After 10
by Stop-n-Pop on Nov 21, 2008 10:40 AM CST
Email
Print(Ed: This post is best viewed in the wide format.)
| Last Year (ranking) | This Year (ranking) | Diff (Improve/Backwards) | |
| OE | 103.8 (27) | 104.3 (18) | +0.5 (I) |
| DE | 111.2 (27) | 108.4 (26) | -2.8 (I) |
| Pace | 91.9 (13) | 90.6 (18) | -1.3 |
| eFG | 48.4 (20) | 46.2 (24) | -2.2 (B) |
| deFG | 51.3 (26) | 49.3 (23) | -2 (I) |
| OReb% | 27.5 (11) | 25.8 (20) | -1.7 (B) |
|
dOreb% |
26.4 (14) | 28.4 (22) | +2 (B) |
| FTA diff | -6.9 (30) | -2.7 (24) | +4.2 (I) |
| FTM diff | -6.0 (30) | -1.3 (20) | +4.7 (I) |
| Pts for | 95.6 (26) | 97.4 (14) | +1.8 (I) |
| Pts against | 102.4 (21) | 101.3 (25) | -1.1 (I) |
| Pt diff | -6.8 (26) | -3.9 (24) | +2.9 (I) |
| TO | 15.7 (20) | 13.7 (1) | -2 (I) |
| dTO | 14.6 (21) | 14.0 (27) | -0.6 (B) |
| record | 2-8 | 2-8 | even |
| Jefferson | ||||||||
| Collins | ||||||||
| Ollie | ||||||||
| Brewer | ||||||||
| Love | ||||||||
| McCants | ||||||||
| Miller | ||||||||
| Foye | ||||||||
| Smith | ||||||||
| Gomes | ||||||||
| Cardinal | ||||||||
| Carney | ||||||||
| Telfair | ||||||||
| Madsen | ||||||||
Individual Player Floor Time statistics
| Cardinal | 1% | +5 | 162.8 | 111.9 | +50.9 | 1 | 0 | |
| Collins | 6% | +4 | 81.7 | 75.4 | +6.3 | 2 | 0 | |
| Brewer | 44% | +2 | 96.6 | 96.1 | +0.5 | 5 | 4 | |
| Love | 49% | -4 | 100.0 | 100.9 | -0.9 | 3 | 4 | |
| Madsen | 2% | -4 | 77.8 | 92.7 | -14.8 | 0 | 1 | |
| Jefferson | 73% | -4 | 94.9 | 95.5 | -0.6 | 3 | 5 | |
| Foye | 69% | -6 | 95.1 | 96.0 | -0.9 | 3 | 5 | |
| Carney | 7% | -11 | 90.3 | 106.3 | -16.0 | 2 | 2 | |
| Ollie | 19% | -14 | 87.1 | 95.0 | -7.9 | 2 | 4 | |
| Telfair | 26% | -20 | 100.1 | 108.2 | -8.1 | 0 | 5 | |
| McCants | 39% | -27 | 90.5 | 97.9 | -7.4 | 3 | 4 | |
| Smith | 34% | -39 | 87.3 | 99.3 | -12.0 | 3 | 6 | |
| Miller | 72% | -48 | 94.2 | 101.3 | -7.1 | 1 | 7 | |
| Gomes | 52% | -59 | 87.9 | 100.0 | -12.1 | 1 | 8 |
Shooting Details
| 61% | .388 | 68% | 41.0 | 71% | .446 | 58% | 52.2 | ||
| 34% | .521 | 61% | 30.4 | 23% | .566 | 38% | 21.8 | ||
| 3% | 1.000 | 78% | 5.1 | 4% | .897 | 81% | 5.8 | ||
| 3% | .550 | 0% | 2.4 | 2% | .643 | 0% | 2.0 | ||
| 100% | .455 | 64% | 79.0 | 100% | .495 | 52% | 81.8 | ||
Team Position Stats
| PG | 30 | 30 | 27 | 2 | 6 | 4 | 10.7 | 18.8 | 30 |
| SG | 14 | 7 | 20 | 11 | 6 | 24 | 17.3 | 16.5 | 8 |
| SF | 26 | 24 | 12 | 22 | 8 | 23 | 13.4 | 15.7 | 21 |
| PF | 22 | 25 | 25 | 2 | 17 | 21 | 15.9 | 21.2 | 27 |
| C | 2 | 23 | 24 | 12 | 21 | 5 | 22.2 | 18.1 | 8 |
Top Five-Man Floor Units
Foye-Miller-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson
71
0.98
1.04
-9
2
3
Telfair-Miller-Brewer-Love-Jefferson
48
1.30
1.19
+8
4
0
Foye-Miller-Brewer-Love-Jefferson
24
1.15
1.08
+0
2
3
Foye-McCants-Miller-Gomes-Jefferson
18
0.84
0.82
+2
4
3
Telfair-Foye-Miller-Love-Jefferson
17
1.20
1.07
+3
2
1
Foye-McCants-Gomes-Smith-Jefferson
16
1.07
1.06
+0
2
1
Ollie-McCants-Carney-Smith-Love
14
1.20
0.89
+8
2
0
Foye-Miller-Gomes-Jefferson-Collins
11
1.19
0.80
+11
1
0
Foye-Miller-Gomes-Smith-Jefferson
9
0.91
1.25
-4
1
2
Foye-McCants-Miller-Smith-Jefferson
8
1.01
1.11
-3
0
1
Top Five-Man Floor Units, Details
Foye-Miller-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson
.461
.500
+4
38%
35%
93%
+2%
Telfair-Miller-Brewer-Love-Jefferson
.523
.565
+7
37%
25%
128%
-2%
Foye-Miller-Brewer-Love-Jefferson
.511
.488
-4
34%
24%
115%
-1%
Foye-McCants-Miller-Gomes-Jefferson
.338
.214
-15
32%
29%
86%
+3%
Telfair-Foye-Miller-Love-Jefferson
.500
.426
-9
39%
30%
100%
+9%
Foye-McCants-Gomes-Smith-Jefferson
.446
.455
-5
43%
23%
73%
+21%
Ollie-McCants-Carney-Smith-Love
.483
.391
-7
47%
22%
86%
+19%
Foye-Miller-Gomes-Jefferson-Collins
.639
.381
+6
50%
38%
76%
+7%
Foye-Miller-Gomes-Smith-Jefferson
.438
.536
-4
38%
36%
61%
+13%
Foye-McCants-Miller-Smith-Jefferson
.400
.467
-1
60%
33%
123%
-7%
Team Stats:
| Team | Min | Poss For | Poss Opp | Pts For | Pts Opp | Off Rtg | Def Rtg | Overall Rtg | OReb For | OReb Opp | DReb For | DReb Opp | OReb Rate | DReb Rate |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MIN | 495.00 | 936 | 935 | 974 | 1013 | 104.06 | 108.34 | -4.28 | 147 | 144 | 328 | 351 | 29.52% | 69.49% |
Team Offensive Shooting Detail stats:
| 3 pointers | 2 pointers | Inside Shots | |
| attempts | 18% | 42% | 39% |
| fg% | .289 | .370 | .565 |
| ast | 96% | 59% | 57% |
| blk | 0% | 5% | 9% |
| pts | 14.1 | 28.0 | 40.0 |
Dunks: 23
And 1: 21
Foul: 11%
Team Defensive Shooting Detail stats:
| 3 point shots | 2 point shots | Inside Shots | |
| att | 18% | 52% | 28% |
| fg% | .364 | .421 | .645 |
| ast | 84% | 43% | 42% |
| blk | 1% | 4% | 10% |
| pts | 16.7 | 37.1 | 31.1 |
Dunks: 17
And 1: 16
Foul: 11%
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'll be posting these stats every 10 games so that we can keep track of what is and is not improving with Our Beloved Puppies Zombies. A few things jumped out at me:
- Take a look at how many inside and 2 point shots the Wolves allow without an assist. They rank 25th in the league in fewest assisted 2 pointers and 27th in the league in fewest assisted inside shots. In other words, they are getting broke the hell down by individual players. We've seen it all year; guys like Kevin Martin and Brandon Roy are able to get what they want when they want it.
- The Wolves don't turn the ball over a lot but they also don't force a lot of turnovers. Even in areas where the Wolves are very good (not turning the ball over) they don't cause enough of a differential on the other end of the court to make it matter. It's time for some gambling defense. It's also time for a quicker offense.
- The Wolves are losing this year because of offense. They are an improved defensive team but they are leaving a lot of points on the board in terms of dissonance between offensive efficiency and production. They aren't shooting particularly well and they have a slower pace than last year. At the beginning of the year, I said that the main goal for this team was a neutral OE/DE differential of somewhere between 108-108 pts/100 possessions. Right now the Wolves are meeting the defensive part of this equation but not the offensive one. An increased pace + a definite 4th quarter pecking order can go a long way to helping this statistical dream become a reality.
What do you guys notice?
Oh yeah, KG is back in town.
UPDATE: We're also going to be keeping track of Ryan Gomes at the 4. He's putting up some pretty ugly numbers at that position while playing 30% of the team's minutes there. With no further delay, here you go:
Ryan Gomes:
Player Floor Time Stats by Position
| 21% |
-10 |
85.4 | 90.5 | -5.1 |
2 |
2 |
||
| 30% |
-54 |
87.7 | 106.5 | -18.8 |
2 |
6 |
||
| 0% |
+3 |
162.3 | 108.2 | 54.1 |
1 |
0 |
Net 48-Minute Production by Position
| -0.5 | +0.163 | -6.1 | +1% | -2.5 | +0.0 | -0.5 | +0.0 | +0.5 | +1.0 | +2.1 | |
| +5.0 | -0.118 | -8.2 | -15% | -2.5 | +2.8 | +0.0 | -0.7 | +0.7 | -5.3 | -9.6 | |
| +0.0 | +0.000 | +0.0 | +0% | -13.5 | +0.0 | +0.0 | +0.0 | +0.0 | +0.0 | +0.0 |
UPDATE ii: I forgot to put in the stat links.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Gomes...
…has ridiculously bad splits at the 4. -9.6 PER, -5.3 points, + 0.7 PF, -2.5 reb, -8.2 FTA, -15% iFG…it goes on and on. He gets absolutely abused there and he plays 30% of the team’s total minutes at the position. This is a good one to keep track of. I’ll add it to the list.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Miller
The most striking thing for me right now is Mike Miller. I couldn’t believe the net point difference when he’s on or off the court, but it makes a lot of sense. I went and just checked his Hollinger stats and his usage rate is 14.6! That’s one of the lowest amongst all Shooting Guards…yet his true shooting percentage is still .626.
It’s not as if Miller is passing up open shots though, he’s just not getting the opportunities, and he clearly can’t create his own shots. I lay this on the feet of both Randy Wittman and our point guards. There is no reason we should wait till the end of games (and really only 2 games thus far) to play Miller off of Big Al.
Agreed...
…his defense is much too bad for him to not be taking all those bad shots he hates taking. That 3 point threat is hard to replace though. It’s also interesting to note that the 5 players with the highest OE are
1- Bassy
2- Love
3- Brewer
4- Foye
5- Big Al
Pick up the pace and run, run, run. Also, from both watching closer in the past few games and from the stat sheet, it’s becoming clear that Foye has really picked up his defense this year. Hat’s off to him on that front.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Yeah I think his main defensive concern right now is the same as his main offensive concern, i.e. the occasional mind-farts, unfortunately they occur most often at the end of games, e.g. going under the screen at the end of the Denver game while guarding Billups. How the hell do you go under the screen any time against Billups, much less at the end of the game? That 3 took their lead from 1 to 4 and basically sealed the deal. This after he played him pretty well most of the game.
I agree on Miller too. I think I’m halfway between what Blakeley and S/P are saying: on the one hand, he’s just not getting the shots he needs to get, he’s not the best at creating his own shot so this is on the other guys; on the other hand, he’s such a good shooter that you wish he’d take some bad ones once in a while – fadeaway 3, hurried 3, shit underhand 3 if necessary but just get ’em up!
Nice pickup on Gomes btw. I noticed that in the last few games (though I didn’t see the Philly game) he’s getting more minutes at the 3, which is obviously nice. Oh also I noticed Love had only 20 min. – I’m not going to complain after a win but any reason for this, other than just riding Smith’s hot hand?
by plinytheelder on Nov 21, 2008 1:55 PM CST up reply actions
Hopefully...
…it’s just the hot hand factor. Even so, they almost lost because of a lack of rebounding.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Maybe these are silly questions
I’m not up on the meaning of some (all?) of these stats, but it looks to me like they are largely tredning in the right direction. Maybe not enough to be a 40-42 team, but they are noticeably better than last year. So why the same record? Does it come down to:
1. That the areas where we’ve regressed/not improved that much, a) rebounding (note that to your point 1above, the other way you get an unassisted 2 in the paint is to grab an offensive rebound and put it back in) and b) OE (where we’ve improved only modestly) is important enough to negate any of the other areas of improvement?
2. Or are we statistically better but the record doesn’t show it yet b/c we’ve lost 2 overtime games and several others that have come down to making/missing shots or ridiculous substitution patterns so all we’re seeing is a “better” point differential, but with bad coaching/luck, no more wins?
Or, put another way, maybe we have more talent and it actually hasn’t played THAT badly, but because we have a crappy coach it doesn’t matter?
Or, maybe we should be apllauding the genius that is Glen (see the quote you cited from today’s PP) and the FO. They’ve added talent but kept Witt, thereby strengthening the team yet still having the ability to preserve ALL of our potential lottery picks this year, through Witt’s sheer gross incompetence in game mismanagement (i.e., when we have Witt, we don’t need the MadDog to chuck threes!).
Obviously, I’m pretty confident it’s the former.
I think...
…they’re improving. The 4th quarter thing is a bit frustrating but I think it’s brought about largely by poor rotations, no system, and a lack of a set pecking order.
I guess Witt should get some credit for this but going back to the rotation thing, he just gets so in the way sometimes.
You know, there is some evidence for the Evil Genius Papa Glen position. Last year when McHale said that they could get 42 wins this year, Papa Glen said something to the effect of “next year’s draft is where we bring it all together”. Obviously, if they win 42 games they give away their top pick. They’re mutually exclusive. I do think it is the former however.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
