Yesterday, I posted a new idea for visualizing box scores: Game Stacks. While the first version did a good job of showing shooting percentages and turnover rates, it didn’t do a good job on rebounds. As my pops pointed out, Indiana had a big rebounding advantage over Michigan by the basic numbers (36-22), so it seemed wrong to rely only on the height of the stacks to determine who rebounded better. The reality: Michigan got more chances not because they rebounded better, but because they had more misses — and you have to miss to get a second chance. The height of the stacks just showed that Michigan got more offensive rebounds, even though their rebounding rate was terrible.
So, round two. Here’s the Michigan-Indiana Game Stack redesigned to capture rebounding:
Without play by play data, I had to keep the rebounding simple — I figured out the offensive rebound rate for each team:
Off reb rate = your off rebs/(their def rebs + your off rebs).
Then, I multiplied this rate by the relevant number of shots to generate the “Missed (O Reb)” category for each type of shot (the dashed regions). Each dashed/empty combo now visualizes the offensive rebound rate for the relevant team.
Now the picture is clearer:
Posted in Basketball, College Sports, Sports Stats
Tagged basketball, basketball graphic, Boston, Boston Celtics, box score, Celtics, Celtics offensive rebounding, Clippers, college hoops, defensive breakdowns, Dick Vitale, Free throw, Game Stack, game stacks, Golden State Warriors, graphical statistics, graphics sports, Hoosier, Houston Rockets, Indiana, Indiana basketball, indiana game, Lakers, lakers pistons, Los Angeles Lakers, Michigan, Michigan basketball, NBA, nba game, offensive rebound, Pistons, point attempts, Rebound (basketball), rebounding advantage, Rockets, Rockets 23 three pointers, Rockets three pointers, shooting percentages, shot attempts, Sports, sports statistics, Three-point field goal, turnover rates, visual shooting percentages, visual statistics, visualization, visualizing basketball games, Warriors, Wolverines
For the NCAA tournament this year, I simulated each game based on my predicted efficiency stats for each team (shooting percentage, shot selection, turnover rate, and offensive rebound rate). I submitted my work for Teamrankings.com’s college basketball blogging competition and I’m thrilled to announce that I moved on to the next round! I’m pretty excited for round 2 (deadline Tuesday at midnight). If you have a topic suggestion, let me know — bonus points for something semi-related to the game simulations I’ve been running.
Now how about those simulations? Here’s a performance overview against a few other rankings (seeding, RPI, Ken Pomeroy, and Jeff Sagarin):
Simply choosing the higher seed got 22 games right. RPI did slightly worse at 21, and I matched Sagarin at the top with 23 correct (71.9%). The problem? As evidenced by the potential wins columns, I lost my champion. Missouri battled Norfolk State the whole game and came out behind. Every method lost Missouri, Duke, and Michigan as round 2 predicted winners, and Missouri, Duke, or both as round 3 winners. I’ll need some help to catch up at the end, though. No other system had Missouri or Duke advance to the Final Four.
Specifically, where did I go right? Of my “upset locks” (over 60% probability), VCU and NC State came through, and Alabama nearly beat Creighton. It’s worth reminding at this point Continue reading
Posted in Basketball, College Sports, Prediction
Tagged basketball, basketball game simulations, Big East Conference, Bonaventure, bracket busters ncaa tournament, Bracket predictions 2012, Bracket predictions from simulations, bracket regressions, champion missouri, cinderella teams march madness, efficiency statistics basketball, efficiency stats NCAA tournament, Florida, Florida State University, game simulations, Horizon League, Jeff Sagarin, Kansas, Ken Pomeroy, Kentucky, Mary, Michigan, Michigan State, Missouri, Mountain West Conference, National Collegiate Athletic Association, NCAA Men's Division I Basketball Championship, NCAA tournament predictions, NCAA tournament simulations, Norfolk State, Norfolk State University, North Carolina, offensive rebound, regression march madness, regression NCAA tournament, Saint Bonaventure, Saint Louis, simulated basketball games, Sports, St. Bonaventure, St. Louis, Stat Geek Idol, Syracuse, Team Rankings, Teamrankings, Tournament, University of Connecticut, upset picks march madness, West Virginia