The big news for today is that “the next book” is finished!!! Actually, it was finished on August 30. At that point all the chapters were completed. Since then, though, we had to write a preface (which includes acknowledgements of the many people who helped us) and organize the references. All of this was completed this past weekend. And today we were told the book has moved in to production at FT Press.
Now production takes a few months. So the book – as Amazon.com indicates — will not be available to everyone until next March. But at this point – after more than a year of work – the entire book does exist; and we look forward to the day when everyone gets a chance to read the stories we have told.
Now that the book is completed, I will now be giving more attention to this blog. The first task is to complete the review of the 2008-09 season. As indicated at NBA Team Reviews: 2008-09, the following teams have been examined.
Charlotte Bobcats: Is this the Year a Charlotte Basketball Team – and MJ – Return to the Playoffs?
Golden State Warriors: Stephen Jackson Wants a Better Team, What if Don Nelson Embraced Tradition?
Memphis Grizzlies: The Memphis Lions Try and Roar
Miami Heat: Miami Fails to Build on Flash, Beasley or Boozer?
Milwaukee Bucks: Revising Expectations Upwards in Milwaukee
Philadelphia 76ers: No Longer Miller Time in Philadelphia
Portland Trail Blazers: Portland Misses and Misses and… Wins Again, Portland Misses and Misses and…Wins?
Washington Wizards: Are the Wizards one of the ten best teams in the NBA?
The season begins in five weeks, so I am going to need to review four teams per week if I am going to complete the 2008-09 season review on time. Now that the book is completed, I think this is possible.
Let me briefly note the purpose of these reviews. First, I wish to report each player’s Wins Produced and WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] for the 2008-09 season. Such numbers are the starting point of my review of what happened last season. With numbers in hand, I then look forward to next season. The look forward is not intended to specify the exact number of games a team will win in 2009-10. No, the purpose is to outline some possibilities (i.e. if player A does X, the team will likely win Z).
All that being said, let me note that the next team I will cover is the Nets. After that, I am open to suggestions.
Again, across the next five weeks these reviews will be the focus. This means I do not play on discussing the NFL and quarterbacks – as I did each of the past three seasons – until after these reviews are finished (unless there is a big demand for this analysis).
One last note… as we wrote the book I was not as responsive as I would like. E-mails went unanswered and other research projects were delayed. Going forward I hope to do a bit better (and I apologize for being so slow this past 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.
Wages of Wins Journal 
Will
September 21, 2009
Loved the last book, can’t wait for the sequel. Congrats!
Tim
September 21, 2009
Great! Here are some storyline suggestions.
I think you have already hinted that Houston without their biggest stars may surprise the experts who predict a down year. What is their true upside potential?
How about the Mavericks with Marion, who was such a stud with Phoenix, and the underrated Kidd, and the dependable if not spectacular Nowitzki? Have people forgotten about them?
And even if healthy, has San Antonio really improved their team enough to challenge the top teams, or are their offseason moves overrated? Can they keep their stars healthy?
Will the Nuggets challenge the Lakers, or will standing pat with their roster prove to be a mistake?
Will Utah find room for both Boozer and Millsap? Or will their unhappiness spread like a cancer? How much does unhappiness matter in the NBA? Do disgruntled players bring down their teams? Or is chemistry overrated?
Have all the moves made by Cleveland and Orlando improved those teams beyond their already impressive records last year? If so, who improved the most? Have they surpassed the Lakers? And can the aging Celtics keep up?
Will the lowly Clippers improve? The Thunder?
Darrin Thompson
September 22, 2009
Looking forward to the Pacers review. Seems like the offseason moves they made brought in average players. Did they lose below average players? And Brandon Rush appeared to finish his rookie season stronger than he began it.
brgulker
September 22, 2009
Congrats on the 2nd book! Any sneak peeks you can offer? :)
I’m very anxious to hear about San Antonio, having added McDyess, Jefferson, Bogans, and Blair. Intuitively, it seems they would have improved.
I’m also anxious to hear about Dallas — will the Matrix help? Or, will he be forced to play SF (where he is notably less productive)?
dberri
September 22, 2009
No sneak peaks :)
We now have two votes for San Antonio and Dallas. Perhaps those teams need to be next.
Philip
September 22, 2009
Looking forward to the new book.
My vote goes to the Celtics and/or Hawks.
Devin
September 22, 2009
I already know the diagnosis for San Antonio – not much improved from last year (when Manu was healthy, that is), because Jefferson isn’t that good, and McDyess is pretty much Kurt Thomas II (not too many minutes).
My top suggestions for next teams (in alphabetical order): Cleveland, Dallas, Orlando, and Toronto. These teams have the most significant amount of changes from last season. You can’t go wrong with San Antonio either, if only to show how little a difference Jefferson will make on their win total.
Italian Stallion
September 22, 2009
Well, I vote for the Knicks. I realize that not many other people will be interested. But if you can do the Nets, I don’t see why the Knicks should be excluded given that they are THE major market and are in the 2nd year of their rebuilding.
Italian Stallion
September 22, 2009
seem to recall that the new book will address the “efficiency and usage” issue a little more.
Is that correct?
I am very slowly coming around to your point of view, but still have some issues with the extremes .
Assume a player is average at everything except scoring. He only scores 6 points per 48 minutes. However, all his shot attempts are dunks. So he hits 95% of them. If my understanding of the method is correct, a player like that will rate above average because his efficiency is so high. However, few would regard a player like that as an above average scorer or player.
I am wondering if the usage/efficiency relationship should require some “minimum usage” before giving FULL CREDIT for high efficiency.
The same might be true of a player surrounded with all below average offensive players. He might find himself carrying such an extreme offensive load because of that unique circumstance that it will hurt him statistically.
David
September 22, 2009
Reading this blog is a highlight of my day, especially with the NBA season fast approaching. Maybe now I’ll have to get the books..Meant to post this comment yesterday, but didn’t have the chance. My recommendation (since you seem to be keeping score) are in this order: Cleveland, Orlando, Toronto, Dallas, Boston, though I am also wondering whether the low productivity you project for Jefferson will be balanced out by the Spurs’ other off season acquisitions.
Jacob Rosen
September 22, 2009
My vote goes for the Cavs, especially with the news about Delonte West. Is he a true asset to this team and is his possible loss a big turning point to their championship hopes?
How much will Shaq’s presence matter to the team this year? Would you make that trade knowing Ben Wallace and Sasha Pavlovic were both promptly waived?
Was Anderson Varejao’s contract extension warranted? Are the new acquisitions of Anthony Parker and Jamario Moon going to matter at all as the Cavs look to upend the Magic?
dmortone
September 23, 2009
Love the blog, my vote is for the Hawks.
PEMAC
September 23, 2009
Hi, I’ve got kind of a big question, one that should probably be filed under “write a post about this in the future”. Basically, you hear a lot about “spacing the floor with the three-pointer” from coaches, players, sports writers, etc. Does that enter into your stats model at all?
If it doesn’t, does that not account at least a little for why some players like Andrea Bargnani and Spencer Hawes come out so poorly in the WoW model? As their primary use in offences is as spot-up shooters, creating mismatches, drawing opposing big men out to the perimeter and creating more room for their teammates to operate mid-range and down-low. This often results in lower rebounding per minute, worse shooting percentages (especially in consideration with other centers) and fewer assists.
I’m certainly not saying anyone’s wrong, but I think it would make a worthwhile post, no?
PEMAC
September 23, 2009
Also, throw in Matt Bonner in there, I guess. Even though nobody’s really accusing him of being a very good player. But there must be some reason Greg Pop keeps starting him, mustn’t there?
Italian Stallion
September 23, 2009
Pemac,
IMHO, Bargnani plays more like a SF than either a PF or C. Therefore, he should probably be compared to other SFs even though he defends bigger men. You can argue that his style leaves a hole on the boards and leads to less efficient scoring etc…, but it’s up to the GM/coach to try to build a team that is well balanced. It’s not up to Bargnani to have the exact same skill set as most other Cs and PFs.
This is one of the quirks of the modern game. Because there are more big men that can handle the ball, pass, and shoot from the outside, IMO the old position definitions aren’t as clean as they used to be.
Westy
September 24, 2009
I’d vote for the Timberwolves. I know you’ve already somewhat discussed how they’re a drastically changed team under Kahn.
But now w/ the addition of Sessions, I think they could surprise some. And I think they’re well-positioned past this year to add some people who help.
The other topic I’d love to see a writeup on would be the summer league. I remember your analysis from the summer Kevin Durant was playing, and it was very interesting. I’d love to see who did well in Summer League, and thus maybe who are some rookies (or unknown veterans) who could surprise this season.
PEMAC
September 24, 2009
The question I have is “does having a center who is able to shoot threes help a team in half-court offensive sets?”. I’ve heard plenty of hullaballoo about that being the case (though lord knows, as a Torontonian I’ve seen no actual tangible gains from it). I’m just curious as to WoWs opinion about this.