You know - it's a shame. A few games back the Clippers game was broadcast in CourtVision powered by AWS which was basically Second Spectrum's analytics data overlayed over the game in real time. It was distracting at first because they didn't explain it at all but once I realized what I was seeing I was fascinated by it because it would show the expected FG percentage as a player dribbled around and would "hold" once a shot went up AND it was color coded to show good vs poor shot quality attempts. It also had the Xs and Ox tracking in the corner of the screen. I commend the effort from @DaDakota - I truly do, but it's a shame we can't just get access to that information from someone who has it(really, none of ya'll fools have access to that?) which is obviously even higher quality and does all that number crunching dynamically of whether the shot taken generated positive or negative value relative to the expected outcome for that individual player. For those with NBA League Pass - apparently Second Spectrum partnered with the Clippers to offer this for their games with Amazon footing the bill...wish we could see it for other teams though but hey - go check out Clippers games to see it in action. It's pretty cool. I wish the NBA offered it as an add on to my regular subscription if it were reasonably priced.
Yes, I know, but the reason for that is that I don't believe that the players that are here now will be the ones that are here in 5 years when we are possibly contending and am more interested in "Are we generating good looks"......not as in...for whom......etc. Because if we are generating good looks, either the players that are here improve and hit more of them or new players are here that can do that. I get 100% that a 3pter from Curry is a better shot than a 3pter from say Tate - but if you are trying to find out if the offense itself is generating good looks - then it doesn't matter who is taking it.....just that the shot is there, and that should allow for a coach to find players that can hit those shots.....IE is this offense working? Let's take a look at it after 10 games..... But I would also be more open to a nuanced system that considers whether we are TAKING good shots with the players we have.....which will probably tell a different story entirely. DD
Yeah publicly posting a data set for feedback and then just saying "you don't like what the data is showing" when someone gives pretty reasonable and obvious feedback is weak, so I'll leave you to it. But I will leave you with another example of a shot you called 'minimally contested'. Oh wait one more thing, you've put a last second buzzer beating heave from Tari Eason 70 feet away from the basket as a "great shot"
I commend the effort, but I feel it's quite subjective regardless of who does this data gathering. U can't eliminate bias from this, the data gathering ain't black and white. Minimally contest vs uncontested? Contested by makeable? Like how are u suppose to gauge sengun post game? What constitutes a great shot when utilizing the post game? Isn't he contested basically the whole time he's backing someone down?
Isn't that a good shot for anyone? If you watch the entire thing he rises above that flat footed contest. Made the same call for Jabari, it is contested but it is at the rim - look you can believe whatever you want - I am fine with it, but if you want to do your own data set, I am saying let's do it. Just stop trying to claim some sort of victimization here, I am all inclusive baby - if you disagree, do your own data set and let's see where the results differ - should be fun. I am fine with disagreement - i could see where this could be a "Tough shot" but if it is at the rim, I tend to think that is a good shot, but this one more than the other, I could certainly agree it is on the border. You can nitpick any dataset, but if you put 10 games together it should flesh out......for accuracy. All data has some bias, there is no way to eliminate it entirely, either in the programming or in the observation. But what you hope is that over time it evens out and becomes more valuable. With Sengun if it is at the rim, it is a great shot. In the Mavs game he had: Great shots = 8 Good shots = 3 Tough shots = 2 poor shots = 0 Not a single poor shot taken, according to my shot tracking. DD
This can't be a useful statistical methodology because there is subjectivity in the parameters. "Good" shot? Isn't the opposite process the kind of thing you use to determine a good shot? Ie, defender within X feet, etc etc. And then track how many of those exist
I dunno, does a side contest equal a front contest, what about someone that just stands there with their arms up, is that a contest? That is why programming doesn't work either. There is subjectivity in any data set, that is why I have argued that people that think stats are the be all end are wrong, at most stats are 30% of so of the decision making process. This exercise is only meant to see if the Rox offense as chaotic as it is.....is generating "Good" or better shots.....nothing more than that. And I would love for others to participate and do it with me - and we can collate the data to get it even further refined. If no one steps up, at least the data will smooth out over time..... Maybe I could track it, post it in the Rox watch chat over what it was registered as, and see if the audience agrees? That seems harsh though as there is major Anti-KPJ bias in our community these days. Great shots are WIDE open though.....we can all agree, those lack ambiguity. DD
Again, if we are generating an open look for Bruno Fernando, is it the offense generating it or is it the defense giving it up? Now I'm relying on the scout to tell me that, and again, that's where the subjectivity is. And on a per-scout level, that subjectivity doesn't smoothed out - it may just get magnified. Just because someone is open doesn't mean it's a good shot or the offense generated a good shot and the coach can just find a player to hit that shot. If you magically got KAT that shot in a couple of season because you somehow got him, it just may mean that shot won't be there to be shot because lo' and behold, they're going to try defending that shot now. The "good shot" indicator would be, is Jalen Green continuously getting open shots? Or the "good Jalen Green" indicator would be is Jalen Green getting buckets no matter the shot? Or "is Jabari Smith hitting open 3's"? As an example, Harden would hit shots with the defender standing inside his shorts. He wasn't technically "open", but it was a good shot for Harden. After 10 games it will just be the same thing. One guy's interpretation of what an open/good shot is. I don't fault you for attempting it, though. Scouts have been doing this for years. It's what stuff like SportVue, player tracking and the resulting stats are trying to get away from. Maybe you'll get a bunch of people to track it for everybody throughout the season and somehow get something out of it, though. Or combine it with available stats to get something out of it.
A good shot is a type of shot that you hit with high percentage. I don’t think any of us can track that. The shot might be relatively open, but it does not mean it is a good shot. Maybe the defense is preferring that shot because it is low %. For Sengun the open 3 is a bad shot if you want to win. It is a good shot if you want to develop him.
The Rockets so far are 29th in overall fg%, despite being 16th in 3pt %, while being 26th in assists and worst in the league (again) in turnovers. They're great at offensive rebounding but worst in the league at fast break defense - which means they are great at offensive rebounding because they (1) suck at shooting and (2) too many people crash for offensive rebounds. They're good at FTs, shooting the 4th most FTA/g. The offensive rebound thing probably plays into this, but Alpi, KPJ and JG do decent with the whistle. Otherwise... they are objectively NOT good at offense. With all the data available, plus the eye test, i am fine coming to conclusions about the offense without any additional data.
Sure we can. Compare it to the player's shooting heat map. It's how Astros help their pitchers tune their approach and evolve into super pitchers. They showed them which pitches they were effective with and how, which pitches were less effective and how, and then to throw more of their effective pitches and less of their less effective pitches. If you are garbage from X location, any shot there is not a good shot. It might be the best shot available, but that doesn't make it a good shot.
I meant it is too much work. Heat map is just location. And then there is other data like catch and shoot, closest defender etc. , how these combine etc. it is more of a professional job.
If you are consistently garbage from X location, you should never be shooting from that location unless you absolutely have to. Full stop.
I believe there is a website that takes into account a player's own shooting percentages but if it was ever public I cant remember it now
There is, you see people post it all the time. Red is good %, blue is bad %, big shapes are a lot of shots, and small shapes are minimal shots.
At this point, I think the first thing we should question is not shot quality but how we try to generate open looks, or the lack of it.
Verbal Christ, thank you for pointing this out. Clearly this was a great shot for anyone who has been a Rockets fan over the last three seasons. KPj gets Christian Woods isolated, the worst defender in the history of mankind, does a side step to avoid any lucky long armed accidental defense, and nails the shot. If that's Giannis, I think we can agree that it's a terrible shot, but if you're arguing that isolating CWoods is bad offense... I don't know what to tell you. It's literally the reason we traded him for Tyty. Literally. Great shot. All day.
Expectations skew "shot quality" though. Take Sengun for example. Man absolutely blows shooting a 3pt shot. A possession that ends with a 3pt shot from him, regardless of how open he is, will never be a "good" shot. At the same time, we are trying to get him to develop range and winning doesn't particularly matter this season, so I want him to take that shot any time he is open on a C&S.
Yeah, but it is a Great shot - if you eliminate the player etc.....because at some point he becomes better at that shot, or we have someone else there that can shoot it. The point is not so much to see if this is good for THIS roster but one that is ready to compete and are the shots generated any good, will it translate to wins with better or more seasoned players. DD
