A friendly war has broken out between two of my favorite NBA blogs. A few days ago Ryan Schwan – of Hornets247 — posted the following:
Flat out, the Grizzlies will be pushing to have one of the worst records of all time. Their veterans are the worst sort of dregs: Greg Buckner, Antoine Walker, and Marko Jaric. Useless, Cancer, Slacker
You’re No Tyson
Josh Coleman — of 3 Shades of Blue — took exception to this comment and made an effort to highlight the positives on the current edition of the Memphis Grizzlies. In the course of this effort, Coleman offered the following specific observation:
Let’s take a look at some stats. Player A averaged 7.6 ppg, 5.2 rpg, 1.8 bpg in 22.5 mpg over 180 games. Player B averaged 7.1 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 1.3 bpg in 22.1 ppg over 181 games. Look strikingly similar? Player A is Darko Milicic since he got traded to Orlando and actually got playing time. Player B is Tyson Chandler’s first 3 years in the league — the 3rd year was shortened by injury. If Darko’s thumb injury that plagued him for most of last season makes him an injury-prone stiff, then I guess I’ll take that with a grain of salt.
After I read this paragraph I wondered if Darko Milicic would agree. In other words, would Darko compare himself to Tyson Chandler? Given that this is the political season, here is my response to this hypothetical thought from Mr. Milicic:
Darko, I have seen Chandler play. I have analyzed Chandler’s numbers. And Darko, you’re no Tyson Chandler.
Let’s look at the numbers. To begin, we need to make a small correction to Coleman’s figures. By my calculation, here are the per-game averages from Milicic (after Detroit) and Chandler’s first three years.
Milicic: 23.4 mpg, 7.6 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 1.8 bpg
Chandler: 22.1 mpg, 7.4 ppg, 6.2 rpg, 1.3 bpg
It appears Coleman’s numbers on Milicic’s minutes and rebounds per game were a bit off. But I think his argument remains the same. These per game numbers don’t look much different.
But as is often the case, a selection of per game numbers can be misleading. Let’s look at all of the box score statistics, per 48 minutes played.
Table One: Comparing Tyson Chandler and Darko Milicic
When we look at performances per 48 minutes, it’s hard to see how Milicic – after he left Detroit – compares favorably to what we saw from Chandler in his first three seasons. Relative to an average center, Milicic has only demonstrated the ability to block shots, take field goal attempts, and avoid personal fouls. With respect to all other aspects of player performance, Milicic is below average (and this is not an immensely different story if we compare Milicic to an average power forward). This is highlighted by Milicic’s Win Score value, which again is below average.
In contrast, Chandler’s Win Score his first three seasons was above average. And this was because Chandler – in contrast to Milicic – was above average on the boards and in terms of shooting efficiency.
When we look at Wins Produced and WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] we see the consequence of these differences. Across his first three years, Chandler – in 3,998 minutes – produced 12.2 wins with a 0.147 WP48 [average WP48 is 0.100]. So Chandler was above average. Milicic has played 4,204 minutes since leaving Detroit. And in these minutes he has produced 2.8 wins with a 0.032 WP8. Yes, those are below average marks.
If we put it all together, we see that Milicic is nowhere near what Chandler was at the end of the 2003-04 season. Chandler has been above average in every season after his rookie campaign. Milicic has never been as productive as an average player. In sum – as I said earlier – Milicic is no Chandler.
And You’re No Answer
Of course, Milicic is not the only player the Grizzlies are depending upon. Memphis also added O.J. Mayo on draft night. Unfortunately – as Ryan Schwan noted – Mayo really wasn’t that good in college (a point Erich Doerr has also made). This statement also led to a response from Coleman:
You know, I thought the same thing about O.J. Mayo prior to the draft. But then I did a little research and came up with these numbers: 20.7 ppg, 3.3 apg, 4.5 rpg, 1.5 spg, .442 FG%, .409 3PT%. For a comparison, here’s some stats: 20.4 ppg, 3.3 rpg, 4.5 apg, 3.0 spg, .390 FG%, 23.2 3PT%. Those are Allen Iverson’s after his freshman season at Georgetown. I think we can upgrade him from “simply not that good” to “much better than perceived”
Here are two responses to Coleman’s comparison:
1. Mayo posted a Win Score per 40 minutes of 5.82 at USC. Iverson’s Win Score per 40 minutes at Georgetown was 9.69. The key differences: Iverson had significantly more assists and steals. The Answer was also a more efficient scorer. All of this means that Mayo is not The Answer.
2. And as has been noted many times, Iverson is really not as productive in the NBA as many generally believe. So even if Mayo was as good as Iverson (and in college he wasn’t), that really wouldn’t be saying much.
Speaking as a Lions Fan
Let me close by noting that as a fan of the Detroit Lions, I can feel the pain of those devoted to the Memphis Grizzlies. Your team is simply not very good. No, they are probably not the worst team in NBA history. But they are not likely to contend for a playoff spot in 2009 (and I wouldn’t be too hopeful about 2010 either).
When faced with so little hope, you start grasping at anything. Lions fans used to think Jon Kitna could be a good quarterback. We used to think the defense was going to stop someone. And we used to think that Matt Millen – just due to the law of averages – would make a good decision. But let’s face it, being a fan of the Lions under Millen means you live for a high choice in the NFL draft.
The same is probably true of the Memphis Grizzlies right now. You may look at this collection of young players and convince yourself that if they only develop this team could be like the Hornets in two or three years. But that seems unlikely. The players who lead the Hornets in wins – Chris Paul and Tyson Chandler – have been good for almost their entire careers. There simply is no evidence that talent like this is currently employed in Memphis. Yes, the Grizzlies youth movement could eventually yield a gem or two. But right now, prospects look pretty bleak.
So Memphis fans, fight if you want. Look at any numbers you can find that give you hope. When next April rolls around, though, I think you will see some very bad numbers in the final standings.
When that happens, though, I urge you not to despair. Just repeat the question every fan of the Lions asks each year: “I wonder who we are going to take in the draft this year?”
– 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.
HKL
September 19, 2008
I enjoy pretty much everything you write, but as a fan of one of the few teams you haven’t written an 07/08 review for yet (Dallas), I’m anxiously waiting for you to crunch the numbers and tell me if I’m looking at a 48 win team or a 61 win team. Thanks.
dberri
September 19, 2008
HKL,
I have a couple of different posts to write, but then I will get to the Mavericks. Hopefully by the end of next week.
William
September 19, 2008
This article reminds me of a recent column at Bobcats Planet (a Bobcats fan site) comparing Adam Morrison’s rookie season to Mike Miller’s first year.
“Compare Miller’s rookie season with Adam’s and it’s safe to say that they are almost mirror images of each other.”
http://www.bobcatsplanet.com/joomla/blog/42-nba/398-adam-morrison-is-not-a-bust
I almost had an aneurysm.
Dave, any update on the release date of WoW 2? With Larry Brown on the scene in Charlotte, I can’t wait to find out if he’s one of the coaches capable of legitimately “coaching up” an NBA team.
Joshua Coleman
September 19, 2008
Dave,
You should know by now that, like any good blogger, I’m only going to use stats that support my position. LOL
I agree that Darko Milicic is not as good as Tyson Chandler. But Chandler was also nowhere near as good a player early in his career as he is perceived to be now, which was the crux of my argument. Too often, fans and media personalities give up on players before they truly have a chance to develop.
I am very curious as to how you reach the conclusion that Iverson was a more efficient scorer in college than Mayo given the disparity in their shooting percentages, which obviously favor Mayo. I’m aware that is a rudimentary stat to gauge things by, but I had to ask.
dberri
September 19, 2008
William,
I hadn’t seen that Bobcats post. Maybe I should write something about that.
Right now we are working on the book every day. This is why the posts are only appearing every few days (as opposed to almost every day before). We hope to be finished with a draft of the book by the end of the year and the book should be in stores in April or May (or June or July).
Joshua,
As I said, I do the same thing when I look at the Lions.
As for the shooting efficiencies… I looked at adjusted field goal percentage. But I just realized that I was comparing Iverson’s sophomore season to Mayo’s freshman performance. You are correct, Mayo’s numbers compare favorably to Iverson’s freshman numbers. When we consider that Iverson has not really been that great of a professional, though, I am not sure that really means much for future wins in Memphis.
Tom S
September 19, 2008
Dave,
Where are my QB and running back ratings? We’re two weeks in, get crackin!
ben
September 19, 2008
Tyson Chandler blows too though. Why argue who blows the most?
dberri
September 19, 2008
Tom S,
I posted the rankings for last week on Saturday. Check out the post on good looking quarterbacks (the first post on that subject).
Rich
September 19, 2008
Iverson has “not really been that great of a professional”? That’s a bit of an exaggeration, wouldn’t you say? I mean, I understand your point – he’s a high-volume, low-efficiency scorer and certainly if you compare him to a Kobe or even Paul Pierce (players who he is generally considered to be in a class with) he falls well short.
But I mean, he’s still what just about anyone would consider a “great professional”. It’s not an easy thing to shoulder the load scoring the ball like he did all those years in Philly – they really didn’t have any other effective scorers during Iverson’s best years. Of course your efficiency will suffer under such circumstances. He was still one of the best scorers in the league for many years, and posted pretty good assist and steal stats as well. If Mayo turned out to be as good as Iverson, well that’s something I would be excited about if I were a Grizz fan.
I’m a big fan of using statistics to analyze basketball, and I do give a lot of credence to in-depth analyses like you do here. I certainly respect your work, but to me this is a classic case of looking too much at the numbers and not enough at the game itself. If you mean Iverson isn’t quite as good as he’s commonly percieved, then yes I agree with you. If you mean that Iverson is no LeBron or Wade or Kobe then yes, I agree with you. But if you say Iverson hasn’t really been a great professional…I have to say that’s just silly.
Owen
September 19, 2008
DB – Excellent post again. I was hoping by now we would be getting your analysis of a Milicic for Randolph swap, but alas…
Rich – Welcome to the blog, this must be your first time. :-). i think you might be arriving a little late for an argument about this. There are probably 100,000 words out there on the Wages of Wins and Iverson, including a New Yorker piece by Malcom Gladwell. Iverson was actually the player that started it all.
Read through the New Yorker article or some of the old posts about Iverson and see if it sways you at all.
https://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/07/25/an-allen-iverson-comment/
Jason
September 19, 2008
Whether or not it’s easy to shoulder the scoring load as Iverson did in Philly is open for debate. There’s the “if not him, then who” school of thought, but there’s also some good indication that his high volume, low efficiency shooting wasn’t really a necessity and that he was taking away from the productivity of others. He was the *highest* scorer in the league. I’m not sure that this means he was the best scorer if best is taken to mean having a positive effect on his team’s success.
What is pretty clear is that his teams won when he was paired with solid defenders and rebounders and when he didn’t have these guys around, they didn’t win. Since his “supporting cast” in their championship run year wasn’t particularly flashy, it’s easy to overlook the differences between those years and other less successful Iverson-Philly teams, but that would be a short sited ppg-centric view of the game, one that’s easy to fall into.
John W. Davis
September 22, 2008
Darko is Rodney Stuckey.
I love you Joe D!
-John W. Davis
http://www.pistonscast.com