This season beginning to feel similar for the Indiana Pacers

Other Statistical Similarities

All of the above may point to a similar “feel” around each season, but is there a statistical correlation between the two teams?

Let’s take a look at the Four Factor stats, or what Dean Oliver dubbed the “Four Factors of Basketball Success.” Those four are a teams’ shooting, turnovers, rebounding, and free throws.

2016-17 Indiana Pacers – ranks in the NBA

Effective Field Goal % (Shooting) – No. 13

FT Attempt Rate (Free Throws) – No. 19

Turnover % (Turnovers) – No. 15

DREB % (Defensive Rebounding) – No. 24

OREB% (Offensive Rebounding) – No. 26

Opponent

EFG% – No. 15

FT Attempt Rate – No. 23

Turnover % – No. 6

OREB % – No. 24

2020-21 Indiana Pacers – ranks in the NBA

EFG% – No. 12

FT Attempt Rate – No. 24

Turnover % – No. 13

DREB % – No. 29

OREB% – No. 22

Opponent (ranks in the NBA)

EFG% – No. 13

FT Attempt Rate – No. 19

Turnover % – No. 5

OREB % – No. 29

A few things stand out. Both teams were bad on the glass, with neither being in the top 20 in offensive or defensive rebounding. Both were average shooting teams, and both were average in terms of defensive-shooting metrics. One of the more similar things is the turnover numbers. Both teams were and are among the best in the league at forcing turnovers, but neither was or is particularly special at limiting their own turnovers.

Shot selection, on the other hand, is nearly completely inversed. The 2016-17 team gave up some of the most three-point attempts in the league and didn’t allow many shots at the rim. This year’s team allows very few three-pointers but leads the NBA in shots allowed at the rim per game.

Offensively, the story is similar. The 2016-17 squad lived in the mid-range, while this year’s team shoots the most within the restricted area of any team in the league.