Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Diego Sanchez and the Dangers of Fame in MMA

With Great Volume Comes ... Great Efficiency?

Editor's Note: Bwoodsxyz writes a weekly stat-oriented column for Bullets Forever.  It appears every Wednesday at noon. 

No attempts at grand pronouncements this week.  Let's just play with some Gilbert Arenas-related charts instead. 

I recently came across this nice piece at GravityandLevity on the "Ewing Theory Paradox," speculating that the reason some teams see an apparent improvement after losing a key offensive player might be that the team's scoring efficiency is not hurt by the loss.  It is worth a read, but I'm most interested in one piece of it for now.  Part of the analysis involves the diminishing returns that result when there is an increase in a player's FG attempts.  Upping the volume hurts efficiency.

Star-divide

On the "Ewing Paradox" page are several charts mapping shots per game and FG%, by season (each season is a data point) for Patrick Ewing, Kevin Garnett, Kobe Bryant,* and Ray Allen.  The charts are used to make the point that if a player is called on to bear a heavier scoring load, then their scoring efficiency will fall.  And, indeed, for each player shown, the general trend was that an increase in shots per game yielded a decrease in FG%.  One might quibble with the metrics here (if I were doing this from scratch, then usage vs true shooting % might be an interesting way to try it, but let's not get into that right now), but the basic point is logical enough and seems sound. 

Of course, as a Wizards' fan, it is hard not to start immediately thinking about Gilbert Arenas when the subject of shooting volume/shooting efficiency comes up

Here is the equivalent chart for Agent Zero, throwing out (as did GravityandLevity for the other players) seasons with low minutes/attempts:

Arenas by-season FG Attempts and %s

Oddly, but somehow not surprisingly, this shows a positive relationship between shots per game and shooting percentage-i.e., his more efficient (by FG% alone) seasons are, generally speaking, the seasons he shot more. 

But, that's a very small sample size for the Agent.  And the result is largely dictated by that 39% season, Gilbert's first in Washington.  Regardless, 5 seasons with significant playing time is not nearly as significant as the data-rich charts for Shaq, Ewing, Ray Allen, and Kobe.

What if we break it down by game instead?  Here is an equivalent plot using Arenas's individual game stats from 05-06 and 06-07:

Arenas by-game FG attempts and %s 05-07

There are obviously a lot of data points here, and there is a lot of variability in shooting percentage from game to game for most any NBA player, but:  There is a clear positive relationship here with Hibachi taking MORE shots and making MORE of those shots

But maybe that is "normal" for players on a per-game basis.? Remember, those charts over at GravityandLevity were using entire seasons as data points.  Well, take a look at a season of Kobe:

Kobe 07-08

This is exactly what one would have expected--Kobe taking more shots generally equals Kobe shooting a lower percentage. Kobe's line trends the opposite of Gilbert's.

Does Arenas's increasing efficiency extend to those "quality shots" from beyond the arc?  It looks like it does:

Arenas 3-pt attempts and %s by game 05-07

And, even if we use a best-fitting-curve instead of best-fitting-line,**  we still show the same general trend, though with an added down-tick in efficiency after crossing the 11-3pt-attempt-in-a-game line:***

Arenas from 3 with curve

So, while you might expect that taking more shots, or attempting more threes, might lead to poor selection and decreased efficiency, this just hasn't been the case for Arenas.  Maybe he creates this relationship because he successfully recognizes when he will have mismatches and exploits them accordingly.  Maybe taking more shots helps him better find his rhythm.  Maybe on nights when he finds he isn't feeling it, he tends to take fewer shots.  Maybe it is coincidence, but that seems unlikely with this sample size of over 150 games.

Does he try to get his teammates more involved when he is shooting poorly?  Let's try to tell by mapping his assists with his FG%, again on a by-game basis for 05-06 and 06-07:

Arenas FG% and Assists by game 05-07

From this, there does not appear to be a strong tendency for Arenas to get more assists on the cold-shooting nights.****  Indeed, there is almost no correlation.  One possible explanation is that it might just be that, for Gilbert, his own scoring is critical to his ability to set up his teammates, and so he can not easily make up for his lost scoring production on cold-shooting nights by increasing his teammates' production.  Those in the "Arenas should shoot less and get his teammates involved more and the offense will run better" camp might have a little reason to worry if that's the case.  (Disclosure:  I'm not in that camp. And I am one of those who buys that his assists will probably go up some outside of the Princeton.)

Also, I'll take this opportunity to say I'm strongly in favor of bringing the "hockey assist" to basketball.  For all we know, while Gilbert did not get more direct assists when his own shot was off, he might have been creating a lot of opportunities that indirectly lead to baskets.  Indeed, while there is a positive correlation between how well Gilbert shot in a game and how well the team shot, it is not as strong as one might expect, and the team has had some very efficient scoring games even while Arenas struggled.  This chart maps the Team FG% on the Gilbert FG% by game for the 05-06 season:

Arenas FG% vs Team FG% 05-06

Of course, it helps here that (in general) when Arenas was cold he didn't keep shooting and dragging down the team percentages with even more inefficient volume.  There are other, better ways of trying to understand Arenas's impact on the offense, but that needs to be a post (or three) all its own sometime.

*          For anyone thinking that Gilbert Arenas does not belong on this list because he is *inefficient* and those guys are *efficient*-Arenas's career TS% and eFG% are the same as Kobe's career numbers and reasonably comparable to Garnett's.

**        I am kicking myself for losing my data set for FGA vs FG% before trying to fit a polynomial curve to it, but, just eyeballing it, I would expect the curve to be very little different from the best-fitting-line on that data set.

***      Ok, I'm not going to seriously argue that Gilbert's optimum number of 3-pt attempts per game is 10 . . . but I must admit I am intrigued.

****    It is probably just noise in the stats, but splitting it into the two component seasons indicates that in 05-06 the better he shot the fewer assists he had (which is what one might expect) while in 06-07 the better he shot the more assists he had (maybe you would explain that as meaning that when he shot well he opened things up for his teammates and got them more easy baskets?).  Speculations/explanations welcome.

Comment 31 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Outstanding work

Great stuff. Fascinating to see those charts. And thanks for saving my foot. If you hadn’t kicked yourself for not running the polynomial line, I was going to do it. :)

by TheSecretWeapon on Aug 12, 2009 1:24 PM EDT reply actions  

Question/Comment

You say:

There are obviously a lot of data points here, and there is a lot of variability in shooting percentage from game to game for most any NBA player, but: There is a clear positive relationship here with Hibachi taking MORE shots and making MORE of those shots.

The chart you use for this has one crazy outlier (close to 40 attempts and 60%), plus a few more datapoints on the high percentage side that, again, may be best characterized as outliers. Just eyeballing it, it seems possible that those few points may account for much of the upward trend in the line — thoughts?

Getting buckets since 2003.

by Icantfeelmyface on Aug 12, 2009 1:40 PM EDT reply actions  

Fair point, but even so

It certainly makes some difference. I’d like to be able to say precisely how much, but again—my data set got eaten by my computer after I produced the chart, so I can’t easily re-run the chart.

I will say this, however. That is just one data point out of 150 (equally weighted), so the impact is actually quite small. Even taking that out, the trend line would still be positive. And, if you take a look at Kobe, he has a nearly 40 shot, better than 50% game helping him out, in a smaller sample size, and STILL has his negative line. So, I think the trend for Gil is legit.

by bwoodsxyz on Aug 12, 2009 3:18 PM EDT up reply actions  

There are some pretty powerful implications to consider here

Namely, if Arenas is better when he shoots more, and if the Wizards are also better (up for debate), then wouldn’t it make sense to surround Arenas with more catch-and-shoot guys?

To answer that question, I’d be really curious to see the curves for Caron Butler and Antawn Jamison. I suspect Butler’s curve is more conventional — he gets worse as he shoots more. I’m not so sure the same could be said for Antawn. I’d expect his curve to be pretty flat, though I could be very wrong about that.

Either way, we have a problem, IMO, if either of them displays a curve like Arenas’. It’s hard to get all three the shots they need to be as efficient as possible.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Aug 12, 2009 2:05 PM EDT reply actions  

Why catch and shoot?

I’m not sure that, even assigning the data significance, it points to catch and shoot guys. I think what it would mean (assuming Butler/Jamison have diminishing returns, which I’ll check), is that you would sooner allocate more shots to Gil than to them. I don’t think it means anything for what style they are playing.

I actually think you could turn it around and, looking at the assist chart, say that you should have Gilbert with guys who can create their own shots, since it is less than evident that he can increase his shot-creating for others when his own shot isn’t falling.

by bwoodsxyz on Aug 12, 2009 3:24 PM EDT up reply actions  

Yeah, true

Catch and shoot is the wrong terminology, like you said. Shouldn’t have phrased it that way. Arenas clearly needs guys who can pass, as we’ve discussed here before.

I guess I’m concerned about shot distribution then. If you assume as your research indicates that Arenas shoots better when he gets more shots, would it then follow that the best complements are players who don’t need to jack shots up to get to their optimal efficiency (like Gilbert)? That’s why I’m curious to see whether we see similar diminishing returns for Caron, Antawn and even guys like Miller and Foye.

This is seriously a fascinating question/discussion. Clearly, Arenas is very unique. How do you optimize your team’s efficiency with a guy that unique?

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Aug 12, 2009 3:38 PM EDT up reply actions  

Caution Advised

I’m realizing that someone might read this and get the idea that I’m saying the evidence suggests Arenas should be encouraged to shoot more. That isn’t the case. To be clear, I think this trend is best taken as evidence, if of anything, that the Hibachi should have the freedom to select its own setting. He is apparently doing a good job, in the aggregate, of allocating shots to himself.

by bwoodsxyz on Aug 12, 2009 4:54 PM EDT up reply actions  

That is a very good point

One implication of the data is that Gil has a high enough basketball IQ to adjust his production on a game-to-game basis, varying his production (in an abstract sense) on factors such as defensive schemes and who is guarding him. It seems that when a game requires or allows it, he takes more shots, but not at the expense of efficiency. What it really implies is that with Gil, there isn’t much “shot jacking.” When he’s shooting a lot there is probably a good basketball reason for doing so.

Getting buckets since 2003.

by Icantfeelmyface on Aug 12, 2009 6:11 PM EDT up reply actions  

Ah

You already basically said all this in your post – my fault for skimming at the end.

Getting buckets since 2003.

by Icantfeelmyface on Aug 12, 2009 9:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

Why?

Why would you assume that the reason for the increase in productivity is a result of the increase in the number of shots?

Why wouldn’t you theorize , as I have (and bwoodsxyz also said) , that the most likely reason for the numbers being as they are is that Arenas is a very smart basketball player – and knows when he’s “on”, and when he’s not….. and adjusts the number of shots he takes accordingly?

Maybe on nights when he finds he isn’t feeling it, he tends to take fewer shots

I mean, doesn’t that make more sense than any other explanation?

Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......

by Rook6980 on Aug 12, 2009 4:57 PM EDT up reply actions  

See my reply to bwoods right above you for another reason

But yes, this reason is another good explanation, and just bolsters the fact that he has a high basketball IQ (offensively).

Getting buckets since 2003.

by Icantfeelmyface on Aug 12, 2009 6:13 PM EDT up reply actions  

I never said the increase in productivity is "as a result" of shooting more

That indicates the reason for his improved shooting efficiency is clear. That’s not the case. What is very clear is that the data indicates Arenas shoots better when he shoots more. Bwoods said it himself.

There is a clear positive relationship here with Hibachi taking MORE shots and making MORE of those shots.

As far as the reason, I think each of bwoods’ alternative explanations (the finding his rhythm explanation, the mismatch explanation) make equally as much sense as the “he takes fewer shots when he isn’t feeling it” theory. At the very least, I don’t think the answer is as simple as picking one of the three reasons for this data. Gilbert’s too idiosyncratic for that to be the case. It’s probably a combination of rhythm, situation and basketball smarts. It’s probably somewhere in the middle of the “shot jacking” vs. “perfect shot distribution” spectrum.

Let me be clear too: I don’t think this is a negative. But regardless, it’s still an interesting point that goes back to the article cited. That article attempted to answer the question of how often you should have Patrick Ewing shoot to maximize his efficiency. With Arenas, the answer is complex because the data suggests the answer is to have him shoot more. Obviously, there are complexities in reason that need to be addressed, but the larger question still looms when thinking about who is best to surround Arenas with.

That’s why I asked the question I did, and I think bwoods’ answer makes some sense. My concern, though, is that if you want guys similar to Gilbert, then how do you get the most out of them when they tend to shoot better when they get more shots?

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Aug 12, 2009 6:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

You surround him with guys

like Caron who have a great all-around game and can get his shots from various spots on the floor (3-point, mid-range, to the hoop, post-up, etc…) – and with Jamison, who, despite being undersized, has a wonderful low post game….

Then surround them with shooters, and intangible guys…. low-usage guys that don’t need the ball to contribute. Offensive rebounders. Shot blockers. 3-point shooters… etc… (ie: the Haywoods, Mike Millers, Randy Foyes, Deshawn Stevensons, McGees, and Dom McGuires)…..

Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......

by Rook6980 on Aug 12, 2009 7:42 PM EDT up reply actions  

So basically, surround him with everything?

You could plug those same attributes in to any scorer. Give him some guys with multi-faceted skills. Give him some guys who are catch-and-shoot players, some offensive rebounders, etc. Again, that doesn’t really tell me much. Every scorer wants a three-point sniper. Every scorer wants a guy with a low-post game. Every scorer wants a second scorer.

(In fact, it argues that you want several initiators, not just one, with a couple low-usage guys. That’s all well and good, but it’s best suited for a guy whose efficiency wears off with increased usage. Is it best suited for an idiosyncratic guy like Gilbert)?

But what’s the answer to the question in bwoods’ terms from the original post, i.e., what type of curves do you want guys around Gilbert to have? The more I think about it, the more I think you want guys with curves as flat as possible. Guys whose shooting efficiency isn’t altered by usage. Because Gil has such inconsistent usage game-to-game relative to other stars (for whatever reason, good or bad), I’d think you want guys who are consistent in their scoring efficiency no matter the number of shots.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Aug 12, 2009 8:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

You could plug those same attributes in to any scorer.

No – not really. For instance, surround Kobe Bryant with low-medium usage guys that can shoot the 3 (Fisher, Vujacic) rebound (Odom, Gasol, Bynum), play defense (Artest, Odom, Fisher), crash the offensive boards (Gasol, Odom), score in the low post (Bynum, Gasol) – and you get a Championship team….

Surround Michael Redd (a “scorer”) with the same type guys, and you get a very different scenario.

Surround Arenas with the same type guys, and it’s a Championship team… Where I think the Wizards are falling short of Championship contention (this year) is in defensive rebounding and perimeter defense (depending on how well Flip can implement his zones)….

Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......

by Rook6980 on Aug 16, 2009 11:16 AM EDT up reply actions  

Surrounding Gilbert

I’m thinking the ideal might be to have other players who either have no correlation or a positive correlation (similar to Gilbert) with him. If every player on a team puts up stats showing a positive correlation, I’m thinking that would be a very good sign that shots are being distributed efficiently. It would mean (in general) guys are taking more shots in games when they are scoring more successfully. That’s what you want as a coach, right?

by bwoodsxyz on Aug 12, 2009 5:22 PM EDT up reply actions  

Couple this with the graphic in Macrophenomal

showing that Gil gets more accurate the deeper the the three pointer, and you get the conclusion that Gil should do nothing but shoot a lot of very deep threes. This could be awesome. Let’s try it in a preseason game.

by Aldo on Aug 12, 2009 2:41 PM EDT reply actions  

If he doesn't bother to bring the ball up...

…and just heaves it from the opposite free throw line, he should be able to play 48mpg.

by RamVA on Aug 12, 2009 3:04 PM EDT up reply actions  

Which is why stats can be so misleading

Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......

by Rook6980 on Aug 12, 2009 4:59 PM EDT up reply actions  

Assignment

Run charts for some of the other Wiz — especially for Butler, Jamison, and Young.

by TheSecretWeapon on Aug 12, 2009 2:55 PM EDT reply actions  

Noted, but you may have to wait a week

These things take some time to put together, but I’ll try to come back with a more complete set for next week’s post.

by bwoodsxyz on Aug 12, 2009 3:21 PM EDT up reply actions  

I'm curious

to see the chart of the REST of the team’s shooting % when he takes a lot vs few shots. I’d like to see that data about a lot of high volume shooters.

by MR on Aug 12, 2009 6:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

Too funny…

As always bwoodsxyz, an excellent piece. I tend to agree with one of your tenants that Arenas creates the relationship between higher volume = a higher shooting percentage. I believe that when he’s “on”, he knows it and shoots more, and when he’s not feeling it, he just takes fewer shots. (Apparently, unlike Kobe……. who thinks that if he’s missing, he should just keep jacking them up until he gets hot…. “Quality shots”, Kobe… “Quality Shots”)

Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......

by Rook6980 on Aug 12, 2009 4:52 PM EDT reply actions  

I think you hit it right here:
Maybe he creates this relationship because he successfully recognizes when he will have mismatches and exploits them accordingly. Maybe taking more shots helps him better find his rhythm. Maybe on nights when he finds he isn’t feeling it, he tends to take fewer shots. Maybe it is coincidence, but that seems unlikely with this sample size of over 150 games.

I think Gilbert is more cognizant of how hot he is and under Eddie he was given more free rein to ride out his hot streaks than other players. Sure, he still had nights where he tried to shoot his way out of cold snaps, but I think he has a better grasp of when he’s hot and how to take advantage of it.

Bullets Forever: A blog dedicated to the Washington Wizards with analysis, commentary, and more YouTube videos than your eyes can handle.

by Jake Whitacre on Aug 12, 2009 7:31 PM EDT reply actions  

Another reason why I love this guy

This just confirms what I’ve always thought of Arenas: He’s a very smart basketball player with a crazy work ethic.

I get sick of all the media obsession with quirkiness or ‘gilbertology,’ or that he needs someone like Avery Johnson to ‘control’ him. He knows what the hell he’s doing and is willing to work his ass off to get the team some wins.

Great piece bwoods.

by se7en on Aug 12, 2009 9:03 PM EDT reply actions  

I think that some of it is that Arenas plays point guard

Not to make an overly-simplistic reply to a really meticulous and well thought out post, but all of the guys mentioned are off-ball players. Yeah, offenses are run through Kobe, Garnett, and Ewing, but they’re not necessarily bringing the ball up the court every time. Arenas, because he plays point guard, has the option to shoot the ball literally every time the Wizards get a possession, so I think it should at least in theory be easier for him to start taking a lot of shots when he feels like he’s heating up, whereas there are checks and balances with someone like Kobe or Garnett.

by pantslessyoda1 on Aug 12, 2009 9:32 PM EDT reply actions  

Thoughts

First, thanks for pointing out GravityandLevity’s article. Great theory.

I have to ask about this:

There is a clear positive relationship here with Hibachi taking MORE shots and making MORE of those shots.
Gilbert’s plots don’t reveal any pattern by eye — I’m guessing the R-Squareds were infinitesimal (meaning increased shots or decreasing them really doesn’t have much impact). Did you check for significance? The program plotting a positively sloped line doesn’t necessarily mean there’s actually a relationship — it’s just plotting the most predictive line (which might not be at all predictive). I understand you not putting R-squareds and alpha levels in here, but did they pass muster?

I think when you look at the per-game figures, you run into several confounds — the first of which is the player’s mentality. I can’t even count how many times I’ve seen Kobe shoot horribly int the 1st half and shoot more in the 2nd because he has to get his. He’s not shooting worse because he’s shooting more — it’s the other way around. In addition, there’s the fact that when teams are doing poorly, most great players try to do more, which could be wholly responsible for the trend you see for most of these guys (“my team is struggling, so I guess I have to step up” – usually against a tough D). The question is, why doesn’t Gil show the same pattern? I personally think it’s a result of his mentality. He tends to take more shots when things are going well, and doesn’t seem to have that “there’s no way I’m letting us lose this game” pitbull mentality in him, both of which would lead to a more even, or even slightly positive pattern.

Even looking across seasons I see an alternative explantion to GravityandLevity’s theory: think about what happens when a star has worse teammates — wouldn’t it make sense for that player to shoot more, and that he would shoot more poorly? (I’d be curious to see how throwing team winning percentage in there as a control variable affected these relationships). And for Arenas there’s one important difference from the rest of those players — all his seasons were from a period where he was progressing as a player and earning more shots – I’m assuming the higher-shot-attempt seasons were the later ones?

I’m not trying to criticize — I’m just trying to consider the possibilities and offer what I think is the most likely explanation. I like the idea and I appreciate you running the numbers!

by steadyhand on Aug 13, 2009 1:31 AM EDT reply actions  

great piece

very nice. I liked how you went forward and mapped his assists out, to see if he went into “playmaker” mode when not shooting well. Arenas is an oddity, shooting better with more shots, and shooting better % on 3’s the farther out he gets!

by tkired on Aug 13, 2009 4:40 AM EDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Washington Wizards.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Randy Wittman Seems to "Get It"

Recent FanPosts

Small
Misusing Vesely
Tumblr_lpbvdtzztv1qc7c5to1_500_small
Best 2012 Draft lottery options?
Steves_small
Attention Mr. Stern - The Big Markets will kill the NBA
Tumblr_lpbvdtzztv1qc7c5to1_500_small
Kaman worth going after?
Small
The Wiz have 4 players worth keeping.
Steve_small
This Is Where I Stand
Stan_marsh_small
Is Kyrie Irving already 'All Star' good?
Unseld_small
Keep the Three Burritoes
Small
Rebuilding the Washington Wizards
Small
Should Wiz try a 2 PG lineup

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Editor-In-Chief

Headshot_small Mike Prada

Associate Editor

Small Vanilla Gorilla

248225_small Sean Fagan

Contributors

Jakesbshot_small Jake Whitacre

Mriggs_cartoon_2__small Rook6980

Addingmachine_small bwoodsxyz

Photo_on_2010-12-10_at_10 Bullet Nation in Exile