You Are Here > Basketball-Reference.com > BBR Blog > NBA and College Basketball Analysis

SITE NEWS: We are moving all of our site and company news into a single blog for Sports-Reference.com. We'll tag all Basketball-Reference content, so you can quickly and easily find the content you want.

Also, our existing Basketball-Reference blog rss feed will be redirected to the new site's feed.

Basketball-Reference.com // Sports Reference

For more from Neil, check out his new work at BasketballProspectus.com.

Archive for April, 2011

Playoff Preview: #2 LA Lakers vs. #7 New Orleans

15th April 2011

Los Angeles Lakers

57-25, 1st in NBA Pacific Division (Schedule and Results)
Coach: Phil Jackson (57-25)

PTS/G: 101.5 (9th of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 95.4 (8th of 30)
SRS: 6.01 (3rd of 30) ▪ Pace: 90.7 (21st of 30)
Off Rtg: 111.0 (6th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 104.3 (6th of 30)
Expected W-L: 58-24 (3rd of 30)

Arena: STAPLES Center ▪ Attendance: 778,777 (8th of 30)

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Playoffs, Statgeekery, Statistical +/-, Win Shares | 6 Comments »

Playoff Preview: #1 San Antonio vs. #8 Memphis

15th April 2011

San Antonio Spurs

61-21, 1st in NBA Southwest Division (Schedule and Results)
Coach: Gregg Popovich (61-21)

PTS/G: 103.7 (6th of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 98.0 (14th of 30)
SRS: 5.86 (4th of 30) ▪ Pace: 92.3 (14th of 30)
Off Rtg: 111.8 (2nd of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 105.6 (11th of 30)
Expected W-L: 56-26 (6th of 30)

Arena: AT&T Center ▪ Attendance: 750,879 (12th of 30)

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Playoffs, Statgeekery, Statistical +/-, Win Shares | 4 Comments »

Playoff Preview: #4 Orlando vs. #5 Atlanta

15th April 2011

Orlando Magic

52-30, 2nd in NBA Southeast Division (Schedule and Results)
Coach: Stan Van Gundy (52-30)

PTS/G: 99.2 (16th of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 93.7 (4th of 30)
SRS: 4.92 (5th of 30) ▪ Pace: 91.4 (17th of 30)
Off Rtg: 107.7 (14th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 101.8 (3rd of 30)
Expected W-L: 56-26 (5th of 30)

Arena: Amway Center ▪ Attendance: 777,852 (9th of 30)

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Playoffs, Statgeekery, Statistical +/-, Win Shares | Comments Off

Playoff Preview: #3 Boston vs. #6 New York

15th April 2011

Boston Celtics

56-26, 1st in NBA Atlantic Division (Schedule and Results)
Coach: Doc Rivers (56-26)

PTS/G: 96.5 (23rd of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 91.1 (1st of 30)
SRS: 4.83 (6th of 30) ▪ Pace: 90.4 (22nd of 30)
Off Rtg: 106.2 (18th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 100.3 (2nd of 30)
Expected W-L: 57-25 (4th of 30)

Arena: TD Garden ▪ Attendance: 763,584 (11th of 30)

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Playoffs, Statgeekery, Statistical +/-, Win Shares | 5 Comments »

Playoff Preview: #2 Miami vs. #7 Philadelphia

15th April 2011

Miami Heat

58-24, 1st in NBA Southeast Division (Schedule and Results)
Coach: Erik Spoelstra (58-24)

PTS/G: 102.1 (8th of 30) ▪ Opp PTS/G: 94.6 (6th of 30)
SRS: 6.76 (1st of 30) ▪ Pace: 90.9 (20th of 30)
Off Rtg: 111.7 (3rd of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 103.5 (5th of 30)
Expected W-L: 61-21 (2nd of 30)

Arena: AmericanAirlines Arena ▪ Attendance: 810,930 (4th of 30)

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Playoffs, Statgeekery, Statistical +/-, Win Shares | 3 Comments »

Playoff Preview: #1 Chicago vs. #8 Indiana

15th April 2011

Chicago Bulls

62-20, 1st in NBA Central Division (Schedule and Results)
Coach: Tom Thibodeau (62-20)

SRS: 6.53 (2nd of 30) ▪ Pace: 90.4 (23rd of 30)
Off Rtg: 108.3 (11th of 30) ▪ Def Rtg: 100.3 (1st of 30)
Expected W-L: 61-21 (1st of 30)

Arena: United Center ▪ Attendance: 893,462 (1st of 30)

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Playoffs, SRS, Statgeekery, Statistical +/-, Win Shares | Comments Off

BBR Rankings: Final Regular-Season Schedule-Adjusted Offensive and Defensive Ratings

14th April 2011

2010-11 NBA power rankings through the games played on April 13, 2011:

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in BBR Rankings, SRS, Statgeekery | 33 Comments »

Layups: Best Defenders in 2011

13th April 2011

At Back Picks, ElGee took a look at the top individual defenders of the 2010-11 NBA season.

Posted in Awards, Layups | 18 Comments »

Mailbag: The Redd-Randolph All-Stars

11th April 2011

Here's an idea sent my way courtesy of BBR reader Rob P.:

"Can you think of players who had excellent 'per-36-minute' stat lines on limited
minutes, and who either outperformed or seriously underperformed those 'per-36'
numbers once given an increase in minutes?

I'm a Celtics fan, so Glen Davis comes to mind as being a good example of
someone who produced close to their per-36 averages upon being given a larger
role.

I'm curious about some of the extremes; players whose averages were seriously
impacted by an increase in minutes. Basically examples that make you think, 'it
was a bad idea to give this guy more minutes' OR 'I can't believe he's been
coming off the bench all this time instead of starting!'"

One of the big early battlegrounds of APBRmetrics was the philosophical debate between per-minute and per-game statistics. Per-game was the traditional standard, but analysts like John Hollinger began to tear that way of thinking down after realizing per-minute performance held over for most players who received more playing time. From Hollinger's seminal 2004-05 Pro Basketball Forecast:

"It's a pretty simple concept, but one that has largely escaped most NBA front offices: The idea that what a player does on a per-minute basis is far more important than his per-game stats. The latter tend to be influenced more by playing time than by the quality of play, yet remain the most common metric of player performance.

[...]

Unfortunately, many NBA execs and fans still believe that somebody can be a '20 minute player' -- that he's only useful in short stretches but can't play a full game. With the exception of the rare few who are scandalously out of shape (Oliver Miller, for example), this is profoundly untrue. [Michael] Redd was the perfect example -- he was thought of as a bench player simple because that's what he'd always been, but there was no reason he couldn't play 40 minutes a night. There's a supposition that some players' production will decrease with increased minutes, but within reason that's completely untrue. The first Prospectus emphatically proved this with research showing that most player's [sic] performance improves with greater playing time."

Hollinger's examples of predictable "breakouts" from per-minute stats included Redd, Zach Randolph, Carlos Boozer, and Andrei Kirilenko, all of whom held onto their low-MPG production when thrust into bigger roles. In fact, Hollinger featured Redd on the cover of his 2nd book as an example of a player with great per-minute stats who was underrated because of a lack of playing time.

So, to answer Rob's original question, and in honor of Hollinger's early per-minute darlings, here are the "Redd-Randolph All-Stars". To qualify, a player had to:

  • play in the "Hollinger Era" (the 1990s, 2000s, or 2010s)
  • play at least 41 games in back-to-back seasons
  • play less than 24 MPG in the first of the back-to-back seasons, and more than 24 MPG in the second
  • see an increase of at least 7 MPG between the two seasons

Of that group (which included 320 players since 1990), I'll list 3 top-5 lists: players who improved their PERs the most when given increased playing time, players whose PERs were the closest to what they had been before when given increased playing time, and players whose PERs declined the most with an increase in PT. This will capture all of the possible extremes Rob mentioned, plus the Hollinger prototype of players whose PERs didn't change at all.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Analysis, BBR Mailbag, History, Statgeekery, Totally Useless, Trivia | 33 Comments »

NY Times: Underdogs Have Little Bite in N.B.A. Playoffs

8th April 2011

Unlike the NCAA tournament, the NBA playoffs are not set up for "Cinderella" runs:

Keeping Score: Underdogs Have Little Bite in N.B.A. Playoffs

This will be my last weekly column for the New York Times this season, as they will move on to baseball next week. However I might contribute a few pieces during the playoffs. Thanks for reading this season.

Posted in NY Times | 5 Comments »