In describing the last three seasons of Utah basketball one would not be tempted to use the word “progress.” In  2006-07 the Jazz finished with 51 victories and an appearance in the Western Conference Finals.  Two years ago the team improved to 54 wins, but was bounced in the second round.  Last year, the Jazz regressed to 48 wins and a first round exit in the playoffs. 

Such a record would suggest changes would need to be made if the Jazz are hoping to reverse course.  This suggestion, though, was ignored by powers-that-be in Utah.  This past summer the only change Utah made to its roster was adding guard Eric Maynor in the draft.  Every other player listed on this team’s roster at ESPN.com was on the team in 2008-09.

Given that the Jazz are returning the same roster, should fans of this team expect the same outcome? 

To answer that question, let’s first examine the outcome from last season.  Table One reports the Wins Produced and WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] for each player employed by the Jazz last season. 

Table One: The Utah Jazz in 2008-09

The Jazz employed five above average players last season (average WP48 is 0.100): Paul Millsap, Deron Williams, Carlos Boozer, Ronnie Brewer, and Andrei Kirilenko.  Despite missing a combined 81 games this quintet still managed to produce 39.4 wins.

In the off-season Millsap was signed to an offer sheet by the Portland Trail Blazers.  When Utah matched this offer it was expected that Boozer – who plays exactly the same position as Millsap – would be sent elsewhere.  At the start of training camp, though, both Boozer and Millsap are still employed in Utah. 

But who is the starter?  At the moment, ESPN.com lists Boozer as the starter. So the depth chart for Utah would be as follows (with 2008-09 Win Produced and WP48 reported]:

Potential First String

PG: Deron Williams [10.9Wins Produced, 0.209 WP48]

SG: Ronnie Brewer [8.5 Wins Produced, 0.156 WP48]

SF: Andrei Kirilenko [5.2 Wins Produced, 0.138 WP48]

PF: Carlos Boozer [3.9 Wins Produced, 0.158 WP48]

C: Mehmet Okur [4.1 Wins Produced, 0.082 WP48]

Potential Second String

PG: Ronnie Price [-0.4 Wins Produced, -0.024WP48]

SG: C.J. Miles [1.3 Wins Produced, 0.038 WP48]

SF: Kyle Korver [3.2 Wins Produced, 0.081 WP48]

PF: Paul Millsap [10.9 Wins Produced, 0.229 WP48]

C: Kosta Koufos [0.4 Wins Produced, 0.031 WP48]

In addition to these ten players, the Jazz also have the services of the following players:

PG: Eric Maynor (Rookie, above average point guard last year in college)

SF: Matt Harpring [0.4 Wins Produced, 0.030 WP48]

C: Kyrylo Fesenko [-0.1 Wins Produced, -0.017 WP48]

Again, this team suffered some significant injuries last year, primarily to Carlos Boozer.  Not only did Boozer miss games, his per-minutes performance also declined.  Prior to last season Boozer’s career WP48 stood at 0.266.  Had Boozer matched that performance last year the Jazz would have won 51 games and entered the playoffs as the 6^th seed (as opposed to the 8^th seed).  And had Boozer been available the entire season – and maintained his career average – the Jazz might have won more than 55 games and taken the second seed.   In sum, a healthy Boozer would have made a huge difference in 2008-09.

Understanding Boozer’s injuries gives us insight into the plan in Utah.  If Boozer is healthy (and yes, that’s a big if), Utah can be one of the top teams in the West.  Of course, there’s the issue of who gets to start at power forward? And perhaps more importantly, can Boozer and Millsap play together?  If not, then the Jazz will always have a very productive player sitting on the bench.

If Boozer and Millsap can play together, though, the Jazz can field a line-up of Williams, Brewer, Kirilenko, Millsap, and Boozer.  Such a line-up – with Boozer producing at his career average – would have an average WP48 of 0.200.  To put that in perspective… a team where each player averages a 0.100 WP48 will win 41 games.  So if the team doubles the average WP48, the team doubles its win total.  Yes, this line-up is quite good.

Of course, other players will play.  But the Jazz – with everyone playing and producing as they have in the past – can be quite formidable.  And that decision to stay the course will look very, very smart (and many of my colleagues at Southern Utah will be very, very happy).

- 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

Wins Produced vs. Win Score

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.

The following was lifted from Hawkonomics, the blog maintained by Stacey Brook (co-author of The Wages of Wins). Although everyone is encouraged to read and enjoy Hawkonomics, Stacey’s blog is primarily written for his students at the University of Iowa.

In today’s USA Today, there is an article stating that a salary cap leads to greater competitive balance. In fact the article quotes David Poile, GM of the Nashville Predators as saying, “[t]he salary cap has brought competitive balance to the league.”

We will tackle this issue formally later in the Sports Economics course, but for now let’s test this hypothesis informally. Since we only have four years of results with a salary cap, the results must be taken with a grain of salt – in other words I cannot make a conclusive statement either way, but will offer some conjectures below. So has the salary cap (payroll cap) brought competitive balance to the NHL?

Let’s see what is happening to competitive balance in the NHL from a few different angles. One way of looking at this is to compare the level of competitive balance – as measured by the Noll-Scully metric – for the four years before the payroll cap and the four years after the payroll cap. Here are the results:

As evident in the table above, the Noll-Scully metric of competitive balance decreased during the four years before the payroll cap, and decreased during the four years after the payroll cap (in bold). Remember that as the Noll-Scully gets closer to zero, competitive balance is improving in the league; so smaller numbers are increases in competitive balance.

But this is really not anything new. Since the 1970′s, the average measure of the Noll-Scully metric has been declining; as shown in the table below. (Note the 2000′s doesn’t include the 2009-10 season, since it hasn’t occurred yet).

Hence, only focusing on the decline in Noll-Scully measure of competitive balance in the four years since the introduction of the payroll cap ignores the decades of decline in the Noll-Scully measure of competitive balance WITHOUT a payroll cap.

As we argue in The Wages of Wins (and as detailed in our paper – The Short Supply of Tall People) competitive balance is declining not because of changes in league institutional rules – such as payroll caps – but rather due to the increasing pool of talent to play sports, such as hockey. So I am skeptical that the payroll cap really has anything to do with the observed improvements in competitive balance.

- Stacey

The WoW Journal Comments Policy

The Boston Celtics 2008-09 season officially ended when the Orlando Magic defeated the Celtics in the second round of the 2009 playoffs.  Boston’s drive to defend their title, though, actually ended when Kevin Garnett’s season ended.  As Table One indicates, on a per-minute basis KG was the Celtics most productive player (by a very, very slight margin).   The loss of such a player meant it was very unlikely the Celtics would defend their title.

Table One: The Boston Celtics in 2008-09

For the 2009-10 season, Garnett is expected to be healthy.  And with Garnett back, Boston will once again – as the following potential depth chart indicates (derived mostly from ESPN.com) — field an imposing starting line-up [Wins Produced and Wins Produced per 48 minutes (WP48) numbers from the 2008-09 season]. 

Potential First String

PG: Rajon Rondo [17.2Wins Produced, 0.313 WP48]

SG: Ray Allen [10.6 Wins Produced, 0.177 WP48]

SF: Paul Pierce [10.2 Wins Produced, 0.161 WP48]

PF: Kevin Garnett [11.6 Wins Produced, 0.314 WP48]

C: Kendrick Perkins [5.0 Wins Produced, 0.106 WP48]

Potential Second String

PG: Eddie House [4.7 Wins Produced, 0.154 WP48]

SG: Tony Allen [1.6 Wins Produced, 0.088 WP48]

SF: Marquis Daniels [0.3 Wins Produced, 0.009 WP48]

PF: Glen Davis [-2.5 Wins Produced, -0.074 WP48]

C: Rasheed Wallace [3.2 Wins Produced, 0.073 WP48]

If we focus our attention on Boston’s starting line-up, and the numbers these players posted last year, we have to believe this team is capable of winning another title.  All five starters were above average in 2008-09, and both Rondo and Garnett were three times better than an average player last season (which is really, really good).

Unfortunately there are two other sets of numbers that cast doubt on this plan. The first set of numbers involves age.  The Celtics success depends on Ray Allen (34 years old), Paul Pierce (32 years old), Kevin Garnett (33 years old), Eddie House (31 years old), and Rasheed Wallace (35 years old).  Last season these players produced 40.3 wins and posted a collective 0.171 WP48.  Given the age of these players, one can expect the per-minute production we observed last season to decline.

Certainly one expects Doc Rivers to limit the minutes of these players.  But that means giving the bench players even more time.  And hence we turn to the second set of numbers that raise concerns.  After we get past the formidable starting line-up, the Celtics don’t have much.  Yes, the Celtics added Rasheed Wallace.  But the team lost Leon Powe (0.187 WP48 last season).  So it’s not necessarily the case that Rasheed makes the Celtics bench much better. 

Of course, if Garnett can play the entire season, that bench may not be needed as much as it was last year.  And that’s essentially the key to the entire season.  Garnett and the other aging Celtics simply have to play and be productive.  If that happens, the Celtics can contend. If that doesn’t happen, then Boston once again falters.

My sense is that this is well understood.  Garnett is clearly the key to Boston’s chances.

That being said, I do want to address the possibility that Rasheed can be KG insurance (which some — although perhaps not many — might think is possible).

As noted, Rasheed is now 35 years old. Across his 14 seasons he has produced 68.0 Wins Produced and posted a 0.096 WP48.  Average WP48 is 0.100, so Rasheed – despite his reputation – has essentially been an average player across his entire career.  Yes, he’s capable of being above average.  But at his age, the Celtics will be fortunate if he just reaches his career mark in 2009-10.

Turnign to KG…. Garnett was taken with the 5^th pick in the 1995 draft, right after Rasheed was chosen with the fourth pick.  Across the next 14 seasons, Garnett produced 272.6 wins and posted a 0.330 WP48.  Yes, the difference between KG and Wallace is vast.

Like Wallace, Garnett was below his career average last season. And like Wallace, KG might have trouble getting back to his career mark in 2009-10. For Boston to win again, though, KG has to do more than get back on the floor.  He has to produce at a level near his career average.  If that happens, the Celtics can challenge for another title. 

If that doesn’t happen, though, Boston’s players are going to age another year.  And that mean the Celtics are that much closer to blowing up this particular title team up and re-building (a reality that Father Time will impose upon this franchise sooner or later).

- 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

Wins Produced vs. Win Score

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.

The Detroit Lions – my team – have finally won.  And although this makes Lions fans very happy (and I am one of these), I want to spend some time today drawing attention to a more serious issue.  Specifically, there’s a case involving the NFL currently before the Supreme Court.  As Lestor Munson of ESPN.com argued, if the NFL wins this case life might change quite dramatically for sports fans.  It certainly will get much more expensive. 

A number of economists who specialize in the study of sports are doing their part to stop the NFL. For that story, I am going to borrow the commentary of Brad Humphreys (posted on Friday at the Sports Economist).

Earlier this week I described the American Needle v. NFL case that will soon be argued before the Supreme Court. The most recent filing in the case is an amicus curiae brief filed by a group of sports economists (including TSE co-bloggers Berri, Coates, Fort, Szymanski and yours truly). The brief rebuts many of the arguments made by the NFL, and points out in detail exactly how a ruling in favor of the NFL will result in a loss of consumer welfare.

From the introduction:

Our principal conclusion is that economic research provides a clear basis for distinguishing between collaborative activities among members of a league that enhance economic efficiency and benefit consumers from collusive activities that are not essential for the efficient operation of a league and that benefit league members by reducing competition among teams. We believe that a ruling that any sports league is a single entity in which teams cannot engage in anticompetitive collaboration in “core venture functions” is inconsistent with the consensus among economists about the efficient scope of league authority and the nature of competition in professional sports.
As citizens and professional economists, we have a substantial interest in fostering the appropriate use of economics in antitrust and in assuring that the economic assumptions that guide decisions in antitrust litigation do not conflict with the consensus from economics research both generally and with respect to professional team sports. The NFL Respondents highlight our interest in this matter by referring to their preferred approach to the single entity concept as “a more nuanced, economics-based approach.”

Roger Noll was the driving force behind the brief. Here is a link to the brief.

Just to summarize…

The NFL is trying to give itself immunity to anti-trust laws.  Such a ruling would apply to all professional sports. If that happens, sports fans can probably expect to spend far more money.  Yes, this prospect is quite serious.  Hopefully, though, the Supreme Court will not side with the NFL.

- DJ

The WoW Journal Comments Policy

The Knicks have finally re-signed David Lee and Nate Robinson.  As Table One indicates, these two players were responsible for nearly two-thirds of the Knicks victories last year.  So without Lee and Robinson in 2009-10, the Knicks season could look fairly bleak.

Table One: The New York Knicks in 2008-09

The Knicks in 2009-10

The difficulty of life without Lee and Robinson can be understood by examining the Knicks potential depth chart (revised from ESPN.com).

Potential First String

PG: Chris Duhon [5.5 Wins Produced, 0.090 WP48]

SG: Larry Hughes [2.0 Wins Produced, 0.064 WP48]

SF: Wilson Chandler [1.0 Wins Produced, 0.018 WP48]

PF: David Lee [14.1 Wins Produced, 0.240 WP48]

C: Eddy Curry [-1.9 Wins Produced, -0.060 WP48 in 2007-08]

Potential Second String

PG: Nate Robinson [6.7 Wins Produced, 0.146 WP48]

SG: Gabe Pruitt [0.2 Wins Produced, 0.027 WP48]

SF: Danilo Gallinari [0.7 Wins Produced, 0.084 WP48]

PF: Al Harrington [0.0 Wins Produced, 0.000 WP48]

C: Darko Milicic [1.1 Wins Produced, 0.052 WP48]

In addition to these players, the Knicks also have Jared Jeffries [SF, 0.9 Wins Produced, 0.034 WP48], and two first round draft picks (Jordan Hill and Toney Douglas).  Both draft picks, though, were below average college performers last year (relative to other players who were drafted).  This was a point made explicitly about Jordan Hill before the draft.

It has been reported that the contract Lee signed called for a million dollar bonus if the Knicks made the playoffs.  Looking at the past performance of the players currently on the Knicks roster reveals that there’s little reason to believe the outcome in 2009-10 will be much different from what was seen in 2008-09.  The two most productive players will probably still be Lee and Robinson.  After these two players, everyone else is still below average.   And this means that Lee shouldn’t count on getting his playoff bonus.

One senses, though, that this is understood by everyone. The Knicks didn’t really do much this summer to alter their roster.  Of the 11 veteran players listed above, only Gabe Pruitt and Darko Milicic were not on the roster last season.  Yes, Eddy Curry, Larry Hughes, and Danilo Gallinari might be available the entire season.  But given the past performance of these players, the only player one can expect to be above average next year is Gallinari; and that assumes that he gets better in his second season. 

So what are the Knicks trying to accomplish? Looking at HoopsHype we see that the Knicks will be very far beneath the salary cap next summer. Preserving that salary cap space appeared to be the number one goal the Knicks had at the beginning of this summer.  And it appears that goal was accomplished.

Throwing the Season Away

Unfortunately, this means the Knicks are essentially throwing away the 2009-10 season.  The team will still play and people will still pay significant dollars to watch.  But the team is not making much effort to contend this season.

All of this illustrates the observation that hope does not spring eternal in basketball.  At the onset of the season in the NFL and MLB, each team can – at least momentarily – envision a scenario where their team contends for the playoffs. This vision became reality for the Detroit Tigers and quickly faded away for the Detroit Lions.  But the vision does exist for everyone at some point in baseball and football.    In basketball, though, this is not always the case. Player performance is far more consistent in the NBA.  So if your team did not contend last year, and little was done to make the roster better, then your team will probably fail to contend this year.

So now fans of the Knicks are in the odd position of just waiting for an entire season to end.  When the 2009-10 season is over, most of the players who are currently with the Knicks will depart.  The Knicks will then enter the free agent market and hope someone takes their dollars.  Ideally that someone will be LeBron James.  Of course, that’s also the dream of a number of other teams.  After LeBron, the Knicks might also focus on Dwyane Wade or Chris Bosh. 

Although one suspects the Knicks will focus on the big names, New York shouldn’t ignore David Lee.  Although Bosh is a bigger name, Lee has actually been a more productive player.  In Bosh’s first six seasons he has posted the following numbers: 51.7 Wins Produced and 0.152 WP48 [with a high of 0.210 WP48 in 2006-07].  In four seasons, Lee has produced 47.3 wins with a 0.283 WP48 [with a low of 0.197 in 2005-06].  In sum, Lee does more than Bosh.  And he will probably be cheaper. 

Of course, all of this can be discussed throughout the season.  And given the scarcity of wins, who the Knicks will sign next summer might be the only worthwhile discussion for fans of this team.

Let me close with one last note on next summer’s draft.  As noted the Knicks are probably not going to be in the playoffs.  Normally this means the Knicks will also get a lottery pick next summer.  That pick, though, is currently held by the Utah Jazz (and it is unprotected).  Isiah Thomas traded that pick away to acquire Stephon Marbury.  Not sure fans of the Knicks regard this trade as a wise move today, but regardless, that pick is now gone. 

One should emphasize, though, that the recent history of this team suggests lottery picks are not very helpful.  Remember, this team took Channing Frye, Danilo Gallinari, and Jordan Hill in the lottery.  The choice of Frye clearly didn’t work out.  Although it’s possible Gallinari and Hill will become productive NBA players, it seems unlikely that these players will produce at the level of David Lee.  So perhaps it’s a good idea the Knicks lost the 2010 lottery pick.  At least, that’s one more story Knicks fans can tell as they witness the lost 2009-10 season.

- 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

Wins Produced vs. Win Score

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.