Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

by louismg on Jan 7, 2007 2:37 AM PST in Numbers

Previous Stats Features:

Tonight, the Kings lost a game they shouldn't have - and not just because they were playing at home against a weak opponent who should have been slapped away like Muggsy Bogues driving for a dunk against Manute Bol.

The Kings, according to our stats scorecard, did those things that all season have led to a victorious outcome, namely:

They made more 3 pointers (82% Win Expectancy)
They made more total field goals (80% Win Expectancy)
They made a higher % of 3 pointers (80% Win Expectancy)
They made a higher % of all field goals (73% Win Expectancy)
They took fewer free throws (71% Win Expectancy)
They took fewer field goal attempts (58% Win Expectancy)

All of the above stats include Saturday's loss...

Tonight, our loyal Excel sheet let us down. But, in actuality, that was because the Kings let us down in a big way, by delivering one of the weakest 4th quarter scoring performances I've seen in a long time. In fact, the team's 12-point output is the absolute worst of the year. With only a 3rd quarter mid-December blip vs. the Jazz, one has to go to the beginning of the season when the Kings approached this level of despair.

LOWEST-SCORING QUARTERS THIS SEASON

POINTS	QUARTER	DATE	OPPONENT	OUTCOME
12	4th	Jan. 6 '07	Portland	Loss
13	3rd	Dec. 14 '06	Utah	Win
14	1st	Nov. 3 '06	Chicago	Win
16	1st	Nov. 1 '06	Minnesota	Loss
16	3rd	Nov. 4 '06	Milwaukee	Loss

You can try to blame tonight's game, or that vs. the Lakers, on missed free throws, questionable coaching, or even the pH balance in the team's Perrier, but if an NBA squad scores 12 points in the 4th quarter, I don't care who you are, you deserve to lose - not even if you do everything else right.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

It IS the water!

Dear Mr. Stats Guy,
Please decipher the ESPN Strength of Schedule stats sheet for me.
Thanks a mil!

by pyro on Jan 7, 2007 5:04 AM PST reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

Mr. Pyro,

Thank you for your application to "Stats Corner" management.

Each year, we receive many applicants from highly qualified candidates, and have to undergo a thorough selection process.

We regret to inform you that your request has not been accepted at this time. We wish you well in your future endeavors.

- Stats Corner

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

by louismg on Jan 7, 2007 8:39 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

No really, i'm not computing where SOS ranking (we are first) fits in with the expected outcomes. Does a high ranking add to expectancy? How often do the SOS and other stats change out? Weekly? I have girl brain on this one. : )

by pyro on Jan 7, 2007 3:01 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

I'll have to start paying more attention to that, to see how frequently it changes, but it's my expectation that the strength of schedule is backward looking - focusing on the teams you have already played.

Of note, it says the Kings are underperforming (we knew that).

At the time of its most recent update, it says the Kings erally should be 16-14, while they are 14-16. That hinges mightily on total points scored vs. total points given up. As the Kings have outscored their opponents on the season, common expectation would be that they'd be above .500, yet they're not...

That two-game swing is a big deal with so few games.

What "should be" a .523 team is instead a .467 one.

One of the funny things about "Strength of Schedule" is that teams like Phoenix who are really good don't get credit, because they never play themselves. Therefore, arguably, it's easier for a really bad team to have a high strength of schedule. They never play themselves either. (Think Charlotte, #3 on the list)

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

by louismg on Jan 7, 2007 4:04 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

Thanks!

by pyro on Jan 8, 2007 1:42 AM PST up reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

Or maybe it IS the gatorade...

http://www.cdbaby.com/cd/rhondda

by Rhondda Nunes on Jan 7, 2007 5:29 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

Face it. The Kings are not going to win many games in this conference. The opposition, on most nights, can put a better level of talent on the floor. Height is one of the big factors. Just inserting Taylor late in the game pointed up how much the Kings need more height. He certainly is not the answer but an indication as to how much they need some tall men. You don't win guarding Zack Randolph with Kenny Thomas.
It is bad enough to have to watch the Kings lose a close one but to have to be subjected to those two numbskull announcers make it twice as hard to take. At one point, Jerry Reynolds pronouced Mike Bibbey as "unguardable". That must have come as a surprise to most other teams. Later, they were rattling on and as an aside mentioned that Thomas had gotten a technical. Never mentioned why or anymore about it. It really reflects on the team and the town. Visitors listeners must think, God, what a bunch of yokels. We must be for putting up with those jerks. They are not announcers, they are cheerleaders.

by Observer on Jan 7, 2007 8:19 AM PST reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

Amen to the comments about Grant and Jerry. Once again, if the TV announcers are complaining about calls more than I am, it's a bad sign. Too often, Grant or Jerry will start whining about a missed call, and I'm thinking, "No, they actually got that one right on the money, fellas." It's sad when you actually find yourself longing for the wisdom and restraint of Bill Walton. Grant and Jerry: stop whining about the refs, stop shining the home team's boots, stop insisting on Geoff Petrie's infallibility, stop talking about what remarkable human beings the Maloofs are, and just call the damn game, OK?

Freakin' Kings.

by DB on Jan 7, 2007 9:36 AM PST reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

Also, isn't it queer that taking fewer free throws and fewer field goals leads to a higher win expectancy? Is that a statistical anomaly or is there an explanation for that?

Freakin' Kings.

by DB on Jan 7, 2007 9:38 AM PST reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

I definitely think it's "odd". That other word is off-limits. :-P

When I first ran the numbers, I could have sworn it was a small sample size, but as the season has progressed, it keeps coming up. Somebody with a bigger database and more tools could probably see if there's more of a correlation league-wide.

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

by louismg on Jan 7, 2007 2:47 PM PST up reply actions

Re: Stats Corner: Suckitude Doesn't Compute

Completely out of me arse, but: Could it have to do with teams shooting a better percentage get less offensive rebounds and therefore less shots? That seems to make sense - even if you're a poor offensive rebounding team (say, a 20% oReb team) and a poor shooting team, you'll have more opportunities for oRebs than a PHX, who shoots very well.

Again, I don't know, but this might make sense.

by Tom Ziller on Jan 8, 2007 7:36 AM PST up reply actions