Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Kidd v. KJ and comparing eras

Expand Messages
  • Dean Oliver
    ... I ve personally had to work on other basketball tasks as well as real work. ... thought ... he ... Opinion first -- KJ was generally a better offensive
    Message 1 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., harlanzo@y... wrote:
      > I see things on the site have slowed down of late so I thought I

      I've personally had to work on other basketball tasks as well as real
      work.

      >
      > My friend swears that Jason Kidd is a better player than Kevin
      > Johnson ever was. Now my intial reaction was, based solely upon my
      > memory of the two players in action, was that I prefer KJ. I
      thought
      > he could shoot and finish and while not as good a passer as Kidd,
      he
      > definitely was more than adequate in that department.
      >

      Opinion first -- KJ was generally a better offensive weapon because
      he could score. He wasn't as good a passer. Kidd has always been a
      good defender, though, one thing that he's never gotten the credit
      for. KJ generally did seem to have a greater impact on better teams.
      What Kidd does to pass a ball is legendary. Overall, I don't think
      he has been as effective as KJ, but his passing flare is impressive.
      He helped make Michael Finley a star that he hasn't matched
      in Dallas (though KJ did, too). He made Antonio McDyess a star that
      he hasn't matched in Denver. He is making Shawn Marion a star. He
      even made Tom Gugliotta look good for a while. But it just bugs me
      that he has weaknesses and they do get in the way of the team winning
      big.

      > With all these variables in mind, how do we most efficiently
      compare
      > these players from two different eras with statistical formulas?
      > (Secondarily, I would like to know who is better kidd or kj).
      > Finally, I realize there is something called floor percentage but I
      > don't know its formula and the problems and solutions it might
      > present over other formulas. So, please give me some feedback on
      > these issues. Thanks for your time.

      Floor percentage is just an offensive evaluation, representing the
      fraction of a player's possessions that he contributes a score to.
      The formula is complex (and has simpler versions), but I'll get it
      out there eventually. I also calculate offensive ratings (points
      produced per 100 possessions) and individual win-loss records.

      What I have (going back only to '92 because I need to consolidate
      some stats)

      KJ
      Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Net Net
      Poss. Pct. Prod. Rtg. Win% W-L
      1992 900 1581 0.569 113.5 1794 107.2 0.721 9.6-3.7
      1993 450 794 0.567 114.1 906 108.3 0.703 5.0-2.1
      1994 754 1322 0.571 116.5 1540 108.3 0.768 8.7-2.6
      1995 416 720 0.578 118.3 851 111.2 0.736 4.8-1.7
      1996 587 993 0.591 121.0 1202 109.1 0.848 7.8-1.4
      1997 738 1286 0.573 122.7 1578 108.6 0.883
      11.1-1.5
      1998 266 503 0.528 108.6 546 103.5 0.689 3.2-1.5
      2000 21 36 0.569 121.8 44 100.0 0.963 0.3-0.0

      Kidd
      1995 547 1129 0.484 102.3 1155 106.8 0.329 4.0-8.2
      1996 759 1628 0.467 104.1 1694 107.0 0.388 5.8-9.1
      1997 369 749 0.494 108.7 814 104.8 0.647 5.3-2.9
      1998 576 1193 0.483 104.5 1247 98.7 0.720 9.7-3.8
      1999 489 922 0.530 112.4 1037 99.4 0.883 8.6-1.1
      2000 557 1150 0.484 104.1 1197 95.7 0.801 9.6-2.4


      Totals
      Scor. Poss. Floor RTG Points Def. Net
      Poss. Pct. Prod. Rtg. Win% W-L
      KJ 4131 7235 0.571 117.0 8462 107.0 0.777 51-15
      Kidd 3298 6771 0.487 105.5 7144 102.8 0.610 43-27

      At their peaks, they are proving to be about equally effective. KJ
      really didn't have much of a ramp-up period (I don't show it),
      though, which makes sense since he actually stayed in school 4 years.
      Kidd may have co-won rookie of the year, but KJ actually had better
      numbers and Kidd won a lot of hype because Dallas didn't win many
      games.

      Between the two, you probably take KJ if you need a scorer and Kidd
      if you need a distributor. Both help a lot.

      Dean Oliver
      Journal of Basketball Studies
    • Dean Oliver
      ... teams. ... Brain spasm here. Kidd never played with Finley. They were traded for each other (something I even wrote about when it happened). I had been
      Message 2 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
        --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Dean Oliver" <deano@t...> wrote:
        > >
        >
        > Opinion first -- KJ was generally a better offensive weapon because
        > he could score. He wasn't as good a passer. Kidd has always been a
        > good defender, though, one thing that he's never gotten the credit
        > for. KJ generally did seem to have a greater impact on better
        teams.
        > What Kidd does to pass a ball is legendary. Overall, I don't think
        > he has been as effective as KJ, but his passing flare is impressive.
        > He helped make Michael Finley a star that he hasn't matched
        > in Dallas (though KJ did, too). He made Antonio McDyess a star that

        Brain spasm here. Kidd never played with Finley. They were traded
        for each other (something I even wrote about when it happened). I had
        been making this list in my head for a while of the forwards that
        seemed to play best with Kidd. And Finley accidentally creeped onto
        it. I do have to wonder how Marion would do with another team. His
        numbers this year are pretty gaudy, but how much of that is Jason
        Kidd. Of course, neither Mashburn nor J. Jackson played very well
        with Kidd.

        Dean Oliver
        Journal of Basketball Studies
      • Dean Oliver
        ... My point is that McDyess was MUCH better with the Suns than he has ever been with the Nuggets -- this All-Star year fully withstanding. Gugliotta before
        Message 3 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
          >
          > Just some observation here Dean-
          >
          > While I think having Kidd to distribute the ball helps somewhat, most
          > of Marion's points come from short jumpers around the basket and
          > offensive rebounds. (his outside shot still isn't that reliable) Kidd
          > certainly is helpful when it comes to the transition game, he's
          > probably one of the best ever at getting the ball up the court.
          >

          My point is that McDyess was MUCH better with the Suns than he has ever
          been with the Nuggets -- this All-Star year fully withstanding. Gugliotta
          before his hurts was also much better with Kidd giving him the ball.
          Rodney Rogers and Clifford Robinson seems to have improved a little with
          Kidd distributing the ball (not as much). There is a Kidd effect, I
          think. I do wonder how big it is on Marion, who was not deemed to be as
          good as he apparently is.

          > As for the Kidd-KJ comparison, first I'll have to note that I'm a big
          > KJ fan, so keep that in mind. Kidd's strengths of course are passing,

          Frankly, I am a big KJ fan, too. Ever since Cleveland, in fact.

          My thought is that, ignoring defense, KJ is clearly the better player.
          Defense is a much harder thing to get your hands around, but Kidd looks
          better to me statistically and observationally. That is more important in
          this defense-oriented era than it was in KJ's earlier days.

          Two ways of looking at the comparison then:

          1. Would the Suns of right now win more with KJ than they are with Kidd?
          2. Would most teams win more with KJ than they would with Kidd? (This
          gets at my overall evaluation of players.)

          I can do a quick analysis of the first one (but not right now during my 5
          minute break from the torture known as Charnock -- my environmental
          project). Bob Chaikin can definitely do this and I'd be curious to see
          that. Use KJ at the same age as Kidd.

          The second question is a lot more extensive. But Bob could take a stab
          with his software, too.

          > Until then I'll pick Johnson because hew was virtually unguardable and
          > his teams were much more successful that Kidd's have been so far.

          This gets at Q#2 and I would tend to agree (not strongly). Looking at the
          current Suns team is a tougher call for me. I think Kidd is a very
          important part of a good defense and KJ would hurt that. (Completely
          ignoring the injury factor, too.)

          Dean Oliver
          Journal of Basketball Studies
          www.tsoft.com/~deano/index.html
          deano@...
        • Robert Bradley
          ... Personally, I think Johnson would be a better fit on the current team considering their weaknesses (which are scoring and perimeter shooting - two areas he
          Message 4 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
            > This gets at Q#2 and I would tend to agree (not strongly). Looking
            > at the
            > current Suns team is a tougher call for me. I think Kidd is a very
            > important part of a good defense and KJ would hurt that. (Completely
            > ignoring the injury factor, too.)

            Personally, I think Johnson would be a better fit on the current team
            considering their weaknesses (which are scoring and perimeter shooting
            - two areas he has a big advantage over Kidd). Kidd would probably fit
            in much better on some teams such as Philadelphia or the Lakers where
            he would have a big scorer to compliment him. And I agree Kidd's a
            better defender, but smaller, quicker guards do give him a problem at
            times.

            Now who's better - Paul Westphal or Dennis Johnson? Talk about
            complete opposites....



            __________________________________________________
            Do You Yahoo!?
            Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
            http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
          • Dean Oliver
            ... Very opposite. I really will have to work to dig up their numbers. I m still accumulating old data through a source with the league. The Group database
            Message 5 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
              --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Robert Bradley <bradleyrd13@y...> wrote:

              > Now who's better - Paul Westphal or Dennis Johnson? Talk about
              > complete opposites....
              >

              Very opposite. I really will have to work to dig up their numbers.
              I'm still accumulating old data through a source with the league. The
              Group database that we started with APBR has very incomplete
              individual turnover data and that's what my source is getting for me.
              For just these two players, I can hand enter the info, but it's a
              total of about 3200 man-seasons of individual turnovers I'm missing.

              I always respected Johnson's game more than Westphal's. But, frankly,
              I was pretty young when Westphal was in his heyday. And my judgment
              is somewhat clouded by my general disdain for Westphal's coaching
              style. I'll run the numbers soon.

              Dean Oliver
              Journal of Basketball Studies.
            • msg_53@hotmail.com
              ... For their careers: Westphal: sco 20.8, reb 2.5, ast 5.6, stl 1.7, TO 3.2, blk .4 DJohnson: 14.4 4.3 5.2 1.5 2.6 .7 regular
              Message 6 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
                --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Robert Bradley <bradleyrd13@y...> wrote:
                > Now who's better - Paul Westphal or Dennis Johnson? Talk about
                > complete opposites....
                >
                For their careers:
                Westphal: sco 20.8, reb 2.5, ast 5.6, stl 1.7, TO 3.2, blk .4
                DJohnson: 14.4 4.3 5.2 1.5 2.6 .7

                regular season totals: Westphal 29.9, DJ 25.4
                playoff totals: Westphal 25.8, DJ 25.7

                Westphal was the more skilled player in general.
                Dennis Johnson played better under pressure and against greater
                competition.

                I rate DJ #66 alltime, Westphal #120
                >
                >
                > __________________________________________________
                > Do You Yahoo!?
                > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
                > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
              • Robert Bradley
                ... Johnson of course enjoyed a much longer period of productivity and was far superior defensively, Westphal was as good offensively as Maravich an Gervin in
                Message 7 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
                  > For their careers:
                  > Westphal: sco 20.8, reb 2.5, ast 5.6, stl 1.7, TO 3.2, blk .4
                  > DJohnson: 14.4 4.3 5.2 1.5 2.6 .7
                  >
                  > regular season totals: Westphal 29.9, DJ 25.4
                  > playoff totals: Westphal 25.8, DJ 25.7
                  >
                  > Westphal was the more skilled player in general.
                  > Dennis Johnson played better under pressure and against greater
                  > competition.
                  >
                  > I rate DJ #66 alltime, Westphal #120

                  Johnson of course enjoyed a much longer period of productivity and was
                  far superior defensively, Westphal was as good offensively as Maravich
                  an Gervin in the late 70s when he was playing in Phoenix before his
                  foot problems began.

                  An interesting trade - Westphal, the great offensive player, for
                  Johnson the great defensive player. Obviously Phoenix got the better
                  of the deal with Westphal's injury in Seattle, but up to that point I'd
                  consider Westy superior.

                  Did your alltime rating take into account longevity or team W-L record?
                  (just curious)


                  __________________________________________________
                  Do You Yahoo!?
                  Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
                  http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
                • msg_53@hotmail.com
                  To all who wonder: Mike Goodman s alltime rankings, based on statistics compiled since 1952, are based on standardized per-game averages, career totals,
                  Message 8 of 11 , Mar 8, 2001
                    To all who wonder: Mike Goodman's alltime rankings, based on
                    statistics compiled since 1952, are based on standardized per-game
                    averages, career totals, per-minute averages, and playoff performance.
                    --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Robert Bradley <bradleyrd13@y...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Johnson of course enjoyed a much longer period of productivity and
                    was
                    > far superior defensively, Westphal was as good offensively as
                    Maravich
                    > an Gervin in the late 70s when he was playing in Phoenix before his
                    > foot problems began.
                    >
                    > An interesting trade - Westphal, the great offensive player, for
                    > Johnson the great defensive player. Obviously Phoenix got the
                    better
                    > of the deal with Westphal's injury in Seattle, but up to that point
                    I'd
                    > consider Westy superior.
                    >
                    > Did your alltime rating take into account longevity or team W-L
                    record?
                    > (just curious)
                    >
                    >
                    > __________________________________________________
                    > Do You Yahoo!?
                    > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
                    > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.