Recently, I had the chance to exchange emails with noted basketball analyst Dave Berri.  Berri was one of few analysts who saw potential in the Bucks at the start of the season, pegging them to finish sixth in the East.  Berri’s new book, Stumbling On Wins, is available on Amazon.com now and will be in stores soon.

The Milwaukee Bucks in 2009-10
After 71 games (team has won 39 games)
WP48 = Wins Produced per 48 minutes
Data taken from Basketball-Reference.com
Return to The Wages of Wins Journal

* – Player is either a rookie, or has limited (recent) NBA history, so 08-09 numbers are the same as 09-10
**- WP48 from 2008-09 is calculated relative to position played in 2009-10
*** – 2008-09 numbers listed for Delfino, Stackhouse, and Brezec come from 2007-08.  Ilyasova’s 2008-09 numbers come from 2006-07

Obviously the Bucks have been the surprise story all year, but you pegged them much higher than most before the season, what did you see differently then and what are you seeing now?

My answer begins with the data (which hopefully is not a surprise). The table presents two perspectives on the players employed by Milwaukee this year.  The first view is the productivity of Milwaukee’s players – measured via Wins Produced and WP48 [Wins Produced per 48 minutes] – this season.  We also see how the team would look if we assume that what the players did last year (or in their most recent NBA season) would be seen again this season.

The first view (columns 3-4) says the Bucks should have won 38.7 games this season (as of Friday night).  Had these players maintained what they did last year, though, the team would have expected – as of Friday night — to win 32.6 games (columns 5-6).  The only real difference is the play of Ersan Ilyasova.  Back in 2006-07, Ilyasova played very poorly in 973 minutes at the age of 19.  Now that he is 22 he has become a very productive player.

If we knew Ilyasova was going to play this well, then we would have suspected the Bucks – even with the injury to Michael Redd – would have been an above average team this year.  Even without knowing about Ilyasova, though, we still would have suspected the Bucks were better than the media projected.

Remember, the experts at ESPN.com expected the Bucks to rank 14^th out of 15 Eastern Conference teams before the season started.  But Milwaukee had the following above average players on their roster (above average based on past performance): Andrew Bogut, Carlos Delfino (he has generally been a very good NBA player), Luc Mbah a Moute, and Luke Ridnour.  With four above average players it seemed unlikely – as I noted last September (see the post below) – that this team would be awful.

Revising Expectations Upwards in Milwaukee « The Wages of Wins Journal

To understand why the media’s projection was incorrect we need to understand that scoring tends to dominate the standard evaluation of NBA players.  The most productive players on the Bucks, though, are not scorers. Consequently, we should not be surprised that this team was under-estimated. Read more…

I had the opportunity to exchange emails with Oak-Hill Academy basketball coach Steve Smith the other day.  I wanted to get his thoughts on former Oak-Hiller Brandon Jennings and his transition to the NBA.  His schedule was pretty tight so I appreciate him taking the time to answer a few questions for me.

When Brandon played at Oak Hill he averaged over 30 points per game, but has largely been praised for having great passing instincts.  Kevin Love recently said Jennings is one of the only guys he’s ever played with who sees things before they happen.  What were your first impressions of him and how did he improve in his year at Oak Hill?  What sort of mold do you see him developing as an NBA point guard, a scorer or setup man?

Brandon played here for 2 years – 11th & 12th grade.  Brandon has always been very competitive and intense on the floor.  He is a great athlete with exceptional strength for his size.  In his 2 yrs at OH he improved in every area:  maturity, leadership, gauging the game to know when to push it and when to slow down.  He is a Nate Archibald or Kenny Anderson type player.

Rod Strickland, Steve Blake, Rajon Rondo, Jeff McGinnis, a lot of notable alumni have played the point guard position at Oak Hill.  Each player has their own styles and skills but does Jennings strike you as being similar to any of the other guys who’ve come through?

Brandon does not fit the mold of any of our great, past point guards.  As I just said, he is more a Nate A. or K. Anderson type.

It takes a special kind of player and special kind of person to do what Brandon did when he moved to Europe to play for a year.  Every person is different and what he did may not work for others, with regard to Brandon as a player do you see that as being beneficial for him?  Has it resulted in more maturity?

Brandon matured as a player and a person.  He went from being a teenager to a man in a short period of time.  But he is still Brandon – fun & full of life.
Will Brandon be able to come in and make an impact in his first year in the league?  Or will it take some time?

It might take sometime to adjust but Brandon should be able to contribute as a rookie.  He is a very cerebral player.

Last question will be simple.  Just finish this statement for me.  In ten years Brandon Jennings  will be …

In 10 years Brandon should be an experienced pro player leading an NBA team from the point guard position.

One thing that stood out to me in Coach Smith’s answers was that he commented on Jennings strength.  That has long been something people have wondered about, would Jennings be strong enough with his slight frame to hold up to the rigors of the NBA game.  It’s possible to be strong without looking very strong, so it’s good to hear that Jennings might be one of those guys.  Again, kudos to Coach Smith for taking some time to answer my questions.