In 2012, Tom Ziller wrote an article for SB Nation on the
scoring volatility of the NBA’s
top scorers. Since then, the subject has remained largely untouched
(although Ben Taylor does discuss it briefly in his book, "Thinking
Basketball").
So, since the NBA is on a hiatus until Thursday, I figured now
was as good of a time to delve a little deeper into the topic.
To help me do so, I called upon the aid of software
engineer/data scientist Daniel Bratulić.
First and foremost, for those unaware, scoring volatility is
basically the degree of variance present in a player’s game-to-game
scoring outputs (e.g. low variance = low volatility). Understanding
which players are more consistent and which ones are more of a
wildcard is important in a game that is often defined as a “make or
miss league.”
As Taylor notes in his aforementioned book: “Teams are
significantly more likely to win games when (at least) one player
has an explosive night.”
This sentiment is especially true this season, where the
championship landscape is as deep as it has been in quite some
time, and a single heater could reroute the entire course of
history (I’m looking at you, Klay Thompson).
To identify the most volatile players among volume scorers, we
charted the variance levels of the top-30 scorers based on their
game-to-game True Shooting percentages. Here's what we found.
Shooting Consistency: 2021-22
(Chart created by Daniel
Bratulić)
For the sake of this exercise, we can shelve Damian Lillard’s
variance right now since it’s doubtful he returns to the court this
season. Steph Curry’s standing on this list is likely due to the
unprecedented (by his standards) shooting slump he endured for a
large chunk of December and January.
What is the most interesting here is the six-man cluster on the
top-left corner, consisting of Donovan Mitchell, Pascal Siakam,
Brandon Ingram, CJ McCollum, Jayson Tatum and Anthony Edwards.
These six are noteworthy because their overall True Shooting
averages are right around the league average. So this means that
their good games are well-above league average, while their
off-nights are probably well-below.
To assess the nature of these players’ volatility, I charted
their True Shooting numbers on a month-by-month basis:
True Shooting Percentage By Month
Player
|
Oct.
|
Nov.
|
Dec.
|
Jan.
|
Feb.
|
Mitchell
|
52.9%
|
54.4%
|
63.4%
|
52.4%
|
66.2%
|
Siakam
|
N/A
|
54.9%
|
53.9%
|
55.2%
|
62.5%
|
Ingram
|
53.6%
|
50.6%
|
58.1%
|
51.7%
|
54.1%
|
McCollum
|
57.4%
|
50.9%
|
46.6%
|
60.2%
|
54.4%
|
Tatum
|
48.8%
|
50.8%
|
58.5%
|
59.1%
|
57.8%
|
Edwards
|
49.6%
|
54.4%
|
59.0%
|
60.2%
|
49.0%
|
(Mobile users scroll right for full
table)
Apologies for the slight cluster in the graph, but from
analyzing that and the table, you will probably notice two
different styles of shooting trends. For Siakam, Ingram and Tatum,
you see one or two outlier months that are more indicative of an
extended stretch of hot/cold shooting than erratic changes in
game-to-game shooting efficiency. For instance, Tatum experienced a
well-documented slow start to the season before returning to True
Shooting percentages more in-line with his career averages during December,
January and February.
On the other hand, Mitchell, McCollum and Edwards have two
months of True Shooting well-above the league average, one month
right around league average and two months well below it.
To use Edwards as an example, his October and February shooting
percentages were abysmal (sub-50%), his November finish isn’t too
far from the
league average of 56%, and his December and January efficiency
hovered right at that golden 60% threshold.
Mitchell, specifically, is no stranger to volatile scoring
seasons. From 2018-21, Mitchell has consistently been an
inconsistent scorer (I know, the irony), finishing with a standard
deviation right around “14” in the three seasons prior to this
campaign (charts from 2018-21 included after the conclusion of this
article for anyone interested).
We’ve also already gotten a glimpse of the postseason highs and
lows that come with his streaky shooting. In 2018-19, Mitchell
posted a dreadful 42.3% True Shooting, and the Utah Jazz were
handedly discarded by the Houston Rockets in five games. On the
flip side, in 2020-21, Mitchell eviscerated defenses with a 60.2%
True Shooting clip. And if not for injuries to him and Mike Conley
(and an aberration of a shooting performance by Terance Mann), the
Jazz very well could have competed for a Western Conference
championship.
In McCollum’s case, the Portland Trail Blazers’ best season in
the Lillard era coincided with one of his most volatile. In
2018-19, McCollum led all volume scorers in volatility with a
standard deviation of “17” (again, reference charts below). During
the playoffs, McCollum shot five True Shooting percentage points
higher in their eight wins than he did in their eight losses, which
signals the highest positive differential of any Blazer that played
at least 300 minutes that postseason (per NBA.com).
Overall, Mitchell, Edwards and McCollum appear to be the most
volatile volume scorers of the 2021-22 season thus far. This
matters because all three of these players are rostered by teams
currently in the thick of the playoff picture. An electric shooting
night from one of these guys could swing a Play-in game, a Game 7
or maybe even an entire postseason series. Such seismic capacity
demands our attention, and further time should be allocated towards
identifying these players and ascertaining the extent of their
impact on winning.
For now, one would be wise to keep tabs on these players because
— for better or worse — they may just go nuclear and tip the
scales, and rewrite the story of the NBA in the process.
Shooting Consistency: 2018-19
(Chart created by Daniel
Bratulić)
Shooting Consistency: 2019-20
(Chart created by Daniel
Bratulić)
Shooting Consistency: 2020-21
(Chart created by Daniel
Bratulić)
Looking to go to the hottest concerts, sports,
theater & family shows near you? Get 100% guaranteed tickets to
more than 125,000 live events from TicketSmarter, the official
ticket marketplace of BasketballNews.com. Order online
now!