Paul vs Antoine - scoring efficiency

[Alexander Wang <awang@MIT.EDU>]

Jim M. made a great post here which I agree with completely. I just wanted 
to add a few comments. I think that no one has ever disputed that Pierce is 
a far more efficient scorer than Walker. The main issue that I've had in 
this area has been Mark Berry's use of Antoine's 41% FG as a measuring 
stick, primarily because three pointers are completely excluded. In fact, 
though, FG% shortchanges Pierce too because it ignored his ability to get 
to the line. The measure of pts/fga overrates this as Jim notes. Anyway, I 
think that points/(FGA*2+FTA) is imperfect but still an improvement over 
pts/fga. As Jim notes, sometimes free throws don't come in a normal scoring 
context so they are overrated in this formula (like when the opposing team 
intentionally fouls to get the ball back at the end of the game); on the 
other hand, they're underrated in this measure because of "and one" fouls 
and the added benefit of drawing a foul on the opponent (and adding a team 
foul). So here are some numbers from the top scorers in the game:

Iverson	50.8
Stackhouse	51.0
Shaq       	55.7
Kobe      	54.2
Carter    	54.3
Webber    	50.9
McGrady  	51.2
Pierce    	55.0
Jamison    	49.2
Marbury     	53.1
Walker     	49.9

The conclusion is that Pierce is the second most efficient big scorer in 
the game behind Shaq, while Walker ranks very low. The All-Star caliber 
guys in his vicinity, Iverson and Stackhouse, have more of an excuse 
because they produce at a higher volume, which is more difficult, and 
arguably have less help.

On the other hand, Joe makes the point that Antoine has better non-scoring 
production than Pierce. The argument that's been repeated several times is 
that Antoine "should" produce more rebounds since he is a PF rather than a 
SG. This is true to a degree. But then again, the fact that he has the size 
and rebounding ability to play PF is in itself a positive. That's the 
reason why mediocre centers frequently get drafted higher than big scoring 
guards. I agree with Mark's "big-men centric" view of the NBA, Jordan-era 
Bulls notwithstanding.

Taking it all into account, I feel that Pierce surpassed Antoine last year 
(and Antoine in his All-Star year) because high-volume, high-efficiency 
scoring really is one of the rarest and most valuable abilities in the NBA, 
which was one of the reasons why Jordan had so much success (dominating 
defense is another) and is considered by many to be the greatest ever 
despite better "non-scoring" production from several other superstars (like 
Bird). Pierce just had a fantastic offensive year and if his defense can 
catch up, it'll be a phenomenal package. Antoine is a very inefficient 
high-volume scorer which roots partially from a lack of judgement and 
athleticism but also from the demands of a team that had few other options. 
I don't think you can disregard his rebounding and assists just because of 
his role on the team; he has those roles because of his skills and he 
deserves credit for that. His poor defense is what keeps him from being a 
great player in my mind. If you could get great defense from a guy who puts 
up his stats, you'd have an All-Star, no question. That statement is almost 
meaningless because PF/C defenders are considered valuable even in they put 
up single figure scoring numbers with zero assists. But I think that, 
probably more than scoring inefficiency, is one of the top questions for 
me, because I think he can cut down his volume and improve his efficiency 
quite a bit (though whether he is willing to do so has yet to be seen).

Alex