Discussion in 'Pistons and NBA' started by TaS, Jan 6, 2009.
He was let go cause the new owner didn't understand him...
Very early in the year, but here are a few stats regarding the Pistons:
Monroe is #10 in the league in rebounds per game (Cousins is 5th).
Monroe is #9 in fg% and in efficiency
Monroe is #2 in the league in offensive rebound percentage (Cousins is #1)
Monroe is #6 in total rebound percentage (Cousins is #4 behind Bynum, Howard, and Love)
I'm thinking that these 2 dudes might be a nasty duo. Finesse and power, but they both board.
Jerebko is #15 in the league in protecting the ball (turnover %)
Not counting tonight's game, on the season:
Det has the worst block differential in at -2.67 per game
Det has the 3rd worst steal differential at -2.33 per game
Det is dead even on rebounds for the year
Det is 28th in ppg
Det defense is 10th in ppg allowed (both of these are probably driven by a slow pace... Prince is the culprit!)
On the season so far, our top 3 +/- players are:
+5 Daye (50 min)
+0 Wallace (87 min)
-3 Bynum (32 min)
Bottom 3 are:
-29 Jerebko (198 min)
-33 Monroe (182 min)
-39 Prince (196 min)
Too early to tell obviously.
So far this year, Prince is averaging a career low in points, rebounds, assists, blocks, FG%, and minutes per game...
Jerebko is shooting .417 from deep.
Thanks Tashawn...........nice report.
Was just looking at the Hollinger power rankings and some of the stats that he provides.
Pace: 30th... we are dead last (again) with 89.7 possessions per game. Miami is first with 99.7 per game. A slow pace is not necessarily bad in itself, but it's quite a pattern here, going on 10 years. We've had multiple coaches, Billups has handed off the Stuckey, Rip and the dribble and wait for him to get open offense no longer applies, we've brought in scoring geniuses like Gordon and Charlie V, yet our pace is still the slowest. It's obviously Tay and his slow pumpfake 100% of the time when he touches the ball that is the culprit.
Points per game: 30th.
Assists: 24th. Probably due to a rookie PG/SG, Stuckey being out a few games, Gordon handling the ball a lot, and general suckiness/ lack of open guys to pass the ball to.
Turnovers: 29th (only the Timberwolves are worse). This is very surprising since this has been one of our strong points. And to think that we are turning over so much on limited possessions is really cause for alarm. Probably the same reasons as above, with an re-emphasis on suckiness.
Rebound rate: 23rd. We're better than average on offensive glass and much worse than average on the defensive glass. Blend them together and we're just mildly bad. Good thing Monroe is kicking butt and Jerebko is back or we'd be 30th without question.
Effective FG %: 27th at 44.3%. Miami is #1 at 53.4%. Very bad obviously. This doesn't mean our guys can't shoot (although that might be the case). It is just sort of an indication at how difficult our attempts are because of the lack of a PG and no interior game. We're probably shooting contested J's when Miami is getting bunnies on the margin.
Total Shooting % (points/ FGA): 29th. So when you also factor in getting to the line and converting with eFG, we are even worse... we should be last in the NBA in this all too critical stat, but Washington is just atrocious.
Offensive efficiency: 29th at 90.7 points per 100 possessions.
Defensive efficiency: 26th at 106.6 points allowed per 100 possessions. We may not realize how bad our defense is because it is disguised by the slow pace. There are only 4 worse defensive teams in the league though, so we are almost at rock bottom.
In summary, we are one of the worst teams in the NBA. Our strength of schedule has actually be really tough to far, so it is conceivable that we are a little better than the stats indicate, but not a ton. We've also had our main man Stuck out for a couple games, so that hurts.
On the flip side, Washington has had an unusually easy strength of schedule so far with an average opponent win % in the mid .300's. So, they are really bad (although their defensive stats are better than ours).
Wow, that's really depressing. It's kinda ironic that the team that ruled the NBA 5 years ago is this bad, and their coach at the time is now coaching the only team that is worse.
Thanks for putting together the stats TaS.
I'm surprised assists are so high. There must be some really, really bad teams out there.
Regarding Offensive Rebounds, we're better than average because we have a lot of opportunities. Just like Allen Iverson wa a "volume scorer", The Pistons as a team are "volume offensive rebounders". We take a lot of bad shots - miss a lot of bad shots - get a lot of offensive boards.
That's why I went with rate over total. Of the rebounds available, we actually nab more than our fair share on the offensive end and way less on the defensive end. Usually, that occurs when you have undersized hustle players who can't box out or get positional rebounds, but use their unorthadox methods to steal offensive rebounds. In our case, I'm not sure what the deal is. Monroe seems like he'd be good at defensive rebounding position and not so good at getting o boards, but not the case.
I just had a peek-a-boo at the Pistons stats over at http://www.basketball-reference.com, looking for interesting trends.
Greg Monroe is 12th in the league in WS (1.7). The top four Pistons in WS are their four bigs (Jerebko .6 Wallace .3, Maxiell .2). Ironically, the Pistons should only have 1.8 wins right now. Something is amiss with that crazy stat.
The other awesome stat is that Monroe has a PER of 26.2, which is 5th in the league. Nobody else is on the team is even above the league average (15.0). At least they have one keeper.
Last 3 games: 64 turnovers
The best 3 game stretch that I could find was in 2006 when they had 19 turnovers.
Last year, our best 3 game stretch was 20 turnovers.
This year, our best 3 game stretch is 41 turnovers.
On the rebounding side of things, we have actually had more offensive rebounds than our opponents in 9 out of the 16 games. On a percentage basis, we nab 31% of the available offensive rebounds, while our opponents get 30% of theirs. So, we are a better than average rebounding team, believe it or not. Given that we are undersized and Monroe and JJ are getting most of the minutes at the power positions, that reflects really well on the toughness that those guys have shown.
A team like the Bulls shows what this stat looks like when a dominant team is at it- they get 34% of the offensive boards and their opponents only get 27%.
A team like the Magic with Dwight Howard shows a different story- 29% on offensiver rebounds and their opponents only get 25%.
I've been poring over our stats to see if there's any glimpse of improvement. You know, it's ok to lose so long as we're improving in category X. I can't spot anything. Pretty much most of the stats & advanced stats I looked at are either flat or trending downward. Not good.
The one thing that stood out is we are 3/5 in games we win the rebounding battle and are 1/12 in games we are outrebounded (one game we tied the other team in rebounds was a loss). Not surprising really.
On the rebounding side, you have to realize that we are missing way more shots than our opponents and defensive rebounds are naturally easier to get- so our rebounders can't really overcome that. The best that they can do it rebound at a higher percentage than the opponent. So far this year, it is about a draw.
In last night's game for example, we were outrebounded 51 to 38. That looks really bad. But when compared to the opportunities available, it looks like this:
Defensive rebound chances:
Det- 27 for 36 (75%)
OKC- 42 for 54 (78%)
Offensive rebound changes:
Det- 12 for 54 (22%)
OKC- 9 for 36 (25%)
It doesn't seem quite as bad. If we would have stolen 1 more offensive board, the percentages would have been about even.
Thank you TaS, that's very informative. So, on paper it looks like we're getting killed on the boards, but in reality, that's more tied to us making our shots. If we did a better job scoring the basketball, we'll be fine rebounding-wise.
here ya go gentlemen, constructive or needs some deconstruction by the pf braintrust?
The Problem of Shot Selection in Basketball Brian Skinner - Plosone
"In basketball, every time the offense produces a shot opportunity the player with the ball must decide whether the shot is worth taking. In this article, I explore the question of when a team should shoot and when they should pass up the shot by considering a simple theoretical model of the shot selection process, in which the quality of shot opportunities generated by the offense is assumed to fall randomly within a uniform distribution. Within this model I derive an answer to the question “how likely must the shot be to go in before the player should take it?” and I show that this lower cutoff for shot quality depends crucially on the number of shot opportunities remaining (say, before the shot clock expires), with larger demanding that only higher-quality shots should be taken. The function is also derived in the presence of a finite turnover rate and used to predict the shooting rate of an optimal-shooting team as a function of time. The theoretical prediction for the optimal shooting rate is compared to data from the National Basketball Association (NBA). The comparison highlights some limitations of the theoretical model, while also suggesting that NBA teams may be overly reluctant to shoot the ball early in the shot clock."
Here's the article, http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0030776
Couldn't find the "chucker quotient" in any of the formulae..........
I've had some thoughts about how poor of a strategy is seems to milk the clock with say a minute left in the game when you're only up 1 score (like the Pistons feebly tried to do tonight). The problem is that they pass up any opportunity to get a good shot and end up forcing something late in the clock... which leads to transition opportunities for the opponent. Seems like it would be much better to run your normal offense and basically adhere to the formula in the study.
These studies are kind of cool as long as you realize what they are.
I would like to bring up a little trend I've noticed lately - Lee356 is on an incredible run that nobody seems to have noticed. Going back to the January 4th Chicago Bulls game in which he waited until the 6th paragraph, he now has a 10-game "complain about Jerebko playing power forward in the opening paragraph" streak (not counting games he didn't post about). Congratulations to you, sir, and keep up the good work!
Of active NBA players with at least 10,000 points to qualify (Lebron scores about 2,200 per year to put that in perspective), here is how they rank in point per game average:
It makes Rip look pretty decent. Every single player ahead of him was an all-star at some point I believe (except Jason Richardson?) and almost all have higher salaries at their peak.
1. LeBron James 27.74
2. Kobe Bryant 25.36
3. Dwyane Wade 25.32
4. Carmelo Anthony 24.81
5. Dirk Nowitzki 22.85
6. Paul Pierce 22.14
7. Vince Carter 21.98
8. Amare Stoudemire 21.77
9. Tim Duncan 20.43
10. Tracy McGrady 20.18
11. Ray Allen 20.16
12. Chris Bosh 20.03
13. Michael Redd 19.79
14. Antawn Jamison 19.61
15. Kevin Garnett 19.42
16. Pau Gasol 18.72
17. Elton Brand 18.64
18. Dwight Howard 18.27
19. Jason Richardson 17.79
20. Jerry Stackhouse 17.72
21. Joe Johnson 17.70
22. Richard Hamilton
The Pistons currently lead the NBA in turnovers with a 20 turnover lead over the next closest team. We have 408 in 25 games played, so a little over 16 per game.
Pistons' Pace (possessions per game)/ NBA rank during the Joe Dumars era:
2012: 87.7/ 30th (L. Frank takes over- Rip gone)
2011: 89.2/ 28th (Hello Ben Gordon and Charlie V)
2010: 88.5/ 29th (Kuester takes over- Sheed gone, Ben back)
2009: 86.7/ 29th (Michael Curry era- Chauncey leaves- AI joins us)
2008: 87.3/ 30th
2007: 87.3/ 30th (Ben leaves us)
2006: 86.8/ 29th (Flip takes over)
2005: 87.2/ 30th
2004: 87.9/ 24th (LB takes over. Tay's PT ramps up, Hello Sheed)
2003: 86.8/ 29th (Hello Chauncey and Rip)
2002: 90.0/ 20th (Rick Carlisle takes over)
2001: 94.7/ 1st (George Irvine coaching, Ben Wallace arrives)
It's amazing to think that we were the fastest team in bball with Ben Wallace in 2001. Carlisle, Chauncey, and Rip seemed to slow it down to a crawl within 2 years. I was surprised to see that our 2004 team actually played at a faster relative pace than any team that we've had since.
As far as I can tell there is no true common denominator. Coaches have changes, point guards have changed, big man have changed. Tay is the closest thing to being the constant, but the 2003 team was 29th in the league in pace without him playing real minutes (Michael Curry was hogging them).
This is the 8th year in a row that we are basically the slowest team in the league. Maybe not bad in itself, but this seems to be the one attribute that defines Detroit Basketball over this period. Our D has gone from best to worst. Our O has fluctuated and has been pretty efficient in recent years. Our turnovers have gone from best to worst. But with all those changes, we still play slow.
Pistons looking really good lately. If they keep playing like this they can make the playoffs!
Separate names with a comma.