# charges taken statistic



## nikeflightz (Apr 1, 2004)

i think that the nba should implement a new statistic, the "charges taken" stat. this stat means that an offensive foul was committed against the person. the stat would be really nice to have, because then we could see who really actually gives his body for the good of the team.

to go along with this "charges taken" statistic, there should be a "charge taken attempt" statistic. this stat means that a player tried to draw an offensive foul from the opponent. this statistic would be nice, because used along with the "charges taken" stat, you could see which players were the most efficient at drawing charges, and who were called for a blocking foul the most.

so who agrees with this?


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

I'm in favour of gathering as much data as possible to be made available in building better and better analytical tools.

I *do* like the idea of a charges taken statistics, but a "charge taken attempt" seems perhaps too subjective. It's not always clear whether a guy was trying to draw a charge, or moved his feet to slowly on defense or was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

That said, if the league wanted to try and keep track of it, go for it. But the "charges taken" stat would definitely be nice.


----------



## Idunkonyou (Feb 23, 2003)

I like the idea. Taking a charge is like taking one for the team.


----------



## tpb2 (Oct 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> I'm in favour of gathering as much data as possible to be made available in building better and better analytical tools.
> 
> I *do* like the idea of a charges taken statistics, but a "charge taken attempt" seems perhaps too subjective. It's not always clear whether a guy was trying to draw a charge, or moved his feet to slowly on defense or was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.
> ...


That's how I feel. I'm trying to think of why it wouldnt show good defense, but I can't think of anything. Plus, it's an easy stat to record.


----------



## reHEATed (Jun 29, 2003)

im for it...just like steals and blocks cause turnovers, this does as well. It could show defense, and whose good at causin turnovers in this way


----------



## Yyzlin (Feb 2, 2003)

The stat on a whole is fairly useless, as "charges taken" doesn't really implicate anything defensively, like steals and blocks do. The only thing it gives you about a player, is well, if he takes charges a lot. I do agree though that if the league wants to record the data, I'm all up for it. Like Minstrel said, the more data, the better in future analytical and statistical use.


----------



## RollWithEm (Jul 16, 2002)

I actually think that charges taken are inherently more valuable than blocked shots because they are a turnover. Blocked shots don't necessarily result in your team getting the ball back.


----------



## tpb2 (Oct 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Yyzlin</b>!
> The stat on a whole is fairly useless, as "charges taken" doesn't really implicate anything defensively, like steals and blocks do.


Why doesn't it show good defense? Some players do not make sure to get in front of their man and take the hit. Plus, taking the hit always results in a turnover AND a foul on the other team. So it actually may give the team more than a steal, although a steal allows a possible transition advantage. A block doesn't even result in a turnover every time. 

Steals and blocks may also show a weakness on defense. A player may gamble too much. The point is that all three stats are have their small problems indicating good defensive play. So I see no reason why that shouldn't be included.


----------



## mysterio (May 20, 2003)

Nope. It'd be a waste of energy to put that into consideration. Its just too much of a non-factor to be considered a stat. It doesn't really tell you much and nobody would care about that number. At least I think so.


----------



## Yyzlin (Feb 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RollWithEm</b>!
> I actually think that charges taken are inherently more valuable than blocked shots because they are a turnover. Blocked shots don't necessarily result in your team getting the ball back.


I agree that it is useful in adding another manner of differentiating the different types of turnovers, it's worthless in measuring any ability that exists in an individual. I wouldn't exactly say having took a lot of charges can qualify as good defense without knowing how many of those attempted charges taken result instead in defensive fouls on the player himself. Of course, like Minstrel mentioned, an attempted charges taken statistic would be extremely subjective. It could be done, but I'm not sure how accurate it would be.


----------



## Yyzlin (Feb 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>tpb2</b>!
> 
> Why doesn't it show good defense? Some players do not make sure to get in front of their man and take the hit. Plus, taking the hit always results in a turnover AND a foul on the other team. So it actually may give the team more than a steal, although a steal allows a possible transition advantage. A block doesn't even result in a turnover every time.
> 
> Steals and blocks may also show a weakness on defense. A player may gamble too much. The point is that all three stats are have their small problems indicating good defensive play. So I see no reason why that shouldn't be included.


You do bring up good points. Many attempted blocks do result in fouls as well, as do steals. But then again, neither of those are good measures of defense either. Iverson consistently ranks among the highest in steals, yet I doubt many would rank him as an excellent defender. So I agree that with the current slate of stats available, charges taken has its place, but like the others, it suffers from definate drawbacks.


----------



## hobojoe (Jun 20, 2003)

It's the only thing Andrew DeClercq would be in the league leaders in(other than fouls per 48 minutes), so I'm all for it. Seriously though, it's not a bad idea, I don't know how relevant it would be to the defensive skills of individuals, but it'd be interesting to look at nonetheless.


----------



## AdamIllman (May 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mysterio</b>!
> Nope. It'd be a waste of energy to put that into consideration. Its just too much of a non-factor to be considered a stat. It doesn't really tell you much and nobody would care about that number. At least I think so.


i would..i agree with RollWithEm....taking a charge is more valuable than blocking a shot because half of the time the shot goes out of bounds back to the other team


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

There are several stats they should keep.

1. They should exclude all midcourt or backcourt buzzer beaters from the 3pt % and keep it as another category.

2. Freethrows that are awarded by intentionally fouling or technical fouls shouldn't be in the same categories as freethrows that result from drawing a foul.

3. Turnovers should be seperated in those that go out of bounds to the opponent and others that lead to easy baskets.

4. They should keep a statistic on how often someone is fouled again excluding intentional fouls at end of game situations.

5. There should be a difference between blocks that change posession and those that don't.

6. Deflections could be a nice stat to know.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>nikeflightz</b>!
> i think that the nba should implement a new statistic, the "charges taken" stat. this stat means that an offensive foul was committed against the person. the stat would be really nice to have, because then we could see who really actually gives his body for the good of the team.
> 
> to go along with this "charges taken" statistic, there should be a "charge taken attempt" statistic. this stat means that a player tried to draw an offensive foul from the opponent. this statistic would be nice, because used along with the "charges taken" stat, you could see which players were the most efficient at drawing charges, and who were called for a blocking foul the most.
> ...


Charges taken doesnt mean who give their body for the team, 90% of the time, the one who took the charge flops...


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

They should keep track of charges. Its a very simple stat to keep track of because theres no judgement call to make, and its a dead ball after each one. 

And it is forcing a turnover, no way around it.


----------



## Amareca (Oct 21, 2002)

BTW,

A block that changes posession without going out of bounds....

Would you count it as a block or steal? Interessting quesiton.


----------



## tpb2 (Oct 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>John The Cool Kid</b>
> And it is forcing a turnover, no way around it.


...and it gives the other team a foul.


----------



## Yyzlin (Feb 2, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>tpb2</b>!
> 
> 
> ...and it gives the other team a foul.


You mean the other player. Offensive fouls don't count against the team.


----------



## tpb2 (Oct 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Yyzlin</b>!
> 
> You mean the other player. Offensive fouls don't count against the team.


Yeah, which is why it doesnt 'cancel out' the gamble the player may take to take the charge, since that's a team foul.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

Elaborating a bit more, charges taken would be fun to play around with (as Yyzlin says, it's not a good measure, by itself, of defense, however it could be a useful part of a bigger system measuring defense) but it's not at the top of my list of things I'd like to know.

Some things I'd like to see recorded:

*Missed shots forced:* Simply record who was defending the shooter when a shot is missed. At the end of the game, you can tabulate missed shots forced by adding up the number of times each player was listed as the defender during a missed shot. If the shooter was double-teamed, record both players' names and each gets 0.5 of the missed shot when tabulating results.

*Passes forced:* Again, when a pass occurs, during a live ball situation, record the passer's defender. A part of good defense is not even allowing a shot. This stat will be mostly useless for guards, as the guards they're defending will often pass in order to set up other players, not because they were stymied. But it *would* be instructive, in my opinion, for forwards and centers, since it's tremendously unlikely that their men are setting others up...more likely, you forced a pass back out of the post because the player didn't like his opportunity. Not perfect, but useful, in my opinion. Again, like "missed shot forced," if the passing player is being double-teamed, credit each player with 0.5 of a forced pass.

*Assists leading to fouls:* Many, many times, a pass will set a player up for a great opportunity, and the defender will simply take a shooting foul to prevent the easy basket. Just as scorekeepers currently record passes directly leading to baskets, also record passes leading directly to shooting fouls (excluding fouls not in the act of shooting but during the penalty). These are passes that are just as productive as assists, or possibly moreso as they also add a foul, but go uncredited.

Those sit at the top of my wish list.


----------



## Hibachi! (Sep 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> Elaborating a bit more, charges taken would be fun to play around with (as Yyzlin says, it's not a good measure, by itself, of defense, however it could be a useful part of a bigger system measuring defense) but it's not at the top of my list of things I'd like to know.
> 
> Some things I'd like to see recorded:
> ...


That would all be really tough to record...


----------



## "Matt!" (Jul 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BigAmare</b>!
> There are several stats they should keep.
> 
> 1. They should exclude all midcourt or backcourt buzzer beaters from the 3pt % and keep it as another category.
> ...


Those are some tough stats to record. I like #4 a lot, but don't like the idea of separation. It all works itself out in the end, you know? 

Also, Minstrel, not every pass is forced, some of them are just in the flow of the offense. When the Lakers are running a triangle, and Malone is holding the ball with Duncan guarding him on the 3 point line, and he dumps it down to Shaq, Duncan didn't really do anything to force the pass, it was just the offense. Or Jason Kidd gets a rebound and kicks it up the floor but Billups is in front of him, does Billups get credit for that?


----------



## nikeflightz (Apr 1, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> Elaborating a bit more, charges taken would be fun to play around with (as Yyzlin says, it's not a good measure, by itself, of defense, however it could be a useful part of a bigger system measuring defense) but it's not at the top of my list of things I'd like to know.
> 
> Some things I'd like to see recorded:
> ...


i like the assist leading to foul one. then we can see the "real" assist number. when a player gets a shot 2 ft from the basket and the point guard makes a tough pass to get to the man, the point guard definitely deserves the assist, even if the person is fouled when he is shooting. the only problems with these additions is that it makes it that much harder to compare players from different eras.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Matt85163</b>!
> 
> Also, Minstrel, not every pass is forced, some of them are just in the flow of the offense.


Oh, I realize that. It's an imperfect stat, for sure. But assuming most cases are as I suggest, it can still be used, especially if the exceptions tend to be fairly evenly distributed.

And if they're not evenly distributed, it is still possible to use modifications.



> When the Lakers are running a triangle, and Malone is holding the ball with Duncan guarding him on the 3 point line, and he dumps it down to Shaq, Duncan didn't really do anything to force the pass, it was just the offense. Or Jason Kidd gets a rebound and kicks it up the floor but Billups is in front of him, does Billups get credit for that?


As for the Kidd example, this is why I said the stat would be close to irrelevant for guards, if not totally irrelevant. One could even eliminate transition passes from consideration, to make it more accurate (also removing the big man making an outlet pass flaw)...since we record "transition points," clearly we already have scorekeepers determining what is transition and what is not.

Regarding the Malone example, it's true that that is not a "forced pass," but it's not all that common to have a big man dumping into a big man. Usually, it's a small man doing it and, as I said before, forget the stat when it comes to guards. Maybe small forwards too. This could be essentially a power forward / center defense statistic.

These aren't things that I believe tell us something directly. These are all elements I'd like to know, perhaps in the use of a larger system.


----------



## D5 (Jun 23, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>SacKings384</b>!
> 
> 
> Charges taken doesnt mean who give their body for the team, 90% of the time, the one who took the charge flops...


Tell that to Brian Cardinal.


----------



## "Matt!" (Jul 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Oh, I realize that. It's an imperfect stat, for sure. But assuming most cases are as I suggest, it can still be used, especially if the exceptions tend to be fairly evenly distributed.
> ...


I know what you mean, and though the intentions are good there are just too many situations to make it a fair stat. What would be a forced pass to one statkeeper could not be to another. The current stats the NBA keeps are pretty much indisputable.



> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> As for the Kidd example, this is why I said the stat would be close to irrelevant for guards, if not totally irrelevant. One could even eliminate transition passes from consideration, to make it more accurate (also removing the big man making an outlet pass flaw)...since we record "transition points," clearly we already have scorekeepers determining what is transition and what is not.
> 
> Regarding the Malone example, it's true that that is not a "forced pass," but it's not all that common to have a big man dumping into a big man. Usually, it's a small man doing it and, as I said before, forget the stat when it comes to guards. Maybe small forwards too. This could be essentially a power forward / center defense statistic.
> ...


This is where it's becomming to complicated though. Is Dirk a center or a wing? Is KG a big or a small? Who is to decide when it is a big man passing to a big man, or anything like that. There are too many exceptions of "if it's a big man, but not when passing to another big man, or as an outlet pass, or an assist."

I just think its too arbitrary, though the idea is good in theory. But hey, so was communism.


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Matt85163</b>!
> 
> There are too many exceptions of "if it's a big man, but not when passing to another big man, or as an outlet pass, or an assist."


Well, the amusing thing is that baseball *does* record mini-splits that are this dense and complicated. "Batting average, on the road, with a man on second, against left-handed fly-ball pitchers."

It's exactly that almost absurdly detailed data that makes baseball easier to build sabermetrics for.

I agree that there's some subjectivity inherent, but not as much as you suggest, I think. Is Nowitzki or Garnett a wing player or big man? If they're officially playing power forward, they're a big man. If they're officially playing small forward, then they're a perimeter player. Scorekeepers don't need to decide that on the fly.

But the "exceptions," as you call them, are really no different from baseball's "mini-splits."


----------



## "Matt!" (Jul 24, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Minstrel</b>!
> 
> 
> Well, the amusing thing is that baseball *does* record mini-splits that are this dense and complicated. "Batting average, on the road, with a man on second, against left-handed fly-ball pitchers."
> ...


That's the difference with baseball though, it's always one-on-one. Pitcher vs. Hitter. With basketball there's switches, bumps, people coming out, rotations, stuff like that. It's really hard to know is guarding who all the time.

Kobe Bryant comes around a back screen from Karl Malone and gets the layup. Is Bruce Bowen responsible for getting hit or Duncan responible for not picking him up? Who gets the shot against him?

And sometimes it is confusing for scorers. There's about 150,000,000 people in the NBA who can play 2/3 3/4 1/2 4/5, and are we considering 1/2/3 smalls, or 3/4/5 big, or is 3 a switch position between both depending who is playing it?

Sabermetrics don't work in basketball because you can detail the information that much. You can have "Ron Artest's opponants FG% in Conseco on Wednesdays when defending the Knicks' motion 4" as opposed to "Ron Artest's opponants FG% in Conseco on Wednesdays when defending the Knicks' pick-and-roll with Allan Houston and Kurt Thomas" as opposed to "Ron Artest's opponants FG% in Conseco on Wednesdays when defending the Knicks pick-and-roll with Stephon Marbury and Kurth Thomas."

See what I mean?


----------



## Tersk (Apr 9, 2004)

I agree with Minstrel..But, i think say you get a pass from someone and you shoot it, u miss the shot but u get fouled..I think the player who passed it to you should get an assist if u MAKE BOTH free throws


----------



## Minstrel (Dec 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Matt85163</b>!
> 
> Sabermetrics don't work in basketball because you can detail the information that much. You can have "Ron Artest's opponants FG% in Conseco on Wednesdays when defending the Knicks' motion 4" as opposed to "Ron Artest's opponants FG% in Conseco on Wednesdays when defending the Knicks' pick-and-roll with Allan Houston and Kurt Thomas" as opposed to "Ron Artest's opponants FG% in Conseco on Wednesdays when defending the Knicks pick-and-roll with Stephon Marbury and Kurth Thomas."
> 
> See what I mean?


I do see what you mean. It requires more subjective calls than baseball does, but look at it this way: when judging defense, we already have subjectivity. When experts or coaches decide the best defenders, they use subjectivity but at the highest level...deciding everything: bad defender, good defender, great defender, etc.

Instead, it would be nice, IMO, to reduce the subjectivity to a much lower level...let statistics companies hire experts to decide who was defending who when a shot went up, etc. It's not as cut-and-dry as baseball, but I don't think that makes it worthless. I'd like to have expert-judged numbers about who forced more misses, more passes, etc and then make my *own* decisions as to who was a bad, good or great defenders.

I'm not sure if I explained that well, but I think moving the subjectivity *down*, to lower-level stuff, allows those interested to make more informed decisions rather than just saying, "Well, the coaches decided Artest was the best, and I have no way to refute that in an informed manner."


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Where do floppers like Manu Ginobili, Vlade Divac, Derek Fisher and Eduardo Najera fit into this type of statistic?


----------

