Prior to this past season Troy Murphy had played at least 2,000 minutes in four seasons in his NBA career. And in these four seasons his Wins Produced and WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] were as follows:
2002-03: 9.8 Wins Produced, 0.187 WP48
2004-05: 7.9 Wins Produced, 0.159 WP48
2005-06: 9.6 Wins Produced, 0.183 WP48
2007-08: 6.6 Wins Produced, 0.151 WP48
Murphy’s average WP48 across these four seasons is 0.171, indicating that Murphy has been consistently a good, but not great, NBA player.
Unlike what we see in football and baseball, basketball players tend to be very consistent. Performance can change due to injury and age, but typically, what you have seen in the past is very similar to what you will see in the future. Consequently, given what Murphy had done in the past, we should have expected Murphy to produce about nine wins in the 2,482 minutes he played in 2008-09. Instead, Murphy produced 19.1 wins.
Again, such a leap is unusual. If we look at Basketball-Reference, we can why this leap happened. Last season Murphy – relative to what he did in the past – grabbed more rebounds and hit more of his shots. Of these two, his leap in shooting efficiency is the most dramatic. Murphy’s career adjusted field goal percentage is 0.485. Last year, though, his mark was 0.580. From beyond the arc he converted on 45% of his shots (on a career high number of attempts). Yes, Murphy in 2008-09 was a very rare big man who could both hit shots from beyond the arc and rebound at a very high rate.
Despite Murphy’s performance, though, the Pacers missed the playoffs. And when we look at Table One, we can see the problem. Beyond Murphy, the Pacers only employed one other player who played at least 1,000 minutes and posted a WP48 mark that was above average. That one player was Danny Granger, and his mark of 0.119 was only slightly above average.
Table One: The Indiana Pacers in 2008-09
Last spring, Granger was the subject of three different posts.
Danny Granger is the Most Improved?
There is Not Much Difference Between Danny Granger and Kobe Bryant?
Bob Newhart, Danny Granger, and Group Therapy in Indiana
Of these three, the Bob Newhart post was my favorite. Any of these, though, tells the same story: Although Granger is above average, he is not really as productive as is commonly believed.
Nevertheless, Granger was the second most productive player on the Pacers last year. And when we look at the potential depth chart for 2009-10 (taken from ESPN.com and Yahoo.com), it seems possible that Granger will be the second most productive player again.
Potential First String
PG: T.J. Ford [4.3 Wins Produced, 0.092 WP48]
SG: Brandon Rush [0.8 Wins produced, 0.022 WP48]
SF: Danny Granger [6.0 Wins Produced, 0.119 WP48]
PF: Troy Murphy [19.1 Wins Produced, 0.369 WP48]
C: Jeff Foster [3.4 Wins Produced, 0.089 WP48]
Potential Second String
PG: Travis Diener [2.9 Wins Produced, 0.196 WP48]
SG: Dahntay Jones [1.7 Wins Produced, 0.057 WP48]
SF: Mike Dunleavy [10.6 Wins Produced, 0.173 WP48 in 2007-08]
PF: Tyler Hansbrough [Rookie]
C: Roy Hibbert [-1.6 Wins Produced, -0.078 WP48]
Of the ten players listed above, eight played for the Pacers last year. Across the past three seasons, Indiana has won 35, 36, and 36 games. In other words, this team has been remarkably consistent. And now they are bringing back essentially the same team. Does this mean the Pacers should expect — and be happy — to win 36 games again?
One player who might make a difference is Mike Dunleavy. Two years ago Dunleavy produced 10.6 wins and posted a 0.173 WP48. Last years, though, Dunleavy was hurt and his production dropped to 0.1 wins. If Dunleavy comes back this year – and returns to what we saw two years ago – the Pacers have a chance to make the playoffs in 2010.
Unfortunately, Dunleavy hasn’t yet come back and is currently listed as out “indefinitely.” So even if Murphy maintains the productivity we saw last year (and I think that counts as an “if”), the consistency of the Pacers will likely continue. In other words, without Dunleavy this team is probably headed for another 30-40 win season and another trip to the lottery. And if Murphy returns to form…. well, the Pacers will probably get a much better lottery pick.
– 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 
Stephen Quirk
October 25, 2009
While not directly related to the topic, I am wondering if Troy Murphy is at his statistical peak at the age of 29 and we should expect to see some performance decline. Bill James has analyzed baseball players’ peak age but I have not seen any similar study for basketball players.
dberri
October 25, 2009
Stephen,
We discuss the peak in basketball in the next book. 29 is past the peak in basketball (and that is all I am going to say). Book comes out next March.
thefatkid
October 25, 2009
Murphy is a classic case of the pitfalls of WP, similar to David Lee. According to WP, Murphy is either a notably above average player or one of the best players in the NBA, depending upon the year. However, this seems a bit odd, given that his apparently elite play hasn’t produced commensurate results for his teams over the years. This is occurs for two reasons, the first of which can be quantified, while the latter is a work in progress.
First, WP treats the rebound as it does every other category statistic. That is to say, the rebound is considered a unique event and one that would not have occurred were it not for the player performing the feat. While this may be true for offensive rebounding, it is far from a certainty in the case of defensive rebounding. Many players simply chase rebounds and grab caroms that would have otherwise gone to teammates. If you examine team on/off court rebounding statistics, you’ll see that many teams are somehow better rebounding squads without “great” rebounding players. This begs the question as to the added value these players actually bring on the glass.
Or, stated in WP terms, many players who are theoretically quite valuable are simply credited for siphoning wins away from teammates, and, in the case of players whose teams rebound better without them, creating parasitic win losses in the process.
Obviously the second problem is that WP places no emphasis on defense beyond blocks and steals, resulting in high values for complete sieves like Murphy.
dberri
October 25, 2009
fatkid…
Two responses:
1. Murphy was only an elite player last year. So this result hardly “depends on the year”. The primary reason he got better is because he shot much better.
2. There are diminishing returns to rebounding. And this is addressed in the next book. I am not going into it here, but you have greatly exaggerated this issue. Players do not take all their rebounds from teammates.
Johnny Y.
October 26, 2009
Personally if I just had to eyeball the situation, I would say a good portion of his improvement is tied to dunleavy’s injury. Mike is a very tall SG, and a pretty solid rebounder at his position. Also Mike was one of their main 3-point threats (along with murphy and granger). Murphys normal FG% isn’t that much higher then it was the previous year, but since hes shooting more 3’s now (and making them at a good rate) it inflates his adjusted FG%. If mike was there, troy probably wouldn’t be required to shoot the nearly 2 extra 3 point attempts per game that he did last year.
There’s obviously some improvement since his fg% and 3point fg% did go up, but his elite status is probably tied a decent amount to dunleavy’s absence.
Nick
October 27, 2009
I think they fact here that is being debated is the “level of talent” that Murphy has.
I don’t care how TALENTED he is. If you can rebound like he did last year…and hit 45% of your 3’s, while taking a lot. You are pretty valuable.
Those are both top-level stats produced by Mr. Murphy.
brgulker
October 28, 2009
Dr. Berri,
Two things about the Pacers that I will be watching (as I anticipate an intense fight in the EC for the final four playoff spots):
1) Hibbert. He looked to be improved in preseason. If that holds true, and he can become average, the Pacers should improve.
2) Tyler Hansbrough. I’m not a fan of his, but it seems like he could be the type of guy who could potentially produce wins — shoot a high percentage (off mostly garbage buckets), rebound, and maybe even generate some steals. Obviously, he’s a rookie.
But, even if those two guys could add 3-4 wins between them, the Pacers could be in the playoffs (Depending on how the rest of the East shakes out).