Wizards Winning Trends from Last Season

[Cramer]

Thank my ex-wife for grief that made most of Christmas eve sleepless......

While I agree with Ruz in the thread, I feel your pain, having been there.

Merry Christmas, my brother.

[hands11]

I already laid out the plan for success in another thread.

I think we all know what it is.

Wall not forcing things. Feeding Nick and Dray first and filling in where needed.
Everyone should rebound. Dray should focus on his inside game more then just outside.
McGee needs to defend the paint and get feed as a viable option by Wall and Dray.

Shooter should shot. That mean Crawford and Wall not shooting from the outside to much.
Post players should take it inside and shoot FTs. Dray, Wall and McGee.
Everyone rebounds and play team D but Dray and McGee should have no game where they don't get at least 8-10 rebounds each. McGee should average at least 12 rebounds. No reason he can't do that.

If they do that, they will win.

[orangeparka]

Good job, what I was merely saying was that just because the team wins more when Wall grabs 6 or more rebounds, doesn't mean the 6 rebounds are the cause of them winning more.

Most likely it has something to do with opponents' FG% or rebound opportunities. When better defense is played, Wall has more opportunities to grab rebounds, which is what's causing more wins.

It'd be dumb for Wall to just focus on grabbing 6 boards a game.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Thanks for taking the time to look up all this stuff, CCJ.

My 2 cents is to be cautious about drawing direct conclusions, because all of these hard numbers are still one step removed from any actual causation. It's not Wall getting six rebounds that makes us win... there's something else going on there. Uncovering the reasons *why* those numbers show up when we're winning is the harder, but ultimately more useful, part of stat diving.

I do think the assist numbers stand out. It seems like when the Wiz are using actual ball movement, we're a much better team.

Question: Can you cross reference the high-block games with opponents' eFG%? I'm curious to see if McGee's block parties dissuade teams from taking shots in the paint, despite the seemingly endless parade of easy layups he gives up to pump fakes.

I went to another site, hoopsstats.com to break out each of the 31 games where McGee had 3 or more blocks (over which the Wizards went 16-15). Here's a link each game:

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fa ... /428/blk-3

I don't know an elegant way to strip data and put it into a spreadsheet, but I do know that if you click each individual game on hoopstats, at the very bottom where it says "Advanced Stats" you will see the third number/column is where eFG is listed for both teams.

Illuminaire,By the looks of the 4 wins in April, McGee's blockititis games may have caused opponents to shoot worse

April 11 Bos 39.3 Was 41.2
April 5 Det 46.4 Was 51.3
April 3 Cha 45.5 Was 45.6
April 1 Cle 49.1 Was 51.1

Next earlier high block game was a loss. McGee played 35.6 minutes, had 6 FTAs and 4 BLKs but the game was against the Miami Heat. The Wizards were down 11 by halftime. My guess is McGee got blocks against the likes of Joel Anthony, Juwan Howard, and Erick Dampier and 1 or 2 against the Big Three, but it didn't matter. James, Wade, and Bosh each made 10 or more FTs. (30-36 combined). On top of that, they nailed their FGAs (31-48). Washington got stomped. For that loss, the eFG rule stood:

Mar 30 Mia 64.8 Was 55.2

This isn't what you asked for ... Did McGee's blocks make all the difference?

What I noticed is that McGee blocking shots resulted in lower opponent eFG EXCEPT when the Wizards played teams that were proficient hitting threes.

-- Notice the loss to Oklahoma among those 31 games. OKC was 12-21 from three while the Wizards went 0-9. Washington lost 89-116 despite McGee's 5 blocks. Take away the minus 36 from threes and the Wizards outscored the Thunder 80-89. Basically, the perimeter players lost that game.

--Notice McGee's 12-block game and the loss to Chicago. The Bulls went 12-32 from 3pt. The Wizards went 4-13. Chicago also won the game out of the front court despite McGee beasting.

CONCLUSION
I believe the Wizards really could be improved this season due to Singleton being a good perimeter defender. Once he gets established at SF opponent 3PT FGs should come down. McGee DID impact opponent eFGs inversely with his blocks. The more he blocked the less opponents scored in the paint. The Wizards simply need to pair his blocks with sound perimeter defense from their Gs and SFs.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

CCJ,

I think you nailed it. When Blatche and McGee are drawing fouls it means they are attacking the basket. Same for Wall and free throws. When we heist, we lose. But our coach doesn't use an inside-out attack and our GM doesn't draft post players. (He loves tall skinny guys that pass the pre-Moneyball eye-test but not the actual effectiveness test, so we end up with guys like Opec or YI and not guys like Faried or Milsap. Basketball is meant to be played inside out, but that's only for the good teams/organizations.

So 100% of the time that Flip and Grunfeld run the Wiz, we suck donkey sticks.

BTW, the big surprise from the work you did for me was that Nick's offense doesn't seem to help us win. I wonder if we looked at his counterpart's PER, that maybe when he plays good D we win. My eye-ball test says we are better with him but maybe its actually his man to man D and not the shooting or maybe the Wiz really aren't better or worse with him. I'm a Nick fan, but the numbers don't lie.

Whoops, w dumseld, I owe Nick a HUGE apology .....

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fa ... /11/30/434

Using hoopstat, I picked up on something I missed earlier.

Nick's very best scoring games DID have an effect. Don't know how I missed this: The Wizards were 6-8 when Nick had 25 or more points. I sure didn't see it earlier.

What I like about the link above is it has a tab called best/worse.

Nick's 10 most efficient games (not highest PER) is where the Wizards were 5-5
His 10 least efficient games, the Wizards went 2-8.

As for counterpart eFG, I know 82games looks at this.

http://www.82games.com/1011/10WAS11.HTM

While Nick outshot his counterpart SGs in eFG .501 to .488, he also lost rebound and assists per 48 at SG. Nick is a great shooter, but 90% of the time he took jump shots and he had a poor passing ratio. Per-82 games, Nick's opponent SGs took (only) 82% jumpers. Their inside FG% was 18 to Nick's 10. Not sure what to make of this.

CONCLUSION
I was wrong to say Young had no effect on wins, but I still don't see much beyond 25 point+ games being key for Young. On hoopstats I didn't see where winning or losing his individual eFG matchup had a huge effect. Just the huge efficiency games/25 point+ games did help.

Anybody see anything else?

[nate33]

While Nick outshot his counterpart SGs in eFG .501 to .488, he also lost rebound and assists per 48 at SG. Nick is a great shooter, but 90% of the time he took jump shots and he had a poor passing ratio. Per-82 games, Nick's opponent SGs took (only) 82% jumpers. Their inside FG% was 18 to Nick's 10. Not sure what to make of this.

Yes but he dominated when going by PER. Nick scored a lot more with higher efficiency and fewer turnovers than his counterpart.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

Best Worst of hoopsstats.com is quickly becoming one of my favorite features.

Blatche's Best 10: Wizards 7-3
Blatche's Worst 10: Wizards 0-10

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fa ... /11/30/422

Just glance at the differences in free throws, rebounds, assists in games at the top vs bottom.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

John Wall's ten best games what leaps at me are points, free throws, assists, and the opposite of some of what I said in earlier post.

Wall's Best 10: Wizards 7-3
Wall's Worst 10: Wizards 2-8

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fa ... /11/30/432

Night and day differences in free throws, field goals, and assists for Wall. Five road games among his best ten. Superstar-worthy efficiency in his top-ten, but huge difference in his bottom 10.

[crackhed]

Anybody see anything else?

nothing on stats, but i wonder if teams could benefit from having the coaching staff approach the development of mental toughness in players the same way they do basketball skills

[Nivek]

While I find this interesting, one of the problems is that it isolates each individual player's performance in a way that may not be meaningful. How often does Wall have a 6 rebound game, for example, when McGee is also blocking more shots?

There's also a big issue with assists. Were "high-assist" games at home or on the road? Most NBA teams tend to generate more assists (and blocks and steals) at home. Some of that could be that they're performing better, some of it could be home-town scorekeeping. The other issue with assists is that we know nothing qualitative about them. In other words, are a higher number of assists in a game a sign of better ball movement, or are they just the result of random fluctuations in shooting performance -- they go up and down depending on how the team is shooting that night?

I agree with CCJ's basic premise -- that setting statistical benchmarks for players would be a good idea. I think there's a great deal more analysis that needs to go into what those benchmarks should be, however.

Also, CCJ: I could use some clarification on what you're posting. On one hand you seem to be suggesting the players would benefit from having defined roles (something I agree with). On the other hand, you seem to ripping Flip when he attempts to define those roles for players. Is it just that you don't like the roles Flip is laying out?

Final point: I'd caution against using statements to the press as a basis for condemning or praising a coach's work with a particular player. The coach is with the players for thousands of hours per season. He talks to reporters for a few minutes before a game and a few minutes after. There's no way he's going to convey more than the most bare-bones summary of any interactionb between them. I'm reasonably certain that Flip's coaching to McGee extends far beyond "substance over style." All he's giving to the media is the catchphrase he uses to remind McGee of the countless specific coaching encounters they've had through the years.

[hands11]

Interesting site that I believe will be more useful to look at this year then last year.

Last year there were so many different rosters so a lot of players dont have significant stats.

For example, if you go to Wall and click tips, you can see that when he was efficient 23 plus they were 12-7. But when you go to click on each game, you see the eff came in all kinds of different ways. Some games with had 10 rebounds. Some he has 12 assists. Some he scored a lot. But then you go to see who he was playing with. Click on the high eff games that they lost. In those game you see other players doing well. You find Dray or McGee with good stats but then you also see lots of players that are no longer hear. Yi, Armstrong, Kirk, Gil, etc etc etc.

Point is, it will be a lot easier to isolate stats when you have a consistent set of data points. ie. players on the roster.

But all that said,

Wall
playing efficient is key. He is the PG. 23 plus 12-7

Dray
5 + FTs made they are 12-6. So when Dray is taking to the hole, they win more.

McGee
4 + FTs made they are 9-4. So when McGee is taking to the hole strong and made them we won more.

37 minutes or more they are 7-4 - so when McGee played well he played more and we won more. That makes sense considering we didnt have a lot of option at center.

These are that the stats that stood out the most. The rest of the roster was so fluid no one really measured. Just a revolving door of players here and gone and other assorted rookies.

Nick
His number seems to be more supporting numbers. When he didnt outplay his opponent in eff, they were 2-15. When he did win his match up they were 9-18. So it is hard for Nick to play well enough to carry the team but if he doesn't play well, they don't win much. So it takes Nick plus something from the core of Wall, Dray and McGee. Mostly Wall being eff and Dray and McGee going toward the hoop and being active. Makes sense. Even Kobe needs a supporting cast to win.

But I think most of us know this is what is needed for them to win.

Should be interesting to look at this site more this year with a stable roster. I think trends will be much easier to read but I expect the conclusions to be the same. You need an eff PG, a SG that can score and post players who are active around the rim on both sides and who offensively put pressure on the defense.

[dobrojim]

(EDITED: This post is somewhat in error--see page two in response to w dumseld)

Nick Young
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... gni01.html

Guess what?
I couldn't find ANYTHING to note. Nick's huge scoring nights didn't seem to make a difference. Nor did his free throw attempts. Nor did assists. Nor did rebounds. I was actually shocked.

CONCLUSION
The one-year qualifying offer was a very good move or the Wizards could have parted ways with Nick.

I know it looks like the team won't win without jump shooting or anybody who can make shots. However, I can't see where Nick made that big of a difference on wins or losses. I still think he's a very good dude and a nice scorer. I really wish the Wizards would trade him to a team like San Antonio or another contending team; like they did Stevenson, Haywood, and Butler last season. Nick could help there.

Does anybody see something I missed on Young?

Interesting data. What he does or doesn't do had little impact on W-L.

I totally agree that the Wiz made a good move by forcing him to sign the QO.
Worst thing that could happen from here is he has a GREAT year and leaves
to get paid, we draft someone like Barnes or Kidd-Gilchrist.

[dobrojim]

Javale McGee
http://www.basketball-reference.com/pla ... elog/2011/

when JM plays big minutes you can usually count on 2 things being
true:

1. minimal stupid fouls/not in foul trouble

2. he's playing well

when he's not playing well, it's often because he's been taken
out of his game by stupid, unnecessary fouls often caused by
poor defensive positioning and decisions like biting on a pump fake.

[dobrojim]

Best Worst of hoopsstats.com is quickly becoming one of my favorite features.

Blatche's Best 10: Wizards 7-3
Blatche's Worst 10: Wizards 0-10

http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fa ... /11/30/422

Just glance at the differences in free throws, rebounds, assists in games at the top vs bottom.

I'm not all that optimistic that this is an hopeful insight given that
Dray is now a 'griselled vet' with 7 years in the league.

It's the Blatche tease. Every now and then he has a really good game,
we win and lots of folks, myself included, get giddy about how good
he could be. The next game or the one after that, we're all feeling
like Charlie Brown after Lucy yanked the ball away. Again. Would
love for this to change, realistically doubtful that it will.

[Chocolate City Jordanaire]

While I find this interesting, one of the problems is that it isolates each individual player's performance in a way that may not be meaningful. How often does Wall have a 6 rebound game, for example, when McGee is also blocking more shots?

There's also a big issue with assists. Were "high-assist" games at home or on the road? Most NBA teams tend to generate more assists (and blocks and steals) at home. Some of that could be that they're performing better, some of it could be home-town scorekeeping. The other issue with assists is that we know nothing qualitative about them. In other words, are a higher number of assists in a game a sign of better ball movement, or are they just the result of random fluctuations in shooting performance -- they go up and down depending on how the team is shooting that night?

I agree with CCJ's basic premise -- that setting statistical benchmarks for players would be a good idea. I think there's a great deal more analysis that needs to go into what those benchmarks should be, however.

Also, CCJ: I could use some clarification on what you're posting. On one hand you seem to be suggesting the players would benefit from having defined roles (something I agree with). On the other hand, you seem to ripping Flip when he attempts to define those roles for players. Is it just that you don't like the roles Flip is laying out?

Final point: I'd caution against using statements to the press as a basis for condemning or praising a coach's work with a particular player. The coach is with the players for thousands of hours per season. He talks to reporters for a few minutes before a game and a few minutes after. There's no way he's going to convey more than the most bare-bones summary of any interactionb between them. I'm reasonably certain that Flip's coaching to McGee extends far beyond "substance over style." All he's giving to the media is the catchphrase he uses to remind McGee of the countless specific coaching encounters they've had through the years.

Nivek, sorry to take a while to get to this post.

The benchmarks could lead you to conclude I am saying players should have defined roles. In a way that is what I am saying, but not really. What i am saying is sort of like the story of the Ugly Duckling. That swan kept trying to blend in with the ducks. He felt ugly and out of place, until he got in his own element with his swan family. I want Flip to help players realize where the players are strong and where the player has a natural skill set that can positively impact the team. Do what you do best. In a way that is saying have defined roles. Bill Russell said of his old Celtic teams, the secret of their success is every guy knew his role.

Really good point where I could be contradicting myself while slamming Flip for insisting roles. I think what I do not like is Flip seems to be negative. From a distance I perceive that Saunders also makes some mandates that cause his guys to play stale, stiff, over-controlled ball. His roles are also roles I do not agree with. Andray should be much more flexibly deployed at PF or C and he should generally play a lot less minutes. So, I sort of see where you're right to say I am trying to have it both ways. Guys need roles and Flip is trying to do that. I criticize harshly. Then again, I just don't see eye-to-eye with how Saunders sticks to roles that aren't working.

As far as the media goes, Nivek, my peeve is that when a coach is negative the media captures that imagery forever. Players will be remembered as knuckleheads always. If the coach were more subtle with his displeasure it would be better. Eddie never gave the media a thing to tip his in-house turmoil. He had dudes fighting (Brendan and Etan), he had Kwame's worst, and who knows what else. Eddie was mum about even Haywood. Never knew why EJ didn't like Haywood (but I hated Brendan not playing when his defense was the best on the team). Saunders IMO could protect his players as a sign that he can rip them but no one else should.