Back-to-back effect: Fact or fiction? (split from Luka thread)
- Thread starter SLAB
- Start date
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
well prior to this Mavs win, the Suns won seven straight over Dallas
That, and the fact that Phoenix went into last night 0-5 on the second night of a back-to-back.
I really don't understand why people insist on talking about back-to-backs as if they aren't a real thing, that really affects NBA teams? People talk about B2B fatigue as being an "excuse," in a way that makes me think that they believe that playing in an NBA game is no different than playing a game of pickup at the Y.
Depends on context of what happened the night before. Phoenix was in a war with the Kings the night before and extended a ton of energy to get back in the game. Some of the Kings previous back-to-backs this season were absolutely understandable when they were in a close/tense game with the starters logging full minutes and high pressure down the stretch.
The Kings win vs. Orlando the other night was not that. They won easily vs. Orlando with little stress for the starters. Fox played 23 Minutes, Willie played only 18 Minutes, and Buddy 25 Minutes. Using the "back to back excuse" for the loss against Phoenix is not valid. Some of the other losses absolutely but not all back-to-backs are created equal.
- It's not an "excuse," if it's accurate.
- There's some false ultimatum stuff happening here: people say stuff like "Using the 'back to back excuse'" as if the argument is either B2B fatigue is the sole reason for the loss, or it didn't factor at all. Saying that B2B fatigue contributed to a loss is not the same thing as saying it's the reason why they lost. It's saying that, "X, Y and Z are the main reasons why the team lost, but also B2B fatigue may have contributed to lapses in concentration, lapses in energy, during a time in the game when they have traditionally been able to step on team's necks, etc."
Like I said on many games you have no argument from me. The Suns played their behinds off against the Kings and then had to fly late into Dallas to take on the Mavericks the next night. Regardless of Dallas being better that is absolutely a scheduling loss. The fact the Suns kept it close is actually a feather in their cap.
Again though it's about context. The Kings/Suns game the day before did not have that same context do to the low number of minutes the starters played the game before.
It can be a contributing factor to losses and even the primary factor in some cases but you don't want the players believing that going into the game.
@sergmatt , But you're right, not all B2B are created equal. So I dug a little deeper, and the first thing I noticed was that ten teams, only a third of the league, have winning records on the second night of a B2B. And that two of those teams (Heat, Wizards) actually have sub-.500 records overall.
The second thing I noticed was the percentage of home games versus road games for the second nights of B2B, and the disparity between teams with winning records in those circumstances, and those without. Of the 10 teams with winning records on the second night of B2B, only half of them have winning records in those circumstances when the second game was on the road: Raptors (6-1), Nuggets (4-1), Thunder (1-0), lakers (3-1), Heat (2-1). The statistical majority of teams with winning records on the second night of B2B have played an overwhelmingly high percentage of those second games at home and, in fact, only three teams (Raptors, Nuggets, Heat) have played more of their second games on the road than at home.
What that indicates to me is that it's not as simple as saying that good teams don't lose those games. Philadelphia has the sixth-best record in the league: they're twelve games above .500. They're 2-5 on the second night of B2B. San Antonio currently occupies the seventh seed in the western conference: they're six games above .500. They're 1-6 on the second night of B2B. Of the sixteen teams currently occupying playoff position, only nine of them have winning records on the second nights of B2B, and five of those nine have benefited greatly from home-heavy second night schedules.
FWIW, the Kings have played in nine sets of B2B, tied with the lakers and the Cavaliers for second-most in the league (Brooklyn has played in ten). They are 6-3 on the first night, and 3-6 on the second night. In only one-third of their B2B has the second game been at home, and they're 2-1 in those circumstances.
The second thing I noticed was the percentage of home games versus road games for the second nights of B2B, and the disparity between teams with winning records in those circumstances, and those without. Of the 10 teams with winning records on the second night of B2B, only half of them have winning records in those circumstances when the second game was on the road: Raptors (6-1), Nuggets (4-1), Thunder (1-0), lakers (3-1), Heat (2-1). The statistical majority of teams with winning records on the second night of B2B have played an overwhelmingly high percentage of those second games at home and, in fact, only three teams (Raptors, Nuggets, Heat) have played more of their second games on the road than at home.
What that indicates to me is that it's not as simple as saying that good teams don't lose those games. Philadelphia has the sixth-best record in the league: they're twelve games above .500. They're 2-5 on the second night of B2B. San Antonio currently occupies the seventh seed in the western conference: they're six games above .500. They're 1-6 on the second night of B2B. Of the sixteen teams currently occupying playoff position, only nine of them have winning records on the second nights of B2B, and five of those nine have benefited greatly from home-heavy second night schedules.
FWIW, the Kings have played in nine sets of B2B, tied with the lakers and the Cavaliers for second-most in the league (Brooklyn has played in ten). They are 6-3 on the first night, and 3-6 on the second night. In only one-third of their B2B has the second game been at home, and they're 2-1 in those circumstances.
This is true, but it also ignores that fatigue is more than just physical: there are a lot of things that go into the preparation for an NBA game, besides the actual playing of the game itself, for which having to do them twice in a twenty-four hour period can lead to fatigue. And, like I said before, fatigue is more than just being physically tired. Mental fatigue leads to lack of focus, lack of discipline, lack of concentration. And, at the NBA level, even a sixty-second lapse in concentration can be the difference between a six-point win, and a ten-point loss.
I don't really believe that that's a thing that happens, in the aggregate.
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
its a real thing, no doubt but that's part of the NBA. How long has it been around? Tell me one other thing; how do some of the best teams in the league fare on a back to back compared to mid-tier and lottery?
I'm not dedicated enough to this subject to do a historical analysis and, as far as the 2018-19, season-to-date, I already went over that.
If you require more specificity, the top five teams in the NBA by record do indeed all have winning records on the second night of B2B but, by way of comparison to the Kings, only two teams in the Top Five (Raptors, Pacers) has played more than six sets of B2B, and three of them have benefited from overwhelmingly home-heavy second night schedules in those circumstances: the Bucks (4-2), Pacers (5-2) and Warriors (5-1) have all played four of their six "second night" games at home. None of the three teams mentioned have winning records on the second night of B2B when the second night is played on the road. The Raptors and the Nuggets are the only two teams in the league who have both played and won the majority of their "second night" games on the road.
Every lottery team has a losing record on the second night of B2B, with the curious exception of the Wizards, who are somehow 5-2 on the second night of a B2B, despite only being 1-6 on the first night.
You've done great work Slim, if it's not too much trouble do you know on those home seconds, how many had home firsts?
I would certainly think any back to back involving zero travel is a significant difference over one that does on either end.
Haven't completed the work on that; started on it, but got busy.
kingsboi
Hall of Famer
It's because they have had so many lopsided losses that the starters rest for most of the game and don't miss a beat on the back to back
Twenty-one teams have played at least one set of "double home" B2B (which is way more than I expected), but only six teams have had multiple sets of "double home" B2B. Seven of the nine teams who haven't played any "double home" B2B currently occupy a playoff position. Only three of the teams that have played eight or more sets of B2B (Raptors, 76ers, Nets) have not had any "double home" B2B.
Just for those who are interested, here the remaining B2B games involving the Kings:
Mon Jan 21 - @Brooklyn
Tues Jan 22 - @Toronto
Thu Mar 14 - @Boston
Fri Mar 15 - @Philadelphia
Sat Mar 23 - Phoenix
Sun Mar 24 - @Lakers
Sat Mar 30 - @Houston
Sun Mar 31 - @San Antonio
Thu Apr 4 - Cleveland
Fri Apr 5 - @Utah
Ouch.
Mon Jan 21 - @Brooklyn
Tues Jan 22 - @Toronto
Thu Mar 14 - @Boston
Fri Mar 15 - @Philadelphia
Sat Mar 23 - Phoenix
Sun Mar 24 - @Lakers
Sat Mar 30 - @Houston
Sun Mar 31 - @San Antonio
Thu Apr 4 - Cleveland
Fri Apr 5 - @Utah
Ouch.
Similar threads
