53 thoughts on “Most Valuable Laker? Might Not be Kobe”

1. I patiently await the rational discourse that is sure to follow.

2. So a anyone have the WP stats for the last game then?

3. Wins Produced is BS! Clearly you are not taking into account Kobe forcing Ray Allen to play so much defense with all those shots. This made Ray Allen tired which caused all those misses. Stats can’t take this into account.

4. Robbieomalley,

   Not only does Kobe play defense when he’s on offense, but he does so while he’s on the bench as well. His intimidating gaze, which he uses from the bench, decreases the effectiveness of players on the other team. Where is that on your stat sheet?

5. David,
   It was a crapfest:
   Player +/- Est WP48 MP Team
   Sasha Vujacic 2 3.046 1 Lakers
   Kendrick Perkins 7 0.187 22 Celts
   Tony Allen -5 0.094 20 Celts
   Lamar Odom 14 0.045 28 Lakers
   Luke Walton 13 0.035 13 Lakers
   Jordan Farmar -1 -0.017 7 Lakers
   Rajon Rondo 2 -0.017 42 Celts
   Pau Gasol 0 -0.051 39 Lakers
   Andrew Bynum 0 -0.141 29 Lakers
   Shannon Brown 1 -0.152 16 Lakers
   Glen Davis -11 -0.158 24 Celts
   Kevin Garnett 0 -0.182 32 Celts
   Derek Fisher 8 -0.251 41 Lakers
   Kobe Bryant 10 -0.303 44 Lakers
   Paul Pierce 1 -0.306 34 Celts
   Rasheed Wallace -10 -0.321 19 Celts
   Ron Artest -12 -0.323 23 Lakers
   Nate Robinson -9 -0.536 6 Celts
   Ray Allen -10 -0.751 42 Celts

6. I think these Kobe threads are being overtaken by silliness (still funny, though).

7. What’s the deal with Year after year Kobe finishing in top 15 or so in adj +/-?

8. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/.a/6a00d8341c630a53ef0134802f972f970c-800wi

   That gaze would intimidate me as well, Dre.

9. Dr. Berri, So far, I only see WP advocates making mock “Kobe fan” posts to lambast … which is why it’s my opinion that these threads are overtaken more by smugness than silliness.

10. From the video on the ESPN Link:
    Magic Johnson “[Rajon Rondo] really got the Celtics back in the game, him and Glenn Davis.”

    Glenn Davis WS48 for the game = 6.06*, way to take over the game Big Baby!

    And this was INFLATED because he averaged a much higher shooting percentage than he usually does. Besides shooting, in the 25 minutes he played, he made 3 Rebounds, 3 TOs and 3 PFs and Nothing eles whatsoever.

    And according to Andres numbers above, Rondo, Gasol, Garnett, Kobe, Bynum, Pierce, and Ray Allen did pretty horrible as well. Thanks for the numbers Andres.

    *Avg WS48 for PFs form 95-05 = 10.3

11. Indeed a crapfest. Question then: When I total up those numbers (WP48) and weight by minute I should get -1 for BOS and +1 for LAL? Assuming a perfect model. Small n and all that applies. However I get -1.158 for BOS and -0.728 for LAL. I’m trying to interpret that, what does it mean? Any ideas?

12. David,
    The model is designed to predict season-long performance. Furthermore, the WP48 numbers provided are estimates based on Win Score. So adding these individual game estimates up is not going to tell you much of anything.

13. Gil,
    To understand the reaction of the people here to Kobe fans, you have to go back to posts written about Kobe in the past. The post with the most views in the history of this blog was on Andrew Bynum. If you read the comments on that post you get an idea of how Kobe fans can behave. And then you will understand the reactions to this post.

14. All,

    Sorry as that was maybe a little immature on my part. I know Robbie and I were just mocking Jackson’s comment that by shooting a ton Kobe was really “playing defense” as he tired out Ray Allen. To give credit where credit is due Kobe really did step it up and pull LA through the Phoenix series.

    The playoffs do bring out the best analysis as I am sure we’ve mentioned. Some of the best involves comments such as “So and so needs to be careful about what he says. All he’s gonna do is fire up the opposing team” Apparently in sports the greats are like Popeye waiting for someone to insult them before eating their spinach and playing well.

15. dberri,

    That was my guess as well. One thought I did have was that LAL were further away from the idealized +1 than BOS from -1 such that LAL won despite underperformance. That is, if you win and play that bad the ball bounced your way and that would bode well for LAL to win the series. I also thought more on my idea of a 4Q-WP model. I’m not sure how to calculate wins. How do you apportion wins to a single Q? I can’t think of any simple way to do this even though I’m still intrigued by how the value of possession could be quantified as a function of time left in a game.

16. I don’t get Arturo’s numbers, mainly in that I’m not sure how KG’s boxscore stats could lead to such poor numbers. Doing a quick PAWS calculation:

    His WS is 9.5 (primarily from the 7 from shooting, 6 from rebs and then some – off TOs and fouls). His WS/min is .299, subtract a position constant and we get a PAWS of .084 (I would guess Arturo’s numbers have him as a C so .074).

    If the average WS/48 for a PF is 10.3 then 9.5 in 31.75 min is clearly above average, and definitely not negative production.

    Odom is also strange here, posting a 9 WS in about 28 minutes, for a PAWS over .100. That his WP is well below average seems nuts. Look at his boxscore for game 3. It’s good. What am I missing? I’d love to hear what WP is valuing so much more/less than PAWS that these numbers come out telling such different stories.

    Reading up, these were WP48 estimates from WS? Then either my calculations are terrible or something is very weird with Arturo’s. I was assuming there was some difference between PAWS and WP48 that explained it (though the largely different stories they’d tell would still be confusing), but this seems even more ridiculous.

    I don’t think you can call someone’s numbers inflated because of a one game high shooting % Shawn, he also, as you point out had more TOs and less rebounds than he normally does, I could make an equally valid (in that both are equally bad) argument that his numbers were DEFLATED because he didn’t support his FG% with the boards that he normally does.

    Inflated/deflated are irrelevant, Glen had a good shooting night, but despite that, did not actually produce. However, he was still a good offensive option two nights ago on a celtics team that, sadly, shot 44%. Actually he did a tad better that WS would say because it doesn’t evaluate the and1 precisely. Not an important difference though.

17. David:

    I’ve posted some spreadsheets on Google docs (http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AlYfoMFgcouRdDB1RDQ0dWtwRGpyVEMyTHNrR25kV2c&hl=en) that breakdown the est. WP48 and Wins Produced for the Finals using win score. The trick to get the numbers to balance is the PAWSmin. You can’t use the league-wide average win score for each position because the context isn’t the entire season but just one game, so you have to use the average win score for each position within the specific game. I use the boxscores and play-by-play from popcornmachine.net and ESPN.com to assign the positions for each player as they enter the game.

    Currently, the Lakers have produced an est. 1.954 wins to the Celtics 1.046. Also, contrary to the opinion expressed in this post (and to my chagrin), I think the numbers can actually be used to support the argument that Kobe should be Finals MVP if he continues his current production in the series (despite the fact that Pau Gasol has been the most productive player).

    DBerri – if you would be interested in a write up on this, then I can send you something tomorrow morning. Maybe it will calm the Kobe fans in the comments sections :-)

    I’d appreciate any feedback on the spreadsheets.

18. DBerri – I just left a comment that addressed the issue w/ single game WP48 (and included a hyperlink to some spreadsheets that provide a solution) but it didn’t post. Is there any chance it was treated as spam?

19. CHL,

    I got intimidated by the stare and screwed up the numbers ( I counted Fga and FGM twice):

    Player +/- Est WP48 MP Team
    Sasha Vujacic 2 1.432 1 Lakers
    Jordan Farmar -1 0.213 7 Lakers
    Kendrick Perkins 7 0.187 22 Celts
    Tony Allen -5 0.174 20 Celts
    Lamar Odom 14 0.160 28 Lakers
    Kevin Garnett 0 0.121 32 Celts
    Rajon Rondo 2 0.098 42 Celts
    Luke Walton 13 0.097 13 Lakers
    Kobe Bryant 10 0.082 44 Lakers
    Pau Gasol 0 0.052 39 Lakers
    Andrew Bynum 0 0.026 29 Lakers
    Nate Robinson -9 0.002 6 Celts
    Shannon Brown 1 0.000 16 Lakers
    Paul Pierce 1 -0.092 34 Celts
    Derek Fisher 8 -0.093 41 Lakers
    Rasheed Wallace -10 -0.108 19 Celts
    Glen Davis -11 -0.158 24 Celts
    Ron Artest -12 -0.182 23 Lakers
    Ray Allen -10 -0.539 42 Celts

    Still a crapfest but not as bad. The Celts actually had 4 of the 5 best playes who played more than 20 minutes but Allen literally cost them the game.

20. Hmm, I’ll update my WP game numbers then. BOS = -0.463. LAL = 0.276. The same take-home message applies (discounting the Win Score vs. WP48 simplification). Conceptually, I’m looking at a residual for a given game. And it’s a large one. LAL underperformed an “average” winning effort (= +1) but still won the game. This is a game BOS needed to win, I don’t think LAL is going to play that bad again. Can you (Dre) post numbers for the other games? And can you verify that there are based on Win Score and not the “real” WP48? For the record, this is more a mental exercise, the whole WOW metric is a long-term mean as opposed to a single game. I’m even skeptical of a full series and “clutch” based on small n problems… But maybe there are some points of discussion here.

21. David,
    If you get +1 in a single game, that means the winning team performed well enough to win 82 games. If a team has a winning margin of +10 in evey game, though, it wouldn’t be expected to win 82 games. Again, it is a measure of season performance.

22. Yes, I think I’m trying too hard to get something out of, as you said, a season-based measure for a single game. So, out of curiosity, what is the sub-season threshold where you think it makes sense? Or is there one? I’m trying to put single-game WP48 numbers in some context, that’s all really. My final try then is this: LAL played like a 22 win team, BOS like a -38 win team (the minus real). So maybe if we look at the span: LAL +60 wins, we get something? Again, a mental game…

23. David,
    I appreciate the complement in calling me Dre :-) ( he does great work)

    I’m calculating as follows:
    Win Score = PTS + REB + STL + ½*BLK + ½*AST – TO – ½*PF – FGA – ½*FTA
    PosAdjust from Dre’s database for the playoffs (AdjP48-Wp48. I know it’s an aproximation but it’s good enough for govt. work))
    PosAdj
    C:100% 0.287
    PF:100% 0.284
    PG:100% 0.144
    SF:100% 0.175
    SG:100% 0.157

    PAWS/min: WinScore/MP- Pos.Adj
    Est WP48: 0.1+Paws/min*1.614

    And the results are:
    Game 1:
    Player +/- Est WP48 MP Team WP
    Ron Artest 26 0.258 33 Lakers 0.18
    Pau Gasol 13 0.222 47 Lakers 0.22
    Paul Pierce -13 0.199 46 Celts 0.19
    Kobe Bryant 6 0.195 39 Lakers 0.16
    Rasheed Wallace 3 0.175 18 Celts 0.07
    Jordan Farmar -7 0.116 13 Lakers 0.03
    Derek Fisher 18 0.069 28 Lakers 0.04
    Shannon Brown 0 0.038 17 Lakers 0.01
    Rajon Rondo -17 0.029 40 Celts 0.02
    Kendrick Perkins -14 0.007 24 Celts 0.00
    Andrew Bynum 11 -0.046 28 Lakers -0.03
    Sasha Vujacic -5 -0.082 8 Lakers -0.01
    Nate Robinson 10 -0.132 13 Celts -0.04
    Michael Finley -3 -0.182 2 Celts -0.01
    Glen Davis -1 -0.190 19 Celts -0.08
    Kevin Garnett -14 -0.197 35 Celts -0.14
    Ray Allen -5 -0.364 27 Celts -0.20
    Luke Walton 1 -0.375 5 Lakers -0.04
    Lamar Odom 2 -0.474 21 Lakers -0.21
    Tony Allen -11 -0.481 17 Celts -0.17

    Game2:
    Game Player +/- Est WP48 MP Team WP
    2 Nate Robinson -3 0.944 6 Celts 0.12
    2 Sasha Vujacic -7 0.625 7 Lakers 0.09
    2 Rajon Rondo 12 0.406 42 Celts 0.35
    2 Pau Gasol -12 0.388 42 Lakers 0.34
    2 Ray Allen 12 0.267 44 Celts 0.24
    2 Rasheed Wallace 15 0.220 18 Celts 0.08
    2 Tony Allen 3 0.188 12 Celts 0.05
    2 Andrew Bynum 1 0.051 39 Lakers 0.04
    2 Kobe Bryant -9 0.033 34 Lakers 0.02
    2 Derek Fisher 4 0.029 35 Lakers 0.02
    2 Shannon Brown -3 0.010 15 Lakers 0.00
    2 Kevin Garnett 1 -0.056 24 Celts -0.03
    2 Kendrick Perkins 3 -0.086 32 Celts -0.06
    2 Paul Pierce 3 -0.187 40 Celts -0.16
    2 Lamar Odom -10 -0.197 15 Lakers -0.06
    2 Jordan Farmar -9 -0.257 13 Lakers -0.07
    2 Glen Davis 3 -0.315 18 Celts -0.12
    2 Ron Artest 0 -0.438 41 Lakers -0.37
    2 Shelden Williams -4 -1.165 4 Celts -0.10
    Game 3:

    Game Player +/- Est WP48 MP Team WP
    3 Sasha Vujacic 2 1.432 1 Lakers 0.03
    3 Jordan Farmar -1 0.213 7 Lakers 0.03
    3 Kendrick Perkins 7 0.187 22 Celts 0.09
    3 Tony Allen -5 0.174 20 Celts 0.07
    3 Lamar Odom 14 0.160 28 Lakers 0.09
    3 Kevin Garnett 0 0.121 32 Celts 0.08
    3 Rajon Rondo 2 0.098 42 Celts 0.09
    3 Luke Walton 13 0.097 13 Lakers 0.03
    3 Kobe Bryant 10 0.082 44 Lakers 0.07
    3 Pau Gasol 0 0.052 39 Lakers 0.04
    3 Andrew Bynum 0 0.026 29 Lakers 0.02
    3 Nate Robinson -9 0.002 6 Celts 0.00
    3 Shannon Brown 1 0.000 16 Lakers 0.00
    3 Paul Pierce 1 -0.092 34 Celts -0.07
    3 Derek Fisher 8 -0.093 41 Lakers -0.08
    3 Rasheed Wallace -10 -0.108 19 Celts -0.04
    3 Glen Davis -11 -0.158 24 Celts -0.08
    3 Ron Artest -12 -0.182 23 Lakers -0.09
    3 Ray Allen -10 -0.539 42 Celts -0.47

    And totals
    Game WP
    Lakers 1 0.35
    Celts 1 -0.35
    Lakers 2 0.01
    Celts 2 0.39
    Lakers 3 0.15
    Celts 3 -0.33
    Lakers Totals 0.51
    Celts Totals -0.30

24. Wow. This post comes pretty damn close to being the last straw. You know, instead of tearing you and your idiocy apart like I really should, I’m just going to ask three simple questions:

    1. What is the highest level of basketball any of you have played?

    2. How many full NBA games do you watch per season?

    3. Do you analyze the games as you watch or do you form no opinion until you perform your computer calculations?

25. Joe,
    You never asked my last question. You claimed something about people in the NBA last time you came here. Once again, how many people in the NBA do you personally know?

26. I know the opinion on advanced stats of a GM who is representative of much of the league. Surely you can understand why I won’t reveal his identity.

    And guess what: “wins produced” doesn’t even factor into his decision-making.

27. Joe,
    On base percentage didn’t figure into many decisions being made in baseball before Billy Beane.

    That line of logic isn’t furthering your argument.

28. Joe,
    Do you know this GM personally?

29. What does that have to do with anything? I mean, am I friends with him? Then no.

    Anyway, I answered your question; I think now I deserve responses.

30. David:

    DBerri rescued a comment from me that I think addresses your single game WP48 issue. Please see my 1st comment above.

    Thanks dberri.

31. Thanks for the corrections Arturo, that makes more sense. Thanks for giving the position adjustments too, I was using the .132, .128, .152, .215, 225 ones. I can’t actually view your site (from my quick look it seemed like the software can’t be used on my iBook (it’s old and doesn’t have intel). Any suggestions (if it’s not a big bother)?

    Heh, I thought Joe’s message was another parody post.

    Making a post declaring someone else’s idiocy without an argument is worse than useless, cause it’s nasty too. Personally, having played in high school and currently playing a lot of pick up games in college (admittedly not a high level), WS makes complete sense.

    If the value of a possession is ~1 point (it’s a tiny bit more but close enough), then it makes sense that anything gaining or losing possession to be worth +/- 1. Scoring 2 points increases the value by 1 from the expected worth, so again, it makes sense for that to be worth 1: production = results – expected value. WS makes clear logical sense. It doesn’t include things out of the box score, but everything in it it gives fair well thought out weights to.

    As dberri has said over and over again, game results are determined by shooting efficiency, rebounds and TOs. If rebounds and TOs are kept constant then the game is completely determined by shooting efficiency. Kobe’s was not good. Others were better. This determining by efficiency and changing possession is obviously true at all levels, though as the expected values of a possession change so must the weights upon those values. Now, you may argue there are lots of things that lead up to those resultant stats (which is why WS/PAWS/WP includes things like assists, PFs, etc…), but for that argument to work you’d need to show that these things (especially parts not shown in the box score) are important. Showing that, say, the person proposing a system hasn’t played seriously or doesn’t watch much (I suspect he watches a fair amount, but I could be mistaken) is an ad hominem attack that does nothing towards disproving an argument or formulation.

    I do think the claims that it doesn’t predict well when a person changes role as in the previous thread are fair, WP shows the results of such a change in role, but it takes a deeper look to see why (change in shot selection). That kind of claim has little to do with defenses of kobe however.

32. I am terrible at saying things succinctly. I’ll edit next time.

33. To be clear I was making fun of comments made about Kobe from the media, not Kobe’s performance. I think he has actually played very well this post season. If we look at SD’s, I’d assume the argument for Kobe being the Lakers best player might become more legitimate (at least for the post season). I haven’t looked at that however, I just assume it’s possible.

    Joe,
    If I (or anyone else) answered any of those questions in any way, what difference would that make regarding the legitimacy of Wins Produced?

    My questions for you,
    1) What flaws do you see in the actual model of Wins Produced? What should be changed?

    2) Can you explain why we should believe the opinions of GMs in general are more correct than Wins Produced (other than their job title)?

    3) Can you please tear our “idiocy” apart? Please?

    Just give it a shot. Make some claims, say why WP is wrong (not just most GMs don’t use it – that’s called an ad populum fallacy).

34. Arturo,

    Thanks a lot for the correct calculations, I was very much so interested in the results so far.

    Cool_Hand_Luke,

    The Lakers have completely dominated the rebounding and blocking part of this series so far, so I would agree that the shooting efficiency is what will decide the game more so (even if slightly marginal like in game 2).

35. I’m going to have to side with Joe:

    1. What is your favorite color?

    2. What did you have for dinner last night?

36. All,

    Reservoirgod’s spreadsheet is amazing! Check it out if you haven’t already. My numbers are entire playoff based, so for those watching the finals and wanting good game by game then this is definitely it.

    Joe,

    1. Middle School. Got a trophy and everything.
    Counter question 1: what is the highest level of statistics you have at least 6 months of experience in?

    2. I don’t have cable so maybe 5-6.
    Counter question 2: How many games do you review the entire box score and use it to analyze a player’s performance?

    3. I tend to just enjoy the game. But I have been guilty of checking yahoo during the game and of course look at the half time stats.
    Counter Question 3: Do you form opinion’s as you are watching and then use the box score data to justify it and then fill in the blanks? E.g. Kobe didn’t shoot well but he was a game changer on defense.

    I hope this isn’t your last straw Joe. I do like open discussions and heated ones are fun too(that is genuine) I also would miss having the right hand man of an NBA Shadow GM around to give insider info(that was sarcasm)

37. Alvy,

    Worth noting that the team shooting better tends to get more rebounds as the other team shoots worse and thus you have more defensive rebounding opportunities, the thing to look at is then not raw totals (not saying you were doing this, but you may have been, I don’t know) but rather defensive rebounding %. Here are the three games so far:

    Game Celtics Lakers
    1 66% 79%
    2 76% 69%
    3 71% 80%

    So yeah, you’re definitely right. This shouldn’t come as a surprise though, Lakers are, tragically, a better rebounding team. Not really a surprise though, Cs usually win by outshooting other teams, not by out-rebounding them.

38. CHL,
    It’s Andre’s website not mine ( I just try to do neat things with it).
    Dre,
    Reservoirgod’s spreadsheet is amazing!

39. I really think Kobe is a very good player and I don’t want to be ripping on people’s opinion of him as much as I do but when I see things like this on ESPN…

    [Comment From Jim Crozier]
    It’s amazing that Kobe carries the Lakers all year long, powers them through the majority of the playoffs, and now suddenly we’re talking about handing the postseason hardware to Gasol. Don’t get me wrong, Gasol is amazing. But the MVP of the Lakers is Kobe Bryant. Period.
    6:01

    J. A. Adande: That’s obvious. But it’s about who was the biggest factor in this series. Heck, Derek Fisher has just a good a bead on the Finals MVP as Kobe does right now

    It becomes impossible to ignore it. Saying Kobe carried the Lakers through the season and post season is so wrong it’s borderline offensive to anyone who follows basketball. Kobe is very good but he’s not out of the first round without Pau and his other team mates (see 05, 06, 07 and this years first round). It takes several star players to compete for a championship, the extent that the media and fans goes out of their way to anoint a basketball Jesus all the responsibility of winning is incredible. Adande saying it’s obvious makes me even more cynical of thoughtful analysis.

40. I think the WP48 statistic is a very telling metric…but it has its flaws too. If you look at Pau Gasol’s shooting percentage, before and after he came to the Lakers, it’s considerably improved. Did Gasol magically become a better player? Or are defenses keying on Kobe producing a lot of easy baskets for Pau? To me, WP48 is not entirely a measure of individual performance, but seems to be treated as such.

41. baseball guy,
    This is what drives me crazy. All the Lakers positives are automatically attributed to Kobe. But then, none of the negatives are ever blamed on Kobe. The Kobe Inquisition refused not to have its cake and eat it too.

42. Anybody have some analysis to explain the over-officiating of the first two games, or the whistle-swallowing of the next two? I despise the Georgetown/Arkansas/Bad Boys defensive philosophy of ‘foul constantly; they can’t call them all’ only slightly more than the ‘let’s see which bench can play’ mode. Is there any rationale for this bipolar crap?

43. I will answer all of the questions everyone has posted for me when Berri answers mine.

44. Pout, pout.

45. Do you guys like the whowins.com site?

    It shows historical precedent for teams that win in the same order in the same home-away pattern, and tells you what happened in those past instances. It says that “In the history of best-of-7 NBA Finals from 1947 through 2009, teams such as Los Angeles which win Game 1 and lose Game 2 at home and win Game 3 on the road had an 11-0 series record but a 1-10 Game 4 record.”

    For whatever that’s worth, there’s the historical precedent.

46. Baseball Guy you may be right, the improvement is hard to quantify. The prof’s work indicates Phil Jackson has a pretty good track record for improving team/players. Maybe that’s the x factor.

47. “I know the opinion on advanced stats of a GM who is representative of much of the league. Surely you can understand why I won’t reveal his identity.

    And guess what: “wins produced” doesn’t even factor into his decision-making.”

    Let me guess:

    Elgin Baylor.

48. This is a awesome write-up, im happy I came across this. Ill be back again later on to check out other posts that you have on your blog.
    16:39

49. Marparker,

    I’m not concluding that Kobe is the reason that Gasol is better from a FG shooting/WP48 perspective (that was just a possible suggestion). Maybe it’s the Phil Jackson coaching magic, the triangle, the defense keying on Sasha Vujacic etc. When I look at this data (see below), I just think it’s likely that FG% is influenced by teammates, playing & coaching styles, cosmology etc., then Pau magical going from a 50.1% shooting with Memphis in 2007-08 to a 58.9% shooter with the Lakers overnight being totally improvement in Gasol’s game.

    WP48 is an interesting statistic, but it isn’t perfect either. And to assume it’s an accurate metric for individual performance, maybe a little of an overreach.

    Gasol Shooting Number:

    Year Team M A Pct
    2001-02 MEM 6.7 13.0 51.8
    2002-03 MEM 6.9 13.6 51.0
    2003-04 MEM 6.5 13.5 48.2
    2004-05 MEM 6.4 12.4 51.4
    2005-06 MEM 7.5 14.9 50.3
    2006-07 MEM 7.8 14.5 53.9
    2007-08 MEM 7.2 14.3 50.1
    2007-08 LAL 7.3 12.3 58.9
    2008-09 LAL 7.3 12.9 56.7
    2009-10 LAL 7.0 13.0 53.6
    Career 7.0 13.5 52.1

    I apologize for the formatting.

50. Baseball Guy,
    The impact a player’s teamates has on his performance has been studied (see Stumbling on Wins, for example). There does not appear to be a link between a player’s shooting efficiency and the shooting efficiency of his teammates. And although player’s are most consistent from season-to-season when they stay on the same team, they are still quite consistent when they switch teams (the correlation coefficeints are about 0.8 and 0.7 respectively). There is more on this, but the general conclusion I reach having looked at the evidence is that the interaction effects in basketball are quite small (in football, though, these are quite large).

51. Ah, so you continue your practice of ignoring questions that diminish your credibility. I expected as much.

    No answers from you, none from me.

52. Joe,
    Part of the advantage of the comments is that Dr. Berri does not need to answer every question. If your intent was a dialog with him then I am sure e-mail would work fine. Just be aware there is a large community of smart people you can talk to as well.

    I admit you are getting hazed a bit on the comments. However, you are approaching a group of knowledgeable people and insulting them without much backup other than “you know people”. I would like to offer some constructive criticism. Instead of your typical approach of insults, asking Dr. Berri questions directly or referencing your “hidden contacts”, try the following template:

    “I do not like PAWS/WP48 because of its assessment of . Here are some stats that lead me to believe WP48 is Evaluating them. Here is my reasoning as to why WP48 may not be ideal here. ”

    I would suggest avoiding All-star games and championships as stats. Hope you keep posting.

53. Pingback: Is LA still the team to beat? « The Wages of Wins Journal