An extremely lazy statistical review of the Spurs
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 3:14 PM CST
Email
PrintI have an awful work ethic. Instead of waking up and writing an insightful, thought provoking piece on the Spurs, I've decided to compile a list of statistics (per Hoop Data) that cover one third of the entire season (13-9) and open up this thread for discussion amongst my fellow Pounders. Enjoy what analysis I managed to do, and don't sue me for watching The Colbert Report late at night.
Things we do well: opponent free throw rate (1st), turnover rate (3rd), 10-15 feet field-goal percentage (3rd), 16-23 feet FG% (4th), effective FG% (4th), three-point eFG% (5th), opp. offensive rebound rate (5th), offensive efficiency (6th)
The fact that the Spurs are excelling in most offensive categories isn't surprising. Considering the Spurs are shooting the ball extremely well from 10-feet-and-beyond, we are subject to a lot of inconsistent basketball. We might get the lights out Spurs (4th quarter and most of the overtime at Dallas) or the lackadaisical version (the first three quarters at Dallas). As we delve away from our defensive roots, we are embracing the extreme variance that comes when you rely on mid-range and three-point attempts. When our shots are falling and we are making solid defensive rotations, we will be an incredibly tough draw for any team. When our shot is failing, well, then the end result isn't so pretty. It also doesn't hurt when the Spurs don't turn over the ball (13.07-percent compared to league average of 14.33-percent) and prevent teams from gaining extra possessions through offensive rebounds. More possessions in our hands and less in theirs usually is a good thing, right?
Hey, it's a Spur taking a shot from within nine feet. How ... league average!
Things we are OK at: 3-9 feet FG% (13th), differential (13th), opp. 10-15 feet FG% (15th), opp. 3-point eFG% (15th), at rim FG% (17th)
As most astute basketball fans know, shot attempts at the rim are a really good thing. They occur when teams execute offensively or when the oppenent is the Charlotte Bobcats. Unfortunately the Spurs don't get too many attempts at the rim (20th) and aren't incredibly efficient in that regard. Digging deeper into specific player at rim FG%, we have Tiago Splitter's .757 FG% puts him fourth among centers who average at least 20 minutes a game. As for Timmy? He's shooting an abysmal .451 from the rim which puts him 33rd. I have no idea if this is a stark indicator that his skills are diminishing more than we'd like to give credit, but considering he shot .717 from the rim last year, I don't believe it will continue throughout the year. Timmy's percent of assists at the rim are also down from last year. At his age, maybe we're not finding him down low as often because our focus offensively is around the perimeter. Or he could not be getting solid post positioning like we're accustomed to. To put his inefficiency from the rim into context, Gary Neal is shooting .588 from 10-15 feet. (Yeah, that floater is deadly.) Still. Interesting nonetheless.
Things we suck at: opp. 3-9 feet FG% (22nd), defensive efficiency (23rd), offensive rebound rate (24th), opp. eFG% (25th), opp. at rim FG% (26th), FT rate (27th), opp. turnover rate (29th), opp. 16-23 feet FG% (30th)
With the amount of pride Spurs fans take in defense (and the level at which the team used to play it) it sure sucks to be witnessing the caliber of defense usually reserved for the Wizards, Clippers and Warriors. But anyone who has watched this team closely, these stats aren't surprising.
Moving on to our last ranked defense against 16-23 footers. You would think finishing last in any defensive category wouldn't be a good sign. It's not. But, if anything, isn't allowing a lot of long, inefficient two-point shots (albeit they're going in currently) better than allowing a lot of shots at the rim or from the arc? Our stats aren't wholly dissimlar from last year. Teams attempt a lot of shots from this range and ultimately they (probably) won't continue hitting these at 42-percent rate. Looking at the percent of assisted field goals from 16-23 feet, the Spurs aren't allowing those shots because of defensive breakdowns. Teams have only benefited from an assist 43.9-percent of the time, good for the best in the NBA by a wide margin. It appears, judging solely by the numbers and our willingness to give up mid-range jumpers, this is by design. I could be wrong and, if so, please let me know in the comments.
Anything else I missed? Berate me mercilessly for being so clueless.
45 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I have posted elsewhere but I think it deserves to be mentioned here too:
long story short, historically popovich has always thaught his players to defend the paint and the 3pt line, while letting the other team shoot all the long two pointers they want.
Tim Duncan would take care and correct any mistakes defensive wise on the paint, and all that other guys needed to do was to close on 3 point shooters. That worked wonders, we were a dominant defensive team and championships would rain for us.
Fast forward to 2011-12: Tim Duncan is now just a decent defender so he needs help to protect the paint.
But the key point is that teams are becoming more and more offensive minded each year. Long gone are defensive specialists that couldnt shoot. Now most teams have 4-5 guys that can hurt you from midrange. The bigs who liked to post up with their back to the basket are becoming an extinct race, now the league its filled with bigs who like to face up and shoot jumpers (and they can make them with ease).
We use the same philosophy that worked wonders…in ANOTHER ERA. Now most teams are comfortable shooting a bunch of long 2 pointers.
I think this is the reason we always have had so much problem defending shooting bigs, those “stretch 4” like Dirk, West, Aldrige, etc. Because they thrive making those 2pt shots we have always allowed and thus we dont know how to defend.
"Kevin Garnett once described defending Tim Duncan as "trying to guard a tree"
Well said. That being said, I’m still fine with allowing these shots. Considering these shots still count as two-points as any shot inside the arc, they are (still) wildly inefficient. You can make 30% from three and essentially be more efficient than shooting .400 from 16-23 feet (even though, like you said, “stretch 4’s” are being able to knock these down more often). I think our defensive scheme could still work in this era. But this year, despite teams not getting to the rim often, we are allowing buckets at a below average rate which might not be a good sign. Prior to this season, we were always in the top third in at the rim defense.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 7:31 AM CST up reply actions
Every good defensive team attempts to force their opponent into shooting long, contested two pointers. Even if teams improve at them offensively, it’s still a better defensive strategy than giving up points in the paint or three pointers. Long twos will always be the most difficult shot to take, regardless of the practice time players put into them. They are generally off the dribble or contested, since they do not stretch the defense as much as the open three pointer. Therefore, long, contested twos will never be the preferable option.
Two things are hurting us. One, we tend to give the shooting 4 wide open twos. Now, wide-open twos is a much different story than the contested variety. Players will make that shot. We need to improve our defensive schemes so that those are more contested. Last night, I thought there was noticeable improvement. Gasol’s normally wide open twos were contested and he missed. That was good defense. We need the same type of activity against Scola tonight.
Second, I think we’ve just been unlucky so far this season as many teams have been hitting contested twos on us. Part of this is giving up too many wide open twos, which allows our opponents to find the range and feel confident in the long two. Once our defense picks up, it’s too late. Dude is already hot. But also hurting us is luck. We have run into a lot of hot teams this year that simply did not miss, regardless of the difficulty of the shot.
"GINOBILI!" -- Sir Charles
Although Spurs D once was solid, Spurs have always had a knack for giving up that long two, but open to shooters (even during that era). Unfortunately, 4’s have become good at shooting. The one way to get around this is have quick wings like a Leonard and Green so you can quickly switch.
And your part 2. Twolves shot 80% from 3pt line in the first matchup. That is unheard of and is burned into my mind. And some of those 3s were super contested.
Winter is coming
Yes, Leonard and Green are our solution to the good shooting 4s. They are quick and long enough to deter the normally wide open 4 shot, and have the ability to recover to their man in time to chase him off the three point line. I think our defense has elite potential. It’s why I’m so optimistic about the season, regardless of the road woes.
"GINOBILI!" -- Sir Charles
I can’t wait until next season when they can actually practice! Oh and training camp!
Winter is coming
Don’t forget summer league! Although, those 2 won’t be there. Cory/Euros/2012 picks should be there though.
The longest, brightest day is followed by the darkest night.
I’m getting way too excited for the 2012-13 Spurs. I can’t stop grinning.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:10 PM CST up reply actions
Don’t get me wrong, I’m still pretty confident with this years edition. Like I said earlier, we go 11 deep and depth, especially this year, will be really important come playoff time.
But (assuming Timmy comes back solely because I wouldn’t know what to do with myself if he retired) if we amnesty RJamnesty, we’ll have cap space, a lot of young wins teeming with potential … and training camp.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:16 PM CST up reply actions
that’s the main thing, we always allowed WIDE OPEN long 2’s to the role players of other teams. We never contested them much in the golden era of timmy.
The problem is, while in 2005 the guy wide open in the baseline with clear vision to shoot a long 2 was probablye someone like Ben Wallace. Now you have a Channing Frye standing in there
my mom (who doesnt know a lick about basketball): "that guy is anything but World Peace"
Agree and don’t agree with the long 2. Agree cause the long 2 is the most inefficient shot in basketball, so it’s a good idea to allow teams to shoot it.
Don’t agree cause that philosophy works pretty well in this era and because mid-range shooting is a lost art nowadays. I recently read an interview of Doug Collins where he said that he urges to defend the three and the rim (Philly is a top 3 team in defensive efficiency right now). That team is full of athletes but still…
The players you mention are still a big minority. The spurs have done pretty good by allowing these players to get theirs and begging their teammates to beat us.
42% shooting on long twos is still not very efficient in the grand scheme of things. Long twos don’t draw fouls. Long twos don’t provide much opportunity for offensive rebounds. At that range, for only two points, the basket defends itself.
Generally speaking we’d rather have teams take open shots from the long two range than have them take threes or get anywhere near the basket.
Go Spurs Go
Check this out: On average teams record an assist on 60% of long twos. Compare this to 85% of threes are assisted and about 40% of shots between 3 feet and 15 feet.
The Spurs’ opponents assist on 44% of their long twos, by far the lowest mark in the league. The Grizz are closest at 52%.
We had the eighth lowest mark last year, seventh before that, third before that… You could say it’s a team characteristic to allow a lot of long twos but not the kind that generate assists.
Go Spurs Go
by greyberger on Feb 1, 2012 4:18 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
I found that as well in my post and looking through years of data, it was a recurring trend. That’s why I mentioned it in my post.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:00 PM CST up reply actions
Completely agree greyberger. That’s why, if anything, I’m not incredibly mad for being last in the league at defending those type of shots.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:07 PM CST up reply actions
Definitely by design! As Chilai mentioned, more and more teams are able to take those mid-range shots and knock them down. However, not as many as we think. Come playoff time, I think the pace will change, as it always does. The Spurs will continue to adjust as has been the norm. Pop has been playing around with the line-up on a regular basis, and it hard for players to make the adjustment to their floor partners. Especially, for the younger guys. I think the lock-out has thrown some things off. I have no worries about where the Spurs will be come playoff time. Especially, once Manu comes back. Imagine the starting five: Duncan, Blair, Leonard, Jefferson, Parker. The reserves come in and it’s: Splitter, Manu, Neal, Green, Anderson.
That will be a deadly combination!
"Why didn't we draft Julyan Stone?" TJ73
I think your line-ups are perfect. I also had the same thing in mind – Leonard defensive prowess is so good that he should remain a starter. Also, Manu off the bench is so f&%$ing deadly, I mean, Even without Ford, that unit can score & defend. Now Imagine a End-Of-Game lineup of Duncan-Splits-Leonard-Manu-Parker. or even put Leonard as a stretch 4 and put Green in this line up.
TropperJoe73, you forgot TJ Ford! That’s a legitimate 11 man rotation right there. Can’t wait.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:04 PM CST up reply actions
I think Blair gets replaced by Leonard. Lol. And Manu comes into starting five.
Then second unit will have TJ Ford instead of Anderson I think.
Even considering James Anderson’s solid game at Dallas, I still think he’ll be the odd man rotation once TJ and Manu come back. As an 11th man, though, he should be ready whenver necessary considering the confidence Pop has in him.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:28 PM CST up reply actions
Well, we can’t assume that Manu and TJ back means big minutes for either. If we follow Pop’s pattern, he’ll ease them in, especially Manu. I do feel like Pop might take a TD-like approach with Manu down the stretch, now that he’s seen what the youth can do.
Winter is coming
We can’t assume, yes, but once the rotation gets situated come playoff time; I think James will suffer the most reduction in minutes. He’s a really solid young player (hopefully he’s with us next year) but that won’t guarantee him a lot of minutes with the depth we’ll hopefully have by April.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:49 PM CST up reply actions
That is solely depends on how fast this team can secure a playoff spot, and how gready is Pop about the seed.
Good point. I don’t see Pop being concerned with seeding to the extent he was last year. Just a guess, though. If we can avoid OKC in the 1st round, that would be really nice too.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 7:24 PM CST up reply actions
Spurs should be fine in securing a seed. I’d bet on that much, if health is coming back.
Winter is coming
Considering their are 10 teams within six games and 11 teams within seven-and-half games, a playoff berth is not a given.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 10:31 PM CST up reply actions
Nor is it out of their hands. Everyone has to face the brutal schedule. But I don’t expect Utah to hold up throughout. Portland is a good example of a team where home vs. road makes a difference (3-8). And it looks like Batum is going to be out a while now.
Houston is still too young to be consistent, especially in a year without training camp and many practices. Memphis is too banged up. Minnesota is getting there, but not yet.
Everything below that, is well…
It’s not a cake walk, but Pop doesn’t have to push Manu back into an early repeat injury.
Winter is coming
Manu off the bench is interesting. I’m envisioning putting Kawhi in a lot of lineups with TP, Manu and Timmy to allow him to focus on the defensive side of the ball and shooting in the constructs of the offense when necessary.
Andrew McNeill (I think) mentioned TP-Manu-Green-Duncan-Splitter crunch time lineup. Wouldn’t that be fun?
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:03 PM CST reply actions
I’m replying to you email now.
The 2012 season: the Spurs have a chance, but only if Manu can be Manu in the playoffs. - CapHill
Pounding the Rock
*your
The 2012 season: the Spurs have a chance, but only if Manu can be Manu in the playoffs. - CapHill
Pounding the Rock
I replied to your email. Thank you for your timely response and your support.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 7:21 PM CST up reply actions
I think any lineup containing Manu and Green would be really fun. I love the energy they bring and when they’re together, watch out.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 6:27 PM CST up reply actions
As we get healthier, Pop will have a lot of flexibility in creating his rotation. As long as we avoid a Bonner-Blair frontcourt at all cost, I’ll be excited to see what transpires.
by The Big Fundamental on Feb 1, 2012 8:11 PM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on Pounding The Rock
Related FanShots on Pounding The Rock
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Featured Stories
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Shaquille O’Neal is in a Chinese beer commercial, too (VIDEO)
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: San Antonio Spurs vs. Oklahoma City Thunder
- C-a-C: This is probably as close to LeBron James working with John Waters as we’ll ever get
- Dwyane Wade’s hot pink pants: The kind of thing you can get away with when you drop 41
- Lamar Odom to New York? Dwight Howard on the move? For now, it’s all talk
