According to Adrian Wojnarowski (of Yahoo! Sports), Pau Gasol isn’t happy.  Gasol seems to think the Kobe Bryant is taking too many shots.  Or more specifically, Gasol is not taking enough.

The Focus on Scoring Leads to Frustration

When we look at the data, we see that Gasol has a point.  His per-game scoring average is at an all-time low. Kobe Bryant is also taking nearly 10 more field goal attempts per game than Gasol.  And since scoring is the primary focus in the NBA, Gasol is now bemoaning his lack of touches.

Of course, one wonders if NBA players shouldn’t be able to focus on more than scoring.  After all, a player’s impact on wins is about more than his points scored per game.  As Table One reveals, when we look at everything in the box score, Gasol should be very happy.  His WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] currently stands at 0.287.  In contrast, Kobe’s mark is only 0.185. So when we look beyond scoring, Gasol is doing more.  Yet, Gasol is unhappy.

Table One: The LA Lakers after 66 games in 2009-10

This story highlights a problem with player evaluation in the NBA.  Because so much attention is paid to scoring (and we see this when we look at the pay of free agents, voting for the All-Rookie team, allocation of minutes, and the NBA draft) players tend to obsess on their own shot attempts.  And when those shots don’t happen with the frequency the players prefer, unhappiness and resentment is the result.

The obvious solution to this problem is to teach players like Gasol that their impact goes beyond scoring.  Coaches often try to teach this lesson.  Much of what the players hear — and how players are rewarded — contradicts this story.  Consequently, Kobe is considered one of the greatest players to ever play the game. And Gasol keeps expressing his frustration.

The Greatness of Kobe

Recently a few of the comments in this forum have once again focused on the issue of Kobe’s greatness.  Many people who comment here (and this is not a surprise), question the notion that Kobe is equal – or even close – to Michael Jordan.  Some have also wondered where Kobe ranks in NBA history.

In an effort to address that issue, let’s consider Table Two.

Table Two: The Best Performance by a Shooting Guard from 1977-78 to 2008-09

Table Two reports the 50 best performances – in terms of Wins Produced — by a shooting guard in the since the 1977-78 season.  As one can see, the top seven slots in the list are held by Michael Jordan.  And Kobe’s very best season doesn’t appear until the 27^th slot.   In all, Kobe appears three times on the list while MJ shows up 10 times.  So Jordan was much better than Kobe.  And really, the difference is very large (a point made back in 2007).

Kobe is also not number two on the list.  Clyde Drexler appears four times before Kobe shows up the first time.  Overall, eight of Drexler’s seasons rank in the top 50 overall. 

When we look at career Wins Produced, we see – as the following list indicates — that Kobe currently ranks 4^th among shooting guards who started their career after 1977. 

• Michael Jordan: 283.6
• Clyde Drexler: 222.8
• Reggie Miller: 162.9
• Kobe Bryant: 149.0

Again, the difference between Kobe and MJ is huge (and Kobe is never going to close the difference).  It does seem likely, though, that Kobe will surpass Reggie Miller.  But he needs to produce more than 60 additional wins to catch Drexler.  And Kobe is already 31 years old.  Yes, MJ did produce more than 70 wins after the age of 31.  But as has already been noted, Kobe is no MJ; and it doesn’t look like Kobe is Clyde the Glide either.

- 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.

After 41 games the Atlanta Hawks and Boston Celtics posted the following marks:

Atlanta: 27 wins, 5.9 efficiency differential (offensive efficiency – defensive efficiency)

Boston: 28 wins, 6.4 differential

In the 22 games since this midpoint (as of Wednesday night), both teams have – as the following numbers indicate – performed somewhat worse. 

Atlanta: 13 wins, 2.7 differential

Boston: 12 wins, 0.7 differential

Clearly both teams have declined relative to what we saw after 41 games.  So what’s the problem?

A non-statistical approach might look at factors like teamwork, defensive intensity, and chemistry.  Player statistics, though, allow us be a bit more definitive.  Specifically, statistics allow us to separate a player from his teammates.  And that allows us to assign responsibility for the outcome we observe.

Let’s start with the Atlanta Hawks.  Tables One-Two provides two perspectives on this team.

Tables One-Two: The Atlanta Hawks after 63 games in 2009-10

Table One reports what the players for the Hawks have done across the entire season.  In addition, we see what the veteran players did in 2008-09.  As one can see, the story told since early in the season remains the same. Josh Smith – who has improved with respect to shooting efficiency, rebounds, assists, steals, and blocked shots – has increased his WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] from 0.116 to 0.284.

And as Table Two reports, Josh Smith is even better in the second half.  Since the midpoint, Josh Smith has posted a 0.305 WP48.  When we look at the remainder of the roster, for the most part we don’t see substantial changes in Wins Produced.  The lone exceptions are seen with respect to the production of Al Horford and Mike Bibby.  It appears those two players are the most responsible for the Hawks second-half decline.

Now let’s look at the Celtics. Unlike the Hawks – who have improved in 2009-10 (thanks primarily to Josh Smith) – the Celtics are winning less than their 2008-09 performance would suggest.  The veterans performance in 2008-09 suggests the Celtics should have already won 52 games this season.  Much of the twelve game drop-off – as Table Three indicates – can be linked to the production of Ray Allen, Eddie House, and Rasheed Wallace (three relatively old players).

Tables Three-Four: The Boston Celtics after 63 games in 2009-10

Since the midpoint, this decline has quickened.  Again, the team has only posted a 12-10 record across the past 22 games.  Virtually all of these wins can be linked to the play of Rajon Rondo, Kevin Garnett, and surprisingly, Ray Allen (who is not quite what he was last year, but is now closer).  Although this trio has played well, Paul Pierce, Kendrick Perkins, and Rasheed Wallace are offering much less. 

One could speculate as to why we see such declines.  Possible explanations include the problems of a small sample (although 22 games isn’t that small of a sample), injury, or age.  The best source for such explanations should be the coaches watching the players every day.  Answering the question “how productive are these players?”  serves to focus the attention of these coaches.

In talking to people in sports, though, one senses an unwillingness to be so focused.  In other words, coaches and teammates seem unwiling to single out individual players. It simply seems easier for people associated with the Celtics to say “well, we need to do better as a team.”  This approach, though, isn’t very helpful.   The data suggests the problems for this team are really linked to just three players (and for the Hawks it’s just two players).  For the Celtics to return to what we saw in the first half of the season it seems likely that the three players identified – and especially Paul Pierce — are going to have to produce more.  Yes, Paul Pierce really deserves the most blame for what we have seen in Boston since the midpoint.

- 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.

David Biderman – of the Wall Street Journal – reports today on The Teams that Make the Nets Look Good.

Biderman’s story is based on the following question he asked me to consider:  Across the past 10 years, have their been other teams in professional sports as bad as the Nets?

To answer this question – as Biderman reports — I looked at how many standard deviations each team is below the average performance in the league.  For example, New Jersey’s current winning percentage of 0.111 is 2.4 standard deviations below the average mark of 0.500.  As Biderman notes, this marks actually trails the performance of the Detroit Tigers in 2003, the Atlanta Thrashers of 1999-00, the Kansas City Royals of 2005, and the Detroit Lions of 2008 (yes, two Detroit teams make this list).  So the Nets – by this measure – are indeed the worst team in the NBA across the past 10 years.  But they are not the worst team in professional sports.

The focus on standard deviations is necessary if one wishes to make comparisons across sports.  If one wishes to focus solely on the NBA, though, one can use a different measure that makes the Nets look slightly better.  New Jersey currently has an efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency) of -10.88.  Since 1973-74 (the first year one can calculate efficiency differential) the following teams have posted a differential below what we see from the current Nets.

• Dallas Mavericks [1992-93]: -14.70
• Denver Nuggets [1997-98]: -12.63
• LA Clippers [1999-2000]: -11.89
• Vancouver Grizzlies [1996-97]: -11.17
• Houston Rockets [1982-83]: -10.95

If we maintain our focus on the just the last 10 years, we see that only the Clippers of 1999-00 are doing worse.  So across the last decade – if we focus on efficiency differential – the Nets are only the second worse team in the NBA.

One might wonder how the Nets fell so far.  To address this issue we need to consider the performance of the individual players.  As Table One reports, the Nets do have four above average players this season (Brook Lopez, Kris Humphries, Josh Boone, Courtney Lee). None of these players, though, are far above the average WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] mark of 0.100.  And nine players employed by the Nets this season have posted WP48 marks in the negative range.

Table One: The New Jersey Nets after 63 games in 2009-10

If we look at how the veterans this team has employed performed last year, we see this team shouldn’t be this bad. The team’s current efficiency differential (and Wins Produced) is consistent with a team that should have already won 10 games (so the Nets won-loss record is a bit misleading).  The 2008-09 performance of these veterans, though, suggests this team should have already won 20 games. 

When we look at the individual players we see that much of the team’s decline is tied to the play of Rafer Alston, Devin Harris, and Keyon Dooling.  What do these players have in common?  All three log time at the point guard position.  So that one position has been the reason why the Nets have moved from “bad” to “all-time horrible.”

Let me close by noting – as the following list indicates — that this is the fifth time Biderman and the Wall Street Journal have referenced my work in recent months. 

Shooting Guards are Getting ‘Short’-Changed

After Age 25, It’s All Downhill for NBA Players

In the NHL, More Dollars Equals More Wins

Few Starting Lineups Could Top These Celtics

The sports section at the Wall Street Journal has focused tremendously on how numbers inform our understanding of sports.  So if you are interested in this aspect of sports (and since you are here I suspect you are), you might want to think about reading the WSJ sports section on a regular basis.

And one last note (this just came in as I wrote this post)… Martin Schmidt says a copy of Stumbling on Wins arrived in the mail today (I haven’t checked my mail yet).  The book is officially released on March 26, so it won’t be long until everyone is able to read our latest. 

- 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.

Here is a fictional story – by Jonathan Bertag – about the early professional career of Hasheem Thabeet.  Bertag tells the tale of Thabeet coming to the Grizzlies, meeting and becoming friends with Allen Iverson, and ultimately being sent to the Dakota Wizards.  Along the way, we see the hero of the story (Thabeet) attempt to defend his production via Wins Produced.  He even defends WP48 when his coach claims it’s not a sound method.

Again, the story is fictional.  But I found it interesting to see someone note that WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] does indicate that Thabeet is not quite as bad as people might think.  As the following table indicates, Thabeet is an average NBA center (WP48 of 0.100).  In fact, he is one of only three players on the Grizzlies who have been above average this year (of those who have played more than five minutes).

Table One: The Memphis Grizzlies after 64 games in 2009-10

Unfortunately, Thabeet is stuck behind Marc Gasol on the Memphis depth chart.  And Gasol has joined with Zach Randolph to produce around 70% of this team’s Wins Produced.  These two players are also entirely responsible for this team’s improvement over what we would expect given the performance of this team’s veterans in 2008-09.  In fact, once we get past Gasol, Randolph, and Thabeet, the remaining players on this team are on pace to produce fewer than 10 wins this season. 

Since Rudy Gay is part of this list of remaining players, it suggests Memphis should think again before re-signing Gay to a new contract.  It seems unlikely that Gay will produce wins at a level that would justify the kind of money people think a scorer like Gay is worth.  Unfortunately for Memphis fans, Michael Heisley – the team’s owner – seems committed to bringing Gay back.

Heisley – in his defense — is also committed to bringing back Thabeet from the development league, and seeing that Thabeet actually plays in the NBA.  After six games in the D-League, Thabeet has posted a 16.3 Win Score per 48 minutes.  This is an above average mark for an NBA center, although it’s not clear how D-League numbers translate into the NBA.  Plus a sample of six is still too small. 

His NBA sample isn’t much better.  But this sample does suggest that Thabeet can contribute (although taking minutes from Gasol seems like a bad idea).    So the fictional Thabeet was correct in the reported conversation with his coach.  And if Thabeet does ultimately contribute, that will break the trend we see with draft picks in Memphis.

- 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 post on adjusted plus/minus involved an examination of Darious Songaila.  And that examination required that I look at the New Orleans Hornets this year.  It would be a shame to let this analysis go to waste.  So here is a brief post on the Hornets.

Let’s begin with the play of Darren Collison.  That story begins with Chris Paul.  CP3 was the MPP (Most Productive Player) in the NBA in 2008-09.  This year, though, he has been limited to 38 games.  So someone else (probably LeBron) will be the MPP this year.

Without Paul, the Hornets have turned to Collison.  As Mark Spears of Yahoo.com notes, Collison has been a pleasant surprise; averaging 18.5 points, 8.6 assists and 3.7 rebounds in 24 games as a starter. 

Collison – and this should not be surprising – is no CP3.  To see this, let’s look at the WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] numbers for the Hornets this season. 

Table One: The New Orleans Hornets after 63 games in 2009-10

As Table One reports, Paul has posted a 0.375 WP48 mark.  Collison – across the entire season – has only posted a 0.080 WP48.  So Collison has been below average in 2009-10.

Since the mid-season point (or the point where the Hornets had played 41 games), Collison has been better.  Across 819 minutes he has posted a 0.126 WP48 mark.  When we consider the fact that rookies tend to be below average, Collison has been very good.  Of course, “very good” is not as good as CP3.  So the Hornets are suffering some with Paul out of the line-up. 

Beyond the story of Collison, let me comment briefly on a couple of stories posted at Hornets247. 

Joe Gerrity has noted that Tyson Chandler played better than Emeka Okafor during each player’s first season with the Hornets.  Chandler posted a 0.301 WP48 for the Hornets  in 2006-07 (at the age of 24).  The next season his production declined to 0.244.  And in 2008-09, his WP48 mark fell to 0.078 (primarily due to injury).  Okafor is posting a 0.159 WP48 this season.  So relative to Chandler in 2006-07, Okafor is doing less. But relative to what the Hornets got last year, Okafor is an improvement.

Marcus Thornton is also a step-up for New Orleans.  Last year, Rasual Butler posted a 0.077 WP48.  This season, Thornton is posting a 0.078 WP48.  Okay, not much of a step-up.  But that analysis is for the entire season.  If we focus on performance since the midpoint, Thornton’s WP48 mark is 0.144. 

So it looks like the Hornets – despite the acquisition of Songaila – did make a few good moves last summer.  And when Chris Paul comes back, New Orleans might have enough to be a very average playoff team in the Western Conference. Yes, it will take something more for the Hornets to rise to be a serious contender for an NBA title.

- 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.