Interesting stat - but the real take home to me is that basically every team is worse calling a timeout than not. Take Golden State, who average 1.09 points per possession when running their offense. That drops to a very beatable 0.97 points per possession on the play after timeout, which may lead the league but is very normal in relation to the usual offense of most teams (only 4 teams average less than 1.0 ppp). In other words, when Phil let his teams play, he intuited that calling timeout interfered with the flow of the offense, and unless the offense was projected to perform so poorly that it would fall well under the mean for the season (you need to be a good coach to be able to get a feel for this), it's not worth calling timeout because there are no short-term gains and no guaranteed long-term gains. As bad as McHale was after timeout, I don't put too much stock into this as it is based off of 7 games and during an awful stretch for the Rockets. As I think Kevin Pelton pointed out, it's very likely the Rockets would have exactly the same record right now with JBB as with McHale.
I think the dropoff is mostly due to fast breaks being impossible after a timeout. I bet strictly compared to halfcourt PPP it'd be better. And lol at McHale
I think you're right. For example, removing transition buckets and limiting to only half-court sets would change the complexion of the points per possession for every single team. In other words, every team's efficiency should go down. But to what degree? And calling timeout removes the possibility of transition or even a mismatch that occurs as the defense is getting set. I think that's where the real benefit is for the defense - they can pick their man out, get set, and be ready for any of several plays the offense may run. Also Golden State is unearthly in transition, but much more normal in a half-court set (even if among the best in the league).
<iframe width="854" height="480" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1q9VO5TUQJo" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Recent video by Coach Nick
Kidd is a great after time outs coach. That's his best quality and basically the only thing I like about him as a coach. He should have been a veteran team coach. And he makes great plays with only ONE single shooter on the floor who is often double teamed or guarded by the best wing defender.
You might be right, but the flip side is that Milwaukee is near the bottom of the league in terms offensive efficiency, and even then they lose about 0.1 ppp after timeout. I can't find team stats when only comparing half-court efficiency to points after timeout efficiency, rep to anyone who can dig up that - but that would be the ideal comparator here.
You don't have to check it out I tell you that Milwaukee can't score well in half court and that's why especially last year they aimed to run. This year they can't because of Monroe mostly, and that's why their offensive efficiency is crap. Losing only 0.1ppp after timeouts is actually marvellous. Probably better than all the other teams at the top. It's a miracle and speaks about how good Kidd is after timeouts. And esp considering what he has to work with. Only one shooter. All the other starters don't even shoot one three a game.
Not arguing that Kidd isn't one of the better play-callers after timeout. He's clearly a good coach and much better than I gave him credit for. Just saying that even on an inefficient offensive team, it seems like the timeout is detrimental to running the offense without stoppage. The best comparator would be half-court efficiency vs. play after timeout efficiency.
he's a god awful coach and can't wait to see him sacked. That's the only thing he does well. He even won a playoff game with this. Look at nyloncalculus. I think I saw a chart of this.
I found it http://nyloncalculus.com/team-ratings-and-statistics/ Go to chart number 5. and click on pnts per 100 HFC plays. Houston's are 89.8. Milwaukee's are 87.5. GSW 99.6.
well by some quick comparison looks like the best is Snyder. And there are teams who are better after timeouts than just hfc plays.
Man . . . How man moving picks The Screen feels the contact and starts backing up to maintain the screen for two to three steps longer to completely spring the guy again and again . . . EVERY SCREEN the Warriors screen takes a step just about Rocket River
So that means that JB actually calls more effective plays out of timeout than Houston normally runs, while Walton/Kerr don't move the needle at all? Kind of crazy. I mean it speaks more to how bad we are as a half court team than how good JB is as a coach, but still interesting.
Malakas those numbers are points/100 plays and are across the board lower than Hollinger points/100 possessions so it may not be accurate to compare. I'll have to dig into the formulas closer to figure out where the difference is
It's points per 100 HALF COURT plays not just plays. It's the hfc efficiency. The difference is on how Partnow counts the possesions. I have seen it the explanation but I dont' bother remembering..for me it seems not important lol. He has somewhere explained. Look around and you will find it.
you can always ask him in twitter and he will explain. https://twitter.com/SethPartnow Good idea to ask him also about the teams defence after the time outs.
