A Look into the numbers: why do we win or lose?
Bumped. GO BRUINS. - N
Ok, so I do not have a definite set of reasons for the ups and downs in this basketball season, or a roadmap showing what our warriors need to do to finish this season with a Pauley banner-raising ceremony. What I do have is a look at how the game statistics have differed between Bruin wins and losses over the course of this season. Much of what I have discovered falls into the "no duh" category, while other sets of data had surprisingly little correlation to game outcome
I Imagine that few here would be surprised to hear that the most significant variance between Bruin wins and losses has come thanks to the SPTR's, relating to the number of fouls called, and opportunities at the line for both teams.
FTm-FTa, FT% (Fouls awarded) [per game averages]
UCLA win:
UCLA: 14.1-19.6, .719 (17.0)
Opponent: 11.3-17.1, .663 (16.8)
UCLA loss:
UCLA: 8.0-11.9, .675 (15.3)
Opponent: 16.7-21.4, .780 (19.0)
In games which the Bruins have won, each team has, on average, been called for an approximately equal number of fouls, with the Bruins attempting 2.5 more free throws than their opponent. In Bruin losses, the opposing team has drawn slightly less than 4 fouls more than the Bruins, but have had an even greater knack for getting to the line, attempting 9.5 more free throws than the Bruins in those games. The idea that more fouls + fewer free throws = lose is not exactly thinking outside of the box, but having a basis for the idea can't hurt.
Another statistical category which shows a noticeable variance among wins and losses is UCLA Defensive Rebounding/opponent Offensive rebounding. While success in offensive rebounding displays no correlation to winning (the Bruins have fractionally outperformed in losses over victories on the offensive end), the average number of defensive rebounds varies greatly between Bruin wins and losses, as do offensive rebounds by the opposing team.
UCLA
Win: 31.1 rebounds/game (21.35 defensive)
Loss: 25.9 rebounds/game (15.86 defensive)
Opponent:
UCLA win: 26.6 rebounds/game (7.9 offensive)
UCLA loss: 25.0 rebounds/game (8.7 offensive)
In victory, the Bruins have brought in an average of 5.5 more defensive rebounds (a whopping 34.6% more) than in losses, while opponents have recovered nearly 1 more offensive rebound in games which they win (10% more) despite totaling fewer rebounds in sum in victories over the ben ball warriors.
Three-point shooting holds another statistical variance between wins and losses. There is a certain logic to the idea that a losing team will shoot more 3-pointers in an attempt to make up ground, particularly late in the game. In UCLA's case, the numbers bear this out. Interestingly, UCLA's opponents also attempted more 3-point shots in games which the Bruins fell.
3PTm-3PTa, 3PT% (per game average)
UCLA:
Win: 7.5-18.1, .416
Loss: 7.6-20.7, .366
Opponent:
UCLA win: 4.7-14.0, .333
UCLA loss: 6.7-16.9, .398
While the number of made 3-point shots remains roughly the same for the Bruins win or lose, they attempt 2.6 more shots to do so. This suggests that, even with the long-range proficiency of several of our players, jacking up a bunch of 3's is not necessarily the best strategy when the team is locked in a tight battle. Allowing a hot shooting opponent to take a high number of shots from behind the arc, to no surprise, is also correlated to Bruin losses.
While other other statistics show a strong correlation to wins and losses, such as shooting % and assist/turnover ratio, the number of shots attempted show very little variation among wins and losses, for both the Bruins and opponents.
FGm-FGa, FG%; Assist/TO ratio
UCLA
Win: 29.2-56.1, .520; 1.32/1
Loss: 25.7-56.6, .455; 1.03/1
Opponent:
UCLA win: 22.0-55.4, .437; 0.60/1
UCLA loss: 24.7-55.1, .493; 1.06/1
Many of the lessons which looking at the numbers associated with wins as compared to losses are basic and rather obvious (Shoot better! Protect the ball!...), there are other statistical variations which may be of interest in watching the last few weeks of this season play out. While taking care to note that correlation with a result does not necessarily imply causation, as well as the capriciousness of the SPTR's, it can be helpful to know what the effect of foul call distribution has been, as well as the importance of defensive rebounding and the knowledge that attempting to shoot out of a long-range slump in volume is not always the best way to win a game.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
5 recs |
2 comments
|
Comments
Fantastic post
You, BruinRule, and Nestor have done us all a fine service in trying to make sense of this unaccustomed low point. Thanks to all for your thoughtful work.
Coach always said that, if you had to pick just one statistical predictor, it would be shooting (FG) percentage. That is, when you outshoot your opponent (percentage wise), you probably win. This makes sense. If your opponent shoots a low percentage, it’s probably because you are playing good, team defense. If you shoot a high percentage, it’s probably because you are passing well and taking good shots.
It seems, though, that there have been games this season that have rendered those stats unreliable. I’m not the statistical maven that you are, but I’m pretty sure that we have won games in which our opponent shot more than 50%. I don’t know if we have won when we’ve been outshot, or lost when we have been on the high side.
In any case, with or without statistics, when you play loose defense or sloppy offense, you lose. BruinRule’s stats about the recent 10-game stretch compared to the last several years, and the number of games in which we have not kept our heads above water is terribly revealing. Still, I love my Bruins. I have my confidence that they will find theirs.
Thanks again for your (plural) posts.
by Bruinut on Feb 26, 2009 8:31 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
3 games in which opponents have shot >50%, and 3 games where they have shot exactly 50%
Two of those games came in the non-conference portion of the schedule, against Mercer (.500) and Wyoming (.535), which the Bruins won due in part to forcing a high number of turnovers (24/game), and they being weak opponents.
The remaining 4 games of 50+ opponent shooting happen to have been the last 4 games, encompassing losses at ASU (.600), Arizona (.500) and home to WSU (.588), and a home win vs UW (.500). The 3 losses also saw the Bruins lose the battle for defensive rebounds, called for more fouls, and found itself at a significant disadvantage at the line (39 free throws attempted, compared to 65 for the opposition – though the Bruins saw a slight advantage in the WSU game, 20-17). We have lost one game while shooting at least 50 from the field, last week’s WSU game. The Arizona road trip saw the Bruins shoot 49% from the field in each game, while in no other loss this season have the Bruins shot better than 44%.
And thanks for the kind words. These sorts of post do allow the sat nerd in me to come out and play :)
by bruinhoo on Feb 26, 2009 6:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs




















