APBRmetrics

[Paydro]

Hello everyone. I can't believe that I've gone so long as a basketball fan without finding this forum; it's great, and I can't wait to see what I can learn from everyone here.

The reason for my first post (and how I accidentally stumbled onto this board) is that I recently got into a debate with someone on a different NBA message board about fast break offenses. I root for the Charlotte Bobcats, and as you all know we don't really have a big man to pair with Okafor. I feel that the best option is Herrmann, and essentially embracing a Denver-style undersized lineup that likes to run the fast break.

The nature of the debate was that a lot of the people on the board were upset that Charlotte was getting outrebounded in the preseason (I know, it's preseason, but bear with us, there's nothing else to talk about), and it was blamed on what was seen as a stupid strategy of leaking players out before the rebound to get fast-break/cherry-picked points. I thought that this was potentially a good strategy, if our failures in rebounding made less of a difference than the points we got.

It became a drawn-out discussion about what a fast-break offense means, so my question to anyone who might answer it is whether there is an inevitable effect of losing defensive rebounding for the sake of a heavily fast-break oriented offense. In other words, is getting fast break points a tradeoff with dedication to defensive rebounding?

Obviously there is a strong correlation, since the 5 teams that got more than 2 points over the league average in fast break points (12ppg) were all 20th or worse in dreb%. That can be explained to some extent by lineup differences, though I think that most of those teams have decent enough rebounders in the front court (Kurt Thomas/Amare/Marion, for instance). I suppose another way to "prove" this would be to show that players who moved to/from high-fast-break teams had a change in their defensive rebound rates after their move.

Anyway, I was just curious to know if anyone else thought this effect was a natural result of a dedication to a fast-break offense or not, and more generally what the effect of pace is on rebounding. Here's the link to the 82games article that I used to get fast break offense points.

http://82games.com/fastbreakpoints.htm

[Mountain]

Hey Paydro, welcome.

Here are some thoughts that come to mind for your consideration.

The difference in defensive rebounding rate for top 10 teams on pace and bottom 10 is 7-8% or about 2 -2.5 rebounds that become opponent offensive rebounds. Losing some rebounds isn't an iron law but it is a likely effect. Among top 10 paced teams Chicago did the best on defensive boards at 10th. Ben Wallace. Okafor. Maybe Okafor can take that lead role on a running team like Ben is doing?

Partly because of these opponent offensive rebounds and partly because of being run back on the 10 fastest on pace teams give up a FG% allowed and points allowed slightly higher than their own offense. On average the top 10 on pace last season by 0.2 points per game. The top 10 on pace improved their offensive efficiency but give it all back on defense. On average. Some teams can buck this over a season, some teams can buck this for a certain segment of games when they are flowing. But running is not necesarily a silver bullet net, you have to be good at it.

The 82 games article you cite shows just 4 teams averaging 15 points on the break. Successful breaks according to this study http://www.82games.com/sacplays.htm
appear to have a significant 10-20% efficency edge over half-court offense, the main attraction to coaches (but ideally you'd want to check this for the Bobcats). Not that many plays result in a shot coming on the break, probably only about 15% of possessions. Multiply the two and you don't get big changes in overall team efficency by pace http://www.82games.com/levbot.htm The very best running teams on average will get 1-3 buckets more a game from this style. Lots of huffing and puffing to achieve that. And there are other ways to that level of edge that might not be as much of a double edged sword as running.

Opportunistic running makes sense. Running "all the time" (a major exaggeration) probably only makes sense for the very top teams. Most of these have a great PG. I don't think Charlotte has a great PG but you know better what you have with Felton, how much improvement to expect, how well he runs the break.

Running teams probably benefit for having a dominant defensive rebounder or a strong duo as opposed to relying on sending 3-4 guys to the glass. Okafor fits that description.

Looking briefly at Charlotte I see they do far better when they score over 100 though this is far more about game shooting efficency than just pace. Still it could be a goal that more running contributes to achieving.

Maybe Charlotte could run some more, maybe target getting to average, getting even with opponents. The fact that they were so low in the rankings last season says something about the ability of the Bobcats to run or the disposition of Bernie or both. Maybe Vincent can design it and instruct the operation of it efficently and minimize defensive slippage. Maybe Felton can run it more and well and if his teammates can fill their roles. Herrmann as a runner, shooter probably could fill that role well, as long as Okafor takes care of a big load of the rebounding and Herrmann and Wallace chip in depending of where the shot comes from and bounces off the rim. The wings might do well in a faster pace too. Worth a try I guess. Don't want to repeat the past game plan too closely.

[Paydro]

Thanks for the response Mountain.

Felton is certainly not an elite (or even above-average) point guard as of the end of last season. He is incredibly fast, handles well, and is pass-first, so that's what leads us to believe a quicker offense is what he's best suited for. Paired with two fast and high-flying players in JRich and Gerald Wallace and a glass-cleaner like Okafor and it seems like the team is ready to run. Felton is also, however, a terrible finisher, and aside from Herrmann/Carroll (the latter of whom will be on the bench most of the time) we don't really have the Raja Bell/JR Smith/Deshaun Stephenson three-point gunner type.

Is Felton aware enough to run it well? I don't know, and won't until this season. This question was mostly to find out if, should we start running more, it would be expected to start losing ground on the defensive boards as a part of the trade-off of getting extra high-efficiency fast-break opportunities. I guess that would also imply that the teams that crash the offensive boards would be prone to give up more fast-break baskets.

I don't really understand "maybe target getting to average, getting even with opponents." It seems to me that fast break offense and defense are not inherently connected, except in terms of fatigue; a team could dedicate itself to both breaking up court whenever possible and rushing back to play effective transition defense. If anything I would suspect that the talent best suited to run the break is also the best suited to prevent the break, being faster and more comfortable in the open court. For example, the Phoenix Suns are 4th in fewest fast break points allowed.

[Mountain]

"talent best suited to run the break is also the best suited to prevent the break"

That makes some sense, Phoenix is athletic, fast/nimble.

Toughness, willingness to stand in for or give contact is another element. Phoenix doesnt have that general reputation but maybe they show it better defending the break than in the half court. Their fast break points allowed is low and helps make the strategy a success.

But another big piece of their fast break points allowed story is that they convert on their own quick offense at a high rate and make the opposing team take the ball out of the basket and inbound it more frequently than other mere mortal fast breaking teams. Checking a handful of top 10 fast break teams I see eFG% of about 54% commonly at 82games for team shooting in first 10 seconds of shot clock. Phoenix was at 59% and for 43% of their attempts (Spurs 57% eFG% but quick shots only 33% of their attempts shows strong early offense performance but lower frequency). Charlotte was at 53% for eFG% early in the clock, representing 36% of shots.

Part of low opponent fast breaks might also be application of a strategy of avoidance, trying to change the pace of the game away from the Suns preferred style.

Golden State run more than Phoenix and despite the grittier image of some of their players it looks like other teams are able to run back on them more than Phoenix. In part because the Warriors were at 55% in first 10 second instead of 59% like Suns. Perhaps also because it looks like the Warriors are heavier and maybe not quite as fast, especially running back on D? They run a ton but sometimes it is forcing the issue more than beating the opponent down court.