The Dallas Mavericks finished the 2008-09 season with a 2.1 efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency). Although such a mark surpasses anything done by the Clippers in their time in Los Angeles (or San Diego or Buffalo), it was the worst performance by the Mavericks since the 1999-00 season. In other words, it was the worst performance by the Mavericks since Mark Cuban bought the team.
In the playoffs the Mavericks did manage to escape the first round. But that was primarily because Manu Ginobili was not able to play for the Spurs. Once the Mavericks moved on to the second round they were quickly eliminated by the Denver Nuggets in five games. Such a performance suggested changes would have to be made to the Mavericks roster if this team was going to return to the ranks of the NBA contenders.
One of these moves was the signing of Quinton Ross, who produced -0.6 wins last year. Such a move probably does not help the Mavericks in 2009-10. Fortunately for Dallas fans, the Mavericks made three other moves that should help this team return to the ranks of NBA championship contenders. At least, that’s what you would conclude if you believe Wins Produced.
1. First the Mavericks re-signed Jason Kidd, giving him more than $25 million to stay in Dallas. Kidd is now 36 years old, which is very ancient by NBA standards. But he did produce 21 wins last year with a 0.349 WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes]. Such production suggests Kidd will help next year.
2. With Kidd retained, the Mavericks then signed Marcin Gortat to an offer sheet (that the Orlando Magic is not expected to match). Gortat produced 5.2 wins in only 794 minutes last year. So his WP48 was 0.316, or more than three times what we see from an average NBA player.
3. And now the Mavericks have engineered a very complicated trade to bring Shawn Marion to Dallas. Marion ranked among the top 10 in Wins Produced each season from 2000-01 to 2006-07, taking the very top spot in 2000-01. Last season, though, his performance drifted well below his career averages. In 2,470 minutes he produced 10.0 wins. His WP48 of 0.193 was above average, but hardly comparable to what Marion did before he reached 30 years of age. Although Marion is not what he used to be, he still had a WP48 mark beyond anything offered by the small forwards and power forwards employed by the Mavericks this past season.
Putting these moves together and we see a potential rotation consisting of the following nine players.
Jason Kidd: 21.0 Wins Produced, 0.349 WP48
Josh Howard: 2.0 Wins Produced, 0.057 WP48
Shawn Marion: 10.0 Wins Produced, 0.193 WP48
Dirk Nowitzki: 8.1 Wins Produced, 0.127 WP48
Erick Dampier: 8.9 Wins Produced, 0.232 WP48
Jose Barea: 2.2 Wins Produced, 0.065 WP48
Jason Terry: 4.8 Wins Produced, 0.092 WP48
Quinton Ross: -0.6 Wins Produced, -0.025 WP48
Marcin Gortat: 5.2 Wins Produced, 0.316 WP48
Last year these nine players produced 61.4 wins. And next year these totals should go higher if Gortat plays more minutes. So it looks like Dallas should contend next year.
What is interesting, though, is that this is not the story told by adjusted plus-minus. Adjusted plus-minus is the metric brought to the world by Wayne Winston and Jeff Sagarin, via the funding of Mark Cuban. According to BasketballValue.com, though, Gortat has a two-year measure of -2.46. And Marion has a two-year mark of 1.58. Neither mark is outstanding, suggesting that the Mavericks have gone to a great deal of effort to add players that are not immensely productive.
So this leads one to wonder, why did Dallas pursue these players? It looks like they are building a Wages of Wins team. But that just can’t be true. Can it?
- 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
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.
43 responses so far ↓
PJ // July 9, 2009 at 7:52 pm
I hope these guys stay healthy. I think the conventional wisdom — as well some of the other stathead wisdom out there, I suspect — probably thinks less of these moves than Wages of Wins does. Gortat and Kidd, in particular, are rated more highly by WoW than by most others, I think. So it’ll be interesting to see how it plays out.
I’d peg them for about 55 wins next season myself — a little better than last year, but not a lot. Kidd will be a year older, after all. And Marion hasn’t been good in a while. I like Gortat, but I’m not sure he’ll have the kind of impact impact that WoW suggests.
chan man // July 9, 2009 at 8:13 pm
Thanks for the post, Prof. Always informative and true to the fact (stats).
I don’t like Mark Cuban – but I think he’s building a good WOW team in Dallas. Smart man. Now we just have to see if (1) anything happen to the rest of the roster – there are trade rumors for Damp and Howard, and (2) if players can return to form.
For (1), if nothing change, it’d be a good mix with Damp and the Polish Hammer sharing mintues at C. This would’ve been good for their WP48 aren’t that different, and the effect (suspect) of increased usage causing a diminished WP48 in the P-Hammer won’t be much of a concern (for this point, see the Amir Johnson effect).
This would be good for flexibility in rotation too, as there could be a wide array of combinations from 1 thru 5, big and small lineups.
For (2), as you’ve studied in previous posts, both Howard, Dirt and the Matrix had proven to be (a lot) better than what they’d shown last year. And for the “watch’em play” groups, this team can very well challenge the Lakers with the Matrix/Howard shadowing the “unstoppable” and “create-shots-for-teammates-with-double-or-triple-team-freaking” Kobe with single coverage, while overmatch them in every other position.
Now my Suns is left without the Matrix or Shaq, Le Boris, RahRah…. What did we get from that promising trade again, other than a few more wasted years on Nashty’s legs and back?
Peter // July 9, 2009 at 9:01 pm
Whoa, whoa, whoa, Dave.
Dallas traded Mullens to Oklahoma for Rodrique Beaubois and drafted Ahmad Nivins. And the team got the draft rights to former Florida star point guard Nick Calathes. And Nivins is one of your top 5 guys based on draft productivity. It’s certainly an improvement over Mullens.
So the only move that could really be criticized from a WoW standpoint is the Ross signing, and even then, he’s a hometown kid.
dberri // July 9, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Thanks Peter. This is what happens when you write a post in about 45 minutes. Hard to remember all the deals from draft night. I changed the post and eliminated the stuff on Mullens.
Daniel // July 10, 2009 at 12:14 am
One thing worth noting– Josh Howard and Dirk Nowitzki both had just about (don’t remember exactly) the worst seasons of their respective careers last season. Dirk has produced close to 20 wins before and Howard has produced 15. I’m a big Spurs fan and I was pretty pissed about the Richerd Jefferson Trade. They could have picked up Marion and Humphries (yet another above-average power forward) for that cost and with the addition of McDyess, they would have had a higher ceiling than the Lakers or Cavs. Stupid, stupid, stupid…
An interesting series of posts would be how good every NBA team would be if every player produced at A) His career average WP/48, B) Every player produced at his career high WP/48, and C) Every player produced at his career low WP/48 (given likely or historical distributions of minutes).
That might be more trouble than it’s worth, but it might be a neat series of posts to do during the NBA doldrums of August and September.
Peter // July 10, 2009 at 4:52 am
From the Wages of Wins perspective, one theme starting to come into play is that, in all likelihood, the gap between the Lakers and everybody else in the Western Conference has shrunk.
The Mavs have just been discussed in this post. The Spurs landed DaJuan Blair, a top-2 producer of wins last season and a player who could see some minutes if Tim Duncan rests in back-to-backs. The Nuggets got another top rook in Ty Lawson who will likely end up as Chauncey Billups’ backup.
The data already stongly suggests that L.A. took a step back from Ariza to Artest. And things could get worse if Lamar Odom leaves; he was one of the major contributors of wins last year.
Tball // July 10, 2009 at 5:40 am
Don’t forget the Spurs landing McDyess – likely of far more consequence next season than the draft of Blair.
BTW – How do the Rockets get a cap exception for Yao? Reggie Lewis died – DIED – and the Celtics had to carry him on their cap for 2-3 more years (the life of the contract). Yao has a career threatening injury, but an injury that still offers a chance to come back next year and a greater chance to comeback the following year and they get an exception? Will this be another Darius Miles situation? Is Yao a free agent now? Am I expressing my grief in the wrong forum?
Peter // July 10, 2009 at 6:29 am
Thanks, T. Forgot about that for a moment.
But I wouldn’t completely rule out the possibility of Blair having an impact. Have any other NBA GMs heard of Hines Ward?
Palamida // July 10, 2009 at 7:16 am
It’s not like Blair wouldn’t get PT At all (I presume).
Even in limited Pt of a 1000 or so mins, against the opponent’s second unit, Blair would probably have enough in him production wise to produce around 4 wins – that’s no small potatoes. Moreover in the NBA, being a sub is more often about the drop-off:
Teams such as the Hornets who had a strong starting unit but a dreadful bench that simply decimated that chances of competing are a good example of that. The fact that the Spurs will not employ a complete scrub off the bench but rather an actual win producer bodes very well for their chances. Say what you will will about RJ but he is a definite improvement over Bowen.
The only real question is who do they intend to deploy at the Center position? not clear on that at all. One final note, For those who may have missed it, the Spurs also signed Former NBA player Marcus Haislip who has been simply awful in his earlier stint in the NBA. Will the Bench PT go to him or to Blair? We shall see.
mrparker // July 10, 2009 at 7:19 am
Can we please at some point this century get to the conclusion that Shawn Marion is a PF and not a SF.
brgulker // July 10, 2009 at 7:20 am
Thanks, T. Forgot about that for a moment.
But I wouldn’t completely rule out the possibility of Blair having an impact. Have any other NBA GMs heard of Hines Ward?
As a Pistons fan, I can assure that Dice will have more of an impact than Blair next season. Two years from now may be a different story; it will depend on how well Dice holds up and how much Blair can improve.
But next year, well, Dice produced at a .200+ clip last season. Diminishing returns and age might come into play a little bit, but he’s still going to produce a lot of rebounds and shoot efficiently. That’s just what he does.
Y’all are lucky to have him. He’ll be a fan-favorite in no time.
@ dberri:
Have you written about players who are relatively low-usage players (such as Gortat) who produced a lot in limited time and were moved into higher-usage roles in the next season?
I can’t seem to remember anything about that off the cuff.
I’m curious to see whether or not Gortat can continue to produce at .300+ in an expanded, high-usage role, and if you’ve written about such a player in the past, I’d be curious to know.
And Jason Kidd is amazing, isn’t he? 36 and still one of the most productive players in the league.
mrparker // July 10, 2009 at 7:46 am
gulker,
The player that immediately comes to mind is David Lee. I’m pretty sure Dberri wrote about him alot before he “brokeout” this past season. I’m pretty sure he has concluded that more minutes just equal more minutes. A recent failure has been Amir Johnson though it’s only been one season.
brgulker // July 10, 2009 at 7:50 am
A recent failure has been Amir Johnson though it’s only been one season.
I would alter that sentence by substituting “Michael Curry and his ridiculous substitution patterns” for “Amir Johnson.” Amir “failed” because his coach set him up to.
Italian Stallion // July 10, 2009 at 8:36 am
I’m not sure Cuban is looking at adjusted +/- or Wins Produced to make the moves he’s making this year. I think he’s just trying to fill “the needs” of the team and is going for the best player available at each position to do so. He’s just stumbling onto some good ones.
Italian Stallion // July 10, 2009 at 8:45 am
I think determining whether a low usage player can play more minutes and maintain his productivity is a very complicated issue that no aggregate study of the topic is going to solve.
IMO, that’s even true if you try to make adjustments for older players, young players only getting more minutes because they are getting better etc…
IMO, most players are fit enough to play more minutes and remain as productive, but there are exceptions (guys that have accumulated injuries that can’t even play well back to back let alone give you 36 minutes every night without breaking down, guys that only get minutes in the very specific circumstances where they can be productive making them look better than actually are, etc….
The aggregate stuff can show you some general patterns, but I think it’s a case by case thing.
Palamida // July 10, 2009 at 8:51 am
I think a lot of the usage issues are more about those players who produced basically vs. the opponent’s second unit switching to play against superior starting five caliber opponents.
Two of the more popular arguments are:
1.) Player x played limited time, didn’t have to worry about getting tired or fouling out. I think it’s true to a limited extent and particularly may inflate the Blocks numbers a bit (e.g – Gortat, Johnson), but it’s not like THAT was the main factor that caused them to produce.
2.)Being a “role player” meant being the 3rd,4th,5th or whatever string on offense, which in turn means when they played there were more “viable” offensive options. Arguably, those players got the defenses attention and the the “role player” was guarded by an inferior defensive player and at the same time got “opener” looks off of double teams etc,. I think this simply doesn’t hold water. We can discuss this over actual examples (which I don’t have in front of me, atm) but in order for that to be true we would expect certain things such as: A drop off in Fg% when switched to a primary role, more To’s, etc. Again, this seems to be the case but only marginally. Most of the production is retained.
Personally, as I said, I think the reduction in said production stems from moving out of the 2nd unit. In Amir Johnson’s case particularly there’s a specific story that needs to be told ; Since coming to the League Johnson had an atrocious foul rate. It was clear that if given a starting role (a status he achieved in the beginning of last season) he would need to cut that rate down significantly in order to actually play typical starter’s mins. The fouls caused him to play roughly the same amount of mins as a starter compared to his previous role off the bench, and the difference in production is simply due to the differences is competition.
Some players are affected less by this as their reduced ability to produce on defense is against top tier players is offset by their increased ability to produce on offense. Limited as Johnson game is offensively (weak jumper, weak face up game) scoring wise, he relies on put backs and good feeds. He can take less advantage of the inferior defense then he takes “back” playing vs. the Garnett’s of the league.
A final more subjective note: I’ve watched quite a few Pistons games last season in which Amir started. Can’t state enough how subjective this is but still; I saw plenty of good off the ball movement, which left him acres of space to operate; getting great deep positions, sometimes using the defensive rotation to obtain great positions against a smaller defender down low. However in those instances he rarely got the ball.
In many cases it seemed as if he wasn’t really in the ball handler’s mind. To make things worse, sometimes his frustration over this caused him to turn the ball over as he was late to get out of the paint and received numerous offensive 3 seconds calls.
Any thoughts?
simulator // July 10, 2009 at 9:09 am
You forgot to mention that Marion and Howard play the same position, and thus likely to divi up their wins in that position.
Dallas may also try to trade Howard for a SG during the off season.
todd2 // July 10, 2009 at 9:41 am
What was the reason for the decline in ED? Did they score less or allow more? I don’t see this team being very good defensively.
todd2 // July 10, 2009 at 9:52 am
Just looked it up. Opponents’ adjusted fg% jumped and FTA’s went up. Defense dipped.
Westy // July 10, 2009 at 10:46 am
Also worth noting is that Q. Ross it sounds like was signed to be a defensive stopper. If that plays out like expected, he would be the typical perimeter defender (doesn’t get a lot of rebounds) like B. Bowen that WoW may not entirely measure the worth of.
Zach K // July 10, 2009 at 11:12 am
@simulator:
I think it will be kind of awesome having Marion and Howard both bc it allows Marion to dominate the second team, and switch between backing up Howard and backing up Nowitzki. In that scenario, they could play Howard and Nowitzki 34 minutes a night, and play Marion 28 minutes a night. They’d then have Dampier and Gortat combine to fill the 48 center minutes.
Another intriguing option would be to go small for short stretches, with Marion at PF and Nowitzki at C. That lineup would be crazy.
I wanted Marion on the Celtics so badly. I might have to be an honorary Mavs fan next year.
simulator // July 10, 2009 at 12:52 pm
I’m not sure if Nowitzki at C and Marion at PF is a good thing.
In WOW world, I think both guys will drop if they played out of their positions. I.e. an average PF grabs 11.4 rebounds/48-min. Marion grabs almost exactly that in 48-min. An average PF would shoot 48.4% from the field, Marion’s shooting FG% last season was 48.5%. etc. In another word, I think Marion’s numbers (especially his rebounding number) are superior if compared to other SFs, but not PFs.
Likewise, I think if Nowtzki is moved over to C, his WOW numbers will suffer as well.
And just like that, what’s going to happen if Howard plays SG? I suspect that he isn’t quick enough to defend other SGs, and his rebounding may suffer due to different positioning.
Muad'Dib // July 10, 2009 at 6:45 pm
I have a general question that has occurred to me with all the players moving around this offseason. Do players’ WoW numbers generally stay consistent when they change teams or is there a difference produced by having different teammates? It seems to me that consistency in WoW numbers on different teams would be very good evidence that an individual player is not getting credit for teammates’ accomplishments statistically.
I’m a big Blazers fan and I hear tons of people say that Lamarcus Aldridge benefits his teammates by his offensive abilities. That, theoretically speaking, Nic Batum gets more open looks because Aldridge requires more defensive attention and that helps Batum’s numbers but not Aldridge’s. I know WoW contradicts this, and I think consistency of a players’ WoW numbers on different teams would be the biggest evidence that a player isn’t getting a boost in his WoW numbers from his teammates’ production.
Matt Walters // July 10, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Dr. Berri-
Have you had a look at the Dallas “statistical evaluation system”? It seems like kind of a weird mutation of +/-, which leads me to believe it is just so much noise. Mark Cuban has a blog post here:
http://blogmaverick.com/2009/02/08/nba-all-stars-by-the-numbers/
Could it be they just lucked into a WoW-endorsed lineup? Or do you have inside information that there is something more going on here?
Also, Muad’Dib- yes players’ WP48 tend stay consistent when they change teams.
Matt Walters // July 10, 2009 at 10:20 pm
In fact the more I look at it (the “system”) the more it appears to be just adjusted +/- where some baskets are worth more than others (???). How can that kind of insanity have led them to acquire Marion and Gortat?
Blake // July 11, 2009 at 4:12 am
I was looking through old posts, and I realized something. Are the 2008-2009 Lakers the first team since 1980 to win a title without a player with a career WP48 of .300 or more?
Palamida // July 11, 2009 at 9:08 am
Blake, I already commented on that in a previous post. The short answer – yes.
mrparker // July 11, 2009 at 5:41 pm
I’m starting to think my comments are invisible. I am going to post this every single time someone says that Shawn Marion is out of position if he is a small forward.
avg power forward (http://www.wagesofwins.com/DavisCurry.html)
19.3 pts 48.4efg 11.4reb 2.8to 5.6fta
Marion’s career as a PF
03′ 26pts 51%efg 13.1reb 1.6to 4.4fta
04′ 24pts 47%efg 12.9reb 2.2to 4.4fta
05′ 24pts 52%efg 14.1reb 1.9to 4fta
06′ 26pts 55%efg 13reb 1.8to 4.2fta
07′ 24pts 60%efg 14.3reb 1.9to 4.3fta
08′ stats not available
09′
tor 24pts 53%efg 16.5reb 2.1to 3.9fta
mia 22pts 57%efg 15.2reb 1.6to 3.6fta
avg small forward(http://www.wagesofwins.com/GrangerMIP.html)
19.9pts 48.2efg% 7.6reb 2.8to 5fta
as a sf
03′ 24pts 49%efg 10.6reb 2.4to 4.2fta
04′ 21pts 48%efg 10.o reb 2.4to 3.7fta
05′ 23pts 52%efg 12.8reb 2.4to 5.6fta
06′ 0%sf minutes
07′ 20pts 52% 10.9reb 1.8to 3.6fta
08′ stats not available
09′
tor 17pts 47% 9.1reb 2.6to 2.8fta
mia 13pts 43% 9.6reb 1.9to 2.2fta
mrparker // July 11, 2009 at 5:42 pm
edit I mean to convey that Shawn Marion is a much more effective pf than a sf
simulator // July 12, 2009 at 10:26 am
Interesting stat…
His numbers do look better as a PF, although I suspect that his prime years in Phoenix had a lot to do with D’Antoni’s system. He played the majority of his minutes as a SF before he became a pseudo-PF (pseudo in the sense that he doesn’t guard the likes of Tim Duncan) in D’Antoni’s system.
I’m not convinced that Marion can be an effective full-time PF in a more traditional offense.
Marion’s 2008 positional numbers are available from 82games.net.:
Phx:
SF
15.3 0.547 2.4 41% 11.3 3.0 1.5 1.5 2.9 18.3
PF
16.9 0.590 3.4 54% 14.0 2.6 1.3 2.3 3.5 22.6
Miami:
SF
18.6 0.520 3.7 36% 11.9 4.5 1.5 0.7 4.5 23.0
PF
16.1 0.479 3.0 50% 14.0 3.2 3.4 1.4 2.5 17.2
Italian Stallion // July 12, 2009 at 10:27 am
mrparker,
From, listening to coach D’Antoni, I think it might be a good idea if we all start redefining our thinking on the issue of positions.
Years ago, most players used to fit into nice little packages like PG, SG, SF, PF and C. Each guy had a skillset that more or less matched the standard. That’s not as true now.
There are 7 footers that can shoot from the outside, but can’t rebound well and can’t cope with strong Cs on defense. PG’s that don’t shoot well, but rebound well and can guard bigger men. Guys that easily move back and forth between SF and PF depending on the matchup on the defensive end . Very tall traditional PFs that play Center etc…
The skills are so mixed and matched, they aren’t so standard.
I’m starting to think about players in terms of who they can guard on defense and the rest of their skills as individual components of a greater whole that you need to make a winning team.
So IMO a guy like Bargnani who is universally hated (and rightfully so) when compared to most Cs and PFs, is really not so bad when you think of him as a kind of SF. Being that tall and having a good outside shot is going to make it tough on a lot of defenders/defenses.
However, to make it work, you need someone that rebounds and does some of the other things that very tall PFs and Cs traditionally do. I actually think that’s why Toronto started playing better when Marion was there. They needed someone that could rebound and he can etc…
simulator // July 12, 2009 at 10:35 am
BTW, if you follow the same logic, Marion’s rebounding # as a center (although the sample size is comparatively small, he actually played more as a C than a PF in 05-06 season, when Amare was out for the season) has been off-chart throughout the years (#s available from 82games).
So maybe teams should give Marion at C some more tries!
Zach K // July 12, 2009 at 2:09 pm
@ simulator:
I see your point about the possibility of the D’Antoni system benefitting Marion disproportionately.
It still stands, however, that when we have seen Marion play PF, he has played extremely well. That’s the evidence we have.
Unless we have a powerful countervailing reason to discount that performance (and I don’t think D’Antoni is sufficient–see Al Harrington), we should take that evidence at face value.
ZK
simulator // July 12, 2009 at 3:28 pm
As I mentioned in the previous post, in 05-06, Marion played more and better as a center than a PF (from http://www.82games.com/0506/05PHO14C.HTM):
Position FGA eFG% FTA iFG Reb Ast T/O Blk PF Pts PER*
PF
20.4 0.551 4.2 33% 13.0 2.2 1.8 1.8 2.9 25.9 23.7
C
19.9 0.567 4.5 45% 15.0 2.1 1.8 2.2 3.6 26.2 26.4
Does that mean Shawn Marion plays better as a C? He could probably continue to get a decent number of rebounds at that position, and outrun some slower Cs in the league.
Likewise, if Marion plays full-time as a PF, should Nowitzki play a C? Is that a team good enough to contend for championship? Can Marion defend against Tim Duncan, Carlos Boozer, Gasol of the world?
The answer to the latter is obviously no. I suspect that Marion will see mins at PF when both teams decide to go for a stretch with small lineups. But full-time, I predict that he’ll stick as a SF, and rightly so.
If you think basketball is simply a game of inserting players who got better numbers at different positions (very much WOW like thinking), you could argue that Marion should play PF and Nowitzki should be his back up (because I suspect Nowitzki’s numbers as a C would be worse than Dampier’s).
ilikeflowers // July 12, 2009 at 5:13 pm
‘If you think basketball is simply a game of inserting players who got better numbers at different positions (very much WOW like thinking)’
The last part of this statement demonstrates a robust ignorance regarding WOW thinking. Reference positional adjustments, evaluating players by position, quotes from the book, et al.
simulator // July 12, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Actually, position adjustment is nothing more than recalculation of the produced wins based on average stat of that position.
What I was saying is that if you believe that a player’s production is an independent variable (which is precisely a WOW thinking), then Marion might be a better PF than Nowitzki
Zach K // July 12, 2009 at 8:41 pm
@ simulator
“Likewise, if Marion plays full-time as a PF, should Nowitzki play a C? Is that a team good enough to contend for championship? Can Marion defend against Tim Duncan, Carlos Boozer, Gasol of the world?”
To answer your question: no, I don’t think Marion can guard Tim Duncan or Pau Gasol for 34 min/game very well (Boozer is another story since he’s only 6′9″ to Marion’s 6′7″).
All I’m saying is that the Mavs can now throw out a rockin’ small lineup for 5-6 min/game. The numbers back that up, and it would without doubt be very difficult for the opposing team to adjust to.
-ZK
mrparker // July 12, 2009 at 9:05 pm
Could it also be said that Tim Duncan cannot guard Shawn Marion? I’ve become more intrigued with the whole position arguement since SVG caused me to have to live through a year of “Kobe Bryant NBA champion”.
My new thought is that they signed the wrong guy to a huge contract. Imagine(in wow terms of thought) if Shawn Marion had played PF for the Magic instead of Rashard Lewis.
simulator // July 12, 2009 at 10:16 pm
I think in 05 in playoffs, Marion played as a PF against SA (who had Duncan at PF and Nazr at C). Although I don’t think they guarded each other, Marion’s numbers were
7.8 pts/game 10.8 rebounds/game
I think Duncan averaged like 30/15 per game.
Marion played much better in 2007 playoff meeting. He played twice as a starting PF, and a SF for the rest.
As a PF, he averaged 20/11.5
As a SF, he averaged 13.5/10
I didn’t bother, but I think Duncan’s #’s were similar to his 05 numbers.
So overall, I don’t think Duncan would worry about having to deal with Marion, as much as Marion would worry about dealing with Duncan (if Duncan’s healthy).
Joe // July 13, 2009 at 3:54 am
Duncan is a Center anyway.
He is just called a PF because it allows him to go to the all star game every year.
MC Welk // July 14, 2009 at 8:34 am
Gortat’s offer matched.
barry // July 15, 2009 at 10:19 pm
I agree with Mrparker…
Dallas is Now Better than the 2006-07 Mavericks? « The Wages of Wins Journal // October 11, 2009 at 8:39 pm
[...] move (2003-04 to 2006-07) we see a player who produced 32.0 wins and posted a 0.169 WP48. In sum, as I noted last July, when it came time to re-build the Mavericks, Dallas apparently abandoned adjusted plus-minus and [...]