Expected Field Goal Percentage
I'd like to introduce a new statistic for you. It's the ATS Expected Field Goal Percentage. I made it up. Now, I'll try to explain it, and how I thought of it, and why I think it is interesting. And, why, like all statistics, it is flawed in drawing conclusions from it.
Coach Pop likes to say things like "The other team made shots" and "we need somebody to step up and make shots" and "basketball is a game of making shots". As complex and intricate as the game is, at its essence it is also very simple. You have to make shots. Therefore, there is a lot of value in players who can make shots. We can look at statistics for a game like field goal percentage, adjusted field goal percentage, true shooting percentage, and several others to get an idea of which teams and players make shots.
One thing I have been trying to figure out, ever since Olf put me on the path, is what does good Spurs offense look like in a particular game. If I can't look at a field goal percentage and know, what can I look at? This has lead me to ask a lot of questions and do a lot of thinking. A few of the factors in judging good offense are: balance of points from inside, open versus contested shots, number of assists per shots made, etc. I'd like to add two more.
One, your better shooters shoot more than your bad shooters.
Two, your players shoot from positions on the floor where they shoot well.
It's not that I hate, it's just that I like the mean
Yes, the mean. Also known as the average. For any given game, you can get lucky or get hot or face a bad defense. However, over time the data points add up and you regress to the mean. Or, to make up my own quote, "you are who you thought you are".
Chip Engelland sees a warning sign at half time of a game if the Spurs are making shots at a higher percentage than they usually do on contested shots or are making all their shots from the outside. You might not find your way all the way back to your mean, but odds are you are who thought you are and you will. What is this jibber jabber? Odds are you didn't become a much better shooting team over night. If you shoot 60% in the first half on shots you usually shoot at a 40% rate, then you better think that you are going to start missing those shots. If it isn't this game, it will be next game.
Expected Field Goal Percentage
Heading into our 59th game of the year against the Hornets our players are who they are. They've taken enough shots and seen enough repetitions to establish a solid mean. If a player has taken 145 shots from a particular place on the floor and shoots 60% from on those attempts, you shouldn't be surprised at all to see him go 6-10 for a game. It's what he does. If a guy is shooting 40% from the corner 3, you should expect him to go 2-5. It's not a fluke. It's not hot shooting. If a guy is shooting 28% from the top of the key, you shouldn't be surprised to see him go 2-7 from there in a game. It's not a fluke. It's not cold shooting. He is who we think he is.
Therefore, the goal of the team should be to get shots from guys where they are good shooters. And not get shots from guys where they are bad shooters. Get it? With this is mind, I decided that a good way to judge the offensive performance of the team for a game would be to determine how they should have shot for the game. Then, compare that to how they actually shot. The first would tell me whether or not they ran a good offense in relation to how they normally run it. The latter would tell me whether or not they "made shots".
I needed two things in order to pull this off. One was the NBA.com Hot Spots Charts. You know, these guys:

The other was a little help from Mrs. ATS in helping me take my shot charting to another level. She created a shot charting sheet for me that more or less mirrors the Hot Spots chart. The result is that for the game against the Hornets, I can break down every shot to the percentage that player shoots from that area of the floor. Here is the box score for the game.
| Player | Zone | Value | P%InZone | Shots | Made | Exp Made | Exp Points | Points | Differential | |
| 3 | 1 | 2 | 0.582 | 2 | 1 | 1.164 | 2.328 | 2 | 0.33 | |
| 3 | 10 | 3 | 0.463 | 2 | 1 | 0.926 | 2.778 | 3 | 0.22 | |
| 3 | 14 | 3 | 0.424 | 2 | 2 | 0.848 | 2.544 | 6 | 3.46 | |
| 3 | 9 | 2 | 0.6 | 1 | 0 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 0 | 1.20 | |
| 3 | 3 | 2 | 0.471 | 1 | 0 | 0.471 | 0.942 | 0 | 0.94 | |
| 3 | 2 | 2 | 0.143 | 1 | 0 | 0.143 | 0.286 | 0 | 0.29 | |
| 9 | 7 | 2 | 0.367 | 1 | 0 | 0.367 | 0.734 | 0 | 0.73 | |
| 9 | 1 | 2 | 0.615 | 6 | 6 | 3.69 | 7.38 | 12 | 4.62 | |
| 9 | 8 | 2 | 0.297 | 2 | 0 | 0.594 | 1.188 | 0 | 1.19 | |
| 9 | 6 | 2 | 0.405 | 1 | 1 | 0.405 | 0.81 | 2 | 1.19 | |
| 9 | 5 | 2 | 0.417 | 1 | 1 | 0.417 | 0.834 | 2 | 1.17 | |
| 10 | 13 | 3 | 0.429 | 2 | 1 | 0.858 | 2.574 | 3 | 0.43 | |
| 10 | 14 | 3 | 0.444 | 3 | 3 | 1.332 | 3.996 | 9 | 5.00 | |
| 10 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.00 | |
| 10 | 1 | 2 | 0.535 | 1 | 1 | 0.535 | 1.07 | 2 | 0.93 | |
| 15 | 12 | 3 | 0.379 | 2 | 1 | 0.758 | 2.274 | 3 | 0.73 | |
| 15 | 1 | 2 | 0.564 | 1 | 0 | 0.564 | 1.128 | 0 | 1.13 | |
| 15 | 10 | 3 | 0.5 | 1 | 1 | 0.5 | 1.5 | 3 | 1.50 | |
| 15 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0.00 | |
| 15 | 1 | 2 | 0.564 | 1 | 0 | 0.564 | 1.128 | 0 | 1.13 | |
| 15 | 4 | 2 | 0.4 | 1 | 0 | 0.4 | 0.8 | 0 | 0.80 | |
| 15 | 2 | 2 | 0.455 | 1 | 1 | 0.455 | 0.91 | 2 | 1.09 | |
| 20 | 6 | 2 | 0.211 | 1 | 0 | 0.211 | 0.422 | 0 | 0.42 | |
| 20 | 11 | 3 | 0.398 | 1 | 1 | 0.398 | 1.194 | 3 | 1.81 | |
| 20 | 1 | 2 | 0.541 | 5 | 4 | 2.705 | 5.41 | 8 | 2.59 | |
| 20 | 2 | 2 | 0.345 | 1 | 0 | 0.345 | 0.69 | 0 | 0.69 | |
| 20 | 14 | 3 | 0.321 | 2 | 0 | 0.642 | 1.926 | 0 | 1.93 | |
| 20 | 12 | 3 | 0.282 | 1 | 1 | 0.282 | 0.846 | 3 | 2.15 | |
| 21 | 9 | 2 | 0.593 | 1 | 0 | 0.593 | 1.186 | 0 | 1.19 | |
| 21 | 6 | 2 | 0.474 | 2 | 2 | 0.948 | 1.896 | 4 | 2.10 | |
| 21 | 8 | 2 | 0.556 | 2 | 1 | 1.112 | 2.224 | 2 | 0.22 | |
| 21 | 2 | 2 | 0.46 | 2 | 0 | 0.92 | 1.84 | 0 | 1.84 | |
| 21 | 3 | 2 | 0.375 | 1 | 1 | 0.375 | 0.75 | 2 | 1.25 | |
| 21 | 5 | 2 | 0.25 | 1 | 1 | 0.25 | 0.5 | 2 | 1.50 | |
| 21 | 7 | 2 | 0.289 | 2 | 0 | 0.578 | 1.156 | 0 | 1.16 | |
| 21 | 1 | 2 | 0.582 | 1 | 0 | 0.582 | 1.164 | 0 | 1.16 | |
| 24 | 7 | 2 | 0.318 | 1 | 0 | 0.318 | 0.636 | 0 | 0.64 | |
| 24 | 1 | 2 | 0.577 | 1 | 0 | 0.577 | 1.154 | 0 | 1.15 | |
| 24 | 11 | 3 | 0.302 | 1 | 0 | 0.302 | 0.906 | 0 | 0.91 | |
| 24 | 14 | 3 | 0.308 | 1 | 1 | 0.308 | 0.924 | 3 | 2.08 | |
| 24 | 6 | 2 | 0.364 | 1 | 0 | 0.364 | 0.728 | 0 | 0.73 | |
| 45 | 1 | 2 | 0.578 | 8 | 5 | 4.624 | 9.248 | 10 | 0.75 | |
| 71 | 38 | 33.025 | 73.204 | 88 | 14.80 | |||||
That's a lot of data there. Let me explain some of it.
- The zone is the area of the floor the shot was taken from. Zone 1 is the area around the basket. Then zones 2-4 are the next level out starting on the top right and going clockwise. 5-9 are the mid-range zones known as "Long 2's". 10-14 are your 3-pointers.
- The value is whether it is a 2-point shot or a 3-point shot.
- P% In Zone is that players shooting percentage from that zone according to the Hot Spot charts.
- Shots is the number of shots that player took from that particular zone during the game.
- Made is the number the player made from the zone.
- The Exp Made is the number of shots that player should have made based on their percentage from the zone.
- Expected points is the Exp Made number * the value of the shot.
- Points is how many points they did make from that zone.
- Differential is the Actual Points minus the Expected Points. Red indicates the player scored LESS points than they should have expected to from that zone.
Conclusions
Well, the Spurs should have expected to score 73 points on the field goals they took. They scored 88 points on their field goals, so they were "lucky" to the tune of 15 more points than they should have had. Where did those points come from? 3-point land.
Check it out:
| Twos | 53 | 26 | 25.871 | 51.742 | 52 | 0.258 |
| Threes | 18 | 12 | 7.154 | 21.462 | 36 | 14.538 |
The Spurs got 14.5 more points from 3-point range than they should have. Conclusion, we lived by the 3 in this game.
Fun fact: The Spurs expected shooting percentage for the game was 46.5%. There shooting percentage for the year going into the game was 46.9%. Conclusion, we pretty much got the same shots that we had been getting all year.
There are a number of deficiencies in this analysis. Like the quality of the shot. But, I think it is as good as any statistic at evaluating an offensive performance in a game and understanding whether we shot well or not. And whether we can expect to continue to have performances like it.
Further, this would be effective for charting the opposing team to determine the effectiveness of the defense. One, did they make shots tonight? Or did we give them easy shots? Two, were we forcing them to spots on the floor where they are good shooters? I think there is a lot of potential here in analyzing any given game.
Here are a couple more shot charts that I find interesting.
Should only shoot 3's from the wings.

Is the Spurs best shooter from the left side of the court in the long 2 range.
7 recs |
35 comments
|
Comments
Bonner should take more shots from basically anywhere. Almost the entire half-court is red hot.
"I like the fact that he’s a man." – Hubie Brown on Blair
by Manu ex Machina on Mar 16, 2010 11:51 PM CDT reply actions
Yep, that’s what I was implying, lol
"I like the fact that he’s a man." – Hubie Brown on Blair
by Manu ex Machina on Mar 17, 2010 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Also, thanks for this new stat, ATS. It’s an interesting take on shot selection.
"I like the fact that he’s a man." – Hubie Brown on Blair
by Manu ex Machina on Mar 16, 2010 11:52 PM CDT reply actions
I’m surprised how low their field goal percentage is in zone 1. Tim I can understand because a lot of his close shots are with his defender still attached to his hip. George and Manu though, you’d think that if they got to the rim they were free of their initial defender and if a big came over to help then pass.
"It's Manuway or the Highway" - tlo
Wow, George is KILLING those corner threes, if I unserstand the numbering system of your zones. Loved this post, btw.
Spurs Basketball. Improving [other] NBA teams since 2010! - swgeek
(Yet another) Interesting write-up.
. . .This has lead me to ask a lot of questions and do a lot of thinking.
I must admit this makes my usual game time thoughts (“Wow that Kobe kicks ass” and “hey I wonder if there is any of that citrus flavored rum left?”) seem shallow by comparison. But I live in L A so that’s OK. Plus despite all of that I enjoyed reading it.
The Lakers "Too big, too strong, too long, too good."
Well there are several but Bacardi has one called Bacardi Limon which is one sale every other week round here so I usually have some of that on hand. I usually just mix it with some lime flavored diet coke over ice, close my eyes, and pretend I’m on a mini vacation in the Bahamas.
It ain’t fancy or sophisticated (feel free to use regular coke and squeeze in some fresh limes). But you can make it during a 20 second time out without missing any action.
By the way, if you prefer vodka, Ketel One makes a good citrus flavored vodka called Ketel One Citroen. Makes killer citrus martinis. (Damn, a few years ago I figured out how to make those but now I forgot how I used to do it.)
The Lakers "Too big, too strong, too long, too good."
Never tried it but it sounds good. Although it might be too sophisticated for the likes of me.
The Lakers "Too big, too strong, too long, too good."
This is awesome. I’d love to see an example of what you said about determining the effectiveness of our defense using this type of charting.
And, it’s funny that Manu is shooting cold all over the floor except for 3 areas (2 of which are from 3-point land).
by silverandblack_davis on Mar 17, 2010 3:27 AM CDT reply actions
Genius and recced.
I’d love to see this for our defense against the Bulls on January 25th or Houston on February 26th since both of those games felt like losses to teams on fire.
Could you evaluate a player or team by how many shots they take from their hotspots? For example Manu takes 100 3’s from red, 28 from neutral, and 66 from blue. Similarly, Duncan is taking 208 shots from the left versus 127 from the weaker right.
If a player isn’t getting shots from his hot spots, you might have a measure on “chemistry”.
You are going to need some interns, but the next step would be to add in the quality of shot, as you said. Contested vs. uncontested jumpers should have a dramtaic impact on the fg% of the shot. And if you could add in the quality of the defender, that would be cool too. So a contested shot against Trevor Ariza lowers your % more than a contested shot against Matt Bonner, which should increase your fg%.
"GINOBILI!" -- Sir Charles
or even how many shots do you get against their worst defender on floor vs the % of the player guarding him….
to put it another way, what is the biggest differential between any player on the Spurs team on the floor at any hot spot vs their defender on the courts defense allowed at the hotspot. That would explicitly translate into what is the highest percentage play to run.
Shot Charts
Shot charts similar to this are used by every team from high school, up thru colleges and the pros. Teams evaluate shooting of their opponents and normally plan their defenses accordingly. I used them while coaching and I think most coaches do the same. Before giving halftime talks coaches review their shot charts on opponents and emphasize defensive adjustments. On offense the same applies. If we are taking shots from areas that the team shoots poorly from corrections have to be made. Usually it involves spreading the floor and isolating players that have physical advantages over the people that are guarding them. Manu is the best the Spurs at directing the offense and spreading the floor. Hill is learning it, but he stilll makes silly rookie type mistakes occasionally. Parker is a pick and roll machine who takes it to the hole and kicks it out to unguarded perimeter shooters when he faces too many awaiting bigs. He has not quite perfected this because he occasionally loses the handle when confronted by a wall of tall, but he certainly is the quickest SA penetrator. Another thought — forget Tiago Splitter, he’ll never wear a San Antonio uniform. The best we can hope for is to trade his rights for a very high draft. The $5 mil max the Spurs can offer won’t hack it when Spains best teams are willing to offer him a lot more. Besides Splitter is not a post up defender with great around the basket defensive skills. That is what the Spurs sorely need now. If TD’s legs weren’t fading that wouldn’t be a great problem, but those wheels of his are getting flatter each year.
No offense, I promise, but that reads like listening to a 6 year old tell you about something they love. Frenetic, but with key insights from their unique point of view. I emphasize that last part because your content is very worthwhile. My brain just felt like the micro machines guy was talking inside of it. Then, the “Another thought — forget Tiago” tangent in the same paragraph melted my brain.
I wonder if this type of logic is used in NBA video games. If not it probably should. So does this mean you figured out how to bet Vegas odds makers?
"Wait,If WTF doesn't stand for Wednesday Thursday Friday, then WHAT THE F*** Does it mean?!?!?!"
~ Captain Oblivious on What WTF stands for
by Captain Oblivious on Mar 17, 2010 11:07 AM CDT reply actions
After further review, 52 of our 88 or 60% were produced from Zones 1 & 14. Player 45 (Blair) scored 10 of these points in Zone 1. From a defensive stand point if I am a coach from the other team, if we can clog the basket and put a man in our corner pocket that does not move, then we win the game. With these shut down, I now know why Pop says “It’s all about making shots”.

by 
























