Blazer's Edge: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:



Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Steve McNair Found Shot to Death


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…

3 recs | Comment 15 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

This thread indirectly explains why I'm worried about LaMarcus Aldridge's piss-poor TS%, while also ...

unimpressed with his gawdy +/- production that’s affected by variables in Channing Frye and Travis Outlaw.

by AK1984 on Jan 7, 2009 4:04 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

yes, he needs to get to the line more

Hopefully he’ll develop some more go-to post moves other than the hook and draw more fouls in the process

"It’s a good ol’ fashioned Rip City beat down!"

by Magnum on Jan 7, 2009 10:32 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

His +/- hasn't been affected by Channing Frye in a while...

I’m not saying you should feel any differently about LaMarcus right now, but we’ve played enough games without seeing Channing Frye that he shouldn’t really be in the discussion about LaMarcus’s +/-. At 35 minutes per game, LA is affected by other things more than he is Frye. And Travis? How do you explain Travis’s radically low +/-? You’re saying that LA’s high +/- is affected by a guy that he plays with 5% of the time, and another that has one of the lowest +/- on the team? From a mathematical standpoint, I’m going to need more convincing.

In K.P. I trust.

by Thack on Jan 7, 2009 11:08 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Of course, there are other parts of offense.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/a/aldrila01.html

In the “Advanced” section, Aldridge’s ORtg for this season is at 112 points produced per 100 possessions, roughly 5 points above league average. ORtg does not take into account usage (which is high for Aldridge), making it similar to TS% and other rate stats. Therefore, he’s an efficient offensive player with box score stats on high usage with a strong +/-. Somehow, I don’t think his +/- is only due to who his backups are.

by poster on Jan 7, 2009 2:52 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What stat isn't?

Oncourt-offcourt, your preferred stat, is at least as influenced by teammates as box score stats are. Roy’s stats are influenced by playing with Aldridge and everyone else as well. Are you saying that TS% is the only way to judge a player’s worth? TS% is largely affected by one of the most volatile year-by-year stats in 2PT FG%.

by poster on Jan 8, 2009 12:49 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

thank you,

this helps

December 18, 2008.

"Roy is Roy, and if I were to bet my life on a game of 5-on-5, I’d bet on whichever team Roy was playing on." by HurraKane212

by maid tu rek on Jan 7, 2009 5:51 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

What about 3-pointers?

I think modern analysis has moved beyond the strict interpretation of FG% . eFG% which weights 3 pointers made by 1.5 gives a truer indication of shooting percentage. TS% which includes free throws is another wrinkle.

by tucsonhanny on Jan 7, 2009 7:53 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Wouldn't the fundamental statistics be points scored and points allowed?

I think +/- is the most flawed statistic in all the world. It makes absolutely no sense to me. Say a coach substitutes all 5 guys and then the point guard turns the ball over 5 times in a row for 5 dunks, everyone has a -10. I just don’t get it.

by tominhawaii on Jan 7, 2009 8:05 AM PST reply reply actions actions   1 recs

Word. WAY to many variables to used with any sort of accuracy. What if you are being

taken in and out of games around the same time as 2-3 other players on your team. And those 2-3 players sucked cheeze its. It would look on paper like you sucked cheeze its. Unfair. Unreliable. UnAmerican. Unpredictable. Unsatisfactory. Under my Umberella Eh Eh Eh.

I'm a little confused by your tactics

by oderiferous emanations 74 on Jan 7, 2009 8:59 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

"the boxscore begins at the point totals"

Yes, it starts with points scored and points allowed, as I said. From there, the most general statistic that displays a players effectiveness is the +/-. Again, it’s TOO general, which is why you can’t look at specific game situations. You need many many many games as a sample size before those sorts of situations that you’re describing are ironed out. Think big picture.

In K.P. I trust.

by Thack on Jan 7, 2009 10:55 AM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

If I'm thinking big picture, then I'm only looking at the standings

+/- is misleading because no one looks at the big picture. The stat depends way too much on the player’s teammate.

If I had a cat that always referenced +/-, I’d stuff that cat in a sack and throw it off a bridge.

by tominhawaii on Jan 7, 2009 12:32 PM PST to parent up reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Well said my friend, well said.
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.

I hate the incorrect use of +/- almost as much as i hate epsn nuckleheads who look only at average number of rebounds and say we’re the worst rebounding team in the league without so much as bothering to adjust for pace or look at reb%.

Fear the Pryzpocalypse

by postup on Jan 7, 2009 10:50 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

points, rebounds, freethrows – all of the boxscore statistics are part of the puzzle that makes up the +/- and the game. yes, you can think of many specific scenarios why the +/- isn’t accurate. but you’re right, over time(!) those get ironed out and the +/- is great to see how different players or combinations of players perform for a team.

by FranciscoSmith on Jan 7, 2009 11:51 AM PST reply reply actions actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

A site by Blazer fans, for Blazer fans
Start posting about the Trail Blazers »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

100_4977_small
JD 7/5
Small
Commitment
Small
Nicolas Batum interview in REVERSE (french mag) of July
Small
HAVE WE LOST OUR MINDS
N1313394467_27679_4745_small
Hedo Turkgolu: 7 Stages of grief (now 14)

Recent FanPosts

180px-blazers_original_small
Check the action, KP. The cards will come.
Batum_small
Cap Space Options
Small
Outside Shooting vs. Driving to the hoop
Small
2009 Blazers = 2000 Bulls?
Small
Blessing in Disguise
Nike_o_small
Why not Andre Miller?
Small
Creating an Offensive Advantage
Small
Interesting take. What are your thoughts?
Small
David Lee begets a SF in the Future

Post_icon New FanPost All FanPosts Carrot-mini

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Greedo Turkoglu



"E lo tolo Pritchard????"
See Ya Later Hedo! It was fun while it lasted :)
fooled us!
Hedo Rejects Deal, Ends Talks
Hedo in red and black. Bustabucket whipped out the Photoshop

Recent FanShots

Thought this was hecka funny TORONTO / PORTLAND - Turkish star Hidayet...
Odem and Lee Not Right For the Blazers
Victor Claver Video Interview
They do not teach pronouns at the Toronto Sun
New Canzano column re: Hedo
Think he'd sign for veteran's minimum?
The Ron Artest Soap Opera Reviewed (by timbo)
Monty Williams might be a top candidate for Wolves
How going after Lee makes sense
Blazers strike back, switch D-League co-affiliate from Toronto to Denver

Post_icon New FanShot All FanShots Carrot-mini


Editors

Kitten_small Dave

Ben_small Ben.

Moderators

Pict1126_small -ken

Polar_bear_small jorga

151054601_tp_small prezofdeath

Small usmcr3049

Jesus_icon_i_small T Darkstar

Wallpaper_small geoffm

Official Partner of Yahoo! Sports