DeMar DeRozan and BS Game Winners
A peanut butter chocolate combination of two old analytics ideas.
Recently DeMar DeRozan has gained notoriety for his back-to-back game-winners in games against the Pacers and Wizards. As the title suggests, I’m less than thrilled with either of these relative to popular perception. Let’s briefly review the game winners and then a throwback to two fun concepts by analytics greats, Bill James and Dave Berri.
DeMar DeRozan downs Indiana
DeMar DeRozan’s first game-winner, to me, is particularly egregious. Down by one and nine seconds to go, with, it appears, no timeouts remaining, DeRozan slowly brings the ball up the court.
Vucevic does a pick and roll and is prepared to roll to the basket. Coby White, who is red hot from three this game, is also open on the perimeter. Both players hold up their arms, asking for the ball. And both look dejected when DeRozan, who has shot 0-2 from the three-point range for this game, ignores them. DeRozan puts up a contested 27-foot three to win the game.
Despite this shot, DeRozan had a bad game. As a power forward, his Points over Par, which estimates the margin a player helped or hurt his team by, DeRozan was -4.7. And his issues boil down to two problems:
As a power forward, only grabbing four rebounds in 35 minutes of playing time is a problem. Indeed, the Pacers outrebounded the Bulls 55 to 42, part of the reason the game was close.
Second, shockingly, DeRozan shot terribly. Even after his last-second heroic shot, DeRozan finished the game with a 35.4% Effective Field Goal Percentage (EFG) — this adjusts for three-point shots — and 47.8% True Shooting (TS) — this adjusts for three-point shots and free throws. For perspective, the league average is 52.3% EFG and 55.6% TS. DeRozan for the season is at 51.6% EFG and 58.8% TS as of this writing.
Had DeRozan played like his regular self, the Bulls wouldn’t have needed his last-second heroics. His regular shooting would have wrapped up the game. Hell, had he played like an average player, the game would have been wrapped up. Instead, DeRozan played terribly, which resulted in the Bulls needing a miracle to beat a much worse team. And we’re not done!
DeRozan is an interesting player divisive in the analytics community due to his shot selection. The recent era has suggested “Moreyball” is the way to go. Namely, teams should take only threes and layups. This is named for the Houston Rockets under Daryl Morey, who helped them become the first team to take over half their shots from three. Many people, including myself, basically think any contested midrange shot is a foolish decision, and teams should look for a better shot. Enter DeMar DeRozan. He shoots decently from midrange. This season, he’s at 54.4% from midrange, just past the threshold to justify such shots — a reminder from above, a player would want their EFG to be 52.3%. So should he take them? I still argue no, because his “Moreyball shots” are still more efficient than that. However, we enter a straightforward scenario where a midrange shot is justified. Down by 1, the Bulls only need two points to win and one to tie. DeRozan is excellent from up close and much better inside than the three, especially 27-feet out. DeRozan could have either passed the ball to a cutting big, passed the ball to a red hot three-point shooter, or gotten closer before taking the game-winner. DeRozan ate the clock, didn’t get open and took a bad shot. It went in, and the Bulls won. But is beating a team you were supposed to beat by two points a victory? I argue no.
DeMar DeRozan downs Washington
The good news, there won’t be a lengthy recap of the game. DeRozan gets the ball on the perimeter down by two on an inbound pass with three seconds to go. He pump fakes, gets up a shot, and the Bulls win. The Wizards covered the Bulls well on the inbound play, and DeRozan made about the best shot he could, given the circumstance.
But, the same problem from the game before happened. DeRozan finished the game with a PoP of -3.9. Terrible. It mostly came down to scoring. 47.7% EFG and 53.0% TS were what DeRozan finished with. Downright awful by his usual standards, and still bad by average.
The BS Win
In neither game can DeRozan be credited for “winning” the game even though he made the last shot. Such a statement is as ridiculous as crediting a routine layup or free throw in the second quarter as the game-winner (Justin Rao made this point years ago on a podcast, I believe). Against a bad team and a mediocre team, both of whom have bad defenses, DeRozan played poorly. Depending on your point of view, he had one good, or lucky, play at the very end of each game, but even after that, you can’t say he won the game!
The narrative I am telling is taken from another Bulls great - Michael Jordan. In Wages of Wins, Dave Berri noted a similar story. Michael Jordan had a clutch play, proving his greatness. But the truth was MJ had a bad game and required last-second heroics to salvage a poor performance (however, in MJ’s case, the Bulls lost!) And this brings up Bill James.
Bill James in baseball popularized the term the “Blown Save Win” or “BS Win.” In baseball, the pitcher that last pitched before the play that gave the winning team the lead for the last time is credited with the win. However, a funny scenario can occur. A pitcher can enter the game when the team has the lead. They can then say give up two home runs to lose the lead while finishing the inning. Then, their team can retake the lead. Even if they’re pulled before the next inning, they get the win. Does that make sense? Well, Bill James rightfully decided to call it a “BS Win.” And DeMar DeRozan’s “game winners” fall in this category.
Back to the Indiana victory briefly. DeRozan’s teammates are aware of how bad the play is. Watch Vucevic and White drop their arms in defeat when DeRozan holds the ball. Vucevic cheers quickly as the ball goes in, but Coby takes a few seconds before feebly holding up his arms. The pros know this was a questionable play that got lucky. And what’s wild is that these two plays in back-to-back games have gotten DeRozan’s name in the MVP discussion.
Weeks ago on the Boxscore Geeks show, Brian and I discussed DeRozan, and I had the following observations:
He was an above-average power forward, just like last year.
His contract is easily worth it.
We’ve seen DeRozan put up hot stretches in past seasons before simmering.
And most of these stayed true. As of this writing, DeRozan has dropped to a little below average, in part thanks to those two bad games! His contract is still okay. And again, a volume scorer having a hot stretch is nothing new in the NBA, nor is it new in DeRozan’s career. What also isn't new is too much emphasis is placed on highlight plays while ignoring the context to get to those plays. DeRozan was arguably playing MVP level part of this season. He currently is not. The Bulls, who are currently atop the Eastern Conference, almost lost two games they should have won because DeRozan is on a cold stretch. It’s bizarre to see the narrative be so different. That said, fans can be happy with a Bulls Win, even if a lucky hit was involved.
-Dre
The NBA and its fanbase seem to thrive on turning outlier events into definitional moments for players. It's a strange mentality.