Rip City

So, a month or two ago I was thinking about the Blazers. Specifically, around the time they announced they were going to retire Terry Porter's number I started remenicing about those old Blazer teams again. Then I remembered the awesome Blazer rap songs and Rip City Rhapsody in particular. I spent hours (literally several hours over 2-3 nights) searching for an mp3 or youtube video of the that song.  You see I loved that song. I had the cassette tape. I had a VHS tape of the highlights from that season that had the video. And I watched it on a pretty regular basis. But I couldn't find it. It didn't exist anywhere. Adter that amount of searching I was convinced that the internet had let me down.

So, why did I tell you all of this? Because I thought perhaps it wasn't clear how big of a dork I was/am?  No, not exactly. You see, the great Lord of the Tubes has granted my wish. So to all of you that love it, to all of you that have never seen it, I present the video of Rip City Rhapsody! Big thanks to Bust-a-Bucket for getting this done.

While watching the video keep your eye out for some classic Drazen shots... as well as Kevin Johnson crying like a baby. But perhaps best of all, is hearing the Schonz calls in the background.

So I am laying her in my bedroom, listening to the Blazer game. You see I don't have Comcast, nor is there a Trailblazer radio affiliate in the Astoria area. Luckily, from one spot in my bedroom I can pickup the broadcast on 95.5 out of Portland. Anyway, none of that has a whole lot to do with this post. This post is actually another in my sporadic series looking at modern statistical analysis and the NBA.

It is still pretty early in the season, so any statistics we could look at would be significantly limited by small sample size limitations. However, I came across a couple of articles at Basketball Prospectus (main page: here) that I think bear some comment, and with a little luck, some discussion. Kevin Pelton is the main writer for Basketball Prospectus, and he has worked to develop a projection system called SCHOENE that is (at least in some ways) similar to PECOTA, a baseball projection system. See here for a nice in depth explanation. In essence, SCHOENE uses last years stats to build a projection for every player that played at least 250 minutes in the previous season. Once the player projections are finished, those can then be used to build team projections. There are obviously several important adjustments made, if you are curious about those follow the link above.

So, that is a long explanation that you probably didn't need just to link to this. That is the SCHOENE projection for the Northwest Division this year. A little surprising to me was the projection for Portland: 51-31 and the division winner. Now don't get me wrong, I love the Blazers. I am just not sure they are 50+ win team this year. Compare this with Hollinger, who looks at Portland as more or less a .500 team. In some ways I tend to think Hollinger's projection is closer to reality, but honestly I am not qualified to discuss which system is stronger. I do think it is important to point out that Hollinger uses 3 years of weighted statistics rather then just last years. Anyway, I thought it was pretty interesting.

PS. Kind of funny, looking at Lamarcus Aldridge's closest comparison (that is what player of similar size, position, etc. did his last season match closest): Channing Frye. 

1st half thoughts.

Sort of live blogging this... Here are the thougths I had.

Frye's first 3 of the season didn't look good. I know he has been working on it, and I won't judge from one shot but it looked rushed and flat.

Frankly, the whole team has looked jittery and rushed. I know they are young, but I was hoping at least Roy and Aldridge would show a little more poise. I hope it gets better soon or tonight could get long in a hurry.

Greg looks a little lost on the offensive side of the ball, at times I can't say I am completely surprised, but this is the first chance I have been able to watch him. He does look rebounding on the defensive side.

Half way through the 2^nd and Outlaw looks like he is starting to heat up. That would help. Portland needs some kind of offensive spark if they are going to make a game of this. Of course, that doesn't mean he nees to force ugly shots...

Like you would expect from a young team, Portland looks really good on one defensive possession, and really bad on the next. If there is anything to take away from this game going forward I think it is this. There is a lot of talent, but it is still young. Consistency will take time, and I think Blazer fans are going to need patience.

I still say Portland should make one of the last 2 spots in the playoffs this year.

Greg just dropped a great move. Drew the double team, split it, drew the foul and still got off a clean shot.. It didn't go in, but it was a look at what he can do.

That goal tending call on Oden looked like bullshit to me. You will notice TNT didn't show the replay...

Blake needs to knock down wide open shots. I have been a big defender of him, but you need to knock down those shots.

LA is playing aggressive defense, but Portland is making it really easy on them. They have no offensive focus. Whatever the game plan was, it doesn't seem that Portland is executing it.

The last 2 minutes there looked a lot better. Let's hope Portland comes out with better energy after the half.

No matter what the TNT announcers say, I don't think there is any legitimate home court advantage in the LA Coliseum.  

Quick Thoughts from Early in the Blazer Game

I am not particularly surprised that Oden caught a couple of quick fouls. That is just the refs saying welcome to LA.

Portland is jacking up too many jump shots, and the ball really isn't moving. Once it gets into the hands of either Outlaw or Aldridge the whole arena knows a shot is going up. If that is going to be the case, Portland doesn't have a chance in this one.

I haven't seen enough to comment on the defense yet.

Look for another, more in depth post later.

Last Blazers Post for a While

Alright, I was sitting down to drop a short draft preview and I saw something so wrong, so incongruous with my world view I had to mention it here. I just saw Bill O'Reilly, avowed conservative arguing for more regulation of a certain business. I'm still not sure what to say.

Anyway, draft day is tomorrow, and the 3rd annual pritch-slapping of the NBA has already begun. In case you haven't heard, the Blazers bought the 27th pick from New Orleans for cash consideration. This is the same kind of move that netted Portland the rights to supposed sensation Rudy Fernandez. I have a had few comments asking what I would like to see Portland do, and what I think is likely. Well, for all my thoughts are worth, here you go:

I still see Pritchard trying to move the 13th pick. I really don't see there being a player available that will be ready to step in and contribute in the way Portland really needs. Moreover, given the working plan (AKA the Cap-Space for 2009-10 Plan), Portland likely needs to move one or more of Frye, J Jack, and Webster. (For more detail see this site.) Based on that I think Pritchard is most likely to either trade up from 13, or trade for a player that fits Portland's needs.

What I would like to see: Of the three players mentioned I would prefer to see them keep Webster. I think at worst he is a legit 3-point threat that can open the floor a-la James Jones or Kyle Korver. If he continues to develop to his true potential, his ceiling is much much higher. That isn't to say I don't like Jack or Frye, I just think Webster is the more rare of the commodities. I am not as convinced as some that SF is a big need for Portland. I think Outlaw and Webster both have big potential at the 3. I am much more convinced that we need an improvement at the point. So, I guess I'm looking for Pritchard to try and pick up a quality point, but one that is comfortable without the ball. A good shooter, and a good defender with a good handle under pressure.

Other then that, given Pritchard's general MO of stocking talent, I expect to see a lot of BPA tommorrow. (And at least 2 more trades... but I am not plugged in enough to really speculate with who/for who.) I do like Heinrich a lot, but I am not a fan of contract, and that rumor seems to have died out.

Advanced Statistics and the Portland Trailblazers Pt. II

I was going to start writing this post a couple of days ago, but I had a little bit of trouble coming by the numbers that I needed. Pace and efficiency stats aren't too tough to come by, but the other numbers are. Well, they are in the form I wanted them in. 82games.com (which is awesome for other reasons...) has the rebounding numbers, but only to 2 decimal places. To really compare across the whole league, the third decimal is important. So, I wound up building a spreadsheet and calculating the numbers by hand. That was before I found the table I was looking for on basketball-reference. I got lazy when it came to calculating league averages for pace and efficiency. I am sure you will cope. Well, with that out of the way, here are the numbers.

	Portland	League Rank	League Leader	League Worst	League Average
Pace	89.7	29	99.7 (Denver)	87.3 (Detroit)	Not Available
Offensive Efficiency	107.3	14	113.8 (Utah)	100.5 (Seattle)	Not Available
Defensive Efficiency	108.4	17	98.9 (Boston	112.8 (Milwaukee)	Not Available
eFG%	49.00%	16	55.2% (Phoenix)	44.3% (Miami)	49.30%
oReb%	26.70%	15	31.8% (Philadelphia)	22.1% (Miami)	26.70%
dReb%	71.80%	24	.783 (LA Clippers)	70.3% (Golden State)	73.40%
TO%	13.40%	7	11.4% (Toronto & Detroit)	16.5% (Boston)	13.00%
FT Rate	22.80%	21	27.6% (Sacramento)	18.3% (Minnesota)	23.20%

Alright, so there are the numbers. What do they mean? That is a good question. And it is a question that doesn't have an easy answer.

First, looking at pace we see something that I think we knew intuitively. Specifically Portland plays slow, deliberate basketball. Moreover, I don't see that changing a whole lot as long as B. Roy is around. But we also see that Portland is pretty efficient on the offensive end. And efficiency is the important thing.

The defensive end is another story. And, to further illustrate why pace independent statistics are important, if we look solely at opp points/game, Portland is 8^th in the league. But once we take Portland snail like pace into account, we see that rather than in the top 1/3 of the league, the Blazers are really in the bottom half. I also think it is important to note that although Portland is near the middle of the league in Defensive Efficiency ranking wise, the distance between Portland and Milwaukee is pretty small.

The other two numbers that really jump out are defensive rebounding and FT Rate. I think most people recognized that Portland struggled on the defensive glass this year. This is an area Portland should look to improve on. With the addition of Oden in the middle, I am expecting some strong improvement here. A better dReb% should also help improve Defensive Efficiency. It is pretty easy to see the strength of keeping an opponent of the offensive glass.

I am less sure what to make the FT Rate numbers. Of the Four Factors, this one is generally regarded as the least important. Also, although ranked quite low, it appears there is a big bunch near the midpoint, and Portland isn't far from it. Looking at the numbers behind Portland's FT Rate, the Blazes made their foul shots at a good clip (about 76.6%), but really didn't get to the line that often. If Portland had gotten to the line as often as the league average, they would have scored almost 1.34 more points per game. Is that much of a difference? It is worth about 4 wins under the basketball Pythagorean formula*. I would say that is fairly significant.

So, did any of this really communicate information that wasn't clear to somebody just watching the season? I am sure some of it was clear. But if you didn't dig into these numbers, you may think that Portland didn't have much trouble on defense, or that the lack of defensive rebounding wasn't particularly crucial. Either of those beliefs could lead to bad moves as it comes time to build the team for next year.

*In case you are not familiar with it, one of the first big advances in sports statistical research was the so called Pythagorean Theorem of Baseball, or Pythagorean Records. It seems almost a truism to say that your win/lose record is going to be determined by the number of runs(or points) you score and the number you give up. However, a little research showed that a teams winning percentage in baseball is closely tied to: runs scored^2/(runs scored^2 + runs allowed^2). It turns out if we tweak the exponent a little we get an even better fit. The same can be said for NBA Basketball. The generally agreed upon formula for basketball is: Pythagorean Expectation % = Tm pts^14/(Tm pts^14+Opp pts^14).

It should be noted that Portland exceeded it's Pythagorean Expectation this year by about 3 wins. Anecdotally it would seem this would be due to performing better then expected in close games, and losing a few more blow-outs then they won. I haven't taken the time to examine this, and I won't now as this post is getting a bit long.

Modern Basketball Statistics and the Portland Trailblazers (Part 1)

So, those of you that have had more than a beer or two with me lately know that for the last year or so I have become intrigued with the so called sabremetrics (or statistical) approach to looking at baseball performances. My interest in this topic has been fired by the Seattle Mariners blog community. It turns out that the two biggest blogs covering the Mariners both take a decidedly statistical approach to analyzing baseball performances. From there I started thinking about and looking into what work has been done in this realm for other sports. This post is a discussion of the new thinking as it applies to the Portland Trailblazers.

Before discussing where the Blazers are and where they could be going, it would be helpful to give a basic description of what new statistics I am talking about and why things like points per game should become obsolete in the near future much as ERA has.

Some of the my favorite work to date has been done looking at offensive and defensive efficiency. The concept is this: Basic statistics measure how many points a team scores and how many points a team gives up. But, these numbers doesn't exist in a vacuum, and teams that score fewer points don't necessarily have worse offenses. If a team is more deliberate in it's offense, if it uses more of the shot clock each trip down the floor, that team will have fewer overall possessions then a team that shots quickly (like the Suns of the last couple of years). Even a team that is efficient in terms of how it uses it's possessions may score fewer points in a game than a less efficient, but faster team.

Since a game is of a defined length (48 minutes in the NBA) it isn't too difficult to calculate the number of possessions per game a team gets (See here: http://www.basketball-reference.com/about/glossary.html for the formula)* Once we know how many possessions a team has in an average game we can look at how many points per possession a team generates. Although this could be a useful measure, most sites extrapolate out to points scored per 100 possessions to compare across teams. This is useful not just to see how efficient an offense is, but it can also be used as a measure of team defense. Looking at offensive and defensive efficiency will give you a basic measure of a teams health.

Although there are other advanced statistics that bear discussion, today I am going to talk about The Four Factors. This is a concept advanced by Dean Oliver in his book Basketball on Paper. Now, this discussion should come with the caveat that I haven't read that book yet. As such, this discussion will be somewhat cursory. The idea is that a basketball game can be broken down into (shocked face) Four Factors:

1. Shooting

2. Rebounding

3. Ball handling

4. Getting to the free throw line.

This may sound a little simplistic, but it should be noted his work was good enough to get him a job with the Seattle Supersonics and the Denver Nuggets as a full time statistical analyst. Since I am starting to run out of time, tonight I will cover the basics of the four factors and the simple, but more useful statistic.

1) Shooting

When talking about shooting, normal FG% isn't enough. Specifically it fails to account for the added importance of a 3 point field goal. Since a three is worth 50% more than a two, we need to use a waited percentage. This number is generally referred to as “effective field goal percentage” or eFG%. Simply put eFG = (fgm + .5*3fgm)/fga.

2) Rebounding

Once again per game stats are insufficient to measure how well a team does. Per game stats don't account for the number of rebounds that are available in a given game. The better measure is offensive and defensive rebounding percentage. These numbers are fairly self explanatory.

OReb% = OReb / (OReb + Opp DReb)

DReb% = DReb / (DReb + Opp OReb)

3) Ball Handling

Rather then just looking at pure turnovers per game, we can use a possession based statistic: Turnover % = Turnovers / Possession.

4) Free Throws

This one is a little more strange. Although we could just look at FTA or FTM, its always better to take into account the pace of the team you are talking about. Most researchers look at FTM/FGA and dub this “free throw rate”.

None of these stats is the be all end all, and all statistics can be effected by factors that aren't necessarily what we are trying to measure. Alright, it is getting late tonight. Sometime tomorrow or later this week I will drop a post discussing what these numbers say about Portland and where they need to improve.

*Basketball reference is an awesome site. If you like basketball and/or statistics, it is a site you can lose a lot of time at. Their formula is quite good, but also a bit complex. If you need a short version FGA + TO + ~.5 FTA – ORB will get you close, but it isn't particularly exact.

The Power of Voices

I doubt this particular bit of news found its way to too many of you out there, but Dave Niehaus was just elected to the baseball hall of fame as a broadcaster. Make no mistake this is an honor the man has earned and then some. Dave has been the voice of the Mariners since day one of the franchise.

But this post isn't exactly about how awesome Dave is, how he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame. Hearing about Dave, and also having read on of Canzano's better columns about the Schonz has had me thinking about the voices that define teams and sports for me. More than any specific game, any player or any heroic performance those two announcers are my childhood sports memories.

I know a couple of you out there grew up in Portland and grew up as Blazer fans. I am still a Blazer fan, and Brian Wheeler isn't bad. But it doesn't always feel like listening to a Blazer game either. The voice of Bill Schonely is so iconic to me it is hard not hearing it, even 10 years after he was run out of the organization. I know he is back doing some work for the Blazers and you can still hear a few of his wonderful phrases but so many are lost. It's almost worst hearing the few that they have as sound bites for the radio broadcast or for Standard TV commercials. Yet, every now and again, from somewhere deep in the back of my memory snippets of his calls come back.

I am thankful that Dave Niehaus is still working for the Mariners. Like Schonely, he doesn't work full games anymore, but there is couple of innings each game that he does call the play by play. I know there will come a day when he is too old to handle even the light duties he has and we will hear his last call. If I am aware of it on that day, I am sure I will feel sad, wistful perhaps. I have a feeling it won't really sink in until the next summer though. One day, when I am in my office tuning into the game I will forget that Dave is gone and expect to hear his voice, and it won't be there.

This post got a little sentimental, which wasn't my original intent. In the end, perhaps the Northwest should be happy to have been blessed with two fantastic, iconic, and long-lasting play by play announcers.

My oh my.

Two Quick Sports Links

So, a couple of sports things to pass on.

1) Greg Oden has a blog. Quite frankly, an awesome blog. This kid is hysterical.

2) It seems many of the current Oregon players don't really understand why Washington is a hated rival of Oregon. I can understand that from some standpoint it can be a good idea to keep the team on an even keel. On the other hand, this used to be such a hated rivalry. It would be a shame for it to fade. For any of you out there not familiar with the history of this particular border war, there have been a few nice articles about it here, here and here.

I think thats about it for now. I should have more about the house in the next week or two.