Why do so many players have better moving 3's than standing?

[guyshafran]

I can't understand the deal with Moving\Standing shooting ratings, especially 3's.

Check out the Clippers for example, but it's like that in so many teams (Sorted by Moving 3 rating):
Farmar - ST3PT=77; MV3PT=90 (WTF?!)
Turkuglu - ST3PT=75; MV3PT=84
Hawes - ST3PT=89; MV3PT=81
Cawford - ST3PT=80; MV3PT=80

my questions:
1. How come so many guys are better at moving 3's than standing ones?
Jordan Farmar can't be almost 20% at moving 3's than standing.
I think there's only a handful of guys around the league are better at moving 3's than standing. Certainly Jamal Crawford can be considered one.

2. 2K thinks Turkuglu and Farmar are better at shooting moving 3's than Jamal Carwford??? Really??? He's also better than Curry btw.

Same goes for midrange as well. Batum has like 65 in standing mid. So weird....

[stillfeelme]

Quote: Originally Posted by guyshafran

I can't understand the deal with Moving\Standing shooting ratings, especially 3's. Check out the Clippers for example, but it's like that in so many teams (Sorted by Moving 3 rating): Farmar - ST3PT=77; MV3PT=90 (WTF?!) Turkuglu - ST3PT=75; MV3PT=84 Hawes - ST3PT=89; MV3PT=81 Cawford - ST3PT=80; MV3PT=80 my questions: 1. How come so many guys are better at moving 3's than standing ones? Jordan Farmar can't be almost 20% at moving 3's than standing. I think there's only a handful of guys around the league are better at moving 3's than standing. Certainly Jamal Crawford can be considered one. 2. 2K thinks Turkuglu and Farmar are better at shooting moving 3's than Jamal Carwford??? Really??? He's also better than Curry btw. Same goes for midrange as well. Batum has like 65 in standing mid. So weird....

They should be based off stats as of last year. They broke it down by how they shoot off the dribble and spot up. Some people actually shot better off the dribble than being spot up. I wouldn't compare Curry's shooting to anyone unless they both have the same consistency you are comparing apples to oranges and then add he can shoot a high volume of shots there is no comparison

[Vni]

Quote: Originally Posted by guyshafran

I can't understand the deal with Moving\Standing shooting ratings, especially 3's. Check out the Clippers for example, but it's like that in so many teams (Sorted by Moving 3 rating): Farmar - ST3PT=77; MV3PT=90 (WTF?!) Turkuglu - ST3PT=75; MV3PT=84 Hawes - ST3PT=89; MV3PT=81 Cawford - ST3PT=80; MV3PT=80 my questions: 1. How come so many guys are better at moving 3's than standing ones? Jordan Farmar can't be almost 20% at moving 3's than standing. I think there's only a handful of guys around the league are better at moving 3's than standing. Certainly Jamal Crawford can be considered one. 2. 2K thinks Turkuglu and Farmar are better at shooting moving 3's than Jamal Carwford??? Really??? He's also better than Curry btw. Same goes for midrange as well. Batum has like 65 in standing mid. So weird....

Just because the number is higher doesn't mean they are better at taking moving threes. It's two completely different stats.

[guyshafran]

Quote: Originally Posted by Vni

Just because the number is higher doesn't mean they are better at taking moving threes. It's two completely different stats.

What do you mean? The number represents part of the formula (Along with shot contest, momentum etc...). The higher it is, the more likely they are to score?

And obviously some players score better off the dribble, but there's no balance in the game. So many players have better moving shooting than standing. It's not or two guys. and some of the numbers cry out.

[swishfury]

This may include coming off screens not literally moving while shooting the 3.

[Vni]

What I mean is that just because the moving threes stats is higher than the standing still threes it doesn't necessarily mean that they are more likely to make a moving threes than a standing one.

It's two different stats.

edit: Nevermind if it's not clear. I'am just dead tired I might be way off right now.