Interesting Stat

[Rick Von Braun]

An interesting tidbit...



Total Home Away
Shooting better than opponent 26-0 15-0 11-0
Shooting worse than opponent 0-7 0-1 0-6
Shooting same as opponent 1-0 1-0 0-0


The Spurs could score in the 100s, the 90s, or even the 80s. The could play a fast pace or a slow pace, they could have more or less rebounds than the opposition, they could have more or less assists, more or less turnovers, but if they want to win the games, they have to shot at a better percentage than the opposition. While the sample is not huge, the probability of this correlation being a sampling error is quite low (less than 0.1%).

Note that a team could still win shooting at a lower percentage if they have more shots attempts (from the field or the FT line). In fact, this has happened 4 times, and the Spurs still lost. In other words, shooting percentage differential is an excellent estimator for the game outcome when the Spurs play.

[boutons]

"when the Spurs play"

That applies not only to the Spurs. I haven't done an exhaustive study, but when I look at a game's stats, the team shooting the better FG %age wins, almost without exception. And if you look here:

http://www.nba.com/statistics/sortable_team_statistics/sortable1.html

.. the contenders (most frequent winners) are also top FG% shooting teams. In Spurs' case, not being top scorer is offset by having a 3rd best FG% complemented with the Spurs' leading defensive game. And note that the lowest opp FG% is for all opponents vs Spurs.

The Spurs improved offense this year is wonderful, but PHX, MIA, SEA have more potent, balanced offenses (Spurs have only 3 players with 10+ PPG) so the Spurs title success depends on keeping the offense going while maintaining the best defense, just like previous years. The Spurs' defense is what distinguishes the Spurs from the other contenders. duh

[2pac]

I think the Spurs passing, and defense to block the passing lanes is more telling.

We are averaging 23 assists, and giving up only 16 assists.

Assists for: 5th in the NBA.
Sacramento has 25, Utah has 23.3 and Phoenix and Minnesota has 23.4.

But on assists given up - no other team is holding their opponent under 20 - we are holding our opponent to 16 - or four less than any other team. Without giving up the easy baskets - teams struggle to find the rythem and groove against us. Because we give up 4 less assists than anyone else by blocking the passing lanes - those are likely easy baskets - like backdoors, etc that we dont give up - which means 8 less points.

In addition - we are blocking 6.6 shots per game - more than anyone in the NBA. Because most blocks come down low (Rasho/Duncan with 4.5/game) thats likely 12-14 points we are not giving up.

So add that to the passing defense, and we are just about at a 20 point advantage because we play great defense.

Add in the fact that we are taking care of the ball and we are top ten in turnovers and top five in A/TO ratio and we are amazing.

[boutons]

"But on assists given up - no other team is holding their opponent under 20"

... which is one of the key stats the SA screwed up in the fucking dumbass loss to SAC. Our defense was bad, gave up 23 AST (par for SAC), and Spurs got outrebounded, too. We didn't "hold" SAC to 86 pts, because SAC shot 44% FG, while Spurs shot 38% (there's that "idiot light" win-indicator again).

[Nikos]

An interesting tidbit...



Total Home Away
Shooting better than opponent 26-0 15-0 11-0
Shooting worse than opponent 0-7 0-1 0-6
Shooting same as opponent 1-0 1-0 0-0


The Spurs could score in the 100s, the 90s, or even the 80s. The could play a fast pace or a slow pace, they could have more or less rebounds than the opposition, they could have more or less assists, more or less turnovers, but if they want to win the games, they have to shot at a better percentage than the opposition. While the sample is not huge, the probability of this correlation being a sampling error is quite low (less than 0.1%).

Note that a team could still win shooting at a lower percentage if they have more shots attempts (from the field or the FT line). In fact, this has happened 4 times, and the Spurs still lost. In other words, shooting percentage differential is an excellent estimator for the game outcome when the Spurs play.


What are some trends for other teams, do you know of any? Teams like the Suns, Sonics, Heat?

Did you conduct this analysis yourself, or did you find it from someone else?

[BigVee]

Years ago, I read where John Wooden said that after looking back on all the games he coached, the most significant stat was shooting percentage. He felt that stat was a result of a lot of other things that happen during a game, i.e execution, defense etc. but that one stat was the best measurement for wins and losses.

[Solid D]

Good person to quote there, BigVee.

Spurs shot .442 last season but were outshot by the Lakers .399 to .472 in the Western Conf. Semis, according to nba.com.

[ChumpDumper]

If you look at individual players' splits, there is an impressive spread between their FG% in wins and losses.

[boutons]

".399 to .472"

Which was a failure of Spurs defense to hold the Lakers FG% down, plus the Lakers Shutting down the Spurs inside/Tim, and driving/Tony/Manu scoring. Had the Spurs D at least held the Lakers FG% down, Spurs might have had B2B rings.

Question: does anybody think that if a team this year (season or playoffs) shuts down the paint the way the Lakers did, that the Spurs are now in better shape to overcome such a defense?

I think not. The Spurs were good enough shooters last year, and this year, during the season, esp in the 16-game win streak preceding the 4-game losing streak. I don't think a single shooter, like Barry or Stephen or Kerr, would make that much difference when the team %age is so low vs the opp %age.

ie, if the defense makes the paint attack difficult, the Spurs still have to find a way to score in the paint vs depending on long jump shooting.

[Solid D]

2 critical success factors, boutons. Barry and Udrih.

Barry and Udrih would have to shoot well from the outside to make a difference.

Barry and Udrih finding the open man is a major + over last year. The quick reversals and ball movement can break down most defenses but the shots still need to fall, no matter how open they are.

[Rick Von Braun]

"when the Spurs play"

That applies not only to the Spurs. I haven't done an exhaustive study, but when I look at a game's stats, the team shooting the better FG %age wins, almost without exception. And if you look here:

http://www.nba.com/statistics/sorta.../sortable1.html (http://www.nba.com/statistics/sortable_team_statistics/sortable1.html)

.. the contenders (most frequent winners) are also top FG% shooting teams.

*snip*

I didn't do an exhaustive study either, but I run some numbers. That table you provided is not that useful because it shows averages, NOT team records as a function of a parameter. No other team in the league has the correlation factor than the Spurs have, not even other winning teams. For example, the numbers for the Sonics are:

Shooting better than opponent 18-5
Shooting worse than opponent 1-6
Shooting same as opponent 3-0

Most winning teams have relatively high positive and negative correlation respectively (better or worse FG%), but no other teams has 1.0 and -1.0 values. None.

There are some possible explanations of this result. For example, teams that win by a large margins make less probable that they shoot the ball significantly worse than the opponents (i.e. the Spurs). In addition, teams that rely on 3pters have higher probability of finishing the game with a lower FG% and more points than the opponnents. If I were to use effective FG%, then that would probably be the best estimator, since it would take into account treys (offensive rebounds, steals and opponent turnovers would still play a role though).



What are some trends for other teams, do you know of any? Teams like the Suns, Sonics, Heat?
For other teams, other estimators seem to have better prediction ability, but I didn't do an exhaustive study to find the best estimator factors for all teams, I simply concentrated on the Spurs.



Did you conduct this analysis yourself, or did you find it from someone else?I conducted the analysis myself.

Just to clarify, my only intention was to provide a simple but yet effective W-L predictor for the Spurs. During a game, you could just take a look at the scoreboard and calculate the FG% differential to estimate the chances of the Spurs winning the game quite accurately.

[Nikos]

Rick Is there any chance you can do a study that tells what the Spurs record is when they have a better PPFGA (PSA) than the opposing team?

PSA = Points Per Shot (while factoring FT's and the value of each possesion being approx .44).

[Rick Von Braun]

Rick Is there any chance you can do a study that tells what the Spurs record is when they have a better PPFGA (PSA) than the opposing team?

PSA = Points Per Shot (while factoring FT's and the value of each possesion being approx .44).I am sorry, but I am short on time. http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/images/smilies/smidepressed.gif

You can always come up with a metric that combines multiple factors and makes a very accurate predictor, not only of W-L, but even margins of victory. There is a tradeoff between the complexity of the metric and its prediction ability.

My point was that FG% is as simple as it gets, most boxscores provide it in pseudo-real time, and it could be used by any fan with no expertise or further calculations.

[boutons]

In-game, I use FG% (both teams) as my primary indicator of "quality", which nearly always tracks the score, knowing that Spurs hold opp to avg FG of 41%.

pts/qtr allowed measured against Spurs avg allowed of 21 (86 PPG allowed). If the opponent just hit the Spurs for 30+ pts in a qtr (rate of 120 PPG), I know the Spurs D sucked that qtr (or one player was hot shooting, out of his head).

And Spurs tend to suck on both ends. If the D is weak to mediocre, Spurs usually ain't doing much on offense, either, with the Spurs losing or a very close game.

[Rick Von Braun]

An interesting tidbit...



Total Home Away
Shooting better than opponent 26-0 15-0 11-0
Shooting worse than opponent 0-7 0-1 0-6
Shooting same as opponent 1-0 1-0 0-0


The Spurs could score in the 100s, the 90s, or even the 80s. The could play a fast pace or a slow pace, they could have more or less rebounds than the opposition, they could have more or less assists, more or less turnovers, but if they want to win the games, they have to shot at a better percentage than the opposition. While the sample is not huge, the probability of this correlation being a sampling error is quite low (less than 0.1%).

Note that a team could still win shooting at a lower percentage if they have more shots attempts (from the field or the FT line). In fact, this has happened 4 times, and the Spurs still lost. In other words, shooting percentage differential is an excellent estimator for the game outcome when the Spurs play.Sheeeeet... the Spurs drop this one while shooting at a very high percentage.

FG%: SAN .541 -- UTH .486
Shooting better than opponent 26-1 15-0 11-1

The difference in this game, +6 steals, +4 off rebounds and -4 TOs created gave the Jazz 13 more attempts than the Spurs. The Jazz brought more energy to the game.

The last possesion by the Jazz gives you an idea of the game.... Tim Duncan goes for the deffensive rebound and misses, Okur gets the offensive rebound, the basket and the win. Neither Horry nor Duncan boxed out Okur in the last play. We were outhustled by the Jazz.