Toronto Raptors, statistical anomaly

[HiJiNX]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up rebounding. We have been a pretty terrible late game rebounding team this year so that even when we do get the stops late, we're giving our opponents extra possessions, which also results in us having to deal with a tighter clock situation when we do eventually get the ball back. Comparing this with Cleveland, they tend to rebound really well down the stretch. I think if we were rebounding better down the stretch, we'd be winning a lot more close games than we do, especially since I think our late game scoring is actually better this year than last (not sure, though, I'd like to see a stat for this).

[Marvin!]

1) The winning team hung on to a small lead, showing resiliancy but not the ability to pull away.
2) The winning team hung around and was able to finnish with a flury and "steal" a win. This also shows resisliancy, however if the team was really good, they would have taken over the game much earlier.
In these games often times, you can say that the losing team was the better team but they: fell asleap for a quater; called a time out too late to stop a run; substituted a mismatch too slowly; came out of the gate/half-time with lethargy; or any number of issues that kept a good team from a larger margin of victory.

good point - and lets not forget the "NOOO! IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!" moments that can win a game that 'shouldn't' be won... they happen all that time and are not necessarily indicative of who was the better team in a given game.

[chsh22]

Another issue is clutch rebounding. Are we actually worse at rebounding this year than last year? That has been a deciding factor - e.g Spurs.

This is actually the first thing that sprang to mind. I probably get frustrated by our lack of grabbing the boards in late game situations.

Also, it would be interesting to know who was in the lead (us or opponents), and what our record is in those close games -- basically the answer to "do we tend to hang on to leads, or do teams more often than not come back to steal games against us?"

[CrookedJ]

Close games summary

Wins:

@ Philly 105-103 4thQ Raps lose 34-35
@ Clippers 80-77 4thQ Raps lose 15-17
@New Orleans 97-92 4thQ Raps win 26-18
@Boston 114-112 4thQ Raps win 30-21

Raps win 4th, or it is very close. Won both 4th 's against good teams.

Losses:

vs Boston 95-98 4thQ Raps win 23-12
vs Utah 88-92 4thQ Raps win 29-28
@Cleveland 108-111 4thQ Raps lose 27-30
@Washington 97-101 4thQ Raps lose 22-23
@Portland 96-101 4thQ Raps lose 12-25
vs Cleveland 90-93 4thQ Raps lose 20-36
@Philly 95-99 4thQ Raps win 39-23
@Washington 104-102 4thQ Raps win 30-24
vs Clippers 98-102 4thQ Raps lose 21-24
vs SanAntonio 99-93 4thQ Raps win 25-28

4th Q in these close losses, Raps lose on the aggregate 248-253

Whats more alarming is that we haven't won a single close game at home.

[DarkKnight]

Games decided by 5 or less this season:

Boston, L, 98-95 (OT)
Philly, W, 105-103
Utah, L, 92-88
Cleveland, L, 111-108
Washington, L, 101-97
LAC, W, 80-77
Portland, L, 101-96
NO, W, 97-92
Cleveland, L, 93-90
Philly, L, 99-95
Boston, W, 114-112
Washington, L, 108-104 (OT)
LAC, L, 102-98
SA, L, 93-88

4 wins - Philly (Bad team), Clippers (bad team), NO (good team), Boston (good team)

10 losses - Boston (good), Utah (good), cleveland x2 (good), washington x2 (bad), Portland (good), Philly (bad), LAC (bad), SA (good)

Whats odd about this is the repeat teams: Boston, Philly, cleveland, Washington, and the clippers all show up twice. We also had an overtime win against portland that was by more than 5, but obviously it was a close game to get to OT. Seems to me that there are jsut certain teams that play the raps close...and 2 of them are our potential 1st rd opponents, Cleveland and Washington....take from this what you will.

[Maximillion]

I'm surprised nobody has brought up rebounding. We have been a pretty terrible late game rebounding team this year so that even when we do get the stops late, we're giving our opponents extra possessions, which also results in us having to deal with a tighter clock situation when we do eventually get the ball back. Comparing this with Cleveland, they tend to rebound really well down the stretch. I think if we were rebounding better down the stretch, we'd be winning a lot more close games than we do, especially since I think our late game scoring is actually better this year than last (not sure, though, I'd like to see a stat for this).

How does that explain last year's success then?

Plus what we lack in rebounding we succeed in other categories such as playing hard for 48 minutes that could easily fit in as the weakness of all weaknesses for a team like Cleveland if they had our record in close games.

I'd say there's no real explanation for winning close games. Being "clutch" is more a matter of luck so we're due to win some close games down the stretch.

[HiJiNX]

-= original quote snipped =-



How does that explain last year's success then?

Plus what we lack in rebounding we succeed in other categories such as playing hard for 48 minutes that could easily fit in as the weakness of all weaknesses for a team like Cleveland if they had our record in close games.

I'd say there's no real explanation for winning close games. Being "clutch" is more a matter of luck so we're due to win some close games down the stretch.

I disagree that there's no real explanation for winning close games. There has to be an explanation simply because good teams win most of their close games and bad teams lose most of theirs -- you can even see this trend in Sam Mitchell's first year here where I think we lost the most games decided by 6 points or less of any team in the league. I don't believe that trends that are so consistent across the league are occurring by chance; there is something there that is causing them.

As for our rebounding this year compared to last, I actually don't believe we were this bad of a late game rebounding team last year as we are this year. If I knew where to get the stats, I'd go look them up. Regardless, last year we had guys like Anthony Parker, Garbajosa and MoPete coming up with clutch rebounds on a regular basis, whereas we don't seem to be getting that type of late game rebounding production this year.

[LLJ]

We don't have a guy who can create for himself late in games except for TJ. And TJ's always a wildcard clutch player anyway--plus, he's been injured most of the season.

But if TJ was at 100% for most of the season we'd win more close games I think. On the other hand, Jose is much more apt at building up big leads because of his no-mistake style.

[zab_tabak01]

fact of the matter is:

these types of stats are meaningless for a team like the raptors.
toronto is simply an offensive powerhouse with horrible defense(regardless if we're better than last year). toronto can't win with defense, which explains why there isn't alot of close game wins this year.

when the offense is on, toronto dominates the game and blows out opponents shot for shot.

when the offense is not clicking, it depends on how well the opponent is shooting whether it remains close, or toronto loses.

simply put, Toronto does not have a good enough team to make stops down the stretch in clutch time when it is NECESSARY to make stops. when your talking about a team like toronto/phoenix style, just throw the stats out the window and stop trying to statistically evaluate the teams future. it all comes down to whether your shots are falling, or not. the elite teams are the ones that can win even when their shots are not falling.

thats why im hoping bargnani can remain on this hot streak..

[raps9]

I don't agree with the notion that we'd win more close games if TJ was healthy. I am not confident at all when TJ is isolated at the top, I hate how we shut everything down and rely 100 per cent on TJ. Hes a great player, but hes not at that level. Bosh should always get a touch, Jose has proven hes an amazing shooter and our wing players can all shoot. I know we don't have that slasher, but we certainly have late game options besides TJ.

The real reason we don't win close games is because we can't rebound the ball. Our players crunch time stats are great because we are shooting the ball great (without TJ!) but as everyone who watches Rapotrs games knows, we can't grab a 4th quarter rebound to save our lives.

Also, it seems that most of the close games we are in are the games we are playing from behind. After making a semi-comeback, it is undoubtedly harder to finish off the game (espcially when we cant rebound and get no 2nd chance possesions). Our close game record is partially a reflection of the fact that our comebacks fall short.

Finally, if we let teams comeback against us more often, our close game record would be better. But thankfully, the Raptors havent dont that a lot this year and just shred apart bad teams for 48 minutes.

[LLJ]

I think you're wrong, raps9. Sorry, but in my opinion any perimeter player who can create for himself is better than none, even if, -and I DO agree with you here, that TJ is not an ideal option.

Big men simply can't create in crunch time by cause of their position. Before San Antonio got Parker and Ginobili, they were winning 50 games a year but tended to be much poorer than they are now in clutch situations. Duncan got swarmed and you couldn't rely on an aging Elie or whoever else they had at the perimeter at the time to create. They used to get lit up by Kobe Bryant all the time before they had their own Kobe in Ginobili to go toe to toe with swingmen like him.

This is why Ben Gordon became Chicago's best option in the crunch the past few years. Ben, like TJ, is not an ideal clutch option but he's still better than whatever players they have because of his ability to create his own shot off the dribble.

Last year TJ won us about 5 games on his own in crunch time. The Clippers game comes to mind. Portland and at home against Seattle also. Probably 3 others I'm not recalling as well. Sometimes he screwed up, but he gave us opportunities all the same.

Jose needs screens to shoot and drive in crunch time, whereas TJ doesn't.

It doesn't have as much to do with rebounds. We're the same as last year on the boards yet the OP was saying we WON MORE CLOSE GAMES last year. I'm not saying rebounding isn't something we could improve on, but we really need a star perimeter player also.

[raps9]

This year, we are certainly scoring clutch, late game baskets. That is not the problem. Also, Jose has shown he is as clutch or more so than TJ.

I see what you are saying about TJ, and you are right, it is beneficial to have someone who can beat his defender off the dribble. However, I would much rather have the ball in Jose's hands. A) He is a much better shooter. B) He has the ability to drive by his defender (even if it requires a screen) C) He will almost always make the smartest decsion (remember TJ on the triple screen with kris Humphries? That kind of thing would never happen with Jose)

The main point im trying to make though is that having TJ or not having TJ in the lineup is not the reason why we are losing close games. It is without a doubt our inability to grab defensive rebounds (ala Delfino not boxing out ginobili the other night) or grab any offensive boards giving us easy 2nd chance points.

LLJ, you just said we're the same on the boards as last year?? I disagree. Jorge Garbajosa and Morris Peterson are far superior defensive rebounders than Delfino and Moon. There is a difference in our rebounding from last year to this year.

[raps9]

**And yes, we do need a star perimeter player. However, we need a star Shooting guard who we can rely on to create hos own shots. Not a point guard who is responsible for being the main scorer and distributor.

We also need a star perimeter player (SG) to make other teams SG work on the defensive end so they dont light us up every signgle game.

[bill russell]

first off, good post schad. i looked at our remaining schedule and counted nine games against what I consider to be good teams. we're capable of winning a couple of those, and also loosing a few to teams we should beat, but i do think a record season is possible. as for close games, the loss of garbo is huge. he was a rock down the stretch in a lot of games. and missing TJ has been important too. i agree with a lot of what's been said about his ability to create down the stretch being over-rated. what i think matters from TJ down the stretch is his sheer competitiveness. the guy never quits. and i've always noticed him being especially disruptive on defense in the final minutes, forcing turnovers, getting steals. i have nothing at all against jose but we miss that from TJ