Andres Alvarez – of Nerd Numbers and the Automated Wins Produced – sent along the following observation:
Kyle Lowry’s game on Sunday night was the 15th best of the season and better than any Derrick Rose has put up so far this season. Additionally, since the New Year, Kyle Lowry has put up .25 more wins than Derrick Rose in 50 less minutes of play time. Lowry also the most wins on his team (and once again, has been playing better than Rose for the last 3 months). So should he be considered a serious MVP candidate?
Okay, this is just silly. Derrick Rose is clearly one of the best players in the game. Afterall, Rose
- was the first player taken in the 2008 NBA draft
- was voted as a starter in the 2011 All-Star game
- scores 24.8 points per game, a mark that ranks 6th in the NBA
- leads the Chicago Bulls – the team currently on top of the Eastern Conference standings – in Wins Produced
- stars in television commercials
In contrast, Lowry
- was the 24th player taken in the 2006 NBA draft
- prior to this season, has only started 21 games in the NBA (and may have seen an All-Star game but certainly has never been asked to play)
- scores only 13.2 points per game, a mark that ranks 70th in the NBA
Obviously Lowry can’t be compared to Rose.
Then again….
Let’s go back to that Wins Produced story. As noted, Rose leads the Chicago Bulls in Wins Produced. After 69 games, Rose has produced 9.8 wins. And his WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] is 0.184. So Rose is above average (average WP48 is 0.100).
Now let’s look at Lowry. After 71 games, Lowry has produced 8.1 wins. This mark leads the Houston Rockets. And his WP48 of 0.172 is actually quite comparable to what we see from Rose. In other words, if Lowry and Rose switched places, the fate of each team would be quite similar (and before you say the Bulls need Rose to take all those shots, take a look at what I wrote a few weeks ago at The Huffington Post).
Obviously Lowry doesn’t score as much as Rose. So what makes Lowry so productive?
Wins in the NBA are driven by a team’s ability to gain and keep possession of the ball (i.e. rebounds and turnovers) and how well the team can turn possession of the ball into points (i.e. shooting efficiency and the ability to get to the free thow line). When we look at Lowry’s stats – reported below — we see that his career numbers (these are the career numbers before the 2010-11 season) indicate Lowry was below average with respect to shooting efficiency from the field. But his ability to get to the free throw line and grab rebounds allowed Lowry to be above average.
This season, Lowry has been a more efficient scorer. He is also getting more assists while cutting down his turnovers. As a consequence, Lowry is now offering nearly as much are Rose.
And just like Rose – as the following indicates — Lowry is the most productive player on his team.
The Rockets’ record is 37-34 after 71 games, a mark that ranks last in the Southwest division and leaves this team currently on the outside of the top eight spots in the conference. When we look at efficiency differential (offensive efficiency minus defensive efficiency), though, we see a mark of 1.7. This is consistent with a team that would win between 39 and 40 of their first 71 games; or about 45 wins across an entire season. And those marks would actually rank 8th in the Western Conference. So the Rockets are not a “bad” team.
Why are the Rockets “not bad”? As noted in early February, the Rockets have been able to find a collection of above average performers. Beyond Lowry, the Rockets are currently employing – as part of their rotation – the following above average players: Kevin Martin, Chuck Hayes, Chase Budinger, and Patrick Patterson. And Luis Scola, Courtney Lee, and Brad Miller are close to average.
So why aren’t the Rockets as good as the Bulls? The above average players on the Rockets all have WP48 marks below 0.200. In other words, the Rockets don’t have anyone who is twice as good as average. In contrast, the Bulls employ Carlos Boozer [0.201 WP48], Ronnie Brewer [0.236 WP48], and Joakim Noah [0.264 WP48].
In sum, Rose simply has somewhat better teammates than Lowry. And that means Rose gets to experience more wins. When we add in Rose’s scoring (driven by Rose’s propensity to take many shots), it is easy to see why Rose is considered an MVP candidate.
Of course, Lowry is nearly as productive. So should Lowry get some consideration for the MVP award?
Well, not exactly. There are still several players who offer more than Rose and Lowry (see Dwight Howard, LeBron James, Chris Paul, etc…). In fact, Howard, James, and Paul offer more than Lowry and Rose combined. And that means Lowry shouldn’t be an MVP candidate. But then again, Derrick Rose really shouldn’t be getting any votes either.
– DJ
Wages of Wins Journal 
nerdnumbers
March 22, 2011
Dave,
To prove how fast the world of stats moves – my comment on the 15th best game is now wrong. Dwight Howard (my preseason vote for MVP) put up a 0.80 Win game last night to knock Lowry down to the 16th best game of the season.
In my opinion the MVP vote should work in a “would you trade them for just this season fashion” in other words “Would you trade Howard for Rose for the playoffs this season?” Is there seriously anyone who says yes to that? On the other hand, I would consider trading Rose for Lowry :)
Matt
March 22, 2011
Rose winning the MVP is going to be a travesty. His hype is gaining steam by the day though and looks unstoppable.
Even without advanced stats I would think everyone could see that Lebron/Dwight/Chris Paul are the most valuable players this year. Even 2K11 could tell you they’re the best. So why can’t the media grasp it?
Thepeaceblogger
March 22, 2011
Love this post and yes I will change Rose for Lowry just to see if he can walk in DRose shoes as well as he does in Houston…
But “Superman” for DRose for the playoffs….NO WAY…
Kris
March 22, 2011
ugh! enough all ready! i dont remember all this critism when Lebron won MVP 2 yrs str8. there were ppl more ‘productive’ than him i.e D.Howard( very similar stats to last yr), Dirk, Kobe etc. Now that someone NEW comes along there are all these “more deserving” more “productive” ppl. D.Howard does deserve to be considered but he shouldnt win it but they r 4th in the East, while Derrick the other candidate is tied for 1st..Derrick has been the only player besides Dwight that has been CONSISTENT this entire yr while helping his team WIN! ooooh and if u think Kyle Lowry would have the 2011 Bulls in the same position as Rose you r on some whitney houston, Lindsay Lohan, Charlie sheen CRACK! Rose has to take as many shots as he does esp when 2 of the starting 5 memebers r there for “defense” Derrick gets to the paint and passes to a wide open keith bogans and what happens…he BRICKS the shot. Luol deng can create his own shot but HE IS NOT A LEADER (i.e the Indy game when Derrick fouled out they LOST) Carlos adds some scoring relief but he plays ZERO defense. I know Im rambling …….and another thing ppl give Derrick hell for being a “shoot first PG” (which I completely disagree) but if he doesnt score or at least shoot and attack the Bulls would not have this record. a Point Guard is suppossed to do what it takes for his team to win..thats what Derrick does. Derrick Rose is this yrs MVP! PERIOD! ;-)
nerdnumbers
March 22, 2011
Kris,
NEW CONSISTENT WIN CRACK BRICKS HE IS NOT A LEADER LOST ZERO MVP PERIOD
Interesting choice of caps. For the record the WP48 metric had LeBron as the top player last year and the 2nd best player in 2009 (by a thin margin to Chris Paul).
Your idea that Derrick Rose has to take the shot is interesting as he has 7th best TS% on the Bulls (right behind Keith Bogans)
I know you think you “rambled” but I’d love to hear some follow up on some of your points. You say Derrick Rose has been consistent, please explain what you mean. Do you really think Boozer plays zero defense? Does this mean he just gives guys a clear lane to the lane and doesn’t try to rebound.
TBall
March 22, 2011
Does strength of schedule impact wins produced? Normally, you’d expect level of competition to even out over the course of the year, but the Rockets are in last place in their division with a winning record – behind four likely playoff teams. Chicago is in a division with four teams that will finish under .500 and Chicago could be that division’s only playoff team. To put a number on it, Houston’s division mates have 185 wins to the 97 in the Central’s oversized basement. With the schedule slanted to more intra-divisional play and intra-conference play, I would expect all of the counting stats Houston musters are harder to come by than Chicago’s.
What impact, if any, does strength of schedule have on a player’s wins produced?
Kris
March 22, 2011
Nerd
Derrick has been consistent he has averaged 24 and 8 all season when he doesn’t shoot that well he attacks the paint and gets to the line. The Bulls r 50-9 and 10-15 against the top 6 teams (SA, LA, Dallas, MIA, BOS, ORL) while only having his FULL & Healthy starting 5 for 2 of those games. And if u think its because of anybody besides Derrick…I really don’t kno what to say. Boozer doesn’t play defense I’m sorry I love him offensively (I wish Coach Thibs would run more plays for him) he does rebound well enough but I’ve seen his man (who he’s supposed to guard) completely dominate and we (Bulls) have lost I.e Lanarcus, Amare, etc. And yes I have seen him give a clear lane to the rim plenty of times but the Bulls play good team defense which kinda covers his flaws. But to say Derrick doesn’t deserve a vote is completely ridiculous. I love what Dwight and Dirk have done this season but Derrick deserves this award.
Lior
March 22, 2011
Strength of schedule surely has an effect (that’s what adjusted \pm is trying to measure) but I don’t think there’s research on that.
One related problem that annoys me: when the NBA needs to break ties (for playoff seeding and home-court advantage), it first uses head-to-head wins. That being equal, it uses wins within the division. That increases the advantage of teams playing in a weak division (who have inflated standings anyway). I think that a strength-of-schedule tiebreak (total wins by the division, or opponent wins weighted by number of games) would make more sense.
robbieomalley
March 22, 2011
Has anyone ever done a correlation study comparing the relationship between the strength of a persons argument and the strength of his or her writing? It seems to me that they match pretty well.
fricktho
March 22, 2011
TBall
WP is simply a reflection of the stats a player has produced, and the competition a player plays against affects those stats. If you’re constantly playing good competition the stats would reflect that. If you’re saying the Bulls’ WP are inflated because of the weak division they play in I suppose that isn’t something you can dispute. It is exactly that.
The Bulls have played 35 games against teams .500 or above whereas the Rockets have played 44 games. Although, the Bulls are 23-12 in those games and the Rockets are 17-27. Given some weird scenario where the Rockets winning percentages remain static – if the Rockets played 35 games against .500 or above teams instead of 44, which would add 9 games to teams below .500, or in other words a strength of schedule similar to the Bulls – their record would be 40-31 right now accounting for 3 additional wins.
In fact the Bulls have played the fewest games in the league against teams .500 or above. They have been given the gift of quite possibly the league’s weakest schedule.
nerdnumbers
March 22, 2011
Kris,
Thanks for the reply. Let me make sure I’m clear (I know I sound crazy). Derrick Rose is a good player on a good team. He’s just not as good as people are saying. I’m sorry but calling him consistent because of his average is not correct. Rose has had games all over the place this season.
You make an odd point. You say despite being good at offense, good at rebounding that Boozer is not good because of his defensive flaws but that’s ok because his team covers his weaknesses. If you look at say Derrick Rose he’s got some flaws in his game including shooting and assist to turnover ratio. However, his team covers these flaws.
Also why is it rediculous to say Rose deserves vote? My point is he has a stronger team (which seems anti-MVP) than many other players. Additionally other players on winning teams are far better and my test for that is the 1 year trade test. Would you rather have a 2011 Rose or 2011 Howard? Rose over LeBron or even Wade?
stephanieg
March 22, 2011
Like when AI won, things are falling into place perfectly. LeBron will never win an MVP with Wade on his team unless Wade dramatically declines, gets injured for most of a season, or they win 70+ wins.
CP3 is on a bad team.
Really, it should be Dwight’s year, but the Bulls are the 1st seed. Thib should be the MVP. :O
JLewis
March 22, 2011
Robbie,
That might be my favorite comment in the last couple of years. The impact of an insult increases exponentially when the intended insultee is unlikely to understand what has just been said about him.
Schermeister
March 22, 2011
Derrick Rose winning would be a travesty to me.
Some peopel quote the 24-8 and say no one has done that for a long time. This just shows you how bad cutoffs are. Allen Iverson was 30.7-7.9 one year (maybe more points). I believe Nash won the mvp year that year. No one was screaming for Iverson. Well similar to Rose he takes a lot of shots. I do however think D Rose is much better then AI, he better at getting to line choosing his shots somewhat better, defense (eyeball test)
People also say Rose can score effortlessly (I see this on ESPN everyday). Well then why is his FG% so low. I would think D Howard would get those comments.
It seems to me lately people are obsessed with PG’s a little bit. Think about stockton or kidd never won an mvp. And now we are clamouring to give it to D. Rose whom many say he isnt even the top PG(many people say C. Paul or D. Will) I say CP3 but hey thats my opinion
Scott
March 22, 2011
Kris – Saying he’s been consistent by pointing out that he’s averaged 24 and 8 all year is an awful argument. If you were to break down his averages per month versus other player’s per month averages then maybe I would listen, but that’s still a very flawed argument. People much smarter than you have concluded that Lowry and Rose are comparable from a production standpoint. Sometimes the facts don’t match your perceptions and that’s just the way life works sometime. Accept it, adapt, move on.
MGL_COOG
March 22, 2011
Kyle for MVP!!
Kris
March 22, 2011
Scott—–
People much smarter than me?!?!? Really talk about a flawed argument-u don’t even know me so please! RELAX! I’m not entertaining any ideas that Kyle Lowry is comparable to D.Rose period. Ask any coach who they would rather have and Derrick would get every vote. the only problem I have with this column is the fact that Nerd said Derrick shouldn’t get any votes. Not only is that utterly ridiculous but I predict that. Derrick wins the award handily. All u stat guys can continue to dissect and over analyze all u want. If the Bulls remain in the top spot in the East and hold on to the 2nd best record in the NBA. Derrick Rose will be the MVP. U can put that in your pipe and smoke it ;-)
Stopbeingahomernerd
March 23, 2011
Are you serious? Like did you sit down and think, ” Hey KYLE LOWRY is up there with Derrick Rose.” I haven’t watched enough KL’s games probably. Yet I have damn near watched every Rose game, and to compare the two with a bunch of baseball nerd stats is terrible. Terrible. Rose’s situation which makes him the number one contender for the MVP. Two of his starters out with Bogans taking up 15 minutes a game will put in the discussion. Not averaging 13 points. Sorry.
Philip
March 23, 2011
Kris,
Welcome to the site. Let’s look at this the other way. Should Deron Williams have been an MVP candidate in 2008? Let’s focus on offense, because that’s most of what you and the MVP voters really seem to care about.
(Why most people, including you, are ignoring the fact that Rose is at best an average defender and that Chicago is only an elite team because they’re so strong defensively, and that their improvement is mostly due to a 5-point improvement in D-rating is beyond me. But I’ll bite anyway).
Ignoring PGs, how would you expect the 2008 Jazz tocompare offensively with the 2011 Bulls?
Utah:
-PG: Williams getting the lion’s share of minutes. A rotating cast of mediocre backups in Price, Giricek, and Hart spelling him for about 10 minutes/game.
-Wings: AK and Brewer starting, getting about 30 minutes/game. Harping and Korver getting about 20 minutes, Miles getting about 10.
Posts: A healthy Boozer and Okur. Millsap getting about 20 minutes a game. And a Collins brother getting 10. Which one, you ask? Does it matter?
Chicago:
PG: Rose getting the lion’s share of minutes. Watson backing him for about 10 minutes/game.
Wings: Deng getting 40 minutes a game, with Bogans, Brewer and Korver getting each getting about 20 minutes a game.
Posts: Factoring in injuries, Noah, Booze, Gibson all averaging about 22 minutes a game, Thomas 15, and Asik 10.
Backup PGs are pretty much a wash.
Hey, look at that, both teams had Brewer and Korver! But both were much better offensively in Utah, scoring more efficiently, and in Brewer’s case more; I don’t see how that’s an argument in Rose’s favor, however. Deng and AK are pretty close on the offensive end, except that Deng plays 40 minutes/game to AK’s 30. Miles and Harping were effective enough spot shooters, both a bit better than Bogans, but not significantly. Overall, I’d say Utah’s wings were a bit better, but it’s because they wings that are playing with Chicago now played better when they were with Utah, but again, this doesn’t really seem like compelling evidence for the “Rose is MVP!” case.
Bigs-wise, Boozer was a bit better in 2008, probably due to health. He also played a lot more minutes. Okur was a good shooter, while Noah was suspect but better at every other aspect of the game. I’d give the nod to Noah. Thomas is a step below all of those guys, but at least can knock down a jumper. Millsap was a bit better than Gibson, but wasn’t anywhere near where he is today. Asik’s capable of finishing at the rim but not much else, but Collins was literally one of the worst offensive players in the league. The only reason he’s not the worst is because he has a twin who’s just as bad. I’ll give a decent nod to Utah. Really it all boils down to Thomas getting 15 minutes/game in lieu of Noah and Booze, and Booze and Noah being slightly diminished when playing. That’s a decent loss, but it would be pretty surprising to see it take more than a 3 point toll on the team’s efficiency.
Both had great coaches. Sloan is/was a HOF coach, and Thibs will definitely be a COY candidate, both rightly so. Slight nod to Sloan from me, but hard to go wrong with either. Both had/have great fans. Utah played in a much more competitive division.
So who would you expect to be better? And by how much?
Utah: O-rating of 113.8, 1st in the league.
Chicago: O-Rating of 107.7, 13th in the league.
A 6-point differential, the difference between an average team and an elite team.
Utah is was hugely better offensively in 2008 than Chicago is now. It’s true I cherry-picked this season, partly because this was Utah’s best offensive season so would seem the most likely time for Williams to get MVP consideration, but also because Brewer/Korver/Booze played for both these teams. But you’re quite spoiled for choice; since William’s rookie season, with him as Utah’s PG the Jazz have been better offensively than the 2011 Bulls every single season.
So tell me, what makes Rose so different from Williams? And why again should Rose get the MVP? Or did Williams deserve it in 2008? Break it down for me.
dirksimmons
March 23, 2011
Okay, I’m a Bulls fan, so I’m obviously bias. With that said, this article is laughable. As a matter of fact, it’s so frustratingly stupid, I don’t even know where to begin refuting it. Kyle Lowry? When’s the last time he saw a double team? High School? This is where advanced statistical analysis takes the soul out of the game. It’s like those more taste-less taste commercials. You’re crazy enough to think a beer is a beer.
However, it is tiring that the media/press get sick of giving it to the same person every year. If Lebron has earned it, then give it to him. I remember Barkley and Malone winning it in the midst of the Bulls dynasty years. Now, advanced statistical mumbo-jumbo might say they earned it, but it’s ludicrous to think anyone would want Barkley or Malone over Jordan. Agreed?
If I had to decide between Rose and Lowry 1,000,000 times, I will take Derrick Rose every single time and twice on Sunday. You can’t measure everything in a box score. The success of the MVP’s team has to be considered. Chris Paul is a statistical giant, but his team isn’t going to play more than 5 games in the playoffs. Doesn’t that count for something? If he is the most valuable player, he’d win more, no?
dirksimmons
March 23, 2011
And another point for the person that thought the Bulls had the weakest schedule in the league…The Bulls also had the most back-to-backs in the league this year. Not always easy to win those second games in the NBA.
Lior
March 23, 2011
“Consistency” is a point I’ve been curious for a while but haven’t seen research on. I’d do the calculation myself if I hard the time, but I don’t.
The problem is (should anyone wish to crunch the numbers): for a given player, we have approximate game-by-game WP48 and WP numbers from the correlation with PAWSMin [these numbers should average (total, respectively) to the season-end numbers calculated by the precise definitions]. Given this data, how large is the standard deviation over the whole season? (There’s a case to be made that games not played should count as zero production, at least for the WP calculation).
Two things I’d love to know but haven’t seen yet:
1. What is the “typical” scaled standard deviation. That is, the (playing-time-weighted-)average player produces at 0.100. But how big are the typical fluctuations around this on a game-by-game basis?
2. Who are the “outliers”? Presumably, some players produce wins by giving roughly the same level of production every game. Others have a greater variance between their great games and bad games. It would be nice to know who is who. Did Malone really “always deliver”?
3. To see if such numbers means anything, one would need to check the season-to-season correlation to ensure that these standard deviation numbers tell us something about the player.
John
March 23, 2011
Schermeister, I agree with you about people going crazy about PGs lately. I think a lot of it has to do with rule changes though. Without hand checks, PGs in this league are virtually unguardable. Thus, their stats are insane, and their games look pretty to the eye.
I think if you put Stockton or Prime Kidd in today’s game, they’d definitely win an MVP at some point (assuming the voters tired of getting it to LeBron).
Also, I wouldn’t pencil in Derrick Rose for the MVP just yet. There’s a loud rumbling for Dwight Howard. Let’s see how the next few weeks play out. It’ll be hard to prevent Rose from winning if he has another game like last night against the Hawks, but I don’t think the award has his name engraved on it yet.
Thepeaceblogger
March 23, 2011
Kris–
I don’t think that the type of comment you use to mock Scott is necessary dude, we all try to make our point heard on this topic and as you can see stats don’t think that DRose is an MVP candidate, like it or not this is a FACT.
My opinion on this : DRose is an amazing player and he has taken an huge step forward form last year to become the LEADER in his team and just for that I believe that he deserve to be in the discussion for MVP this year, but I don’t need to read DB or Nerd to know that there are a lot of players more productive or valuable to their team than DRose, for me the Bulls MVP is not DRose but coach Thibodeau. He has, with his Celtics defence mind, made the Bulls on of the best defensive team in the league, not DRose.
No matter where you look or at what type of stats (DB, Nerd, ESPN, NBA.com) you’re addicted too, the best players in the game in term of productivity are always the same : LBJ6, CP3, DW3, DH12…
LBJ6 will not get a third MVP award unfortunately (and I believe he should get it…) because of the “decision” but if DRose win it over DH12, I think that it will be really unfair….
Thanks guys (from Portsmouth UK)
Kris
March 23, 2011
Peace blogger-
How exactly did I mock him? He said “ppl much starter than you” when he doesn’t even know me. So “dude” read what I replied to. Like I said Dwight Howard was more valuable to Orlando than Lebron was last year but nobody said anything because Lebron is “just so great…the MVP trophy has his name on it” when Lebron couldn’t even get out of the 2nd round. D.Howard is second to me in the MVP race and Derrick is 1st. you guys can over analyze all the stats that u want but D.Rose has his team 1st in the EAST and SECOND BEST RECORD IN THE NBA! so yea…..u see where I’m going with this.
nerdnumbers
March 23, 2011
An interesting observation (albeit an old one) When you try and say Chris Paul is MVP or Kevin Love is MVP the response is pretty much “They can’t be! Their team doesn’t have enough wins” The same thing is coming up comparing Lowry with Rose (which started as a joke but you know what now I’m serious Lowry for MVP)
The point is if looking at individual performance is not the deciding factor for MVP perhaps we can rename the award MVT (Most Valuable Team). At least that would be honest. . .
A final note: Calling someone crazy or questioning how we can think a certain way is not an argument. In case you missed it this is a stats blog, bring stats to back up your point or at least half way clever insults (I did like the one about taking the soul of the game)
Thepeaceblogger
March 23, 2011
Kris–
Ok I agree “ppl much smarter that you” wasn’t appropriate considering that he doesn’t know you.
Anyway, look DRose is having an amazing season and because of “the decision” he may end up with the MVP award, which according to me would be tough on DW12… As I said the Bulls are really good this year because of Thibodeau defence, DRose is a better player than last year, no doubt about that, but going as far as to say that he is a better player than LBJ6 or DW3…I don’t think so..
But hey, this is my opinion Kris, for me Rose isn’t the best player in the league (he is pretty far from it), as the MVP award usually mean, LEBRON JAMES is the best player in the league and has been for the past 3 years now, but I respect your opinion dude and if Derrick Rose get the MVP award this year I will still be happy for him….
Thanks,
Jeremy
March 23, 2011
I’d rename it “TSOTTWTBRIOOTC” aka, Top Scorer on the Team With the Best Record in One of the Conferences. Pretty much a guarantee that this is the rule voters historically use.
Kris
March 23, 2011
Ok!!!! So this is what I took from this Blog
-Derrick rose shouldnt get ONE MVP (say WHAT?!?!)
-Kyle Lowry should get MVP votes (REALLY?!?..am I in the matrix)
-Lebron James is more productive (eh…stats..stats..stats..)
-Dwight Howard is MVP over Derrick (huh?)
I gotta get a way from here apparently I’m not smart enough (re Scott..thanks Pal! Stay classy ;-) ) nor do I think stats tell the whole story. so you guys stay blessed!!! Gotta go! Derrick Rose for MVP!!!!
Kris
March 23, 2011
and Yes Nerd I would rather have 2011 Rose over 2011 Howard.. any day of the week ten times over!
fricktho
March 23, 2011
I’ve become resigned to the fact Rose will probably win the MVP, which is fine. He’s a fantastic player to watch. Perception is a big factor. It’s just unfortunate a lot of the Bulls off-season additions are going unnoticed in the national discussion. The Bulls made major changes. Boozer, Brewer, Bogans, Asik, and Korver were all added. Those 5 account for 20 wins, which is 40% of their total. The Bulls really do have a good team, which should be the anti-MVP case. Dwight Howard is straddled with much worse support, and would get my vote, since I would be required to justify any choice based on team win totals.
I’m having automated wins produced withdrawals!
Italian Stallion
March 23, 2011
I agree with the general premise that Rose is being over hyped to the point of ridiculousness, but the greater debate is still about the relationship between usage and efficiency.
Those that think Rose is among the better players in the league (the sensible ones that don’t think he’s an MVP candidate) will argue that he’s not taking a lot of shots (some of which are very difficult) because he’s a ball hog and poor decision maker. They will say he’s taking a lot of tough shots because there’s not a lot of offensive fire power on the team. As a result, his efficiency is getting punished because he takes more than his fair share of the tough ones.
We have to know whether that’s true in Rose’s case and to what degree to determine his true value.
Italian Stallion
March 23, 2011
fricktho,
http://nerdnumbers.com/seasons
Kelly
March 23, 2011
Would anyone here actually accept the postulate that if the Bulls traded straight up for Lowrey they would be a better team? If so you’re WAY too much in this whole WS thing. The thing is, that Lowry has a better WS/48 says more about the quality of the stat than the quality of the players.
I am something of a stat geek, and don’t dismiss things entirely, but sometimes people do need to actually pay attention to the game more than the box score. It seems to me that there’s an overemphasis on TS% and not enough on the players actual impact on the game.
When Rose drives and kicks he raises his teammates eFG by 8-10%. That’s what’s not covered here. If he doesn’t shoot when he drives, he’s not a threat to score, then players don’t come off their man to pick up Rose and they don’t leave his teammates open.
Patrick
March 23, 2011
The similarities between Rose this year and Iverson in 2001 are shocking:
1) Hyped former 1st overall picks that are entertaining to watch.
2) Team defense was insane, team offense was middle-of-the-pack.
3) Both players score a ton of points per game at average efficiency.
4) Supporters of the player in question use bad stats to forward their arugment (per game averages) and ignore stats that actually mean something (things related to efficiency).
5) No credit is given to elite coach or elite defender/rebounder starting at center.
6) MVP award more about completing a national narrative than actually rewarding the best basketball player.
-Patrick
nerdnumbers
March 23, 2011
Kelly,
Thanks for bringing stats to the table. You do make a good point. We get back to classic arguments here though. If Rose is raising his team’s game (6 players have better TS% than he does) then why is he taking so many shots? Chicago is a middle of the road offense. How can we credit Rose with upping his team’s offense if the end result is average? If Rose can up his team’s shooting by 8-10% on drive and kicks (could you give me the source, that’s really cool) then we is he taking so many shots? His assist to turnover ratio is also not that hot.
Fun note on raising team’s offense. Houston Rockets behind Lowry have the 4th best ORating, Bulls behind Rose are 12th. . . Lowry MVP. If you want to argue Rose is upping his team’s defense I’d love to listen but it seems that when people quote 24 and 8 they are focusing on offense.
fricktho
March 23, 2011
I don’t think the Bulls would take as significant of a drop off as some might think swapping Lowry for Rose. Look at what we’ve witnessed happening in the Denver/NY trade. Would the Bulls offense look differently? Yes. Lowry’s usage rate is only 18% whereas Rose’s is 32%. Other players would be taking shots. Korver, Brewer, and Boozer were all highly productive players prior to coming to the Bulls. Rose has not made any of those three ‘better’ by supposedly increasing their eFG%, which he has not in any of those cases. They’ve all seen drops from their eFG% from last year.
fricktho
March 23, 2011
I suppose you could argue that Deron Williams’ increased his teammates eFG% by a greater amount than Rose has seeing as how Brewer, Korver, and Boozer were all poached from the Jazz, and they all possessed higher eFG%s playing for Utah than they do playing for Chicago. In that sense why wasn’t Deron Williams the MVP last season? He would have had a better case than Rose has this year. The difference between the Jazz of 2010 and the Bulls of 2011 isn’t the PG position, it’s the Center position. Noah for MVP.
ilikeflowers
March 23, 2011
Off Topic,
Here’s a quote from the Seattle Post…
The top of Mike D’Antonio’s rotation looks impressive on paper with Anthony, Stoudemire and Chauncey Billups but the team lacks a true center and has a starting two guard, rookie Landry Fields, that is a nice story but would be a deep reserve or situational player of a real contender.
The Landry Fields watch is revving up. So who’s the most likely to land him?
arturogalletti
March 23, 2011
ILF,
The line for Fields would stretch around the league. Chicago, Boston, Dallas, San Antonio (at the 3) I can think of.
Baby and picks sound ok to you for Fields? How about Shannon Brown? Richard Jefferson?
Actually how about Kidd, Heywood and Barea for Billups, Shelden and Fields ?
Adam C. Madison
March 23, 2011
Kelly makes a great point wrt taking the soul out of the game.
It should not be an if-or situation. All knowledge of the game, subjective and objective, should be welcomed.
We’re on a sabermetric website, however. So, for the most part, all you’re gonna get are stats. That is inherently flawed, of course.
“(Why most people, including you, are ignoring the fact that Rose is at best an average defender and that Chicago is only an elite team because they’re so strong defensively, and that their improvement is mostly due to a 5-point improvement in D-rating is beyond me. But I’ll bite anyway).”
There’s a good chance Rose is at least an average defender. Henry Abbott had a post about it recently, IIRC, and this adds more fuel to the fire:
http://elgee35.wordpress.com/
Kelly
March 23, 2011
nerdnumbers,
First, I don’t recall where I read the stat on Rose, (truehoops somewhere) but it gave the teams efg% when Rose passes out of isolation, and I figured it out based on the team’s efg%-Rose’s own shooting.
The question though, why does Rose shoot if his teammates are more likely to make the shot is a fair one. However, that doesn’t mean that there’s no response to it.
First, it’s not just when he assists on isolation it’s when he passes. His usage% is about 31ish, which means that 69% of the time he does pass. That’s one of the misconceptions. Unlike shooting guards, he’s the principle ball handler so virtually every possession begins with him. If he’s passing out 65-70 percent of the time then that means he is passing first, not shooting first.
Second, his assist percentage is somewhere between 8th and 10th (depending on whatever happens day to day). His turnover rate is less that 15 percent. There’s only been one other player to ever have a usg over 30, assist % over 40 and t/o percentage under 15. The other was Wade a couple of years ago.
Part of the problem with thinking about assist/turnover ratios is that it doesn’t take into account usage. Having the ball more is going to inherently result in a greater NUMBER of turnovers. If you take (usage % + assist % – t/o %)/ t/o % you get a more telling result which is a ratio of favorable outcomes to possessions/unfavorable. In that Dirk is tops, Rose is second. Considering the fact that Dirk is barely a ball handler that says something.
Anyway, my point there is that the whole assist/turnover ratio thing is an overblown ratio that has less meaning than it might seem.
As far as why does he shoot so much, let me put it this way. Where I get bothered by people talking about this, let me ask you this. How many times have you heard Tom Thibodeau complain about Rose shooting too much? None. In fact Thibs designed the offense FOR him to shoot so much. Are you actually going to fault a player for being coached?
So now think about this. Thibs probably knows more about basketball than everyone who is commenting on this thread and writing the articles put together. He may know more about the game than any human being alive, and I’m actually not exaggerating.
So why do you think Thibs WANTS Rose to shoot so much if it is inefficient? The answer lies in the fact that it’s actually productive whether he’s scoring or not. The fact that he doesn’t score matters some, but not as much as he shoots.
And believe me, I know that sounds like balderdash, but it’s counterintuitive. When Rose penetrates he breaks down defenses and causes them to collapse. He doesn’t just draw double teams, he draws triple teams and quadruple teams.
If teams don’t collapse on him, he’s going to be dunking every ball and his ORtg would be like 200. You have to double team him, or triple team him. If he never shoots or rarely shoots he’s not a threat. Teams don’t collapse on him, they don’t leave players wide open with enough time to watch the extended version of Avatar. That increased efg% by his teammates is a direct result of the threat of Rose getting to the rim.
That’s why Thibs wants Rose to shoot, because it’s the threat.
But there’s more to it than that. During the Pacers game the Bulls could have won in regulation when Rose passed it out to Korver for a wide open three. Korver didn’t take the shot but gave it back to Rose. After the game Rose privately told Korver (according to Korver) that the team needs him to take those shots.
That’s where the difference is between guys like Allen Iverson or Stephon Marberry and Derrick Rose is. Rose does it because he’s asked to, not in spite of the fact that he’s asked not to. Rose wants the team to benefit. They wanted to be heroes.
The whole post hoc ergo propter hoc kind of logic that goes into seeing a casual relationship between the numbers and assuming that means a same attitude is where people go wrong. There game was selfish. Rose’s game is selfless.
On the offensive rating thing, I’ll say that the reason that Rose is considered a candidate isn’t primarily his offense, it’s the Bulls winning. The obvious difference between them is that the Bulls have about 18 more wins.
Now I understand that there are differing notions of what MVP means and what “value” means, but generally speaking being on an “elite” team is sort of an essential. People aren’t basing a Rose candidacy on the 24 and 8, they are supporting it with that.
Having said that let me say this also. When Rose literally hit the tapes to figure out what was wrong with his game to get to the line more often, he figured something out. He was going in to fast and he wasn’t getting the calls because of that.
Since then he’s been averaging better than two and a half more free throw attempts per game, and he’s elevated his FT% by 10%. Since then the Bulls ORtg has been 111.2, up from 105.4 at that time.
Now there’s obviously more at play than just that there, but strictly based on that, it’s about three more points per 100 possessions the Bulls added onto their ORtg.
And while people talk about how the Heat needed to figure out how to play together and all that they don’t take into account the same is true for the Bulls who added more new pieces than Miami. And the Bulls have had Boozer and Noah playing musical chairs with injuries, which that more than anything has been slowing down the offense.
Since the break, the Bulls offense has begun to really find itself. Their ORtg since then is a whopping 113.5 and their defense has maintained it’s usually stellar play.
If you haven been noticing it wasn’t that long ago the Bulls were 23rd on Offense. That they’re 12th right now is pretty telling. It’s interesting that people who use stats as a model and then put forth Howard don’t make the same argument against him. The Bulls have a better ORtg and a better DRtg than Orlando.
As far as Derrick’s contributions on defense, I don’t get why people are so adamant that the Bulls defense is in spite of him and not because of him. I can say this. I went to synergy and entered the points per play against of every starting guard in the NBA. Derrick Rose’s was the lowest of anyone. He was also the fourth lowest of any of the top 100 players in PER.
So is that definitive proof that he’s one of the top defensive players? It probably should be. It would be if it were Chris Paul or Deron Williams but people dismiss that because it’s Derrick Rose. Let’s just say that he is playing 38 minutes a game on the best defensive team in the NBA at the most important position. Do you really think he doesn’t have something to do with the defense?
So anyway, what I’m getting at is that there’s a much better statistical argument for Rose than “24 and 8.” Theres a certain smell test to things and when you see someone making an argument that Lowrey is better than Rose it doesn’t pass it.
People need to set aside their myopic obsession with “efficiency.” I understand the principles behind it, but clearly the Bulls are winning. Clearly they are becoming a highly effective offense and adding that on to their stellar defense. If the whole notion of why efficiency is so important is that it helps you win, and the Bulls are winning with Derrick Rose being “inefficient” maybe people need to stop arguing that Derrick Rose isn’t helping the Bulls win and start wondering why. They need to question the paradigm, not the reality.
Kelly
March 23, 2011
Chris, you’re comparing the offense of a team that had played together for years and under the same coach with a team that added eight new players and learned the system this year, and have played about 80 percent of their games without one of their two key offensive players?
Dude, you’re not just cherry picking. You’re planting the seeds, fertilizing and watering them, and then picking them when they grow. Since the AS break the Bulls ORtg is 113.5. Amazing what happens when you give a team half a season to learn a system and learn to play together isn’t it?
Kris
March 23, 2011
Kelly u effin Rock!!!!! ;-)
arturogalletti
March 23, 2011
Rose is the new Kobe.
Does that mean I’m going to be defending him in a few years?
Probably. He’s good now. Just not the MVP.
Philip
March 23, 2011
Kelly,
There are some aspects of the defense that Rose excels at, and some that he struggles with. He’s good in isolation and a good rebounder. He’s mediocre off ball and doesn’t do a consistently good job of fighting through screens. He plays generally conservative defense, and doesn’t gamble much or force many turnovers.
Also, your argument that “When Rose penetrates…double, triple, quadruple-teamed…etc” can go for every single high-usage player in the league. Defenses collapse on people that drive. It’s what they do. It’s what they did to Lebron and Wade before they played together, and what they’re doing now. It’s what they did to Kobe in 2006 when he terrible teammates, and what they did to him from 2008 onwards when he had great ones. It’s what happened to Iverson in Philly, and what happened to him in Denver. It’s what they did to Jordan before Pippen and Paxson and Grant were making big contributions, and what they did after. None of these players were any more efficient with better teammates.
We can also look at “scorers” traded to teams with weaker supporting casts and see if their efficiency changed. Miller’s stayed stable when he went from Denver to Philly. Harris’s dropped a couple of points when he went to NJ, but he had injury woes. Carter’s hasn’t changed in 5 years. Pierce’s and Allen’s went up a bit with Boston.
Everyone and their mother has been worse since joining Detroit, a team loaded with “scorers”. And yet joining the Bucks hasn’t negatively impacted Delfino or Salmons at all.
Perhaps Derrick Rose is special, his supporting cast is uniquely terrible, and he alone possess the ability to draw double teams and shoot difficult shots. But I’m pretty skeptical. And if that supporting cast is so terrible, I wonder why they weren’t so terrible when they were playing for other teams.
I assume that “Chris” is short for “Philip” and you’re referring to me. Yes, the Bulls have been pretty impressive over the second half of the season. But we’re debating the MVP award, which is a cumulative award for the entire season.
I know conventional wisdom is that teams play better together when they’ve been playing together longer. I’m pretty dubious of that; I think it’s an after-the-fact rationalization. Most NBA offenses aren’t that different. “Spread the floor and run pick-and-rolls for the PG” isn’t exactly unique. Neither is flex. Neither is running 1-4 isos, or post-up plays, or quick-hitters to get a shooter a good look. Chicago is hardly unique in this regard.
I think it’s much more likely that Chicago’s improvement is to Rose playing a bit better, and much more importantly, Noah and Booze playing.
marparker
March 23, 2011
According to Arturo Win Shares is the second best model with the same explanatory power as Wins Produced and the second best consistency. That model has Rose as the 6th best producer in the NBA.
While I’m inclined to side with WP in saying that Rose is getting a little undue love I’m not going to dismiss what WinShares has to say either.
arturogalletti
March 23, 2011
marparker,
WS is good. It features an adjustment for team performance (which does help Rose as he plays on good team). I’m also inclined to agree with WP though.
And I may be writing something to that end.
Mike
March 23, 2011
@Kelly so he is the MVP of what, the second two thirds?
IMHO, the MVP is Dwight Howard – plain and simple. He does it all, and has kept a remade team relevant. DH for MVP (chant it with me).
Kelly
March 24, 2011
Philip,
Way to just ignore the stats that you don’t support your case. If my position were that Rose is the only player in the league who draws double teams then you’d have a really good point. It seems you like to build strawmen.
The argument isn’t that he’s unique in that regard, the argument is that that’s the way the offense is designed to work and it actually does work that way. The “inefficiency” argument revolves around him shooting “too” much. But he does what he’s supposed to do and plays the way he’s coached to play.
The same goes for his not gambling on defense. Are you going to assert that you know more about defenses than Thibodeau? That’s what it seems the Rose-is-not-MVPs seem to overlook. Rose is doing what he’s coached to do.
You say that Rose “has trouble” fighting through screens. That’s no longer true. It’s one of the things he’s greatly improved on this year. First, teams set an amazing number of picks on the guy, it’s 49% of the time. Second, they score only 33.6% of the time when they do so. So, you’re argument that he’s “mediocre” falls very flat. He’s way the heck above average.
Third, another strawman on the “everyone is so terrible” argument. I never argued that they were terrible. Why do you have to argue “with” things I haven’t said? It’s fallacious.
But let me ask you this? Why does it matter? Those who prop up the whole “the rest of his team is good too” argument overlook a couple of things. First, was Kobe’s team good when he won? Was Garnett’s team good when he won? Pretty much the only one who won with horrible teammates is James, and you can’t say that any more. How many of the top candidates are the only All-Star on their team though?
Finally you assess that the reason that Chicago’s playing together is a result of the rest of the team playing better and Noah and Boozer playing together. Does it not occur to you that you prove my argument when you’re saying that. That’s precisely my point.
The rest of the team is starting to gel and now they have Noah and Boozer playing on the team. That PROVES that the Rose has actually been carrying the offense through most of the season. Have you noticed that since they’ve been playing better Rose’s shots have gone down? His efficiency has gone up.
I agree that some people take too much credit away from the rest of the team, but some want to use that argument to take too much of the credit away from Rose. The rest of the team is good. Rose makes them very good.
Mike
March 24, 2011
Of course Lowry is considered better than Rose: he takes less shots and gets more rebounds.
Sam Cohen
March 24, 2011
Completely off-topic, but I thought the NBA player comparisons for Jimmer Fredette in the NY Times article from yesterday were hysterical:
“Stardom, however, is unlikely, the scouts and front-office personnel said. Comparative players that came up were Jeff Hornacek, Steve Kerr, Kyle Korver and Jason Kapono.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/24/sports/ncaabasketball/24byu.html?hpw
Look! It’s a white guy who can shoot! (Adam Morrison and Peter Maravich were also mentioned at other points in the article. Oddly, they managed to not bring up J.J. Redick.)
My recollection is that Hornacek and Kerr actually fare very well when evaluated by WP, but that the others do not, which also tends to make the list of comparables even more ridiculous.
Italian Stallion
March 24, 2011
There one thing that doesn’t add up for me about Rose is the same argument that has often been used to support Carmelo Anthony (not comparing the two as players).
If a player is a great offensive threat, is constantly drawing double and triple teams, is constantly kicking the ball out to open teammates etc… much of that value is going to be captured in his assist total. It’s not like players that draw a lot of attention don’t get any credit for it if they turn it into something positive.
Last night Melo played the best game I have seen him play as a Knick.
When he got the ball, instead of holding it, looking for his own shot first, shooting a marginal shot, driving and throwing up a bad shot etc… he looked for teammates unless he had a great look. When he drew attention to himself as he made his move he passed instead of taking that marginal shot.
He wound up with a TS% of 71% , 9 assists, and a WP48 of .399 for the night. Great night!
That higher TS% and all those assists fed right into his value. Had he taken the same marginal shots he always takes, he would have scored more points, but his assist total and TS% would have been lower and we’d be having a similar debate about the fact that he draws double and triple teams etc….
Schermeister
March 24, 2011
Something of note
The bulls will probably finish first which will seal the deal for D. Rose MVp(unfortunate)
This is because their upcoming schedule is only vs .435% teams.
Chicago already has the 3rd easiest SOS is basketball(tied with Boston) However bostons SOS will stay the same over the next 12 games compared to the bulls which will go down. Plus I Boston may rest there players a few more minutes. These teams face each other one more time, so that will of course have a huge influence on who gets #1.
Schermeister
March 24, 2011
Sam,
That article is great, white people compared to white people. What a surprise! Reminds me of Kevin Love being compared to only white guys. Keith Van Horn came to mind, maybe the only big white guy people could remember
Adam C. Madison
March 24, 2011
Kelly,
I was really adamant in my position that D-Ho is the MVP, and that it would be a travesty if he didn’t win it.
You have convinced me that, if Rose should not be the outright MVP, he and D-Ho should share the award. Your posts have been marvelous, your logic impeccable, your tone gracious.
Just one question:
What is your source(s) for things like:
“You say that Rose “has trouble” fighting through screens. That’s no longer true. It’s one of the things he’s greatly improved on this year. First, teams set an amazing number of picks on the guy, it’s 49% of the time. Second, they score only 33.6% of the time when they do so. So, you’re argument that he’s “mediocre” falls very flat. He’s way the heck above average. “
Griffin Taylor
March 24, 2011
Professor Berri,
Read WoW, try to push it on friends w/ mixed results..tough to talk sports with them theses days..I cited this article on my new website, twocentsports.com…
The site is created by the college mind for the college mind, and I want to use it to get young ppl on the whole saber/apbr metrics trend…Maybe you can check it out, and I plan to link your site in the 2CentSports Favorites box on the top left of the home page..
Any chance you’d reference my site next to all yours on this one? Or I can ever write something for the blog? Or one of your writers would contribute to my site?
Appreciate the time
Griffin Taylor
gct1@alfred.edu
Mike
March 24, 2011
@kelly there is NO WAY that Rose is the MVP.None. Not a smidgeon. No way.
You are making a one sided case, and not comparing Rose to anyone else. Lets look at Lebron and Miami. How many games have they had a D League team for? http://www.nba.com/heat/stats/ shows that NO ONE has played all 71 games, and that most players have missed games. For a team with no depth, that hurts.
What about Howard? He has averaged 23.1 ppg, 14.20 rbs, 1.29 steals, 2.43 Blocks. Tell me ANYONE is more valuable on BOTH ends of the court?
And whilst Rose has dealt with injuries, Howard has dealt with a complete roster overhaul. Of their rotation, they lost VC, Marcin Gortat, Mickael Pietrus and Rashard Lewis, and got back Hedo, Arenas and JRich. And they keep winning. That is largely down to the consistently awesome production from Howard, as well as the elevation of Bass and Anderson at the 4.
So Rose, whilst he has had a good season, and no one is arguing he hasn’t, is simply not a patch on Howard.
Adam C. Madison
March 24, 2011
“Has anyone ever done a correlation study comparing the relationship between the strength of a persons argument and the strength of his or her writing? It seems to me that they match pretty well.”
So far Kelly is winning by a country mile by that yard stick. In fact, he should look into starting a blog / website if he hasn’t already.
Italian Stallion
March 24, 2011
I understand that Rose fits the generally accepted criteria associated with the MVP award winner, but there are simply too many other players better than him that also fit the criteria.
IMO, Howard is so obviously the MVP I’m shocked there’s even a debate.
His stats are as good as anyone in the league, his team has a very good record, he is considered the BEST defender in the league, and he can totally dominate a game on either or both ends of the floor.
If I could pick one player to start a team, I’d probably pick Lebron, but for just this year I’d take Howard.
Philip
March 24, 2011
Kelly,
What stats am I ignoring? The main stats that you’re presenting is that Rose’s efficiency has slightly improved due to improved foul drawing and shooting, and that the Chicago offense has vastly improved.
I agree with you about turnovers – considering his usage rate, his turnover rate is acceptable. My apologies for not addressing this.
I don’t want to get into defense too much, so I won’t go any farther. Can we agree that Rose is a decent-to-good defender, but that it’s other player’s on Chicago that are what makes the Bulls’s defense elite?
The “he does what his coach tells him to do” and “he’s selfless” arguments aren’t stats.
“That increased efg% by his teammates is a direct result of the threat of Rose getting to the rim.”
What players have an increased efg% since joining the Bulls? I checked out players’ 5-year averages. Boozer’s, Brewer’s and Korver’s have all declined. Bogans’s and Thomas’s have gone up. Considering that the former three shoot a lot more than the latter two, I’d say the evidence points to Rose having a negative effect on his teammates’ efficiency.
Everyone else has been with the Bulls for their entire careers, so it’s impossible to differentiate their playing with Rose from any other factor about playing for the Bulls. This year, Gibson has declined. Noah has stayed the same. Deng has improved. Again, no evidence to point to Rose having an overall positive or negative impact. (Watson’s has declined sharply, but he doesn’t play many minutes with Rose).
Incidentally, the many, many faults of “player X improves his teammates’ efficiency” was addressed in “The Melo Effect”. Even then, at least Melo’s teammates’ had shown undeniable improvement in their TS% while playing for the Nuggets with Melo. You can’t say that for any of the current Bulls.
“The rest of the team is starting to gel and now they have Noah and Boozer playing on the team. That PROVES that the Rose has actually been carrying the offense through most of the season. Have you noticed that since they’ve been playing better Rose’s shots have gone down? His efficiency has gone up.”
Imagine you’re working on a chilli recipe. Your recipe is pretty so-so; the salt, pepper, cumin, parsley, etc just isn’t cutting it. Whenever you manage to get a bit of dark chocolate or cinnamon, your chilli is a lot better, but you never have both and rarely have as much of either as you’d prefer. You splash out and get rock salt. Your salt is a bit better, but not by much. Then you manage to get a large supply of both dark chocolate and cinnamon, add both, and your chilli is pretty good.
Would you say, “Wow, the rock salt really did the trick!”
Or would you think that the change from sea salt to rock was a small part of the improvement, and that the main change was due to adding two completely new ingredients?
Because you’re basically saying that adding two new ingredients PROVES that the third ingredient, which is more or less the same and that was already there in the first place is the reason the chilli improved.
“Third, another strawman on the “everyone is so terrible” argument. I never argued that they were terrible. Why do you have to argue “with” things I haven’t said? It’s fallacious.”
My apologies, I mistakenly took it to be implicit to your argument.
My thinking is this: either Rose’s teammates are really good and they deserve more credit than they’re getting for Chicago’s record, or his teammates aren’t that good and Chicago has such a good record because of Rose, the deserving MVP. It’s a pretty straightforward dichotomy.
Let me ask this – why isn’t there any love for Duncan or Ginobli as MVP? Because people rightly acknowledge that they’re great players, but the reason the Spurs have the best record in the league is because their complementary players are so good.
“But let me ask you this? Why does it matter? Those who prop up the whole “the rest of his team is good too” argument overlook a couple of things. First, was Kobe’s team good when he won? Was Garnett’s team good when he won? Pretty much the only one who won with horrible teammates is James, and you can’t say that any more. How many of the top candidates are the only All-Star on their team though?”
Kobe didn’t deserve his MVP. Garnett’s and James’s teammates were all vastly inferior to D Rose’s the year that they won theirs. If Rose was as good as either of those two during their MVP years (or even this year), Chicago would be winning 65+ games and be an overwhelming favorite. As it stands, they’re a great team, and have as good a chance as anyone to win the championship this year, but they’re not head-and-shoulders above the competition they would be with a player like James or Garnett in lieu of Rose.
“The rest of the team is good. Rose makes them very good.”
Agreed. Rose does make them better. But the improvement is probably from about a 52-win team to a 60-win team. That’s good. But that’s not MVP-worthy.
Gil Meriken
March 24, 2011
“Lowry’s WP48 of 0.172 is actually quite comparable to what we see from Rose. ” – Not disputable, this is a mathematical formula, and it is pretty clear cut.
“In other words, if Lowry and Rose switched places, the fate of each team would be quite similar” – This is quite a leap of logic.
This is like saying “If a player with a WP48 of .441 switches places with another player with a WP48 of .346 (about 20% worse), the fate of each team will be dramatically different than before the switch”.
What if I told you the player with a WP48 of .441 was 09-10 Lebron James and the .346 was 10-11 Lebron James?
So Miami would be much better with 09-10 LBJ on their team, where he would suddenly have a .441 WP48? And Cleveland last year would have been worse with this year’s LBJ? Aren’t they basically the same player? Couldn’t you even argue that 10-11 LBJ has a better skill set and more experience than 09-10 LBJ?
whiplashtony
March 25, 2011
Hey super nerds – basketball is played by tall people. No 6ft midget guard should ever be considered for MVP as long as a Dwight Howard is playing. Don’t get your Chicago Bull panties in a snit if Kyle Lowry is getting some pub for his outstanding 2nd half play. I think the article is just trying to draw attention to the ws/wp stat methodology and that Lowry is playing well. Stats have a long way to go to measure value, and WP and WS do not value blocked shots enough. I’ll tell you why the Rockets aren’t the Bulls. We got C. f’ing Hayes at center, and we play in the West Conf. Enjoy Melo and Dwill the next decade D. Rose. Anyways, centers in basketball are like goalies in hockey. The position is just way more important that the others. In the case of basketball it’s just physics. I’m a Rocket Fan since Akeem was drafted without the H) and I would still trade Kyle for D. Rose in a heartbeat. Dwight Howard is holding down that defense by himself. Rose has a lot of bigs like Noah, Asik, Gibson and a stellar defensive coach. Dwights offensive game took a huge leap no doubt to those sessions with Dream (sure wasn’t Ewing). Do you really need a formula explaining why a 7ft guy is more valuable in a game with a 10ft basket?
philos
March 25, 2011
@Gil: Why wouldn’t this year’s Miami Heat be better with the 2009-2010 LeBron? He had the same FG% this year and last but he’s taking less attempts both in the field and from the line. He’s settling for more jumpers than finishing at the rim or from 3. He’s assisting less and turning the ball over more. He’s producing less steals and blocks too. So yes, I dare say whether it’s a form of diminishing returns (I don’t buy it in this case) or a change in his style of play (much more likely), he’s less efficient this year and Miami would’ve been better with last years version.
Yes, Lebron might have more experience this year, but there’s no evidence that he has developed a better skill set compared to last year.
reservoirgod
March 25, 2011
I can’t believe this article got so many comments.
The assertions that Rose gets to the line more than Iverson are insane. Take a trip to the Play Index at basketball-reference.com and compare the two. One other thing about Rose & Iverson – the argument was also made back then that the offense was designed for AI to shoot so the 76ers great rebounders could crash the offensive boards for higher percentage shots. If those coaches are so great then why couldn’t they design a play to come up with a higher percentage shot in the first place?
I also have to disagree w/ those that say the “usage vs. efficiency” issue is at the heart of the Derrick Rose debate. It’s not. Usage vs. Efficiency is just a clever way to justify fans’ love affair w/ chuckers & their inflated scoring totals. The evidence of that love affair was laid out in The Wages of Wins along with its impact on player productivity & winning ball games. Chuckers cost you wins. It’s AMAZING the same people that claim to be connected to the “soul of the game” outside the boxscore abandon this basic tenet of basketball that everyone knows. Nobody likes to play w/ a chucker in real life. Yet everybody loves chuckers in the pros. The mind-altering effects of television are truly amazing.
You know what takes the “soul out of the game?” A chucker that doesn’t pass the ball to the better shooters on their team getting a pass for being a ball hog because they have a pretty crossover and stepback jumper that they can’t knockdown at an above average rate. THAT’S soulless basketball and I hope the fans of it rot in purgatory. I’ll be right next to them rooting for Allen Iverson to make a comeback. At least he gave great interviews.
Adam Morrison can congratulate Kelly for citing stats w/ no sources (or behind pay walls) all day long, but it doesn’t make them any more credible than a man selling a bridge in Brooklyn.
reservoirgod
March 25, 2011
Some truth for the Derrick Rose fans from a Derrick Rose fan:
Adam C. Madison
March 25, 2011
I feel I was a bit exuberant to claim anyone over MVP than D-Ho — Italian Stallion said it best; I don’t think anyone is remotely close to D-Ho this year, and I feel like people who aren’t giving him his due just aren’t watching the games — but Kelly made a few great points!
Also, I feel this debate (and the similar ones in the past, and inevitably in the future) go far to define the quality of this blog, and more specifically its “message board,” in terms of groupthink / tolerance.
I don’t have a horse in this race; I’ve long espoused a combination of watching the games and analyzing sabermetrically-inclined stats (and unlike most people on this forum I play basketball daily as well) but my repeated complaint has been the defensive missives fired at anyone who has the gall to suggest, Hey, WP accounts for 80% of the box score stats, but what about that last 20%? And who claimed those box score numbers are great indications of value, anyway?
I consider those guys trolls, guardians of the status quo, the curmudgeonly old guys resist to the inevitability that is change.
Thank you, Philip, for proving that you’re better than that! Your first response was a bit defensive, but you’ve gathered yourself and delivered a haymaker of your own!
This is so entertaining; I need to grab the popcorn!
Philip
March 26, 2011
Adam, my pleasure.
Rick
March 26, 2011
Is it bad that I can’t tell whether the pro-subjectivity/conservative-notions-of-social-knowledge/traditional stats/ESPN-talking-head commenters are being tongue-in-cheek?
It seems to me that if you say, “But I seen it, and thus it is,” you’re operating on blind faith (and a host of logical fallacies I’d love to teach in a composition classroom). Is that any way to go about evaluating anything at all?
Gil Meriken
March 26, 2011
@philos You are missing the point. Lebron cannot transfer his WP48 to another team, because his WP48 is not independent of the team. Dr. Berri may show that Wp48 is relatively consistent when players change teams, but that’s because they usually retain the same role (not minutes, but “style of play” as you call it). Lebron’s situation was a great experiment because his is an example of a superstar changing teams and roles, and the WP48 being quite different, it would seem, solely because of the new players and/or system. I will stand corrected if it’s just a case of Lebron having to adjust to new players and his WP48 goes up next year ( my personal opinion is if this happens, there’s going to be an opposite effect on Wade or Bosh’s WP48). It’s only one counter-point, but a powerful counterpoint, that LeBron did not keep the same WP48 (within even 10%), only a few months later. This rules out age, health, and a variety of other factors that would be understandable in creating such a large difference in such a short period of time. Again, he didn’t become a worse shooter in a qualitative sense, or a worse player in any measurement of his skills independent of a team. He can’t simply “do what he did in Cleveland” any more than he can do what another player does, in say, Los Angeles.
marparker
March 26, 2011
once again, in Lebron’s case, the question must be asked: what does the difference in wp48 have to be to be considered statistically significant
Gil Meriken
March 27, 2011
@ marparker It seems you may know the answer. Do you know? And if it happens that a 25% difference is not statistically significant, then what are the implications of comparing a player with a WP48 of 0.250 and another with 0.200? Or does this only apply when comparing the same player from season to season?
Druthers
March 27, 2011
Too bad Kyle Lowry isn’t a Bull; I would have loved to watch him switch places with Rose last night and put up 30 points (on 17 shots) and 17 assists, with only 2 turnovers against one of the NBA more-solid scoring defenses.
Matt
March 29, 2011
Too bad Kyle Lowry isn’t a Bull; I’m sure he could’ve managed to avoid 10 turnovers and help his heavily favored team defeat a near .500 Sixers team.
Guess we’ve both made great contributions to this debate.
Gil Meriken
March 29, 2011
Too bad Kyle Lowry isn’t a Piston; they could use him.