APBRmetrics

[Nikos]

I posed this question to Dean Oliver one time in a conversation, but I just thought I would mention it again on the board.

Isiah Thomas never was a terribly efficient offensive player, nor a particular standout on D. He played big in the big games more often than not, and was one of the leaders of the Detroit Pistons. He made a lot of the big shots.

But for some reason when he saw less possesions, and his teams got better, his stats seem to get worse. He got less efficient, had relatively low PER rankings, and poor W-L %'s. His teams were good on offense, but he wasn't always the most efficient scorer. He did turn the ball over a little
too much.

Was Thomas essentially the Original Allen Iverson type of player? Or perhaps like Tiny Archibald? A guy who could hit clutch shots, be a leader to some great teams, but overall was not very efficient or dominant.

So how good was Isiah? Was he really a top 5 PG of all time as many proclaim him to be? Is he really any better than Jason Kidd, Gary Payton?

How is what he accomplished much different than what Chauncey Billups did for the Pistons? (Aside from Thomas having two titles).

As an aside Isiah did have some very good seasons early on in his career, before his team became championship calibur -- but the effciency dropped as his team improved and became balanaced on both ends of the floor.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thomais01.html

[Mike G]

Isiah's efficiency as the 2nd-4th scoring option on those Pistons teams could be defined several ways. If you are looking at shooting % and turnovers, as you say he had a fairly high TO rate; and his eff% was up and down relative to his teammates.

When I think of an efficient player, I think of someone who makes things happen. A stagnant offense is bad for all members of the team. When one guy is willing to penetrate, challenge the big guys, and set up teammates, that can make everyone's game come easier.

A certain number of bad shots and turnovers should be forgiveable when your team is winning. It's pretty hard to track the statistical evidence of breaking down defenses -- except that your team may outscore the other.

Here are my best guard careers of alltime:

Michael Jordan
Magic Johnson
Jerry West
Oscar Robertson
John Stockton

Clyde Drexler
Bob Cousy
Isiah Thomas
Gary Payton
Kobe Bryant

Walt Frazier
Jason Kidd
Reggie Miller
George Gervin
Allen Iverson

KJ is a bit off this pace, and then it's a big drop to the next group of guards. Kidd of course is movin' on up, as is Kobe. Payton is right there.

[bchaikin]

So how good was Isiah? Was he really a top 5 PG of all time as many proclaim him to be?

depends on how you are measuring greatness.....

robert horry played significant minutes for 5 championship teams. was he a great player? his statistics aren't overly impressive - did he bring statistically unmeasurable qualities to a team to make them the complete winners, i.e. was he the ultimate team leader? a superb defender? or was he just a player in the right place at the right time, several times, and in reality not much better of a player than most others in the league?.....

i think one of the whole points behind statistical analysis is to try cut through all the folklore and myth and suppossed intangibles that have pervaded basketball (as well as other sports) throughout its history and to try to quantify as best we can how each player contributes to a team's success thru the statistics they compile. this wasn't possible for a long time in basketball because enough stats weren't kept. but for close to three decades now imho enough stats have been tracked to do just this...

isiah was never an efficient scorer. his Scoring FG% (taking into account 2pters, 3pters, and FTs) in all but 1 of his 13 seasons was below the league average. his best seasons statistically came before his team won big (his teams won games in the range of 46-52 wins from 83-84 to 86-87, probably his best seasons statistically), and the seasons his teams won big (87-88 thru 89-90 when the pistons went to the finals 3 straight seasons) he was consistently turning the ball over on 6% of his touches, high for a PG. he was never a very good rebounder, and did get a number of steals but never more than 5 per 100 minutes played the years his team won big (he got more in earlier seasons)....

however during the pistons run of 87-88 thru 89-90 he was the team's 2nd leading scorer twice and leading scorer once in the regular season, and the team's leading scorer in the playoffs in each of those 3 seasons. he also was the pistons leading passer in each of those seasons and in the respective playoffs....

yet only once did he score as many as 20 pts/g in the regular season during this time, and as much as 22 pts/g in the playoffs - i.e. he played on some very balanced teams, and each of those seasons at least 5 players scored over 10 pts/g during the regular season with at least one teammate scoring almost as much as he did during both the regular season and the playoffs...

was he a clutch player? most would probably say yes. was he a great leader? again most would probably say yes. was he a top 5 PG of all-time? statistically speaking imho the answer would be no, not even close..

[Mike G]

Ranking my top alltime players by position makes me a bit squeamish, but I'll do this for Isiah. He looks like an average rebounder, as guards go, just below the middle of the pack of 106 top guards. And this selection includes many sometime-forwards like McMillan, Moncrief, Gervin.

But Isiah's playoff rebounding was on another level: about 1/3 higher than his season rates. Such a rate places him in the upper 18% of (good) guards.

His career playoff TS% is about .005 higher than his normal numbers.

The career credits I've broken down into playoff subtotals, to give Isiah this ranking among guards (for playoffs):

5067 Michael Jordan
3607 Magic Johnson
2975 Jerry West
2415 Kobe Bryant
2378 John Stockton

2317 Clyde Drexler
2260 Isiah Thomas
2184 Bob Cousy
2103 Sam Jones
1990 Reggie Miller

1982 Oscar Robertson
1980 Walt Frazier
1865 Dennis Johnson
1768 Allen Iverson
1722 Gus Williams

(No units on this number, just "brownie points")

Isiah only moves up one spot from his total-career ranking, passing Oscar and Cooz but being jumped by Kobe. Though he was always a playoff overachiever, he had skimpy postseasons to show for his first few years, which were among his best personally.

I don't think the Pistons' late-80s rise was due to Isiah's doing less. His career follows a pretty smooth trajectory, and he just got a lot more help later on. While he was still very good, he found himself surrounded by other very-good players.

[Nikos]

[Mike G]

In his first six years, Isiah was all-rookie, and then all-league 5 times (1st team in the middle 3 years of those 5). That sounds like universal "elite" recognition. In all, 11 years as allstar (2 game MVPs), and HOF.

I'm beginning to think maybe the word "overrated" isn't the most overrated word, but that "efficiency" is. If you don't care to define what you mean by "efficient", then we are left to guess.

Here are the Pistons' and Isiah's yearly TS%:

yr Det. Isiah EffSco
82 .533 .478 14.9
83 .527 .516 19.5
84 .530 .510 18.5
85 .527 .519 18.2
86 .533 .544 19.6
87 .542 .518 18.9
88 .547 .513 18.7
89 .550 .520 18.2
90 .535 .494 17.7
91 .521 .498 16.8
92 .519 .497 18.0
93 .510 .481 15.9
94 .510 .480 15.1

EffSco is a 36-min projection, adjusted for the team's pace, and factoring in the actual eff% shown.

For Isiah's all-NBA 1st-team years (84-86), his eff% is close to or better than that of his team's. It's hard to say how much his PG play affected the team eff%.

Someone might study how teammates' shooting % changed when they were traded to/from the Pistons during the Isiah era. Previous studies have shown significant average improvements upon teaming with certain PGs (Kidd, Oscar, etc).

Such a player may have a shooting % below that of his team, and yet he improves his team's efficiency.

[Nikos]

Meaning his win % was very low, and his PER was mediocre. Most all stars and franchise players on good teams had much better stats. Actually they were not really all that close, Isiahs had one of the worse W-L's for a HOFer, and his PER was mediocre for many seasons. He shot pretty poorly, was turnover prone, and his PSA was low.

That is what I meant when I was refering to efficiency.

[Mike G]

Upon Further Review ...

Isiah Thomas was definitely overrated earlier in his career. My ratings show his 5 all-NBA seasons to be barely allstar-worthy.

However, the one Great guard during that time was Magic Johnson; and Isiah was the 2nd-best, unless you count F-G Sidney Moncrief.

I don't give a hoot for "player losses" or "winning %", but the Player Wins are nice. During '84-86, Isiah was just #10 in total PW. For the years '83-87, he's #12. But in both spans, he's #2 or 3 among guards.

For his whole career, 1982-94 -- which is like Trying to promote a guy -- he drops to #20 in Player Wins. Among guards, he ranks below Jordan, Magic, Stockton, Drexler, and Cheeks, in that interval.

But thru all this, a funny thing happened. In the playoffs, Isiah lived up to his overratings. He became a superstar, like Reggie Miller did. Even his turnover rates dropped by some 15%.

[HoopStudies]

I've always felt that the story of Isiah Thomas would be one of the longest and most difficult to tell. And this is before he tried to be a coach, GM, league owner.

Isiah joined a horrible Detroit team and it got a lot better. But Bill Laimbeer, Kelly Tripucka, and Vinnie Johnson all joined at the same time.

When Isiah joined the Pistons, their offense got much better. When Isiah left the Pistons, their offense got much better.

Joe Dumars, Bill Laimbeer, and Dennis Rodman all have been considered stars as well. The correlation of Laimbeer's minutes with Detroit's net rating is much higher than Isiah's.

Isiah's numbers are such that they suggest a player who, like AI, is good at keeping a team near .500, not extending it to greatness.

Again like AI, Isiah's team was successful in the playoffs when the defense got to be very good. Isiah's teams just happen to be better at it.

Isiah's greatest teams were considered so because of their defense and Isiah was never considered a great defender.

Before the Pistons won titles, Isiah was frequently criticized in the press for being selfish or unpredictable. Chuck Daly even suggested that Isiah lost concentration.

Isiah supposedly froze out MJ.

Isiah for Ralph Sampson was a trade proposal.

Isiah was not chosen for the Dream Team.

Isiah's performance in the playoffs was a little better than in the regular season.

Isiah's similars are also somewhat mercurial -- Stephon Marbury, Steve Francis, AI. None of those similars won a title.

Given how much greater Isiah's reputation is than his basic stats, all these things really need to be considered and a better statistical analysis would have to be done to really characterize him fully. Given that my goal has always been more to be proactive and make a difference on a present team than to look back, this has been pretty low priority to me. But I've definitely thought about it and would be interested if someone does a full story on it.
_________________
Dean Oliver
Author, Basketball on Paper
The postings are my own & don't necess represent positions, strategies or opinions of employers.

[Mike G]

"Isiah's performance in the playoffs was a little better than in the regular season. "

Holy Cow, are you kidding?

Maybe you're just looking at totals, or per-minute stuff.
With playoff-opponent and pace adjustments, Isiah rebounded 33% better, assisted 98% as well, had 7% more steals, 30% more blocks, and 15% fewer turnovers, while scoring 10% better, in the playoffs.

As I add up the "linear weights" he seems to be 112% as good in playoffs as in regular seasons. Since the norm is to be 94% as good, that's some incredible 19% better than expected in postseasons.

The original question of whether Isiah was "Great, or just Very Good?", should perhaps be answered: "Never just Very Good; just Kinda Good, and Great."

[HoopStudies]

[CrazyFromTheHeat]

[Nikos]

Another interesting thing I noticed upon checking B-R.com is that there were not many STAT HOG type of PG's back in the early 80s. Only Magic was racking up big #'s and using up a lot of possesions as a PG. Maurice Cheeks might have been the best PG outside of Magic back then. Johny Moore seemed solid, Tiny Archibald had a few good years.

But it seems that a new breed of PGs were coming in. Guys who were more spectacular, and using more possesions on their respctive teams then PGs were used to doing. Of course Stockton was an all time GREAT PG who was dominant without scoring that much.

However, this 80s era may have been where the birth of do it all on offense PG's occured. Guys who looked to score as much as to pass to their teamattes. Eventually you have Tim Hardaway, Kevin Johnson etc... coming in the late 80s.

Isiah was the first spectacular guy to come after Archibald it seems.

Maybe Isiah was a very good PG, but at the time in the early to mid 80s PG was just not a position where players racked up stats and used up a lot of a teams possesions. Come to think of it, the entire game had possesions spread over the team a lot more than todays teams do.

That could factor into the mix. Isiah may have been an elite PG in his time, and today would probably be similiar to Marbury or Iverson -- with maybe better PG skills, and similiar clutch scoring ability.

As an aside MikeG, what makes you dismiss the W-L% so easily. I understand the concept that some players use more possesions and are valuable despite having a worse W-L than an ultra efficient role player -- but is it really a meaningless stat in your eyes? And if so, why? I am very interested to see what others think of the W-L% as well.

[Mike G]

I think another thread could be started regarding DeanO's Player W-L records. In fact, since several of us have our homegrown "systems" of analysis, we could take turns having the screws put to us.

It isn't a hasty dismissal I make. When Moses Malone brought his 12-3 record to Philly, they didn't lose 3 more games. If a guy brings 12 wins, it stands to reason he brings 12 Fewer Losses.

Steve Nash (8-3) and Q Richardson (3-8, maybe?) joined the Suns and bring what? 11 wins and 11 losses? Or 11 more wins and 11 Fewer losses?

The Losses are tagged on to players for no reason other than the team lost games. When Moses left Houston, all the remaining players' roles became bigger, and they were the same players they had been. But they lost games, and as individuals became "losers", according to W-L.

The Wins column follows very closely the PER column (b-r.com is my source), and/or my own ratings. When I look at career Wins I see a very good corroboration of my own rankings.

But the Losses mean nothing that I can discern, other than that players were on some bad teams.

It doesn't make sense to me intuitively or analytically. Shall we go there?

[bchaikin]

Another interesting thing I noticed upon checking B-R.com is that there were not many STAT HOG type of PG's back in the early 80s. Only Magic was racking up big #'s and using up a lot of possesions as a PG. Maurice Cheeks might have been the best PG outside of Magic back then. Johny Moore seemed solid, Tiny Archibald had a few good years.

But it seems that a new breed of PGs were coming in. Guys who were more spectacular, and using more possesions on their respctive teams then PGs were used to doing. Of course Stockton was an all time GREAT PG who was dominant without scoring that much.

in magic's first 3-4 seasons in the league (the early 1980s) there were other PGs getting just as many touches/min as he, including kevin porter, johnny moore, john lucas, phil ford, michael ray richardson, gus williams, isiah thomas, and even ray williams (in 82-83 with KC). it wasn't until norm nixon was banished to the san diego clippers in 83-84 and magic was running the laker show all by himself that his touches/min really topped out...

however what he had more than any other PG those very early seasons of his career was a complete game - while still being one of the highest scoring and best shooting PGs in the league he was also getting something like 8-10 reb/g and 2.5-3.5 st/g, unheard of at that time for a PG....

simulation actually shows these early seasons as being his best statistically because he was just so dominant in so many areas - shooting (high Scoring FG%s) and rebounding and passing and getting steals. he literally was a one man wrecking crew on a team that already had a ton of other talent (jabbar, jamaal wilkes, mcihael cooper, norm nixon)...

in his first 12 seasons in the league the lakers were in the finals 9 of those seasons - unreal...