The NBA Playoffs are under way, and I thought it would be fun to use some analytics to talk about some things I am noticing. I'll continue to update this notebook throughout the playoffs with different projects looking at some NBA playoff stuff:
All the code for the projects below can be found here:
Should Brook Lopez Play?
Posted: 7/08
Earlier in the Playoffs, I wrote about bigger players with less of a functional skillset getting played off the floor:
The trend is that larger, less mobile players simply can't adhere to the complex defensive coverages and offensive schemes once you get to the playoffs. You just need players that can do more. In game 1 of the NBA Finals, Brook Lopez played far less minutes than usual:
Was this a justified adjustment from Mike Budenholzer? Yes, the Bucks defense was worse with Lopez on the floor, but how much of that was on him? That's really hard to figure out mathematically, but we can do some adjusting for shot making:
While there is a little bit of a difference when you factor in shot making, it does not go all the way. It's difficult to make judgements with just the numbers because of sample size. We are looking at 40-60 samples here, and we don't have context on who was in the game for the other team or whether the possessions were in transition or not. You have to rely a little more on eye test to make a judgement. The Bucks threw a lot of coverages at the Suns, and to me it didn't seem liked they worked. I thought Brook Lopez should have played more minutes because he also gives you a lot more offensively, but Budenholzer didn't agree. It'll be interesting to see how many minutes Brook Lopez plays in game 2.
The Bucks Restricted Area Dominance
Posted: 7/02
Last night felt like watching a different Milwaukee Bucks team than before. A good line that I heard was that when a team loses their best player, they become harder to defend yet easier to stop. This means that they end up relying less on their great player and more on ball movement and designs. I critiqued how little the Bucks seemed to get to the rim n game 4, and they were much better in that department in game 5:
It felt like they were dominating inside and I thought the rim frequency number would be higher. The reason it felt like they were so dominant was because of the accuracy:
The Bucks shot a ridiculous 85.2% from the restricted area in competitive play. Some of this was because of more functional space without Giannis, but some was also simply smarter actions. Sets designed with Lopez being used as a screener with optimal spacing worked really well. It also helped that the Bucks were taking better advantage of Atlanta's meh point of attack defenders, plus Bobby Portis and Brook Lopez both had very good games. Another reason Milwaukee had much more success was simply because Clint Capela didn't play as many minutes as usual, which I will get into later.
Rotations Weirdness Without Either Best Player
Posted: 7/02
Last night's game was the first game of the series that neither team was able to play their best player any minutes. Both Trae Young and Giannis were hurt, which led to some interesting lineup decisions for both sides:
First I'll start with the Bucks. Their entire rotation saw a jump in minutes, but the two most prominent ones here are Brook Lopez and Bobby Portis. Portis has seen his minutes steadily increasing throughout the series, and last night he got the surprise chance to start. It's interesting because with Trae Young out for Atlanta, the Bucks can afford to play Portis big minutes without bleeding too much on defense. The Bucks deciding to switch most actions, and Portis held up just well enough against Atlanta players who aren't incredible advantage creators against a switch. Portis also provided spacing on offense with the ability to mash smaller players on the interior.
The Hawks just had their second game without Trae Young, and there is one interesting impact I did want to point out:
Look at Clint Capela's minutes last game. He was taken off the floor at times because the Bucks switching was killing his offensive value. Capela has never been a good post player at all, so he can't hurt a switch unless there is a lob thrown after an advantage is created at the point of attack. That's why I think this is interesting. Not only does Trae not playing take him out, but it makes it much harder to play Capela. He is their best interior defender by far, but if he is really hurting you offensively it becomes more difficult to play him big minutes. Whether or not the Hawks played Capela, they would be giving something up. Pretty interesting effect of the Trae Young loss.
What the Bucks Did Was Sustainable...
Posted: 7/02
Last night, the Bucks had an offensive rating of 128.1 (86th percentile), which was their best of the series so far:
Usually when this happens, it is because a team shoots the ball uncharacteristically well from behind the arc. Last night was different. The Bucks only went 9/39 from 3, which is 31.3%. That is well below their season average, and they were missing a lot of good looks. The reason their offense was doing so well was not because of shot making:
The Bucks also did not have an above average free throw rate, which can sometimes lead to numbers like this. Something that was in their favor was how good their offensive rebounding was, however. They rebounded 37.5% of their misses, which is good for the 95th percentile. While that was important, I thought the most important piece was the much improved theory of their offense:
Doing things like using Lopez as a screener, cutting through the lane, hunting optimal spacing, attacking space with good matchups, etc. is what opened up the Bucks offense to me. Sometimes they default far too much to iso-ball with poor spacing. That just isn't good enough. Their offense last night was fun to watch, and they were able to do it in a sustainable way. If Giannis comes back it will be different, but they should still implement a lot of the same concepts they found success with in game 5.
More Point God Appreciation
Posted: 7/01
Last night, Chris Paul scored 41 points on 80.96% True Shooting in a game that will absolutely go down as a legacy game for him. He had been struggling to find his rhythm since he came back from the COVID absence, but last night he was sensational. Here's how his performance stacks up to the rest of his postseason:
Chris Paul was also getting it done as a passer and on defense, but his scoring last night is what was really impressive. He was much more aggressive attacking downhill in pick and roll, which opened up the floor for his other looks. He was also knocking down 3's at a great clip, going an insane 7 for 8 on the night. Per usual, the way Paul was scoring was not easy:
Most of his shots were self created, and his efficiency on those looks was great. It's always awesome to watch a small guard like him be able to pulverize a defense built around length and athleticism. Chris Paul's game last night was a special performance in a close out game. Was there some shooting luck? Of course. There is in every single great game. I'm just very happy that Paul had a performance like that to reach the NBA Finals for the first time in his career.
The Suns Improved Theory?
Posted: 7/01
I thought the Suns offense looked a lot better last night in terms of their theory. In game 5, the Clippers were able to get the Suns out of what they like to do by mixing in man and zone with their small group. In game 6, the Suns did not let that bother them nearly as much. They went to a lot of their patented screening actions to force tough assignments, even in a zone alignment. The ball and player movement felt much more purposeful, but the stats do not exactly say that:
There was actually less passing in last nights game from the Suns then there has been before. I think this is actually because of more offensive success, as the Suns did not need many passes after their primary action to score the ball. They posted a 140.2 offensive rating in competitive play, which is good for the 98th percentile per CleaningTheGlass. A lot of it was from simply making more of their shots:
Look at the eFG% from 3-point range. The Suns went a ridiculous 17 of 31 from there. Yes, I think they were getting good looks, but that's far beyond what you could reasonably expect. Look at the shot making from both teams in that game:
It was definitely not as ad of a loss from the Clippers as it felt like towards the end. The Suns hit a ton of shots, but that's regression. They had gone cold the past few games, so they were due for a game like this.
The Suns Unexpected Contributor
Posted: 7/01
Last night when it was announced that Cameron Johnson couldn't play, I questioned who would fill in his role and how effective they could be. The answer to that question was Torrey Craig, who was very good last night in the close out game 6:
Not only did Craig take up the Johnson minutes that were lost, he also took some minutes from Mikal Bridges because he was playing so well. Where Craig plays a role is on the defensive side of the ball:
Craig simply did a better job at defending Paul George than Mikal Bridges did last night. That's why he got more minutes. He's frankly done a very good job on Paul George all series long. Craig is a stronger player, which is more needed in this particular matchup. Because of age and injuries, George doesn't have the same burst he used to have. He has gotten stronger to compensate, but that is why Craig was more effective than Bridges. Craig also filled a role on the defensive and offensive glass, as well as being a good cutter and and ball mover. Craig could play a big role if the Suns match up with his former team in the next round...
Is Trae Young a Ewing Theory Player?
Posted: 6/30
The "Ewing Theory" is something created by Bill Simmons, which was coined after he watched the Knicks consistently play better when Ewing was off the floor. Last night, the Hawks dominated the Bucks all night without Trae Young. So, is Young a Ewing Theory player? The answer is no:
Anytime you make massive judgements based on a 1 game sample, you are probably doing something wrong. The Hawks have been far better with Young on the floor the past two seasons, and they have had to make a lot of moves for secondary ball handlers to combat that exact issue. My theory for why the hawks played so well yesterday is more because the Bucks were not prepared. A ton of very specific preparation goes into every playoff game, and we didn't know Young wasn't playing until a couple of hours before the game. Trae Young is a great player, and he obviously helps his team when he is out there. Just like any player, he has flaws, but his strengths greatly outweigh them.
The Hawks Were a Different Team
Posted: 6/30
Like I just mentioned earlier, the Bucks were facing a completely different Hawks team without Trae Young. Instead of the creation being initiated by 1 player most of the time, there were multiple Hawks players creating for themselves and others. I'm not saying this made them better, it just made them different:
There actually was not more movement of players, just more movement of the ball. There was significantly more passing last night from the Hawks, which is a direct result of losing the heliocentric creator that can do everything out of pick and roll. They needed more ball movement to be effective, and to the players credit they delivered. I also wanted to look at their shot locations from the game to see if there were any significant differences:
There were less shots at the rim than usual, and I would guess that is because the lack of the lob threat without Trae Young (who's one of the better lob throwers ever). Besides shooting very well from floater range, it's not like there's anything here that truly stands out. There was less self creation across the board, which is obviously to be expected.
I want to emphasize this again: the Hawks are not a better offensive team without Trae Young. They are different. The point of looking at these is to see how their different, and then think about how that could impact the Bucks. Milwaukee was playing a different team, which was one they did not game plan for. That's tough in the playoffs, and I think it is a big reason that they lost.
The Bucks Offense Was Not Good...
Posted: 6/30
The Hawks were very solid defensively last night, but I also think the Bucks offense didn't have the same juice it had in previous games. The transition attack wasn't there to the same extent, the advantage creation was lackluster, and some of the actions and movement left a little to be desired. Here's how their offensive rating stacked up to other games in the series:
Obviously, you're not going to win much with an offensive rating over 20 points below your season average. Again, the Hawks deserve credit. The help was sharp, the rotations were good, and the point of attack defense was generally better. However, the Bucks just were not attack the rim as much as they should have:
Finishing at the rim is one of the Bucks biggest strengths. They were 3rd in the league this year in finishing at the rim, but in order to finish at the rim you have to shoot from there first. Clint Capela and Onyeka Okongwu did a great job of defending Giannis and preventing him from getting to the rim. I still wish the Bucks ran more actions with him as a screener or in the dunkers spot. He is not useful when they have him hanging around the slot, and he is actually hurting his team when that happens. Holiday also has to be better. He should theoretically have a matchup advantage most of the time in this series, and he needs to leverage that into rim attacks more frequently. Same can be said for Brook Lopez if a center isn't guarding him.
At the end of the day, shot making still matters. Milwaukee didn't really make shots despite getting good looks at times:
The Bucks scored over 20 points less than expected last night, which is obviously a big number. Remember, the shot quality models are not perfect, but they do a good enough job of distinguishing big margins such as this. There is going to be regression in game 5 for the Bucks. However, their approach needs to improve.
The Impact of Small Ball
Posted: 6/29
The Clippers finally went to more of their small looks against the Suns last night, which is how they got here in the first place. I get that Zubac has been playing very well, but I have been calling for a reduction of his minutes in favor of Batum and Morris in this series. Last night, Zubac was hurt and we finally got 36 minutes of the small ball I've been looking for. Here's how the weighted heights matched up for each team:
The Clippers weighted height was actually not that much smaller than the Suns. Some of that is because Chris Paul and Cam Payne drag down the Suns average, and some is because the Clippers small ball features big wings such as George, Batum, and Morris. Here is how the rotation shook out for the Clippers last night:
We finally got a ton of Marcus Morris minutes, but I do believe he hasn't been playing as much because of a nagging injury. We also got more Batum minutes, which is something I've been begging for throughout the playoffs whenever he doesn't play much. The theory of small ball is mostly to help a team space the floor on offense and then switch a lot more on defense. While the traditional 5-ut spacing with small ball was there for the Clippers and helped them a lot, they went to more untraditional routes on defense. They played a lot of zone with Morris in the middle and Mann/Beverley disrupting at the top, which got the Suns away from their stuff.
Here are the Suns shot locations from game 5:
They actually were able to get into the lane more often to attempt finishes, but they just couldn't capitalize. Some of this was because of good defense from Morris and nice help, but this could also be slightly attributed to luck. Shooting that poorly from inside 5 feet is not normal almost no matter who is defending. The Suns were forced into more mid-range jumpers than usual, but some of the 20-24 foot shots also account for corner 3's (which the Suns uncharacteristically missed a lot of). I really liked the activity of the Clippers defense, and going small helps to be able to fly around in full rotation and plug holes that arise during a possession. However, the Suns got too far away from their stuff.
Something else that challenges a lot of small ball groups is rebounding. Rebounding is also something that challenges a lot of zone defenses, so it would've made sense if DeAndre Ayton has a monster offensive rebounding game (similar to what he did in game 4). However, as noted a lot on the broadcast, the Clippers did a phenomenal job of gang rebounding:
The Clippers snagged 40 out of 43 available defensive rebounds, giving them a ridiculous defensive rebounding rate of about 93% (league average is 74.4%). This not only ended good defensive possessions, but it also allowed the Clippers to run more in transition. The Clippers rebounding as well as they did went a long way in helping the small group be so successful. It'll be interesting to see what Tyronn Lue does with his rotations if Ivica Zubac is available for game 6.
Shot Making is Still Huge...
Posted: 6/29
The Clippers won last night to push the series to a 6th game, but they were certainly helped by some shots falling. Paul George was 15/20, Marcus Morris was 9/16 on a lot of tough looks, and the same can be said for Reggie Jackson's 8/14. On the other hand, Suns players such as Devin Booker and Chris Paul were not making all the shots they are accustomed to. Here's how both teams faired in shot making last night:
The Clippers gained about 6 points from shot making and the Suns lost about 9. If both teams shoot exactly as expected in that game then the Suns end up winning by 1. Again, shot quality is not a perfect measure, but it is a decent place to start to look at overall game shot making or shooting variance. The Clippers did plenty defensively to help swing the odds in their favor, and the Suns did things that didn't help them offensively. Monty Williams is an excellent coach and will have some adjustments for game 6.
How Much Did the Zone Bother the Suns?
Posted: 6/29
Whenever someone asks Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim about why he plays exclusively zone defense, he talks abut how it makes it so his team isn't playing against the other teams preferred style of offense. The opponent is forced into their zone offense, which is something they don't practice nearly as much. This is why there is often chaos around Syracuse in March. Last night reminded me of that, with the Clippers playing a lot of zone with their small group. The Suns felt out of rhythm, as they couldn't run a lot of the successful sets they have been doing all season:
Their movement and potential assists were both below their season average last night, and part of that was because of the disruption of the zone. The offense couldn't run the intricate ball screen sets, and it couldn't flow into those secondary actions we are used to seeing from them. Instead, it was a lot of step up screens for Chris Paul without much ensuing movement. Again, Monty Williams is a brilliant coach and will adjust. It is difficult to construct a good zone offense if you didn't come into the game expecting it. The Suns still got some decent looks by attacking downhill and kicking out. Expect more actions to attack that, such as certain screening alignments to force one defender onto two players.
The Bucks Defensive Strategy
Posted: 6/28
The defensive strategy for the Bucks has been clear so far: keep the Hawks out of the paint and away from easy looks and live with the results. Clog up the middle, disrupt actions with activity at the nail and length in the passing lanes, and play the percentages:
The two most important numbers here for me are the drop in paint touches and the drop in assisted shots. The Bucks are making life a lot more difficult by not allowing such easy lobs from Trae Young. His assist numbers have been far lower in the past couple of games because the easy lobs and general reads are not there for him. The Bucks will live with Young shooting lightly contested floaters every time, as that is what the numbers are telling them they should give up:
Look at the massive drop in shots near the rim. While the Hawks have been very successful in that area, the best form of defense is prevention. The most efficient area of the floor is around the basket, so preventing the Hawks from getting there will obviously cause a drop in efficiency. The Bucks have also done a solid job in running shooters off the line and funneling them into help. Look at the number of unassisted three's made for the Hawks. They aren't getting a lot of easy looks because of how the Bucks are playing the passing lanes. It feels as if the Bucks have figured things out defensively, but the Hawks still have counters. Initiating ball screens much higher worked, and that double drag is still rather effective. I'd expect to see more of that in game 4.
The Bucks Transition
Posted: 6/28
The Bucks have found some success in this series pushing the pace against the Atlanta Hawks in a Lakers-type of fashion. While it may feel like the Bucks are playing faster, I am not sure if that notion is particularly true:
They aren't playing more quickly, but they are being smart about what they do in transition. This season, the Bucks led the league in transition frequency at 17.8%. In game 2 they were at 18.9% and in game 3 they were at 17.6%. It feels like they have been playing a lo faster because they have been scoring more in transition, which makes us remember the plays in which they run. In the regular season, the Bucks scored 117.5 points per 100 transition possessions, good for 7th in the league. In game 2 that number was at 137.8, and in game 3 it was at 124.2. An interesting way they have been doing this is by switching Bobby Portis onto Trae Young. Young has a tendency to settle for jumpers when he gets the switch, and the Bucks have been using that to their advantage. They will live with a Trae Young step back, as they know he will miss that shot more often than not. When that does happen, Portis is running the floor as soon as the shot goes up and getting a deep seal on a guard in transition. This leads to easy buckets, and the Bucks have been doing it with other players as well.
Slowing Down a Primary Creator
Posted: 6/28
Something that is interesting that I have seen a couple of team do this postseason against great primary creators is to try nd limit their passing options more than their scoring options. I have talked a lot about the Bucks using their length to disrupt passing angles for Trae Young and switching more actions against him, but here is the visualization of the affects of that:
Trae Young has scored the ball well in games 1 and 3, but he has not had the same ridiculous impact as a passer as he normally does. Great scorers raise their own individual efficiency, but great passers raise everyone else's efficiency. That is why primary creation from a passing standpoint is at such a premium in the NBA. The Bucks would rather have Trae Young shooting floaters than finding passes to open players. The ball movement from the Hawks starting from Young's advantage creation is tough to stop, so why not prevent it? This is a strategy we saw the Trail Blazers use against Nikola Jokic:
Jokic did not have the impact as a passer, but the did score the ball phenomenally well in that first round series. I like the idea behind trying to limit the passing impact of the other teams best primary creator at the expense of giving him scoring. Sometimes it does not look as good in the traditional box score if Trae Young scores 35 points, but last night he only had 12 potential assists. Milwaukee will live with that stat line all day long.
Stopping Trae Young and the Hawks
Posted: 6/27
In game 2, the Bucks held Trae Young and the Atlanta Hawks to a season low offensive rating of 82.9 per CleaningTheGlass, which filters out garbage time:
The best way to stop a prolific offense is to slow down their primary creator, and the Bucks did just that in game 2. They adjusted their scheme to have the drop be higher and have a lot more help come at the nail and from the corners. They also rotated around much better, fought over screens more proficiently, switched 1-4, and didn't play my mortal enemy Jeff Teague. All of this led to Trae Young having much more difficult reads coming off the Hawks screening actions:
The activity in the passing lanes and on digs also forced a lot of turnovers. The Hawks turnover rate in the game was 23.7%, which is in the 0th percentile. Allowing the Bucks to force live ball turnovers and get out in transition is not a recipe for success for the Hawks. The Hawks are going to adjust for game 3. They are going to run more actions to try and get Trae Young looks in the lane, whether that be more ram or higher ball screens. Young is also going to play better and there will be some shooting regression on both sides. As we all know, game 3 is going to be massive in determining which team represents the Eastern Conference in the NBA Finals.
DeAndre Ayton's Rim Protection
Posted: 6/27
In last night's game, DeAndre Ayton was masterful defensively. He contested 8 shots at the rim, and the Clippers only made 2 of those shots. He was also all over the floor, making plays with his quick feet and activity. Ayton has been consistently a very good rim protector in these playoffs:
Every round, I have been a little concerned with how Ayton plays if he is asked to defend more complicated actions and assignments. So far he has held up really well. The Suns are doing a good job of pre-switching a lot of actions to keep Ayton in help positions, but he has still held up in switches and scrambles. The rim protection is there, and he is now acting as a deterrent to some guards and wings around the rim. It has been fun to experience the DeAndre Ayton coming out party in these playoffs, and either potential matchup against the Bucks or Hawks would be another very good test for him.
Clippers vs. Suns Game 4 Rock Fight
Posted: 6/27
Last night's game 4 was fairly ugly, with a throwback to a 90's score line of 84-80. Here's how that game looks when comparing it to other low scoring playoff games of the past 5 years:
The game last night wasn't as bad as it appeared because of slower pace than usual, but it was still very low scoring. Something that we can go too far away from at times is how to credit the defense when there is a low scoring game. Yes, there were some ugly offensive moments, but a lot of that was caused by really good defense from both teams. I've been very impressed by both teams defense in terms of point of attack and how they are mixing in different looks and recovering. There were also some elements of pure shooting variation in last nights game:
Again, this does not fully take into account how good the defense was at times. However, there were plenty of good shots taken in this game that simply did not go into the basket. There is going to be some regression in the next game, and I would bet it will be higher scoring. While the offense wasn't the prettiest at times, don't forget to appreciate the nuances of both teams defense in leading the charge towards poor offense.
How Much Should the Bucks Adjust?
Posted: 6/25
In Game 1 against the Bucks, Trae Young had another spectacular night. He showcased his insane creation ability yet again, to the tune of 48 points on 61.1% True Shooting. Here's how his creation stacked up to the rest of his playoff performances:
Trae Young self created a ridiculous 33 of his 34 field goal attempts. The question that I have after that game is how much the Bucks should adjust and how they should go about doing it. The Bucks mostly stayed within their normal defensive scheme, which is a drop coverage with Brook Lopez. This is what it opened up for Young:
Some of the floaters that Young was making weren't just floaters, but they were deep floaters. The Bucks drop forced him into taking a lot more of those floaters, and the math would tell you to give them that over the lob to Capela every time. Basic probability would also tell you on a sample of only 9 shots, there will be variance in how many of them go into the basket. Trae Young shot 6/9 on 10-14 foot shots, which is an incredible number. Something the Bucks are going to have to determine is if this was an excellent game from Young and adjustments should be made in pick and roll coverage, or if they will bet on a regression to the mean. The answer definitely isn't as clear as people seem to think, which is the really tricky part about playoff adjustments.
Tyronn "Bill Belichick" Lue
Posted: 6/25
I've seen reporting coming out from the Clippers locker room that they sometimes call coach Lue "Bill Belichick" because of how much he adjusts. It's a little bit of a shot at former coach Doc Rivers because of how little he adjusts throughout a playoff series, but it's also a credit to Lue. Sometimes, Lue's biggest adjustments are to simply take players in and out of the rotation:
It's interesting Zubac has played more, as the adjustment before has been the exact opposite. He played very well in drop coverage yesterday, and definitely earned the minutes he played. Cousins and Rondo have seen their roles shrink because of how poor they've been in their minutes. Beverley and Mann have seen their minutes go up because of how good they've been defensively. I don't expect the lineup adjustments to top here. Batum and Morris haven't played as many minutes as I've expected. Reggie Jackson may also see more minutes with the second unit to generate offense. I really don't think Rondo is going to play any minutes later in the series. We will see how Lue continues to adjust heading into game 4.
The Best Form of Defense is Prevention
Posted: 6/25
After torching the Clippers for 40 points in game 1, Devin Booker has not quite had the same impact as a scorer in games 2 and 3. He isn't getting looks as easily as in game 1, and the Clippers have adjusted to where he isn't getting the same number of attempts:
A lot of coaches preach that the best form of defense is prevention of the shot the opponent wants to take, and that's what the Clippers have been doing well. Devin Booker is the most dynamic scorer on the Suns, and taking away a lot of his impact by defending him with the right players and forcing him to see multiple bodies has been helpful:
While Patrick Beverley may not have had a massive role in the first two series, he is probably the best option to disrupt Devin Booker. His ability to get into the ball handler and disrupt his rhythm has really helped fuel the Clippers ability to get stops against an offense predicated on timing and strong primary creation. Mann has also done a solid job in the role of disruptor. The x-factor here is Chris Paul, who didn't play in games 1 and 2 and wasn't quite right in game 3. Adding another creator to the mix will force the Clippers to play two strong defensive guards that can really fight over screens, and that will limit their offense to an extent.
If you're interested in learning how to get started in R or learning more about basketball analytics, I would highly recommend subscribing to the F5 by Owen Phillips. His tutorials allowed me to build a great foundation on how to scrape data and make these good looking charts you see in this notebook. Could not recommend it more!
Comments