Below is a snapshot of the Web page as it appeared on 4/1/2011 (the last time our crawler visited it). This is the version of the page that was used for ranking your search results. The page may have changed since we last cached it. To see what might have changed (without the highlights), go to the current page.
Bing is not responsible for the content of this page.
APBRmetrics :: View topic - How Does Offensive Efficiency Change Throughout the Season?
APBRmetrics Forum Index APBRmetrics
The statistical revolution will not be televised.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

How Does Offensive Efficiency Change Throughout the Season?
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    APBRmetrics Forum Index -> General discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
DC4646



Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:30 pm    Post subject: How Does Offensive Efficiency Change Throughout the Season? Reply with quote

Hi all,
Well, the title of the post is pretty self explanatory. I just ran a simple linear regression with week-number (25 weeks in a season) along the x-axis and offensive efficiency along the y-axis. Here is an image of the resulting graph: http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ldfrs9-ffs0/TPfGIY-BR9I/AAAAAAAAAAM/1TvnxF8EOH0/s1600/offeffgraph2.png.

As you can see, league-wide offensive efficiency goes up as the season goes on. On average, there is a jump of about .16 pts/100possessions each week. r^2=.76.

Here are few important notes:
a). All the data I used came from basketball-reference. I used 10 years of data (it's conceivable that if you go back farther you get a significantly different results, though I personally don't think you would). The averages on the y-axis were computed as follows. Just for the sake of being concrete, I'll look at the first point on the graph. For this point, I computed how many possessions took place, in each game, for the 1st week of the season (10/28-11/5). Using the score of each game and the number of possessions, I computed the offensive efficiency of every team, in each game that took place in the first week. I then averaged the offensive efficiencies. This process was repeated for all 25 weeks of the season.

b). These offensive efficiency numbers represent global averages. For example, the first data point in the graph represents the average offensive efficiency of the entire NBA for the first week of the season. Because these are global averages, defensive efficiency is exactly the same as offensive efficiency (just like how at the end of the season, league-wide offensive efficiency is exactly the same as league-wide defensive efficiency).

c). Because these are global averages and because they were taken over 10-years, this graph doesn't really describe an individual team's offensive efficiency over the course of one season. For one, rarely is a team's offensive efficiency exactly equal to its defensive efficiency. Secondly, league-wide avg offensive efficiency changes from year to year. For example, last year the league-wide avg offensive efficiency was 107.3 pts/100possessions, which is extremely high in the context of the above graph.

Interpretations of the Data:
a). This graph seems to suggest that as the season goes on offense generally improves, while defense gets worse. One possible explanation is that it takes time for offenses to get into the swing of the things (i.e. new players have to be incorporated, coaches have to institute new offenses, rotations aren't set yet, players are still rusty from the off-season...).

b). The data also suggests that offensive efficiency, taken over the course of a season, generally underestimates how good a team's offense is at the end of the season. This is because when you average over the course of the season, among other things, you do penalize a team for slow starts. This bias may or may not be big enough to have a serious effect on inferences one would like to make using season-long average offensive efficiency. Or, the real issue is whether season-long average offensive efficiency underestimates some teams' end-of-season offenses more than it does others. That's the question I am currently investigating.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DSMok1



Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 611
Location: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I just posted this graph in another thread last week:



My numbers agree with yours. My data is for the last 3 seasons.

After adjusting for team strengths and rest days, I found that average efficiency increased at 0.026 Points/100Poss/Day. (That multiplies out to 0.18/week, very close to your numbers).

The very low number for the first week of the season could be tied to the number of days off; a similar drop in efficiency was observed in my data for the first game for each team after the all-star break.
_________________
GodismyJudgeOK.com/DStats
Twitter.com/DSMok1


Last edited by DSMok1 on Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:47 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mike G



Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3597
Location: Hendersonville, NC

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What if you separate the playoff-bound teams from those who have dropped out of the running? It may be that players for lottery teams will slack on defense, while still gunning for impressive offensive stats. This effect would only increase as the year goes on.

And perhaps the opposite effect: greater defensive intensity late in the year among teams vying for playoff seeding.

And then, in playoffs, how have teams fared relative to their competition? There aren't many meaningless games in playoffs.
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DSMok1



Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 611
Location: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike G wrote:
What if you separate the playoff-bound teams from those who have dropped out of the running? It may be that players for lottery teams will slack on defense, while still gunning for impressive offensive stats. This effect would only increase as the year goes on.

And perhaps the opposite effect: greater defensive intensity late in the year among teams vying for playoff seeding.

And then, in playoffs, how have teams fared relative to their competition? There aren't many meaningless games in playoffs.


In the playoffs, there is a significant drop both in pace and rating.
_________________
GodismyJudgeOK.com/DStats
Twitter.com/DSMok1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mike G



Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3597
Location: Hendersonville, NC

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 12:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If ORtg drops in playoffs, even relative to better DRtg opponents, then doesn't that suggest the observed season-long increase in league ORtg may be inflated by some experimental lineups, tanking, sloughing on D, etc?

Even playoff teams may rest their stars in late games, allowing lesser players to run amok on offense. It seems that playoffs are closer to the true gauge of where a team's offense and defense really are, at season's end.
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DSMok1



Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 611
Location: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 2:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mike G wrote:
If ORtg drops in playoffs, even relative to better DRtg opponents, then doesn't that suggest the observed season-long increase in league ORtg may be inflated by some experimental lineups, tanking, sloughing on D, etc?

Even playoff teams may rest their stars in late games, allowing lesser players to run amok on offense. It seems that playoffs are closer to the true gauge of where a team's offense and defense really are, at season's end.


You know, I was wrong what I said about rating. It is pace that drops. I just plotted out the results of my regression factoring out team ratings and effect of rest days, and here is the resulting chart:



The amazing thing is that the end of the regular season and the beginning of the playoffs just about line up, even though I used a separate modifier for the playoffs. So it doesn't look like there is an issue at all: offenses just get better through the season and then decrease slightly in the playoffs.
_________________
GodismyJudgeOK.com/DStats
Twitter.com/DSMok1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
EvanZ



Joined: 22 Nov 2010
Posts: 287

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DSMok1 wrote:
offenses just get better through the season and then decrease slightly in the playoffs.


Run into tougher defense, right?
_________________
http://www.thecity2.com
http://www.ibb.gatech.edu/evan-zamir
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)



Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Location: Basketball Research

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A bit off the topic, I had looked at underdog winning percentages at the end of last year's regular season. I don't know what's your take but I could not detect any trend except for a few weeks.


_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com


Last edited by Serhat Ugur (hoopseng) on Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:30 pm; edited 3 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DSMok1



Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 611
Location: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 3:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

EvanZ wrote:
DSMok1 wrote:
offenses just get better through the season and then decrease slightly in the playoffs.


Run into tougher defense, right?


That's accounting for opposing defenses already....
_________________
GodismyJudgeOK.com/DStats
Twitter.com/DSMok1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
DC4646



Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Serhat Ugur (hoopseng) wrote:
A bit off the topic, I had looked at underdog winning percentages at the end of last year's regular season. I don't know what's your take but I could not detect any trend.



How exactly are you defining "underdog"?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng)



Joined: 13 Oct 2006
Posts: 209
Location: Basketball Research

PostPosted: Thu Dec 02, 2010 5:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DC4646 wrote:
Serhat Ugur (hoopseng) wrote:
A bit off the topic, I had looked at underdog winning percentages at the end of last year's regular season. I don't know what's your take but I could not detect any trend.



How exactly are you defining "underdog"?

I'm using point spreads released by sportsbooks for each game.
_________________
http://www.nbastuffer.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DC4646



Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 12:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@Serhat
I don't know a whole lot about sports betting. Do you think your findings are saying something about Vegas' point spreads or basketball or both?

If you define "underdog" differently, say by using the difference between pt. differential, you might see trends. In fact, you'd almost certainly see a ton of "upsets" early in the season simply because of the high variability of any of the stats one might think of using to define underdog. That would actually be a major problem.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DC4646



Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@DSMok1:
I'm glad our numbers are close. To be honest, I'm just sort of getting used to R. At the back of my head, I felt like there was a small chance that I might have plugged in a few numbers wrong. And, my findings would be totally off. And, the study of basketball statistics would be set back 20 years.

p.s.
What software do most people use for basketball statistics? I'm using R mostly because I'm planning on going into biostatistics and I know that I'll probably eventually need to learn R.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DC4646



Joined: 27 Oct 2010
Posts: 16

PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Going back to this sentence in my original post: "I used 10 years of data (it's conceivable that if you go back farther you get a significantly different results, though I personally don't think you would)." More precisely, I used data from the last 10 seasons.

I just ran the same study for data from 1990-1999, I actually did get (kind of) significantly different results. The graph is here: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ldfrs9-ffs0/TPkpKGN9NqI/AAAAAAAAAAQ/w8eMeptTW-s/s1600/offeffgraph1999.png.

For the sake of comparison, the graph for data from 1999-2010 is here:http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ldfrs9-ffs0/TPfGIY-BR9I/AAAAAAAAAAM/1TvnxF8EOH0/s1600/offeffgraph2.png

In the graph using data from 1999-2010, each week there was a jump of .16 pts/100posession. In the graph from 1990-1999, each week there was a jump of only .08 pts/100possessions. r^2 in old graph was .76. r^2 in the new graph is only .4.

I want to say hand-checking rules have something to do with the difference, but that's not really based on anything. Or, maybe it has something to do with parity issues before the 1999 CBA.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DSMok1



Joined: 05 Aug 2009
Posts: 611
Location: Where the wind comes sweeping down the plains

PostPosted: Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

DC4646 wrote:
@DSMok1:
I'm glad our numbers are close. To be honest, I'm just sort of getting used to R. At the back of my head, I felt like there was a small chance that I might have plugged in a few numbers wrong. And, my findings would be totally off. And, the study of basketball statistics would be set back 20 years.

p.s.
What software do most people use for basketball statistics? I'm using R mostly because I'm planning on going into biostatistics and I know that I'll probably eventually need to learn R.


I primarily just use Excel. You can do just about anything with it.

I've dabbled in R, and when I get more into Adjusted Plus/Minus calculations, I'll have to. I think R is probably the way to go.
_________________
GodismyJudgeOK.com/DStats
Twitter.com/DSMok1
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    APBRmetrics Forum Index -> General discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 1 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group