Should D’Antoni Get Credit for Lin’s Success?

I ran into a post on Marginal Revolution about Jeremy Lin, titled “Is Jeremy Lin a Fluke?”:

Nate Silver says no. I say that in Mike D’Antoni’s offensive schemes a lot of point guards reap more than the statistics they would pick up on other teams and from other offenses, and since the D’Antoni scheme is not very generalizable, or capable of winning a championship, the “other team” metrics are more or less the correct ones.

Here at the Wages of Wins we have our own thoughts about Lin (more on that in tomorrow’s post), but for now I am much more interested in Tyler Cowen’s thoughts on Mike D’Antoni above.

First, I might ask, If it’s all about D’Antoni’s schemes, why is Steve Nash still one of the best point guards in the league? D’Antoni has been gone for several years, and to my knowledge his successors have changed the system a lot (and, in any case, isn’t Cowen making the argument that they couldn’t? I’m not sure what “hard to generalize” really means). Why didn’t Nash’s performance drop off with D’Antoni’s departure?

Careers per-48 Stats
SEA	Min	WP48	Wins	PTS	DRB	ORB	REB	AST	TO	BLK	STL	PF
06-07 PHO	2682	.307	17.1	25.3	4.3	0.5	4.8	15.8	5.1	0.1	1.0	2.1
07-08 PHO	2780	.251	14.6	23.7	4.4	0.5	4.9	15.5	5.1	0.1	0.9	2.0
08-09 PHO	2484	.194	10.0	22.4	3.9	0.4	4.3	13.9	4.8	0.2	1.1	2.1
09-10 PHO	2660	.250	13.8	24.1	4.2	0.6	4.8	16.1	5.3	0.2	0.8	1.9
10-11 PHO	2497	.244	12.7	21.3	4.2	0.8	5.0	16.4	5.1	0.1	0.9	1.7
11-12 PHO	567	.231	2.7	21.8	3.0	0.5	3.6	15.2	5.3	0.0	0.8	0.8
Career Avg	2465	.241	12.4	23.4	3.9	0.8	4.7	13.9	4.6	0.1	1.1	2.3

Average PG	1624	.099	3.3	18.8	3.9	0.9	4.8	8.3	3.2	0.3	1.8	3.6

Career Shooting Efficiency
	FG%	2FG%	3FG%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FGA	3FGA	PPS	FTA
Nash 05-06	51.2%	54.8%	43.9%	92.1%	58.3%	63.2%	18.1	5.9	1.41	4.8
Nash 06-07	53.2%	57.5%	45.5%	89.9%	61.3%	65.4%	17.4	6.1	1.45	4.4
Nash 07-08	50.4%	52.7%	47.0%	90.6%	59.7%	64.1%	16.6	6.6	1.43	4.2
Nash 08-09	50.3%	52.9%	43.9%	93.3%	56.6%	61.5%	16.4	4.8	1.36	4.1
Nash 09-10	50.7%	54.0%	42.6%	93.8%	57.0%	61.5%	17.8	5.3	1.35	4.1
Nash 10-11	49.2%	52.5%	39.5%	91.2%	54.2%	60.1%	15.6	3.9	1.36	4.8
Nash 11-12	52.8%	57.7%	39.2%	85.0%	58.0%	61.3%	16.3	4.3	1.34	3.4
Nash (career)	49.7%	52.4%	43.3%	90.8%	56.2%	61.2%	17.1	5.1	1.37	4.7

Average PG	43.0%	45.7%	35.6%	80.5%	47.8%	52.5%	16.0	4.3	1.18	4.4

Although D’Antoni left the Suns after the 07-08 season, there hasn’t been an appreciable drop off in Nash’s performance. In fact, Nash is a bit of medical curiosity, since a player his age should be declining rabidly.

Furthermore, if D’Antoni’s system is so generous to point guards, why have Toney Douglas, Iman Shumpert, and Mike Bibby all been so terrible?

Raw Stats
	Min	WP48	Wins	PTS	DRB	ORB	REB	AST	TO	BLK	STL	PF
Shumpert	751	.010	0.2	16.4	4.5	0.9	5.4	5.3	4.0	0.4	3.3	5.0
Bibby	272	-.003	-0.0	10.4	4.2	0.5	4.8	4.9	2.1	0.2	1.6	4.1
Douglas	533	-.141	-1.6	17.7	4.0	0.5	4.5	5.2	4.1	0.1	2.1	4.1

Average SG	570	.099	1.2	20.1	4.3	1.0	5.4	4.2	2.8	0.4	1.6	3.3
Average PG	617	.099	1.3	19.6	3.9	0.9	4.9	8.2	3.6	0.4	1.9	3.3

Shooting Efficiency
	FG%	2FG%	3FG%	FT%	eFG%	TS%	FGA	3FGA	PPS	FTA
Shumpert	38.5%	41.7%	28.8%	84.6%	42.1%	45.4%	16.9	4.2	0.97	2.5
Bibby	28.6%	31.6%	27.5%	83.3%	38.6%	40.6%	12.4	9.0	0.84	1.1
Douglas	32.1%	38.1%	23.8%	85.7%	37.1%	39.3%	21.6	9.1	0.82	1.9

Average SG	42.5%	45.8%	35.7%	80.3%	48.3%	52.6%	17.2	5.6	1.17	4.3
Average PG	42.9%	46.1%	34.7%	80.9%	47.8%	52.4%	16.8	4.7	1.17	4.4

Regarding the second part of Cowen’s analysis, I am curious as to how exactly he determined that “the D’Antoni scheme is not very generalizable, or capable of winning a championship”? What huge sample of championship runs is Tyler using for his observations here? Even if we made the rather generous assumption that every Suns roster he coached was championship-caliber (as an aside, I hope he isn’t going to argue that the Knicks rosters of the past few years were), we’re talking about a sample of a few seasons, correct?

I’m fairly certain if a student presented a paper that came to economic conclusions based on evidence like this in one of Tyler Cowen’s classes, the grade would not be favorable.

19 Responses to "Should D’Antoni Get Credit for Lin’s Success?"

lovethoseknicks says:

February 12, 2012 at 3:33 pm

1. In several interviews with Alvin Gentry right after D’Antoni left (while the Suns were still good) he said he was doing exactly the same things he learned from D’Antoni. In any event, I don’t think it’s an accident that Nash got much better for the Suns.

2. Bibby has been borderline comatose since the playoffs last year. He’s done.

3. Douglas was exposed as not being able to the run point over the last 2 years. He only gets time there because the Knicks are so thin they are desperate. He’s also coming off shoulder surgery in the off season and hasn’t been able to shoot no matter where he plays.

4. Shumpert was a combo guard in college, but he was known as more of a SG. He only got a lot of time at PG time in NY because the Knicks are so thin they are desperate.

5. Duhon was under all star consideration in his 1st year for D’Antoni (non entity now)

6. Felton was under all star consideration in his 1st year for D’Antoni (they want to run him out of town in Portland now)
lovethoseknicks says:

February 12, 2012 at 3:46 pm

Clearly, I’m a D’Antoni fan (granted I may be the only one left in NY).

I think he gets a bum rap about defense because so many people look at how many PPG the Suns used to give up instead of their defensive efficiency. They were an above average defensive team. People also don’t understand that he willingly makes some tradeoffs between offense and defense because they net out positive. He’d rather average 105 – 100 than 98 – 95 and have a 5 point differential than say he has a better defense.

The key point in all this is that it takes a specific kind of PG to run his system properly. Lin looks like a pretty good match so far. You have to be very good at the P&R (some are not), have the ability to penetrate & hold your dribble, run the break well, and be creative enough to take what the defense is giving instead of running a lot of set plays and ISOs. It also helps if you have 3 point range so teams can’t go under screens. That may be the Achilles heal for Lin.
TheNBAGeek says:

February 12, 2012 at 3:49 pm

1) Gentry may have tried to run the same system (again, isn’t Cowen’s argument that this is not possible?), who knows.

2) Bibby’s performance in 2012 so far is worse than his “comatose” performance of 2010-11.

3) & 4) seem like excuses

5) fans and coaches might have called Duhon an all-star, but that’s hardly an argument likely to convince me. Duhon was pretty damn average in NY (and incidentally is playing pretty much exactly as well so far in 2012 as he did in 08-09. Looking at his career performance I see no noticeable “D’Antoni effect”:

http://www.thenbageek.com/players/242-chris-duhon?career=1

6) Felton was better in CHA 09-10 than he was in 10-11 and I once again see no “D’Antoni effect” in 10-11:

http://www.thenbageek.com/players/68-raymond-felton?career=1
MIA_Heat_Index says:

February 12, 2012 at 4:37 pm

@nbageek:

Ilovethoseknicks is right about Bibby. The comment was that Bibby’s been comatose since the 2011 playoffs, and he has been. Bibby’s Est.WP48 in 2011 playoffs: -0.033 (see http://miami-heat-index.blogspot.com/p/heat-produced.html). Bibby’s WP48 in 2012: -0.030.
TheNBAGeek says:

February 12, 2012 at 4:50 pm

LTK,

I actually agree with you about the defensive efficiency, which is irrelevant to the argument. Said argument, by the way, is not that D’Antoni is a bad coach. I think he’s a perfectly capable coach.

“You have to be very good at the P&R (some are not), have the ability to penetrate & hold your dribble, run the break well, and be creative enough to take what the defense is giving instead of running a lot of set plays and ISOs. It also helps if you have 3 point range so teams can’t go under screens.”

What you just described seems like what I would want for a PG to thrive under my system if I were a coach, and I’m fairly confident my system would nothing like D’Antoni’s, because I have no clue what his system is.

In other words, those are all things that just generally make point guards good, irrespective of the system.
motherwell says:

February 12, 2012 at 7:55 pm

What you just described seems like what I would want for a PG to thrive under my system if I were a coach.

I agree in part, but the one key skill D’Antoni has almost removed from the required skillset of his PGs is feeding the post. He emphasises shooting and PnR skills over skills like feeding the post and controlling the clock.

Does the D’Antoni system require a “special” PG? No, not really. Does it emphasis SPECIFIC PG skills over others? I’d say yes, but the overlap is much larger than the disparity. And most importantly, does it make PGs significantly better? In overall stats probably, but in per minute or efficiency stats probably not. As a Suns fan, that we’ve never had a serviceable backup to Nash, and we’ve tried many, many PGs, kinda proves that.
TheNBAGeek says:

February 12, 2012 at 8:09 pm

I won’t disagree with you, but I will say that de-emphasizing “feeding the post” and “controlling the clock” both hardly seem like integral, “difficult to generalize” components of a “system”.

I’ll also say that feeding the post is easy, seriously. I was never a good basketball player but I could do that. In fact, I HAD to do that because if I didn’t, I’d get yanked off the floor.

“Controlling the clock” sounds, to me, a lot like basically dribbling around the perimeter without doing much of anything for the first 10 seconds of the shot clock. I can see why D’Antoni would de-emphasize this skillset.
motherwell says:

February 12, 2012 at 8:49 pm

I won’t disagree with you, but…

Is that a “….But you know what, I think will” but? But is such a lovely word :)

“difficult to generalize”

I dunno, seems exactly what D’Antoni does! If you don’t run iso plays and postups, a PG doesn’t need feeding skills. If that isn’t de-emphasising, I don’t know what is.

Feeding the post is hard in the NBA – this isn’t the YMCA. 6’10″ athletes make it hard, and the margin of error is often small, especially when 3 feet further out makes a difference.

Ditto managing the clock. The Suns threw away a number of games by going too fast when they didn’t need to. Managing the clock, and knowing when NOT to press, is a PG skill some schemes push, whereas others go full tilt.

I think a fairly solid argument could be made that, at some moments of a game, wasting seconds is more important than taking a more efficient shot quickly, and D’Antoni’s system is very much shoot always.
TheNBAGeek says:

February 13, 2012 at 7:05 am

Motherwell,

I’m well aware it’s not the YMCA, thanks for the headsup. My point is that if a 3rd string high-school player finds it easy to feed the post, odds are that a world-class athlete finds it easy to feed the post, even against “6’10″ athletes”. Which is in any case, a ridiculous thing to say. The post defender is not the one who might make feeding the post difficult, the wing defender is. Sealing off those 6’10″ athletes is the job of the 6’10″ athlete who presumably plays the post on your team.

I never claimed that managing the clock isn’t hard. I merely said that I understand why D’Antoni does not value it highly.
lovethoseknicks says:

February 13, 2012 at 9:09 am

D’Antoni’s system is predicated on running, space and the P&R. You don’t always have ideal personnel. So you adjust.

When he had Shaq in the middle he ran things somewhat differently than when he just had Amare in the middle. That’s what I’m saying about Gentry. Gentry used to play a guy like Frye at C . That’s because he can shoot 3s very well. He helps create the space for Nash to operate. Now he plays Gortat at C, so it’s tweaked. D’Antoni faces the same issue when Amare/Chandler are together. Same system.

Anyone that has been watching the Knicks knows Douglas can’t run the P&R AT ALL & Shumpert is not competent yet. Shumpert is more of a SG or SF. D’Antoni has said as much.

No one is saying Lin would be terrible without D’Antoni. It’s never that black or white. However, the system for these 5 games has been to give him space (playing Novak for example) & running the P&R with Chandler. It’s perfect for his skill set.
lovethoseknicks says:

February 13, 2012 at 9:19 am

“And most importantly, does it make PGs significantly better? In overall stats probably, but in per minute or efficiency stats probably not. As a Suns fan, that we’ve never had a serviceable backup to Nash, and we’ve tried many, many PGs, kinda proves that.”

IMO any PG with the ability to penetrate, run the P&R, & shoot will put up better efficiency & per minute stats because they will get more space to operate & shoot earlier in the clock before the defense is set.

If they cant run, penetrate, or knock down a 3 they are screwed.

The opposition will simply go under picks & give the player all the space he needs to throw up bricks.

That’s how teams adjusted to Duhon & Felton after their great starts. It slowed them down. The Lakers just tried that on Lin, but he was knocking down jumpers too. It remains to be seen if he can sustain that because you can be sure they are going to keep trying that approach given that he has never been a 3 point shooter.
lovethoseknicks says:

February 13, 2012 at 9:23 am

To sum it up:

1. Not every PG has the same skill set (not even every great one)

2. Not every PG that plays for D’Antoni is going to improve sharply

3. If your primary skill is running the P&R, running the break, & you have some shooting range you are going be a lot better playing for D’Antoni than just about anyone else.
TheNBAGeek says:

February 13, 2012 at 9:31 am

LTK,

All of that is irrelevant. If you are going to post some statement with absolutes like Cowen did, you’ve got to give me, you know, actual PROOF that the results have anything to do with the system.

All of your arguments sound plausible. You know what else sounds plausible? That D’Antoni coached Nash during his prime, and that none of these PG’s results are much different than they would have been in other systems. Neither argument is particularly conclusive, and the correct thing to say here is not “I’m right, you’re wrong”, but rather that “WE DON’T KNOW, because the evidence is inconclusive.” Any answer other than that is just flat-out trying to make order out of chaos.

Seriously, if a student in a class presented data like this with conclusions like this in any economics class, they’d get an F.
lovethoseknicks says:

February 13, 2012 at 5:15 pm

NBA Greek,

Yes or No Questions

1. Did Nash play better for D’Antoni or Dallas?

2. Did Duhon play better for NY for Orlando?

3. Did Felton play better for NY or Portland?

4. Did Lin play better for NY or GS?

5. Do you agree with the unanimous conclusion in NY & around the NBA that Douglas is not a PG?

6. Do you agree with the unanimous conclusion in NY that to date Shumpert has not demonstrated an ability to play PG?

7. Do you agree that some PGs are better at running the P&R than others?

8. Do you agree that it’s probably easier for a PG to penetrate if the rest of the players on the court are good 3 point shooters that make it difficult to help inside?

9. Do you agree with the statistics that suggest that running and shooting early in the clock leads to more open shots and thus a higher efficiency level?

10 Do you think when a coach says he’s playing Novak/Frye despite some statistical drawbacks in order create extra space he is lying?

Continue
lovethoseknicks says:

February 13, 2012 at 5:38 pm

In basketball, people use statistics to try to measure productivity. They also use statistics (& observation) to try to determine why things are happening. There are rarely proofs. There is only evidence.

IMO evidence strongly suggests that not all short players can play PG, not all similar quality PGs can run the P&R well, some PGs play uptempo basketball better than others & others play half court better, playing at a faster pace gets you more open shots, & playing with a lot of space makes it easier for the PG to penetrate.

When you see a coach doing everything possible to try to maximize the ability of an up tempo PG that’s good at P&R to run, operate with space, run a lot of P&Rs with a great partner, I think the evidence suggests that part of his success will be related to the ideal conditions the coach is trying to create.

If you put that same player in a slow it down half court offense with a post up big man (or the Triangle) why would you ever expect equal results?
lovethoseknicks says:

February 13, 2012 at 5:53 pm

Last comment on this because I don’t even disagree with the basic premise that Lin has been playing very well. IMO, the system is only maximizing what is apparently already a very good player.

After D’Antoni was let go, Terry Porter initially got the head coaching job. They were expected to continue performing at a high level. Porter chose to change the system and play in a slower paced half court offense while putting more emphasis on defense. The Sun’s disappointed badly. Nash was not playing as well and there were rumblings about the changes Porter made. That’s what prompted the switch to Gentry. Gentry knew D’Antoni’s system. Almost as soon as they made the switch back the Suns started running and scoring again. Nash started playing better and the Suns started winning again. That Suns team with Nash was built to run, space the floor etc… and not play slow and in the half court
TheNBAGeek says:

February 13, 2012 at 6:50 pm

LTK,

This is not a courtroom. I’m not being cross-examined. You can’t just ask a bunch of yes/no questions for which neither yes nor no offer anywhere close to a complete answer in some wild attempt to get me to say stuff that somehow fit your argument.
lovethoseknicks says:

February 14, 2012 at 10:13 am

NBAGeek,

I don’t mean to come off as hostile or combative. I just think the box score does a great job of measuring what happened (productivity), but not necessarily what would have happened given different conditions.

As much as I love this model and your work, I can’t ignore evidence that some coaches have success selecting players with the skills that fit their coaching style & by trying to put combinations of players on the court together to maximize their productivity. It’s logical, there is evidence, coaches and players get feedback from each other about what is working, and they look at other stats to try to verify what they are doing.
When Talent Meets Opportunity « Trevi Jeffers says:

February 15, 2012 at 3:55 pm

[...] the “Wages of Wins” blog ran a post supposedly debunking the myth that D’Antoni’s system is generous towards point guards. They cite Nash’s ability to maintain his numbers even after D’Antoni took the Seven [...]

February 2012
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Jan				Mar »
		1	2	3	4	5
6	7	8	9	10	11	12
13	14	15	16	17	18	19
20	21	22	23	24	25	26
27	28	29

Share this:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply