With all due respect - 08:42, 13/10/2015

With all due respect, I still think you are wrong on this issue and it hurts the crbideility of the model when it shouldn't because usage usually changes with changes in skill. That shows up in the model as more wins produced. The rest are lower level changes within the player's existing range. To begin with, it obvious that just increasing shot attempts per 48 minutes does not mean efficiency will change. 1. It depends on whether the player was fully utilized before the increase and how much more you are asking of him. For example, we all know that Lebron James can up his usage from where it is in Miami and remain highly efficient because he's already done so in his career. But could Landry Fields up his usage to Lebron's level and remain as efficient? I'd bet my life against a dollar he couldn't. His efficiency would fall off a cliff. He's a massively less skilled offensive player at this stage of his career (and probably will be forever) . If he could, he'd do it tomorrow and become a max player. 2. Players are constantly working on their game specifically trying to expand their offensive skills set, shooting range etc So when we do see increases in usage, it's often because the player has improved and the team can go to him more often and expect favorable results. That's why there's little or no change in efficiency. 3. While an increase in usage sometimes doesn't have an appreciable impact on a player's overall adjusted fg%, if you compared the adjusted fg% of just the incremental shots to the previous level, the impact would sometimes be much larger and more noticeable.4. Sometimes a system or offense will get more of the same types of shots for a specific player. In that case, he should have no problem staying as efficient despite an increase in usage. 5. Most players have at least a little flexibility to get a few more of the same types of shots they usually get, but great players seem to have a lot more flexibility than lower level players. The bottom line is that every player has a different skill set, different shooting range, different strengths and weaknesses, is often playing in a different system or with different players etc and there is no magic formula that will apply to all players in all situations and tell you how a change in usage will impact their efficiency. That why people observe games, takes notes on shot locations, evaluate athleticism, take an inventory of skills etc and try to assess these things. It isn't a neat mathematical equation (at least this stage). To deny that some players can't increase their usage much without negative impact is to deny something that every young kid understands within a few days of first playing the game. During the first week they understand that layups are easier than jump shots, they can't all get layups all the time, and some kids are better at jumps shots than others etc . So they start distributing things in a way that makes sense. The kid that doesn't is called a chucker and they all get pissed off at him.