Page 1 of 1
Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 12:23 am
by @docoolstuff
I just compiled a list of a few players who have been labeled as "busts" or disappointments despite putting up some pretty damn good seasons simply because they were drafted early. My list with my explanations are here:
http://lifeisapeachbasket.blogspot.com/ ... ought.html
"Busts"
Shawn Bradley
Tony Battie
Eddie Griffin
Josh Childress
Martell Webster
Brandan Wright
Al-Farouq Aminu
Honorable Mentions:
Raef Lafrentz
Nick Collison
Drew Gooden
Jordan Hill
Tristan Thompson
Always appreciate feedback! Who am I missing?
Re: Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 12:55 am
by bchaikin
agreed - shawn bradley was far from being a bust. compare the first 11 years of the careers of shawn bradley and mark eaton - statistically you'll find little difference...
Re: Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 2:27 am
by Mike G
I don't know much about who might have been called a 'bust', and I don't know that there'd be a way to quantify it.
But I am pretty sure you'll not get much serious interest in a 'study' that uses WP as though it means anything.
Re: Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 2:46 am
by Dr Positivity
I think one of the reasons is for a lot of these players, the team that drafted them didn't get much out of the pick. So from the team perspective the pick was a bust, even if the player went on to be good
Re: Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Wed Mar 26, 2014 12:32 pm
by Mike G
Yes; it's likely a drafting team's fan base and media would apply the label to a player who is seen to have been a waste of a high pick.
Meanwhile, looking at Win Shares at this page:
http://bkref.com/tiny/vIzCj
... it's seen that in the lottery era (1985- ), Bradley ranks 17th of 29 players picked at #2. Below him are Marvin and Derrick Williams, Beasley, Evan Turner, Kidd-Gilchrist, and Oladipo among active players. Some of these could pass him before they're done.
Ferry, Swift, Darko, Jay Williams (and Bias) won't be passing anyone.
And there's Thabeet.
So of these 29, Bradley will presumably wind up 17th to 20th. The term 'bust' might be reserved for the bottom 20% or so?
Judging by the Median WS for a given draft pick is a lot kinder than judging relative to the Mean. But a surprise like David Lee at #30 -- he already has the career WS (64) of the median #1 pick -- shouldn't lead us to think worse of an avg #30 pick. Half of those taken at #30 have <1 WS.
After a lot of smoothing, here are suggested 'expected' career Win Shares (regular season) for various draft picks since 1985.
It's just multiplying the median at each pick by the factor
1.15 to adjust for players whose careers are not completed.
I'd also suggest that less than half of each median is arguably a
bust.Code: Select all
pk exp pk exp pk exp
1 63 11 18 21 10
2 54 12 15 22 10
3 48 13 13 23 9
4 42 14 11 24 8
5 35 15 9 25 7
6 30 16 9 26 6
7 27 17 9 27 4
8 24 18 9 28 3
9 22 19 9 29 2
10 20 20 10 30 2
No amount of smoothing seems to take out the bulge around pick #21 -- relative to the slump at 16-18. Maybe smarter teams are drafting then?
Re: Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 12:27 am
by bbstats
I think this list is very funny because adjusted +/- *also* looks extra-favorably (though moreso) upon Collison and Bradley, and you're using WP (!).
I will not use my posting power to hijack this thread into a discussion about WP...I will not use my posting power to hijack this thread into a discussion about WP...I will not use my posting power to hijack this thread into a discussion about WP...I will not use my posting power to hijack this thread into a discussion about WP...
Re: Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 12:58 am
by @docoolstuff
All great points and I appreciate all the feedback.
I wanted to be more clear about quantifying what a "bust" was, but defining a quantifiable measure turned into a fool's errand. Additionally, I agree with the ROI sentiment, but I think the point I was making (and should have done a better job explaining) was that even those players who didn't match the expected ROI still generated value somewhere within 1-2 SD of that expected production.
Also, apologies for not varying up the metric used more - I obviously looked at more than WP when compiling the list and will show those next time.
Re: Players mislabeled as "busts?" Who am I missing?
Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2014 1:28 am
by Mike G
Also, a return on investment is relative to what's available in a given draft. Win Share totals for rookie classes may vary by a factor of 3. After 5 years, we see these totals for entry years since 1980:
Code: Select all
5yWS class PER WS/48 5yWS class PER WS/48 5yWS class PER WS/48
628 2009 16.5 .121 572 1981 14.8 .101 466 1983 16.3 .117
626 1982 16.1 .103 571 1999 16.5 .116 463 1988 16.1 .120
610 1990 16.2 .119 555 1986 17.1 .124 453 2008 16.3 .127
610 2004 15.2 .099 517 2000 16.9 .123 441 1991 15.3 .106
603 2002 16.1 .114 497 1989 15.2 .107 440 1997 17.2 .126
601 2005 15.9 .116 496 2010 16.6 .120 438 1992 16.7 .119
595 1980 16.4 .123 489 1993 16.0 .099 404 1995 16.2 .116
591 1985 17.9 .139 481 2003 16.1 .117 392 1998 15.8 .114
582 1994 15.6 .113 478 1984 15.4 .112 385 2007 15.3 .103
576 2006 16.4 .114 474 1996 15.9 .112 355 2001 14.1 .080
. 472 1987 14.7 .098
The average is about 512 WS in 5 years, and the range is from 1.23 to .69 of this.
Only player-seasons of 900+ minutes are in the sample. That may mostly explain the predominant above-avg performance here.