VORP Speed: Why last year’s Golden State Warriors are the best analog for the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls

Last year’s Golden State Warriors were more like the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls than this year’s team.

Well, no, not actually.

Not if you’re focused on team winning percentage or point differential, anyways. But, if your concern is the distribution of responsibility amongst the players on the roster, then the 2014-15 Warriors looked a lot more like the 1995-96 Bulls than the 2015-16 Warriors do.

The History of Successful NBA Roster Construction

Past NBA champions have employed a variety of successful roster structures. There’s the “solo act” wherein a single transcendent player carries his team to ultimate victory. Then there’s the “dynamic duo”, with two more-or-less equally important players sharing the spotlight and the responsibility of winning games. The “big three” utilizes a trio of top players who combine their efforts to achieve greatness. And, finally, the “team concept” relies on a more egalitarian approach, with many important contributors and a deep bench working together synergistically (“Ubuntu!”).

Of course, sorting specific NBA champions into these four categories can get a bit sticky. Some teams are found along the continuum between two roster types. Some teams have been mislabeled thanks to popular misconceptions. Some teams have morphed between roster types in consecutive seasons. We can visualize the roster architecture of past NBA champions and compare it to this year’s Warriors squad using the summary statistic, value over replacement player (VORP), as a surrogate measure of the importance of an individual to his team’s success during the regular season. Data is available from Basketball-Reference starting with the 1973-74 season.

Relative VORP contribution (% of team total) for each player on every NBA champion since 1973-74 compared to 2015-16 Golden State Warriors, sorted by the size of the contribution made by the team’s VORP leader (from solo acts to team concepts).

I calculated a player’s VORP contribution as the fraction of his VORP relative to the total team VORP, where the total team VORP included any players with negative VORP contributions (“debtors” in the plot above). As you can see in the plot above, this has the effect of pushing the positive VORP blocks (“leader” + “contributors”) beyond the +100% mark for most teams. You’ll notice that, for each team, the blocks that extend further right than the +100% mark exactly counterbalance the debtors’ blocks on the left, so that, the net total for each team is always equal to 100%. Although my plot is perhaps a bit less intuitive than a pie chart, this accounting is important in ranking the size of the contribution made by each team’s VORP leader.

For example:

• In 2011-12, LeBron James led the Miami Heat with a VORP of………………………..…….. +7.6
• The positive VORP contributions of his teammates (“contributors”) totaled…………………. +8.9
• The negative VORP debt of his teammates (“debtors”) totaled……………………………….. -2.3
• The Heat’s positive VORP totaled………………………………………………………………… +16.5
• The relative contribution of LeBron to positive VORP (as depicted in a pie chart) was……. 46%
• The Heat’s overall (positive + negative) VORP totaled………………………………………… +14.2
• The relative contribution of LeBron to overall VORP (as depicted above) was……………… 54%

I believe 54% is the more appropriate estimate of LeBron’s contribution to the Heat, as it gives him credit for overcoming the debt of seven non-positive VORP teammates (the most egregious of which was Norris Cole with -1.2 VORP).

Another way we can visualize the roster structure of past NBA champions is using a VORP curve. A VORP curve plots the relative vorp contribution of each player against his VORP rank on his team to display the same information that was contained in a single bar of blocks in the above plot.

VORP curves: Relative VORP contribution (% of team total) for each player, shown from the team’s VORP leader to the 12th man (left to right)

The benefit of the VORP curve is that we can make comparisons between the curves of two different teams and quantify how alike or different they are. To make these comparisons, we can calculate a statistic called the sum of squared errors[1. SSE = (VORPTeam 1, Player 1 – VORPTeam 2, Player 1)^2 + … + (VORPTeam 1, Player 12 – VORPTeam 2, Player 12)^2.]

This statistic is just a measure of how far apart the two curves are from each other at each point, summing from the team VORP leader down to the last man on the bench (or, at least, the 12th man on the bench, which is the lowest common denominator when comparing across eras). The plot above shows an example comparing two very different VORP curve shapes: the 2011-12 Miami Heat vs. the 2013-14 San Antonio Spurs. Because these roster structures are so different — they represent the opposite ends of the spectrum from “solo act” to “team concept” — the sum of squared error is large and the teams are recognized as being dissimilar. We can use this approach to identify similarities in roster structure across decades of NBA champions.

Last year’s Warriors

In terms of roster structure, the 2014-15 Warriors’ closest analog among previous NBA champions was the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls, owners of the best regular season record in NBA history.

Relative VORP contribution (% of team total) for the 2014-15 Golden State Warriors and their five closest matches among past NBA champions

Both the 2014-15 Golden State Warriors and the 1995-96 Chicago Bulls had six major VORP contributors (% of team total):

GSW: Curry (35%), Green (20%), Thompson (13%), Bogut (11%), Iguodala (9%), Barnes (8%)
CHI: Jordan (32%), Pippen (25%), Kukoc (14%), Rodman (11%), Harper (8%), Kerr (6%)

You can see from the comparison and from the plot above that the two teams have a very similar VORP breakdown. (For more discussion about how these teams would match up in a hypothetical series, check out this post from my blog, Crumpled Paper Jumper).

The 2014-15 Warriors’ other cousins were the 1994-95 Houston Rockets led by Hakeem Olajuwon, the 2003-04 Detroit Pistons led by Ben Wallace, the 1986-87 Los Angeles Lakers led by Magic Johnson, and the 2006-07 San Antonio Spurs led by Tim Duncan. As a group, these teams straddle the line between “solo acts” and “team concepts”. Each team VORP leader contributed somewhere between 29-41% of his team’s total VORP. At the same time, the sixth-most valuable player on each of these teams contributed at least 5% of the team’s total VORP. A general characterization for this group could be something like: a team led by a clear-cut alpha dog who had lots of support from his fellow starters and from his sixth man (i.e., “alpha + help”).

After his continued development this season, Draymond Green’s position as the Warriors’ No. 2 VORP contributor now seems well deserved and wholly uncontroversial. But, be honest, if you saw these VORP numbers at the end of last year you would have said, ‘hmm, I’m surprised the Splash Brothers aren’t No. 1 and No. 2 for the Dubs’. Similarly, you might be mildly surprised to see the Bulls order, with Toni Kukoc slotted in the No. 3 spot in front of his more flamboyant teammate, Dennis Rodman. To me, though, the most unexpected stat highlighted in the above comparison is the relatively modest contribution which was made by his Airness, Michael Jordan. I would have thought that Jordan was even more valuable to the 1995-96 Bulls than his VORP numbers indicate. More on this later.

This year’s Warriors

The 2015-16 Warriors’ closest analog among past NBA champions is the 1999-00 Los Angeles Lakers. This was the first of three consecutive championship seasons for Shaq O’Neal and Kobe Bryant, when the balance of power was still very much in Shaq’s favor.

GSW: Curry (45%), Green (23%), Bogut (11%), Iguodala (9%), Thompson (7%), Barnes (4%)
LAL: Shaq (45%), Kobe (23%), Horry (13%), Rice (7%), Harper (7%), Green (4%)

In terms of VORP distribution, these two teams were more similar than any other combination tested (among all permutations between 41 NBA champions + 2015-16 Warriors).

Relative VORP contribution (% of team total) for the 2015-16 Golden State Warriors and their five closest matches among past NBA champions

The other Warrior doppelgangers among champions past were the 2000-01 Los Angeles Lakers led by Shaq, the 2011-012 and 2012-13 Miami Heat led by LeBron, and the 1994-95 Houston Rockets led by Hakeem. This is a completely different group of NBA champions than the VORP matches for the 2014-15 Warriors. Each of the teams in this group has a team VORP leader who contributed at least 45% of the total team VORP, with the LeBron-led Heat teams, in particular, being much closer to the “solo act” end of the roster structure spectrum. Most of the constituents of this group could be classified as a team led by a clear-cut alpha dog with a strong second banana (i.e., “alpha-bravo”). Just like Shaq had Kobe and LeBron had Dwyane Wade, Stephen has Draymond to play the supporting role to his lead. The underlying cause of the shift in the Warriors’ roster dynamics from last year to this year is obvious: Stephen Curry has become even better and even more important to his team than he was during his inaugural MVP campaign.

A Brief Interlude for an Extended Star Trek Metaphor

The Warriors are the crew of the U.S.S. Enterprise:

Stephen Curry is Captain Kirk
Draymond Green is Bones (you could argue he should be Spock, but he’s too emotional)
Klay Thompson is Spock
Bogut, Iguodala, and Barnes are Scotty, Chekov, and Sulu in some order

The 2014-15 season was a normal Star Trek episode where Captain Kirk [Steph] was on the ship with his entire crew [team]. Everybody pitched in to carry the episode [season] with perfectly timed jokes [clutch shooting], romantic subplots [efficient scoring], and well choreographed fights vs. aliens [defense].

In contrast, the 2015-16 season is a Star Trek episode where Captain Kirk has led a landing party to the surface of a hostile planet. He’s down there with three generic crew members whose only job will be to die anonymously. In every scene [game], you know Kirk is going to be the one with the great one-liner, he’s going to be seduced by every attractive female alien the planet has to offer, and he’s going to kick the ass of every space monster that gets in his way. That is Stephen Curry in 2015-16, he’s Captain Kirk on an alien planet.

A Contrast of Styles

The Spurs have lately used a very unique roster structure to chase their championship dreams, one with a remarkably even distribution of value across the roster.

Relative VORP contribution (% of team total) for the 2014-15 San Antonio Spurs and their five closest matches among past NBA champions

The closest matches to the 2013-14 Spurs team are the 1988-89 Detroit Pistons (VORP leader: Dennis Rodman), the 2004-05 San Antonio Spurs (VORP leader: Manu Ginobili), the 1997-98 Chicago Bulls (VORP leader: Michael Jordan), the 2010-11 Dallas Mavericks (VORP leader: Dirk Nowitzki), and the 2007-08 Boston Celtics (VORP leader: Kevin Garnett).

What probably stands out most are the unexpected VORP leaders: Rodman over Isiah Thomas (who was actually third in VORP on this iteration of the Bad Boys) and Ginobili (despite not being a starter) over Duncan. Of course, these surprises are just symptoms of the very even VORP distribution that characterizes the roster of each team in this group. The Bad Boys, in addition to Rodman and Isiah, had Bill Laimbeer, Joe Dumars, Vinnie Johnson, John Salley, and Rick Mahorn pitching in, plus partial seasons from Adrian Dantley and Mark Aguirre (traded for each other). The Spurs, at the height of their “Big Three” era in 2005 had Manu, Duncan, and Tony Parker, plus Bruce Bowen, Robert Horry, Brent Barry, Rasho Nesterovic, Devin Brown, Beno Udrih, and Malik Rose all playing a part. The Bulls, Mavs, and Celtics teams also had a lot of depth. Each of the teams in this group had VORP leader who accounted for no more than 27% of the total team VORP and, in each instance, the difference between the top VORP contributors was small.

Even in this group that typifies the team concept, the 2013-14 Spurs stand apart. The relative contribution of the team’s VORP leader, Kawhi Leonard (19%), was the lowest of any VORP leader on an NBA champion since 1973-74. The 2013-14 Spurs got more of their VORP contributions from their bench (37%) and less from their starters (65%) than any past NBA champion. Contributions came from everyone: Kawhi (19%), Duncan (14%) , Ginobili (12%), Danny Green (11%), Patty Mills (10%) , Marco Belinelli (9%), Boris Diaw (9%), Tiago Splitter (6%), Parker (4%), Jeff Ayres (3%), Cory Joseph (3%), and Matt Bonner (2%). The Spurs are continuing with this successful model again this season, to great effect.

VORP curves for the 2015-16 Golden State Warriors compared to the past two NBA champions, with closest matches among past NBA champions shown for each team.

The Changing Roles of Past NBA Champions

Some of the plots above demonstrate that team dynamics and player roles can shift over time. Let’s take a closer look at three all-time greats with at least five NBA championships each and track how their contributions changed from championship-to-championship over the course of their careers.

Michael Jordan, Chicago Bulls
1991: VORP% = 47(1st); Teammates = Pippen, Grant; Structure = Big 3
1992: VORP% = 36(1st); Teammates = Pippen, Grant; Structure = Big 3
1993: VORP% = 50(1st); Teammates = Pippen, Grant; Structure = Big 3
1996: VORP% = 32(1st); Teammates = Pippen, Kukoc, Rodman; Structure = Alpha + help
1997: VORP% = 28(1st); Teammates = Pippen; Structure = Dynamic duo
1998: VORP% = 27(1st); Teammates = Rodman, Pippen (44 g), Kukoc, Harper; Structure = Team

Jordan had two distinct championship eras: pre-baseball (91-93 three-peat) and post-baseball (96-98 three-peat). Jordan had an outsized role during the pre-baseball championships, contributing as much as half of his team’s VORP. In general, there were three key contributors during these years: Jordan, Scottie Pippen, and Horace Grant. Post-baseball, Jordan had more quality teammates and his contribution to the team’s VORP total was smaller. During his final championship, Jordan’s VORP contribution had decreased to as low as 27% of the team total.

Kobe Bryant, Los Angeles Lakers
2000: VORP% = 23(2nd); Teammates = Shaq; Structure = Alpha-Bravo
2001: VORP% = 30(2nd); Teammates = Shaq; Structure = Alpha-Bravo
2002: VORP% = 26(2nd); Teammates = Shaq; Structure = Dynamic duo
2009: VORP% = 26(2nd); Teammates = Gasol; Structure = Dynamic duo
2010: VORP% = 25(2nd); Teammates = Gasol; Structure = Dynamic duo

Likewise, Kobe had two championship eras: one as young Kobe (2000-2002 three-peat) and the other as the Black Mamba (2009-2010 repeat). During his first championship, young Kobe was clearly the second banana to Shaq’s leading role. In the subsequent year, young Kobe played a larger part for the Lakers, increasing his contribution to the high point of his five championship seasons (30%). Finally, in 2002, young Kobe basically matched Shaq’s contribution, for better or worse. The two grappled over the reigns of the Lakers the following year, ultimately leading to Shaq being traded away from L.A. in 2004. Kobe devolved into some serious one-man-showmanship for a few years and was only able to emerge from his dream/nightmare with the addition of Pau Gasol. Kobe and Pau made essentially equal contributions during their two championship seasons. It’s interesting to note that Kobe was never his team’s leader in VORP during any of his championship seasons.

Tim Duncan, San Antonio Spurs
1999: VORP% = 28(2nd); Teammates = Robinson; Structure = Dynamic duo
2003: VORP% = 43(1st); Teammates = Bowen, S-Jack, Robinson, Manu, Parker; Structure = Alpha + help
2005: VORP% = 23(2nd); Teammates = Manu, Parker, Bowen, Horry, Barry, Nesterovic; Structure = Team
2007: VORP% = 29(1st); Teammates = Manu, Parker, Barry, Bowen, Horry; Structure = Alpha + help
2014: VORP% = 14(2nd); Teammates = Leonard, Manu, Green, Mills, Belinelli, Diaw; Structure = Team

Tim Duncan entered the league as David Robinson’s protege. During their 1999 championship, Duncan and Robinson were a dynamic duo, with the Big Fundamental pitching in a respectable 28% from the 2nd spot. In 2003, Duncan reached his alpha dog prime. He was the go-to guy with a strong supporting cast, including a young Ginobili and a younger Parker. The next two championships, in 2005 and 2007, were earned through the strong play of Duncan, Ginobili, and Parker during a period of time when the trio was referred to as the Spurs’ “Big Three” (although, as you can see above, I don’t label these Spurs teams as having a “big three” roster structure, as I prefer to reserve this designation for trios like Jordan-Pippen-Grant who had much less help from the rest of their roster). Interestingly, Manu eclipsed Duncan in 2005, although both had more than a quarter of the team’s VORP. Most recently, in 2014, the Spurs embraced the ultimate team concept, as described at length above. Duncan’s contribution (with a diminished minute load) was limited to 14% of the team’s total VORP, his smallest contribution for any of his five championship teams.

It will be interesting to follow the dynamics of the Warriors roster structure from year-to-year as they continue to pursue more championships. How will players’ roles change as Andrew Bogut and Andre Iguodala age? How will the Warriors’ brass attempt to fit pieces together this summer with the impending free agency of Harrison Barnes and Festus Ezeli? Could Kevin Durant join the Dubs this summer to form a new dynamic duo? Will Curry’s influence continue to grow? Where will Captain Kirk and his crew find themselves next episode?