Re: The Boston Celtics Mailing List Digest V9 #384

[Kestutis.Kveraga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Kestutis Kveraga)]

--- You wrote:
Anyway, Delk and Shammond might both go cold once in a while..but since they 
are both good shooters..that is unlikely. 
--- end of quote ---

That's right. They may not be (well, they are not) as good as some of the
people playing their position (I won't call them point guards), but for our
purposes, having two good players at the position may be better than having one
great player. While you usually would prefer a "difference-maker" to two OK
players at a position, for spot-up 3-point shooters,  maybe you would not.
Obviously, you still need the stars who attract double and triple teams, or you
will be like the deep, but superstarless Blazers. 

The probability that at least one of ShammonDelk will be "on" is greater than
with a single  player that has their combined scoring average, so you get a
more balanced production out of that position. I suppose that's statistically
true of any two players, but I looked at ShammonDelk's  and WalkerPierce's
combined scoring production for the 11 games, and the latter pair oscillates a
lot more.  ShammonDelk's scoring variance (how much they oscillate about their
combined mean) is about 60% that of WalkerPierce's.  I suppose that may come
with a higher scoring average, but, after 11 games, ShammonDelk's production is
much steadier. While both have had up and down games, in only one game (the
Bucks loss) did they score fewer than 18 points combined (5).   A more serious
and extensive statiscal analysis may blow this argument out of the water, but
for now, Obie may be right about viewing ShammonDelk as a steady, productive
unit. 
Kestas