http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/sports/1109392 "We did some stats, different kind of stats, looking at our whole offense, putting in some different kind of factors," coach Rudy Tomjanovich said. "Last year, with a young team and an injury-plagued season, we were fifth in the league offensively with this formula. "You get what each possession was worth on average. Fifth in the league. With injuries alone, that would go down. But with a young team, guard-oriented, to be efficient offensively to me is unbelievable. I wonder where the rocket's finished defensively using their stat?
Since he ran this against the whole league, you have to believe this is a simple stat to generate...not the offensive play efficiency stat that the coaches score themselves. I think this can probably be calculated from the box scores. I tried to come up with an efficiency stat based on Rudy's comments 2 yrs ago. It is not based on points, but rather how many times you score versus possessions....in other words, scores (or FTs trips) divided by possessions = scoring efficiency. I've run this by some HS/college scouts and they admit to having used something similar. The formula is: Total Possessions with a Score/FT ------------------------------------------- = Scoring Efficiency per offensive trip Total Possessions Figure out Total Possessions <B>Note: we are trying to approximate this from a box score, so some assumptions must be made.</b> There is a lot of assumptions in this, but basically you figure out possessions by trying to figure out how many times a team had possession. When you have possession, what can you do? Basically you shoot the ball, go to the free throw line, or turn it over. However, you can shoot it more than once, so you subtract offensive rebounds. So, you can approximate possessions from the box score by adding FGA + turnovers + FTAs/2* - offensive rebounds (don't count a possession twice!). Problem #1 is dealing with 3-point plays and opposing technicals that allow you to retain possession for another FGA. By not including technicals as possessions, you actually reward a team's efficiency rating. Figure out Total Scores Treat any trip to the free-throw line as success...don't worry about FT%. FGM + FTA/2* + opposing technicals. While it may seem odd to put FTA/2 in both the nominator and denominator, the idea is to counts trips to the free throw line as 100% success. * to deal with 3-point plays, delete all odd number FTs for each player before figuring FTA/2. On the total score side, add back in the opposition's technical fouls.
Thx, I've worked with something very similar to that to simulate points/possession for a season instead of scores per possession on a game by game basis. I think it dealt with 3 point plays differently.
Your points per possession is more straightforward, since all you have to do is agree on how to measure total possessions, then divide that into points. The thing about points per possession versus the more generalized scores per possession is the later does not consider FT% while giving a bonus for illegal defense, since illegal defense gives the offense two scoring opportunities for a single trip down the floor. The idea is to measure whether a play got a score or got you to the line, period. The weakness of my method is the arbitrary way you have to handle 3 point plays. Note: you can factor in 3 point FGs with my method by using a 3 point coefficient of 1.5. Thus, to figure out Total Scores FGM + FTs/2 + opposing illegal def becomes (2pt FGM) + 1.5(3pt FGM) + FTs/2 + illegal def The coefficient means every 2 three pointers count as 3 FGMs, overall, which is true. I'm willing to bet this comes pretty damn close to a Points per Possession measurement. Anyhow, Rudy says in that article that they tried a lot of different variables. Maybe we should just run these and see if we can find how the Rockets score 5th overall in the league.
Interesting thread. To play devil's advocate though, efficiency can equate to maximization of possessions. In other words, offensive boards could be factored in since they either maintain possession or create a new shot/set. Of course, on the flip side is that a team like GS (poor shooters but strong rebounders) now becomes a formidable offensive team. I don't know if this is a bit too detailed, but should one also factor in breakaways or fast-breaks, like how many times a fast-break is successful vs. attempts? And while we're on the fast-break issue, should you also consider the all-important secondary break, a la Utah, possibly giving more weight to that success rate than the primary break rate?
Live, You cannot measure fastbreaks from a box score. I'm pretty sure Rudy is talking about readily accessible stats, since he compared the Rockets against the whole league. As for offensive rebounds, my way already rewards offensive rebounds by subtracting them from your FGA when calculating total possessions. This subtraction erases any missed shot whenever you got the rebound, which is *exactly* what an offensive rebound does; it gives you another try. There is no reason to reward offensive rebounds twice by adding them to the other side of the ratio, as you suggest. Do you agree that my way does indeed reward off rebounds?
crispee, Good points, no arguments from me. As for the fast break issue, I was thinking more of as an individual assessment from gameplay\tape study rather than comparative vs rest of league. Sorry, I should have phrased it better. But anyway, I think I'll give it a try this season. Should make for an interesting analysis. I'm just trying to figure out a scoring method for DEFENSIVE effeciency. TOTAL POSSESSIONS (TP) = FGA + STL + (FTA/2) TOTAL MADE (TM) = FGM + (FTM/2) DEF. EFF. = (TM) / (TP) I don't think it's as important to focus on 3's and how to compute them from a defensive standpoint, an attempt is an attempt, a point is a point, etc. And, of course, blocks count as an attempt, so they're already factored in. I'm still trying to figure how TECHS factor in, especially with the new defensive 3 second rule. I'm quite sure, if the Rocks continue to play the passing lanes, they could get quite a few calls against them. What'cha think?
ESPN follows the PPS (pts per shot) stat which is the Pole ratio on cc.net, right? The Rockets were tied for 3rd in this. <a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=teamstatoff&sort=pps&league=nba&seasontype=2&avg=pg&order=true&split=0">PPS rankings</a> What this stat does not do is factor in turnovers!! Thus, we could be very efficient if we get a play off, but if we turn it over, that doesn't count against us since we didn't take a shot. So, since we were one of the worst TO teams last year, the PPS is skewed for us. Plus, this does not reward offensive rebounds. I'm beginning to believe a PPP (Points Per Possession) is a slicker way. My Scores Per Possession is probably needlessly complicated for the limited value it may or may not add.
Crispee, yes pps has been termed the Pole ratio....its a good simple stat that I've used for about a decade. Its a rough approximation for ppp, that I like for its simplicity and usefulness. It can tell how good a team would be offensively if they reduced turnovers. Also it can show difference from a good shooting team from a good offensive rebounding team (they can have troubles against good defensive rebounding teams). PPS is a great player evaluator in a box score. If a player scores less points than he has FGA, he was most likely hurting his team. I can accept a guy being cold, but he has to react well to it. Once you get ppp, you can get shots per possession by dividing ppp by pps. Shots per possesion can be called the Golden State Ratio.
HCrispeeP, I'm not sure if I agree with you on rewarding a team's efficiency rating on an offensive board. Here is my thinking..... Even if a team is able to gain an offensive board, they still took a shot to gain the board. In my eyes an offensive board is another possesion. Why do I say this? By rewarding a team for an offensive board you are effectively saying that a missed shot opportunity should not be counted towards their total possesion count. I do not concur with this line of thinking. Each and every shot opportunity should be counted as a seperate possesion. This is in keeping with your line of thinking regarding free throws. It does not matter if either one or two are made, but whether a scoring opportunity was converted. Hence with the free throw line of thinking a team should not be rewarded for an offensive board. That would effectively reward them for a missed shot/possesion. The circular argument (intentional) presented above to illuminate a specific point..... As an offensive board presents a second scoring opportunity. It is a seperate possesion (not in a basketball play sense, but from a scoring conversion sense). Thoughts?????
Joe Joe, Both your PPP and my SPP (which is incalculable on season stats only per game stats) treat off rebounds the same, so one would not favor GS over the other. ROCKET!! Your point is a measure of a player's efficiency. In measuring a team's efficiency, I believe in measuring per possession. So, no matter how many misses you have per possession doesn't matter, as long as you convert. Call it the Moses Malone stat. Also note, that is why Chicago was so damn effective, because Jordan draws so much attention allowing Rodman more room underneath for rebounding position. imo, you must count offensive boards when measuring team efficiency. FG% is not as important when compared to how often you score per possession. <b>and the stats are in using Points per Possession.</b> (Possession = FGA + FTA/2 + TOs - Off Reb) This was actually really easy using a SQL database...pretty much cut and paste and run a query. <pre><font face="courier" size=1> PPP Wins PPP Wins LAL 1.038 2 Milw 1.048 2 Dal 1.030 4 Tor 1.010 5 SA 1.027 1 Phil 0.990 1 Utah 1.023 4 Orl 0.989 7 Port 1.021 7 Ind 0.978 8 Hou 1.019 9 Char 0.976 6 Minn 1.014 8 Bos 0.974 9 Sac 1.013 3 NYK 0.973 4 Sea 1.011 10 Mia 0.971 3 Den 0.996 10 Wash 0.962 14 LAC 0.968 12 NJN 0.961 12 Phoe 0.961 6 Cle 0.959 11 Vanc 0.954 13 Det 0.957 10 GS 0.931 14 Atl 0.943 13 Chi 0.929 15</font></pre> What stands out is Sac, Phoenix, NYK and Mia. Turns out that Sac and Phoe had even more turnovers than the Rockets. Phoe had almost 1 a game more, and a poor FG%. NYK and Mia are low down because their success was built on defense, not offense....so this still accurately measures their offense. Note how efficient Milwaukee was. And it fits that Dallas would score well, too. If we don't count bonus points due to 3 pointers, Dallas probably falls below SA, and maybe Utah. <b>Compare that to ESPN's Points per Shot--<a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/statistics?stat=teamstatoff&sort=pps&league=nba&seasontype=2&avg=pg&order=true&split=0">PPS rankings</a></b> ROCKET!! PPS does not count offensive rebounds, but notice how GS is last under both measurements. It doesn't really matter...they still suck. PPS, however, somehow places Minn 18th when they are 6th in FG%, and Boston is just way too high at 11th.
Sorry, The spp I was refering to was shots per possession. Just a miserable attempt at humor. I'm at work so here's a quick look at shot per possession. shotperposs LAL ....... 0.843 Dall ....... 0.837 Sa ....... 0.815 Utah ...... 0.805 Hou ........ 0.828 GS ....... 0.878
Here is that the stat used by a friend of mine to calculate possessions. Possessions = Opponent's Field Goals Made + 0.5 * Opponent's Made Free Throws + Opponent's Turnovers + Defensive Rebounds + 0.5*Blocked Shots
Well, I don't know the fancy formulas.but i know that we shot alot of long shots last yr. I know we didn't run even though we are suppose to be young and energetic and i also know we didn't prssure the ball at all and our turnovers lead to points for the other team. It would be nice to give token backcourt pressure like teams do us sometime so some of those backcourt turnovers lead to point.
