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

Re: Pace

Expand Messages
  • HoopStudies
    ... Almost purely empirical. I scored a bunch of games, counting possessions. I recognized that possessions occur when a team takes a field goal and does not
    Message 1 of 7 , Jan 30, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Arthur LaVergne <deanlav@y...> wrote:
      > The pace that I typically calculate is team
      > possessions or
      >
      > FGA - OR + TO + 0.4*FTA
      >
      > [Dean LaVergne] Dean, could you expound upon the
      > derivation of the 0.4 multiplier?

      Almost purely empirical. I scored a bunch of games, counting
      possessions. I recognized that possessions occur when a team takes a
      field goal and does not get the offensive rebound (FGA - OR), turns
      the ball over (TO), or on some free throws. (There is some junk on
      the offensive rebounds since some team rebounds are awarded and some
      OR's are off of FTA's.) Looking for the simplest fit and left with
      the FTA's as the last factor, I just looked for a multiplier that fit
      my data. 0.4 worked pretty well and didn't give the false impression
      of being an exact number (like 0.387). Martin Manley also used the
      0.4 for estimating the number of "plays" (he called them possessions)
      as FGA + TO + 0.4*FTA.

      So it's purely empirical. It would change if you had a 3-to-make-2
      rule. (Though I tend to support Bob Chaikin's proposal for the 3-to-
      make-2 rule, I've dreaded having to refigure out the empirical
      number.) I have actually checked this multiplier on a smaller scale
      in college and found 0.4 to work ok there even though they have the 1-
      and-1. I would need to do a thorough study to check it there,
      though.

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