Ultimate Game Breakdown: Coaching: Lakers 104 Nuggets 97 in Denver Nov. 1
This report will always lead off with “Total Production,” and with “Real Efficiency,” simply because these are probably the long hoped for development of a single measurement that can be used to compare the quality of coaching as shown by a particular game! If your time is limited, read these two sections at the least!
TOTAL PRODUCTION (See any of the Ultimate Game Breakdown-Players reports for how this is calculated)
Nuggets Total Real Player Production: 144.65
Lakers Total Real Player Production: 139.95
IF THE TEAM THAT PRODUCED THE MOST DID NOT WIN THE GAME, AS HAPPENED HERE, THE COACHING IS ALMOST CERTAINLY TO BLAME
In this game the team that produced more did not win the game. The players of the higher producing team did more but they still lost the game! In most or all such cases, this will be because the coaching is inferior. The combination of the strategies and tactics used by the lesser coaching staff is not as good at producing points as are the strategies and tactics used by the better coaching staff. Or in unusual cases, the players may be out of control and so they may be defying what the coaches have told them to do.
.
REAL EFFICIENCY
Nuggets Real Efficiency: Points / Production 0.671
Lakers Real Efficiency: Points / Production: 0.765
Difference: Lakers were .094 better in converting production to points. This is a very, very large advantage thanks mostly to the Lakers’ coaches. A substantial difference is .020 or more.
Real Efficiency is points / production. It is telling you how good the team was in translating it’s production into the one and only thing that counts toward winning: scoring. Although all the specific ways that differences in the quality of coaching produce different efficiency in scoring will in all honesty most likely never be known, it is a total certainty that the team with a substantially higher Real Efficiency had higher quality coaching, probably including better strategies and/or better tactics and plays, for the game. I want to make very clear that there is no other known reason other than differences in the quality of coaching to account for substantial differences in efficiency.
The number of shots changed from scores to misses by great defending is NOT among the possible reasons. Although that can not be calculated for individual players, forced misses are included in the production numbers at the team level. Every time a player defends well and forces a miss, the other team gets a reduction of it’s production count, which is the same statistically as if you knew who forced the misses and gave them the agreed upon reward for each miss they forced.
Moreover, although at this time it is too early to say for certain, it is considered very likely that the Real Efficiency for various coaching staffs will be relatively consistent from game to game. If this proves to be the case, then Real Efficiency will be a huge breakthrough in comparing one set of coaches with another.
COACHES USE OF RESERVES--NUMBER OF PLAYERS USED
In most cases, the coach who uses more players is the better coach. Reserves would not be professional basketball players at all unless they at least on occasion play as well as starters more often do. So having one or two more reserve players play in a game than the other team has playing gives your team that many more opportunities to discover a reserve player who is “on fire” for the particular game, and who can be a surprise factor toward winning it. Of course, the quality coaches need to and usually do recognize a reserve who is on fire and then leave him in the game more than usual in order to pocket the full amount of the advantage from this.
Moreover, it has been observed that the coaches with the best overall records and especially the ones with the best playoff records play non-starters for substantially more minutes than the lesser coaches. Yes they have their mega stars, but one way they try to get the extra edge over the other guy is to come up with a great package of non-starter playing times for each game.
And the coaches who consistently play that extra non-starter or two are almost by definition the ones who are better at developing the non-starters and who are better at integrating the non-starters into the offensive and defensive game plans, which are of course built around what the starters can do.
NUMBER OF NON-STARTERS IN THIS GAME
Number of Players Who Played at Least 6 Minutes: Nuggets 9 Lakers 10
Number of Players Who Played at Least 10 Minutes: Nuggets 8 Lakers 9
The Lakers’ coaches provided 1 extra possibility than did the Nuggets’ coaches for a reserve to provide an unexpected major spark to propel their team to victory.
PLAYING TIME OF NON-STARTERS EXPLAINED
Now let’s look at minutes. Since the gap between how good the starters are and how good the non-starters are on average is bigger for some teams than for others, you can not simply say that the more minutes the reserves play, the better the coaching is. However, if during the course of the season you see that a Coach consistently uses reserves for 6-14 minutes less and especially for 15 or more minutes less than most other coaches do, than this would be a likely sign that the Coach is excessively stingy with his reserves, or overly reliant on his starters if you prefer.
If a coach is stingy, this frequently will mean that he is unable or unwilling to one extent or another to develop his non-starters into being better players and possible starters. Also, stingy coaches will be ones who often are unable or unwilling to integrate the non-starters better into the dominant offense and defense of the team. Specifically, for example, the stingy coaches are not going to be very interested in making sure that each non-starter has an offensive play or two called while he is on court, where he is one of the key players on the play.
Whether the non-starters are getting enough playing time is something that you have to be sort of a detective about. You decide whether the reserves are getting enough playing time by considering all of the following:
1. How often does this coach play one or two or even three fewer reserves than the other coach?
2. How often does this coach play his reserves for fewer total minutes than the other coach plays his reserves?
3. How many minutes in total this season (or in prior years, for that matter) have reserves gotten on this team compared with what reserves of other teams have gotten? Although this has apparently never been reported anywhere, look for a special report on this subject by yours truly.
4. Possible Mitigating Factors… How good are the reserves compared with the starters? And just as importantly, how big is the gap compared with the gap for other teams? The bigger the gap to begin with between how good the starters are and how good the non-starters are, and the bigger the differences in the gaps between this team and other teams, the more the coach is justified in violating (1), (2), and (3).
But keep in mind that no matter how great the starters are and how supposedly bad the non-starters are, a Coach never has a total blank check to be as stingy as he wants. A coach who is excessively stingy toward reserves due to his incorrect beliefs or philosophy is cheating not only the reserves but also the team as a whole. The stingiest six head coaches out of the 30 NBA coaches are ones who you can safely assume are cheating not only their reserves but their team as a whole. Since stingy coaches seem to be relatively common, you definitely do not want the coach of your team to be among the most stingy of all.
By the way, these six culprits will be identified in the not too distant future. Other stingy coaches can and will be identified on a case by case basis.
5 How often are the veteran starters being overplayed to the point where they “run out of gas” at the worst possible time, late in games? Beyond a certain point, which varies a little from veteran to veteran, any veteran starter loses some effectiveness after he is out on the court too long.
Is it possible for a coach to be too generous to non-starters? Yes, of course it is possible. But in the real world, it seems from all available evidence that this would be a rare problem.
PLAYING TIME OF NON-STARTERS FOR THIS GAME
Note: starters are considered to be the five players who played the most minutes; whether they actually started is not really important here.
Nuggets Non-Starters Minutes: 71
Lakers Non-Starters Minutes: 76
The 5 more minutes that Lakers non-starters played is just small enough to be considered of little significance.
REAL PRODUCTION OF PLAYERS BROKEN DOWN
Now by looking at what the reserves did while out there, you can get some important evidence about how well the reserves are integrated into the overall offense and defense of the team. What you do is look at the production of the non-starters as a percentage of the production of the starters. The higher the percentage, the better the non-starters are integrated into the team’s overall offense and defense.
Real Player Production of Nuggets Non-Starters: 40.40
Real Player Production of Lakers Non-Starters: 32.60
Real Player Production of Nuggets Starters: 104.25
Real Player Production of Lakers Starters: 107.35
EVALUATION OF REAL PRODUCTION OF NON-STARTERS
In this game the Nuggets' non-starters, led by J.R. Smith, were apparently more integrated into their teams' offense and defense than were the Lakers' non-starters.
Be cautioned that evidence from a single game is of limited value because all players have games where they are much above and other games where they are much below normal. So in order to make conclusions about how well a coaching staff has integrated their reserves into the team as a whole, you have to look for persistent patterns across many games, which is of course something we do!
NUGGETS COACHING ERRORS
EXTREME PLAYING TIME DECISIONS CONSTITUTING COACHING ERROR
At any given time, Karl may be doing one or more of the following:
1. He may be imposing a draconian penalty by completely benching a player who should not be benched unless the Nuggets want to shoot themselves in the foot or in the head.
2. He may be severely under playing a player, either due to an excessive penalty for some mistake the player has made, a miscalculation of the benefits and costs of that player, or due to subjective factors up to and including extreme dislike of a player and a desire to make sure that the player is removed from the team in the off-season.
3. He may be over playing and over relying on one or more very experienced and talented veterans. Although a formal study has not been completed, there is plenty of evidence that Karl is one of the stingiest coaches in the League with respect to playing time he gives out to non-starters.
The system we use employs the ranges of playing time minutes that are reasonable for the Nuggets. The ranges take into account all known factors, including not only how good the players are, but also how well they fit into what is strongly believed to be the best possible offensive and defensive strategies that the Nuggets could use. These ranges are plenty large enough to allow for complete coaching discretion, within reason. But the ranges are not large enough for a Coach who is making a clear and basic error regarding how and how much his players should be used.
To be absolutely clear, if the actual playing time is outside of these ranges, it is clearly a coaching error. Playing times lower than the minimum or higher than the maximum are obvious and significant coaching errors.
Certain modifications are needed sometimes. If a player has to leave the game due to an injury, then the minimum rule does not apply for that player. Also, this is subject to appropriate modifications in games in which there is garbage time. How the rule is applied in the case of garbage time games depends substantially on whether the game is a win or a loss. The details on how extreme playing times are calculated in garbage time games will be added to this report in the near future.
CURRENT REASONABLE PLAYING TIME RANGES FOR THE NUGGETS
Carmelo Anthony: 32-42
Allen Iverson: 30-40
Nene: 30-40
Kenyon Martin: 30-40
J.R. Smith: 26-36
Linas Kleiza: 18-28
Chris Andersen 16-26
Anthony Carter: 14-24
Renaldo Balkman 0-16
Dahntay Jones: 0-14
Juwan Howard: 0-8
Chucky Atkins: Unavailable
Steven Hunter: Unavailable
Sunny Weems: Unavailable
EXTREME PLAYING TIMES CONSTITUTING COACHING ERROR FOR THIS GAME:
Anthony Carter: Overplayed, 7 minutes
Kenyon Martin: Underplayed: 1 minute
Total Minutes of Extreme Playing Time Error: 8 minutes
NOTE: The high quality coaches have 0 minutes of error in almost all games.
SEVERE AND CONTINUING SLUMPS
If there are any players who are obviously performing far below what they are capable of, some part of the blame must lie with the failure of the coaches to establish offensive and/or defensive strategies and tactics that will guarantee that the player does not fall to the level he has fallen to. You never to my knowledge see good players on the teams with the high quality coaches have “major and continuing slumps.” There are two ways a player can be declared to be in a major and continuing slump:
1. His production drops by 1/3 or more for each of 3 straight games or more.
2. His average production drops by 1/4 or more over any stretch of 6 games or more.
NUGGETS IN SEVERE AND CONTINUING SLUMPS PARTLY OR ENTIRELY CAUSED BY BAD COACHING
1. No one yet because we don’t have enough games, but obviously I’m keeping a close eye on Carmelo Anthony and even on Iverson to a lesser extent.
UNAVAILABLE PLAYERS
Are coaches as responsible for results when key players can not play as when they can? No they are not; they are less responsible. For how much less, see the impact of the players unavailable on the team’s prospects as shown in the “Manpower Alert Status” system. So the first thing we present in the coaching breakdown is complete information about players who could not play, and about players who might have been playing with minor injuries.
WORLD’S MOST COMPLETE DATA SOURCE FOR NUGGETS PLAYER AVAILABILITY: NUGGETS PLAYERS WHO COULD NOT PLAY IN THE GAME AND WHO WERE NOT AVAILABLE TO THE NUGGETS COACHES
:
NUGGETS PLAYER CHUCKY ATKINS
CBS SPORTSLINE Knee, Questionable for Nov. 5 at Golden State
ESPN Atkins (knee) is doing limited shooting and movement drills on his surgically repaired right knee but hasn't gone through any hard workouts yet, the Denver Post reports
MSNBC Knee, Out 2-3 Weeks
NUGGETS OFFICIAL SITE underwent successful surgery on his right knee on 9/24 and is expected to miss six weeks …
NUGGETS PLAYER SUNNY WEEMS
SPORTSLINE Groin, Questionable for Nov. 5 at Golden State
ESPN
MSNBC Hernia, Day to Day
NUGGETS OFFICIAL SITE did not play in any preseason games and has yet to see
action in the regular season due to a left groin strain. He remains out for tonight’s game …
NUGGETS PLAYER STEVEN HUNTER
SPORTSLINE Knee, Out until at least mid-November
ESPN
MSNBC Knee, Day to Day
NUGGETS OFFICIAL SITE right knee inflammation.
LAKERS PLAYERS WHO COULD NOT PLAY IN THE GAME AND WHO WERE NOT AVAILABLE TO THE LAKERS COACHES
No one was unavailable; no injuries reported
PLAYERS WHO MAY HAVE BEEN PLAYING IN THIS GAME WITH MINOR INJURIES
NUGGETS
Nene
LAKERS
Sasha Vujacic
Josh Powell
Kobe Bryant
MANPOWER ALERT
As of November 1, 2008
This gives you the total impact on each team due to unavailable players.
To calculate the impact, I start with the ESPN player ratings of the unavailable players. The ESPN player rating, while not as good as the Real Player Ratings, are still a very good player rating system. Since there is no full scale live database yet for tracking Real Player Ratings on a real time basis, I have to use the ESPN ratings right now.
Added to these player ratings is one half of the number of minutes per game that a player has been or is supposed to be playing in excess of 20 minutes per game. This is to reflect the extra importance of the players who the team most heavily relies on. Also added is 8 points for the player who is subjectively considered to be the most important player on the team in terms of leadership, and 4 points for the 2nd most important such player.
As an example of how all of this works, consider what the impact on the Cleveland Cavaliers would be if LeBron James were injured. The impact on the Cavaliers would be his ESPN rating plus one half of the number of minutes per game he plays in excess of 20 plus 8 more points, since he is the team leader.
There are numerous instances where the ESPN rating has to be adjusted to get the player’s real value correct. Until late December, the ESPN numbers are modified slightly as necessary to factor in how good the player was during last season as a whole. In cases where due to coaching error a player’s minutes are grossly less than what they should be, that player’s rating is adjusted upward to reflect what it would be if he was playing the minimum reasonable number of minutes. Rookies and other players who were unable to play more than a small fraction of how much they were expected to play have what their ratings would have been estimated from the ground up.
The minimum alert points for any unavailable player are 5. In practice all little used reserves, which generally are the ones who do not play in the majority of games, will be rated 5 points. This minimum is set regardless of player ratings for these low minute players, since the unavailability of even players who have seldom played in recent times reduces crucial flexibility for the coaches, reduces opportunities for wild card “on fire” games, and increases the need for the best players to play even when they should not be playing, such as during garbage time and during when they have certain minor injuries.
NUGGETS INJURIES, ILLNESSES, SUSPENSIONS, AND PERSONAL LEAVES
1. Chucky Atkins 24 points
2. Steven Hunter 5 points
3. Sunny Weems 5 points
Nuggets Unavailable Players Total Alert Points: 34
HOW TO INTERPRET THE MANPOWER ALERT POINT TOTAL
NOTICE: The following interpretation chart assumes that the coach is fully competent and that he makes an appropriate rearranging of his lineups and playing times. If a coach makes seriously incorrect adjustments to lineups and playing times when one or more players become unavailable, the impact on the team will of course be much more severe than what is described here. A totally incompetent coach could in effect increase the true Manpower Alert against his team by as much as 100%,. In other words, he could as much as double the negative impact on his team if when he loses one or more players he makes bad decisions on how to change his lineups and playing times.
0 to 12 No problem at all in either the regular season or in the playoffs
13 to 24 Virtually always, this level is no problem in either the regular season or in the playoffs.
25 to 36 Generally, an extremely small problem in either the regular season or in the playoffs.
37 to 48 Should be a very small problem. This level can affect winning and losing in the regular season or in the playoffs only if the other team is completely healthy or almost completely healthy.
49 to 60 A small problem in the regular season unless it lasts for more than about 6 weeks; in which case the season as a whole is under some threat. For the playoffs, it will often be a major problem, but exactly how much of a problem it is will depend largely on the alert level of the other team.
61 to 72 A substantial problem in the regular season that will definitely cost the team a win here and there. If this level lasts more than 6 weeks, the season as a whole becomes threatened to one extent or another. The impact on marginal playoff teams is more severe, because this level can cost such teams a playoff berth. In the playoffs, this level will generally mean a quick elimination, except of course if the other team has substantial availability problems as well.
73 to 84 A serious problem; the entire season is under a serious threat. Games are lost that would have been won on a regular basis. If the team makes the playoffs regardless of this problem, it will generally be immediately eliminated.
85 to 96 A very serious problem; the entire season is under a very serious threat. Many games that would have been won are now lost. If the team somehow makes the playoffs regardless of this huge problem, it will almost always be immediately eliminated.
97 to 108 An extremely serious problem; season is most likely lost unless the alert level is much improved within a 2-4 weeks. If the team at this alert level somehow makes the playoffs, it will be eliminated immediately.
109 to 120 In many cases, the season is lost if this level is reached for more than a week or two. Making the playoffs is out of the question if a team remains at this level for more than 6 weeks or so. If a team is suddenly at this level while in the playoffs, it will be immediately eliminated.
121 and more: It’s over; come back next season.
MANPOWER ALERTS FOR THIS GAME
Nuggets Unavailable Players Total Alert Points: 34
Lakers Unavailable Players Total Alert Points: 0
Result: The Lakers had a manpower advantage that led to a 1.4 point advantage in the final score
Current Estimate of the Current Average Manpower Alert for the 30 NBA Teams: 60
As a rough but useful estimate, to determine the theoretical impact on a game due to unavailability of players, start with the difference in alert points, and subtract 20 from it since the first 20 points should be completely offset by correct substitutions, and then divide the remainder by 10. The result is a rough but useful estimate of the advantage a team had in points due to the difference in unavailable players.
SUMMARY OF OUTSIDE FACTORS THAT THE COACHES HAD NO CONTROL OVER
Home Court Advantage: Nuggets 4 Points
Extra Rest Advantage, if any: Lakers 5 Points
Manpower Advantage: Lakers 1.4 Points
Net of all Outside Factors: The Lakers had an advantage of 2.4 Points. The Lakers would still have most likely won the game even if there were no outside factors at all.
