Scoring Eff. Ratings- Advancing Hollinger (KnickerBlogger)
Posted: Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:17 am
Author Message
KnickerBlogger
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 180
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:19 am Post subject: Scoring Efficiency Ratings - Advancing Hollinger Reply with quote
LINK
Quote:
You can see the problem. Hollinger’s system spreads the value mostly created by O’Neal and Wade among all of the Heat free throw attempts. Further, Shaq and Wade have created 73.8% of the BFTA, but only 62.9% of the FTA for the Heat. Which leads us to two fairly obvious conclusions:
1. Not all players create BFTA at the same rate.
2. Players who can create BFTA are undervalued.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
HoopStudies
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 705
Location: Near Philadelphia, PA
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:44 am Post subject: Reply with quote
We looked at this for, I think, the Lakers a few years ago when Stu had some similar data. It is certainly true and we should perhaps look to improve the estimation. Sounds like a good project for someone. Or did KevinP do something that I'm vaguely remembering?
_________________
Dean Oliver
Author, Basketball on Paper
The postings are my own & don't necess represent positions, strategies or opinions of employers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Yyzlin
Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 27
Location: North Carolina
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:38 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Wouldn't the raw data that Roland has be able to help us out with this? I believe I remember somewhere, although I may be wrong, that Roland draws his data from play by play information. It seems relatively simple to record the context of every foul a player receives, since it would be part of the play-by-play. That why, you can divide it into several categories: shooting foul with missed shot, shooting foul with made shot, and non-shooting foul. If you wanted to get even more detailed, you could divide non-shooting fouls into two categories: bonus situation fouls that lead to free throws, and those that don't. And of course, you could toss technical and flagrant fouls into the mix as well, although they aren't as important because of their relative rarity.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:01 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
**EDITED due to premature post....
Quote:
All free throws do not equal the same the number of possessions. Many free throws are not worth any possessions at all.
If Dwyane Wade gets fouled going to the basket, misses the shot, and gets two free throws, then those two free throws are meant to equate with the missed scoring opportunity caused by the foul. But if Wade hits the shot, and gets sent to the line for one free throw, then that one free throw isn’t meant to equate to any possessions at all. It is a bonus opportunity rewarded to Wade for making the shot while still being fouled. Anyone can take a shot, and anyone can get fouled and miss their shot, but the extra free throw is just that, it’s FREE, not compensation, a bonus that Wade created outside of the Heat’s normal possession opportunity.
Now, you may be thinking that this is not news, that this is the exact thing that Hollinger was trying to deal with having One Free Throw = 0.44 Possessions. But the problem with that number is that it takes all free throws taken everywhere and assigns them an equal, tiny share of the “bonus” value created by a much smaller number of shots. Wouldn’t it be better to reward that “bonus” value on just those shots where it was earned, and leave all other free throws equaling 0.50 free throws? Sure it would, but there’s only way one way to do that.
EDIT** -nevermind, I did not read carefully. Seems like an interesting point, now that I thought about it a bit.
And technically shouldn't these BTFA stats be easily accesible as Yyzlin said?
Last edited by Nikos on Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:13 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yyzlin
Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 27
Location: North Carolina
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:09 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Nikos wrote:
I know this is a simple concept and all, but isn't making an AND 1 just like making a three pointer? Why should those who create BFTA's matter if the player is not neccesarily MAKING the shot? Obviously an off reb could be had if the player misses the free throw, so that could skew things up as well.
Doesn't the .44 number seem just as reasonable, as opposed to giving credit to those who simply attempt bonus free throws after a made shot?
This is from what I gather. The 0.44 possessions per free throw coefficient is derived from team numbers, which tend to be heavily skewed by a few players. If someone like Damon Jones doesn't create any BFTA's (or 1 in his case based on the article), then his possessions per free throw rises to 0.5, while players like Wade and O'Neal would theoretically have lower coefficients.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:11 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes I agree and this is a good point, notice my edit.
I wasn't reading carefully and posted prematurely. I was trying to cover it up before anyone noticed (I figured no one probably would in time) -- but I was wrong Smile )
As an aside, should players be penalized or have their efficiencies altered if they are awarded penalty FT's based on technicals and illegal defenses? Or is the fact that they were asked to shoot them the bonus of it self, and also has value of its own? Similiar to having a go to guy on a possesion or example, going to a teams strength, in this case having the best FTer.
Bottom line: -- what if a player gets a penalty or technical FT, why should that specific FT be 0.44 considering it is not within the context of a 'convetional possesion' as it is defined in the PSA or PPFGA? Shouldn't it carry a different weight considering the only potential is to gain 1 point, and a not a full 2pts or 3 that might be obtained through a TRUE POSSESION?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi everybody. I'm new to this site, and I appreciate everyone weighing in. I actually recorded all of the free throws based on Technicals and illegal defenses too, and then decided they weren't part of the "bonus" free throws I was looking for. In the end, technical fouls are like any other possession - your team has the ball, someone has to shoot it. If you're the shooter, then you are credited with one attempt, which becomes half of a possession, which is fair.
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:25 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Crazy are you saying that tech Fts should be multipled by 0.50, and 3pt play FT's should count as .44?
Also wouldn't this whole concept hurt those who DO get to the line a lot and even for those who create BFTA? Because most FTs are normal ones anyway, so this tends to favor guys who shoot a better field goal %, as opposed to guys who get to the line a lot and convert reasonably well.
This will tend to sway more towards FG% types. For example Wade and Maggette won't seem as efficient anymore, because they get to the line a lot even without BTFA. Those extra FT's they get only represent a small percentage of their TOTAL FTA. And since they do not hit that many three pointers, they will seem less efficient than the tradional PSA indicates right now.
Wouldn't this be a pretty drastic change in many players scoring efficiencies? Now players who hit a lot of threes and get to the line are more valuable than those who might shot a real high % and get to the line (but don't hit many 3pt shots).
Last edited by Nikos on Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:32 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
CrazyFromTheHeat wrote:
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
I volunteer. My primary interest is Raptors games, but this can be done from play by play logs, right?
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:51 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Wish me luck with the "quotes" thingy. If it doesn't come out well I'll do it again.
Nikos wrote:
Crazy are you saying that tech Fts should be multipled by 0.50, and 3pt play FT's should count as .44?
Tech fouls by 0.50, 3pt FT are counted as part of the "bonus" ones, more completely defined as "free throws after made shots".
Nikos wrote:
CrazyAlso wouldn't this whole concept hurt those who DO get to the line a lot and even for those who create BFTA? Because most FTs are normal ones anyway, so this tends to favor guys who shoot a better field goal %, as opposed to guys who get to the line a lot and convert reasonably well.
This will tend to sway more towards FG% types. For example Wade and Maggette won't seem as efficient anymore, because they get to the line a lot even without BTFA. Those extra FT's they get only represent a small percentage of their TOTAL FTA.
The data shows the opposite, but you may be thinking that because the formula hasn't been posted here. Here it is:
Shooting Efficiency = Total Points divided by [FGA + ((FTA - BFTA) divided by two)]
So what happens is, a whole mess of Wade's free throws gets lopped off of his attempts (because they weren't part of the possession), making the number we're dividing by less, which then makes his final Scoring Efficiency Rating higher.
Nikos wrote:
CrazyWouldn't this be a pretty drastic change in many players scoring efficiencies? Now players who hit a lot of threes and get to the line are more valuable than those who might shot a real high % and get to the line (but don't hit many 3pt shots).
It wouldn't change the ratings much at all, except for those guys who score and get fouled a lot. If there were one main conclusion I could draw from this whole thing, it would be that players who can draw fouls and still score are being undervalued.
Sure hopes this prints well.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:53 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Ed Küpfer wrote:
CrazyFromTheHeat wrote:
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
I volunteer. My primary interest is Raptors games, but this can be done from play by play logs, right?
Cool! Thanks Ed! Yes, it's all on play logs. Email me and I'll break it all down for you. To throw in a little of my Boston lingo, it's wicked easy.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:01 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Crazy
What I am saying is that this might all EVEN out, even if you factor BTFA. Because BTFA usually are a small portion of the players FTs. So how can it really help THAT much? If most of the FTs they take are regular and multipled by .50, then its more likely it could hurt them, unless players who get to the line a lot less are getting a much less proportinal BTFA's while still taking a lot of FG's.
Or perhaps its a bell shape thing that affects certain people who might have a high or low BTFA relative to FTA. I wonder if there is a somewhat linear relationship for those who get lots of FTA in relation to BTFA's.
Can you give us the old and new PSA's for the Miami Heat so we can apply this example and to see which players might be undervalued or overvalued?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:25 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I ran a quick PSA comparison based on your BTFA's. It all depends I guess on the frequency with which you get to the line and your % when you get there. And if there is a close relationship to guys who take a lot of FT's relative to FGA's, then it makes sense that guys who get fouled and MAKE FTs are undervalued.
Damon Jones got affected the most in terms of the starting 5. I'll try and post my chart using Tabs2Spaces, but Im not sure how to.
From what I have Shaq's NEW PSA took a larger dip than Wade's because of his poor FT shooting %. So I guess it is more sensitive to those who get to the line a lot and miss.
So I guess in general it may be true that it does undervalue those who get a lot of BFTA, and especially those who shoot a good %. From Miami, it seems that whoever gets to the line a lot seems to have between 10-12% BFTA. If this holds true, than for the most part all good FT shooters who get to the line a lot are undervalued. Unless there are some bizarre cases where players get to the line and a lot, but have hardly any BTFA's. I guess we would have to study all the teams to find this out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: I can't believe it Reply with quote
Here are the raw numbers on bonus free throws for the Heat:
Shaq 49
Wade 41
Haslem 14
E Jones 11
Laettner 3
Doleac 1
D Jones 1
Butler 1
Anderson 1
So we obviously have guys accumulating bonus free throws at different rates, right? And that's bound to make a difference, right? Well, I ran the numbers for my system and Hollinger's, and the results are remarkable. All numbers are points per possession.
Shaq - me 1.17, JH 1.17
Wade - me 1.14, JH 1.14
Haslem - me 1.17, JH 1.17
EJ - me 1.05, JH 1.05
DJ - me 1.20, JH 1.21
Laettner - me 1.22, JH 1.23
Butler - me 1.06, JH 1.07
Doleac - me 1.00, JH 1.01
Dooling - me 0.87, JH 0.89
Anderson - me 0.94, JH 0.95
Allen - me 1.08, JH 1.09
Person - me 1.04, JH 1.04
Wang - me 1.25, JH 1.28
If anything, the 0.44 number overcompensates, so that what happens is that players who don't get to the line see their number drop a little with my system, but no one benefits. Very discouraging. I thought there would be more of a difference, but I guess not.
Maybe the positive is that I've proven the effectiveness of Hollinger's 0.44 number.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:29 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Yea the differences are not very large, if at all. Thats why I started before, that it all pretty much levels out even though the .44 doesn't make sense in the sense of when your watching the game.
The guys who are affected the most on the Heat are Laetner and D.Jones I beleive.
Author Message
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:14 am Post subject: Reply with quote
To emphasize what's already been said about the differences not being very large:
Code:
Player BTFA FTA Ratio ePos aPos
----------------------------------------------
O'Neal 49 427 0.115 187.9 189.0
Wade 41 347 0.118 152.7 153.0
Haslem 14 123 0.114 54.1 54.5
Ejones 11 113 0.097 49.7 51.0
Laettner 3 32 0.094 14.1 14.5
Doleac 1 24 0.042 10.6 11.5
Djones 1 47 0.021 20.7 23.0
Butler 1 31 0.032 13.6 15.0
Anderson 1 21 0.048 9.2 10.0
Dooling 0 48 0.000 21.1 24.0
Allen 0 10 0.000 4.4 5.0
Person 0 4 0.000 1.8 2.0
Wang 0 4 0.000 1.8 2.0
Looking at the raw data, it looks like Shaq and Wade create a ton more BFTAs, but the fact is they create a ton more free throws in general. Generally speaking, the same qualities that earn three-point plays also earn two free-throw attempts.
John Hollinger actually did study this issue in the first Prospectus, finding similar results, but it's good to look at it again. One thing that I don't think has been resolved to my satisfaction, unless my reading comprehension is poor -- what about three-shot fouls?
John argues players should only get credit for technical FTs where their overall percentage is above the league average. That is a fairer opportunity cost than one point -- the opportunity is not making the free throw, but having someone else take it. I'm not sure if it's better to use league average or some "replacement-level" free-throw percentage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3613
Location: Hendersonville, NC
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:00 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow, things move fast here! I went ahead and replied on the Heat board before I finished reading the thread here.
We concur that .44 is a very satisfactory multiplier for the Big 2, Wade and Shaq. This implies that these guys get 12% of their FT as and-1s.
However, the team totals are (before last night) 1231 FTA and 122 BFTA. That's almost exactly 10%, implying a multiplier of .45 .
I'll guess the difference between getting the respect (and getting the call), and not getting the respect is believably within that range of 20% more calls for a Wade than for a Dooling.
A range of .44-.45 may be good enough. Or there may be other factors to tease out; such as a ratio of assists/points: a ballhandler/distributor is more likely to get fouled before he's attempting a shot. A guy with postup game might get fewer shooting fouls than a slasher.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 1:16 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I compiled a list of every and-1 and technical FTA from all the games in November and December (except two, if anyone wants to go ahead and do those). I don't have time for any analysis but I'll make the data available. The csv is on my Yahoo site.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:01 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Thinking aloud a little bit ... there's another distinction we can make here, which is how two-shot fouls were "gotten", for lack of a better word. Some come when a player is fouled in the act of shooting, but you have other scenarios like the end of games when teams foul intentionally.
Is it reasonable to think that a player like Damon Jones is shooting most of his free throws in these situations and that's why his BFTA/FTA ratio is so low? That three-point plays and shooting fouls are relatively evenly distributed (besides luck in this small of a sample size) and guys like Jones just have really low shooting foul ratios?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:51 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
admin wrote:
Thinking aloud a little bit ... there's another distinction we can make here, which is how two-shot fouls were "gotten", for lack of a better word. Some come when a player is fouled in the act of shooting, but you have other scenarios like the end of games when teams foul intentionally.
To me, free throws from intentional fouls should count the same as the regular ones. In the end, this becomes the possession, and the player still has the responsibility of making the shots. It only matters whether or not the foul was intentional if you're talking about something like shot creation, which is a much messier topic.
admin wrote:
Is it reasonable to think that a player like Damon Jones is shooting most of his free throws in these situations and that's why his BFTA/FTA ratio is so low? That three-point plays and shooting fouls are relatively evenly distributed (besides luck in this small of a sample size) and guys like Jones just have really low shooting foul ratios?
I can't back this statistically, but I think its because an overwhelming proportion of DJ's baskets come on "open" shots. He gets a ton of them in the Heat's half-court offense, and the few times he shoots with a hand in his face he usually misses. Also, he never drives to the basket, so his chances for BFTA are minimal. One of the things I like about the BFTA results is that so far they have come out pretty much as you would expect from just observation.
And going back a few notes to times when a player attempts 3 free throws, I counted the third one as BFTA, the reasoing being that if you counted it as a regular free throw, the three free throws would equal 1.5 possessions, which they obviously aren't.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:00 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
CrazyFromTheHeat wrote:
Also, he never drives to the basket, so his chances for BFTA are minimal.
At the same time, so should his chances for any free-throw attempts be minimal. What I'm arguing is that few players really have a "skill" for getting three-point plays; drawing the shooting fouls is the skill, and sometimes the shot happens to bounce in.
But we can't just look at free throws attempted to measure the "free-throw drawing" skill, because a player like Jones, I suspect, will take a significant percentage of his free-throws off of intentional fouls.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:31 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="admin What I'm arguing is that few players really have a "skill" for getting three-point plays; drawing the shooting fouls is the skill, and sometimes the shot happens to bounce in.[/quote]
But that would imply that players should accumulate BFTAs at the same rate, and they don't. Here are the Heat players BFTA Percentages (percentage of total FT), listed with their number of FTA in front of their names:
427 Shaq 11.48
347 Wade 11.82
123 Haslem 11.38
113 E Jones 9.73
48 Dooling 0.00
47 D Jones 2.13
32 Laettner 9.38
31 Butler 3.23
24 Doleac 4.17
21 Anderson 4.76
10 Allen 0.00
4 Person 0.00
Wang 0.00
The real interesting one is Dooling. He's hardly ever on the floor at the end of games, drives to the basket better than anyone on the team other than Wade and possibly EJ, and still can't accumulate a single BFTA. It's a small sample, but it does suggest that getting fouled and getting the basket is a skill.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:07 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Argh. A mistake creeped into my data, giving Josh Childress of all people credit for and-1s that he didn't take. Don't use the data I uploaded to the Yahoo site, I'm fixing the mistakes now.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:42 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Okay, I fixed the data. The file now has the details of every free throw attempted this season, until Jan 21. The csv uses the following format:
Code:
DATE AWAY HOME PLAYER TEAM SHOT# #SHOTS TYPE Q TIME
04-11-02 DEN LAL anthony,carmelo DEN 1 2 Shooting 1 10:40
04-11-02 DEN LAL anthony,carmelo DEN 2 2 Shooting 1 10:40
04-11-02 SAC DAL dampier,erick DAL 1 2 Shooting 1 9:56
04-11-02 SAC DAL dampier,erick DAL 2 2 Shooting 1 9:56
04-11-02 HOU DET wallace,ben DET 1 1 Shooting 1 9:18
DATE, AWAY, HOME, PLAYER, TEAM should be obvious. SHOT# is the shot sequence, eg 1=front end of a two-shot scenario and the FTA on an AND-1. #SHOTS is the total number of FTAs in that sequence. TYPE is the foul description displayed on the nba.com PBP logs. They've used the following:
TYPE
Away from Play
Clear Path
Delay Technical
Double Technical
Elbow
Flagrant Type 1
Flagrant Type 2
Hanging Technical
Illegal Defense
Inbound
Loose Ball
Non Supported Technical
Offensive
Personal
Punching
Shooting
Taunting Technical
Technical
Q is the quarter in which the FTs were attempted, TIME is the time remaining in the quarter.
Here's a direct link to the file, which probably won't work. If not, you can look around here and download the file titled "and1s.csv".
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 7:38 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's how the types of FTs break down:
Code:
FTAs
TYPE 1 2 3 TOTAL
Away from Play 35 4 0 39
Clear Path 28 0 0 28
Delay Technical 4 0 0 4
Double Technical 1 0 0 1
Elbow 0 4 0 4
Flagrant Type 1 0 77 0 77
Flagrant Type 2 0 12 0 12
Hanging Technical 12 0 0 12
Illegal Defense 341 0 0 341
Inbound 0 24 0 24
Loose Ball 3 1002 0 1005
Non Supported Technical 2 0 0 2
Offensive 0 8 0 8
Personal 8 6628 3 6639
Punching 2 0 0 2
Shooting 2473 18578 303 21354
Taunting Technical 6 0 0 6
Technical 446 0 0 446
TOTAL 3361 26337 306 30004
The FTAs that represent the end of a possession -- Shooting, Loose Ball, Away from Play, and Personal -- sum to 13259, or 44.2% of the total. Nice to have that FTA coefficent confirmed.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:54 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I've uploaded a csv with showing a breakdown of every player's FTA -- how many and-1s, how many techs, etc. It's at the Yahoo site I linked to above.
The leaders in in BFTA%, or "and-1%":
Code:
PLAYER BFTA FTA BFTA%
brand,elton 35 223 15.7%
mohammed,nazr 20 132 15.2%
curry,eddy 24 162 14.8%
stoudemire,a 54 388 13.9%
jamison,antawn 21 156 13.5%
odom,lamar 24 180 13.3%
miller,andre 20 150 13.3%
martin,kenyon 20 153 13.1%
hill,grant 22 173 12.7%
wallace,ben 13 105 12.4%
haslem,udonis 16 130 12.3%
wallace,gerald 15 123 12.2%
miller,brad 22 182 12.1%
sweetney,mike 12 102 11.8%
wade,dwyane 42 359 11.7%
williamson,c 13 112 11.6%
stojakovic,peja 17 151 11.3%
okafor,emeka 18 161 11.2%
marbury,stephon 24 215 11.2%
o'neal,shaq 49 440 11.1%
Andre Miller?
The lowest BFTA% among players with 100+FTAs:
Code:
PLAYER BFTA FTA BFTA%
boykins,earl 3 115 2.6%
hamilton,r 7 253 2.8%
croshere,austin 5 130 3.8%
nailon,lee 4 100 4.0%
billups,c 8 185 4.3%
collins,jason 5 105 4.8%
alston,rafer 6 124 4.8%
allen,ray 11 226 4.9%
nash,steve 5 102 4.9%
fisher,derek 5 101 5.0%
okur,mehmet 9 180 5.0%
dampier,erick 6 120 5.0%
brown,p.j. 6 116 5.2%
turkoglu,hedo 6 115 5.2%
iverson,allen 21 360 5.8%
williams,eric 8 137 5.8%
blount,mark 6 102 5.9%
brezec,primoz 6 102 5.9%
abdur-rahim,s 6 101 5.9%
hinrich,kirk 7 112 6.3%
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow Ed! You're my hero. I can't wait to get started with all of that data. One thing that jumps out at me right away is Iverson among the lowest. Who would have guessed that?
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:08 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Hey Ed can you post ther attachment of all players BFTA?
Also when you get the chance post the W-L %s on your site, that addition would make it near flawless.
Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:44 am Post subject: Reply with quote
admin wrote:
What I'm arguing is that few players really have a "skill" for getting three-point plays; drawing the shooting fouls is the skill, and sometimes the shot happens to bounce in.
Well, Ed's data isn't helping this hypothesis, though I suppose we'd have to see a couple of seasons worth of data to see whether there is year-to-year consistency. ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3613
Location: Hendersonville, NC
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 8:54 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Ed Küpfer wrote:
The FTAs that represent the end of a possession -- Shooting, Loose Ball, Away from Play, and Personal -- sum to 13259, or 44.2% of the total. Nice to have that FTA coefficent confirmed.
Using Ed's data, I figured this somewhat differently.
Since we are looking for a multiplier to apply to 1 FTA that makes it equivalent to 1 FGA, I look for a departure from 2 FTA in the average possession-ending foul.
From the total of not-in-the-act fouls (personals, loose ball, and inbounds) and act-of-shooting fouls, I subtract "bonus" FT (and-1s, 3rd of 3-shot FTA); and divide by the total FTA:
(7654 + 21354 - 2473 - 101) / 30004 = .881
101 is 1/3 of 303 3-shot fouls.
7654 is # of non-shooting 2-shot fouls.
Half of .881 is .4405, so we are corroborated.
(I didn't include "away from play" fouls in the possession-ending category
: 35 of 37 were 1-shot fouls. I'm not familiar with this call, actually.)
How do we get an odd number (77) of FTA from flagrant-1's ? I can see a teammate stepping into the lane and nullifying some FTA -- but not a T.
As to the wide range of BFTA/FTA, clearly there are 2 skills at work: drawing the foul, and finishing the shot. Iverson draws fouls and flings up prayers. Shaq tends to score with guys hanging on him.
Shaq might be at the top of the list if his FTA weren't diluted with hackashaq plays. No chance for a bonus shot there.
There are quite a range of "ballhandling" fouls still in the mix (undifferentiated from "shooting" fouls.) I suspect these are more significant than differences in "finishing strength".
KnickerBlogger
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 180
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 10:19 am Post subject: Scoring Efficiency Ratings - Advancing Hollinger Reply with quote
LINK
Quote:
You can see the problem. Hollinger’s system spreads the value mostly created by O’Neal and Wade among all of the Heat free throw attempts. Further, Shaq and Wade have created 73.8% of the BFTA, but only 62.9% of the FTA for the Heat. Which leads us to two fairly obvious conclusions:
1. Not all players create BFTA at the same rate.
2. Players who can create BFTA are undervalued.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger
HoopStudies
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 705
Location: Near Philadelphia, PA
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 11:44 am Post subject: Reply with quote
We looked at this for, I think, the Lakers a few years ago when Stu had some similar data. It is certainly true and we should perhaps look to improve the estimation. Sounds like a good project for someone. Or did KevinP do something that I'm vaguely remembering?
_________________
Dean Oliver
Author, Basketball on Paper
The postings are my own & don't necess represent positions, strategies or opinions of employers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Yyzlin
Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 27
Location: North Carolina
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 2:38 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Wouldn't the raw data that Roland has be able to help us out with this? I believe I remember somewhere, although I may be wrong, that Roland draws his data from play by play information. It seems relatively simple to record the context of every foul a player receives, since it would be part of the play-by-play. That why, you can divide it into several categories: shooting foul with missed shot, shooting foul with made shot, and non-shooting foul. If you wanted to get even more detailed, you could divide non-shooting fouls into two categories: bonus situation fouls that lead to free throws, and those that don't. And of course, you could toss technical and flagrant fouls into the mix as well, although they aren't as important because of their relative rarity.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:01 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
**EDITED due to premature post....
Quote:
All free throws do not equal the same the number of possessions. Many free throws are not worth any possessions at all.
If Dwyane Wade gets fouled going to the basket, misses the shot, and gets two free throws, then those two free throws are meant to equate with the missed scoring opportunity caused by the foul. But if Wade hits the shot, and gets sent to the line for one free throw, then that one free throw isn’t meant to equate to any possessions at all. It is a bonus opportunity rewarded to Wade for making the shot while still being fouled. Anyone can take a shot, and anyone can get fouled and miss their shot, but the extra free throw is just that, it’s FREE, not compensation, a bonus that Wade created outside of the Heat’s normal possession opportunity.
Now, you may be thinking that this is not news, that this is the exact thing that Hollinger was trying to deal with having One Free Throw = 0.44 Possessions. But the problem with that number is that it takes all free throws taken everywhere and assigns them an equal, tiny share of the “bonus” value created by a much smaller number of shots. Wouldn’t it be better to reward that “bonus” value on just those shots where it was earned, and leave all other free throws equaling 0.50 free throws? Sure it would, but there’s only way one way to do that.
EDIT** -nevermind, I did not read carefully. Seems like an interesting point, now that I thought about it a bit.
And technically shouldn't these BTFA stats be easily accesible as Yyzlin said?
Last edited by Nikos on Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:13 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Yyzlin
Joined: 31 Dec 2004
Posts: 27
Location: North Carolina
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:09 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Nikos wrote:
I know this is a simple concept and all, but isn't making an AND 1 just like making a three pointer? Why should those who create BFTA's matter if the player is not neccesarily MAKING the shot? Obviously an off reb could be had if the player misses the free throw, so that could skew things up as well.
Doesn't the .44 number seem just as reasonable, as opposed to giving credit to those who simply attempt bonus free throws after a made shot?
This is from what I gather. The 0.44 possessions per free throw coefficient is derived from team numbers, which tend to be heavily skewed by a few players. If someone like Damon Jones doesn't create any BFTA's (or 1 in his case based on the article), then his possessions per free throw rises to 0.5, while players like Wade and O'Neal would theoretically have lower coefficients.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 3:11 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes I agree and this is a good point, notice my edit.
I wasn't reading carefully and posted prematurely. I was trying to cover it up before anyone noticed (I figured no one probably would in time) -- but I was wrong Smile )
As an aside, should players be penalized or have their efficiencies altered if they are awarded penalty FT's based on technicals and illegal defenses? Or is the fact that they were asked to shoot them the bonus of it self, and also has value of its own? Similiar to having a go to guy on a possesion or example, going to a teams strength, in this case having the best FTer.
Bottom line: -- what if a player gets a penalty or technical FT, why should that specific FT be 0.44 considering it is not within the context of a 'convetional possesion' as it is defined in the PSA or PPFGA? Shouldn't it carry a different weight considering the only potential is to gain 1 point, and a not a full 2pts or 3 that might be obtained through a TRUE POSSESION?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:16 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi everybody. I'm new to this site, and I appreciate everyone weighing in. I actually recorded all of the free throws based on Technicals and illegal defenses too, and then decided they weren't part of the "bonus" free throws I was looking for. In the end, technical fouls are like any other possession - your team has the ball, someone has to shoot it. If you're the shooter, then you are credited with one attempt, which becomes half of a possession, which is fair.
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:25 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Crazy are you saying that tech Fts should be multipled by 0.50, and 3pt play FT's should count as .44?
Also wouldn't this whole concept hurt those who DO get to the line a lot and even for those who create BFTA? Because most FTs are normal ones anyway, so this tends to favor guys who shoot a better field goal %, as opposed to guys who get to the line a lot and convert reasonably well.
This will tend to sway more towards FG% types. For example Wade and Maggette won't seem as efficient anymore, because they get to the line a lot even without BTFA. Those extra FT's they get only represent a small percentage of their TOTAL FTA. And since they do not hit that many three pointers, they will seem less efficient than the tradional PSA indicates right now.
Wouldn't this be a pretty drastic change in many players scoring efficiencies? Now players who hit a lot of threes and get to the line are more valuable than those who might shot a real high % and get to the line (but don't hit many 3pt shots).
Last edited by Nikos on Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:32 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
CrazyFromTheHeat wrote:
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
I volunteer. My primary interest is Raptors games, but this can be done from play by play logs, right?
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:51 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Wish me luck with the "quotes" thingy. If it doesn't come out well I'll do it again.
Nikos wrote:
Crazy are you saying that tech Fts should be multipled by 0.50, and 3pt play FT's should count as .44?
Tech fouls by 0.50, 3pt FT are counted as part of the "bonus" ones, more completely defined as "free throws after made shots".
Nikos wrote:
CrazyAlso wouldn't this whole concept hurt those who DO get to the line a lot and even for those who create BFTA? Because most FTs are normal ones anyway, so this tends to favor guys who shoot a better field goal %, as opposed to guys who get to the line a lot and convert reasonably well.
This will tend to sway more towards FG% types. For example Wade and Maggette won't seem as efficient anymore, because they get to the line a lot even without BTFA. Those extra FT's they get only represent a small percentage of their TOTAL FTA.
The data shows the opposite, but you may be thinking that because the formula hasn't been posted here. Here it is:
Shooting Efficiency = Total Points divided by [FGA + ((FTA - BFTA) divided by two)]
So what happens is, a whole mess of Wade's free throws gets lopped off of his attempts (because they weren't part of the possession), making the number we're dividing by less, which then makes his final Scoring Efficiency Rating higher.
Nikos wrote:
CrazyWouldn't this be a pretty drastic change in many players scoring efficiencies? Now players who hit a lot of threes and get to the line are more valuable than those who might shot a real high % and get to the line (but don't hit many 3pt shots).
It wouldn't change the ratings much at all, except for those guys who score and get fouled a lot. If there were one main conclusion I could draw from this whole thing, it would be that players who can draw fouls and still score are being undervalued.
Sure hopes this prints well.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 5:53 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Ed Küpfer wrote:
CrazyFromTheHeat wrote:
As for Dean's comment -sounds like a project for someone- it is, ME! But I would love some help. It's very easy, but tracking every team is too much for anyone with a job. I figure five or ten people could do the whole league fairly easily.
I volunteer. My primary interest is Raptors games, but this can be done from play by play logs, right?
Cool! Thanks Ed! Yes, it's all on play logs. Email me and I'll break it all down for you. To throw in a little of my Boston lingo, it's wicked easy.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:01 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Crazy
What I am saying is that this might all EVEN out, even if you factor BTFA. Because BTFA usually are a small portion of the players FTs. So how can it really help THAT much? If most of the FTs they take are regular and multipled by .50, then its more likely it could hurt them, unless players who get to the line a lot less are getting a much less proportinal BTFA's while still taking a lot of FG's.
Or perhaps its a bell shape thing that affects certain people who might have a high or low BTFA relative to FTA. I wonder if there is a somewhat linear relationship for those who get lots of FTA in relation to BTFA's.
Can you give us the old and new PSA's for the Miami Heat so we can apply this example and to see which players might be undervalued or overvalued?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 6:25 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I ran a quick PSA comparison based on your BTFA's. It all depends I guess on the frequency with which you get to the line and your % when you get there. And if there is a close relationship to guys who take a lot of FT's relative to FGA's, then it makes sense that guys who get fouled and MAKE FTs are undervalued.
Damon Jones got affected the most in terms of the starting 5. I'll try and post my chart using Tabs2Spaces, but Im not sure how to.
From what I have Shaq's NEW PSA took a larger dip than Wade's because of his poor FT shooting %. So I guess it is more sensitive to those who get to the line a lot and miss.
So I guess in general it may be true that it does undervalue those who get a lot of BFTA, and especially those who shoot a good %. From Miami, it seems that whoever gets to the line a lot seems to have between 10-12% BFTA. If this holds true, than for the most part all good FT shooters who get to the line a lot are undervalued. Unless there are some bizarre cases where players get to the line and a lot, but have hardly any BTFA's. I guess we would have to study all the teams to find this out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:05 pm Post subject: I can't believe it Reply with quote
Here are the raw numbers on bonus free throws for the Heat:
Shaq 49
Wade 41
Haslem 14
E Jones 11
Laettner 3
Doleac 1
D Jones 1
Butler 1
Anderson 1
So we obviously have guys accumulating bonus free throws at different rates, right? And that's bound to make a difference, right? Well, I ran the numbers for my system and Hollinger's, and the results are remarkable. All numbers are points per possession.
Shaq - me 1.17, JH 1.17
Wade - me 1.14, JH 1.14
Haslem - me 1.17, JH 1.17
EJ - me 1.05, JH 1.05
DJ - me 1.20, JH 1.21
Laettner - me 1.22, JH 1.23
Butler - me 1.06, JH 1.07
Doleac - me 1.00, JH 1.01
Dooling - me 0.87, JH 0.89
Anderson - me 0.94, JH 0.95
Allen - me 1.08, JH 1.09
Person - me 1.04, JH 1.04
Wang - me 1.25, JH 1.28
If anything, the 0.44 number overcompensates, so that what happens is that players who don't get to the line see their number drop a little with my system, but no one benefits. Very discouraging. I thought there would be more of a difference, but I guess not.
Maybe the positive is that I've proven the effectiveness of Hollinger's 0.44 number.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:29 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Yea the differences are not very large, if at all. Thats why I started before, that it all pretty much levels out even though the .44 doesn't make sense in the sense of when your watching the game.
The guys who are affected the most on the Heat are Laetner and D.Jones I beleive.
Author Message
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 3:14 am Post subject: Reply with quote
To emphasize what's already been said about the differences not being very large:
Code:
Player BTFA FTA Ratio ePos aPos
----------------------------------------------
O'Neal 49 427 0.115 187.9 189.0
Wade 41 347 0.118 152.7 153.0
Haslem 14 123 0.114 54.1 54.5
Ejones 11 113 0.097 49.7 51.0
Laettner 3 32 0.094 14.1 14.5
Doleac 1 24 0.042 10.6 11.5
Djones 1 47 0.021 20.7 23.0
Butler 1 31 0.032 13.6 15.0
Anderson 1 21 0.048 9.2 10.0
Dooling 0 48 0.000 21.1 24.0
Allen 0 10 0.000 4.4 5.0
Person 0 4 0.000 1.8 2.0
Wang 0 4 0.000 1.8 2.0
Looking at the raw data, it looks like Shaq and Wade create a ton more BFTAs, but the fact is they create a ton more free throws in general. Generally speaking, the same qualities that earn three-point plays also earn two free-throw attempts.
John Hollinger actually did study this issue in the first Prospectus, finding similar results, but it's good to look at it again. One thing that I don't think has been resolved to my satisfaction, unless my reading comprehension is poor -- what about three-shot fouls?
John argues players should only get credit for technical FTs where their overall percentage is above the league average. That is a fairer opportunity cost than one point -- the opportunity is not making the free throw, but having someone else take it. I'm not sure if it's better to use league average or some "replacement-level" free-throw percentage.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3613
Location: Hendersonville, NC
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:00 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow, things move fast here! I went ahead and replied on the Heat board before I finished reading the thread here.
We concur that .44 is a very satisfactory multiplier for the Big 2, Wade and Shaq. This implies that these guys get 12% of their FT as and-1s.
However, the team totals are (before last night) 1231 FTA and 122 BFTA. That's almost exactly 10%, implying a multiplier of .45 .
I'll guess the difference between getting the respect (and getting the call), and not getting the respect is believably within that range of 20% more calls for a Wade than for a Dooling.
A range of .44-.45 may be good enough. Or there may be other factors to tease out; such as a ratio of assists/points: a ballhandler/distributor is more likely to get fouled before he's attempting a shot. A guy with postup game might get fewer shooting fouls than a slasher.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 1:16 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I compiled a list of every and-1 and technical FTA from all the games in November and December (except two, if anyone wants to go ahead and do those). I don't have time for any analysis but I'll make the data available. The csv is on my Yahoo site.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:01 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Thinking aloud a little bit ... there's another distinction we can make here, which is how two-shot fouls were "gotten", for lack of a better word. Some come when a player is fouled in the act of shooting, but you have other scenarios like the end of games when teams foul intentionally.
Is it reasonable to think that a player like Damon Jones is shooting most of his free throws in these situations and that's why his BFTA/FTA ratio is so low? That three-point plays and shooting fouls are relatively evenly distributed (besides luck in this small of a sample size) and guys like Jones just have really low shooting foul ratios?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 7:51 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
admin wrote:
Thinking aloud a little bit ... there's another distinction we can make here, which is how two-shot fouls were "gotten", for lack of a better word. Some come when a player is fouled in the act of shooting, but you have other scenarios like the end of games when teams foul intentionally.
To me, free throws from intentional fouls should count the same as the regular ones. In the end, this becomes the possession, and the player still has the responsibility of making the shots. It only matters whether or not the foul was intentional if you're talking about something like shot creation, which is a much messier topic.
admin wrote:
Is it reasonable to think that a player like Damon Jones is shooting most of his free throws in these situations and that's why his BFTA/FTA ratio is so low? That three-point plays and shooting fouls are relatively evenly distributed (besides luck in this small of a sample size) and guys like Jones just have really low shooting foul ratios?
I can't back this statistically, but I think its because an overwhelming proportion of DJ's baskets come on "open" shots. He gets a ton of them in the Heat's half-court offense, and the few times he shoots with a hand in his face he usually misses. Also, he never drives to the basket, so his chances for BFTA are minimal. One of the things I like about the BFTA results is that so far they have come out pretty much as you would expect from just observation.
And going back a few notes to times when a player attempts 3 free throws, I counted the third one as BFTA, the reasoing being that if you counted it as a regular free throw, the three free throws would equal 1.5 possessions, which they obviously aren't.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:00 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
CrazyFromTheHeat wrote:
Also, he never drives to the basket, so his chances for BFTA are minimal.
At the same time, so should his chances for any free-throw attempts be minimal. What I'm arguing is that few players really have a "skill" for getting three-point plays; drawing the shooting fouls is the skill, and sometimes the shot happens to bounce in.
But we can't just look at free throws attempted to measure the "free-throw drawing" skill, because a player like Jones, I suspect, will take a significant percentage of his free-throws off of intentional fouls.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 8:31 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
[quote="admin What I'm arguing is that few players really have a "skill" for getting three-point plays; drawing the shooting fouls is the skill, and sometimes the shot happens to bounce in.[/quote]
But that would imply that players should accumulate BFTAs at the same rate, and they don't. Here are the Heat players BFTA Percentages (percentage of total FT), listed with their number of FTA in front of their names:
427 Shaq 11.48
347 Wade 11.82
123 Haslem 11.38
113 E Jones 9.73
48 Dooling 0.00
47 D Jones 2.13
32 Laettner 9.38
31 Butler 3.23
24 Doleac 4.17
21 Anderson 4.76
10 Allen 0.00
4 Person 0.00
Wang 0.00
The real interesting one is Dooling. He's hardly ever on the floor at the end of games, drives to the basket better than anyone on the team other than Wade and possibly EJ, and still can't accumulate a single BFTA. It's a small sample, but it does suggest that getting fouled and getting the basket is a skill.
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sat Jan 22, 2005 9:07 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Argh. A mistake creeped into my data, giving Josh Childress of all people credit for and-1s that he didn't take. Don't use the data I uploaded to the Yahoo site, I'm fixing the mistakes now.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:42 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Okay, I fixed the data. The file now has the details of every free throw attempted this season, until Jan 21. The csv uses the following format:
Code:
DATE AWAY HOME PLAYER TEAM SHOT# #SHOTS TYPE Q TIME
04-11-02 DEN LAL anthony,carmelo DEN 1 2 Shooting 1 10:40
04-11-02 DEN LAL anthony,carmelo DEN 2 2 Shooting 1 10:40
04-11-02 SAC DAL dampier,erick DAL 1 2 Shooting 1 9:56
04-11-02 SAC DAL dampier,erick DAL 2 2 Shooting 1 9:56
04-11-02 HOU DET wallace,ben DET 1 1 Shooting 1 9:18
DATE, AWAY, HOME, PLAYER, TEAM should be obvious. SHOT# is the shot sequence, eg 1=front end of a two-shot scenario and the FTA on an AND-1. #SHOTS is the total number of FTAs in that sequence. TYPE is the foul description displayed on the nba.com PBP logs. They've used the following:
TYPE
Away from Play
Clear Path
Delay Technical
Double Technical
Elbow
Flagrant Type 1
Flagrant Type 2
Hanging Technical
Illegal Defense
Inbound
Loose Ball
Non Supported Technical
Offensive
Personal
Punching
Shooting
Taunting Technical
Technical
Q is the quarter in which the FTs were attempted, TIME is the time remaining in the quarter.
Here's a direct link to the file, which probably won't work. If not, you can look around here and download the file titled "and1s.csv".
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 7:38 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's how the types of FTs break down:
Code:
FTAs
TYPE 1 2 3 TOTAL
Away from Play 35 4 0 39
Clear Path 28 0 0 28
Delay Technical 4 0 0 4
Double Technical 1 0 0 1
Elbow 0 4 0 4
Flagrant Type 1 0 77 0 77
Flagrant Type 2 0 12 0 12
Hanging Technical 12 0 0 12
Illegal Defense 341 0 0 341
Inbound 0 24 0 24
Loose Ball 3 1002 0 1005
Non Supported Technical 2 0 0 2
Offensive 0 8 0 8
Personal 8 6628 3 6639
Punching 2 0 0 2
Shooting 2473 18578 303 21354
Taunting Technical 6 0 0 6
Technical 446 0 0 446
TOTAL 3361 26337 306 30004
The FTAs that represent the end of a possession -- Shooting, Loose Ball, Away from Play, and Personal -- sum to 13259, or 44.2% of the total. Nice to have that FTA coefficent confirmed.
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ed Küpfer
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 787
Location: Toronto
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:54 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I've uploaded a csv with showing a breakdown of every player's FTA -- how many and-1s, how many techs, etc. It's at the Yahoo site I linked to above.
The leaders in in BFTA%, or "and-1%":
Code:
PLAYER BFTA FTA BFTA%
brand,elton 35 223 15.7%
mohammed,nazr 20 132 15.2%
curry,eddy 24 162 14.8%
stoudemire,a 54 388 13.9%
jamison,antawn 21 156 13.5%
odom,lamar 24 180 13.3%
miller,andre 20 150 13.3%
martin,kenyon 20 153 13.1%
hill,grant 22 173 12.7%
wallace,ben 13 105 12.4%
haslem,udonis 16 130 12.3%
wallace,gerald 15 123 12.2%
miller,brad 22 182 12.1%
sweetney,mike 12 102 11.8%
wade,dwyane 42 359 11.7%
williamson,c 13 112 11.6%
stojakovic,peja 17 151 11.3%
okafor,emeka 18 161 11.2%
marbury,stephon 24 215 11.2%
o'neal,shaq 49 440 11.1%
Andre Miller?
The lowest BFTA% among players with 100+FTAs:
Code:
PLAYER BFTA FTA BFTA%
boykins,earl 3 115 2.6%
hamilton,r 7 253 2.8%
croshere,austin 5 130 3.8%
nailon,lee 4 100 4.0%
billups,c 8 185 4.3%
collins,jason 5 105 4.8%
alston,rafer 6 124 4.8%
allen,ray 11 226 4.9%
nash,steve 5 102 4.9%
fisher,derek 5 101 5.0%
okur,mehmet 9 180 5.0%
dampier,erick 6 120 5.0%
brown,p.j. 6 116 5.2%
turkoglu,hedo 6 115 5.2%
iverson,allen 21 360 5.8%
williams,eric 8 137 5.8%
blount,mark 6 102 5.9%
brezec,primoz 6 102 5.9%
abdur-rahim,s 6 101 5.9%
hinrich,kirk 7 112 6.3%
_________________
ed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
CrazyFromTheHeat
Joined: 21 Jan 2005
Posts: 31
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 10:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow Ed! You're my hero. I can't wait to get started with all of that data. One thing that jumps out at me right away is Iverson among the lowest. Who would have guessed that?
_________________
The Best Miami Heat Coverage
http://heat.mostvaluablenetwork.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Nikos
Joined: 16 Jan 2005
Posts: 346
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:08 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Hey Ed can you post ther attachment of all players BFTA?
Also when you get the chance post the W-L %s on your site, that addition would make it near flawless.
Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Kevin Pelton
Site Admin
Joined: 30 Dec 2004
Posts: 979
Location: Seattle
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 1:44 am Post subject: Reply with quote
admin wrote:
What I'm arguing is that few players really have a "skill" for getting three-point plays; drawing the shooting fouls is the skill, and sometimes the shot happens to bounce in.
Well, Ed's data isn't helping this hypothesis, though I suppose we'd have to see a couple of seasons worth of data to see whether there is year-to-year consistency. ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Mike G
Joined: 14 Jan 2005
Posts: 3613
Location: Hendersonville, NC
PostPosted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 8:54 am Post subject: Reply with quote
Ed Küpfer wrote:
The FTAs that represent the end of a possession -- Shooting, Loose Ball, Away from Play, and Personal -- sum to 13259, or 44.2% of the total. Nice to have that FTA coefficent confirmed.
Using Ed's data, I figured this somewhat differently.
Since we are looking for a multiplier to apply to 1 FTA that makes it equivalent to 1 FGA, I look for a departure from 2 FTA in the average possession-ending foul.
From the total of not-in-the-act fouls (personals, loose ball, and inbounds) and act-of-shooting fouls, I subtract "bonus" FT (and-1s, 3rd of 3-shot FTA); and divide by the total FTA:
(7654 + 21354 - 2473 - 101) / 30004 = .881
101 is 1/3 of 303 3-shot fouls.
7654 is # of non-shooting 2-shot fouls.
Half of .881 is .4405, so we are corroborated.
(I didn't include "away from play" fouls in the possession-ending category
: 35 of 37 were 1-shot fouls. I'm not familiar with this call, actually.)
How do we get an odd number (77) of FTA from flagrant-1's ? I can see a teammate stepping into the lane and nullifying some FTA -- but not a T.
As to the wide range of BFTA/FTA, clearly there are 2 skills at work: drawing the foul, and finishing the shot. Iverson draws fouls and flings up prayers. Shaq tends to score with guys hanging on him.
Shaq might be at the top of the list if his FTA weren't diluted with hackashaq plays. No chance for a bonus shot there.
There are quite a range of "ballhandling" fouls still in the mix (undifferentiated from "shooting" fouls.) I suspect these are more significant than differences in "finishing strength".