Note: The following repeats much of what I said about the Atlanta Hawks in August. Missing from that post was a table reporting what happened in 2008-09 and a listing of this team’s depth chart. These items have been constructed and the original post has now been re-written. With this post, Detroit is the only team that needs to be completely reviewed. The Detroit post will be up later today or tomorrow.
Back in 2004-05, the Atlanta Hawks won 13 games with a -10.2 efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency). Looking at the ten players who led this team in minutes played, we can see why Atlanta failed so miserably (WP48 = Wins Produced per 48 minutes).
Al Harrington: 2,550 min., -0.1 Wins Produced, -0.003 WP48
Josh Childress: 2,376 min., 10.8 Wins Produced, 0.218 WP48
Antoine Walker: 2,128 min., -0.1 Wins Produced, -0.002 WP48
Josh Smith: 2,050 min., 8.1 Wins Produced, 0.189 WP48
Tyronn Lue: 1,528 min., 2.4 Wins Produced, 0.076 WP48
Pedrag Drobnjak: 1,435 min., -2.7 Wins Produced, -0.091 WP48
Tony Delk: 1,340 min., 0.3 Wins Produced, 0.012 WP48
Boris Diaw: 1,201 min., 1.1 Wins Produced, 0.044 WP48
Jason Collier: 942 min., -3.1 Wins Produced, -0.158 WP48
Royal Ivey: 809 min., -0.7 Wins Produced, -0.039 WP48
The Wins Produced of this collection sums to 16.0, telling us that this team failed because the players it employed were generally (although not always) unproductive.
Over the next three seasons the Hawks improved, winning 26, 30, and then 37 games. Last season the Hawks took another step forward and won 47 games, advancing to the second round of the NBA playoffs.
Reviewing 2008-09
Table One reports how the players Atlanta employed last season performed.
Table One: The Atlanta Hawks in 2008-09
Table One ranks players by Wins Produced. We can also repeat the exercise performed above and look at the players who led the Hawks in minutes played.
Joe Johnson: 3,124 min., 8.6 Wins Produced, 0.131 WP48
Mike Bibby: 2,740 min., 7.8 Wins Produced, 0.136 WP48
Josh Smith: 2,421 min., 5.9 Wins Produced, 0.116 WP48
Al Horford: 2,242 min., 9.4 Wins Produced, 0.201 WP48
Marvin Williams: 2,093 min., 6.5 Wins Produced, 0.149 WP48
Ronald Murray: 1,975 min., 1.4 Wins Produced, 0.035 WP48
Maurice Evans: 1,840 min., 2.1 Wins Produced, 0.055 WP48
Zaza Pachulia: 1,473 min., 2.7 Wins Produced, 0.088 WP48
Solomon Jones: 675 min., -0.2 Wins Produced, -0.012 WP48
Acie Law: 560 min., 0.5 Wins Produced, 0.040 WP48
If we look over these two lists we note that only Josh Smith appears both times. This suggests that the Hawks improved because different players got to call themselves Hawks.
Now the Hawks wish to take the next step. Steve Aschburner of Sports Illustrated, though, tells us — in Can Hawks evolve into contender? — the plan is now changing.
The Hawks, for the most part, have had a “stay-cation” summer. With Rick Sund passing his one-year anniversary as GM this offseason, Atlanta diligently has kept intact the nucleus assembled by predecessor Billy Knight. …”Yeah, I like our club,” Sund told the AJC. “The only reason I say that is there’s still growth from within.”
Looking at 2009-10
The Hawks have not entirely stood pat. The team traded Acie Law and Speedy Claxton to the Golden State Warriors for Jamal Crawford. On draft night the Hawks chose point guard Jeff Teague. And the Hawks also signed Joe Smith.
Judging by what he did last year in college, Teague is not expected to be a major producer of wins next season. And when we look at the potential depth chart for Atlanta – taken from Yahoo.com and ESPN.com – we see that Crawford and Joe Smith are also not expected to significant producers of wins.
Potential First String
PG: Mike Bibby [7.8 Wins Produced, 0.136 WP48]
SG: Joe Johnson [8.6 Wins Produced, 0.131 WP48]
SF: Marvin Williams [6.5 Wins Produced, 0.149 WP48]
PF: Josh Smith [5.9 Wins Produced, 0.116 WP48]
C: Al Horford [9.4 Wins Produced, 0.201 WP48]
Potential Second String
PG: Jeff Teague [rookie]
SG: Jamal Crawford [1.2 Wins Produced, 0.023 WP48]
SF: Maurice Evans [2.1 Wins Produced, 0.055 WP48]
PF: Joe Smith [1.2 Wins Produced, 0.051 WP48]
C: Zaza Pachulia [2.7 Wins Produced, 0.088 WP48]
A review of this depth chart reveals that every player in the Hawks potential starting line-up is above average. But the team has very little off the bench. And except for Horford, no player that is very far above average. Consequently, this team lags behind the top teams in the East.
Once again, though, the plan is that these players will get better. And this is possible. Marvin Williams, Josh Smith, and Al Horford are still in their early twenties. Improvement at that age does happen.
But we should be realistic about how much improvement is likely. Basketball players – relative to what we see in baseball and football – are very consistent over time. So although there is a standard age profile in basketball (players first improve and then decline), the slopes up and down are gradual. Consequently, a dramatic change in player productivity is not something one should count upon.
Let’s imagine, though, that a dramatic change did happen. Specifically, what if Williams, Smith, and Horford all boosted their WP48 by 50% (a fantastic percentage I just made up)? These three players produced 21.7 wins last year. Therefore, a 50% jump would result in 10.9 additional wins. Such a leap moves the Hawks from a 45 win team (that is what their efficiency differential said they should have won in 2008-09) to a 56 win team. Had this happened last season, the Hawks would have moved from the 4th seed in the Eastern Conference all the way to…. okay, the 4th seed. Yes, the Cavaliers, Celtics, and Magic all won more than 56 games last year. And these teams have all made moves this summer that will likely increase their win totals in 2009-10.
So a 50% improvement in the three young players the Hawks are counting on to evolve (as Aschburner put it) would not be enough to overtake the top teams in the East. And even if that improvement happened, the Hawks are still likely to lose production from players like Mike Bibby, who are on the wrong side of the age profile.
If we put it all together, the Hawks plan to contend in the East appears flawed. Improvement from within is probably not going to close the gap between Atlanta and the top teams in the East. This team might as well hope the Cavaliers, Magic, and Celtics suffer major injuries. Certainly if such a hope was realized, the Hawks could also rise to the top.
As the saying goes, though, hope is not a plan. And at this point, it doesn’t look like Atlanta really has much of a plan. This is a team that has risen from the ashes because it acquired more productive players. To move on, more roster changes are needed.
It’s possible fans of this team might disagree. Two years ago Boston Celtics needed seven games to eliminate the Hawks in the playoffs. This year, injuries to the Hawks appeared to derail their post-season run. Despite such evidence, we must remember that the 82 game regular season is the better measure of a team’s quality. In 2009-10 the Hawks finished with a win total in the mid 40s. To seriously contend in the East, the team needs at least 15 more wins. Improvement from existing players should simply not be expected to close this gap. Yes, one can hope. But again, that’s not really a plan.
– 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 
khandor
October 26, 2009
David,
IMO, the Hawks are not banking on achieving a higher Regular Season Games Won Total this year. What they’re banking on, instead, is that their squad is capable of qualifying for post-season play for the 3rd consecutive season and perhaps winning a 1st Round playoff series for the 2nd consecutive year and, just maybe, being cohesive and deep enough to upset one of the Big 3 in the East this season during a conference semi-final series [or, at least, stretch them to the limit in a hard-fought battle].
By keeping their core group of talented youngsters to together and NOT expecting to see “major” improvements each year but only gradual ones, the Hawks are charting the proper course for their franchise … something which they have failed to do well in the past, on numerous occasions.
If Atlanta can stay relatively healthy this season, and make the playoffs in the middle of the EC, they should be in a good position to try to accomplish their incremental goals.
Daniel
October 26, 2009
khandor– you’re missing the point. The team will not improve linearly… If they brought back Childress and stopped being cheap, they’d be close to the 55 wins.
The problem with the Hawks is that they are lacking a superstar– someone with a WP/48 over .300. Nearly every title team for the last 25+ years has had one of these (off the top of my head this only excludes last year’s Lakers who had 4 players right at or above .200). If they had picked Chris Paul instead of Marvin Williams, they probably would have won a title already. Since they probably won’t get any superstars in the draft in the 20s, the only way they can pick up great players is in free agency/with trades. The new GM ignored Ariza, McDyess and Gortat, the best free agents of the summer, and hasn’t made any effort to bring Josh Childress back to the Hawks even though they hold his rights.
Joe
October 26, 2009
The only way the Hawks start winning is if the owners sell the team and get somebody competent running the front office. Rick Sund is not the answer– he drove Seattle into the ground with bad trades– they won 52 games in ’04 and 35 in ’05 and the only difference was firing Nate McMillan and giving Reggie Evans (best rebound rate in the NBA) away midseason.
khandor
October 26, 2009
Daniel,
It’s not me who’s missing anything that’s happening with the Hawks. It’s those who think the Hawks are actually trying to win a league championship this season that are missing IT.
Whoever is, in fact, making the key decisions for the Hawks right now at least seems to realize that young and growing teams should NOT be going “all in” at this still early point in the development of their core group of players.
Patience is required.
Adding more solid young players through the Draft is required.
This season was not the season to add a big ticket UFA.
Man of Steele
October 26, 2009
khandor,
You might want to look through a few of Dr. Berri’s articles about the fate of “talented young teams” (like today’s Blazers or Motumbo’s Nuggets). They have to have a superstar (.300 wp48) to become a championship team, it seems. The Hawks will probably not have that if they keep together this appealing core of talented young players. None of their players will get there (unless you look at some pie in the sky career trajectory for Al Horford). Having so much salary devoted to these players, they will never be able to sign a superstar free agent, and being a middling playoff team in the east, they will never get a lottery pick that could become a superstar.
Actually, Dr. berri’s analysis was right on the mark. While khandor is correct that Atlanta may not plan to win the title this year, I think what is not understood is that Atlanta’s plan is not going to yield a championship at any point (with this team).
todd2
October 27, 2009
Khandor’s point is valid. Short of acquiring established stars a la’ the Celts, keeping a core group of younger players intact can lead to success. There has been some research that indicates higher player turnover from one year to the next is a recipe for disaster. Bibby’s past his prime and no one’s arguing that this team is a contender, but this franchise could end up looking like the current version of the Rockets in a year or two. Or, better yet, the Blazers, who are being considered contenders at this point w/out a “superstar.”
Italian Stallion
October 27, 2009
Off topic, but I consider Roy an emerging superstar at Portland.
I think perhaps we are looking at the wrong thing when we say a championship team needs a superstar.
I think what a championship team needs is a player that has the skill set and emotional makeup to take the game over in the last few minutes when most players are suffering from tight sphincters. Of course, he also has to be a highly skilled player, but some very highly rated players cannot do that and some can.
IMO, Roy can.
brgulker
October 28, 2009
I think khandor is right insofar as I don’t think the ATL ownership/management is trying to build a contender.
I think they’re trying to make money. And a team that wins between 45-50 games will make money throughout the regular season and into the Playoffs.
They have two obstacles to contention, as I see it:
1) Bibby is aging and will get worse from this year to the next. They have no viable replacement.
2) They are still one .300 or two more .200 players away from contention, and they won’t have the money to sign those types of players given their salary commitments.
khandor
November 16, 2009
Yes, it’s early in the schedule but, at least, thus far, it would appear to be the case that what I said this past summer about the Atlanta Hawks might turn out to be quite accurate.
FYI, see the Current NBA Standings.
John Lee Young
May 18, 2010
Who many game did each team win