According to Don Seeholzer of the Pioneer Press, Kevin Love is angry. (HT TrueHoop)
“That rookie-sophomore (bull),” Love said. “I’m sorry to say, but that’s what it was. I was pretty upset today about it, but I’m not going to let that drag into the future at all. There’s always next year. Pardon my French, but that was just (bull).”
Wolves coach Kevin McHale had a similar reaction before the game.
“I just heard (that). What a travesty that is,” he said. “That’s utterly ridiculous. Who picks that team?”
Although McHale suspected it was the media, NBA assistant coaches are actually responsible for choosing the players who participate in the NBA’s Rookie Challenge. And these assistant coaches found nine rookies who were more deserving than Kevin Love.
Giving Love to Love
Here is what Henry Abbott – of TrueHoop – had to say about Love just a few days ago:
…if you take:
Every rookie who has ever played in the NBA since 1946 …
Weed out everyone who played less than twenty minutes per game …
And sort them by who gets the highest percentage of total rebounds while on the court …
You’ll find that two current rookies are in the top ten all time. Which is really something.
One of them is Greg Oden, who is ninth at the moment. He’s ahead of people like Hakeem Olajuwon and David Robinson. Not bad. Not bad at all.
Another 2008-2009 rookie, however, is currently third all time. By this measure he’s ahead of Shaquille O’Neal, Charles Oakley, Buck Williams, and Bill Walton (trailing only Clifford Ray and Larry Smith, who were three years older in their rookie years than the boy I’m talking about).
This rookie is also better known for doing something besides rebounding.
But TrueHoop reader Larry has pointed out, and Basketball-Reference.com confirms, this player is certainly showing that he’s a special rebounder.
So … who is he?
Kevin Love of the Minnesota Timberwolves. Here’s the evidence.
His total rebounding percentage is greater than his age, which just about never happens. He’s only 20, but he grabs 21.3 percent of the rebounds while he’s on the court.
The top rookies and sophomores
Although Love dominates on the boards, he’s not much of a scorer. As one can see HERE, Love currently ranks 13th among all rookies in points scored per game. Of the top nine rookies, eight were named to the roster of the Rookie Challenge. The lone exception was D.J. Augustin, whose spot was taken by Greg Oden (the number one choice in the 2007 draft).
A similar story is told for the sophomores. Each of the top eight sophomores in points scored per game – as seen HERE — was named to the sophomore team (the lone exception was Aaron Brooks). In sum, just as we often see when we look at other decisions in basketball, scoring dominates the assistant coaches’ choices for the Rookie Challenge.
If we move past scoring, though, we see why Love and McHale were a bit miffed.
Table One: The Top Rookies at the Midpoint of the 2008-09 NBA Season
Table Two: The Top Sophomores at the Midpoint of the 2008-09 NBA Season
Tables One and Two report the top rookies and sophomores as the midpoint (after 41 games) of the 2008-09 season. As one can see, whether one looks at rookies or sophomores, Kevin Love’s production of wins leads the way. This is true when you look at Wins Produced or WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes].
Obviously much of Love’s production is derived from his ability to get rebounds. Relative to scoring, rebounds tend to be undervalued by many basketball observers. Certainly scoring is what we tend to focus on in watching a game. There is also a sense that rebounds are really not about the player who grabs the ball. This argument tends to note either the issue of diminishing returns (i.e. one player’s rebounds are taken from a teammate) and/or the importance of defense in creating rebounding opportunities. It certainly is the case that we see diminishing returns in the rebound numbers. But as I noted a few days ago (and will be discussed briefly in our next book), the effect is quite small. In addition, rebounds per minute are quite consistent across time. This suggests that a player’s rebounding numbers are really about the player (not so much the defenders around the player). And this means that what the T-Wolves are getting from Love today should continue tomorrow (because he really is good at getting rebounds).
Unfortunately for Love, what he’s offering doesn’t get much…. okay, love (had to see that coming). And this is the problem for all these assistants who someday hope to lead a team. On the one hand, coaches are often telling players to understand their role and not focus solely on scoring (see HERE and HERE). On the other hand – as Love has learned – scorers tend to capture more than their fair share of attention and love (okay, I’ll stop). This conflicting message must make coaching in the NBA harder than it has to be. And it could be solved if coaches simply understood the Wisdom of Red Auerbach.
Looking at the Game
Okay, enough on Love’s justified anger. Let’s talk about the Rookie Challenge.
The sophomores have a six game winning streak in this game. Although one might think this is because the talent level is declining in the NBA (each year’s rookie class loses to last year’s class), this record is most likely due to the fact NBA players improve early in their careers. In other words, the natural progression of an NBA player’s productivity means second year players will on average be more productive than rookies. As a consequence, even before the assistant coaches forgot to put the most productive rookie in the game, it was expected that the sophomores would have an advantage.
When we look at Table Three, though, we see the rookies have some hope. The average rookie named to the Rookie Challenge roster has a 0.082 WP48. The average sophomore, though, only has a 0.067 WP48.
Table Three: Evaluating the Rosters of the 2009 Rookie Challenge
If we go back to Tables One and Two, we see that the average sophomore is more productive than the average rookie. The problem for the sophomore team is that five of the nine players named to the team are NOT ranked in the top ten sophomores in terms of wins production. The rookie team -despite over-looking Love – has seven of the top nine players. Consequently, the rookie team – at least in terms of Wins Produced – looks a bit better.
The Second Choices
Of course, there’s one big issue for the rookies. The worst player in this game – again in terms of WP48 – is Michael Beasley. Beasley was the second player taken in the 2008 draft and he was expected – based on his college numbers – to be very productive in the NBA. So far, this hasn’t happened. Although Beasley is good at taking shots, he’s not good at any other aspect of the game (i.e. shooting efficiency, rebounds, turnovers, etc…).
Although Beasley has clearly struggled, there’s some hope. Like Beasley, Kevin Durant was the second player taken in the 2007 draft. And like Beasley, Durant played very badly his rookie season.
After struggling earlier this year, Durant has now improved. As Table Two notes, at the midpoint of the 2008-09 season Durant is the second most productive sophomore. And when we look at the entire NBA, a player who was well below average last year is ranked 57th in Wins Produced at the midpoint of this season (hopefully I will get these numbers posted soon). With 425 players in the league, Durant is now an above average player. And as noted, it’s expected that such a young player will continue to improve. So eventually Durant might become the player his fans envision.
We should remember, though, that even if Durant continues to play well it will not change what he did last year. In other words, Durant – the NBA’s Rookie of the Year in 2008 – was not the best rookie last year. And even he develops into a Hall-of-Fame player, this will not change Durant’s rookie season record.
A similar story can be told about Beasley. Right now the second choice in 2008 is not a very productive NBA player. Consequently, like fans of Durant, Beasley fans might wish to express some anger when I say their favorite player – at this point in time – is not a productive NBA player. This anger comes from the belief – expressed last year by fans of Durant -that their favorite player will someday be a great player. Even if that happens for Beasley, though, it will not change the fact Beasley did not play well the first half of his first NBA season. That first-half record is now in the books, and as noted, it’s not a good record.
And if the player we saw in the first half of 2008-09 shows up at the Rookie Challenge, it might be possible for the sophomores to make it seven in a row. In other words, despite the production advantage the rookie have entering the game, the game’s least productive player might be the one that dictates the outcome.
– 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 
mrparker
January 29, 2009
This infuriates me. Love is a great player who is posting that high a win score despite shooting at a level we would expect from a point guard. That must mean he is absolutely abusing the league in ever other category. Imagine what he would be if he can just get to an average shooting percentage which his college numbers suggest won’t be a problem.
Mabye McHale is to blame. He is not playing Love the minutes he deserves. On the other hand he is playing Love more effectively than the previous coach and I think this has plenty to do with Minnesota playing such good basketball lately.
Love had 17 and 10 in 13 minutes against the pistons last night. How many times do you see a line like that?
Amir
January 30, 2009
Kevin Love shouldn’t be angry. the whole All Star weekend is just a show, not real basketball. He should thank the assistant coaches for letting him rest/not get injured.
as a minnesota fan very far from minnesota – I’m very pleased with the guy. by 3 years time he will prove he was worth the trade for that scorer guy.
did you notice that Chalmers is near the top as well ? imagine if we had this guy now to sub for Telfair
Tom Mandel
January 30, 2009
Hmmm.
Dave, will you kindly check http://www.tommandel.com/JaVale.xls, where it would seem that I show JaVale McGee (after 547 minutes) w/ a .087 WP48, putting him definitely among the top rookies.
Tom Mandel
January 30, 2009
I might add that using the same tools, I have Brook Lopez at .112 (after a few more minutes than your figures); you have him at .113, making me think I’m right about JaVale.
bobcatsden
January 30, 2009
I love these posts comparing public opinion to WP48. For the life of me, I don’t understand why Michael Jordan (or whoever) doesn’t hire someone to explain Wins Produced to him.
TRad
January 30, 2009
It seems that basketball-reference doesn’t include TRB% for seasons before 1970/71 (look at Wilt’s stats:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/c/chambwi01.html)
So Love’s stats aren’t probably as outstanding as it seems. But the second best since 1970/71 is good enough for me. Bad for Love, good for T’Wolves. Love probably will be cheaper as RFA/UFA.
Peter
January 30, 2009
Given his Beach Boys ties, Love just hasn’t been getting good vibrations.
And in spite of his father’s college choice, this is most certainly not water off of a Duck’s back.
I haven’t been feeling any love with your repetition of the same puns, Dave.
Peter
January 30, 2009
By the way, Kevin McHale, don’t get me wrong, Love is very, very good.
But if you didn’t trade a certain member of the Rookie Challenge away in the first place, you wouldn’t have had to moan and groan about the guy you ended up getting getting snubbed in the process.
Jimbo
January 30, 2009
And the obsession with rebounds continues unabated…
Tommy_Grand
January 30, 2009
I suspect you’ll get fewer replies from angry Beasley fans this year than you got from angry Durant fans last year. Assuming that’s correct, can we conclude that your arguments are gaining traction?
Horsecow
January 30, 2009
You should never make love angry … the assistant coaches should relax and enjoy the experience.
All kidding aside, I wish the T-wolves would get over their Craig Smith/Ryan Gomes obsession and give Love more playing time. He could average 15 rebounds a game, easily.
Anon
January 30, 2009
Tommy,
Beasley is viewed as having struggled so far by most analyses I’ve read, so when DJ makes the same claim it’s not as controversial. Also, Beasley doesn’t have any excuses as to why he couldn’t be performing well. He has Wade to make things easy on him, and they’re not really asking him to do much.
Lior
January 30, 2009
We should keep in mind what the All-Star game is: a scoring extravaganza. All-Stars are supposed to be selected based on their entertainment value, not their game-winning value. Very few viewers want to see tough defense, good box-outs and well-grabbed rebounds during the all-star game — they want to see a free-for-all dunk fest.
Kevin Love should be a leading candidate for ROI not to be an All-Star.
Ken
January 30, 2009
“And the obsession with rebounds continues unabated…”
Actually, it would seem that the obsession with SCORING continues unabated.
Really, of all you guys that play basketball (and I assume everyone here plays ball at some level) who never notices “that guy” that seems to get every rebound? Is he not extrememly valuable, even in a pickup game? You’re going to seriously tell me with a straight face that rebounds are overrated? Only if you DON”T play ball and watch games, can you say that rebounds are overrated.
“That guy” that gets all of the rebounds is frustrating, because he keeps your team at one-and-done’s, and he keeps possessions alive for his team…
C
January 30, 2009
Great point, Ken. Just played with someone like that last night. Loved it when he was on my team.
You could take that line of thinking further, too– think about that guy in the pick-up game who racks up a lot of points, but mostly because he takes so many shots. Not that fun for anyone– except him.
Peter
January 30, 2009
By the way, if we analyse Love’s performance during the month of January (given that the Wolves have one of the top records in games played in 2009), we get stats like this:
12.5 points, 10.1 rebounds, 1.5 assists, 53.7 AFG%, 76.7 FT%
It is no accident that the Wolves’ record is also intertwined with Love’s increase in productivity.
And, ironically enough, the biggest improvement has been on the offensive end. Develop that perimeter shot and conditioning, and watch out, league.
Jacob Rosen
January 30, 2009
Great comments up above about Durant there. A guy I have been very impressed by this year is Courtney Lee. He was just supposed to be a scorer/long-range shooter out of Western Kentucky, but has really thrived as one of the better perimeter defenders on an under-rated Magic defense. He played some solid ball against LeBron last night, and looks to be something special.
Tball
January 30, 2009
Anyone else read the “Make Love Angry” title and think this article was going to go in a wholly inappropriate way?
Vince Gagliano
January 30, 2009
Hmmmm, what about “Arizona Dreamin'” for a more appropriate, Beach Boys-related title? (Kevin’s uncle, Mike Love, is a member of the band.)
By the way, since they could have up to four first-round picks in the upcoming draft, let’s just say that while the Wolves want to do well, they don’t want to do too well if they want to keep all those picks intact.
dberri
January 30, 2009
Tball,
I was originally going to call this:
Assistant Coaches Make Angry Love
anon
January 30, 2009
the love thing is egregious, agreed. but I don’t think it’s a fair assessment of durant. durant is a small forward who was placed in a position his rookie year that he had never played. the experiment ended this year and he’s been quite productive since. In fact, OKC went from a team that had only won 2 games pre-switch, to a team that has won 6 of its last 10. The team is still dismal. But a switch from .012 in late November to 1.25 two months later is pretty remarkable. And I imagine if you just isolate his recent production, you’ll see that he’s more productive than Horford. So I think it’s unfair and inaccurate to put Durant in the same company as Beaseley
Peter
January 30, 2009
By the way, to further grasp his productivity, Love is 8th in the NBA in offensive rebounding, and is far and away the top rookie in this department.
Tommy_Grand
January 30, 2009
I think Durant might be the best SF in the west. I’d be interested to see an analysis of his performance since the position change.
Of course, most of the best SFs do not play in the west.
The following players all have two things in common (1) They played some SF this year. (2) they play in the EAST.
Lebron (best SF in the NBA – should win MVP)
Paul Pierce, D. Granger, Rashard Lewis, Vince Carter, Antwan Jamison, David Lee (not really a SF anyway), Caron Butler, G. Wallace, Igoudala, Jamario Moon , Shawn Marion (maybe #2-3 when healthy), T. Prince, M. Williams, Hedo Turkaloo (sp?)
dustin
January 30, 2009
Tom,
I have mcgee at .081
Peter
January 30, 2009
Love got six fouls in 18 1/2 minutes against LA, and 14 points and 9 rebounds.
Michael
January 31, 2009
Doesn’t anyone else think Kevin Love is being slightly arrogant for his little outburst after he wasn’t selected? I mean the guy has been in the league all of half a season.
Maybe he deserves to be there purely because of offensive rebounding (I’m not convinced) but even then, to huff and puff about being passed over for it at this stage of his career reeks of hubris to me.
I think he should know better.
On a completely unrelated note, has anyone else noticed that Bynum is beasting everyone right now? I wonder what happens to the Lakers standing compared to the Cavs et al if he keeps this up. Hopefully it pushes them to the top!
Tom Mandel
January 31, 2009
Dave, you need a Web developer to create a little app for your site. The visitor would put in a player’s name and each of the various stats, and your application would return the guy’s wp48.
Actually… there’s a business here! But I know that wouldn’t interest you, being as you are an academic ‘n all….. :)
Tom Mandel
January 31, 2009
10 seconds more thinking and I now see *various* ways for this to be turned into a business. Better be in touch! :)
free nba picks
January 31, 2009
Agree with most of you, Love needs more time…
“All you need is love…”
Peter
January 31, 2009
While we’re at it, I feel that it’s fitting to compare Love’s rookie season to Horford’s sophomore one, since both players are 1st and 2nd amongst the rookies and sophs in Wins Produced, and play similar roles on offense and defense for their respective teams.
Per 36 minutes:
Horford (through 33 games):
11.9 points, 9.6 rebounds, 2.8 assists, 0.6 steals, 1.8 blocks, 51.7 FG%, 72.7 FT%
Love (through 45 games): 14.3 points, 13.2 rebounds, 1.9 assists, 0.6 steals, 0.9 blocks, 44.7 FG%, 75.9 FT% per game
Love has better scoring and rebounding numbers, but Horford is passing and blocking more and shooting better from the field.
Also note that both big men are shooting 70%+ from the line, and that Horford has already had a year of experience at the next level.
Last, but not least, given that both were drafted behind the top two consensus talents at draft day, both have ended up as value picks on their respective teams.
This needs a post of its own, Dave.
Peter
January 31, 2009
Oh, and Love generally plays 20-25 minutes a night while Horford gets 30-35.
Italian Stallion
February 1, 2009
Rebounds are definitely valuble. They’re just more fungible than reasonably efficient scoring. If you have a good scorer, that makes him more valuable than a good rebounder because one is more difficult to replace than the other.
mrparker
February 1, 2009
stallion,
A good rebounder can do so at both ends of the court. You can only put points on the board for your team in one basket.
Its an acceptable approximation(I think from Oliver) that fgeff differential is 40% of the game, rebounding 20, turnover 25, and ft 15.
Using that approximation your efficient scorer contributes to 20% of the game(taking away since we can only consider his offense) while your good rebounder also contributes to 20% of the game(10 percent for each end of the floor). Since good rebouding usually goes along with a good team defensive fg percentage you could assume that good rebounders as a general rule contribute more to a defense than an efficient scorer. Couldn’t it then be inferred that good rebounders are more important than good shooters to a teams overall winning percentage?
Peter
February 1, 2009
It’s probably a subjective issue.
In the years when Shaq and Kobe dominated, they both both their team’s best shooters AND their best rebounders.
Nowadays, with the emphasis on guards, the team’s best rebounder is a defensively oriented center, while its best shooter is a backcourt player.
Peter
February 2, 2009
Shaq and Duncan, excuse me.
Westy
February 2, 2009
I guess I’m not completely surprised that these selections by the assistant coaches so closely follow scoring.
As McHale tried to do, I’d again blame the media. As much as coaches DO understand the game better than the media, they don’t have the time to understand much more than their own team. Thus, voting for players from other teams likely turns into voting for players they’ve heard are playing well. Well, where do they hear those things? From the media. So I don’t doubt that these coaches are being influenced by the media, which is being driven by scoring.
I would not be surprised that if these same coaches spent a week with all the rookies in practice, they’d come out with a much different ranking that does not match their current one. Or likewise, if they were picking players to actually build a team they would coach, they would pick different players.
I think what this shows is not necessarily that the coaches don’t judge basketball talent well, but that they don’t have time to do so in voting for these teams.
Unfortunately, that reinforces the fact for the media that the most ‘important’ players are the highest scorers.
Westy
February 2, 2009
Couldn’t it then be inferred that good rebounders are more important than good shooters to a teams overall winning percentage?
Only if each talent is similarly rare.
Peter
February 2, 2009
Here’s the problem with McHale complaining, Westy:
McHale, back when he was the general manager, already knew Mayo’s and Love’s tendencies back when they were playing college ball.
Even on draft day, Mayo was pegged by the media as the best talent available not named Michael Beasley or Derrick Rose.
Mayo was a shoot-first guard at USC, as he is now in Memphis. Love was defense-first at UCLA, which is still the case.
And yet, McHale still had the audacity to (even though Win Scores suggested it be done) trade away a guaranteed scorer in exchange for a player with whom he fell in love with (no pun intended) on draft day.
Even though he is now the coach, McHale was responsible for trading scoring for rebounding in the first place. Thus, he is blaming the coaches for something that was really his fault to begin with.
Love has a right to complain because he has simply been doing his job up to now and because high draft selection usually plays a role in the selection of rookie teams.
mr. parker
February 5, 2009
westy,
This is a couple of days late, but I have to disagree with your analysis of coach think. These are the guys who leave the David Lee’s of the world on the bench. These guys as a whole don’t get it.
Westy
February 8, 2009
These guys as a whole don’t get it.
So your hypothesis is that the 32 NBA coaches understand basketball less well than those of us who have never worked in the industry professionally?
While I agree there are a few poor coaches, I certainly do not think that they as a whole can fairly be called unqualified.
Westy
February 9, 2009
I might also note that the main coach who was leaving David Lee “on the bench” was Isiah Thomas.
I think there’s a good likelihood that Thomas is not a good proxy for what an effective NBA coach would be.
Tony K
February 12, 2009
Hi there!
Take a minute and read my review about sportsbettingchamp. :)
You might get interested…
/Tony K
MarkRight
October 21, 2009
Cool story you got here. It would be great to read something more about that topic.
Avril Kuree
September 14, 2010
Rather interesting blog you’ve got here. Thanx for it. I like such topics and everything that is connected to them. I definitely want to read more on that blog soon.
Avril Kuree
escort services schweiz