I don’t want to write about last night’s game against the Lakers. The lazy turnovers, the poor defense and the missed shots all contributed to one of the more depressing losses in recent Jazz history. It wasn’t that the loss was unexpected (the Jazz always seem to lose to the Lakers, which is another story), but the way the Jazz lost made me wonder if this team was going to ever win again.

They have to win again. I mean they have still won 60% of their games and have exactly the same record as last year’s Jazz team did after 45 games, so they have to be a better team than what they have shown over the past five games. So what does it take for the Jazz to win? To answer that questions I looked at the team game log for this year as well as Hollinger’s overall team stats. From the game log I tried to see what stats made the most difference in the Jazz winning or losing a game. For the overall team stats I looked at the past nine years to see if there was any relationship between the stats and each season’s total win total for the Jazz. 

The most important statistic in predicting total team wins is effective field goal percentage. There is a 76% *correlation between how the Jazz shoot and how many wins the team can expect in a year. They won 54 games in the 07-08 season, which not coincidentally enough was the season they shot the best with an eFG% of 52.8%. This year they are have an eFG% of 50%, which is good for 14th in the league and is the Jazz worst mark since the 2005-2006 season.

*Just a quick note explaining correlation. Correlation in my example looks at the mutual relationship between two sets of data. The higher the correlation % the more in line the two sets of data (wins and eFG% for example) move together.

Below is the correlation chart between Hollinger’s team stats and overall Jazz wins:

Considering that eFG% is the most important stat for winning then it would help the Jazz win more if players like Kirilenko and Jefferson made a little bit more than their 47.9% eFG%. Kirilenko seems to settle for too many mid-range jump shots and not surprisingly his jump shot eFG% comes in at only 41%. Every time he shoots one of those mid-range shots he is decreasing the chance the Jazz will win. Unfortunately it seems like he is relying more and more on his jump shot. As a percentage of total shots his % of jump shots has gone up from 54% to 55% to 61% the past three years. Both Kirilenko and Jefferson need to stop settling for jump shots and take the ball to the basket more.

One thing that has been mentioned by Hollinger and on Monday in an excellent article by Zach Lowe is how the Jazz defense has been a problem. His main points are the Jazz aren’t good defenders and don’t do a good job of grabbing defensive rebounds. For the Jazz both stats have been less important in predicting total wins. Over the past nine seasons defensive rebounding has only had a 25% correlation to wins and defensive efficiency only has had a 31% correlation to wins. In other words both stats are important in predicting wins for the Jazz (the better the Jazz are = more wins), but they seem to be less important for the Jazz than for other NBA teams.

Now to switch courses a little bit, let’s look at the game logs to see how the Jazz do under different parameters. I wanted to answer the question of what stats predict the probability of the Jazz winning. I went through the game log and ran a few scenarios to see how the Jazz have done over the past 45 games. Start each point below with “When the Jazz…”

• Shoot better than their opponent in field goal % they have won 88% (22 out of 25) of their games.
• Have a better than their average (1.74) assist to turnover rate they have won 87% (20 out of 23) of their games.
• Shoot better than their average 46.3% they have won 83% (19 out of 23 games) of their games.
• Shoot better than their average (78.4%) on free throws they have won 81% (17 out of 21) of their games.
• Shoot better than their average (35.8%) on three pointers they have won 70% (14 out of 20) of their games.
• Have a better than average (71%) defensive rebounding rate they have won 63% (10 out of 16) of their games.
• Shoot worse than their average of 46.3% they have won 36% (8 out of 14 games) of their games.
• Shoot worse than their opponent they have won only 25% (5 out of 15 games) of their games.
• Have a worse assist to turnover rate than their opponent they have won only 19% (3 out of 16) of their games.

Therefore it isn’t much of a surprise how the Jazz lost to the Lakers last night. They need to shoot better and turn the ball over less. Basically they just need to play better basketball. I am probably pointing out the obvious with this analysis, but considering I didn’t want to write about the game last night this was a worthwhile distraction.

Before we get to the question about whether or not Paul Millsap should be an All-Star this year let’s consider a simple question. Why is Millsap not even in consideration?  First, Millsap was left off the ballot. Now, Bill Simmons writes an All-Star preview and lists out 22 Western Conference players without mentioning Millsap. I understand that he might not be a shoe-in All-Star for a lot of reasons. Does the 4th best team need two All Stars? (Deron Williams is a definite All-Star, and I would challenge anyone to disagree with that statement.) Do his stats really measure up?  I think it is a discussion that needs to be had and thankfully for the loyal readers of this blog I’m up for the challenge.

Let’s review the 12 forwards that were listed ahead of Millsap in Simmons All-Star game article.  Carmelo Anthony, Kevin Durant, Pau Gasol, Dirk Nowitzki, Kevin Love, Blake Griffin, Tim Duncan, LaMarcus Aldridge, Lamar Odom, Zach Randolph and Luis Scola. One thing that most of those players have in common (exceptions are Duncan, Gasol and Odom) is that they score a lot of points. In fact if you look at just points per game then it is pretty clear why Millsap was left off the list of potential All-Stars. The 17.2 points per game that Millsap is averaging doesn’t imply All-Star forward.

However, if you look at advanced stats then the case can be made that Millsap should be in consideration. You still might come down on the side that he shouldn’t be an All-Star, but at least you will include him in the conversation. Below are the advanced stats for those 12 players with the stats worse than Millsap’s highlighted in red:

Here is a summary of the above:

• Paul Millsap does two things incredibly well that most people probably either don’t realize or discount. He is really good at stealing the ball (2.1 STL %) and not turning the ball over (9.3% TOV). Those numbers ranked 1st and 2nd respectively out of the twelve highlighted forwards.
• Millsap also has really good shooting percentages. His effective field goal percentage of 54% is only behind Odom and Nowitzki among the forwards.
• Millsap also is an underrated defender. While, it is hard to quantify defensive impact (for example how do you judge defensive rotations?) you can look at his steal percentage and his block percentage of 2.1%and realize that if nothing else Millsap is an active defensive player.
• Overall this translates into a pretty good Win Shares and Win Shares per 48 minutes. Out of the twelve forwards he comes in at 7th in Win Shares and 6th in Win Shares per 48 minutes.

That being written, I would move the following players behind Millsap in the Western Conference forward All-Star queue:

1. Luis Scola- I hope this was another joke by Simmons like his Greg Oden line. The only thing Scola has over Millsap is rebounds, assists and usage %. The first two are only minor differences though.
2. Carmelo Anthony- An overrated scorer with bad advanced numbers, who also just happens to have played 15% less minutes than Millsap.
3. Zach Randolph- This is closer than the first two, but still I think Millsap is a better player. Randolph shoots a worse percentage and has an absolutely dreadful assist percentage of 7.6% compared to Millsap’s 12%.
4. LaMarcus Aldridge- Millsap shoots better, rebounds better, passes better, steals better and turns the ball over less.  How is this even close? Alridge has played a ton of minutes and blocks a few more shots, but that shouldn’t make up for the fact that Millsap is a much better player. Even Alridge’s points per 36 minutes is only 1.5 more than Millsap’s 18.1, so you can’t really point to scoring as that big of difference.
5. Blake Griffin- This might surprise people who only watch Sportscenter highlights because Griffin is a regular on the Top 10, but his numbers aren’t very far off from Millsap. Griffin gets the lead in PER because of his strong PPG and rebounding numbers. Millsap gets the lead in WS/48 minutes because of his better shooting efficiency numbers. I am fine if you want to put Griffin ahead of Millsap, but it isn’t as easy as one of Griffin’s slam dunks.

After that I would concede the argument to Duncan (great player on the best team), Odom (his numbers surprised me as well), Durant, Nowitzki, Love and Gasol.  That would place six forwards on the roster.  If we filled in the guards with Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, Manu Ginoboli, Russell Westbrook and Deron Williams that would leave one open spot. If you are following my train of thought then you might realize that the 12th man on the 2011 Western Conference All-Star team should be Paul Millsap.

There is a reason why people enjoy shopping on Black Friday.  Is it the opportunity to buy stuff?  No.  You can go to a store any day and buy till your heart is content and your wallet is empty.  Is it because stuff is cheap?  No.  You can go to Dollar Tree seven days a week.  The reason that people go shopping on Black Friday is because of the deals you can get.  Specifically they go there because of the value.  

In the NBA we tend to focus on one side of the value equation.  How much does a player help the team?  For example will the Nets make the playoffs by adding Carmelo?  The issue is that with a salary cap there is a need to look at the other side of the equation.  How much does a player cost?  The value equation in the NBA should be cost divided by production.  It is great to get a very productive player, but it is also important to look at the cost.

Based on my calculation NBA teams will pay out nearly $2 billion in salaries ranging from $24.8M to Kobe Bryant to $473,604 for a rookie like Derrick Caracter or Ishmael Smith.  There will be 1,230 games and therefore 1,230 winners.  Based on that the cost of a win for the 2010-2011 season comes in at $1.6M.  Therefore if you pay a player $1.6M in salary you should expect that player to directly contribute to one win for that player to justify his salary.  Somebody like Kobe Bryant needs to contribute to at least 15 wins to *justify his salary.

*I am not looking at any marketing aspects like how a player might affect attendance.  That is tougher to judge and instead I am more curious about a players contributions through numbers that are easily accessible.

This analysis should be extremely important to Jazz management since the ownership wants a winner, but doesn’t want to pay the luxury tax.   Based on that lets see who is providing the most value to the Jazz.  I am going to dividing each player’s salaries with how their projected wins and rank them on this cost of win statistic.   There will be a clear distinction of which Jazz players are overpaid and which ones are underpaid. 

Below is a chart with the Salary divided by the Projected Win Shares:

Any Jazz player above the line between C.J. Miles and Al Jefferson are players that are earning their salary for the Jazz.  Anyone below the line (starting with Big Al) are players who are overpaid.  The key observations of the above are:

• Paul Millsap is one the most valuable players in the league when you consider his salary ($7.6M) and production (11.2 projected win shares at a great 0.19 WS/48 minute average). 
• Deron Williams might be paid a lot of money, but he is worth every penny.
• The Jazz might not get much production out of their shooting guards (Miles and Bell), but considering what they are paid both are good deals.
• Al Jefferson is going to have to produce a lot more to justify his $13M salary.
• All Jazz fans should be glad Andrei Kirilenko’s max contract is finished after this year.
• Gordon Hayward just needs to keep improving and I see his name moving up the list.
• Mehmet Okur’s name at the bottom of the list is just because his injury has limited his time to only 4 games and 57 minutes. 

One other thing that is interesting is that if each of the players that are below-average in terms of value produced an average amount of wins per their salary then the Jazz as a team would be projected to win 62 games.  62 games would be a vast improvement over the 47-50 current win projection and take this team from being a good team into a title contending team.  This value equation hopefully sheds a little light on how the Jazz are doing from a personal standpoint.

I know that Jazz fans can be a little down right now.  Last night the Jazz lost a home game by 23 to the Atlanta Hawks.  It wasn’t an inspiring effort even if you take it account that they were without *Paul Millsap.  The team has made it a habit of falling behind early in the game and it is hard to make a double digit comeback every game.  Deron Williams acknowledged this recently in the Salt Lake City Tribune.  Also, John Hollinger’s playoff odds have the Jazz projected as the 5th seed with 47 wins.  They have a 0.7% chance of winning the championship.  Things are starting to turn negative and I would like to reverse that trend by pointing out some of the positives I have seen from the Jazz this year.

*Millsap should send the media his stats and a tape of the Hawks game to every relevant person to prove that he should be an All Star this year.

Positive 1 – Elite players- The most difficult asset for any NBA team to acquire are elite players.  Those teams that do (ex. Heat and Lakers) stand a great chance of advancing far in the playoffs.  The Jazz have two elite players in Deron Williams and Paul Millsap. Both are putting up unbelievable years.  Millsap is shooting more and making them at a higher rate.  He is playing more aggressively and is signed for a very reasonable salary for 2.5 more years.  For those of you who question whether or not he is an elite player check out the Win Shares and the Win Shares Per 48 Minutes leaders on basketball-reference.com.  He is 12th in the former (between Dwight Howard and Dirk Nowitzki) and 17th in the later.  Deron Williams is also on the list coming in at 6th and 14th respectively.  Williams continues to improve his play every single year and he has to be in the discussion of the 10 best players in the NBA.  The Jazz have the two players they can build around.

Positive 2 – Gordon Hayward - I have never been much of a Hayward fan as evidenced by my When should Jazz fans start worrying about Gordon Hayward post.  However, he has shown signs of life over 3 of the past 5 games.  David Thorpe wrote about the rookie improving in his latest rookie watch (Hayward moving up) article.  It looked like something clicked in the 2nd half of the Clippers game and since that moment Hayward looks like a different player.  If he could provide some much needed help on the wing then the Jazz will improve tremendously. 

Positive 3 – They are still in 1st place in the Northwest division.  While Hollinger’s more advanced projections might peg them for 47 wins they are winning at a pace of 54-55 wins.  I think they will still settle in around 50 wins, but maybe we have it wrong and they are really a 54-55 win team.

Positive 4 – After 36 games last year the Jazz were 2 games above 500.  This year they are 12 games above 500.  That is pretty remarkable considering how much has been written about this year’s Jazz team trying to incorporate new players like Al Jefferson, Raja Bell and Gordon Hayward.  Below is a chart graphing the wins above or below 500 for this year’s team compared to last year’s team.

Positive 5 – Al Jefferson is going to get better.  This is more of a unsubstantiated prediction than anything else, but I think Al Jefferson is going to have a much more productive 2nd half than 1st half.  Based on his career numbers he is a doing a better job blocking shots and not turning the ball over for the Jazz.  Also, his free throw percentage is at a career high at 79%.  The main difference is that he just isn’t making shots at the same rate.  His field goal percentage is a career low of 47%.  That will go up and it is important that it does because Jefferson is a key player for the Jazz team.  When he scores less 15 points or less the Jazz only win 43% of the time. When he scores more than 15 points the Jazz win 82% of the time.  Even more remarkable might be the stat that when he makes 50% or more of his shots the Jazz have won 12 out of 14 games.

This team can be frustrating to watch at times.  Also, I know that it can be tough to feel like the team is always going to be right behind the Lakers, Celtics and Spurs in the NBA standings, but keep your heads up Jazz fans because the team is close.  There are a lot of things to like about this team and this year so far and I think things are only going to get better.