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

re: NBA stats site

Expand Messages
  • roland_beech
    ... The shooting percentages definitely change as the shot clock winds down, as does the type of shot a team is likely to take. We re doing some research on
    Message 1 of 9 , Oct 10, 2003
      >One other thing I like about this is that it seems to support my
      >long-standing but poorly supported statement about shooting with 3
      >or fewer seconds on the clock being much poorer. I can't check it
      >for sure with their posted numbers, but they can. Hint, hint.

      The shooting percentages definitely change as the shot clock winds
      down, as does the type of shot a team is likely to take. We're
      doing some research on this to see if the better teams are primarily
      better at executing in the later seconds on the clock, get to that
      situation less often, or if everyone struggles with time running out
      and it's a matter of the good teams being stronger in the earlier
      shot clock segments...likewise the defensive numbers are interesting
      here

      >Perhaps the Pythag would be informative here. Using Tim Duncan as an
      >example:
      >OffPts DefPts Min Win% W-L
      >OnCourt 97.0 88.9 3151 75.6% 50-16
      >OffCourt 91.7 97.9 775 29.9% 5-11
      >50-16 is a number people can easily understand, while points scored
      >and allowed appeals only to us statheads :-)

      agree completely that the 50-16 vs 5-11 is a nicer look than the
      others we show...of course it's a projected stat versus an actual
      one, but we can certainly look to add this for future page updates

      >BTW2: Roland, nba.com shows Duncan as playing 3181 minutes. Typo,
      >or is there a rounding error? Not that a 1% error is a big deal.

      We calculate playing time to the second and accumulate as opposed to
      the NBA which I believe rounds to the nearest minute on a game
      basis. So, that explains part of it. I'm sure we will differ from
      official stats in certain places

      >The 5-man units provide enough information for now -- I could spend
      >hours looking at them! I would suggest showing the floor time as
      >absolute minutes, as well as the percentage of total team minutes.

      A good point too, and particularly in-season you might have in the
      first month a unit with something like 2% of total minutes
      translating into 5 actual minutes together...not a big sample!

      >That data set could lead to a flood of ideas on what to do with it.

      We have an ever-expanding list of research ideas to pursue,
      including such obscure things as: performance of players in
      different foul states (eg playing with 5 fouls), does getting a shot
      blocked change a player's subsequent shot selection, rookie play pre
      and post-wall, where does home court advantage actually come from,
      and in particular detailed analysis of five-man unit traits, how
      these characteristics match up against opponent five-man units, etc
      etc
    • schtevie2003
      Very interesting data on 82games.com. A couple of questions: 1) What is the source of the raw data from which the +/- summaries were generated? 2) Apparently
      Message 2 of 9 , Oct 10, 2003
        Very interesting data on 82games.com. A couple of questions:

        1) What is the source of the raw data from which the +/-
        summaries were generated?

        2) Apparently I am misunderstanding the +/- definition in the
        tables. By my way of thinking when you take the +/- for a given
        player when ON the court and multiply it by his fraction of playing
        time and then add the +/- for the same player when OFF the court
        and muliply it by his fraction of non-playing time, what you should
        get is the team plus minus, no? In doing a loose check on Paul
        Pierce, I find the implication that the '03-'03 Celtics were
        outscored (which may be the case) but also that the team
        implied figure based on Mr. Battie's +/- differed, which cannot be,
        according to my conception of the stat. Please advise.

        Thanks,

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