Tag Archives: Kobe Bryant

Clutch is overrated

Posted on by
11

Brace yourselves. You can now browse the last ten years of play by play data with ease at Basketball Reference. The first place many have looked was at the very ends of games to find out about clutch. Jeremy and I decided to retell an old story about clutch for the 2010-2011 season with the new data.

Clutch Players shoot more


There’s nothing surprising about this finding. With the game on the line the clutchest players want the ball and increase their shots per minute.

Clutch players shoot worse

Of course when crunch time hits our clutch players have a tendency to shoot worse from the field. In fact, only Monta Ellis and Carmelo Anthony saw an improvement in their effective field goal shooting.

It doesn’t matter


It turns out that players that like to shoot in the clutch also like to shoot during the rest of the game. It also turns out clutch time is a small portion of the game and it doesn’t happen every game. Add up all the clutch shots and it’s only around 4% of the total shots our top clutch shooters take.

Summing up

With an ability to look at clutch data closer it is very tempting to use it examine certain clutch players with a closer lens. And certainly it is also tempting to try and explain clutch time. Our players must be taking riskier shots at a quicker pace. Or maybe the defense really clamps down in clutch. In fact it’s pretty easy to believe that teams will change their strategy in clutch time and equally easy to believe they will not make optimal decisions.

What is important to do though is to temper this with how important it is. LeBron James was not clutch last season and neither was Dwyane Wade (whereas Carmelo Anthony and Monta Ellis were). That didn’t stop the Heat from winning lots of games and making it to the finals. We’re likely to overestimate the odds or importance of an event based on how easy it is to remember. Clutch shots are a great example of this. I’m not saying clutch shots aren’t fun, or memorable or even not important. I’m just saying perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to define players based on actions that make up less than 5% of their offensive plays.

-Jeremy and Dre

Clutch was defined as any shot taken with two minutes left in the fourth quarter or overtime with five points or less between the teams. The top ten “clutchest” players (Russell Westbrook, Kevin Durant, Derrick Rose, Kobe Bryant, Monta Ellis, Andre Iguodala, Jason Richardson, LeBron James, Carmelo Anthony and Tyreke Evans) were used and were defined as those that had the most shots in clutch time for the 2010-2011 season.

Jeremy Lin helps teach us about Yay Points, Clutch and Risk

Posted on by
3

This season New York has been front and center when it comes to a lot of our basketball posts. With Wages of Wins Favorites Carmelo Anthony and Tyson Chandler (albeit popular by us for opposite reasons) joining forces and up-and-comer phenom Landry Fields teaming up with aging like milk Amare Stoudemire, there were simply too many interesting reasons to avoid the Knicks this season. That’s why it’s surprising that the biggest story this season from the Knicks is none of those players.

The story that has taken the NBA blogosphere by storm is Jeremy Lin. We’ve talked about the draft and how it is perfectly acceptable to say no one could have seen Lin coming. After all most young players — even future greats — don’t play well in their first starts. But what is not acceptable to say is that no team should have realized Lin was worth a look. In a league where mystery box players such as Bargnani get major minutes as young players, it is ridiculous to say the Warriors, Rockets or even Knicks were right in sitting Lin on the bench. However, with Lin now front and center, I am happy to say there are even more great lessons to be learned from this already amazing story.

Lin and Yay Points

Points drive perception in the NBA. Points get you drafted high, paid, voted to All-Star games and even sways voters for major awards. It is true that to win in the NBA you have to outscore the opponent, and this is a matter of points. Of course, missing shots gives the opponent an opportunity to score. As does turning the ball over. In Lin’s first three starts he scored 28, 23 and 38 points while shooting over 60% true shooting. That’s remarkable! In his last two games he’s kept up the 20+ points per game but he had a 33.3% true shooting percentage in the win over Minnesota and 54.3% true shooting percentage in the win over Toronto — also had Lin not scored his last second clutch shot he would have ended the night with a below average 50.3% true shooting percentage. Those marks are terrible and above average respectively. He’s also been racking up the turnovers. Of course, the focus is still on points. Lin shoots amazingly? He’s amazing! Lin shoots terribly? He’s still amazing! Lin shoots above average? Still amazing! People like winners. The Wages of Wins showed the biggest factor in ticket sales is a winning team. However the biggest thing people like to give credit to is scoring. Lin is scoring a lot of points on a currently winning team. Players like Joe Johnson show this is a good way to boost your popularity.

Lin and Clutch

Toronto has been a bad team this season. However, recently they’ve been a great opponent for some spectacular play (perhaps we should rename them the Washington Generals?) Both Kobe and Lin were able to sink last second clutch shots to will their team to a win. Of course, neither Kobe or Lin actually played that well. As I mentioned, Lin needed the clutch shot to get his scoring percentages above average and with 8 turnovers to his 11 assists, it’s not like he was being a great facilitator. Kobe’s game was even worse. He shot 9 for 23 and did little else. Yet at the end of the game, both players were lauded as heroes. The True Hoop blog actually had this to say about Kobe:

Sunday was a day in which Kobe Bryant made like Magic Johnson…

Wait…what? 9-23 shooting with two rebounds and four turnovers is like Magic? This wasn’t an article written by Henry Abbott and thank goodness Abbott did take another look at this game. That said, on the network that has been pounding the Kobe isn’t clutch drum, all it takes is one game against a bad team with a bad performance by a player that gets the game winner to draw comparisons to one of the greatest players ever? Yahoo Sports was similar in their talk of Lin and his game winner in Toronto:

Even after his amazing week, this one took Linsanity to a whole new level.

Again, a game with a below average performance against a bad team somehow takes Lin’s Michael Jordan like start (seriously compare Lin’s third start to Michael Jordan’s third start) to the next level? I enjoy clutch and excitement on Sports Center, but both of these claims are hyperbole to the Nth degree!

Lin and risk

The rise of Lin has brought out a lot of speculation and finger pointing. How could the Warriors cut Lin? (The answer by the way was so they could not sign DeAndre Jordan) How could the Rockets cut Lin? (The answer was to make room for Dalembert and to keep warm bench spots open for Jonny Flynn and Hasheem Thabeet) How could the rest of the league pass on him?

The issue in the NBA is this: playing an unknown player while your team is losing is a risky proposition for coaches. Much like going for it on fourth down in football will draw scrutiny in a loss, so will playing unknown players in front of known players. While everyone scurries to prove that Lin will be the greatest player since MJ or that they could have known he was coming (we’re somewhat guilty of that), there’s a bigger issue. Lin is proof of an inherent flaw in NBA management. Owners refuse to quit because they’ve sunk millions of dollars into players. Coaches refuse to play unknown players because of a risk to their job.

Lin is the very definition of a low-risk high-reward proposition. This season he will make less than $1 million. Compare that to even the most fringe free agent point guard signed in Earl Watson, who will make $2 million a year. Lin’s college numbers also suggested he was worth a look. On a losing team (such as Golden State), such a player should be great; you play him, and if he works out you’re better off. If he fails, then your cap is intact and you can roll the dice again in the draft. Yet the way the NBA management is structured, somehow playing a cheap, undrafted player is seemingly high risk. I say seemingly because, as Arturo has pointed out, if you are on a losing team your only hope of salvation is winning. That’s a problem that I suspect won’t be solved even after all the dust has settled and the finger pointing in regards to Lin has stopped.

Summing up

Let’s just get this out of the way: sample size. I didn’t even need to form a complete sentence around those two words. Lin has started less than ten games. All the narratives we are building stand a very good chance of looking foolish in the future. All I can say is that in all aspects (fun to watch, fun to talk about, fun to analyze the stats) Lin has been a joy for NBA fans. As the NBA is about entertainment that’s really all we can ask for. Regardless of how this plays out in regards to Lin’s career or NBA front office decisions, what we can say is that for two weeks in February Jeremy Lin was the most polarizing person in the NBA, and that in itself is pretty damned impressive.

-Dre

 

Weekend Podcast: Lakers vs. Celtics, Authenticity of Superstars and Dwight Howard Trade Machine

Posted on by
Reply

From http://www.bouncex3.com/

The Weekend Podcast finally returns from the NBA lockout! David Berri and the Miami Heat Index discussed comparisons of Paul Pierce vs. Larry Bird and Kobe Bryant vs. Magic Johnson, Charles Barkley’s comment on “fake superstars” and the best teams for Dwight Howard to win a title.

The podcast is available from the Miami Heat Index blog.

Topics

  • Lakers vs. Celtics: How does Paul Pierce compare to Larry Bird in terms of Wins Produced? How does Kobe Bryant compare to Magic Johnson in terms of Wins Produced?
  • Authenticity of Superstars: NBA superstars are typically identified by their scoring but Charles Barkley said there are only six great players in the league. Which scorers selected for the All-Star team by the fans and the coaches actually produce like superstars?
  • Superman Trade Machine: Will the NBA’s new revenue-sharing plan enable small market teams like the Thunder or the Nuggets to compete for Howard’s services? Which teams should trade for Dwight Howard to ensure they can compete with the elite for the title?

It’s not 2008 anymore

Posted on by
24

This post uses the Wins Produced metric. For longtime fans we’ve made a few changes in the offseason, you can read up on them in the walkthrough. For all fans you can find up to date numbers at the NBA Geek.

I listened to a very enjoyable video cast over at Truehoop yesterday with Haralabos Voulgaris (@haralabob) and he had a great line that I can’t agree with more:

You shouldn’t call a player that’s not currently playing at an All-Star level an All-Star regardless of what he did in the past

It is common to consider a player’s legacy when discussing their skill. This season Kobe has not been playing well. However, I have consistently ended up in twitter fights where Kobe’s legacy is included to justify his current performance. The idea that experience helps a player is a bit off.

In Stumbling on Wins Berri and Schmidt showed that players do not age like wine, they age like milk. This especially matters to Kobe, who is 33 this season. Of the 405 players that have suited up this season only 41 of them are 33 or older. In that group of veterans there are some players with some great legacies. In fact if we jump back to Kobe’s MVP season we can see how close these players are to greatness.

Greats over 33 years of age in 2012 back in 2008
Player Age MPG WP48 WP League Rank
 Chauncey Billups  31 32.3 0.287 15.1 4
 Marcus Camby  33 34.9 0.257 14.8 6
 Steve Nash  33 34.3 0.253 14.6 7
 Kevin Garnett  31 32.8 0.298 14.4 8
 Jason Kidd  34 36.3 0.236 14.3 9
 Kobe Bryant  29 38.9 0.194 12.9 14
 Tim Duncan  31 34.0 0.233 12.9 15
 Shawn Marion  29 36.7 0.253 12.2 18
 Paul Pierce  30 35.9 0.195 12.7 22
 Ray Allen  32 35.9 0.181 9.9 30
 Dirk Nowitzki  29 36.0 0.162 9.4 34
 Vince Carter  31 36.8 0.151 9.3 35
 Ben Wallace  33 32.5 0.174 8.0 49

Using the WP48 metric a player is generally considered a star if they have a WP48 above 0.200 (twice as good as an average player). They are considered a good player if they have a WP48 above 0.150 (50% better than an average player). In 2008 seven of our thirteen greats were playing at star level. All of them were playing much better than average and all ranked in the top 50 in the league for production. How big of a difference does four years make?

Greats over 33 years of age in 2012 (through January 10th 2012) via the NBA Geek
Player Age MPG WP48 WP
Ray Allen  36 34.9 0.334 1.7
Marcus Camby  37 25.2 0.264 1.3
Steve Nash  37 29.3 0.222 1.2
Ben Wallace  37 12.9 0.178 0.5
Jason Kidd  38 28.1 0.168 0.8
Shawn Marion  33 27.1 0.153 0.9
Kevin Garnett  35 30.4 0.126 0.6
Kobe Bryant  33 36.4 0.115 1.0
Paul Pierce  34 30.4 0.099 0.3
Chauncey Billups  35 30.6 0.089 0.3
Vince Carter  35 20.8 0.066 0.3
Dirk Nowitzki  33 31.0 0.059 0.4
Tim Duncan  35 25.2 =0.002 0.0

Excluding Ray Allen, Marcus Camby and Ben Wallace all of our former greats have degraded since their old days. Even Camby and Wallace are hard to give much credit to as their production is around the same on far fewer minutes. All of our players have decreased their playing time (I have no doubt the insane lockout induced schedule has contributed to that). In 2008 over half of our players were stars. Four years later less than half of them are much better than average. In fact, a few have fallen off a cliff.

Here’s a reminder from Stumbling on Wins how we expect players to change year to year as they age.

Player performance with age.
Age change Expected performance change from previous season
23 to 24 +2%
24 to 25 no change
25 to 26 -2%
26 to 27 -4%
27 to 28 -6%
28 to 29 -9%
29 to 30 -11%
30 to 31 -17%
31 to 32 -22%
32 to 33 -35%
33 to 34 -57%
34 to 35 -146%

Players peak around 25. Up until they’re around thirty their decline is slow. Once they hit thirty-two though their degradation is very swift. All of our greats are now in that range and some of them were already there four years ago.

When players age in sports it’s not a question of if they’ll stop being great it’s a matter of when. Sure some players can defy expectations. However, when we look at our current crop of older players with good resumes in the NBA it doesn’t look good to think that as a group they’ll even stay a shadow of their glory days. People can quote player awards, that they’re clutch (even if they’re not), or that they have experience. If they’re in their thirties though they’re a ticking time bomb waiting to fall apart and that even includes great players. So when someone reminds you that Kobe or Dirk was an MVP just a few seasons ago, it’s not out of line to ask what they’ve done for you lately.

-Dre