Stats Corner: Losing the Close Ones

by louismg on Jan 15, 2007 9:10 PM PST in Numbers Comment 11 comments

Previous Stats Features:

It's no secret that TZ and I have often come to similar conclusions around the same time. That's what happens when you have two stat-focused guys following an inconsistent team and trying to make sense of it all. This morning, TZ hit the nail on the head when he wrote: "The Kings' point differential suggests they should be a .500 team. Yet, they're flirting with .400. One would assume that soon, some of those close games will start going the Kings' way".

We know what happens when you assume, but most statisticians will tell you that as more data is compiled, deviations eventually return to the mean. That's part of what has been so frustrating with this Kings squad, who one night will blow out a bad team by 25 (Philadelphia or Atlanta) and the next week or so, drop a pair to the ~~Jail~~ Blazers. The team has the horses to compete, but isn't quite getting over the hump to the point where they are winning when the final buzzer sounds.

Looking into the numbers, you can partially see why the Kings record is so much worse than their overall scoring differential would dictate. The Kings have lost nearly twice as many close games (decided by fewer than 5 points) as they have won, and when the margin of victory is less than 10 points, the Kings are a woeful 5-14. It's not that this team is getting blown out. They've actually been on the happy side of 10+ point beatdowns more times than they play victim, and they've only lost by more than 20 on one occasion. (vs. Phoenix on 12/5), while they've spanked four teams this way (Portland on 11/25, Atlanta on 12/10, Philadelphia on 12/27 and Golden State on 12/30).

KINGS WIN/LOSS MARGINS THIS SEASON

LOST BY >10	LOST BY 6-10	LOST BY 1-5	WON BY 1-5	WON BY 6-10	WON BY >10
7	7	7	4	1	9

That's why we are looking at an odd conundrum. The Kings have been outscored by a mere 15 points all year, yet we're seeing them in a six game tailspin, occupying a solid position in the Pacific Division cellar at 14-21. This isn't a .400 team on paper, but on the hardcourt, they just aren't doing what it takes to win the close ones. It'll take a more than a calculator and Microsoft Excel to figure out why.

0 recs | Comment 11 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Hey Now

You can say we suck, and that's true. You can say the Kings are better than we are, and that's also true. But calling us the "JailBlazers" is so three seasons ago. As a matter of fact I'd be willing to bet that player-for-player we now have more squeaky-clean choirboys than the Kings do, which is no small feat.

--Dave

by BlazerDave on Jan 16, 2007 1:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Re: Hey Now

This reminds me...what ever happened with the EMuss DUI arrest?

by pyro on Jan 16, 2007 2:07 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Hey Now

Court appearance got pushed to February, I believe.

by Ziller on Jan 16, 2007 7:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Hey Now

You are likely correct. I'll suggest falsely that the term Jail Blazers was introduced via "AutoCorrect" and that my computer coerced its placement.

Kings-obsessed. A's obsessed. More ramblings: louisgray.com

by louismg on Jan 16, 2007 6:20 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Hey Now

I understand. My word processing program used to do the same thing. Evil Microsoft! Evil!

--Dave

by BlazerDave on Jan 16, 2007 9:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Stats Corner: Losing the Close Ones

When the stats are that even you really have to look at the little things like shot judgement and effects of coaching decisions. For instance, the game against the Knicks came down to that final shot that was ill advised by Artest. Now the question is, did the coach call for something else and Artest just decide to take matters into his own hands. If that is the case there is real problems. If on the other hand, Artest had absolutely no alternative but to take that desperation shot, he was well advised to do so. If you asked him, he would probably say he had no alternative but was that really the case? This has been true in other situations as well. Assessing the keys to a game like that become almost impossible when you look at the total game. You can certainly make a case that a foul or missed freethrow in the first quarter had as much to do with the loss as Artest's shot at the buzzer. Bibby's shooting probably was much more of a factor than Artest's desperation 3. For that matter you can blame Williamson for his last second illegal screen. You could go nuts trying to isolate the exact cause of the loss.

by Observer on Jan 16, 2007 7:51 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Re: Stats Corner: Losing the Close Ones

Artest's ugly 3 wasn't nearly as bad as the typical Ron-Ron 1 on 1 shot he jacked up with about .38 seconds left. He never even bothered looking at a teammate - like say Reef or KMart, who were both scoring at will - before he tossed up the really "high percentage," off-balance fade away. And, yes, that is coaching. Muss has failed to corral Ron and his penchant for taking horrible shots. Unless there is a huge turnaround, I think it very unlikely Muss is back next year. The number of times he has been out-coached this season - particularly in the 2nd half - is stunning. Moreover, it is clear that he has no influence over this team. The offense is horrible and the defense even worse. This group of players, while not great, has the talent to be a decent .500 team.

by Kusian on Jan 16, 2007 9:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Stats Corner: Losing the Close Ones

In the paper, Muss said he called for a modified pick-and-roll play. If the play that ended up being run was a pick-and-roll, it was possibly the worst pick-and-roll in the history of modern sport. As it was, Muss said he thought Artest had a good game, especially on defense, and said nothing else about the last play. I almost don't blame him, because Artest getting himself suspended for punching the coach does nothing to help.

by Ziller on Jan 16, 2007 9:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Stats Corner: Losing the Close Ones

Of course Muss said he had a good game. He always says the same thing about the games, players and the opposing team. I swear I saw a string on his back with a ring on it tht says "pull for interviews."

by pyro on Jan 16, 2007 11:11 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Stats Corner: Losing the Close Ones

Nice.

by Ziller on Jan 16, 2007 12:09 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Stats Corner: Losing the Close Ones

louismg, The Kings overall stats do show that they should have a better record, or perhaps are due for some more close wins. However I would be interested in what 'crunch time' stats might show. I don't know exactly what period you might use, the whole 4th quarter or the last 2 minutes.
Do you think that this analysis may show up some characteristic for losing the close ones, like poor decision making?

by kinginaus on Jan 16, 2007 7:31 PM PST reply actions 0 recs