Warning: This post contains advanced stats. Proceed with caution.
Just renewed my Synergy subscription so I'll be able to provide "real-time" game recaps this season for you guys. The idea is that we'll be able to see patterns emerging over the course of the season. Has our post offense improved? Are we still one of the best spot-up teams? Those are the some of the "advanced" questions that Synergy can be used to answer.
If you haven't already, make sure to read my Advanced Stats Primer to get up to speed on PPP, Synergy, and other terminology you may not be familiar with.
Our offensive efficiency was good overall at 0.98 PPP. The PNR play was almost equally effective whether the ball handler or big took the shot. As usual, the team excelled in transition. Spot-up shooting was a weak spot, though.
|
PLAY |
%TIME |
# |
PPP |
|
Overall |
100.0% |
101 |
0.98 |
|
Isolation |
12.9% |
13 |
0.77 |
|
P&R Ball Handler |
7.9% |
8 |
1.38 |
|
Post-Up |
10.9% |
11 |
0.82 |
|
P&R Roll Man |
5.0% |
5 |
1.40 |
|
Spot-Up |
15.8% |
16 |
0.88 |
|
Off Screen |
5.0% |
5 |
1.20 |
|
Cut |
14.9% |
15 |
0.93 |
|
Offensive Rebound |
3.0% |
3 |
0.00 |
|
Transition |
15.8% |
16 |
1.38 |
|
All Other Plays |
8.9% |
9 |
0.67 |
We held Chicago to 0.81 PPP overall, which is very good. We effectively stopped them on almost every play type, save for POST plays (no surprise there, really).
|
Overall |
100.0% |
110 |
0.81 |
|
Isolation |
7.3% |
8 |
0.50 |
|
P&R Ball Handler |
9.1% |
10 |
0.40 |
|
Post-Up |
9.1% |
10 |
1.20 |
|
P&R Roll Man |
3.6% |
4 |
1.50 |
|
Spot-Up |
23.6% |
26 |
0.92 |
|
Off Screen |
5.5% |
6 |
0.50 |
|
Cut |
10.0% |
11 |
0.73 |
|
Offensive Rebound |
10.0% |
11 |
0.82 |
|
Transition |
14.5% |
16 |
0.94 |
|
All Other Plays |
7.3% |
8 |
0.50 |
Here are the league average efficiencies from last season. You can use these to compare the values in the tables above. Blue line represents GSW's average.
Here are the league average rates (% of time each play was run) from last season. GSW is in blue.
1 recs | 18 comments
"We effectively stopped them on almost every play type, save for POST plays (no surprise there, really)."
The key there though is that the W’s bigs did an outstanding job of denying the ball to the post, which was risky but great strategy (based on what Kwame said after the game).
And really, “deny” is an understatement when Biedrins and Brown combined for 7 steals themselves. So although the Bulls were most efficient there last night, the Warriors did a great job of limiting the types of plays that hurt them.
Was a little surprised at how quickly the Bulls centers brought the ball down when they caught it (which was part of the problem), but those are the types of things good defensive teams take advantage of and the W’s did well did.
Would be interested in what the Bulls’ post up percentage (and other numbers) from last year just to get a sense of how well we took them out of what they “normally” liked to do.
Nate Parham - December 27, 2011
good points
In future posts, I will give opponents averages, too.
Evanz - December 27, 2011 via mobile
Exactly...
I’d guess the number of turnovers we created on the post entry pass more than made up for the inside efficiency. I’d be curious to see if Synergy counts those possessions as post plays, because they technically didn’t ever establish ball control in the post. I think I’ll have to break down and subscribe this season. Evan, are you liking synergy?
olympicmike - December 27, 2011
yes
I like
It’s $90, which seems reasonable to me
Evanz - December 27, 2011 via mobile
and it's $0 for me to read you posting them
Which I find even more reasonable!
tafkasam - December 27, 2011
+1
bigkino217 - December 27, 2011
hahaha, YES!!
Duby Dub Dubs - December 28, 2011
"I’d be curious to see if Synergy counts those possessions as post plays, because they technically didn’t ever establish ball control in the post."
Me too.
Based on those numbers, the answer would seem to be “no” though – 10 plays could not include the steals Andris/Kwame got and end up as 1.2 pts/poss could it?
Nate Parham - December 27, 2011
Really looking forward to seeing how this year’s defense shapes up to be any different or more effective than past years. My eye told me last night’s defense looked a lot like Don Nelson’s defense (creating possessions through turnovers) when it worked.
Doctor Kajita - December 27, 2011
I agree. We did add more defensive personnel, though, so we should be better defensively this season no matter what. Remains to be seen how much coaching makes a difference. Some promising signs, though – it seemed to me we created the TO’s last night without gambling too much/giving up position. In game 1, I really liked our defensive rebounding. We looked to be more physical down low and did better at keeping the other team from getting easy rebounding position. Last night we regressed in that area, though.
Missing Barry - December 27, 2011
This is what I was thinking too, that they’re playing a disciplined version of Don Nelson’s defense. However, it remains to be seen if “discipline,” “Don Nelson,” and “defense” can all be used in the same sentence going forward.
I do like Kwame Brown’s grown man rebounding though.
Doctor Kajita - December 27, 2011
"...they’re playing a disciplined version of Don Nelson’s defense."
That sounds like a better way of putting it ;)
But I don’t recall the team trapping as often/aggressively under Nellie… or bigs having so much responsibility to rotate… but maybe I just have a really hazy memory of defense being played under Nellie…
Nate Parham - December 27, 2011
Maybe not in recent years,
but that swarming defense that we had during our playoffs run was pretty aggressive and vicious. One guy would tie you up while another guy would come over and intercept your pass or just reach in and yank it from you. The defense we saw last night was pretty similar, though last night’s defense wasn’t quite as “swarming”.
IQofaWarrior - December 27, 2011
My eye told me last night’s defense looked a lot like Don Nelson’s defense (creating possessions through turnovers) when it worked.
I kinda got the same feeling. Couple that with the Bulls not taking us seriously until it was too late for them to re-group. They obviously had not scouted us much as they played right into our strengths and avoided our weaknesses.
Skeptic con Urquell - December 27, 2011
Like I mentioned in the recap...
That ‘07-’08 team was 2nd in steals and 1st in opponents turnovers. I’m not sure if there will always be as much of an emphasis on creating turnovers as there was last night, but it seems like a good fit for the personnel we have right now. It would do wonders for the offense too, because Monta is most effective on the break, and I can’t get enough of Steph tossing lobs from half court. :)
olympicmike - December 27, 2011
weren't they also like top 3 in blocks that year?
bigkino217 - December 27, 2011
I think a little moderation is justified in all the enthusiasm for the new defense.
The Bulls are not a particularly good offensive team. They’re a great defensive team. They ORTG was only 11th in the league last year despite a defense that caused a lot of misses and turnovers (eg: easy points on the other end off breaks).
I mean, yeah, it’s great to see good post defense. But it’s just one game.
Ronaldinho - December 27, 2011
Rec'd
Thanks for sharing Evanz, and giving us your analysis on the data/graphs as well.
bObaBaLLa - December 27, 2011
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Golden State Of Mind to post a comment.