The big NBA news this week is that Ron Artest might be traded from the Sacramento Kings to the Houston Rockets. Here is how the impact of this trade has been described by two writers at ESPN.com.
John Hollinger (Artest makes it a trio, boosting the Rockets’ offense, title hopes):
The big idea is that Artest, between his scoring and his underrated playmaking skills, will add enough offense to get Houston well into the upper half of the league in offensive efficiency. From there, the Rockets’ suffocating D — with Artest adding yet another stopper to the mix — can accomplish the rest. If it comes to fruition, Houston could find itself hoisting the Larry O’Brien Trophy next June.
J.A. Adande (From the edge, Artest gives Rockets a missing element):
Go ahead and group the Rockets with the Hornets and Spurs — not just because they’re in the same division, but because they can legitimately challenge the Lakers for their Western Conference crown.
As one Western Conference scout said when asked about the trade, “Wow. They just moved up, for sure. They were missing that element, that danger, that toughness, that [expletive]. And now they have it.”
In addition to Hollinger an Adande, Chris Broussard now ranks the Rockets trio of Tracy McGrady, Yao Ming, and Ron Artest as the fourth best threesome in the league (behind the top trios with the Celtics, Lakers, and Spurs).
Artest and the Sacramento Kings
A couple of days ago I posted my initial reaction to this trade: Not sure how Artest dramatically improves the Rockets. But then again, I haven’t looked at all the numbers yet. But my first reaction is not as positive as what I saw on ESPN when the story broke.
I have now looked at the numbers and I think my initial view is correct. To see this, let’s start with what the Sacramento Kings were last year:
Table One: The Sacramento Kings in 2007-08
Table One reports two perspectives on the Kings. The first looks at what the Kings could have expected given what their players did in 2006-07. The second reports what the players actually did in 2007-08. As one can see, the Kings were about nine wins better this past season relative to what you would have expected with the simple assumption that what you saw in 2006-07 would be seen in 2007-08.
When we look over the individual players we see that this improvement can be tied almost entirely to the play of Brad Miller and Beno Udrih.
Miller’s 2006-07 performance was out of step with what he has done his entire career. In other words, his 2007-08 production was what we would expect from Miller if we looked at any year other than the 2006-07 campaign. As for Udrih, his numbers were quite similar to what he did in 2004-05, or the last time he logged more than 1,000 minutes in a season. In sum, what the Kings did last year was not a really surprise.
Artest, the “ferocious rebounder”?
And what they did was not really about Ron Artest. Artest only produced 3.7 wins for Sacramento last season. And when we look at Artest’s career we see that his 2007-08 output is not much different from what we have always seen from Artest.
Table Two: Ron Artest’s Career
Relative to his career numbers, Artest in 2007-08 was basically the same. The lone exception was his shooting efficiency. But with respect to rebounds, steals, turnovers, free throw percentage, assists and blocked shots; what you saw last season from Artest you saw in his career averages.
The problem for the Rockets is that what you see from Artest is solid production, for a small forward. This is a problem because the Rockets already have two players at small forward, McGrady and Shane Battier. As a consequence, John Hollinger reports that his spies in Houston tell him the idea is to line up Artest at power forward.
As Hollinger notes, the Kings often did move Artest to power forward last season. The results, though, were not encouraging. Despite playing more minutes at power forward than he ever had before, Artest’s rebound numbers were the same as his career marks and less than what he did in 2005-06. It appears that the Kings moved Artest to the 4 spot but forgot to tell him that rebounding was now a bigger part of his job description.
Table Two compares what Artest has done for his career relative to an average power forward. Relative to the average power forward, Artest – for his career – is below average with respect to shooting efficiency, rebounds, turnovers, blocked shots, and Win Score. And let me emphasize, relative to an average power forward, Artest is below average on the boards. So contrary to what you may have heard, Artest is not “unquestionably a ferocious rebounder.” Such production suggests that Houston will have a problem if Artest lines up at power forward.
The “good” Rockets
To see how much of a problem, let’s look at what the Rockets were last year.
Table Three: The Houston Rockets in 2007-08
If we look at what Houston’s players did in 2006-07 and 2007-08, we don’t see much difference. McGrady offered less and Bonzi Wells returned to what we tended to see before 2006-07. But most everyone else was pretty much the same.
And what kind of team was this “same”? Well, it was a “good” team. The Rockets should have expected to win about 52 or 53 games. Historically, this would have meant the Rockets were serious playoff contenders. But in 2007-08, the Rockets Wins Produced (and efficiency differential) lagged behind the LA Lakers, Utah Jazz, New Orleans Hornets, San Antonio Spurs, and Phoenix Suns in the Western Conference. This means our “good” Rockets team should have expected to lose in the first round of the playoffs. And of course, they did.
Does the acquisition of Artest change Houston’s prospects? As we saw in Table Two, it doesn’t look like Artest is going to help much. Here is Houston’s projected line-up with Artest:
Point Guard: Rafer Alston, Aaron Brooks
Shooting Guard: Tracy McGrady, Luther Head, Brent Barry
Small Forward: Shane Battier, Tracy McGrady, Ron Artest
Power Forward: Ron Artest, Luis Scola, Chuck Hayes, Carl Landry
Center: Yao Ming, Luis Scola, Dikembe Mutombo
When we look at this roster it’s hard to see how Artest makes things better. At small forward the Rockets have Battier and McGrady. Artest was a little bit better than both at the three spot last year, but not much better.
When we look at the power forwards we see that Scola, Hayes, and Landry (assuming he re-signs) all offer more than Artest. Again the problem is rebounding. Once again I have to return to what was said earlier. Artest is not “unquestionably a ferocious rebounder.” Even as a small forward he is often below average on the boards.
If I may digress for a moment, I think only in basketball can we see a player described as a “unquestionably skilled” at something he doesn’t actually do well. Often you see this for scorers with low levels of shooting efficiency. But you also see it with respect to rebounds.
To put this oddity in perspective, can you imagine a baseball player described as great home-run hitter without hitting many home-runs? Or a running back described as a prolific rusher without gaining many yards on the ground? Or a hockey player described as a great scorer without accumulating many goals? My sense is that this disconnect between the descriptions and the numbers really only happen in basketball.
Okay, enough digression. Back to what the Rockets can expect next season. As noted, the addition of Artest doesn’t help much. Adding an aging Brent Barry might help, although it’s hard seeing him get many minutes at shooting guard (McGrady and Luther Head are going to probably get most of the minutes at the two spot).
When we consider that the additions of Artest and Barry probably don’t help much, it’s hard to conclude that the Rockets are much improved. So we can expect this team to continue to lag behind (and with Andrew Bynum coming back, far behind) the Lakers. I also don’t see this team necessarily closing the gap on the Jazz, Spurs, Hornets, and Suns. In sum, another first round exit in the playoffs can probably be expected.
Two Caveats
Let me close with two caveats. First, I have seen people suggest (such as Evan in the comments at the Wages of Wins Journal), that the Rockets could play this line-up:
Point Guard: McGrady
Shooting Guard: Battier
Small Forward: Artest
Power Forward: Scola or Landry
Center: Yao Ming
Such a line-up would be an improvement on what we saw last year, although I don’t think it’s enough to catch a healthy Lakers team. I also am not convinced we are going to see this line-up play often since it means sitting all the point guards this team has on the roster.
Of course there is one other possibility. Perhaps some of the Rockets could change their level of productivity. For example, McGrady – who once was more productive than Kobe – has slipped in recent years. If T-Mac were suddenly what he used to be, then the Rockets could be much better.
Although I think a healthy McGrady might offer more, I am not optimistic that Artest will really be much different from what we have seen across the first 18,587 regular season minutes of his career. And consequently, although I think the Rockets could be better (I don’t think it will happen but it could), I don’t think that will be because this team acquired Ron Artest.
Update: When I wrote this last night I still had Mike James on the roster. As someone noted in the comments, James is not on this team anymore (oops!). This means that Evan’s line-up — with McGrady at point guard — is perhaps more plausible.
– 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 
Nick
August 1, 2008
Two things:
1) I would guess that Artest and Battier are probably a couple of players that, at least theoretically, Win Score would underrate, since a very large part of their perceived value comes from playing “suffocating D.” Now whether or not they do play suffocating D is another question, but it seems like you should mention that fact here, especially since this whole post is about Artest’s added value to the Rockets and you fail to mention his defense, which is like talking about Dwight Howard’s value to the Magic and failing to mention his rebounding.
2) For daily disconnects between numbers and reality in baseball, just head on over to Firejoemorgan.com. I promise you this is not just a basketball phenomenon. Furthermore, listen for the word “gunslinger” when NFL analysts are talking about QBs, since that’s how they explain away the uncanny amount of interceptions an overrated passer has.
Steve
August 1, 2008
Where to start?
Mike James was traded AGES AGO from the Rockets.
Rox will probably start Rafer, Tmac, Ron, Scola, Yao so I don’t agree with your analysis there. Battier will come off the bench. Ron will rarely play the PF, that’s reserved for Scola, Hayes, and Landry (hopefully), maybe Dorsey.
Barry is easily above Head in the backup SG department.
Bob
August 1, 2008
What Steve said, and whoever wrote this article should be fired.
Evan
August 1, 2008
I like my lineup. I’m a fan of more size whenever possible, although I’d have artest play the 2. It’s been awhile since i watched much artest, but I recall him having pretty good passing skills. Maybe not so much on the shooting though, although Battier should be able to hit the occasional 3..
tmac might not like playing the 1, or guarding the 1 though. still, i like my lineup alot.
dberri
August 1, 2008
Thanks Steve for noting that Mike James is not on this team. As for your contention that Artest is not going to play power forward… Hollinger states that “his spies” tell him differently. Perhaps you have better spies in the Houston’s organization.
Brian
August 1, 2008
Along with Camby’s removal from the Nuggets, the Artest trade should be a good gauge for the WoW v. PER debate. The PER school of thought would have you believe tht Ron Artest’s ability to get shots up (as opposed to Hayes and Battier who rarely shoot) will drive up the efficiency of McGrady and Yao…Also, unrelated, Artest, when not in career flux, was a consistent .150 player for 3 solid years.
Aaron
August 1, 2008
Using statistics this way is unreliable because it excludes countless variables. Take this passage:
‘Table Two compares what Artest has done for his career relative to an average power forward. Relative to the average power forward, Artest – for his career – is below average with respect to shooting efficiency, rebounds, turnovers, blocked shots, and Win Score. And let me emphasize, relative to an average power forward, Artest is below average on the boards. So contrary to what you may have heard, Artest is not “unquestionably a ferocious rebounder.” Such production suggests that Houston will have a problem if Artest lines up at power forward.’
First of all, the author ignores that Artest has significantly higher points scored, steals, and assists than the average PF.
Second, you can’t evaluate players “on average.” For example, Ben Wallace may do several things below average, but that does not accurately show Ben Wallace’s value, because some things he does very well. Alternatively, there are some players who are good because they are all-around average even though they don’t kick ass in any one category. Battier might be an example of a guy who is “average” in several categories but great all around.
Third, and perhaps most importantly, it is totally mistaken to consider Artest in an either/or scenario, like the Rockets can have either Artest’s numbers or Scola’s numbers, but not both. All the rotation players will get their minutes: Artest is not taking away all of Scola’s minutes, or anyone else’s, except for Bobby Jackson.
Why isn’t this article about Artest’s numbers last year versus Bobby Jackson’s numbers last year? That’s your real either/or comparison.
ilikeflowers
August 1, 2008
Aaron, do you have any evidence for your claim that players can’t be (usefully) evaluated on average? Based on the to date usefulness of w48 in predicting team success after players move to new teams, it seems that it is quite reasonable to evaluate players this way within position. Do you have any useful, testable basketball predictions for us?
ilikeflowers
August 1, 2008
And your third point is a straw man.
Tyson
August 1, 2008
I thought Shane Battier would be coming off the bench. He’s an ideal 6th man.
I may be the only one who thinks this, but I think Houston was capable of contending for a championship before the Artest trade. As Berri pointed out, McGrady is a great player when he’s healthy, and it really hurt the team IMO not having Yao for that 1st round series. Carl Landry and Luis Scola were improvements at PF.
If McGrady and Yao can play 80 games, Houston will win 60 games, and Artest will get a lot of the credit.
Josh R.
August 1, 2008
How does the expected injury to McGrady (it happens every year) affect this analysis? If McGrady goes out for X games, then presumably in those games Artest can switch over to SF and they line up Yao (presuming he’s not injured), Scola, Artest, Battier, and their PG (Alston?).
That would presumably be a better team than the alternative (where McGrady is replaced by…?). In other words, perhaps they will win more games in the regular season than expected due to a more flexible roster in the face of injury. Whether that translates to the post-season is debatable.
Kevin
August 1, 2008
I think Morey and Adelman know what they’re doing (they did draft Dorsey in favor of some overrated players). I don’t believe Artest will play the 4, unless the Rockets match up against feeble opponents (Bargnani, Villanueva, Marvin Williams, Al Harrington, etc). Surely, Morey appreciates how good their front court is. Rebounding was a big part of their success last year, and I think it’s clear that the Rockets’ managers recognize that. They did keep Hayes and obtain Scola and Landry, and now Dorsey (I take it all back if they fail to bring back Landry). If the Rockets make a mistake in building their roster, it won’t be that kind of mistake. I’ll bet that Artest will fit in to the rotation on the wing. If he gets pissy, at least they don’t have to bring him back. Adelman has favored very tight rotations in the past. Having Artest helps him to do that. So what about this scenario: McGrady brings the ball up, Artest guards it on the way back. McGrady guards the weakest guard or SF. I think I like that arrangement.
Justin
August 1, 2008
It’s a good point to make that a guy who isn’t super rebound-focused won’t tend to do all that much better when moving from the 3 to the 4, but I’d also point out that his role as a primary scorer is likely to change, which will put him in more of a rebounding position (if he’s interested…) when the ball’s released, as he’s not so often the one shooting it (and missing).
I’m not sure how quick Ron’s feet are, but I’d strongly consider putting him at the 2 if T-Mac is more effective at the 3. That would accent Artest’s post-up size a lot more.
Putting 6’7″ Ron Artest at the 4 strikes me as going small /quick, and I don’t know why a team with Yao Ming on its roster would do such a thing regularly.
Tball
August 1, 2008
I think you give the other sports (non-basketball) too much credit. I’ve heard Vince Young and Michael Vick referred to as excellent passers in their early years based more on arm strength than ability to get the ball to a player. A player can average <3.5 yards a carry and average 90 yards/game with a commited coach, earning accolades as a top running back. Gold gloves are routinely awarded to mediocre defenders on popular teams. And baseball statisticians have spent 100 years trying to convince people that good batting averages don’t make good hitters or stolen base leaders are not automatically great leadoff hitters (Juan Pierre). And all of these accolades often carry from reputations earned at the beginning of a career.
Alien Human Hybrid
August 1, 2008
The wild variations in Artest’s seasonal numbers indicate that his productivity is contingent on variables not easily codified by on-court statistical measures.
Ryan
August 1, 2008
I really like when your titles ask a question and then you offer reasons why the answer to the question could be “no”. Keep it up.
Palamida
August 1, 2008
Alien Human, what “wild variations” are you talking about?
99/00 is Artest’s rookie season.
In his first two season in the league he performed at sub-average standards. It’s very common as you may know. In his third season he hit the 0.119 mark and surpassed the average and he hovered around that number (from both ends) in all the seasons after that apart from the 2004-05 season in which he posted a mark of 0.261. Mind you that was “achieved” in 291 mins due to the suspension and those 291 mins make up a very small sample… and we i think we can safely assume that the variance originates from the sample size. In sum you can hardly argue that the “wild variations” incidates that his productivity is contingent on variables not easily codified by box score stats.
Have a nice day.
Philippe
August 2, 2008
I think a more interesting and relevant column would be to develop a statistical argument of why the Rockets (by all acounts they are very savvy with stats and in making roster decisions) made the transaction in the first place. The move was not without risk. Artest often, as everyone knows, marches to the beat of his own drum. This could disrupt the team dynamic and create a worse situation for the players and coaches.
If you can’t show why this move would improve the team, it may indicate a limitation to the model you are using?
Harold Almonte
August 2, 2008
About the “wild variations”, I think he could mean that using career numbers to make analisys could be irrelevant, since players might be actually performing on a different side away of that career average.
About the Artest’s def. fame. It’s built mainly from defending opp.’s playmaking and def. attempts, rather than helping or rebounding. His below average “taking of rebounds” might be irrelevant, providing that he could keep the opp. PFs also below average with his “hustle”, and translate the rebounding war to other positions (which is not what the team would like because Yao’s injury concerns). Can he do that? playing that position? He’s strong enough, but let’s wait for the season.
Harold Almonte
August 2, 2008
82games tells us that whe he plays at PF, he allows 11.5R/48. Then probably he might not be giving the boxing out protection called for him.
GV
August 2, 2008
The difference between being a number 6 seed (and facing a tough number 3 without home court advantage) and being a number 2 seed (facing a weaker 7 with home court advantage) was only a one gam last year in the Western Conference. So even if Artest makes the Rockets a mere game or two better, it could have huge implications for the all-important seeding. Artest will take minutes away from Luther Head and Novack (among others who weren’t very productive) and will be a good fill in for McGrady when he inevitably misses his 5-10 games this year. I can easily see Artest giving the Rockets 3 or 4 more wins. With only two more wins the Rockets would have been the number one seed in the West last year.
It is also worth noting that while this trade makes the Rockets marginally better, no one else in the West, besides the Hornets and Lakers, can expect to improve. The Suns will be lucky to win 50 games with Shaq. Dallas and San Antonio are another year old. Denver blew itself up by trading Camby. Golden State lost Davis. The Clippers lost Brand. I don’t see any reason why Utah would improve.
I also think that one thing that is often forgotten when using win scores is that it is not supposed to be precise. There is a margin of error. Reasonable minds can, of course, differ on the scope of the margin of error, but there obviously is one. And as others have pointed out, one factor in that margin of error is likely win scores inability to capture the value of someone who forces a missed shot (which is one of the reasons I think Battier is vastly underrated using the win score metric).
While this trade does not make the Rockets “dramatically” better, I think it could lead them to a Championship, especially if Yao and Tracy stay relatively healthy. The Rockets got off to a slow start last year. They had to work the kinks out in their new offensive system (which was radically different from the one they ran the year before). They also had to wait for Landry and Scola to figure things out a bit, and for the Rockets coaches to realize that both of them had a huge amount of skill. I suspect a better indication of what the Rockets are capable of can be found by looking at their stats from the end of the second month of the season until Yao got hurt.
chris
August 4, 2008
What are the ‘numbers’ for aging superstars who get to sit on the bench more? Are they more effective in the minutes they do play?
What about players that are usually double-teamed but, now, have sufficient firepower around them to get a soft one-on-one coverage?
Yao vs. Golden State was hard because they’d rush over and triple team him. With T Mac it was hard to do, but with T Mac and Artest it won’t happen as much.
Okay, maybe Artest won’t rebound like crazy or score 23 ppg. Maybe T Mac and Yao’s numbers will both go down, but isn’t that exactly what happened to the Celtics? All of their numbers went down, but they were fresh the whole game (even with a short bench) and pulled out easy wins.
Consider some of the hardest tasks in the NBA: gaurding Kobe and gaurding Lebron.
Now Shane and Artest can switch off, taking breaks to get rejuvinated and having no concerns about foul trouble.
Lots of beautiful things come from this trade, most of which fall outside of the points/rebounds/assists/etc. columns.
benj
August 5, 2008
This is one of those times you should have taken a look at the results and stopped and listened to a little common sense for a moment. Would anyone in their right mind believe Ron Artest is only slightly better than Bobby Jackson & Donte Green? Pretty poor analysis…. Those wins produced types of stats should only be used to determine lineups on a specific team(where all things are equal).
Like Chris mentioned above, the stats can’t decipher what the opposing team’s defenses are doing to stop a player. In this case, having three relatively strong offensive options(who can pass no less) prevents teams from doubling up on a star and likely will increase their efficiency/production. Tmac on the court with a lineup of Rafer, Battier, Scola, and Deke is a lot more limited than a lineup of Rafer, Artest, Scola, and Yao. Plus you can’t directly compare stats from year to year because pace is a factor as well. Tmac’s numbers dropped when he came to Houston because he played a much slower pace than in Orlando.
Also, you say Houston’s first round exit was expected but if Yao(broken foot – out), Battier(bad ankle – played with a noticeable limp), McGrady(bad shoulder – wearing a brace the whole series), and Alston(missed two games of the series – both losses) had all been healthy this team easily would have crushed Utah. In fact, a couple of weeks after Yao went out, they were the number one team in the Western Conference. Your numbers show wins produced, but wouldn’t everyone on the Rockets have lower win produced numbers when Yao went out? Wouldn’t that make Yao look more valuable than he actually was because everyone else was forced to play with Dikembe as a starter in Yao’s absence? In short, there were LOTS of problems with your argument. Thanks for playing, but this is why a guy like Hollinger is so good because he carefully thinks the stats out and tests them with common sense to make sure he isn’t missing something.
….and don’t be proud that you can argue Yahoo’s amateur writing – an article credited generically to “Yahoo Sports”. They are only a small step up from poster “SportzFan4Life” on your favorite team’s sports blog. Clearly the writer of this article either didn’t know what he was talking about or was an ineffective writer/communicator.