The teams considered playoff contenders in the Western Conference include Portland, the LA Lakers, San Antonio, Dallas, Denver, New Orleans, Utah, and maybe Phoenix (and maybe Golden State). With the exception of Phoenix (and Golden State), all these teams made the playoffs in 2009. Only one Western Conference playoff team – the Houston Rockets – are generally omitted from the list of 2009-10 contenders.
The Rockets were dropped from the list when it was learned Yao Ming would miss the next season. Coupled with the injury to Tracy McGrady, the Rockets now face the prospect of entering the next season without a “star” player. Here is how Chris Mannix describes the team in Sports Illustrated: Houston is now a pale imitation of the team that took the Lakers to seven games in the Western Conference semifinals.
Mannix goes on offer the following quite from Daryl Morey: “When the previews come out, we’ll probably be in the back of the magazines, under the cologne ads.”
In John Hollinger’s preview at ESPN.com (insider access required), ten teams are listed ahead of the Rockets. And when I listed the contenders earlier in the week, the Rockets were ignored.
The Above Average Rockets
Then I looked at the following list of veteran players who should play for the Rockets this season.
Luis Scola: 2,448 min., 9.8 Wins Produced, 0.189 WP48
Shane Battier: 2,031 min., 6.2 Wins Produced, 0.147 WP48
Trevor Ariza: 1,998 min., 8.0 Wins Produced, 0.192 WP48
Aaron Brooks: 1,998 min., -0.5 Wins Produced, -0.012 WP48
Carl Landry: 1,467 min., 5.4 Wins Produced, 0.175 WP48
Chuck Hayes: 858 min., 2.5 Wins Produced, 0.139 WP48
Brent Barry: 857 min., 2.0 Wins Produced, 0.113 WP48
Kyle Lowry: 608 min., 2.3 Wins Produced, 0.182 WP48
An average NBA player posts a 0.100 WP48. Of the eight players listed above, seven were above average last season.
The Wins Produced from these players sum to 39.7. The minutes, though, only sum 13,486. An NBA team that avoids overtime will play 19,680 minutes in a season. Consequently, it seems likely some (if not all) of these players will play more minutes in 2009-10. And if per-minute performance doesn’t change (an issue I will address at the end of this column), increasing the minutes of these players (except for Brooks) will lead to more than 40 wins.
The eighth seed in the West last year won 48 games. So if the West is the same in 2009-10, the Rockets will have to come closer to 50 wins to make the playoffs. This may be difficult. But I am suggesting – contrary to the perceptions of this team – that it’s possible the Rockets can make the playoffs without McGrady or Ming.
A Collection of Non-Scorers
Once again, perceptions say this is not possible. When we look at the scoring of the above eight players we can see why expectations are so low.
Luis Scola: 12.7 Points per game, 20.1 Points per 48 minutes
Shane Battier: 7.3 Points per game, 10.3 Points per 48 minutes
Trevor Ariza: 8.9 Points per game, 17.5 Points per 48 minutes
Aaron Brooks: 11.2 Points per game, 21.5 Points per 48 minutes
Carl Landry: 9.2 Points per game, 20.9 Points per 48 minutes
Chuck Hayes: 1.3 Points per game, 5.1 Points per 48 minutes
Brent Barry: 3.7 Points per game, 11.6 Points per 48 minutes
Kyle Lowry: 7.6 Points per game, 16.9 Points per 48 minutes
Scola leads this group with 12.7 points per game. When we turn to scoring per 48 minutes we see only three players who exceed the league average of 19.8. Scoring drives perceptions in the NBA, and the lack of scoring numbers from this group suggests the Rockets are doomed.
But wins are about more than scoring. And when we measure these players contributions to wins (via Wins Produced), we see that Houston has fewer problems than people believe. Consequently, I think it’s possible that Morey’s considerable reputation is about to become further enhanced.
If the Rockets do make the playoffs without McGrady and Ming, the following will also occur:
- Morey is going to be considered for Executive of the Year
- Rick Adelman will be considered for Coach of the Year
- Aaron Brooks – who may lead this team in scoring – will be considered one of the best point guards in the game.
All of this is possible because this collection of non-scorers is also a collection of above average performers. Unfortunately, it seems likely that none of the non-scorers will get much credit if this team exceeds expectations.
Performance History
Let me close by noting that the seven above average performers listed above have a history of productive play. For example, consider the recent history of these players.
Luis Scola:
2007-08: 4.8 Wins Produced, 0.113 WP48
Shane Battier:
2007-08: 6.5 Wins Produced, 0.107 WP48
2006-07: 6.4 Wins Produced, 0.103 WP48
Trevor Ariza:
2007-08: 2.6 Wins Produced, 0.225 WP48
2006-07: 5.8 Wins Produced, 0.217 WP48
Aaron Brooks
2007-08: 0.3 Wins Produced, 0.020 WP48
Carl Landry
2007-08: 4.3 Wins Produced, 0.292 WP48
Chuck Hayes:
2007-08: 6.7 Wins Produced, 0.206 WP48
2006-07: 7.8 Wins Produced, 0.217 WP48
Brent Barry:
2007-08: 2.7 Wins Produced, 0.231 WP48
2006-07: 7.7 Wins Produced, 0.225 WP48
Kyle Lowry
2007-08: 4.3 Wins Produced, 0.101 WP48
With the exception of Aaron Brooks, these players were above average before 2008-09. This suggests that these players will be above average in 2009-10. If that happens, the Rockets have a good chance of being an above average team. That means the Western Conference might have as many as ten teams contending for eight playoff spots. And I haven’t even thought much about the Clippers, Thunder, Kings, Grizzlies, or T-Wolves (okay, I have thought about the T-Wolves).
- DJ
The WoW Journal Comments Policy
Our research on the NBA was summarized HERE.
The Technical Notes at wagesofwins.com provides substantially more information on the published research behind Wins Produced and Win Score
Wins Produced, Win Score, and PAWSmin are also discussed in the following posts:
Simple Models of Player Performance
What Wins Produced Says and What It Does Not Say
Introducing PAWSmin — and a Defense of Box Score Statistics
Finally, A Guide to Evaluating Models contains useful hints on how to interpret and evaluate statistical models.
This is the test, I guess. People say wouldn’t it be neat to gather an entire team of WoW favorites who aren’t necessarily scorers and see if they can hold up. I think this is as close to that idea that we might get. It will be interesting to see.
Also “Houston is now a pale imitation of the team that took the Lakers to seven games in the Western Conference semifinals.” The team that took the Lakers to seven games didn’t have Yao for four games that series and no McGrady at all. So that writer is missing something.
My thoughts exactly. I’ll be watching the Rockets closely this season (or at least their record).
Thanks for weighing in so quickly, Dr. Berri! I’m still troubled by a problem I mentioned in my previous post, however. The above production is based on the assumption of continuity in production by players playing out of position. For instance, for the Rockets to field the given lineup, Scola would have to playing the lion’s share of minutes at C, while retaining his productivity. The Rockets do not have a SG on their roster who is healthy and has been a starter anytime recently (Barry logged 800 minutes last year), so either Ariza, Battier, or Lowry should be playing a considerable amount of time out of position at SG. In sum, I’d like to agree with the previous that this team is the test of WoW, but I’m not quite sure. We have little data to tell us how great the distortion effect of playing out of position is. WoW may be right about how good this team could be, but the team lacks players at certain positions, and thus may be more likely to fall short of forecasts based on the objective productivity of its players.
More and more, I am beginning to think that this team may the test of versatility theories in the NBA. Most would have you believe that having a player who can play out of position for the good of the team actually makes the team better. If that is so, then the Rockets should be great, since Scola playing out of position will open up tons of minutes for Carl Landry and Chuck Hayes. However, I think we may see that it’s better to have players at their natural position. Alternatively, we may find that the risk/reward of such a situation depends entirely on the level of backup available at the given positions. For example, the Rockets have no center, and Scola is sure to be an improvement over a FA pick-up at C. The Rockets also have 2 very productive PFs, so they may not be urt as much by Scola playing out of position as they would be if they still had Motumbo or if they did not have Landry and Hayes.
One last thing before I quit monologing about the Rockets: They could fall short of expectations by listening to the conventional wisdom – a strange situation since they are usually more WoW-oriented than other teams. Most people around the league are claiming thatAaron Brooks took huge step forward in the playoffs and will now lead the team in Yao’s absence. When you get down to the nuts and bolts, though, Brooks is a poor performer, and the Rockets would be much better with increased minutes given to Mike Lowry. We’ll see if Morey and Adelman dare to buck conventional wisdom.
Scola was a 28 year old rookie when he entered the league and averaged 3o minutes last year. Not much more upside.
I would think that Chuck Hayes, not Scola, would get the lion’s share of minutes at C. The Rockets should also expect to give decent minutes at C to Joey Dorsey, who is a great rebounder, and Euroleague champion David Andersen.
As for the hole at SG, I would imagine a fair share of minutes would go to rookies Jermaine Taylor and Chase Budinger. Taylor posted a 11.7 PAWS40 last year in college. Budinger was below average his last year of college, but if his summer league performance is any indication of his ability, we can expect him to be an efficient shooter.
For the center, the Rockets signed a David Andersen from the Euroleague to play center. He will play most of the minutes there, with Chuck Hayes at backup.
From the scouting reports, he is that type of undervalued, high-efficiency player (at least in Europe.) It remains to be seen how well that translates.
Brooks and Ariza will likely be the high-scorers, and Brooks will maintain his low WP48 rating on account of it, IMHO.
Great analysis. The Rockets are my team, and I hate to have them as an experiment, but it makes them interesting to watch regardless of our endless string of bad luck.
Yes, but who is going to score??? The performance of the Rockets will be a referendum on this model.
This illustrates the biggest problem with WoW – assuming win score will remain constant regardless of the amount of scoring in the line up.
Will these non-scorers continue to be productive when they’re forced to manufacture shots they are not equipped to take?
It’s much easier for Battier, Scola, etc. to be productive when other guys are taking the lion’s share of the shots. If the offensive efficiency sputters without scoring in the line up, though, these individual players will see their win scores plummet because they will be forced to take bad shots and “use” possessions they wouldn’t otherwise use.
Exactly Matt, which is why the lack of a “usage” component is Win Score undermines its legitimacy as a predictor of performance.
Matt,
WP48 is durable, year-to-year for players. Assuming win score will remain constant regardless of the amount of scoring in the line up isn’t a problem with WoW, it is a point of controversy for its critics. And this year’s Rockets should provide an opportunity to discuss those elements again.
Of course what will happen is that one or two scorers will step to the fore, approximate their wins produced, and we will hear these scorers came out of the shadows of Houston’s Big Three of last year and led the team to a near playoff-birth (say, 45 wins).
We keep talking about two stars, but the talk last year at this time was that the Rockets had their version of the Big 3. Artest was part of that equation, was part of the playoff run last season, and is gone now. His game is not as well regarded, but he was part of the ‘star power’ of last year’s team. Certainly the star outshines Ariza’s, even if the ability does not.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but aren’t those numbers based on having Yao and Artest in the lineup to take pressure off those guys? It’s pretty easy being Luis Scola when Yao’s constantly getting doubled and all you have to do is spot up or roll to the rim.
Pingback: Matthew Yglesias » Endgame
Blake, you may be right. Still, that would involve playing a (maybe) 6’8″ center, which could still fall under “playing outof position. If Hayes does play the majority of minutes at center, then not only will there continue to be not enough minutes for Carl Landry (as he will still be stuck behind Scoal at PF), the Rockets will also have the smallest full-time C in the league by a mile, at least as far as I know. Dorsey is a 4, though.
I agree with you about the draft picks, and I seem to remember both Taylor and Buddinger being fairly well-appraised by Dr. Berri’s methods. Perhaps they can make up an effective SG in combination with Barry.
I would note that that lineup (with Taylor or Buddinger starting) is probably optimal – Battier has all the strengths of a great 6th man, which he would be with Ariza at SF and one of the rookies starting at SG. Still, I think it might be better to have Scola at C and Landry starting at PF, with Hayes spelling both of them (at least until we get a better look at Anderson in NBA games).
In response to everyone’s comments about failure because of lack of a scorer, I would point out that the Rockets took 2 of 4 games from the Lakers without a scorer in their playoff series (small sample size, I know, but how often are people wrong about this with the Rockets? Whenever Yao orMcGrady goes down, we hear that the Rockets season is over form everyone in the media, but it is often not true. When Yao was injured a few years ago the team realed off an incredible winning streak without him. Without McGrady this year the team was a game away from the #2 seed and took the Lakers to seven games in the conference semis. This idea that the Rockets’ non-scorers are an uncompetitive team in the NBA has just not been proven).
Not sure if one team projection in a year invalidates a model. But an interesting comparison is here.
http://sonicscentral.com/apbrmetrics/viewtopic.php?t=2297&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30
Neat season projection numbers by DSMok1 based on +/-
a couple notes; Battier and Ariza can fill the wing positions, defensively and offensively, thus SG is not so much of an issue, HOU will need to be a very good team defender as there will be a need for much help on the post but they have good team defenders that can rotate quickly and thus if motivated it should not be a huge problem, scoring will not be a problem if they play fast (as they say they will), as a fast pace will create the same spacing that Yao created and they can often have 5 shooters on the floor with (Scola, Landry, Ariza, Battier & Brooks) and lets not look past the ability of many of the current Rockets to draw fouls or seeking out offensive rebounds, free throws and more FG attempts are great routes to scoring. these are a number of what ifs but its clear that a route to success is there. they probably will struggle with SAN or LAL but they should contend decently with the rest of the west. obviously they could use some height and some depth on the wing but those issues don’t guarantee failure and are far from worth panic and sending away talant for a more traditional looking team.
Their starting five is good and can compete with just about anyone but they don’t have depth. If Battier and Ariza and Scola have to play 48 a night that seems to me like a recipe for burnout and/or injury. One or two unknowns are going to have to step up. However, I have a feeling (not sure how it could be measured) that the West is getting worse and the East is getting better. That could work in their favor.
Interesting that Houston’s front office loves stats, and also loves Aaron Brooks and Chase Budinger, isn’t it?
Since when are the rockets going to be bad? The same rockets that took the lakers to 7? Well actually, no, a better rockets with Ariza.
I don’t understand why Ariza can’t play “SG”, he’s fast enough, got sufficient ball-handling skills, reasonable perimeter defending and can make shots.
Anyways, I’d be surprised if the rockets don’t do quite well (or surprisingly well according to the critics). Scola had a very good season after an almost equally good rookie season. He coped very well at PF/C against Gasol and Bynum, two of the best big men in the NBA.
We’ll see whether you have to have high-usage superstars to do well…
Prof. Berri,
Could you answer to that:
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=937483&start=30
of the criticisms of berri’s work people put forward in that thread, half of them are blatantly false, and the rest have been addressed multiple times in this blog.
Pingback: The 10-man rotation, starring Kobe in your face | Sports News Images and Videos
Pingback: Top Posts « WordPress.com
I have no doubt that Houston will be a superb defensive team. They could be one of the best defensive teams in the league – the Cavs, Magic and Celtics were head and shoulders above everyone else in terms of defensive efficiency during the regular season, and they were three of the top four teams in the league.
I wonder if Houston remains successful, will it be despite a significant decline in their offensive efficiency.
Most NBA is largely based on isolation plays or two-man game. The mid-2000s Pistons were a successful team which bucked that trend, but even they could run iso plays for Sheed, pick-and-roll for Billups, and read/react off-ball screens for Hamilton.
I have no idea what type of plays Houston will run. I know the jury is still out on the full impact of a coach upon a team, and what effect Adelman has upon his teams. He has a good reputation, and as much as anyone has veered away from stagnant offenses characteristic of many teams; lots of off-ball screening and cuts off the high post.
But the question remains – can a team be successful with only a couple of players that can really break down a defender?
Battier and Barry are both great shooters and heady players, but almost every bucket they get is assisted. Landry and Ariza are bucket getters, but they are rarely primary options.
Is Brooks going to pick up the slack? Is T-Mac going to be healthy?
Scola is legit. He’s great playing off-ball, but Argentina has been a top-3 team internationally putting the ball in his hands a lot. He was arguably the best big in Beijing.
Other than Scola, though, this will be a great test of efficiency versus usage, and the implicit impact it has on a player’s output, however it is measured. It will also be a test of how important “creating shots” truly is.
I think a little reality needs to be added to this discussion. Ariza came out of UCLA too early to become an accomplished college player. As a pro at the end of last year he had developed a reliable 3 point shot when left alone and he has a strong drive to the basket. He cannot make a jump shot to save himself. He is not a good passer. His best possessions end with him shooting or driving and dunking. Defensively, he is a great help defender but is not a strong physical one on one defender. He should benefit greatly by playing for Adelman but he is very much a work in progress. Finally, how can he play more minutes sitting on the bench injured? He has had injuries the past two years and driving to the rim is a hazardous way to make your living.
Overall, I agree that the Rockets are underrated but completely disagree that Ariza is any kind of savior.
LakerFan,
You are blind
Ariza may not be a savior, but he is still better than Ron Artest!
I’m not so sure Houston is really the perfect test case for this model.
I think if Houston plays very high level defense, the team can remain reasonably competitive despite the lack of high usage scoring.
If Houston has a reasonably successful season, the fans of this model will point out how a bunch of low usage offensive players managed to win a lot of games just like the model predicted. But it could really be a situation where a superior defensive team was held back from being a championship contender by the lack of high usage scorers.
We could see a situation where we get the right answer for the wrong reason.
I was directed to this article from True Hoop, and I’m very relieved to see that somebody out there is taking a pragmatic approach when evaluating the Rockets. It seems everybody has dismissed the Rockets because there’s no star player to recognize. On top of that, people had been very critical of the Rockets after letting Von Wafer go, who btw was a very entertainingly explosive player, but he just didn’t fit. It seems people are always anxious to spit on the Rockets. As if they had no grasp on what Houston has managed to do in the past against the odds. I’m not saying Houston will be good, and I’m certainly not going to say they’ll suck either. I can’t underestimate them, and I’m really dissapointed at how many people have just decided to ignore the Rockets.
Pingback: August 17 Houston FaF Smear « Fourth And Fifty
I was under the impression that they would start brooks and ariza in the back court, battier at sf with scola and landry upfront. wich would give them a decent defensive lineup and lets not forget mcgrady is coming back whether he will be much help is yet to be seen but i could imagine him avergeing in the high teens by midseason when rounding into form.
oh and maybe just maybe james white might get some minutes at shooting gaurd! im crossing my fingers i could realistically see him developing into a gerald wallace type player.
Stallion, They may have problems with help defense though. They should be good in rebounding and on the ball, and great at 1,2,3 especially when Lowry, Battier, and Ariza play together (Ariza is a better wing defender at this point than Artest), but even great wing defenders get beaten, and they are going to small down low, without guys who have either great length or great leaping ability. (Yao, despite getting dunked on and being slow is a pretty solid defensive fulcrum.) That is pretty surely going to hurt them.
The one game from last year that illustrates how good this team could be though is Game 6 against the Lakers. Scola proved he can score without help from anyone else. Landry proved he can be an outright mismatch for almost any player that’s going to guard him offensively. Battier once again showed how well he can defend without fouling. Aaron Brooks scorched Derek Fisher, as he will all slow point guards. And Chuck Hayes showed that he’s easily at top 5 on ball post defender at either the power forward or center position. That’s a lot of good things happening on one team. And the team still was far from playing the best game it could play.
Nothing would really surprise me with this team, though I think they will get owned by Boston, Cleveland and the Spurs, if Duncan is healthy, not really having much of a chance. And I think Chris Paul might single handedly obliterate a team without an intimidating presence at center. The thing with every one of these players is they compete every game. That’ll win you a lot of games in the NBA.
Pingback: Looking with Envy at Baseball Stats? « The Wages of Wins Journal
Pingback: Will the Rockets suck this year? – Off the Kuff