<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[The mid-range shot was not inefficient — it was being used wrong]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">The analytics revolution correctly identified that pull-up two-point jumpers from mid-range have lower expected value than threes or layups in isolation. That is true. But it incorrectly concluded that all mid-range is bad. The corner mid-range, the post mid-range, and the pull-up after established ISO — completely different.</p>
]]></description><link>https://spveforpit.com/topic/570/the-mid-range-shot-was-not-inefficient-it-was-being-used-wrong</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Sun, 26 Apr 2026 13:23:18 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://spveforpit.com/topic/570.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 01:29:05 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to The mid-range shot was not inefficient — it was being used wrong on Thu, 23 Apr 2026 01:29:05 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto">The analytics revolution correctly identified that pull-up two-point jumpers from mid-range have lower expected value than threes or layups in isolation. That is true. But it incorrectly concluded that all mid-range is bad. The corner mid-range, the post mid-range, and the pull-up after established ISO — completely different.</p>
]]></description><link>https://spveforpit.com/post/1449</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://spveforpit.com/post/1449</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[midrange_is_art]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 23 Apr 2026 01:29:05 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>