Assist-to-turnover ratio

[atskooc]

I'm not sure if we've talked about this before (we very well may have), but I've never quite understood why there is a comparison ratio between assists and turnovers.  I suppose I can see how it's an important thing to track for point guards (the guys who are supposed to take care of the ball and pass it to scorers), But so much more goes into an assist than just the pass.  Someone else has to actually finish the play and score.  I realize it'd be a pain in the butt, but I think a successful pass (as in, one that actually made it to a teammate)-to-turnover ratio would make more sense in determining a player's ability to take care of the ball.

 

Anyone know why these two stats are compared so often? Is there a correlation between the two that I'm missing?

[49r]

@atskooc it probably isn't any less relevant than the TD/INT stats you see on quarterbacks all the time...

[atskooc]

4 minutes ago, 49r said:

@atskooc it probably isn't any less relevant than the TD/INT stats you see on quarterbacks all the time...

I suppose that's true.

 

TD/INT ratio does both deal with passes, though.  Basketball turnovers aren't necessarily on passes. 

 

Every so often we'll see a QB's stat show his interception/pass attempt ratio, which I think is a much more telling statistic.

Edited November 2, 2016 by atskooc

[hhcmatt]

12 minutes ago, atskooc said:

Anyone know why these two stats are compared so often?

 

The most logical reason to me would be that they are two statistics that are easy to record and thus have been established for a long time.  Comparing a ratio does give you a quick and dirty look at the ball handling skill of a player.

 

16 minutes ago, atskooc said:

But so much more goes into an assist than just the pass.  Someone else has to actually finish the play and score.

Pretty much. Advanced analytics have backed up the fact that turnovers matter much more in terms of your team winning or losing than assists, which can be considered a style indicator. So an assist indicates that a score happened but non-FT scoring is covered by (effective) shooting percentage. 

[AuroranHusker]

The only real correlation:

 

Turnover = bad

Assist = not bad

[Fullbacksympathy]

For a point guard though?  The A:T is one of the first things I look at when judging a PG.  That's one of the many reasons why Watson is such a stud.  

[atskooc]

I suppose dimes said it best: it's a simple way to look at the stats.

 

I totally understand how those two stats are important (especially for a point guard); I just don't see how they're particularly related.

[AuroranHusker]

34 minutes ago, atskooc said:

I suppose dimes said it best: it's a simple way to look at the stats.

 

I totally understand how those two stats are important (especially for a point guard); I just don't see how they're particularly related.

 

And, I agree, PGs it can be quite useful. I think it's been done that way a long time & it makes for a simple computation. I think it would be much more useful to categorize 'how' the turnovers occurred along with all of the analytics of the "turnover." 

 

Announcers tend to get caught up in assist:turnover ratios during college basketball games when they don't know what else to talk about, it seems.  It can be kind of annoying when the announcers don't seem to understand the game of basketball enough to provide useful information...