Jamie Vann Struth is an economist based in Vancouver, BC. He owns an economic development consulting firm and crunches sports statistics for fun. His history with the Grizzlies goes back to the beginning, when they were born in 1995 at the exact time that he arrived in Vancouver to attend graduate school at Simon Fraser University. He has continued to follow the Grizzlies in Memphis and waits patiently for the NBA’s inevitable return to Vancouver.

This is part one of a two-part post on the Memphis Grizzlies.  In this first part, Jamie will review the 2009-10 season. In part two, he will address the progress of the team’s young players and whether or not the Grizzlies should re-sign Rudy Gay.

The Memphis Grizzlies appeared to take a major step forward in 2009-10, adding 16 wins to their total and nearly reaching the .500 mark with a record of 40-42. Only the Oklahoma City Thunder, with a 27-win improvement, made a bigger step. 

The Grizzlies’ appear to have made significant progress in Year Two of owner Michael Heisley’s Three-Year Plan to achieve playoff contention. Was this improvement expected, and does it foretell even greater things to come?

Expectations, or Lack Thereof

Entering this past season, the Grizzlies were upstanding members of the NBA’s laughingstock class. Along with the Clippers, Warriors and Timberwolves (and maybe a few others), they were viewed as a frugal and dysfunctional organization that was largely ignored both nationally and by their own fans (ranking 29^th in NBA attendance the previous year). This reputation was based on performance (after 15 years in the NBA, the franchise is still seeking its first playoff victory) as well as a series of player transactions in the last several years that were widely ridiculed and often seemed motivated more by financial considerations than helping the team win.

The key personnel moves entering 2009-10 included the following:

• The drafting of center Hasheem Thabeet of Connecticut with the #2 pick in last year’s draft.  The scouting report on Thabeet showed a potentially dominant defensive center in the mold of Dikembe Mutumbo who was acknowledged to be much less NBA-ready than other top draft picks (including the Memphis college product Tyreke Evans, who was chosen 4^th in the draft and became NBA Rookie of the Year). Chad Ford, ESPN’s draft guru, called Thabeet the most likely high draft pick to be a bust in the NBA.
• The acquisition of veteran power forward Zach Randolph in a trade from the Los Angeles Clippers.Randolph had a history of excellent production, but also a very poor reputation for off-court problems as well as selfish and apathetic play. This trade was possible due to the cap space the team acquired in probably the most ridiculed trade in NBA history. On February 1, 2008, the Grizzlies traded Pau Gasol, their top win-producer in the previous several seasons (although not that year), to the Los Angeles Lakers. Gasol has since contributed greatly to the Lakers winning two straight Western Conference titles (and counting).  Why, the critics pointed out, would the Grizzlies agree to pay Randolph $16 million per year after trading away a similarly-paid player in Gasol who did not carry the same baggage, just over a year earlier?
• The signing, just before training camp, of veteran guard Allen Iverson for backcourt depth. There was widespread doubt about Iverson’s ability to suppress his immense ego and play a backup role behind both of the Grizzlies’ youthful starting guards, Mike Conley and O.J. Mayo. Of course, Iverson is famous in Wages of Wins history as perhaps the best example of a player whose reputation vastly exceeds his actual production of wins. Iverson ended up getting hurt early in training camp and missing the start of the season; at which point he made several appearances off the bench, complained publicly about not starting, and quit the team only 67 minutes into his Grizzlies career.

The 2008-09 team went 24-58 and national expectations were for little change. The average prediction of a pre-season panel of 10 ESPN “experts” was for a 13th-place finish (which ended up being the Golden State Warriors with a record of 26-56). Some of the local media observers of the team were more optimistic, projecting win totals into the 30s, but there was no expectation of playoff contention.

The early-season performance of the team was reviewed in this forum in early January, when the Grizzlies were a surprising 16-16 and still very much in playoff contention. Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol were identified as the key contributors to the team’s better-than-expected start. The following table updates the data in that post to include the entire season.  (Please note that the basic WP48 calculations were provided by Andres Alvarez, and then modified to improve the allocation of players by position. This was done using lineup data at 82games.com and personal observation of the team.)

Table 1 – Memphis Grizzlies in 2009-10

Based on their off-season moves, the Grizzlies could be expected to modestly improve from 24 wins to just over 30 wins this season. The rookies contributed only 1 win, as did the two players added in mid-season (Jamaal Tinsley and Ronnie Brewer). The boost in expectations was entirely due to the addition of Zach Randolph (0.150 WP48 last year) in place of Darko Milicic (0.057 WP last year).

The team ended up producing 36.4 wins, an improvement of 5.2 wins over expectations. As stated earlier, the biggest boosts came from Zach Randolph and Marc Gasol, who together produced 9.3 more wins than expected. O.J. Mayo and Rudy Gay had modest improvements over the previous year, while Mike Conley regressed significantly with only 3.7 Wins Produced, less than half his expected production.

Evaluating the Team’s Improvement

As the Grizzlies enter Year Three of the Three-Year Plan, it is essential that team management correctly assess the reasons for improvement and whether future gains can be expected.  After all, a 16-win improvement is great, but 40-42 is not.

The first thing to understand is the team’s record indicates some random good fortune. Their efficiency differential (the average points difference between the Grizzlies and their opponents, per 100 possessions) was -2.4, which is consistent with a record of 37-45. The Grizzlies were therefore “lucky” to win three extra games. This balances the previous season, when the team went 24-58 with the efficiency differential of a team going 26-56. So while the team improved by 16 wins, its improvement in efficiency differential is only consistent with an improvement of 11 wins.

The second key factor is health, and more specifically the team’s remarkable good health. The youthful core of Gasol, Gay, Mayo and Conley missed a total of 17 games (13 of these by Gasol at the end of the year). But even more important was Zach Randolph playing 81 games, after averaging only 61 games in the previous five seasons.

If Randolph had played only 2,115 minutes, which was his average in the previous 5 years, and he was replaced by some combination of DeMarre Carroll and Darrell Arthur (average WP48 of -0.021), the team would have been worse off by 4.9 wins. In reality, having Randolph miss an extra 20 games likely  would have pushed both Rudy Gay and Marc Gasol to play more power forward while Thabeet and Haddadi played more center (and Young played more small forward), in which case the drop-off from Randolph may not have been quite this severe. The key point, however, is the Grizzlies bench was very weak and not only didn’t include a single above-average player, but featured several players who made a negative contribution to winning.

Third is the improvement in Randolph’s performance. He came to Memphis highly motivated to restart his career and ultimately appeared to mature into a solid citizen and good teammate. Improved production followed as compared to the previous year.  Specifically, Randolph improved his rebounding, shot-blocking and foul shooting, and committed fewer turnovers. He also took far fewer 3-point shots, which helped improve his shooting percentage, but his effective field goal percentage (which takes the extra value of 3-pointers into consideration) was unchanged.

Can Zach keep it up? It’s certainly possible as he just turned 28 and could have a few more years at nearly the same level of production (although once he moves far past 30 we can expect production to decline noticeably). But one possible red flag is his public demand for a new contract as he enters the final year of his current deal. Will he be able to ignore this possible off-court distraction next season? That is something only those much closer to the situation can determine.

The final issue in evaluating this team is the progress of the team’s young players.  That issue, though, will be addressed in the next post on the Memphis Grizzlies.

- Jamie Vann Struth

The WoW Journal Comments Policy

Here is a post entirely (well, almost entirely) devoted to future posts.  Over the next few days we are going to have

• a two-part post on the Memphis Grizzlies from Jamie Vann Struth.
• a post from Arturo Galletti on the spending habits of the Phoenix Suns (and every other NBA team).
• a post from Benjamin Gulker evaluating the notion that the Pistons should re-sign Rodney Stuckey.
• a post addressing the link between quarterback performance and the NFL draft (yes, I am addressing that issue again).
• and finally, I think there should be a post on the relative merits of Derrick Rose.  Not sure who will be writing this post, but if no one volunteers I might put something up on this topic next week.

These should all appear in the next week (I think), with the first post (from Jamie) appearing later today (hopefully by high noon in the West).

While everyone waits, let me note that I was interviewed by Tim Trushel of Sports Memo Radio today.  The interview was nearly 40 minutes long, and you can hear the entire discussion at the Sports Memo website (see the archive from May 20 and click on my name).  Tim comes at sports from the perspective of Las Vegas gambling.  So he and I had an interesting discussion on the subject of interpreting the numbers from professional sports.

- DJ

The WoW Journal Comments Policy

And it keeps getting bigger and bigger (and better and better)…

Andres Alvarez has expanded his Wins Produced site (please see prominent link on the right).   You can now see Wins Produced and WP48 numbers for every player from 2005-06 to 2009-10.   And the numbers aren’t just for the regular season.  Alvarez has also calculated Wins Produced for the playoffs.  This is something that I have never done before, so I was very interested to see the most productive players in the playoffs for each of the past five seasons.  These players are….

• 2006: Dirk Nowitzki , 7.25 Wins Produced
• 2007: LeBron James, 4.23 Wins Produced
• 2008: Kevin Garnett, 6.02 Wins Produced
• 2009: Dwight Howard, 7.36 Wins Produced
• 2010 (thus far): Rajon Rondo, 3.86 Wins Produced

Oddly enough, the player producing the most wins in the playoffs failed to win the NBA title three times from 2006 to 2009.  If we focus on the team that won the title in each season, the top producer of wins was as follows:

• 2006: Dwyane Wade, 5.55 Wins Produced
• 2007: Tim Duncan, 3.71 Wins Produced
• 2009: Kobe Bryant, 5.64 Wins Produced

Ultimately these numbers will be expanded all the way back to the 1977-78 season.  So soon, everyone is going to have an abundance of Wins Produced numbers to ponder.

Okay, obviously the big news today is the expanding data set from Andres.  But there are some other Stumbling on Wins stories I want to note.

Two Toronto Star stories from Dave Feschuk

Dave Feschuk – of the Toronto Star — posted a story on Sunday that reviewed the story we told about aging in the NBA in Stumbling on Wins.  Feschuk’s story began with our general finding, then focused on how Steve Nash managed to defy the pattern we identified.

The next day I spent more than an hour on the phone with Dave. From that conversation came the following column (appearing on Thursday):Changing NBA coaches mostly pointless, report claims.

From this column

• we see that Bryan Colangelo claims he has read Wages of Wins, but not Stumbling on Wins.
• we also see that Colangelo thinks you cannot just rely on numbers to make decisions.  In fact, he seems to distrust numbers (at least, that is my impression).
• are some quotes from me on the subject of Andrea Bargnani, Adrian Dantley, and Doc Rivers.  These are supposed to be funny (or reveal that I am a smart-ass).

The Sports Economist on Stumbling on Wins and the “Yay! Points” Thesis

Two economists from the Sports Economist – Brian Goff and Robert Macdonald – have commented on Stumbling on Wins.  Goff’s column – LeBron “Stumbling on Losses” – details the tension between behavioral economics and mainstream economics (and says nice things about our book along the way).  Macdonald’s column – (Ir)rational Reading – connects our work to The Myth of the Rational Market by Justin Fox.  As Macdonald notes, both books challenge mainstream economics and leads him to wonder when sports economics will move away from relying so heavily on mainstream models.

Let me close by noting that WarriorsWorld.net recently posted Stumbling on Wins: The Right Stats.  From this great review (any review that likes our book is a “great” review) we see a clever name for the tendency of NBA decision-makers (and fans) to over-value scoring.  Hence forth, maybe we should call this the “Yay! Points!” thesis. 

- DJ

The WoW Journal Comments Policy

Ted Leonsis – the new owner 0f the Washington Wizards – has endorsed Stumbling on Wins and said he reads this blog.  And now he has the number one pick in the 2010 draft.

If Leonsis listens to the general consensus his choice is easy.  He simply has to pick John Wall.  The numbers, though, say this choice is not quite that easy.

Here are the top five players in the draft according to Chad Ford of ESPN.com (insider access required).

1. John Wall, PG
2. Evan Turner, SG
3. Derrick Favors, PF
4. DeMarcus Cousins, C
5. Wesley Johnson, SF

This list is hardly unique to Ford.  One suspects that the top five for most draft analysts would be fairly similar.  But is the order of these picks “correct”?

We should emphasize that college numbers do not forecast future NBA performance perfectly (in other words, the numbers won’t guarantee that a decision-maker will be “correct”).  There is, though, a link between what we see in college and what we will see in the future.  And that link – which we will illustrate with PAWS40 [Position Adjusted Win Score per 40 minutes] – suggests the following order:

1. DeMarcus Cousins: 15.61
2. Evan Turner: 14.37
3. Wesley Johnson: 13.40
4. Derrick Favors: 11.20
5. John Wall: 9.97

Average PAWS40 is 10.17.  So of these five players, Wall was the only below average performer last year.  Yes, he was a just a freshman.  Then again, so was Cousins.  And yes, there have been below average point guards – like Deron Williams and Steve Nash – who became great NBA players.  Bu then again, there have been many, many below average point guards in college who did not become great NBA players.

So what I am I saying?  This really is not an easy decision. The Wizards need to ask themselves: Why did Wall play relatively poorly last year?  Can these weaknesses be corrected?  And would it be a better idea to take a player – like DeMarcus Cousins or Evan Turner – who already projects to be a more productive NBA performer?

The good news is that the Wizards have several weeks to think about this.  This process should involve more than just collecting information.  As we note in the book, the information needs to be sorted in terms of what matters (i.e. some college numbers) and what doesn’t matter (i.e. Final Four appearances, relative height).  And no decision should be made until the process in completing.

One last observation before this process begins:  Derrick Rose was considered the consensus number one choice in 2008.  Rose posted better college numbers (11.28 PAW40) but after two seasons he has yet to develop into one of the top point guards in the game.  Maybe that will happen for Rose in the future.  Maybe, though, it won’t.  The Rose story, though, should be considered as Washington evaluates the merits of Wall.  Remember – and I repeat – people were just as certain about Rose in 2008. 

UPDATE: For more on this story see John Wall, Derrick Rose, and the State of the Wizards.

- DJ

P.S. There will be more analysis posted here as we get closer to the NBA Draft.

The WoW Journal Comments Policy

Jeff Van Gundy argued this weekend that adding LeBron to the Chicago Bulls wouldn’t be enough to transform the Bulls into a title contender.  Kevin Ferrigan – who was asked to respond to this story – disagrees. Kevin is a third year law student at William & Mary Law School.  He is originally from Maine, but has been a lifelong Bulls fan going back to the Jordan dynasty.

LeBron James and the Cavaliers were ousted from the playoffs just a few short days ago. Already, there has been a great deal of speculation about where the King will end up next season. In recent days, an increasing number of voices have pointed to my beloved Chicago Bulls as one of the best possible destinations for LeBron.  At least Chicago is a preferred destination if winning is — as he claims — his number one priority.  However, Jeff Van Gundy recently made some interesting comments about what LeBron could do for the Bulls. In short, Van Gundy claimed that LeBron alone would not make the Bulls a title contender. But is he right? Let’s take a look at the Bulls’ roster and the story told by Wins Produced.

The Bulls don’t have a full roster of players for next year. In fact, according to ShamSports.com’s Chicago salary page, the Bulls have just 6 players under contract for next year. Those players are Derrick Rose, Joakim Noah, Luol Deng, Kirk Hinrich, Taj Gibson, and James Johnson. The Bulls will also have the 17^th pick in this year’s draft (resulting from a pick swap with the Milwaukee Bucks). A mid-first round pick is unlikely to have much of an impact as a rookie. So, let’s take a look at the Wins Produced and WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] of the other six players and see what they can offer the King next year (Wins Produced numbers courtesy of Andres Alvarez).

• Joakim Noah: 10.9 Wins Produced, 0.272 WP48
• Luol Deng: 7.7 Wins Produced, 0.139 WP48
• Derrick Rose: 6.8 Wins Produced, 0.113 WP48
• Taj Gibson: 5.7 Wins Produced, 0.124 WP48
• Kirk Hinrich: 4.1 Wins Produced, 0.080 WP48
• James Johnson: -1.0 Wins Produced, -0.066 WP48

An average player posts a WP48 above 0.099.  So of these six players, four are above average. It’s worth noting that the Bulls’ best player by WP48, Joakim Noah, was limited this year by injury trouble.  Despite this limitation, Noah was still able to produce nearly 11 wins. Next year, if he’s able to remain healthy for more of the year — and keep his production at the level we saw this year — he could produce 14 or 15 wins.

Together these six players accounted for 34.2 Wins Produced.  And that includes the negative production from James Johnson.  Chicago’s Wins Produced in 2009-10 was only about 36.8,  so the Bulls not under contract were generally unproductive.

Now let’s look at LeBron James’ MVP year. This year he produced a WP48 of .401 and produced 24.8 wins (if one thinks of LeBron as just a small forward, these numbers rise to 0.444 and 27.2). Adding 24.8 to the 34.2 Wins Produced from the six players listed above, and we see a team with 59 victories.  And that means if LeBron and the remaining Bulls on the roster are able to match their production from the last year, the Bulls would already be near 60 wins before we even consider the contribution of the players who must fill out the remaining roster spots.

All of that assumes performance doesn’t change.  Again, though, Noah should be healthier.  Furthermore, Derrick Rose is still young.  And that means Rose will probably get even better. 

There is a potential downside to the move.  The second most productive player on this team is Luol Deng, who happens to play the same position as LeBron. This suggests that Deng could be the odd man is LeBron comes to town. If Chicago is able to land an equally productive player at a position of need (like shooting guard where Hinrich is inadequate) for Deng via trade, this should not be an issue. However, if the Bulls trade Deng for an unproductive player simply to clear minutes for LeBron, they will have wasted an asset and hurt their chances at being a contender.

Despite the Deng issue, I think the numbers hint that Coach Van Gundy was probably incorrect in his assessment that the Bulls would not be a title contender if they added LeBron. They’d still need to fill out the roster, of course, but adding nearly 25 wins to a team that went to the playoffs this year would be a huge, huge upgrade.  And this should be enough to vault the Bulls back into the contender conversation; a conversation they have not been a part of since the days of the guy who made the number 23 famous.

- Kevin Ferrigan

The WoW Journal Comments Policy