Re: Seattle Resurgence?
- Does anyone have the data on the corresponding "effect" that Payton has
had on the Bucks? It would seem that this might be a useful check on
any presumed results.
Also, does anyone have the win-loss records of opponents before and
after the trade? This should be a first check on interpretations, no?
--- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Kevin Pelton" <kpelton08@h...>
> Okay, it's taken a while, but I finally got the pre-/post-trade
> numbers posted:
> All numbers, like most things in life, highly unofficial.
> The numbers below average points scored/allowed are points per 100
> possession. FYI I use the 'small possession' model (I think that's
> what we termed it), where a missed shot ends a possession even if the
> team gets an offensive rebound. I prefer this method because it
> isolates rebounding from the measurement, and I find rebounding to be
> its own separate category from offense and defense. *shurg*
> Team-level stuff:
> Defense is really about the same. A slight improvement, in fact. The
> important thing to notice here is that the Sonics have clamped down
> from three. During the 42 game stretch where they tanked and went
> The offense has skyrocketed. The Sonics are shooting better from the
> field and from three, which is largely attributable to Allen
> replacing Payton (in a direct comparison) and Barry and Lewis playing
> For all the talk about their terrible rebounding, the Sonics are
> actually outrebounding their opponents post-trade. This can be traced
> again to a couple of things, Allen rebounding like a small forward
> (and, in fact, better than the Sonics' starting small forward _and_
> starting center) and Reggie Evans seeing more action.
> Individual-level stuff:
> Rashard Lewis has played much better since the trade. Draw your own
> conclusions as to why.
> Brent Barry has played much better since the trade. This is probably
> due to health.
> Final thought:
> Maybe the stats are significant now, but even if they're not, there's
> a significant reason why. The Sonics' 22-30 pre-trade record is
> really an amalgum (is that the right word?) of their 8-2 start and a
> miserable 14-28 effort from mid-November to mid-February. If we add
> the good start to the good finish (so far), the Sonics are 24-10 in
> one portion of the season and 14-28 in the other, which is a pretty
> remarkable difference to me. In case anybody's interested in
> comparing the middle stretch to the post-trade games, 39 games worth
> of those numbers are here:
> Isolated offense was 86.7, isolated defense 90.4 points per 100
> possessions. Ugly.
- --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "Mike G" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
> What matters is that x points and y rebounds occurred in z minutes.This is actually misleading. I won't say wrong, but misleading.
Pace is very important. Many of the individual stats are offensive
and without adjustment for pace overweight players who just put up a
lot of offensive stats _per minute_. And pace is mostly (not
entirely) a function of a decision about pace, not ability (though
ability has a small impact). How fast or slow teams play reflects
primarily on their style not their substance. How many points and
rebounds per minute reflects both style and substance. Removing pace
more isolates the substance.
The way common possessions do it is by isolating another variable in
addition to minutes that is common between both teams on the floor.
Both teams have 48 minutes to win. Both teams have 100 possessions
to win in a fast game or 85 in a slow game or whatever. But both
opponents have the same number (not true with small possessions
= "plays"). So, yes, what matters is what happens per minute, but it
is equivalent to say that what matters is what happens per
possession. And what happens per possession isolates quality better
than what happens per minute.