Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Oscar's Effect -- getting technical

Expand Messages
  • Mike G
    ... other ... Using a slightly different sample of players, I found a significantly smaller increase in shooting %, with/without Oscar. I used the combined
    Message 1 of 5 , Oct 4, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "John Hollinger"
      <alleyoop2@y...> wrote:
      > The 2% difference is interesting, but I wonder how much of it was
      > because of the fact that Oscar was taking all the shots. So the
      other
      > guys were taking fewer shots, but because they had to create fewer
      > for themselves, they ended up shooting a higher percentage...

      Using a slightly different sample of players, I found a
      significantly smaller increase in shooting %, with/without Oscar.

      I used the combined shooting %, rather than raw FG%. Maybe one
      difference is that with Oscar, guys were spotting up and shooting
      (thus a higher FG%); and without Oscar, guys were 'creating',
      driving, getting to the foul line (thus a better 'scoring
      efficiency').

      In either case, I found no evidence that Oscar cut into anyone's
      stats, and seems to have upped the scoring production. I haven't
      broken it down into his Royals career (dominator), and his Bucks
      career (distributor).


      > Kind of
      > like what will happen to Gary Payton and Karl Malone this year. If
      > that's the case, you should see the same effect with a lot of high-
      > scoring players.

      Are you predicting less scoring but higher efficiencies from these
      guys? It will be interesting, to say the least.

      I wonder about the 'Effect' that a lot of dominating players have on
      various teammates. Not just point guards (though that's essentially
      their job), but other guys who demand the ball a lot.

      One could further break it down by position. Does Karl Malone's
      presence enhance the stats of other forwards, while eating into the
      FGA of shooting guards? etc.

      >
      > Let's call this the "Ainge Effect" (side note: this theory is
      still
      > in beta, which is one reason I'm testing it out on this audience).
      > Danny Ainge averaged 15.7 points a game for title-contending
      Boston
      > while shooting 49 percent. He gets traded to crappy Sacramento and
      > suddenly he has to creat a lot more shots for himself. As a
      result,
      > his average goes up to 17.5 and 17.9, but his percentage drops to
      > 45.7 and 43.8. Then he goes to title-contending Portland and can
      be a
      > complementary player again; his average drops back down to 11.0,
      but
      > he shoots 47.2 percent.

      There's abundant evidence that this happens. There might even be a
      formula that tends to equalize these factors. Multiplying shooting
      % by points-per-minute tends to even out these changes-in-scoring-
      load produced by changes-in-roles.
      >
      > Thoughts?
    • Dean Oliver
      ... other ... of ... still ... Boston ... result, ... be a ... but ... There is no doubt this happens. Those charts that I put out a year or more ago -- those
      Message 2 of 5 , Oct 5, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In APBR_analysis@yahoogroups.com, "John Hollinger"
        <alleyoop2@y...> wrote:
        > The 2% difference is interesting, but I wonder how much of it was
        > because of the fact that Oscar was taking all the shots. So the
        other
        > guys were taking fewer shots, but because they had to create fewer
        > for themselves, they ended up shooting a higher percentage. Kind
        of
        > like what will happen to Gary Payton and Karl Malone this year. If
        > that's the case, you should see the same effect with a lot of high-
        > scoring players.
        >
        > Let's call this the "Ainge Effect" (side note: this theory is
        still
        > in beta, which is one reason I'm testing it out on this audience).
        > Danny Ainge averaged 15.7 points a game for title-contending
        Boston
        > while shooting 49 percent. He gets traded to crappy Sacramento and
        > suddenly he has to creat a lot more shots for himself. As a
        result,
        > his average goes up to 17.5 and 17.9, but his percentage drops to
        > 45.7 and 43.8. Then he goes to title-contending Portland and can
        be a
        > complementary player again; his average drops back down to 11.0,
        but
        > he shoots 47.2 percent.
        >
        > Thoughts?

        There is no doubt this happens. Those charts that I put out a year
        or more ago -- those were designed to look exactly at this in a
        theoretical way because I had seen it so often empirically. Iverson
        improves his teammates pretty significantly even though he isn't
        efficient, just because he's using 30+% of his team's possessions.

        So, with the Lakers, if Phil can get them all cutting down their
        possession use to 23-27% (rather than 27-32%), they should be a
        dynamite offense.

        DeanO
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.