Talk Me Down: How is Deng not MVP of the Bulls?

[Doctor MJ]

The facts in front of us:

-Thibodeau takes over as coach of the Bulls, and the Bulls become an incredible team who if anything look stronger this year.

-While the feeling on Deng had been gradually going down through that point, and the stars of the Bulls were supposed to be Rose, Noah, and Boozer, it was Deng who led the team in minutes with only Rose close to him.

-This eventually led people coming around and calling Deng the #2 player on the Bulls, but Rose was the clear cut #1, won the MVP to boot.

-This year the gap between Deng & Rose on MPG is even wider, and we've seen the Bulls without Rose. They do quite well.

And now Deng has really opened up a huge lead on Rose and the other big minute Bulls in +/- stats. Examples:

-Engelmann has Deng ranked 4th in RAPM, and 1st in Defensive RAPM (Rose ranks 33rd).
-Deng has a net +274 for the season, while Rose is only at +217 (Noah & Boozer lag behind further).

I understand how bizarre this notion that he's the true MVP of his team is, and to some degree that's what I want to talk about. If this truly is the case despite Deng being quite pedestrian even by many advanced stats (PER is 15.8, literally average), this says some rather profound things.

[colts18]

Nick Collison is the MVP of the Thunder.

[MacGill]

Doc, this sounds like a spinoff to the Harden > KD thread from Bast I'll be interested in some of the responses here:)

[Rerisen]

The Bulls didn't do fine without Rose against legit competition. Look at the teams they played, virtually all scrub teams. Teams they could beat with simply their rebounding and defense, and with Watson, John Lucas, and Mike James just doing volume chucking to provide offense. Even with Rose out, Deng nor Boozer stepped up with big offense, because they can't create their own shot.

Memphis clobbered the Bulls without Rose. And the Bulls split 2 games with Boston, with their offense looking terrible in both. Then fell apart vs NJ.

Using +/- stats for this small a sample of a season is silliness. Deng has a higher net total because Rose missed 10 games. Deng also plays the most minutes with the Bulls superior bench, which tends to beat other benches even more than their starters beat other starters. Thus his +/- separation grows from Rose and the other starters. Not to mention Boozer very likely dragging Rose's numbers down. Boozer has always shown up small in +/- and relative to Gibson, who the Bulls stomped teams with when he's in.

You are just overthinking this.

[C-izMe]

This year he has been. He has played a lot more minutes than Rose and the team has done better with him out there. I wouldn't say he is better than Rose but he has been better (if that makes sense).

[sp6r=underrated]

The facts in front of us:

-Thibodeau takes over as coach of the Bulls, and the Bulls become an incredible team who if anything look stronger this year.

-While the feeling on Deng had been gradually going down through that point, and the stars of the Bulls were supposed to be Rose, Noah, and Boozer, it was Deng who led the team in minutes with only Rose close to him.

-This eventually led people coming around and calling Deng the #2 player on the Bulls, but Rose was the clear cut #1, won the MVP to boot.

-This year the gap between Deng & Rose on MPG is even wider, and we've seen the Bulls without Rose. They do quite well.

And now Deng has really opened up a huge lead on Rose and the other big minute Bulls in +/- stats. Examples:

-Engelmann has Deng ranked 4th in RAPM, and 1st in Defensive RAPM (Rose ranks 33rd).
-Deng has a net +274 for the season, while Rose is only at +217 (Noah & Boozer lag behind further).

I understand how bizarre this notion that he's the true MVP of his team is, and to some degree that's what I want to talk about. If this truly is the case despite Deng being quite pedestrian even by many advanced stats (PER is 15.8, literally average), this says some rather profound things.

Deng ranks 8th in Wins Produced per 48 minutes and 3rd in overall wins produced.

[Doctor MJ]

Nick Collison is the MVP of the Thunder.

I want to make clear that I'm not saying this simply because Deng has big +/- numbers. Maybe I shouldn't have brought that up at all, but I can't deny it's a relevant part of the picture.

The big difference between those situations +/- wise is the minutes. A player with big +/- numbers in limited minutes might argue that he should get more minutes, but the idea that he's secretly the best player on the team simply because of the +/- is pretty silly. You'd essentially be saying that the coach was being totally incompetent completely on the basis of one stat prone to reliability issues, and speaking as someone who has followed this stuff for a while, small minute role players never seem to maintain superstar +/- year in and year out, which further implies that there is a lot more context that needs to be considered.

With Deng, Thibs has actually decided he needs Deng on the court more than anyone else despite the fact that traditional stats wouldn't consider that reasonable at all. The fact that the +/- stats appear to be backing up his rationale on this only reinforces the notion. And of course the fact that the Bulls have been phenomenal the whole time Thibs has been there pretty much make it silly to think that Thibs doesn't have his reasons for doing this.

[Rerisen]

What would be a more valuable way of looking Deng's value, is that Rose *enables* Deng to mean so much to the Bulls. Because of Derrick being able to handle the #1 option role and do the majority of the playmaking, Deng's large intangibles as a glue guy can come to the fore, and can become quite valuable. Especially with the Bulls not having a legit backup SF that is very good (either Korver, who is terrible on defense with high negative impact on defensive +/-, or Ronnie Brewer out of position, who is high negative impact on offensive +/-). That is why Deng plays so many minutes.

But as to which player the Bulls would struggle more without longterm, it's not even a question. Rose by a landslide. This is something the numbers cannot disentangle because it hasn't happened for a long enough period. But which you gain a thorough understanding of in watching the Bulls every game.

The teams the Bulls lost to without Deng were the top 3 teams in the East at the time. Miami, Indiana, and Philadelphia. With 2 of those 3 on the road. Which would have been tough games even if the team was healthy. And would have been especially hard to win without any of their top guys, Rose, Noah, or even Boozer.

[Doctor MJ]

The Bulls didn't do fine without Rose against legit competition. Look at the teams they played, virtually all scrub teams. Teams they could beat with simply their rebounding and defense, and with Watson, John Lucas, and Mike James just doing volume chucking to provide offense. Even with Rose out, Deng nor Boozer stepped up with big offense, because they can't create their own shot.

Memphis clobbered the Bulls without Rose by 40 points. And the Bulls split 2 games with Boston, with their offense looking terrible in both.

Using +/- stats for this small a sample of a season is silliness. Deng has a higher net total because Rose missed 10 games. Deng also plays the most minutes with the Bulls superior bench, which tends to beat other benches even more than their starters beat other starters. Thus his +/- separation grows from Rose and the other starters. Not to mention Boozer very likely dragging Rose's numbers down. Boozer has always shown up small in +/- and relative to Gibson, who the Bulls stomped teams with when he's in.

You are just overthinking this.

I'm not trying to say the Bulls are elite without Rose, but it's realistically this team sure seems well above average without him.

I'm also not really trying to make this about Deng vs Rose generally, though I understand why that will be part of the conversation. To me the big story would not "lol, so Rose sucks!" because he doesn't. The big story is a guy with such meh stats having such impact.

RE: lost by 40 to the Grizzlies. Huh? I'm just going to let you correct yourself and say what you meant.

Re: +/-.

Actually the RAPM number uses a prior so while it's heavily weighted toward this year, it's not just this year. basketballvalue has a 2-year APM number going, it also ranks Deng ahead of Rose. Both of these metric adjust for the players a guy has played with and against so that's not going to be a bias for big minute players like this.

You're right that Deng playing more would give him more opportunity to have a higher raw +/-, but I mention it because he actually does despite not having the benefit of his superstar teammate for those extra minutes.

Re: Deng plays more time with the bench. Again, the quality of players he shares the court with are accounted for. There's also the matter that using the fact that the starter who plays the most minutes by definition must spend a decent amount of time with bench guys against him just seems odd.

[SideshowBob]

EDIT

http://www.basketball-reference.com/boxscores/201201010CHI.html

[therealbig3]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that says that the Bulls beat the Grizzlies by 40 points.

I just checked their schedule, and the game they lost to the Grizzlies, they only lost by like 16 points or something.

[Rerisen]

Re: Deng plays more time with the bench. Again, the quality of players he shares the court with are accounted for. There's also the matter that using the fact that the starter who plays the most minutes by definition must spend a decent amount of time with bench guys against him just seems odd.

From what I've seen in obviously being an avid Bulls watcher is the 'accounting' of other players is not something that in reality has constant value.

For instance, when the Bulls play scrub teams without Derrick they stomped many of them. And I actually don't think they would have won much bigger even with Rose. But when they play much better teams that can pressure the Bulls limited ball handlers, the Bulls ability to produce good shots without Rose falls to nearly nil.

Therefore, the other players RAPM is attempting to account for with adjustments do not have static value across all situations. Which would normally wash out in the numbers, but relevant to this year, is skewed because of the vast majority of the team's minutes without Rose were played against very poor competition.

In general, you are right, the examination of Deng's various +/- numbers being out of whack with his production stats is not really about him vs Rose. Though you did label the post that way. But rather if we are to believe these numbers, Deng is not just more valuable to the Bulls than perceived, but actually more valuable than a bunch of superstars are to their teams, who are generally considered superior. Is Deng really as valuable as Kevin Durant?

*Note - Bulls lose to Griz by 40 with Rose, not without him. Wrong game I was thinking of.

[SideshowBob]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but that says that the Bulls beat the Grizzlies by 40 points.

I just checked their schedule, and the game they lost to the Grizzlies, they only lost by like 16 points or something.

Completely slipped my mind there

[lorak]

Rose is first option on offense, but Deng on defense, and Deng's offense > Rose's defense, so that's why Deng's overall value is bigger for Bulls than Rose's (and for example RAPM confirms that).

[therealbig3]

I just want to say that there are instances where 2nd options and role players tend to have big impact, apparently more than the superstar of the team (Ginobili in SA, Harden/Collison in OKC, and now Deng with CHI), and I think it's because they do many things that are extremely important for the team that are not easily replaceable. Deng is a good scorer, who's also their best defender. I feel like he's pretty much their defensive anchor, and his offense is so important because of the lack of scoring that the Bulls have outside of Rose, that he becomes extremely valuable for them, so they struggle without him, more so than without Rose.

But I think the role of the superstar is that they allow these kinds of players to do what they do, because they are the focus of the defense, and they are the #1 shot creators on their team. Shot creation is the most important part of offense, if you can't either set yourself up or a teammate up with a good look, you're not a good offensive player. And the superstars are generally those that can do these things at an elite level. And with a guy like Rose, who has an elite defense behind him, that can win easier games without much offense, he's not going to seem to have the elite impact that he should have. But I think Rose is the difference between the Bulls being a lower seeded playoff team, and arguably the best team in the East/NBA in general. And without him, I don't think Deng is quite as good, at least offensively.

[Rerisen]

basketballvalue has a 2-year APM number going, it also ranks Deng ahead of Rose.

Yet last year Deng's APM was just +1.04 to Rose's +11.66. This year year Deng is at +17.50, with all kinds of strange Bulls lineups due to the injuries, Rose and Deng both missing a noticeable amount of games. To me this suggests unreliability in the number, and I truly believe has a large degree to do with the Bulls being a machine in the regular season, especially against bad teams.

But the construction of the team is rather unique with so much reliance on one guy offensively that this domination cannot hold up without Rose against stiffer competition. There is just no way for numbers to understands how players value can increase or decrease in a fashion that is not linear as competition scales up or down. But which yet could indeed be happening, without being captured unless the sample size without Rose grew much larger, and to include many more higher quality opponents.

[therealbig3]

*Note - Bulls lose to Griz by 40 with Rose, not without him. Wrong game I was thinking of.

The Bulls beat the Grizzlies by 40 with Rose.

EDIT: NVM, saw your edit.

[Doctor MJ]

What would be a more valuable way of looking Deng's value, is that Rose *enables* Deng to mean so much to the Bulls. Because of Derrick being able to handle the #1 option role and do the majority of the playmaking, Deng's large intangibles as a glue guy can come to the fore, and can become quite valuable. Especially with the Bulls not having a legit backup SF that is very good (either Korver, who is terrible on defense with high negative impact on defensive +/-, or Ronnie Brewer out of position, who is high negative impact on offensive +/-). That is why Deng plays so many minutes.

But as to which player the Bulls would struggle more without longterm, it's not even a question. Rose by a landslide. This is something the numbers cannot disentangle because it hasn't happened for a long enough period. But which you gain a thorough understanding of in watching the Bulls every game.

The teams the Bulls lost to without Deng were the top 3 teams in the East at the time. Miami, Indiana, and Philadelphia. With 2 of those 3 on the road. Which would have been tough games even if the team was healthy. And would have been especially hard to win without any of their top guys, Rose, Noah, or even Boozer.

I think the way you've phrased the one way causality puts a bias toward specific types of players that isn't productive. It's certainly true that in version of basketball with less players, Rose's role would be the one that always remained necessary, but that doesn't make it inherently more valuable on the 5-on-5 level. Hell, the greatest dynasty of all time was built around a help defender, a role which doesn't exist in the 1-on-1 game.

I also find the "weaker backups" argument to be very strange when you've just said that Rose enables Deng. You don't see the issue with the idea that Rose is the super-special player who is the "enabler" of Deng, but the Bulls just happen to have backups who enable him pretty dang well too.

I think though that maybe the most useful way to turn this conversation is to say, okay, let's go with the idea that Deng's impact is what it is because the Bulls have no one else like him, how amazing is it that they so desperately need a player like Deng who puts up such average numbers and whose role isn't even very easy to describe?

[Rerisen]

I just want to say that there are instances where 2nd options and role players tend to have big impact, apparently more than the superstar of the team (Ginobili in SA, Harden/Collison in OKC, and now Deng with CHI), and I think it's because they do many things that are extremely important for the team that are not easily replaceable. Deng is a good scorer, who's also their best defender. I feel like he's pretty much their defensive anchor, and his offense is so important because of the lack of scoring that the Bulls have outside of Rose, that he becomes extremely valuable for them, so they struggle without him, more so than without Rose.

But I think the role of the superstar is that they allow these kinds of players to do what they do, because they are the focus of the defense, and they are the #1 shot creators on their team. Shot creation is the most important part of offense, if you can't either set yourself up or a teammate up with a good look, you're not a good offensive player. And the superstars are generally those that can do these things at an elite level. And with a guy like Rose, who has an elite defense behind him, that can win easier games without much offense, he's not going to seem to have the elite impact that he should have. But I think Rose is the difference between the Bulls being a lower seeded playoff team, and arguably the best team in the East/NBA in general. And without him, I don't think Deng is quite as good, at least offensively.

A lot of good points here. You saw similar above and beyond +/- figures (RAPM as well) for say Lamar Odom, on several recent years of the Lakers, who is interestingly, a similar player to Deng in ways.

But was Lamar really more valuable than Kobe, as in, the Lakers could do better missing Kobe than Lamar in those years.... probably not.

What you are probably getting is a unique combination of two players playing extremely well together, one a superstar and one a role player that plays off said superstar. With the role player by whatever twist of chance or perhaps anomaly, playing well enough when they apart, in far less minutes, that the stat is spitting them out actually ahead of the superstar. But if we grew the gap in the minutes they were separate to equal the minutes they played together, I really question if such trends would hold.

[lorak]

basketballvalue has a 2-year APM number going, it also ranks Deng ahead of Rose.

Yet last year Deng's APM was just +1.04 to Rose's +11.66. This year year Deng is at +17.50,

Why look at APM when RAPM is available?

2011: Deng +4.8, Rose +2.2
2012 (non prior informed): Deng +3.2, Rose +1.6
2012 (prior informed): Deng +5.8, Rose +3.0