Monthly Archives: August 2011

FIBA U19 WC: MVP and All-Tournament Team

Posted on by
2

Devin Dignam (of NBeh? “fame”) is the Toronto Raptors writer for the Wages of Wins Network. His background with the Raptors gives him unique insight into many areas including the draft, overpaid players and overrated players.

The FIBA U19 World Championships took place from June 30th to July 10th, but it has taken me until now to compile all 62 box scores and calculate the Estimated Wins Produced numbers. Over the next week or two, I’ll be writing several posts about this tournament that focus on familiar Wages of Wins themes.

MVP and All-Tournament Team

At the close of the FIBA U19 tournament, five players were selected – although the method used is unknown to me – to the All-Tournament team. Furthermore, the Raptors’ 2011 draft choice, Lithuanian Jonas Valanciunas, was awarded the Tournament MVP. My immediate questions upon learning these facts were: did these players actually deserve to make it onto the All-Tournament team? And was Jonas Valanciunas really the most productive player in the entire tournament?

Raptors' fans, meet your future starting centre

Table 1: Top 15 Players in FIBA u19 2011 Tournament by EWP*

Player Country Position EWP40 Estimated Wins
J. Valanciunas Lithuania C 0.527 3.66
E. Dukulis Latvia** F 0.366 2.30
A. Drmic Australia F 0.324 2.08
D. McDermott USA F 0.303 1.80
T. Mitchell Jr. USA F/C 0.506 1.80
D. Pierre Canada** F 0.313 1.74
D. Kulagin Russia G/F 0.247 1.68
C. Felicio Brazil** F/C 0.344 1.64
G. Grochowski Poland** G 0.331 1.59
T. Katic Croatia** G 0.311 1.55
L. Nogueira Brazil** C 0.315 1.52
H. Greenwood Australia G 0.245 1.51
V. Cizauskas Lithuania G 0.309 1.50
A. Cvetkovic Serbia G 0.237 1.49
P. Lambic Serbia G 0.264 1.47
  • Note: players selected for the All-Tournament Team in bold
  • **Team did not make top 6.

Good news Raptors’ fans! Valanciunas was indeed the tournament MVP, and it wasn’t even close; Valanciunas produced more than one and a half times more wins than the next player on the list. This bodes very well for the future of a franchise whose starting centre was the least productive player in the league last season.

All-Tournament Team

But what about the rest of the All-Tournament team? As you can see above, only four of the five players on the All-Tournament team finished in the top 15 in Estimated Wins. Is there another table I could put up that would contain all five? Of course there is!

Table 2: Top Players in 2011 FIBA U19 Tournament by Points Scored

Player Country Team EWS Rank Pos Total Points
J. Valanciunas Lithuania 1 C 207
B. Barac Croatia** 8 F 168
M. Michalak Poland** 7 F 157
A. Ahmed Egypt** 12 C 148
J. Lamb USA 5 G/F 146
D. Saric Croatia** 8 C 145
D. Kulagin Russia 3 G/F 143
A. Drmic Australia 1 F 139
S. Karasev Russia 3 F 138
H. Greenwood Australia 6 G 137
D. Pierre Canada** 11 F 135
A. Cvetkovic Serbia 2 G 130
M. Creek Australia 6 F 130
E. Dukulis Latvia** 10 F 127
D. Bertrans Latvia** 10 C 122
  • Note: players selected for the All-Tournament Team in bold
  • **Team did not make top 6.

On this list, the fifth and final member of the All-Tournament team, American Jeremy Lamb, makes an appearance. It seems that, whether the five members of the All-Tournament team were determined by vote or simply appointed by FIBA, the method that was used was to look at the top scorers at each position and to ignore players on teams that finished below the top six. Following this logic, the top scoring centre was Valanciunas, the top scoring forwards that played on top six teams were Lamb and Russian Dmitry Kulagin, and the top scoring guards that played on top six teams were Australian Hugh Greenwood and Serbian Aleksandar Cvetkovic. Of course, because Lamb and Kulagin also spent time at shooting guard, by these rules the best option would’ve been to pick them as guards and stick Drmic and Karasev on as the forwards, but hey, who’s keeping score?

The WoW 2011 FIBA U19 WC All-Stars

Devin's Motive: Get a Canadian on the All-Tournament Team!

Turning back to Estimated Wins Produced, here are the players who I think should belong on the All-Tournament team:

Player Country Position EWP40 Estimated Wins
J. Valanciunas Lithuania C 0.527 3.66
E. Dukulis Latvia PF 0.366 2.30
A. Drmic Australia SF 0.324 2.08
D. Kulagin Russia SG 0.247 1.68
G. Grochowski Poland PG 0.331 1.59
T. Mitchell Jr. USA PF/C 0.506 1.80
D. Pierre Canada F 0.313 1.74
T. Katic Croatia G 0.311 1.55

Note: players selected for the All-Tournament Team in bold

On my list, I have cheated somewhat and included eight players – five starters and three backups who can play more than one position. The starters are the top players at their respective positions; the backups are second at their positions, with the exception of Canadian Dyshawn Piere, who finished third behind American Doug McDermott. I elected to go with Pierre over McDermott for several reasons:

  • Pierre was the better overall player. Although he didn’t make any threes, Pierre was the more efficient shooter, scored more, drew significantly more free-throw attempts, rebounded more, had more assists and blocks, and fouled less. McDermott had more steals and was excellent at taking care of the ball, but given that these two players are so close in total wins, I’d rather have Pierre, who had the better EWP40.
  • Since Tony Mitchell Jr. is already on my team, if I pick Pierre over McDermott, each player on my team will be from a different country.
  • Pierre played for the 11th ranked team – it’s always nice to see good players on bad teams get their due (see Love, Kevin).
  • Pierre is Canadian, rendering all previous points superfluous.

Comparing my team to the actual All-Tournament team, we can see that only two of the players are on both lists. If it’s any consolation though, Greenwood and Cvetkovic were very close to making my team as well.

Summing Up

At the 2011 FIBA U19 World Championships, the five players on the All-Tournament team were determined by total points scored by players on teams that finished in the top six. Unsurprisingly, these five were not necessarily the players who were the most productive players in the tournament.

-Devin

*Author’s note: You’ve probably noticed that I refer to “Estimated Wins Produced” in this article. Estimated Wins Produced are slightly less accurate, but easier to calculate than “regular” Wins Produced. To calculate Estimated Wins Produced, take a player’s Win Score per minute and adjust it for position played. From there, PAWSmin is plugged into a formula to determine Estimated WP40.

NBA Late Bloomers

Posted on by
6

Waiting on Potential

He'll live up to his potential. . . any day now

Some players don’t pan out during their early years. GMs are more than willing to give certain players a second chance though. In spite of their “bust” titles Kwame Brown and Darko Milicic are still gainfully employed. It’s easy enough to believe that players with enough potential will eventually “snap out of it” and become a star despite playing poorly early in their career. Is this really a reasonable assumption?

I decided to look for late bloomers. Here was my criteria:

  • Player played two seasons where they earned 10+ Wins (Star) during their career
  • Player never had a good season (WP48>0.150 and 1000+ MP) in their rookie contract (first four years)

Has the NBA traditionally been ripe with players that simple needed a little more time to develop? Should a GM invest their efforts into finding diamonds in the rough that other GMs overlooked? The answer appears to be no.

Late Bloomers

It Takes some MVPs a little time to get NBA ready

Table 1: Late Bloomers before they Bloomed.

Player Pre-Star Seasons Pre-Star G Pre-Star GS Pre-Star MP Pre-Star WP48 Pre-Star WP
Chauncey Billups 5 297 203 8154 0.071 12.1
Darrell Walker 5 378 126 8796 0.096 17.6
Detlef Schrempf 5 374 52 8690 0.090 16.3
Doug Christie 4 155 51 2962 0.037 2.3
Gary Payton 4 327 321 10222 0.127 27.0
Gerald Wallace 4 208 77 3485 0.105 7.6
Mike Miller 5 351 283 10747 0.115 25.8
Sam Cassell 6 353 126 9205 0.087 16.7
Stephon Marbury 7 502 496 19196 0.086 34.5
Steve Nash 5 307 148 7536 0.112 17.6
Terrell Brandon 4 304 68 6736 0.086 12.1

Table 2: Late Bloomers after they Bloomed

Player Post-Star Seasons Post-Star Star Seasons Post-Star G Post Star GS Post-Star MP Post-Star WP48 Post-Star WP
Chauncey Billups 9 7 685 685 23523 0.213 104.3
Darrell Walker 5 3 342 230 9805 0.218 44.5
Detlef Schrempf 11 7 762 472 24907 0.193 100.0
Doug Christie 11 3 672 657 23116 0.159 76.7
Gary Payton 13 10 1008 912 36895 0.185 142.5
Gerald Wallace 6 5 407 392 15394 0.239 76.6
Mike Miller 6 3 382 247 12480 0.214 55.7
Sam Cassell 9 3 640 564 20608 0.149 64.1
Stephon Marbury 6 2 344 320 12690 0.113 29.8
Steve Nash 10 10 783 783 26637 0.260 144.3
Terrell Brandon 7 4 420 412 14809 0.206 63.5

We do have some genuinely awesome talents. Chauncey Billups, Detlef Schrempf, Gary Payton and Steve Nash all turned into great players after their rocky starts. Walker, Christie, Cassell and Brandon managed to have short bursts of greatness. Miller and Wallace are still playing and their ability to overcome injury will dictate their legacy. Marbury managed to turn himself from a below average overrated scorer to an average overrated scorer. There’s hope for every player!

Summing Up

Dudes. . . time to give up on these guys

Despite the fact that late bloomers do exist we should not be so optimistic. Over 2500 players have suited up since 1978. Around 300 of these players have turned into “stars”. It’s very rare to find a star player and even rarer to find one out of a pool of players that have been playing badly. Everyone can hope that their favorite player that is chocked full of potential will turn it around. Sadly, the fact is if it hasn’t happened by their first contract extension, it probably won’t ever happen. That won’t stop many GMs from hoping though.

-Dre

Arvydas Sabonis and other Centers that Aged like Fine Wine.

Posted on by
5

 Greg Steele is a student at Abilene Christian University and a long-time Houston Rockets fan. Being short and round (and not like Charles Barkley), Greg is a basketball watcher, not a basketball player. As such, Greg was attracted to statistical measures which recognize the contributions of round and clumsy players as well as those of the more aesthetically pleasing players, so the Wages of Wins was a natural fit. Greg is available via email at ges05a@acu.edu

Hall of Fame

Sabonis is in unique company.

This past Friday the 2011 class was inducted into the NBA Hall of Fame. Although Dennis Rodman occupied much of the spotlight (as usual), well-known scorers Artis Gilmore and Chris Mullins received plenty of attention. The inductee who has been overlooked, though, is the tallest of the class: Arvydas Sabonis.

Sabonis was inducted into the Hall of Fame at least partially because he was one of the first international players to jump to the NBA. Unfortunately, Sabonis came along in a time before the globalization of the NBA, and so Sabonis only entered the NBA as a 31 year-old “rookie.” Despite his late start, Sabonis’ short career was very productive. While we have almost no statistical information about Sabonis’ career before he came to the NBA, we can compare his performance after the age of 31 with the 3 best centers in the last 20 years, all of whom played well beyond their 31st birthdays: Hakeem Olajuwon, David Robinson, and Shaquille O’Neal. The chart below compares the performances of the four centers after the age of 31.

Table 1: Wins Produced for Top Centers that played over the age of 30

Hakeem Olajuwon Shaquille O’Neal David Robinson Arvydas Sabonis
WP at 31 20.6 15.4 1.2 13.3
WP at 32 15.6 15.9 17.8 10.5
WP at 33 15.5 8.5 18.4 12.7
WP at 34 10.4 3.0 16.6 9.2
WP at 35 7.0 5.6 13.9 9.8
WP at 36 10.4 12.4 12.9 3.5
WP at 37 2.0 3.7 9.2 DNP
WP at 38 6.6 2.1 Retired 6.1
WP at 39 3.7 Retired Retired Retired
Total WP in 30s 91.8 66.6 90 65.1
Career WP% 33.70% 24.50% 34.80% 100%

 Table 2: Wins Produced per 48 Minutes for Top Centers that played over the age of 30

Hakeem Olajuwon Shaquille O’Neal David Robinson Arvydas Sabonis
WP48 at 31 0.302 0.300 0.390 0.368
WP48 at 32 0.262 0.306 0.348 0.280
WP48 at 33 0.267 0.225 0.348 0.261
WP48 at 34 0.176 0.128 0.311 0.227
WP48 at 35 0.205 0.153 0.281 0.278
WP48 at 36 0.207 0.265 0.269 0.129
WP48 at 37 0.093 0.142 0.264 DNP
WP48 at 38 0.206 0.137 Retired 0.243
WP48 at 39 0.130 Retired Retired Retired
WP48 in 30s 0.205 0.207 0.316 0.256

Clearly, Robinson is the class of the group, followed by Olajuwon, who was better as an older player, and Shaq, who was better as a younger player. While Sabonis’ 65.1 Wins Produced lag significantly behind Hakeem Olajuwon and David Robinson, the mean WP48 of Sabonis’ 7 seasons after age 31 is higher than the mean WP48 of Olajuwon’s 9 seasons after the age of 31. Sabonis’ mean WP48 is also significantly higher than O’Neal’s, even though O’Neal only played one more season than Sabonis.

A Tale of Two Cities: Sabonis and Shaq

Shaq and Sabonis. . . foul?

Sabonis is most similar after the age of 31 to Shaq, whose late-career output accounted for only 24.5% of his total career Wins Produced. If we project Sabonis’ career along the same career arc that we see with O’Neal, making Sabonis’ 65.1 WP after age 31 account for 24.5% of his “career” WP, we come up with an estimated 265.7 Wins produced for Sabonis, if he had entered the NBA as a younger man. Shaquille O’Neal turned 20 in his first NBA season, unlike Robinson (24) or Olajuwon (22). Again we find that Sabonis is more directly comparable with O’Neal, since Sabonis was the star of the Soviet Olympic team at the age of 19. Thus, using Shaq’s career arc as an approximation of Sabonis career arc seems reasonable because: 1) The two had very similar production after the age of 31, and 2) both began playing top-level basketball as young players.

Summing Up

As you can see Sabonis easily belongs as a member of this group. It’s somewhat fitting that Sabonis made the hall of fame the same season Shaq retired. While we got to see Shaq play for a very long time, we only got to see Sabonis play at the twighlight of his career. Let’s just be happy that thanks to the Hall of Fame his greatness won’t be forgotten.

-Greg

Dennis Rodman and Artis Gilmore: Two of the 50 Greatest NBA Players of All-Time?

Posted on by
11
The Weekend Podcast returned from summer vacation and, in honor of Dennis Rodman and Artis Gilmore‘s inductions into the Hall of Fame, bloggers from the Wages of Wins Network debated “The Worm”, the “A-Train”, as well as eight other players that should be added to the 50 Greatest NBA Players of All-Time.

The Cast (from the Wages of Wins Journal)

The Synopsis

Mosi published a post in February that updated the 50 Greatest NBA Players of All-Time using Wins Produced and the Hall of Fame probability model from basketball-reference.com. Here was the method he used for updating the list:
  1. Since Wins Produced can only be calculated with statistics that go back to the 1977-78 season, any one that played the majority of their career before 1978 cannot be removed from the list.
  2. Wins Produced is great for measuring the production of a player’s game, but the 50 greatest players should have form and function. They have to look like a great player and this has to be validated by a group similar to the one that selected the original 50 greatest players. To meet that criteria, the only players that will be considered for addition to the list will be those that have a greater than 50% chance of being selected to the Hall of Fame, according to basketball-reference.com’s Hall of Fame Probability model.

Devin felt players from the 1950s and 1960s were overrated and responded to Mosi’s post with his own updated list of the 50 Greatest NBA Players using a different method.

Here is Devin’s method: For players who played their whole careers after the 1976-77 season (also known as the turnover era), I simply made use of Arturo’s handy list of the greatest players since 1978. For players who played at least part of their careers before the 1977-78 season, I used this method (click on link to see method) for estimating Wins Produced. It’s important to note that, due to the fact that the NBA didn’t keep track of steals, blocks, or turnovers during most of the pre-turnover era, the WP numbers are inflated. I also didn’t count ABA stats…

Despite the different methods, Mosi and Devin’s lists had 35 players in common. That left 15 different players from each list in limbo, so Mosi and Devin took their differences to Arturo for arbitration on a podcast. This spreadsheet lists the players Mosi and Devin debated for Arturo’s decision.

Debating the 50 Greatest NBA Players of All-Time

Bill Sharman vs. Grant Hill. Arturo’s decision: Hill

Paul Arizin vs. Larry Nance (highlights). Arturo’s decision: Nance Neither

Pete Maravich vs. Marcus Camby. Arturo’s decision: Camby Neither

Earl Monroe vs. Paul Pierce. Arturo’s decision: Pierce

Billy Cunningham vs. Dirk Nowitzki. Arturo’s decision: Both

Rick Barry vs. Steve Nash. Arturo’s decision: Both

Dave Bing vs. LeBron James. Arturo’s decision: LeBron

Sam Jones vs. Artis Gilmore (highlights). Arturo’s decision: Gilmore

Dave DeBusschere vs. Mark Jackson (highlights). Arturo’s decision: DeBuschere Jackson Neither

(Editor Arturo’s note: If you listen all the way to the end you’ll find that the final descicion was neither. I called an audible and gave it to Dwyane Wade)

Bob Cousy vs. Shawn Marion. Arturo’s decision: Cousy

Nate Archibald vs. Ben Wallace. Arturo’s decision: Wallace

Hal Greer vs. Buck Williams (highlights). Arturo’s decision: Neither

Lenny Wilkens vs. Walt Bellamy (analysis & highlights). Arturo’s decision: Bellamy Neither

Willis Reed vs. Dikembe Mutombo. Arturo’s decision: Both

John Havlicek vs. Dennis Rodman. Arturo’s decision: Both

After arbitration, the WoW Network’s 50 Greatest NBA Players of All-Time were (in no particular order, with changes to the NBA’s original list marked by an asterisk):

  1. Bill Russell
  2. Bob Pettit
  3. Charles Barkley
  4. Clyde Drexler
  5. Dave Cowens
  6. David Robinson
  7. Dolph Schayes
  8. Elgin Baylor
  9. Elvin Hayes
  10. Gary Payton
  11. George Mikan
  12. Hakeem Olajuwon
  13. Jason Kidd
  14. Jerry Lucas
  15. Jerry West
  16. John Stockton
  17. Julius Erving
  18. Kareem Abdul-Jabbar
  19. Karl Malone
  20. Kevin Garnett
  21. Kobe Bryant
  22. Larry Bird
  23. Magic Johnson
  24. Michael Jordan
  25. Moses Malone
  26. Nate Thurmond
  27. Oscar Robertson
  28. Patrick Ewing
  29. Robert Parish
  30. Scottie Pippen
  31. Shaquille O’Neal
  32. Tim Duncan
  33. Walt Frazier
  34. Wes Unseld
  35. Wilt Chamberlain
  36. Grant Hill*
  37. Paul Pierce*
  38. Billy Cunningham
  39. Dirk Nowitzki*
  40. Rick Barry
  41. Steve Nash*
  42. LeBron James*
  43. Artis Gilmore*
  44. Mark Jackson*  Dwyane Wade*
  45. Bob Cousy
  46. Ben Wallace*
  47. Willis Reed
  48. Dikembe Mutombo*
  49. John Havlicek
  50. Dennis Rodman*

The final list is a product of each blogger’s biases: Mosi’s respect for the old school and Hall of Fame, All-Star Team and All-NBA selections; Devin’s views on basketball in the 50s and 60s and reliance on Wins Produced to identify greatness; and Arturo’s preference for modern players, belief that big men win championships and fascination with Rodman. The interaction of all those biases made for an interesting, hour-long discussion.

You can listen to the podcast one of three ways:

What were the best and worst decisions made for the WoW Network’s 50 Greatest NBA Players of All-Time? Let us know in the comments section.

Note from DJ (think of this as the first comment):  The following post – from 2009 – argues that Rick Barry is probably not one of the 50 greatest players of all-time: The Better Barry

At least, I don’t think Brent Barry is one of the 50 greatest players of all-time.  And I do think Brent was a more productive player – at least per-minute – than his famous father.

Note from Arturo: I put Mr. Dwyane Wade in. Here’s the highlight reel:

Defending Rodman (featuring the 100 Most Productive Seasons since 1978)

Posted on by
18

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.

Dennis Rodman was inducted into the NBA hall of fame as part of the 2011 Class.

Some people disagreed with the choice.

Some have made rather convincing cases for his inclusion.

Here’s mine:


Rodman owns the two most productive seasons since 1978. He owns 7 of the top 100 seasons.

Table 2: Breakdown of Multiple Top Raw Productivity Players

Name # of Top 100 Apperances Average of Rank
Charles Barkley 10 113
Magic Johnson 8 173
Dennis Rodman 7 204
Tim Duncan 6 208
Marcus Camby 6 777
David Robinson 6 136
Kevin Garnett 5 474
Dwight Howard 4 172
Hakeem Olajuwon 4 504
Shaquille O’Neal 3 476
Robert Parish 3 692
Wes Unseld 3 115
Moses Malone 3 297
Kareem Abdul-Jabbar 3 1233
Dikembe Mutombo 3 276
Ben Wallace 3 335
Larry Bird 2 289
Andrew Bynum 2 579
Artis Gilmore 2 396

Please keep in mind that I am using raw productivity per minute so Dennis Rodman two best seasons were more productive on a per minute center than any center, big man or player since 1978.

He played 30 minutes or more 557 times in the regular season. His teams won 392 of those games or 70% of those games. That would be  on average 58 wins for an 82 game season.

In the playoffs, it goes to an unreal 45-17 or 72.5% percent of games won by his teams when he played 30 minutes or more.

As a point of reference, Shaq teams went 628-315 in the regular season (66%) and 111-74 in the Playoffs (60%)

He has 5 Rings and 7 Rebounding titles.

To me, this puts him in the pantheon. We can argue the exact ranking till we are blue in the face but he clearly belongs in the Hall of Fame.

I’ll leave you with one final thought: the greatest athlete Phil Jackson ever coached according to Phil?

One Clue. He's in the Photo

-Arturo