The San Antonio Spurs currently have a record of 44-20. Across 82 games, such a record projects to 56 wins, or just two fewer regular season wins than the Spurs had last season when it eventually took the NBA title. So it looks like the Spurs in 2007-08 – despite losing badly to the Hornets badly on Wednesday night – look to be just as good as the 2007 NBA champs.
The Efficiency Differential Story
When we delve deeper into the numbers, though, we see a different story. In 2006-07 the Spurs scored 106.4 points per 100 possessions. On defense, again per 100 possessions, this team allowed 97.3 points. Hence its efficiency differential – offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency – was 9.1. As Table One indicates, this was the best efficiency differential the Spurs have achieved in the Tim Duncan era (and although not indicated, also in team history).
Table One: The Spurs Efficiency Differential in the Tim Duncan Era
After 64 games this season, the Spurs are only scoring 104.57 points per 100 possessions. And per 100 possessions, the team is allowing 99.64 points (the worst defensive effort in the Duncan era). So its efficiency differential is only 4.9. This is the worst differential the Spurs have had since Duncan’s rookie season. In sum, if we believe that efficiency differential trumps won-loss record as an assessment of team quality (and there is some reason to think this) then the Spurs have slipped quite a bit this season.
How did the Spurs Slip?
And of course we wonder how this happened. For an answer, we first turn to Table Two.
Table Two: The San Antonio Spurs after 64 games
Table Two offers two projections of the Spurs. The first assumes that what the players did last year on a per-minute basis will be offered again this year. The second projects what we have seen so far to the end of the season.
The top two players on this team – Tim Duncan and Manu Ginobili – are essentially unchanged from last season. The third most productive player this season, Fabricio Oberto, is much improved from 2006-07. So obviously Duncan, Ginobili, and Oberto are not the problem.
However, when we look at the fourth most productive player – Tony Parker – we start to see a problem. Parker posted a 0.194 WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] last season, a mark that is well above average (average is 0.100). This season his WP48 has dipped to 0.119, which is right around average. The drop-off in Parker’s productivity accounts for 3.5 of the 10.6 difference we see in the two projections for this team.
Why Did Parker Decline?
Now where has Parker declined? For that answer we turn to Table Three.
Table Three: Tony Parker in 2006-07 and 2007-08
From Table Three we see that Parker is essentially the same player with respect to assists and turnovers. Where he is not the same is in the areas of shooting efficiency (from the line and the field), rebounds, and steals. The drop in these three areas explains virtually all of the declines we see in Parker’s output.
And of course we wonder: why has Parker regressed with respect to scoring, rebounds, and steals? Parker plays for the same coach, in the same city, and with many of the same teammates. Judging by his shot attempts, assist, and turnover numbers, his role on the team is also unchanged. Given all that’s the same, it’s hard to understand why Parker is offering less.
Well, there is one obvious change. Parker was a single man last year. After last season, though, he married actress Eva Longoria. As we know from the Tony Rom0-Jessica Simpson saga in Dallas, when an athlete fails, we need to look no further than his love life for an explanation. Yes, this is clearly Longoria’s fault.
Okay, there’s one other possibility. In Parker’s first six seasons he only missed 21 games. This season he has already missed 13. It could be that Parker’s feet and ankle problems have reduced his productivity. Yes, that’s not a very sexy answer. But it probably is closer to reality. Unless Longoria can be blamed for Parker’s injuries, Parker’s marriage has nothing to do with his statistical drop-off. In fact, blaming the wife or girlfriend for a player’s performance is more than a bit silly. And that applies to the Romo-Simpson story as well.
Other Declines
The decline in Parker’s output only explains a part of the team’s regression. The Spurs have also received less from Michael Finley, Jacque Vaughn, Matt Bonner, and Francisco Elson.
The issue with Elson and Bonner has been resolved (at least partially) with the Kurt Thomas acquisition. Thomas has been above average for much of his career, and after ten games in San Antonio he has remained above average.
Additionally, Brent Barry – who I noted a few days ago is a very good player – is schedule to return to the line-up. If Barry can take some of Finley’s minute (or minutes from Vaughn), it’s possible much of the problems in San Antonio can be resolved before the playoffs.
Summarizing the Spurs Story
Here is a quick summary of the tale being told.
1. The Spurs won-loss record says this team is as good in 2007-08 as it was last year.
2. The team’s efficiency differential, though, tells us the team is much worse.
3. A significant chunk of the team’s decline can be traced to Tony Parker.
4. It would be an interesting story if we could link Parker’s decline to his marriage to Eva Longoria, but the truth is that it’s probably just Parker’s injuries.
5. The recent moves by the Spurs probably fix much of the non-Parker problems.
So if Parker can be healthy for the playoffs, the Spurs can expect to contend for another title. And that should be good news for fans of this team.
Of course, there is some bad news. Given how much the Western Conference elite have improved (and the improvement of the Celtics and Pistons in the Eastern Conference), another title will be quite difficult. It’s entirely possible – despite the trade for Kurt Thomas, the return of Brent Barry, and Parker’s improving health — that the Spurs will once again fail to win a title in an even-number season. Such odd luck must also have an explanation. Is there a wife or girlfriend that can be blamed for the Spurs failures in even-numbered years?
-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.
Wages of Wins Journal 
john
March 14, 2008
I still feel that SA Spurs have what it takes to become Champions again….
http://mundoalbiceleste.blogspot.com/2008/03/nba-news-20th-straight-win-for-scola.html
Nichh
March 14, 2008
tony parker is fat!!!
Daniel
March 14, 2008
The Spurs have 6 players now who will play heavy minutes in the playoffs who have recently, or are currently offering approximately .2 WP48 or better in Parker (last season), Duncan, Thomas, Ginobili, Oberto, and Barry, with three of them near or over .3 WP48. Here’s how the other Western Conference teams with players over .2 WP48 stack up: the Jazz have 4, the Mavs have 4, the Lakers have 3.5 (counting the Pau Gasol of Christmas Past, an out-of-shape Andrew Bynum, and Trevor Ariza potentially playing 20 minutes/game in the playoffs), the Suns have 2.5 (depending on Shaq), the Hornets have 2, the Rockets have 2, the Warriors have 2, and the Nuggets have 1. This means that the Spurs basically have twice as many very good players as all but two West teams and effectively 3 superstars in the bunch (.3WP48 ).
When rotations shorten in the playoffs and minutes are reallocated, the Spurs only have Finley, Udoka, Vaughn, Robert Horry’s corpse and Bowen under .2 WP48. Every player outside their top 6 is known either for his man-to-man defense, his three-point shooting, or both– and though their is no metric that takes floor spacing into account, keeping defenders in the corners is huge in helping their two penetrating guards and great PF to be effective. Regardless of how you stack it, the 5 Spurs on the floor at any given time in the playoffs will average over .2 WP48, which is nearly as good as an all-star team. Their WORST potential lineup, which is probably Stoudemire, Finley, Bowen, Horry, and Oberto still averages .02 WP48, and wouldn’t happen unless the Spurs are on either side of a blowout. Yes, the Spurs are this good.
Though you’ll probably pick the Celtics and Lakers in the playoffs, take into account the surprising depth of the Spurs and the reallocation of minutes into your equation.
The “Big Three” are averaging about 33mpg now. They’ll probably average closer to 38mpg in the playoffs. This is a huge variable that needs to be entered into playoff projections. Other teams’ stars really can’t play many more minutes as they’re already around 40 mpg, but the Spurs’ Big Three are really only playing 2/3 of each game.
stephanie
March 16, 2008
Do coaches anywhere still preach that athletes shouldn’t have sex a day or two before big games since it will supposedly rob them of energy and aggressiveness? I was under the impression that this used to be considered standard practice.
So yeah, maybe poor Tony Parker is being robbed of his testosterone. Maybe Eva Longoria is in reality a Lakers mole. Make up your own joke about protecting your precious bodily fluids.
SMK
March 18, 2008
Stephanie –
If that were the case then A.C. Green would be in the Hall of Fame and Wilt Chamberlain would be just another big man.