The most lopsided stat in NBA history?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kace

the only interesting stat is free throws attempted against free throws allowed per game.

and guess what, it's 19.8 against 19.8, and we shoot these FT at exactly the same % than our opponent against us (77 %).

Which means we're not winning nor giving up a SINGLE ONE POINT in the FT area compared to our opponents.


though, it would be interesting to look at this stat in the matchup against the TOP teams to see if we have a disadvantage here.

---

If you assume that the other teams in the league play defense as well as we do, then there is some merit to that. (But not much.) Otherwise, it's completely fucking ridiculous. One thing you're not considering is that since the break, our defense has improved. But our opponents FT attempts have risen significantly, while our FT attempts have dropped significantly.

It's late, but I'll post some more direct numbers later. For now, consider a couple of things:

1. If the Spurs have so few free throw attempts because of pace, then shouldn't their assists and rebounds reflect the same thing? If you pace-adjust those numbers, the Spurs are off the charts.

2. Since the break, the Spurs' 3-point attempts have dropped significantly. They have been taking about the same number of 3's they took in their last championship season. They haven't been "living by the 3" nearly as much as they did early in the season. You may not have noticed the shift, but the numbers don't lie.

3. The Spurs have also been taking a much bigger percentage of their 2-point attempts in the paint than you might guess. I'll try and pull some exact numbers - but you might want to have a look at some of the game play-by-plays and notice how many of their shots (made and missed) are in the paint. All I'm saying is that they aren't drawing enough whistles on those plays.

4. The Spurs' 2-point FG% has been much higher than the Lakers', Celtics', Cavs', or Magic's. If you still believe that they are taking more than their share of jump shots, then you have to conclude that they are the best-shooting team in the league. You can't have it both ways. If they are shooting a much higher percentage, from much farther away, they are better shooters. Does it feel like they are the best-shooting team in the league? I'm telling you, they are taking a lot more shots near the rim than you think. Especially since the break.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

One thing you're not considering is that since the break, our defense has improved. But our opponents FT attempts have risen significantly, while our FT attempts have dropped significantly.

---

I don't see your problem with that.
It is not that simple, but an improved defense probably means that you are playing more physical. So it is not really surprising that our opponents FT attempts have risen.

We also have only 3 players shooting at least 4 FT/game. One is out.
No surprise to see a drop in our FTA.


And from your original post:

Quote:

---

But when you are looking at season averages, it still means that the Spurs are having to work a hell of a lot harder to put points on the board.

---

I have to disagree with that.
In the top 10 in FTA/game, you have Kevin Martin, Wade, Maggette, Bosh, Stoudemire, Carmelo Anthony. A list of players who have missed a number of games through their career because of injuries.
I can't believe it is a coincidence. IMO, you have to work hard to shoot a lot of FT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathbzh

In the top 10 in FTA/game, you have Kevin Martin

---

You invalidate any argument you have with this.

Kevin Martin shoots more FTA than Tim Duncan and Tony Parker.

Consider that for just a second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cry Havoc

You invalidate any argument you have with this.

Kevin Martin shoots more FTA than Tim Duncan and Tony Parker.

Consider that for just a second.

---

So what?

I never said it is a good or bad thing to shoot a lot of FT.
All I say is that you need to work hard to obtain FT...

I wonder what argument you are talking about.

I suspect you have found something; and I suspect it is because SA's superstars (Tim and Tony, this season; Manu is not included because he hasn't played enough) don't get the level of "respect" that other stars get. You could confirm this by FTA's/g for each team and subtracting the top 2 generators of FTA from each team...

Consider that TD gets 6.7 fta/36 and tony gets 5.1. (on a per game basis, TD gets 6.4 and tony gets 4.8 fta/g). According to 82games.com Duncan is 22nd (17%) (in the league in % of fouls drawn per shot attempt. While TP, is 98th (10%)... Duncan is 8th in the league at and 1's drawn, and Parker is 58th. If I could figure out a way to sort the data for big men, I might find that TD gets his fair share, but I strongly suspect that TP gets a lot less calls than he "should".

PS to continue the comparison to NJ you started. Their top 2 are Harris and Carter. Harris is 3ed in the league at and 1's, carter is 36th. Harris is 3ed (21%) in the league at % of fouls per shot attempt, and Carter is 96th (10%). FTA/36 is 9.2 for Harris and 5.0 for Carter (9.3 and 5.1 per game respectively). The top 2 stars generate 3.2 fta/game more for NJ, which is half of your observed 6.3 FTA/game (spread over less than 30% of the minutes available TP MPG = 33.9, TD MPG = 34.6, combined = 68.5 of 240 MPG = 28.5%. For Carter and Harris, the equivalent percentage is 30.6%).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathbzh

So what?

I never said it is a good or bad thing to shoot a lot of FT.
All I say is that you need to work hard to obtain FT...

I wonder what argument you are talking about.

---

What are you talking about?

It's always, always, always a good thing to shoot a lot of FT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cry Havoc

What are you talking about?

It's always, always, always a good thing to shoot a lot of FT.

---

But it does not means you don't have to work to have them.

Look at my posts in that thread.
The only things I said are:
1) it is useless to compare FT shooting in distinct games. Spurs are shooting the same numbers of FT than their opponents.
2) You don't shoot FT when you are waiting on the 3pt line. You need to work for them.
3) The post ASG FT shooting trend is not so surprising with an improved defense and Ginobili out.


And I will quote you one last time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cry Havoc

It's always, always, always a good thing to shoot a lot of FT.

---

Say that to Shaq

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mathbzh

But it does not means you don't have to work to have them.

Look at my posts in that thread.
The only things I said are:
1) it is useless to compare FT shooting in distinct games. Spurs are shooting the same numbers of FT than their opponents.
2) You don't shoot FT when you are waiting on the 3pt line. You need to work for them.
3) The post ASG FT shooting trend is not so surprising with an improved defense and Ginobili out.

---

This isn't just a post ASG FT shooting trend. The Spurs are shooting FTs at a HISTORICALLY low rate with the best post player since Abdul-Jabbar and one of the top 3 point guards in the NBA? With maybe the best penetrating player in the NBA? Not to mention perhaps the top finisher at the rim?

THIS. DOESN'T. MAKE. SENSE.

Quote:

---

And I will quote you one last time

Say that to Shaq

---

Okay. Since you're attempting to say it's a BAD thing when Shaq shoots a free throw, would you be willing to bet that if Shaq shot 70 free throws in a single game for the Suns this year that they'd lose the game? Because you're stating it's a bad thing and that's absolutely devoid of any kind of rationale. Free throws are ALWAYS good. They're free shots at the hoop even if you miss them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GSH

3. The Spurs have also been taking a much bigger percentage of their 2-point attempts in the paint than you might guess. I'll try and pull some exact numbers - but you might want to have a look at some of the game play-by-plays and notice how many of their shots (made and missed) are in the paint.

---

see above: "Spurs therefore currently scoring 34.9% of their points in the paint, versus 42.5% as recently as January."

I hate free throws.

They take so damn long, especially Tim.


When I record a game on my DVR, I fast-fwd through that crap.

Manu's out. That's a lot of fouls right there.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Agloco

Manu's out. That's a lot of fouls right there.....

---

So a Spurs team without Manu should draw less fouls than some of the worst teams in NBA history? There is no logic to this.

It is just pace, and the Spurs shoot many threes too. We have no slashers outside of the big three and even if the Spurs get near the basket, they can't get the ball into the hoop anyway. The refs also seem to swallow their whistles when they see the Spurs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

These Spurs aren't built to get to the line. The only players who get to the line at all are the Big Three and George Hill. With Manu out, Duncan slowed and Hill no longer playing point guard, that leaves just Parker.

Earlier in the season, Bonner was on pace to shoot less free throw attempts per minute than anyone in NBA history. Players like Mason, Finley, Thomas, Udoka and Bowen all hardly get to the line. Add in a slower than usual pace and the fact that the team relies so heavily on three-point shooting ... and it's not too surprising.

The lack of free throw attempts was a problem last season and with Bonner and Mason added to the rotation, the problem was bound to get worse.

---

I really get tired of this company line. There have been a ton of non calls and it has nothing to do with Bonner or Mason.

well, talking about amazing stats, what about the spurs being the best team in the league since 2006 in second game of back-to-back, at 68 % of wins in those games ??? :wow

everyone keep saying we suck in those games though. very unexpected stat for me.

people are saying we shoot a lot of threes, but do we really shoot more threes than teams like orlando? the pacers? kings?

yes, i realize orlando has howard inside with nelson and turkoglu driving. but are you really going to tell me they match the presence of our big 3?

obviously manu being out is a factor, but it shouldnt be a historical one

kevin martin gets 10 fta/g? I like him as a player, but dude barely drives- i checked his hot spots site on nba.com and he's shot 430 shots outside the paint, vs 260 inside.

Tony has 364 outside, and 637 inside. 637. yet he averages almost half the number of FTA per game? thats just absurd. how does kevin martin work harder for his FT, just because he gets injured more? its certainly not because hes driving more.

Im not going to cry conspiracy, but there's not a doubt in mind that tony gets no respect. and for the guy saying FTA arent necessarily good, of course they are. one, you are getting the other teams players in foul trouble. two, you are getting them over the penalty. that means that when the game is tight, they dont have fouls to give. it means they have to go deeper into their rotation and change the way they defend you. and all of those benefits are independent of whether you sink the FTs.

Spurs are just an old soft team

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by diego

and for the guy saying FTA arent necessarily good, of course they are.

---

I am this guy... and I never said that (but for a sarcastic comment about Shaq).
All I said is that it is not a problem if you shoot only 18 FT as long as your opponent don't shoot more than you.

For the comment about Shaq shooting 70 FT (I guess it would put the Suns at shooting 80-85 FT)... I would be very comfortable with this if the Spurs are also shooting 85 FT.

I don't like to capitalize my post but here I need to say it.
I AGREE WITH YOU... SHOOTING FT IS A GOOD THING (high%, foul trouble...).
BUT, IT IS FALSE TO BELIEVE YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORK FOR THEM

All I say is that the situation is not as bad as some of you make it sound.

Even if you disagree, I hope you will understand what I am trying to say (sorry I french, and sometime I have a hard time to express clearly my feelings about the game).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kace

well, talking about amazing stats, what about the spurs being the best team in the league since 2006 in second game of back-to-back, at 68 % of wins in those games ??? :wow

everyone keep saying we suck in those games though. very unexpected stat for me.

---

That is amazing.

Wasn't it like 03-04 where we couldn't win a B2B to save our life?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dbestpro

I really get tired of this company line. There have been a ton of non calls and it has nothing to do with Bonner or Mason.

---

Fine, but the stats cited by kace earlier suggest that while the Spurs deal with a lot of non-calls, their opponents have to do the same thing on most nights.

To me, the numbers indicate that officials call fewer free throw fouls in games involving the Spurs than any other team in the association. The Spurs shoot 19.7 FTA/gm, Spurs' opponents shoot 19.8 FTA/gm. So, in any given Spurs game, the total on FTA is likely to hover around 40; the next closest combination appears to be Toronto, whose games average right around 44.

I think what the numbers suggest isn't that the Spurs are getting hosed in particular games -- I think they suggest that officials "let them play" a lot more in games involving the Spurs, which is something of a nod to the Spurs' pedigree and to their desire to play physical defense.

The conspiratorial bent of this thread would make much, much more sense if the numbers showed that the Spurs FTA/gm were low and that teams playing games against the Spurs were getting to the line substantially more often. They're not. Again, I think all of this goes to show that officials allow much more physical play in Spurs games -- on both ends -- and that strikes me as being fairly beneficial to the Spurs, given their need to play tough defense, their inability to attack the basket frequently, and their reliance on shooting the three (25% of all Spurs FGA in 2008-09 are 3's).

I also don't buy that superstars are entitled to calls or that stars get calls because they're stars. I think certain kinds of plays in the NBA get calls -- usually, hard and athletic drives -- and I think it just so happens that superstars are best able to make those kinds of plays and, therefore, get the calls that follow them. Corey Maggette and Kevin Martin aren't superstars, but they get calls because they constantly attack the basket.

It frustrates me sometimes to see how much opponents can get away with against Tim on the box, but the numbers we're talking about would certainly seem to suggest that if I watched the other end without my Spurs-colored glasses on, I'd see that the Spurs bigs are getting away with the same sorts of contact on the same sorts of plays. I don't think, however, that Tim is entitled to calls just because he's Tim Duncan.

+1 FromWayDowntown
You said it better than me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FromWayDowntown

Fine, but the stats cited by kace earlier suggest that while the Spurs deal with a lot of non-calls, their opponents have to do the same thing on most nights.

To me, the numbers indicate that officials call fewer free throw fouls in games involving the Spurs than any other team in the association. The Spurs shoot 19.7 FTA/gm, Spurs' opponents shoot 19.8 FTA/gm. So, in any given Spurs game, the total on FTA is likely to hover around 40; the next closest combination appears to be Toronto, whose games average right around 44.

I think what the numbers suggest isn't that the Spurs are getting hosed in particular games -- I think they suggest that officials "let them play" a lot more in games involving the Spurs, which is something of a nod to the Spurs' pedigree and to their desire to play physical defense.

The conspiratorial bent of this thread would make much, much more sense if the numbers showed that the Spurs FTA/gm were low and that teams playing games against the Spurs were getting to the line substantially more often. They're not. Again, I think all of this goes to show that officials allow much more physical play in Spurs games -- on both ends -- and that strikes me as being fairly beneficial to the Spurs, given their need to play tough defense, their inability to attack the basket frequently, and their reliance on shooting the three (25% of all Spurs FGA in 2008-09 are 3's).

I also don't buy that superstars are entitled to calls or that stars get calls because they're stars. I think certain kinds of plays in the NBA get calls -- usually, hard and athletic drives -- and I think it just so happens that superstars are best able to make those kinds of plays and, therefore, get the calls that follow them. Corey Maggette and Kevin Martin aren't superstars, but they get calls because they constantly attack the basket.

It frustrates me sometimes to see how much opponents can get away with against Tim on the box, but the numbers we're talking about would certainly seem to suggest that if I watched the other end without my Spurs-colored glasses on, I'd see that the Spurs bigs are getting away with the same sorts of contact on the same sorts of plays. I don't think, however, that Tim is entitled to calls just because he's Tim Duncan.

---

When the Spurs have a defense that's built around great defenders NOT sending the opponent to the line, yet the opponents on average STILL go to the line more than the Spurs do, that seems more damning, not less.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by timvp

These Spurs aren't built to get to the line. The only players who get to the line at all are the Big Three and George Hill. With Manu out, Duncan slowed and Hill no longer playing point guard, that leaves just Parker.

Earlier in the season, Bonner was on pace to shoot less free throw attempts per minute than anyone in NBA history. Players like Mason, Finley, Thomas, Udoka and Bowen all hardly get to the line. Add in a slower than usual pace and the fact that the team relies so heavily on three-point shooting ... and it's not too surprising.

The lack of free throw attempts was a problem last season and with Bonner and Mason added to the rotation, the problem was bound to get worse.

---

with players like manu, tony and tim inside.....how can this possibly be?


NBA is rigged......thats my final answer.

We need to make this a local, national topic on TV or radio. these are cold hard facts. interpret them as you wish..........we all come to the same conclusion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phila_Chamberlain

The nets also have no dominate big man, thus they slash into the lane more leading to more and ones/ two shot free throws. It is simple when you attack the basket with guards more fouls are called. The Spurs don't slash as much as the nets, again, plain and simple.

---

Dominant big men have always shot tons and tons of free throws throughout the history of the game. The fact that you don't have one should lower your free throw totals.