The Wages of Wins Journal

The Joey Harrington era has finally ended in Detroit. Now that another quarterback’s career has ended in Detroit it is a good time to reflect on the history of signal callers in the Motor City. In 1971 Greg Landry was named to the Pro Bowl and he still remains the last Detroit quarterback to earn this honor. Thirty five years have come and gone, and no other quarterback of the Lions has made the Pro Bowl roster. Given that several quarterbacks are named each season, the Lions failure on this point is from a statistical point of view a simply amazing achievement. The odds against a team failing so consistently are indeed quite large.

How did the Lions do it? Let’s spend a bit of time reviewing the list of signal callers who have started for the Lions but not traveled to the NFL’s annual all-star game.

• Gary Danielson (1978-1984): Danielson inherited the mantle of “starting Lions quarterback” from Greg Landry and is really the first Lions quarterback I remember (although I did have a Greg Landry football when I was a kid). What I remeber most about Danielson is that he did start for a Lions team that almost defeated the 49ers in the playoffs in 1983. In all, though, he only had three seasons where he played at least 15 games, so he was not often on the field as the Lions starter. Today Danielson announces college football games for ABC.
• Eric Hipple (1985-1986): After 1984 Danielson went to Cleveland and the Lions turned to Eric Hipple. Hipple lasted only two seasons as Detroit’s starting quarterback. Today Hipple is a motivational speaker, or in some sense, a people coach.
• Chuck Long (1987-88): Like Joey Harrington, Long was a first round draft choice expected to lead the Lions to much success. Long did not have a lengthy career in Detroit, really only playing one full season in 1987. When Wayne Fontes decided to employ the run-and-shoot offense, Long’s career in Detroit ended. Last December Long was named the head football coach at San Diego State University.
• Rodney Peete (1989-93): Peete was a 6th round draft choice of the Lions out of USC. For five seasons he traded the job with Erik Kramer and another first round draft choice of the Lions, Andre Ware. Interestingly, all three have had some success in broadcasting.
• Scott Mitchell (1994-1997): In 1994 the Lions went shopping and bought Scott Mitchell. In 1995 Mitchell had one great season, posting the 36th best season of any signal caller in the league from 1995-2005. The average quarterback in the NFL produces 0.133 net points per play. Mitchell’s net points per play in 1995 was 0.249. In other words, he was pretty good. Unfortunately, as quarterback’s often are, Mitchell was inconsistent. His net points per play the next two seasons was below average.
• Charlie Batch (1998-2001): In 1998 the Lions selected Batch in the second round. Early in the 1998 season he was named starter. For two seasons his net points per play was above average. And then for two seasons his performance was below average. Today he is the back-up quarterback for the Super Bowl champion Pittsburgh Steelers.
• Joey Harrington (2002-2005): After Batch the Lions turned to Harrington. Harrington never posted an above average season, although he came close in 2004.
• Jon Kitna or Josh McCown (2006- ??): And now the Lions turn to Jon Kitna or Josh McCown. These two signal callers have already received significant playing time in seven NFL seasons. Only Kitna has been above average in net points per play and he only did it once. In 2003 Kitna posted a net points per play of 0.141. At 33 years of age, Kitna cannot be thought of as the quarterback of the future. Unfortunately McCown, who looked to have been signed to take on the mantle of starting quarterback down the line, may not even hold on to his job as number two quarterback. According to Tom Kowalski of Booth newspapers and MLive.com, McCown has not performed well in mini-camp and may end up third on the depth chart behind Dan Orlovsky.

So that is where the Lions are today. After a history of failed quarterbacks the Lions have turned to a collection of quarterbacks who have yet to find much success on the football field. There is some good news in this story. The list of failed quarterbacks includes a number of people who went on to significant accomplishment. Unfortunately, none of these accomplishments occurred on the football field, although in the case of the announcers, something was accomplished near a football field. So I guess that is something.

If Harrington follows in the footsteps of those who failed before him, we can expect some day he will make a great announcer. Perhaps there is a lesson in all of this for Detroit. Their ability to groom future announcers suggests that the communication device in the quarterback’s helmet should not simply receive the coaches’ instructions, but should also allow the quarterback to broadcast the game to the audience. If this was the case, the Lions quarterbacks could show the Lions fans where their talents truly lie.

- DJ

The voting for Rookie of the Year was quite easy this season. Chris Paul was clearly the most productive rookie.  Who was second best?  Both the coaches voting for the All-Rookie team and the media’s selection for Rookie of the Year placed Charlie Villanueva second.  The number one choice in the 2005 draft, Andrew Bogut, finished third in voting points for both awards. Was Villanueva better than Bogut this past season?

Both players play in the frontcourt making comparisons by the numbers easier.  In terms of scoring totals, Villanueva is the clear winner.  Villanueva scored 13 points per game while Bogut only posted 9.4 points per contest. Looking at the rookies, only Paul scored more often than Villanueva, so by this measure, Villanueva is the second best rookie.

Basketball, though, is about more than scoring totals.  What matters more is scoring efficiency.  If we look at points per field goal attempt – which I measure as points minus free throws made, divided by field goal attempts – we see that Bogut garnered 1.066 points per field goal attempt while Villanueva scored exactly one point per shot from the field. Now Villanueva has more diversity in his shot attempts, taking more than two hundred shots from beyond the arc while Bogut missed the only three shots he took from downtown.  Villanueva, though, only made 32.7% of these shots, a rate a bit below average for an NBA player.  So I am not sure Villanueva should be credited for taking these shots.  After all, do we trumpet the hitting ability of below average batters in baseball?

When we move beyond scoring we see clearer differences.  Villanueva only captures one rebound every 4.5 minutes on the floor.  An NBA power forward averages one rebound every four minutes, so Villanueva costs his team rebounds when he plays.  Bogut is about right on average, taking just a bit more than four minutes – 4.1 if you wish to be exact — to capture a rebound.  Bogut is also a better passer than Villanueva, although Bogut loses a bit of ground committing a few more turnovers.

We can look at all these statistics until are heads hurt.  Let’s put it all together and consider each player’s Wins Produced.  This past season Villanueva produced four wins for Toronto.  Bogut’s Wins Produced equaled 6.9. So when we look at all the statistics together, considering how each impacts wins in the NBA, we learn Bogut was more productive this past season.

The media, though, gave Villanueva 248 voting points for Rookie of the Year while Bogut only tallied 98.  Now the difference between these two players is not that great.  Still, many members of the media think Villanueva is better.  And the numbers, at least this year, tell a different story.   Of course, maybe the media was just looking toward the future when Villanueva could be the better player.  Or, maybe many members of the media suffer from “scoring illusion”, which we can define as people focusing on nominal scoring totals, rather than the real impact scoring has on wins in the NBA.

- DJ

Chris Paul was named Rookie of the Year this week.  The statistics confirm the analysis of the voters; Paul is easily the most productive rookie.  Paul produced 18 wins in his first season. To put this in perspective, consider that

• the combined Wins Produced of the five rookies trailing Paul in the voting for this award – Charlie Villanueva, Andrew Bogut, Raymond Felton, Channing Frye, and Deron Williams – only sum to 18.7.
• Deron Williams, the player who prevented Paul from being a unanimous choice, produced less than one win his rookie season. Villanueva, the player who finished second in voting points, only produced four wins this past season.
• if we move beyond the rookies, in the entire NBA only seven players produced more wins than Paul.  So he is already one of the top ten players in the league.
• if we move past this season, in the last fifteen seasons only Shaquille O’Neal and Tim Duncan produced more wins his rookie season than Paul.  In other words, Paul’s rookie campaign bested the first campaign of Jason Kidd, Grant Hill, Allen Iverson, Chris Webber, Yao Ming, LeBron James, and every other star to enter the league in the past fifteen years.

Given this, the question “who is the best rookie?” was an easy one to answer.  Here is a question that I can’t answer: Which voter took the “unanimous selection for Rookie of the Year” away from Paul and voted for Deron Williams?   

- DJ