APBRmetrics

KeeneKaufmanWheeler · Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 72

Hello, I'm a longtime NBA fan who has recently started trying to take statistical analysis beyond my fantasy team.

One question I've been asking myself is, "Did the Bulls actually improve themselves by signing Ben Wallace?"

This past season the Bulls ranked right in the middle of the NBA pack in points scored, points allowed and point differential (97.8 (#13), 97.2 (#16), +0.6 (#14)). It appeared to me from watching many games (I'm a Milwaukee resident) that the problem for the Bulls was that they would bring the defensive effort every night, but there was great volatility in their offensive production. Basically, they had very little dependable frontourt scoring and if Ben Gordon had an off night, there wasn't much they could do.

So while they could have gone in the direction of trying to add a scorer to smooth out the game-to-game offensive results, they replaced Tyson Chandler with Ben Wallace. Does this improve them?

The first thing I looked at on 82games.com was PER by position. Center was a glaring weakness for the Bulls. Their position PER was 13.9, by far the lowest of the 5 positions. So replacing Chandler (12.23 last season, but 16.5 in 2004-05) with Wallace (17.54) makes sense there.

But the Bulls frontcourt is still in some flux. They lost Songala and Othella Harrington and addded PJ Brown. Is Wallace-Brown an upgrade over Chandler-Songala-Harrington?

Next I looked at was the 5-man unit stats on 82games.com

The Pistons basically played the entire season with one offensive unit (Billups-Hamilton-Prince-R. Wallace-B. Wallace) with a winning % of 72%.

The Bulls' top 3 (listed in order of minutes played):
Duhon-Hinrich-Deng-Nocioni-Sweetney (33%)
Hinrich-Gordon-Deng-Songala-Chandler (59.2%)
Hinrich-Gordon-Deng-Chandler-Harrington (58.6%)

So the Bulls have lost the 4 players that made up the frontcourts of their two most effective lineups. They have replaced them with Wallace and Brown. The Bulls "most common" lineup has 2 deficiencies -- it doesn't have Ben Gordon, and it does have Nocioni at power forward. Also, this was their starting lineup last year, so it meant Nocioni going against the other teams' #1 PF. This can now change, but Nocioi will have to play more backup PF this year than last.

Next, I compiled some 2005-06 stats for the major players in the trade. My apologies for poor formatting, this is a first effort for me.

The categories in order are:
Net total rebounding (on floor/off floor)
Net points per 100 posessions
Individual on floor winning percentage
The average winning percentage for that team*
% of teams minutes played
PER
pp40 min

*average winning percentage of all players who played more than 10% of the minutes for that team last season. It seemed to me that Detroit would have more wins than Chicago, so I averaged them to try and calculate a rough replacement player value when compared to their own team

Mark · Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 807

I agree with the value of looking at the things you did and most of what you said about them though we do have to be cautious the past follows them fully as these guys are entering new context.

I guess I would add a few things. The players coming in are playoff proven veterans who will probably work with Skiles. Chandler's playoffs was much worse than his regular season and I can see why they were finally forced to admit their overestimate of him. Brown and Wallace will get the offensive boards he did and I think they have a chance to make Bulls into a very top team on defense. They were 6th on defensive efficiency last season (better than where they rank on raw points allowed) and with the additions could/should challenge for a top 2 spot on that next season. Songaila is decent on offense but not on defense and he wont really be missed much- Nocioni's playoffs suggest he can provide extra offensive kick to fill regular season need too. Nocioni will be expensive to re-sign though but PJ Brown is only a one year expensive thing and they might let him go or retain more modestly priced. I expect the Bulls will be able to manage the cap alright for at least the next 2 seasons. It really was time to try to kick it up and Paxson is all in. Hurting Detroit wasnt just spite, the Bulls could get to conference finals and took advantage of opportunity to try to hurt their main rival for that. Thing is I dont think Detroit will actually be devastated. I expect them to be about the same. Mohammed and more McDyess, I am guessing that Ben probably not missed that much. Good to Very good defense at other 4 positions and still likely above average at center defense. How much was Ben's help and whether the other Detroit defenders were good or very good will be revealed. Wallace fouls only half as much per game in more minutes as Chandler (3rd most fouls per game in league) and his being there helps keep others from fouling to try to save a basket too. This might be one of his biggest positive impacts. Last season Bulls were 2nd highest on FT/FG given up to opponents and that should come down with Wallace and Brown.

KeeneKaufmanWheeler · Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 72

The point about defensive efficiency is what I am most particularly interested in. Is the difference between the 6th best and 2nd best team shaped like a linear or bell curve? And, if it costs you 4 spots in offensive efficiency, is it a fair trade? These are probably questions that cannot be definitively answered with stats.

I just imagine the Bulls offense looking just like this years', only with "Hack-a-Ben" in full effect.

The point about Wallace both avoiding and conserving his teammates' fouls is a very good one.

Mark · Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 807

You have a handle on the complexity. I think the Bulls feel with Nocioni and Deng and PJ's ability to hit the jumpshot their offense will be good enough. (Malik Allen is decent too and signing him after attracting Songaila probably immediately determined that Songaila wouldnt stay. He got his stats and big contract elsewhere and the Bulls were covered against this a year ahead of time.)

I wasnt that impressed with the Wallace signing because I think they way overpaid and the length of contract will come back to bite them but I tend to think they will be somewhat better next playoffs and they were very close to doing something notable. They are short-term results maximizing. The fans want a reward after a long downcycle.

94by50 · Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 499 Location: Phoenix

Mark · Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 807

Nocioni / Wallace maybe enough offense as a combo and it is help defense for Nocioni and others. Allen or Sweetney at C / Brown at PF off the bench maybe enough offense too and that defense seems ok too. Not sure how much T Thomas plays first year, where and how. I guess if Deng plays SF and Nocioni plays some there too, you can squeeze some minutes for Thomas at PF and then Brown is gone or diminished minutes after this year. Do they pay to retain Sweetney next summer or is he a likely trade piece before then? They are pretty well stocked and have flexibility for matchups or trades.

Using the material 94X50 presented, if the Bulls dont slip offensively- because of player development of Nocioni, Deng, Gordon, even Sweetney and maybe some baskets from T Thomas, I wouldnt be surprised by a 50 win season. A 50 win season is a worthwhile return for overpaying one player. Get several and not affect how many of the young players you retain then it worked out. Get one or none such season and commensurate playoff achievemnt and lose some of the youth you would have retained otherwise it might not be as much a gain. Even with frontloading I don't think Wallace's contract will be movable for high quality after 2 years so this is a major gamble, likely to run its course (but I guess could be short-circuited if Skiles and Wallace clash or the results don't show up by packaging him with young talent for a trade).

94by50 · Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 499 Location: Phoenix

Mark · Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 807

I am not ready to try to predict next season but in general I agree with your eastern conference forecast.

Best prospects for 60 wins are probably Suns and Mavs and that might be it.

I just noticed that fouls and freethrows was a really big team issue with Chicago, giving up about 6 more made FTs a game last season based off 5th worst on own FTs made and league worst on FTs made given up. Wallace is definitely major surgery to try to correct that on defense. The issue was much worse last season than previous 3 for some reason, perhaps purposeful strategy.

And I forgot 04-05 Bulls won 47 games so getting to 50 isnt maybe a huge step up into new territory it is recovering from misstep and a small step forward. 50 is a solid year so I won't expect more but they seem to have enough talent. If Skiles can avoid overcoaching, oversteering. I think he might be wise to rachet down a notch, give them a little more freedom, but I doubt he will. Getting a top 4 seed more important than 50 wins but 50 might be what it takes.

05-06 regular season to playoffs Bulls went from +1 rebounding to -4 against tough opponent. Wallace and Brown and Thomas seem like they will help with that challenge when they get there.

tsherkin · Joined: 31 Jan 2005 Posts: 247

Point of note, people are talking about how relatively ineffectual Wallace is on offense... let's not forget that we're talking about Ben Wallace and Tyson Chandler, shall we?

Last year, Tyson Chandler scored 5.3 ppg and shot 50.3% from the foul line. He was only able to stay on the floor a little under 27 minutes per game. Also last year, Ben Wallace was able to post 7.3 ppg on 51% from the line in a little over 35.2 minutes per game.

Wallace was putting up about 8.26 points per 40 and Chandler about 7.86 per 40.

There's not actually a noticeable gap in offense here that favors Chandler in any way. They both score the same way: putbacks, easy feeds and free throws. Traditionally, Chandler is more of a 60-66% shooter but last year, they were virtually identical except that Wallace was able to stay on the floor longer, rebound better and block more shots.

Yes, normally Chandler would shoot FTs more reliably but how much is that worth?

Chandler drew an average of about 3.6 free throws per 40 minutes and made about 1.8 free throws per 40 minutes... not surprising, given he was basically a 50% shooter at the line.

Wallace? Drew about 4.1 FT/40 and made about 1.7/40.

So Ben is still hitting about as many and putting slightly more pressure on the opposing defense. But realistically, looking at those numbers, their basically identical, so it seems apparent that the Bulls aren't actually losing much from that end unless Chandler's season was a fluke and he wasn't on the downward progression wrt foul shooting (which seems possible since he'd just set his career-high from the line in each of the two previous seasons).

Hmm... now I've confused myself.

Does anyone have anything predictive about Chandler's foul shooting? Or how to predict a player's performance from the line at all? Chandler shot almost 12% below his career average last season, what's the liklihood that he'll stay near there?

Mark · Joined: 20 Aug 2005 Posts: 807

Prediction:

"If this is how the positions break-down, and player’s perform as they did in the past, then as one can see HERE , the Bulls can expect to win 64 games. "

https://dberri.wordpress.com/2006/07/21/making-ben-gordon-rich

Pullback on expectations for Bulls and expectations of method:

"Now does all this mean that everyone should head to Vegas and bet on the Bulls to win 60 plus games? No. At least, if you do and lose your money I’m not responsible. "

"In all, this was just a fun exercise that suggests the Bulls look to be a better team in 2006-07. "

KeeneKaufmanWheeler · Joined: 02 Aug 2006 Posts: 72

If the metrics used in the Making Ben Gordon Rich article are so accurate at predicting wins assuming the absence of injuries, then couldn't they also predict the average number of wins lost to injury and make that the predicted victory total?

Can one really state that if Ben Wallace had signed in San Antonio for the midlevel he could be expected to add 20 wins to their total next season and propel them to an 83-(-1) season?

Is Wages Of Wins worth reading? The reviews on Amazon are pretty negative, but I always assume that the sort of people who post reviews on Amazon are the most picky people on Earth who live in their parents basement and have nothing better to do than post negative reviews on Amazon.

mateo82 · Joined: 06 Aug 2005 Posts: 211

Great analysis! I always love it when we get some team stat analysis because they are infinitely more accurate than hugely-flawed individual stats that everyone loves to discuss.