Το Buzzer Beater υπερήφανα ανακοινώνει την επιστροφή του!

Δεν μπορούμε να δώσουμε μεγάλες υποσχέσεις, αφού ο Ελληνικός Στρατός μας κρατάει ακόμα δέσμιους. Αλλά σίγουρα θα ξεπεράσουμε τα hits του google και φυσικά θα μεταφέρουμε όσο είναι δυνατόν, τα τελευταία πιο ασήμαντα αλλά και άκρως ενδιαφέροντα νέα από το μαγικό κόσμο του ΝΒΑ. Η αλήθεια είναι πως το blog θα μπορούσε να ανοίξει πολύ νωρίτερα αλλά η Art & Design Team δούλευε πυρετωδώς για τη δημιουργία του νέου header.

Η επιστροφή του Buzzer Beater θα ανεβάσει ακόμα πιο ψηλά τη δημοτικότητα του ΝΒΑ, κάτι που φαίνεται να χαροποίησε ιδιαίτερα τον David Stern.

Βλέποντας τους Nenad Krstic, Carlos Delfino, Carlos Arroyo, Jannero Pargo, Earl Boykins, Primoz Brezec, Brandon Jennings κ.α. να επιστρέφουν άτακτα στο ΝΒΑ αφού γνώρισαν από πρώτο χέρι την έλλειψη οργάνωσης στην Ευρώπη (συν πολλά ακόμα που θα τα αφήσουμε καρφιά για άλλα posts), δε θα μπορούσε να μη κάνει come back το Buzzer Beater από τη παραμεθόριο.

Κατ’αρχάς, έχουμε ηθική υποχρέωση να αφιερώσουμε το πρώτο βίντεο σε έναν από τους πρωτεργάτες για την επιτυχία του Buzzer Beater, τον Ron Artest. Αλλά και να ευχαριστήσω όσους συνέχιζαν να μπαίνουν κατά καιρούς στο blog και να το κρατάνε ζωντανό. Το επόμενο κομμάτι  της Celine Dion είναι αφιερωμένο και σε εσάς…

We’re only a few weeks into this NBA season, and already we’re seeing some interesting developments:

Last week, LeBron proclaimed that he will (probably) change his number next season. Before I tell you why he’s right and why he’s wrong, watch his explanation:

I definitely understand LeBron’s intentions here. Michael Jordan is the greatest basketball player on the planet, and he has had more of a global impact on the game than anyone. Still, having respect for a guy is not necessarily a great reason to change your number. So, if he dons the number six jersey as he plans, then has a deep conversation with Bill Russell one day, will he then change his number again? I mean, Russell does have a record 11 NBA titles in thirteen seasons (eat your heart out, Robert Horry), and I don’t see that record falling anytime soon…not in today’s salary-strapped NBA. In addition, he was player-coach for the last two titles, and the league’s first black head coach. THAT’S the kind of guy that everyone should respect.

LeBron himself said that he idolized Jordan at a young age, as do lots of kids that grow up watching basketball. My gripe is that as a grown man, you shouldn’t still be wearing #23 because your idol wore that number, anyway. Unless the guy was your dad…or there’s some other meaning behind your jersey number, it shouldn’t be that important. Personally, I think players should be more like Ron Artest, changing numbers every couple of years. I’m sure the NBA wouldn’t mind that much, as those die-hard LeBron fans would have to buy jersey after jersey to keep up so they can keep idolizing their favorite player. Accordingly, grown men shouldn’t wear another grown man’s jersey. It’s just kind of lame to me to see some out-of-shape fan squeeze into a Kobe Bryant jersey. Seriously man…you could’t pull that look off on Halloween.

Lastly, that’s the type of call that has to come from David Stern and the league. When I think of an entire league retiring a jersey number, I think of Jackie Robinson. Nothing against Jordan, but Jordan wouldn’t be who he is without Jackie Robinson…or Sweetwater Clifton. Notably, Magic Johnson agrees with LeBron on the matter.

- With a win in Houston Tuesday night, the Suns have started off 10-2 with the NBA’s best record. Nash looks great right now. He’s turning it over a lot, but he always does. Amar’e Stoudemire and Leandro Barbosa aren’t exactly impressing me (or my fantasy basketball team), but Channing Frye is playing great basketball, fitting in much better than Shaq ever did. His ability to space the floor makes it much easier for Amar’e to work inside and for perimeter players to drive to the hoop.

- Speaking of Shaq, his positive effect isn’t obvious to me yet in Cleveland. They did manage to beat Orlando, but that probably had more to so with Mo Williams actually playing well, something he couldn’t do in the playoffs last year. The biggest impact I’ve seen Shaq make this year was on Gilbert Arenas’ fiance. Of course, I was eager to see the first Wizards-Cavs game since the rumor broke, but Shaq was out tonight with a bum shoulder. Even though Gil is a nice guy, I don’t know how calmly one can take such large-scale rumors about the biggest clown in the NBA smashing the mother of your two (soon to be three) children. Add Delonte’s issues and the fact that LeBron still isn’t talking about his destination next season, and that’s a lot of drama. Maybe LeBron will give the Browns a chance. I silently think they traded Braylon Edwards away to make him happy.

- Earl Boykins is back in the league, and he just made Mo Williams look stupid, running circles around him late in the game. Earl is a hell of a pickup for the Wizards bench — I’m somewhat surprised he was still floating around and available. He’s a proven bench spark plug, and could probably help any team in the league.

- In contrast, Iverson might be able to hurt every team in the league. When the Grizzlies waive you, that’s what you call rock bottom. As I previously stated, Iverson could have played his way into the starting lineup. Still, it’s probably for the best. I think AI would be wise to chill out for a little while, stay in shape, and hope some team looking for an extra boost to make a playoff run takes a chance on him.

- Can we name Brandon Jennings the Rookie of the Year now, or do we have to wait? I say we should just do it now — just to relieve some of the pressure on Blake Griffin when he comes back. I willmake a bold stament (and by bold, I mean not very bold at all) and say that the ROY will definitely NOT be Hasheem Thabeet.

David Holston playing big.

I don’t play basketball. I used to think it was my height, but now I think it’s my utter lack of ability. Whatever the case, ability is something David Holston clearly doesn’t lack. Standing somewhere between 5′6″ – 5′8″ and averaging 25.9 ppg for Chicago State, the dude has some sweet moves and a rap song (Santana’s Second Coming) about adversity:

It’s kinda crazy that he is still at it when, according to a video I watched of him that I cannot find anymore, everyone makes fun of him. Made of Teflon. More importantly, he is compared to Earl “Big” Boykins, so one hopes he can also make the leap to the NBA.

Happily, I am not the only fan of David Holston. There is this dude:

Okay, this dude is actually great. If you look at the rest of GK07’s YouTube stuff, all he does is make videos about the autographs and the ebay autograph things he gets in the mail.

As long as David Holston has fans like Doc Hollywood and GK07 then he is doing okay.

I decided with today being the eve of the NBA Slam Dunk Contest that there really isn’t a better day to give praise to my fellow short sports.  And I’m not talking about 3’6’’ freak shows that get one day contracts (see Eddie Gaedel and the St. Louis Browns), but the true professional short sport athletes of the NBA.  Since the NBA began in 1948, only four players have competed in the NBA and been shorter than the American male average height.  Those four players were Tyrone “Muggsy” Bogues, Earl Boykins, Anthony “Spud” Webb, and Nate Robinson, who are respectively 5’3’’, 5’5’’, 5’7’’, and 5’7.7’’ (even though the New York Knicks list him as 5’9’’, his last official physical put him at the former).  It’s hard enough being shorter than the average American male at 5’9’’ (trust me, I know), but these guys were all substantially shorter than the average NBA player.  This league of giants’ average height is a staggering 6’7’’, making them all at least a foot below the average, yet somehow…SOMEHOW two of these men have managed to win the NBA Slam Dunk Contest.  Anyway, on with the tribute.

Most recently, we have the tallest of our short sports, Nate Robinson.  He was able to pull off the win in the 2006 Slam Dunk Contest, mostly because of this dunk over fellow short sport Spud Webb:  

    Robinson is sort of an atypical small man in the NBA, averaging double figure points per game, but only 2.8 assists.  His talent even goes beyond basketball, with his actual college scholarship from Washington coming for football.  He walked on the basketball team on his way to making the 2005 Sweet Sixteen, being a third team All-American, getting selected in the first round of the draft, and winning the Slam Dunk Contest.  But even more impressive then all that, I believe comes from the less than 0.1 blocks per game he averages, with this play.  Just as a comparison, Gheorghe Muresan would have had to block the shot of a 9’7’’ being to be as impressive (FYI no human has ever been that tall).

Spud Webb, the guy Nate Robinson is dunking over up there, actually won the 1986 NBA Slam Dunk Contest, over the king of dunks, the Human Highlight Reel, Dominique Wilkins.  One of the dunks being this one:

    I especially liked this one, because you can play real life Where’s Waldo while admiring just how impressive Spud’s vertical leap is.  He was able to average about ten points a game and over five assists over his college and pro careers.  Most admirably, he had the honor of playing for Jimmy V at NC State.

Earl Boykins, who probably has had the least impressive out of the four careers, yet remains my favorite.  I have a special place for him since he began his pro career with my old hometown Rockford Lightning.  His most remarkable achievement probably happened November 11, 2004 when he became the shortest player ever to score over 30 points, with 32 against the Detroit Pistons.  But I think this is all I’m going to give Earl since he had to resort to playing in Europe now.

Finally, the shortest of them all, Muggsy Bogues.  Bogues arguably had the most extraordinary career of all these short sports despite being the shortest.  He nearly averaged a double-double at Wake Forest (14.8 pts, 9.5 asts).  And in the NBA his career was just as striking.  Out of the four he remains the leader in blocks with 39.  He also managed to become the Hornets career leader in assists and steals.  In the bigger picture of the entire league he still holds on to amazing career marks of 8.7 assists per game and 13.5 assists per 48 minutes, which puts him in the company of the likes of  the two all-time leaders in these categories: John Stockton (10.5, 15.4) and Magic Johnson (11.1, 14.1).  But most of all, his accolades reached their pinnacle when this little Renaissance man starred alongside MJ in the 1995 classic, Space Jam. 

I’ve included this chart, just in case you still haven’t been able to fathom what kind of height disparity us short sports face: 

So, in closing, sure, I might not be able to reach the string on the light in the basement when I want to play beer pong, but if you come across one of these four guys don’t be so lax, because they will dunk on your ass and stuff that ball right back in your face.

NBA Free Agents Deciding to Play in Europe; Change is to Come

By: Sean Speirs

            Money is everything.

            Professional European basketball teams have started to show up on the doorstep of some free-agent NBA athletes this off-season, offering them better contracts and overall salaries that just simply cannot be comparable to any offers the NBA could have proposed to a restricted free agent.

            And money is all it took to convince these athletes to move.

            Although Europe has always been a contender in past NBA off-seasons, premier European teams have started to realize this summer that they can offer better contracts to restricted free agents who may not have the same economic opportunity with an NBA career.

            The biggest transition deal so far has been from the Greek basketball club Olympiacos, who has signed Atlanta Hawks Forward Josh Childress for a three-year $20 million contract after taxes.  This deal also marked the biggest contract in Euroleague history.   

            25-year-old Childress, who averaged 11.8 points and 4.9 rebounds last season, was the Hawks main force off the bench all throughout the 2007-2008 season.  As his contract expired this summer, the Hawks GM Rick Sund was able to match any offer from any NBA team.  However, due to the collective bargaining agreement, the Hawks could not match an offer from any international club.

            It has not been known yet how much the Hawks tried to offer Childress back, but due to the salary cap in the NBA, it was impossible to match Greece’s overall proposal.

            In the midst of Childress’ transaction, other NBA players who were restricted free agents this summer have been following the trend.  Such players include:

            -Earl Boykins:  The 5’5” guard is headed to Italy’s Virtus Bologna for a one-year, $3.5 million contract, making him Italy’s highest-paid player.

            -Nenad Krstic:  The once New Jersey Net center signed a two-year contract with Triumph Moscow worth $9 million.

            -Jannero Pargo:  The 28-year-old guard has signed a one-year deal with Dynamo Moscow worth $3.5 million.

            So far, these players who have decided to transition over to Europe may seem like mere role-players (not even) to any typical NBA team.  An NBA fan might even go to say “go ahead, there is no reason to keep these non-producing players in the NBA anyway.” 

            Unfortunately, for such a case, the bigger picture is not being seen. 

            When dealt in Europe, the Childress’ and Boykins’ of the NBA will have and probably continue to be treated as stars both publically and financially.  They will receive countryside recognition that may possibly be equal to that of any NBA athlete superstar here in the United States.

            Which brings about the main problem that is bound to hit the NBA. 

            What if the superstar’s in the NBA, come their restricted free-agency time in the league, want to not only receive a better salary the NBA cannot offer, but also a greater fan-base that extends worldwide?

            NBA superstars such as Lebron James and Kobe Bryant, whose contracts expire in 2010 and 2011 respectively, have jokingly pondered about the thought of relocating. 

            But when the joke becomes a serious matter, how will it affect the NBA?

            There have already been written articles that compare possible future contract moves (that may send a Bryant, James, or Wade to Europe) with the move that brought European soccer sensation David Beckham to the Los Angeles Galaxy.  An NBA superstar outcome to Europe would be just as big as Beckham’s, at least for American’s, since we seem to follow the NBA and its players more closely. 

            Although most of the NBA’s superstars are already somewhat big names in Europe, the experience of playing against new forms of competition and living in a different country could be something worthwhile and appealing to the athlete.

            When the chips are set, the overall outcome will always come down to money.  It ultimately did for the restricted free agents this summer, and probably will for one of the NBA’s super-stars in off-seasons to come. 

            At least the NBA has time to think of a way to keep their game-selling stars in the league, or else a possible Bryant-less and James-less future is in sight.  And without them or other superstar moneymakers, then there will be no money, sales, or profit driving the NBA.

            And money…is everything.

BY: Sean Speirs

IMAGE COURTESY OF YAHOOSPORTS.COM

By BJ

Last year, David Beckham signed a 5-year, $250 million deal to play for the Los Angeles Galaxy in the MLS. In the 1997-98 season, Michael Jordan made $33 million with the Chicago Bulls. When LeBron James is able to opt out after the 2009-10 season, NBA teams already creating salary cap space for “the summer of LeBron” can’t even afford to offer James $20 million a year (from their idiotic free-agent signings). So what does the King have to say about that?

James has reportedly said on Tuesday that he would strongly consider playing in Europe if offered $50 million a year. The source close to James said that he would play for only a year or two if he went abroad before returning to the NBA. Is there any easier way to make $100 million in two years? I can’t see LeBron going, but you can’t blame him for leaving with that kind of money offered to him as well as the opportunity to truly be a global icon. I know there’s not a whole lot you can’t do with $40 million that you can do with $100 million, but you have $100 million!

Several more players bolted overseas, making the number of NBA players who have signed to an international team for next season nine. Josh Childress (3-year, $20 million), Carlos Arroyo (3-year, $7.5 million) and Earl Boykins (1-year, $3.5 million) are the only players of the nine who have played exclusively in the NBA before going abroad for next season.

Brett Favre is a New York Jet. After a roller coaster ride that began after he was reinstated in the NFL by commissioner Roger Goodell on Sunday, the Packers management subsequently said that there would be a quarterback battle with Aaron Rodgers in camp, contrary to what they’ve been telling the public all along. But after a private meeting with last year’s Packers quarterback on Tuesday, the two agreed on one thing – that Favre likely would not be playing in Green Bay. In the wake of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and New York Jets looking to become the recipient of Favre, the Jets won over Green Bay with a conditional fourth-round pick to the Pack on Wednesday that could become a second-round pick based on Favre’s performance.

The Jets cut starter Chad Pennington on Thursday to clear salary cap space for Favre. Pennington was due $4.8 million this season.

The U.S. basketball team wrapped up their exhibition tuneup with an 87-76 win over Australia on Tuesday and while analysts are saying it’s good they were able to overcome their struggles in a close game when it didn’t count yet, it reaffirms the recent belief that an NBA All-Star team, even with Kobe Bryant, can’t dominate international competition at will like we all think they should. Their first game is Sunday against host China at 7:15p PDT.

Update: The Oakland Athletics’ Brad Ziegler tossed two more innings without giving up a run Tuesday, upping his total to 34 scoreless innings without giving up a run. He is now just three innings shy of the team record for longest streak without giving up a run, and with Huston Street’s sixth blown save of the year in the same game, Ziegler is reportedly in the closer mix.

Boykins defied the odds at 5-foot-5. In 10 NBA seasons he averaged just under 10 points per game.

Earl Boykins has defied the odds his entire career. The 5′5″ point guard has had a lot of success in the NBA for someone of his stature.

Boykins becomes the second American NBA player to take a deal in Europe this summer, signing a one year deal with Italian club Vitus Bologna. The deal is worth $3.5 million and it will make him the highest paid player in the Italian league next year.

In 10 NBA seasons, Boykins has averaged 9.4 points per game. His best season was two seasons ago, spending time with Denver and Milwaukee, averaging 14.6 points, 4.4 assists and 2.1 rebounds. He then opted out of his Bucks contract in 2007, and only played the final 36 games of 2008 with the Charlotte Bobcats, where his scoring dropped to 5.1 points per game.

I love what Boykins brings to the court, hopefully he’ll make his way back to the NBA next season. The next question is, who’s the next NBA player to defect?

Somebody want to tell me what is wrong with this picture?

Earl Boykins, who was the shortest player in the NBA, is the latest to make a dash for European luxury. He signed a one-year, $3.5 M contract with Italy’s Virtus Bologna, which is probably $3.5 M more than his next best offer in the NBA. Does anyone really care? Somebody call Spudd Webb and Mugsy Bogues out of retirement and tell them there’s money to be made in Italy.

Boykins is now the highest paid player in whatever Italian league Virtus Bologna plays in, which sounds like a log of Bologna to me.

First Josh Childress, then Carlos Arroyo and now they took Earl “The Pearl” Boykins. David Stern better watch out especially if LeBron James is taking Euro offers seriously.

Así es, Italia también se apunta a lo de llevarse jugadores de la NBA. En este caso, ha sido la Virtus de Bolonia la que ha fichado a Earl Boykins, el pequeño y veterano base de los Charlotte Bobcats (y ex de una lista casi interminable de equipos), donde jugará un año por el que recibirá 3,5 millones de dólares. Con ese sueldo, Boykins, de 32 años y apenas 1,70 de estatura, será el jugador mejor pagado de Italia la temporada que viene, lo cual no está nada mal para un hombre como él. Boykins es un hombre rápido y con buena muñeca, aunque esta temporada pasada su juego dio un importante bajón. De ser un interesante microondas que había promediado 14 puntos por partido con los Bucks en la temporada 2006-2007, pasó a ser un mero jugador de banquillo que apenas gozaba con 15 minutos por encuentro en Charlotte.

Supongo que en la Virtus será titular prácticamente indiscutible. Esperemos que recupere un poco su juego vivo de antes, aunque el hombre tampoco está para muchos achaes…

*NPR is at the strange center of a confluence of bloggers, Father’s Day and rapping. [daddytypes]

*M.I.A. has cancelled her European tour. Possibly to plan her wedding.

*The Times on Lil Wayne: “He often raps about smoking dope and swigging cough syrup.”

*Bonaroo has a site set up to help mobile festival goers access info easily. [largehearted boy]

*Fashion(?): Punk rock belts for children. I’ll be honest with you. I don’t know what punk rock means.

*A collection of goods made out of repurposed vinyl records: bowls, bracelets, coasters.

*More Andrew Kuo stuff from the New York Times: On music festivals.

*Nooka is putting out a glow-in-the-dark watch to celebrate Kanye’s Glow in the Dark tour, which is in Minneapolis tonight. [crave]

*One Laptop Per Child: Teaching the world to sing? “TamTam, a piece of software that allows children to create their own music, is central to the OLPC educational mission.” [work]

*Remember when Qtrax, the free, legit P2P music site, tried to launch in January and it turned out they didn’t have deals with any labels? They’re ready to launch again.

*Lily Allen has been posting fairly heavily on her blog lately. Unquestionably frightening, but on the plus side, she makes the listenerd look almost literate.

*Local (kinda): The Hold Steady is streaming their new album, Stay Positive, on their MySpace page. MySpace. Quaint!

Note: Since this post was published, the Winshares formula has undergone some revisions of some substantive import, as well as a renaming. To see the most current iteration and accurate tables and graphs, please see the BoxScores page.

This post is a lengthy discussion of the theory and methodology behind the Winshares player value metric. If you are already familiar enough with Winshares, or are impatient, read the “In brief” section just below, and then you might want to skip ahead to the payoff graphics at the very end of this post. As always, comments and criticisms are encouraged!

In brief

Winshares are a statistic developed to estimate a player’s value in terms of wins. Combining individual statistics with team performance, Winshares allocate credit for team wins according to each team member’s contributions to team total production. As of the end of the 2007-08 regular season, Winshares are calculated as follows:

winshr = (val / team val) * team wins

val = pts – fgx*0.5603802 – ftx*0.9345311 + as*0.7697530 + or*0.8709732 + dr*0.7111727 + st*0.9190908 + bk*0.9495596 – to*0.8473544 – pf*0.7729732

Motivation

Why create yet another statistic that attempts to reduce all of player value to one number? Especially when there are so many other good and widely accepted measures already in use? Because the theory is sound, the operationalization is elegant, and the results appear valid.

Why use boxscore stats, ignoring plus/minus and everything that modern science now knows about possessions and efficiency, especially since defense is so poorly captured and other statistics, like assists, are arbitrary? Because boxscore stats go back to the beginning of professional basketball. Plus/minus is extremely data-intensive to calculate, and we have no way of getting that kind of data for most historical games. I’m ignoring possessions, and not emphasizing defense, because it is my belief that comparing one player’s boxscore stats to those of his team gives a reasonable estimate of player contributions–sometimes overestimating, other times underestimating, but on average, getting it approximately right. Mostly, though, calculating Winshares is possible as long as the same stats are tracked for all players on a team, and we know how many times the team won–meaning it can be applied very generally.

Why even try to use statistics to measure player value? You can’t capture that with a number! There is much to be said on both sides of this issue. I am of the opinion that statistics ought to be considered within a larger context of other data, qualitative and quantitative. However, I do feel strongly that numbers have a lot to tell us–they allow us the hope of greater objectivity, and therefore possibly less subjective, more accurate assessments. When applied identically to all players, Winshares will adjudicate “fairly,” paying no attention to max contracts, shoe endorsements, nicknames, or “intangibles.” Intangibles are tricky–they may indeed be part of player value, but they are also, by definition immeasurable, and may therefore expand to fill the role required of them? Was your favorite player not voted league MVP? Certainly they failed to consider his intangibles, which would have easily put him over the top…

Why are Winshares measured in that specific way? Don’t you know that linear weights are no good, or that assists are worth much more than you give them credit for? Read on…

Theory

Imagine a cooperative grocery store, owned by those who work there. At the end of one year, the store’s revenues exceed its expenditures by a large margin, and the workers are to be paid out of this surplus. One concept of fairness might dictate that a worker who worked p% of the total man-hours for that year ought to receive p% of the surplus. Arguably, he contributed p% of whatever effort determined whether or not the store would succeed, and should be rewarded accordingly. A worker working a large number of hours could be said to have contributed more to the store’s success or failure than another who only worked one shift a month–if the store profits by a large margin, that employee should receive a larger share of the windfall, just as if the store loses money, that employee should be held culpable for a larger share of the deficit.

Now imagine another similar store competing in the same market. Its surplus at the end of the year is twice that of the first store. Is it possible to compare the value, in terms of surplus, of employees from the two different stores? I would argue that it is possible: if pay is allocated in the same manner in both stores, with worker i in store j receiving payment in proportion to his labor contribution, the worker who receives the highest paycheck is the most valuable. That is, if pay is equal to worker man-hours over store total man-hours times store surplus, we can compare employees across any two firms in the same market.

But wait–what if some employees are more efficient workers than others? What if Alice can generate three times the revenue that Bob can generate in the same number of hours? Doesn’t our payment formula then overpay Bob and under-reward Alice, and doesn’t this complicate yet again the comparison across firms? Yes it does, and so we might try to find better measures of worker contributions to the surplus. Perhaps we could keep statistics on the number of cans shelved, or the number of transactions tendered, or the number of smiles flashed–if we could figure out even just the relative value of each of these things (that is, not necessarily how they each translate into surplus, but whether one smile is worth two cans shelved, etc.), then we are back on track. It doesn’t matter whether or not we can measure exactly how much revenue is brought in by each additional shelve stocked (although this would be interesting and useful), but if we know that it’s worth more (by some scalar factor) to clean the bathroom than it is to check receipts at the door, we can still estimate each workers contribution to the total amount of valuable work being done at the store.

This analogy carries over very well to sports, and specifically here, to basketball. A player who plays fully 1/5th of total team minutes played (that is 48 minutes per game for 82 games) ought to be credited with approximately 1/5th of his team’s success or failure–both of which can be measured in terms of wins. Using minutes to assess contributions runs into the same problem as in the stores above–they say nothing about efficiency–and as such, it is useful to find other statistics that more accurately estimate contributions to team success. The statistics employed in Winshares are boxscore stats, such as points, rebounds, assists, missed shots, etc. These are imperfect measures, but to the extent their relative value can be assessed, they may be useful in estimating each player’s contribution.

Calculation

Unfortunately, this relative evaluation is very difficult. It is often claimed by more “sophisticated” observers of the game that most fans fail to look past point-per-game numbers, giving infinitely more weight to scoring than to any other contributions. Yet, it is exceedingly difficult to identify just what the appropriate weights might be. Multiple regression analysis yields somewhat unsatisfactory results when applied in a straightforward manner–typically finding, for example, that offensive rebounds are actually detrimental to team success. Other work, including that done by Berri and Hollinger, is much more thorough, but leaves something to be desired (a topic which has been covered better elsewhere than can be possibly done by this author in this exposition).

As for Winshares, it would be disingenuous to claim that the ideal and true set of values has been found, but it is my belief that the reasoning is sound, and the results pass the “laugh test,” that is, given a subjective assessment of the sport, the relative importance of each boxscore statistic seems to be, at the very least, in the right order.

To identify the weights used, we may begin with a simple but strong assumption: the most valuable “good things” are those that opponents are most resistant to allowing, and thus are relatively rare, while the most detrimental “bad things” are those that a player is most trying to avoid, and thus are similarly relatively rare. With this in mind, I present counting sums for each of 8? boxscore counting stats from 1979-80 through 2007-08 (which I call the Modern era, characterized by the introduction of the three point shot to NBA play):

* field goals missed and free throws missed

Dividing each of these totals by the sum of the totals (17,008,507), we arrive at the following frequencies:

Normalizing these frequencies to that of points, we get:

Then, subtract each of the above from 1, so we are placing more weight on the rarer occurances, and set the points coefficient to 1, because the ultimate aim of all defense is to prevent scoring, and the ultimate aim of all offense is to score:

Assign positivity and negativity according to whether each is helpful or deleterious to team success, and we arrive at a set of scalars for estimating valuable contributions (often abbreviated val):

val = pts – fgx*0.5603802 – ftx*0.9345311 + as*0.7697530 + or*0.8709732 + dr*0.7111727 + st*0.9190908 + bk*0.9495596 – to*0.8473544 – pf*0.7729732

Any player’s val less than zero is then set to zero, but val is rarely a large negative number. Compared to the difficulty of valuable contribution assessment, the final steps in Winshare calculation are extremely simple: merely find each player’s percent contribution to his team’s total sum of valuable contributions from all players, and multiply this by team wins:

winshr = (val / team val) * team wins

We are left with an estimate of individual player value that combines individual contributions and team success, and allocates the most credit to those players who did the most to win the most. There is just one adjustment made to allow comparisons across all NBA seasons: for seasons prior to the official distinction between offensive and defensive rebounds, the formula is adjusted to incorporate total rebounds in their stead.

Discussion

The first thing to note is that as we apply the formula increasingly further back in time, we might become somewhat less certain of its absolute accuracy as the boxscore statistics on which it is based drop from the official record. Thus, for the very earliest years of the BAA, we might not be as confident in our estimate as for most years since, but the results are still very compelling, and seem to hold up to scrutiny despite the relative dearth of data. One of the merits of Winshares as a measure is that it is relatively flexible across a variety of situations, relying as it does on player percent contributions, which can almost always be measured in some manner.

Another caveat is to bear in mind that Winshares is a season-cumulative statistic, and so the ceiling varies by the number of games played in a season. Winshares for the strike-shortened season of 1998-99 are much lower than other contemporary seasons, due to the fact that all teams won fewer games than they normally would have. Adjustments can easily be made, however, by finding per-game or per-minute Winshare rates, and making comparisons at that level. This helps, too, in determining the impact of an injured player, given that he has played fewer games. However, the initial impetus for constructing Winshares was to estimate player value in terms of wins, and this is best done on a season-cumulative scale.

One thing done relatively poorly by Winshares in its current iteration is measurement of the value of players traded during the season. To do this completely accurately, it would be useful to isolate only the games the player appeared in for each of his several teams, looking at individual statistics and team wins within those sub-season units. However, this sort of analysis requires data not generally available in convenient form, and truly, the logical extension of this idea is fairly well captured by the plus/minus statistic. As it stands, Winshares still does a relatively good job (subjectively assessed) in measuring traded players’ value, but it is something worth noting.

Winshares in application

Often understanding is best achieved through application, and so I present

The Top 1,000 Winshare Seasons

covering the NBA, ABA, and BAA from 1946-2008. Keep in mind the above caveats about data availability, especially for seasons prior to 1951-52. In a similar vein, here is a list of

The Top 100 Winshare Careers

again, this is cumulative across the entirety of each player’s career, and so players with longevity are advantaged. I have included games played in this listing, to allow the reader to make his or her own adjustments.

Finally, every player, every team played for, 2007-08 season.

Geometric representation

One of the more useful ways to conceptualize Winshares is as player percent valuable contributions * team success. This has a particularly interesting expression in geometric terms, where Winshares can be thought of as the area of the rectangle created by multiplying valpct by team wins. The following series of visualizations depicts Winshares as a geometric comparison of player value. The color scheme is based on playing style–more detail on this classification may be found here.

2007-08 NBA: Chris Paul edges out Kobe Bryant as most valuable player according to Winshares, Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce turn in stellar seasons for the Celtics, and LeBron James carries a huge load for his team, and is rewarded in terms of Winshares, if not in post-season success.

1986-87 NBA: A season featuring more all-time greats than perhaps any other (as noted here), we see Larry Bird and Magic Johnson at the height of their rivalry, Michael Jordan and Hakeem Olajuwon coming into their own, and too many other star players to even mention.

1971-72 NBA & ABA (combined): Classic Lakers and Celtics teams, a young Dr. J, Kareem’s greatest year, an almost-as-great year from Artis Gilmore, and countless other NBA past greats.

Sacramento Kings Franchise History: This storied franchise didn’t quite make the playoffs in a very competitive 2007-08 Western Conference, but its history is littered with greats such as Oscar Robertson and Chris Webber.

If action movies have taught me anything, it’s that you should never underestimate your opponent. Even the guy who fought monkey-style in Bloodsport won a couple of fights before he ran into Chon-Li.

Playing pickup ball, it’s tough to not underestimate some of the people who make their way onto the court.

When you go from guarding a legit player one game to some guy who’s wearing jeans and is lucky if he’s 5-1, wearing a pair of Lacoste’s that look more like loafers than sneakers the next, it’s tough to approach him with the same intensity. Plus, if you do d him up and he does suck, then you look like the a-hole who has to go out and crush people who are just out to have some fun.

So yesterday I backed off on the little guy who looked so out of place in our game of three-on-three. He then took us all on by himself and kicked our asses.

The guy wasn’t a shooter. He did all of his damage off the dribble, driving to the basket. He’d get an inch on his defender at the three-point line, then the next thing you know, two dribbles later he’s at the hoop, going into a sea of arms that were way longer than his. It didn’t matter. One-on-three, he’d go into the air, double clutch, maneuver the ball around outstretched arms, slice through defenders and turn nothing into something. He came away with basically a one-on-three win and left the other five people on the court, his teammates included, shaking their heads.

After the game, the two of us talked. Out of respect for the assassin’s privacy and for the masterful performance he put forth, I can’t disclose the exact words exchanged. The conversation was very similar to this, though:

PS – this post was made awesome because of the following people:
- Phil Collins
- Bloodsport (JCVD, Chon-Li and the man who fought monkey-style)
- Bruce Lee
- The mysterious mini-me Filipino version of Earl Boykins.

Staring at an Eastern Conference where there’s no such thing as eight teams with winning records, the Bobcats made a little move in pursuit of the playoffs. Thursday they signed 5-foot-5-inch point guard Earl Boykins — the second-shortest player in NBA history — for the rest of the season. Boykins is diminutive (5-foot-3 Bobcats radio analyst Muggsy Bogues was the only NBA player shorter), but he can light up the scoreboard with his quickness and shooting ability.

Charlotte Observer