Printable View
So you're saying that the graph includes both how the play was initiated AND how it finished (i.e., double counting)? That may be right, but jestersmash's interpretation is equally logical (and I'm guessing the more plausible one).Quote:
Originally Posted by DespЏrado
Unless someone has a link with the explanations, it's all guessing.
This threadQuote:
Originally Posted by DespЏrado
Your head
PPP deletes the ambiguity, it can't mean anything more than points per possession. :bangQuote:
Originally Posted by ShoogarBear
In a PnR whether it results foul shots, a tiago dunk, a weakside three, or a stepback on the hedge that possession and the players that took part of the play would be rewarded.
Don't get mad at me, you owned your own self. You said if it had included PPP it would be a different result, when I point out the fact that it measured PPP, you resorted to insults.Quote:
Originally Posted by jestersmash
Yeah, trying to find a site that clearly lays out the definitions now, but I'm 95% certain P&R ball-handler looks at 3 possible scenarios:Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoogarBear
1) P&R Ball handler comes off the pick and makes a shot himself (jump shot, layup, runner, etc.)
2) P&R Ball handler comes off the pick and misses the shot
3) P&R Ball handler comes off the pick, tries to make the pass to the roller, but turns it over
Even if subjectively we feel like it's the roller's fault for turning the ball over, the turnover will always be affixed to the handler as far as synergy is concerned.
Here's strong evidence that this is, indeed, the case - http://www.bulls101.com/2012/04/09/t...and-hero-ball/
A Rose-Noah P&R that resulted in a Noah layup was credited to Noah under "P&R Roll man" but not Rose.Quote:
Rose > P&R Ball Handler > Turnover
Rose > ISO > Jumper > Miss 2
Rose > ISO > Turnover
Rose > P&R Ball Handler > Jumper > Miss 3
Rose > ISO > Jumper > Miss 2
*Deng and Rose take turns missing two free throws each
Rose > ISO > Jumper > Miss 2
*Game heads to OT
Rose > P&R Ball Handler > Jumper > Miss 2
*Noah grabs rebound of Rose miss and splits free throws
Noah > P&R Roll Man > Layup > Make 2 > And 1
Rose > Transition > Layup > Make 2
Rose > P&R Ball Handler > Jumper > Make 2
Noah > P&R Roll Man > Turnover
Rose > P&R Ball Handler > Jumper > Miss 2
Korver > Off Screen > Jumper > Miss 3
Rose > P&R Ball Handler > Turnover
Rose > Hand Off > Jumper > Miss 2
*Game Over
The only situations for P&R Ball Handler are if the ball handler makes the shot himself, misses the shot, or turns the ball over.
Really, if you're going to do it that way, you're effectively analyzing the effectiveness of whole 5 man units -- if you count the pass out to the spot-up shooter toward the screener and the handler, you're also measuring his effectiveness as a spot up shooter, and bad shooters will have an effect on the overall success of the play (because defenders will more readily leave a bad shooter to provide help defense).Quote:
Originally Posted by DespЏrado
Even then, it would be useful to analyze which types of shots lead to the most successful outcome -- shots by the screener (whether spotting up or rolling to the basket), shots by the handler (whether pulling up or driving), or shots taken by other spot up shooters or players on cuts.
That kind of data is a lot harder to aggregate sensibly, I think, so I'd say this chart's simpler analysis (who took the shot, what kind of shot) is probably nearly as good and much easier to perform.
Here we go, here's another site that strongly suggests that Synergy's "PnR ball handler" only refers to when the Ball handler actually shoots (or turns the ball over) and does not credit the ball handler for making a pass to the roller who then lays the ball in -Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoogarBear
http://www.bballbreakdown.com/breaki...xers-offenses/
He reiterates "with the ball handler shooting" when discussing the Synergy "P&R Ball Handler" play type.Quote:
Stats provided by Synergy Sports
Rajon Rondo Running The Show
It’s interesting that the Celtics are merely average at Spotting Up, even though that’s the play they do the most by far. But I find it even more fascinating that the play they run 3rd most – the Pick And Roll with the Ball Handler shooting – is 2nd to last in the league in efficiency.
Yeah, under DespUrado's interpretation, the Noah layup should have had and entry for both the Handler and the Roll Man. Also, Korver's "Off Screen" jumper should have had somebody passing him the ball.
I think it's only counting how the play finished, not how it started.
Another site - http://www.stepienrules.com/2012-art...is-season.html
Quote:
According to Synergy Sports, the percentage of times the Cavaliers ran each of the following Offensive Play Types for this season breakdown like this:
The Cavaliers were in Spot Up situations for 20.9% of the 5,034 total offensive possessions they've had through the first 47 games. They've been in Pick and Roll Situations with the ball handler shooting 13.9% of the time, Transition 12.9%, Isolation 9.3%, Cutting situations 9.1%, Miscellaneous sets 7.6%, Post-Up 6.9% of the time, shooting off Put Backs 6.8%, P&R where the pick man is shooting 6.5%, shooting Off Screens 3.2%, shooting off a Hand Off 1.9%, and for the other 1% of the time the video was not available.
Then the PPP term is being misused by the graph maker as PPP has to include assists, it's to bad he didn't include the raw numbers from the graph as it would be really easy to add an assist stat into the equation. You could approximate it.Quote:
Originally Posted by jestersmash
I'll see if I can whip it up.
So yeah, it's the ending action.Quote:
Synergy Stat Definitions
Offense – Plays
How we select the player - Synergy tracks the final play “type” in every offensive possession of the game. We always log the player responsible for the ending action which can be a shot attempt, turnover or drawing a foul that results in free throws.
But I see where Despurado is coming from. When breaking down the Spurs offense, it's much more noteworthy to figure out which ballhandlers create the most points per play in the pick-and-roll. The ballhandler shooting himself is just a small part of the story. And since spot-up jumpers and pick-and-roll finishes don't create themselves, it's pretty pointless to figure the PPP of those occurrences.
Which goes back to my point: it would be much more interesting to see the efficiency of each initial set (i.e., TP PnR vs. Manu PnR :stirpot: vs. 4-down), and the see the breakdown of the finish (i.e., Ball Handler finish vs. Roller Finish vs. Spot-Up)Quote:
Originally Posted by timvp
What is ultimately beautiful about this game is when plays do breakdown how players adjust to the new situation. Many teams panic and one guy overhandles. We actually move the ball around. Which imo, is rather amazing as we have some very new fellows making some very nice passes.
We would definitely be a team that would earn a high number of assists one or two passes before the statistical assist. They used to keep track of this in hockey I think.
Agreed. My "eyeball test" tells me that Tim Duncan tends to get better looks at the pick and pop with Tony handling the ball, while Splitter tends to get cleaner looks around the rim with Manu handling the PnR with him, but again this is all just speculation and could be wrong. It'd be nice to have the data.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoogarBear
I can safely say I don't actually remember the last time Gary Neal even attempted a pass to the roller on a PnR, which is why above anything else, I was surprised when Despurado nonchalantly found it unremarkable when he (albeit incorrectly) interpreted the OP data to mean Neal's overall PnR (passes included) > Manu/Tony's overall PnR.
Gary Neal's M.O. on PnR has been for him to look for his own shot most of the time, not necessarily because he's selfish or a ball hog, but because he's just not good enough to make the pass to the roller.
On the rare occasion I see Neal actually attempting to look for the pass first, he tends to go into somewhat of a defensive back-to-the-defender "crab dribble" while laboriously looking over his shoulder to see if he can get the ball to Splitter, but he's so slow at it that by the time he looks for the roll, the play is pretty much over and someone has to bail him out.
js showed empirical evidence that both were not counted with the Bulls example. I see nothing else that proves the contrary.
And just so we are clear the original graph was using a PPS meaning points per shot and shouldn't be labeled PPP. IMHO.
Ok so Assists per possession breaks down according to the formula at this link to
Parker .444 APP
Manu .352 APP
Neal .233 APP
Edit - strike the rest of this as it was bad math on my part.
Add that to the eyeball guesstimate of the original graph numbers (which does leave something out, in that we have to know how many of those assists were on a Pick'n roll but will might as well categorize this as good enough.)
Tony (~.75 on the graph + .444) = 1.194
Manu (~.78 on the graph + .352) = 1.132
Neal (1.0 on the graph + .233) = 1.233
Meaning Neal even though he is a much worse passer given his assists per possession still can run a possibly more effective pick 'n Roll. Unless we up the ante and count the assists as 2 points rather than 1.
If an assist is 2 points which seems more relevant
it would break down more like this.
Tony 1.6338 points per pick n'roll
Manu 1.484 points per pick n'roll
Neal 1.466 points per pick n'roll
Synergy keeps track of PnR's where a pass leads to spot ups, cuts etc. For MySynergySports.com, it gets simplified to the ending action. So if a Parker PnR leads to a Bonner Spot Up, only the Bonner Spot Up gets counted on that site.
I don't have a link to offer as verification, but I can tell you the total Points per Possession on all PnR's this season including the passes.
Neal - 1.116
Manu - 1.065
Tony - .982
Keep in mind, Neal and Manu are roughly equal in # of possessions, and Parker has twice as many as the other two combined.
Nice find El Jefe, definitely didn't want to take my numbers as perfect beyond the Assists per possession.
The spurs as a total do 110.9 pts per 100 possessions so that breaks down to 1.109 PPP for the team.
Interesting, thanks for the data :tuQuote:
Originally Posted by El Jefe
Neal's love affair with the simple screen --> 3 point shot attempt (coupled with the fact that he ends up making those 3s at a very respectable percentage) really helps him out here.
Manu hasn't been looking for the 3 off the PnR as much this year as he's admittedly tried to embrace more of a "facilitator" role on offense. If he can't get the pass to, say, Splitter, his second option is usually to drive in for the layup around the rim (or draw contact, although refs have been somewhat inconsistent at calling said contact for Manu this season).
Tony obviously doesn't have a reliable 3 point shot, so his PPP ends up suffering a bit there.
At the risk of looking like I'm bullying you in this topic, this is a flawed analysis. Assists per possession includes all assists - not just assists made as the primary ball handler on the PnR.Quote:
Originally Posted by DespЏrado
You can't look at APP, multiply it by 2, add it to PnR "ball-handler" PPP and then claim that the final result is points "per pick n'roll."
I know, just as close as I thought I could get without more data, especially just guessing what the graphs numbers were, accuracy wasn't possible. The APP is the only stat number I would use from there.Quote:
Originally Posted by jestersmash
Also this is patently false. I said Neal's pick n' roll was more likely to lead to points hence why I was arguing the PPP notation in the legend, not that he was in any way a better passer other than lobs (which Tony is horrible at and Manu is inconsistent at.)Quote:
Originally Posted by jestersmash
El Jefe's numbers seem to back my original assertions up if they are true to source. And mean that my argument while procedurally wrong was still the correct assessment of the game and Neal's ability to provide instant offense in spurts.
That said there is no way I would play him more than spot minutes in the backup point when we need to jump start the offense or hit a 3.
Tony is a much better passer, paces the game better, breaks down defenses at will (his ISO stat attests to this.) and can actually play defense.
You said it doesn't surprise you as Neal throws the best lobs on the team (his lobs are soft and "on target"), while Manu's passes "get away from him" and Parker hits players too low.Quote:
Originally Posted by DespЏrado
You did not say (in that initial post) that Neal's pick and roll was more likely to lead to points. You incorrectly interpreted the data and emphasized Neal's "lobbing" ability while juxtaposing it to Manu's occasional turnovers and Tony's penchant to hit players too low.
Actually, here, I'll just post your original argument -
Seriously there's no need to backpedal anymore. You were wrong. It's ok, it's not the end of the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by DespЏrado
I've been wrong plenty of times on this forum.
No you assumed that was what I was arguing, I was trying to be complimentary of Neal who is already mostly known for shooting it, it would have been redundant to say Neal can hit the a jumpshot. It's Gary fucking Neal, He shoots, it's what he does.
He can occasionally connect the screening bigman with some of the best lobs a guard for the Spurs is capable of throwing, the most important part about his pick n' roll though is that he doesn't attempt a pass if he isn't sure of connecting the pass. His shot is as likely to connect as his pass, so he does exactly what a coach would tell him to do to make his PnR effective, don't hesitate to fire to get the best shot, pass only if you are going to connect it.
A great example of a lob though not on a PnR would be at the :25 second mark of this video Youtube. The next shot is of him hitting a 3 on a PnR behind Tiago.
So the hard data we have from the initial PnR sets:
Neal 1.116 PPP
Manu 1.065 PPP
Tony 0.982 PPP
While Neal is obvious not in Manu or Tony's class as a passer, he's got pretty clever moves to the basket and so nobody cringes when he runs the PnR. Still, those numbers are surprising, and have to be due to Neal's quick release behind the pick.
I also suspect Neal benefits from being a change of pace (and playing against second-string) and think his PPP would drop if his minutes went up significantly.
Without any more data, one could guess that the breakdown of the finishes would be something like:
Neal: 70% shot, 10-20% roll man, 10-20% spot up
Manu: 50% shot, 30-40% roll man, 10% spot up
Tony: 60-70% shot (but more at the basket as opposed to Neal), 20% roll man, 10% spot up