It feels like, to me at least, that the mid-range game has completely disappeared from College and Pro basketball. It feels like if the action isn't going to the rim, it is a post up, or a 3-pointer.

The mid range elbow jumper, by and large does not exist.

I think part of this is analytical. The numbers say that the mid-range jump shot is a bad percentage shot. The percentage chance of making it does not justify taking it over a 3-pointer. Given the choice, you'd rather take the 3-point shot because the percentage chance is justified by the extra point.

It does not feel that most offenses (possibly some zone offenses with the short corner and elbow) take advantage or are designed to get the ball into the mid range areas.

I feel that this is a mistake. There are a lot different things that can be done from the mid-range area. But that jumper has to be one of the options. When it isn't utilized, the effectiveness of the drive, the kick, any action attacking the basket is diminished.

We see scoring down in the NCAA. I do not think many teams utilize the mid range game anymore, except out of desperation as the shot clock is expiring (aka pick and roll pull up jumpers).

Does anyone else see what I see? Are the analytics correct about the mid-range two being a bad shot? Or is this one of those cases where the percentages lose out to the actual on-court effectiveness of the tactic?

Should we be making a more concerted effort to bring back the mid-range game into basketball?

Hard to say without seeing some data. I found a sight that has some shot charts of the top teams.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/25111176/ncaa-tournament-shot-chart-analysis-on-top-teams-players

From what I understand, quite a few college coaches have changed their offenses and emphasis to be geared towards lay ups and threes. They see the analytics across the board and know that you score more efficiently by taking those shots. They also try to adjust their defenses to allow the midrange shot but take away lay ups and threes.

The NBA does that at times too (ex: the Bulls ICE the pick and roll giving up the long 2pt shot and the pick and pop).

But I think the NBA is more sophisticated in their analytics because it all depends on the specific player.

Generally speaking, my 10th grade team is the most efficient by far when taking lay ups from the right side. The next most efficient shot is the free throw... followed by a 3 pointer from a wing.

Looking at the shot chart on that link, it looks like they are FG%. I'd rather see EFG%.

Looking at Iowa State, I'd rather take a 37% 3pt shot than a 39% 2pt mid range shot. You'll score at a more efficient rate if you shoot the threes.

I don't know what to think about mid range game when it comes to "offense" and brining it back to make the game better.

I do know that if you want to play a mid-range game, players have to practice it and spend a lot of time working on that. Not many kids are willing to do that on their own. But they will jack up threes in their back yard.

Personally, I try to develop players in all aspects (and all ranges). Then when in high school, I steer them towards what they are good at. I happened to have two 10th grade players this year that had awesome midrange games. They were horrible at threes. So I didn't tell them to stop shooting threes, but I did tell them if they want to get better you have to do what you are good at and do that more than anything else. In other words, take more mid range shots and take fewer threes. Their EFG% ened up really high at end of the season and the 10-17 foot jump shot was a great shot for them.

Back to your question. I think it's all about developing players. I think when you develop shooters, you work on all ranges (start close and work your way back as you area ready). The 5 spot shooting driill where you only move back if you shoot 60% of higher from each spot is great for that.

Thanks for your replies.

I agree about efficiency. I likewise wouldn't want my players taking a 39% effective mid-range shot over a 39% three pointer.

What I do believe is getting lost actually relates to what you had regarding your team: their second most effective shot was the free throw.

When I talk about mid range game, I normally think about elbows and short corners. I do not see a lot of offense designed to get players the ball in these areas. Zone offense will put players in these spots, but I don't see it as a goal of the offense. Conversely, I've heard Geno Auriemma talk about wanting to get his BEST player the ball in the pinch post. Doesn't matter if it is his point guard, center, or whatever position they play, they want to get them the ball in that high post-elbow area.

I can conceptualize some of the results based on what I grew up watching. The Jordan era Bulls teams would run their own triangle sets around getting the ball to their best players (Jordan/Pippen) in those elbow areas. Jordan was very good at hitting the jumper from those areas. Now, he was the greatest player of all time. Obviously he would do very well regardless of where you are getting him the ball. But I do wonder if offense the way it was taught now would utilize his skills as well. As hard as Jordan worked on his game, his 3-pointer was never really the most consistent strength of his game. But he had such great footwork, superior athleticism, and instincts about what to do with the ball, that he destroyed teams from the mid-range area.

Now think about the best player on your team. What could they do from the mid range? What do you run to get them the ball in the areas I just talked about? (Speaking generally, not to anyone specifically).

I do understand the concept of effective field goal percentage. What I do wonder about is what other things can happen off of that mid-range jump shot. Shot fakes and drives. Drives and dishes. One dribble pull-ups. If the opponent respects the mid-range shot enough to challenge it, the other aspects are opened up, and I would say one of those things that will go up will be the opportunity to get fouled.

So while I agree that a 37% two shouldn't be taken over a 39% three, I would want my players to increase their percentage and experience operating from those areas. Using Don's Attack and Counter training, increasing the shooting percentage, and then I'd be much more interested in percentages when the ball gets in that area, for offensive success, and how often fouls are accrued. These are things I'm unsure if the analytics measure.

I completely agree that if you are going to focus on something for your offense, you'd better have your players practice it. I also agree from my own observational anecdotes that players want to practice the 3, not the mid-range two. It is an aspect of the "3 or lay-up" type offenses that are starting to permeate college ball more and more.

I do believe that we need to re-examine the mid-range game and bring it back a little bit more, because with offense starting to gear towards "3 or lay-up", and with defenses gearing to stop it, I think that offense that try to attack the mid-range area's can be effective.

Just spit-balling some thoughts, and I'd love to hear from coaches to pick this apart. I'm not pretending that I'm finding anything radical. I feel it is more about bringing something back that I believe is going away.

Brian, the game has passed you by... Just kidding!

If you can be effective at your midrange game, there is no doubt that it adds an element to your game and would more likely increase the percentages of your lay ups and 3-point shots as it would be more difficult to guard you. Thus, opening up the other areas of your game.

Also, what if you're a 5'10 kid trying to play at a high level. It becomes much more difficult to finish over those giants and athletes in the lane. You better learn to pull up and hit a jumper.

I watched Uconn play a little for the first time during the championship game last night. Am I nuts or were they running quick hitters into the flex offense for a large portion of the game?

Jeff, their high post motion utilizes a rear screen option for any cutter that arrives at the low block without the ball. I didn't get a chance to see all of the game, but at the clinic I saw him at, Coach Auriemma did say he changed some of his system year to year based on his talent.

He ran a bunch of Phoenix Suns stuff one year and ran none this year. With Stewart, Tuck, et al,l, I wouldn't be surprised to see more flex stuff.

What I did see, from about 11 minutes left second half, they still had a lot of high post feed, handoff cut reads, but I know in that offense he uses a flex cut off a low post to wing extended rear screen.