Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Follow PostSports on Twitter  |  Facebook  |  E-mail alerts: Redskins and Sports  |  RSS
Posted at 4:51 PM ET, 03/10/2011

Minute by minute -- a look at JaVale McGee

By Kevin Broom

In cyberspace the past couple days, a season-long conversation about JaVale McGee has flared up. On one side are those who argue that McGee makes the Wizards better (looking at +/- data) and that when he plays more, the team has a better record.

On the other side are those who argue that McGee is capable of dominating individual games because of his overwhelming athleticism, but that he fails to do so regularly for several reasons, including that:

  • he's unskilled
  • he doesn't know how to play
  • he continues to suffer from lapses in concentration.

The "McGee is a good player being hampered by bad coaching adherents" point to the team's 5-2 record when McGee plays 36 minutes or more. Sounds impressive. Especially when you look at McGee's per minute numbers when he plays that much.

But, this argument is yanked short by Ye Olde "Chicken or Egg?" question. Is McGee playing well (and the team winning) because he's getting more minutes, or is the team winning and McGee getting more minutes because he's being productive? And, is this analysis an example of the hazards of arbitrary endpoints?

In other words, why is 36 minutes significant? Drop the minute total to 34 and the record goes to 6-3; to 32 and it's 7-5; to 30 and it's 8-9. Would six more minutes of McGee in those games where he got less playing time really convert some of those losses to wins? On the other hand, the team falls off a cliff (8-35) when McGee gets less than 30 minutes.

An examination of McGee's game-by-game performance reveals that no one statistical category appears to be determining his playing time. Two measures have the highest correlations with McGee's minutes: Game Score (a PER-like stat that measures a player's overall statistical contributions) and +/-.  Here's a list of the stats with the strongest correlations to McGee's playing time this season (1.0 means perfectly correlated):

  1. +/- -- 0.49
  2. Game Score -- 0.44
  3. Fouls -- -0.34
  4. sOrtg -- 0.34
  5. Points -- 0.33
  6. Offensive Rebounds -- 0.24
(sOrtg is a simple overall measure of offensive efficiency. The formula is 100 x (pts / (fga + .44 x fta + tov)) )

This list is suggestive. When McGee is productive (Game Score), the team's +/- is likely to be better, and he's likely to play more. The biggest drag on his playing time is fouls.

When I've done this kind of analysis on other players, I found little evidence for the argument that a coach will give a guy more playing time when he's productive and less when he's having a bad night. In McGee's case, Flip Saunders seems to have a feel for how McGee is performing and is able to curtail his minutes on bad nights. Or, it could just be that McGee coincidentally performs worse per minute on nights when he plays less.

The game-by-game data shows that McGee's per minute performance declines steadily when his minutes go down. For example, his Game Score goes from 16.5 per 40 minutes in games where he plays 36 or minutes to 14.2 when he plays 30-34; 13.1 at 25-29; 10.5 at 20-24; and 5.4 at fewer than 20 minutes.

He grabs nearly 14 rebounds per 40 minutes in those high-minute games, but only 10.8 in all other games. His turnovers per minute go up when he plays less; his efficiency drops; his per minute scoring falls; his fouls skyrocket. McGee's +/- and the team's record follow the same trend. His per minute blocked shots higher when he plays less (the data does NOT suggest that his per minute blocks and per minute fouls are related to each other -- in other words, it doesn't appear that he fouls more when he's blocking more shots).

In high-minute games, the team is 5-2. In all other games, they're 11-42. In high-minute games, McGee's +/- is +6.4 per 40 minutes; in all other games it's -8.5 -- a swing of 14.9 points per 40 minutes. That's huge. A more comprehensive table showing this data is available here.

To summarize: The data suggests that when McGee plays well and stays out of foul trouble, he gets more minutes and the team plays better. It does not appear to support the argument that the team would be better if only the coaching staff would get him more playing time.

By Kevin Broom  | March 10, 2011; 4:51 PM ET
Categories:  Kevin Broom, Wizards  | Tags:  Kevin Broom, Wizards  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: A night to celebrate
Next: D.C. United preseason lessons

Comments

I agree with the summary.
Without recording one statistic, a fan can watch McGee in the first 5 minutes of a game and tell by his body language and activity whether he'll have a good night or a clunker.

Posted by: bozomoeman | March 11, 2011 9:19 AM | Report abuse

Yep, that seems to be exactly the way Flip coaches him and McGee seems to have it down pat. If he goes in and makes mistakes early or appears to be in la'la' land, he knows he is being pulled immediately and his chances of having a high minute productive game is zero.

McGee knows it, we know it, and Flip never fails to coach McGee the exact same way. Flip never gives McGee the chance to overcome a bad beginning.

It is all very evident and the stats seem to verify it. It is like a self-fulfilling phophecy.

If McGee starts a game off positively without making mistakes, chances are he knows that the will get time on the floor.

If McGee goes out and picks up a stupid foul or makes a silly mistake he knows that Flip will quickly have him on the bench. You can tell it in his body language.

Everybody knows this, but if Flip was smart he would try to change this negative repetitive cycle other than just having him on the bench and reducing his playing time.

Why, because other Teams know that this is a quick way to neutralize McGee in a game and most importantly, if Flip could figure out how to let McGee overcome mistakes on the floor rather than by always benching him, it might have an positive impact for the Team, something that the stats says isn't happening yet.

LarryInClintonMD.


Posted by: LarryInClintonMD | March 11, 2011 10:02 AM | Report abuse

Since the Wizards will not do it, McGee needs to take some of his millions and hire Olajuwon to give him the same lessons that he gave Dwight Howard.

Posted by: oakiedokie1 | March 11, 2011 10:40 AM | Report abuse

Good blog! It makes sense - if McGee plays poorly, he gets pulled earlier. And if he plays poorly, the team is obviously more likely to lose - especially factoring in that the backups have been Hilton Armstrong - who doesn't belong in the NBA - and a raw rookie from France.

Posted by: Giveussomehope | March 11, 2011 10:48 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company