The Perception of the Third Quarter
UPDATE: I have added the data for this year up to game 17 for the Spurs. Like CapHill said in the comment section the Spurs are having serious issues in the 1st and 4th quarters if we are looking at the point differentials.
In an effort to learn how to collect data from the internet (screen scrape, compassionately of course) I decided to take on a small (initially) project and write a fanpost for PTR. The motivation for this post originated from comments like the following:
THIRD QUARTER SUCKED!!!!! -- Artis Gilmore
I HATE THIRD QUARTERS -- Sleep Research Facility
Ugh. And the Spurs are showing why they have the third quarter collapse under copyright. -- Tim C.
Third quarter collapses are "in" again. -- LatinD
What a depressing third quarter. It’s . . . it’s like watching a Spurs game! -- Lauri
And there are many more colorful comments regarding the infamous third quarter. So I ventured to find out if the Spurs' third quarter calamities are the real deal or if they are imaginary psychological junk. A few disclaimers and notes before we begin. This is the first time I do something like this and although I have randomly checked the data to verify the accuracy of it and make sure there were no mistakes, I did not check the data like I would if I were to publish it in a scientific publication so it comes with no guarantee of accuracy. Also, these are the most basic statistics possible and there are no adjustments for pace or any other advanced metric. In addition, I ignored for the time being performance during the playoffs, overtimes and the difference between normal games and SEGABABAs which would add some complications to the data collection. Finally, if anybody is interested in getting their hands on the entire data set (it is BIG!) let me know and we can work something out.
My initial plan involved looking at the Spurs numbers during the last 10 years to see how their performance in each quarter varied per year. If you are keeping count that would be 10 years x 82 games x 8 scores (4 quarters for Spurs and opponent) which yields 6560 data points collected. Of course when I was done doing that I realized that the results dont mean anything if you dont compare them to the rest of the league, this led me to collect 6560 points x 30 teams for a total of196800 points! whew! Im glad computers are good with numbers.
OK, enough rambling and lets look at the data. The following plots show the league minimum, maximum and average points scored per quarter along with the same number for our Spurs for every year in the data set.
That was fun wasnt it? One of the main features is that the Spurs have been right near the league average offensively in every quarter. What is more incredible is that the third quarter has been notoriously close to the league average and it does not show a lot of variation, something we would not expect from our understanding of the third quarter performance of our team. A few additional noteworthy observations include the difficulty of the team in scoring point in the 4th quarter the last three years indicating a possible difficulty in closing out games, and the scored points per 1st quarter in 2007-2008 which was near the league minimum, which might indicate that the guys were behind after the first in many of their games (more on that later).
Now that we looked at the offense lets take a peak at the defense. And the defense is a thing of beauty for most of the decade.
WHOA!!! That is some nice defense. The first thing that jumps at me is our defensive domination compared to the league in the first and second periods. Those are some beautiful data points. In the third quarter we were still near the league minimum but somewhat closer to the league average. The fourth quarter went up and down throughout the decade. A second interesting observation is that we had the best points allowed per quarter the last three years in the fourth quarter which for me was unexpected. There is not much more to say about the defense by itself just like the information in the offense is somewhat ambiguous. A better approach is to look at these together and calculate the average points differential per quarter. Here a positive number is good and a negative number is bad.
OK. Guess what is the league average point differential per quarter? That is right, Im a genius and spent a bunch of time calculating a quantity that is obviously zero. In any case the exercise had didactic consequences and I dont regret doing it. In any case this is one of the more revealing findings. Look at the first and second quarter data and see how we used to essentially get solid leads for the early part of the decade. In 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 however the point differential for these quarters decreased dramatically. In some instances there were probably as many of those quarters in which we had a lead in those years as those were we didnt. Not a good omen for dominating basketball games. In 2007-2008 especially we were behind after the first quarter as much as we were ahead (probably) which means that the team had to fight back in half of their games. A nice year was seemingly 2002-2003 in which it appears that the team was so dominant in the first three quarters that they could ease it in the fourth (and maybe rest the starters? or maybe almost blow it in the fourth? some Spurs veteran fan can tell us).
To finalize, the main objective of all this was to find out if the third quarter is really worse than the other ones for us. I think the answer is partially answered in that it does not seem that the third quarter has ever been any worse than the others. If I had to call any quarter as the Spurs worst would be the fourth in which our defense and points differentials are all over the place. As for the reasons we have this perception, maybe further analysis would reveal the answer. A possibility that I have thought about is that maybe some of the third quarter collapses have been huge. Its a possibility that can be verified with the data set I have built and I hope I can do it (or maybe some of our resident statisticians) before the seasons is over.
Thank you all for reading! If there is enough interest I can make a monthly post monitoring the numbers for this year (I already have a little script that would do most of the work) let me know if you would enjoy that.
30 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
This is great, LE. I’d like to see how we stack up against contenders using these stats (maybe on a team-by-team basis instead of using max, min and league-wide averages), although you’d have to subjectively select which teams are and have been contenders for the last few years.
by silverandblack_davis on Dec 6, 2009 10:35 PM CST reply actions
Interesting post. How dowe know which players take up most of the second quarter this year? I readily assume that they’re mostly bench players, but I want to be sure. Say I’m right and the reserves play for most of the 2nd quarter, why then do the starters seem to always have less +/- numbers when compared to the bench? Why am I too lazy to even attempt to find the answers to my questons?
"Yes, it's important that I have good numbers, and I'm well-respected as a player. But I think it's more important that I'm respected as a man." - Some Tall Guy Who Wore #50
Hey guys! just to clarify… I did not post anything for this year I believe. I only included last years data…. I can include some of this years data in some near future post.
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
Oh yeah, shit. The last points were for ‘08-09. No one told me to read what’s written in graphs. And all the while I thought you just had to look at them graphs.
"Yes, it's important that I have good numbers, and I'm well-respected as a player. But I think it's more important that I'm respected as a man." - Some Tall Guy Who Wore #50
oh you (magnificent) bastard! i was actually doing something exactly like this, looking at scoring for/against per quarter for the last few years. i was having trouble finding easy to process data though (entering it by hand? not fun), and had only done this season to date.
i wanted to do a total breakdown per quarter as well, looking at average assists/rebounds/turnovers etc. again, finding easily processed data to suck into a spreadsheet? not much luck, and i don’t feel like writing scripts to do it (do enough programming in the day job).
oh well.
one thing i’d like to see – point differential per quarter in losses, versus wins. that might explain the (apparently wrong) perception that we suck in the third quarter – when we lose, its the third quarter where we lose it. and maybe third quarter averages when the game is close at half time (say, within 5-10 points?) versus when its starting to look like a blowout (11+ points). just some ideas, not asking you to do it :)
free george hill!
by sleep research facility on Dec 7, 2009 5:11 AM CST reply actions
Excellent work. I agree the Spurs used to win a lot more games early and were able to coast in the fourth. It’s not just about putting in subs, NBA garbage time is about working on your jump shot and 1-on-1 moves. It’s a time to entertain and avoid injury so not much in the way of team defense, taking charges and setting bruising screens. If you throw away the 4th quarter and just plot point differential at the end of 3 I think the trend the last few years would be pretty alarming.
Great work, LE! It would be interesting to track this over the course of this season and how it’s playing out. I think the 1st and 4th quarters have been our worst this year, based on my observations.
I am a little concerned however that PtR is starting to rely on statistics and facts, instead of opinion. This means I could now actually be wrong. ;-)
Silly things do cease to be silly if they are done by sensible people in an impudent way. - Jane Austen
Dont worry…. I made all that up : ) I will update the graphs tonight with this years data but I will not comment on it. Look for it at around 7:00 PM EST
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
As you all can see now the points differential for this year are scary. The 1st and 4th quarters are actually negative. The bright spot is that the 2nd quarter is near the best in the league.
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
I love this, LE, love it.
I think a good way of really answering the 3rd quarter collapse question would be this: For each game, check in which quarter the team scored the least points. Then count the number of times it happened in the 1st, the 2nd, the 3rd and the 4th. Rinse and repeat for all the years you analyzed. Check what the numbers tell you.
That’s one. The following step would be to calculate the difference between those “collapse quarters” and the mean of the other three quarters. Then calculate the mean value of those differences, and graph those.
I think those would allow us to visualize the results better. Let me know if my explanations made sense. And if you want, I can help.
Great work, again. I front paged it, I hope no one minds. Thanks for sharing.
Straight from the No-Stat Zone to your computer!
Dunkin' Cheerleaders
LD and SRF, those are some wonderful suggestions. To implement SRF’s ideas however I would have to recollect the data because I did not think of recording the result of the game. I will work on some of those things later on in the season. Thanks for the great response to the article!
"If an expert says it can't be done, get another expert"
- DBG
I’m so glad you scientifically proved there’s no such thing as a 3rd quarter collapse. Please forward your graphs to the NBA so tonight’s 37-19 abomination can be adjusted and the Spurs can be declared winners over the Jazz. :-(
by doggydogworld on Dec 7, 2009 10:53 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
+1
"Yes, it's important that I have good numbers, and I'm well-respected as a player. But I think it's more important that I'm respected as a man." - Some Tall Guy Who Wore #50
by theonlyromeo on Dec 7, 2009 11:39 PM CST up reply actions
nice – i suppose this is just an aberration in the data though………
maybe we should crunch numbers on 3rd Quarter collapses in games that matter (against premier teams, conference games, etc)
"Mr. Gilmore deserves to be in the Basketball Hall of Fame damnit. Highest field goal percentage EVER"
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/g/gilmoar01.html
Congrats LE. Spurs.com now has a link to this on their home page.
We specialize in misinformation around here. Facts and stats just get in the way.
by Wayne Vore (ATS) on Dec 8, 2009 3:04 PM CST reply actions
Popcorn Machine has this plus-minus chart that reveals a lot too
http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/gameflow.cgi?date=20091207&game=SASUTH
If you can play tough defense, share the ball, and make timely jumpers...Guaranteed W.
by The Man In Black on Dec 8, 2009 3:40 PM CST reply actions
And now I have that Popcorn song in my head.
I have flying monkeys at my disposal, and I'm not afraid to use them.
BESIDES winning ,What do the mavs,lakers,an celtics do that we could in 3rd quarters
They put Odom at the 3,Dirk at the 3,and Wallace at the 3"detroit""blazers"…Ive seen these teams hit slumps like us and go with a big front court for a stretch until something happens wether its just keeping a lead and slowing things down or helping there big men get in a shooting rythem against a shorter forward..DUNCAN,DICE,BONNER all can hit a 17ft jumper an rebound .
Don’t know much bout the Mavs or Celtics but Odom virtually always plays the 4. And Odom, Gasol & Bynum are never on the floor at the same time.
The Lakers "Too big, too strong, too long, too good."
by olf on Dec 9, 2009 9:30 AM CST up reply actions
You and your “facts”, olf. You should know better by now. :-)
Silly things do cease to be silly if they are done by sensible people in an impudent way. - Jane Austen
Yeah, I’m more cranky than usual this morning. I could say it was frickin cold in L A last night but I know you’re the wrong person to complain to about that.
The Lakers "Too big, too strong, too long, too good."
by olf on Dec 9, 2009 1:12 PM CST up reply actions
Anything to do with the Jazz lead over LA?
"Yes, it's important that I have good numbers, and I'm well-respected as a player. But I think it's more important that I'm respected as a man." - Some Tall Guy Who Wore #50
by theonlyromeo on Dec 9, 2009 10:50 PM CST up reply actions
Heh. The thing is, these stay in our mind. It might be an illusion, when considering all 82 games. But someone had better tell the players soon.
Straight from the No-Stat Zone to your computer!
Dunkin' Cheerleaders

by 







































