Most important NBA stat, FTA?

Throughout my years of consuming NBA basketball, I have come across a very interesting observation. One of the best predictors of how valuable an NBA player is can be derived from his free throw attempts per game(FTA). This may seem obvious to some, but the exact correlation is actually very striking in how exact it is. On a yearly basis, the top 30 players in terms of FT per game will show you most of the top 30 players in the league. It's uncanny!

As the name indicates, these points are "free" and should never be underestimated in how valuable they are. The history of the NBA has shown that a top player for any given year most likely scores between 25-30 points per game. Now we have to consider how many field goal attempts he averaged that year. If a guy scores 20 points by taking 20 shots per game, he is a BAD player. That is a bad ration of points to shots and very inefficient if you want to win games. Think about it, most teams average between 75-80 shots per game. If your best player gets only 1 point for every shot he takes, your team isnt going to score much and lose. That is a problem with Derrick Rose at this point in his career. He does not get to the free throw line enough to be considered a top player. He averages about 16.5 points on 15 shots per game. That is highly inefficient. He only averages 3 FT's per game. A great player who scores 26 points per game will most likely average about 20 shots per game. When Kobe averaged 35 and T-Mac averaged 33, the didnt simply have out of this world seasons, they simply took more shots because the team around them sucked. Those years kobe took 27 shots, per game, much more than his career average of 19, and T-Mac took 24 shots that year well above his 18 career average.

What stays consistent year to year is free throw attempts is directly proportional to a players efficiency and most times effectiveness. One example from last night. Al Thornton shot 13-28 for 34 points. The extremely high shot total accounted for the 34 point game. He got to the line 6 times and made all 6 shots. So a solid but not great night for the 2nd year player. His teammate Eric Gordon shot 12-19 for 41 points. So he took 9 less shots and scored 7 more points. Far more efficient. How? He took 8 more free throws and made 6 more than Thornton. A spectacular night!! And it just so happens that the best and most talented guys are the ones who get to the line the most. Here is the top 20 this year in FTA per game. Tell me who of these is not great?

1 Dwight Howard (10.7)
2 Dwayne Wade
3 Kevin Martin(most underrated player in NBA)
4 Devin Harris
5 LeBron James
6 Corey Maggette
7 Chris Bosh
8 Shaq O'Neal
9 Danny Granger
10 Amare Staudemire
11 Brandon Roy
12 Kobe Bryant
13 Chris Paul
14 Paul Pierce
15 Kevin Durant
16 Carmelo Anthony
17 Dirk Nowitzki
18 Tim Duncan
19 Chauncey Billups
20 Gerald Wallace(6.4)

Coincidence, I think not.

2 examples on the other spectrum. Peja Stojakovic this year has taken just 44 free throws in 34 games and Bobby Simmons has only taken 31 free throws in 40 games. Both of these players are paid in excess of 10 million and both of them suck!

3 comments:

Adam Kaplan said...

It would be nice to see an official stat to prove strong correlation and causation between points and FTA with regression analysis and stuff..

But fuck that. That's actually extremely interesting analysis just how uncanny and how strong the correlation is. Seriously.

This was an extremely interesting basketball post to read!

As you were telling me before, shooting efficiency is a really important stat and crazy how sabermetrics are bleeding over into other sports. First football and now basketball. You can be the Bill James of basketball!

Cubsfan4evr said...

A very good point! All of those players are great. Some of them like Howard need to improve at the line and he would be that much better. He would be adding a few points to his average on "free throws".

Adam Kaplan said...

I just realized, I think the one major exception to this rule is Shaq (throughout his career). I think, as this article points out, if you're good at FT, and FTA then you're good, but just because you're not on this doesn't mean you aren't good.

I think it's theoretically possible to get a lot of FTA and not be good and be good while being bad at FT/ not get a lot of attempts. But still this post brings up a great point.