The Bakersfield Californian

Economics class was never quite like this

| Thursday, Jun 22 2006 1:50 AM

Last Updated: Thursday, Jun 22 2006 1:54 AM

I was an economics major in school. That's right, Econ. Must not have been a very good one, I know, ha ha.

I got oh too unfamiliar with the great economic minds -- John Maynard Keynes, John Kenneth Galbraith, Alfred Marshall, Alfred E. Newman. What? Me worry?

But had any of them gotten into applying their labor, supply and demand, diminishing return and regression theories to sports fan loyalties, NBA player evaluations and NFL quarterback ratings the way local economist David Berri has, I'd have paid more attention.

Berri, 36, is an associate professor of economics at Cal State Bakersfield in one life, and a debunker of conventional wisdom, just like his boy Galbraith, in his other life. He was recently featured on the Op-ed page of The New York Times using his theories to break down the NBA Finals -- "What the non-scorers do matters," he concluded -- and he's co-authored a book titled "Wages of Wins: Taking Measure of the Many Myths of Modern Sport," in which he gets to economically debunk away in a breezy, sometimes humorous fashion. It's been out about a month now and the best way to get it is on Amazon.com. You can read excerpts and reviews by going to www.wagesofwins.com.

Think being a big scorer makes Allen Iverson a great basketball player, do ya? Think strikes and lockouts drive away fans? Think high salaries create a competitive imbalance? Think fans watch NBA games because of the stars of the game? Think players like Michael Jordan and Kobe Bryant make their teammates better? Think quarterbacks win and lose games?

Berri has solid evidence based on formulas encompassing economic theories and statistical equations taking in a wide range of data that you'd be wrong on all accounts.

"People and particularly broadcasters will say this and that about somebody, but when the data comes back, it's often, 'no you're wrong, it doesn't say that,'" he says.

The book contains bits and pieces of dozens of his previously written academic papers tearing apart commonly held notions, and evaluating talent based on his not-yet-patented-but-should-be "wins produced" formula. I can't explain it, but what it is is an equation that crunches all scoring and non scoring data (rebounds, assists, shot blocks, etc.) relative to a player's position -- 10 rebounds for a small forward is worth more than 10 boards for a power forward, for example -- and spits out at the end the number of wins a player produces for his team per 48 minutes played and per season. I can tell you this, efficiency is key and a rebound is as valuable as a bucket, which explains why Dennis Rodman was worth so much to Berri's beloved Pistons, maybe more than Isiah Thomas even.

"Without Rodman, the Pistons went bad," Berri said, with a straight face, actually.

Adding up all the "wins produced" numbers Berri crunched for each member of the 2005-06 Mavericks, as a team the Mavs should have won 57.4 games during the regular season. Doing the same for the Heat, they should have won 51.2 games. The Mavs actually won 60 and the Heat 52, so Berri's got that working for him against those who want to argue that his concept is bogus. Moreover, he says, if general managers took his methods of analysis to heart they could build better teams.

Economic theories come into play more when debunking myths about lockouts keeping fans away, competitive balance and great players making others on the team better. Law of diminishing returns is the appropriate theory when debating how Kobe Bryant makes Smush Parker a better player, which he doesn't, Berri would assert, largely because of the common sensibilities of the theory applied to the team dynamic. "If you add more productive players to your team, you can expect either the productivity of the new players or the productivity of existing players to decline," he writes in the book on page 115.

"Wins produced" is the concept that will get most readers attention -- it got mine -- but I don't see a whole lot of economic theory built in, unless you're evaluating Lamar Odom and his decline in wins produced because he now plays on Kobe's team (see diminishing returns) or any other player now matched with a superstar. The book will give you "wins produced" season rankings for 2004-05 -- Kevin Garnett 30.0 (leads all players), MVP Steve Nash, 16.1; Shaq, 15.9; Dirk Nowitzki, 17.2; Allen Iverson, 10; LeBron James, 21.7; Dwayne Wade, 8.2. -- but go to Berri's blog page (www.dberri.wordpress.com), and you get some detailed breakdowns of this year's NBA season along with new "wins produced" numbers and Berri's picks for All NBA.

NBA MVP? Not Steve Nash. Not Kobe Bryant . . it's Kevin Garnett, hands down the most productive player in the NBA the past four years. Bryant, who produced 14.3 wins, doesn't make Berri's first, second or third all-NBA teams, although he's the next most productive guard behind Detroit's Chauncey Billups. Shaq, 8.5 wins for the Heat, doesn't make any of the teams, either. Both Kobe and Shaq made made the official All-NBA First Team, along with Nash, Nowitzki and James. Berri's first team was comprised of Garnett, Nash, Ben Wallace (20.1 wins), Shawn Marion (22.6) and Jason Kidd (23.7).

Iverson and Carmelo Anthony, players high up on a lot of favorite player lists, combined for just 13 wins produced.

I kept wanting to divert his attention to baseball and the Cubs, but then again conventional wisdom tells me there ain't no theories out there that can help them.