NYT: The Pick-And-Roll is the NBA's Old Reliable

"No other play in the N.B.A. creates such havoc, no other play is used as often." A few surprises regarding which teams use it the most and the least, and what statistically is the best way to defend it. Great article. Via Kevin Pelton.

about 2 years ago Norsktroll 5 comments 3 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

interesting read

Have to disagree with this though:

For example, when the defender went under the pick against James, he averaged 0.93 points. When James was played over the pick, he averaged 1.02 points.

They generalize as if NBA teams are irrationally going over the pick because LeBron is more effective if you go over. But of course LeBron is devastating attacking the basket and has a somewhat suspect jumper. So it’s going to make more sense to force him to use that jumper than to allow him to power his way to the hoop.

by atomiccafe on Nov 20, 2009 9:54 AM PST reply actions

Why use the PnR so much?

Those teams scored less than one point per possession, for the most part (presumably that includes free throws). Teams average more than that overall:
http://tinyurl.com/6lgow4

So it’s less efficient than offense in general but used more often? Huh?

by erastus25 on Nov 20, 2009 12:37 PM PST reply actions

I can't really argue with your logic

But it seems like there’s no way this can be true.

Maybe possessions that don’t use a PnR are often fast-breaks, which are skewed towards 2 points?

by rmcdougall on Nov 20, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions

that's my guess

Also, do stickbacks count as an additional possession? If so, an offensive rebound and quick 2 would be a high percentage possession not resulting from the P n R.

Teams also tend to use the P n R after checking through some easy “early offense” options (big with great position in the post, wing cutting wide open to the basket). At the end of the shot clock, they will rely on the P n R to create against a set defense when other options didn’t work out, which would explain why it doesn’t necessarily work as well.

by atomiccafe on Nov 20, 2009 3:00 PM PST up reply actions

They might be using a different definition for what a possesion is

With Hollinger’s offensive efficiency numbers if a team gets an offensive rebound it is still considered the same possession. It is possible that Synergy is using a different definition for a possession and regarding each offensive rebound as a new possession.

Even if there isn’t a difference in definition of what a possession is, it makes sense that the plays that create most of a team’s offense (pick and roll, post ups, isos) will have a lower efficiency that the team’s efficiency overall. You take out those plays and what you have left are things like fast breaks, cuts to the basket, and put-backs, all high-percentage plays that you won’t have a chance to use every possession.

by trk on Nov 21, 2009 2:48 PM PST up reply actions