The Four Factors and Using the Timberwolves

Right now, the Wolves are about seven hours away from heading into their weekend back-to-back, which should be a good indication of how the Wolves are playing now that they've got the first W down. The current coverage of Wednesday's game (especially Britt Robson's superlative column) is fairly complete, but there's one thing I would like to point out that I didn't see mentioned anywhere: the Wolves did a fine job on the offensive boards, grabbing 30.3% of the their chances. Not only is that 4% above the league average, but it actually below average for the Wolves. They have been doing an amazing job of recovering their misses (fourth in the league), which is one of the main reasons we've only seen on real blowout to date. They are fifteenth in the league in defensive rebound percentage, and 9th overall. It's probably the true strength of this team to date. It's also one of the four factors defined by Dean Oliver. He defines it as thus:

After looking at a lot of teams over the years, I have come to realize that teams like these are bad because they don't control four crucial aspects of a game:

1. Shooting percentage from the field.
2. Getting offensive rebounds.
3. Committing Turnovers.
4. Going to the foul line a lot and making the shots.

There is really nothing else to the game.

Dean Oliver, Basketball on Paper, p. 63.

The Wolves are one of the best teams on the offensive glass, one of the worst at the line, slightly above average at committing turnovers, and almost exactly average when it comes to points per shot (complete disgression: I prefer points per shot to percentage because it allows a quick comparison between. Example: Greg Buckner is currently shooting 51.6% on twos, and 36.7% on treys. But he is making 1.03 points per two, and 1.09 points per three. So if the Wolves wanted to play things purely by the numbers, it would be better to have Buckner shoot from the arc than the paint. A note to those of you who think that this is simply a different way of expressing effective field goal percentage: you are completely correct). The Wolves problem is that their defense has been poor. More precisely, their opponents' offense has been very good. The Wolves opponents have an average offensive rebounding percentage (26.0%, league average is 25.6%) and an average turnover rate (12.0% versus leaguewide 11.9%). However, the Wolves opponents have been outstanding in two areas. First is in free throw shooting. Wolves opponents are getting to line .49 times for every field goal attempt, which means that whenever someone drives to the basket against the Wolves there is a coin flip's chance that they're going to be taking a free throw attempt. The other problem is that the Wolves are giving up 1.03 points per attempt. So they're a regular team on the glass and on the floor, but their opponents are simply putting the points up. Part of it is that the Magic, Nuggets, and Lakers are in the top eight in pts/fga (the Nuggets and Magic are in the top 5), while Sacramento and Denver are in the top ten for fta/fga (the Lakers are 11th). A good test of the Wolves will be Cleveland next week, which is a team whose strengths and weaknesses in the four factors mirror the Wolves. Meanwhile, tonights game against the Wizards will be a good chance to see if the foul trouble is truly behind the Wolves, or if it simply took a day off. They turnover the ball more often than other teams, and are shooting a woeful 0.84. But they get to the line at an above average clip. If the Wizards prevail, it'll be at the line.

Last night I put together the usage percentages for the Wolves players. Usage is simply how many possessions involves a given player. The formula is FGA + TO + (0.44 * FTA) + (0.33 * AST). I then divided it by the number of possessions (FGA + TO + (0.44 * FTA) - ORB) to see what percentage of plays involved specific Wolves.

Three things to note. Percentages that are red indicate that the player was deactivated for that game. 0.00% that are not in red do not indicate that the player didn't play (though that is the most likely scenario), but rather that they weren't involved with a possession. Finally (and most important) the percentages are higher than 100%. That's because more than one player can be involved with a possession, and usage numbers don't consider offensive rebounds. The only game that will ever add up to 100% is when the Wolves don't have an offensive rebound or assist. So what do we see from this? First, Rashad McCants has been the focal point of the offense so far (shocking revelation, I know). Even though Jefferson has posted the highest numbers, remember that McCants missed 1.75 games with an ankle sprain, and that the in Game 2 who was in frequent foul trouble, fouling out with 6 minutes left in the game after playing only 5 minutes in the second half. At this point it looks like the goal is to get McCants the ball about one-fourth of the time, with Jefferson getting it about one-fifth of the time. The surprising thing is that this is actually demonstrates team play for the Wolves. With the exception of Orlando, where four of their five starters were involved in 20% or more of their plays, the leader of any team (Carmelo Antony, Kevin Martin, Kobe Bryant, etc.) the Wolves have played to date has been between 25-30%. Both McCants and Jefferson have hit this mark twice (both of Jefferson's was while McCants was injured). It'll be interesting to see what happens when Foye returns. The most obvious reductions are going to be in Telfair and Jaric's numbers, but I think we'll also see a decrease for McCants. Not too much, but I imagine something along the lines of 20-20-15 for the three.

1-8

No, that is not the prediction for the Wolves' record come November 22. That is the shooting line for Sebastian Telfair last night. While he had a nice line otherwise (4 assists and a steal versus a turnover and 3 fouls in 30 minutes), Telfair's shooting last night was completely indefensible. He was even 0-3 beyond the arc, which has been his strength until this point. So far the Wolves best advantage has been their three point shooting. They are fourteenth in the league (ninth until last night) in threes, and Rashad McCants (50%), Marko Jaric (40%), Ryan Gomes (40%), and Sebastian Telfair (38.5%) are shooting above league average (36%). The game last night highlighted the biggest flaw in the Wolves offense; at this point McCants is the only player that is above average in both three point and two point shooting. The current NBA average for 2 point shots is 47.3%, the Wolves are currently shooting 44.8%. Right now, the two point shooters for the Wolves are Craig Smith (55.3%), Greg Buckner (53.3%), McCants (51.6%), Al Jefferson (50%), and Theo Ratliff (48.3%). Now, having eight above average scorers is a good thing, and something that Timberwolves fans can feel optimistic about. But the problem is they not distributing their shots according to type. Buckner has taken 21 three pointers (33.3%), while Sebastian Telfair taken 39 two point attempts (28.2%). 35 of Gomes 50 shots have been from inside the arc, where's he's shooting 37.1%.

Of course, it's too early to put any faith in percentages. If Corey Brewer's true shooting % is scary right now (48.1%), it was Freddy Kruger on steroids before last night (37.5%). Since we're still in the section of the season were a single good game can vastly turn the stats of any player around, I'll avoid making any predictions or recommendations, save one each; the Wolves will be most successful by having McCants and Gomes/Jaric/Telfair force defenses to spread out, and then either feeding it in to Jefferson and Smith/Ratliff/Buckner or taking an open shot if they aren't challenged, and the Wolves will beat Sacramento on Wednesday for their first win.

My favorite stat of the night: Antoine Walker - DNP-CD. Walker fell of the cliff last year, and was my choice to be cut from the Wolves trade with Miami. He's currently shooting the team worst in field goal percentage (23.8%), three pointer percent (12.5%), and second worst in two pointers (30.8%, just ahead of Telfair's 28.2%). Also (to stretch an analogy) his true shooting percentage is so bad that it's beyond your regular monster into some sort of Gieger monster/Lynch hybrid.

Oh Ye Gods!

Once again the Wolves collapsed at line. It's gotten to the point that even the Star Tribune has started commented on it. The result is, of course, another loss for a team that really needs to get it's act together when it comes to getting to the line. But let's address a few issues surrounding fouls and free throws first. The Wolves still have the highest rate of fouls per game (30), and are twelfth on the list of overall fouls (they are tied for least number of games played to date). And individual numbers are just as atrocious. The average NBA player is committing a foul once every 10.8 minutes right now. The Wolves are fouling once every 8.8 minutes (worst in the league). They only Wolves above the average right now are Michael Doleac (who's logged 3 minutes this season), Theo Ratliff, and Ryan Gomes. Al Jefferson is a bit below average, at 10.3 minutes per foul. The worst offenders are Craig Smith and Corey Brewer, who foul once every 4.6 and 4.9 minutes respectively. While there is a tendency for veteran players to get the benefit of the doubt in calls, the severity of the issue seems to make it safe to assume that teams are going to be going to free throw line a lot against the Wolves. This is part of a total decline on the parts of the Wolves players from their performance last year. Last season they went 9.2 minutes per foul. This should put them on pace to commit 2258 fouls this season (assuming they play the 2006-2007 league average for minutes). Of course, if you multiply 30 by 82, you can make an assumption of 2460 fouls for the season, which is an absolutely staggering amount.

So, free throws. The Wolves are currently the worst team in free throws by pretty much any measure you want to use barring percentage (they are shooting 72.1%, which allows them to scale the dizzying heights of mediocrity to 22nd). Last year, these Wolves fta/fga was 0.271, while the league average was 0.327. In other words, they were getting to the line 82.9% of the league average. This year, they are hitting the line for every 0.194 field goal attempts, or 61.4% of the rest of the NBA. I don't know if there's anything I can truly add to the discussion beyond this. Even if they were league average at getting to the line, they would still be 1-3 (though the games would have been much more respectable).

And now for the non-free throw factoid: Currently the Wolves have been outscored 414 to 380 (-34) in their games. If you take away their worst quarter in each game (the 4th against Denver and New York, the 3rd against Orlando and LA), the Wolves end up outscoring their opponents 301 to 297 (+4), which is a 38 point swing. Why is this important? Well, the Wolves are being outscored by 9.5 points in these four quarters, which is disastrous for any team. But beyond those quarters, the Wolves are holding their own against their opponents. And on a positive note, they've gone from -11 to -11 to -8 to -8, so we can hold out hope that they are improving in this regard.

Next time: Something besides free throws, let us hope.

...and the foul!

The Wolves are currently the second worst team in the NBA at drawing a foul (.210 FTA/FGA) behind Portland. The league average is .315, the league best is .486. An example of how poorly the Wolves are drawing the foul: the league leader in FTA/FGA is Memphis. While they have taken 17 more free throw shots than the Wolves, they have attempted 110 fewer field goals. Being the worst in FTA/FGA isn't necessarily the end of the season; the worst team in the league last year was the Phoenix Suns. Of course, the Suns had the fourth lowest turnover rate, and the third lowest number of personal fouls and opponent free throws (these numbers are particularly incredible since the Suns had the third highest pace last season). So the Wolves free throw issue is only a woe if they have an amazingly low number of turnovers, personal fouls, and opponent free throws.

The importance of the free throws becomes apparent when you compare the Wolves to the Pacers. The Wolves turnover the ball less often (10.2% to 11.6%), shoot equally well (44.5% to 44.6%), and are better with threes (40% to 38%). The Wolves also grab a greater percentage of their rebounds, both offensively and defensively (26.7% to 26.6% and 76.52% to 70.32%, respectively). Yet the Wolves are 0-3 while the Pacers are 3-0. There are two reasons for this. The first is that despite the Wolves being considered a defensive team, their opponents are currently shooting 47.39%. The Pacers' opponents are shooting 39.85%. Part of this is due to the matchups to date, as the Pacers' opponents have 40.85% in their other games, while the Wolves opponents' are shooting a healthy 45.65%. But the other problem the Wolves have is in their free throw shooting. The Wolves are 29th of 30 in free throws (18); the Pacers are 11th (28). The best way to show the impact this has on the teams is thus: the Wolves (0-3) have scored 287 point and made 38 free throws. The Pacers (3-0) have scored 327 points and made 67 free throws. So 72.5% of the difference between the points scored between the two teams is the difference in free throws. It's important to remember that the Pacers aren't even a superlative free throw team; they can best be defined as above average. It's also important to note that even if you change the Wolves FT/G to league average (and they had the same FT% that they had in the specific games), they would only be 1-2 right now.

Now it's important to remember this is just three games for each team; a huge (or terrible) game for either team would greatly impact their standings. If we assume these numbers would stand for the rest of the season, than Indiana would beat last year's best opposing field goal percentage by 3% (the difference between the best and worst opp fg% last year was 5.66%). The worst fta/fga ratio last year was .266. If the Wolves keep their pace of getting to the line they are going to be at .056 below that mark (the spread from last year was .126). Now I doubt that either the Wolves or the Pacers are going to be record setting teams this year. But to date a large part of the Wolves' troubles can be traced to the line.

(Note: the data here is current as of Tuesdays games. As of today the Pacers are now 3-1. However, I think the example is still illustrative of the Wolves' difficulties)

The Cost of Gerald Green

While going through the old posts and attempting to edit the tables so they are, you know, readable, I realized that I got down to the specifics of Gerald Green. While I don't think much of his potential (my current rankings of the pups is roughly Jefferson, McCants, Foye, Smith, Gomes, Brewer, Green, Richard, Telfair), I do think the Wolves are shooting themselves in the foot in not picking up his option. His option would have cost the Wolves roughly $2.5 million. Assuming that he has a year similar to last year, does anyone think that Green is going to get less than that next offseason? Using a modified help value from Popcorn Machine (rebounds + assists + steals + blocks - (turnovers + personal fouls - (field goals attempted - field goals made))) I came up with some similar players to Green (22.75 PTS/48, 0.97 PFA, 52.10 TS%, -10.55 hv/48). First up, Jamal Crawford (22.69, 0.92, 51.66, -6.44). Playing for the Knicks, Crawford is due to make $7.9 million this year, $8.6 million next year, and has $9.3 and $10.8 million player options for the following two years. Of course, he was signed by Isiah Thomas, so that number is a tad inflated. Another player to look at is Willie Green (21.82, 0.88, 45.75, -11.23), who played out his rookie contract with Greenesque shooting, and is now making $3.5 million a year for the next four. Also on the list is Marcus Banks (21.17, 0.88, 49.69, -9.39). I don't think he needs any introduction to Wolves fans, so I'll just mention that he's making the midlevel exemption for the next four years. Juan Dixon is making $2.9 million this year, which is comparable to what Green would make next year. Of course Dixon's shooting numbers are all worse than Green's (19.38, 0.96, 51.59). I won't bore you by continuing to go on like this, but I will say that there are players with similarly terrible help values that shoot a lot better. They are guys like Ray Allen, Carmelo Antony, Michael Redd, and Wally Szczerbiak. If Green develops a solid shot within the next few years, he could be in line for a contracts like that

So what have we learned? Well, the approximate cost of someone like Gerald Green between $5.3 million (with Crawford's numbers), and $3.7 million (without). Best case scenario, by not exercising their option, the Wolves have cost themselves $1.2 million in salary. It's not the end of the world, but it's not something you want to see from a team that's dedicated to rebuilding.

At Least I Got A Hat

Some quick notes about tonights game, while the details are still fresh in my head.

1) The Wolves assist to turnover ratio was healthier than I thought it would be (1.92), and 12 of the Nugget's 18 turnover's were steals. That's some good defensive pressure by the Wolves.

2) Sebastian Telfair had 3 steals and 5 assists for the night. That's good. He also had 4 personal fouls and 3 turnovers. That's bad. He shot 1-2 from beyond the arc. That's good, if limited. He shot 4-13 from the floor, with no free throws. That's horrendous.

3) Antoine Walker is going to be trouble. At 9:34 left in the fourth, he rebounds a missed shot, walks it up court, shoots from the free throw line, and misses (Denver rebound). At 9:11 he fouls Antony. At 8:41 there is a full timeout called by Denver; Walker stays in the game. At 7:11 he rebounds the ball, walks up, and misses a three. During Denver's possession Corey Brewer fouls Carmelo Antony; Brewer, Jaric, and Walker are all subbed out at that point. Hopefully Wittman pulled Walker as punishment for his terrible shot selection in those two and half minutes, but considering the three player switch I thing the message (if there was one) got lost in the shuffle.

4) The Wolves final shot at coming back in the fourth quarter was a play where Sebastian Telfair took the inbound pass and drove to the basket where he was promptly descended upon by half the Nuggets (bench players included). Either Telfair made an awful, awful decision to try make that play on his own, or Wittman really screwed up the call.

5) The Wolves 19 free throws puts them 26th in the league.

6) As predicted, Rashad McCants is coming back strong. He shot 50%, including 3-7 on three pointers. He also had some nice defensive work, though he needs to cut down on the turnovers.

7) The Nuggets had 0.52 free throw attempts per shot. The Wolves had 0.21.

8) No Gerald Green tonight. Hopefully this isn't a trend, as his scoring could have been the difference tonight. There was a 8:42 stretch tonight (10:49 to 2:07 in the fourth) when the Wolves scored four points. In this same stretch the Nuggets scored 16.

9) The Wolves had some ticky-tack fouls. Calling Jaric's hit a flagrant 1 was being kind to Jaric, I thought. Similarly, there was a point I thought Telfair would get a flagrant for pushing off Iverson to create space (from where I was sitting it looked like he pushed him in the face). Finally, there was a point when McCants was beat by Antony on a break, and McCants pushed him from behind as he went for the layup.

10) The Wolves simply cannot expect Ratliff to give 14 points a night. He account for 9 of the 19 free throws, however. Hopefully he will impart the secret of drawing the foul to Jefferson before he departs.

11) Jefferson's performance wasn't too bad, considering that the Nuggets had men on top of him all night. In Camby, Nene, and Martin the Nuggets have above average post defense. However, he's probably due for a rough start until opponents learn to respect McCants' play and Foye returns.

12) I am pleased by the number of threes that the Wolves took last night (they should be in the top ten in three point attempts by the end of the night). I'm planning a post on the importance of three pointers to this group of Wolves, but suffice to say the more they take, the better. If they had taken all their shots from the three line and converted the same percentage, they would have scored 98 points tonight (including free throws). Not that taking 88 three pointers is a viable strategy, but this fact amuses me for some reason.

Friday Night Lights

I’m sure everyone’s heard the phrase “today is the first day of the rest of your life”, and it is certainly true for the Timberwolves tonight, where they start the first game of the post-Garnett era. And due to Randy Foye’s injury, the Wolves will be looking at starting either Jaric or Telfair at point tonight. It’s not something that should please many Wolves fans, as it a pretty much a rock and hard place situation.

Player	FG%	FT%	TS%	FTA/FGA
Marko Jaric	41.85%	76.14%	51.00%	0.271
Sebastian Telfair	37.13%	81.82%	45.85%	0.232

Player	PTS/FGA	2P%	3P%	TR/48
Marko Jaric	0.94	43.33%	37.65%	5.669
Sebastian Telfair	0.82	40.17%	28.91%	3.277

Player	PF/48	DQ/48	PTS/48	TOR
Marko Jaric	5.299	0.031	11.43	14.75%
Sebastian Telfair	5.037	0.03	14.534	11.69%

Player	AS/48	ST/48	TO/48	BK/48
Marko Jaric	4.467	2.311	2.711	0.493
Sebastian Telfair	6.614	1.305	2.973	0.334

It’s pretty indisputable that Jaric is the better player of the two, as Telfair only beats him in free throw percentage (but Jaric is more likely to get to the line), points per 48 (but Jaric is 0.12 points per attempt better), turnover percentage (though Telfair makes more turnovers per minute), and assists (though Jaric didn’t play point guard last year). So what is to be done? I personally believe that they should split Foye’s time equally between the two at the start, with minutes being added or subtracted based on Telfair’s performance. The reason for this that Telfair is a young man on the last year of his contract, and unless he changes his ways is probably at the end of NBA career. In this situation, it behooves him to play within himself. The best way to do this would be to simply look for the pass when he’s on the court. If he can show himself to be a standard backup point (sans shooting), then he should earn himself more playing time while Foye is out. If he does anything else – steps up defense and the boards, finds a shooting stroke – that would be a bonus. My only concern with playing Telfair is how that his shooting is so woeful that anyone the Wolves play have a free defender roaming the floor. Here’s how bad Telfair was at shooting last year: his points per attempt ranked 321^nd out of 329 (of players that had at least 500 minutes). The goat of last year was Speedy Claxton, whose 0.68 was 0.05 points per attempt worse than any other player that had over 500 minutes. I don’t think Telfair will do this badly again, but it’s fairly obvious he is a backup at best. From his hotzone data, the Wolves best bet would be to get him beyond the arc on the left side (the Bruce Bowen area), or else open looks from the free throw line. His numbers at both spots aren’t outstanding but are passable.

Tonight the Wolves open their season against Denver. I’m of two minds about this game: on one hand I expect the Wolves to look disjointed, as two-thirds of the team left over the offseason. On the other hand, I’m expecting that we’ll see a starting lineup of Telfair/McCants/Gomes/Jefferson/Ratliff, meaning four of the five starters played together last season. Additionally, I think the Wolves should spread the floor with some 3 point shooting. Ryan Gomes, Marko Jaric, and Gerald Green all shot above league average from behind the arc last year, which the Wolves should exploit by having whichever one is being guarded by Iverson take distance shots. And if three Nuggets are chasing guys around the perimeter, that gives Jefferson more room to work in the block. The Camby-Martin-Nene-Najera quartet is going to be bad enough to deal with, but if the Wolves can’t find some range, Jefferson is going to have to deal with small forwards hassling him as well.