| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
cherokee_ACB
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 157
|
 Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 2:47 pm Post subject: Efficiency in different possession start cases |
 |
|
I've done a study on the average offensive efficiency in different possession start cases, using data from play-by-plays of the Spanish basketball league. You can find it at
http://www.muevetebasket.es/cont.php?id=500
It's in Spanish, so I'll translate the main table here
| Code: |
Possesion start Efficiency
Start of quarter 104.7
2p FG made 107.0
3p FG made 106.9
FT made 108.4
2p FG missed, def. reb. 112.5
3p FG missed, def. reb. 107.3
FT missed, def. reb. 103.2
2p FG missed, off. reb. 124.5
3p FG missed, off. reb. 115.5
Steal 126.8
Non-steal turnover 111.6
Average 110.4
|
This is based on 280 games from last season (18 teams, 31 games per team). In all cases there was at least 1000 possessions observed. I know there's some bias in the data, because the distribution of cases is not the same for all teams, but I don't think it has much impact on the results. The figures for offensive rebounds are the expected offensive efficiency after the rebound was taken. This means those possessions are taken into account both for the OR case and whatever was the true start of the possession.
First thing is, is there any similar study on the NBA? What I've found at 82games.com is only partial data for some cases and they tend to focus on eFG% instead of efficiency.
Now, my comments on the results:
- Not surprisingly, the way your opponent scores (2p, 3p or FT) does not affect your efficiency much.
- But it's a different story if the possession starts with a defensive rebound. Most teams did better after an opponent missed 2p FG. There was a significant exception, though. Sergio Rodriguez's team managed an efficiency of 119 after missed 3-pointers by taking advantage of the excellent rebounding ability of their wing players and their love for the fastbreak. I have to say that in the season before, 2003-04, the efficiency in the 3p case was slightly better than in the 2p case.
- It's easier to put back the ball when an offensive rebound follows a 2 point shot than when the shot is made behind the arc.
- Good defense improves your offense by around 5%. Same in the other way around, good offense improves defense. I love it.
- A steal is a great offensive weapon, more than an offensive rebound.
Last edited by cherokee_ACB on Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:07 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
adandar
Joined: 27 Dec 2005
Posts: 13
Location: Philadelphia
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 3:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting article... I translated it with babelfish.altavista.com for those non-spanish speaking viewers out there.
The high efficiency with regards to steals makes sense because all other turnovers/change of possession instances being equal, a steal that leads to a fast break is one the most efficient offensive opportunites along with an offensive rebound which the data supports. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3605
Location: Hendersonville, NC
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
This really is fascinating.
How about these efficiencies after rebounding missed opponent shots:
After - Eff.
3FGA - 107.3
2FGA - 112.5
FTA --- 103.2
A wide range is seen here. I can only guess that big men miss more FT, and big men force more missed shots. Then, the high Eff after missed 2's may reflect that bigs are taking/missing more of those; but the same guys aren't in such good position to get back on D.
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Almonte
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 616
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 4:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
In the article they got surprised of the higher efficiency after 2p missed than after a 3p missed. Just five of 18 teams were different. They think it must be the type of wing players. But, in another article about ACB league rebounds, they say it was more difficult to take an offensive rebound after a 3p missed than after a 2p missed (30% and 35% of available). Maybe perimeter defense is very competitive in that league.
Last edited by Harold Almonte on Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:18 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 5:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The reason offenses are worse after a missed free throw is because the defense is set.
Here are some NBA numbers compiled by Roland:
viewtopic.php?p=423#423 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Almonte
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 616
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I could see how steals produce a higher offensive efficiency in possesion start, but have very low influence in team defensive rating (maybe because gambling). And some ratings love to hype those disruptive defense boxscore stats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3605
Location: Hendersonville, NC
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| admin wrote: | The reason offenses are worse after a missed free throw is because the defense is set.
|
This seems intuitively obvious. So why then is there this distribution of efficiencies after a made shot?
3fg - 106.9
2fg - 107.0
FT -- 108.4
The defense is set, yet offense fares a bit better. There may still be an effect due to who is shooting the FT. If your good ballhandlers/FT-shooters are in the game, your big defenders may not be? Just a theory.
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Harold Almonte
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 616
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| It would be interesting a study about how and where players`s missed shots tend to bound. I once read Rodman talking about he knew how some shooters shot and failed, and the average zone of ball`s bound direction from some shooters`s missed shots (and the jump time of some rebounders). maybe he was exagerating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike G wrote: | | The defense is set, yet offense fares a bit better. |
Did you look at the NBA link? I just woke up, so I might have misread it, but I think it shows offense as worse after a made free throw. I think sample size fluctuations probably account for this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3605
Location: Hendersonville, NC
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| admin wrote: | | Mike G wrote: | | The defense is set, yet offense fares a bit better. |
Did you look at the NBA link? I just woke up, so I might have misread it, but I think it shows offense as worse after a made free throw. I think sample size fluctuations probably account for this. |
Yes. But in Spain, they play Real basketball.
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asimpkins
Joined: 30 Apr 2006
Posts: 245
Location: Pleasanton, CA
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:05 pm Post subject: Re: Efficiency in different possession start cases |
|
|
I thought this might be helpful:
| Code: |
Possesion start Efficiency
Steal 126.8
2p FG missed, off. reb. 124.5
3p FG missed, off. reb. 115.5
2p FG missed, def. reb. 112.5
Non-steal turnover 111.6
Average 110.4
FT made 108.4
3p FG missed, def. reb. 107.3
2p FG made 107.0
3p FG made 106.9
Start of quarter 104.7
FT missed, def. reb. 103.2
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike G wrote: | | Yes. But in Spain, they play Real basketball. |
Well, at least in Madrid. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cherokee_ACB
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 157
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 4:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mike G wrote: |
This seems intuitively obvious. So why then is there this distribution of efficiencies after a made shot?
3fg - 106.9
2fg - 107.0
FT -- 108.4
|
FWIW, in the second half of the 2004-05 season, efficiencies after a made shot were 110-110-105 (3fg-2fg-ft), and after a defensive rebound 111-113-112. Have in mind that missed FTs is the least usual case - we're talking 1200 possessions in my study, which is like drawing conclusions of Ben Wallace impact on Detroit and Chicago after just 15 games.
One factor that increases average efficiency after FTs is that, because of the team foul penalty, there are more FTs near the end of a quarter. The penalty situation also helps to increase efficiency. The net result is a higher average for FT cases than it should be. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cherokee_ACB
Joined: 22 Mar 2006
Posts: 157
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2007 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've run my scripts on last season NBA play-by-plays. The results:
| Code: |
Possesion start Efficiency
Start of quarter 96.0
2p FG made 103.8
3p FG made 104.1
FT made 104.2
Non-jumper missed, DR 108.3
Jumper missed, DR 104.1
FT missed, DR 101.9
Non-jumper missed, OR 123.3
Jumper missed, OR 118.5
Steal 124.0
Non-steal turnover 101.7
Average 105.5
|
They are quite consistent with the international basketball data I have. In this case, I can't differentiate between 2p and 3p misses, so I'm presenting missed jumpers vs non-jumpers. Although it's really hard to work with NBA pbp's (I'm using basketballvalue ones), I've done a number of checks to make sure numbers are not significantly off.
Some notes:
- Again, gambling for steals may not help defense that much, but it certainly improves offense.
- Even if efficiency after made FTs doesn't drop compared with that after made FGs, eFG% in this case is just 46.4%. Only quarter starts lead to a lower eFG%. This is an effect of the foul penalty.
- It's easier to put back a missed close shot than a jumper.
- Apparently, it's also easier to score if your opponent misses a layup. In fact, there's no difference between starting a possession after a made shot and after a missed jumper.
- The biggest difference between NBA and Spanish league results is efficiency after non-steal turnovers. It's below average (as it should be) in the NBA, but above average in Spain. It's probably because in the NBA an steal is always credited if the ball stays live, which is not always the case in Spanish stats. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3605
Location: Hendersonville, NC
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 11:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excellent work once again. I'm rearranging your categories to descending order of efficiency.
| cherokee_ACB wrote: | I've run my scripts on last season NBA play-by-plays. The results:
| Code: |
Possession start Efficiency
Steal 124.0
Inside shot missed,OR 123.3
Jumper missed, OR 118.5
Inside shot missed,DR 108.3
Average 105.5
3p FG made 104.1
FT made 104.2
Jumper missed, DR 104.1
2p FG made 103.8
FT missed, DR 101.9
Non-steal turnover 101.7
Start of quarter 96.0
|
- Again, gambling for steals may not help defense that much, but it certainly improves offense.
... |
If you gamble and miss on a steal, does the opponent more often get an open shot? Your OffEff is worse after a made FG. I think all you can infer is that a successful steal improves offense (and defense, obviously).
Hope you don't mind I changed the terminology -- from 'non-jumper' (since that's what I am) to 'inside shot' (a la 82games.com).
Why is start-of-quarter Eff so low? What about Eff following a timeout?
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
