That's four empty possessions.

Player B missed all 10, and his team, worst offensive rebounding team in the league, gets two of those 10 rebounds (20%).

I'm not sure what % of missed shots result in easy layups on the other end, but I don't think it's all that high. Let's say it 20%.

Player A - 4 lost possessions, 2 points scored on easy layup

Player B - 8 lost possessions, 4 points scored on easy layups at the other end.

However, player B created the equivalent of 5 or 6 productive possessions by getting to the line 6 times and making 10-12 FTAs.

Player B created those 10 points out of thin air. They call them free throws but you have to earn them first. Player A didn't earn a single one of them, and didn't put any foul pressure on the other team.

Player A - 4 lost possessions, 2 points scored on easy layup

Player B - 8 lost possessions, 4 points scored on easy layups at the other end. 5 lost possessions offset/redeemed by making 10 FTs (out of 12 FTAs).
8-5 is 3 lost possessions, plus 4 points for the other team from long rebounds.

But Player B also drew 6 personal fouls. That's beyond my capabilities to mathematically calculate the value of in a vacuum, but it does have real value that isn't always appreciated, until an opposing starter is sent to the bench early in the first half with two fouls, or gets ejected from a close game in the 3rd of 4th quarter, or the opposing team goes into Bonus and your team gets free throws on every non-shooting foul.

I'd say it's pretty much a toss-up between Player A and Player B, but the edge could easily go to Player B depending on who he was drawing fouls from and in what context.

All told, both scored 10 points on 10 FGAs, which puts them a little below league average, which is somewhere around 1.1 or 1.2 points per FGA.

But neither had a terrible game by any means, and neither did much better than the other.

Rambone,

No need to get testy.  I mentioned that I prefer "offset" only to let you to that, by using "offset," I was talking about the same thing you were when you used "redeem."  I wasn't splitting hairs at all.  Simmer down.

You said: "A missed FG is only an empty possession some of the time. A made FT is a productive possession 100% of the time.  You're comparing apples and oranges to contrast a missed FG with a made FT:

A made field goal is a productive possession 100% of the time.  (Plus the possible bonuses of its counting for three points or drawing and and-one foul.

A made free throw is a productive possession 100% of the time but without the bonuses.

A missed field goal is an unproductive possession 100% of the time, pending offensive rebounds.

A missed free throw is an unproductive possession 100% of the time, pending offensive rebounds (which I believe are statistically less likely than offensive boards on field goal misses).

you said:

"Player A shoots 5-10 from the field and finishes with 10 points.

Player B shoots 0-10 from the field but 10-12 from the FT line.

Who had the better game? Did either have a bad game? Did either have a good game?"

I suppose one way to look at a basketball game is to think of it as an accounting ledger.  Two points scored one way are the same as two points scored a different way.  However, I believe basketball is a lot more intricate than a ledger.

For example, the fact of scoring two points via field goal is psychologically more uplifting for the scoring team than scoring two points via free throws.  That's a primary reason why players are coached not to concede baskets—especially on dunks and breaks—so as not to infuse the opponent with a psychological energy spurt.  Free throws can slow down the momentum of a team, even if it's the team that's taking the free throws.

Similarly, a missed field goal can really take the starch out of a team that just worked hard to get a stop.  Field goals are rewards.  For the most part, free throws are consolation prizes.

For related reasons, field goals contribute to the rhythm of "runs" much more than free throws do.  Stoppage of play dampens the momentum of runs.

Moveover, the field goal is the staple of basketball.  Attempting field goals is the primary objective of the game.  Free throws are more of a fall-back situation.  Teams usually set up offensive plays designed to score field goals, not free throws.

I have no idea what you're talking about when you bring parentheses into the conversation.  I used parentheses simply to acknowledge that the effect of missed field goals could sometimes be obviated by offensive boards.  (The same could be true for missed freebies.)  I did not use the parentheses to place a value on anything, as you seem to infer.

I agree that neither had a terrible game, but I believe Hunter (with all his pluses and minuses) had greater impact on the win than Young (with all his pluses and minuses), and Hunter looked much more authoritative out there.

Sam

Sam wrote:Attempting field goals is the primary objective of the game. Free throws are more of a fall-back situation. Teams usually set up offensive plays designed to score field goals, not free throws.

You might want to let the NBA know that the primary objective of the game has changed.

The top scorers and top scoring teams have been doing it all wrong.

rambone wrote:

Sam wrote:Attempting field goals is the primary objective of the game. Free throws are more of a fall-back situation. Teams usually set up offensive plays designed to score field goals, not free throws.

You might want to let the NBA know that the primary objective of the game has changed.

The top scorers and top scoring teams have been doing it all wrong.

Rambone,

Are you saying the top scorers and scoring teams DO NOT prioritize fgas and fgm over ftas and frms?

bob


.

I'm saying a point is a point, and the primary objective in basketball is to score the most points. And the leaders in FTs made are usually much the same as the league leaders in scoring. And the team that makes the most free throws often wins the game.

Not only that, but attacking the rim and drawing fouls is often an integral part of the game plan, especially if the other team has a valuable big man they want to get in foul trouble.

And rather than being psychologically damaging, or whatever, many coaches view attacking the rim and drawing fouls to be a form of toughness and aggression, of dictating the game.

Because more often than not, the team who leads in FTs wins the game.

Rambone,

I apologize if I'm misinterpreting what you say, but your last post to me seems to suggest that the primary objective of NBA teams is to score free throws rather than field goals.

If that were true, why (in 2014-15) did the 30 NBA teams average 6,852 field goal attempts and only 1,873 free throw attempts?  Or, if you prefer to consider only made shots (because shooting percentages are higher with free throws), the 30 teams averaged 3,076 made field goals and only 1,405 made free throws.

As I suggested earlier, field goals are the primary rewards or objectives, and free throws are the consolation prize.

Moreover, I don't believe I received an answer to my question: Since the free throws taken by Young and Hunter weren't taken as substitutes for the missed field goal attempts, how could the made free throws have compensated for the missed field goal attempts? The free throw attempts were taken in addition to the field goal attempts; and the scoring total of each player would have been greater if he had hit a higher percentage of field goal attempts plus hitting the free throws. Hitting free throws didn't negate, in any way, shape or form, the poor field goal shooting and the empty possessions all or most of those field goal misses caused.

Sam

Sam, why don't you re-read the first sentence again?

arambone wrote:I'm saying a point is a point, and the primary objective in basketball is to score the most points.

A point is a point is a point is a point is a point.

Team with the most points wins.

Let me know if you're still confused with my really simple point, and if the primary goal of basketball still eludes you.

consolation prize. Give me a break.


Q: "who won the game last night?"

A: "Oh, the Bulls had the most field goals"

Q: "Yes, but who won the game?"

A: "Oh, you mean who scored the most points? Why didn't you say so? The Pacers scored the most points, and won the game. But that's just a consolation prize. The Bulls scored the most field goals."

Q: "Who gives a shit?"

Picking up fouls has the advantage of forcing the opposing coach to consider pulling a key player and replacing them with an inferior player.  Also, when teams are in the penalty the other team has the opportunity to shoot fritos and make it less likely they will have a completely empty possession.

An 80% frito shooter has a 64% chance of hitting both shots (Sam, please check me on this).  So, one could argue that a 64% chance of two points is better than a 44% chance with a fga.  This does not take into account fatigue.  However, a fga taken at the rim has a higher than 64% chance of going in.  It also has a higher chance of including a foul for a plus 1 than a 3pt fga has of both going and earning a trip to the stripe, with or without the +1.  My point is that, while fritos don't change, fgas are very variable and are therefore hard to compare to fritos.  Given the choice between a layup, even a contested one, and a contested mid-range fga, I'm going with the layup.  Aside from the obvious "duh" factor, the layup forces the defense to play excellent defense, pick up a foul or allow the VERY high percentage shot while a mid-range shot, even if uncontested, is not as good and if the shot is contested at all the odds go down and the defense knows it.  As a result, they know they don't need to foul the shooter, just turn it into a 40% shot from 50% shot by putting a hand in their face.  Aggressiveness increases fg% by getting you shots closer to the basket.  It also often increases ftas, but that's not because ftas are better, more preferred or coached for more than fgas but because they are a side benefit caused by making the defense work harder just to break even.  Saying that teams prioritize ftas over fgas makes no sense to me.  If that was true the Dwight Howards, DeAndre Jordan's, Omer Asiks and other horrible free throw shooters would be out of jobs since their skill sets are in direct opposition to the team's priorities, free throws.

Here are the top free throw attempters/game last season:

James Harden - 10.22
Russell Westbrook - 9.76
DeMarcus Cousins - 9.17
LeBron James - 7.81
DeMar DeRozan - 7.05
Jimmy Butler - 6.95
Anthony Davis - 6.90
Kobe Bryant - 6.9
Dwight Howard - 6.6
Blake Griffin - 6.4


Here is the list of field goal attempters/game last season:

1.  Russell Westbrook - 22.0
2.  Carmelo Anthony - 20.2
3.  LaMarcus Aldridge - 19.9
4.  LeBron James - 18.5
5.  James Harden - 18.1
   DeMarcus Cousins - 18.1
7.  Anthony Davis - 17.6
8.  Dwayne Wade - 17.5
9.  Blake Griffin - 17.1
10. Chris Bosh - 16.9

There seems to be quite a bit of overlap between top fgas and top ftas.  Why?  Perhaps because shooting earns you fritos, not the other way around.  Is being clever and creating and playing through contact earn you a chance at additional points?  Yes, but if you don't shoot, you don't get those chances.  Therefore, fgas must be the priority with ftas being the secondary benefit of them.  Non-shooters do not shoot a lot of fritos.  Coaches load up the floor with good good frito shooters ONLY when time is running out and the opposing coach has no choice but to foul, NOT all the time because that's their priorities. Put simply, if you asked any coach which he'd rather have, a dunk (which is a fga) or two fritos, what would he say? The dunk, obviously. Therefore, unless every coach is cognitively dissonant, their priorities are and should be fgs, specifically higher percentage ones but taking whatever the defense will give them, and not fts.

To be clear, a shot that does not go in (or is scored because of a defensive goal tend) but has a foul called is NOT counted as a fga.  If you take a shot, are fouled and the ball does not go in but you get two fritos, your boxscore will look like 0-0 from the field and x-2 from the line.  So, shooting 0-8 means you missed 8 shots.  If they are long shots, that probably creates long rebounds which creates opportunities for the other team to run a fast break.  If you take 10 ftas and hit 8, for 8 points, you could argue that those 8 points are the same as 4 fgas and therefore that 0-8 is the same as 4-8, but it isn't.  Those 8 missed shots are empty possessions.  If you want to say those 10 ftas represent 5 opportunities to produce 2 points each, so 5 possessions, then you'd have to say you are 5-13, because those 5 additional possessions are in addition to the other 8, not instead of.  Bottom line, a missed shot is a missed shot and since you don't count the missed shots that earn you fritos, the missed shots that don't earn you fritos don't just go away.

And there is a emotional aspect to shooting.  KG didn't allow shots taken after the whistle that were not part of continuation to go in specifically because he didn't want the shooter to feel good about watching his ball go in without earning it.  He said that, that's not me saying it.  RJ Hunter had a horrible first couple of games in Utah and then the ball went in a few times and suddenly he started shooting like he had all those years at Georgia State.  How many times have we seen a Celtic who is normally a good frito shooter go the line and brick a few and then suddenly every Celtic who goes to the line starts bricking theirs?  If that's not an emotional reaction, what is it?


bob


.

bob wrote: Saying that teams prioritize ftas over fgas makes no sense to me.

Nobody's saying that. I'm just saying a point by FT is just as valid as a point by FG. It's not a consolation prize.

Scoring the most points is the primary goal of basketball. How did something so simple get forgotten here, replaced by "the primary goal of basketball is FGs".

And FTs are an important weapon in basketball.

Note, please, please, please, that I didn't say THE MOST important weapon in basketball. I said AN important weapon, highly valued by most of the best scorers.

As your list of FTA leaders makes obvious.

Players often make drawing FTs central to their offseason training goals. They add muscle, and practice aggressively attacking the rim and drawing fouls. All.Summer.Long. With the full support and encouragement of their coaches and training staff.

Because the goal in basketball is to score the most points, and FTs are just as valid a form of points as anything else.

Most of the best scorers in the NBA, when they pump fake a guy up in the air, jump right into their man to draw the foul and go to the FT line.

They don't just fade away and avoid all contact, in hopes of a better chance of making their field goal. And their coach claps, teammates high five, and the announcers praise the savvy move of drawing the foul.

Nobody shakes their head and talks about the psychological damage of missing the FGA, or the psychological victory of the defensive team.

Give me a break.

It's fine to have a strong preference for how you like to see points scored, but it's another to declare other forms of scoring points as less valid, or less valuable, or psychologically damaging, or disruptive.

I think the main point of contest was your claim that Young scored 9pts on 8 shots when it is in practice 9 points on 10 (just guessing since he had 5 fta so I am guessing it is either 2+2+1 or 2+3) possessions. FTs/fouls have added benefits and drawbacks too but you can not just count FTs as "free points" since they are a part of the possibilities to score and not on top of those (generally speaking).