The Utah Jazz in 2005 had the third choice in the NBA draft. Needing a point guard, they had a choice between Deron Williams and Chris Paul. The college numbers of the two players clearly indicated that the best choice was Paul.
Table One: Williams and Paul in College
The data reported in Table One comes from each player’s last season of college basketball. As we can see, Paul was superior with respect to shooting efficiency from the field, free throw percentage, scoring, rebounds, and steals. Not surprisingly, Paul posted a much higher Win Score per minute (0.256 vs. 0.150). Although college data does not tell us everything about a player’s pro potential, the differences between Paul and Williams in college should have given the Jazz second (and third, fourth, and fifth) thoughts about passing on Paul.
Nevertheless, the Jazz selected Williams. Unfortunately for the Jazz, the rookie production of each player confirmed the college numbers. Paul produced 18 wins his rookie campaign, a mark for freshmen that in the past fifteen years has only been bested by Tim Duncan and Shaquille O’Neal. Williams, meanwhile, produced 0.9 victories his rookie campaign. The difference was not just seen in Wins Produced. Paul went on to be Rookie of the Year, a unanimous selection to the All-Rookie team (voted on by the coaches), and was also named the starting point guard for Team USA in the 2006 World Championship. In sum, few people would argue last summer that Williams was even close to Paul as a player.
The sophomore campaign for each player went differently. Williams improved dramatically, producing 9.2 wins and posting a Wins Produced per 48 minutes of 0.149. The Utah Jazz also improved, going from 41 victories in 2005-06 to 51 wins this past season. Beyond improving in the regular season, Williams has apparently shined in the playoffs. Utah is currently playing in the Western Conference Finals, which hasn’t happened since John Stockton and Karl Malone led the franchise to the NBA Finals in 1998.
The dramatic improvement in the performance of Williams and the Jazz has caused an equally dramatic change in people’s assessment of his value. Although many of have voiced this sentiment, I think Henry Abbott of TrueHoop put it best yesterday:
Abbott is not alone in thinking that Utah’s run in the playoffs has vindicated the decision to take Williams over Paul. Unfortunately, I think the data still tells us that Utah’s selection was incorrect.
Comparing Williams and Paul in 2006-07
Although Williams did do better his sophomore campaign, it’s still the case that Paul is more productive. Paul – who missed substantial time due to injury – still managed to post 13.2 wins this past season. Only Chauncey Billups, Steve Nash, and Jason Kidd produced more wins from the point guard spot. Furthermore, Paul’s WP48 of 0.270 ranked 14th among the 127 players with at least 2,000 minutes played (Williams ranked 49th). The difference between Paul and Williams is similar to the difference between Kobe Bryant (WP48 of 0.234) and Tayshaun Prince (WP48 of 0.135). Should the Lakers trade Bryant straight up for Prince? Would anyone suggest such a move?
The difference between Paul and Williams can also be clearly seen when we look at the individual stats:
Table Two: Williams and Paul in 2006-07
With respect to rebounds, steals, turnovers, personal fouls and free throw percentage, Paul is still the more productive performer. Williams does offer greater shooting efficiency from the field and a few more assists, but these two areas where Williams is better is not enough to close the gap between the two players.
Again, I do not think one needs Wins Produced and Win Score to see that Paul has clearly been the better player. He was better in college and better in the pros. Yet people still wish to argue that Williams is now equal or superior to Paul. What has caused this confusion?
Change Your Teammates, Change Your Evaluation
There is one area where Williams has consistently bested Paul. In both college (where Williams played at Illinois and Paul played at Wake Forest) and in Utah, Williams has played on the better team. We can see this when we look at the both the Utah Jazz and New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets these past two seasons.
Table Three: The Utah Jazz in 2005-06 and 2006-07
Table Four: The New Orleans/Oklahoma City Hornets in 2005-06 and 2006-07
In his rookie season, the teammates of Williams produced 33 wins and posted a 0.090 WP48. This past season the performance of his teammates improved to 39.4 wins and a WP48 of 0.112.
In contrast, Paul’s teammates only produced 15.3 wins and a WP48 of 0.043 during his stellar rookie season. This past year his teammates only offered 23.6 wins and a WP48 of 0.065. Yes, Paul did have Tyson Chandler as a teammate, but after Chandler and Devin Brown, every other teammate was below average. In fact, the Hornets allocated nearly 6,500 minutes to players whose production was less than zero.
And this is why Paul is not playing in the conference finals. His absence is not an indictment of his lack of productivity, but rather of the inability of the Hornets to surround Paul with productive players. Unfortunately, analysts have trouble separating what a player does from his teammates. Often when teammates are poor, the assessment of a “star” declines. Likewise, when teammates are better, the assessment of an individual player improves.
Is Williams a Prime-Time Performer?
Not only does Williams have better teammates, but Williams and these better teammates have spent the past six weeks playing prime-time basketball. Meanwhile Paul has been out of sight and out of mind.
Should sixteen playoff games change the conclusion we reached from two seasons worth of NBA regular season games (and a collection of college contests)? Perhaps they should if we now have evidence that Williams is really a “prime-time performer.”
What is a prime-time performer? In The Wages of Wins we reviewed a paper I wrote with Erick Eschker. This paper defined a prime-time performer as a player who raises his level of play in the post-season. In other words, he played best when the games mattered the most. Paul has been unable to lead his team into the playoffs, so we can’t see if he has this quality. Williams, though, after 16 playoff games has clearly demonstrated… okay, not really anything (by the way, we find little evidence that any player in the NBA is a “prime-time performer”, a point I made in talking about NFL quarterbacks last January).
Williams offered a per-minute Win Score of 0.141 in the regular season. After 16 playoff games his Win Score per-minute is 0.153. Yes, that is a bit better. But Williams is still offering less than what Paul routinely brings to the table.
It should be emphasized that Williams is indeed a “good” player. He was above average in the regular season. He has been above average in the post-season. And he is one of the reasons Utah has made it the conference finals. Of course, he is not the only reason. Carlos Boozer, Paul Millsap, and Andrei Kirilenko also have helped. We should also not ignore the Warriors upset of the Mavericks, since without this event the Jazz would have faced Dallas in the second round (and likely lost).
Although Williams did play well in the regular season, and has played well in the playoffs, his overall level of productivity still pales in comparison with Paul. And although I doubt the Jazz and Hornets would consider swapping point guards at this time, if such an offer was made, the Jazz would be foolish to pass on Paul a second time. Because as good as the Jazz were this year with Williams, they would still be better with Chris Paul.
– DJ
Wages of Wins Journal 
JChan
May 30, 2007
I have found it interesting that the national media is going so crazy over Deron Williams all of a sudden. Mark Jackson put him as the second-best point guard in the league. Even as a Jazz fan, I know that is ridiculous.
As for “prime-time” performers, what do you think of the job LeBron has been doing in these playoffs? Yeah, 14 games is less than 20% of a season, but the increase has been substantial, and not just scoring. What constitutes a good sample size in this situation? If the Cavs make it to the Finals and end up with 22-24 games played, is that sufficient to say James has “stepped it up” in the playoffs?
I hate people who drop links in their comments, so I’ll just say I posted on this today and leave it at that. If you have a second, DJ, maybe you can check out the post and see if my numbers look right and if they have any relevance.
max
May 30, 2007
That… was great.
Let’s judge these gentlemen after at least say, 5 seasons and 2-3 playoff runs?
Jason
May 30, 2007
I think there’s something rather problematic about comparing WP48 in the regular season with WP48 in the post season to show player decline or improvement.
You noted that overall WP48 declines on average by 0.03 in the playoffs for players across the board. I don’t know if it’s even necessary to invoke anything different about the pace of the game to account for this. The problem seems to be more of a theoretical one.
In the regular season, the average WP48 is 0.100 for all players, something that must be true since every game has a winner and a loser and there are 10 “48 minutes” in a regulation game. Unless Wins Produced for the league deviates from actual wins substantially (in which case we’ve got other problems) this must be true.
But the teams in the playoffs aren’t made up of this pool, but are
The competition is better but in the end, the contests are still zero-sum games. The average again has to be 0.100 for all players, which means that something has to give. In this case, it’s the average wp48.
I calculated the summed winning percentage of all playoff teams this year. It’s 0.597, which should, just on principle of what WP48 represents, mean an average for all players from playoff teams of one-fifth this, or 0.119. Since the WP48 average has to drop back to 0.100 in the playoffs (unless teams find a way to have more than one win in a game) this year an *average* difference of about 0.02 WP48 for all players simply tells us what we already knew: the teams that made the playoffs were with very,very few exceptions, better than the teams that didn’t. I ran the numbers for the 96-97 season (10 years ago, taken for simplicity) and found in that season the *theoretical* WP48 for players on playoff teams in the regular season should have been .0127, meaning a difference more or less at that 0.03 that you found empirically.
As for LeBron in the playoffs, I’d doubt very much that what he’s doing is statistically signficantly different from his regular season performance and not just in the normal variation expected around such statistical measures. *per minute* he’s actually scoring at a lower rate and a tad bit less efficiently, handing out slightly fewer assists and grabbing a *tiny tiny* bit more rebounds. All of it seems pretty much in line what he did in the regular season though, and given somewhat stiffer playoff competition, I’d say it’s likely a wash. The big change in his *per game* stats is explained almost entirely by more minutes played. Is it that he’s stepped up or just not sat down?
Jason
May 30, 2007
Sorry, the curtailed sentence above should have read:
“But the teams in the playoffs aren’t made up of this pool, but are made up of those teams *above* the average.”
I should remember: “Edit twice, cut and paste once. “
Jason
May 30, 2007
Also, the theoretical average WP48 of players on playoff teams should have been 0.127 and not 0.0127 as I typed.
dberri
May 30, 2007
Jason,
The 0.03 result refers to Win Score per minute, not WP48. I have never looked at WP48 from regular season to playoffs. Perhaps I should.
Tom Anichini
May 31, 2007
As much as I embrace the WP philosophy and methodology, I wonder whether there’s any “crowding out” by good teammates. Reflecting on the recent Garnett v. Duncan discussion, I wonder how much Garnett’s/Paul’s WP stats are inflated relative to Duncan’s/Williams’ simply because the latter have more productive teammates and play on teams who rely less on them to produce. Think back to Jordan’s first retirement — how would Pippen’s WP stats have compared during that interval to the first and second three championship seasons? I’d bet they were better than both.
dberri
May 31, 2007
Tom,
Your comment is completely consistent with WoW. There is “crowding out” and one could argue that Duncan might be slightly better than Garnett because of this. Althought it is still the case that if Duncan was on the T-Wolves they would have still missed the playoffs.
The difference between Paul and Williams is so great, though, that the crowding out effect cannot explain the difference.
By the way, your example of Jordan and Pippen is right on the money. When we talk about “crowding out” in the book — or what we note as simply the law of diminishing returns — it is the impact of Jordan’s first retirement we use as an example. We also do some simple regression analysis and reveal that it is indeed the case that when your teammates are better you end up being worse.
Harold Almonte
May 31, 2007
This is the same Lebron vs. Wade disscussion. One is the unanimally best skilled, but the other one had the good luck to have a best team. Game’ issues.
About prime-time, Williams had already demonstrated in his March Madness carreer what prime time means (absolutely shooting down three college scoring stars). But, there is something called “points allowed”, that all linear metrics forgot to take account, you need to watch the games as scouts do, to not be catched by stats illusions.
AC Slator
May 31, 2007
As a pistons fan I would never trade Tayshaun Prince for Kobe. Team play and defense (Prince is better despite Kobe being nominated to all-defensive teams) make Tayshaun a far superior player.
MC Welk
May 31, 2007
Paul gambles on defense; hence, his higher steals rate. He’s smaller, can’t defend the low post and already, demonstrably, fragile. The Jazz were skittish after enduring the injury travails of Raul Lopez. Due to his status as reigning ROY, Paul already got many more calls, specifically uncalled palming violations. Who’s to say that Williams WSPM doesn’t continue to climb while Paul’s has already plateaued?
Moose
May 31, 2007
Good article but in line with what Tom mentions, I do think quality of teammates can inflate Paulk in a Hornet situation and Williams in Utah may not be as stronfg as he individually could look in a weaker situation. I dont have the time right at the moment to mount a full case but I do not think Utah would have a significantly better season with Paul (i.e. no more than a few games won difference and no change in plaqyoff outcome.) I think they are closer to even in overall team effect than WP individual scores. Maybe Paul has some edge but it is smaller and I think likely to get smaller next year.
Steelsmack
May 31, 2007
Deron Williams is the better player. His numbers are worse because he doesn’t have the ball in his hands as often. If CP3 gets good players on his team, they will take the ball out of his hands. Donyell Marshall played with Toronto, won 6th man of the year, now he plays for Cleveland where he’s lucky if he gets off the bench. His numbers are down because he has competition. Same thing with Larry Hughes. Cleveland has 5 starters who can score, Washington only had 3, so Larry was much more involved with the offense in Washington, and thus had better numbers. CP3’s FG% and assists should go up with a better team, but his production would go down, unless he went to a team that runs up and down the court like Phoenix, more possessions equal more points, assists, rebounds, free throws, steals, blocks, etc. I’ll take a winner and ridiculously clutch player in Deron over CP3 any day.
Wes
May 31, 2007
What your stats don’t taken into account is system. There is no way Chris Paul would’ve been a good fit in Sloan’s system, which is predicated on half-court execution and hard-nosed physical defense. Paul is a lousy defender. And he’s soft defender. I hope you’re not implying that steals is an indicator of a good defender, otherwise John Stockton is the best defender of all time. Ridiculous. Who the better player is going forward is up for debate (I don’t see how it’s not Williams) but there is absolutely no chance Utah would’ve been better with Paul. None.
Charley
May 31, 2007
The defense of Chris Paul is useless. There is no comparison. Deron Williams is and always will be the more complete player.
You can support any argument with more lies, damned lies and statistics and it won’t change the undisputed fact that D-Will is a winner. He’ll probably win a championship before CP3 even snifffs the playoffs.
Maybe Deron will send Chris a get-well card after he leads team USA to an olympic berth.
wynaut
May 31, 2007
nice article. Paul is really better than Williams.
Chirstopher
June 1, 2007
I think there were system and character issues. Wasn’t Paul the lad you punched an opponent in his last NCAA tourney appearance? That had to have been a red flag for several NBA teams. Also, it would seem that Williams dovetails better with Sloan’s mindset. Another issue, and it’s possible this came out during the draft process, is durability. Paul has had injury issues, Williams has not. Was that factored into the stats tables on the two? Paul has missed 22 games, Williams only 4. I think both picks were good ones and both have long and successful careers ahead of them. As PGs seem to need at least 3 yrs to fully “get it” in the NBA, I’d withhold judgment until then.
Scott Steele
June 4, 2007
The biggest reason I would take Williams over Paul, Williams has only missed 4 games in two years to injury. How many has Paul missed? Also, the idea of playing on a better team only hurts Williams numbers, there are many other options, not just himself to help win games. I would take Williams 99 out of 100 times! Nothing against Paul, he is a great player!!
Raj
June 8, 2007
Paul is the better player , the only time when DEron plays better is when he plays Paul, but that doesent make him better the other 78 games.
parishyatt
June 8, 2007
Until Chris Paul can lead a team, any team, deep into the playoffs, any playoff, as has Deron Williams with the Illini and with the Jazz, then Chris Paul isn’t qualified to carry D-Will’s jockstrap.D-Will was chosen in the 2005 draft OVER Chris Paul. He will forevermore be the player who was taken over Chris Paul. You can structure your stats to come to any conclusion you wish, but the fact remains that Deron Williams is a stud and will be an All-Star before Chris Paul. Get over it!!
Phoenix Life Home Auto Insurance
June 26, 2007
Deron Williams is amazing and I am so happy a small market team like Utah is doing so well again. I came to really dislike them when Stockton and Malone dominated but better Utah than some team like the Knicks, who should be playoff bound every single year just because of the city they play in.
Jay Gold
July 12, 2007
This is quite simply ridiculous and anyone who takes it without a salt shaker doesn’t know much about basketball. Yes, Paul puts up some nice numbers and he has worse teammates than Deron, but if you honestly watched what Deron did all season and in the playoffs and still believe that the Jazz made a mistake, you need to pick a new sport to follow. He runs the pick and roll with Boozer incredibly well for such a young player, and, in general, he fits Sloan’s system beautifully, much better than Paul would. He’s tough, he’s confident, he’s got swagger and killer instinct, he’s clutch and he’s got a more well rounded offensive game than Paul. His crossover is a thing of beauty, he’s got the step back, the pull up, he can hit the three (with much greater consistency and ease than Paul), he’s deadly from midrange (definitely better than Paul), and he can absorb contact and finish in traffic (better than Paul can). Oh, and if you collapse on him, watch out. He’s a savvy decision maker with great court vision and passing skills. He made Bruce Bowen look like a fool on multiple occasions, which very few players can say. He is also undoubtedly a primetime performer, not to mention a leader, a winner, a competitor and a guy who’s going to do whatever it takes to improve and take his team to the next level. He’s not a mindblowing athlete, but he’s quick enough to get by anyone who tries to guard him, he can jump high enough and hang long enough to finish in traffic, and, while he does need to improve his lateral quickness, he’s comparable to Paul defensively, even if he gets fewer steals. Also, this is mostly speculation based on playing style, but Deron will probably end up being more durable than paul.
These are the things real basketball analyists look at. They don’t make up bogus formulas. They aren’t completely worthless, but they’re inherently flawed in a lot of ways and they’re much less telling than actually watching players play and analyzing them from a basketball standpoint. I’m not saying that Paul is an excellent young point guard or even that Deron is necessarily better, but there are many reasons why the Jazz brass would not even consider trading Deron for Paul, and they are not out of their minds. Deron was a hell of a lot more than just above average throughout the season and during the playoffs. Your “analysis” on the other hand…well, let’s just say it didn’t quite make it to the average plateau.
Mo
July 18, 2007
Even though Deron Williams helped get his healthy team to the playoffs, had a slightly better fg% and .4 more assists, he’s still looking up at Paul. Don’t get it twisted. Paul missed 18 games and Williams only managed to put up 3 more double-doubles than Paul. Paul led sophomores in scoring and efficiency while averaging more rebounds, 3-pt shooting and free throw shooting that Williams. Williams is a bit turnover prone as well. Paul also has a higher PER than Williams. Williams had a really nice season and even though he helped his “healthy” team to the playoffs, (Boozer was a big contributer to this), Williams is still looking up at Paul. Don’t get it twisted.
D-Pizzle
August 17, 2007
CP3 is da best n my opinion and he’ll prove it when he makes it 2 da playoffs ;)
Deron is still a kick ass player!!!
Leo
August 28, 2007
Wins produced? That’s ridiculous… It took
some time, but the truth came, D-Will is a
better player than Paul. He’s complete and
effecient. Paul is a showman, a Vince Carter
type.
TJ
August 30, 2007
CP could be twice as good as Deron and it wouldn’t really matter, because no matter how good you are, you can’t help your team much if you are injured. Grant Hill was an incredible player that was better than both CP and DW, but it didn’t matter much, because he missed about 5 seasons in a row. DW is more durable, and that’s the bottom line. CP’s stats could be better in every column for 2006-2007 and it wouldn’t matter. The Jazz made a judgement call, that DW would be more durable than CP, and would therefore lead the TEAM to a better record. I think people forget that basketball is a TEAM game. It doesn’t matter if your name is Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, or Wilt Chamberlain (or Chris Paul), if you are on my team and the team loses, I don’t care how good your stats are. The Jazz management are good at putting a TEAM together that is capable of making the playoffs. Most people thought after losing John and Karl, it would take the Jazz a decade to put together a playoff bound team. But what happend? The next year the Jazz finished .500 with a bunch of no names, finishing 1 game out of the playoffs. The Jazz brass made the right decision by drafting DWill, and it only took one season after drafting him to pay off. CP was the riskier pick because of his size, so the jazz went with the conservative pick in DW. If CP ends up missing 20+ games every season, I don’t think the Jazz will regret picking DWill at all, no matter what Paul’s stats show. Even if CP doesn’t miss 20+ games, the Jazz still have an awesome PG PF combo like in days of old, and have surrounded those guys with some great talent. DWill is the man and he understands the TEAM game.
mrparker
August 31, 2007
Its still too early to say who is better. I
wouldn’t be surprised to see another jump in
Dwill’s wp48 this season. This guy is a
tireles worker and it has shown since he
arrived at Illinois.
I am as big a Chris Paul fan as anyone but
with him being stuck on the Hornets we might
as well get used to not seeing him in the
playoffs. Soon enough people will start
calling him a guy who can’t win and he will
no doubt be thrown onto th same junk heap
as KG has been thrown on his whole career.
I’m not sure of his contract status but this
kid must, must get out of New Orleans ASAP.
Mike L.
October 13, 2007
Comparing WP48 between individual players and saying one is better than the other is a fundamentally flawed methodology. The rate at which a player generates steals or blocks is not necessarily indicative of good defense–anyone who has followed the work of Ken Pomeroy and/or John Gasaway knows that many excellent defensive teams have generated few steals or blocks. The difference between Paul and Williams in rebounding can certainly be accounted for in the qualities of their teammates–Utah was an excellent rebounding team (leading the NBA in overall rebounding percentage and offensive rebounding) and had no real need for its PG to hit the glass. I would also venture that it is difficult to quantify how well a given player runs the team’s offense–but it may be worth noting that Utah was 3rd in the NBA in points-per-shot (PPS) while New Orleans was dead last.
JOSH
October 16, 2007
Hey cp3 fans. You are crazy. Screw your stupid formulas. That is just your way of trying to find something Paul has on Williams. Which is nothing. Just use your freaking eyes. Deron Williams eats his lunch every time they meet. And oh did you see what he did in the playoffs. He can do that in the regular season anytime he wants. He just chooses to use his teammates more because thats the way you do it. He had to step up his game in the playoffs because his teammates didn’t show up in the playoffs. Did you see how one of the so called best defenders in the league couldn’t do anything to stop him (Bruce Bowen)? Not to mention, no one on the Spurs(a great defensive team) could do anything to stop him. The only reason Deron didn’t get rookie of the year is because Sloan never plays rookies. He has always done that,no matter who they are. John Stockton played less time than Williams in his rookie year. So he just didn’t play enough to pile up the stats. Well guess what? Those days are long gone. And it doesn’t matter if Chris Paul is healthy or not. He will never be as good as Deron Williams. And please stop with the, Jazz have better teammates. Maybe they do. but really it’s irrelevant. The Jazz didn’t make the playoffs before Williams. If Paul is so good, why can’t he get his team to the playoffs? He’s got some talent around him. Stop making up excuses. Where is Paul when his team needs him most. He doesn’t equal wins. Williams does!
boomdizzle99
November 8, 2007
i can see why you think deron is better but he isnt because he’s less creative in the open court, have you seen when they played together in the t-mobile rookie vs sophmore game? paul plays the point better because he’s quicker and has better handling and understanding of the game. utah wins so much because of boozer!!!! not williams. Baron davis embarrassed deron in the playoffs(individually) lebron,Dwade,and carmelo accept paul more because he’s better. williams turns it over more and fouls a lot. CP3 is one of the better defensive point gaurds while williams has AK47 there to erase his mistakes all the time. Hornets will win more games in 07-08 and utah isnt a surprise anymore with that boring style of play and wont get past the rockets anymore
emmanuel
November 8, 2007
deron sucks, sloans style has won 0 championships, paul will help hornets get to playoffs this year. all utah does is shoot the ball which doesnt cut it (the spurs,mavs,suns,rockets own them) in the playoffs. and did i mention 0 championships for sloan? that team aint goin nowhere, they wont even win their division (denver will)
Nicolo
November 9, 2007
so there you go! with this paper, that just proves that Kobe Bryant is the best NBA player right now. Not just the most exciting or anything but the best! Better than Nash, Wade, etc. Come on, look at his supporting cast just like CP3’s compared to Deron. But hey! We can argue that the play of the Lakers recently is better than ever. ..at least for now.
al
November 14, 2007
hahahaha. clearly what your stats lack is some qualitative analysis. the fact that your stats show chris paul as being so much better than williams should tell you a little about the major flaws in your analysis.
in every statistical analysis, analytical correlations can only be drawn using logic, which should stem from both qualitative and quantitative factors. go watch some games.
Mike
December 5, 2007
it seems that much of your argument is based on wins produced and i’m not all that sold on that as a completely valid statistic. for me, i would be happy with whichever one is on my team. both very good, yet different.