After 20
by Stop-n-Pop on Dec 6, 2009 12:58 PM CST
Email
Print
It's that time of year again. Stat time. The goodies begin below the fold.
UPDATE BELOW THE FOLD
First of all, this year we're going to feature a number of excel sheets that will allow you to chart your way through the Wolves' performance. I'll post an excel sheet every 20 games so we can all see how the team is progressing. Here's the first one: Wolves after 20
UPDATE: Thanks to the good folks at Basketball Geek, we now have play-by-play data from all 20 contests. I have put the data in an easy to use single spreadsheet here: Play by Play END UPDATE
That should cover quite a bit. We have team vs. opponent stats, total stats, per game stats, net stats, advanced stats, league stats and even attendance stats. Moving on, here's last year's After 20 post so you can compare how this year's team is doing to last year's squad.
Let's get around to some 82Games stats:
Shooting Details
68%
.404
54%
46.1
67%
.454
66%
49.8
26%
.514
43%
22.5
25%
.590
56%
24.1
4%
.909
70%
6.3
6%
.926
88%
9.3
2%
.594
0%
2.0
2%
.633
0%
2.0
100%
.457
51%
76.9
100%
.521
64%
85.2
Notes: these numbers show the shot selection for teams, and the relative effective
field goal percentage, assisted baskets, and points per game by shot type.
Shot Clock Usage
40%
.516
45%
34.7
37%
.588
59%
35.5
26%
.431
54%
18.7
25%
.506
65%
20.8
24%
.416
57%
16.6
24%
.480
73%
19.1
10%
.395
57%
6.9
14%
.437
63%
9.8
Notes: the shot clock times represent the elapsed seconds before the shot is taken,
and reflect the relative speed of shot-taking by teams.
Shot Blocking
1555
63
4.1
194
0.32
1598
120
7.5
174
0.69
Turnovers/Fouls
38
137
133
5
194
154
29
37
36
136
121
15
174
124
18
36
Individual Player Floor Time statistics
| Hart | 0% | +5 | 0.82 | 0.40 | +48.3 | 1 | 0 | |
| Love | 2% | +5 | 1.06 | 0.92 | +10.0 | 1 | 0 | |
| Pecherov | 29% | -32 | 1.01 | 1.07 | -5.7 | 8 | 10 | |
| Cardinal | 14% | -34 | 0.95 | 1.05 | -12.0 | 3 | 9 | |
| Ellington | 29% | -56 | 0.96 | 1.07 | -9.9 | 5 | 12 | |
| Jawai | 21% | -66 | 0.95 | 1.13 | -16.3 | 4 | 11 | |
| Pavlovic | 31% | -87 | 0.95 | 1.09 | -14.5 | 7 | 10 | |
| Sessions | 48% | -92 | 0.95 | 1.06 | -10.0 | 5 | 10 | |
| Wilkins | 30% | -110 | 0.95 | 1.15 | -19.0 | 4 | 14 | |
| Gomes | 62% | -118 | 0.99 | 1.10 | -9.9 | 6 | 13 | |
| Hollins | 43% | -138 | 0.91 | 1.09 | -16.7 | 2 | 17 | |
| Brewer | 63% | -149 | 0.98 | 1.11 | -12.4 | 7 | 12 | |
| Jefferson | 60% | -149 | 0.99 | 1.12 | -12.9 | 4 | 12 | |
| Flynn | 60% | -179 | 0.99 | 1.15 | -15.6 | 4 | 15 |
Top Five-Man Floor Units
Flynn-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Hollins
103.8
0.89
1.18
-59
1
9
Flynn-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Pecherov
82.8
1.07
1.11
-8
2
6
Flynn-Brewer-Wilkins-Gomes-Jefferson
65.2
0.98
1.11
-17
3
3
Flynn-Brewer-Gomes-Hollins-Jawai
34.8
1.08
0.93
+12
5
0
Sessions-Pavlovic-Wilkins-Jawai-Pecherov
25.3
1.04
1.02
+1
2
2
Sessions-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Pecherov
20.4
1.23
0.79
+16
4
2
Flynn-Ellington-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson
19.1
0.99
1.28
-14
1
3
Sessions-Ellington-Pavlovic-Hollins-Jawai
14.6
0.68
1.08
-10
0
3
Sessions-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Hollins
14.1
0.76
0.96
-5
2
2
Sessions-Ellington-Pavlovic-Cardinal-Hollins
11.2
1.01
0.70
+5
1
0
Top Five-Man Floor Units, Details
Flynn-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Hollins
.438
.530
+2
29%
34%
43.5%
-3%
Flynn-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Pecherov
.489
.500
+6
23%
36%
47.0%
0%
Flynn-Brewer-Wilkins-Gomes-Jefferson
.421
.482
+2
31%
32%
50.5%
+4%
Flynn-Brewer-Gomes-Hollins-Jawai
.569
.414
-8
31%
29%
43.0%
+2%
Sessions-Pavlovic-Wilkins-Jawai-Pecherov
.444
.463
0
33%
39%
46.5%
+8%
Sessions-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Pecherov
.475
.324
+3
48%
32%
66.5%
+2%
Flynn-Ellington-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson
.513
.595
-7
36%
41%
51.5%
-5%
Sessions-Ellington-Pavlovic-Hollins-Jawai
.267
.321
-6
37%
21%
48.5%
-10%
Sessions-Brewer-Gomes-Jefferson-Hollins
.423
.269
-13
46%
27%
40.5%
-5%
Sessions-Ellington-Pavlovic-Cardinal-Hollins
.500
.368
0
20%
16%
51.5%
+12%
Team Won-Lost Profiles
Points For
1
6
14%
-15.1
0
6
0%
-9.2
1
5
17%
-13.2
Points Agn
0
5
0%
-18.6
1
5
17%
-7.5
1
7
13%
-12.8
Net Points
1
9
10%
-14.5
0
5
0%
-8.8
1
3
25%
-12.8
Off eFG%
1
6
14%
-14.3
0
9
0%
-13.1
1
2
33%
-7.3
Def eFG%
1
8
11%
-11.9
0
4
0%
-15.0
1
5
17%
-12.2
FTA Net
1
10
9%
-12.1
0
3
0%
-10.3
1
4
20%
-15.2
Rebounds
0
7
0%
-16.3
1
2
33%
-6.3
1
8
11%
-11.9
Turnovers
0
5
0%
-16.6
2
3
40%
-6.2
0
9
0%
-14.0
Assists
1
11
8%
-12.7
0
2
0%
-14.0
1
4
20%
-12.0
Blocks
0
8
0%
-14.0
2
4
33%
-8.8
0
5
0%
-15.0
Pace
1
6
14%
-15.6
1
6
14%
-5.4
0
5
0%
-18.6
Notes: these stats are designed to show how a team has played against opponents with certain characteristics. Each opponent is ranked in the above 11 categories and graded as either 'Good' (rank 1-10), 'Average' (rank 11-20), or 'Poor' (rank 21+). We compile the wins, losses and net points for each of the stats and opponent levels.
Team Production by Position
17.5
.473
5.4
31%
5.5
6.6
4.8
0.1
2.7
20.7
14.6
17.4
.411
3.5
30%
6.2
3.5
3.4
0.5
3.4
16.4
9.9
15.3
.433
2.6
27%
8.9
3.2
2.2
0.5
4.4
15.3
11.9
17.3
.485
3.4
30%
10.5
2.8
2.6
1.2
5.1
19.3
15.9
16.6
.484
4.9
39%
10.7
2.3
2.8
1.2
6.3
19.7
14.9
Opponent Production by Position
16.2
.495
4.2
20%
5.1
9.5
4.4
0.5
3.5
19.5
16.7
17.2
.532
4.5
26%
5.4
5.7
3.2
0.3
2.6
21.4
17.4
17.6
.487
4.7
28%
7.0
3.9
2.3
0.6
2.6
21.1
16.4
16.3
.503
5.1
37%
12.3
3.3
2.7
1.6
4.1
20.8
19.2
14.6
.596
5.7
54%
14.8
2.4
2.8
3.3
5.6
21.2
22.3
Net Production by Position
1.4
-.022
1.3
11%
0.4
-2.8
-0.4
-0.4
0.8
1.2
-2.0
0.2
-.122
-1.0
4%
0.8
-2.2
-0.3
0.2
-0.7
-5.0
-7.5
-2.3
-.054
-2.1
-1%
1.9
-0.7
0.1
-0.2
-1.7
-5.8
-4.5
0.9
-.018
-1.7
-7%
-1.7
-0.5
0.1
-0.5
-0.9
-1.5
-3.3
2.1
-.111
-0.8
-15%
-4.1
-0.1
0.0
-2.2
-0.7
-1.5
-7.3
That about does it. Be sure to check out Knickerblogger, Basketball Value, Basketball Reference and Basketball Prospectus to round out your stat searches.
14 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Al's recovery is all over these numbers
Jefferson has been game, but the guy’s legs for these first 20 have not been under him. You can see it in the numbers; in every area but his assist rate his production’s depressed. Blocks, everything. You can see it subjectively, too. With a measure more kick in his heels the last couple of nights, it’s a different Al, and I almost hadn’t remembered how much more lift he’d had before.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
I thought we would be a better defensive team this year
but so far our Opponent eFG% is higher than it was even last season. The root cause appears to be Opposing Centers, whereby their eFG% is over 50 points (.596 vs. .542) higher than last season. Their FTAs are higher, their rebounds are higher, etc. We are being dominated by Centers.
The other area we aren’t doing so well in vs. last year is Opposing SG eFG% (.532 vs. .523 last year). The theory was that Brewer would really help upgrade our perimeter D. Well, that just hasn’t been the case. For whatever reason, SGs generally have done quite well against us. I don’t think Brewer has been quite the lockdown guy we had all hoped for, which makes his offensive ineptitude all the more glaring. We’ll see if this number turns around as the season wears on. I think he still has the potential to be a major defensive force, but it really hasn’t played out that way yet this season, other than in the steals category.
It wasn't just Brewer, was it?
At least the outlines of a better perimeter defense were on this roster at year’s start.
Damien Wilkins and Pavlovic, both decidedly mediocre offensive players, have decent defensive reputations at the 3 and 2. Flynn, while he’s undersized and played the zone at ’Cuse and so on, was advertised by David Kahn on draft night as having the potential to be one of the great on-the-ball defenders in the league. Ramon Sessions at least has the size to matchup with some folks at SG.
You contrast all that with what the Wolves put out there in 08-09, and it should come to at least an improvement in perimeter defense generally. That’s not saying too much, is it? Given that Telfair and Foye were very, very bad defenders?
(None of this is said with any great malice or impatience. The roster came together at training camp looking like a pile of left elbows.)
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Agree
The theory was that the addition of Pavs, Sessions, Wilkins, and a healthy Corey Brewer + the length of Hollins taking Smith’s minutes would all be defensive upgrades. And indeed, opposing Small Forwards are doing quite a bit worse against us vs. last year. But everywhere else we are seeing either no improvement or degradation. The added D-rebounding we will get from an improving Jefferson and Love will help, but we need to do more than just rebound people’s misses. We need them to miss more often!
by Rascal Flatts on Dec 7, 2009 11:45 AM CST up reply actions
Explanation
The Interior Defensive rotation has been very poor to non-existant at times which is why opposing C’s are scoring alot. Plus considering that Al isn’t 100% and hasn’t been able to gather as many rebounds (which will then go to the opposition) explains much of this. Getting Love back should allow the wolves to play fairly consistent Interior defensive rotations, which I saw against Utah. This still will breakdown until Al and Love get used to playing with each other, but it will improve. It won’t ever be great, but with their offensive skillsets…it doesn’t have to be great…just solid.
As to the shooting guards, how often have you seen brewer rotate to another man and no one pick up his? I see it a lot. Some of this is his fault as he is always going for the great play, which you can’t always do, but a lot of it is also his teammates not being on the same page. Especially against Cle and Bos, there were a lot of times where opposing SG’s got wide open looks for this exacty reason.
Just remember that opposing player PER is a widely inaccurate stat. Defense is a team game, not just one on one and requires observation and advanced stat crunching that looks at lineups, and opposing lineup averages.
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 7, 2009 7:48 AM CST up reply actions
All of that does not read like "lock-down defender," does it?
Maybe there are no such defenders, now.
However, what you’re saying about Corey (that he gambles on “the great play” for steals, and so on) seems more like the word I use to describe him on both ends: “disruptive.” That’s much more the defensive role of someone like Marko Jaric, as opposed to your elite defender who makes Kobe or Wade work super hard and get his points on lower percentages and so on, isn’t it?
I agree, though, there’s not even any real “same page” for the Wolves to be on right now defensively….
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
I think as a team defender
his disruptive style doesn’t match with his linemates right now. If you put him on just one player, I think he is a lockdown defender. But he is almost never just put on one player. If that makes sense. On a team that rotated really well he would also be a lockdown team defender, but team D is just that…TEAM D. Overall, Brewer tries to do too much and that is and always will be his downfall.
In the right situations brewer is very valuable, but when in a poor lineup mix he sticks out for all of the wrong reasons. For me he will always be in that talented but with holes that need to get covered up category.
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 7, 2009 8:31 AM CST up reply actions
Agreed
I think if Brewer had the opportunity to just match up on one guy all night long he would prove himself to be a ‘lockdown’ type defender. As it is now, however, he’s trying to play defense for 2-3 teammates out there. I don’t why our defensive rotations are so poor right now but they are.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Sometimes the rotate properly
and others it seems like they just don’t know how. I haven’t been able to watch enough on my TV with DVR to replay and see if it is just matchups that are difficult or personnel lineups by the wolves.
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 7, 2009 10:41 AM CST up reply actions
I hear you
but I was looking only at opposing team eFG%, not PER or DReb%. A healthy Love and Jefferson will certainly help on DReb%, but I had thought our team was constructed to better stop the first shot attempt.
by Rascal Flatts on Dec 7, 2009 12:06 PM CST up reply actions
I think it is constructed better to stop lane penetration by guards
but our backcourt isn’t full of shotblocking guards. They are just more positionally sound when it comes to staying in front of their man. The higher eFG% I think really has to do with the rotating part of the defense versus man d (which is definitely better).
by TheEvilProfessor on Dec 7, 2009 12:21 PM CST up reply actions
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.
