Five "Coaching Factors" Summary
|
|
|
|
|
| Physicality | Sengun +25 net wins Davis +10, Gafford +7 |
||
| Playing Hard | Thompson 15 wins Davis 10, Marshall 10 |
||
| Decision Making | Green +15 net wins Irving +9, Thompson +7 |
||
| Shotmaking | Christie +8 points Dinwiddie +6, Thompson +4 |
||
| Referee Effects | Sengun +4 wins Davis +4, Adams +3 |
- Raw Physicality Wins Leaders - Sengun 46, Davis 29, Gafford 29
- Playing Hard Wins per 36min leaders - Thompson 14.6, Marshall 14.4, Dinwiddie 12.1, Davis 11.6, Washington 11.1
- Decision Making poor decisions - Sheppard 3, Brooks 3, Davis 3
- Shotmaking own shots - Dallas +9, Houston +2
- Overt Referee Argues: Dallas 11, Houston 9.
High argue players: Marshall 3, Davis 2, Sengun 2.
Roland Hard Play Leaders: Sengun 34, Davis 21, Irving 17, Gafford 11.
Team Physicality Summary
Winner: DALLAS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| DALAS | ||||||
| HOUSTON |
Tracking over forty types of contact, aggression, and resilience
Header notes:
RPR = "Roland Physicality Rating" (in development), Wins = a Physicality play that is deemed a 'win', L/D = Losses/Defeats (non-intentional fouls and soft plays), L2+ = level 2 or higher force physicality plays, Falls = player hits the ground, KD = Knockdowns: causes opponent to hit the ground
Notable Team Physicality Details
|
|
|
|
| Drives: | Dallas +3 | Green +5 |
| Ball Pressure: | Dallas +1 | Eason +1 |
| Bumps & Grabs: | Dallas +4 | Davis +2 |
| Rebounding: | Houston +2 | Adams +3 |
| At Rim: | Dallas +10 | Gafford +7 |
| Postups: | Houston +4 | Sengun +6 |
| Screens: | Houston +5 | Sengun +10 |
| Level 2+ Wins: | Dallas +9 | Gafford +6 |
"Net Knocks" - Sengun +7, Thompson +5
Knockdowns - Thompson 9, Sengun 7
Falls - Irving 7, Gafford 5
Head-to-Head Physicality
Gafford +6 vs Thompson
Sengun +5 vs Gafford
Washington +5 vs Thompson
Player Physicality Stats
DALLAS MAVERICKS
Wins |
Downs |
Hard Play Score |
|||
| Player |
|
|
|||
| Anthony Davis | |||||
| Kyrie Irving | |||||
| Daniel Gafford | |||||
| Naji Marshall | |||||
| P.J. Washington | |||||
| Dante Exum | |||||
| Spencer Dinwiddie | |||||
| Max Christie | |||||
| Klay Thompson | |||||
HOUSTON ROCKETS
Wins |
Downs |
Hard Play Score |
|||
| Player |
|
|
|||
| Alperen Sengun | |||||
| Jalen Green | |||||
| Stephen Adams | |||||
| Amen Thompson | |||||
| Jae'Sean Tate | |||||
| Dillon Brooks | |||||
| Tari Eason | |||||
| Aaron Holiday | |||||
| Reed Sheppard | |||||
| Cam Whitmore | |||||
Physicality as a Foundation—Not Yet a Final Word
Right now I don't have the sample size to make bold statements. Working with a team —and able to eventually pull similar tracking for every game of the season using Hawkeye data— would allow for two full seasons of analysis! This dataset raises more questions than answers perhaps.- Why are the "Playing Hard" wins seemingly so significant? (the team with the better game score has won over 80% in our sample of games). Are there compounding effects when multiple PH stars are in the game together?
- Should teams put more emphasis on the Hard Play guys in roster construction? (And shout-out to all the important UNDRAFTED hustle players in the Finals: Dort, Caruso, McConnell -- pay attention for the next Vegas Summer League breakouts! )
- How far can a team go with solid decision making? Currently this is tracking as an 80% predictor of who wins.
- Will other teams seek to up their ball pressure/swipes at the ball seeing the OKC success and runaway turnover edge numbers? Is this a skill that can be coached up, or does OKC have players who are especially well suited to the job?
- Can we identify player archetypes —like Gafford— who challenge certain players like an Amen Thompson? Is there consistency in head to head physicality dominance?
- Shai's performance in the playoffs was masterful but how dependent is he on current officiating? His go-to "clear out space for a jumper with his forearm shove" never got whistled for an offensive foul or a travel in the finals. How can players maximize the referee effects in their favor?
What Kind of Physicality Wins?
Early tracking data reveals some trends in what actually moves the needle:- Winning the “Playing Hard” effort count won the game 84% of the time!
- The better “Decision Making” team is running an 80% win rate.
- Physicality Rating (RPR): Teams winning this stat won the game 71% of the time.
- Total Physicality Wins: 70% game win rate.
- Ballhandler Pressure/Swipes at Ball: 65% win rate. A key OKC weapon.
- Bumps/pushes/grabs/get-frees: 61% win rate.
The early takeaway? Smart, sustained pressure and toughness in key actions—not just brute force—tend to correlate with winning. These are the building blocks of tactical physicality.