0 Points

Search this Topic:

Add Reply New Topic

Bob Sturm Writes On The Mavs' Long-Distance Shooting: Meet The Metric 'ADS'

Author

Comment

dbmrfish

Bob Sturm Writes On The Mavs' Long-Distance Shooting: Meet The Metric 'ADS'

Lead

[-]

(05/03/10 03:26)

Head Honcho and Chief Bottle Washer

Tags : None

Remove this ad

Bob Sturm Writes On The Mavs' Long-Distance Shooting: Meet The Metric 'ADS'

By Bob Sturm - Special To DallasBasketball.com
In watching another Mavericks playoff disaster, I have had this twitch inside me to pursue something that has troubled me for almost a decade of watching Mavericks Basketball.
If you have heard the show at all after Mavericks playoff games going back to the Michael Finley-Don Nelson era, you certainly have heard me say, "The Mavs cannot win by trading 22-footers for 2-footers." What that means to me is simply this: The Dirk Mavs seem to design offenses that free Dirk and his mates up for open perimeter looks. This has served them well many nights in the last decade, but as is the case with any perimeter-based offense, there are just nights where you cannot "throw it in the ocean."

The Full Story

JanFan

[-]

(05/03/10 03:35)

DB Cadet

It's great to have a way to quantify how many jump shots are being taken and their impact on the game. Very interesting read, and I look forward to the next installments.

HakeemFan

[-]

(05/03/10 03:49)

DB Member

Very interesting read.

DeeKay

[-]

(05/03/10 03:51)

Does Bob realize or even care that his 12:00 show not starting really until 12:20 make it unlistenable anymore?

JanFan

[-]

(05/03/10 03:53)

DB Cadet

It looks like this could be useful information for the team's stat guys. I hope it makes its way to Cuban and the coaches.

mavsfan81

[-]

(05/03/10 04:02)

This is really great stuff. I think some of this data is misleading.

-It's worth noting that in only 1/3rd of the games did the Spurs actually have "shorter" shots than us (that were significant). But, on the other hand, if the Spurs drive and kick for a 15 footer, and we just jack up a 15 footer, it is reflected the same in these statistics.

I also think that he kind of "cherry picked" stats for his analysis. For example, on his Game 3 analysis, he writes that:

Remember Game 3 in San Antonio? The game made famous by Manu's broken nose, JJ Barea's 32-minute stint, Danny Crawford's record continuing in Mavs games, and the Mavs fade in the fourth tells us plenty:

He correctly points out that the Mavs' faded in the fourth quarter when they 14.0 to 10.5 distance differential. But, he ignored the fact that the worst offensive quarter the Mavs had in that game was the 1st, where they took their closest shots (10.1). The point totals in that game were 16, 28, 26, 20, the distances attempted were 10.1, 14.5, 13.4, 14.1, and the point differentials were -7,+4, +7,-8. In that game, there appeared to be no correlation at all between effective shooting and the distance of shots taken. In fact, the same is true of the Spurs, whose point totals were 23, 24, 19, 28 and their distances were 11.6, 10.1, 9.3, 10.5. I think if anything was proven here, it's that to play proper offense, you need a proper mix of jump shooting and attacking, and everyone (myself included) saying that we need to attack the rim, attack the rim, attack the rim, then attack the rim again is probably wrong. We needed to attack more, and make more jumpers.

YaMean

[-]

(05/03/10 04:04)

Good stuff, it puts statistical evidence behind what we felt we already knew about the Mavs. A few other things off of the top of my head that would be interesting to look at with ADS:

-- ADS of each Mav, and compare that to the ADS of the top 3 other players in the league of the same position.
-- Also compare the ADS of each Mav (and top 3 players for each position) to their offensive efficiency ratings.
-- This may take a while, but ADS of Mavs vs. their opponents for every game of the last season (or maybe just do the all the games of the past 3-5 post-seasons) and how it correlated to W/L and also final scores and/or point differential. (wonder how Orlando would mess up this rating with their dependency on 3s)
-- ADS of each team over the regular season (or playoffs) and correlation to their final record/seeding, and playoff success, so we can see how the Mavs ADS compared to the other teams and how it does or doesn't impact success.

While it is a simple stat, I think that if the stat showed overwhelming alignment between success (for both teams and players individually) to lower ADS scores, it would be a powerful message to both the Mavs players and coaches, and could really help them focus in on improving ADS by position, by player, etc. to get the overall ADS down. Not sure if you could actually change the players tendencies, but it at least puts some data for the coaches to put behind their "take it to the hole" speeches.

bk4mavs

[-]

(05/03/10 04:16)

mavsfan81 wrote:
This is really great stuff. I think some of this data is misleading.

-It's worth noting that in only 1/3rd of the games did the Spurs actually have "shorter" shots than us (that were significant). But, on the other hand, if the Spurs drive and kick for a 15 footer, and we just jack up a 15 footer, it is reflected the same in these statistics.

I also think that he kind of "cherry picked" stats for his analysis. For example, on his Game 3 analysis, he writes that:

Remember Game 3 in San Antonio? The game made famous by Manu's broken nose, JJ Barea's 32-minute stint, Danny Crawford's record continuing in Mavs games, and the Mavs fade in the fourth tells us plenty:

He correctly points out that the Mavs' faded in the fourth quarter when they 14.0 to 10.5 distance differential. But, he ignored the fact that the worst offensive quarter the Mavs had in that game was the 1st, where they took their closest shots (10.1). The point totals in that game were 16, 28, 26, 20, the distances attempted were 10.1, 14.5, 13.4, 14.1, and the point differentials were -7,+4, +7,-8. In that game, there appeared to be no correlation at all between effective shooting and the distance of shots taken. In fact, the same is true of the Spurs, whose point totals were 23, 24, 19, 28 and their distances were 11.6, 10.1, 9.3, 10.5. I think if anything was proven here, it's that to play proper offense, you need a proper mix of jump shooting and attacking, and everyone (myself included) saying that we need to attack the rim, attack the rim, attack the rim, then attack the rim again is probably wrong. We needed to attack more, and make more jumpers.

I agree with what you're saying here. When Kidd drives, defenses know it is to kick it back out, so there is little to no collapse of the defense to contest the shot or get in rebounding position, so when he passes it out, no real daylight has been created for a jumpshot. When Roddy or JJ drives, there is an actual threat to finish at the rim, and so defenses have to react and more space opens up for the jumpshooters.

mavsfan81

[-]

(05/03/10 04:27)

If anything, he proved that there is no correlation between taking jumpers and our point totals. He went in depth on 3 games and there was zero correlation between taking shorter shots and scoring points:

Quarter	Distance	Point Total
1-Game 3	10.1	16
2-Game 3	14.5	28
3-Game 3	13.4	26
4-Game 3	14	20
1-Game 5	12.9	27
2-Game 5	12.6	26
3-Game 5	14.5	29
4-Game 5	18.6	21
1-Game 6	14.2	8
2-Game 6	11	26
3-Game 6	13.2	29
4-Game 6	15.8	24

EDIT: There is an error in my numbers. Ignore for a second while I fix it.
EDIT2: Numbers are fixed.

Last Edited By: mavsfan81 05/03/10 04:32. Edited 1 times.

newkidd07

[-]

(05/03/10 04:47)

I think if there was a way to weigh FG% with the ADS stat, some of the inconsistencies might be filtered out. That way, you could examine how often they shoot from outside & how often it works out in their favor. If it is less than 50% in the playoffs, then there is no wonder we keep getting bounced in the first round since the opposing team would conceivably start pushing the shot outward through defensive adjustment. If you're raining 3's like Roddy did against GS though, your ADS will be high but your FG% should be a little higher as well. I don't know. It just seems like it might be a better gauge than pts scored.

mavsfan81

[-]

(05/03/10 04:48)

Remove this ad

newkidd07 wrote:
I think if there was a way to weigh FG% with the ADS stat, some of the inconsistencies might be filtered out. That way, you could examine how often they shoot from outside & how often it works out in their favor. If it is less than 50% in the playoffs, then there is no wonder we keep getting bounced in the first round since the opposing team would conceivably start pushing the shot outward through defensive adjustment. If you're raining 3's like Roddy did against GS though, your ADS will be high but your FG% should be a little higher as well. I don't know. It just seems like it might be a better gauge than pts scored.

I actually think you need to gauge it by personnel on the court. When we are shooting a bunch of jumpers in the first, that means guys like Marion are shooting jumpers. Whereas, when you have Barea and Jet out there, a better shot might be a jumper. Frankly, when you look at our first quarter point totals, Carlisle needs to have his head examined for not benching Marion and starting another offensive player.

Jay in Ft Worth

[-]

(05/03/10 04:58)

Snidely Whiplash

SA's ability to have free reign in the paint hurt Dallas' chances. Matt Bonner was taking it to the rack with impunity in game 5.

bevomav

[-]

(05/03/10 04:59)

The eye opening thing to me is it proves the Mavs don't shoot any more jump shots than the Spurs..Most games were close..

The Spurs just hit more..

Jay in Ft Worth

[-]

(05/03/10 05:06)

Snidely Whiplash

Bob, say a little more about this:

On the other end of the court - perhaps, again partly because you have a 7-foot power forward named Dirk - the Mavericks are usually not able to force playoff opponents to settle for jump shots in the 4th Quarter. Too many times, whether it was Mike Bibby, Tony Parker, Chris Paul, Dwyane Wade, Baron Davis, Manu Ginobili or someone else, the penetration into the paint doomed the Mavs when the game turned into a half court match of wits.

These playoff games often come down to a contest of execution in the half-court game. On offense, The Mavericks' best chance was the high pick and roll of Nash/Dirk or Terry/Dirk. On Defense, the inability to force contested jump shots, put the pressure on the offense to never lose serve. To make matters worse, the offense would not draw many fouls. The defense would be under constant stress as slashers ate the Mavs for lunch.

This seems to me to be such a huge issue, but I usually tick people off by talking about it. So maybe if a reasonable person talked about it (not an idiot like me) then maybe we could actually discuss it around here. I polarize too easily.

ravindersingh

[-]

(05/03/10 05:09)

DeeKay wrote:
Does Bob realize or even care that his 12:00 show not starting really until 12:20 make it unlistenable anymore?

what does the time have to do with anything? do your ears turn off at 12:20?

YaMean

[-]

(05/03/10 05:12)

bevomav wrote:
The eye opening thing to me is it proves the Mavs don't shoot any more jump shots than the Spurs..Most games were close..

The Spurs just hit more..

live by the jumper, die by the jumper!

markus1234

[-]

(05/03/10 05:20)

DB Member

This is nothing new to me.

Jet and JJB are soft jumpshooters come playoff time.

Dirk is also a jumpshooter, but HE MAKES THEM. The problem are his teammates and the front office /coach who keeps them on the floor, and a guy like Roddy on the bench...

Just comparee manu to Jet/JJB on both ends. nuff said...

mavsfan81

[-]

(05/03/10 06:00)

bevomav wrote:
The eye opening thing to me is it proves the Mavs don't shoot any more jump shots than the Spurs..Most games were close..

The Spurs just hit more..

Yes. It's funny how all the data clearly points to the Mavs not taking more jumpers than the Spurs, and that taking closer shots does not lead to the Mavs scoring more points, yet the author here cherry picked data to support his original hypothesis (that the Mavs don't drive as much as the Spurs and this is why they get into trouble), and everyone here seems to be saying, "finally, proof that they just launch jumpers", when the data actually points to the opposite. If anything, this shows the Mavs need better jump shooters.

Rasheeds Big White Spot

[-]

(05/03/10 06:01)

To me, Bob Sturm has always looked like a perfect storm combination of all the people/characters from "Goonies".

Last Edited By: Rasheeds Big White Spot 05/03/10 06:08. Edited 1 times.

1techsan

[-]

(05/03/10 06:04)

DB's Mr. Moose

Which one is Dan?

investor

[-]

(05/03/10 06:06)

Remove this ad

Interesting post. With a lot of work, you could get a sample big enough to see how you statistic was correlated with regular season wins and playoff series wins.

One thing -- a small point -- Average Distance per Shot is redundant. Average Shot Distance (ASD) or Distance per Shot (DPS) mean the same thing; either would be better.

Yuku free message boards

Bob Sturm Writes On The Mavs' Long-Distance Shooting: Meet The Metric 'ADS'

Bob Sturm Writes On The Mavs' Long-Distance Shooting: Meet The Metric 'ADS'

Bob Sturm Writes On The Mavs' Long-Distance Shooting: Meet The Metric 'ADS'

The Full Story