For the first time – in a very long time – the Knicks have a winning record. And naturally, that must mean it’s time to acquire another collection of unproductive scorers. In separate trades with the Warriors and Clippers this past week, the Knicks sent out Jamal Crawford, Zach Randolph, and Mardy Collins for Al Harrington, Cuttino Mobley, and Tim Thomas.
The WP48 Story
Let’s ignore the reported reason why these moves were made for a moment and simply look at the players involved. Here are some of the relevant numbers [WP48 = Wins Produced per 48 minutes]:
The Knicks Surrender:
- Zach Randolph: 0.143 WP48 in 2007-08, 0.102 Career WP48
- Jamal Crawford: 0.032 WP48 in 2007-08, 0.049 Career WP48
- Mardy Collins: -0.067 WP48 in 2007-08, -0.028 Career WP48
The Knicks Acquire:
- Al Harrington: 0.024 WP48 in 2007-08, 0.019 Career WP48
- Cuttino Mobley: 0.029 WP48 in 2007-08, 0.064 Career WP48
- Tim Thomas: -0.053 WP48 in 2007-08, -0.016 Career WP48
In terms of scoring, Randolph, Crawford, Harrington, Mobley and Thomas have scored at an above average rate across their careers. But when we look at Wins Produced, we see that only Randolph has produced at an above average level. And – as Table One indicates below — Randolph has been even better this year. So although it looks like Mobley can come in and offer what the team got from Crawford (although Mobley has been awful this year), going from Randolph to Harrington-Thomas is a step back.
Dreaming About 2010
One suspects that the Knicks know this is true. So despite a 7-6 start (which suggests the playoffs are possible), the Knicks have deliberately taken a step back.
The payoff to this step back – according to Marc Stein of ESPN.com (and others I am sure) – is the 2010 free agent class. By shedding the salaries of Randolph and Crawford, the Knicks hope to be major players in a market that will include LeBron James, Chris Bosh, Steve Nash, Dirk Nowitzki, Amare Stoudemire, etc…
Assuming all this is true, the Knicks have essentially bailed on both the 2008-09 and 2009-10 seasons in the hope that they will land a talent in 2010 that will give the Knicks a chance to compete for a playoff spot and the NBA championship.
It’s important to note – as Marc Stein observes: “…no fewer than 15 teams — including the Cavaliers — awoke Friday morning with less than $40 million in committed salaries on their books for 2010-11.” So even if the Knicks can convince one of these players to leave their current home, they still have to convince these superstars to come to a franchise that might have nine consecutive losing seasons when the summer of 2010 begins.
Table One: The New York Knicks after 13 games in 2008-09
Table Two: The Golden State Warriors 12 games in 2008-09
Table Three: The LA Clippers after 13 games in 2008-09
Helping the Warriors and Clippers
What about the Knicks trading partners? As Table Two indicates, the Warriors have shed their least productive player in 2008-09. So although Crawford doesn’t offer much, he should be able to give the team more than they were getting from Harrington.
As for the Clippers…. in the off-season this team took Marcus Camby away from the Denver Nuggets and gave Baron Davis a new home. When we look at WP48 [reported in Table Three], both of these players have been above average, although Davis has dropped off a bit from his career mark (0.153). In addition to the production the Clippers have received from Davis and Camby, LA is also getting an above average level of production from Chris Kaman. Unfortunately, the Clippers have received little from anyone else. In fact, eight of the players the Clippers have employed this season have WP48 marks that are below zero.
Given these early results, the trade with the Knicks looks quite positive. Not only do the Clippers shed two very unproductive players (and as noted, two players who have never offered much), but the team adds a productive player in Zach Randolph.
The only obvious problem with this move is that the Clippers – like everyone else – only have 96 minutes to allocate at power forward and center. Currently the minutes per-game of Camby and Kaman sum to 65.5. So if the Clippers don’t play anyone else – and they don’t change the minutes of Camby and Kaman — they can only give Randolph 30.5 minutes of playing time a night.
As for the rest of the roster, the Clippers have to decide who gets the minutes of Mobley. Their choices appear to be Ricky Davis or Eric Gordon. R. Davis has been dreadful this season, posting an adjusted field goal percentage of 32.7%. Gordon has only posted a mark of 41.3%, and although this is also quite bad, it’s absolutely amazing relative to R. Davis.
Okay, I think those are the relevant details for all involves. Let’s try and summarize what I think we have learned. If we focus on the 2008-09 season, I think these moves hurt the Knicks while potentially improving the Warriors and the Clippers (with the latter team probably the most improved). Going beyond this season, the Knicks might someday look back on these trades as the first move this team made in building a championship team. Then again, if the stars of the 2010 free agent class say no, Knicks fans might someday ask: “How many consecutive losing seasons are we destined to suffer?”
By the way, this column is another example of large-market bias. Rather than focus on either the Warriors and Clippers (and despite playing in LA, the Clippers have never been a big-market team), I spent most of this post focusing on the Knicks. My next post will make up for this transgression by focusing entirely on a small-market team.
– 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 
Vince Gagliano
November 23, 2008
Dave, I am sensing a post on the New Orleans Hornets coming up. And by the way, a sidenote:
Productivity-wise, Chris Paul is becoming the Kevin Garnett for a new decade of basketball fans.
This is not a typo – using the estimated productivity model, Paul has posted a .509 WP48 through his first 12 games.
We have not seen this type of productivity since Michael Jordan in 1989.
dberri
November 23, 2008
Vince,
I agree that Chris Paul is amazing. But the Hornets are not the subject of my next post. I will get to them eventually, though.
Vince Gagliano
November 23, 2008
I was just giving you some more food for thought, Dave.
Paul probably isn’t going to have the best season of the WP48 era: both Michael Jordan and Magic Johnson have had .500+ years. But with those kinds of numbers, I would suspect that Paul’s productivity would be pretty hard to ignore.
Right now, I would see Kobe Bryant taking his second straight MVP. Usually, voters love to see players on teams close to or surpassing 60 wins. And Bryant remains the star player on a large-market team that is currently running roughshod over the West.
But Paul has established cred of his own. And unlike KG, he actually has a halfway decent cast around him. West and Chandler are around average, and Posey is a pretty decent defender.
Also, at the rate he’s going, Dwight Howard is making a case for the NBA’s Defensive Player of the Year. Right now, with an estimated WP48 of .438, he’s putting together his own monster season. If it ended right now, he’d have better numbers than (drum roll please) Shaq’s 1999-00 season. Don’t ruin any more of the surprise.
dberri
November 23, 2008
Vince,
These are good thoughts. Both Paul and Howard are amazing players and do compare favorably to the all-time greats.
nykperspective
November 23, 2008
Mr. Berri,
Your assessment is incomplete. You cannot assume that players from different situations are going to produce similarly. Mobley and Thomas both were playing with a new PG. Harrington was obviously having problems with the coach. Plus, you don’t take into account D’Antoni’s system and what effect it has on players’ production.
Tommy_Grand
November 23, 2008
NYK,
Do you think the Knicks are better without Crawford and Randolph? Mobley’s numbers may improve, but this trade is unlikey to help the 08-09 team.
Tommy_Grand
November 23, 2008
Chris Paul should have won the MVP last season.
Anon
November 24, 2008
Isn’t bringing in a star point guard supposed to help players improve, as opposed to making them worse? I think the problem with Mobley and Thomas is more that they’re not very good. Harrington will probably improve, but he’s never exactly been amazing. This trade seems to clearly hurt the knicks talentwise in the short-term, although it does clear up salary for free agents in 2010. Now if only they weren’t giving their 2010 draft pick to Utah….
Vince Gagliano
November 24, 2008
If anything, since the Knicks are likely conceding the 2009-2010, giving up the draft pick could actually be a good thing for them.
It frees up $2 mil-$4 mil in salary cap that they did not have before, which they can use towards a deep free agent class. Also, they do not have to wait to develop a productive player in a vet like they have to do in the vast majority of rookies.
One of those vets, Dwyane Wade, is making a case to get his share of the cut, producing in excess of .300 WP48 this season.
Mike G
November 24, 2008
Can you do a post on the WP of “cap space”?
Ie, perhaps look at teams which generated cap space purposefully, and then the average WP of the players they acquired?
Tball
November 24, 2008
Mike,
Check out a couple of the posts on “most overpaid” players. I believe a WP was worth $1.67 last season, rookies get underpaid as do a few ‘max’ contract players (e.g., Shaq while with the Lakers) and free agents earning long term deals get overpaid, particularly in the final year(s) of those deals.
nykperspective
November 24, 2008
Tommy,
I don’t think they are better. I think they are equal with the potential to get better. I give credit to Walsh seeing that although this could be a very good team that wins some games, they would always fall short of accomplishing something great.
Although the knicks lose a little offensive production, they also improve their defense and overall long range shooting. They also get players that are less turnover prone than Crawford and Randolph. They also put together a rotation that doesn’t let up on offensive pressure.
It also makes it more difficult to game plan against when there is no clear go to guy yet. Although I suspect it will be Nate Robinson.
Different doesn’t always mean worse.
Plus, as the season goes on, the Knicks will only gain depth (Curry, Gallinari, Jeffries).
Joe
November 24, 2008
Eddie Curry is not “depth.”
Matt
November 24, 2008
Width, maybe. But not depth.
John W. Davis
November 25, 2008
This trade was horrible. I know its for the cap room but still, at least get Camby from the Clippers.
Mobley can’t even pass his physical.
Jim Glass
November 25, 2008
The Knicks have to rebuild the whole team. Isiah left a ruin, the players the current regime inherited can’t play the way the new regime wants — they are just the opposite of D’Antoni’s style.
So that’s what they are doing. They actually are in a position now to get committed salary cap for 2010 down to $0 (zero) if they want.
Who the Knicks got in return in the trade isn’t the main point — they had to take who they could get under the salary cap rules.
Their idea now is not *just* to get a big-name FA in 2010, but to (1) clear the decks, then (2) get some good young players, if only role players, who can play D’Antoni’s run-and-gun style to please the fans and restore some optimism among them, and then (3) use *that* to attract the big name FA or two.
As to 15 other teams having less than $40m committed for 2010, well sure … but how many of those are in a big city market like NY where the team can freely spend to the max *and* the local endorsement and media market will be worth an extra fortune to the player?
Finally, as to the importance of clearing the decks to give the fans some optimism….
http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/knicks_fans_discover
j
November 26, 2008
the davidson scoreline tonight emphasis a number of things the wages of wins stats underestimate, almost everything except fouls. a 30 point win, all because of one player who put up no positive statisticts, considering any d-1 player should be able to score 4 on 3.
andrew g
November 27, 2008
The Davidson game is an extreme case. Models are built with the average or likely case in mind. It’s not surprising it would give weird results for outliers.
You also have to think the opposing coach wasn’t acting rationally. Probably just wanted to get his team some exposure on Sportscenter!