Comments on: Go-To Guys & Floor %

By: Neil Paine

Neil Paine — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 17:12:21 +0000

Floor% has existed since 1988:

http://www.rawbw.com/~deano/hoopla/floorpct.html

When was "eWins" invented, exactly?

By: Mike G

Mike G — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:59:49 +0000

Wow, another statistic: Floor%. Is this better or worse than more Indians vs Custer?

Reggie was never the go-to guy for the Pacers, except in years that Smits got <2000 minutes. Tells me what?

By: Jason J

Jason J — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 20:33:51 +0000

Okay got it. That's very interesting and makes Magic's ranking make more sense. I still think we may over-credit a Carlos Boozer type who is out there finishing a lot of plays that someone else (Williams) is creating when the numbers put him first, but as far as team scoring if it works, it works.

Check out 87-93 where Barkley and Jordan never rank any lower than 3rd (Jordan is tied with Bird for #3 in 1987).

If you could combine team Floor % with a reliable / realistic defensive indicator, I wonder how good a predictor it would be for total team wins.

By: Neil Paine

Neil Paine — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:59:30 +0000

I should note that I amended the definition of Floor % to say that it's "the percentage of a player’s individual possessions which result in at least 1 point for his team". Earlier I had incorrectly said that it was the % of possessions in which he scores at least 1 point, but it also includes the production of points through assists and offensive rebounds. So that should be considered as well when we think of Magic -- he wasn't a big scorer, but he created a ton of points for others in these situations as well. In my mind, the go-to guy is the guy with the ball in his hands, expected to create something, but it doesn't necessarily have to be something for himself. There's a lot of value in being able to either create for yourself if necessary, but also being able to find the open man; I guess you could say that Magic maximized the Lakers' chances of scoring in that kind of situation, even if he didn't actually score the basket himself. Also, we're not talking strictly buzzer-beating situations here where you can draw up plays and counter-plays, etc., I was just thinking of, say, the last 5 minutes of a very close game. And I think teams still go to their bread-and-butter plays down the stretch in that situation almost exclusively. The last shot of a game, coming out of a timeout, is really a separate scenario unto itself because, like you say, the opponent has time to draw up a defense, and as a coach you know this and can adjust accordingly. But in the possessions leading up to that -- very few of which come directly off of a timeout -- it seems to me like you stick with the girl you took to the dance, so to speak.

By: Jason J

Jason J — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:39:09 +0000

I'm not sure this measures exactly what it sets out to measure in terms of very close late game situations, simply because the nature of a late game situation against a good team almost dictates that the typical play that your go to guy scores on won't be available (unless you're Kareem and can hit a running hook at 15 feet). Good teams take away your first option. With guys like Amare & Malone, whose effectiveness has so much to do with running specific plays (in their cases the pick and roll / pop), this would seem to be a particular problem. Their Floor % seems very much tied to what's going on with the team as a whole, and maybe not so tied to what they will be able to produce in an end game situation. And with big guys in general, there's always the concern of having enough time in the game to get them the ball in scoring positions with enough clock left to kick it out to a teammate if the defense collapses and takes their scoring opportunity away. Also when I'm seeing a guy like Magic in first place, I think we have to remember that Magic was not what you'd typically think of as a go to guy. He increased his shooting volume as Kareem got older, but he was always always pass first player, not a guy that received the ball on the wing in a, "There you go. Now create two points for yourself against a set defense that is keying on your scoring moves." situation. Most of the time when he called his own number in a game it was precisely because he had an opening he couldn't ignore or a mismatch that dictated he back into the post or drive to the hoop. Like a Stockton or a Nash, his scoring efficiency was, to some extent, a result of his ability to pick and choose when to shoot (not to take anything away from the great decision making and shooting prowess of all three of those guys). What Floor % measures is how effective each go to guy is on an average possession. That seems enormously valuable in and of itself.