The Pitfalls of Statistical Analysis: Statistics Critique
In a 2-part look at basketball statistics, Vicious D takes a look at how basketball statistics have failed. Today, he takes a look at how to improve basketball statistics, and proposes that the system is not that difficult to change.
In last week's article, I talked about how basketball is a tricky animal and therefore a tricky sport to analyze. Basketball, unlike say baseball, often relies on a team play to create an offensive or defensive result rather than a group of individual plays. It's therefore not surprising that team statistics are often the best indicator of how a team ranks in the league. If the Raptors have the best free throw percentage in the NBA, then it means that the players that are taking the most free throws are the best in the league in doing so. For my own tastes, team statistics have offered the best and most accurate picture of a team and can be mostly trusted.
Individual statistics though, still leave much to be desired.
As most casual fans know, the statistics available to the public and the statistics available to the average general manager or coach can be as different as night and day. In basketball, we've heard coaches talk about calculated deflections (a steal's 'assist' at times) and other statistics that are not readily available. Individual player tendencies are also looked through and analyzed to give better defensive schemes. For example, we've heard that many teams examine such metrics as the effectiveness of a player going to the left or right; again, not readily available statistics to most onlookers.
The only statistics provided by NBA.com are the basic stats that are used to calculate all other alternative perspective breakdowns, such as those available via Wages of Wins, Hollinger's ESPN Statistical Analysis, and 82games.com. Out of the core 15 statistics available, statistics such as games, minutes, field goals, and shot percentage are pretty undeniable. They are hard evaluations of players on the court. However, based on the 15 core categories provided to us from NBA.com, I'm going to break down where some of the other NBA stats have failed:
Assists: They're defined as a pass that directly leads to a basket, but they're often left to the scorekeeper's subjective discretion. Unlike assists in hockey, assists in basketball are hard to cover because they happen quickly and with around 100 combined shots taken in an NBA game, there is little time to go back and correct errors . Add to the fact that there have been reports of inflated stats and it all equals to some questionable numbers. Too often though, it's a series of passes that leads to a basket while only the final pass that's scored. To reward those who attempt a team play, I believe Secondary Assists are a statistic that should be calculated. In a game that has as much scoring as basketball has though, this calculation could be a monumental task . However, there are no rules that say that stats have to be calculated directly by the scorekeeper after a play. Secondary assists could be calculated at a secondary location and would allow fans to have a better glimpse at who is initiating the play. It would also reward a player for their selflessness in making the pass that leads to the pass. Another metric, Assists to Foul Shots, on the other hand, could be easily calculated. Currently, assists are not calculated for plays where a player gets fouled and doesn't make his shot. Players that end up scoring on a play are often given a chance to score by the passer. By setting up a play where the opposing team has to foul, I'd argue that the assisting player should get recognition for instigating the play.
Rebounds: We talk often about how rebounding is a team effort. However, rebounding is only ever calculated on an individual basis. What about players blocking out their man? How about the players who try to do their part in the entire rebounding mechanism? Unfortunately, basketball doesn't reward them for their work. I'd like to include a percentage for how many times a player blocks out a man, but it'd be a subjective measurement of which player was playing out of position. Instead, I believe that Taps (Rebounding Assist) would be a great new calculation. How many times has a player tapped the ball out to his team? How many times has a player been unable to keep control of the basketball because he was blocking out his man, but still manages to tap the ball to a friendly face? Taps may even encourage a different style of rebounding and possibly a faster paced game. This was something Rasho Nesterovic excelled at in his first tour of duty with the Dinos; he didn't always corral the final rebound, but many a time he made sure the other team didn't either by tapping it to teammates.
Steals: Steals are actually a fairly objective statistic. Either you're able to take the ball away from your man and retain possession or you aren't. However, I think that the addition of Deflections as a stat would add to the entire steals metric. Steals are often the product of another person poking the ball loose or deflecting the ball to a teammate. Undervaluing that skill set or not computing it would be doing a disservice to those with active hands.
Blocks: Another area that we as Raptors fans have looked at over the years has been in the blocks category. Part of the reason is because it's been said that Chris Bosh is one of the best blockers in the league. It's not necessarily because he has the highest block percentage, but the fact that his blocks keep the ball in play. Block and Retained Possession would be a good statistic to remedy this and quantify blocks in a different way. If a center or power forward simply spikes the ball out of bounds (ahem - Dwight Howard), they would no longer be seen as a great shot blocker.
+ / - : I find no either stat as infuriating and useless as the +/- statistic. While as mentioned, I do feel strongly about the effectiveness of most team stats, this one is too reliant on overall team play and is yet used to measure an individual's effectiveness on the court. This is especially true on the defensive end. As we've discussed at length with Jose Calderon last season, one player's injury and ineffectiveness can bring down an entire unit's ability to defend. Why should players such as Anthony Parker or Chris Bosh suffer due to Calderon's ability to move? With Calderon getting torched at the point of attack, a solid defender like Parker was sometimes racking up -15 type numbers evne though individually, his defence on the night was fairly good. A much more interesting stat may be Opponent vs Scoring %. Basically, the stat would be calculated by figuring out the shooting percentage of the opponent a person is directly guarding. It would not be reliant on who was assigned to which man, but who ultimately was defending the shot. So for example, if a team were to run the pick and roll on the Raptors and Bargnani successfully altered the shot of his man, his Opponent vs Scoring % would decrease. Another easily implemented defensive stat would be Charges. Frankly, I'm not sure why this stat isn't in the books already except to dissuade flopping. Nevertheless, charges are such an essential part of a defensive stop that they should be calculated and available to the public.
Finally, Fouls Incurred would be another good measure of a player's prowess to enter the paint and draw fouls. Yes, foul shots already do some of the work, but to have an accurate breakdown that measures how many fouls a player has drawn from their opponent would give a more accurate picture. For example, if one looks at free throws attempted, it doesn't tell which resulted in two foul shots and which resulted in mere penalties. Foul shots also do not measure fouls drawn in a non-shooting situation. The inclusion of this statistic may encourage more players to attack and be more aggressive.
Now that we have a few more suggested statistics, the question becomes how to track these stats. It's here where I believe a company such as EA or 2KSports would become beneficial. As video game companies continue to try to bring the basketball court into our living rooms, they require more statistics in order to derive an accurate portrayal of a player's abilities. The NBA would not even need to fund the calculations, but would just need to extend their partnership with both companies to create better representations of their athletes. As a result, we in the public would have access to new stats that would be previously unavailable.
Finally, I'd also like to talk about secondary statistics calculation such as those employed by Wages of Wins, 82games.com, or Hollinger's ESPN stats. While each site provides their own unique perspective on statistical analysis, each also has an inherent weakness. The first is that most of them are trying to equalize the players by calculating them in certain situations. Whether it be for crunch time or for the full 48 minutes, these sites try to equalize the minutes across the league to generate more information. However, there are always reasons why certain players do not play in certain quarters nor are they able to play more minutes. A player's efficiency will drop off the more they play and the flaws in their game can make them unusable at times. In addition, most of these statistics do not take into account that the sample pool that is available may be very small for certain players and to simply equate their numbers with those of more established players can lead to inaccurate conclusions. Finally, these stats are based on a system that already doesn't provide us enough information. A player such as Andrea Bargnani is not suddenly going to look like a good defensive player if you calculate his statistics on a 48 minute schedule. It's because the original statistics are already missing vital information, so any extrapolation on the limited data would only provide limited answers.
At the beginning of this two part analysis, I wanted to set out and challenge our way of thinking about how statistics are portrayed in basketball. How is it that in basketball that there seems to always be more than a handful of players who seem to be much loved and defended by their local fans for doing the "intangibles"? Why do others often see these players as "overrated"? It's because statistics in the NBA still have a far way to go. As a result, it's been my personal policy to be very careful about the statistics I've quoted in the HQ, preferring to stick with team statistics and to look at objective statistics such as shots taken and shooting percentages. However, there are solutions available out there so that basketball can be more accurately portrayed and players can be more accurately accounted for.
It will truly be a great day when we can say that the "intangibles" players are becoming fewer and fewer thanks to a more complete statistical breakdown.
32 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Agressiveness
One stat I’d like to see would be agressiveness. I’m not entirely sure how it would be calculated, but it would be some metric combining:
Where the player caught the ball versus where he shot the ball (if he drove, or settled for a jumper);
Whether he drew a foul (minus whether he got called for a charge) on his posession;
and then possible divide these numbers by how long the ball was in the players posession (whether he held it for 20 seconds, then jacked up a long three or whether he got the ball and attacked).
Essentially, what I’m trying to weed out with this is, while a guy like Jamario Moon might have good team stats, or a good shooting percentage or whatever, I want to know if we’re bringing in a player that’s going to make stuff happen out there, or if he’s just going to be an Antoine Walker, and jack threes and never draw a foul.
Haha. Yeah, that’d be a good thing to try and implement with secondary analysis after we got more stats. The only way we can measure aggressiveness right now is with a shot selection chart.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 10:48 AM EDT up reply actions
Sportsguy Agrees
Good post Vicious – Bill Simmons talked about many of these similar statistics in an ESPN Mag article a while back, in addition to various others he’d like to see.
I do disagree with you on one point though. It’s not necessarily true that a player’s effectiveness decreases with more minutes played. That’s probably the overall trending, but not the hard and fast rule.
Yeah, it’s not a hard and fast rule. However, I think that in a game like basketball, conditioning is such a huge part that we can’t just discount it. I think that a player that plays 10 minutes a game and know it, may have an opportunity to go all out. If he knows that he has 20 minutes in a game, he may have to let off the pedal a little since he’s going to get tired and he’s also going to play with a larger variety of players who might not be as good (ie the bench)
And wow. I never read that article, but it sure looks a lot like the two I wrote. That’s nuts.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 10:51 AM EDT up reply actions
Sweet spot
I’d argue that there is sweet spot that differs for each player. If you play a player for too few minutes their numbers may actually get worse because they can’t get into the flow of the game. I haven’t verified this example, but I’d bet that Belinelli’s numbers were better when he played 15-20 minutes vs when he played less than 10.
I’d certainly agree with that sweet spot. I’m just saying that extrapolating for 48 minutes isn’t quite an accurate account. It’s like saying Bolt will run the 400 m in 38 because he ran the 200 in 19. I just don’t necessarily agree that for athletes, we can say it’’ll be a constant increase in production.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 1:34 PM EDT up reply actions
Well, his 200m time is almost exactly twice his 100m time ;)
9.58 x2 = 19.16 seconds, versus his actual 19.19 seconds.
Not that I disagree with you (in fact I completely agree that 48 minute stats are seriously flawed) just a hilariously bad example to pick at random.
lol. Well, yeah. If you half Kobe’s time, he’d probably have the same average. lol.
I should have said something like Donovan Bailey
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 3:42 PM EDT up reply actions
Great post
All of the “new” stats that you propose would be quite valuable – perhaps hard to implement and properly measure, but certainly they would all be beneficial in analysis.
However, Assists to Fouls, Block and Retained Possession, and Fouls Incurred would not be overly difficult and would all be great additions.
While they are weaknesses in measures used by Berri et al, they also expose the issues with looking solely at the basic NBA box score. They are not perfect, but in many cases. For example, AI gets too much credit to scoring points – and often doesn’t get “penalized” by fans for his low TS% and high turnover rate (which both mean the opponent’s get the ball more often to score at the other end – ending up costing the team perhaps more than he benefits one). There is no holy grail, but these authors have made improvements in how we all look at the game.
No, they’re definitely not perfect, but they have some value. I just question how much added value they give because they can only simply dive deeper into the numbers.
I kinda equate it to have an orchard that has apple. However, the farmer (NBA) only picks up fiji apples, and then the market (those secondary sites) simply uses those apples to make pies, apple sauce, apple juice, etc. Sure, you can tell a lot about the quality of the trees in the farmer’s farm. However, you kind of have an incomplete look at the orchard because there are many other types of apples out there that might be better for different uses.
Now I’m hungry… Great
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 10:45 AM EDT up reply actions
I hope other bloggers read this.
Great post, I agree with your premise and conclusions. I’m not sure more stats is the answer as I think the best way to analyse players in basketball is to watch them play. I love that you proposed a solution for collecting stats, great outside the box thinking.
Way to go!!!
Haha. Thanks man. I’ll never say that stats can replace looking at the game. But I think the NBA can do a much better job with what they provide.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 10:40 AM EDT up reply actions
I actually like +/-
I think that if you compare the +/- of an individual player to the +/- of the entire team on any given game or even a season, this is a very meaningful statistic. Takes into account offense and defense, and is perhaps the only stat that takes the “intangibles” into consideration.
I think in hockey, that’s the case. Lines can be mixed and matched and scoring doesn’t occur as often. Not only that, but your offensive and defensive lines get mixed and put out at times.
However in basketball, you basically have your starters and your bench. Players are settled into a rotation most of the time, and the rotation for the most part, is usually fixed. Therefore, if you’re always playing with certain people, they can affect your +/- rating constantly. For example, if you’re always paired with Will Solomon, and he’s horrible on defense and fairly bad at initiating offense, your +/- rating is going to look absolutely terrible. There’s little you can do to change that, and because the rotation is more or less set, there’s not a chance that you won’t be playing with him. Similarly, if you’re always playing with LeBron James, your +/- is going to get inflated.
+/- is something that works only when you have the ability to have a variety of different players play with you. If you’re always locked with people, it’s just not a useful stat.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 10:39 AM EDT up reply actions
I Agree
I think that if a player’s +/- over the season or even longer is higher than the +/- of the other player’s on his team it shows that the team consistentely does better when he is on the court rather than the other players on the team. The same of course would also hold true if a player had the worst +/-on the team compared to his teammates and all gradations in between.
+/- on a game by game basis can be the result of that particular game’s unique situations so on a game to game basis I think that +/- can be deceiving.
I like the rest of the ideas and would like to suggest another which I believe I also mentioned in the comments to part #1.
I would like to see some stats involving assists to field goal attempts and field goals made.
1. I would like to see a “potential assists” calculated. On every shot taken it can be determined if an assist would be rewarded if a basket is scored. I would include only actual shots taken. From this stat we could calculate.
What was player’s assist percentage? In other words how many assists did he get vs how many he would have gotten had the player on the receiving end of the pass made the shot successfully. This could give us some insight over the season as to whether a passer was passing the ball to players who had a higher field goal percentage or a lower field goal percentage of off his passes.
Breaking this down by quarter and say each of the last 6 minutes of a game would give us some idea if the passer is finding the right players to pass to in the clutch
2. What is player’s field goal percentage on a potential assisted play? On every shot taken determine if an assist would have been rewarded if the player made the shot. We would then be able to look at a player’s field goal percentage on an unassisted field goal vs what his field goal percentage was on potential assisted plays. We could then tell if a player shoots better when they create their own shot vs when they shoot off of a potential assist. I would calculate these percentage for both 2 point goals, 3 point goals and also when fouled.
What percentage of a player;s shots come off of potential assited plays vs unassisted plays would tell us how a player does at creatiang their own shot.
It would be interesting to see if a player gets fouled more when they create their own shot or off of a postential assisted play.
.
Very good analysis
I do believe more stats are needed in basketball (Being the baseball nerd that I am. lol) to analyze based on team play. The stats used right now mostly seem to recognize only the surface of a player’s abilities.
I like your suggestions. However, wouldn’t it be difficult to keep track of secondary assists? Basketball is a pretty fast-paced sport.
Which is why I don’t think all of this should simply fall on the scorekeeper in the arena. There are video game companies who would pay for extra stats and heck, the teams themselves already fork over tons of dough. That’s the surprising thing. If every team just pooled their money together and better stats would be generated, I think it would make the game better as a whole
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 1:36 PM EDT up reply actions
Second assist
I liked the article and the general idea that the set of stats that we currently use has some big holes. A few of questions:
1) In a give-and-go situation could a player earn both a second assist and a basket on the same play? That seems accurate to me.
2) Do you think that adding more stats would improve the way players play or would it just give them more options for padding their numbers.
3) Can anyone imagine a stat that would accurately reflect how hard it is to get past a given perimeter defender?
1) I do not think that we can really use the secondary assist stat in general because it could get silly. You could argue for example that the player who initiated the original pass on a perimeter pass around was just as responsible for a basket as everyone else who made the pass. You have to draw the line somewhere and I think the NBA has it correct right now. As for the give and go what you are talking about is assisting your own basket which is simply ludicrous.
2) I really don’t think it will change how people play necessarily unless teams start rewarding players based on the new stats. Getting recognition may motivate a few players to change their games but if you are a ball hog now you will more than likely still be a ball hog and if you pass up shots to someone else then you will probably do it just as much.
To answer your 3rd question, yes it is called True Shooting Percentage which if I understand correctly is a combination (average?) of your field goal percentage and your free throw percentage. You could probably break this down by the player covering any said player. Ultimately someone with a high TS% played well against defenders while players with a low TS% did not.
TS%
TS%
True Shooting Percentage; the formula is PTS / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA)). True shooting percentage is a measure of shooting efficiency that takes into account field goals, 3-point field goals, and free throws
from basketball-reference.com
TS% Against
I would think that this information is already compiled but not released to the public.
I know for example that 82games.com computes a number of stats that they sell to the teams in the league but these stats are not available to the public.
One of the stats that 82games.com makes available to the public is shooting percentage by an opposing team for each player when that player is on the court compared to the opponents shooting percentage when that player is not on the court.. So I would think that they also compute the number that you are suggesting but just don’t make it available to the public.
I don’t think that’s an accurate look at it either. All that 82 Game’s stat calculates (from what I’ve seen) is the difference between when the player is on court and off court and the opposing team’s percentage as a whole. It’s less incumbent on an individual’s defensive skills.
What I’m proposing is to just calculate whether the shot has made it in or not and assign it to the person who was covering that player at the moment of the shot. It’s not hinging on who was assigned to that player, because with switches on defense and such, that’s always changing.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 5:25 PM EDT up reply actions
As I Mentioned in My Post
I mentioned that they sell information to teams that they do not make available to the public.
I pointed out that they make public on 82games.com the stat of opponents teams shooting percentage when a player is on the court vs off of the court
Then I said that they probably have the number that you are suggesting but don’t make it available to the public (because they sell it to teams)
So we agree that this would be a good stat. However, I am saying it is already computed but not made available to the public.
The reason I believe that they calculate the number you are looking for is because once you calculate what they do make public it is a simple matter to break down a player’s defensive stat against his opponent. when you already have that number for how they do against their opponents team when they are on the court. If the opponents shoot X% against all 5 guys when you are on the court it is simple to compute that % one on one.
For Example
I contacted them a year or so ago and asked them if they had a rebounding stat that showed what percentage of rebounds each player got in his defensive area that he was in at the time of the shot.. For example for each time during a game that a player was in the restricted area at the time of a shot and the ball rebounded into the restricted area what percentage of rebounds did he get that came down in the restricted area while he was in there..
They said that they computed that stat but only sold it to teams.
Gotcha. Thanks for the heads up.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 3, 2009 8:11 PM EDT up reply actions
In any case, there’s not much that we can say about the stats they don’t show to the public.
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 4, 2009 1:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Do any of Hollinger, WoW or 82games include ‘quality of competition’ or ‘quality of teammates’ in their statistics? It’s become standard fare for hockey stats geeks, and it leaves a glaring hole in their compilations otherwise.
I've been looking at the sky
I don’t believe they do yet. Maybe 82 games does for teams, but nothing available to us mere mortals
Kinnon "Vicious D" Yee
Author - RaptorsHQ.com Twitter @RapHQVicious
by Raptors HQ - Vicious D on Sep 4, 2009 1:55 AM EDT up reply actions
Yikes
I have even less respect for these stat compilations than I did before. One guy spends the whole game guarding Bosh; his teammate defends the same position against Voskuhl, and night after night we’re supposed to compare their statistics straight up? No wonder Hollinger’s stats love guys like Kris Humphries (not that I won’t miss Hump).
I've been looking at the sky
by Back In Black on Sep 4, 2009 11:06 AM EDT up reply actions
That is a good point about secondary assists. In ice hockey you can get the last two touches as assists. And they are equally weighted. Perhaps adding that 2nd assist would make basketball a more informed game to the spectators, instead of point guards getting all the glories. How about players who force the other player into turnovers. That’s a very good defensive stat too.

by 













