Okay, a comment on a different thread concerning the Pistons tempo prompted me to do a little statistical compilation.

For the raw numbers I used (from 82games):
1) regular season number of offensive
2) regular season points scored per 100 possessions,
3) regular season opponents possessions per game
4) regular season opponents points scored per 100 possessions,
5) the same four categories for the playoffs.

Then i created three indices (that may be entirely meaningless):
1) points per 100 possessions/possessions per game = offensive (or defensive, as the case may be) Efficiency Index;
2) offensive efficiency index/divided by defensive efficiency index multiplied by 1000 = Goodness Index (so named because it turned out that Goodness Index bore an almost exact correlation to won loss record -- in fact the of the 17 teams with the highest Goodness Index, 16 made the playoffs. Actually everything else in this post may merely be a pretext to justify the coining of what I consider a very brilliant new statistical category: The Goodness Index)

I applied these two indices to both the regular season and the playoff numbers and then came up with my third index:
3) Regular Season Goodness Index - Playoff Goodness Index minus = Disappointment Index (also known as the Flip Saunders Memorial Index; though perhaps, as it turns out, we need to rename that award)

So, fyi: here are the top 5 squads in each category (as well as the Pistons ranking if they aren't in the top 5; keep in mind that the playoff rankings are relative to a field of 16)

Regular Season Possessions Per Game
1.Phoenix 96; 2.Denver 95; T3.Golden State and Charlotte 94; T5.Washington, Chicago, Philly, Boston 93 [Detroit = 29th at 88, just ahead of last place Memphis at 87]

Regular Season Points Per 100 Possessions
T1.Dallas, Phoenix 112; T3.Detroit, Seattle 111; T5. Miami, Washington, Toronto 109

Regular Season Offensive Efficiency Index
1.Detroit 1.276; 2.Dallas 1.273; 3.Memphis 1.233; 4. San Antonio 1.227; 5.Seattle 1.207

Regular Season Opponent Possessions Per Game (with the defensive categories, the lower your score the higher you rank)
1.Memphis 86; T2. Portland, Detroit 87; T4.Houston, Utah, Dallas 88

Regular Season Opponents' Points Scored Per 100 Possessions
1.San Antonio 100; T2.Memphis, Indiana, New Jersey 102; T5.Detroit, LA Clippers 103

Regular Season Defensive Efficiency Index
1.Phoenix 1.093; 2.Denver 1.117; 3.Chicago 1.118; 4.LA Clippers 1.120; 5.San Antonio 1.124 [Detroit = 20th, between Houston and Memphis]

Regular Season Goodness Index
1.San Antonio 1092.3; 2. Detroit 1077.7; 3.Dallas 1067.6; 4.Memphis 1039.2; 5.Miami 1038.1

Playoffs Possessions Per Game
T1.LA Clippers, Phoenix 95; 3.LA Lakers 94; 4.Denver 92; T5.Washington, Miami, San Antonio 91 [Detroit = 16th, dead last, with 84]

Playoffs Points Per 100 Possessions
1.Phoenix 115; 2.Dallas 114; 3. San Antonio 113; T4.Detroit, Washington, LA Clippers 111

Playoffs Offensive Efficiency Index
1.Detroit 1.321; 2.Dallas 1.267; 3.San Antonio 1.242; 4.Milwaukee 1.225; 5.Cleveland 1.225

Playoffs Opponent's Possessions Per Game
1.Detroit 84; 2.Memphis 85; T3.Indiana, Cleveland 86; T5.New Jersey, Milwaukee 88

Playoffs Opponent's Points Scored Per 100 Possessions
1.Detroit 103; T2.Miami, New Jersey 104; T4.Dallas, LA Clippers, Indiana 107

Playoffs Defensive Efficiency Index
1.Denver 1.120; 2.LA Clippers 1.126; 3.Miami 1.130 4.Phoenix 1.167; 5.Dallas 1.189 [Detroit = 10th at 1.238]

Playoffs Goodness Index
1.Miami 1069.3; 2.Detroit 1067.3; 3.Dallas 1065.4; 4.Phoenix 1037.6; 5.LA Clippers 1037.4

Disappointment Index (number 1 is most disappointing; Regular Seasons Goodness Index minus Playoff Goodness Index)
1.Memphis 178.3; 2.Sacramento 103.8; 3.Milwaukee 101.6; 4.Denver 76.6; 5.LA Lakers 69.2 [Detroit: 13th at 10.4; and fyi: 14.Dallas 1.2; 15.LA Clippers -18.0; 16.Miami -31.2]


Okay, so I really have almost zero idea what all these numbers show, if anything. I feel a little Dr. Frankenstein among statistics, doing a lot of expert-looking tinkering but breaking things and making monsters along the way. However, it does appear to me that Detroit plays with very few possessions, but gets a lot of points out of them (and continues to do so in the playoffs) and that on balance, Detroit has barely dropped off at all, on balance, in the playoffs.

But I'd love to hear others' thoughts both on the methods and on the results. Have I proven anything other than that I can obsessively waste 4 hours making an Excel spreadsheet?

I believe that same modus operandi yielded the first bobble head dolls.

It looks good prof. I'd like dba to take a look and throw in his two cents as well.

__________________
Nov 13 LW Milan Lucic had an active night. He scored his first goal in eight games since his Oct. 25 hat trick and also pounded Michael Komisarek in a third-period fight. Lucic cut his hand in a fight with Michael Komisarek. "I'll be fine," he said. "(X-rays are) negative, but there's so many broken bones in there from before you can't really tell."

Interesting ideas, prof, but it looks to me like your goodness index has involved more work than necessary. I would imagine that for any individual team, the number of possessions per game is almost exactly the same on both offense and defense, and a quick look at some 82games.com stats seems to bear that out. Seems like every team has either exactly the same number of possessions per game on both ends, or a difference of at most one. So your goodness index is based on:

(points scored per 100 possessions/offensive possessions per game)

divided by

(points allowed per 100 possessions/defensive possessions per game)

But since the offensive possessions per game numbers are either identical or almost identical to the defensive possessions per game for each team, those numbers are basically cancelling out when you do the division. The same logic applies to the "per 100 possessions" factor on both offense and on defense. So in effect, you're just calculating pts scored/pts allowed for every team.

This is true d4, so I am! (your learn something new everyday!).

I think what happened is that my interests kind of evolved as I got into the numbers. I started out just interested in tempo (represented by possessions per game); then I got interested in efficiency (points per 100 possessions); then i got interested in how offensive efficiency compared with defensive efficiency (which is a little more than just ppg, because it includes the possessions factor and so levels the field by accounting for different tempos in a way that just ppg does not); and lastly with the regular season vs. playoff goodness (presuming that Detroit would be just behind in Memphis in disappointment). But as I moved from one question to the next, i retained every factor from the previous question, whether or not it was necessary.

In any event, I think the things that really stood out in my mind as I moved along the way:
1) how slow Detroit's tempo is; I mean, I didn't think we were racehorses, but I didn't expect us to have the second fewest possessions in the league.
2) how efficient Phoenix's defense is (not to mention Denver's; I'm still not sure if I've interpreted that correctly: for it seems to suggest that the most efficient defenses somehow correlate with uptempo offenses); 3) how little Detroit has actually dropped off during the playoffs in terms of efficiency (though their tempo has slowed quite a bit).
4) the way in which teams tempos goes up or down from what they are used to in the regular season to the playoffs and how (or whether) that correlates with their playoff success. So, for example, it appears to me from the numbers that Phoenix pretty much preserved their tempo from the regular season and that the Lakers and Clippers increased theirs, suggesting to me that Phoenix succeeded in imposing their more familiar fastbreak tempo on those teams.

Of course, in all of this, I'm reminded me of a friend, who defined sociology as the science of bursting through open doors.

Pistons only give you about 88 chances to score.
Our efficiency maxes out due to intangables like steals and blocks.
With rebounding being our only weakness.

I don't get what you mean that our "efficiency maxes out due to intangibles like steals and blocks".... would you elaborate a little?

With just 88 touches we still are best at 100 possessions.
Phoenix which uses 96 must bungle a few.
We have the most efficient O even though we use it less.
Addition by subtraction. A case where less is more.

gotcha, yes. as we all know, few turnovers makes a big difference in that regard.

the weird thing to me is that during the regular season we scored a 111 points per 100 possessions, with 88 possessions per game. now in the playoffs we are scoring 111 points per 100 possessions, with just 84 possessions per game. if i'm not misunderstanding that means we are somehow making more of our possessions in the playoffs than in the regular season. that maybe squares with my spectator impression of the first seven playoff games, but not with the last seven games.

No, points per 100 possessions is a rate, like miles per hour. If I score 11 points on 10 possessions, that's 110 points per 100 possessions, same as if I scored 97 points in 88 possessions, or 92 points in 84 possessions. It means that the Pistons are scoring fewer total points in the playoffs, but their efficiency (points per possession) has stayed the same.

d4, i'm a little embarrassed to be so dense with these things: especially since I hauled in the numbers and made such a to-do about them, but I think I only partly get it. I mean I do get that the efficiency of the team has stayed the same (while both possessions and points have declined).

Is points per 100 possessions a measure of efficiency (just like points per possession, as in the last sentence of your message)? If so, let's say team A scores 110 points in a game with 100 possessions. And in a different game Team B scores 77 points on 70 possessions. Team A and Team B are equally efficient, correct?

And Team A is playing at a faster tempo right?

So what my numbers are showing, it seems, is in that case just that the Pistons have slowed the game down in the playoffs (4 fewer possessions per game). Yes?

Again, apologies for my clumsiness with numbers.