[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Raef vs. Antoine, per 48

----Original Message-----
From: "Berry, Mark  S" <berrym@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Oct 21, 2003 4:44 PM
To: "'celtics@xxxxxxxx'" <celtics@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Raef vs. Antoine, per 48

We've discussed many times the holes in per 48 minutes stats, but I'm going
to throw some out there anyway. I do think they're a little more relevant
than some of the per 48 comparisons where people extrapolate the stats of a
guy who plays 10 minutes per game.

But you're largely comparing apples and oranges here. Very different players with different games and different targeted roles, while the key good and bad with Walker have as much to do with non-stat intangibles. I mean we sort of agree by the time I get to the end of your post, but I don't think this is all that meaningful, because they're different players playing different roles and their planned roles here would have been different.

We also know about the differences in shooting percentages,
which don't change when considering per-48 stats.

Well yes they do. Walker required more than 3 times the number of shots to get those points. That has an effect on everyone.
514 attempts vs 1554 last season
3,254 vs 10,263 career

And it took a lot more minutes too
1,611 vs 3,235
9,345 vs  20,827

Guess who looks more efficient.
And you can go with where the points are and the types of shot, and the effect on things like offensive flow and position for rebounding.

Antoine per 48 last season: 23.3 points, 8.4 rebounds.
Raef per 48 last season: 19.0 points, 9.8 rebounds.

Antoine per 48 for his career: 25.3 points, 10.3 rebounds.
Raef per 48 for his career: 19.9 points, 11.5 rebounds.

When you consider the surrounding players, isn't it pretty much a wash,
statistically?

A couple stats pulled out and set up in a vacuum sure, but that's hardly meaningful. I could set up stats to say almost anything you want. And actually, back to rebounds, the one thing that does bother me is that despite playing more inside, Raef doesn't do much better on the offensive boards, which is our real weakness. We were actually fairly decent on the defensive boards most of the season, hovering around 10th in the league most of the time.

And when you consider the extra shots Antoine got and the
respective shooting percentages, doesn't the distinction blur even more?

Nope, actually makes Raef look so much more efficient. But again, they play very different roles and this is just one aspect.

I'm not saying Raef Lafrentz is better than Antoine. We'll see how it goes.
But I am saying the simple analysis of "Antoine's a 20-ppg scorer and
all-star" is WAY too easy. Is he an all-star in the West?

Probably not, at least in part because he doesn't get the minutes and there are too many name big men in the west. Maybe he enters the 3 point contest. OTOH, if he's as smart as I think he is despite his ego, he can carve out a very nice role there where all the talent around him makes his best assets - the range of things he can do and his court vision - more valuable than when he tries to be The Man, self appointed or otherwise.

I don't know if any of this says anything that Bob Ryan didn't say perfectly
in his column today. But I think hindsight will show this trade was a lot
closer to the Stackhouse-for-Hamilton deal than the "Antoine's an all-star
and Raef sucks" crowd would care to believe.

Yeah, I'll agree. This is a matter of trading the more talented player for the one likely to be a better fit in many ways, with hope that Jiri adds something too and that the draft pick either helps facilitate a deal or brings a player. I heard somewhere it was one the Mav's acquired rather than their own, so maybe not necessarily going to be at the bottom of the round. Also, losing Delk helps at the point because he scores enough and plays good enough defense that you need to give him minutes, but he isn't an offensive PG and was one of too many munchkins in the backcourt.

Speaking of Baker... He now has far more responsibility than I'm remotely
comfortable with. He looks good so far, but as I've said before... the
moment you start relying on Vin Baker is the moment he breaks your heart.
Well, the Celtics are relying on him big-time right now. Makes me sweat just
thinking about it.

Why? I see this as giving him a chance for more minutes but given the point of a lot of these changes, that we have more rotational options, I don't see where that translates to relying on him big time. And I don't think management is stupid enough to do so. You can't be pretending that he's supposed to take over much of Antoine's role, are you?

Anyway, Antoine is Don Nelson's problem now. I'm excited about the
possibilities.

It will still be the way I thought it would, real ugly and inconsistent at times at first because there are just so many changes, but I think this helps make us a much less predictable team ito opponents when we start to click. And takes some stress off Battie's knees. People dont' often credit how key Battie has been over the past year or so.

Kim