Friday, November 2, 2007
Rockets v. Lakers- An early season look
The game turned out to be a nailbiter-- the Lakers staged a furious comeback, tying the game on a Derek Fisher 2-pointer, only to see the Rockets regain the lead seconds later on a contested 3-pointer from Shane Battier. A foul to put Kobe on the line, an intentionally missed free throw, and a scrum for the ball later, the Rockets left LA with a 95-93 victory.
I didn't watch the entire game, but I did get to see a good portion of it. I watched the entire first half at home before leaving to do some errands. After the errands, I headed to the gym and watched most of the fourth quarter while running on the treadmill (well, mostly running--some walking might also have been involved).
The game looked like a defensive struggle from what I could tell, with both teams contesting shots and generally making life miserable for the other side. Ronny Turiaf, playing big minutes with Lamar Odom injured, looked particularly active and energetic on the defensive end. That said, the number of free throws that Kobe took (he was 18-27 from the charity stripe-- actually a bad night for him, percentage-wise) made me think that I might have been confusing good defense with a propensity to foul.
Well, was it good defense? Over the summer, I looked at how forced turnover rate, opponents true shooting percentage, and defensive rebound rate were the main contributors to good team defense (or defensive efficiency, defined as points given up per 100 possession). So I decided to look at the statistics from the game and see what information I could tease out.
I was particularly interested to see what these numbers told me for two contrasting reasons: (1) Last year, the Lakers were a very good offensive team, but a very poor defensive team. A strong defensive showing could give hope for a more successful season. (2) Last year, the Rockets were one of the top defensive teams in the league. They replaced Jeff Van Gundy, a defensive minded coach, with Rick Adelman, an offensive minded coach. A good defensive showing might indicate that they are likely to retain their stellar defensive play while integrating an improved offensive.
Of course, this was just one game, so the results might just as easily tell us nothing of lasting importance (Hey, I'm a blogger. That means I want instant satisfaction. No time for reasoned analysis here...).
First step was to take the information from the box score and convert it into the numbers that I needed.
[pause while I go and do this...]
Before sharing the numbers with you, I just want to put them in some perspective. Last year, the league average defensive efficiency (according to my unofficial numbers) was 103.85, average forced turnover percentage was 15.92%, average opponents TS% was 54.15%, and average defensive rebound rate was 72.91%.
And now the show... (boy, this post has already gotten long)
Last night, Houston (last year's numbers in parentheses) had a defensive efficiency rating of 96.25 (97.64) with a forced TO rate of 12.42% (15.03%), an opponent's TS% of 48.54% (51.16%), and a defensive rebound rate of 77.08% (76.97%). Last year Houston had a great defensive by playing stay at home basketball (i.e. not going for steals), forcing bad shots, and cleaning up the defensive glass. Based on their first game, it sure looks like Houston is going to feature the same sort of defensive again this year. And based on their personnel, I'm not surprised. Yao Ming is so big that his mere presence in the lane alters just about every shot in his vicinity. Obviously the Lakers offense suffered without the presence of Lamar Odom, but such an impressive performance still bodes well for Houston's ability to maintain their defensive efficiency this season under Rick Adelman.
The Lakers (last year's numbers in parentheses) had a defensive efficiency rating of 101.59 (106.22) with a forced TO rate of 19.25% (15.13%), an opponent's TS% of 54.20% (54.78%), and a defensive rebound rate of 68.42% (73.32%). Overall, the Lakers defense seemed to improve, but I think it really was about the same. The high TO rate is a bit of a mirage--it fueled their late comeback the other night, but last season the Warriors had the highest forced TO rate at 18.21%. Only the Warriors and Bulls had DTOR greater than 18% last season, and no other team cracked the 17% barrier. (If you assume the Lakers had slightly above a 15% DTOR, then defensive efficiency goes up to over 106) I was surprised that the Lakers didn't do better on the boards-- Odom is a good rebounder, but I assumed Turiaf and the other subs would fill in ably for him in that department. The Lakers were helped by Houston's inability to hit its free throws (they shot 21-31, last year Lakers' opponents shot 76% from the line), but even an average showing by Houston would only have added about 2 points to the Lakers' defensive efficiency. All in all, the Lakers had a good defensive showing, but I think its dependence on the turnovers makes that result a bit of a mirage. If the Lakers want to be a good defensive team, they're going to need some work (especially on defensive rebounding).
So I wasn't wrong-- the game was a defensive struggle. And the (very) early results are that both Houston and the Lakers are likely to replicate their defensive success (or failure) from a year ago.
[Don't worry, I haven't forgotten about the Sixers. I'll try and do a similar analysis for the Sixers after every five games or so. But compiling the stats takes time, so I won't always be able to do it.]
Thursday, November 1, 2007
One more set of predictions
As a complement to the predictions he made for Sports Illustrated, Ian Thomsen also convinced the scouts he talked with to make predictions for the year. I'd say the predictions from the scouts are pretty standard (that is, they think the Sixers will be bad-- 14th in the East), and they definitely rely heavily on what happened last year. In aggregate, they bump Orlando out of the playoffs because they move Boston to the head of the pack in the Eastern conference, but other than that they predict all the same teams to make the playoffs this year as made it last year (for both conferences). I don't think there will be much movement either (I only predict the Nets and the Warriors to drop out of the playoffs), but it's striking how little movement they expect there to be.
If I have the time, I'll try and put all the different predictions I've found into a spreadsheet so at the end of the season it'll be easy to compare how everyone did (including myself).
[Update: Make that two. The Wages of Wins predicts the Eastern Conference here, and the Western Conference here.]
[Update 2: Okay, there are tons of other predictions and previews out there, but I'm done tracking them down! You'll need to fend for yourself.]
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Disaster strikes!
Much to my chagrin, I can tell from looking at the box score that a few things happened in today's game that I really wished hadn't happened:
(1) Mo Cheeks played a small line-up. How do I know? Well, our centers and power forwards (Dalembert, Evans, Smith, and Booth) played only 64 out of the 96 minutes available for the two big man positions. I understand Dalembert only playing 25 minutes-- he's coming back from injury so maybe his conditioning and timing isn't that good (he picked up 4 fouls in 25 minutes which could be a sign of rust)-- but why did Reggie Evans only play 22 minutes? In that time period he had fifteen rebounds! The man is a machine on the glass, and he should be playing more even if he isn't doing anything else.
(2) Willie Green played big minutes, and so did Rodney Carney. Cheeks played Green for 33 minutes and Carney for 16 minutes. You know my opinion of the two of them, so as far as I'm concerned we effectively conceded the shooting guard position to the other team for the full game. To be fair, it doesn't look like either player was that bad tonight, but based on their playing time it's clear that Mo Cheeks and I don't see eye-to-eye on this issue.
[note: ESPN's box score only accounts for 229 out of the 240 minutes played by the Sixers. I'm assuming this is the result of the way they rounded minutes played, but it means my discussion of everyone's minutes might be a tad off.]
The good news is that for the most part it seems like the Sixers played the Raptors pretty tough. Most nights Igoudala isn't going to cough up 6 turnovers, and assuming a slightly better showing from AI2 the Sixers would have had a real shot at victory. And Dalembert will hopefully play more minutes as he gets healthier.
All in all, a mixed bag, but not a bad start to the season (although a loss is still a loss...).
Current Record: 0-1
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Western Conference Predictions
The Real Deal Holyfield (Toss a Coin)
So Close and yet So Far
What about us?
(7) Denver- They score a lot of points, but I don’t think they really worry any of the top teams. No one would be surprised if this was the year Iverson’s body finally broke down or if Camby misses significant time with an injury. Barring that,
(8) LA Lakers- If Kobe gets traded, then all bets are obviously off and we can forget that I ever made a prediction for the Lakers. If he isn’t traded, then I think the Lakers will find their way into the playoffs again. And, with
(9) New Orleans- They’ve been on the verge of the playoffs the last two seasons, and it looks like they’ll be on the verge of the playoffs again this year. I haven’t really seen them play, so it’s hard for me to comment on them. Tyson Chandler anchors them defensively, and he had a very solid summer with Team
It was nice while it lasted
I’ve heard the NBDL is looking for some teams
Monday, October 29, 2007
Eastern Conference Predictions
Cream of the Crop
You need a Crystal Ball for these Guys
Two of these Things are going to Belong
Wait, you’re telling me that you’re a Professional basketball team?
Sunday, October 28, 2007
League overview
First, I made my predictions by thinking about each team, their finish last season, and the moves they made in the offseason, and then making an educated guess about how many games they would win. If someone is anal enough to go through and add up all the projected wins, that person will notice that I've predicted too many wins. Since one team needs to lose each game, the overall record of the league at the end of the regular season is always 1230-1230. My predictions give the league an overall record of 1251-1209 (626-604 Eastern Conference, 625-605 Western Conference). Clearly not actually possible. So sue me. It's the preseason--you're supposed to be overly optimistic for all the teams. (I was actually even more optimistic at first, but then I tried to adjust the numbers once I realized what I had done...and then I decided it wasn't worth the effort)
With that book-keeping out of the way, what insights do I think I gleaned from my look around the league?
1. The top teams are in the West. The top teams have been in the Western Conference for the last few years, so this observation wasn't exactly a revelation. This year I think the top five regular season teams will be in the West-- San Antonio, Dallas, Phoenix, Houston, and Utah. Those first four teams are the class of the league, and I think they'll all challenge the 60 win mark. While Utah is a step below, the Jazz are still as good as the top teams in the East over the course of the regular season (Chicago, Detroit, Boston).
2. Boston is the wild card. I don't expect Boston to be amazing over the course of the regular season because of the lack of depth, but the post-season will be a different story. Assuming the Big 3 (Garnett, Allen, Pierce) are healthy, they can play 40+ minutes a night in the post-season, making Boston's lack of depth a much less signficant factor. So don't judge Boston's title chances on their regular season record.
3. The top teams are in the West, but so are the worst teams. In predicting team records, I thought the top teams in the West would win close to 60 games while the worst teams in the West would win close to 20 games-- a 40 game spread. In the East, I thought the top teams would win close to 50 games while the worst teams would win close to 30 games-- a 20 game spread. Teams like Minnesota, Portland, Seattle, and the LA Clippers have no chance of even getting near the playoffs. In the East, I think Atlanta and Milwaukee are the only ones without a realistic chance of getting to the playoffs, and they'll still be closer than those teams from the West I just mentioned.
4. If you don't have a .500 record this season, you aren't getting into the playoffs. I think this year there are at least 10 teams in each conference that can legitimately claim a shot at having a .500 record. Maybe this is just a result of my total predicted wins being too high, but I do think that at least 8 teams in each conference will end up reaching that mark. No patsies in the playoffs this year.
5. The middle tier teams in the Eastern Conference are impossible to predict. Miami has injuries. Cleveland might be dealing with the absence of Varejao if his contract situation isn't resolved. Washington has players returning from injury, making it hard to figure out what last year's performance really means. I think one of these teams is likely to drop out of the playoffs, but I can't predict which one and I was too much of a pansy to actually make a prediction that included this belief.
6. Everyone' s favorite Cinderella team from last season, Golden State, is going to discover that the clock has hit midnight. They lost Jason Richardson and didn't really get anything in return. I don't see how they recover from that decision.
One final note-- Since I made my predictions last week, there have been a few trades (Antoine Walker to the Timberwolves) and injuries (Mike Bibby, Chucky Atkins) that probably would have impacted my predictions. I decided not to redo my predictions, but in a few cases I mention "major" events that have occurred since I made my initial predictions.
This scout stopped watching games five years ago
Reading the scout's comments on the Dallas Mavericks over at CNNSI.com, I noticed this statement:
The key for Dallas is that when you get into the playoffs and people are stopping your transition game by getting back on defense, you've got to be able to run the half-court offense. The Mavericks struggle in the half-court when they have to play there on a consistent basis.If he was talking about the Mavericks of five years ago, I'd say "Right on!" But we're not. Last season Dallas was 28th in the league in pace factor--only two teams in the league averaged fewer possession per game than Dallas. Dallas was almost exclusively a half-court team last year, and playing that style they had the second most efficient offense (points per 100 possessions) in the league (to go with the league's fifth best defensive efficiency rating).
The Mavericks don't generally struggle in the half-court; they excel at it. Obviously not the case in last year's playoffs, but generally so.
That said, this Mavericks blogger thinks the scout was dead-on with his observation. I think the blogger was mostly agreeing with the second half of the scout's discussion (not included in the quote above) in which the scout talks about Dallas' failure to make adjustments in the series and create mismatches, but it's hard to be sure.
But what do I know, I'm not a professional...(not that my amateur status is going to keep my from playing a professional on my blog!)