Matthew Yglesias made the following observation last Friday: Dave Berri endorses conventional wisdom, says Curry & Evans were the best rookies. When I read this statement I thought… “is it really news when my view corresponds to the views of sportswriters?” Well, perhaps it is (at least, for the few people who care about my viewpoint).
With this statement in mind, let’s prepare for some more news. The sportwriters have named LeBron James as the Most Valuable Player in the NBA. And when we look at the Most Productive Player (MPP) – or the leader in Wins Produced – we see… LeBron James. Yes, I am endorsing conventional wisdom.
And let me say, it feels great!!! Finally, I am part of the majority of NBA fans. Rather than stand against the crowd, I am now proudly part of the crowd.
And this feeling also goes beyond LeBron. If you think Kevin Durant and Dwight Howard are among the top four players in the game, it turns out…. yes, I agree again. Wow!!! This is fantastic!!!
Okay, enough of that. Let’s talk about Kobe Bryant. Not a single sportswriter thought Kobe was the MVP this year (and yes, I agree again!!). However, the voting for the MVP award suggests Kobe was the 3rd best player in the NBA in 2009-10. The word “best” (or “most valuable”) is not really defined. But if we defined “best” in terms of Wins Produced we would see – as reported in Table One — that Kobe was only the 32nd “best” player in the NBA this past season.
Table One: The Candidates for MVP in 2010
In fact…
- Kobe was only the third most productive player on the Lakers (behind Pau Gasol and Lamar Odom).
- Kobe was only the fourth most productive shooting guard (behind Dwyane Wade, Manu Ginobili, and Joe Johnson).
- If we turn to WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes], Kobe falls behind Wade, Ginobili, Brandon Roy, and Jason Richardson at the shooting guard position (minimum 2,000 minutes played).
In sum, I don’t think Kobe should have received much consideration for this award. And a similar story could be told about Dirk Nowitzki and Carmelo Anthony (and does anyone – besides one sportswriter – think Stephen Jackson is the 5th “best” player in the NBA?).
Table One only reports the players who received votes. The complete list of Wins Produced leaders will be offered when the All-NBA teams are announced. I also need to write a post on the All-Rookie team as well.
For now, though, I need to get back to my grading. Spring semester grades are due tomorrow at 4pm. And as I told my students, there is a real good chance I will hit that deadline.
– 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 
ilikeflowers
May 3, 2010
Kobe thread!!!
ilikeflowers
May 3, 2010
Looking beyond just Curry and Evans, 2009 looks like it was a bumper crop of promising young guards:
Curry 0.151
Evans 0.159
Harden 0.131
Lawson o.156
Collison 0.096
Casspi 0.101
Beaubois 0.157
Daye 0.110
Douglas 0.083
simon
May 3, 2010
There was also Beaubois who looked electric at times for the Mavs in his limited minutes. Potentially a superior Ben Gordon.
h
May 3, 2010
Uh oh. Here come the Kobe defenders…
internet commentator
May 3, 2010
Hey man! That’s not cool! Kobe has won so many championships! And you’re telling me that someone like Dwight Howard is better??? I mean, come on, Dwight Howard??? All he does is collect rebounds! Any old idiot like David Lee or Joakim Noah can do that!
This blog posting is contrary to things I have heard from very smart people. I remember Jeff Van Gundy getting on TV and calling Kobe “the best player on the planet” just a few years ago, for heaven’s sake!
I won’t be your so called “data” or “model” or “rational viewpoint.” I love Kobe Bryant and you are just a hater!
Chicago Tim
May 4, 2010
Wow, Durant really picked it up over the second half of the season. I’m dying to know who else was in the top ten, but I suppose I’ll find that out eventually. I would also like to know who played spectacularly well but didn’t get enough playing time to climb into the top ten (Kevin Love?).
Thanks, and good luck with the grading!
Evan
May 4, 2010
Impressive how fast KDurant went from below average to one of the best in the game.
todd2
May 4, 2010
Durant’s a pleasure to watch. He’s got a step-back 3 point shot he didn’t have before. Must’ve worked like a dog during the off-season. That 5/23 vs LA in game six was abysmal, though. He’s got to find other ways to beat teams when he’s drawing a crowd. Sounds like a recurring theme here: shooting more doesn’t mean winning more!
Alvy
May 4, 2010
lol, again, love this blog, but the matter in which this community gets off is by far the creepiest.
Michael
May 4, 2010
Kobe is becoming A.I mark 2 isn’t he. At least when his wp48 was above 0.2 you could at least agree he was ‘really good’. Now I have to describe him as ‘above average’. People aren’t going to like that!
marparker
May 4, 2010
Is anyone else getting sick of the Deron Williams hyperbole? He had one good series!
I’m not talking about players anymore unless they are above .4wp48 or below .1wp48.
Also, with James’ numbers its becoming laughable to hear anyone argue he is not the best in the game at this moment. I’m just hoping he doesn’t go down the same way David Robinson did. The Cavs have alot of almost really good players. I hope that’s enough for James to get the championship so people can stop saying things that make no sense.
brgulker
May 4, 2010
In reference to ilikeflowers’ comment above:
My interest is piqued by Beaubois. The few times I’ve seen him, he’s been fantastic.
Also, as a Pistons fan, I wouldn’t get your hopes up for Austin Daye just yet. I’d say it’s a coin flip whether or not he sticks in the NBA. Unless he puts on a good 20 lbs. of muscle, he just won’t be able to compete.
Michael
May 4, 2010
“Is anyone else getting sick of the Deron Williams hyperbole?”
Most definitely. I hope Paul is healthy next year.
A lot of people are also trying to claim Rose is the top point guard out east as well, which is really irritating.
dberri
May 4, 2010
If you look at the point guards out east, Rose might be a top five point guard in the Eastern Conference. After Rondo, you have Raymond Felton and Jarrett Jack. Rose is a bit behind both, but not by much.
Phil
May 4, 2010
Classic dberri; always pandering to the masses.
brgulker,
Just like Durant needed to put on 20 lbs of muscle before he could compete? Or, staying a little closer to home, Prince?
Not saying that it couldn’t help, but the whole “he doesn’t have the right body type” is incredibly overrated in evaluating current and predicting future player effectiveness.
There’s plenty of superb players that give up height or inches at their position and do just fine. Your best player (Wallace) is the epitome of this.
Michael,
Rose is one of the better poing guards in the east. But that’s like being the tallest Munchkin in Munchkin Country. Almost all the exceptionally good PGs are out west.
brgulker
May 4, 2010
Phil, out of curiosity, how many Pistons games did you watch this season?
calling all toasters
May 4, 2010
Kobe was only the 32nd “best” player in the NBA this past season
Hello? Hello?
Is anybody out there?
Koooooooooobe fans?
*tap* *tap* Is this thing on?
dberri
May 4, 2010
I am beginning to think that some of the readers in this forum just want to pick on Kobe fans.
Walter Matthews
May 4, 2010
Interesting… so Kobe Bryant hits 6 game winners yet he isn’t considered a top MVP candidate because some stat called “win-shares” says he only contributed 9.9 wins this season.
So apparently he only earned around 4 wins during the other 76 games this season?
Evan
May 4, 2010
Where is TrueHoop when we need them?
Ambour
May 4, 2010
Wow…this post is so full of fail. People have gone so nuts with all of these useless stats that it’s ridiculous. “Win shares”?! Seriously?! Fail. Kobe led the Lakers to the best record in the Western conference while averaging 27, 5 and 5 with broken finger on his shooting hand. Pau Gasol didn’t even play for a good portion of the season and LO is the most inconsistent player on the Lakers. Again, FAIL.
Patrick
May 4, 2010
There we go.
Alvy
May 4, 2010
I would like to apologize, Ambour and Walter Matthews. Although you both probably aren’t familiar with the Wages of Win metric, the users on this forum probably don’t care and thus will call you idiots, etc. Don’t take it personal, but I suggesting learning about the metric, it’s very good.
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
Walter, if you switched Kobe for Wade or Ginobili or any of the other wp48 0.250+ shooting guards, then LA wouldn’t have needed those game winners because they would’ve been beating the pants off of the likes of Memphis and Sacramento. But you can’t see what doesn’t happen, that’s where stats come in. Games that tight are a coin flip.
More to the point Kobe isn’t even a particularly good clutch shooter. This link doesn’t include the current season, but Kobe’s way down the list. He hits more than most because he misses more than most, way more…
http://www.82games.com/gamewinningshots.htm
Zachary K
May 4, 2010
@Alvy
Thanks for pointing it out. The people who don’t know the things I know really are idiots. I thought about it a lot, and it turns out it’s true. Furthermore, anyone who didn’t know that already is, prima facie, an idiot.
ZK
todd2
May 4, 2010
Kobe shot 44% for the series vs OKC. Every shot is a game winning shot, if you make one more early in the game you don’t need the late one. Marparker makes an interesting comparison James v Robinson. Is it possible to break wp48 down even further and grade players vs opponents with winning records?
Duncan
May 4, 2010
And what about this past Game 1 vs. the Jazz? What was his TS% for that game?
Money
May 4, 2010
Stats are great. They have helped usher in a new era where over priced inefficient scorers aren’t going to be as valued anymore. But stats add to the discussion, not end it. Any rational fan, and even you berri, can not rely solely on this stat and believe with 100% confidence that Odom is more important to the lakers than bryant.
Josh
May 4, 2010
First let me say I agree that Kobe does not deserve the MVP this year. His play fell off quite a bit from last year and he had far too many games where he was trying to get his shot back and just kept missing. He really should have taken more time off to heal that finger/ankle/knee. That said, can all the Kobe-haters at least admit that he is playing through injuries that would probably cripple most of us? Dude’s been playing through injuries all year and you want to say he’s AI part 2? Come on, is a guy allowed to have an off year before you all start throwing him in the gutter?
Side note, I know this wasn’t brought up here but since you all are Kobe haters I assume you are Lebron-o-philes, so answer me this: Kobe haters say Kobe doesn’t deserve his rings because he had Shaq on his team and last year Gasol. In the Shaq years he was a very good player but Shaq was the driving force, I’d say last year Kobe was the driving force while Gasol was the very good second player (does that mean Gasol doesn’t “deserve” that ring?). So Kobe needed help to get rings so he somehow his four rings are “less worthwhile” than the dozens Lebron will one day get.
Meanwhile Lebron has been putting up these awesome stats, WS/48 through the roof year in and year out, yet he still can’t get a ring, and all his defenders say “well if he was playing with good players blah blah blah…. so, if Kobe needed good players to help him, and Lebron needs good players to help him… why does Kobe not deserve his rings while Lebron gets credit for whatever he wins “when his teammates are finally good”?
Also, I don’t think the guys he plays with are really that bad, especially this year, they have just become far too dependent on Lebron driving and taking all the defensive focus in order for them to get open. When Lebron is having a slow game (like last night) his teammates are stuck in “waiting for Lebron” mode because they don’t remember how to get themselves open shots unless Lebron does it for them. I remember for a long time Kobe was criticized for doing too much, making his teammates get used to him doing everything, so when he needed help they were not ready to step up. Meanwhile his teammates were Smush Parker, Chris Mihms, Kwame Brown, and other pillars of the game. Why don’t we criticize Lebron for doing the same thing while having some fairly decent guys around?
Not saying he doesn’t deserve the MVP, he’s obviously the best player in the game two years running and I’m sure he’ll get more MVPs, but seriously can you all let him do something real with those stats before you anoint him the greatest of all time?
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
Josh, I didn’t read all of your long post, but the only person that I have seen mention Lebron and “greatest of all time” is you.
EJ
May 4, 2010
Kobe fans, please relax.
If Kobe wasn’t injured (playing at a similar level to last year) and had played 82 games, he would probably have been the 15~20th best player in the NBA.
Not bad for a 31 year old shooting guard.
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
Money, when you start talking about “important to the lakers” you are talking about something a little different from who is the most productive. Now you’re getting into marginal and strategic value which may change the answer – at least for past years when Kobe was somewhere among the top 3 SG’s – he’s not there this year.
On a side note it would be nice to get some sort of uncertainty measure for wp48 and wins produced.
todd2
May 4, 2010
Duncan, you can find it at ESPN. That’s spelled E-S-P-N. (sorry guys, couldn’t resist)
Josh
May 4, 2010
@ilikeflowers – Fair enough, but thats why I said “I know it hasn’t been brought up here but I assume Kobe haters are Lebron-o-philes”. But I probably shouldn’t have just assumed. Lets be honest, most people who hate on Kobe/Kobe fans tend to be Lebron fans, especially on internet forums, especially internet forums where Win Shares are taken as the be all end all of a players value (I think it should definitely be taken into account but like another poster said, you really think Lamar was more valuable this year than Kobe? Do you watch the Lakers or just look at stats?)
But since all the other responders seemed to want to turn this into a hate kobe forum, I thought I could pose a counterargument and see what other people think. Sorry if it was too long, but can you at least try to respond?
Jesse
May 4, 2010
Perfect example of stats not meaning a whole lot. If you HONESTLY think Odom was the second best/most important player on the Lakers this year then you clearly didn’t watch the games. Plus, a GOOD stat would take into consideration Odom’s six-man role, whereby he plays much of his minutes against lesser competion from the opponents bench. Also, you’d have to look at actual game footage and see how often Odom is open because Gasol and/or Kobe are drawing double teams. Or the fact that Odom is never checked by the opposing team’s best defender. Or the fact that the other team never game plans to stop Odom. Isn’t part of VALUE the fact that a player makes the game easier for others? If so, then doesn’t having a game plan designed to stop one player make it easier for other players? Yes. So, again, this stat does a poor job of telling the whole story.
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
Josh are you trolling? What’s with the straw man arguments?
“Kobe haters say Kobe doesn’t deserve his rings because he had Shaq on his team and last year Gasol.”
Again no one here says anything close to that. The consensus here for past years is that Kobe was one of the top shooting guards in the game, but falls short of being an all time great (generally those players who spent their primes at 0.300+).
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
For those new to this forum, generally what happens here is that whenever it is mentioned that Kobe is one of the top 3 SG’s in the game BUT isn’t close to being the best (as in most productive) player in the league all sorts of opinions stated as fact without a shred of evidence get posted – particularly once the post gets linked to from ESPN. It’s to the point that some of us look forward to the nonsense that ensues. It’s much easier to refute and laugh at these posts than it is to actually have to think and weigh things like was recently the case with an epic usage vs scoring efficiency thread.
Josh
May 4, 2010
ilikeflowers… Argh. Alright nevermind. You are completely missing the point. I know that was not what the article was about, hence why I said “I know this is a side argument” thing. I was trying to bring up some separate arguments I had heard elsewhere in this whole Lebron/Kobe debate, I thought in a forum about how Kobe isn’t that good there might be some people who had heard these other arguments or might agree with them and could respond to me. You don’t so you don’t need to respond. If anybody would like to discuss what I brought up, feel free to.
todd2
May 4, 2010
For what it’s worth, the Kobe backlash is probably due him playing in a major media market. The Lakers get more than their fair share of coverage, which is great for Laker fans and not so good for everyone else. I’d like to see less of the guy’s mug and it’s nothing personal. I’d welcome the opportunity to see a player like Chris Paul, Gerald Wallace, or David Lee, for that matter, more during the regular season.
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
Jesse, the real question is how much are these strategic issues really worth? Maybe they’re worth a great deal maybe not so much. I haven’t seen any real convincing analysis either way. Have you specifically watched Odom say 50%+ of all of the time that he is on the court for say 41+ games this year? Have you done the same for Kobe? Have you tracked the cause and effect of how Kobe benefits Odom? Have you ever thought of tracking the cause and effect of how Odom benefits Kobe? You are prepared to give Kobe much credit for being the focus of another team’s defensive strategy. How much credit do you give the team for assisting Kobe in his offensive endeavors? If you discount Odom because of effects credited to Gasol why not discount Kobe some for the same reason?
“Plus, a GOOD stat would take into consideration Odom’s six-man role, whereby he plays much of his minutes against lesser competion from the opponents bench.”
This is good point, but again you’d need to measure how often this actually happens and also discount Kobe’s performance in the same manner.
Do you know of a stat that performs better (agrees with your opinions better) at analyzing the strategic impact of a player?
Josh
May 4, 2010
Hey Todd, I hear you. In any sport, if the big “star” who gets all the coverage is not on your team you can get pretty sick of him. This year I personally wanted to see way more of Durant, although I get the feeling he will soon get the superstar coverage and… You know its bad when the stars team loses and they show more of his highlights than anybody on the other team.
JLee
May 4, 2010
Sorry, DJ. But your article is absolutely worthless and John Hollinger-like.
It should be agreed, by Kobe-lovers and haters alike, that Kobe may not be the most efficient player. Nor is he the most explosive and exciting, not by a long shot.
However the subject at hand is the MVP and there should be no question as to who the MVP of the Lakers is. Sure, the numbers might conclude Pau, Odom or Bynum to be more “efficient”. But for anybody who has played organized ball, you know who the MVP of your team is. Without your MVP, the team is not a contender. And that’s who Kobe Bryant is for the Lakers. Pau knows it. LO and Fish know it — the whole team knows it. They need Kobe to win rings… And that’s the bottom line.
So, for the MVP of a Lakers team sitting on top of the Western Conference, 2nd best in the league and the reigning champs, no less, not to be highly considered for league MVP candidacy… like your article, it would be absolutely ridiculous.
Please do us all a favor. Get your head out of your stats-filled hole. Go buy a $10-20 basketball and walk on over to your nearest park. Play some basketball. Thanks
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
JLee, now that is a proper Kobe thread post!
Patrick
May 4, 2010
Actually, I would argue Pau knows better, given how much he’s complained about his touches and the types of shots Kobe has taken.
Michael
May 4, 2010
Josh,
To clarify, the ‘A.I 2’ remark was referring to the fact that both are scorers whose actual production is significantly weaker than the popular perception would suggest.
I am not suggesting the two are actually comparable production wise, Kobe obviously has offered much more than Iverson ever did.
Michael
May 4, 2010
Even Foxsports seem to be getting in on the idea that Kobe might not be the Laker’s best player anymore:
http://www.foxsportswest.com/05/03/10/Kobe-Might-Not-Even-be-the-Lakers-MVP/landing.html?blockID=227777&feedID=4034
palamida
May 4, 2010
Jesse, You state speculation with certainty:
“Perfect example of stats not meaning a whole lot. If you HONESTLY think Odom was the second best/most important player on the Lakers this year then you clearly didn’t watch the games. Plus, a GOOD stat would take into consideration Odom’s six-man role”.
Quick side note before I commence – LO has been a starter for most of his career and he’s numbers as a starter are pretty much in line with his “6th man role” stats, so hard to argue that effect is crucial.
Let’s try to glance at some evidence. Kobe was injured\resting in 9 games this season. That’s not a very large sample, but it’s all we can work with.
Considering the players involved played in the vicinity of 300 mins in that sample I think we can glean a few meaningful things from that data.
First, Pau Gasol. Since we’re mostly interested in the offensive schemes i’ll disregard other box score stats: Pau Gasol was virtually the same player in those 9 non-Kobe games. His mins. are similar. Per game he took about 2 extra shots. His Efg% for the season is 53.6%, Kobeless, his Efg% stands at an incredible…. 53.6! yep, that’s not a typo. same exact number. He also got to the line (per game) at virtually the same rate – 5.6 FTA per game for the season and 5.66 “Kobeless”. It’s worth noting that this level of consistency puts my mind at ease regarding the sample size issues.
Now for our main man, Lamar Odom.
You (and JLEE) claim that he benefits from Kobe being the Focal point of opposing defenses. That they have this whole weave of intricate defensive schemes aimed at stopping the force of nature and perennial MVP candidate that is Kobe Bryant.
Let us examine, then – How Kobe’s absence affected Odom’s offensive game. BTW, Odom was a starter in most (if not all of those games, didn’t bother looking the exact number, feel free to do so). Odom’s Efg% for the season is 50.2%. He attempted 9 FGA per game throughout the season. In similar, albeit very slightly increased PT Odom attempted an extra 0.6 FGA – Kobeless. He converted at 47.7 Efg%. That does seem to indicate he suffered a Minor, yet still significant drop in efficiency when playing in a Kobeless Lakers. However Odom got to line twice as often! 5 FTA per game as opposed to 2.5. Anyone who desires can calculate the TS%, Personally I didn’t bother, but guesstimating:
Since Odom was only about a 70% shooter from the stripe this season this probably doesn’t negate the “entire” 2.5 Efg% drop. let’s guesstimate it improves to 48, or 49%.
So if your claim is that playing without Kobe makes Odom shoot at 48 or 49% rather than 50% – you’re dead on!
All that defensive attention and elaborate schemes are worth (again, just guesstimating) 1%.
And it’s not like Extra shot opportunities are created by idk… Kobe driving and dishing, Kobe Doubleteamed and kicks to the Shooting Odom, or what have you.
Odom attempted EXACTLY the same Number with Shanon Brown,basically, and converted at almost exactly the same rate.
This is naturally, just one way to look at this.
But at least it’s a method that is backed up but more than capping the word “honestly”.
Yes, Jesse, Berri’s metric does not produce results that fit your preconcieved notions, but isn’t that the point of looking at stats and using an objective analytical approach? If you only wanna use the “eye test” and only accept results that fit with those of your “eye test”, why bother even entering a blog about statistical analysis?
JLEE, Kobe is one of the top SG’s in the league and has been for years. As for being MVP, I think most readers of this blog don’t realize that if Dwight Howard produces say, 20 wins per season and Kobe produced 10, that doesn’t make Howard twice as valueable. Positions matter!
Let’s look at it this way: Howard is a beneficiary of how the game of Basketball is played. Tall men have distinct advantages. As big men (and a very good one, at that) Howard did in fact produce all those wins. However, He was basically (metapohircally) tasked with outproducing his counterpart – I.E the Opponent’s Center.
Someone is deployed closer to the basket and “gets” to reap the rewards that usually come with it – Take rebounds, Block shots, and obtain High % shots all the while while being less susceptible to committing To’s. Another player is tasked with playing Further away from the basket. He needs to overcome not only his man, but also the distance from his position to the hoop (be it by throwing the ball from longer ranges or having to “advance” the ball, under duress, closer to the basket via dribbling or passing). There’s a reason why Kobe plays SG and Howard plays center. It’s not like Howard is deployed in the more favorable position arbitrarily. (I’m guessing we all know what that reason is). Howard tends to produce more wins than Kobe but so does Howard’s counterpart:
Don’t make the mistake of thinking WoW’s position adjustment already controls for this. It doesn’t. This all has to do with “replacement level” issuess and I won’t delve into it deeper here, Many of the readers here, already know what I’m talking about.
Off course in this particular case that wouldn’t matter either :) Howard is superior to Kobe even when we use these “relative” terms.
That pertains more to the likes of say… CP3.
I would rather build around CP3 then around Howard for those reasons. (which I haven’t really explained in this comment, it was more of – if you know what i’m talking about, great; if not – not, kind of thing).
P.S IlikeF, That was a job well done in turning this into another of “those” threads :).
Speaking of which: for the guy that argued that Kobe’s game winning shots are worth at least 4 wins all by themselves, I wanna offer my sincere condolences. I’m usually not up for the “spiteful” sort of commentary, but seriously???! if you’re under the age of 12, please accept my apology.
Alvy
May 4, 2010
I have a strong feeling I may be the only Lakers fan that has consistently posted on here.
The value of Kobe’s production this season is basically dead on to what the metric suggest. Kobe, really did not play well this season, worst, he seemed to have done it with some intention. In other words, shooting the Lakers out of games when Gasol or Bynum were *clearly* better options on the offensive end.
Second of all, I want to clear that the views of Kobe fans are not consistent with those of Lakers fans. Basically every media outlet from LA has greatly praised Gasol, and have favored front-court play more than anything. The play of Kobe is often an afterthought this season. Certainly, the media concerns itself with Kobe’s play and health (because he’s “their guy,”) but much of the success the Lakers have had has been rightfully noted to be because of Gasol.
In general, I’m not entirely sure how LA fans feel about Lamar Odom, as he warrants some criticism for his poor decisions on he court, or lazy effort; however, when LO plays well, the Lakers seem very good. Consider particular outlier throughout the season and it’s not surprising how well Odom ranks this season. I would also like to note that Phil Jackson often demands Odom to play well, more so than his other players. I feel as if Jackson is on to something, something this metric is suggesting.
Lastly, if Lakers fans or Kobe fans don’t particularly agree with this metric, that’s fine, but consider learning about it first because the large consensus in Lakers land is pretty much consistent with what the final aggregate results suggest.
ilikeflowers
May 4, 2010
Walter,
palamida reminds me that you are assigning Kobe credit for the entire win when he hits a game winning shot. Surely when he misses a game winning shot then, he’s earned that loss all by himself too. Right? Or does it only work that way when Kobe makes the shot?
Phil
May 5, 2010
brgulker,
Maybe one or two. Why?
palamida,
Wonderful comment.
Dre
May 5, 2010
Shameless self promotion AND a different take on the MVP :
brgulker
May 5, 2010
Phil,
Your comment struck me as dismissive, as in, if I would just take the time to look at the stats and other successful skinny players, I should know that Daye will be productive. If I misread you, please ignore my question. That’s how it came across to me.
I watched about 60-65 Piston games this season (I pretty much gave up on them for the last 15 or so). And IMO, Austin Daye does not help his team right now, because he is AWFUL on the defensive side of the ball. His lateral quickness is almost nonexistent. He gets pushed out of position by other SGs, let alone Fs. Sure, he gets the occasional block, which boosts his productivity, but IMO, his .100+ rating overstates his value.
Hence, my comment. If Daye can improve his body, he could become the next Tayshuan, et al. But honestly, I think it’s a coin flip. Sometimes guys just don’t develop enough physically to make it in the NBA. Maybe he will, maybe he won’t.
Will
May 5, 2010
Just one question;
if you had a draft and it was just for one year, all 32 teams drafting, do you really think Kobe would be drafted 31st, he would easily be top 5, probably top 3. (remember this is one year only). No one will be drafting either Odom or gasol ahead of kobe, infact only Lebron and maybe Durant would be taking, and i doubt Durant just for exp sake.
I guarantee you there are not many GM’s or coaches for that matter that will be passing on Kobe for one year, drafting for long term, different story as kobe unfortunately is getting on in age.
Stats are great and should be used be they will always only tell you part of the story in sports. There are intagibles that you can not put a stat on.
Joe
May 5, 2010
The stats on this forum are Wins Produced and Win Score.
Win Shares are elsewhere.
marparker
May 5, 2010
Dre,
FWIW D. Lee played almost exclusively at Center this year. Like your video.
Will,
Using how GM’s would behave in draft as proof of your stance is shaky ground.
Michael
May 5, 2010
“if you had a draft and it was just for one year, all 32 teams drafting, do you really think Kobe would be drafted 31st, he would easily be top 5, probably top 3. ”
Exactly, he’s overrated.
palamida
May 5, 2010
Brgulker and Phil, I feel like I want to chime in on this topic as well. Regardless of the specific case that is “Austin Daye”, I tend to view this whole issue much like Phil views it, meaning: Daye was projected as a productive player from college (and he was productive “despite” his thin frame) ,
and he met those expectations in the NBA. Durant indeed is the most daunting and recent evidence of this whole “”frame is overrated” business. You offer subjective evidence – i.e – “even Sg’s back him down easily”. Now, just because the evidence is subjective – doesn’t make the conclusions wrong, not by any means. Perhaps Daye is in fact a defensive liability and perhaps even his offensive numbers would improve if he were to “bulk” up. But let’s hold up here for a second.
The Pro game is a game of size. not just length – width as well. I suspect some players who lack certain physical tools (but possess others) sometimes never make it to the league and perhaps not even to a college (at least not a major one, where they actually have a chance to get drafted) for that reason alone. It’s quite rare to see players drafted in the first round (or at all) with frames as thin as Durant’s and Daye’s.
In Durant’s case it’s quite easy to see why: He’s effectively tall as an NBA center (9’2 reach). Just for comparison sake for those not familiar with that measurement – Noah and David Lee are both, for example – 8’10.5 ; Al Horford is 8’11. Tyrus Thomas is 9 – you get the picture. That’s long… real long. considering he has the length of a center, the ball handling and long range shooting skills of a guard, combined with Rebounds and Blocks out of the PF book – it’s not hard to see why Durant is so productive. In fact Durant, apart from his long frame, has very little to offer in the way of physical tools – not only does he give a lot in pounds, he’s also a poor jumper and sprinter. In Durant’s case all these things do not matter because he is so talented (and so damn long :p). Daye naturally isn’t Durant (and wasn’t nearly as productive in College as Durant), however he too possesses that 9’2 frame. What the folks call “freakishly long” :). So again, we have a SF with Center length. I’m calling Daye a SF because that’s how I see him (3 pt range, among other things) and because he’ll probably never be able to defend the PF position, (20 lbs. is one thing, but his frame probably can’t support much more than that). Like I said, players with his frame, rarely make it to the NBA – there’s a reason why he was productive in college and continued to be productive in the NBA – Despite his thin frame! So I ask you this Brgulker: I probably watched him play not more than a couple of time, How often was he “backed down”? how often did it lead to easy layups? dunks?. could you possibly even tell me something like that? I would imagine his defensive strategy would be something along the lines of: “Yeah you can back me down a little, but i’m quick enough not to lose you all together so I’ll try to force you to shoot over the top.” And lemme tell you – that top is quite high. I would venture to guess some offensive players thought they had the drop on him, getting to the spot on the floor they wanted, only to find out it’s not that easy shooting over the top of 9’2 Daye. 9’2 is Spencer Hawes. 9’2 is Marcin Gortat, 9’2 is frigging Tyson Chandler!
Some Objective data:
His counterpart stats do not seem to indicate he was any kind of liability. I’m referring to the SF position where he played the vast majority of mins, He allows his opponents to convert at a slightly above average Efg%, albeit in slightly below average FGA. He outrebounds his opponents by a large margin. He commits more PF than he should and sends his opponents to the line rather often, but that could be in part due to his “rookieness” and not solely do to his frame. All in all that specific metric puts him somewhere in the slightly below average range. Considering Rookies do not tend to make Good defenders, this seems to me as perhaps an even lesser issue than one might think. Let’s look at +/- for a second. I’m not a big “believer” in this branch of stats but i’ll throw it out there just for fun – Basketballvalue’s “unadjusted” defensive RTG numbers read as -1.24. Compared to other members of this Pistons team, it actually seems (perhaps i’m reading this wrong) quite decent. Tayshaun prince for example is a -1.54, meaning slightly worse. (naturally one is a starter, one a reserve, etc) like I said – just putting it out there.
82games +/- numbers put him at +1.71 (here + means a bad thing :p). Again perhaps slightly below average as well, but both box-score stats, and +/- do not seem to indicate that what you’re arguing is indeed happening, I.e that Austin Daye in his rookie season has been a major defensive liability. This, perhaps demonstrates the problem of using the “eye test”.
You’re mind can’t possibly track every possession, see every shot Daye contested or didn’t) , calculate and memorize the actual Efg% his man converted at. Perhaps you thought the some missed shots were “good looks” that opponents simply didn’t convert. When we watch games – that can happen. Over a season though, it’s seems unlikely that “luck” is the deciding factor.
It’s plausible to argue that the way our mind works, since you’re already anticipating Daye would be sub-par defensively (judging by his frame) your mind makes mental notes, and adds extra “value” and credence to observations that confirm your notions (such as, Daye being backed down,etc) and less credence and attention to those instances where he “holds his own”? It’s possible, it’ll be hard for one to argue that’s completely out of the question. Off course i’m just speaking hypotethically – I don’t know what your specific thought process was – i’m just trying to make a broader point – I hope you understand this is not an attack by any means. I’m merely asking questions, providing food for thought.
By frame alone, Would you ever even consider the possibility that Kevin Garnett has been one of the best individual and team defenders in this last decade? I sure wouldn’t – but he probably was (and still is).
Daye might gain from gaining :) some weight, and he might not. Bottom line is that he’s productive now and that was expected. To what extent his “ceiling” is tied with adding 20 lbs. I do not know, but accusing Phil of not watching “enough” Pistons games and claiming that just because you watched 60-65 of those and have a different opinion – yours trumps his because of your “first hand experience” is to me, rather absurd.
palamida
May 5, 2010
Will, People have already pointed out the basic fallacy in your argument so I don’t wanna repeat what has already been said.
However, the one thing that really caught my eye (Hint: it wasn’t your fallacious argument) is the fact that there are now two extra teams playing in the NBA!
That’s great news! is one really in Vegas like they talked about a year ago? Where’s the other? when was the expansion draft? Was I asleep during all of this? probably….
I’m Jk, Sorry buddy, but you left that door wide open and no one else stepped through, so I just had too.
All in good fun.
brgulker
May 5, 2010
Palamida,
Preface: I did not read all of that. I read parts, and I want to respond to some.
I’m calling Daye a SF because that’s how I see him (3 pt range, among other things) and because he’ll probably never be able to defend the PF position, (20 lbs. is one thing, but his frame probably can’t support much more than that). Like I said, players with his frame, rarely make it to the NBA
Okay, I’m totally confused. You spent all that time providing “food for thought” and then basically conceded my point, which was simply that Daye needs to add strength in order to become a good enough defender to stick in the NBA.
So I’m confused as to what you’re arguing in the first place, because you’ve admitted that my point has merit from the get-go.
So I ask you this Brgulker: I probably watched him play not more than a couple of time, How often was he “backed down”? how often did it lead to easy layups? dunks?. could you possibly even tell me something like that?
There’s no objective measure to which I can point to make my argument. Defense is best tracked at the team level is the argument even from Dr. Berri, I think. The data sets are too unreliable to be used confidently.
I’m telling you from watching the games (I’m not an ignoramus), watching interviews with the coach, paying attention to advanced statistics — in other words, trying to use every piece of information that’s available — Daye is a bad team defender. You can take my opinion for what it’s worth or leave it.
There’s no objective data by which I can construct an argument in my favor, and I readily admit that. I’m offering an opinion as such. Conversely, there’s no reliable objective data (IMO) on which you can build yours (although you’ve obviously engaged what data we do have). Plus, you’ve admitted you’ve hardly seen him play. So again, I really don’t get what all that fuss is about.
Bottom line is that he’s productive now and that was expected. To what extent his “ceiling” is tied with adding 20 lbs. I do not know, but accusing Phil of not watching “enough” Pistons games and claiming that just because you watched 60-65 of those and have a different opinion – yours trumps his because of your “first hand experience” is to me, rather absurd.
Wait a minute. Daye hasn’t been that productive. His per minute production is average (which is good for a rookie). But, he played in very limited minutes (according to Coach Kuester, because of his defense, which again, according to the Coach was due to not being strong enough) and produced very few wins.
Also, I didn’t accuse Phil of anything. I asked him how many games he’d watched, because he seemed to dismiss my opinion entirely simply because I mentioned that my observations of a player don’t jibe with his per minute productivity according to WoW measures.
I value WoW metrics very highly (because they are accurate), but when people think all you have to do to tell if a player is valuable or not is look at a piece of paper that has .100+ attached to a player’s name, I’m not going to agree. Specifically, because it doesn’t capture defense thoroughly enough IMO — which was the entire point of my comment about Daye in the first place.
Lastly, I take offense to the way you phrased the bolded sentence. You’re putting all sorts of words in my mouth and then writing me off as a result of your mistake. I didn’t say that my “first hand experience” trumps anyone. But watching the amount of Pistons basketball that I’ve watched does matter — subjective impressions are just that, but they do have value. And I assure you, I’m not an idiot when it comes to basketball. I’m not going to list my playing experience or anything like that, because it will inevitably come across as arrogant, and I’m not that.
I offered an opinion as an opinion. “Daye needs to add strength in order to last in the NBA.” That’s my opinion. Garnett, Durant, Prince — all of those guys are skinny, but they’re strong.
Daye is skinny, and he’s weak. Watch 1o minutes of a game in which he plays, and it will be obvious to you. Watch 10 minutes of any game, and you’ll see his poor team defense (in spite of his ability to block a shot here and there), which is directly tied to his lack of strength.
palamida
May 5, 2010
Brgulker, First of all you misread me “entirely” I did not imply nor do I think that your’e an idiot. Far from it, I’ve read many of your comments in the past and I have a fairly positive opinion :)
More to the point: Quick note – Durant was mostly criticized post-measurements for failing to benchpress 180 a single time. Hard to call him skinny and “strong”. Subjectively Idk if i’d go as far as calling Prince – “strong” but let’s leave the semantics for a minute.
It may be the case with Daye as well as it appears he as well failed to perform this feat (benchpressing once). So I concur that he’s skinny and weak. The fact Kuester alluded to his “defense” as what limited his PT, I don’t know if we can glean anything meaningful from that, Personally I don’t glean much from it, but i’d rather not go into why just now. I do concur that his limited PT makes for a rather small sample and yet I still hold to my original opinion: His stats so far do not indicate he’s a Major liability along the lines of what you’re describing. Perhaps with more data, that will change, but the truth is most rookies are sub-par team defenders and not because of their strength. By in large veteran players do a much better job on the defensive end, especially on the team level – which is more about decision making and less about physicality. It’s odd to me that you’d point out specifically that his team defense is the one suffering the most from his lack of core strength, as that is typically more evident in one on one situations but perhaps i’m just grabbing you by the tongue here and if that’s the case, I apologize as it’s not my intention.
Final thing: Regarding spending all this time and yet “agreeing that your point has merit from the get go”.
Well, not exactly. I misspoke. What I meant was that it seems to me Daye is capable of playing the 3 (in terms of the entry level ball handling skills, passing and having 3 pt range). While he doesn’t excel in any, he probably meets the minimum requirements and as such would be more “useful” to his team if deployed as a SF. (It is my contention that “going big” is generally better).
The fact that he probably isn’t strong enough to defend the 4 does not mean that I agree his ill-suited to defend the 3! Sure he’ll give up strength, but he’ll have a considerable height adv. (I consider standing reach, or what Ty refers to as “effective height” to be the real measurement of height, after all – no one plays ball using his head!). when and IF he’ll learn to use his length to his adv. he might be able to compensate for what he’s giving up in strength. What little evidence there is doesn’t even indicate he really needs to improve drastically. I totally agree that he’ll probably never be the league’s most prominent wing defender, but that’s not to say he’ll be sub-par. Luc richard bah a moute is a perfect example: Sure, he’s stronger – but again he’s very thin and you would never have expected him to become one of the league’s best defenders at the PF position in his rookie and soph seasons, now would you?
In summation, I didn’t mean to offend, I merely pointed out that while You might be correct – you also may be mistaken. That’s all.
brgulker
May 5, 2010
First, let me say that you’d be hard-pressed to find a bigger Pistons fan than I. I read and watch anything and everything I can about the team and its players. I really do try hard to understand the game and my team, and I seek out every piece of available “evidence,” including my own knowledge, experience, and impressions. That said, I’ll respond again.
Subjectively Idk if i’d go as far as calling Prince – “strong” but let’s leave the semantics for a minute.
I’m not calling Prince strong ‘subjectively.’ I have “data” that’s available to any Pistons fan who watches games, reads the papers, etc. (interviews with coaching staff, training staff, results from team workouts, etc., etc.). You can dismiss that information if you want, but that doesn’t mean I’m just eyeballing Prince (and/or Daye) and concluding he’s thin but strong (or vice versa). I’m not. There’s a lot more informing my judgment than my eyesight.
The fact Kuester alluded to his “defense” as what limited his PT, I don’t know if we can glean anything meaningful from that, Personally I don’t glean much from it, but i’d rather not go into why just now.
Here’s why I’m more confident in Kuester than most people are right now:
1) He benched Ben Gordon and Charlie Villanueva in spite of their fat contracts (CV even earned a DNP-CD this season!), both of whom are historically overrated if you put any stock in Wins Produced.
2) He started the old, undersized, yet incredibly productive Ben Wallace over the younger, more highly paid Wilcox, Brown, and CV.
3) He started Jonas Jerebko.
4) He publically repromanded Rodney Stuckey on multiple occasions for A) taking too many low-percentage shots, B) not facilitating for teammates, and C) taking too many shots, period.
I doubt he’s read Dr. Berri’s book, but I think just about anyone who has and agrees with it would agree with those four decisions, right?
Clearly, he values defense and rebounding. Daye is a good rebounder thus far, relative to other SFs, so why didn’t he play more? Really, we’re talking about a guy who barely cracked the rotations on one of the worst defensive and rebounding teams in the league! If he’s a good rebounder, he should be playing — unless he’s really bad in another facet of the game.
I do concur that his limited PT makes for a rather small sample and yet I still hold to my original opinion: His stats so far do not indicate he’s a Major liability along the lines of what you’re describing.
You mentioned counterpart production, which Dr. Berri argues is unreliable. What other stats are there that help capture defense? If you look at Orating and Drating and put any merit in those, those are actually in my favor.
It’s odd to me that you’d point out specifically that his team defense is the one suffering the most from his lack of core strength, as that is typically more evident in one on one situations but perhaps i’m just grabbing you by the tongue here and if that’s the case, I apologize as it’s not my intention.
You sort of are and sort of aren’t. Austin’s ability to block shots makes him a decent on-ball defender, because it helps make up for his lack of lateral quickness (again, not subjective impressions — google the results from rookie workouts last season. Austin’s at the bottom, literally, of almost every category).
Austin’s a bad team defender. I’m unaware of a stat to back this up. I attribute at least some of it to his lack of lateral quickness and lack of strength (can’t get through screens welll off the ball, e.g.).
But you’re right, at least some of that is attributable to rookieness.
One last point, or question rather, regarding physicality in general: In the game of basketball, do you think that it’s generally adventageous to be bigger, faster, and stronger than your opponent?
I answer yes, because it helps you produce more for your team. I’m curious what you might think, as I’m sort of reading you as running an end around in your SF vs. PF discussion…
In summation, I didn’t mean to offend, I merely pointed out that while You might be correct – you also may be mistaken. That’s all.
Concluding a lengthy post with, “What you’re saying is absurd” is probably going to sound offensive, don’t you think?
That said, apology accepted.
But if that’s your only point, then I have to ask, “Why bother?” When in my very first comment, I said,
I’d say it’s a coin flip whether or not he sticks in the NBA
I don’t argue that Daye has promise, and I don’t disagree that he’s good at certain things that help teams win. He produced the statistics that he produced, in spite of his physical shortcomings. That all happened.
I’m trying to offer some sense as to why I think he didn’t find more of a role on a really bad team, a bad team who could have used a boost on the boards, no less. Specifically, that his overall defense wasn’t very good, in spite of the blocks and steals he accumulated individually.
brgulker
May 5, 2010
Here’s hoping my last response is just delayed in the interwebz… if not, oh well.
One more point about Daye in relation to counterpart production. I’m not sure where others find this type of data, but looking at 82games.com …
http://www.82games.com/0910/09DET8.HTM
Austin Daye let his opponents shoot at ridiculously high eFG% for SGs and not much better for SFs, 61% and 51% respectively.
dberri
May 5, 2010
brgulker,
I think I rescued your comment from spam. Not sure why it went there.
palamida
May 5, 2010
I only have about a min, so i’ll comment later at length. as far as the data goes I used 82games’s as well. I said: I’m referring to the SF position. the reason for this wasn’t because the other position didn’t fit my “ideas” it’s because The sample size is extremely small. he only played for 915 mins this season, and roughly 2/3 of that was as a SF.
78 mins as a SG and 150 as a PF are simply too small. They might indicate a real trend, but I don’t feel it’s wise to use those numbers. You may off course, Disagree.
51% for a counterpart SF is just slightly below average. (as I argued in the original comment).
I’ll probably have more on your latest comment later, but I really have to go :p
brgulker
May 5, 2010
Dr. Berri, thanks!
Palamida,
Unfortunately, I really struggle with the counterpart data. Here’s why. This season, the Pistons deployed Stuckey and Gordon together as a backcourt combination. At some point during the season, Kuester decided to play Stuck as the PG on offense but matched him against SGs on defense (vice versa for BG).
A fellow Piston fan, who’s also a reader of this blog, noticed that 82games.com isn’t tracking that accurately. He laid it all out in the comments of a game thread, and I really don’t want to take the time that it would require to dig it all up.
Suffice it to say, I suspect (but can’t prove) that something similar is happening with Daye. Austin played a lot of SG this season, and I suspect that 82games.com simply hasn’t got it all straight.
But assuming they are correct, wouldn’t the fact that he struggled to defend opposing SGs and PFs reinforce my point that he’s limited on defense by physicality?
palamida
May 5, 2010
I totally agree that 82games (while surely doing their best) are not tracking the data perfectly, and are especially prone to the kind of situation you’re describing, meaning players matched up with different players on the opposite ends of the floor
That limitation (i.e problematic and inaccurate tracking) is probably the primary factor limiting the entire “counterpart” approach atm, Imo.
As for Daye I looked at all the lineups he was a part of this season. In the lineups in which at least two of the following were employed I assume he was A SF and not a SG: Stuckey,Gordon,Bynum, Hamilton and Atkins.
Those lineups account for at least 500 mins. (I did this quite crudely, so it’s very close, yet not an exact number).
that’s out of the 600 or so mins, 82games report. Not that far off. And that’s the minimum, in truth there may have been lineups with other players (most prominently, Prince and an additional guard) in which Daye was deployed as a SF driving the 500 number even closer to the reported 600. To say whether he guarded SG’s when deployed as a SF offensively
I really can’t say, but that’s the best I can come up with.
“But assuming they are correct, wouldn’t the fact that he struggled to defend opposing SG’s….” – As I stated very clearly, The sample size (whether the positions are accurately depicted or not, is an important, yet separate matter) is extremely small at those positions.
If it were bigger or if the results were to be replicated in a larger sample in future seasons it will most definitely reinforce your point.
Tommy_Grand
May 5, 2010
“Every shot is a game winning shot, if you make one more early in the game you don’t need the late one.”
This would be true in a game played by robots. Human performance is afflicted (or enhanced) by emotional pressure. The psychological pressure surrounding a last-second shot is dissimilar to the stress inherent in taking a first-quarter shot. But even assuming arguendo that Kobe is unusually good at hitting last-second shots, that ability, while important, does not vault him over players who produce more on a per minute basis, such as the “Akron Hammer.”
Phil
May 5, 2010
brgulker,
What do you think I’m dismissing? I am not dismissing the notion that box score statistics don’t fully capture a player’s defensive contributions.
I am also not dismissing your assessment of Daye as a player. I’ve heard different accounts of Daye’s defensive ability. I haven’t seen him play much myself.
His anticipation and concentration is poor? He’s late on defensive rotations? He picks up stupid fouls? Those are the case with most rookies. And they all have little to do with physical strength. As Bobby Knight said, “Mental toughness is to physical as four is to one.”
Most rookies get pushed around, too, regardless of size. The NBA is a man’s game, and they’ve been playing with relative boys for their entire lives beforehand. Of course they’re not ready for that level of physicality. It’s fasters, stronger and bigger, by significant margins. It’s no wonder that many players struggle to adjust. Some never do. But for most, it’s because of the mental aspects rather than the physical.
Putting on weight could certainly help. So could improving his lateral quickness. So could growing a couple of inches, or being able to jump higher, or having bigger hands. But ultimately, those physical attributes are secondary to the mental aspects of being a good defender.
I’m not going to go off on a tangent on rotations or pick-and-roll coverage, but those are two of the most important aspects of NBA defense, and don’t have much to do with anything that can be easily measured or explained – at least, not as easily as “He’s too light/short/etc” can.
My point is that I don’t necessarily disagree with you about the what, but rather about the why. If skinny players like Prince and undersized players like Wallace can thrive, then I see no reason why Daye’s physique alone is a huge barrier.
Russell
May 6, 2010
palamida: I really like your post about Gasol and Odom’s stats when Bryant was out. I thought that was very interesting and it did change my perception about Bryant’s productivity (I have always thought he was overrated in general but also thought WoW undervalued him). I haven’t read all 70 posts on this thread, so I apologize if it was listed somewhere else, but could you list the dates of the games that Bryant didn’t play in this season?
I disagree that Daye being pushed is a “subjective” evaluation.
palamida
May 6, 2010
Russel, there you go:
06/02/10 – @ Portland (W)
08/02/10 – San Antonio(L)
10/02/10 – @ Utah (W)
16/02/10 – Golden State – (W)
18/02/10 – Boston (L)
08/04/10 – @ Denver (L)
09/04/10 – @ Minnesota (W)
13/04/10 – Sacramento (W)
14/04/10 – @ LA Clippers (L)
Sadly I couldn’t offer the same perspective on recent seasons as Kobe played 82 games in each of the previous two.
As for Daye, I think I pretty much said all I had to say on the matter but I wanna clarify my view:
What I referred to as “subjective” was this:
I’m not arguing he was never “pushed around” or even that he was rarely, “pushed around”. As I said I barely watched him play. I do not know how often that occurred. I was interested if the numbers (even if the sample size was small) are any indication of such a tendency.
I suggested that perhaps he was in fact – “pushed around” but that the mind,perhaps, pays extra attention to possessions where he was “pushed” than to possessions were nothing “out of the ordinary” took place, and simply “remembers” his season as a result, as one where he was “pushed around” more often then he actually was. Without Charting it, it’s really hard to “prove” that’s not the case.Just to be clear – I’m not claiming that’s what happened, rather that that’s what I mean by “subjective”.
In another example, I suggested other factors may be at play here, factors that limit the “eye test” from being a good method of evaluation. For instance, What if he was “pushed” fairly often, but he compensated by contesting the shots using his length? If the this match up (Daye vs. opponent) was indeed so “exploitable”, I would expect he’s opponents to to take high % shots – Layups, Dunks and just overall “closer” shots. If that was the case, across a season I would expect his opponents to convert at a considerably better than average FG%. In the SF position where he played the majority of his mins there’s no clear evidence to support that. (his opponents were somewhat better than average, but not hardly what you’d expect, if indeed he’s a liability to the extent that Brgulker estimated there’s a good chance he won’t even stick around as an NBA player! That’s all I argued.
In very limited minutes there’s is evidence of him struggling to defend other positions (especially the 4) but that sample is just tiny. As I said, If the results would be replicated in a larger sample in the future, allowing us to glean more statistically significant results – then we will have something “objective” to work with. I did not say Daye wasn’t a liability nor did I claim that won’t be one, in the future. I merely pointed out that what little evidence there is, doesn’t reinforce that claim, thus far. I hope that clarifies my position on this, that’s what I meant by “subjective”.
brgulker
May 6, 2010
The problem I have with your approach, palamida, is that you seem to be ignoring perception completely. If Dr. Berri’s work has taught me anything, it’s that our eyes can trick us. But that doesn’t mean they always do — which, ironically, is evidence in this post about LBJ, the MVP, and the media.
In other words, it seems to me that the only evidence you’re willing to consider at all is the statistics. The opinion of his coach, the opinion of his GM, the opinion of his conditioning coach, the opinion of the informed fans who’ve watched him play — all of those pieces of information are evidence. Not perfect, not perfectly objective, and certainly biased. But still worth considering. To dismiss all of that completely in favor of a stat sheet and a stat sheet alone seems like a mistake.
Dr. Berri says it better than I do, from “What Wins Produced Says and What It Does Not Say,” linked above:
What I offered was the opinion of an informed fan, who’s looked at all the same data sets as you, but in addition has watched roughly 75%-80% of the young man’s career.
To disagree is fine — sports conversations are great! But I still think you’re arguing/assuming that I don’t have any evidence at all upon which to form my opinion. And that’s where I just don’t agree.
palamida
May 6, 2010
Ok Brgulker, Now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said I disregard anything that isn’t of a statistical, empirical nature. Subjective Analysis can offer great value, specifically in answering the “why” type of questions. The use of Subjective analysis though, must be done with caution and with understanding it’s limitations.
The same goes for objective analysis.
When you presented your argument regarding Daye, my curiosity was piqued and I decided to glance at what objective data that was available to me and see if that objective data “supports” your argument .With the reservations I already pointed out the data did not appear to support your argument. I didn’t say you were wrong – flat out wrong. I thought it’d be interesting to present that data to you, and to other readers – and to discuss it. I also argued against using subjective data as the SOLE means of evaluation. When the Subjective and Objective seem to “agree” – that gives more credence to both. When they “disagree” the discrepancy must be resolved. Perhaps Daye’s teammates were already “anticipating” his need of “help” and were quick to provide it and that’s why his opponents weren’t feasting on him? who knows? it’s certainly possible. My point is that there can be plausible explanations for the discrepancy (sample size being the most glaring one) between the two “methods” of evaluation. My “approach” is simply to strive for a logical resolution. When there’s such a conflict, it’s important to provide different data sets, ideas, speculations, etc. until one can reach a logical resolution. I wasn’t dismissing your “subjective” evaluation, I was merely putting it out there : The data and your evaluation appear to be at odds.
P.S You say that : “What I offered was the opinion of an informed fan, who’s looked at all the same data sets as you”. Did you? prior to posting your arguments, did you look at data, at all?
One final note: I did not at any point argue or even imply for that matter, that “You just don’t have any evidence at all”. If that’s how my words were taken, that’s unfortunate, seeing is that is not what I meant. What I meant was that this “dissonance” needs to be accounted for, one way or another. And to begin that process one must first realize there is a conflict. I presented the conflict, that’s all. Hope that settles that :P
brgulker
May 6, 2010
When there’s such a conflict, it’s important to provide different data sets, ideas, speculations, etc. until one can reach a logical resolution. I wasn’t dismissing your “subjective” evaluation, I was merely putting it out there : The data and your evaluation appear to be at odds.
Okay, perhaps the point of our disagreement is more clear. I don’t see any data that runs contrary to my personal opinion about Daye’s defense. We’ve talked about two sets of data, as far as I can tell: counterpart production and Drating.
His Drating is bad (point for me?). His counterpart production stats aren’t good (not really a point for either? Not sure.).
I don’t see how the data is at odds with my opinion of Daye’s defense. His Drating stinks, and the other data set is unreliable and inconclusive. Unless there’s another set of data to analyze that we haven’t discussed yet that’s informing your opinion?
Where’s the dissonance? I just don’t see it. The numbers suggests that Daye is at best a below-average defender.
Did you? prior to posting your arguments, did you look at data, at all?
This is precisely what I mean about being dismissive. It’s not what you’re saying as much as how you’re saying it. I’ve already told you that I have. I’ll say it again if it helps, yes, I did.
Ok Brgulker, Now you’re putting words in my mouth. I never said I disregard anything that isn’t of a statistical, empirical nature.
No, I’m not putting any words anywhere. Maybe I’m overgeneralizing, but not putting words in your mouth. You’ve seen Daye play “a couple times.” I’ve seen Daye play in 60+ NBA games. Still, you’re right, and I’m wrong about Daye’s defense, even though the numbers are inconclusive at best.
But really, take a look at your own words. Your very first response to me is a total and complete dismissal of the subjective approach. If you want to backtrack on that now, that’s fine by me, but this response speaks pretty clearly for itself. You even say you’re “trying to make a broader point,” which specifically is that our minds aren’t capable of producing complete, accurate perceptions of a player.
82games +/- numbers put him at +1.71 (here + means a bad thing :p). Again perhaps slightly below average as well, but both box-score stats, and +/- do not seem to indicate that what you’re arguing is indeed happening, I.e that Austin Daye in his rookie season has been a major defensive liability. This, perhaps demonstrates the problem of using the “eye test”.
You’re mind can’t possibly track every possession, see every shot Daye contested or didn’t) , calculate and memorize the actual Efg% his man converted at. Perhaps you thought the some missed shots were “good looks” that opponents simply didn’t convert. When we watch games – that can happen.
Over a season though, it’s seems unlikely that “luck” is the deciding factor.
It’s plausible to argue that the way our mind works, since you’re already anticipating Daye would be sub-par defensively (judging by his frame) your mind makes mental notes, and adds extra “value” and credence to observations that confirm your notions (such as, Daye being backed down,etc) and less credence and attention to those instances where he “holds his own”?
It’s possible, it’ll be hard for one to argue that’s completely out of the question. Off course i’m just speaking hypotethically – I don’t know what your specific thought process was – i’m just trying to make a broader point – I hope you understand this is not an attack by any means. I’m merely asking questions, providing food for thought.
You clearly phrase things as questions, and you do say that you’re just providing food for thought. But, they sounded like rhetorical questions the first time, and even more so after this conversation.
Honestly man, it sounds like you’re saying, “I’m not telling you your eyes are tricking … but really, your eyes are tricking you.”
(And that doesn’t even mention the faulty presupposition you’re reading into my comments, namely, that I’m biased against skinny players. Honestly? How’s that logical?)
Not trying to pick a fight, not trying to make an enemy. And frankly, I agree that our eyes can fail us. Dr. Berri’s made that crystal clear with his work. But your own words go far beyond that, or at least as I read them.
Russell
May 6, 2010
palamida: Thanks for taking the time to post the specific dates and results of the games Bryant didn’t play in.
to anyone who cares: I’m beginning to convert from “Wages of Wins is good but not any better than other available formulas/systems of analysis” to “there is a strong possibility that Wages of Wins is the best available to the general public.”
Trevor Ariza-ish swings in WP48 when players change teams or roles, an emphasis on WP48 even for players who play limited minutes, and (in my opinion) an inability to rate defense still have me doubting, but I think I better read the books.
palamida
May 6, 2010
Brgulker, You raised a wide array of issues in this last comment, I’ll only address a few of them, even though I could probably “go on” at length on many of the issues raised.
“Okay, perhaps the point of our disagreement is more clear. I don’t see any data that runs contrary to my personal opinion about Daye’s defense”
“His Drating is bad (point for me?)”
I disagree with that last “fact”.
In the Pistons roster last season only two players posted better marks: Ben Wallace (106) and Chris Wilcox (109). Charlie V, and K. Brown both posted identical marks (110). The Pistons were a poor defensive team and that 110 mark is misleading. Personally I don’t value this rating particularly, but if anything – his mark (within the context of his team) was good, and perhaps one might argue it’s superb considering he’s a rookie.
So that’s not a “point” for you, not in my book at least. Furthermore (both) his +/- defensive marks while below average, are further negated when judged within the context of his team and aren’t anything other than slightly below average to begin with. So are his counterpart SF numbers.
So I really don’t see the quarrel here – there is a discrepancy – I do see data that runs contrary, etc.
Does the “objective” trump the “subjective”? not necessarily – but there IS a discrepancy that needs to be addressed.
I don’t agree that the “questions” you have quoted and alluded too are rhetorical. In terms of “style” I’ll say they are phrased in a specific which is – as if a naysayer asks them (Not to be mistaken with ME being the naysayer). It’s more of a : “How would you respond if someone asked you those things”. English is not my native language and perhaps my full meaning is sometimes partially (or even completely) lost, and certain connotations echo – even though they are not intended by me, and for that I apologize but at the same time, there’s not much I can do about it.
Just to make sure I’m getting through this time around: They are in a sense rhetorical questions, but they do not represent my stance; They represent a certain thought process, much like in an imaginary debate exercise when “contestants” are asked to represent a certain view for 1 min and then are tasked to represent the opposing view. I hope you’re getting me here :) I represented certain views\ideas in an attempt further the dialogue and help us both direct this discussion into a desired, constructive “path” which is – getting to the roots of the issue at hand.
“Honestly man, it sounds like you’re saying, “I’m not telling you your eyes are tricking … but really, your eyes are tricking you.””
So in summation, No, I’m not telling you that you’re eyes are tricking you (nor am I thinking that’s the case) – I’m asking you: “what would you say if I (or someone else) told you your eyes might be tricking you?” What would be your response to that?. Perhaps You think that’s the same thing, but it’s my contention that there’s a very distinct line that separates the two.
For example I did not mean that YOU were “biased against skinny players” :
“It’s plausible to argue that the way our mind works, since you’re….”
You can (and I probably should have to begin with) replace the word – “your” with “one’s”.
Since one’s mind…. etc. Not YOUR mind,Mr. Brgulker, but rather a hypothetical mind. That’s what I meant.
I have a couple more things to say, specifically concerning the whole “broader point ; our minds can’t… ” business, but seeing as we’re hogging this thread with what is now essentially – a completely off-topic discussion, I think it’s best we’ll leave it at that. If you wish, we can continue this specific discussion in a more private manner which is probably more suiting anyways.
Gabe
May 6, 2010
palamida,
Just a quick reply from another Pistons fan:
I glanced at Daye’s 82games profile and his position was listed incorrectly a bunch of times (Whenever he was on the court with Jerebko, Daye is listed at the “bigger” position, which is backwards). So 82games data isn’t exactly “objective” since there is a big element of subjectivity involved in how they assign positions.
Also, while I take it you are mainly exercising your debating/arguing muscles, you never really addressed brgulker’s point that Kuester seems to have at least an intuitive grasp of WP– by his playing Ben Wallace and Jerebko lots of minutes despite neither of them being (seen as) scoring threats, and both being largely described as probable 3rd stringers by the Pistons Front Office last off-season. As a Pistons fan, Kuester’s allocation of minutes generally made me trust his judgement.
palamida
May 7, 2010
Gabe, As for the position adjustment, we discussed 82games’s “subjective” element earlier in this comment section, Here’s what I said in an earlier comment:
“I totally agree that 82games (while surely doing their best) are not tracking the data perfectly”
Also note, “That limitation (i.e problematic and inaccurate tracking) is probably the primary factor limiting the entire “counterpart” approach atm, Imo.”
Drating and (unadjusted) +/- are “objective” (for what it’s worth).
Honestly this is just nitpicking and semantics.
We all understand what I meant by “objective” and “subjective”. From the way I addressed the “objective” data limitations it’s clear that I do not see it as “objective” in the definitive sense of the word; While having a “subjective” component, I think that it’s still “safe” to address those metrics as “objective” – they’re essentially objective. Even box score stats are prone to bias (home team favorable stat keeping, etc.) but by in large I think that sort of data is still valuable. As I have said I do not see “objective” data (i.e different stats, in this case) as an end all\is all kind of data. Just as a valuable, important tool. On a side note, In an earlier comment I even reported the results I gleaned from going over *all the team’s 5 man units” one by one, in an attempt to mitigate 82games’s possible errors. I simply decided “arbitrarily” on calling Daye a SF in every lineup where AT LEAST two of the following were employed: Stuckey,Gordon,Bynum,Atkins and Hamilton.
If more lineups were to be added (specifically ones where he played with Jerebko, (idk how many mins that is) he would probably fair a bit worse, considering his PF counterpart (82games) are worse and here they’ll be added into the SF mix. Considering that would probably be something in the 50 mins range tops, I doubt it’ll change the general picture from wall to wall.
But yes, we noted and discussed the problematic nature of their position adjustment. Do you think that these problems invalidate any evaluation that’s made based on them? I don’t. But surely some reservations need to be stated and observed. Again I did not argue that Daye wasn’t a bad defender. I simply tried to examine what “objective” (or rather “more” objective) data can tell us about Brgulker’s “subjective” evaluation.
As for Kuester I just don’t know enough. I don’t agree that certain decisions are necessarily a result of an “intuitive grasp of WP” that’s pure conjecture; there can be a wide array of reasoning that produced some “results” that are similar to the “Wp approach” but were made with different reasons.
Unless I get to sit down and “chat” with him I’d be hard pressed in calling his decisions “WP friendly” since that might as well be, well, a total coincidence. (it may not be, surely, but neither me nor you can really argue one way or the other, so I feel this particular discussion is rather moot).
What I didn’t care for was using that “data” to deduce: a.) Kuester seems to have an “intuitive understanding of WP”, ergo – b.) he “knew” something when he benched Daye for most of the season. That to me, is simply unsupported. BTW again, I’m not suggesting it’s NOT true, perhaps Kuester does have that grasp and that led to the “benching”, but I jut don’t think any of us know enough to make this even a viable argument let alone a “true” argument.
To clarify once more, It’s not like I had a pre-conceived notion of Daye being a decent defender, or any other “level” of defender for that matter. I just examined what data there was when Brgulker commented on his subject, and since the results appeared to be “at odds” with his argument – I presented, as is, what I “saw” to the group, meaning Br, and the rest of the readers.
It’s not like i’m headlining a campaign aimed at awarding Daye the Defensive player of the year award :) – just to keep things in perspective.
the juice
May 7, 2010
WILL YALL PLEASE JUST GO ON WIT YALL LIVES??? LEBRON IS THE BEST.. SO THATS ALL THAT NEED TO BE SAID!!