I'm currently reading The Wages of Wins, which uses econometric methods to objectively valuate basketball statistics in terms of their impact on winning games.  The basic theory of the authors is that measurements of a player's efficiency are better tools for evaluating players than statistics like "points per game." Since teams have an equal number of possessions in a basketball contest, the team that efficiently uses those possessions is more likely to win.  Turning the ball over without scoring is "bad," while converting a possession into points is "good."  The authors regressed nine statistics to find their relative impact on wins.  Here's a simplification of their findings.

"Good" statistics: Each point, rebound, and steal have relatively equal impacts on winning.  They are about twice as important as each block and assist.  So, to quantify the positive statistics, here's a simple formula: points + rebounds + steals + 1/2(blocks) + 1/2(assists)

"Bad" statistics: field goal attempts and turnovers have equally negative impacts on winning.  They are twice as bad as free throw attempts and personal fouls.  Here's a simple formula for the "bad" stats: field goal attempts + 1/2(free throw attempts) + turnovers + 1/2(personal fouls)

Putting this all together we get what the authors call a "Win Score":

Points + Rebounds + Steals + 1/2(blocks) + 1/2(assists) - field goal attempts - 1/2(free throw attempts) - turnovers - 1/2(personal fouls)

Win Score proves to be an excellent method of comparing players who play the same position.  But since power forwards and centers tend to have higher average Win Scores than guards, adjustments need to be made when comparing little men to big men.  That's not necessary for this article, as I'm going to compare Allen Iverson to Andre Miller, who both play at the guard spot.  According to the authors of Wages of Wins, an average guard has a Win Score Per Minute of .13.

I used the last four years of Andre Miller's statistics and found that he had a Win Score of 1659.5 over that time period.  I then divided this number by the number of minutes Miller played (9449) to find that Miller's Win Score Per Minute is .176.   Clearly, Miller is an above average guard in terms of his contribution to winning.

For Allen Iverson, I used the last five years of his statistics because he was limited by injuries over some of the last few seasons.  Iverson's total Win Score over this time period is 1515.5, and he played 12,442 minutes.  That comes out to Win Score Per Minute of .122.  This reveals that Iverson is actually a below-average guard.

Now, before Iverson fans jump on me, let me point out that Iverson is definitely an athletically-gifted superhuman.  However, the statistics show that his usage of his abilities doesn't help his team win any more than an average guard's play.  A few stats jump out at me, including Iverson's large number of turnovers over this time period (1153) compared to his relatively low number of assists (2015).  When you consider that the authors' econometric analysis found that the costs of a turnover are twice as high as the benefits of an assist, Iverson's poor assist-to-turnover ratio actually cost his teams games.  When you half his assists, you get 1007.5, which is lower than the detriment (1153) caused by his turnovers. 

Another area where Iverson hurts his team is in the field-goal-attempts department.  Since there are a finite number of possessions in an NBA game, a team has a limited number of shot attempts.  When a player misses these shots, the team turns the ball over to the other team unless it can grab the offensive rebound.  By being a "volume shooter" who has trouble averaging better than a 42% field-goal percentage, Iverson causes his team to have many fruitless possessions.  (As a simple comparison, Jason Kidd also has a low career field-goal percentage, but he makes up for this inadequacy with his excellent assist-to-turnover ratio).  In the Win Score model, Iverson's 8675 points over the five-year span was almost completely offset by his 7071 field-goal attempts.

76er fans, you should be sending Christmas gifts to GM Billy King right now.  He just got you a point guard who can help you win games.  And the authors of Wages of Win predict that the 76ers will win about half their games the rest of the year now that they have Miller in the lineup.

Meanwhile, Nuggets fans should put coal in George Karl's and Rex Chapman's stockings.  What are they thinking in sending away a guy with a .176 Win Score Per Minute for a guy with a .122? Well, they probably weren't reading Wages of Wins, so maybe that should go in their stockings, too. 

This trade should be especially disappointing to Denver fans because of the development of Carmelo Anthony over the last two years.  Since the beginning of last season, his Win Score Per Minute has been .169.   That's a marked improvement after his awful field-goal percentage and selfish play during his first two years caused his Win Score Per Minute to be very below average among guards.  With Miller and a maturing Anthony, the Nuggets finally boasted one of the better backcourts in the Western Conference.  Plus, Miller and Anthony complemented each other, as Miller's assists aided Anthony's rise in field-goal percentage.  With Iverson, who isn't a true point guard,  now handling the ball, Anthony will see fewer open looks, and his ensuing frustrations could cause an ego clash between the two "superstars."

Remember, though, that the public still perceives Iverson as a superstar, so the betting world will favor the Nuggets once Anthony returns from his 15-game suspension and is paired with "The Answer." This will be a wonderful time for my blog readers to bet against the Nuggets until the public wisens up to the fact that the Nuggets aren't even going to make the playoffs this year (and, if they do, it'll be a first-round exit).

I also feel a bit sorry for George Karl, since his coaching efforts helped lead to Anthony's emergence as a premiere NBA player.  With Iverson "sharing" the backcourt, it's going to turn into a giant, inefficient headache.  But, you dug your own grave, George, so my sympathy is very minimal.

There's also a touch of irony here that stems from Saturday night's brawl against the Knicks.  Afterwards, Knicks coach Isiah Thomas stated that the fight wouldn't have happened if Karl hadn't been running up the score.  Karl, who's a close friend of Larry Brown, despises Thomas, and he emotionally called Thomas a "jackass" (among other terms) when the media confronted Karl with Thomas' comments.  (As an aside, Karl is correct that Thomas is a jackass.  I know of few other people in business who can get away with incompetent decisionmaking for such a long time period.  But that's another story).  So, you'd think that if Karl was friendly enough with Brown to despise Thomas, shouldn't Karl have been clued in on Brown's nemesis from the Philadelphia days?  Iverson caused nothing but problems for Brown, who performed one of the all-time best coaching feats in guiding the 76ers to the NBA Finals in spite of Iverson's penchant for ballhogging.  Yet, two days after lambasting one of Brown's arch-nemeses, Karl embraces another one. 

As a jaded former Mavericks fan, I didn't think I'd have anything basketball related to be thankful about this Christmas.  Alas, I'm thankful that I'm not a Nugget.