<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Nichols and Dime: Setting Up the Three: Which Shot Types Do the Best Job?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2009/08/19/nichols-and-dime-setting-up-the-three-which-shot-types-do-the-best-job/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2009/08/19/nichols-and-dime-setting-up-the-three-which-shot-types-do-the-best-job/</link>
	<description>Unbiased opinions from extremely biased people</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 May 2012 16:40:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Nichols</title>
		<link>http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2009/08/19/nichols-and-dime-setting-up-the-three-which-shot-types-do-the-best-job/comment-page-1/#comment-18054</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Nichols</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 10:01:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/?p=3194#comment-18054</guid>
		<description>Baird, although your suggestion has some potential, I would have concerns about the new sample sizes.  As it is we&#039;re looking at a pretty small sample size of 30 observations.  

merl, that is a good suggestion.  It may make sense to only filter out those possessions that are earlier than 10 seconds AND following a turnover...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Baird, although your suggestion has some potential, I would have concerns about the new sample sizes.  As it is we&#8217;re looking at a pretty small sample size of 30 observations.  </p>
<p>merl, that is a good suggestion.  It may make sense to only filter out those possessions that are earlier than 10 seconds AND following a turnover&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: merl</title>
		<link>http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2009/08/19/nichols-and-dime-setting-up-the-three-which-shot-types-do-the-best-job/comment-page-1/#comment-18014</link>
		<dc:creator>merl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 03:09:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/?p=3194#comment-18014</guid>
		<description>If you were going to try and filter out fast breaks, how about setting some arbitrary line in the sand (at say, 10 seconds) and considering shots before then as being on the fast break and shots after them being in the half-court?

Then the inside/outside comparisons would be a bit more meaningful since it&#039;s really the half court sets you are interested in.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you were going to try and filter out fast breaks, how about setting some arbitrary line in the sand (at say, 10 seconds) and considering shots before then as being on the fast break and shots after them being in the half-court?</p>
<p>Then the inside/outside comparisons would be a bit more meaningful since it&#8217;s really the half court sets you are interested in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baird</title>
		<link>http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/2009/08/19/nichols-and-dime-setting-up-the-three-which-shot-types-do-the-best-job/comment-page-1/#comment-17973</link>
		<dc:creator>Baird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2009 18:57:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.hardwoodparoxysm.com/?p=3194#comment-17973</guid>
		<description>The data might not have strong correlation due to the fact that most teams are not built optimally (lack of good shooters/good post players, etc).  If you break the data down by records...say worst 25% of the league to best 25%, would there be a stronger correlation between inside play, or even midrange play and 3 pt% for the best teams?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The data might not have strong correlation due to the fact that most teams are not built optimally (lack of good shooters/good post players, etc).  If you break the data down by records&#8230;say worst 25% of the league to best 25%, would there be a stronger correlation between inside play, or even midrange play and 3 pt% for the best teams?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

