RE: Sporting news article on Pierce

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

At 01:37 PM 8/3/01, Berry, Mark  S wrote:
>First of all, I'm not saying Antoine is a shoddy basketball player. I'm
>saying that he's not as good-especially in his role on this team-as many on
>the list think he is. I'll give you an example-Antawn Jamison put up numbers
>somewhat similar to Antoine's last year (24 ppg, 8.5 rpg, 44 percent
>shooting), but I don't think Golden State considers the guy the foundation
>for a championship team. He's a nice player on a bad team. I think you can
>say the same thing about Antoine. I don't think it's a coincidence that both
>players are considered 'tweeners.

I'm not saying that Antoine is a "championship foundation" player. His 
defense alone prevents him from being that type of player. On the other 
hand, I don't think that "most inefficient offensive PF and worst defensive 
PF" is an accurate description either. I agreed that he's not Garnett or 
Webber, let alone Shaq or Duncan.

>As for the 3-pointer, the Reggie Miller comparison, etc. We're probably just
>going to have to disagree here, but a few points... The important difference
>between Miller and Antoine is the fact that Miller is a shooting guard and
>one of the best 3-point shooters in NBA history. Antoine is a power forward
>and an average 3-point shooter. Like it or not, there are certain roles a
>power forward simply has to play-especially a power forward playing
>alongside centers named Battie, Potapenko and Blount. That PF has to rebound
>and he absolutely has to get some high-percentage offense. Antoine had one
>season with a decent two-point shooting percentage. That's it. And you can't
>just throw out that 3-point percentage when talking about his overall field
>goal percentage. IF he averaged three three-pointers a game, maybe... but he
>averaged close to 10 a game in the second half of the season.

No, I'm not saying throw out the 3 point percentage, I'm saying separate 
it. Are you saying that 3 point field goals are the same as 2 point field 
goals? Lumping them together isn't meaningful. You can't just mush it 
together and pretend they're the same. It's a flaw in the stat-keeping 
system, on a par with averaging in free throws. If one shot's giving you 3 
pts vs 2 pts, you can shoot a lower percentage and still be more productive.

>As for the
>argument that he has to shoot 3-pointers to protect Pierce, who posts up...
>come on, Alex. The 1980s Celtics were one of the great post-up teams of all
>time and that team rarely attempted as many 3-pointers as a team as Antoine
>does alone. There are so many holes in this argument...

That's because they had post up players who were centers and forwards, not 
shooting guards. They still needed shooters to protect their post players 
from double teams (or at least punish them). And Antoine doesn't need to 
shoot 600 3's to protect Pierce, but he has to be a credible threat out 
there. And as long as they're giving him that open look and he's hitting 
35%+, that's an offensive output that many teams would be happy to get - 
long rebounds or not, offensive rebounds or not, free throws or not. You 
seem to be stuck on the idea that the Celtics have to have traditional 
player in traditional roles. They have a SG that posts up and goes to the 
free throw line like a PF or C - even better really than almost all of them 
- and a PF that tosses up a good percentage on 3's, and feeds this SG from 
the perimeter. If we got the exact same production on offense from a 
traditional PF and SG, you wouldn't complain - we'd be celebrating our 
"Miller plus" three point shooting SG and our PF that comes close to 
leading the league in free throws.

>As for 33 percent
>being as good as 50 percent... it's simply not true. The points work out the
>same in theory, but that means two out of every three trips, your opponent
>is getting a rebound and fast break opportunity. Also, you're not getting to
>the line when you fire away 3-pointers, so you're definitely going to score
>more "hidden" points when shooting those two-pointers. So shooting 33
>percent on threes is not the same as shooting 50 percent on twos.

I acknowledged the side effects in my post. 33 percent on 3's is not the 
same as 50 percent, but 37 percent on 3's is better than 45 percent, or 
whever the Celtics convert from 2 pt range, even with the hidden effects. 
The Celtics won more when they went even more to the Antoine 3 point show.

>The idea that simply being able to get the shots off excuses the low
>percentage... the great players do both. Shaq, Duncan, Kobe, McGrady... even
>Vince and Pierce, who are a notch below.

I agree. Antoine is not on this level. I never said he was.

But the idea that Antoine is the most inefficient power forward, based on 
the stats, is a misleading one. There are quite a few offensively second 
rate PFs that shoot high percentages with low scoring averages. Antoine is 
a better offensive power forward than them, period. But he has a lower 
percentage because he has to face double teams, start the offense, and also 
score 20+ ppg.

Anyway, Alex, I'm not sure we'll ever agree. Plenty of people on this list
>look at Antoine's 20 points, 8 rebounds and 5 assists and say that's all
>that matters. I don't believe that. I watch the games, and Antoine can have
>some of the ugliest "good games" (stat-wise) of any player in the NBA. It's
>about more than stats. That's why you can look at the stats for Walker,
>Garnett and Jamison and wonder what the difference is. Watch the games and
>you know.

Antoine gets bashed on this list much more than he gets praised, in my 
view. When Joe says "Look at Antoine's stats", which is how this got 
started, it seems to me like he's saying, "hey wait, Antoine doesn't suck 
like he's portrayed in the media and on this list" and not "Antoine is a 
championship caliber PF". You're fixated on the idea of this team being too 
weak in the middle and it makes you interpret all of Antoine's 
contributions in the most negative way. Your entire post was a list of why 
everything Antoine does is not as good as it seems, from his 3 point 
shooting to his assists to his scoring. I don't think that 23 ppg, 9 rpg, 
and 5.5 apg are all that matters, but you can't just disregard them either 
because he doesn't fit into your mental picture of what a PF needs to do.

Alex