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

Charting Laker games - Status

Expand Messages
  • McKibbin, Stuart
    Just an update on the charting project I gave myself. Out of 16 Laker games I ve charted 14, I missed the first Utah game and the Houston game is on tape just
    Message 1 of 3 , Dec 4, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Just an update on the charting project I gave myself. Out of 16 Laker games I've charted 14, I missed the first Utah game and the Houston game is on tape just waiting to be charted.
       
      I'm charting 5 categories of stats: 1) Offensive rebounds, putbacks by the rebounder and second chance points. I do not count recovering a blocked shot as an offensive rebound. 2) In-the-act FTA's, technical FTA's, and-1 FTA's, bonus FTA's, and threepoint FTA's. 3) Steals, fastbreak attempts off steals, fastbreak points off steals 4) Blocked shots, who recovers them, fastbreak attempts off blocks, points off blocks 5) Offensive fouls
       
      First, apparently I undercount steals and blocks. In the games I've charted, the boxscores say the Lakes had 123 steals and 115 blocks, and the opponent 104 steals and 66 blocks. My numbers are Lakers 109 steals and 86 blocks, opponents 86 steals and 45 blocks. I only catch about 72% of the blocks and 86% of the steals. It's a fast paced game, and little tip blocks in traffic are hard to pickup on, but I didn't think my numbers were THAT bad. Of course, it could simply be that the official scorekeepers are especially liberal in handing out gold stars. One question: Because my numbers are so far off does that limit the usefulness of my stats?
       
      Some preliminary numbers from the 14 games. Lakers 109 steals, 67 fastbreak attempts, 83 points. Opponents 86 steals, 59 fastbreak attempts, 82 points. So if we assume the teams averaged 1 point for each non-fastbreak attempt steal that means Lakes 109 steals, 125 points; opponents 86 steals, 109 points. Totals: 195 steals, 234 points or 1.2 points per steal. I realize we can't extrapolate this to the league at large (Laker games may not be representative) but it is interesting.
       
      Blocks: I counted 131 blocks for the games, the shooting team recovered 56 of them. So a block deprived the offense of the ball just 57% of the time. Moreover, those 75 defensive recoveries resulted in very few fastbreak attempts yielding just 33 points. It seems the blocked shot isn't much of a fastbreak starter.
       
      Offensive rebounds: My numbers matchup with the boxscores pretty well (once you add in the offensive recovery of blocked shots).  What is amazing is how much better the Lakers are than their opponents at the rebounder sticking the ball back in the hole. Lakers 150 off rebs (plus 6 off team rebs), 72 shots by the rebounder, 48 putback baskets. Overall 176 points from the 156 second chance opportunities. The opponents had 156 off rebs (plus 11 off team rebs) 75 shots by rebounder, but only 29 putback baskets. Overall 161 points in 167 second chance opportunities.
       
      Last thought, the following stats show how unique and outstanding a player Shaquille O'Neal is:  54 off rebs, 33 putback shots by him making 24 (73%). He personally scored 57 points directly after his grabbing the rebound, his teammates chipping in for another 12 points.  In the 14 games, I charted 27(!) of his FTA's as "and-1's" (17.4% of the 155 FTA's he shot in those 14 games), the next highest on the Lakers is Kobe with 7. For some of you that calculate offensive efficiency, that helps him, right? He had 37 personal fouls in the 14 charted games, 9 are offensive (24.3%). For those of you that calculate defensive efficiency, that helps, too, right?
       
      Anyway, I'll continue this for the rest of the year.
    • HoopStudies
      ... by the ... blocked shot ... 1 FTA s, ... off steals, ... fastbreak ... charted, ... opponent ... blocks, ... blocks and ... traffic ... Of ... especially
      Message 2 of 3 , Dec 5, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "McKibbin, Stuart" <smckibbi@c...> wrote:
        > I'm charting 5 categories of stats: 1) Offensive rebounds, putbacks
        by the
        > rebounder and second chance points. I do not count recovering a
        blocked shot
        > as an offensive rebound. 2) In-the-act FTA's, technical FTA's, and-
        1 FTA's,
        > bonus FTA's, and threepoint FTA's. 3) Steals, fastbreak attempts
        off steals,
        > fastbreak points off steals 4) Blocked shots, who recovers them,
        fastbreak
        > attempts off blocks, points off blocks 5) Offensive fouls
        >
        > First, apparently I undercount steals and blocks. In the games I've
        charted,
        > the boxscores say the Lakes had 123 steals and 115 blocks, and the
        opponent
        > 104 steals and 66 blocks. My numbers are Lakers 109 steals and 86
        blocks,
        > opponents 86 steals and 45 blocks. I only catch about 72% of the
        blocks and
        > 86% of the steals. It's a fast paced game, and little tip blocks in
        traffic
        > are hard to pickup on, but I didn't think my numbers were THAT bad.
        Of
        > course, it could simply be that the official scorekeepers are
        especially
        > liberal in handing out gold stars. One question: Because my numbers
        are so
        > far off does that limit the usefulness of my stats?
        >

        Good luck replicating NBA numbers. Their scorers are quite arbitrary
        in awarding steals and blocks. As an example, the Toronto block
        shot "record" was rescinded a few days later when people questioned
        it. A lot of steals and blocks are awarded without any logic I see.
        I tend to undercount them as well.

        Does this affect the usefulness? Yes, somewhat. For instance, if
        your analysis says, for example, that 80 steals lead to 100 points
        and we then say that a steal increases offensive efficiency to
        approximately 1.25 pts/poss, but the league actually recorded 100
        steals, the conclusion is clouded. If we go to use the overcounted
        NBA numbers, we could easily be overstating the value of an NBA-
        official steal.

        > Some preliminary numbers from the 14 games. Lakers 109 steals, 67
        fastbreak
        > attempts, 83 points. Opponents 86 steals, 59 fastbreak attempts, 82
        points.
        > So if we assume the teams averaged 1 point for each non-fastbreak
        attempt
        > steal that means Lakes 109 steals, 125 points; opponents 86 steals,
        109
        > points. Totals: 195 steals, 234 points or 1.2 points per steal. I
        realize we
        > can't extrapolate this to the league at large (Laker games may not
        be
        > representative) but it is interesting.
        >

        Would be nice if you didn't assume 1 pt for non-fastbreak attempts.
        Also note that if you use the official count on steals, you have 227
        steals and your estimate of 234 points off of it -- pretty close to 1
        pt/assist. That's where the potential undercounting is a problem.
        Maybe "true" steals are worth 1.2 pts, but NBA official steals may be
        worth only about 1 pt.

        > Blocks: I counted 131 blocks for the games, the shooting team
        recovered 56
        > of them. So a block deprived the offense of the ball just 57% of
        the time.
        > Moreover, those 75 defensive recoveries resulted in very few
        fastbreak
        > attempts yielding just 33 points. It seems the blocked shot isn't
        much of a
        > fastbreak starter.
        >

        Good info. A blocked shot is primarily a defensive contribution.

        > Offensive rebounds: My numbers matchup with the boxscores pretty
        well (once
        > you add in the offensive recovery of blocked shots). What is
        amazing is how
        > much better the Lakers are than their opponents at the rebounder
        sticking
        > the ball back in the hole. Lakers 150 off rebs (plus 6 off team
        rebs), 72
        > shots by the rebounder, 48 putback baskets. Overall 176 points from
        the 156
        > second chance opportunities. The opponents had 156 off rebs (plus
        11 off
        > team rebs) 75 shots by rebounder, but only 29 putback baskets.
        Overall 161
        > points in 167 second chance opportunities.
        >

        Hmmm. Mixed results. I have generally done incomplete looks at the
        issue and almost always with _good_ teams. Those good teams suggest
        that scoring off an offensive rebound is a little more efficient than
        scoring in general. Maybe it ain't true with mediocre or poor teams.

        Useful to know that approximately 1/2 of all offensive rebounds are
        shot by the rebounder. I can definitely use that. I've always
        assumed 1/5th would be, knowing that it doesn't make a huge
        difference to my analysis. I need to review this stuff a little
        later to see how it all adds up.

        > Last thought, the following stats show how unique and outstanding a
        player
        > Shaquille O'Neal is: 54 off rebs, 33 putback shots by him making
        24 (73%).
        > He personally scored 57 points directly after his grabbing the
        rebound, his
        > teammates chipping in for another 12 points. In the 14 games, I
        charted
        > 27(!) of his FTA's as "and-1's" (17.4% of the 155 FTA's he shot in
        those 14
        > games), the next highest on the Lakers is Kobe with 7.

        I estimate total possessions from free throws as 0.4 * FTA. So
        0.4*155 = 62 total possessions from his free throws. The "and 1's"
        do not count as a possession, which is why I use 0.4, not 0.48 or
        something closer to 0.5 (which would account only for technical
        fouls). From your numbers, 155-27 = 128. 128 foul attempts on two-
        shot fouls means 64 possessions. So I'm off by 2 possessions, which
        could be some of the technical fouls shot by the Lakers.

        Let me take a guess then at how many FTA's Kobe had:

        (x-7)/2 ~ 0.4x

        x ~ 35

        That is very low, knowing that he has shot 144 in 16 games.
        He "should have" shot many more "and-1's", probably on the order of
        20. The person who should have the next most and-1's is Devean
        George or Robert Horry, with maybe 4-5.

        How many total "and-1's" have their been for the Laker team? How
        many total technical foul shots for the team?

        I need to check to see how variation from the 0.4 would affect my
        offensive efficiency ratings. I think your info slightly raises
        Kobe's pts produced, his scoring possessions, and his total
        possessions. So, it would slightly help my calculated numbers for
        him.


        For some of you that
        > calculate offensive efficiency, that helps him, right? He had 37
        personal
        > fouls in the 14 charted games, 9 are offensive (24.3%). For those
        of you
        > that calculate defensive efficiency, that helps, too, right?
        >

        Keep counting. If 25% of all fouls are offensive, that is a useful
        piece of knowledge. Or if it's 20-30%, that helps.
      • mikel_ind
        Stuart should be getting paid for this. ... If you know about what your error is, it seems practical to factor that in. ... recovered 56 ... the time. One
        Message 3 of 3 , Dec 8, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Stuart should be getting paid for this.

          --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "McKibbin, Stuart" <smckibbi@c...> wrote:
          .... I only catch about 72% of the blocks and
          > 86% of the steals. ...: Because my numbers are so
          > far off does that limit the usefulness of my stats?

          If you know about what your "error" is, it seems practical to factor
          that in.

          > ....Blocks: I counted 131 blocks for the games, the shooting team
          recovered 56
          > of them. So a block deprived the offense of the ball just 57% of
          the time.

          One could keep track of such things as shot-clock violations
          following a block, reduced shooting pct (to beat the clock) after a
          recovered block, or even 'dumb' fouls trying to recover the block.
          In other words, what is the offensive efficiency after an offensive
          recovered block?
          I may be splitting hairs, but there is a lot of good in a blocked
          shot.

          >...Lakers 150 off rebs (plus 6 off team rebs), 72
          > shots by the rebounder, 48 putback baskets. Overall 176 points from
          the 156
          > second chance opportunities ...
          >... Shaquille O'Neal is: 54 off rebs, 33 putback shots by him
          making 24 (73%).
          > He personally scored 57 points directly after his grabbing the
          rebound, his
          > teammates chipping in for another 12 points.

          If Lakers have: 176 pts / 156 OReb
          and Shaq has: 57 pts / 54 OReb
          then
          non-Shaq Lakers: 119 pts / 102 OReb

          That would seem to make Shaq weaker at scoring after an OReb than his
          teammates are?

          > In the 14 games, I charted
          > 27(!) of his FTA's as "and-1's" (17.4% of the 155 FTA's he shot in
          those 14
          > games), the next highest on the Lakers is Kobe with 7. For some of
          you that
          > calculate offensive efficiency, that helps him, right?

          I guess I have counted 13.5 FGA too many for Shaq, and his overall
          pct. should be .554 instead of .534.
          The effect on his scoring 'rate' is significant; instead of the 29.5
          I have given him, he should be at 30.7.

          > Anyway, I'll continue this for the rest of the year.

          Keep up the good works, Stuart.
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.