December 19, 2006
You Down With PPP?
Last week, one of my readers (Professor Matt) sent me and then published a very interesting spreadsheet. He had calculated a set of temp-free statistics for all the ACC teams as of about a week ago.
The gist of temp-free statistical analysis is that you can look at how efficient teams are on both offense and defense. The more standard methods that most people look at for measuring a team's offensive or defensive prowess is points scored or points allowed. That's a crappy way to do it. Teams that give up the fewest points typically do that not because they are great on defense, although they might be, but because they are extremely deliberate on offense. The easiest way to keep your opponent from scoring is to not give them the ball. The same goes on offense. If you play a pressure defense that forces short possessions (layups or turnovers), you'll get the ball a lot and score a lot. That doesn't mean you're any good at offense, just that you play it a lot.
So enter the tempo-free stats with measures like points-per-possession (PPP) and Effective FG% (eFG). To see what Matt generated, check out the slick Google Spreadsheet.
One note - Ken Pomeroy computes some similar statistics, but in a different way. Pomeroy actually goes one step beyond this and factors in the tempo and efficiency of a team's opponents. Obviously, these numbers are a little trickier to compute, but they are fun to play with. It's like porn for geeks.
But back to Matt's numbers. His spreadsheet contains all of the data, but I'll highlight the money columns here:
PPP | Opp. PPP | PPP Margin | eFG | Opp. eFG | eFG Margin | TO% | Opp. TO% | TO% Margin | |
| Boston College | 1.09 | 0.93 | 0.16 | 0.508 | 0.445 | 0.063 | 0.208 | 0.219 | -0.011 |
| Clemson | 1.12 | 0.85 | 0.27 | 0.543 | 0.449 | 0.094 | 0.210 | 0.257 | -0.048 |
| Duke | 1.05 | 0.80 | 0.26 | 0.537 | 0.405 | 0.132 | 0.264 | 0.253 | 0.011 |
| Florida State | 1.06 | 0.91 | 0.15 | 0.544 | 0.492 | 0.053 | 0.236 | 0.279 | -0.043 |
| Georgia Tech | 1.14 | 1.00 | 0.14 | 0.563 | 0.521 | 0.042 | 0.221 | 0.226 | -0.005 |
| Maryland | 1.04 | 0.86 | 0.19 | 0.527 | 0.411 | 0.116 | 0.239 | 0.251 | -0.012 |
| Miami | 1.14 | 0.95 | 0.18 | 0.533 | 0.491 | 0.042 | 0.205 | 0.215 | -0.010 |
| NC State | 1.10 | 0.98 | 0.12 | 0.553 | 0.487 | 0.066 | 0.186 | 0.193 | -0.007 |
| North Carolina | 1.17 | 0.95 | 0.22 | 0.559 | 0.503 | 0.057 | 0.198 | 0.215 | -0.016 |
| Virginia | 1.15 | 0.95 | 0.19 | 0.517 | 0.453 | 0.064 | 0.200 | 0.190 | 0.009 |
| Virginia Tech | 1.10 | 0.83 | 0.27 | 0.528 | 0.444 | 0.084 | 0.179 | 0.281 | -0.102 |
| Wake Forest | 1.09 | 1.05 | 0.04 | 0.545 | 0.542 | 0.003 | 0.216 | 0.218 | -0.002 |
A few things that jump out (and remember, the season is young and these teams have played a lot of patsies):
- As you might have guessed, UNC has the best offense in the ACC. What these stats don't show you is that Carolina's tempo increases their advantage on that end of the floor.
- Virginia has a surprisingly efficient offense. That really surprised me since they really only have two above-average offensive players and several who are clearly below average. Just goes to show what good guard play can do for you.
- Duke and Maryland have the worse offenses in the league. Duke's problems have been well-publicized, but I was a bit surprised to see the Terps so low.
- On the flip side, the Dukies have the best defense in the league. Again, that's no surprise. In fact, their D is so effective that even with the second-worst offense, Duke has the second best PPP Margin and the best eFG Margin in the league. So maybe I've been a bit to bearish on their future.
- The flip side of that coin is that Virginia Tech and Clemson are tied for the best PPP Margin. In both cases, the teams have been helped greatly by weak schedules, but it's odd that the three-loss Hokies would still rate so well. A large part of the Hokies' statistical success so far seems to be the turnovers they are forcing. If they can keep that up against ACC teams, they might just meet their preseason expectations.
- Only two teams, Duke and Virginia have positive turnover margins (and positive is bad). For Duke, we know it's because their point guard play has been so poor this year. The UVA number is shocking though, since they have the best point guard in the league and one of the top two-guards. The problem for the Cavs is that they force so few turnovers. They might want to address that and see if they can't get a few more free possessions.
- Want to know why the Yellow Jackets have stumbled and the Deacons just suck? Look at their defense! Their defensive eFGs are by far the worst in the league. What in the name of Dave Odom has happened in Winston-Salem?
So what do you see in the numbers?
As you mentioned, Ken Pomeroy's numbers are a bit more complex than mine. I think they key, though, would be to automate the collection and organization of the raw numbers. If one could automate data collection (e.g., through some type of script to download data from all of the myriad stores) and then pre-process those numbers into some standardized format (e.g., comma-delimited files), then the calculation and presentation of tempo-free numbers would be embarrassingly easy, particularly if one were to employ some mathematical software (rather than programming the whole thing in, say, C++). The amount of tempo-free data analysis and presentation that could be performed boggles the mind.
Thoughts?
| Matt wrote: |
| Well done, Dave. Compiling stats (me) is easy -- analyzing them (you) is the tough part. Towards the end of the week, I might try to update the numbers. I'll let you know. Once we get in to conference play, the tempo-free stats should start to really provide some insight.
As you mentioned, Ken Pomeroy's numbers are a bit more complex than mine. I think they key, though, would be to automate the collection and organization of the raw numbers. If one could automate data collection (e.g., through some type of script to download data from all of the myriad stores) and then pre-process those numbers into some standardized format (e.g., comma-delimited files), then the calculation and presentation of tempo-free numbers would be embarrassingly easy, particularly if one were to employ some mathematical software (rather than programming the whole thing in, say, C++). The amount of tempo-free data analysis and presentation that could be performed boggles the mind. Thoughts? |
Thoughts? I'd LOVE that. It's one of those things I'd definitely do if I had more time in my life. I love me some stats and as a programmer, I also like setting things up like that. I think Ken has his whole process automated, but I don't know where he gets his raw data.
Speaking of statistics, did you know that VMI is averaging over 102 points per game and is 5-8?
| Matt wrote: |
| Speaking of statistics, did you know that VMI is averaging over 102 points per game and is 5-8? |
Aren't they running that crazy offense where you shoot within 5 seconds and sub every minute or two? I'm drawing a blank, but it was first rolled out at some DIII school, like Loyola Marymount on steroids.
The school you're thinking of is Redlands, I think, but the original school was maybe in Iowa? ... I found it! Grinnell!
From what I just read though, VMI isn't quite playing that style, but they are running and pressing the whole game.
Speaking of which...did you know that Jerry Glanville now works for June Jones at Hawaii? Running backs coach or something silly like that.
www.accbasketblog.blogspot.com
http://www.scacchoops.com/forms/TeamStats.asp
If there are other stats you want me to track, give me some suggestions. Believe me, I'm not trying to steal thunder here from the work Matt has done, just trying to provide the data you are looking for.
Very nice stats -- thanks for the heads up. Are you compiling and calculating manually or have you automated the process? Some tempo-free differentials would be nice to see, too (e.g., OE - DE).
Interesting to note that your table shows all ACC teams currently have OE>100. I suspect this will change once we enter the conference season.
I will add the margins, as it is very telling. It may be a week or so though with the holiday weekend approaching.
Thanks for the suggestion.
The sortable columns are very nice, but you might want to look into setting the cursor to the pointer so that folks realize they can click there (I know the text says so, but people might miss that).
I'll be making use of your stats page as the season goes on!
The page is best viewed in IE right now, where there is a hand to click on the columns.
I still will add the efficiency margins and perhaps some other stats suggested here, although I haven't quite decided how I want to implement it, so as I mentioned it may be a week or two before I get around to it.
In the meantime, enjoy my site, and I would love suggestions!
thanks
jb
BrightCar Car Maintenance Software - Software To Manage Your Car Maintenance Schedule
