John Hollinger wrote an article on ESPN arguing that Lebron James should be the MVP. As usual, he came up with some arbitrary mathematical equations to back up his argument. Now if you know anything about me, you know that I think that Hollinger’s PER system is absolutely absurd. The unfortunate thing is that he still continues to use it, and so do his fans. I do have to say though, I’m pretty pleased with how many people are noticing its stupidity.
Without getting into too much detail, I’ll explain the problem with his PER system. It’s a mathematical formula, and as such, if the results are off, people should abandon it. No one would be using the famous Pythagorean Theorem today if it only worked SOME OF THE TIME. Yet that’s what Hollinger’s system does. It only works some of the time.
The problem with arguing against him in the past however has been the fact that the PER formula is not something that you can actually refute by bringing up facts. I mean don’t get me wrong, Hollinger’s system has a ton of flaws in it.
- It doesn’t take into account intangibles
- It sets the standard PER for every season at 15, a completely arbitrary number that Hollinger picked out
- It doesn’t effectively take into account coaching styles, differences in eras or fatigue
- It weighs some things more than other things and assigns arbitrary values to certain stats.
The problem though, is that you can’t measure it against something empirical. It’s an individual ranking and you can’t very well measure individual PER’s against real life team success. There could very well be a correlation, but there’s no proof of a cause and effect relationship.
That in a nutshell has been the genius of the PER system, you can’t refute it based on clear cut evidence, you can argue it based on simple logic, but can’t really argue against it using empirical evidence. (Of course you can’t prove it using empirical evidence either because it’s far too flawed, but his followers seem to ignore this). It’s a math formula, so to their worshipping minds, it’s got to be infallible.
That’s where this new article comes into play, John Hollinger has effectively shot himself in the foot today. He did this because he took the individual PER number that was so hard to argue against (because basketball is a team sport) and he used it to create two new metrics: VA (Value Added) and EWA (Estimated Wins Added).
He essentially took the PER and used it to come up with numbers that translate into something we can actually compare to, WINS. Therein, he shot himself in the foot. Now before I explain and show you why he basically made his entire formula null and void, and thus his entire Lebron James for MVP article indefensibly stupid, we have to agree on something.
Math is not an opinion.
Let’s all agree that if a Math formula doesn’t work, we drop it. We don’t continue to use it. Even in statistics, once it’s shown that a formula only-kind-of-sometimes-sorta-works people drop the formula. If you can agree with me that a mathematical formula should work all of the time than continue to read on. If you think that a statistical formula only has to work most of the time and the other times it has to be near the correct answer (hence a spread) then read on. But if you think that Hollinger is right, Lebron’s the MVP, and that all proofs against his formula don’t mean diddly squat, than leave.
Still here?
Ok let’s continue.
Part one of his argument for Lebron centered around the idea that Lebron James may have the best individual season ever by eclipsing Michael Jordan’s record setting PER mark. Since Hollinger chose to introduce MJ, I’m going to use Michael Jordan himself to disprove Hollinger’s entire VA and EWE theory.
According to Hollinger’s calculations for this season, these are the values given to the top 5 MVP candidates:
| Player |
Team |
PER |
VA |
EWA |
| LeBron James |
Cavaliers |
31.69 |
843.3 |
28.1 |
| Dwyane Wade |
Heat |
30.55 |
795.7 |
26.5 |
| Chris Paul |
Hornets |
30.06 |
702.6 |
23.4 |
| Dwight Howard |
Magic |
25.87 |
556.6 |
18.6 |
| Kobe Bryant |
Lakers |
24.88 |
545.0 |
18.2 |
What he’s essentially saying is that Lebron James leads the league in “PER” (his made up statistic that equates to Player Efficiency Rating). Lebron James also leads the league in “VA” (another made up statistic that equates to Value Added). Finally, Lebron James also leads the league in “EWA” (Another made up statistic that equates to Estimated Wins Added).
Value Added and PER are difficult to measure in real life because they are individual characteristics, but EWA is very easy to measure. Just look at the teams record. If the team misses a key player for the majority of, or the entirety of a season, see how much worse they actually do without this key player.
This is another reason why I’m using Michael Jordan. He missed the majority of the season in 1985-1986 and the entirety of the season in 1993 – 1994.
Before I show you the breakdown of Michael Jordan’s numbers I want to explain briefly how, once finding out the player’s PER, Hollinger finds Value Added and Estimated Wins Added.
To find VA (Value Added) Hollinger uses the following formula:
Total Minutes Played in a Season * ([PER - PRL]/67)
- PER in this equations stands for “Player Efficiency Rating”
- PRL stands for “Player Replacement Level” (which Hollinger puts at 10.5 for both Lebron James and Michael Jordan)
So for an example, lets take a look at the 1990-1991 season. In this season Michael Jordan:
- Played 3,034 total minutes in the regular season
So to calculate Michael Jordan’s 1990-1991 VA (Value Added) you would:
- First: subtract 10.5 (PRL) from 31.6 (Jordan’s PER). The result would be 21.1
- Second: divide 21.1 by 67. The result would be 0.31
- Third: Multiply that number (0.31) by total minutes played (3.034). The result would be 955.48
According to this formula, Michael Jordan’s Value Added in the 1990-1991 season would be 955.48
Following me so far? If not, review that again.
If you are, we need to do one last step, find the EWA. To do this, Hollinger explains that you simply need to take the Value Added figure and divide that by 30.
So Michael Jordan’s EWA in the 1990-1991 season would be (955.48 / 30) = 31.85
Using this formula, Hollinger concludes that Michael Jordan was worth roughly 32 wins to his team in 1991.
I followed this formula in order to find the results of Michael Jordan’s PER, VA, and EWA results for two sets of seasons. The two sets of seasons revolve around two events in Michael Jordan’s Career.
Note: As you will see I left out 94-95 season because of all the injuries the Bulls sustained that year, and because Jordan came back to play part of that season. Since Jordan was not in peak physical condition and because the Bulls sustained a ton of injuries, I left that season out.
The First Set includes 4 seasons from 1983-1987
This set starts with the Bulls’ season right before MJ was drafted. I do this in order to see how many wins the Bulls had directly before drafting Michael Jordan, and how many wins Michael Jordan gave them the season he was drafted. The second important comparison here is to see how many wins Michael Jordan gave the Bulls in his third season after missing the majority of his second season due to injury.
| Season |
Jordan MP |
Jordan PER |
Jordan VA & EWA |
Team Wins |
| 1983-1984 |
Not Drafted |
Not Drafted |
Not Drafted |
27 |
| 1984-1985 |
3144 |
25.8 |
717.96 VA & 23.93 EWA |
38 |
| 1985-1986 |
451 |
30.06 |
129.91 VA & 4.33 EWA |
30 |
| 1986-1987 |
3281 |
25.87 |
1038.17 VA & 34.61 EWA |
40 |
| Avg 84-87 |
6876 |
27.27 |
628.68 VA & 20.96 EWA |
36 |
As is very noticeable, there is a HUGE discrepency between how many wins Hollinger THINKS Jordan is worth, and how many wins Jordan was actually worth. If we take Jordan’s average EWA over his three seasons (including the dismal 4.33 which is a result of playing only a handful of games that season) we reach 20.96. Yet the average amount of games that the Bulls won with Jordan is 36. Before Jordan was even drafted the Bulls had won 27 games. That’s a difference of 9 games. Hollinger’s formula predicted 21 games.
This means that Hollinger’s formula was 43% correct. In other words, Hollinger’s EWA formula should say “plus or minus 57%” at the end of that. That’s a pretty bad spread.
Ok lets take it on an individual season. In fact, let’s take it on the BEST individual season. Let’s compare the Bulls before they got Jordan (because that was the year with the lowest win total) with the 1986-1987 season (because that was the year with the highest win total).
Ok so, In the 1986-1987 season Jordan had his highest EWA ever, a shocking 34.61. That means that the Bulls should have won 34-35 more games than they did before they even drafted Jordan. In reality however, The bulls sans-Jordan got to 27 wins, and the Bulls in that season got to 40 wins. That’s a difference of 13 wins.
So that means that Hollinger’s system was 38% right. That’s a spread of 62%. Would you EVER higher this guy for your statistics predictions? His estimate missed the mark by 62%.
The Second Set includes the 4 seasons from 1990-1994.
This set starts with the Bulls first championship season and goes on to the Bulls first season without Michael Jordan. Of particular importance in this second set is seeing the difference between the amount of games that the Bulls won during their championship run with MJ, and how many they won during the season that he missed entirely due to his retirement.
| Season |
Jordan MP |
Jordan PER |
Jordan VA & EWA |
Team Wins |
| 1990-1991 |
3034 |
31.6 |
955.48 VA & 31.85 EWA |
61 |
| 1991-1992 |
3102 |
27.7 |
796.33 VA & 26.54 EWA |
67 |
| 1992-1993 |
3067 |
29.7 |
878.90 VA & 29.30 EWA |
57 |
| 1993-1994 |
Retired |
Retired |
Retired |
55 |
| Avg 90-93 |
3067.67 |
29.67 |
876.90 VA & 29.23 EWA |
62 |
In all probability the second set should produce more Hollinger-friendly results. The Bulls were winning championships with Jordan in the lineup and his EWA’s weren’t as high as they were in 1986-1987…The EWA accuracy actually gets worse though!
As is very easily noticeable, there is a huge discrepancy between what Hollinger says will happen and what actually happens, again. Hollinger claims that Michael Jordan has an Estimated Win Addition of 29.30 during the 1992-1993 season. If you look at the following season without Michael Jordan, the Bulls only lose 2 fewer games than the previous one with a healthy Michael Jordan. That means that Hollinger was 7% right. His spread for this perticular year was 93%.
If you look at the average Michael Jordan EWA value during his first championship three-peat run of 29.23 games, you don’t see ANY season during which Michael Jordan adds 29 wins to the 55 win record the Bulls had in 1993-1994 without him.Basically, no season from 1990-1991 until Jordan retires in 1993 do the Bulls win 29 more games then they did during the Jordan-less season. Yet that’s what Hollinger’s system predicts.
Even if you take the 72-10 season, the season with the most wins in NBA history…the math still doesn’t add up. MJ’s EWA using Hollinger’s formula for the 95-96 season is 29.6. The difference between 72 wins and the 55 wins that the Bulls had without MJ is only 17. 17 more wins, when the Bulls should have had 29 more wins. That’s barely 60% of Hollinger’s quota, AND THAT’S THE GREATEST SINGLE SEASON WIN RECORD OF ALL TIME. So in Hollinger’s most accurate comparison, his formula was only 60% correct. I’m not a math guy, but plus or minus 40% is a pretty pitiful spread.
If you do what every statistician is supposed to do, and take an average, it’s actually pretty pitiful…
Jordan’s average EWA during the 3 seasons in the chart is 29.23. The average increase in wins that the Bulls achieved in the three seasons they had MJ versus the one season they didn’t have MJ is only 7. So, divide 7 (number of wins Jordan is ACTUALLY worth on average) with 29.23 (number of wins Hollinger thinks Jordan is worth on average) and you get a measily 24%
Yup, Hollinger’s EWA system should have an asterisk after it that says “plus or minus 75%”. That right there, is perhaps the WORST SPREAD in statistics history. Wait, no it’s not, the 93% spread that Hollinger’s formula resulted in between the 92-94 seasons is the worst spread in history.
Congrats Hollinger, you’ve managed to out-stupid yourself yet again.
Now, notice that I didn’t even argue FOR Kobe, I just argued AGAINST Hollinger’s logic and his formula. By this point, if ANYONE accepts these stupid formulas of his, please go get your head checked.