For example let's have a look at the '70 Lakers:
If you count the total number of rebounds from their RS gamelogs you get: 4132
(https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/LAL/1970/gamelog/)
Whereas if you look at the total stat team table you get: 4154
(https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1970.html#totals-team)
Minor difference, especially over 82 games, right?
However, look at the '62 Royals:
total number of rebounds from their RS gamelogs: 4892
(https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/CIN/1962/gamelog/)
total stat team table: 5665 (!)
This is a difference of 773 , which is 15.8% more than actually found in the gamelogs.
(https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_1962.html#totals-team)
I basically found the same pattern up to the 1969 season:
Code: Select all
Season Phase Tm_ID Phase gTRB Ph-TRB
G sum tot Δ %Δ
0 1960 RS PHW 75 5244 5916 672 12.81
1 1962 RS CIN 80 4892 5665 773 15.80
2 1963 RS SFW 80 4751 5359 608 12.80
3 1964 RS CIN 80 4830 5400 570 11.80
4 1964 RS SFW 80 4871 5499 628 12.89
5 1965 RS PHI 80 4646 5246 600 12.91
6 1965 RS SFW 80 5042 5715 673 13.35
7 1965 RS STL 80 4476 5208 732 16.35
8 1966 RS CIN 80 4979 5559 580 11.65
9 1966 RS PHI 80 5024 5652 628 12.50
10 1966 RS SFW 80 5087 5727 640 12.58
11 1967 RS CHI 81 4544 5295 751 16.53
12 1967 RS CIN 81 4651 5198 547 11.76
13 1967 RS SFW 81 5353 5974 621 11.60
14 1968 RS CIN 82 4504 5129 625 13.88
15 1968 RS PHI 82 5143 5914 771 14.99
16 1968 RS SEA 82 4742 5338 596 12.57
17 1968 RS SFW 82 5320 6029 709 13.33
18 1970 RS LAL 82 4132 4154 22 0.53
19 1971 RS SDR 82 4659 4686 27 0.58
20 1972 RS LAL 82 4598 4628 30 0.65
21 1976 RS SEA 82 3693 3715 22 0.60
22 1977 RS SAS 82 3684 3660 24 0.65
23 1978 RS WSB 82 4141 4164 23 0.56
24 1980 RS SAS 82 3644 3668 24 0.66Now I am not actually sure how bball-ref calculates team pace pre-1974:
https://www.sports-reference.com/blog/2013/12/estimating-pace-and-per-possession-ratings-1951-1973/
But if total team rebounds are being used, this could actually lead to pace being over-estimated then right? And if that's the case actually ORtg/DRtg are being under-estimated and over-estimated, respectively. I wouldn't know by much though, and in the end if it matters much, but something to keep in mind when thinking about how much stats were really "inflated" in the '60s to due relatively high pace.
