FanPost

KG vs the other elite big men: by the numbers

In late January I took a look at how Rajon Rondo compared with the other elite point guards in the league, according to 5 different advanced stats (PER, Win Shares, Wins Produced, Roland Rating from 82games.com, and Adjusted +/-).  Late last month I compared Paul Pierce and Ray Allen with the best wings in the NBA using the same measures.  Now I'm back to do the same thing with Kevin Garnett, to see how he compares with the best big men in the NBA according to the advanced stats.

I think KG is a very interesting test case for these advanced stats, because according to the traditional box score stats KG is arguably the least accomplished among the Big 4 this year.  Rondo leads the league in assists and steals, two point guard staple categories.  Pierce and Allen are both among the most efficient shooter/scorers in the league, within range of the famous 40/50/90 standard.  But KG, at 15 points and 9 boards, just looks...regular.  There's little in the traditional box scores to separate him from the Andray Blatche and DeMarcus Cousins of the world, let alone putting him among the big man elite in the league. 

Yet, I know that Garnett is among the best bigs in the league.  Or at least, I thought I knew that...but then again I'm a big fan, so maybe I was just biased?  Or maybe, as many fans and analysts have taken to saying, Garnett's contributions are more intangible than tangible at this stage in his career.  Maybe his emotional leadership and communication skills are the only things that separate him from the pack, but the actual numbers that people use to quantify the game are no longer his friend in his current role and career stage.  Especially since defense, where he is still unquestionably one of the best, isn't really directly measured in most common stats.

Maybe. 

But, just in case, let's take a look.  The following is a snap-shot of 25 of the best big men (power forwards and centers, both) in the NBA, according to the 5 advanced stats mentioned previously.  And like before, though I have the category values recorded for all 25 players in all 5 stats, for the sake of brevity I'll only make charts for the top-15 in each category before putting all 25 into the final rankings.  Without further ado...

PER: Hollinger's stat, probably the most popular of the "advanced stats", favorable (compared to other advanced stats) to volume scorers and players that generate a lot of free throws; generally ranks those considered "great" by the general public well, though also will tend to have role players with good scoring-per-minute very highly.

 

   PER
Dwight Howard 26.07
Kevin Love 24.67
Dirk Nowitzki 24.02
Amare Stoudemire 23.99
Pau Gasol 23.5
Blake Griffin 22.23
Zach Randolph 22.21
Al Horford 22.05
LaMarcus Aldridge 21.59
Andrew Bynum 21.51
Tim Duncan 21.35
Nene  21.3
Kevin Garnett 20.8
David West 20.62
Al Jefferson 20.19

 

Win Shares: From Basketball-reference.com, emphasizes shooting/scoring efficiency; loves points per shot (thus values FTs drawn).  To account for different minutes played, we're going to look at Win Shares per 48 minutes played.

 

  WS48
Dwight Howard 0.234
Pau Gasol 0.233
Kevin Love 0.222
Dirk Nowitzki 0.216
Andrew Bynum 0.211
Nene  0.21
Al Horford 0.205
Joakim Noah 0.198
Kevin Garnett 0.197
Lamar Odom 0.19
Zach Randolph 0.172
Tim Duncan 0.167
David West 0.165
Chris Bosh 0.163
LaMarcus Aldridge 0.162

 

Wins Produced: Dave Berri's controversial stat (most likely to be trashed on an APBRmetric board) is also the one seemingly growing fastest in popular usage; wins produced values what he defines as possessions, so loves rebounds, steals, and blocks and doesn't like TOs; doesn't value shot creation, but does value assists.  We'll look at Wins Produced per 48 minutes.

 

  WP48
Kevin Love 0.484
Dwight Howard 0.397
Kevin Garnett 0.323
Al Horford 0.297
Joakim Noah 0.294
Zach Randolph 0.294
Andrew Bynum 0.291
Tim Duncan 0.286
Pau Gasol 0.276
Lamar Odom 0.257
Blake Griffin 0.246
Nene  0.235
Andrew Bogut 0.208
Josh Smith 0.203
Dirk Nowitzki 0.184

 

Roland Rating: 82games.com's Roland Rating is based upon a combination of PER and +/- stats.  It looks at the individual PER of each player, the PER of their primary defensive assignment, and subtracts the 2 for a 1-on-1 value then they combine that 1-on-1 value with a team-impact based on-court/off-court +/- stat to get the rating.  Tends to produce fewest "what???" rankings, because players that rank out highly in both the 1-on-1 and team stats are almost universally who we consider to be among the best in the game...though the order at the top isn't always what you'd expect. (Note: 82games last updated on March 5, so these results are only current to that date)

 

Roland Rating
Dwight Howard 14.6
Kevin Garnett 12.0
Dirk Nowitzki 11.3
LaMarcus Aldridge 10.1
Al Horford 9.7
Pau Gasol 9.4
Tim Duncan 8.9
Blake Griffin 8.6
Kevin Love 7.9
Andrew Bynum 7.1
Chris Bosh 7
David West 6.8
Zach Randolph 6.4
Lamar Odom 6.4
Josh Smith 6.1

 

1-year Adjusted +/-: This is Basketballvalue.com's APM calculation.  For the point guards I used 1-year APM, which I don't love because APM is so incredibly noisy that a single year (or less) doesn't give conclusive answers.  For the wings I used 2-year APM (which still may be too short for an APM calculation and also includes data from last season, which I really don't like) because at the time there were too many "no freaking way" values in the 1-year APMs that didn't match either the 2-year average or any stretch of common sense.  I actually like longer APM calculations, 4 years or more, to really clean up the noise and give a robust effect.  Nevertheless, we're talking about this year specifically and the 1-year values seem to have been cleaned up since I did the wings, so I'm back to using the 1-year APM here (with associated standard error):

 

APM 1 yr APM 1 yr SE
LaMarcus Aldridge 16.53 6.27
Dirk Nowitzki 13.65 4.38
Dwight Howard 12.84 5.38
Andrew Bynum 12.22 5.75
Kevin Garnett 11.45 6.16
Paul Millsap 11.21 5.08
Nene  9.62 4.87
Pau Gasol 9.25 6.27
Chris Bosh 8.74 5.52
Brook Lopez 7.28 6.56
Blake Griffin 7.25 5.27
Lamar Odom 7.13 5.18
Tim Duncan 5.57 6.11
Andrew Bogut 5.24 5.28
Josh Smith 4.79 4.97

 

Overall Rank orders: Giving each of our 25 guys a '1' through '25' ranking based on where they ranked in each stat, here is a summary of how each guy did.  I'll add an average across the 5 stats (with standard error) to give us a better idea how our seat-of-the-pants-advanced-stat-cross-section-view ranks KG with respect to 25 of the best big men in the NBA:

 

PER WS48 WP48 Rld Rtg APM  Avg. Std. Er.
Dwight Howard 1 1 2 1 3 1.6 0.40
Dirk Nowitzki 3 4 15 3 2   5.4 2.42
Pau Gasol 5 2 9 6 8   6 1.22
Kevin Garnett 13 9 3 2 5   6.4 2.04
Kevin Love 2 3 1 9 20   7 3.54
Andrew Bynum 10 5 7 10 4   7.2 1.24
Al Horford 8 7 4 5 19   8.6 2.69
Tim Duncan 11 12 8 7 13   10.2 1.16
LaMarcus Aldridge 9 15 22 4 1   10.2 3.79
Blake Griffin 6 18 11 8 11   10.8 2.03
Nene 12 6 12 18 7   11 2.14
Zach Randolph 7 11 6 14 22   12 2.88
Lamar Odom 16 10 10 13 12   12.2 1.11
David West 14 13 19 12 17   15 1.30
Chris Bosh 21 14 21 11 9   15.2 2.50
Joakim Noah 22 8 5 24 24   16.6 4.17
Paul Millsap 17 20 17 23 6   16.6 2.87
Amare Stoudemire 4 19 23 16 21   16.6 3.36
Josh Smith 19 22 14 15 15   17 1.52
Andrew Bogut 25 24 13 17 14 18.6 2.50
Carlos Boozer 18 17 16 21 23 19 1.30
Elton Brand 24 16 18 22 16 19.2 1.62
Brook Lopez 20 25 25 20 10 20 2.74
Al Jefferson 15 21 20 25 25 21.2 1.85
Luis Scola 23 23 24 19 18 21.4 1.21

 

Conclusions:

As we saw with both the point guards (Chris Paul) and the wings (LeBron James), one big man stood out as clearly the best according to the advanced stats.  Dwight Howard was alone at the top among bigs, ranking first in three of the five measures looked at and top-3 in all five.  Call this the stats MVP-tier.

Next, there is a group of five or six big men that all have a statistical argument for second-best big man in the league: Nowitzki, Pau Gasol, Garnett, Love, Bynum, and maybe Horford.  Finding KG on this level, which I'll call the top-shelf, shows that KG is still among the best bigs in the game on a tangible, quantifiable level.  It's not all intangibles and mind games, he's actually still packing a statistical punch as well.

There was a lot more variation across the stats for the bigs than for the point guards or wings, which led to larger standard errors.  Thus, Horford could either be grouped with the top-shelf bigs above or the second-tier bigs because his standard error would place him in either set.  The other second tier bigs, by the numbers, include Tim Duncan, Aldridge, Griffin, Nene, Odom and maybe Randolph (like Horford, his standard error would get him into either this level or the next).

Interestingly, the two Kevins with Timberwolves ties seem to be opposite sides of the coin from each other.  Kevin Love would be challenging Dwight Howard for the top big in the league honors, if you looked only at the three box score-based stats used here.  But in the two stats that factor in +/- impact, Love is down among the lower third of bigs.  On the other hand, KG would be solid among the box score based advanced stats (eighth among bigs), but in the two categories that factor in +/- (which would include defensive impact) he's among the top few in the game.  Zach Randolph is another like Love that looked great in the box scores and struggled in the +/- categories, while Aldridge is another like KG that looked outstanding in +/- but not as strong in the boxes.  Just some food for thought.

These rankings illustrate what it is that makes the Lakers so strong and dangerous: they have THREE big men among the top two tiers, including two on tier-1.  No other team in the league has even two bigs in the top-2 tiers, let along 3.  If the Celtics ever get healthy they can use quality big depth around KG to take the battle to LA, and the Bulls and Hawks are no slouches themselves, but in terms of quantity and quality the Lakers bigs are extremely strong.

Rookie wonder Griffin measures out well here, among the better bigs in the league, though he's still behind old-man Duncan, which many casual observers probably wouldn't suspect just based on the Sportscenter highlights and box scores.

The player that finished surprisingly low in the rankings is Amare Stoudemire, who was actually getting MVP buzz just a month or two ago.  Now, according to the stats I looked at here, Amare would rank 18th among big men alone.  His PER looks great, but he is among the lowest rankings in each of the other 4 stats that I looked at.  Stat may have helped revive Madison Square Garden and helped bring the spotlight back to the Knicks, but the stats suggest that what he's producing on the court may not be quite as special as the buzz he was able to create off the court.

All in all, this has been an interesting study.  The Celtics didn't have anyone on the "stats MVP level" at any position, but they had four guys measure out as "top-tier" in the league at their position.  Like the Lakers' bigs, that's a unique finding in the league.  True, the Big-4 may be sacrificing a bit in stats and attention for the sake of the team.  But if you put on your nerd hat, it's clear that all four are tangibly, quantifiably performing at elite levels this year.  Which is a big reason why #18 is on the horizon.

Be respectful and keep it clean. Thanks.

X
Log In Sign Up

forgot?
Log In Sign Up

Forgot password?

We'll email you a reset link.

If you signed up using a 3rd party account like Facebook or Twitter, please login with it instead.

Forgot password?

Try another email?

Almost done,

Join CelticsBlog

You must be a member of CelticsBlog to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at CelticsBlog. You should read them.

Join CelticsBlog

You must be a member of CelticsBlog to participate.

We have our own Community Guidelines at CelticsBlog. You should read them.

Spinner.vc97ec6e

Authenticating

Great!

Choose an available username to complete sign up.

In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.

tracking_pixel_9347_tracker