[討論] 5-Man Units

看板Rockets作者small2th ("We Are Red Nation")時間16年前 (2010/02/07 15:09)推噓10(10推 0噓 0→)

留言10則, 10人參與討論串1/1

http://www.82games.com/0910/0910HOU2.HTM Top Five-Man Floor Units # Unit Min Off Def +/- W L Win% 1 Brooks-Battier-Ariza-Scola-Hayes 731.1 1.04 1.03 +1 20 26 43.4 2 Brooks-Battier-Ariza-Landry-Scola 162.4 1.10 1.13 +11 15 20 42.8 3 Brooks-Lowry-Budinger-Landry-Andersen 131.5 1.18 1.00 +46 12 7 63.1 4 Lowry-Battier-Budinger-Landry-Andersen 109.4 1.19 1.20 -7 9 11 45.0 5 Lowry-Ariza-Budinger-Landry-Andersen 95.9 1.08 0.95 +23 12 11 52.1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 6 Lowry-Ariza-Budinger-Landry-Scola 81.9 1.00 1.09 -15 8 11 42.1 7 Brooks-Lowry-Ariza-Landry-Scola 70.2 0.99 1.09 +0 10 8 55.5 8 Brooks-Battier-Ariza-Landry-Hayes 62.2 1.09 1.15 -11 5 7 41.6 9 Lowry-Battier-Ariza-Landry-Scola 52.7 1.01 1.05 +3 10 6 62.5 10 Brooks-Lowry-Ariza-Landry-Andersen 48.7 0.97 0.98 +3 8 8 50.0 Top Five-Man Floor Units, Details # Unit eFG eFGA FTA Close dClose Reb T/O 1 Brooks-Battier-Ariza-Scola-Hayes .454 .461 -24 43% 35% 50.0% 0% 2 Brooks-Battier-Ariza-Landry-Scola .445 .466 +7 37% 34% 54.5% -4% 3 Brooks-Lowry-Budinger-Landry-Andersen .473 .450 +31 34% 29% 50.5% +7% 4 Lowry-Battier-Budinger-Landry-Andersen .462 .520 +23 39% 32% 53.5% -5% 5 Lowry-Ariza-Budinger-Landry-Andersen .423 .435 +3 32% 38% 52.0% +6% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Lowry-Ariza-Budinger-Landry-Scola .411 .490 +6 40% 39% 48.0% +2% 7 Brooks-Lowry-Ariza-Landry-Scola .438 .469 -9 38% 30% 51.5% -3% 8 Brooks-Battier-Ariza-Landry-Hayes .434 .515 -8 41% 27% 53.0% +1% 9 Lowry-Battier-Ariza-Landry-Scola .418 .494 +26 48% 43% 61.0% -4% 10 Brooks-Lowry-Ariza-Landry-Andersen .440 .400 -4 33% 24% 42.5% 4% 第一個組合就是我們的先發，平均一場球這組合會上約16分鐘，當然是最多的，但可以看到不管是進攻上或防守上，其表現跟其他組合相比都是一般般，非特別好或特別差，不過也很可能是因為，先發組合對上的也常常是對手的先發，所以在進攻上或防守上遇到的強度都比其他組合來的更大，所以使的先發組合表現看起來並沒有很讓人滿意。如果說第一組是火箭第一節的組合，第二組大概就是第四節關鍵期最常擺的組合了其中不同就是把海爺換成最佳第六人洗衣店，大體上它的表現跟第一組差不多，不管攻守都是平均水準。可能也跟上面的原因很像，因為第四節對手們也都擺回先發陣容，強度都比較大。如果把第一和第二組合放在一起看當作是火箭的先發表現(洗衣店和海爺各算半個先發)，而他們對位的都是對手的先發組合，而對手先發eFG都比火箭先發的eFG來的高，Win%跟其他組合比起來都偏低，這可能顯示一個其實大家早就都知道的事實－火箭的先發組合相較於其他隊的先發來說競爭力較低。而第三組的表現令人讚賞，AB搭四個替補陣容，進攻上表現的非常好，由於這組合大都對上對手的替補陣容，所以遇到的強度通常也較低，根據hoopsstats上的統計，火箭板凳每場得38.4分，是聯盟第二高，只輸給擁有偽板凳Manu及先發愛輪休的馬刺隊。也因為這樣，才會造成常常是替補幫先發追分數，或是替補賺分數給先發花的怪異情況...。但這不代表你讓替補組放上去直接面對對手的先發，他們就一定表現的比先發好，畢竟替補裡大都是攻優於守的球員，用替補去打爆對方的替補或許真的是最明智的作法。第四和第五組也都是常出現的四個替補搭上一個先發之組合，但效果沒有第三組那麼好，難道...一哥有靈氣!?XD，不過數據上也不算差， +/-值來看第五個組合也幫球隊追了不少分。至於其他組合出現的時間沒有前五個那麼多，大家就自己看自己解讀吧～ Legend: Min = the total minutes the unit was on the floor. Off = the unit's points per possession. Def = the unit's points per possession allowed. +/- = the team net points for the unit. W = number of games a unit outscored its opponents while on the court. L = number of games a unit was outscored by its opponents while on the court. Win% = the winning percentage for the unit based on Wins versus Losses. eFG = the effective shooting percentage, adjusted for the value of 3-point shots eFGA = the effective shooting percentage allowed to opponents. FTA = net free throw attempts. Close = the percentage of shots taken from close range. dClose = the percentage of opponents' shots taken from close range. Reb = the rebound percentage for the unit, based on chances. T/O = the net turnover percentage for the unit based on opponent turnovers minus unit turnovers. -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 218.172.80.196

推

wadabinga

02/07 20:45, , 1^F

02/07 20:45, 1^F

推

Tommyrot

02/07 21:43, , 2^F

02/07 21:43, 2^F

推

Kshatri

02/07 22:01, , 3^F

02/07 22:01, 3^F