Comparing Andrew Bogut to Chris Paul using Replacement Value
Yesterday I figured out the value of the average replacement player at each given position (replacement player being defined as "a readily available substitute which the team could acquire without much cost" and being statistically defined by me as any player who spent at least 40% of his time at the given position and who took up at least 0.5% of his team's playing minutes but not more than 6.0%). Not surprisingly I found that it is more costly to replace the center position than any other position, with power forward being next costliest, point guard next, then small forward, and finally shooting guard.
With that information in tow, I decided to revisit the Andrew Bogut/Chris Paul debate to see whether, adjusting for replacement value, Bogut might look a little better pick in hindsight.
Click here to see the Total Win Contributions, season by season, of Chris Paul and Andrew Bogut after adjusting for replacement value
Well, slightly... but not much. Chris Paul is still the far more dominant Win Contributor in every season. So there's still a huge gap. And even as Bogut's play has arisen to new levels, so has Paul's, thus the numbers this season give no aid and comfort to Bucks fans.
But how were we to know? The guy is maybe 6'0, and how much does he weigh? How could you project him to be so dominant?
Of course, if you were to compare Bogut to the real "other" choice in that draft -- Marvin Williams -- its no contest for Bogut.
One other thing... this is the first time I've gone back in time with Total Win Contribution. There is a consistency to the numbers for both guys that suggests legititmacy for the whole concept of "Defensive" or "Counterpart Opponent" Win Score, so I was happy to see that.