Monday, January 7, 2013

OKC vs Miami QS vs NQS Explained, Part 2



I originally wrote this post not too long after the NBA finals, so another post right on time..

The contents of the PDF are set up a little messily, but with a little guidance it should be somewhat self explanatory.  (Column B1) 'q' simply means a quality two point shot taken, and the player's average points per attempt.  (C1) 'nq' is a non quality two point shot.  (D1) 'raw 2' means the weighted value of both NQ and Q shot attempts.

(E1) 'q3' a quality three point shot.  I'm going to guess you can figure out (F1) and (G1).  So on to (H1).  It's blank, so I guess I forgot to put something like, 'raw value'.  So (H1) is simply the weighted value of any shot attempt by a player.    (I1) 'Usage' the percentage of possessions that end with that player taking a shot.

It's a little tedious, but I guess I'll go through an entire line. So for instance; (B3) a Russell Westbrook quality two point attempt 'will' result in 1.32 pts.  (Hopefully you're following what I'm saying.)  You could also say that RW would make 66% of his quality two point attempts.  (C3)  RW scores a raw 0.71 points on any NQ 2 point shot taken, or 35.5%.  (D3) Westbrook's raw 2 point shooting is 1.05, or 52.5%.  (E3) Westbrook did not make any quality threes, so his average for a q3 is 0, and Idk if you can figure this out.. heh-heh, but that means he shot 0% on quality three point attempts.  (F3)  0.46 pts per shot for a nq3, or roughly 15.3%.  (G3)  A raw 3 PPS of 0.33, or 11%.  (H3)  And his pure value of any given shot is, 0.93, or 46.5%.  (I1)  Any random Thunder possession ended with Westbrook taking a shot approximately 32% of the time.

That should clear up everything through the first 7 lines, except for cases like (C7), and (E7).  In (C7)  a * means that Ibaka did attempt nq2's, but the attempts were minimal.  In the case of (E7, or any of the other *'s) a * means that the shots were too negligible to record on the pdf, because the sample size was way too small.
And occasionally an anomaly made it through anyways, since I was only doing these stats off of 5 games. Like in B15 you could draw the (wrong) conclusion that since Chalmers averages 2.00 points per quality two point attempt, any quality 2 that he attempts will always be made.  (which is, obviously, not true)

(The reason for the colors)  (B8-H8)  is sort of more complicated..  And to make it even more complicated...  I made some mistakes in setting that up.  Feel free to ignore the first number in each column (2, 3, 4, 4, 7, 8, 9).   The red (B8) means a spot where the shooter is hot  (as compared to the rest of the league).  The blue (H8) is a cold shooter.  (as compared to the rest of the league).  Instead of going from cold to hot, (as I kind of wish I had), I went from hot to cold.  So the far left side (B8) is a lot better than the far right side (H8)..  While something like (D8 compared to E8) would only be slightly better.  Get it?

For Lebron to have a league average pure shot value for a Q2, his shot value could be anywhere within the standard deviation of .1 from 1.30.  Since Lebron's Q2 shot value is only 1.36 and the .1 deviation covers that, this means that (based on all of 5 games) Lebron has effectively a league average pure Q2 value.

I was comparing each individual shooter to my league-wide NBA average.  (Found at row 38 and on down)  I think the colors can make it easier to gauge how well players shoot, it adds some detail to the pdf..  But it also adds some clutter to it, and it (like everything else) takes quite a while to add.
     As a quick example of the color... Looking at Lebron James, both his Q and NQ 2 pt attempts are effectively league-average, but on the plus side, his raw 2 point-value, and his Q3 are slightly above league average, but, on the downside, his raw 3 pt-value is frigid.  I'll assume that makes sense to you, and move on..

The only other note before the end of this section, is that the 'metamorphosis of Thunder/Heat' (A5 and A14), is just a representation of the rest of their players, the rest of the players who are not named, with their stats combined.

I thought this was somewhat fascinating.  If I do this again, then hopefully I can find a better way to attach the PDF.  It looks like if you click on it, then it's a bit easier to see.

No comments:

Post a Comment