The major basketball story these days is the adventures of Team USA at the World Championships. For coverage of this story, I am going to turn the forum over to Ty Willihnganz of Courtside Analyst. As he noted a few days ago, Ty was not initially impressed after watching Team USA take on Croatia. And now that Team USA has advanced with an undefeated record (and one significant scare against Brazil), Ty has also offered a list of players who impressed (and who haven’t impressed). For those who are not reading Ty’s work (not sure why this would be, but I guess it could be happening), I am going to re-post Ty’s analysis below (if you click on the links you can see that Ty includes pictures with his posts, so it is better to read this work at Ty’s site).
Team USA looks headed for trouble
Last night I was watching the early part of Team USA’s opening game against Croatia and I was stunned how easily Croatia was controlling inside play. Then I realized that absent Kevin Love (and a diminished Tyson Chandler, and I guess Lamar Odom) Team USA has no size to speak of. In fact, looking at the playing minutes, the team seems to be actively ignoring the role big men have played in writing the history of the game of basketball. Its a subtle point to internalize, I guess. It must take — what?– all of three seconds of study to uncover.
Man, who designed this team anyway? Don Nelson?? He’s been playing without a center in Golden State for several seasons now, and he’s driven that franchise right into the gutter. Yet the Committee that chose Team USA must think he’s the Frank Lloyd Wright of championship basketball design.
Wow. You cannot argue to me that any representative team of half quality would feature Stephen Curry or Eric Gordon or Rudy Gay on its roster. Those cannot seriously be the best players the Committee could find. What, Randy Foye wasn’t available? (Actually they forced most of the best players off the team for lack of shooting ability).
And what tournament were they watching in 2008? Where did they get the idea that a team of jump shooters would present our best opportunity to succeed? Didn’t they notice that the Redeem Team dominated through superior length and athleticism, not through shooting? Didn’t they see that Kobe Bryant and MichaelRedd, the two players who stood outside and played international style, were the least effective players? Couldn’t they tell that the United States last decisive advantage rests with guys of the Charles Barkley type (who every member on the Dream Team — and the stats — say was the best player on Team USA 1992).
The World can shoot with the USA. They love that. They can’t dunk with them. They can’t rebound with them. They can’t handle the length and basket attacking style that only we can bring.
Well, not this unit. Kevin Love has had to come off the bench to save the United States bacon in two games. In Game Two he and Lamar Odom provided the United States with 40% of their rebounds using only 16% of the team’s playing time?
What are you doing Kryzyzweski? Thank God for Kevin Durant.
But the United States numbers so far don’t project well. They are dominant, but not Mega-dominant like most of the successful United States teams of the past. Their overall numbers project to an .829% winning percentage, which would be outstanding for an NBA team, but I’m not entirely convinced either Slovania or Croatia are NBA quality. Consider that the Redeem Team projected out to a 1.450% winning percentage and they were nearly upset.
I’m not saying this US team will be upset. But the only reason I’m not is because I question the overall competition level of a tournament where former Badger Kirk Penney is the leading scorer and Yi Jianlian is number two.
If it weren’t for that caveat I’d say that Team USA is headed for a nose dive.
Grading 2010 Team USA (plus Win Chart)
With a thanks to Basketball-Reference.com’s Neil Paine, who accumulated all of the necessary statistics, I put together a Win Chart purporting to attribute wins and losses to each player on Team USA for every game the team has played thus far (up through Tunisia and including the friendly matches). I also handed out grades to each player for their relative performances so far.
Click Here to see 2010 Team USA Win Chart
Although the competition was much better at the 2008 Olympics, if you click here you can use the 2008 Gold Medal team’s Win Chart as an international ball comparison.
Grades for Team USA (so far)
A+
Durant, Love (co-Valedictorians)
The dominant players on the team thus far have been PF Kevin Durant, the leader of the team in wins with 1.9, and C Kevin Love, the leader of the team in performance level with an unconscionable +13.07 Marginal Win Score per 40 minutes. Love, despite playing the second least minutes, has somehow produced the second most wins. What a display. He’s just having his way with the competition on the backboard. Yeah, he doesn’t look glamorous doing it, but basketball ain’t about the pretty. And what can you say about Durant? Durant has been impressive on both offense and defense. Who knew he would be such a great defender coming out of Texas? He’s simply developing into a real beast (though watching him I wonder how long his spindly legs can support his mobile game. Are seven footers supposed to be able to play like 6’5” guys?) Love, on the other hand, is putting up a pretty convincing case that he may be the best rebounder alive today.
A
Westbrook, Rose, and Gay (tri-Salutatorians)
Some players who have played surprisingly well include Derrick Rose and especially Rudy Gay. Each is normally around average during the NBA season when measured by wins produced. But each has been hard for the world to handle so far. Russell Westbrook has really developed into an outstanding player in the past few seasons. He and Durant, along with other Oklahoma players, are the foundation for what could be a scary good team in Dust Bowl. They could be Miami’s chief threat, or perhaps the other way around.
B-
Iguodala, Odom (cum laude)
Remember this grade is on a curve. Iguodala and Odom are each doing okay, but when you consider that each is normally an above average NBA player, and sometimes considerably above average, their individual national team numbers are milquetoast.
C
Billups, Gordon, Chandler (a “C” is a degree)
A “C” is kind of generous. In international competition, what look like above average win numbers if they were posted in the NBA are akin to below the median numbers when posted against world competition. Tunisia and Slovenia clearly are not NBA timber. Of the three who earned this grade, Chauncey Billups and Tyson Chandler are both players who have exhibited signs of rapid decline in their once very productive careers, and Eric Gordon is a young player who is hard to measure. Coming out of college I projected him to disappoint, in his first season he surprised me with productive play, but last season he slumped backward toward what I expected he would produce (surf over to the NBA Win Chart Pages on the right hand column of this blog if you want to see my exact calculations for each of the players mentioned in this post).
F
Stephen Curry (NR: needs replacement)
I don’t know what he’s doing on this team, or how on Earth he beat out Rajon Rondo, but Stephen Curry has looked awful. For such a reputed “shooter” he looks like a “non-shooter”. Besides (warning: tirade coming) why would National Team organizers favor players with jump shooting skills?! Those skills are easily replicated. Why not concentrate on loading the team up with players who show either rare productive skills (Love’s rebounding), rare physical skills (Wade, Rose, Westbrook or Rondo), or freakish combinations of skill, size, and talent (LeBron, Durant). Why put guys like Gordon and Curry on the team? Foreign teams can match them. Didn’t Redd prove that? Or how about the Iverson/Marbury disaster of 2004? How many more of these mistakes is USA Basketball going to make?
F-
Danny Granger (See ya next fall… same homeroom)
How low are grades allowed to go? Granger has been awful. If the World Championships were considered his original third grade year, Granger would right now be thinking up reasons to explain to his friends why he has to spend this fall repeating the third grade. What in the hell is Granger even doing on the team anyway? What fool thought he could possibly add more value to Team USA than the monster from Charlotte, SF Gerald Wallace? Still, Granger’s play has been inexcusably putrid. Unless Granger is suffering from West Nile or something, his poor play is hard to explain even by his ordinarily low standards.
-Ty Willihnganz
Wages of Wins Journal 
Scott
September 5, 2010
In the team’s defense, they were constrained with their big man selection. Garnett and Duncan have no interest in international ball anymore. Shaq is the same, and a shadow of his old self. Boozer, Bosh and Howard wanted to take this summer off. Amare had insurance issues, David Lee and the Lopezs got injured. There are probably some pretty good bigs I’m forgetting, but if you cut out the older players productive (Camby, Ben Wallace, Haslem) on the assumption they, like Garnett and Duncan, don’t really want to deal with a summer spent playing (particularly if they have injury issues like Camby), you start to rapidly run out of producers.
Scott
September 5, 2010
Well, I suppose they could have invited Troy Murphy- even if his defense is poor he’d be a boon on the boards and could also partially fulfill the shooter role that Gordon/Curry is holding.
Daniel
September 5, 2010
Love by far the best player in the tournament. When he’s in, the team just visibly clicks. And statistically, he’s putting up Wilt-like per-minute stats.
Seriously… in 52 minutes (which is about full NBA game + overtime), Love has put up 37 points, 33 rebounds (14 offensive), 6 assists, 3 steals, shot 60% from the field, and 6 fouls and 6 turnovers.
He does play mediocre defense, though– not surprising give the stability of his NBA coaching.
Scott
September 5, 2010
Sorry to for the deluge, but I also wanted to add I’m not defending the minute allocation at all- Love should be playing much more. I was providing some justification for the structure of the team, that is all.
marparker
September 5, 2010
Again, I really hate Coach K and think he is overrated. He had a problem playing Zoubek 2 seasons ago and only played him because he was forced to last season. He could have had a real shot at the national championship with Zoubs playing minutes 2 seasons ago. He’s not as smart as everyone credits.
UNC fan though.
arturogalletti
September 5, 2010
Ty,
Brilliant piece as always. I will echo DJ comments and add that anybody who likes basketball and statistical analysis should be reading your blog.
The minute allocation on this team and player selection is confounding. Scorers, really? What’s the argument for not playing Love and bringing a smallball team? Frustrating.
This team makes me wonder if there’s any way Presti can swing a deal for Love to OKC. Westbrook, Thabo, Durant, Love and Ibaka would be ridiculous.
entityabyss
September 5, 2010
Hey dberri, I have a few questions (if anyone can answer them, that would be nice). My questions aren’t about this post, it’s about the wins produced metric.
First question- players’ rebounding numbers do not change dramatically over time, and although the effect is not great, teams with good or bad rebounders will affect how many rebounds a player gets. Although the effect wouldn’t be great, wouldn’t an adjustment for how good a team is at rebounding (rebounding percentage) and a player’s rebounding percentage rather than totals help in the accuracy in telling how good a player is at rebounding?
Second question- certain players lots of fouls. Is their value in certain players getting players on the opposing team in foul trouble and also making the opposing team reach the foul limit faster? Someone was telling me about how shaq in his prime would get players in foul trouble which affected the team. Is their value in that?
Third question- their is an estimated value for how many freethrows a player takes that isn’t and1 freethrows. Hoopdata tracks and1s, so wouldn’t using that instead of an estimation (although the effect wouldn’t be too big), me more accurate, especially for players who get a lot of and1s?
Warriorsworld
September 5, 2010
If you don’t understand why Gordon and Curry are key players then you don’t understand the international play. Rondo is a great NBA player but he is not very good in this setting. We haven’t even seen a team play a killer zone yet, Russia will likely be the first. Lithuania/Spain/Turkey awaits. And you knock Don Nelson but guess who was the last coach to win a World Championship? Yeah, Don Nelson.
Philip
September 5, 2010
Warriorsworld,
Gordon has been mediocre in the tourney, Curry has been terrible. How does their inclusion to the US team prove anything?
reservoirgod
September 5, 2010
Actually, Gordon & Curry have been very good so far in the tournament with an estimated Wins Produced per 40 minutes above 0.200. I’ve posted another article on Bleacher Report that breaks down Team USA using Win Score & Wins Produced, if you’re interested in a different take from Ty’s. Yes, Durant & Love have led the way but all of the guards have been well above average. Rondo has not been missed.
dberri
September 5, 2010
Mosi,
Love the slideshow. I will get a link up tomorrow.
MSL
September 5, 2010
I’m just curious? How can Rose be playing well, when he has as many assist as turnovers (11 and 11), while he’s shooting 25% from three point land?
Rose is not a point guard, he’s a Off guard in a two guards body, who’s not a natural floor leader or set up man. He should be coming off the bench as a scorer.
Jake
September 5, 2010
The Curry hate is why the USA hasn’t won the FIBA’s since 1994. Come on, don’t hate on the best built international guard we have. IMHO Billups playing the two instead of Curry has been one of the reasons we aren’t blowing anyone out. Our 5 should have been Rose, Curry, Iggy, Durant, Love with Granger and Gordon coming off the bench with Gay(underrated shooter) playing some wing also. Nobody is stopping those 8 with man or zone, PERIOD.
reservoirgod
September 5, 2010
Dave:
Thanks for the compliment. Wish I had gotten it done last nite but I fell asleep in front of the computer.
MSL:
The avg guard in a game w/ Team USA is only averaging 3.6 asts/40 mins & 3.1 TOs/40 mins while Rose is averaging 3.8 asts/40 mins & 3.8 TOs/40 mins. He makes up for the turnovers by being above avg in rebs & steals. Despite his poor 3-pt shooting his adj. shooting% is still 13 pts above avg (61.3% vs. 47.5%). When I watch Rose I’m struck by how much faster he is than his competition and his ability to finish at the rim. I think the blueprint for Team USA was to pair speedy PGs who can get out in transition w/ knockdown shooters. I think Rose has been doing his job quite well.
reservoirgod
September 5, 2010
Jake:
In all fairness to Coach K (who deserves none), Curry wasn’t very productive in the exhibitions & scrimmages. He was very productive in the preliminary round but foul trouble probably wouldn’t allow him to stay in the game against a tough backcourt (he’s averaging 5.2 fouls/40 mins).
jbrett
September 6, 2010
Ty,
“Basketball ain’t about the pretty” should be engraved in gold and hung on the wall in every GM’s office in the world, as well as stamped on the forehead of every fan of Iverson, Marbury, Harrington, etc. Five words that sum up the essence of Wins Produced as well as anything I’ve read, or tried to say, in more than a year.
arturogalletti
September 6, 2010
Ty,
jbrett is right. I’m stealing “Basketball ain’t about the pretty” for by build me winner algorithm.
nerdnumbers
September 6, 2010
jbrett and arturo,
That seems like it needs an image of Dennis Rodman to go with it. . .
brgulker
September 7, 2010
Ty,
Excellent stuff. You posted this on your blog, too (iirc).
@ Scott,
I don’t think anyone has a problem with the big men that are or are not on the team. The question is about the wings and guards that were selected over other available players.
Billy Blanks
September 7, 2010
You get an F, not G, no Z- for this article. Are you serious? Get a clue!
Scott
September 8, 2010
Brgulker- opening part of Ty’s piece seemed to be questioning the teams lack of size to me, which is why I pointed out the problems with getting more size. I have no good explanation for Curry/Gordon over Rondo or Granger/Gay over Wallace other than a mistaken belief we need more “shooters.”