RE: [Celtic_Pride] article from Globe

["Berry, Mark S" <berrym@BATTELLE.ORG>]

All true enough, Joe. I just believe that 3-pointers almost invariably are
governed by the law of diminishing returns. The "points per shot" idea is
deceiving for a few reasons, not the least of which is more bad things
happen on missed 3-pointers than on missed post-ups (fewer offensive
rebounds, long rebounds that tend to lead to fast breaks, offensive
breakdown, players standing and watching...). Toine's 3-point shooting
should be a strength, but when he displays it so much, to the point of
virtually forgoing his post/dribble-drive game, it just makes him easier to
defend and less of a threat. If he took three or four 3-pointers a game
(which still would rank him among the league-leaders in attempts), and they
all were good shots, it stands to reason that his percentage would be
higher, opponents would respect that threat more, and it would open up his
overall game more. I think Pierce grasped this last year, when he seemed to
be becoming just a spot-up 3-point shooter. He really diversified his attack
over the summer and this season, and is a much better player and more
dangerous 3-point shooter. 

If the Celts would just stick Toine at SF and leave him there a while, we
might see some changes. He'd overpower almost every small forward in the
league. The 3-pointers would still be there whenever he wanted them, but the
higher percentage shot would be posting up the smaller man. Look how
successful Pierce has been doing just that this season. 

Moving Toine to the SF position would signal a needed change in philosophy
for the Celts. Teams can win games in the NBA trying to "out-quick" their
opponents, but the most successful teams over the long haul out-size the
other guy. The Celts have tried small-ball long enough. Let's start pounding
teams with Toine at SF and work on upgrading the PF and C positions. Maybe
PF is manned by Battie/Moiso/Vitaly next season... maybe by a banger
acquired in the draft. I'm hoping the draft produces an Eddy Curry, Yao
Ming, Brendan Haywood or Dasagna Diop... a center with legit NBA size. I'm
hoping trades can bring in help at the PF/C spots. We need a point guard,
but the bigger need is in the frontcourt. The Celts have had sand kicked in
their faces too long. Again, if they don't believe Toine can play SF, then
trade him this offseason (but I'm tired of the argument that he can't defend
small forwards--is he really doing that well defending power forwards? At
least at SF, he'd be a matchup nightmare for his opponent). Those are the
only options. This team will never progress above mediocrity if it's built
around an undersized, soft power forward.

Mark



-----Original Message-----
From: Hironaka [mailto:j.hironaka@unesco.org]
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 1:54 PM
To: Berry, Mark S; celtics@igtc.com
Subject: Re: [Celtic_Pride] article from Globe


"Berry, Mark S" wrote:

> Me again:
> Think about that. He's second in the league in attempts, but 44th in
> percentage. Should someone who is so average from long range be taking so
> many 3-pointers?

Yeah, I don't disagree totally about those ten treys a game, but Antoine is
shooting .432 (345-804) from 2-point range this season and that figure might
presumably be even lower if he wasnt able to draw big defenders outside with
his
bombs .371 (149-402). I'm not saying .432 wouldn't also rank him 44th among
forwards in the league, but it well might, and what becomes the argument
then?

The short answer is that Antoine is another of many unique player, with an
individual shortcomings that can't always be treated separately from his
overall
package of strengths. Havlicek, for example, though not great at anything in
particular was good at almost everything.

As noted before, Antoine would need to up his 2-point shooting to over .550
in
order to match the per-shot-attempt scoring efficiency of his effort to date
from out in Larry Land (since you get 1.5 as many points per field goal made
out
there).

Pitino coached it into his game plans all his life, regardless of what he
says.
Say you have a wide-open three early in the shot clock, as opposed to a
contested three later with the clock running down. If  you number crunch and
discover that you statistically hit your wide-open threes at a high enough
proficiency to make it worth it, then the game plan is bombs away whatever
the
shot clock. It is not pretty and it doesn't always look like team
basketball,
but there is a logic behind it that I don't disagree with. Why wait until
the
shot clock is way down just for appearances sake, if you are open early on
in
the clock and have shown you make a high percentage of wide open threes? The
downside, as Mark notes, is sometimes Toine will have a terrible night on
his
three attempts, whereas it is relatively rare that you will have 2-10 nights
attempting only post-up moves and dunks.

If we aquired a guy who could be our All Star-caliber inside scorer and
banger,
then great, but clearly none of the other prospects have stepped up yet so
we
can't blame Antoine for playing a jack-of-all trades role. Tony Battie was
drafted 3-places ahead of Antoine. Moiso and Fortson came several lottery
picks
later. Even Potapenko was a late lottery pick I think. If we had ended up
with a
McDyess instead of a Paul Pierce, we probably wouldn't be having this
conversation about Antoine's game.

****