The Offense and Shot Distribution

[ballin]

The Facts

Let's start off with the positive: the Celtics defense is second in the league at at 99.9 defensive rating (that's points allowed per 100 possessions).

Now for the bad news: our offense is ranked 17th in the league with a 106.8 offensive rating (points scored per 100 possessions).

So what?

Well over the last 10 years there has only been a single team to win a championship with an offensive rating this bad: the Detroit Pistons. Needless to say, our offense could use improvement if we want to have a serious chance at winning it all.

Where's the problem?

Well, offensive rating is determined by offensive efficiency, so let's look at some True Shooting %'s.

.614 -Paul Pierce
.620 -Ray Allen
.568 -Kevin Garnett

.499 -Rajon Rondo
.504 -Glen Davis

As we can see, Rajon Rondo and Glen Davis are less efficient than the Big 3. Much, much less efficient. This in and of itself isn't such a bad thing... championship teams have occasionally employed offensively inept players throughout history. Take Ben Wallace for example on that Pistons team I mentioned earlier. It's not a big deal as long as they don't shoot that much and drag the team's efficiency down, right?

Well unfortunately, that's exactly where this team's problem is. On a per minute basis, Glen Davis takes about as many shots as each of the Big 3 (around 13 shots per 36 min.). Rondo takes only a couple of shots less. Yikes. For comparison, Ben Wallace shot only about 5 shots per 36 min. the year that Pistons team won a championship.

So what do we do?

Fortunately, the solution is simple. Doc needs to tell Rondo and Davis to shoot less, and tell the Big 3 to shoot more.

There's an objection to this that's sure to follow: the same old, tired, incorrect "usage" argument. The argument is as follows "The more shots a player takes, the more their efficiency will decrease." There's an appeal to the logic of it... that the more a single player takes shots, the more the opposing defense will collapse on them. Makes sense.

Unfortunately, the facts show us that this happens to be a myth. David Berri over at Wages of Wins did a statistical regression and found no measurable link between field goal attempts and efficiency, and reasoned that if there was a connection, the correlation was minimal at best. For example, some of Kobe's most efficient years were the 3 years he led the league in field goal attempts.

So Pierce, Allen, and KG should take more shots, as it is unlikely to affect their efficiency.

But let's take it a step further and assume that the usage argument is correct. After all, didn't Ray, Paul, and KG all have lower TS%'s before coming to Boston? Indeed they did, but this could more likely be attributed to their terrible teammates. It's pretty easy to double Kevin Garnett when there isn't another threat on his team (that sort of thing).

Sorry, I'll get back on track. Let's say that the lower TS%'s were 100%, purely, and solely because the usage argument is correct. Guess what? Ray, Paul, and KG would all still be significantly more efficient than Rondo and Davis TAKING DOUBLE THE AMOUNT OF SHOTS THEY CURRENTLY TAKE, EVEN IF THE USAGE THEORY IS ASSUMED TO BE TRUE. Look at their stats and you'll see that history proves this.

So in conclusion, even if you think efficiency is correlated with field goal attempts, Ray, Paul, and KG should all be taking more shots if we want our offense to improve.

[vinnie]

Great and well thought-out post. I think you hit the nail on the head. Do you happen to know the offensive efficiency rating for Jeff Green, Shaq, or Delonte West, who all will be key players in the playoffs?

[ballin]

Great and well thought-out post. I think you hit the nail on the head. Do you happen to know the offensive efficiency rating for Jeff Green, Shaq, or Delonte West, who all will be key players in the playoffs?

Jeff Green - .581 (He's playing a lot better than his career average. I expect somewhat of a regression to the mean, but I also think Doc is using him better than OKC did and that explains part of it)

Shaq - .655 (Has always been EXTREMELY efficient. Explains why he has so many rings, really.)

Delonte West -.513 (He's usually more efficient. I guess it's to be expected since he's coming off injury)


/basketball-reference.com was the source

[BballTim]

  Someone brought up that Berri study a month or two ago. Either it's seriously flawed or it doesn't mean what people think it means, I can't remember which. And none of the big three are the athletes they were 4 years ago, so your history argument isn't that great. But in general you are right, the offense is more efficient when Rondo's passing and the big three are shooting.

[LB3533]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

[ballin]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

Yes and no. The Big 3 could certainly be shooting a bit better, to be sure. But believe it or not, even a bad day from the Big 3 is still usually way more efficient than an average day from Davis or Rondo. On that note, I'd still take Paul Pierce putting up a lot of shots on an off night than risk Rondo and Davis shooting us out of the game entirely. Just look at the Memphis game to see my point.

Paul Pierce: 22 points on 10 shots
Kevin Garnett: 10 points on 9 shots
Ray Allen: 14 points on 10 shots

Now, contrast this to BBD and Rondo.

Rondo: 6 points on 12 shots
Davis: 12 points on 11 shots

Obviously, not every one of the Big 3 is going to be on fire every game. But 2/3 of the Big 3 were being their typical efficient selves, and Garnett was being just mediocre.

On the other hand, Rondo was being inefficient and Davis was being mediocre. This is basically to be expected if you look at their season stats.

Now for the bottom line: If Rondo and Davis had taken half as many shots, and those shots had been taken by the Big 3, statistically speaking, it's HIGHLY likely that would have benefited the team by at least 3 more additional points. In other words, we would have won the game if the Big 3 had shot more and Rondo and Davis had shot less, even factoring in KG's off-night.

[Marcus13]

TP - This is what I've been saying but you have the numbers to prove it

[BballTim]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

Yes and no. The Big 3 could certainly be shooting a bit better, to be sure. But believe it or not, even a bad day from the Big 3 is still usually way more efficient than an average day from Davis or Rondo. On that note, I'd still take Paul Pierce putting up a lot of shots on an off night than risk Rondo and Davis shooting us out of the game entirely. Just look at the Memphis game to see my point.

Paul Pierce: 22 points on 10 shots
Kevin Garnett: 10 points on 9 shots
Ray Allen: 14 points on 10 shots

Now, contrast this to BBD and Rondo.

Rondo: 6 points on 12 shots
Davis: 12 points on 11 shots

Obviously, not every one of the Big 3 is going to be on fire every game. But 2/3 of the Big 3 were being their typical efficient selves, and Garnett was being just mediocre.

On the other hand, Rondo was being inefficient and Davis was being mediocre. This is basically to be expected if you look at their season stats.

Now for the bottom line: If Rondo and Davis had taken half as many shots, and those shots had been taken by the Big 3, statistically speaking, it's HIGHLY likely that would have benefited the team by at least 3 more additional points. In other words, we would have won the game if the Big 3 had shot more and Rondo and Davis had shot less, even factoring in KG's off-night.

  You can't ignore the free throws people take when counting shots. PP was still efficient but it was more like 13-14 shots.

[ballin]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

Yes and no. The Big 3 could certainly be shooting a bit better, to be sure. But believe it or not, even a bad day from the Big 3 is still usually way more efficient than an average day from Davis or Rondo. On that note, I'd still take Paul Pierce putting up a lot of shots on an off night than risk Rondo and Davis shooting us out of the game entirely. Just look at the Memphis game to see my point.

Paul Pierce: 22 points on 10 shots
Kevin Garnett: 10 points on 9 shots
Ray Allen: 14 points on 10 shots

Now, contrast this to BBD and Rondo.

Rondo: 6 points on 12 shots
Davis: 12 points on 11 shots

Obviously, not every one of the Big 3 is going to be on fire every game. But 2/3 of the Big 3 were being their typical efficient selves, and Garnett was being just mediocre.

On the other hand, Rondo was being inefficient and Davis was being mediocre. This is basically to be expected if you look at their season stats.

Now for the bottom line: If Rondo and Davis had taken half as many shots, and those shots had been taken by the Big 3, statistically speaking, it's HIGHLY likely that would have benefited the team by at least 3 more additional points. In other words, we would have won the game if the Big 3 had shot more and Rondo and Davis had shot less, even factoring in KG's off-night.

  You can't ignore the free throws people take when counting shots. PP was still efficient but it was more like 13-14 shots.

True, I took a shortcut by omitting trips to the free throw line. But it cuts both ways; Davis and Rondo went to the line a couple of times as well. So, free throws considered the Big 3 were still much more efficient and the end result is the same.

[BballTim]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

Yes and no. The Big 3 could certainly be shooting a bit better, to be sure. But believe it or not, even a bad day from the Big 3 is still usually way more efficient than an average day from Davis or Rondo. On that note, I'd still take Paul Pierce putting up a lot of shots on an off night than risk Rondo and Davis shooting us out of the game entirely. Just look at the Memphis game to see my point.

Paul Pierce: 22 points on 10 shots
Kevin Garnett: 10 points on 9 shots
Ray Allen: 14 points on 10 shots

Now, contrast this to BBD and Rondo.

Rondo: 6 points on 12 shots
Davis: 12 points on 11 shots

Obviously, not every one of the Big 3 is going to be on fire every game. But 2/3 of the Big 3 were being their typical efficient selves, and Garnett was being just mediocre.

On the other hand, Rondo was being inefficient and Davis was being mediocre. This is basically to be expected if you look at their season stats.

Now for the bottom line: If Rondo and Davis had taken half as many shots, and those shots had been taken by the Big 3, statistically speaking, it's HIGHLY likely that would have benefited the team by at least 3 more additional points. In other words, we would have won the game if the Big 3 had shot more and Rondo and Davis had shot less, even factoring in KG's off-night.

  You can't ignore the free throws people take when counting shots. PP was still efficient but it was more like 13-14 shots.

True, I took a shortcut by omitting trips to the free throw line. But it cuts both ways; Davis and Rondo went to the line a couple of times as well. So, free throws considered the Big 3 were still much more efficient and the end result is the same.

  I don't think KG was that much more efficient than Davis, and obviously it's not true that any of the big three on a bad night are more efficient than Davis or Rondo on a good night.

[ballin]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

Yes and no. The Big 3 could certainly be shooting a bit better, to be sure. But believe it or not, even a bad day from the Big 3 is still usually way more efficient than an average day from Davis or Rondo. On that note, I'd still take Paul Pierce putting up a lot of shots on an off night than risk Rondo and Davis shooting us out of the game entirely. Just look at the Memphis game to see my point.

Paul Pierce: 22 points on 10 shots
Kevin Garnett: 10 points on 9 shots
Ray Allen: 14 points on 10 shots

Now, contrast this to BBD and Rondo.

Rondo: 6 points on 12 shots
Davis: 12 points on 11 shots

Obviously, not every one of the Big 3 is going to be on fire every game. But 2/3 of the Big 3 were being their typical efficient selves, and Garnett was being just mediocre.

On the other hand, Rondo was being inefficient and Davis was being mediocre. This is basically to be expected if you look at their season stats.

Now for the bottom line: If Rondo and Davis had taken half as many shots, and those shots had been taken by the Big 3, statistically speaking, it's HIGHLY likely that would have benefited the team by at least 3 more additional points. In other words, we would have won the game if the Big 3 had shot more and Rondo and Davis had shot less, even factoring in KG's off-night.

  You can't ignore the free throws people take when counting shots. PP was still efficient but it was more like 13-14 shots.

True, I took a shortcut by omitting trips to the free throw line. But it cuts both ways; Davis and Rondo went to the line a couple of times as well. So, free throws considered the Big 3 were still much more efficient and the end result is the same.

  I don't think KG was that much more efficient than Davis, and obviously it's not true that any of the big three on a bad night are more efficient than Davis or Rondo on a good night.

I said in my analysis that Davis and KG were both mediocre, so I wasn't claiming that KG was more efficient. I just said that the Big 3 as a whole was more efficient.

What I am saying, though, is that that was a "bad" night for KG (below his average) and a "good" night for Davis (right around his average).

[Carhole]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

Yes and no. The Big 3 could certainly be shooting a bit better, to be sure. But believe it or not, even a bad day from the Big 3 is still usually way more efficient than an average day from Davis or Rondo. On that note, I'd still take Paul Pierce putting up a lot of shots on an off night than risk Rondo and Davis shooting us out of the game entirely. Just look at the Memphis game to see my point.

Paul Pierce: 22 points on 10 shots
Kevin Garnett: 10 points on 9 shots
Ray Allen: 14 points on 10 shots

Now, contrast this to BBD and Rondo.

Rondo: 6 points on 12 shots
Davis: 12 points on 11 shots

Obviously, not every one of the Big 3 is going to be on fire every game. But 2/3 of the Big 3 were being their typical efficient selves, and Garnett was being just mediocre.

On the other hand, Rondo was being inefficient and Davis was being mediocre. This is basically to be expected if you look at their season stats.

Now for the bottom line: If Rondo and Davis had taken half as many shots, and those shots had been taken by the Big 3, statistically speaking, it's HIGHLY likely that would have benefited the team by at least 3 more additional points. In other words, we would have won the game if the Big 3 had shot more and Rondo and Davis had shot less, even factoring in KG's off-night.

  You can't ignore the free throws people take when counting shots. PP was still efficient but it was more like 13-14 shots.

Actually you basically can. One of the biggest problems with our offense is that only PP draws fouls at an above average rate. Scoring at the foul line is actually of a greater value as it relates to game play than making a layup. And creating fouls is a huge but often overlooked skill set.


Typically the most skilled offensive players (or players that can create a consistent size/speed advantage) take the most foul shots because they are the most difficult people to guard
Foul shots are points without a moving clock.
Foul shots are typically opportunities to set up your half court D
Fouls drawn on opposing players can adjust rotations/player minutes
By drawing fouls a player is making the other people on the court more efficient over the long run. If PP draws 4 fouls in a quarter the next time KG is bodied up on the post or Ray is grabbed coming off a pin down, even without the ball, they are getting the opportunity to score without having to break down a set defense.

I never get the argument that foul shots some how negates a percent of a players scoring efficiency - or that you "have to take the foul shots into account as ft attempts".

It is actually very similar to why Base on Balls are not counted as at bats because it should not reduce a players batting average yet it increases their efficiency as a hitter (measured by on base percentage)

The player earned those points, they scored points while keeping time and hence additional possessions available in the game. They adjusted the game in a number of other beneficial ways which more then balance out their not being a fga in the box score.

This is also why a player like Rondo can be so infuriating he is really the only other player we have that can consistently create fouls with his quickness advantage but he chooses not to and that has a negative impact on the long term offensive success of the team.

[BballTim]

Our offense is stinking BECAUSE our Big 3 haven't been as offensively efficient as those above TS% reflect.

Ray and Paul have had some off shooting nights over these last few games...half of them losses!!!

KG's been more consistent and is already too unselfish...but it makes more sense for KG to be unselfish when he supposedly has two great efficient wings to defer to.

If our Big 3 are rolling from Quarter 1, we get bench production...we are easily beating teams by double figures and resting our starters for all of Quarter 4.

Yes and no. The Big 3 could certainly be shooting a bit better, to be sure.

 On that note, I'd still take Paul Pierce putting up a lot of shots on an off night than risk Rondo and Davis shooting us out of the game entirely. Just look at the Memphis game to see my point.

Paul Pierce: 22 points on 10 shots
Kevin Garnett: 10 points on 9 shots
Ray Allen: 14 points on 10 shots

Now, contrast this to BBD and Rondo.

Rondo: 6 points on 12 shots
Davis: 12 points on 11 shots

Obviously, not every one of the Big 3 is going to be on fire every game. But 2/3 of the Big 3 were being their typical efficient selves, and Garnett was being just mediocre.

On the other hand, Rondo was being inefficient and Davis was being mediocre. This is basically to be expected if you look at their season stats.

Now for the bottom line: If Rondo and Davis had taken half as many shots, and those shots had been taken by the Big 3, statistically speaking, it's HIGHLY likely that would have benefited the team by at least 3 more additional points. In other words, we would have won the game if the Big 3 had shot more and Rondo and Davis had shot less, even factoring in KG's off-night.

  You can't ignore the free throws people take when counting shots. PP was still efficient but it was more like 13-14 shots.

True, I took a shortcut by omitting trips to the free throw line. But it cuts both ways; Davis and Rondo went to the line a couple of times as well. So, free throws considered the Big 3 were still much more efficient and the end result is the same.

  I don't think KG was that much more efficient than Davis, and obviously it's not true that any of the big three on a bad night are more efficient than Davis or Rondo on a good night.

I said in my analysis that Davis and KG were both mediocre, so I wasn't claiming that KG was more efficient. I just said that the Big 3 as a whole was more efficient.

What I am saying, though, is that that was a "bad" night for KG (below his average) and a "good" night for Davis (right around his average).

  You don't have to summarize what you said, it's in a previous post:

  "But believe it or not, even a bad day from the Big 3 is still usually way more efficient than an average day from Davis or Rondo."

[BballTim]

I never get the argument that foul shots some how negates a percent of a players scoring efficiency - or that you "have to take the foul shots into account as ft attempts".

It is actually very similar to why Base on Balls are not counted as at bats because it should not reduce a players batting average yet it increases their efficiency as a hitter (measured by on base percentage)

  Because foul shots use up an offensive possession. If PP takes 20 shots in a game and makes 10 baskets that's 20 points on 20 shots. If he takes 20 shots in the next game and makes 2 out of 10 shots, gets fouled on 10 shots and makes 8 of the 20 foul shots that's 12 points that resulted from the 20 shots. You'd be claiming that the 12 points on 20 shots is more efficient than the 20 points on 20 shots because the box score would show 12 points on 10 shots. This is entirelyt different from a base on balls because the walk doesn't "use up" an at bat. If there was one out before the batter walked there's still one out after he walks.

[missyP]

I enjoyed reading your posts in this thread. Very insightful, thanks for sharing.
I guess statistically speaking we should close out a game with Delonte, Ray, Paul, KG and Shaq when we do not have big leads or struggling to score.