1709Re: [APBR_analysis] Re: Cross Generational Simulating/Comparisons
- Jan 27, 2003
the superiority of the average team in the early 80 to its 60s counterpart was on
the order of 10 to 12 points per game (at a modern game pace). This is equivalent to how much better the best Bulls team was to the league average.
not sure what these numbers mean or where they are coming from....how did you arrive at this or derive these numbers?...
Just looking at the average offensive productivity over the time in question, what one sees is that it improved dramatically (the 12 points per game above).
would love to "look" at it but you're not showing anything...
Now, those who believe we stand on the shoulders of giants might be inclined to say that defenses got worse as opposed to offenses having improved. Is this view tenable? The answer is "no" because the trend is accompanied by a dramatic slowing of the game. This slowing, all else equal, implies that offensive productivity should have decreased. . Why? It either means fast-break baskets were being reduced or that the half-court offenses were having to work harder for shots. But offenses improved, dramatically...
here are some number for you to chew on:
pts/ sec/ pts/
year FG% 48min poss poss
7778 .469 107.7 13.4 1.000
7879 .485 109.8 13.5 1.029
7980 .481 108.5 13.8 1.041
8081 .486 107.5 14.0 1.043
8182 .491 107.9 14.1 1.058
8283 .485 107.9 13.8 1.037
8384 .492 109.2 14.0 1.063
8485 .491 110.2 13.9 1.066
8586 .487 109.5 13.9 1.059
8687 .480 109.2 14.1 1.067
8788 .480 107.6 14.3 1.065
8889 .477 108.5 14.1 1.062
8990 .476 106.3 14.4 1.065
9091 .474 105.5 14.5 1.063
9192 .472 104.5 14.7 1.067
9293 .473 104.5 14.7 1.066
9394 .466 101.0 15.0 1.049
9495 .466 100.6 15.3 1.069
9596 .462 98.8 15.5 1.063
9697 .455 96.2 15.8 1.053
9798 .450 94.8 15.7 1.036
9899 .437 90.9 16.0 1.009
9900 .449 96.9 15.3 1.030
0001 .443 94.0 15.6 1.020
0102 .445 94.8 15.7 1.034
sec/poss is the avg time per team possession, pts/poss is the avg points scored per team possession. you can see a general trend in a slower game thru time (secs/poss) but no such similar trend in offensive productivity...
as you can see total points scored and game pace have next to nothing to do with offensive productivity per team possession. 1978-79 and 1999-00 have the same pts scored per team possession (1.029 and 1.030) yet vastly different game paces, vastly different FG%s, etc. if you should doubt these pts/poss numbers, DeanO or any other of the stats gurus in this discussion group can verify (or for that fact deny) them....
since i can't accurately calculate pts/poss prior to 77-78, i can't present similar evidence. but the above clearly shows that over a 24 year time span of the NBA that offensive production per team possession is not directly correlated to game pace (slowing down the game or speeding it up)......
And the only explanation I can deduce is that offenses were disciplining themselves (through improved coaching I surmise) and expunging bad shot selection. Now, as
I also said before, I expect that defenses were also improving during this time so that the 12 point estimate is in fact a low estimate of the actual improvement in these two decades.
have no idea where this is coming from...
And to continue. If one accepts the general and continuous improvement of the game over the two decades mentioned, then it becomes arbitrary to imagine that progress stopped then. The reasonable prior belief is that the slow decrease in offensive productivity after this point is the result of defensive improvements, rather than some technological retrogression.
what slow decrease in offensive productivity? i see similar offensive productivity in 77-78 to 80-81 as i see in 97-98 to 01-02, with the higher productivity per poss of the 1980s being higher and fairly constant...
technological retrogression?? like what, bring back the jump ball after every score??...
And finally, I made what I think is a very persuasive argument for the superiority of the trained athlete in more recent times. In the form of a question, if there are not some return to his efforts, why is he killing himself in the gym?
a nice philosophical arguement but not pertinent for stats analysis..
There is the "proof". I look forward to any alternate explanation of these facts and inferences.
All this aside, I should say that I have nothing but the highest regard for the notion of using simulations for analyzing the game of basketball. To my mind, they are the best method for understanding the effect of marginal changes in game variables.
However, they are not useful - only highly deceptive - in determining the competitiveness of NBA teams from different eras.
words from the wise i guess....
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>