Luck – not the Lottery – Helps Out Memphis

Dave Berri is the General Manager of the Wages of Wins Network.         He is a Professor of Economics at Southern Utah University, lead       author of The Wages of Wins and Stumbling on Wins, and (thankfully)   now a past president of the North American Association of Sports   Economists. 

Lately much of this forum has been dominated by talk of the lockout.  Certainly for NBA fans, this is the big news of the day. Although the lockout is important, for most fans – we suspect – the lockout isn’t interesting.  So let’s take a break from this talk and briefly discuss an actual NBA team.

Draft Picks vs. Luck

This discussion is going to begin with the NBA draft.  On draft night NBA teams tend to argue that the players they have added are definitely going to help.  And on draft night, fans tend to believe that (or at least, want to believe).  But as the summer games begin, doubt starts to appear.  This doubt tends to grow when the actual games start to play in the fall.

With the NBA lockout, though, it is likely that few fans doubt the future success of the players selected in the 2011 draft.  This is especially true for teams choosing players in the lottery.  Each player selected is probably still seen as the future savior of their respective team.

But is that expectation likely to be realized?  Consider the case of the Memphis Grizzlies.  From 2006 to 2010, Memphis had five picks in the lottery. And this year, after missing the playoffs the previous four seasons, Memphis not only made the playoffs; the Grizzlies also advanced to the second round for the first time in franchise history.  Clearly the draft works.

Or does it?  If we review the recent history of Memphis in the lottery, a different story seems to emerge.  Our review begins back in 2005-06.  That season the Grizzlies won 49 games.   Of these wins, 42.0 could be traced to the productivity of Pau Gasol, Mike Miller, Eddie Jones, and Shane Battier.

Table 1: 2006 Memphis Grizzlies

Memphis Wins Produced per 48 Minutes Wins Produced
Pau Gasol 0.217 14.1
Mike Miller 0.230 10.9
Shane Battier 0.147 8.7
Eddie Jones 0.164 8.3
Jake Tsakalidis 0.225 3.4
Bobby Jackson 0.084 3.1
Lorenzen Wright 0.074 2.6
Damon Stoudamire 0.102 1.8
Chucky Atkins 0.039 1.0
Lawrence Roberts 0.096 0.4
Anthony Roberson 0.019 0.0
John Thomas -0.253 -0.1
Dahntay Jones -0.024 -0.5
Brian Cardinal -0.071 -0.6
Hakim Warrick -0.072 -1.1
Antonio Burks -0.097 -1.2
Sum Wins Produced 50.9
Actual Team Wins 49

In the summer of 2006, Jerry West – the president of the Grizzlies – sent Battier to the Houston Rockets for Rudy Gay (a lottery pick in the 2006 draft) and Stromile Swift.   In addition to the loss of Battier, Pau Gasol started the 2006-07 season hurt (he was hurt during the 2006 World Championship). Eddie Jones was also supposedly hurt (and eventually removed from the team).  Although Pau Gasol did eventually return, without the production the team received from Battier and Jones, the Grizzlies found themselves in the lottery in 2007.

And with that pick, the Grizzlies selected Mike Conley.  During the 2007-08 season, though, Pau Gasol was sent to the LA Lakers (for his brother Mark Gasol).  Without Pau Gasol the Grizzlies again returned to the lottery in 2008.

Funny Story

This time Memphis selected Kevin Love, one of the most productive players in the game today.  Unfortunately, none of that production was received by Memphis.  Love was traded – along with Mike Miller (the last remaining member of the 2005-06 quartet) – for O.J. Mayo.   Consequently, Memphis returned to the lottery again in 2009.

With the 2nd pick in the 2009 draft, Memphis selected Hasheem Thabeet.  He proceeded to do very little.  And ultimately he was sent to the Houston Rockets during the 2010-11 season for…. yes, Shane Battier.  Yes, the player traded away for a lottery pick in 2006 – the trade that began the destruction of the 2006 playoff team – was brought back in exchange for the Grizzlies 2009 lottery pick.

Before Thabeet left town, though, Memphis found itself back in the lottery in 2010.  With that 12th pick in the 2010 draft, Memphis selected Xavier Henry.  Henry was the 5th lottery pick by the Grizzlies in five years.  And here is what those five lottery picks did for Memphis from 2006-07 to 2010-11:

  • Rudy Gay: 17.0 Wins Produced, 0.061 WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes]
  • Mike Conley: 18.5 Wins Produced, 0.095 WP48
  • O.J. Mayo: 9.7 Wins Produced, 0.058 WP48
  • Hasheem Thabeet: 0.6 Wins Produced, 0.021 WP48
  • Xavier Henry: -1.1 Wins Produced, -0.103 WP48
  • All Five Lottery Picks: 44.7 Wins Produced, 0.066 WP48

An average player posts a WP48 of 0.100.  As one can see, none of these lottery picks has been above average across their entire career with the Grizzlies.  So how did the Memphis Grizzlies get back to the playoffs in 2010-11? To answer that question, let’s look at production of the 2010-11 team.

Table 2: 2010-2011 Memphis Grizzlies vs. 2009-2010 Numbers

Grizzlies Pos MP WP48**
2010
WP
2010
WP48
2011
WP
2011
Change
in
WP
Zach Randolph 4.31 2724 0.212 12.0 0.290 16.4 4.4
Mike Conley 1.00 2872 0.049 2.9 0.124 7.4 4.5
Rudy Gay 3.16 2152 0.073 3.3 0.144 6.4 3.2
Marc Gasol 5.00 2586 0.189 10.2 0.117 6.3 -3.9
Tony Allen 1.48 1494 0.150 4.7 0.194 6.0 1.4
Sam Young 3.00 1577 -0.002 -0.1 0.055 1.8 1.9
Shane Battier 3.00 557 0.143 1.7 0.153 1.8 0.1
O.J. Mayo 2.00 1869 0.083 3.2 0.032 1.3 -2.0
Darrell Arthur 4.00 1609 -0.023 -0.8 0.034 1.1 1.9
Hamed Haddadi 5.00 168 -0.091 -0.3 0.274 1.0 1.3
Greivis Vasquez* 2.00 860 0.033 0.6 0.033 0.6 0.0
DeMarre Carroll 3.00 39 0.009 0.0 0.190 0.2 0.1
Jason Williams 1.00 124 0.119 0.3 0.019 0.0 -0.3
Rodney Carney 3.00 5 0.076 0.0 0.144 0.0 0.0
Leon Powe 4.00 141 0.166 0.5 -0.050 -0.1 -0.6
Acie Law 1.00 94 0.061 0.1 -0.194 -0.4 -0.5
Ishmael Smith 1.00 113 -0.212 -0.5 -0.212 -0.5 0.0
Hasheem Thabeet 5.00 369 0.095 0.7 -0.128 -1.0 -1.7
Xavier Henry* 2.00 527 -0.103 -1.1 -0.103 -1.1 0.0
TOTAL 37.4 47.2 9.8

* – Rookie in 2010-11 (or player with very little prior NBA experience), so numbers from 2009-10 are the same as what we see in 2010-11

**-WP48 in 2009-10 is calculated with ADJ P48 in 2009-10 and position played in 2010-11

The Grizzlies won 46 games in 2010-11.  The team’s efficiency differential and Wins Produced is consistent with a team that would win about 47 games.  When we look at the five aforementioned lottery picks, we see that this quintet produced 13.0 of these victories.  And that means, 34 of the team’s Wins Produced came from players who were not selected by the Grizzlies in the lottery.

Now it is the case that Conley and Gay were finally above average this past season (the only two lottery picks that managed to be this productive).  But the Grizzlies would not have been successful without Zach Randolph, Marc Gasol, and Tony Allen.  And where did these players come from?  As noted, Gasol came in the trade for his brother in 2008.

The next year, the Grizzlies acquired Zach Randolph via a trade with the LA Clipppers.  And last summer, Tony Allen was signed as a free agent.

Prior to coming to Memphis, both Randolph and Allen were above average players.  And each has been above average with the Grizzlies.  But both Randolph and Allen have never played as well as they have for Memphis.  In other words, their level of production – given what we saw in the past – has been somewhat surprising.

And these were not the only surprises.  Given what the veterans employed by Memphis did in 2009-10, the Grizzlies should have won about 37 games in 2010-11.  The ten-game improvement can be linked to improved play from Randolph, Conley, and Gay (as noted, Conley and Gay are now above average).

In sum, it doesn’t appear that Memphis has been helped by the lottery.  The players who primarily produced the results we saw this year were not acquired in the draft.   And the leap we see in the performance of some players… well, maybe that is just “luck”.   Consider the following from an interview with Mike Heisley, the team’s owner.

“I’ve been wrong about a lot of things,” said owner Mike Heisley. “I was wrong about Allen Iverson and we were wrong about [Hasheem] Thabeet. I said this when we were bad so I have to say it now, too. A lot of this is pure luck.”

Yes, the owner of the Grizzlies clearly didn’t see all of this coming.

We like to think successful teams had a plan.  And one plan teams in the NBA say they follow is “we are building through the draft”.  For the Grizzlies, though, that plan didn’t work so well.  And so they appear to have turned to Plan B: “Let’s hope we get lucky”.

Let me close by noting that this really is not “pure luck”.  The Grizzlies did acquire some talent (i.e. Gasol, Randolph, and Allen), that helped the team achieve success in 2010-11.  Although Randolph and Allen have played better in Memphis, both were above average before they got to Memphis.  So their above average play in Memphis could have been predicted.  And the same could be said for Battier.

All of that suggests that although some of this may be “pure luck” (i.e. the improvement in players might be “luck”… or maybe evidence of good coaching), much of what happens in the NBA is predictable.  At least, much of what happens for NBA veterans is predictable.  When it comes to the draft… well, maybe one shouldn’t hope — as the Memphis story illustrates — that lottery picks are really going to make a difference.

- DJ

Wages of Wins Network Bullets

Hey all,

Many of our esteemed Wages of Wins members have been writing killer stuff on their respective blogs. We thought you might enjoy a quick overview to go with a few links.

Mosi Platt (@MIA_Heat_Index) at The Miami Heat Index

Put me on the Wolves and they'll win more!

Ty Willihnganz at Courtside Analyst

Does Parity Mean I make it to every other Finals?

  • Ty shows that the institution of the salary cap has not helped competitive balance. As such we should not believe that any new cap rules wills improve the Parity Problem of the NBA.
  • Ty gives the players hope by saying if Lester Munson and Forbes are right and the League is Making Money that the players may have hope of winning the lockout.
  • Ty points that the Owners acting like Pawn Shops gives the players little hope for the lockout. The owners let the players set the asking price and have time on their side. It doesn’t help players any either if owners know that the lockout won’t affect popularity.

James Brocato(@JBrocato23) at Shut Up and Jam

Best Sonics of All Time.

Ben Gulker(@brgulker) of Pistons by the Numbers

"What if I play awesome and you say it was your idea?"

  • Ben looks at the coaching career of Lawrence Frank in New Jersey. His conclusion is that players make the coach, not the other way around. Unless Jason Kidd and Vince Carter from five years ago are walking in the door it does not look good for the Pistons.

In Case You Missed It (Links to the Past)

We’re avid readers around here. If you see any awesome web sites or articles you think we don’t know about please post them in the comments!
-Dre

How Many Points is Your Player Worth? (Rev. 2)


Arturo Galletti is the Co-editor and Director of Analytics for the Wages of Wins Network. He is an Electrical Engineer with General Electric in the lovely isle of Puerto Rico, where he keeps his production lines running by day and night (and weekends) and works on sport analysis with his free time.

The Wins Produced metric works great when looking over how much a player helped our hurt your team for a season or over their career. When trying to discuss game to game though it can be a little abstract. Luckily the Wins Produced formula is all about converting points (or the difference in points using efficiency differential) to wins so what if we convert wins back to points? It’s easy enough to do with the following formula.

Point Margin = 31 .0 (Wins Produced-Wins Produced by an Average player)


(Editor Arturo’s Note: I screwed this up again :-) . Fixed now)

Basically the difference in Wins Produced for a player versus an average player can be mapped directly to point margin (go here if you want the full detail behind that equation). Let’s illustrate this as well (for simplicity I’m using .100 WP48 as the player average, it’s actually .099). Here’s a break down of how that works on a minute by minute basis.



Trotting out a star (0.250 WP48) is like spotting your team 4-5 points. Trotting out a player like Bargnani? Just the opposite. Trotting out an average player doesn’t gain you any points, but it doesn’t lose you any either.

For quick review of how the best players are helping their team here are the top 30 players, in terms of Point Margin per game.

Name Team G MP PM PM/G
Kevin Love MIN 73 2611 612.3 8.4
Dwight Howard ORL 78 2935 571.5 7.3
LeBron James MIA 79 3063 505.2 6.4
Chris Paul NOH 80 2880 463.9 5.8
Dwyane Wade MIA 76 2824 380.7 5.0
Zach Randolph MEM 75 2724 339.0 4.5
Kevin Garnett BOS 71 2220 298.6 4.2
Kris Humphries NJN 74 2061 305.1 4.1
Pau Gasol LAL 82 3037 337.0 4.1
Andrew Bynum LAL 54 1500 210.8 3.9
Marcus Camby POR 59 1540 227.3 3.9
Joakim Noah CHI 48 1576 183.7 3.8
Rajon Rondo BOS 68 2527 260.2 3.8
Steve Nash PHO 75 2497 285.8 3.8
Reggie Evans TOR 30 798 113.2 3.8
Andre Iguodala PHI 67 2469 238.1 3.6
Al Horford ATL 77 2704 272.0 3.5
Tim Duncan SAS 76 2156 266.1 3.5
Blake Griffin LAC 82 3112 279.3 3.4
Tyson Chandler DAL 74 2059 250.0 3.4
Paul Pierce BOS 80 2774 256.1 3.2
Landry Fields NYK 82 2541 249.4 3.0
Lamar Odom LAL 82 2639 249.2 3.0
Kevin Durant OKC 78 3038 232.3 3.0
Jason Kidd DAL 80 2653 232.2 2.9
Deron Williams UTA 65 2465 178.1 2.7
Manu Ginobili SAS 80 2426 206.7 2.6
Andrew Bogut MIL 65 2297 160.2 2.5
Nene Hilario DEN 75 2291 176.7 2.4
Kobe Bryant LAL 82 2779 184.2 2.2

Table 1: Top 30 Players for 2011 based on Point Margin per game

Starting Kevin Love is like giving your team an eight point advantage (we’ll get to that more in a second.)  The Heat got a 11.4 point boost every game LeBron and Wade showed up. Why don’t teams with these players win every game? Well let’s also check out the bottom players.

Name Team G MP PM PM/G
Andrea Bargnani TOR 66 2353 -337.0 -5.1
Craig Brackins PHI 3 33 -12.4 -4.1
Bobby Simmons SAS 2 16 -6.5 -3.3
Brook Lopez NJN 82 2889 -237.0 -2.9
Darko Milicic MIN 69 1686 -193.8 -2.8
Earl Barron MIL 21 305 -55.4 -2.6
Jeff Green BOS 75 2427 -193.4 -2.6
Aaron Brooks PHO 59 1284 -150.2 -2.5
Jordan Crawford ATL 42 1027 -106.6 -2.5
Glen Davis BOS 78 2298 -194.5 -2.5
Michael Beasley MIN 73 2361 -179.3 -2.5
Samardo Samuels CLE 37 701 -90.1 -2.4
Ekpe Udoh GSW 58 1030 -140.6 -2.4
Travis Outlaw NJN 82 2358 -198.3 -2.4
Jonny Flynn MIN 53 983 -127.6 -2.4
Nick Young WAS 64 2034 -149.7 -2.3
Al Harrington DEN 73 1665 -170.1 -2.3
Jawad Williams CLE 26 391 -59.2 -2.3
Ryan Hollins CLE 70 1182 -158.1 -2.3
Eduardo Najera CHA 31 372 -69.4 -2.2
Carl Landry NOH 76 2008 -167.9 -2.2
Sonny Weems TOR 59 1413 -130.0 -2.2
Linas Kleiza TOR 39 1032 -85.5 -2.2
Jermaine O’Neal BOS 24 431 -52.6 -2.2
Dante Cunningham CHA 78 1637 -166.2 -2.1
DeMar DeRozan TOR 82 2851 -173.2 -2.1
Gilbert Arenas WAS 70 1796 -147.7 -2.1
Derek Fisher LAL 82 2297 -172.5 -2.1
Nikola Pekovic MIN 65 887 -136.2 -2.1
DaJuan Summers DET 22 199 -45.9 -2.1

Table 2: Worst 30 players of 2011 based on Point Margin per game

Bargnani is essentially an anti Dwyane Wade giving his team a 5 point handicap each game. Kevin Love’s 8.4 points can only handle Darko, Beasley and Flynn and the Wolves have even more bad players after that. Luckily the bad players hurt a little less than the good players help. For the most part at least.

If you want the entire league in a shiny image you can get them all here:
Point Margin for every player in 2011

-Arturo

NBA Lockout and Inception of Conventional Wisdom

An idea is like a virus...

“What is the most resilient parasite? Bacteria? A virus? An intestinal worm? An idea. Resilient… highly contagious. Once an idea has taken hold of the brain it’s almost impossible to eradicate.” 

-Cobb from Christopher Nolan’s “Inception”

The NBA lockout entered its fourth week on Friday, but a lot of the commentary presented by NBA writers and analysts has not moved beyond the typical conventional wisdom, including these popular gems:
  1. The teams that pay the most, win the most.
  2. The league can and should control competitive balance.
  3. Bad contracts are hurting the NBA.
  4. A lockout will kill the popularity of the sport.
Dave Berri, Martin Schmidt and Stacey Brook actually looked over these issues more than five years ago in The Wages of Wins. But Scientific American explains that misinformation - even when we are aware it is incorrect – can still influence us because it’s  “like a virus, resilient, highly contagious“. Luckily enough, being informed about misinformation can diminish its effects. Consider this article an attempt at attacking the virus of misinformation.

The Team that Pays the Most Wins the Most

Conventional wisdom says that teams with higher payrolls win more titles.  Furthermore, if the high payroll teams are all in big markets, then competitive balance is severely harmed and the league suffers.

David Aldridge from Turner Sports published that conventional wisdom on NBA.com two weeks before the lockout.  Here are some key points:

  • The Lakers with luxury tax cost $110 Million.
  • The Kings below luxury tax cost $45 Million.
  • The Lakers by spending money make money.
  • The Kings by trying to save money are losing money.
  • A new system is needed to make the teams more competitive.
Thus we see the common, parasitic, and incorrect idea linger.  And here is yet another example.
Kevin Arnovitz from espn.com suggested the NBA consider Bob Costas’ revenue sharing plan for Major League Baseball to address the disparity between big market and small market teams. The MLB revenue sharing plan was based on baseball’s Blue Ribbon Panel, that did indeed show a spending to win disparity (although the panel only considered five years of data). The Wages of Wins addressed this issue though (Chapter Three):
When we look at the Blue Ribbon years, (1995-99) we see that payroll explains about 33% of wins… So although payroll and wins have a stronger relationship during the Blue Ribbon years, it is still the case that for these years about two-thirds of wins cannot be explained by payroll.

A flawed parasitic idea about the MLB is being applied to the NBA. Does it make any more sense in basketball?  From 2000-01 to 2009-10 (using data from USA Today), team payroll in the NBA only explains 6% of the variation in team wins.  To put that in perspective, if we look at baseball since the 1980s (i.e. look at more than the five years considered by MLB’s Blue Ribbon panel) we see that about 18% of wins are explained by team wins.  All of this says that teams can’t simply buy a title in the NBA or MLB.

The League Can and Should Control Competitive Balance

Berri and his colleagues also reported findings on NBA competitive balance in the Wages of Wins (Chapter 5): “The NBA, relative to any other league we have examined, is not competitively balanced. Yet fans keep coming to the games.” Their analysis showed the standard deviation of winning percentage in the NBA was about three times higher than a league with perfect competitive balance.

Sport Years Noll-Scully Competitive Balance
NBA 1986-2005 2.86
MLB American League 1986-2005 1.78
MLB National League 1986-2005 1.76
NHL 1985-2004 1.70
NFL 1985-2004 1.45

Table 5.1 from the Wages of Wins. Twenty Years of Competitive Balance in North America

In the article  “Competitive Imbalance Continues in the NBA.” Dave and crew explain very simply that the league is limited in their control over competitive balance thanks to the short supply of tall people. No matter how much money teams have to throw around, there are a limited number of players like LeBron James and Dwight Howard. Unless a great many more tall people talented in the sport of basketball suddenly appear, it is unlikely we’ll see the league more balanced no matter what rules David Stern puts in place.

A bigger issue also raised in the article is that in spite of the lack of competitive balance – which has persisted through much of NBA history – league revenue, fan attendance and television ratings continue to increase (at least, have so through much of league history). It’s a very nice tale to believe that a fair and balanced league would be both possible and also more popular. But thus far the data hasn’t supported either claim.

Bad contracts hurt the NBA

Guess who makes more money?

Another piece of conventional wisdom of the NBA lockout is that bad contracts are a problem for the owners. Former espn.com columnist Bill Simmons repeated this argument two weeks ago.

The problem with the “bad contracts” argument is that players’ collective share of revenue is the same regardless of what each individual player gets paid in salary. As a group, the players’ cannot earn more than 57% of basketball-related income, so while bad contracts may impact owners individually, they do not negatively impact the owners as a group. Other players are affected by bad contracts because they reduce the slice of the pie that is available to the rest of the players.  So owners shouldn’t be upset when Joe Johnson, Rudy Gay, Andrea Bargnani, etc… are overpaid.  Other players, though, should be very unhappy with Johnson, Gay, Bargnani, etc…

See Taking a Look at the Numbers Behind the NBA Labor Dispute and Better Angels by Arturo Galletti for an in-depth explanation of why bad contracts did not cause the NBA lockout.

A Lockout Will Kill the Popularity of the Sport

Did something else cause popularity to drop?

Another piece of conventional wisdom tossed around during the NBA lockout is the notion that an extended lockout will drive away fans.

The lockout won’t kill NBA popularity. Why? Because NBA fans like the NBA! The Wages of Wins reported an analysis of how lockouts and strikes – ones that cost games – impact attendance. The analysis revealed that there really wasn’t a statistically significant impact from these events in baseball, football, hockey, or basketball. Fans may say they won’t come back. But the data says they do.

It turns out that when a sport is taken away, fans have very little they can do other than threaten the league to “come back or else!” Unfortunately the “or else” amounts to very little, and fans are happy to return once the stadiums and arenas reopen.

Getting Rid of the Bad Ideas

We know Aldridge and Arnovitz read the Wages of Wins Journal. Aldridge said as much in the past and Arnovitz linked to this blog last week. Despite familiarity with ideas from the Wages of Wins Journal, their thoughts were still infected with strains of conventional wisdom exposed as myths five years ago.

Nothing in this article is new, but hopefully these old ideas will help a new generation of NBA fans see the lockout clearly without being infected by the virus of misinformation (parading about as the conventional wisdom). By addressing the problems of the conventional wisdom surrounding the lockout, it’s my hope that these resilient and bad ideas will wither away before they can infect the subconscious of anyone else.

-Mosi

If you’re interested in a discussion of why there is a lockout and what the potential solution could be, then check out the Weekend Podcast: Replaying Thoughts on the NBA Lockout.

Trivia: Getting to the points quickly.

 Dre (@nerdnumbers) is Co-Editor for the Wages of Wins Network. He also leads up the stats collection department. Dre loves to scour the data for interesting facts and you lucky readers get regular doses of trivia as a result.

Congrats to Beasel32, Anthony Franco and Nathan Verney for taking this one down before the end of the weekend! Highlight below to see the answer if you don’t feel like guessing.

  • In 1978 Walter Davis scored 1959 Points to go along with a WP48 of 0.129 on Phoenix
  • In 1980 Dave Greenwood hit 1334 Points to go along with a WP48 of 0.142 for Chicago
  • In 1983 Clark Kellogg hit 1625 Points to go along with a WP48 of 0.230 for Indiana
  • In 1989 Willie Anderson hit 1508 Points to go along with a WP48 of 0.129 for San Antonio
  • In 1991 Lionel Simmons hit 1421 Points to go along with a WP48 of 0.149 for Sacramento
  • In 1992 Dikembe Mutombo his 1177 Points to go along with a WP48 of 0.193 for Denver

Today’s trivia question started with simple retweet I received from the best Colorado fan out there @Smooth_Operatah (paraphrased)

Dikembe Mutombo had offense!

This question  merits a post on its own, but for today it inspired a trivia question. My reply to this was that I’d prefer Dikembe due to his status as the greatest Nugget center and also the fact that in his earlier days he actually did have a pretty solid offense. Looking over the history of Dikembe’s offensive game using the simplest stat of Points Per Game, a funny thing about Dikembe stood out. It put him in rare company which leads to today’s trivia question:

Since 1978 only six players have managed to

  • Have a WP48 > 0.100 in their rookie season
  • Score 1000+ points in their rookie year
  • Played at least five seasons in the NBA
  • Had their best scoring season as a rookie

As per my usual routine I’ve named one of them for you. Think you can get the other five?

-Dre