APBRmetrics

Mike G · Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:52 am Post subject: 2011 deadline trade reviews

In the past week, about 9.4% of the league's talent was traded around, as estimated by equivalent wins added (eWins).

Using eWins projected to 82 games (with former teams), traded players represented 115 of a full season's 1230 wins. Of these 115 , 47 eWins moved from the East Conf. to the West:

DSMok1 · Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:57 am Post subject:

You're missing the OKC players that moved from West to East, Jeff Green, Krstic, DJ White, and Mo Peterson.

Your numbers LOOVE Nazr Mohammed!
_________________
GodismyJudgeOK.com/DStats
Twitter.com/DSMok1

Mike G · Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 9:59 am Post subject:

Crap. and thanks!
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong

DSMok1 · Posted: Fri Feb 25, 2011 10:17 am Post subject:

Mike G · Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 10:39 am Post subject:

Wizards 4.3, Hawks 3.7

schtevie · Joined: 18 Apr 2005 Posts: 413

On occasion, over recent years, I have wondered what Danny Ainge believes; what organizes his thoughts when it comes to making basketball decisions. There are now distant stories of his brain typing fetish, suggestions of above-average ability in drafting (what may not be true), and the unquestioned ability to have once spectacularly fleeced Kevin McHale. But what to make of what just happened?

The latest round of transactions suggest to me an organizing principle: Danny Ainge believes in Danny Ainge. Period. Why he felt compelled to reverse the rational off-season strategy and throw away the highly valuable and time-tested Kendrick Perkins starting lineup is beyond me (unless he has inside information on the injury and has passed on to Presti a pig in a poke.) Now you have to find 13+ points per 100 possessions? Where is that going to come from? By trading for Jeff "Please Don't Look at the Scoreboard" Green? At a minimum, it can be said what Danny Ainge does not believe: anything containing the terms "plus" and "minus", raw, adjusted, or other. The only mitigating argument I can think of is that the (unspoken) belief is that Krstic will, on very short notice, be, on net, Perkins' equal, and that the acquisition of Green is a poor insurance policy.

This has to be extremely dispiriting if one is a Celtics fan. The obvious, overarching goal was to win this year. And I simply cannot see how the recent transactions are anything but a step backwards. And not just for this year, but next. What with the likelihood of a lock-out (or would it be a strike?) the aging Celtics would have been specially poised to capitalize on a shortened season, and as such, shouldn't the presumption have been to stand pat with all proven elements?

I am hoping there is something else.....

BobboFitos · Joined: 21 Feb 2009 Posts: 201 Location: Cambridge, MA

DSMok1 · Posted: Sat Feb 26, 2011 9:36 pm Post subject:

My view: the Celtics were sure they were going to lose Perkins next summer. They didn't really like Nate Robinson.

They also knew that they were going to have to play at least 1 really good SF in the playoffs (Lebron, perhaps Carmelo) if they were going to make the finals. With no depth at SF, how were they supposed to matchup? On the other hand they felt that Orlando was less of a threat than previous years, and that perhaps they won't have to play the Lakers in the finals.

So they felt that they could maximize their chances of winning this year by getting rid of a C to get a SF. Since Perkins was out the door already, and they had done quite well without him, they were fine trading him.

Jeff Green is a SF that has been totally mis-cast as a PF in OKC. He is capable of being a really solid wing defender. In a structured offense, with some restrictions on the shots he puts up, he could be a very solid bench scorer. True, he's not been that great this year in OKC, but changing roles completely will probably help a great deal. He's a very solid individual and will do his job well. His contract is also up after this season, and if Boston likes him they'll hold the RFA cards.

Krstic is a servicible offensive center, not a great defender, but a decent space-filler.

If Boston doesn't have to play the Lakers for the title, but does have to play Lebron and/or Carmelo, it's a solid trade.
_________________
GodismyJudgeOK.com/DStats
Twitter.com/DSMok1

schtevie · Joined: 18 Apr 2005 Posts: 413

Mike G · Posted: Sun Feb 27, 2011 6:45 am Post subject:

The Celtics gave up a C and a G, receiving a (different kind of) C and a F.
They gave up players totaling 44 minutes (when healthy), acquiring 57 minutes (per game).
In general, is 57 mpg for a .632 team a lot weaker than 44 mpg for a .737 team?
Why did Jeff Green get 37 MPG from his Coach of the Year? He does some of everything and plays both F positions, and he doesn't turn it over much.

Just a theory, but perhaps the Celtics were not too impressed by Perkins' postseason last year. His (career high) season PER of 15.0 dropped to 9.5 in playoffs; his WS/48 from .117 to .076, e484 from 1.31 to .46 .

He had those 6 techs in 23 playoff games (after 16 in the season).
He looks terrible vs Mia, not bad vs Cle, terrible vs Orl, faded vs LA.
viewtopic.php?t=2586
DSMok1 had him at 0.10 VORP in the Finals (Gasol 9.32)
_________________
`
36% of all statistics are wrong

EvanZ · Joined: 22 Nov 2010 Posts: 298

schtevie · Joined: 18 Apr 2005 Posts: 413

Apologies. In reply to DSMok1, I lazily asked if there was evidence that the Boston SFs were not holding their own. A simple Pierce/not Pierce lineup check at basketballvalue answers the question. Answer: Pierce very good (Overall Rtg = 12.47) ; not Pierce very bad (-5.93). And there you have it. The genesis of the trade.

Let's see if we can quantify the championship argument, which stipulates that starters remain healthy and play typical playoff minutes. (If starters go down, its same time next decade.) The Celtics need ten non-Pierce minutes at SF; let's round up a bit and say 20 possessions. Now let's say that Jeff Green works like magic, that the productivity of his SF lineups as identified by EvanZ are almost all on his account, and improves the non-Pierce lineups by 6 points per 10 possessions. So, in a wildly successful outcome, we are looking at about an extra point per game. Sounds good.

To (hopefully) gain this, what has been the cost? Perkins starting lineup productivity (especially) now needs replacement (hoping, really hoping, that Krstic can become that guy, quickly, and stay healthy) and Rondo's primary backup is now gone (Nate Robinson's Overall Rtg roughly having equaled non-Rondo's at 2+).

Maybe Jeff Green really is a star small forward, whose star was dimmed in getting bumped big by Kevin Durant. I am a bit too lazy at the moment to try to infer some of this possible potential by looking at previous year's lineup data on basketballvalue. But after his first game with the Cs, what do we see? 17:50 minutes played, probably a 92 possession game, +/- of -10, so a Overall Rtg of -29.3! Well, it's a start....and he had to have overlapped a few minutes with Pierce, so it was probably those non SF minutes dragging down the average again....(I know. The lowest form.)

But enough grousing, what about a positive suggestion? Let's see, the Cs really need a tweener player. Someone who can defend big, but who also can do reps at either guard position. And boy, if they could get someone who would fit in well with the existing players that would be a bonus. Hmmmmmm. Wait, I know! Tony Allen! Danny, get on the phone.

Crow · Joined: 20 Jan 2009 Posts: 822

Apart from future considerations, worries about Perkins' health, betting on Shaq, wanting more offense...

Green is a good clutch shooter.
Krstic is better against the East and eastern playoff teams over the last 2 seasons than his average performance.

As for the future, it is possible the Celtics feared Perkins going to Miami.

greyberger · Joined: 27 Sep 2010 Posts: 52

We'll have to see who the Celtics target/get through contract buyouts. The big they add in a week or two might end up getting more playoff minutes than either of the O'Neals, even if they're healthy and available.

The names I hear are Leon Powe or Troy Murphy or perhaps even Joel Pryzbilla.

schtevie · Joined: 18 Apr 2005 Posts: 413

Belated thanks to Mike Z for organizing the APBeerMetrics at the Fours. And additional thanks for taking the time to assure me that the Perkins trade was a good idea, in fact promising me that as a result the Cs will win it all this year.*

Just wanted to check in and mark my previews to market. First, the very pleasant surprise. Krstic has been great, a completely new player since arriving in Boston. From basketballvalue, his Overall Rating has increased almost 13 points (from -1.35 to 11.40)! And this aspect of the trade has been a win win, with Perkins (tentatively) improving a bit as well.

But what of Jeff Green, allegedly the key figure from the Celtics' perspective? Here the surprise is also pleasant (relative to my low expectations). The argument was that Jeff Green was a small forward whose career had been played out of position, hence he would flourish in his new role. Additionally, I previously noted that the motivation for the trade appeared to be an effort to shore up the "not Pierce" part of the offense, which had had an Overall Rating of -5.93 just prior.

Looking at Jeff Green's minutes in Boston, broken down into those playing with and without Pierce, we might infer the new potential of the "not Pierce" part of the offense. And here, things look pretty good. It turns out that Jeff Green has worked like magic, as the "not Pierce" Green lineups have improved by my hypothetical six points (Offensive Rating = 101.14, Defensive Rating = 100.84, hence Overall Rating = 0.31). Serendipity (no great shakes on offense, but no defensive liability either, a significant improvement on the status quo).

That said, all has not been rosy. When with Pierce, the numbers are: Off Rtg = 103.33, Def Rtg = 100.16, and Overall Rtg = 3.17. So, Pierce's Overall Rtg has taken a big hit on the offensive margin.

So, the (current) bottom line on the trade from Boston's perspective is pretty good, with Krstic being the very pleasant surprise and Green appearing to be a solution to the "not Pierce" problem. Now all the Cs need is for Shaq to come back lean and mean, playing 25 to 30 minutes per game (with all the others starters staying/getting healthy) and Boston should do just fine in the post-season.

* if Boston comes out of the East and wins four of seven in the Finals.