In the business world, dashboards are used to provide at-a-glance views of key performance indicators (KPIs) or performance measurements. I've come up with my own dashboard so that we can see how the Jazz performed in their game last night versus the Trail Blazers. Rather than focus on the biggest and most obvious indicator for last night's game of "we lost", the dashboard drills into the game and visually pulls out how the players did in being effective and adding value, and how the team did in key categories.
First on the dashboard is starter effectiveness. This graph shows how effective our starters were versus how effective the Blazers starters were. I measure effectiveness in three different ways, an estimate of the wins produced per 48 minutes (y-axis), the Larry H Miller average (x-axis), and estimated PER (size of dot). The bigger the dot the more effective a player was and vice versa for the smaller the dot. Also, the way this chart is structured, a player in the upper right hand corner played more effectively than a player in the lower left hand corner.
The next chart attempts to quantify a player's value based on his offensive effort (y-axis), defensive effort (x-axis), and calculated approximate value (size of dot). Here, players want to be in the upper right hand corner as that shows good defense and good offense; further, larger dots show a greater overall stat contribution to the game than smaller dots (i.e. approximate value is a counting type number to show how a player is affecting the game stat wise).
The next charts show overall effectiveness of the 10 players with the most minutes from each team (the max players I can put on these charts is 10; the Jazz played 10 players and the Blazers played 11 players).
The next charts show overall value of the 10 players with the most minutes from each team (the max players I can put on these charts is 10; the Jazz played 10 players and the Blazers played 11 players). Please don't hate me because Burks dot is so small - he didn't have a good night shooting.
My next dashboard items are team shooting, team free throws, team rebounds, and team turnovers. Dean Oliver identified these factors as the factors that go into winning a basketball game (the factors are also known as the "Four Factors of Basketball Success"). Dean recognized that each of these factors did not contribute equally towards winning a basketball game, and weighted the factors.
Dean attributed 40% of a basketball win to effective shooting, 15% to getting to the line and making free throws, 20% to rebounding the ball well, and 25% to taking care of the basketball.
My first dashboard graph on these factors, shooting, shows that the Blazers had 10 more shooting attempts than us - consequently making more buckets, though they had the same number of three point makes as we did. Portland's field goal percentage was only slightly higher than ours (42.2% versus 38.8%), so a key to their victory was those extra attempts.
The second factor, free throws, is my next graph. Clearly the Jazz had the advantage in this area, taking 36 free throws and making 26 (72.2%) to the Blazers 31 attempts and making 19 (61.3%). This shows the Jazz were aggressive in going to the hoop, and that they capitalized on the opportunities when they got to the line.
My third dashboard graph in this four factors category shows the rebounding war. Rather than show the total rebounds each team collected, I am showing the number of potential defensive rebounds each team had and the number they actually collected. Folks, the Jazz lost this one pretty badly. Of the 52 potential rebounds the Jazz could have grabbed, they only roped in 33. That's 63%. Now compare that with Portland grabbing 38 of their 48 potential boards or 79%. When you consider the rebound discrepancy with the shooting graph above, you can see how Portland was able to procure an extra 10 shots. Had we grabbed 79% of our potential defensive rebounds, our total defensive boards would have been 41 rather than 33 - a difference of 8 boards!
The final four factors dashboard graph is of team turnovers. The graph shows the total number of plays each team had. The number of plays is calculated by adding up total field goal attempts, 44% times total free throw attempts, and total team turnovers. Note that Portland had nine more plays than the Jazz but had a similar amount of turnovers - the Blazers had 18 turnovers to our 17 turnovers for turnover percentages of 14.8% (Blazers) and 15% (Jazz). So Portland took slightly better care of the ball when they had it than when we did, but the big take home point here is they had nine more plays - also a side effect of their domination of the boards.