Last week I posted the WP48 and Wins Produced numbers for each player on each team in the NBA. From these numbers we could see that the current MPP (Most Productive Player) is LeBron James (13.8 Wins Produced). And the current MPP for Rookies would be DeJuan Blair and Tyreke Evans (4.2 Wins Produced). Today I want to briefly discuss the top players off the bench (Most Productive 6th Man).
Of the 423 players who have played in the NBA this season, 255 have not started at least half their team’s respective games. This sample of 255 was ranked in terms of Wins Produced (after 41 games), and the top 10 are as follows:
- Manu Ginobili: 5.2 Wins Produced, 0.266 WP48
- Anderson Varejao: 4.3 Wins Produced, 0.175 WP48
- Kyle Lowry: 4.2 Wins Produced, 0.200 WP48
- DeJuan Blair: 4.2 Wins Produced, 0.273 WP48
- Andrei Kirilenko: 4.0 Wins Produced ,0.193 WP48
- Chris Andersen: 4.0 Wins Produced, 0.221 WP48
- Matt Barnes: 4.0 Wins Produced, 0.191 WP48
- Carl Landry: 3.6 Wins Produced, 0.161 WP48
- Omri Casspi: 3.3 Wins Produced, 0.145 WP48
- Luke Ridnour: 3.3 Wins Produced, 0.167 WP48
A number of sports writers gave out mid-season awards, but I am going to pick on Ian Thomsen (primarily because I could easily find his column today). Thomsen of Sports Illustrated.com argued that the top three sixth men are Jamal Crawford, Carl Landry, and Jason Terry. As one can see, Landry does make the list of top 10 players. But Crawford (2.3 Wins Produced) is only the 19th most productive player off the bench. And Jason Terry (1.0 Wins Produced) is only ranked 57th.
Not surprisingly, when we turn to points per game we see the following rankings:
- Al Harrington: 18.2 points per game
- Jamal Crawford: 17.1 points per game
- Jason Terry: 16.3 points per game
- Carl Landry: 16.2 points per game
So what’s wrong with Harrington? Of these four, he is the only one playing for a losing team. Yes, post-season awards tend to be about scoring and playing for a winner. Consequently, I expect the eventual winner might come from Thomsen’s list. But I don’t think any of the players Thomsen identifies will produce more wins than Ginobili.
In my next post I will discuss the Most Improved Player. Thomsen argues for the following three names: Kevin Durant, Josh Smith, and Marc Gasol. Each of these players has actually improved. And two of these names would rank among the ten most improved players. But after 41 games, someone else has actually improved the most. And as I noted, in my next post I will identify that player (I would do it now, but I have some other work I need to finish).
– 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 
Italian Stallion
January 31, 2010
You don’t have to be a fan of WOW to realize that Al Harrington is a terrible basketball player despite his scoring.
Even though I think relatively efficient scoring is underrated here, Harrington is not efficient. Furthermore, he’s a black hole on the court. As soon as he gets the ball, he puts his head down and goes one on one, one on two, one three…. He’d go one on six if the opposing team was allowed to do it. He destroys the ball movement and takes the team out of a healthy rhythm.
Some of his “badness” is also hard to pin down statistically because overall he can have some great nights. They become part of his overall record. But the more important the series of plays, the more likely he is to turn the ball over, take a bad shot, get called for an offensive foul, miss a defensive assignment, bungle a defensive rebound, get a technical foul etc…. Die hard Knicks fans with some understanding of the game have to keep a barf bag handy just to watch him play.
Italian Stallion
January 31, 2010
I’d like to see you include Wilson Chandler of the Knicks in the most improved study, but you would have to start with December when he started recovering from off season ankle surgery and began regaining his athleticism.
As soon as that happened, he stopped taking as many 3 pointers and started going to the hoop. His efficiency immediately spiked a lot.
He’s also doing a few other things better when you factor in that last year he played some PF and this year he’s playing a lot of SG. Now he’s covering some of the better perimeter players in the league. That’s making it more difficult to get defensive boards and block shots.
He’s probably no where neat the top of the list, but as a 22 year old he may not have reached his top yet.
Purdman
February 1, 2010
Add David Lee to that most improved list as well. Look at his jump shooting numbers!
Brandon
February 1, 2010
Does Manu Ginobili really qualify as a 6th man? He’s 4th on the team in minutes per game.
Filipe
February 1, 2010
I’d say that the 6th man award is much more influenced by scoring than any other award because people perception of 6th man is a big scorer of the bench. It’s pretty obvious watching Nuggets games that Chris Andersen impacts it from the bench much more than JR Smith but if we ask most people they describe Smith as the team 6th man and Andersen as the other big. Varejão has actually being acknowledge as a potential 6th man candidate by quite a few columnists but they all point out his lack of scoring hurts him due to perception of what 6th man role mean.
Jared
February 1, 2010
The idea of a 6th man award is itself a bit bizarre. What is so special about a 6th man that makes it a worthwhile subject for an award? The best non-starter in the NBA? The best of the mediocre? Why not an award for the best player who finished third on his team in scoring, or an award for the best player who played between 20-26 minutes?
The 6th man award might be the most pointless award in sports. Most players are disappointed being a 6th man. Players who win a 6th man award are probably excited that they don’t have to be 6th men anymore.
Dave, it’s time you came out with your own, more meaningful award (if you haven’t already): the most underrated/overrated player award. I don’t know which metrics you would use to determine how a player is rated, but once you figure that out a discussion of the top x most underrated and most overrated players would make for an excellent read.
brgulker
February 1, 2010
Charlie Villanueva and Ben Gordon — who both come off the bench in Detroit — won’t be making anyone’s short list for 6th man of the year this year.
Way to go, Joe Dumars.
brgulker
February 2, 2010
I think it’s a way to counter the notion that your “best” players have to start.
TBall
February 2, 2010
Jared,
db writes those articles annually at the end of the season. Check 7/26/09 and 7/28/09 in the archives. The titles are “Most Overrated” and “Most Underrated”.
Brandon,
The 6th man is expected to get minutes. See Wiki (the only true source of all information in the universe): The sixth man in basketball is a player who is not a starter but comes off the bench much more often than other reserves, often being the first player to be substituted in. The sixth man often plays minutes equal to or exceeding some of the starters and posts similar statistics. He is often a player who can play multiple positions, hence his utility in substituting often. For example, Kevin McHale, a famous sixth man who played for the Boston Celtics in the 1980s, variably played center and power forward.”
Frank Ramsey is credited with being one of the first 6th men, a Hall-of-Famer who was a combo guard behind Bob Cousy and Bill Sharman. Havlicek, Hall-of-Famer, identified by SLAM Magazine as the 15th best NBA player ever, brought the ‘position’ to new heights and the award was created shortly after his retirement. They didn’t keep the GS stat before 1979, but Ramsey averaged 24 minutes/gm over his career and Hondo averaged 36.6 min/gm.
The idea, generally, is that if you start your 5 best players, they may all be ready to come out at the same time (toward the end of the first quarter). Then you will have your 6th-10th best players in, which is a precarious position. To combat this you can: 1) give a starter the hook after a few minutes of PT and sub them back in toward the end of the first quarter; 2) let someone extend themselves by playing the full first quarter; or 3) don’t start your best 5.
Whenever Havlicek came off the bench, I promise you the Celtics were not starting their best 5. Same is true with the Spurs and Ginobili and it probably is just a carrot to give those players for accepting a non-starting role (which also mars your all-star candidacy).
Italian Stallion
February 2, 2010
This goes along with the “6th man is usually a scorer” idea, but I think a lot of 6th men are also what you would call “energy” players.
Even though they might not contribute in many ways, they tend to be streaky shooters that can turn a game around all by themselves.
That’s why guys like Crawford and even Nate Robinson are considered good 6th men.
If you look at their overall stats and liabilities on the defensive end you might not consider them especially good players.
But both are streaky shooters with the skill set required to occasionally come into a game with the team down 15 and turn it around all by themselves with a flurry of 3 pointers and isolation plays. When they don’t, it’s not considered a major drawback because the team was down 15 anyway.
That can be a fairly valuable asset to have when your starters are a little dull to open the game.
Jared
February 2, 2010
brgulker,
How does a 6th man award counter the notion that your best players have to start? The 6th man award is given to a member of a subset of players of which most of the best players in the NBA are excluded. A comparison is never made between bench players and the best players.
In general,
Is there such a thing as being skilled at being a 6th man? I’d guess that in general players would have a higher WP48 coming off the bench than starting — not only is the competition they face on the other team slightly weaker on average than the competition they’d face if they were starting, but the competition they face on their own team for statistics is slightly lower as well.
Has someone already calculated the inflationary (or if I’m wrong, deflationary or lack of) effect of being a bench player upon WP48 (or any other efficiency statistic)?
How would you go about determining if a player is particularly skilled at coming off the bench? Is the inflationary effect of being a bench player uniform, or are some types of players better suited for the bench?
Is WP48 being calculated for anything other than all minutes (I’m new to the blog/waiting for the book to arrive)? There are plenty of breakdowns that would be interesting to read about. Home/away, by quarter, a measurement of relative fatigue (e.g. WP48 for each 10 minute increment of playing time), players being defended by starters versus players being defended by bench players, etc.
WP48 seems like a fantastic metric, but until it’s broken down further, it doesn’t really tell much other than that certain players should probably be playing more minutes and others less. I’d like to see it broken down further to get an idea of how many minutes each player should get, and approximately when those minutes should be given.
Leo
February 2, 2010
For what its worth, I think the most valuable place to have a productive sixth man is at PF/C–Lamar Odom or Kevin McHale for example–since those tend to be the positions that require the most additional minutes–because A: big guys get tired quickly and B: they tend to get in foul trouble. A good three man rotation with at least one guy who can play both slots (Duncan, Gasol, Garnett) is worth more than all the Jamal Crawfords in the league.
brgulker
February 2, 2010
How does a 6th man award counter the notion that your best players have to start? The 6th man award is given to a member of a subset of players of which most of the best players in the NBA are excluded. A comparison is never made between bench players and the best players.
The general assumption is that your “best” players at each position become your starters. Hence, players derive a sense of confidence and pride from being starters.
The 6th Man Award is meant to recognize that there a lots of influential, productive players that don’t start but still make an impact for their team.
Jared
February 2, 2010
Right. The purpose of all awards is to provide recognition. My question is why 6th men are worthy of recognition. Is there some particular skill they possess, or are they merely players who, in their coaches opinion, are not good enough to play starter’s minutes (as an aside, the fact that players can play every minute but the first and still be eligible for this award is ridiculous)? If there is no particular skill a 6th man possesses that makes him more valuable as a bench player than as a starter, then 6th men are not worthy of recognition. Why recognize the best of the mediocre? It’s like baseball giving an award for the best 7th hitter.
Leo
February 2, 2010
Actually, in some cases, a sixth man can be used in a way sort of analogous to a designated hitter–maybe he does one thing particularly well, or maybe he can’t defend top-flight starters, but his skills match up advantageously (perhaps more advantageously than the starter’s) against second string talent. (I’m often suspicious of this type of thinking–you often end up with a Ben Gordon type player–but I think that is the rationale that teams use).
Sometimes it just means that a team has two players at the same position that are both above average, or an above average player who can fill multiple roles. Why not just start the best 5? Well maybe two of them are 6’2–or 7’2 and sort of lumber up and down the court–or maybe none of them can shoot from the perimeter.
brgulker
February 2, 2010
Is there some particular skill they possess, or are they merely players who, in their coaches opinion, are not good enough to play starter’s minutes (as an aside, the fact that players can play every minute but the first and still be eligible for this award is ridiculous)?
My understanding of the award is that it’s meant to debunk the very notion that you just mentioned.
There are 6th men who do, in fact, play starters minutes and are obviously good enough to do so. I think the award is meant to recognize that you don’t need to start to be a valuable player to your team.
IMO, it’s a good message for the NBA to send … it emphasizes the importance of every member of a team. It’s a good thing to recognize, especially for youngsters.
bduran
February 2, 2010
Jared,
you don’t seem to be getting what brgulker is saying. He says it’s not necessary for your best players to start, not that some people are better off the bench. Ginobili has been one of the best 3 players on the team and is always on the floor at the end of halves. However, he helps the team more coming off the bench so that he’s on the floor when Duncan and Parker are out at the end of the 1st and 3rd quarter.
It’s extremely valuable to have a good player on the bench, whether by design or because you have an even better player starting at his position and this award recognizes that.
That being said, it’s probably more exciting for an up and coming player to win the award while on the way to becoming a star player then it is for a player like Ginobili who’s a starter who just happens to not start.
brgulker
February 2, 2010
Think about it from the perspective of a high school basketball player.
You’re a good player, but you’re not good enough to start. That could hurt your confidence.
But look at a guy like Manu. He’s a great player, and he helps his team more by coming off the bench than he does by starting. Recognizing his high quality play and his great attitude is a good thing for the league to do, overall. It sends the message that basketball is about team, at least it does for me, and sometimes the good of the team requires some personal sacrifice.
Reznor-Warner
March 21, 2010
Now I know Manu puts up plenty of points off of the bench, but I don’t think anybody brings the kind of energy to the floor quite like The Brazilian Wild Thing. Keeping a basic consistency of players (and by that I mean players who have had extended stays in Cleveland; Varejao, Ilgauskas, Gibson, James) has really helped the comfort level of the Cavaliers. In fact, Z, Boobie and LeBron have all three played for the Cavs and the Cavs only. Being as comfortable as Andy is, he feels free to bring as much energy as he can without the fear of his teammates to try interrupt him or calm him down. Andy knows exactly what they’re doing and they know exactly what Andy’s doing. If Varejao is close the basket, Mo or West feel plenty comfortable throwing up a contested shot.
I guess the two points I’m trying to present here are energy and comfort. And Anderson Varejao definitely brings both to the team.