This weekend I noticed that the New Jersey Nets – in the supposed to effort to build a playoff contender – signed Keyon Dooling. Having spent some time thinking about the NBA, I knew immediately that Dooling’s level of production in his career was not likely to help a team contend. And when I looked at all the other veteran players the Nets added to their roster this summer, I saw the same pattern. Like Dooling, the other veterans added were simply not that productive.
Given the productivity – or lack of productivity – of the newest Nets, I looked for some other motivation for these roster moves. And the obvious choice was the “LeBron Conspiracy.” Essentially the Nets were not making moves to win in 2008-09 or 2009-10. What the Nets were apparently doing is making sure that when King James was ready to move in 2010, he was going to move to New Jersey (or Brooklyn).
Having settled on the conspiracy theory, I then asked the question: “… is King James going to win in New Jersey?” After all, the Nets do not look like a very good team right now. So why would LeBron want to join a team that wasn’t very competitive?
Is Cleveland Competitive?
A few people read my comment on the Nets and wondered whether the Cavaliers had done enough to keep LeBron. In other words, if you take LeBron away from the Cavs, what have you got? For an answer we turn to Table One.
Table One: The Cleveland Cavaliers in 2007-08
Last season the Cavs won 45 games. Had each player performed as he did in 2006-07 (except for those who didn’t play much or at all in 2006-07), the Cavs could have expected to win… 45 games.
When we look at the performances in 2007-08, though, Cleveland was actually a bit worse than a 45 win team. The team’s efficiency differential was -0.38. This is consistent with a team that is just below the 0.500 mark.
Looking at the individual players we see that LeBron – who was very good in 2006-07 – was very, very, very good in 2007-08. Although James improved, Drew Gooden, Sasha Pavlovic, and Ira Newble were quite a bit worse. And if we consider all the ups and downs, Cleveland was a tad bit off what we might have expected (but only a tad).
One might look at the play of Gooden, Pavlovic, and Newble and start thinking about all the below average players employed by Cleveland last season. The Cavaliers, though, did have a few above average performers (in addition to LeBron). An average player posts a WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] of 0.100. Looking at Table One we see that Zydrunas Ilgauskas, Anderson Varejao, Delonte West, Ben Wallace, and Dwayne Jones all surpassed the average mark.
Of course looking at a few players here or there is not a great way to evaluate a team’s supporting cast. What did the Cavaliers have without LeBron? LeBron’s Wins Produced was 20.2 last season. The rest of the Cavs produced 20.0 wins. Given the minutes everyone played, everyone not named King James posted a 0.057 WP48. This is not the worst mark in the league for a supporting cast, but it’s clearly below average.
All this leads to a couple of questions:
Landing LeBron
First – and this one I will try and answer – who is in a better position to land LeBron in 2010, the Cavs or Nets?
In 2007-08 the Cavs employed a below average supporting cast. The Nets supporting cast, though, was even less productive. Jason Kidd led the Nets in Wins Produced last season. The average WP48 of everyone in New Jersey not named Kidd last season was only 0.039. And as noted a couple of days ago, New Jersey hasn’t done much to improve the cast.
How the rosters are now, though, is not the issue. What matters are the players available in 2010. Turning to HoopsHype, we see the New Jersey Nets currently have only Vince Carter and Eduardo Najera under contract for the 2010-11.
The Nets also hold an option on Yi Jianlian, Brook Lopez, Sean Williams, Ryan Anderson, Josh Boone, and Maurice Ager. If the Nets chose to keep all these players, New Jersey would have – assuming 2007-08 performance held until 2010-11 (a strong assumption but not impossible) – two above average performers: Carter and Boone. Again, that’s not much of a supporting cast. But then again, with that much room under the cap (and the potential for two more lottery picks), the Nets could have much more to entice LeBron (besides money).
What about the Cavs? Again, looking at HoopsHype, we see that Cleveland has the following players under contract after 2010: Daniel Gibson.
Yes, that’s it. Rookie JJ Hickson is available under a team option and LeBron can stay under a player option. Every other player is not under contract for the 2010-11 season.
This means at this point we are not sure what Cleveland will have on its roster if and when King James opts out of his contract. With LeBron on board for two more seasons it seems unlikely the Cavs will have any lottery picks. But Cleveland could be adding additional free agents that might give LeBron hope that a championship contender could be built in Cleveland.
Other Questions
Okay, I said a couple of questions. Beyond the issue of who is in a better position to land LeBron is the issue of how the 2007-08 supporting casts in Cleveland and New Jersey compared to the rest of the league. Yes, I said both are below average. But how far below average? Does anyone have a supporting cast that is less productive? And which team has the best?
These questions are going to have to wait for another day. And that day won’t be tomorrow. My next post (which might go up tomorrow) is going to focus on the Las Vegas summer league. Erich Doerr was nice enough to send me the final data. Now all I have to do is offer some useful analysis. Here is a quick preview: So far it looks like Minnesota is winning the Kevin Love – OJ Mayo trade.
– 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.
Wages of Wins Journal 
William
July 23, 2008
This is a particularly relevant post given Gilbert Arenas’ quote to the Washington Post yesterday regarding the Cleveland Cavaliers.
Arenas reportedly told his team, “You guys played the whole season without me and you guys made it to the playoffs,” he said. “Tell Cleveland to play without LeBron. I don’t think they won a game last year.”
Gilbert is clearly wrong, but based on the numbers above, there’s a kernel of truth to his comments.
Owen
July 23, 2008
I think Gilbert was referring to the fact that Cleveland was 0-7 without Bron last year. I think he also thinks he is on Lebron’s level, that he is definitely wrong about….
mrparker
July 23, 2008
Nice post, there isn’t much room for argument or any questions left unanswered. So I’ll have to comment on the comments….I can’t believe Gilbert is saying his name in the same breath as Lebron’s. Maybe his pay is up there and maybe he is a pretty good player, but please don’t compare what Gilbert Arenas brings to a team to what Lebron James brings to a team.
Alex
July 23, 2008
FYI – HoopsHype has an error. Devin Harris is also under contract for NJ for the next 4 years. So NJ will have Vince, Najera and Harris under contract in the summer of 2010 (assuming no trades between now and then). As I recall, Harris is an above average player (according to his WP48).
Also, I haven’t read WoW yet (although I recently purchased it!), but one thing that I wonder about is the degree to which a player’s WP48 in 2007/8 will conform to their WP48 in 2010. After all, NJ’s supporting cast of Yi Jianlian, Sean Williams, Brook Lopez, Josh Boone, Ryan Anderson, and CDR are all 22 years old or younger. What is the likelihood that none of them will improve signficantly? I don’t know what the variation in WP48 from year-to-year is, but I’d think that for young players like these, it is likely that at least some of them will significantly improve over the next 2 years.
Cleveland, on the other hand, does not have a lot of young players likely to improve a lot. Gibson and JJ Hickson are their only real young players.
So, when you are looking at the supporting casts in the summer of 2010, you not only have to take into account productive players on the roster now, but also the potential improvement of young players (not to mention the unknown of free agency).
Jacob Rosen
July 23, 2008
Very nice post Mr. Berri. I very much enjoyed this one, especially when taken with the additional information posted in some of your most recent articles. I said some very similar things in my most recent post on my blog. Check them out if you have a second.
Jacob Rosen
July 23, 2008
My website is http://www.jrosen.wordpress.com, by the way.
Brian
July 23, 2008
I thought it very itneresting that for the Cavs last year, Delonte West, Ben Wallace, and Anderson Varejao all were above average. Yet, they didn’t play extended minutes either because of only recently being traded to the team or for holding out. Gooden and (WOW, especially) Pavlovic kept them down. Now Gooden is gone. With a starting lineup of Gibson, Delonte, Lebron, Wallace, Ilgauskas- and Varejao as 6th man, shouldn’t we be looking at the Cavs as a team to improve next year? If they just cut pavlovic’s minutes and play with their recently acquired players all year, this looks like a 51-2 win team.
Randall Levin
September 9, 2008
Wasn’t Joe Smith above average last year? Also, players under 22 are not necessarily any more likely to improve than players 22-25. Most players in the first category are playing out rookie contracts and haven’t established themselves as bona fide players. They are only on teams because they were drafted, have potential, and come cheap. Some of them won’t even remain on NBA rosters once they hit free agency. Some will, and of those some will get significantly better, some will remain bench warmers. I think you have to look at these on a (shudder) case by case basis.