What a difference a day made
Twenty-four little hours
Brought the sun and the flowers
Where there used to be rain

Okay, it’s actually snowing in Cedar City.  That aside, yesterday is a bit different from today. And it’s not just the weather that changed.  Yesterday I argued that Andrew Bynum isn’t quite back.  Then last night, Mr. Bynum scores 26 points (on just 18 field goal attempts) and grabs 15 rebounds.  His WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] for the game was 0.496.  And now his season mark is 0.229.  No, he isn’t quite back to what he was in 2007-08.  But after eight games, he’s clearly offering more than what we saw last year.

As a team, the Lakers also look better today. Prior to last night’s game the team’s efficiency differential was 5.4.  Today it’s 7.1, and Pau Gasol hasn’t played yet. 

So what’s the moral of the story?  Writing about stats and basketball before the first ten games has been played is a risky business (even if you are just looking at the generally consistent box score numbers).  One game can have a significant impact on your story.  Yesterday I argued that Bynum wasn’t really much different from what he was last year, and therefore, the Lakers had not really improved enough to repeat as champions. Today… well, Bynum is still not back to what he was in 2007-08 (unless he just keeps doing what he did last night).  But if I were a fan of the Lakers, I would certainly be a bit more optimistic.

- 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.

Andrew Bynum is apparently off to a great start in L.A.  After five games, Bynum is averaging 20.0 points and 10.6 rebounds per game.  This is important because the Lakers chances to repeat as champions depend a great deal on the play of Bynum.

To see this point, let’s look back on last season.  The Lakers won the NBA title in 2009, giving the world the impression that the Lakers were the best NBA team in 2008-09.  Although it’s true the Lakers should have been favored to defeat each team they faced in the 2009 playoffs, some good fortune allowed the Lakers to miss both the Celtics and Cavaliers in the playoffs.  Boston – because of Kevin Garnett’s injury – was defeated by the Orlando Magic.  And Orlando also upset the Cleveland Cavaliers.  As a consequence, the Lakers road to the title was made easier.

One would suspect that such good fortune wouldn’t be repeated in 2010.  For the Lakers to expect to repeat, they should have to field an even better team in 2009-10.  Unfortunately, the only significant move the Lakers made was essentially swapping Trevor Ariza for Ron Artest. And as noted before, this move probably didn’t make the Lakers any better.

Despite a failure to significantly alter their roster, many people still felt the Lakers were clearly the best team in the West and a good bet to repeat.  This position was based on the play of both Bynum and Jordan Farmar (the team’s back-up point guard).  The Lakers won a title in 2009 with both of these players offering substantially less than what they offered in 2007-08.  If Bynum and Farmar could return to what we saw two years ago, then the Lakers would improve enough to contend with any team in the West; as well as the Cavaliers, Celtics, and Magic.

Just to review, here is what Bynum and Farmer did two years ago:

Andrew Bynum [2007-08]: 0.358 WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes]

Jordan Farmar [2007-08]: 0.111 WP48

And here is what each player did last year:

Andrew Bynum [2008-09]: 0.158 WP48 in 1,446 minutes

Jordan Farmar [2008-09]: -0.035 WP48 in 1,192 minutes

Had each player maintained what he did in 2007-08, the Lakers – even without these two players logging any more time on the court – could have challenged the Chicago Bulls record of 72 regular season wins in 1995-96.  So if these two players could return to form, then the Lakers in 2009-10 would be a very good team indeed.

Seven games have now been played in 2009-10 and the Lakers are now 6-1.  The Lakers efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency), though, is only 5.4.  To put that in perspective, last year the team’s differential was 7.8.  So the Lakers – despite their record – haven’t looked as good as last year.  In fact, their current mark is consistent with a team that will win about 55 games.  Yes, this would be wonderful for the LA Clippers. But for the Lakers, 55 wins would be a great disappointment.

What about Bynum and Farmar?  Well, both have improved.  But despite the numbers reported at the start of this column, neither is back to what he was in 2007-08.  After seven games here is what each player has done:

Andrew Bynum after seven games (okay five games) in 2009-10: 0.181 WP48 in 200 minutes

Jordan Farmar after seven games in 2009-10: 0.063 WP48 in 199 minutes

What of the other players on the Lakers?

Here is what these players did last year:

First String

PG: Derek Fisher [2.6Wins Produced, 0.051 WP48]

SG: Kobe Bryant [15.0 Wins Produced, 0.244 WP48]

SF: Ron Artest [4.6 Wins Produced, 0.089 WP48]

PF: Pau Gasol [15.6 Wins Produced, 0.250 WP48]

C: Andrew Bynum [4.8 Wins Produced, 0.158 WP48]

Second String

PG: Jordan Farmar [-0.9 Wins Produced, -0.035 WP48]

SG: Sasha Vujacic [2.7 Wins Produced, 0.099 WP48]

SF: Luke Walton [2.2 Wins Produced, 0.091 WP48]

PF: Lamar Odom [10.6 Wins Produced, 0.220 WP48]

C: D.J. Mbenga [-1.5 Wins Produced, -0.084 WP48 for career]

And here is what everyone is doing this year:

First String

PG: Derek Fisher [199 Minutes, -0.024 WP48]

SG: Kobe Bryant [275 Minutes, 0.225 WP48]

SF: Ron Artest [260 Minutes, 0.123 WP48]

PF: Pau Gasol [injured]

C: Andrew Bynum [200 Minutes, 0.181 WP48]

Second String

PG: Jordan Farmar [199 Minutes, 0.063 WP48]

SG: Sasha Vujacic [55 Minutes, 0.048 WP48]

SF: Luke Walton [80 Minutes, 0.229 WP48]

PF: Lamar Odom [261 Minutes, 0.160 WP48]

C: D.J. Mbenga [82 Minutes, 0.183 WP48]

When we look over this roster we see that Kobe is still Kobe.  And Odom is still above average.  When Gasol finally returns, this will be a very good team.  But without Bynum returning to what we saw in 2007-08, I still don’t see how this team is much better than what we saw last year.  And I don’t think what we saw last year is going to be good enough to win the title in 2010.

Let me close by noting that the analysis of 2009-10 is obviously based on a very small sample size.  Bynum could change his overall performance with one great game (or decline quite a bit with one really bad performance).  So we shouldn’t behave like Jeff Bower – GM of the Hornets – and reach any strong conclusions from such a small sample.  All that’s being said at this point is that if people were hoping to see the Andrew Bynum from 2007-08, that Bynum hasn’t appeared yet (and of course, Bynum has already missed two games because of injury — which is a completely different story).

- 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.

Every once awhile a sports fan might notice that there is a world outside the games we watch and play.  And when we look we quickly notice one important difference between the “real world” and the wide world of sports. In the “real world” it’s hard to figure out who is responsible for the outcomes we observe.  For example, who should we blame for the government’s slow response to Katrina?  Every person asked claimed it was someone else’s responsibility.  Or consider the problems in the U.S. automobile industry?  Again, ask anyone and you are sure to learn it was someone else’s fault.

In sports, though, a person can’t so easily hide.  We know which team won and lost each contest.  And player statistics allow us to move from these team outcomes to the individual players.  As has been noted before, player statistics are specifically tracked so teams can assign responsibility (or blame, if you will) for outcomes to the individuals.

To illustrate, consider the Cleveland Cavaliers, a team that has a 4-3 record after seven games in 2009-10.  Before the season started Cleveland was considered a serious contender for the 2010 NBA title.  And if the Cavaliers finish with four wins in their final seven games, that dream can come true.  Such a mark at the start of the regular season, though, suggests trouble.

Cleveland’s efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency) of 4.9 is consistent with a team that will win about 53 games.  This is hardly the record of championship contender.  And when we look at the individual players we can see who is responsible for Cleveland’s struggles.

Let’s start this exercise with how Cleveland’s players performed last year:

First String

PG: Maurice Williams [7.1Wins Produced, 0.119 WP48]

SG: Delonte West [7.3 Wins Produced, 0.163 WP48]

SF: LeBron James [27.8 Wins Produced, 0.436 WP48]

PF: Anderson Varejao [8.1 Wins Produced, 0.168 WP48]

C: Shaquille O’Neal [7.9 Wins Produced, 0.167 WP48]

Second String

PG: Daniel Gibson [0.6 Wins Produced, 0.015 WP48]

SG: Anthony Parker [6.3 Wins Produced, 0.114 WP48]

SF: Jamario Moon [8.4 Wins Produced, 0.194 WP48]

PF: J.J. Hickson [1.0 Wins Produced, 0.070 WP48]

C: Zydrunas Ilgauskas [3.4 Wins Produced, 0.093 WP48]

As noted in the last post, this starting line-up has the potential to rank among best line-ups since 1981.  And the bench isn’t too bad, either.  At least, that’s what we would think looking at last year’s numbers.

Now let’s look at what these ten players have done this season.

 First String

PG: Maurice Williams [241 minutes, 0.023 WP48]

SG: Delonte West [94 minutes, 0.022 WP48]

SF: LeBron James [265 minutes, 0.448 WP48]

PF: Anderson Varejao [227 minutes, 0.286 WP48]

C: Shaquille O’Neal [178 minutes, 0.145 WP48]

Second String

PG: Daniel Gibson [155 minutes, 0.085 WP48]

SG: Anthony Parker [230 minutes, 0.026 WP48]

SF: Jamario Moon [71 minutes, 0.061 WP48]

PF: J.J. Hickson [54 minutes, -0.283 WP48]

C: Zydrunas Ilgauskas [154 minutes,-0.020 WP48]

With numbers in hand we can now assign responsibility.  Although this team is off to a less than thrilling start, it doesn’t look like we can blame LeBron James, Anderson Varejao, or Daniel Gibson.  Each of these players is actually doing more than he did last season.  And Shaquille O’Neal – who I think some people have blamed – is actually pretty close to what he did last season.  Given his age, that might be the best Cleveland fans can hope for.

When we look at the other six players, though, we see some players who have not produced at the level we saw last year.  Hickson and Ilgauskas – who were each below average last year – are now in the negative range.  Williams, West, Parker, and Moon – who were each above average last year – are now below average. 

It’s very important to note that three of these players have yet to play 100 minutes. So forecasting out of this sample is not something we should do.  The point of this exercise is to simply identify the specific players who have started slowly.  And that exercise says LeBron, Varejao, Gibson, and Shaq (at least, given his age) are doing fine.  The other six players, though, need to step it up if the Cavaliers are going to truly contend this season.

Let me close by noting a problem with a record from the start of the season.  Had the Cavaliers started 29-5, and then won only four of their next seven games, Cleveland fans wouldn’t notice much.  The team would be 33-8 and still on pace to win 66 games.  But when the team starts 4-3, it becomes hard to imagine that a 29-5 run is just around the corner. Given what these players did last year, though, it’s possible for Cleveland to start winning much more frequently.  In sum, in a few months this November record might be a very distant memory.  And all those players we are blaming today might once again be celebrated in Cleveland.  

 - 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 Wall Street Journal reported the top five starting line-ups – in terms of average WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] – since 1981-82.  Here are the top 25 across the same time period:

1. Utah Jazz [1996-97]: 0.238 WP48, 9.39 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 6]

2. Chicago Bulls [1995-96]: 0.236 WP48, 13.00 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 1]

3. Chicago Bulls [1996-97]: 0.221 WP48, 11.61 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 2]

4. LA Lakers [1984-85]: 0.219 WP48, 6.90 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 53]

5. Boston Celtics [1986-87]: 0.217 WP48, 6.50 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 68]

6. Utah Jazz [1998-99]: 0.216 WP48, 7.15 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 44]

7. Phoenix Suns [1992-93]: 0.216 WP48, 6.46 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 69]

8. Boston Celtics [2007-08]: 0.215 WP48, 10.95 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 3]

9. Boston Celtics [2008-09]: 0.214 WP48, 8.02 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 23]

10. Portland Trail Blazers [1990-91]: 0.213 WP48, 8.26 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 18]

11. Orlando Magic [1995-96]: 0.211 WP48, 5.82 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 92]

12. Boston Celtics [1987-88]: 0.210 WP48, 5.86 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 90]

13. LA Lakers [1985-86]: 0.208 WP48, 7.25 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 39]

14. Boston Celtics [1985-86]: 0.208 WP48, 8.94 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 10]

15. San Antonio Spurs [1993-94]: 0.206 WP48, 5.62 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 100]

16. LA Lakers [1986-87]: 0.205 WP48, 8.85 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 11]

17. San Antonio Spurs [1991-92]: 0.204 WP48, 3.32 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 200]

18. LA Lakers [1999-00]: 0.204 WP48, 8.84 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 12]

19. Seattle Super Sonics [1995-96]: 0.203 WP48, 8.01 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 24]

20. Orlando Magic [1994-95]: 0.203 WP48, 7.10 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 45]

21. Dallas Mavericks [2006-07]: 0.203 WP48, 7.81 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 28]

22. Chicago Bulls [1990-91]: 0.203 WP48, 9.20 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 8]

23. Houston Rockets [1996-97]: 0.202 WP48, 4.69 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 130]

24. Phoenix Suns [1989-90]: 0.200 WP48, 6.78 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 58]

25. Phoenix Suns [2007-08]: 0.200 WP48, 5.09 Eff. Dif. [Rank: 115]

The above list reports both the starter’s (top five players in games started) average WP48 as well as the team’s efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency).  Across the 759 teams that have played from 1981-82 to 2008-09, these two numbers have a 0.88 correlation.  So the quality of your starter’s isn’t everything, but it’s something.

The Wall Street Journal reported that the starters for the Boston Celtics in 2009-10 [Rajon Rondo, Ray Allen, Paul Pierce, Kevin Garnett] would rank 9^th on this list (with a mark of 0.214). What about some other teams this year?

So far the Cleveland Cavaliers have primarily started the following quintet: Maurice Williams, Anthony Parker, LeBron James, Anderson Varejao, Shaquille O’Neal.  Last year these five players had an average WP48 of 0.201.  And if you replace Parker with Delonte West, the average rises to 0.211 (a mark that ranks in the top 15^th).

As noted, it was the LA Lakers that inspired this story. The Lakers starting line-up of Derek Fisher, Kobe Bryant, Ron Artest, Lamar Odom, Andrew Bynum only averaged a 0.153 WP48.  If you replace Odom with Pau Gasol this average rises to 0.159.  And if Bynum returns to what we saw in 2007-08 [0.358 WP48], then the average rises to 0.199 WP48. 

So it’s possible that the Celtics, Cavaliers, and Lakers could field starting line-ups that will crack the top 25 (or come close).  Of course, all of this is based on last year’s numbers.  And although last year’s numbers are linked to what we see this year, player performance is not constant. So these starting line-ups may be better — or worse — than what is reported above; and we won’t have enough data to see where each team is at for a few more weeks.

The NBA often says it cares.  But if it really cared, the NBA would solve our data shortage by scheduling games a bit faster at the start of the season.  How about double-headers?  They do it in baseball.  And if they had a few of these at the start of the NBA season we could get the data we need to answer our questions so much quicker.

Until something like that happens (as if it would), we are left with the limited data we see in November. So look for a few more “Lawson” posts until this season really gets going.

- 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.