Soon after the 2009 free agent market opened the Detroit Pistons made a huge splash, giving $100 million to Ben Gordon and Charlie Villanueva. At the time this deal was announced I – as a lifetime fan of this team (with a wonderful team banner on my office wall) – offered a quick response: Ugh!
To understand this response, let’s look at the career numbers for Gordon and Villanueva:
Gordon’s Wins Produced = 15.3
Gordon’s WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] = 0.059
Villanueva’s Wins Produced = 11.2
Villanueva’s WP48 = 0.074
An average player posts a 0.100 WP48, so both Gordon and Villanueva had career numbers that were below average. Given such numbers, Detroit’s $100 million investment was unlikely to generate the return the Pistons envisioned.
Well, we are now 20 games into the Gordon-Villanueva era. And the early returns – despite winning three of the last four games – are still “Ugh”.
Table One reports what the Pistons have done – with respect to Wins Produced and WP48 – after 20 games.
Table One: The Detroit Pistons After 20 Games in 2009-10
The Pistons’ efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency) is currently -2.0. This mark – and the team’s Wins Produced – suggests the Pistons will win 36 games this season (assuming – incorrectly – that minutes played stay the same the rest of the year). As Table One indicates, about 7.7 of these wins can be traced to the production of Gordon and Villanueva. More importantly, Gordon’s WP48 is 0.084 while Villanueva’s WP48 stands at 0.073. Yes, the $100 million players are still below average.
The good news is that Ben Wallace – after three years away from the Motor City – has returned. And his productivity – after years of injuries – is quite impressive for a 35-year old player. As Table One reports, Big Ben’s WP48 is currently 0.281 and his projected Wins Produced stands at 14.8.
Here is what was reported when Wallace was signed for $1.3 million last August:
Although it may have been the plan to have Wallace come off the bench, that’s not what happened. Big Ben has started all twenty games, and his productivity – although not quite what he did last time he was in Detroit (0.332 WP48 in 2005-06) – is simply amazing for an old basketball player.
Again, this is not what the Pistons expected. And if we subtract Wallace’s projected productivity from the rest of Detroit’s roster we see a collection of players that are only expected to produced 21.3 wins. In sum, without Big Ben – a player who was not expected to play much or play this well — Detroit would be very bad.
Fans of the Pistons (not this fan, but perhaps other fans) might note that so far Tayshaun Prince and Richard Hamilton haven’t played much. Last year, though, Hamilton was below average (WP48 of 0.052). And although Prince was above average (WP48 of 0.122), he only produced 7.8 wins. In sum, even with Prince and Hamilton the Pistons wouldn’t be that good.
Of course, in the Eastern Conference – where the list of truly good teams only includes Boston, Cleveland, Orlando, and Atlanta – “not that good” might still be good enough for the playoffs. But for $100 million, the Pistons fans probably expect a team that can seriously contend in the East. And the signings of Gordon and Villanueva – as expected – are probably not going to make that happen. So for this Pistons fan, “Ugh!” is still the word.
– 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 
brgulker
December 8, 2009
Thanks for this, Dr. Berri. Solidarity, my fellow Pistons fan.
I was interested to see Stuckey vs. Bynum. Intuitively, I’ve believed Bynum is a better all around player, and judging from your analysis, it’s not even close. In fact, Bynum actually produces pretty well for a PG.
One other guy has been encouraging: Jonas Jerebko. I suspect that he’s just below average right now because his FG% is low. Having watched almost all the games thus far, I’d venture to say that his FG% is only going to go up over the next 2-3 seasons. He just needs to learn how to finish in the NBA, and I think he will.
And how about Ben Wallace? He’s been a blast to watch. And we’d be lost without him.
The two surprises: How poorly Jason and Kwame have been playing. I expected more this season, and they’ve disappointed terribly.
brgulker
December 8, 2009
Last thing for now:
Kuester starting Ben Wallace has given me confidence in his coaching ability (yes, I know coaches don’t affect wins that much). The fact that he recognizes Ben’s value — that he realizes a 35 year old working for minimum wage is his best big man in spite of him not scoring — encourages me. In my mind, it demonstrates that he understands what it takes to win. That’s a good sign for the future.
Daniel
December 8, 2009
On the plus side, the Pistons picked up Austin Daye, who is an above average player as a rookie, albeit in limited minutes.
And to think, they turned down the Rondo and Allen trade for half their (unproductive and inefficient) team…
Garrett
December 8, 2009
I think I’ll wait until the end of the season to see how Ben Gordon’s ankle heals, Rip’s ankle heals, Tay’s back heals, and CV’s nose heals before I make a decision on whether the free agent signings were a bust. We’ve been (thankfully) really healthy for pretty much the last DECADE, so it’s frustrating to get hit with the injury bug but that’s how it goes. I want to see all the pieces get a chance to play together before I decide whether they fit or not.
Italian Stallion
December 8, 2009
In defense of Detroit, I think you have to point out that the first 20 games were essentially meaningless. Prince missed 17 games, Hamilton missed 19 games, and Gorden hasn’t been 100%, which is reflected is his somewhat worse shooting efficiency (which is the one thing he brings to the table).
I think it’s also interesting to point out that Chicago is struggling badly on offense because it can’t replace Gorden’s efficient and clutch scoring.
(not saying he isn’t overpaid, just that he may be more valuable than given credit for)
brgulker
December 8, 2009
(not saying he isn’t overpaid, just that he may be more valuable than given credit for)
He’s gotten plenty of credit recently by PER and adjusted +/-, to be fair. WoW is the only one of the more advanced metrics that consistently rates him poorly, as far as I’m aware.
dberri
December 8, 2009
adjusted +/- once again says he is below average. Gordon’s ranking — like the ranking of many players — bounces around in adjusted +/-.
His box score numbers are remarkably consistent. And these numbers say (according to WP) that he is below average.
I think the Pistons are getting exactly what they could have expected from Gordon. And that isn’t worth the money he was paid.
brgulker
December 8, 2009
adjusted +/- once again says he is below average.
Heh, I didn’t realize that this year was different from last year.
What’s their defense for this argument:
His box score numbers are remarkably consistent. And these numbers say (according to WP) that he is below average. ?
I’d honestly like to read it.
brgulker
December 8, 2009
copied the wrong thing above:
adjusted +/- once again says he is below average. Gordon’s ranking — like the ranking of many players — bounces around in adjusted +/-.
Meant to ask how they respond to this statement.
kevin
December 8, 2009
After a solid start, the Joe Dumars trains seems to have run off the rails. When they made the billups/Iverson trade, at least you could rationalize that as a salary dump and dumars was keeping his powder dry for a run at a big name after Iveron’s contract expired.
But Gordon and Villanueva? You have to be kidding me. And they failed to bring back Rasheed to boot. If you’re going to deliberately tank the season to retool, you may as well go all the way and trade every veteran you have for draft picks.
the only thing Dumars seems to building in Detroit is institutionalzed mediocrity.
Italian Stallion
December 8, 2009
I think regardless of whether you are using PER, Adj +/-, or WP, Gordon is not shooting quite as well this year as he did last year so far. That is probably due to him not being 100%.
I realize there is a disagreement about the relationship between usage/efficiency, but I’m in the camp that believe it matters at the margins. I also think efficient outside scoring is more valuable than equally efficient inside scoring because of floor spacing. So to me, a high usage efficient clutch outside shooter like Gordon is better than he looks from the box score.
Overall, he’s lacking in other areas, but I still think he’d brings more to the table than some think.
ilikeflowers
December 8, 2009
I guess that depends upon whether efficient outside scoring helps spacing for efficient inside scoring more than efficient inside scoring helps spacing for efficient outside scoring.
Italian Stallion
December 8, 2009
ilikeflowers,
IMHO it clearly does, but that is based entirely on 35 years of observation, not on a statistical analysis.
There are some exceptional centers that draw double teams and free things up for outside shooters.
There are also some players that are so good at penetrating they free things up for outside shooters.
But it seems to me that almost every team needs some solid efficient outside shooting or everything grinds to a halt on the inside too. As little as one really bad outside shooter (other than the C) can sometimes gum up the works a little.
ilikeflowers
December 8, 2009
That is my opinion as well based upon my several decades of work on my gray matter model. The data often contains surprises however and I’d like to see a more formal analysis. Unfortunately, I’m not aware of one.
Chicago Tim
December 9, 2009
Okay, now that they lost at home to the New Jersey Nets, will you tell us why the Chicago Bulls are so bad? I’m sure there are a number of reasons, but I would like to see the statistical analysis.
dberri
December 9, 2009
Chicago Tim,
Luol Deng and Noah are playing very well. Tyrus Thomas was also above average before he got hurt. The rest of the team is horrible. The highest WP48 of anyone not named Deng, Tyrus, or Noah is 0.018 (John Salmons).
Chicago Tim
December 9, 2009
Wow! Rose, Salmons, Hinrich, and Miller all playing much worse than expected? Out of a seven-man line up? Ugh.
I wasn’t expecting Rose to make the leap some predicted, but it sounds like he has taken a large step back from average to bad. I hope that is due to his ankle injury and that he will recover. Miller is a real surprise — maybe he’s just getting old.
One question, is Deng playing better than last year — i.e., has he returned to his 2006-07 production level, or anywhere near it? If Rose can recover and Deng and Noah continue to improve, there’s still hope for next year. My concern is that no quality free agents will want to come to Chicago.
John Giagnorio
December 9, 2009
Tyrus Thomas is above average, and of course the Bulls are looking to trade him for nothing after refusing to give him a chance in the many years he’s been on the team. Draft a guy in the top 5, never play him because you “dislike his attitude” and think he “doesn’t hustle.” The Chicago Bulls – they’d rather lose than play someone who they don’t think is a “good kid.”
kevin
December 9, 2009
Iverson with another stinkbomb against Detroit tonight. 3-10 from the field. no rebounds 6 turnovers in 33 minutes. stuckey goes for 27.
John W. Davis
December 26, 2009
Prof Berri,
In Joe We (USED TO) Trust!