The main problem with NBA analytics
A plethora of NBA organizations are relying on statisticians from highly ranked business schools, such as Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Stanford University or the University of California Berkeley to give them historical metric data on the NBA games that are supposed to help teams formulate the best strategies to win an NBA title.
I am an advocate for organizations that give creative control to strong basketball minds who favor the concept of the eye test when ultimately making decisions for a franchise because most statisticians don’t have the prior knowledge of basketball fundamentals and strategies.
For example, that teams in the NBA playoffs play a slower paced style than in the regular season.
Most teams that have a stronger half-court offense advance further into the playoffs because there aren't as many opportunities to create run-and-gun transition offense due to better transition defenses, so the field goal and three-point percentages tend to be worse than the regular season.
Players have to conserve energy for the grind of the NBA playoffs and playing at such a high-tempo style just wears downs on the players in the long run.
Just ask run-and-gun dependent Coach Mike D’Antoni on why the teams he coached, such as the Phoenix Suns, Los Angeles Lakers and most recently the Houston Rockets have not won NBA titles?
Perhaps, ask Coach Don Nelson about why teams he coached, such as the Milwaukee Bucks, Golden State Warriors, and Dallas Mavericks never won titles under his up-tempo offense?
Many of the teams that Nelson and D'Antoni coached have lacked the ability to lock-down on an opponent with hard-nosed defense when their own shots aren't falling, for overwhelming an opponent with high scoring offenses was their form of defense in their respective systems.
The Houston Rockets finished the regular season with the third seed in the Western Conference, holding a 55-27 record while setting an NBA record with a total of 1,081 three point shots made.
However, the San Antonio Spurs eradicated the Rockets 114-75 to win Western Conference Semi-Finals in six games, which further support that this fad of NBA analytics where shooting more threes is not key to winning NBA titles.
Statisticians that NBA organization hire has this idea that shooting more three point shots than two point shots will increase the probability of winning more NBA titles.
Many NBA organizations who depend heavily on NBA analytics are failing to look at the foibles of such data.
NBA analytics will argue that although shooting two-point shots at 50 percent is a higher percentage shot, yet shooting more three-point shots at a lower percentage will equate to more points because three points are greater than two points.
Example: Three-point shots: 11/33= 33% = 33 points Two-point shots: 11/22= 50% =22 points
On the contrary making 33 percent of three point shots is not necessarily a more efficient way of scoring in comparison to making 50 percent of two point shots. The three point shot is the lower percentage shot, which increases the probability that you're going to make fewer shots.
Giving an equal number of attempts, 50 percent of two-point conversions have a greater expected value than 33 percent of three-point conversions.
(.33*3= .99 and .50*2=1)
Isn't the objective of the game of basketball to make more shots than the other team?
In game six of the 2017 Western semifinals between the Spurs and Rockets:
Spurs:
Two-point shots:
46/74=62%=92 points
Three-point shots:
5/22=23%=15 points
Rockets:
Two-point shots:
9/37=24%=18 points
Three-point shots: 13/40= 32%= 39 points
Despite the fact that Kawhi Leonard did not the play in game six, the Spurs still made 46 two-point shots in game six, managing to win the game in a convincing fashion.
The Rockets made only nine two-point field goals in game six.
The Spurs were more efficient when shooting more two point shot attempts at 62 percent than shooting threes at 23 percent and as a result scored substantially more points when shooting the higher percentage shot. Hypothetically, the Rockets still would have scored 14 fewer points than the Spurs if they maintained their three point pace of attempting more three-point shots than the Spurs two-point shots. Rockets hypothetical three-point pace:
(26/80= 32%= 78 points)
Although the Golden State Warriors won NBA titles in both 2015 and 2017, using a run-and-gun offense, yet still managed to lose the 2016 NBA Finals to the Cleveland Cavaliers, becoming the first team to lose in the NBA Finals after leading a series 3-1.
Most notably, the Warriors failed to make a single field goal in the final 4:39 in game seven of the 2016 NBA Finals because they lacked a half-court offense and kept shooting three-point shots despite the fact that they weren't making three-point shots.
This fad of NBA analytics is bad for the NBA because it's becoming a copycat league, yet most teams don't have the proper personnel to copy the Warriors blueprint, for other organizations who copy this specific concept of NBA analytics are doomed for failure to win an NBA title, repeatedly.
Again, just ask Mike D'Antoni.