John Davis and Deven Khrucell are the hosts of Pistonscast - Detroit Pistons Podcast. Earlier this week - as the following announcement from their website indicates –both John and Deven interviewed me for the latest edition of their show.
Tuesday March 18th’s episode, entitled “Why the Detroit Pistons Have the Best Bench: The Numbers Don’t Lie Featuring Sports Economist David Berri from The Wages of Wins Journal at dberri.wordpress.com,” is now available.
If you click on the now available link you will be treated to a 30 minute podcast featuring John, Deven, and yours truly. Yes, instead of reading my rambling discourse on basketball, you can now hear me voice these very same semi-random thoughts.
For those who don’t want to listen, or just want more information, here are a few of the topics John, Deven, and I discussed.
1. The Tragedy of Kevin Garnett
2. The Potential Greatness of Amir Johnson
3. and The Wages of Wins Basketball Story: Fans really want wins but players are paid to score (and just to repeat, scoring and/or star power by itself does not produce many wins or attract many fans).
The Greatest Bench in the NBA
In addition, as the title of the discussion indicates, we talked about which team has the greatest bench. The following table reports the WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] of each team’s starters and bench players at the midpoint of this season.
Table One: Evaluating Benches in the NBA after 41 Games
As I told John, starters are defined as the top five players on each team in terms of games started. The bench is everyone else.
At the midpoint, the top three benches were employed by San Antonio, Boston, and Detroit. Of these, I think the Celtics might be the biggest surprise. People think that Boston is just Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Ray Allen. But the players off the bench - specifically Leon Powe, Eddie House, and James Posey - have been very productive this season.
One should note that the Celtics bench, although still good, slipped a bit in the second-half. After 66 games - or not counting Boston’s domination of the Rockets on Tuesday night - the Celtics bench had posted a 0.076 WP48. This mark still ranks in the top ten, but it’s now behind the Pistons mark of 0.91 (also after 66 games and not including the Pistons defeat of the Nuggets on Tuesday night).
The Spurs mark still tops the league. But as I told John and Deven, that mark is a bit misleading. Manu Ginobili - the most productive shooting guard in the NBA right now - has spent much of the season coming off the bench. Ginobili, though, plays more minutes than Michael Finley. So one could argue that Ginobili is the de facto starter on the Spurs. And when you switch Ginobili into the starting line-up for Finley, you see San Antonio’s bench WP48 declines to 0.042.
Consequently, Pistons fans - or people like John, Deven, and myself - can argue that the best bench in the NBA plays in Detroit. And if Amir Johnson could just get some more minutes, that bench production would go even higher.
The Earl Lloyd Story
In addition to the current NBA and the Pistons bench, John, Deven, and I briefly touched upon the story of Earl Lloyd. And I wanted to add a few more details.
This story goes back to the beginning of the NBA. The NBA’s first official season was in 1949-50 (the BAA played three seasons prior to this year). Back in 1949-50 the NBA consisted of 17 teams. These 17 teams employed 223 players. And everyone of these 223 players was white.
The next season the NBA followed the lead of Major League Baseball by integrating. Earl Lloyd, Nat Clifton, and Chuck Cooper joined the league, with Lloyd - due to scheduling - officially being the first black player to play in an NBA game.
The story of Lloyd was told in the recent ESPN documentary: Black Magic. Lloyd starred on a West Virginia State team that went 35-0 in 1948-49. He was then drafted by the Washington Capitals in the 9th round of the 1950 draft.
The Capitals didn’t make it through the 1950-51 season and Lloyd was out of basketball in 1951-52. In 1952, though, the Syracuse Nationals (who later became the Philadelphia 76ers) picked Lloyd up on waivers. Lloyd then went on to play eight more seasons (with both the Nationals and Detroit Pistons) before retiring in 1960.
If you missed the documentary, parts of this story can be read at either Wikipedia and/or Basketball-Reference.com. What these stories do not report is the brief observation made in Black Magic.
According to ESPN’s documentary, Lloyd was not asked to score much by the teams that employed him in the 1950s. And when we look at Lloyd’s stats, we see evidence supporting this claim. Lloyd only averaged in double figures once in his career. Yes, he had trouble hitting his shots (career field goal percentage of 35.6%). But that was true of many players in the 1950s, and these players could reach double figures by taking a large number of shots. Apparently Lloyd didn’t get that opportunity.
Instead of asking Lloyd to score, his employers asked him to focus on rebounds and other non-scoring aspects of the game. Now it’s important to remember that rebounds were not tracked in the NBA until the 1950-51 season. Initially all the NBA tracked was scoring, assists, and personal fouls. If Lloyd was asked to focus on the non-scoring aspects of the game, then he was basically being asked to focus on factors that were not initially tracked, and probably (given what we know about the NBA today) not valued very highly by the coaches, media, and fans of basketball.
I wish to contrast this treatment of Lloyd with the treatment received by Jackie Robinson and the other players who integrated Major League Baseball. It should not come as a surprise that the first black baseball players were better than the average white player (and this point was made in an article in the March, 2002 issue of the American Economic Review by Brian Goff, Robert McCormick, and Robert Tollison) . After all, if you could choose any member of a previously excluded group, you would choose the most productive members first.
This should have been the same pattern in the NBA. But the output of Lloyd - and also of Clifton and Cooper - are not consistent with this expectation. None of these players were outstanding scorers, and hence they were not perceived to be great players (like Jackie Robinson). And perhaps that was because they lacked that ability. But it’s possible that these players - due to discrimination - were not given the opportunity to score.
Remember, The Wages of Wins argues that players are often defined by their ability to score. Scoring, though, suffers from diminishing returns. If Lloyd scored more, other teammates would have to score less. Consequently it’s possible that Lloyd was told to defer to his teammates, and hence his production — and people’s perception of his value — was unfairly diminished.
Let me close by noting (again) that there is more to wins than scoring. So it’s possible that Lloyd, Clifton, and Cooper did produce wins (although we can’t tell since much of the data wasn’t tracked). Wins production, though, is not the issue here. Again, scoring is what drives the perception of a player’s value. If these players were asked to score less, then it’s clear that discrimination continued in the early years of the NBA even after integration took place.
- DJ
Our research on the NBA was summarized HERE.
The Technical Notes at wagesofwins.com provides substantially more information on the published research behind Wins Produced and Win Score
Wins Produced, Win Score, and PAWSmin are also discussed in the following posts:
Simple Models of Player Performance
What Wins Produced Says and What It Does Not Say
Introducing PAWSmin — and a Defense of Box Score Statistics
Finally, A Guide to Evaluating Models contains useful hints on how to interpret and evaluate statistical models.
12 responses so far ↓
Dervin // March 19, 2008 at 8:13 am
I think the difference between Baseball and Basketball and individual performance is Basketball on the offensive end is a more zero-sum game.
If a player takes a shot, he’s taking a shot away from a teammate, where in baseball, a player getting a hit doesn’t alter the hits and at-bats of the teammate*.
The other thing we have to remember about integration, Robinson wasn’t chosen because he was the best Black baseball player - he was chosen because he could stand on the field and take the abuse from the fans and his teammates. I would think the same would apply for basketball as well. They were good, but they were picked for their ability to take a bite out of the sh*t sandwich.^
*for the most part.
^Think of the Cleo Hill story - as a Sixer’s fan it p*sses me off about how progressive Red Auerbach was - I have to respect him as a human being as well.
Craig W. // March 19, 2008 at 9:07 am
It is really the Cleo Hill story that really p*sses me off. St Louis was a really racist city in the 50’s and 60’s and looking at baseball, football, and especially basketball brings the point home. Blackballing (how’s that for a stereotypical word?) a player because he wanted to score would mean Gilbert Arenas wouldn’t be allowed on the NBA court today.
John W. Davis // March 19, 2008 at 11:20 am
Good working with you Prof. Berri. We will definitely have you on again! To the point of Black Magic I am glad they didnt just air this is in February because it was Black History Month. This is a story that is about basketball just as much as African-Americans. I would argue that with March Madness the month of March is the biggest month for basketball. So Kudos to ESPN Executives for airing it in March!
Tim // March 19, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Another great article, thanks.
This is a non-sequitor, but I saw an article today about who should be coach of the year in the NBA, and I wondered what you would say about that. There are teams doing better than conventional wisdom expected (i.e. Philadelphia), and then there are teams doing better than you expected (i.e. Detroit), but can anyone determine how much of that has to do with coaching? You’ve hinted from time to time that your research shows coaching matters, but perhaps not as much as most people think. Is it even possible for you to statistically determine the coach of the year?
Tim // March 19, 2008 at 2:46 pm
In the article about Amir Johnson you said “Flip Saunders is considered an offensive-minded coach, so it is possible he has done something to change how these players perform. Yes, coaching can impact performance and this might just be an example of this phenomena (then again, maybe it isn’t).” I’m guessing that’s your answer to the coach-of-the-year question. Flip Saunders and some other coaches have players who are playing above expectations. Coaching can impact performance. Perhaps these coaches are impacting performance. Then again, perhaps they are not.
If that’s your answer, can you just tell us which coaches, in addition to Flip Saunders, fit into this category? Which teams, besides Detroit, are performing better than you expected, and not just better than conventional wisdom expected?
Animal // March 19, 2008 at 9:38 pm
No snake mittens in this post.
Animal // March 19, 2008 at 9:38 pm
(That means it’s good .)
nakki naama // March 20, 2008 at 2:51 am
What if the black players were asked to focus on rebounding, etc. instead of scoring simply because they were better at it?
Daniel // March 20, 2008 at 8:17 am
Manu Ginobili is a sixth man. Crap thinking like that is why he hasn’t won a sixth man of the year award yet. He comes off the bench in the majority of games, hence he is a bench player.
Tom Philpott // March 20, 2008 at 10:09 am
This typically great post makes me think of great Detroit benches of old — specifically back when Chuck Daley could call the likes of Vinnie “The Human Microwave” Johnson and the great Dennis Rodman off the bench.
That got me thinking of other benches of the Golden Age–Michael Cooper/Bob McAdoo (Lakers), McHale/Walton (Celtics), Bobby Jones (Sixers). any chance of a benches of the Golden Age post?
Also, I’d love to get your take on the post-Marion Suns. Thanks!
don // March 20, 2008 at 10:37 pm
Whatever his scoring efficiency, Earl Lloyd had a beautiful gliding underhand layup. He and Sweetwater opened up to a certain 7 year old white boy that basketball could have a fluid grace.
Taking a Test from Pistonscast « The Wages of Wins Journal // April 18, 2008 at 1:02 pm
[...] Deven Khrucell of Pistonscast. A few weeks ago I made my first appearance on the Pistons podcast, discussing the greatness that is Amir Johnson and the productivity of Detroit’s bench. This week the topic was Rodney [...]
Leave a Comment