duncan228
04-22-2010, 09:22 PM
Spurs Roundup: The Four Factors that gave San Antonio the edge in Game 2 (http://www.kens5.com/sports/Spurs-Roundup-The-Four-Factors-that-gave-San-Antonio-the-edge-in-Game-2-91815064.html)
by Dan Oshinsky / KENS 5
By now, you've probably heard of them, or at least heard of their creations. If you've read Michael Lewis' "Moneyball," their creations will sound especially familiar: OBP. Slg%. VORP.
Thanks to men like Bill James, Voros McCracken and Nate Silver, stats like on-base percentage, slugging percentage and Value Above Replacement Player were added to the sports fan's lexicon, and baseball fans are better off for it.
Basketball has its own stat gurus. So if you want to know why the Spurs had such success in Game 2 against the Mavs -- and why they struggled so mightily in Game 1 -- you'll need to look to a lesser-known basketball mind: Dean Oliver.
The Four Factors
Oliver wrote a book called "Basketball on Paper," in which he explains the four most important factors to basketball success:
1. Shooting
2. Limiting turnovers
3. Offensive rebounding
4. Getting to the free throw line
Seems obvious, right?
Except that the metrics Oliver used to measure those four factors aren't that typical (http://www.rawbw.com/~deano/articles/20040601_roboscout.htm):
1. eFG%: Effective field goal percentage is like regular field goal percentage, except for one thing: it adds extra weight for successful three-point baskets. An example: Manu Ginobili shot 44.1 percent from the field this season, but thanks to his strong three-point shooting percentage, his eFG% was 51.4%.
2. Turnover percentage: Some teams play at a faster pace, which leads to more possessions, which leads to more shots, rebounds and turnovers. So some teams might look like they're turnover happy, but really, they're being penalized for creating extra chances on offense. What turnover percentage does is put the rate of turnovers in proper context. The formula: turnovers divided by possessions.
3. Offensive rebounding percentage: Again, it's all about context. The percentage measures how successful a team is at grabbing offensive boards based on how many chances they have to grab offensive rebounds in each game.
4. Free throw rate: This measures how many free throw attempts a team gets per field goal attempt. Teams that get the ball inside tend to draw more fouls per field goal attempt. And the old cliche holds true: free throw success and playoff success typically go hand in hand.
So how have the Spurs done in this series?
Game 1
NBA Stats (http://statsheet.com/nba)
http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x282/duncan228/temp/4factors.jpg
More stats at StatSheet.com (http://statsheet.com/nba/games/2010/04/18/san-antonio-spurs-94-dallas-mavericks-100)
The Good: The Spurs shot the ball well, and their three-point shooting percentage (4 of 11) was acceptable. Overall, they shot well enough to win the game.
The Bad: The Spurs could not keep the Mavs off the free throw line. For every 10 shots the Mavs attempted, they shot about 4.5 free throws. That's a remarkable percentage. Meanwhile, the Spurs were getting one free throw attempt per every 10 shot attempts.
Compounding the problem was the Mavs' dominance on the offensive glass. The Mavs grabbed 30 percent of the available offensive rebounds, leading to many more second chance opportunities (and points).
Game 2
NBA Stats (http://statsheet.com/nba)
http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x282/duncan228/temp/4factors2.jpg
More stats at StatSheet.com (http://statsheet.com/nba/games/2010/04/21/san-antonio-spurs-102-dallas-mavericks-88)
The Good: The Spurs won on all four factors. Of note:
* The Spurs shot nearly an identical eFG% as in Game 1. The Mavs shot a full 10 percent worse.
* The Spurs cut down on their turnovers per possession.
* The Spurs dominated the offensive glass, even though the Mavs had a similar offensive rebounding percentage in both games.
* The Spurs got to the line more frequently, and they cut the Mavs' free throw rate in half.
If the Spurs can win all four factors again on Friday, expect the series to swing to 2-1 in San Antonio's favor.
One More Thing to Watch For
The Spurs have made a few major shifts to their postseason lineup. DeJuan Blair has seen a combined 17 minutes of game action so far in this series, but Matt Bonner's played 19 minutes in both games. Looks like Gregg Popovich is going with experience, three-point shooting and a shock of red hair in this series.
Then there's the curious case of Keith Bogans: he played 16 minutes in Game 1 but rode the bench in Game 2. And after the way the Spurs responded in that second game, don't expect Bogans to see many minutes in Game 3.
by Dan Oshinsky / KENS 5
By now, you've probably heard of them, or at least heard of their creations. If you've read Michael Lewis' "Moneyball," their creations will sound especially familiar: OBP. Slg%. VORP.
Thanks to men like Bill James, Voros McCracken and Nate Silver, stats like on-base percentage, slugging percentage and Value Above Replacement Player were added to the sports fan's lexicon, and baseball fans are better off for it.
Basketball has its own stat gurus. So if you want to know why the Spurs had such success in Game 2 against the Mavs -- and why they struggled so mightily in Game 1 -- you'll need to look to a lesser-known basketball mind: Dean Oliver.
The Four Factors
Oliver wrote a book called "Basketball on Paper," in which he explains the four most important factors to basketball success:
1. Shooting
2. Limiting turnovers
3. Offensive rebounding
4. Getting to the free throw line
Seems obvious, right?
Except that the metrics Oliver used to measure those four factors aren't that typical (http://www.rawbw.com/~deano/articles/20040601_roboscout.htm):
1. eFG%: Effective field goal percentage is like regular field goal percentage, except for one thing: it adds extra weight for successful three-point baskets. An example: Manu Ginobili shot 44.1 percent from the field this season, but thanks to his strong three-point shooting percentage, his eFG% was 51.4%.
2. Turnover percentage: Some teams play at a faster pace, which leads to more possessions, which leads to more shots, rebounds and turnovers. So some teams might look like they're turnover happy, but really, they're being penalized for creating extra chances on offense. What turnover percentage does is put the rate of turnovers in proper context. The formula: turnovers divided by possessions.
3. Offensive rebounding percentage: Again, it's all about context. The percentage measures how successful a team is at grabbing offensive boards based on how many chances they have to grab offensive rebounds in each game.
4. Free throw rate: This measures how many free throw attempts a team gets per field goal attempt. Teams that get the ball inside tend to draw more fouls per field goal attempt. And the old cliche holds true: free throw success and playoff success typically go hand in hand.
So how have the Spurs done in this series?
Game 1
NBA Stats (http://statsheet.com/nba)
http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x282/duncan228/temp/4factors.jpg
More stats at StatSheet.com (http://statsheet.com/nba/games/2010/04/18/san-antonio-spurs-94-dallas-mavericks-100)
The Good: The Spurs shot the ball well, and their three-point shooting percentage (4 of 11) was acceptable. Overall, they shot well enough to win the game.
The Bad: The Spurs could not keep the Mavs off the free throw line. For every 10 shots the Mavs attempted, they shot about 4.5 free throws. That's a remarkable percentage. Meanwhile, the Spurs were getting one free throw attempt per every 10 shot attempts.
Compounding the problem was the Mavs' dominance on the offensive glass. The Mavs grabbed 30 percent of the available offensive rebounds, leading to many more second chance opportunities (and points).
Game 2
NBA Stats (http://statsheet.com/nba)
http://i182.photobucket.com/albums/x282/duncan228/temp/4factors2.jpg
More stats at StatSheet.com (http://statsheet.com/nba/games/2010/04/21/san-antonio-spurs-102-dallas-mavericks-88)
The Good: The Spurs won on all four factors. Of note:
* The Spurs shot nearly an identical eFG% as in Game 1. The Mavs shot a full 10 percent worse.
* The Spurs cut down on their turnovers per possession.
* The Spurs dominated the offensive glass, even though the Mavs had a similar offensive rebounding percentage in both games.
* The Spurs got to the line more frequently, and they cut the Mavs' free throw rate in half.
If the Spurs can win all four factors again on Friday, expect the series to swing to 2-1 in San Antonio's favor.
One More Thing to Watch For
The Spurs have made a few major shifts to their postseason lineup. DeJuan Blair has seen a combined 17 minutes of game action so far in this series, but Matt Bonner's played 19 minutes in both games. Looks like Gregg Popovich is going with experience, three-point shooting and a shock of red hair in this series.
Then there's the curious case of Keith Bogans: he played 16 minutes in Game 1 but rode the bench in Game 2. And after the way the Spurs responded in that second game, don't expect Bogans to see many minutes in Game 3.