July 24, 2014

And the Most Productive Shooting Guard is…

Andre Showboat Iguodala

Yes sir!  It’s our own Andre Iguodala.  No joke.

So you are probably wondering – “what the hell am I smokin’?”

Qualifier

In the first half the season Andre Iguodala is the most productive shooting guard in the NBA based on the metric Wins Produced.

Through the first 41 games Iguodala’s contributions should have lead to 8 wins for the Sixers, tops among all shooting guards.

What about small forwards?

Iguodala ranks 4th among small forwards in wins produced behind LeBron (13.8), Gerald Wallace (11.9) and Kevin Durant (8.2).

What about overall?

Iguodala ranked 13th overall in wins produced in the NBA.

Now this is just one metric by one person, but I tend to like this metric so it caught my eye.  It doesn’t place as much value on pure points scored like Hollinger’s PER and EWA (estimated wins added) and more on shooting and scoring efficiency.  It also favors strong rebounders as well.

On a per minute basis Iguodala doesn’t rate as high.  He falls behind Manu Ginobili and Dwayne Wade on a per minute basis in the shooting guard category and behind Lamar Odom in addition to the previously mentioned small forwards as well.

But he benefits from playing a lot of minutes as a productive player so the summation of wins is greater than those other guys.

What does it all mean?  Simply – Andre Iguodala is a really productive player.

And the second most productive player on the Sixers is…

samuel-dalembert-does-work

You knew that right?  Dalembert had 5.1 wins produced at the halfway mark and ranks 11th among centers and 34th overall in the NBA.

What more noteworthy is the fact that Sammy has always held this spot on the Sixers.

Dala and Sam have been the #1 and #2 players in terms of wins produced for the Sixers for the last few years.

The Sixers as a team

Ended up with 16 wins produced or 3 more wins than they actually had through 41 games.   I took a look at basketball-reference’s Pythagorean win-loss projection and that metric suggests the Sixers should have 3 more wins as well.

I guess that means the Sixers are under-achieving but not by a lot.  Even if they had those 3 extra wins they would be looking up at the 8th seed.

So who is to blame?  Players?  Coach? GM? Everyone?

I have a post in mind to discuss that more closely as well.  In the meantime check out the table to see how other Sixers players are performing and the rest of the NBA.

If you liked this post...Help Spread the Word:
  • YardBarker
  • BallHype
  • StumbleUpon
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Google
  • Mixx
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Comments

  1. Pete says:

    what do they categorize Durant as?

  2. Dannie says:

    Small forward

  3. tk76 says:

    Iguodala is a SG… don’t tell that to E.J.
     
    He’s been almost exclusively at SF since AI arrived.

  4. Dannie says:

    Even ESPN has him listed as a SG.

  5. tk76 says:

    Not saying he should not play SG.  I think he is good at either position.  Just that each of the last two seasons the team started off with him at SG, but pretty much gave up and switched him mostly to SF after the first 1/4 of the season.
     
    Per 82games, Iguodala has played 47%t  his minutes at SG this year, as compared to only 17% last year.  But he has played a lot less SG over the past 20 games.

  6. jjg says:

    THEORY OF OBSERVATIVITY   The people have spoken through All-Star balloting:  Eastern Conference SFs:  Iguodala, 6th.  Eastern Conference Cs:  Dalembert, not in top 10.  Their “wins produced” has gone fairly unnoticed by the great unwashed who carry discerning memory and horse sense about players (in most cases).  Give that Houston stat nerd his pick of either or both for cap space, if he’s enticed by above chartings.  Transaction will be a cherry picking for future cherry/ies.  Go #9 & #1, literally.  It’s called fan fatigue. 

  7. jkay says:

    ROTFLMAO!!! ohh yeah we are going to trade our 2 most productive players for a hobbled superstar whose team wins more games without him.
    perhaps it will debunk the belief that Iguodala is trash. he may be the least productive SG shooting the ball. but you can’t argue with him making your team better.
     
    Sammy haters beware!
    would only stand to reason that Dalembert who provides awesome shot blocking and great help defense in addition to limiting the Tim Duncans and Shaqs of the league is a plus to your team. geez why dont we embrace him more?
     
    *i think ESPN just went with whatever nonsense was announced at the beginning of the season and ignored the actual reality of the lineup as it is.
     
     

  8. tk76 says:

    So by that “metric” AI is the best SG?
     
    Fan voting… the new gold standard :)

  9. jkay says:

    seriously though, the disparity between Cleveland’s leader LBJ (13.8) and runner up all purpose utility man Varejao (4.3) is very damning to the credibility of the metric.  if you want to extrapolate, you’d conclude that James was playing with a band of bums. or Derek Fisher (at 0.1 despite playing 41 minutes) is expendable.
     
    problem i have always had with stats concerning wins produced or even the +/-, is that they are always subjective. it can never be adequately comprehensive because, of course, its a team game.

  10. Dannie says:

    jkay – Do you even know how the stat is calculated?  I hope you do before you criticize the credibility of a metric.

    No metric is perfect by any means, but if we are going to have a conversation about the credibility of a metric the parties involved have to at least know how it’s derived.

    What is subjective about a metric?  It’s a calculated number.  What a stat or metric is interpreted to mean can be subjective.  But the metric itself is not.

  11. jkay says:

    i am not criticizing the system itself, I am sure whoever did it took a whole lotta time into considering what would be the appropriate input.
    i do have a problem with the label “wins produced”. is inappropriate and misleading.
     
    but thanks for correcting me, it is the interpretation that is subjective.

  12. Dannie says: