As in the previous posts, three-year averages of adjusted plus-minus ratings follow:
1. LeBron James, +13.70
2. Ron Artest, +7.79
3. Andrei Kirilenko, +6.36
4. Paul Pierce, +6.17
5. Luol Deng, +5.88
6. Chuck Hayes, +5.75
7. Corey Maggette, +4.72
8. Peja Stojakovic, +4.66
9. Shane Battier, +4.06
10. Gerald Wallace, +3.45
Other Notables: Hedo Turkoglu (+2.78), Josh Howard (+2.49), Rashard Lewis (+1.08), Tayshaun Prince (+0.88), Caron Butler (-0.38), Bruce Bowen (-0.64), Carmelo Anthony (-1.50), Richard Jefferson (-2.18)
LeBron is #1 with a bullet, and in fact, ranks #1 among all NBA players over the last 3 seasons, and yes, he ranks ahead of Kobe. LeBron is the main reason I have cringed every time I have heard a commentator proclaim Kobe to be the best basketball player on Earth. I suspect that this sentiment has something to do with Kobe's veteran status as well as the fact that Kobe, at this point in his career, is probably more skilled on the whole. However, the reason I think that LeBron is possibly superior and at least an equal (and why Kobe falls short compared to Jordan as well) is sheer physical skill. LeBron is an absolutely dominant inside player - something that Kobe cannot match. Kobe is a great athlete, but LeBron is a freakish athlete. Even with his questionable jumper, LeBron scores at the same rate and efficiency as Kobe due to his unquestioned ability to get to the basket.
OK - enough LeBron worshipping. From this ranking, Houston is in a great position adding Artest to their already loaded roster. They are jammed at forward and Artest is another player who can't stay healthy, but at the very least they now have 63-win kind of upside (although there are a lot of ifs to make that happen). Kirilenko ranks so high primarily due to an insane 2006 rating - in truth, he was probably one of the top 10 players in the league between 2002 and 2006, but he is past his prime today, although still a valuable asset. I do enjoy that touted role players like Chuck Hayes and Shane Battier make the top 10 - Hayes is probably overrated by this metric, but Battier's defensive contributions are strong enough that I don't think #9 is an absurd placement.
As a Bulls fan it does my heart good to see Luol Deng come in at #5 - even with an off year last year, he was still much more valuable to the team than Hinrich or Gordon. In my opinion, the Bulls should rebuild around Rose, Deng, Joakim Noah, and Tyrus Thomas - with everyone else being expendable. Ben Gordon is a nice piece to have on offense but his defensive liabilities make the kind of contract he's asking for an unwise investment.
To address the lower ranking star players - it is clear to me at this point that Carmelo Anthony and Richard Jefferson, to a lesser extent, are not contributing to wins in a manner suggested by their statistics. Both, it seems, have serious defensive issues and have consistently low ratings over a 3-year period, suggesting that these results are no fluke. The Nets were not unwise to get rid of Jefferson whereas the Nuggets should seriously consider trading Carmelo or reducing his minutes to inspire him to play better defense. As for some others, Bruce Bowen's reputation dates from a few years ago - he is old now and not as valuable as he once was. Tayshaun Prince is hurt by a questionably low 2006 rating - he probably is better than this analysis indicates. Caron Butler never really came into his own until this season - in the past, he has been another weak defensive player. Stay tuned for my ranking of power forwards!
Sunday, August 03, 2008
Saturday, August 02, 2008
The NBA's Top 10 Shooting Guards
More 3-year adjusted plus minus rankings here, this time for shooting guards. I should note that the best way to do this would be a regression over 3 years of data rather than averaging years. I'm just waiting for the good people at Basketball Value to provide more along these lines.
1. Kobe Bryant, +11.55
2. Manu Ginobili, +9.46
3. Dwyane Wade, +7.74
4. Vince Carter, +6.34
5. Andre Iguodala, +6.16
6. Jason Richardson, +4.79
7. Michael Redd, +4.18
8. Ray Allen, +3.79
9. Tracy McGrady, +3.73
10. Kirk Snyder, +3.59
Other notables: Joe Johnson (+2.59), Jamal Crawford (+2.22), Brandon Roy (-1.01 - only 2 years though), Ben Gordon (-2.27), Kevin Martin (-2.68), Jerry Stackhouse (-3.64), Richard Hamilton (-7.41)
On the whole, I think there are fewer surprises here than on the PG list. Based on adjusted plus-minus, Kobe lives up to the hype, although as we will see with the later positional rankings, it is hardly as obvious that he is the best player on the planet as the media likes to pretend. Noticeably, Manu Ginobili ranks as a truly great player by this metric, which I think he deserves. It does surprise me that Andre Iguodala ranks in the top 5 - I suspect he has some extra value due to his defense whereas players like Michael Redd and Ray Allen give up a lot on defense. Tracy McGrady ranks a surprising 9th, well behind his former Toronto teammate Vince Carter, but his rating has decreased every year between 2006 and 2008, suggesting that his injuries are taking a toll on his production. As for Kirk Snyder ranking 10th, I suspect that it is a fluke since he simply hasn't played much in 3 years but it seems like he is definitely worth signing to a cheap contract to prove whether or not his high ranking is real.
There aren't a whole lot of star SGs who rank poorly in this metric and the ones who do seem fairly logical. Brandon Roy is probably just a victim of his youth - young players usually don't make the kind of contributions picked up by plus-minus. Ben Gordon and Kevin Martin are talented offensive players who get toasted on defense. I'm not sure why Stackhouse ranks so low, but Rip Hamilton's rating is artificially deflated due to a 2006 season where the Pistons' starting five played a huge load of minutes together, as explained by David Lewin here. Even so, Hamilton rated as a negative player in both 2007 and 2008, a quite surprising result suggesting that the Pistons' success is due to the other members of its starting five.
1. Kobe Bryant, +11.55
2. Manu Ginobili, +9.46
3. Dwyane Wade, +7.74
4. Vince Carter, +6.34
5. Andre Iguodala, +6.16
6. Jason Richardson, +4.79
7. Michael Redd, +4.18
8. Ray Allen, +3.79
9. Tracy McGrady, +3.73
10. Kirk Snyder, +3.59
Other notables: Joe Johnson (+2.59), Jamal Crawford (+2.22), Brandon Roy (-1.01 - only 2 years though), Ben Gordon (-2.27), Kevin Martin (-2.68), Jerry Stackhouse (-3.64), Richard Hamilton (-7.41)
On the whole, I think there are fewer surprises here than on the PG list. Based on adjusted plus-minus, Kobe lives up to the hype, although as we will see with the later positional rankings, it is hardly as obvious that he is the best player on the planet as the media likes to pretend. Noticeably, Manu Ginobili ranks as a truly great player by this metric, which I think he deserves. It does surprise me that Andre Iguodala ranks in the top 5 - I suspect he has some extra value due to his defense whereas players like Michael Redd and Ray Allen give up a lot on defense. Tracy McGrady ranks a surprising 9th, well behind his former Toronto teammate Vince Carter, but his rating has decreased every year between 2006 and 2008, suggesting that his injuries are taking a toll on his production. As for Kirk Snyder ranking 10th, I suspect that it is a fluke since he simply hasn't played much in 3 years but it seems like he is definitely worth signing to a cheap contract to prove whether or not his high ranking is real.
There aren't a whole lot of star SGs who rank poorly in this metric and the ones who do seem fairly logical. Brandon Roy is probably just a victim of his youth - young players usually don't make the kind of contributions picked up by plus-minus. Ben Gordon and Kevin Martin are talented offensive players who get toasted on defense. I'm not sure why Stackhouse ranks so low, but Rip Hamilton's rating is artificially deflated due to a 2006 season where the Pistons' starting five played a huge load of minutes together, as explained by David Lewin here. Even so, Hamilton rated as a negative player in both 2007 and 2008, a quite surprising result suggesting that the Pistons' success is due to the other members of its starting five.
The NBA's Top 10 Point Guards
Presented below are three-year averages of adjusted plus-minus for the NBA's point guards. I rank the top 10 then mention some other notable names that didn't make the Top 10.
1. Steve Nash, +8.52
2. Baron Davis, +7.32
3. Jason Kidd, +7.25
4. Allen Iverson, +5.51
5. Chris Paul, +4.89
6. Jason Terry, +4.64
7. Nate Robinson, +4.00
8. Chauncey Billups, +3.85
9. Devin Harris, +3.17
10. Tony Allen, +2.51
Other Notables: Rajon Rondo, +4.00 (not included due to only 2 years in the league), Tony Parker, +1.86, Monta Ellis, +1.83, Andre Miller, +0.58, Deron Williams, -0.67, Mo Williams, -1.36, Kirk Hinrich, -2.11, TJ Ford, -2.53, Jose Calderon, -3.49, Mike Bibby, -3.58
I believe that this list shows both the advantages and pitfalls of adjusted plus-minus. There can be no doubt that Nash, Davis and Kidd have been a cut above the rest of the NBA's point guards, posting consistently high numbers over the last 3 seasons. Yet the relatively low rating of players like Chris Paul, Tony Parker, and Deron Williams might arouse skepticism. Personally, I suspect that Paul's rating should be somewhat higher, but looking at the breakdowns into offense and defense handily provided at countthebasket, it is my guess that although Paul and Nash are probably the two best offensive point guards in the game, Paul's defense is even more of a liability than Nash's and thus keeps him from joining the top 3 (for now, at least).
As for some other ratings of note, adjusted plus-minus pinpoints the Spurs' success as being primarily dependent on Duncan and Ginobili - Parker has been a winning player, but not a great one. Deron Williams' three-year average is low because of a poor rookie season; nonetheless, his rating of +2.0 over the last 2 years is still outside of the top 10 - we will have to see if this trend continues as he matures. Pretty much every other star PG who rates as a losing player (Williams, Ford, Calderon, Bibby) are there due to their defensive liabilities. From this analysis, the offensive advantages enjoyed by the Raptors from employing both Ford and Calderon were more than offset by the two getting lit up on defense.
What have we learned from this set of ratings? Point guard is the top offensive position but also the weakest defensive position in the NBA. Thanks to countthebasket.com, we can see the splits for each player (for 2008, at least). Some point guards really get killed on defense and this makes them much less valuable than their box score statistics would indicate. In the case of Steve Nash, his defense doesn't sink his rating like it does Chris Paul's but it does lower it enough that he probably wasn't the MVP in 2005 or 2006 although he was arguably the top offensive player in the league. The greatest value of adjusted plus-minus is what it tells us about individual defense, and when it shows consistent ratings over a multi-year period. Its downside of course, it its high standard errors but I believe that presenting 3-year ratings like this offsets a lot of that bias.
1. Steve Nash, +8.52
2. Baron Davis, +7.32
3. Jason Kidd, +7.25
4. Allen Iverson, +5.51
5. Chris Paul, +4.89
6. Jason Terry, +4.64
7. Nate Robinson, +4.00
8. Chauncey Billups, +3.85
9. Devin Harris, +3.17
10. Tony Allen, +2.51
Other Notables: Rajon Rondo, +4.00 (not included due to only 2 years in the league), Tony Parker, +1.86, Monta Ellis, +1.83, Andre Miller, +0.58, Deron Williams, -0.67, Mo Williams, -1.36, Kirk Hinrich, -2.11, TJ Ford, -2.53, Jose Calderon, -3.49, Mike Bibby, -3.58
I believe that this list shows both the advantages and pitfalls of adjusted plus-minus. There can be no doubt that Nash, Davis and Kidd have been a cut above the rest of the NBA's point guards, posting consistently high numbers over the last 3 seasons. Yet the relatively low rating of players like Chris Paul, Tony Parker, and Deron Williams might arouse skepticism. Personally, I suspect that Paul's rating should be somewhat higher, but looking at the breakdowns into offense and defense handily provided at countthebasket, it is my guess that although Paul and Nash are probably the two best offensive point guards in the game, Paul's defense is even more of a liability than Nash's and thus keeps him from joining the top 3 (for now, at least).
As for some other ratings of note, adjusted plus-minus pinpoints the Spurs' success as being primarily dependent on Duncan and Ginobili - Parker has been a winning player, but not a great one. Deron Williams' three-year average is low because of a poor rookie season; nonetheless, his rating of +2.0 over the last 2 years is still outside of the top 10 - we will have to see if this trend continues as he matures. Pretty much every other star PG who rates as a losing player (Williams, Ford, Calderon, Bibby) are there due to their defensive liabilities. From this analysis, the offensive advantages enjoyed by the Raptors from employing both Ford and Calderon were more than offset by the two getting lit up on defense.
What have we learned from this set of ratings? Point guard is the top offensive position but also the weakest defensive position in the NBA. Thanks to countthebasket.com, we can see the splits for each player (for 2008, at least). Some point guards really get killed on defense and this makes them much less valuable than their box score statistics would indicate. In the case of Steve Nash, his defense doesn't sink his rating like it does Chris Paul's but it does lower it enough that he probably wasn't the MVP in 2005 or 2006 although he was arguably the top offensive player in the league. The greatest value of adjusted plus-minus is what it tells us about individual defense, and when it shows consistent ratings over a multi-year period. Its downside of course, it its high standard errors but I believe that presenting 3-year ratings like this offsets a lot of that bias.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)