overpaid/underpaid (Rondo shows up at 3rd most underpaid)

[Jeff]

http://dberri.wordpress.com/2009/08/04/the-underpaid-and-overpaid-in-2008-09/

Wages of Wins looks at the overpaid and underpaid players of last year

Rondo shows up at #3 and there are no Celtics on the overpaid list

hats off to Danny-boy, he's put together a very efficient roster

[Roy Hobbs]

Two problems from my perspective:

1) Berri's methodology is way off, as has been discussed in the past.  For instance, the thought that Mike Miller -- who had an atrocious season last year -- should be one of the game's highest paid players just strikes me as wrong.  Also, of course, Rajon Rondo is not the Celtics best player.  (According to Berri's formula, Glen Davis is also one of the very worst players in the NBA.)

2) Good players on rookie deals are always going to seem underpaid versus their veteran peers, making "underpaid" lists that include them silly.

[CoachBo]

Two problems from my perspective:

1) Berri's methodology is way off, as has been discussed in the past.  For instance, the thought that Mike Miller -- who had an atrocious season last year -- should be one of the game's highest paid players just strikes me as wrong.  Also, of course, Rajon Rondo is not the Celtics best player.  (According to Berri's formula, Glen Davis is also one of the very worst players in the NBA.)

2) Good players on rookie deals are always going to seem underpaid versus their veteran peers, making "underpaid" lists that include them silly.

Agreed.

And obviously, I am not one who takes basketball sabremetrics very seriously.

[Fafnir]

I still like the list, because it highlights productive players relative to their salaries.

I agree that Berri's methodology is flawed in how it weights rebounding and deals with positional differences. The his system would predict a huge improvement in the Magic's win total just by getting a below average PF to play next to Rashard.

[Cman]

Two problems from my perspective:

1) Berri's methodology is way off, as has been discussed in the past.  For instance, the thought that Mike Miller -- who had an atrocious season last year -- should be one of the game's highest paid players just strikes me as wrong.  Also, of course, Rajon Rondo is not the Celtics best player.  (According to Berri's formula, Glen Davis is also one of the very worst players in the NBA.)

2) Good players on rookie deals are always going to seem underpaid versus their veteran peers, making "underpaid" lists that include them silly.

Agreed.

And obviously, I am not one who takes basketball sabremetrics very seriously.

I put no stock in Berri's figures.

But I think it is wrong to bash the idea that a lot can be gained by using statistics to analyze which a player's contribution - or potential contribution - to their team (ie: sabremetrics).  I believe Danny has at least one person working on this full time.  In other words, just because Berri doesn't know what he is doing doesn't mean that there aren't highly skilled people who do...

[MrTripleDouble10]

I'm value stats to a degree.  They're only useful in basketball to a point.  Having elite talent trumps all forms of sabrmetrics/secret statistical formulas on any court, at any time, in any place in the world.

Think of it this way:  Daryl Morey (Houston Rockets GM) is considered to be one of the masters/experts in using the new type of statistical analysis.  Well his next couple of years (especially this year) will prove just how good he really is.  Yao is out, McGrady is a shell of his former self and Artest is gone.

I'm interested to see just how good he can build a team based on his methodology.  I don't buy it that much.  I think it's good for rounding out a bench or finding role players.

But we as Celtics fans need to look no further than down the street.  Ainge built a champion and a title contending team with grade A talent.  If you're looking to be a quality playoff level team every year, then yes, this approach could work.

If you're looking to build a champion, the tried and true formula is clear: you need AT LEAST one of the top 5 players in the NBA.  There have been VERY FEW exceptions.

[jambr380]

The 2000 minutes thing is weird. I just glanced at the lists and didn't really read his methodology, but it would seem to me that there are a number of players that didn't play 2000 minutes that are overpaid. Maybe he could take out players that didn't attain this number because of injury, but players that are so bad that they couldn't play 2000 minutes should definitely be on the overpaid list.

Overall, the overpaid list looked like it had some pretty good players on it (Carmelo, Gomes, Hamilton, and several more that I can't remember). Like many of you,  I agree the methodology is flawed.

[Cman]

Think of it this way:  Daryl Morey (Houston Rockets GM) is considered to be one of the masters/experts in using the new type of statistical analysis.  Well his next couple of years (especially this year) will prove just how good he really is.  Yao is out, McGrady is a shell of his former self and Artest is gone.

I'm interested to see just how good he can build a team based on his methodology.  I don't buy it that much.  I think it's good for rounding out a bench or finding role players.

But we as Celtics fans need to look no further than down the street.  Ainge built a champion and a title contending team with grade A talent.  If you're looking to be a quality playoff level team every year, then yes, this approach could work.

You realize D. Morey used to work for the Celtics until 2007?  One could argue that the drafting success that DA had is due in large part to Morey. 

[jdub1660]

The 2000 minutes thing is weird. I just glanced at the lists and didn't really read his methodology, but it would seem to me that there are a number of players that didn't play 2000 minutes that are overpaid. Maybe he could take out players that didn't attain this number because of injury, but players that are so bad that they couldn't play 2000 minutes should definitely be on the overpaid list.

Overall, the overpaid list looked like it had some pretty good players on it (Carmelo, Gomes, Hamilton, and several more that I can't remember). Like many of you,  I agree the methodology is flawed.

Yea. When the list was loading, I was ready to see names like Ben Wallace, Tracy McGrady, Antoine Walker

I agree that this formual could weed out some overpaid/underpaid players, but Dwade and Lebron underpaid? Thats just dumb. 14mil a year off their 2nd contracts is not underpaid. It seems like a majority of the players that are given the fattest contracts they 2nd time around seem to bust more often.

[Rondo2287]

Anybody else surprised to see Jason Kidd on that list as uderpaid with a salary of 21 mill?

[Fafnir]

Anybody else surprised to see Jason Kidd on that list as uderpaid with a salary of 21 mill?

Nope. PGs have the lowest expected production in his system, mainly because they get the least rebounds.

So PGs who shoot a good percentage and rebound grade out as huge win producers. Hence the system loves Rondo/Kidd/CP3.

[the_Bird]

2) Good players on rookie deals are always going to seem underpaid versus their veteran peers, making "underpaid" lists that include them silly.

+1 on this.  Dumb to call a player underpaid when the salary was basically set based entirely on draft position.  Ought to just exclude players from consideration who are still on rookie deals.

Besides, any time you do an "underpaid" list that has Troy Murphy at #7 and does NOT include Perkins...   you REALLY need to look at the assumptions and methodology more closely.

[Fafnir]

2) Good players on rookie deals are always going to seem underpaid versus their veteran peers, making "underpaid" lists that include them silly.

+1 on this.  Dumb to call a player underpaid when the salary was basically set based entirely on draft position.  Ought to just exclude players from consideration who are still on rookie deals.

Besides, any time you do an "underpaid" list that has Troy Murphy at #7 and does NOT include Perkins...   you REALLY need to look at the assumptions and methodology more closely.

His system loves Nick Fazekas, it doesn't account for the fact that he can't guard anyone.

[the_Bird]

The point about the Celtics not having any really bad contracts is valid, though.  We've got three max/near-max guys, but based on their recent play they're all still worth it, and none of them projects to be significantly overpaid (assuming they age as we expect).  Perk is on what I would argue is the best non-rookie deal in the League.  Even Scal's deal, as maligned as it has been, isn't THAT bad, especially now in year 5.

The one "dumb" contract we have is Tony Allen's, and that's just because Tony Allen ought to be making $30k a year in the D-League.

[bobdelt]

I dont understand how anyone making over $20/mil makes the underpaid list.

It was pretty terrible IMO.