Joined: 23 Jun 2005 Posts: 8488 Location: The (real) short corner
Posted: Tue Jan 17, 2017 6:49 pm Post subject:
I haven't posted much on this thread this year as real life has gotten in the way. Apologies for that. But I'll be writing in depth articles for GT's Laker Film Room, starting with my first piece here:
Is there a specific term for the down screen we set when the ball handler has the ball on the sideline and the player comes off the screen straight up the lane line?
Joined: 23 Jun 2005 Posts: 8488 Location: The (real) short corner
Posted: Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:55 pm Post subject:
BigGameHames wrote:
Is there a specific term for the down screen we set when the ball handler has the ball on the sideline and the player comes off the screen straight up the lane line?
Is there a specific term for the down screen we set when the ball handler has the ball on the sideline and the player comes off the screen straight up the lane line?
To the stats gurus up in here, could someone provide me a breakdown of how they track PPP by play type (it's a stupid question, I know, but I want to make sure I'm totally accurately tracking the data before starting to avoid even stupider mistakes). I'm bored and annoyed and thinking of doing a play type analysis of every Lonzo Ball possession this season since I have access to every UCLA game.
Any ideas/assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
To the stats gurus up in here, could someone provide me a breakdown of how they track PPP by play type (it's a stupid question, I know, but I want to make sure I'm totally accurately tracking the data before starting to avoid even stupider mistakes). I'm bored and annoyed and thinking of doing a play type analysis of every Lonzo Ball possession this season since I have access to every UCLA game.
Any ideas/assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
Let me know if you need a platform for that piece if you decide to do it, I'd be happy to feature a piece like that on my site.
PPP by Play Type on nba.com is calculated by all of the possessions that a players uses, meaning FGA, FTA, or Turnover. The problem w/how they do it is that it doesn't include passing. For example, if Jordan Clarkson comes off of a pick & roll and dumps it off to Tarik Black for a dunk, Tarik Black is gonna get credited in the "Pick & Roll Screener" category, but Clarkson won't get any credit at all.
Synergy Sports has data that includes points created off of the pass, but it's premium content.
Last edited by GoldenThroat on Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:35 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 23 Jun 2005 Posts: 8488 Location: The (real) short corner
Posted: Thu Mar 02, 2017 7:08 pm Post subject:
Baron Von Humongous wrote:
To the stats gurus up in here, could someone provide me a breakdown of how they track PPP by play type (it's a stupid question, I know, but I want to make sure I'm totally accurately tracking the data before starting to avoid even stupider mistakes). I'm bored and annoyed and thinking of doing a play type analysis of every Lonzo Ball possession this season since I have access to every UCLA game.
Any ideas/assistance would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
It's important to note that the play type PPP accounts only for the possessions that the player attempted a shot or turned the ball over off that play type. So Ballhandler PPP doesn't credit the PG for making the pass to a spot up shooter for a made 3. That goes into the other player's Spot Up PPP.
So you can do it in this way to be consistent with the numbers we get on stats.nba, or you can also count assists off play types which I think is more accurate in measuring a player's effectiveness. I think GT does the latter on lakersfilmroom.com on a team level. Synergy does do assists + scoring on a player level but does not make it publicly available.
or you can also count assists off play types which I think is more accurate in measuring a player's effectiveness. I think GT does the latter on lakersfilmroom.com on a team level. Synergy does do assists + scoring on a player level but does not make it publicly available.
I'm going to try and track his plays like this, which seems like it'll be more illustrative given some of the concerns people have about Ball's game. If I actually complete it and it turns out well, I'll throw it up here in this thread for feedback.
Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 12111 Location: Bay Area
Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 12:13 pm Post subject:
GT, Tox, Fiend and other LFR fam:
I was wondering if you could talk about the teams improvement (or lack thereof) on the offensive end through the course of the season? Early, I feel like the common refrain I heard was that the team was running about "90% of 20%" of the playbook.
From my view, I don't think the team has progressed much beyond that. If anything, we seem to have regressed. I see no real progression on counters, and the ball seems stickier than at the start of the season -- less side to side action, less passes overall. The ball stays on one side, often involves only an action between two players, and the result is typically a shot from that side (from one of the two players), and nary a player was involved.
Am I completely off or has the team's offensive progression flatlined
I was wondering if you could talk about the teams improvement (or lack thereof) on the offensive end through the course of the season? Early, I feel like the common refrain I heard was that the team was running about "90% of 20%" of the playbook.
From my view, I don't think the team has progressed much beyond that. If anything, we seem to have regressed. I see no real progression on counters, and the ball seems stickier than at the start of the season -- less side to side action, less passes overall. The ball stays on one side, often involves only an action between two players, and the result is typically a shot from that side (from one of the two players), and nary a player was involved.
Am I completely off or has the team's offensive progression flatlined
This is a really interesting topic that's worth exploring. I think in many respects you're correct here. I touched on it a bit in our last podcast, but this will be an offseason video for sure.
And it was 20% of 90%...meaning that they ran a lot of different sets, but didn't get too in depth on any of them. Although they've pared things down a bit as the season's gone on.
Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 12111 Location: Bay Area
Posted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 4:37 pm Post subject:
GoldenThroat wrote:
Cutheon wrote:
GT, Tox, Fiend and other LFR fam:
I was wondering if you could talk about the teams improvement (or lack thereof) on the offensive end through the course of the season? Early, I feel like the common refrain I heard was that the team was running about "90% of 20%" of the playbook.
From my view, I don't think the team has progressed much beyond that. If anything, we seem to have regressed. I see no real progression on counters, and the ball seems stickier than at the start of the season -- less side to side action, less passes overall. The ball stays on one side, often involves only an action between two players, and the result is typically a shot from that side (from one of the two players), and nary a player was involved.
Am I completely off or has the team's offensive progression flatlined
This is a really interesting topic that's worth exploring. I think in many respects you're correct here. I touched on it a bit in our last podcast, but this will be an offseason video for sure.
And it was 20% of 90%...meaning that they ran a lot of different sets, but didn't get too in depth on any of them. Although they've pared things down a bit as the season's gone on.
Doh! silly me. I had the thought right. Thanks for the response, look forward to the video.
All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum