Factors in Pace (ziller, 2007)
Posted: Wed Apr 20, 2011 5:30 pm
Author Message
ziller
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Sac Metro
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: Factors in Pace Reply with quote
In investigating the quizzical nature of Sacramento's high pace rank (#4) despite a plodding offense, I ran correlations using current season data via Knickerblogger.
I found the strongest correlations to pace factor this season were, in order:
Defensive TO rate - .515
Defensive Reb% - .468
Defensive eFG - .366
This would indicate pace isn't the best factor to judge the willingness of a team to run; it better indicates which teams (due to talent or strategy) force turnovers, rebound defensively well, and give up a good opponent shooting percentage.
Despite all this, four of the top five pace teams obviously run and want to run. Thoughts, anyone?
_________________
SactownRoyalty.com
tziller@gmail.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:02 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Possessions per game is a crude estimate for pace. There have been some threads on this in the past.
Poor offensive rebounding teams will appear faster than they actually are, as will good defensive rebounding teams. This is because offensive rebounds for either team lead to longer possessions, which means fewer possessions per 48 minutes. A high FG% by either team also decreases offensive rebounds and thus inflates possessions per min.
As for defensive TO rate, that should correlate to pace as lots of fast breaks come off of opponent turnovers.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's an old thread on a similar topic:
http://sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/vi ... .php?t=431
Crude as it may be, fast break points may still be a very good measure of pace, and better than possessions per 48 minutes in some cases.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ziller
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Sac Metro
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:29 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the link to the old thread, John.
_________________
SactownRoyalty.com
tziller@gmail.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ziller
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Sac Metro
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:47 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I looked at 82games' shot clock data. Doesn't add much to what existing pace data tells us.
_________________
SactownRoyalty.com
tziller@gmail.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
That's also confounded by quick putbacks off of offensive rebounds. 82games also did a study on time of possession here:
http://www.82games.com/random27.htm
But again, offensive rebounding is a big factor.
I haven't thought it through but there must be some relatively simple way to adjust possessions per game to account for offensive rebounding (and opponents' offensive rebounding). We have good measures of rebounding but I'm not sure how you'd best combine them with possessions per game. In a non-quantitative way one can at least say that a team like NJ (who's 5th in DR% but 27th in OR%) is likely slower than their 16th ranked possessions/game suggests.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Harold Almonte
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 616
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
high DRebRate and TO Rate not necessaryly means "willingness to run", but chances to. An average time from offensive possessions after a FGM (from inbound to first play at the offensive end) will say if they really like to run.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ben F.
Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 391
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:59 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
What I'm really interested in is the idea of dictating tempo. Is it easier for a team to force a slow pace or a high pace? If a running team plays a slow it down team, will they on average be somewhere in the middle or will it gravitate towards one side more? Clearly it depends on coaching philosophy and the like, but I think it's one avenue that we've left largely unexplored.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:13 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
FFSBasketball wrote:
What I'm really interested in is the idea of dictating tempo. Is it easier for a team to force a slow pace or a high pace? If a running team plays a slow it down team, will they on average be somewhere in the middle or will it gravitate towards one side more? Clearly it depends on coaching philosophy and the like, but I think it's one avenue that we've left largely unexplored.
Using the figures from Harvey Pollack's guide, I looked at team fast break points scored and allowed in 05-06. On average teams scored 12.2 fast break points per 48 minutes last year. The standard deviation for fast break points scored was 2.8, while the standard deviation for fast break points allowed was 1.3. I'm not sure exactly how to interpret this but it does appear to provide some evidence that teams can and do dictate offensive tempo.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
deepak
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 665
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 12:40 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Is there a good estimator for fast break points based on pace, 2fg, 3fg, fta, turnovers forced, etc. ?
ziller
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Sac Metro
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:27 pm Post subject: Factors in Pace Reply with quote
In investigating the quizzical nature of Sacramento's high pace rank (#4) despite a plodding offense, I ran correlations using current season data via Knickerblogger.
I found the strongest correlations to pace factor this season were, in order:
Defensive TO rate - .515
Defensive Reb% - .468
Defensive eFG - .366
This would indicate pace isn't the best factor to judge the willingness of a team to run; it better indicates which teams (due to talent or strategy) force turnovers, rebound defensively well, and give up a good opponent shooting percentage.
Despite all this, four of the top five pace teams obviously run and want to run. Thoughts, anyone?
_________________
SactownRoyalty.com
tziller@gmail.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:02 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Possessions per game is a crude estimate for pace. There have been some threads on this in the past.
Poor offensive rebounding teams will appear faster than they actually are, as will good defensive rebounding teams. This is because offensive rebounds for either team lead to longer possessions, which means fewer possessions per 48 minutes. A high FG% by either team also decreases offensive rebounds and thus inflates possessions per min.
As for defensive TO rate, that should correlate to pace as lots of fast breaks come off of opponent turnovers.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's an old thread on a similar topic:
http://sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/vi ... .php?t=431
Crude as it may be, fast break points may still be a very good measure of pace, and better than possessions per 48 minutes in some cases.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ziller
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Sac Metro
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:29 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for the link to the old thread, John.
_________________
SactownRoyalty.com
tziller@gmail.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
ziller
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Posts: 126
Location: Sac Metro
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:47 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
I looked at 82games' shot clock data. Doesn't add much to what existing pace data tells us.
_________________
SactownRoyalty.com
tziller@gmail.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:02 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
That's also confounded by quick putbacks off of offensive rebounds. 82games also did a study on time of possession here:
http://www.82games.com/random27.htm
But again, offensive rebounding is a big factor.
I haven't thought it through but there must be some relatively simple way to adjust possessions per game to account for offensive rebounding (and opponents' offensive rebounding). We have good measures of rebounding but I'm not sure how you'd best combine them with possessions per game. In a non-quantitative way one can at least say that a team like NJ (who's 5th in DR% but 27th in OR%) is likely slower than their 16th ranked possessions/game suggests.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
Harold Almonte
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 616
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:06 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
high DRebRate and TO Rate not necessaryly means "willingness to run", but chances to. An average time from offensive possessions after a FGM (from inbound to first play at the offensive end) will say if they really like to run.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ben F.
Joined: 07 Mar 2005
Posts: 391
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:59 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
What I'm really interested in is the idea of dictating tempo. Is it easier for a team to force a slow pace or a high pace? If a running team plays a slow it down team, will they on average be somewhere in the middle or will it gravitate towards one side more? Clearly it depends on coaching philosophy and the like, but I think it's one avenue that we've left largely unexplored.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Eli W
Joined: 01 Feb 2005
Posts: 402
PostPosted: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:13 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
FFSBasketball wrote:
What I'm really interested in is the idea of dictating tempo. Is it easier for a team to force a slow pace or a high pace? If a running team plays a slow it down team, will they on average be somewhere in the middle or will it gravitate towards one side more? Clearly it depends on coaching philosophy and the like, but I think it's one avenue that we've left largely unexplored.
Using the figures from Harvey Pollack's guide, I looked at team fast break points scored and allowed in 05-06. On average teams scored 12.2 fast break points per 48 minutes last year. The standard deviation for fast break points scored was 2.8, while the standard deviation for fast break points allowed was 1.3. I'm not sure exactly how to interpret this but it does appear to provide some evidence that teams can and do dictate offensive tempo.
_________________
Eli W. (formerly John Quincy)
CountTheBasket.com
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
deepak
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 665
PostPosted: Wed Mar 21, 2007 12:40 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Is there a good estimator for fast break points based on pace, 2fg, 3fg, fta, turnovers forced, etc. ?