RE: A lighter Antoine

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

Mark,

I agree on general principles on what you say. I would love an upgrade in 
an interior player. Right now, my feeling is that Antoine is still going to 
defend PFs, where his defensive rebounding can help the team, while his 
generally poor interior defense will hurt the team. But I remember Pitino 
citing a stat that in one-on-one situations, our Cs gave up something like 
54% FG (and PFs 52%). Vitaly, Battie, Blount are all PFs playing center, 
all with various flaws. They don't rebound and they don't defend, whereas 
Antoine just doesn't defend - he does get rebounds, though he can do better 
also. Vitaly's asset is his shooting. Battie and Blount block shots. I feel 
that if we upgrade with Dale Davis, say, who I would love to have, he's 
better off at C next to Antoine (on defense). I think Davis and Antoine 
could rebound better than Davis and one of the V/B/B rotation.

I think if you move Antoine to PG and add a physical inside PF, you're 
definitely not getting much out of Antoine's talents. You're taking away 
his rebounding and his post up play and mainly using his passing skills 
(good for a PF, not good for a PG) and three point shooting.

Really what I'd want with Antoine at PG is a real center, or at least a 
physical PF playing center (Antonio Davis?), and then a power forward who 
is a solid defender and rebounder, but who can spot up from 18+ feet. I'm 
really dreaming at this point, because guys who can defend inside are 
really tough to find, even if they do little else.

And you're absolutely right, it's not like everyone has to be able to 
shoot, if you have talented inside players who can catch on the move and 
finish. Which we don't have.

So, yeah, I would love to acquire Dale Davis. I don't think I'd put out a 
lineup of Davis/Battie/SF/SG/Walker at PG though, because I'd rather have 
Davis/Walker/SF/SG/SG with Walker playing PG on offense, rather than have 
Battie/Potapenko/Blount. Because these guys are inferior to Walker as PFs; 
they're starting at C right now because we have no one else. If we could 
trade one of them for an upgrade (packaging a pick and/or a swingman, say) 
and turn the other two into backup C/PFs behind Walker and the upgrade, 
they'd be in their proper roles. If you can get two tough inside players, 
one of whom can shoot or post up on offense, even better, with Antoine, 
Paul, and Joe Johnson on the perimeter. But realistically, I'm thinking 
about one upgrade at a time, with Antoine probably still defending the 
weaker of the opposing PF or C and only spending a relatively small part of 
the game at PG offensively.

And adding Mason is a whole other story, because he's got enough post up 
ability to demand double teams and passing ability to boot. Probably Jim 
O'Brien is the wrong coach to keep him in check though. Plus we can't 
afford him. I was reading earlier today that he might be getting a contract 
starting at $6M from Milwaukee because they have a trade exception.

Alex

At 12:57 PM 8/28/01, Berry, Mark  S wrote:
>I don't buy that Alex. The greatest post-up point guard of all time played
>with Kareem and Kurt Rambis/A.C. Green. Those guys weren't spotting up for
>jumpers. Just because Antoine posts up a small point guard doesn't mean the
>only alternative when a double team comes is a 3-pointer (although with
>Pierce and JJ on the court, you'd certainly have that option). Assuming the
>opponent doubles with either the PF or center, how about having the Celts'
>PF or C diving to the basket? Vitaly certainly is capable of hitting 15-foot
>jumpers. Look at the mid-80s Celts. Bird acted as the "point forward" and
>posted up smaller small forwards a lot. He was playing alongside Parish and
>McHale. Again, those guys weren't three-point snipers, but the offense
>worked just fine.
>
>But that argument just feels like missing the forest for the trees. This
>team desperately needs to rebound and defend the interior better. Can anyone
>argue that? If you can play Antoine at PG and add a big, physical power
>forward to the lineup (hypothetical-we don't have that guy on the roster
>right now), you address a lot of those problems. To pass up that opportunity
>because it might not be the best strategy when Antoine posts up just seems
>silly. You bring up Milwaukee-they've been trying to add Anthony Mason all
>summer. They've won without the big PF, but it's clear they'd be better with
>that guy (and they have a pretty good post-up point guard of their own in
>Sam Cassell).
>
>And even if Antoine never posts up-unlikely, to say the least-his size is an
>advantage in seeing the court and delivering entry passes to the post from
>the PG spot. The best spot for a slimmed down Antoine is SF, but with
>Pierce, JJ and Kedrick at SG/SF, those minutes aren't there. Antoine will
>play PF or PG. I say put him at PG and add a banger.
>
>If this team has to choose between adding a Dale Davis or an Austin
>Croshere, I think there's no question who is the better fit. Give me Davis
>any day.
>
>Mark