While the discussion continues in the comments of the original expanded/four factors stats post, below is the expanded Wizards half of the box score for the 10/14 Wiz-Cavs game and a few comments.
My blog-editing skills are sub-par, so in addition to providing the box score in the below, here is an html spreadsheet version: Wizards-Cavaliers 10/14 Preseason Box Score
| Washington vs Cleveland (10/14/2009) - Preseason | |||||||||||||||||||
|
. |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
. |
PLAYER | MIN | FGM-A | 3PM-A | Fouls Drawn | FTM-A | +/- | PTS | OREB | AST | TO | STL | TO Created | DREB | BLK | FGMA-A | 3PMA-A | PF | FTAM-A |
|
. |
Jamison | 7 | 1-2 | 0-0 | 0 | 0-0 | -6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 1 | 2-2 |
|
. |
Blatche | 30 | 6-10 | 0-0 | 2 | 4-4 | 8 | 16 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 2-7 | 1-2 | 3 | 2-2 |
|
. |
Oberto | 24 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 1 | 0-0 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 2 | 0 | 4-7 | 0-0 | 1 | 0-2 |
|
. |
Arenas | 24 | 4-10 | 1-2 | 6 | 9-11 | 6 | 18 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3-5 | 1-2 | 5 | 3-5 |
|
. |
Butler | 24 | 5-6 | 0-0 | 2 | 2-4 | 6 | 12 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 5-7 | 2-3 | 3 | 2-3 |
|
. |
Miller | 30 | 9-12 | 5-5 | 5 | 1-3 | 9 | 24 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 5 | 0 | 5-11 | 2-4 | 4 | 2-5 |
|
. |
Stevenson | 24 | 2-5 | 2-4 | 0 | 0-0 | -1 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2-6 | 1-2 | 1 | 2-2 |
|
. |
Foye | 24 | 6-10 | 0-1 | 7 | 9-9 | -1 | 21 | 0 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3-7 | 1-4 | 3 | 2-2 |
|
. |
McGee | 24 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 1 | 0-0 | -1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 7-13 | 0-1 | 1 | 0-0 |
|
. |
Young | 11 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 0 | 0-0 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1-1 | 1-1 | 2 | 1-1 |
|
. |
Davis | 9 | 0-2 | 0-0 | 0 | 0-0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0-3 | 0-0 | 0 | 0-1 |
|
. |
McGuire | 9 | 1-3 | 0-0 | 0 | 0-0 | -7 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2-3 | 0-1 | 0 | 0-0 |
|
. |
Team | 0 | 4-6 | 3-4 | 0-1 | ||||||||||||||
|
. |
|||||||||||||||||||
|
. |
240 | 38-69 | 8-12 | 24 | 25-31 | 109 | 1 | 23 | 14 | 11 | 22 | 26 | 4 | 38-78 | 12-24 | 24 | 16-26 | ||
|
. |
7 unforced | ||||||||||||||||||
|
. |
55.1% | 66.7% | 80.6% | 48.7% | 50% | ||||||||||||||
Some methodology notes:
Both Rook and I separately tracked the game. (I did track the Cavs' side as well, but have not had time to present the information.) For those interested in how hard this is to implement and how much judgment is involved, I'll note that our separate tracking yielded very few differences, even though Rook was not necessarily working from the same set of rules on assigning responsibility for help and ball movement that I was. The two main differences would be: (1) he assigned all shots to an individual player, while I used the team category. This mostly was an issue for ball movement leading to wide-open Cavs 3-pt attempts. There were several that Rook counted against Miller that I counted as "Team" since Miller was legitimately off helping elsewhere and was unable to recover. (2) I had McGee come out a bit better than Rook did, as there were two made baskets that I counted against the perimeter defender for getting beat, that Rook counted against McGee because McGee did get into the area enough to take a swing at the ball. The expanded box reflects my approach on both of these, but much thanks for Rook's work tracking and putting together the expanded sheet.
Some game notes:
- Butler has had very inefficient FG defense in both games, which appears to be a product of drifting too far off his man when his man doesn't have the ball.
- Blatche has been solid, though perhaps a little limited. He is still certainly subject to criticism for his technique in some respects, and he probably should be getting to more spots on help (note that McGee essentially doubles Blatche in FG Attempted Against), but he again managed both to generate turnovers and use his length to encourage some misses.
- McGee is ACTIVE. Of course, his FGAA number is inflated some by allowing Z to get offensive putbacks too frequently, but still. Between his active help defense (which is good) and his failure to deny people the ball (which is bad), he ends up involved in a lot of plays.
- Not an "expanded" item, but the Four Factors category that scares me with this team is the absence of offensive rebounding and the lack of strength on the defensive boards. The Cavs had 10 more shot attempts. I don't think that's a sustainable way to win. They pulled it off in this game because....
- This team can shoot jumpshots. The Cavs' interior defenders all posted few FGAA with relatively low percentages of makes by the Wiz, but the perimeter players got killed.
- The perimeter rotations need to tighten up. Allowing 4 uncontested three-pt attempts is not good. Those resulted in 9 points and probably made this game closer than it should have been.