league averages of TS%, eFG% and assisted vs. unassisted shots

[Patman]

I find this useful for an other purpose. It shows that defenses in the 80' and 90' weren't really better. TS as you can see was between .511 and .543 EFG% was max .498. last season TS was .542 and EFG was .498.
This just shows that defense may be different today but overal they are as good as the 80's and 90's defense when it comes to prevent effective scoring. Physicality is down, but the defensive schemes got more complex and effective (largly due to removing illegal defense rule).
Even though you can more clearly deduct this by avg Ortg of teams, and it shows the same picture.

If Handchecking etc. would still be allowed, most that say it is to soft now would complain about it, because we would see pretty bad shooting.

Also i don't know if it is possible to get decent data by position with a regression. Rules changed over the years, I assume that this has some influence on the Percentages (Handchecking makes it easier for Guards, no Illegal Defense makes it harder to operate out of the Post), on the other hand the Positions evolved with the rule changes, so maybe the influence on the percentage is small.

[DenButsu]

I find this useful for an other purpose. It shows that defenses in the 80' and 90' weren't really better. TS as you can see was between .511 and .543 EFG% was max .498. last season TS was .542 and EFG was .498.
This just shows that defense may be different today but overal they are as good as the 80's and 90's defense when it comes to prevent effective scoring. Physicality is down, but the defensive schemes got more complex and effective (largly due to removing illegal defense rule).
Even though you can more clearly deduct this by avg Ortg of teams, and it shows the same picture.

If Handchecking etc. would still be allowed, most that say it is to soft now would complain about it, because we would see pretty bad shooting.

Also i don't know if it is possible to get decent data by position with a regression. Rules changed over the years, I assume that this has some influence on the Percentages (Handchecking makes it easier for Guards, no Illegal Defense makes it harder to operate out of the Post), on the other hand the Positions evolved with the rule changes, so maybe the influence on the percentage is small.

Handchecks notwithstanding, and I'm not a stats expert by a damn sight, I found Dean Oliver's explanation in his book for why past defenses were better pretty convincing.

[Patman]

Handchecks notwithstanding, and I'm not a stats expert by a damn sight, I found Dean Oliver's explanation in his book for why past defenses were better pretty convincing.

I read the book, but can't remember that part, he talks about that the early defenses, pre 80 were far better, or to be precise the Ortg was worse, so you could argue that Offenses got better. He talks about that many of the top defenses played man to man, but the data only goes up to 2002, i think it was the year illegal defense was lifted. But maybe i just don't remember it.

I find it hard to believe that the Defense today is considerably worse than in 85 when the ORTG are nearly the same. This would mean the whole game got worse, the offense today would also be worse because they reach the same level of efficiency against worse defenses.

[PatsSoxKnicks]

Also i don't know if it is possible to get decent data by position with a regression. Rules changed over the years, I assume that this has some influence on the Percentages (Handchecking makes it easier for Guards, no Illegal Defense makes it harder to operate out of the Post), on the other hand the Positions evolved with the rule changes, so maybe the influence on the percentage is small.

I've had some thoughts on this. Something along the lines of comparing the positions to each other from 05-06 onwards and then using that data to project out. However, there's too much uncertainty there. The shooting %'s aren't going to be linear. I don't know, I'd have to really think about how you would go about doing this.

[PatsSoxKnicks]

I read the book, but can't remember that part, he talks about that the early defenses, pre 80 were far better, or to be precise the Ortg was worse, so you could argue that Offenses got better. He talks about that many of the top defenses played man to man, but the data only goes up to 2002, i think it was the year illegal defense was lifted. But maybe i just don't remember it.

I find it hard to believe that the Defense today is considerably worse than in 85 when the ORTG are nearly the same. This would mean the whole game got worse, the offense today would also be worse because they reach the same level of efficiency against worse defenses.

I'm working on a football project for him right now but when thats done, I'll get a chance to meet with him and can ask him about his opinions on this then.

[Patman]

I'm working on a football project for him right now but when thats done, I'll get a chance to meet with him and can ask him about his opinions on this then.

That would be really nice, would love to hear his take on that. Really liked his book and i think his statistical analyses are really good. I'm no statistical expert just have basic understanding of the topic.

[Chronz]

IIRC Oliver says defenses from the far past were better than given credit for(60's-70's). 80's/90's defense get overrated when people use it as the measuring stick for defensive dominance when what we have today is superior or at the least comparable.

Its when you get into the late 60's, early 70's that people here disrespect the game. And to a degree they have a point, the game wasnt tactical (theres no reason why teams should have allowed West to dribble the ball up without a left hand), but they made up for that by allowing extreme levels of aggression and no 3pt line to space defenses out.

There is a limit though, once you get into the early 60's when the game was still developing there was alot more to their low shooting% than just good/bad offense/defense.

The courts were a mess (the Celtics used to force opponents into deadspots on the court), the balls werent standardized, environmental effects played a role in some venues.

[PatsSoxKnicks]

bump because i was looking for this