Comments on: Defend Rodney Stuckey all you want, just don’t say he doesn’t get enough respect from the officials

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Tue, 11 May 2010 23:52:54 +0000

Unfortunately, I don’t know anywhere that tracks contested shots at the rim.
You are correct about the flaw in this data. When a player is fouled while shooting at the rim, the shot attempt doesn’t count. Again, I don’t know where data is available to reconcile that.
It’s reasons like that I don’t consider graphs like these as presenting conclusions. Instead, I look at them as clues.
Here are a few sites that I primarily rely on for data (each offer different things):

Basketball-Reference.com
HoopData.com
BasketballValue.com

If you want to e-mail me (danfeld11@gmail.com) about what you want to analyze, I could try to give you more specifics about where to find the appropriate data.

By: Odeh

Odeh — Fri, 07 May 2010 15:35:49 +0000

We do have a 3 point shooting guard in Ben Gordon. Last I checked he has shot consistently around 40% from the 3-point arc for most of his career except for last season being the exception. Now I have to ask myself why was it the exception? And my answer is because his 3 point shots are far more contested and out of rhythm than in his prior seasons because Stuckey could not get him the ball in the right spot because he is not a point guard. We only had a small sample of Stuckey and Gordon playing together but Gordon is a player that can come off screens and pick and pop and Stuckey cant deliver it to him. Gordon is better off the bench because of his explosiveness to score in bunches so I still contend that we should move Stuckey to the 2, bring in a pass first, 3-point shooting point guard, trade RIP and bring Gordon off the bench. However, I do agree that a big man is our first priority, and if a good deal is not available for a point guard then Stuckey is adequate but not the long term solution at the point.

By: Alex

Alex — Fri, 07 May 2010 04:01:24 +0000

I totally agree. Drawing fouls is an art and a skill as much as it is shooting at the right time in the right situation. I do believe that our lack of offensive weapons, not just lack of three point shooting, makes stuckey such a focal point of the defense that they can contest more of his shots. I would love to dig deeper into this if the stats were available. I really don’t know if showing contested shots at the rim to free throw attempts would show anything different in stuckeys case, but I’m leaning that way. The other thing that I’m curious about is if the this graph is including all shots at the rim. Technically, if a player shoots a shot at the rim and misses it but gets fouled there was no shot attempt. Does your graph include those attempts? Because if it doesn’t we’re missing an even bigger part of this. You can even go further and narrow down fta to attempts that were only given out for shots at the rim rather than perimeter shots included. I majored in statistics and do a lot of work in numbers and the one thing I know is that you have to really understand the data before coming to conclusions. I’ve wanted to look at a lot of stats from the nba out of curiousity but dont know where to find the data. Any idea where it is easily available? Thanks Dan.

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Thu, 06 May 2010 23:47:14 +0000

The point guards who don't play as physically don't take as many shots near the rim, though. So the chart accounts for them not them. How many shots you take at the rim isn't a perfect indicator of how physically someone plays, but I think it's a good indicator.

And I agree, Williams would be a good model for Stuckey. And I think Billups would, too. I always thought Stuckey had the skill set to develop a similar post-up game.

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Thu, 06 May 2010 23:42:34 +0000

I think you’re right. I’ll see if I can get the data on that.

By: The Boourns

The Boourns — Thu, 06 May 2010 20:46:45 +0000

So not knowing who some of the guards are that represent the other dots on that scatter plot above it’s hard to make assumptions based on playstyle. But by normalizing for playstyle (eg – removing the difference between a PG who shies away from contact vs. one who aims to draw contact), you miss out on the fact that Stuckey plays a very physical PG position compared to a lot of PGs in the league.

He should be watching nothing but Deron Williams gameplay footage to get a better sense for how to maximize his free throw attempts by drawing contact in the right way vs. putting his shoulder down and going straight into guys followed by yelling “HEY!” in the hopes of a ref blowing his whistle.

I think Stuckey definitely draws a lot more contact that goes uncalled vs. smaller, quicker PGs who depend on speed to get past a defender vs. strength to get through a defender but the way that Stuckey initiates that contact is what he needs to work on, not gaining the respect of the officials. Because lets be honest, in the NBA, selling the call is just as important as actually initiating the contact that the call is made on.

By: nuetes

nuetes — Thu, 06 May 2010 19:37:46 +0000

i think billups gets more fouls outside of the lane than inside it though. his shots at the rim are fairly low. he’s one of the biggest actors in the nba. anytime a big shows on a pick and roll billups will run into him and flail about. or he’ll always put his body into the guy guarding him while he’s dribbling and pull a good act job. not to mention his late game freebies. of course none of that is a knock on him because he gets to the line, and thats all that matters.

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Thu, 06 May 2010 19:36:42 +0000

I think Stuckey can be the best player on a title contender. I don't think he will be.

But he's the best shot Detroit has. No other player on the roster is more likely to fill that role. No potential free agent is more likely to fill that role. And unless the Pistons move up in the lottery, no draft pick is more likely to fill that role.

So, what should the Pistons do? If they can trade Stuckey and get good value, I'm cool with that. But if it's so obvious Stuckey isn't that good, that won't happen.

Basically, I'm not saying it will work out well, but I think Detroit's best chance is to ride it out with Stuckey.

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Thu, 06 May 2010 19:13:47 +0000

In hindsight, trading Billups was a mistake. But that doesn't mean Stuckey is below average. He's far from that.

And I'm the first (or second behind you, in this case) to say Ben Wallace was a superstar. He was a top-3-or-so player in the league for a stretch.

But I still think that title team was balanced in that the top player (Wallace) was closer to the fifth-best player (Tayshaun Prince) than the typical championship team. For comparison, look at last year's champion. The difference between Kobe Bryant and Derek Fisher was bigger than between Wallace and Prince.

Also, I don't think the Pistons let Ben Wallace go because they thought he was washed up. I think they let him go because he was no longer worth $15 million per year. And they were probably right.

By: Dan Feldman

Dan Feldman — Thu, 06 May 2010 18:54:40 +0000

Honestly, I wouldn't be disappointed with adding a big man in the draft, trade and free agency. It's such a key position that it would only increase Detroit's odds of finding one that works.