Who are the NBAs most efficient scoring defenders?

Executive Summary: Opponent TS% is a defensive metric that represents how many points a team
allows per opponent scoring attempt (scoring attempt = a field goal attempt or an attempt that results
in free throws), and correlates very closely with defensive rating (points allowed per 100 possessions). In
this paper I attempt to dis-aggregate Opponent TS% to an individual level using player which
requires player tracking data from SportVU to determine the closest defender on each scoring attempt.
For this reason, it was not possible to calculate an individual player version of this metric prior to the
availability of this data.
Further Study: A study of individual four factor performance on defense specifically rebounds
converted per rebounding chance, which also requires SportVU data to determine rebounding chances.
====================================================================================
One of the more interesting dimensions of data that is being tracked via the NBA SportVU cameras is the
distance and identity of the closest defender on any shot attempt. By using this information, we can
attempt to analyze defensive efficiency of individual players, a field of study which was previously
near-impossible for basketball analysts.
Lets start by defining scoring efficiency. A commonly used metric to track offensive scoring efficiency is
True Shooting Percentage (TS%), with a defensive counterpart metric in Opponent True Shooting
Percentage (Opponent TS%). The formulae for both are listed below. These metrics measure efficiency
at scoring the basketball, or preventing scores, with the idea that a 100% efficient scorer is a team or
player who exclusively attempts 2-pt field goals and makes 100% of those attempts. A player who
exclusively attempts 3-pt field goals and makes 100% of those attempts would have a TS% of 150%. As
part of the formula, a variable is used in the denominator to try and estimate the number of scoring
attempts that resulted in free throws but not a made field goal.
A simpler of way of thinking about TS% is that it is the number of points per scoring attempt, halved.
It is also important to note that TS% correlates very closely (0.89 correlation, 1 is perfect) with Offensive
Rating (points per 100 possessions) and Opponent TS% correlates very closely (0.91 correlation) with
Defensive Rating (points allowed per 100 possessions). The net of these two metrics correlates very
closely with winning percentage (0.94 correlation).
Formulae for TS% and Opponent TS%:
TS% = Points / (2 * (FGA + 0.44 * FTA))
Opponent TS% = Points Allowed / (2 * (FGA allowed + 0.44 * FTA allowed))
Previously, TS% could be calculated at both a player and individual level using box score data, but
Opponent TS% could only be calculated at a team level, and was not able to be disaggregated to an
individual player level. The reason this calculation has proven elusive is because it requires the ability to
know, for a given defender, if the defender was responsible for a player being able to score on a shot
attempt. There is no box score metric that can determine if a player was the primary defender on a
made or missed field goal, but the SportVU data tracks the closest defender on each shot attempt.

Here is the formula that I derived for Opponent TS% for individual players:
Opponent TS% = (Points scored against on FG + Estimate of points scored against on free throws 1, 2) /
(2*(FGA against + Estimated number of 2 shot fouls committed 3 + Estimated number of 3 shot fouls
committed4))
You may have noticed the 0.44, the free-throw variable in the formula, is now missing. The reason for
this is because I modified the formula slightly to more accurately try and quantify the number of
shooting fouls that resulted in free throws, using available data, rather than use a variable to estimate
the figure.
Below are the results for Opponent TS% for individual players. As a method of presenting the data in a
clearer way, I have multiplied the Opponent TS% by 2 in the far right column, which equates to, as
mentioned earlier, the number of points allowed by a player per opponent scoring attempt.
So what does all of this mean? Coaches and analyst can now dissect Opponent TS% down to an
individual player level in order to try and identify both strong and weak links on defense in a way that
was not statistically possible before.
For example, the Golden State Warriors have the fewest points allowed per 100 possessions at 97.2. If
we wanted to try and track that strong performance back to individuals, we can see from the list below
that the team has three players (Andrew Bogut, Draymond Green, Shaun Livingston) in the Top-10 in
terms of individual player Opponent TS%. On the other end of the spectrum, the Cleveland Cavaliers are
the fourth worst team in the NBA in points allowed per 100 possessions at 106.7, and have their three
primary starters (LeBron James, Kevin Love, Kyrie Irving) right around the mean relative to the rest of
the NBA.
In terms of the results - the difference between Andrew Bogut (0.796 points allowed per opponent
scoring attempt) and the average NBA player (1.088 points allowed per opponent scoring attempt) may
not seem like much. But when you add those little differences up over dozens of opponent scoring
attempts, and begin to aggregate players on certain lineups, you will see differences in defensive
performance.
Player Name

Individual Player Opponent TS% (Minimum 100 FGA against)

Team
Opponent TS%
Opponent TS% x 2 =
(mean = 54.4%, median = 53.4%)
Points Allowed Per
Opponent Scoring
Attempt

(mean = 1.088, median = 1.068)

1) Andrew Bogut
2) Justin Hamilton
1

Warriors
Heat

Top 10
39.8%
43.2%

0.796
0.864

Estimated number of points scored against on Free Throws = (League free throw percentage) *{[(Number of 2 Shot Fouls
Committed)*2]+[(Number of 3 Shot Fouls Committed)*3]+(Number of And-Ones)}.
2
Estimated number of And-Ones = 80%*(shooting fouls committed); 80% is an estimate for the number of shooting fouls not resulting in
And Ones based on article published on Nyloncalculus.com.
3
Estimated number of 2 shot fouls committed = (shooting fouls committed x 0.80)*(FGA against from 2-pt range / FGA against).
4
Estimated number of 3 shot fouls committed = (shooting fouls committed x 0.80)*(FGA against from 3-pt range / FGA against).

3) Andre Roberson
4) CJ Watson
5) Wes Matthews

Thunder
44.2%
0.884
Pacers
44.3%
0.886
Trail
44.7%
0.894
Blazers
6) Rudy Gobert
Jazz
45.6%
0.912
7) Tim Duncan
Spurs
45.7%
0.914
8) Draymond Green
Warriors
45.8%
0.916
9) Shawn Marion
Cavaliers
45.9%
0.918
10) Shaun Livingston
Warriors
46.0%
0.920
Notable players outside of Top 10 and Bottom 10
11) Roy Hibbert
Pacers
46.1%
0.922
12) Anthony Davis
Pelicans
46.6%
0.932
16) Marc Gasol
Grizzlies
47.0%
0.940
18) Taj Gibson
Bulls
47.2%
0.944
23) Damian Lillard
Trailblazers 47.7%
0.954
24) Serge Ibaka
Thunder
47.7%
0.954
31) Pau Gasol
Bulls
48.3%
0.966
36) Joakim Noah
Bulls
48.7%
0.974
39) Kawhi Leonard
Spurs
48.9%
0.978
43) DeMarcus Cousins
Kings
49.1%
0.982
45) John Wall
Wizards
49.4%
0.989
56) Brook Lopez
Nets
49.8%
0.996
58) Stephen Curry
Warriors
49.8%
0.996
70) Tyson Chandler
Mavericks
50.2%
1.004
75) Dwight Howard
Rockets
50.3%
1.006
88) Alan Anderson
Nets
50.9%
1.017
104) Joe Johnson
Nets
51.4%
1.029
133) James Harden
Rockets
52.3%
1.046
156) Kevin Durant
Thunder
53.3%
1.066
Median = 53.4%, 1.068
174) Blake Griffin
Clippers
53.7%
1.074
175) LeBron James
Cavaliers
53.7%
1.074
Mean = 54.4%, 1.088
199) Kevin Love
Cavaliers
54.5%
1.090
216) Kyrie Irving
Cavaliers
54.9%
1.098
243) Andrew Wiggins
T-Wolves
56.1%
1.121
254) Jeremy Lin
Lakers
56.6%
1.132
276) JR Smith
Knicks/Cavs 57.5%
1.151
302) Carmelo Anthony
Knicks
60.1%
1.202
306) Kobe Bryant
Lakers
60.7%
1.214
Bottom 10
311) Caron Butler
Pistons
61.3%
1.226
312) Garrett Temple
Wizards
61.3%
1.226
313) Marco Belinelli
Spurs
61.4%
1.228
314) Shabazz Napier
Heat
61.6%
1.232
315) Joe Harris
Cavaliers
61.7%
1.234

316) Perry Jones

317) Manu Ginobili
318) Zach LaVine
319) Brandon Davies
320) Jose Calderon

Thunder
Spurs
TWolves
76ers/Nets
(cut by Nets
on Jan 6)
Knicks

62.2%
62.2%
62.8%
63.1%

1.244
1.244
1.256
1.262

64.1%

1.282