"Clutch" Shots (last 3 seasons)

"Clutch" Shots (last 3 seasons)

In the last 24 seconds of the game, who's converted the most shots when the game is tied or team is down by 1 or 2 points?

http://82games.com/random12.htm

I've said elsewhere that people focus in on this particular statistic too much in deciding who's clutch and who's not. LeBron is a terrible "clutch player" according to it. But guess what? Kobe and Billups don't look too good either. Maybe there's more to being clutch than just converting game winning shots.

And I think the observation made at the end about teams relying too much on their star players at the end is interesting. But they should also consider that the shot taken at the end of games are often (a) timed to be the last shot, thereby restricting the amount of time available to explore other options, and ( are often taken from out of bounds with maybe less than 10 seconds left, allowing defenses to setup and making it difficult to run a successful play.

 

This is where stats are misleading. It's all good to mention 82games.com constantly, but converting the shot is much harder than for instance passing to the player to make the shot, or getting a defensive rebound and passing the ball up. To me, simple things like that shouldn't be counted as clutch, making a key steal, block, shot or play should be defined as "clutch." Sometimes, stats can be looked into too much, remember, stats don't always tell the whole story. I'm not entirely sure if 82games is actually collecting the stats fully, there seem to be some things missing. The title of the thread should be changed, it's actually last two seasons, if this season was to be counted, Kobe would have another 5 shots added in.

 

T-mac scored 13 points in the games last 35 secs.. Rockets were down 13 .. Mcgrady hit 4 3's and 1 and1 3 on duncan... 1 of those 3's was a buzzer beater.. I'd say thats the best comeback ever in the last 3 seasons.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Laker_fan:</div><div class="quote_post">This is where stats are misleading. It's all good to mention 82games.com constantly, but converting the shot is much harder than for instance passing to the player to make the shot, or getting a defensive rebound and passing the ball up. To me, simple things like that shouldn't be counted as clutch, making a key steal, block, shot or play should be defined as "clutch." Sometimes, stats can be looked into too much, remember, stats don't always tell the whole story.</div>

Which statistic did you find misleading? Did the article present some stats that contradict what you just said?

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I'm not entirely sure if 82games is actually collecting the stats fully, there seem to be some things missing. The title of the thread should be changed, it's actually last two seasons, if this season was to be counted, Kobe would have another 5 shots added in.</div>

No, it's not. It includes games up to 2/26/06. And 82games.com gets all it's data straight from the Play-by-plays, which you can find at ESPN.com or NBA.com.

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting durvasa:</div><div class="quote_post">Which statistic did you find misleading? Did the article present some stats that contradict what you just said?</div>

Not really, I stand by everything I said. Infact, are you upset that I'm not giving these stats much attention? The clutch play in this includes "assists." An inbound pass or a simple pass could count as an "assist" in clutch play. Its not the hardest thing to do.

It says the stats are from the 05-06 season aswell. I can count three shots Kobe has taken this season with 24 seconds remaining and this has a total of three seasons as six. I count count another three clutch shots that have been taken within a minute this season. As I said, this isn't counted in these stats because they are looked into in a over deep manner. They don't include steals, blocked shots or anything that include good defensive plays. Thats why most of the players on that list are gaurds or small forwards. The big men on that list are mostly players that have range through to the three point line, like Dirk or Yao. This article is bias against bigger players.

Again, just to prove that we can look into things too much. This article here looks at clutch play in a slightly different way, as we see from this article, Kobe is the best clutch scorer per 48 minutes. Stats can be manipulated to tell different stories. Thats why as I have said before, stats don't tell the whole story.

http://www.82games.com/clutchplayers.htm

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting Laker_fan:</div><div class="quote_post">
The clutch play in this includes "assists." An inbound pass or a simple pass could count as an "assist" in clutch play. Its not the hardest thing to do.</div>

I don't think the assist numbers should be used to conclusively state, "Player A is a better clutch passer than Player B." But we can use them to support slightly weaker statements such as, "Paul Pierce historically has been a willing passer in the closing seconds of games."

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">It says the stats are from the 05-06 season aswell. I can count three shots Kobe has taken this season with 24 seconds remaining and this has a total of three seasons as six.</div>

Can you remember more than 6 shots he's made that meets the conditions of what the article is looking at over the past 3 seasons? If so, you can confirm that by checking out the play by play of those games, provided at ESPN.com. Click on the score for the particular game, and then click on Play by play:

03/04 schedule
04/05 schedule
05/06 schedule

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">I count count another three clutch shots that have been taken within a minute this season. As I said, this isn't counted in these stats because they are looked into in a over deep manner. They don't include steals, blocked shots or anything that include good defensive plays. Thats why most of the players on that list are gaurds or small forwards. The big men on that list are mostly players that have range through to the three point line, like Dirk or Yao. This article is bias against bigger players.</div>

You'd have a point, if the article said that this statistic measures how "clutch" a player is. They responded to the question of who's converted on the most game winners and at what conversion rate. I think they make it clear what they're measuring. We can draw our own conclusions from the facts.

People are making a big deal about LeBron not being clutch, because his percentage on game winning shots is so low over his career. I think it's a flawed argument, because there are many big time clutch players who also don't fare well by such a measurement -- including Kobe and Billups. I fully agree with you that just focusing in on this stat when considering how clutch a player is doesn't make much sense. Indeed, the site also provides many other stats for players in the last five minutes of the game when neither team is above 5 points, and I think that's much more useful for judging who's plays well in crunch time. By those numbers, Kobe looks pretty good (which matches our expecations). And, what do you know, LeBron looks pretty good as well.

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">Again, just to prove that we can look into things too much. This article here looks at clutch play in a slightly different way, as we see from this article, Kobe is the best clutch scorer per 48 minutes. Stats can be manipulated to tell different stories. Thats why as I have said before, stats don't tell the whole story.</div>

Of course. In fact, I purposely put clutch in quotes in the thread title to emphasize that it's not a be all, end all study on clutch shooting. Actually, at the end they even provide a link to a better view of "clutch play" (last five minutes of a game), from which your link is sampling.

I think you, the site author, and I are pretty much in agreement.

 

Durvasa, I like the stats you do but The English Kobe fan is correct - Peja is 2 of 3 in the clutch and Manu is 1 of 7 - that TELLS YOU THAT YOU CAN'T BY GO STATS. Ask anyone in the league who is more clutch Manu or Peja. According to this, Peja is the most clutch FG% player in the league. Funny how he never developed the nickname "ICe COld Peja"

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting phunDamentalz:</div><div class="quote_post">Durvasa, I like the stats you do but The English Kobe fan is correct - Peja is 2 of 3 in the clutch and Manu is 1 of 7 - that TELLS YOU THAT YOU CAN'T BY GO STATS. Ask anyone in the league who is more clutch Manu or Peja. According to this, Peja is the most clutch FG% player in the league. Funny how he never developed the nickname "ICe COld Peja"</div>

I'll repeat that it doesn't measure who the most clutch is. It measures what it says, who has hit the most game winners. Substituting "game winners" with "clutch play" is a mistake. Obviously, hitting game winners is a plus and adds to one's reputations as a clutch player, but there's much more to being clutch than that.

Part of the reason I posted this was to debunk the notion that LeBron is "the anti-clutch" because he hasn't hit many game winners.

Misinterpreted statistics are harmful to any analysis, but that doesn't diminish the value of statistics themselves. It's just important to understand exactly what the statistic says and what it doesn't say, and then draw conclusions from that.

Here's a very good article on the topic, by a reputable stats guy in academia who happens to be a Professor of Economics. I believe he recently took a job with the Washington Wizards, in fact. I'll post a quote he references that sums up his opinion on using statistics in basketball:

<div class="quote_poster">Quote:</div><div class="quote_post">
"The reason to use stats in any field is because humans are poor at evaluating probability. We tend to see patterns where there aren't, overestimate the probability of low frequency events and, most importantly, have a tendency towards comfirmation bias -- looking for evidence that confirm our preexisting beliefs.

One of the things that's said in defense of stats in baseball is that you can't tell the difference between a .260 hitter and a .280 hitter by watching one game or one series. The difference amounts to one extra hit every 2 weeks. Similarly is there any way to tell just by watching whether Eddy Curry is more or less prone to turnovers than Yao Ming?

Similarly I think that one of the best uses of stats is to provoke questions and try to map out ways in which questions can be answered. How can we tell if a team is shooting 'too many' or 'too few' three-pointers? Do shot-blockers have an 'intimidation' effect? How valuable are 'scoring' point guards compared to 'traditional' point guards? Are specialists more or less valuable than generalists? How valuable is it to have guards who can rebound or big men who can pass? What separates a good shooter from a great shooter? Stats can't answer all of those questions but they can rule out some wrong answers that have intuitive appeal and focus attention on possibilities that are more likely to be correct.</div>

 

<div class="quote_poster">Quoting phunDamentalz:</div><div class="quote_post">Durvasa, I like the stats you do but The English Kobe fan is correct - Peja is 2 of 3 in the clutch and Manu is 1 of 7 - that TELLS YOU THAT YOU CAN'T BY GO STATS. Ask anyone in the league who is more clutch Manu or Peja. According to this, Peja is the most clutch FG% player in the league. Funny how he never developed the nickname "ICe COld Peja"</div>
Game winning shot does not = clutch ability.

Peja could've taken 2 open game winners, because he's not a guy that creates for himself so much. At least if you're going to compare, compare similar guys like Lebron, Wade, Carter, McGrady etc, Peja took 3 shots like you posted, which means he's not really a go to guy in the clutch anyways.

Even though the stats is not supposed to measure clutch ability, you still used an extremely poor example.