Getting trendy
Why this picture? I don't know, I just kind of thought it was funny.
We’re 17 games in, which means roughly 20 percent of the NBA season is put away, which means some trends are starting to come to the surface. You know, like what’s working in wins versus losses. Those type of things.
Obviously, in wins, you play better. Everybody knows that. It’s why you won. You shot better or rebounded better or played better defense or your players played better. It’s no revelation that in losses your numbers go down and your best players probably didn’t play as well. Again, it’s why you lost.
But at the same time, it’s somewhat key to determine WHAT those things are you’re not doing as well. Because common sense says, correct those issues that are consistently rearing their heads in losses and you know, they turn to wins.
So here are a few developing themes:
In wins, Oklahoma City averages almost four assists more per game. The Thunder dish out almost 21 a game in Ws, and just 16.1 in losses. That’s most punctuated by Russell Westbrook who averages 7.9 helpers in wins and just five a game in losses. But here’s what that says to me: It’s not that Russ is necessarily worse in losses (though in some circumstances he has been), but more that he’s had to shoulder the load more because his teammates either weren’t knocking down shots or playing well. He’s averaged 16.6 points per game in Ws and 17.3 in Ls. Russ has had to pick up the scoring in some losses because things weren’t working (the first Houston game really sticks out in which Westbrook had 33).
Kevin Durant scores four fewer points a game in losses, Jeff Green four fewer and Nenad Krstic a full five fewer. That could be a combination of Westbrook not creating and setting up as well, or just that they aren’t knocking down their usual shots. Add those points they have in wins and Westbrook is averaging seven or eight assists a game in losses too. That’s the thing about assists – it’s a two part thing. It’s easy for people to see Westbrook’s numbers, but at the same time, if he makes a great drive and frees Krstic up for an open 20-footer and Krispy clangs it, whose fault is that?
In losses, turnovers are up by a three a game. This was an issue last year as well. Naturally when you’re losing you start forcing things and start trying harder to make plays. It’s desperation. Westbrook turns it over 3.1 times in wins and 4.4 in losses. Durant goes from 2.8 to 4.0. Thabo even goes up a full turnover more. Again, it’s kind of a natural tendency for any team, but taking care of the ball was an issue last year and it’s something the Thunder has done much, much better with this year, highlighted by just 11 turnovers against Milwaukee.
Accentuated by last night’s loss, 3-point shooting is far different in wins versus losses. In wins, OKC hits six Thunder moneyballs (copyright: Matt Pinto) and shoots 40 percent from deep. In losses, that goes to four treys and just 22.7 percent. The Thunder takes nearly three more a game in losses and again, that’s similar to turnovers. You’re desperate for points so you start chucking like George Costanza. Durant goes from 32 percent to 17. Green 33 to 23. Sefolosha 50 to 11 (!). Westbrook 50 to 15. It’s clearly an issue.
Along the same lines, OKC is eight percent lower from the field in losses. That pretty much explains the lower numbers for Durant, Green and Krstic, three of OKC’s top jumpshooters. Durant drops eight percent. Green almost nine. Krstic an astounding 20 percent. Westbrook holds true basically shooting the same percentage.
Nothing all that revolutionary, but I love looking at the splits that make one game different from another. What’s different for the team home from away? In Sunday games or Monday games? In games on three days rest versus two days? Sometimes it’s coincidence. Sometimes it’s a trend. It’s early in the season and some of these things can tighten up or change a bit. But as we watch a team that’s slowly turning into a potential playoff contender, it’s key to understand what’s working and what’s not. Then correct it. That’s why we (and by “we” I mean “Clay Bennett) pay Scott Brooks the medium sized bucks.
As significant as all of the distinctions that you point out are to the outcome of games, I don’t know how correctable they are from a coaching standpoint. For the most part, our shot selection and ball movement look much improved from what I saw last year- though individual lapses still occur. Russell is up and down in the turnover department, but the switch from Watson to Ollie did much to help our ongoing turnover crisis. Russell and KD should both protect the ball better as they mature, but I don’t know of any short-cut to get there. A couple of topics down I just went off on Thomas’ general ineffectiveness and the need to add a defensive/rebounding big now. Defense is something that teams CAN do consistantly on a night in/out basis- and we ARE playing better defense as a team. For my money, adding a center that is already a quality defender and rebounder to the core of our current squad is the quick and obvious fix for what ails us- and Presti has assetts and cap-room coming out his ears with which to accomplish this. Gortat, Biedrins, Okafor, Haywood, Camby, Pryzbilla, McGee- thats a lot of targets. Surely we can pry one of those guys loose from their current squad.
The glaring figure to me is this:
0-5: The Thunder’s record when they play a team for the second time this season.
I know it’s early and the sample size is small, but that tells me that teams are either asleep on the Thunder the first time they play them, or that more experienced teams are better able to make adjustments than the Thunder.
Thoughts?
@Bryan
Interesting stat for sure. I’m not sure what that means honestly…
@Royce
I’m hoping it doesn’t mean that the Thunder got some wins solely because teams are looking past them or not taking them seriously…. because guess what: the word is out.
It comes down to our lack of a post player, we cant recover from poor jump shooting nights, when the best starter only shoots 47% thats a problem 27 teams are better then us in that stat.
Even just 10 points from the post would go a long way to fixing scoring issues and the assist issue. we would have somebody that would be there to keep us in games when the shots are not falling.
Who knows what it means… but it’s troubling!
It should also be noted that, with the exception of the Lakers, the Thunder beat all those teams the first time they played them (in case that was not clear).
http://sports.yahoo.com/nba/news;_ylt=AtSsGXB26anjiyFOvdi2aLi8vLYF?slug=ap-cavaliers-ilgauskas&prov=ap&type=lgns
maybe we can grab ilgauskus cheap, he is unhappy in cleveland
Picking nits:
* Comparing the gross number of assists in wins vs. losses does little to help us, since, by your own admission, it’s natural that we scored more in wins than we did in losses. More helpful, I think, would be to compare team assist percentage from wins vs. losses (that is, # of assists/# made fgs).
Often times in losses, I think we look for things to blame and decide ‘we didn’t share the ball enough’ or ‘we didn’t rebound enough’ because the actual answer is crappy and boring: we didn’t shoot well enough. For some reason, I think we like to blame ball movement or rebounding or defense more than missed open looks because the first three sound correctable but third is just bad luck.
@f5alcon
Agreed.
For all the improvements, like Thomas’ post presence or Kirstic’s improved D or KD’s and Thabo’s increased rebounding numbers, the Thunder still have one GLARING need: A real BIG who can score down low or create shots for others by passing out of the post…. without hurting or possibly improving team D.
@f5alcon
My thoughts went more to the beating we took last night off the glass. We actually have a great rebounding team- except at the one position that usually grabs the most boards. Adding a Gortat, et al should mean that we regularly out-rebound our opponents and NEVER get dominated in the way we were last night. As well as our team is playing defensively (other than the center position)- we would/should still be in a position to win even on nights that our shots aren’t falling if we had an intimidating center to go with what everybody else is already doing.
@Sammy
That’s well put.
@Sammy
Good point:
If you want my honest opinion about last night’s game… it all came down to some bad bounces off the glass that went Houston’s way. You could see the toll it took on the younger players in the third quarter… that sort of frustration alwasy seems to excerbate fatigue and reduce mental focus…. which seemed to lead to more turnovers and missed open shots.
I’m not making excuses, but soooo many of those Houston offensive boards were just blind luck… and from where I was sitting, you could see how much it irritated the team.
@Bryan
I’m not worried about that at all. While the stat sounds worrisome, two of those losses are away games against teams that are definitely superior to the Thunder (Magic and Lakers), and Houston beat us soundly the first time so the fact we lost to them again is neither here nor there. That leaves SAC and LAC, two tough luck losses that hardly represent a meaningful sample size.
Thanks for that… I feel better now. But if the Thunder lose many more of those, I’m crying foul!
Yeah, it was amazing how many times last night there were four okc players standing right around the basket waiting for the bounce, and the ball would either careem over all their heads to the rocket player standing 16ft away or it would bounce straight into the chest Carl Landry.
I didn’t catch the game last night but I have noticed we don’t really box out all that well (though nobody really does in the nba). doing so helps cut way down on those type of rebounds…
@thunder tim
A lot of those rebounds were grabbed 20-30 ft out…
I think it’s the offense. Seriously. Our defense is very very good, top 6 or 7 actually. You can’t be unhappy about that.
The offense shoots considerably more midrange jumpers than the NBA average while simultaneously shooting much less at the rim or from three than the NBA average. We take much more of the least efficient shots in the game and much less of the most efficient shots. It’s really that simple. Our offense is largely predicated on drive and dish, and the shot that results is usually a midrange. We need more better shooters to up our efficiency (Thabo stands out) or to tweak our offense.
We use screens all the time, but when is the last time you actually saw our screener roll to the basket and get a shot close in? Our bigs always pull up and shoot (Green and Krstic). We need to go to the rim and the PNR is one very established way of doing it. We have the athleticism.
If we upped our offensive efficiency by a percent or two we would be in the playoffs. We may still be, but it would be virtually assured all things being equal and our defense holding the line.
@Steve H
i know you like gortat but he is a bad rebounder only 4 per game @16 minutes, minutes adjusted thats 5.9 in the same mins krstic plays, basically 1 RPG game better then krstic. pryzbilla, ilgauskus, haywood, biedrins, okafor, camby all have better rebounds rate then gortat and krstic.
amen . . .
someone like you Joe, or anyone else that watched Green as a rookie –
WHY isnt he posting up more – for example, last night we are playing undersized 4s like Jeff – WHY isnt he posting up? Didnt he have a post up game at Georgetown???
As far as bigs go, I’m expecting the unexpected. I think that Presti will pull a Thabo-esque trade for a lesser known center who will be put in position to break out in OKC.
what stinks is the value of Phoenix’s draft pick . . . bottom . . .
@Kev
Phoenix’s draft pick would probably be enough to get a guy like Josh Boone.
@Kev
Jeff Green’s game hasn’t changed at all, or hardly at all since his rookie year. Even though we’ve changed coaches it really hasn’t. The only real difference is that he shoots a little better (last year especially). He’s always played on the wing. He’s rarely posted up and he’s rarely been an aggressive rebounder. He’s part of that new breed of four that plays out on the wing.It’s all fine if you have a quality big man at the five (think David West and Tyson Chandler) or Kevin Garnett and Kendrick Perkins, even Nowitzki and Dampier. But Green and Krstic is a non starter IMO. That’s why I have been a proponent of matching the finesse guys with the power guys up front. However, Etan (power) and Collison (power) have very good player pair numbers.
Assisted FG rate falls from 55% in wins to 48% in losses.
@f5alcon
I do like Gortat, and I’m suprised that his rebounding stats aren’t higher than that. Is that a career average, or this season’s output? Just watching the guy, he is in continuous motion and looks very active. Regardless, I’ll be happy with any of those guys I listed- and I’m sure quite a few that I over looked as well. NBA.com lists us at 16th in rebounds per game, with KD, our leading guy at a little over 7 per, ranked 44th in the league. Where would we rank I wonder if we had a top-ten rebounder at center?
A lot of times stats like these can be summed up easily with something like 1.) The Thunder play worse in losses than they do in wins
I don’t want to sound like I’m ripping this post, because I’m addicted to parsing stats as much as anyone. But I see it a lot in baseball, too. Someone will say something like “Well, when our 3-4-5 hitters don’t knock in a run, we’re 7-28!” Well, yeah, when we don’t score runs, we lose.
Thunder take 2 more 3 pt attempts per game at home and because fo a better FG% hit 2 more.
The offense on average has been better the last 5 games than compared to earlier.
offense is about the same against playoff teams and lottery teams but the defense is worse against the worse teams and / or better against the better teams depending on how you want to say it.
Both the offense and defense are significantly better against the east, the offense even moreso.
7-0 when they score 100+. 2-7 when they don’t.
This is a nice display of how the team compares to others
http://www.nbastuffer.com/2009-20010_NBA_Regular_Season_Power_Rankings_Chart.html
I don’t think you can call any team below average on offense a “contender”. If you decided to maybe you could get OKC, Milwaukee and Miami in there.
Maybe you can grant “contender” to 2 teams below average on defense- Utah and Phoenix.
The ten teams neutral or better on both are the main contenders.
No meaningful difference in pace in wins and losses. Big difference in shooting quality.
I agree with many of the commenters; the biggest thing we could do to improve our shooting % is to get a solid inside scorer.
I’m pretty high on Marc Gasol right now–anybody else with me?
@KingGondo
Depends on what Memphis wants in return.
I’d try to get Gasol with a package of Etan, Livingston, both of the first-round picks, and maybe the rights to DeVon Hardin and Robert Vaden as well. We’d have to take Jaric too, but that’s okay. We would have our center of the present and future, so it would be worth it.
DJ White’s rebounding per minute has snuck up in the last 10 games. To the point where his offensive rebounding rate per 48 in the team’s best and his defensive rebounding is only 1 rebound behind Ibaka and good for second place.
http://www.dougstats.com/09-10/OklahomaCityThunderLF.html
But it is spot minutes, much in garbage time.
On PER every player over PER25 and 50+ minutes played is an All-Star or soon to be except DJwhite and Nesterovic.
Essentially every player who has been PER22 in over 500 minutes in a season over the last 5 years has been an ALl-Star.
White last season and this season combined has almost 200 minutes and a PER22. An outlier.
A Boozer?
http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=a1STb
White shoots better and more often than a rookie Boozer. Not quite the same rebounder but not off by that much. White way better on blocks and turnovers.
@Vega
I would love to get Gasol, but I can’t see why they would part with him unless we are offering one of our core players. Gasol is giving them good numbers, costs them very little, and good centers are always at a premium. Same goes for Hibbert and Lopez, and I don’t see the likes of Howard, Bynum, Jefferson or Oden breaking free either.
I’m not really worried about our offensive production in the long run. Russell will become more efficient- with fewer turns and a higher shooting % with experience. KD will commit fewer turns. Harden is of course going to improve significantly. Ibaka could really become something spectacular at the PF position. We don’t need to add any players or implement any different strategy to make those things happen- they will happen on their own with experience.
Unless and until he gets bigger minutes White’s reference is more Carl Landry than Boozer. But at some point you’d want to find out what he could do in bigger regular minutes.
Landry has handled it fine.
White’s reference is more “early” Carl Landry, for now.
Hey Crow, DJ stinks on defenee – he will never play bigger minutes until he getts better at defense – I like the PER stat, but his is irrelevant because it’s mostly garbage time like you said . . .
Yeah his defense stinks at PF. By 82 games it is fine at Center. If you believe it.
But DJ can boost himself by playing better defense. He should know that.
A big not often discussed is Fesenko in Utah. Jerry Sloan is not a fan of his and Utah will need to trim payroll. Somebody could snag him. Whether he can be better than he is right now or better than Mullens I can’t say but I’d have some “gambler’s” interest.
By coincidence he had his best game of the season tonight- 11pts, 5 rebounds in 20 minutes and a solid +/-.
Only two teams in the west have more road wins than Thunder but only two have worse in conference records.
@Crow
What’s important from here on out is that we beat the teams that we should beat, with an occasional win over a team like the Mavs or Spurs. Anything else is just gravy (such as wins over the Celtics, Suns, or Lakers). No more dropping home games to the Clippers, or losing road games against the Kings. And anything less than a season sweep of the T-Wolves and Grizz would be highly disappointing.
If we do that, .500 is absolutely attainable.
So can we have a caption competition for pics like this?
For the pic in this article, “COOTIES!”
In retrospect, I think Sam Presti (and a lot of other GM’s) missed an opportunity to buy low on Chris Kaman. He’s the exact type of center we need, someone who can score at close to a 50% clip, play a bit of defense, rebound, block a couple shots..