The "Fundamental" Statistics

I was watching SportsCenter tonight, and I saw some very interesting statistics after the Celtics/Bobcats highlights: I saw a breakup of certain team statistics during their first 29 games (27-2) and their last 7 (2-5).  The two notable ones for me were their field goal percentages (FG%) and their opponents’ field goal percentages.

But before I get into that, I have to say that it was timely.  I consider two statistics the most fundamental: FG% and +/-, and I had a discussion this evening about the latter (shoutout: Matt, Rob…not Jebner).

No boxscore statistic displays the game in a more raw form than the +/-.  At its simplest, basketball is a team-game of trying to put a ball in your hoop more times than the other team puts it in theirs - the clock will tell you when to stop.  The +/- statistic shows how well the team did at that while you were on the court.

Not so poetically, the boxscore begins at the point totals – the tally of how many times you were able to put the ba... well, you get it.  From the team’s point total, you could consider the point totals of the individual players as the next breakdown, but that doesn’t really say anything about defense.  Similarly, steals and blocks obviously don’t say much about offense.  The +/-, however, quite literally encompasses all of the other statistics by showing the difference in points scored by the team while the player was on the floor.

Now, what’s beautiful about it is also what’s ugly about it: it’s a vague statistic.  The +/- is really no good for use in analyzing a single player in a single game.  It is not expressly indicative of the player’s success or failure; it is that of the team while he was on the court.  It's much more accurate to look at the statistic as how the TEAM did while he was playing.  A player’s teammates may not have played well, or maybe the other team was hot; there are an infinite amount of reasons why the +/- can send a very different message than the other statistics.  Over time, though, it goes back to the basics.  Ultimately, it doesn't matter many points a player scores or how many blocks they get; the 5 guys on the floor have to score more points than the other 5 guys.

The exact value of the +/- is almost never relevant.  In order for the statistic to accurately reflect its fundamentals, you have to take the limit as n-->infinity (thereby negating the relevance of all other variables), find the gold at the end of the rainbow, and do the Hokey Pokey.  It’s terrifying, so I’ll save you the trouble.  The brilliance of the +/- only comes out when it is considered in trends and over long periods of time.  It’s also very important that the values on one team almost never be compared to those of players on other teams.  This would (and has) result(ed) in seeing most of the starting fives from Boston, L.A., Cleveland, etc. at the top of the list.  Instead, it’s much better for observing how well one team does with certain players in the game.

Field goal percentage is a similarly fundamental statistic to me.  We develop strategies to maximize efficiency on offense and effectiveness on defense; the percentages give us the most general idea of how well those strategies are working.  Of course, fouls, offensive rebounds, and turnovers (among others) can radically change the landscape of the game by providing additional chances for points (I think the fact that the Blazers are stellar in the latter two is a direct reflection of good coaching).  Still, over time, FG% will paint a very clear picture about the strength of an offense or a defense.

So back to Boston…

While Boston was 27-2, they had a FG% of 48.6%.  During that time, their opponents shot 41.4%.  Over the last 7 games (5 losses), the Celtics shot a lower 46.6%, but their opponents shot a similar 41.7%.

I couldn’t help but be amazed that their defense held up so well in a 2 and 5 stretch.  41.7% is something that we can only dream of doing consistently.  It’s that stamp, though - the one that the dynasties have.  Chicago, Detroit, San Antonio, Boston.  I’m a Duck football fan, so I love me some offense.  But defense wins championships.

This drought has only taken the Celtics to back-with-the-pack (their winning percentage is nearly equal to L.A. and Cleveland).  I’m sure that Doc Rivers isn’t sweating much - he’ll just go in to work tomorrow spend some extra time on offense.  I can’t imagine he’d have them doing drills on how to put a hand in a guy’s face when they're still holding teams to 41% shooting – none that they wouldn’t be doing otherwise, that is.  It must help the soreness of losing that offensive drills are way more fun.

That's what I want for the Blazers.  We have the slowest offense in the NBA; we get ‘er done with offensive rebounding and taking care of the ball.  We're clearly trying to play smart, slow basketball.  Right now we're trying to figure out how to be effective on offense without Roy, but we're ALWAYS trying to be more effective on defense.  And you can’t love the Blazers without appreciating what the others have done before us!  Kevin Pritchard came out of my favorite one – I’m not ashamed.  I hated Manu because he flopped, but now everybody flops.  I digress...

I look forward to the days where we go 2-5 even though the other teams struggle to efficiently put the ball in the basket.  None of those teams will outlast us in a 7-game series…