How good would the Bulls be without Rose?
Brief look at what MVP contenders' team records would be without them based on off court data from this season. Without Rose, the Bulls would expected to be 39-18
about 1 year ago
snley
60 comments
0 recs |
Comments
So with this logic Manu is more valuable than Rose?
Rose: Who in the blue hell are you?
Rondo: Well
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO YOU ARE!
fine, don't read it
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 28, 2011 10:59 AM CST up reply actions
So you think with CJ Watson startin the bulls would still win 39 games?
Rose: Who in the blue hell are you?
Rondo: Well
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO YOU ARE!
Great
So the Lakers would be just as good without Kobe. Thanks.
I don't know what's worse
If Orlando and Chicago would be pretty much the same without Howard and Rose, or OKC would be the best time in the league without Westbrook.
Stuff like this is why I can never get into numbers as much as some people.
Road Warriors East Coast Takeover Assassination Missions:
Wizards:
Hawks:
Magic:
Heat:
by Dr. Handsome, D.D.S. on Feb 28, 2011 10:52 AM CST reply actions 5 recs
And people say numbers don't lie
In few cases numbers do lie
Rose: Who in the blue hell are you?
Rondo: Well
IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO YOU ARE!
ever read the book
how to lie with statistics? Numbers don’t lie, but people do.
This is a terrible mis-use of statistics
Unless the player he is measuring the team without has missed a good amount of time he is just measuring how a team’s backups do against other teams backups.
So the Bulls bench is quite good, which we already knew, but that doesn’t really say anything about how good Rose is.
by tuluse on Feb 28, 2011 1:15 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Bulls bench > opposing bench
So Bulls bench > Derrick Rose?
Teams without Chapu lost 1173 games during the 2009-'10 season.
on the one hand, I do think that Rose's supporting cast does get shorted in his 'campaign'
on the other, I don’t want to credit Gar Paxdorf too much.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 28, 2011 11:00 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Allstate?
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 28, 2011 11:35 AM CST up reply actions 3 recs
While I understand what this metric is trying to do
and agree with the fact that Derrick has a very good supporting cast, it is very clearly broken. The Thunder would not be better without Westbrook and the Magic would be struggling to make the playoffs without Dwight. This has the same flaws as plus-minus, in it doesn’t adjust for who he playing against and the open looks he gives his teammates. I mean look at the end of the heat game. D-Rose was the one that got Deng that open shot.
No longer believes in the Bogans Prophecy
I think the point is more to provide an immediate counter to rhetoric suggesting the Bulls would be in the tank
or at least have it become debatable. I don’t see how Dwight Howard doesn’t do better by this, either.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 28, 2011 11:36 AM CST up reply actions
And for the record
I think the Bulls are still a .500 team without Rose and would still win the weak Central. They still have enough overall talent to avoid the world of basement dwelling.
Road Warriors East Coast Takeover Assassination Missions:
Wizards:
Hawks:
Magic:
Heat:
by Dr. Handsome, D.D.S. on Feb 28, 2011 11:46 AM CST reply actions
When you do a calculation like this, does the person ever step back and wonder
these numbers don’t make any sense? I’m not just talking about Rose. The numbers for Westbrook, Kobe, Howard also seem way off base.
by Basketball Smurf on Feb 28, 2011 11:51 AM CST reply actions
Winning percentages are logarithmic, not linear to additional contributions from a player
In plain English, I think this statistical measure has things backwards. It’s not measuring the potential MVP’s quality, but the quality of his teammates.
On an otherwise poor team, the MVP candidate is an observable chunk of their winning percentage.
On an otherwise good team, you wouldn’t observe as much of a drop off if you suddenly subtract the MVP candidate, but that doesn’t mean the candidate contributes less.
Extra wins at the margin become progressively more difficult to get. It’s not too hard to put together a 50 win team. It’s very hard to put together a 60 win team.
BullsTwo > Back up and running!
by Sports2 on Feb 28, 2011 11:53 AM CST reply actions 7 recs
I agree.
If Chris Paul backed up Derrick Rose (let’s assume they are equal players) for 13 mpg while Rose played 35 mpg, you’d have a great team. If you went by plus-minus, subtracted Rose and increased Paul’s minutes to 35 or whatever, you wouldn’t get a huge drop. Just the difference in 13 mpg of Rose to Paul’s new back-up (say CJ Watson). So you could take a 60 win team and make them a 57/58 win team (I’m making that up), but it doesn’t mean Rose isn’t any good. It just means that Rose has a great back-up. But in that sense, Rose doesn’t have a lot of marginal value.
It’s like, if you brought Paul in and determined that Rose and he couldn’t play together (for whatever reason), it wouldn’t make Paul any less good, but it would make him significantly less valuable.
In the past 10 years, just four team owners have not paid a luxury tax and are not on pace to pay one this year: Donald Sterling, Jerry Reinsdorf, Chris Cohen (Golden State), Bob Johnson (Charlotte).
Two owners’ teams averaged an operating income of over +$10 million per year while their teams have lost over 60% of their games: Donald Sterling and Jerry Reinsdorf.
I thought you were going to finish up with
“shame if anything happened to it”
Where Would They Be Without Him? is the wrong question.
Where are they with him? seems like a better and more easily answered question. Its strange that people would want to go through a tortured thought exercise to see how much things would suck if someone wasn’t around, when its a lot easier to stack up the positive contributions a player has made and judge those.
MVP is usually the best player on the best team.
Really the only reason Rose is in the conversation is that the media can’t figure out who is the best player on the teams ahead of them. If Boozer and Noah had been healthy the whole year they might have had the same problem with the Bulls.
well i think most would still call Rose the best on the team with or without Booz/Noah
but their injuries do seem to be a big reason that he’s in the conversation. not far behind that reason though are a) LeBron resentment and b) being the fresh faced humble new guy. ultimately, even with Booz/Noah healthy for the whole year, i think Rose would still be getting a good amount of MVP attention. it’s just a good story, and the media eats that up.
Yes, there is a great deal of LeBron resentment.
And before January, LeBron’s stats were down significantly from last year. Now there’s that whole issue of being “clutch.” Plus the Bulls have exceeded expectations while the Heat have, despite their excellent record, fallen short of through-the-roof expectations. Really, people are looking for reasons not to give it to LeBron.
I think it's usually the clearly best player on the best team
Like no one the Celtics will ever win even if they had the best record because it’s seen as a group effort, not a single player being the most valuable.
Yes, that's what I meant.
And the same is true of the Spurs and the Lakers. Nowitzki, though, is creeping back into the MVP conversation because Dallas is doing well.
Is there any stathead that says Rose is actually an MVP?
It seems like the trend now is to bash Derrick Rose cause his stats are not high enough.
Berri’s metric doesn’t like him
Holliingers metric doesn’t like him
Plus Minus doesn’t like him
I would be more impressed if a stathead could explain why the Bulls continue to Beat the top teams with a non MVP, who isn’t even the best player at his position.
LeBron James is a stat monster yet his team is struggling to win close ones.
Maybe Roses presence elevates those around him and increases everyone’s productivity.
One could say Thibs defense is the reason for the impressive record. but at this there are those that say even this is an illusion with Hollinger saying that there is an abberation in their opponents ft% being so low.
Rose is an MVP, despite what the experts say.
by houstonbull on Feb 28, 2011 12:49 PM CST reply actions 4 recs
lol
why can’t my biases be confirmed!?!
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 28, 2011 1:10 PM CST up reply actions 3 recs
Rose is opening things up for his teammates in a way that stats can't measure
So basically the stats say his teammates are lot better than they look when you watch games.
Also the Bulls defense is incredible.
The statheads love the Bulls.
The Bulls have a great team, with many players the statheads believe are underrated.
And they don’t hate Rose. I think all the statheads agree that Rose has contributed more to the Bulls’ wins this season than any other player. However, they believe too much credit is given to Rose, and not enough to the other players supporting him.
And I think most statheads would like the MVP award to go to the best player in the league, or at least the best player on a winning team, rather than the best player on the best team. In other words, they want more attention paid to individual stats. Particularly whichever stat they tout as the one stat to rule them all.
okay maybe its wrong to think they ‘hate derrick rose’
but their eagerness to show how wrong my eyes are with statistical proof irritates me
They could write these articles about anyone but why Manu isn’t an MVP doesn’t get as many hits as someone from a major city market.
If the prevalence of these advance analysis were around in 86 I am sure they would be saying how Jordan is overrated.
You make it seem as if it's something personal, but it's not
They write about Rose being overrated because other, mainstream, writers have written about Rose being worthy of the MVP. They’re not being contrarian for the sake of being contrarian. They’re doing what any sound thinking person should do: refuse to accept the words of others at face value and look for their own evidence. If Rose was playing at an MVP level according to advanced statistics, they’d be writing as such. Your comment about Jordan is ridiculous as he measures quite well in advanced statistics. These writers don’t know you. They don’t care what you see. They study the statistics and write what they believe to be true.
Well, isn't what LeBron did last night the living embodiment of The Secret, leaving millions on the table and turning himself into a hometown villain, all for the sake of winning?
Neil Paine, basketball-reference.com
Yes, for years it was Kobe,
and before that it was Iverson. I’m not saying Rose is the same as Kobe and Iverson (they are three very different players), I’m saying that high volume low percentage shooters who get the MVP award, or get talked about for the MVP award, drive stat guys nuts.
Oh, and stat guys think Carmelo Anthony is overrated too.
My issue is the whole one stat to rule them all approach
and the lack of context that goes into a lot of the arguments about numbers in basketball. Some people do get it right and it’s really an interesting discussion, especially for me (I’m a big fan of sabrmetrics).
I just don’t think there is ever one number that you can look at that explains everything. I look at basketball stats like fielding stats in baseball, on the whole incomplete and never giving the full story.
"What do you think, I just dunked my whole career?" Jordan asked Henderson after making a 3.
"You’ve got to miss eventually," Henderson told him.
"That’s what Cleveland said," replied Jordan
I agree that talking about all the stats is a more nuanced approach.
But it’s also much harder to make lists, and blog readers love lists.
I hate this whole concept.
And its worse when really smart people like the dudes at Basketball-Reference start pushing this type of nonsense, because they aren’t challenging themselves at all. They don’t say, “Does this sound right? Because I’ve seen Derrick Rose play, and he’s clearly the best player on the court, he shouldn’t just be giving the Bulls a one game advantage over not having him.” Instead, they just run some numbers through an algorithm and out pops a number that can easily be explained away, but instead of making that effort, they just publish it as some sort of evidence. Evidence that because it sounds smart and uses concepts people don’t quite understand seems much weightier than it is.
by JockstrapNoah on Feb 28, 2011 1:11 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
I took it as just a quick counter to the 'Rose has the least help!' talk that usually has zero evidence
and not to say it’s not true, just that it’s not an absolute truth.
BaB on Twitter | BaB on Facebook
"Don't nag, flag!"
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Feb 28, 2011 1:28 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, but you are smart enough to read between the lines.
All I see is a CJ Watson led 39-18 team.
Maybe the basketball world needs a nice puff piece on the Bulls bench and how its better than the Miami bench and the Celtics bench. Less chemistry articles, more straight up the bench is better articles.
by JockstrapNoah on Feb 28, 2011 1:45 PM CST up reply actions
I think they set up a straw dog.
They misinterpret the argument that Rose has clearly contributed more to the Bulls success than any of his teammates as an argument that the Bulls wouldn’t win anything without Rose. Then they refute the argument few people were really making.
I mean, when the All-Star selections came out no one said that meant the Bulls sucked without Rose. They just said that all the other elite teams have multiple All-Stars, while the Bulls have only one.
Although now that Dallas is coming on strong, they can make a similar argument about Nowitzki. Furthermore, they can make the argument that Dallas would suck without him, based not just on this statistical analysis, but on Dallas’ record when Nowitzki was injured.
Yeah thats a great point about Nowitzki.
He hasn’t been mentioned in MVP talk that I’ve heard, but he’s clearly what makes that team click and they’re on a 16 – 1 run right now. I’d put him right up there with LeBron and Rose for MVP talk.
by JockstrapNoah on Feb 28, 2011 2:30 PM CST up reply actions
Its not that he has no help.
I just disagree with all these stat freaks that think a bad plus or minus means he’s not the MVP
the argument for Rose is his game has taken a huge leap forward. Without him the entire dynamic of the team changes. When your best offensive weapon is your big man you will have problems late in game. You need a driving guard to open things up.
When I watch the games when there is a crucial play to be made Rose makes it. He starts slow to let his teammates into the flow of the game. He seems to have a very high Basketball IQ for when he needs to take over and when he needs to get the ball in someone else’s hand.
I think Rose is the ultimate stats don’t tell the whole story kind of player. he leads a defensively focused team that grinds out points and capitalizes on the opponents mistakes.
the team right now is designed well its designed so each of the pieces complements the other unlike Miami it has a concept of how it will win games.
Isn't Noah the ultimate
stats don’t tell the whole story player? Keep in mind that when you insist Rose is responsible for x percentage of the Bulls’ wins, you are taking away credit from the rest of the Bulls’ players. Everyone agrees the Bulls are doing great, the question is whether it is really all about Rose.
This is clearly not a legitimate counter
It’s measuring how strong the Bulls bench is against the other team’s bench for the most part. Taj and Asik being great at defense does nothing to do with how impactful Rose is. Moreover, they claim to estimate what the teams’s record would be without Rose which is just stupid and flat out wrong. It’s measuring what the Bulls record would be if each game was less than 10 minutes long, and it was only played by the Bulls bench against the other team’s second unit. If you’re going to push a statistic, state what it’s actually measuring, not what you wish it was measuring.
You’re assuming that people don’t like this article because it puts down Rose, and aren’t looking at the article itself closely enough. You could simply be a fan of good research and honest labeling to hate this article. Even if the “Rose has the least help” argument is untrue, this does nothing to dispel that. People saying that are talking about players on the top end, not the quality of Watson/Brewer/Taj/Asik off of the bench.
I don’t care if this is “quick” or not, you can’t just add up a bunch of shit research and turn it into a good conclusion. The value of bad research is 0.
I disagree.
Really the only reason Rose is in the conversation is that the media can’t figure out who is the best player on the teams ahead of them.
That doesn’t have much to do with it. The top 2 teams with the best record are a far more balanced group. No one player is having a ‘remarkable’ season. If KG were still a 20+ 10+ 5 guy or Duncan a 20+ & 10+ guy, they’d be the leading candidates. Let’s look @ the ‘5’ teams below San Antonio & Boston (by winning %) and they’re best player(s):
- Dallas
- Miami
- Chicago
- LAL
- Orlando
Dirk Nowitzki – Was having an MVP caliber season, until he went down with a knee injury. His numbers have dropped off since his return (24.5 ppg before the injury, down to 22.8 now) but Dallas was 2-7 without him (41-9 with). Their record without him is evidence of his “value” to the team, however, I’m not sure voters put much stock into that. As the argument could be made that if you take any #1 guy, off any ‘winning’ team, then there would be a pretty big drop off in wins.
Lebron James – Although he’s playing along side some guy named Dwyane Wade, he has basically put up the same numbers that won him the MVP the last 2 seasons. 26 points, 7.5 rebounds & 7 assists per game this year. He’s scoring is down (about 3.5 ppg less) and his assists are down (by about 1.5) from last season. That’s understandable, considering his other ball dominating teammate. One thing I should point out tho, his usage rate (per Hollinger) has only dropped off by 2% from last season. Has helped lead his team near the top of the Eastern Conference Standings. However, at the moment they are only 14-15 against .500 teams, 29-2 against teams under .500. That’s a possible knock on his MVP candidacy. Plus there’s that elusive club of 3 MVP’s in a row and post “decision” I’m not sure he’s endeared himself to some of those that have a vote (I don’t think that’s fair but f him). In my person opinion, it’s anyone BUT this guy……please!
Dwyane Wade – 25.5 ppg, on 50% shooting (career high), 7 rebounds (up from 5 last season) & 4 assists (down from 6.5 last season), yet he’s almost not in the MVP conversation. The price you pay when Lebron James is your teammate I suppose. His usage rate (per Hollinger) is down 4% so far this season, in comparison to last. I’d argue he’s having a better season this year than last. But is he the MVP of the Heat or is that James? Some voters probably think so, some probably don’t.
Derrick Rose – 25, 8 assists & 4 rebounds per game. There were many questions coming into the year (hell even before than I can recall) that would he make that 3rd year “leap.” I think he’s answered that with a resounding yes! The Bulls, although missing “arguably” their 2nd and 3rd best players for almost 50 game (combined) are only 2 games out of the #1 seed in the East. There’s a lot of factors as to why; the teams defense, the coach etc. But Derrick has been a constant. Teams have been doubling, tripling (as well as spot shadowing) him pretty much all this year and he’s still more often than not able to make the right play for his team. It makes his numbers all the more impressive imo. Oh and per Hollinger his usage rate has increased by almost 5% over last season.
Kobe Bryant – 25 ppg, 5 rebounds & 5 assists. Playing the least minutes per game since his 2nd season, playing 5 minutes less per game than the previous year. Per Hollinger, his usage rate has actually increased by almost 2% over last season. Don’t think voters are seriously looking at him as the leagues MVP.
Dwight Howard – 23 ppg, 14 rebounds & 2 blocks. He’s been on an absolute tear. He’s been great on both ends of the floor for his team. I’m not sure if there is a single player more important to his teams’ success. If Orlando can get hot in the 2nd half (meaning win a better clip than they have been) he could be your leagues MVP.
Dark horse candidate might be Kevin Durant. However, he had such an incredible season last year (remember the, 25+ points in 29 straight games?), that what he’s been doing this year might not been seen as nearly as worthy of an MVP award. As he hasn’t really made any headlines, although he did have that 47 and 18 game and a buzzer beater game winner but that’s about it. His stats are very close to that of last year. I think the rise of Russell Westbrook has taken some away some of his shine. But like Orlando in the East, the Thunder need to up their position in the West for him to get more play in the MVP race.
by chicity773 on Feb 28, 2011 2:50 PM CST reply actions 2 recs
You disagree and then provide evidence for my point.
Right off the top, you agree that the two best teams, Boston and San Antonio, are “balanced.” You list two candidates from the Heat — and the biggest knock against James is that he plays next to Wade. As I have said, I expect Nowitzki to get back into the conversation now that the Mavs have a better record than the Bulls. Orlando is four games behind Chicago — if they moved ahead, Howard would get more press.
Finally, you list Bryant from the Lakers, but I think many people see the Lakers as a more balanced team this year, with the front line of Gasol, Bynum, and Odom as responsible for their record as Bryant. In fact, early in the year when the Lakers were beating everyone it was Gasol who was getting the most talk for the MVP award.
At the beginning of the year people talked about Durant, but he regressed from last year while Westbrook got better. And overall the Thunder don’t have an elite record. That may change due to their trades, but even if they passed the Bulls I think the media might have trouble figuring out who is their best player, Durant or Westbrook.
Your point
was that the “media” couldn’t “figure out” who the best player is from the Celtics or the Spurs. That’s what I don’t agree with. If Tony Parker were averaging 18 & 10 (despite not being seen as the “best” player on his team), you think he wouldn’t be in the conversation? Rondo started off the year as an assist machine, (15+ per game) had he maintained that pace and being putting up say, 11-13 ppg & 14-15 assists, he’d be a “serious” MVP candidate (even tho I think KG is the more valuable player on the team).
Also, the Lakers were a balanced group last season. Kobe missed 9 games and the Lakers won 6 of them. He still finished 3rd in MVP voting (only 10 fewer [total] votes than media darling Durant). So he’s definitely in the discussion this year as well.
Found this link today from Steve Aschburner, from NBA.com. His most recent MVP ranking list:
http://www.nba.com/2011/news/features/02/25/race-to-mvp-18/index.html
How dare you come up with a statistic that tells me Rose isn't MVP!
Oh wait, this is basically what I was saying after the Milwaukee game. That Rose’s supporting cast doesn’t get nearly enough credit. 39-18 seems like a bit of a stretch, but the Bulls would still be a decent team without Derrick.
by JSB on Feb 28, 2011 4:13 PM CST via mobile reply actions
You're just as guilty as everyone else
You acknowledge that 39-18 is a ridiculous number, but you’re willing to embrace this research because it confirms something that you already believe.
by runningman on Mar 1, 2011 6:51 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't know, so many people have said the supporting cast
is underrated that I’m starting to think they do get enough credit.
Most of the people touting Rose for MVP would not claim he is the best player in the league. Nor would they say, contrary to this article, that the Bulls would collapse without him. I think most of them are are just saying Rose has clearly contributed more to the Bulls’ success than any one other player, and they are having a hard time picking out an MVP candidate from the teams ahead of the Bulls. And, as I have noted, that may change if Nowitzki and the Mavs finish with a better record than the Bulls.












