The Wages of Wins Journal

Note to the Media — One of the Best Teams in the NBA is in Utah

August 10, 2008 · 20 Comments

The top three teams in the NBA this past season were Boston, the LA Lakers, and Detroit.  Whether we look at won-loss record or efficiency differential, these three teams were clearly the best.

The Fourth Best Team in 2007-08

But who is number four?  If we look at won-loss record we see two teams with 56 wins (San Antonio and New Orleans). And we see two more teams with 55 victories (Houston and Phoenix).  But efficiency differential tells us that it’s the Utah Jazz – who won 54 games last year – that ranks just behind the big three.

Table One: 2007-08 Efficiency Differentials

Utah’s mark of 7.15 was just behind the Lakers differential of 7.35.  And the difference between Jazz and the Pistons (Detroit’s differential was 8.17) was actually smaller than the gap between the differential of Utah and New Orleans (the team with the 5th best differential last year).

In spite of this mark, though, Utah tends to be ignored when people get around to listing the NBA’s elite teams.  For example, Houston – the team Utah eliminated in the first round of the 2007 and 2008 playoffs – seems to be more frequently listed as a potential NBA contender (this is just my impression). 

As a new resident of the state of Utah I can tell you why the perception of the Jazz seems to fall short of Utah’s actually production.  Clearly, because Utah is not a major media market, the nation’s sports media discounts the achievements of the Jazz.  At least, that’s what every team in a smaller market claims when it’s slighted (or just thinks it is slighted) by the national media.  I heard these arguments when I lived in Detroit, Nebraska, Colorado, Iowa, and even Bakersfield, California (damn, I got to quit moving). 

Counting Top Players

Whether or not the perception of Utah matches its performance is open to debate.  The actual performance of this team last year, though, is far more certain.  The Jazz were one of the best teams in the NBA.  And when we look at Wins Produced, we can see which players were responsible for this outcome.

Table Two: The Utah Jazz in 2007-08

An average NBA player posts a WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] of 0.100.  When we look at Table Two, we see that Utah employed five players – Carlos Boozer, Deron Williams, Ronnie Brewer, Andrei Kirilenko, and Paul Milsap – who exceeded the average threshold.  Three of these players – Boozer, Williams, and Brewer – topped the 0.200 mark.  As I have noted in the past, a team of 0.200 players would be expected to win all of their games.  In essence, such players could be thought of as perfect (although obviously all players still make mistakes). 

When I looked over Utah’s roster I wondered how many other team could boast such a collection of top talent.  With this thought in mind I looked at the players who logged at least 1,000 minutes for a single team in 2007-08.  From this list of players, I then counted how many 0.200+ players (WP48 in excess of 0.200) and 0.100+ players (WP48 in excess of 0.100) each team employed.  The results are reported in Table Three

Table Three: The Number of 0.200+ and 0.100+ Players

on Each Team in 2007-08

Table Three ranks teams first according to the number of 0.200+ players on a team.  It then looks at the number of 0.100+ players.  What stands out when you look at this table is that except for the Philadelphia 76ers, the 16 playoff teams in 2008 finished in the top 16 in Table Three.  In sum – and this is not a shocking finding – top teams tend to employ the largest number of very good players. 

When we look over the specific teams in Table Three, we are not surprised to see the Celtics lead the field.  The Mavericks, Lakers, and Jazz should actually be thought of as tied, since Devin Harris was traded for Jason Kidd.  In other words, the Mavericks never employed six +0.100 players at one time this past season.

Looking Forward in Utah

Looking back at the Jazz, we see that with respect to 0.200+ and 0.100+ players, only the Celtics looked like a clearly better team in 2007-08.  If we look forward to 2008-09, though, we should first note that Kirilenko’s career WP48 mark stands at 0.262.  And Brevin Knight, the latest edition to the team, has a career mark of 0.160.  Furthermore, Mehmut Okur and Matt Harpring also have career averages in the 0.100+ range (0.138 and 0.132 respectively).

So if these players post career average marks in 2008-09, and the remaining Jazz do not change from the 2007-08 level of production, the Jazz will have four 0.200+ and eight 0.100+ players.  In sum, Utah would look like a very serious contender in 2009.

If we break it down by position, we see that the Jazz – if Okur returns to his career average – have an above average player at every position in the starting line-up.  The weakness last year was at back-up point guard and back-up center. The addition of Knight appears to correct the back-up point guard problem.  And in the draft, the Jazz selected center Kosta Koufos.  Although Erich Doerr’s analysis doesn’t indicate that Koufas will help much, at least an effort was made to shore up a team weakness.

Losing the Last Game

Even if the Jazz are still stuck with Jarron Collins in the front-court, though, Utah looks like a formidable team.  Unfortunately, it also looks like Utah is once again destined to fall just a bit short.

To put the “once again” in perspective, we need to remember that the top five teams – in terms of efficiency differential – since 1973-74 (the first year we can calculate differential) were the Chicago Bulls of 1995-96 (13.00 differential), the Chicago Bulls of 1996-97 (11.61 differential), the Boston Celtics of 2007-08 (10.95 differential), the Chicago Bulls of 1991-92 (10.64 differential), and the Utah Jazz of 1996-97 (9.39 differential).

Yes, the Jazz of 1996-97 were one of the top five teams since 1973-74.  But it could not win an NBA title because in the finals it faced a Chicago Bulls team -with Michael Jordan, Dennis Rodman, Scottie Pippen, and company – that was one of the top two teams since 1973-74.

I fear the same scenario will play out in 2008-09. We should expect the Jazz to be one of the top teams in the league.  But I can’t see this team passing the Lakers or Celtics in 2009.  So although Utah has assembled an impressive roster – perhaps the most impressive edition of this franchise since 1996-97 – the fate of this team will probably be similar to what we saw in 1997.  Utah will win a mess of games, only to lose the last game it plays in the 2009 playoffs. 

Although this will make people in Utah sad, it should not detract from the fact that one of the very best teams in the NBA is in Utah.  And that should (probably won’t, but it should) get some attention from the national sports media.

And I am not just saying all this because I really like living in Utah.

- DJ

The WoW Journal Comments Policy

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

Wins Produced vs. Win Score

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.

Categories: Basketball Stories

20 responses so far ↓

  • Serhat // August 11, 2008 at 3:06 am

    Utah is the best team in the NBA when it comes to efficiency differential in home games. Here’s the home and road splits http://www.nbastuffer.com/2007-2008_Regular_Season_Stats.html
    However, on the road they are eleventh.

  • ganzo // August 11, 2008 at 7:47 am

    As a longtime Jazz fan, you are right about the national media underestimation of Utah. A prominent recent example is Brousard’s threesome list that excludes Williams, Boozer, and Kirelenko/Okur in favor of others that are not going to win nearly as many games. You would be hard pressed to find any prognostication from the media (going back to the Malone/Stockton years) that predicts they will do better than they actually have in a given year. I can’t say whether this occurs just as much with other small market franchises but I think cultural impressions of Utah lead to a bias that goes beyond its small market status. Is there any work out there that systematically looks at media bias by empirically examining how well teams do compared to national media predictions?

  • todd // August 11, 2008 at 8:50 am

    What’s the significance of New Orleans winning 56 games with only three 0.100+ players?

  • Joe // August 11, 2008 at 10:59 am

    @todd

    The significance? That, according to WP, Chris Paul(Most Productive player) and Tyson Chandler(top 5 C) were responsible for most of their wins.

  • Greg // August 11, 2008 at 11:31 am

    So if 33 year old Brevin Knight, 32 year old Matt Harpring, and Andrei Kirilenko, a player who’s production has notably decreased over the past few years, produce their average career marks , the Jazz will be good. Cool, I guess?

  • MC Welk // August 11, 2008 at 12:53 pm

    Kirilenko actually trended back upward last year. Harpring is almost done. Miles will be a .100+ player, Koufos can supplant Collins in a year and the remaining roster hole can be filled with the Knicks unprotected 2010 pick. Still a year or two away as we know all of the other elite team’s 30-somethings will replicate their peak production, right Greg? I’ll buy you a 3.2+ beer even in Utah.

  • Joe // August 11, 2008 at 2:38 pm

    Fantastic write up. I think the Jazz have a very solid core, and your hit it right on the noggin. I do think the Jazz have a chance to beat both the Lakers and Celtics though. Last year Utah had a chance to win every game vs the Lakers, this year with better PG play from Knight and a more expierenced Deron Williams, Utah should be good.

  • Christopher // August 11, 2008 at 5:06 pm

    Why are the Efficiency Differentials different between this post on the NBAstuffer table?

  • Tom7 // August 11, 2008 at 5:07 pm

    Interesting. Thanks.

    No other NBA team with as many Olympians… Carlos Boozer, Deron Williams, and Andrei Kirilenko.

  • Phil // August 11, 2008 at 5:15 pm

    As an aside, I think another reason the Jazz often get less attention is that they play in the Northwest division with Denver, Portland, Minnesota, and Seattle–not exactly the cream of the Western Conference these past few years. Most people figure that the Jazz, being a “pretty good” team, ought to walk away with the conference anyways and don’t end up paying much attention until playoffs time.

  • Joe // August 11, 2008 at 5:28 pm

    The lakers have 3 olympians too – kobe bryant, pau gasol, sun yue.

  • Kent // August 11, 2008 at 7:11 pm

    This is an excellent column.

  • Ken // August 11, 2008 at 8:08 pm

    I would think the pundits are giving even less respect to the Dallas Mavericks right now. But, as table 3 points out they have 3 players at .200 or better (Dirk, Kidd, Dampier). Howard (who was a .214 the season before) and Terry were both over .100. Dallas has added another .100+ player in Diop this summer and Brandon Bass was a .094 in his first opportunity to get minutes (and was better than that down the stretch and in the playoffs). That would get them to 7 players at .100+. But there won’t be a single pre-season prediction that ranks Dallas above Utah.

  • randylewiskemp // August 12, 2008 at 8:14 am

    Great Story. Thanks for sharing.

  • Todd // August 12, 2008 at 1:13 pm

    The New Orleans trio was better than the rest, but their bench was one of the weaker ones. Boston, Detroit and the Lakers had stronger benches than the rest of the league. It makes me wonder what the best approach for a GM would be; building around a few “stars”, focusing on depth (i.e., six to eight 0.100+ players) or somewhere in between? What teams have managed to stay competitive through the years, avoiding the spikes like we’ve seen from the Heat? What have their rosters been like? Just food for thought…gosh, I was jumping around and placed this on another post by mistake. sorry

  • JazzFanInHouston // August 13, 2008 at 2:07 am

    Is is possible to get a comparison between the first half and second half numbers for the Jazz for the 2007-2008 season. The Jazz were mediocre in the first half and pretty decent in the second half.

    The metrics on this site seem to be good predictors for the regular season. Are there any metrics that accurately predict head to head contests between two top teams (Jazz vs Lakers etc.) in a playoff.

  • Christopher // August 13, 2008 at 12:41 pm

    >Are there any metrics that accurately predict head to head contests between two top teams (Jazz vs Lakers etc.) in a playoff.

    I think efficiency differential. Has DB looked at how well efficiency differential predicts individual play-off match-ups?

  • Tommy_Grand // August 14, 2008 at 8:38 am

    The 4th best team for 2007-2008 was probably the SA Spurs. I would put Utah 5th.

  • Castle // August 25, 2008 at 4:18 pm

    Utah may be one of the best teams in the NBA, however they won’t win their division.

    Anyone looked at the Blazers recently?

  • Knowing is Only Half the Battle in Chicago « The Wages of Wins Journal // August 28, 2008 at 10:11 pm

    [...] Kirilenko and Ronnie Brewer for Gordon.  As noted a couple of weeks ago (in a post titled — Note to the Media), Kirilenko and Brewer were well above average for the Jazz last season. So such a suggestion – [...]

Leave a Comment