There is one certainty in sports.  For every athlete, a day will come when a player’s production declines.  The decline doesn’t always happen in a consistent pattern (i.e. ups and downs are still possible at an advanced age).  And significant drop-offs don’t happen at the same age for every player.  All we know is that someday, every athlete stops helping.*

To illustrated, consider the WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] marks Kareem Abdul-Jabbar posted after the age of 30.

30: 0.394

31: 0.348

32: 0.340

33: 0.274

34: 0.206

35: 0.182

36: 0.143

37: 0.225

38: 0.145

39: 0.115

40: 0.045

41: -0.056

An average player posts a WP48 of 0.100.  Kareem was three times the average player prior to 33 years of age.  He was still twice the average player before age 35.  At the age of 36 his WP48 numbers were still above average, but clearly Kareem was no longer outstanding.

But then at age 37, Kareem was suddenly twice the average again. This spike, though, was temporary. His performance at age 38 looked quite similar to what we saw at age 36. And at age 39 he was just barely above average.  In his last season – at age 41 – Kareem’s performance dipped into the negative range.  Yes, one of the greatest centers to play the game was suddenly reduced to Spencer Hawes (Hawes posted a -0.021 WP48 last season) once he passed 40 years of age. 

Now let’s consider the WP48 numbers of Shaquille O’Neal after the age of 30.

30: 0.321

31: 0.287

32: 0.292

33: 0.220

34: 0.106

35: 0.116

36: 0.167

Like Kareem, Shaq entered his 30s as a player producing at a rate well beyond what we see from an average player.  By his mid-30s, though, Shaq was no longer the same player.  Yes, he was still above average.  But the 20-something Shaq that dominated the NBA had vanished.

Although Shaq has clearly declined, the Cleveland Cavaliers still took a chance on acquiring his services.  This chance was motivated by the age and health-status of Ben Wallace.  Last season Big Ben posted a 0.159 WP48.  But his health limited his availability in the regular season and his production in the playoffs. 

So this past summer, Wallace was sent to the Phoenix Suns for Shaq.  It was suspected that Big Ben would retire.  But after being released by Phoenix, Big Ben signed with the Pistons and is now leading Detroit in Wins Produced.

Meanwhile, the Cavaliers decided to take a chance on Shaq.  Yes, it’s likely that people in Cleveland knew that “someday” O’Neal would stop helping.  But it was hoped that “someday” would happen after the 2009-10 season (and after a championship parade in Cleveland).

Unfortunately, there’s evidence that “someday” is happening in Cleveland. 

Table One: The Cleveland Cavaliers after 22 games in 2009-10

Table One reports the Wins Produced of the Cleveland Cavaliers after 22 games.  In addition, it reports what we could have expected from this team had player performance not changed from what we saw last season.  With respect to most players, the assumption of constant performance doesn’t lead us too far astray.  There are, though, two notable exceptions. 

Before getting to Shaq, let’s talk about Zydrunas Ilgauskas.  Last year, Ilgauskas posted a 0.093 WP48 [a mark very close to average]. This season – at the age of 34 – Ilgauskas is posting a -0.051 WP48.  Yes, Ilgauskas is now a 41 year-old Kareem.  Consequently, Ilgauskas is on pace to produce 5.5 fewer wins than what his performance last year would suggest.

For much of his career, Ilgauskas has been an above average (i.e. WP48 in excess of 0.100) but not outstanding performer (i.e. WP48 less than 0.200).  As noted above, though, Shaq has often been amazing.  And even as age has taken its toll, he has still maintained an above average WP48 mark.

At least, until the 2009-10 season began.  Shaq’s WP48 mark this season has only been 0.017.  So at the age of 37, Shaq is a bit worse than the 40-year old Kareem. 

Again, the impact of age is not constant.  So it’s possible Shaq – and Ilgauskas – will bounce back.  But if they don’t, the Cavaliers are simply not going to be what I envisioned before the season started. 

As Table One notes, had everyone maintained what we saw last year, the Cavs would currently be on pace to win 69.3 wins.  Such a record would make the Cavs a clear contender to win a title (which is what I suggested before the season started).  The declines we see with respect to Shaq and Ilgauskas, though, takes 10 wins off of the Cavs projected totals. And that clearly drops the Cavs behind the Celtics and Lakers.

Let me close with two observations.  First – as Table Two suggests – the problems for O’Neal and Ilgauskas are primarily related to shooting efficiency.  Most other numbers for these players haven’t changed from last year.  But shooting efficiency from the field – and for Shaq, also from the line – has declined for both players. And consequently, overall productivity has declined considerably.

Table Two: Shaquille O’Neal and Zydrunas Ilgauskas

Secondly, some people might remember that I have already commented on the Cavaliers troubles.  This first comment, though, came after just seven games (so the sample was even smaller than what we have today).  And at that time, Shaq was playing better (although Ilgauskas was still very bad).  Since that time, though, Shaq has missed time due to injury.  Of course, injuries are part of the problem of age.  But if Shaq can recover and start producing at the level we saw last year, Cleveland can get better.  If not, a season of promise in Cleveland may end up a very big disappointment.

- DJ

* – we talk about age and performance in the NBA in more detail in our next book.

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.

Carmelo Anthony got off to a very fast start this season.  His performance across his first two games led Henry Abbott – of TrueHoop – to post the following: Carmelo Anthony’s trainer on his MVP-caliber client.  Abbott’s interview with Melo’s trainer explained how Anthony’s game has changed and why he was the league’s MVP (in the view of his trainer). 

The words MVP and Carmelo once again were heard when Melo scored 50 points – including two clinching free throws — against the New York Knicks towards the end of November.   After this game, Chauncey Billups – the starting point guard on the Denver Nuggets – noted the following: “‘Melo is one of the best players in the world. If you’ve got him going like that, then you’ve got to ride him.”

Anthony entered the league in 2003.  Across his first six seasons he has not exactly been part of the MVP conversations.  Last season he received no votes for the award.  And in 2007-08 he only received one 4^th place vote – and this was his best career finish.

This season, though, seems different.  Melo currently leads the NBA in scoring.  And the Nuggets – as Table One reports – currently ranks 3^rd in the NBA in efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency).  In fact, Denver is one of only three teams (after Boston and the LA Lakers) who are on pace to win 60 games this season. 

Table One: Efficiency Differentials after 25% of the 2009-10 Season

There are two factors that appear to dominate voting for the MVP award: Scoring and Team Wins.  Since Melo leads in scoring – and he plays for one of the league’s top teams – he must be part of the conversation. Right?

Well, maybe not.  For Melo to be MVP in 2009-10 he should – at the very least – be clearly better than LeBron James (the 2009 MVP).  We know Carmelo is scoring more points.   And as Table One reports, the Nuggets are doing better than the Cavaliers (a story for another day).  So in terms of scoring and team wins, Anthony is the better player.  But when we look at all the individual statistics – reported in Table Two – we see that King James is clearly doing more than Melo this season.

Table Two: Comparing LeBron James and Carmelo Anthony in 2009-10

The key differences can be seen with respect to shooting efficiency, rebounds, and assists.  When we turn to Wins Produced and WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] we can see the size of the difference.  As of the games played on December 8, LeBron has posted a 0.396 WP48 and is on pace to produce 25.4 wins.  Meanwhile, Melo is posting a 0.188 WP48 – and if this performance continues – will produce 10.4 wins by the time the season ends.  Yes, Anthony is above average.  But when we look at everything it’s clear that King James is still King (at least in a kingdom of James and Anthony).

Okay, what if we shift our focus to the Nuggets?  Denver currently is posting a 7.36 efficiency differential.  If this mark continues it will be the best the Nuggets have ever done as an NBA team.  So the Nuggets – who reached the conference finals last season – have clearly improved.  But can we attribute this change to Melo?

For an answer we turn to Table Three (wow, three tables in one post).

Table Three: The Denver Nuggets in 2009-10 After 22 Games

Table Three reports what Denver’s players have done this season.  It also reports what the Nuggets could have expected given what their players did in 2008-09.  As one can see, Denver has improved by about seven wins.   Most of this improvement can be tied to the play of Nene Hilario.  Although Hilario is scoring less (due to declines in shot attempts and shooting efficiency), he has improved with respect to rebounds, steals, assists, turnovers, and personal fouls.   And this means Hilario is on pace to produce about five more wins than his performance last year would suggest. 

Not only is Hilario the most improved on this team, he is currently leading the Nuggets in Wins Produced.  Second on the team – although just barely – is Chauncey Billups.  And that means, Melo – the player some think is the best player in the league (and the player Billups thinks is one of the best in the world) – is currently only third on the Nuggets in Wins Produced. 

So is Melo MVP?  If we define this award in terms of scoring and team wins, Anthony has a case.  But if we define this in terms of a player’s contribution to wins, Anthony isn’t even MVP on his own team.

Let me close by noting the play of Ty Lawson.  Currently Lawson is posting a 0.189 WP48 and is on pace to 6.9 wins.   Such production surpasses what we see from Jonny Flynn, Brandon Jennings (yes, Jennings had dropped off quite a bit), and Jrue Holiday (all point guards taken before Lawson).  But all of this is also a story for another day.

- 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.

Soon after the 2009 free agent market opened the Detroit Pistons made a huge splash, giving $100 million to Ben Gordon and Charlie Villanueva.  At the time this deal was announced I – as a lifetime fan of this team (with a wonderful team banner on my office wall) – offered a quick response: Ugh!

To understand this response, let’s look at the career numbers for Gordon and Villanueva:

Gordon’s Wins Produced = 15.3

Gordon’s WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] = 0.059

Villanueva’s Wins Produced = 11.2

Villanueva’s WP48 = 0.074

An average player posts a 0.100 WP48, so both Gordon and Villanueva had career numbers that were below average.  Given such numbers, Detroit’s $100 million investment was unlikely to generate the return the Pistons envisioned.

Well, we are now 20 games into the Gordon-Villanueva era.  And the early returns – despite winning three of the last four games – are still “Ugh”.

Table One reports what the Pistons have done – with respect to Wins Produced and WP48 – after 20 games.

Table One: The Detroit Pistons After 20 Games in 2009-10

The Pistons’ efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency) is currently -2.0.  This mark – and the team’s Wins Produced – suggests the Pistons will win 36 games this season (assuming – incorrectly – that minutes played stay the same the rest of the year).  As Table One indicates, about 7.7 of these wins can be traced to the production of Gordon and Villanueva.  More importantly, Gordon’s WP48 is 0.084 while Villanueva’s WP48 stands at 0.073.  Yes, the $100 million players are still below average.

The good news is that Ben Wallace – after three years away from the Motor City – has returned.  And his productivity – after years of injuries – is quite impressive for a 35-year old player.  As Table One reports, Big Ben’s WP48 is currently 0.281 and his projected Wins Produced stands at 14.8. 

Here is what was reported when Wallace was signed for $1.3 million last August:

In Detroit, the Pistons plan on using Wallace as a backup to Kwame Brown. The Pistons were especially thin on their front line last season and still believe that Wallace can defend and rebound — albeit not at the same pace as his last stint with the Pistons.

Although it may have been the plan to have Wallace come off the bench, that’s not what happened.  Big Ben has started all twenty games, and his productivity – although not quite what he did last time he was in Detroit (0.332 WP48 in 2005-06) – is simply amazing for an old basketball player.

Again, this is not what the Pistons expected.  And if we subtract Wallace’s projected productivity from the rest of Detroit’s roster we see a collection of players that are only expected to produced 21.3 wins.  In sum, without Big Ben – a player who was not expected to play much or play this well — Detroit would be very bad.

Fans of the Pistons (not this fan, but perhaps other fans) might note that so far Tayshaun Prince and Richard Hamilton haven’t played much.  Last year, though, Hamilton was below average (WP48 of 0.052).  And although Prince was above average (WP48 of 0.122), he only produced 7.8 wins.  In sum, even with Prince and Hamilton the Pistons wouldn’t be that good.

Of course, in the Eastern Conference – where the list of truly good teams only includes Boston, Cleveland, Orlando, and Atlanta – “not that good” might still be good enough for the playoffs.   But for $100 million, the Pistons fans probably expect a team that can seriously contend in the East.  And the signings of Gordon and Villanueva – as expected – are probably not going to make that happen.  So for this Pistons fan, “Ugh!” is still the word.

- 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.

My latest post for Huffington Post Sports is a comment on the latest injury suffered by Greg Oden. Here is how this column begins:

The most coveted player in the 2007 NBA draft was Greg Oden. The elation of the draft, though, has been followed by much disappointment. An injury cost Oden his entire rookie season. Last year he was only healthy enough to play 1,314 minutes across 61 games. So after two years, Oden hadn’t played much. And now, after just 21 games, he’s going to miss the entire 2009-10 season.

The fact that Oden hasn’t played is certainly disappointing. But a more important question is how much it matters that Oden isn’t going to play anymore this year. And that question depends upon how well Oden has performed.

Oden averages less than 24 minutes per game. So his per game statistics (i.e. point scored, rebounds, etc…) don’t look very impressive. When we turn to per-minute performance – or per-48 minutes performance – Oden’s impact is far more striking. Read the rest at Huffington Post Sports…

The primary purpose of this post was to highlight how well Oden had played this season (to see how good Oden has been, please read the post).  Certainly it’s possible that the Blazers could overcome this loss.  But it seems fairly likely that Portland’s season is not going to go quite as well as I thought earlier this year. 

And I should add – as others have noted – the Blazers franchise seems cursed.  First it was Bill Walton (see Is it Teamwork? A History Lesson).  Then we see the story of Sam Bowie (see A Little Bit of Hindsight Bias: Reviewing the Drafting of Sam Bowie).  And now we have the story of Greg Oden.  Although all of this is just a coincidence, one suspects that any highly touted center drafted by the Trail Blazers in the future is going to be more than just a bit concerned about starting his career in Portland.

- 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.