New life for Bogut?
New Bucks coach Larry Krystkowiak has said Bucks C Andrew Bogut has been an underutilized asset. He has said he intends to run the offense through Bogut, and is interested to see how Bogut responds to his more "free-flowing" sets. So far, he's responded pretty well. Bogut's Eff48 is up to 28.45 in two games under Coach K.
Of course, Bogut has fooled us before with temporary upswings in his numbers. So this trend still has to meet the test of time before it can be called a legitimate renassaince for the big man.
Redd's numbers up, too
Coach K has stated he is a firm believer in assists. His reading of the numbers has led him to conclude that the top teams are those who compile the highest assists (a conclusion I want to concur with because I believe in it, but last year I remember trying to find a correlation between the two and coming up somewhat empty). Anyway, the new emphasis seems to be helping G Michael Redd.
In the last two games his productivity is up despite the fact that his signature numbers (scoring numbers that is) are about the same. He's doing it by doing something I have begged him to do since I started this blog -- he's mixing in the occasional assist and rebound. Just that small addition to his game brings his numbers from standard 2 guard numbers up toward the elite of the game. If he sticks with it, perhaps his numbers will match his max salary. Keep it up, Mike.
How's that, again?
Anyone following the Bucks in the late 80's pronounces the new coach's name according to the pronunciation we heard then (kris-TOE-we-ack). Come to find out we were wrong all along. Coach K has informed the media that the actual pronunciation is (kris-KOE-we-ack).
Sorry, big fella. That new pronunciation rolls off the tongue about as well as reinforced superglue. Thus, for the time being, I'm sticking with the 80's pronunciation. Kristo for 2!
Lowering the Opponents numbers works
Thus far, under Coach K, the Bucks Eff48 numbers have been merely adequate, yet they have won both games. The difference is the Bucks are finally making it difficult for their opponents to be productive. In those two games, only one opponent has logged an Eff48 over 30, and that was Charlotte substitute forward Walter Herrmann, who just got over it at 30.39. If you go back over my past Eff48 boxscores, you'll see that represents a big difference from the Stotts regime.
Bucks Diary Eff48 Boxscore
97Redd......................................29.86
Bogut.....................................27.60
Bell.......................................20.57
Skinner..................................18.00
Patterson................................15.99
Williams..................................14.04
91Herrmann.............................30.39
McInnis................................26.88
Wallace................................26.79
Carroll.................................15.99
Voskuhl................................15.36
Anderson..............................12.00
Morrison...............................10.90
Felton..................................02.08
posted by Ty Will @ Monday, March 19, 2007
5 Comments:
Sky..where do you pull those Eff48 stats from after each game? Also, is there a definition for the formula used to come up with those?
I just go to ESPN.com after every game and take a look at their scoreboard box scores. I then whip out my calculator and calculate all of the numbers myself (its too hard to hunt them down on NBA.com).
I only calculate and list numbers for players who have played close to 20 minutes. That's because, even though the stat is theoretically playing time neutral, there's what I call the "banshee factor". In other words, I think its easier for a player to come in for short periods, play like a banshee, and put up deceptively impressive numbers. For instance, let's say Damir Markota comes into a game at garbage time, plays six minutes and has three putbacks. That's 9 eff points (6 points and 3 rebounds) in six minutes. His Eff48 score is off the charts at 72.00. But did he really play like Chamberlain? No. So I'm more interested in seeing who can keep the pace over a sustained period. That requires a sustained production level.
I use ESPN's boxscore because it is the most complete box score, as it lists turnovers.
As for the definition, Eff48 is the one christened to the stat by NBA.com. I hate it too, but I can't think of a better term.
So what is the calculation for Eff48? Not that I want to do it after every game (especially since you do it) But I'd like to see what the formula is.
Looks like this:
Efficiency Formula: ((PTS + REB + AST + STL + BLK) - ((FGA - FGM) + (FTA - FTM) + TO)) / G
Saw it on this webpage:
http://www.nba.com/statistics/default_48_minute_leaders/LeagueLeadersEFF8Query.html
There's this page, also which seems to give the same formula.
I don't know where the blogger is getting decimal/fractional results, though, for a single game.
Post a Comment
<< Home