Rick Morrisey – a sportswriter with the Chicago Tribune – has the following advice for John Paxson (general manager of the Chicago Bulls): Bulls should throw Joakim Noah overboard.

In this article Morrisey makes two arguments:

1. Noah has a problem fitting in with his teammates and coaches.

2. Noah is not a productive NBA player and is therefore not worth the hassle.

Abbott Responds

In response to this column, Henry Abbott – of TrueHoop – noted the following:

There’s a column in Chicago today, by Rick Morrissey of the Tribune, ripping Joakim Noah for various things. One of the criticisms is that he is not productive: “Noah’s supporters say he’s a monument to hustle. No. He’s the king of looking like he’s hustling. When you’re 6 feet 11 inches, wave your arms with exaggerated gestures and have a ponytail that bobs as you run up and down the court, you tend to look busy. He’s averaging 4.5 points, 5.9 rebounds and 18.2 minutes per game. The numbers say he’s not worth the hassle.” I think that’s a case of old-school stats deceiving. Because more sophisticated numbers show Noah’s one of the best rebounders in the NBA per minute. Noah is third in the whole NBA getting offensive boards, and his overall rebound rate is ahead of that of Shaquille O’Neal, Tim Duncan, Antonio McDyess, Kendrick Perkins, David Lee, Ben Wallace, Yao Ming and many other big names among big men. Noah looks like a bit of a spaz out there — agreed — but he is not unproductive.

The Value of Noah

So here we have two journalists commenting on the relative value of Noah.  Both are looking at the same numbers.  But both are coming to different conclusions. 

As we often do here, let’s look a bit more closely at the numbers.  We will start with a comparison of Noah, Aaron Gray, and Spencer Hawes.  Each of these players was selected in the 2007 draft.  Noah was selected with the 9^th overall pick, Hawes went one pick later, and the Bulls took Gray in the second round.  In sum, Hawes and Gray are Chicago’s alternatives to Noah.  In 2007 Chicago could have selected Hawes.  And today, Gray is often being chosen over Noah.  Across the last 16 games, it’s Gray who has been the primary starter at center for the Bulls.

When we look at the numbers – reported in Table One – we see that Noah is actually offering more per-minute than either alternative. You wouldn’t see this, though, if you focus solely on point production.  Noah certainly leaves much to be desired as a scorer.  With respect to all of the scoring stats, Noah is below average.  When we move past scoring, though, we see that Noah excels in everything except personal fouls.  In sum, there is much to like about Noah.  At least, as long as you look at more than scoring.

Table One: Evaluating Joakim Noah in January of 2009

To put Noah’s production in perspective, let’s look at the 10^th player chosen in 2007. Spencer Hawes – who plays about 10 minutes more per game than Noah — is below average with respect to everything except taking shots from the field, shooting efficiency from the free throw line, blocked shots, and assists.  But because Hawes takes an above average quantity of shots, some people have argued that he is a better player than Greg Oden.  And I suspect many would take Hawes over Noah.  The numbers, though, suggest Chicago made the right decision in the summer of 2007.

Despite the story the numbers are saying, Chicago is acting like they made the wrong choice.  Noah is only averaging 18 minutes per game this season and as noted, recently Gray is starting at center for Chicago.  

If we go back to Noah’s college numbers we see that he was not much of a scorer at Florida.   Although Noah clearly demonstrated that he was not going to be a major producer of points in the NBA, Chicago still spent a lottery pick to acquire his services.  And now, after demonstrating that his game is really not about scoring, Chicago behaves as if Noah’s not really a very productive player. Yes, as the Morrisey article indicates, Noah does have a problem getting along with coaches.  But as Morrisey notes, this is not generally an issue for players who are considered productive.  It looks like Noah is doing what his college performance promised, yet now Chicago seems unhappy to get what they asked for.

Finding Problems in Chicago

And when we look at Wins Produced, we see that Chicago is actually getting quite a bit from Noah.  In fact – as Table Two indicates — Noah currently leads this team in both WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] and Wins Production.

Table Two: Chicago Bulls in 2008-09 after 35 games

Unfortunately for the Bulls (of the players who have played 500 minutes this year) only Aaron Gray is more productive than even an average player.  And Gray plays the same position as Noah (and he’s not offering as much as Noah). At every other position, the players getting minutes are below average.  In other words, every other player getting significant minutes is “not good” (at least, not so far this season). Continue reading →

The Portland Trail Blazers came into existence in 1970.  In the team’s first four seasons success proved elusive.  Not only did the team fail to have a winning season, Portland never even managed to reach the 30 win threshold.  As is often the case in North American sports, failure is rewarded.  For the Blazers, the reward came in 1974 when Portland took Bill Walton with the first pick in the NBA draft.   

In Walton’s rookie season the Blazers managed to win 38 games and even score more points than their opponents.  The next season the team took a small step back, but the 1976-77 team – led in Wins Produced by Bill Walton – managed to both lead the league in efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency) and win the NBA title.  

Walton was hurt the next season and by the time he took the court again in 1979 he was wearing the uniform of the San Diego Clippers.  Without Walton, though, Portland still found some success.  After posting a negative efficiency differential in 1979-80, the Trail Blazers embarked on a string of 23 seasons where their efficiency differential was always in the positive range.  Although another championship proved elusive, no other franchise has been able to put together a longer streak of above average performances (at least not since 1973-74, the first year we can measure efficiency differential).

History Repeats

In 2003-04 this streak came to an end.  And over the next three seasons – just as we saw at the onset of this franchise – success proved elusive. The team only averaged 30.3 wins per season and Portland’s efficiency differential was always in the negative range.

Once again, such failure was rewarded.  In 2007 Portland selected Greg Oden with the number one pick in the NBA draft.  Unfortunately, Oden was injured in the summer of 2007 and missed the entire 2007-08 campaign. Despite losing Oden, Portland still managed to win half its games last season (although the team’s efficiency differential was in the negative range). 

Such success without Oden suggested that Portland was a team on the rise.  And in 2008-09 we see some evidence of this ascension.  After posting a -1.06 efficiency differential in 2007-08, Portland’s differential stands at 3.19 after 34 games in 2008-09.  Such a mark is consistent with a team that will win about 49 games.  In other words, after winning 41 games last year, Portland has so far improved by about eight games.  Yes, this is a leap forward although perhaps not quite the leap some people envisioned last summer.

When we look at the individual players we can identify who is responsible for Portland’s success.

Table One: The Portland Trail Blazers after 34 games in 2008-09

From Table One we see that Portland currently employs six players – Joel Przybilla, Brandon Roy, Rudy Fernandez, Steve Blake, Greg Oden, and Nicolas Batum — who are posting WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] marks that are above average (average is 0.100). Each of the veterans in this list has posted above average numbers in the past.  And although few expected Batum to make a significant contribution, the play of Oden and Fernandez during their rookie seasons is not unexpected.

Missing Lottery Picks

Virtually all of this team’s wins can be traced to this list of players.  If we look at the remainder of the roster we see a number of lottery picks, but not much productivity.  For example, LaMarcus Aldridge was selected with the second choice of the 2006 draft.  Thus far – as Table Two notes – Aldridge has yet to produce wins at an above average level.

Table Two: Evaluating LaMarcus Aldridge

When we look at the individual stats we see where Aldridge succeeds and fails.  Aldridge is very good at taking shots from the field. As a consequence, he’s an above producer of points.  He is also good at blocking shots and he avoids turnovers.  But he’s below average on the boards, he doesn’t get many assists, and he can’t get to the free throw line.  And when we look at the total package, as noted, he’s a below average performer. Continue reading →

When the NBA merged with the ABA in 1976, four ABA franchises – the Denver Nuggets, Indiana Pacers, New Jersey Nets, and San Antonio Spurs – were added to the NBA.  Of these four, Denver was the most successful that first season in the NBA.  The Nuggets won 50 regular season games and were the only ABA survivor to win a playoff series (or a game).  When we look at efficiency differential – offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency – we see that Denver had a mark of 4.53 in 1976-77.  Only the Portland Trail Blazers – the eventual league champ (and team that eliminated Denver in the playoffs) – posted a better differential (5.00).  Such an inaugural season certainly suggested that Denver’s future in the NBA would be quite bright.

Although that might have been the suggestion in 1977, reality has been quite different.  In terms of efficiency differential, the 1976-77 team remains the best in the NBA history of the Denver Nuggets.  To put this point in perspective, Denver has only posted an efficiency differential in excess of 3.00 twice [1987-88 and 2007-08].  And only two more seasons saw a mark in excess of 2.00 [1984-85 and 2004-05]. 

If we turn to wins, a similar story is told.  Denver’s best NBA season – in terms of wins – occurred in 1987-88.  That year Denver won 54 games.  In only three other seasons – 1976-77, 1984-85, and 2007-08 – did this team reach 50 victories. In contrast, the team has reached 50 losses eight different times. In sum, despite a promising start, NBA basketball in Denver has not generally been very successful.

Losing Camby

And that brings us to this season. After 35 games, Denver has a record of 23-12.  With a winning percentage of 65.7%, the Nuggets are currently on pace to tie the NBA franchise record for wins in season. When we look at efficiency differential the results are not quite that promising. Denver’s differential is currently 3.30, a mark that suggests 50 wins are a possibility.  Although this mark is quite good relative to Denver history, it lags far behind the top teams currently in the NBA.

Of course, given the move the Nuggets made this summer, it seemed unlikely the 2008-09 team was likely to challenge the best in the NBA or even the best in Denver history.  In July the Nuggets sent Marcus Camby to the LA Clippers for a Wal-Mart gift certificate (or something like that). Camby led the 2007-08 Denver Nuggets with 21.0 Wins Produced.  Apparently Denver’s plan was to replace Camby with Nene Hilario, who missed most of the 2007-08 season.  In 2006-07 Nene posted a 0.158 WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes], which would be worth 8.7 wins in the time allotted Camby last season.  In other words, the move from Camby to Nene would cost the Nuggets about twelve victories.

This decline was partially offset by the addition of Chris Andersen and Renaldo Balkman, two additions designed to make-up for the loss of Eduardo Najera.  Last year Najera produced 1.3 wins with a 0.038 WP48.  As Table One indicates, Andersen and Balkman are both above average talents, and their addition cuts the cost of losing Camby about in half.

Table One: The Denver Nuggets in 2008-09 after 35 games

What’s interesting about this season is that Denver really hasn’t decline at all.  Their most productive player is gone and the team’s efficiency differential – as the above numbers indicate – has only declined about 0.30.  In other words, the team is about what they were last year.  So how is this possible?

Adding Billups

As noted last November, the trade of Allen Iverson for Chauncey Billups looked to be enough to completely offset the loss of Camby.  We can see this if we look at the relative performances of each player.

Here is what Chauncey Billups produced from 2002-03 to 2007-08 [the six years he played in Detroit]. Continue reading →

Last June I picked the Boston Celtics to defeat the LA Lakers in the 2008 NBA Finals.  Even as that happened, though, I warned that the Lakers would probably win in 2009.  In fact, last October I argued the Lakers might be the team to beat beyond the 2008-09 season.

After 30 games the Lakers have been very good.  The team’s efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency) currently stands at 9.90.  To put that number in perspective, here are the top five differentials since 1973-74.

• Chicago Bulls (1995-96): 13.00
• Chicago Bulls (1996-97): 11.61
• Boston Celtics [2007-08]: 10.95
• Chicago Bulls (1991-92): 10.64
• Utah Jazz (1996-97): 9.39

In sum, the Lakers – as expected – have thus far been a dominant team.  And when we look at the individual players we can see who is responsible for this outcome.

Table One: The LA Lakers in 2008-09 after 30 games

From Table One we see that the Lakers have four players – Pau Gasol, Kobe Bryant, Trevor Ariza, and Andrew Bynum – who have posted WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] marks above the 0.200 level.  Remember, 0.100 mark is average, so each of these players are twice as good as an average player.  And this quartet would be a quintet if Lamar Odom was producing as he did last year.  Even with Odom’s decline (and the drop-off we see with respect to Bynum), the Lakers are still expected to win 67 games this season.  Unfortunately for the Lakers (but fortunately for the rest of the league), the Lakers are not alone on top of the league.

 Rondo Stops the Decline

Last year the Celtics won 66 games and took the title.  Boston’s only significant defection in the off-season was James Posey, who produced 5.1 wins last season [with a 0.136 WP48]. With most of the team’s top producers of wins returning, one might expect a repeat performance.  This, though, was not my expectation entering the season.  Here is what I said last August:

“…given the age of its players, we should expect many of the top Celtics to actually decline.  Consequently, just like we saw when Bird led Boston to titles in the 1980s, the Celtics are not likely to repeat as champions in 2009.”

Not sure what I meant by “many”, but Table Two indicates that both Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce – two players who have surpassed 30 years in age – have indeed declined. 

Table Two: The Boston Celtics in 2008-09 after 33 games

If nothing else besides the productivity of KG and Pierce had changed, Boston would only be on pace to win 62 games in 2008-09.  In other words, Boston should have been passed by the Lakers.  After 33 games, though, Boston’s efficiency differential is 10.85, or nearly exactly what this team did last year (and this is after their less than successful recent trip to the West Coast). 

So how has Boston remained a dominant team? The answer is almost entirely Rajon Rondo.  While KG and Pierce are on pace to produce 8.1 fewer wins this year, Rondo is on pace to provide 8.2 additional victories.  Consequently, Rondo is now the most productive player on the Celtics.  Yes, Rondo is offering more than KG, Pierce, or Ray Allen. 

If we look at the individual stats, we see that Rondo – relative to last year – is a more efficient scoring, tallying more assists, and getting more steals.  As a result, his WP48 has risen from 0.219 (which is very good) to 0.371 (which is amazing). Despite this performance, Rondo is not even listed among those receiving All-Star votes in the Eastern Conference. 

Cleveland Completes the Trio

The play of Rondo has allowed Boston to keep pace (and currently slightly surpass) the Lakers.  Although these teams are each having historic seasons, neither tops the league in efficiency differential.  That spot is currently held by the Cleveland Cavaliers.  Cleveland’s mark of 12.86 rivals the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls, and it’s the Cavaliers who currently have the best shot to surpass the seventy win mark (assuming current production levels remain unchanged).

Cleveland’s position at the top is certainly a surprise (at least to me). Last year Cleveland had a negative efficiency differential, so the improvement in this team has been astounding.  Unlike the Celtics in 2007, Cleveland has not improved by adding two future Hall-of-Fame players.  Cleveland’s only major addition last summer was Maurice Williams.  Last year Williams posted a 0.122 WP48 mark in Milwaukee.  This year his WP48 stands at 0.130.  Although both marks are somewhat above average, Williams is simply not offering enough production to transform an average NBA team into the league’s best. 

Such was the point I made last November.  As I noted, the key to Cleveland’s transformation has been the play of Anderson Varejao, Ben Wallace, and Delonte West.  Last year these players only produced 8.4 wins.  This year – as Table Three indicates – this trio is on pace to produce nearly 30 victories.  Part of this leap is tied to the increase in minutes these players are getting.   And part of this is tied to the fact that Varejao and Wallace have essentially reverted to what we saw prior to last season. 

Table Three: The Cleveland Cavaliers in 2008-09 after 31 games

The addition of Varejao, Wallace, and West are enough to transform the Cavaliers from a 40 win team (what their efficiency differential suggests they were last year) into a 60 win team.  To get to 70 wins, we need to look primarily at the play of LeBron James.  King James is producing 5.4 more wins this year than his play last year suggests.  And if it weren’t for the play of Chris Paul (and I need to write a post on Paul and the Hornets), LeBron would be the leading candidate for Most Productive Player (M2P) in the league.  Fortunately for LeBron, the MVP award is not based on Wins Produced.  Consequently, LeBron should have a very good chance of winning his first MVP award in 2009.

Brief Comments on the Other Contenders

Entering this season I worried that 2008-09 season would be all about the Lakers.  The dramatic improvement in the play of Rajon Rondo, as well as the changes we have seen in Cleveland, have produced a three-way race for the title.

Unless we see a major injury, the NBA championship will likely be won by one of these three teams.  Although our focus will likely remain on Cleveland, Boston, and LA, one might also wonder about the other contenders (or should we say pretenders?). Continue reading →