The Lazy Statistician: STATRIBUTES SERIES PART 1 - SHOOTING
Posted: Mon Sep 11, 2017 5:00 pm
The Lazy Statistician, STATRIBUTES SERIES 1: SHOOTING PERCENTAGES
Welcome back to a new series by the Lazy Statistician. I'd like to introduce to you, the Statributes series. Long have I desired to know how attributes actually correlate with statistics and for more reasons than just being able to use a lazy portmanteau.
For this series, most of the work has gone on in the backend. I took last year's regular season stats (2015-2016) season and last year's attributes (at close of season) and smashed them together in a table so I could see how things relate to each other. I will be using this table for a number of upcoming articles and analyses, maybe even beyond this season. If that is the case, I might still draw from the 2015-2016 season instead of updating with this year's stats and attributes because that was a ton of work for a lazy statistician to do. Don't worry, though. The stats will still be thrown together without an optimal understanding of more advanced statistical methodology.
ANYWAY
In the first series, I'm taking a look at offense. Especially scoring. So as to let you dip your toe in the water with something not super-exciting, here's a look at free throw shooting. I've separated the players into their (past) current letter-grade bands, summing up their free throw makes and attempts and seeing what the average FT% is for people in each letter grade.
+---------+--------+
| ft_band | ft_pct |
+---------+--------+
| A | 0.8643 |
| B | 0.7634 |
| C | 0.6462 |
| D | 0.5269 |
| F | 0.4117 |
+---------+--------+
So that looks like it makes sense. Every letter grade you advance up in fts attribute points, you get loosely 10-12% bump in your free throw shooting percentage.
Next up, we'll look at three point percentage in the same way:
+---------+--------+
| tp_band | tp_pct |
+---------+--------+
| A | 0.4195 |
| B | 0.3626 |
| C | 0.3198 |
| D | 0.2571 |
| F | 0.1278 |
+---------+--------+
That makes a whole lot of sense, too. For every letter grade band you jump, you can expect a high level increase of about 5 percentage points to your three point percentage.
NOW HERE'S WHERE THINGS GET TRICKY
I thought that would follow through to inside scoring. A lot of GMs out there are big on that inside focus, and I've especially been using that with my team this year. But...
+----------+---------+
| ins_band | ins_pct |
+----------+---------+
| A | 0.6385 |
| B | 0.6277 |
| C | 0.6247 |
| D | 0.6333 |
| F | 0.6579 |
+----------+---------+
Alright, so throw out the F band. That's only Theron Shannon and Vernon Norman's combined 76 inside field goals attempted from last season. Everyone else had a higher inside rating.
Still, that's pretty nuts. I broke out my z-score calculator, looking at the sample sizes of inside field goals attempted and made, and the slim margins that the A band holds over the B band are not even statistically significant.
Then, I looked at other attributes to see if they had more of an effect on inside shooting percentage: height, jump, strength, offensive rebounding...nothing.
I went back and tried to set minimums for inside field goals attempted to clear out some of the noise...100, 300, 500...still no dice.
I even made a lazy scatterplot graph to see if visualizations helped identify some kind of trend.
The only thing that came close to setting my inside gameplanning nerves at ease was looking at per 36 minutes PPG.
+----------+---------------+
| ins_band | ppg_p36 |
+----------+---------------+
| A | 26.0982557500 |
| B | 18.6864100364 |
| C | 13.5331577733 |
| D | 11.1409735521 |
| F | 14.3538465000 |
+----------+---------------+
It should be noted that these numbers are pretty consistent if we throw out guys who played less than 12 mpg and even guys who played less than 24 minutes per game. Unfortunately, there are too many factors here to draw a real conclusion. A lot of dudes with A attributes in inside scoring are going to be keyed up or have teams focused on dishing them the ball a lot.
So what does that mean?
Does inside scoring potential matter? Probably, but maybe not as much as the other scoring potentials. Personally, I wouldn't go so far as to trade my inside specialists, but it IS making me think twice about how to spend my points (or how to save them for upcoming tax and insurance instead of making incremental gains to the INS ratings of my young guys who have room to grow).
In any case, I've got a lot of att's 'n' stats mashed together now. I've got per game, shooting, and efficiency stats all loaded up, and I've definitely got a few things I already want to look at next (especially considering athleticism), but if you have any specific things you'd like to see me zero in on, just ask!
Welcome back to a new series by the Lazy Statistician. I'd like to introduce to you, the Statributes series. Long have I desired to know how attributes actually correlate with statistics and for more reasons than just being able to use a lazy portmanteau.
For this series, most of the work has gone on in the backend. I took last year's regular season stats (2015-2016) season and last year's attributes (at close of season) and smashed them together in a table so I could see how things relate to each other. I will be using this table for a number of upcoming articles and analyses, maybe even beyond this season. If that is the case, I might still draw from the 2015-2016 season instead of updating with this year's stats and attributes because that was a ton of work for a lazy statistician to do. Don't worry, though. The stats will still be thrown together without an optimal understanding of more advanced statistical methodology.
ANYWAY
In the first series, I'm taking a look at offense. Especially scoring. So as to let you dip your toe in the water with something not super-exciting, here's a look at free throw shooting. I've separated the players into their (past) current letter-grade bands, summing up their free throw makes and attempts and seeing what the average FT% is for people in each letter grade.
+---------+--------+
| ft_band | ft_pct |
+---------+--------+
| A | 0.8643 |
| B | 0.7634 |
| C | 0.6462 |
| D | 0.5269 |
| F | 0.4117 |
+---------+--------+
So that looks like it makes sense. Every letter grade you advance up in fts attribute points, you get loosely 10-12% bump in your free throw shooting percentage.
Next up, we'll look at three point percentage in the same way:
+---------+--------+
| tp_band | tp_pct |
+---------+--------+
| A | 0.4195 |
| B | 0.3626 |
| C | 0.3198 |
| D | 0.2571 |
| F | 0.1278 |
+---------+--------+
That makes a whole lot of sense, too. For every letter grade band you jump, you can expect a high level increase of about 5 percentage points to your three point percentage.
NOW HERE'S WHERE THINGS GET TRICKY
I thought that would follow through to inside scoring. A lot of GMs out there are big on that inside focus, and I've especially been using that with my team this year. But...
+----------+---------+
| ins_band | ins_pct |
+----------+---------+
| A | 0.6385 |
| B | 0.6277 |
| C | 0.6247 |
| D | 0.6333 |
| F | 0.6579 |
+----------+---------+
Alright, so throw out the F band. That's only Theron Shannon and Vernon Norman's combined 76 inside field goals attempted from last season. Everyone else had a higher inside rating.
Still, that's pretty nuts. I broke out my z-score calculator, looking at the sample sizes of inside field goals attempted and made, and the slim margins that the A band holds over the B band are not even statistically significant.
Then, I looked at other attributes to see if they had more of an effect on inside shooting percentage: height, jump, strength, offensive rebounding...nothing.
I went back and tried to set minimums for inside field goals attempted to clear out some of the noise...100, 300, 500...still no dice.
I even made a lazy scatterplot graph to see if visualizations helped identify some kind of trend.
X: Inside FG%, Y: Ins Attribute Rating, Results: Kyrie Irving's perception of Earth
The only thing that came close to setting my inside gameplanning nerves at ease was looking at per 36 minutes PPG.
+----------+---------------+
| ins_band | ppg_p36 |
+----------+---------------+
| A | 26.0982557500 |
| B | 18.6864100364 |
| C | 13.5331577733 |
| D | 11.1409735521 |
| F | 14.3538465000 |
+----------+---------------+
It should be noted that these numbers are pretty consistent if we throw out guys who played less than 12 mpg and even guys who played less than 24 minutes per game. Unfortunately, there are too many factors here to draw a real conclusion. A lot of dudes with A attributes in inside scoring are going to be keyed up or have teams focused on dishing them the ball a lot.
So what does that mean?
Does inside scoring potential matter? Probably, but maybe not as much as the other scoring potentials. Personally, I wouldn't go so far as to trade my inside specialists, but it IS making me think twice about how to spend my points (or how to save them for upcoming tax and insurance instead of making incremental gains to the INS ratings of my young guys who have room to grow).
In any case, I've got a lot of att's 'n' stats mashed together now. I've got per game, shooting, and efficiency stats all loaded up, and I've definitely got a few things I already want to look at next (especially considering athleticism), but if you have any specific things you'd like to see me zero in on, just ask!