Roland NBA Hard Play Report

Houston @ Dallas — February 8, 2025

DALLAS 116, HOUSTON 105

Five "Coaching Factors" Summary

Factor
Winner
Edge
Top Players
Physicality
DALLAS
+6 wins
Sengun +25 net wins
Davis +10, Gafford +7
Playing Hard
DALLAS
+9 wins
Thompson 15 wins
Davis 10, Marshall 10
Decision Making
-tie-
Green +15 net wins
Irving +9, Thompson +7
Shotmaking
DALLAS
+7 points
Christie +8 points
Dinwiddie +6, Thompson +4
Referee Effects
DALLAS
+2 wins
Sengun +4 wins
Davis +4, Adams +3
  Physicality = "Player vs Player contact plays"   Playing Hard = "non contact/light contact effort plays"


  • 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

Team
RPR*
Wins
L/D
L2+
Falls
KD
DALAS
327.6
133
16
37
26
17
HOUSTON
306.0
127
20
29
17
26

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

Category
Winner
Top Player
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

Physicality
Playing Hard
Wins
Knock
Downs
Roland
Hard Play
Score
Player
Wins
Net Wins
Anthony Davis
29
+10
10
2
21
Kyrie Irving
22
+5
10
6
17
Daniel Gafford
29
+7
2
6
11
Naji Marshall
11
+0
10
0
10
P.J. Washington
9
+3
5
1
8
Dante Exum
9
-1
6
1
5
Spencer Dinwiddie
4
-6
8
0
2
Max Christie
13
-7
7
1
0
Klay Thompson
7
-5
5
0
0


HOUSTON ROCKETS

Physicality
Playing Hard
Wins
Knock
Downs
Roland
Hard Play
Score
Player
Wins
Net Wins
Alperen Sengun
46
+25
7
7
34
Jalen Green
22
+0
9
2
10
Stephen Adams
22
+3
4
4
8
Amen Thompson
11
-12
15
9
6
Jae'Sean Tate
2
+1
3
0
4
Dillon Brooks
10
-3
4
2
2
Tari Eason
10
-5
5
1
0
Aaron Holiday
1
-1
1
0
0
Reed Sheppard
1
-3
2
0
-1
Cam Whitmore
2
-11
2
1
-9







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?

We don’t have those answers yet, but the tagging framework is built to find them.

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.
Some areas like falls and knockdowns aren’t seemingly predictive, but may become more meaningful with more nuance as larger datasets emerge.

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.


Anonymization by Anonymouse.org ~ Adverts
X