Page 1 of 4
Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:14 am
by LISTEN2JAZZ
http://dberri.wordpress.com/2008/12/28/worth-the-money-–-the-bogut-and-okafor-story/
Bogut - as Table Two indicates - is Milwaukee’s most productive player. Despite his new contract, though, he’s not the highest paid player on this team. Even after his new contract kicks in next year, his pay will still lag behind the compensation of Richard Jefferson and Michael Redd. Not surprisingly, Jefferson and Redd lead the Bucks in points scored per game. But both players are below average with respect to WP48 (and this was true last year as well).
Before moving on to Okafor, let’s quickly note that the Bucks have improved in 2008-09. Given what the players have done in the past the Bucks should have expected to be on pace to win 26 games this year (what they won last year). The performance of this team this year, though, is consistent with a team that will win about half their games.
About one-third of this improvement can be tied to the play of Bogut. Although Bogut has taken a step forward, the biggest leap can be seen in the play of Luke Ridnour. Ridnour’s WP48 was 0.125 as a starter in Seattle in both 2004-05 and 2005-06. When Ridnour stopped starting on a regular basis, though, his performance fell into below average territory. This season he has been returned to the starting line-up and his WP48 has risen to 0.147.
In addition to Ridnour and Bogut, the Bucks are also getting an above average performance from Ramon Sessions and a nearly average performance from Luc Mbah a Moute. Each of these players was a recent second round selection. Their play suggests that someone in Milwaukee knows something about drafting players. Then again, these same people selected Joe Alexander and Yi Jianlian in the first round. Both of these players have been below average NBA players, so maybe Milwaukee still has some issues in its scouting department.
Direct link to Bucks roster ranked by Berri's formula:
http://www.wagesofwins.com/Bucks310809.html
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:16 am
by REDDzone
Sweet, he wrote the article on my suggestion.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:21 am
by LUKE23
I think there is very little doubt that Bogut is our most valuable player. He's our best interior defender, far and away our best rebounder, and he scores more efficiently than anyone on the roster. In addition, he plays the hardest position to fill on the basketball court. That is why I am puzzled when people say the contract we gave him was poor. It wasn't.
So Berri has us at 41-41 right now, Hollinger has us at 43-39. That is interesting.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:25 am
by paulpressey25
The winscore formula doesn't appear to take into account "charges drawn". While Bogut is low on blocked shots, he makes up for it with critical charging calls for us.
The problem we have on that chart are RJ and Redd. Almost $30 million in salary going to guys who just aren't doing what needs to be done. And unfortunately neither guy's contract expires in 2010.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:27 am
by Joana
So, how are Berri's pre-season predictions doing?
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:36 am
by paul
Interesting that so many people like this are giving Bogut major credit yet his coach seems incapable of doing so, quite the opposite in fact.
Great to see Ridnour's play get some of the credit it deserves as well, along with Luc and Ramon. We really need more out of Redd and RJ quickly - I'd love to see what kind of predictions we'd be seeing if they both get back to the level we know they can play at.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:36 am
by REDDzone
My numbers line almost perfectly with his other than Ridnour's. For some reason he has LR's numbers as higher than mine. Maybe its positional adjustment or something, I'll have to find time to check.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:41 am
by trwi7
paulpressey25 wrote: The problem we have on that chart are RJ and Redd. Almost $30 million in salary going to guys who just aren't doing what needs to be done. And unfortunately neither guy's contract expires in 2010.
Yep. I'd be more excited about the future of this team if those two expired before 2010 or if this was the first year one or both of the was a below average contributor, but we're continuing to see a decline in their play which is concerning about moving them to say the least.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:45 am
by paulpressey25
paul wrote:Interesting that so many people like this are giving Bogut major credit yet his coach seems incapable of doing so, quite the opposite in fact.
Again, I think it is tough love. He feels Bogut can be more than he is and I agree with him. A 15-18 wins produced type player versus the 11 games he is currently at. He's damn close if he can play more consistently and figure out how to get his scoring average back at 16ppg like it was for those last 50-games of last year.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:46 am
by LISTEN2JAZZ
Joana wrote:So, how are Berri's pre-season predictions doing?
Why do you keep criticizing stat guys, and yet keep refusing to name the non-stat guy who gets it right all the time? Tell me right now the name of the pundit who will get next year's predictions correct.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:49 am
by REDDzone
Joana wrote:So, how are Berri's pre-season predictions doing?
How are yours doing? Perfect I'm sure.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:55 am
by Joana
adamcz wrote:Joana wrote:So, how are Berri's pre-season predictions doing?
Why do you keep criticizing stat guys, and yet keep refusing to name the non-stat guy who gets it right all the time? Tell me right now the name of the pundit who will get next year's predictions correct.
Huh? Who is that non-stat guy that claims some kind of predictive power?
If Berri is just another guy giving prediction, why do we open topics with his stuff?
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:57 am
by LUKE23
Many people knock the statistical analysis people, one because it goes against their eye test and what they want to believe, two because they don't understand it. It's annoying but also a fact of life.
Some people honestly think that what they just casually watch, without tracking anything, in a less game sample is a better barometer than people who take every minute of every game into account, and look at the trends statistically.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:05 am
by Chuck Diesel
I don't often knock stat people, but I'll take own observations, notes and analysis of a basketball game over someone else's statistical formula any day. Many people who scout basketball for a living would say the same thing.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:06 am
by REDDzone
It just bothers me when people take lil shots at the man himself as opposed to giving any type of objection to the article in question.
Is berri saying anyone is a great or a poor player? No. What he is trying to do is give us a new perspective on who is producing for our team and who isn't.
If anyone thinks the Bucks will be a better team than projected, or worse team than projected, or that Bogut hasn't been our best contributor thus far, or whatever else, I'm sure everyone would be interested in the objection and the reasoning behind it.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:14 am
by paulpressey25
I'm not sure where Berri is all that wrong here. Before the season, he said Redd and RJ were on the decline and wouldn't do much of anything for us. And they aren't.
The only areas where he's been wrong are:
a) Bogut outperforming slightly where Berri had him
b) Ridnour outperforming where he had him.
No way Berri could have predicted that somehow Sessions and LRMAM would elevate their games to be major contributors. His formulas aren't necessarily set up to do that. (i.e. starting from an almost zero baseline to then say that a second round pick will launch on the scene with a plus 4 to 8 wins produced.)
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:20 am
by Joana
LUKE23 wrote:Many people knock the statistical analysis people, one because it goes against their eye test and what they want to believe, two because they don't understand it. It's annoying but also a fact of life.
Some people honestly think that what they just casually watch, without tracking anything, in a less game sample is a better barometer than people who take every minute of every game into account, and look at the trends statistically.
That's a very lame and annoying straw man argument. That dichotomy is way too simplistic and not proper of a cultivated mind. Personally, I believe I've read more about basketball stats, and used them more, than anyone else in this board.
The problem is that most people are basketball illiterate and don't understand what they're watching. So, they tend to trust stats, even metrics that are pretty meaningless or flawed. I've pointed a few of the problems of Berri's most famous formulas and my points weren't contradicted.
I understand why you're suspicious of what you watch. I've noticed reading the game threads that you see the exact same play - not the same, but extremely similar plays - differently, depending on the players involved on the execution. That's a case where your passions/hates for particular players cloud your judgment to the point that your eyes start playing tricks with you. I wouldn't trust my judgment as well if I was like that.
What I knock is not the statistical analysis people - I even know some of them. Well, with a few exceptions, some guys do a really bad work. For example, if you're going to label everybody who knocks Berri (and not only his work) as "stats haters", you're going to be very surprised with the kind of people that falls into that category. What I knock - and mock - are the "know-nothings" who think that any criticism of stats is rooted on lack of understanding.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:21 am
by LISTEN2JAZZ
Joana wrote:adamcz wrote:Joana wrote:So, how are Berri's pre-season predictions doing?
Why do you keep criticizing stat guys, and yet keep refusing to name the non-stat guy who gets it right all the time? Tell me right now the name of the pundit who will get next year's predictions correct.
Huh? Who is that non-stat guy that claims some kind of predictive power?
Charles Barkley, Kenny Smith, Steven A Smith, Bill Walton, Ric Bucher, and literally dozens of others who have been given a national platform at ESPN, NBA.com, Sports Illustrated, Sporting News, SLAM Magazine, and plenty of other places.
If Berri is just another guy giving prediction, why do we open topics with his stuff?
A: Because his track record seems better than most of the guys listed above
B: Because it's interesting and insightful
C: We do open topics about other writers when they cover the Bucks, but they don't anger you in the same way, so you forget about them
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:28 am
by Joana
REDDzone wrote:It just bothers me when people take lil shots at the man himself as opposed to giving any type of objection to the article in question.
I have already written why are Berri metrics flawed somewhere on this board, haven't I? I can't keep repeating myself every time this issue pops. There's a very good peer-reviewed paper, from Kubatko, Oliver, et all, that makes an excellent work defining the value of possessions. I strongly advise it (I can e-mail it).
I don't have any type of objection to the conclusions of the article. I believe Bogut has been the MVP of the season. I think Luc and Jefferson are under-appreciated because defense isn't measured. I think Sessions is over-appreciated for the same reason. And I think that things are closer that what the article implies.
Re: Berri 12/28 on Bogut/Bucks
Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 2:31 am
by Epicurus
Chuck Diesel wrote:I don't often knock stat people, but I'll take own observations, notes and analysis of a basketball game over someone else's statistical formula any day. Many people who scout basketball for a living would say the same thing.
I am sure you are correct about the scouts, but therein lies the problem--self-aggrandizement and hubris.