APBRmetrics

davis21wylie2121 · Joined: 13 Oct 2005 Posts: 530 Location: Atlanta, GA

This trade make sense to anybody? Because I'm just not seeing it.

supersub15 · Joined: 21 Sep 2006 Posts: 144

Ryan J. Parker · Joined: 23 Mar 2007 Posts: 132 Location: Charleston, SC

I respect Cuban, but as an outsider it looks like he just did what he said he wouldn't do.

If Stackhouse comes back then maybe some of the salary moves make sense, but I'll leave that to the guys that understand that part of the biz.

asimpkins · Joined: 30 Apr 2006 Posts: 237 Location: Pleasanton, CA

I don't get it at all. It strikes me as even worse than the Shaq trade -- which I think has a slight chance of working out if Shaq can stay on the court.

In his article, Hollinger pointed out that it wasn't even certain that Stackhouse would make his way back to the team. Cleveland, Detroit, or Phoenix could all offer him more money.

I'm not sure how this is supposed to make them a better team. It seems like they lose in defense, scoring, and depth (as well as their future). I'm guessing their rebounding breaks even at best with Diop's departure. I don't see how his passing really fits in -- the Mavs don't really need it and they'd have to change their style of play to take advantage of it.

jemagee · Joined: 05 Nov 2005 Posts: 98

In an espn chat someone asked (before the trade) why arne't the nets better...the gist of the answer was that "because you are seeing what they were, not what they are"

That's how i feel about this trade

also...could SOMEONE please panic and make an outrageous offer for andre miller...thanks...

Why isn't andre miller for devin harris straight up better for dallas if they even needed a PG upgrade?

Ryan J. Parker · Joined: 23 Mar 2007 Posts: 132 Location: Charleston, SC

So what happens now that George blocks him from being included? I still don't see how the Mavs give up two 1st rounders. I guess I have a lot to learn.

jemagee · Joined: 05 Nov 2005 Posts: 98

94by50 · Joined: 01 Jan 2006 Posts: 460 Location: Phoenix

What are the odds that Kidd's rebounding "mysteriously" decreases? I doubt he's going to lead the Mavericks in rebounding like he did Jersey.

jemagee · Joined: 05 Nov 2005 Posts: 98

Ben F. · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 352 Location: MD

jemagee · Joined: 05 Nov 2005 Posts: 98

Ah...another silly clause in the CBA rears its ugly head.

Devean, you aren't getting a ring in dallas whether this trade happens or not...why does he even care?

And seriously, when will SOMEONE panic and over pay for Andre Miller...maybe if the kidd deal falls apart?

Mike G · Joined: 14 Jan 2005 Posts: 1888 Location: Delphi, Indiana

Whether or not 'panic' aptly describes these trades, I can't remember ever seeing good teams tear themselves apart in midseason like this.
_________________
`
There's no I in analysys.

Ben F. · Joined: 07 Mar 2005 Posts: 352 Location: MD

John Hollinger wrote in his ESPN article about the trade (which is now Insider, so I can't link to it) that when Josh Boone has been playing major minutes, Kidd's rebounding has suffered. This is related to the topic of diminishing returns on rebounds, as Eli recently brought up, so I thought I'd take a little more in-depth look at whether Boone was indeed taking rebounds away from Kidd and how big of an effect it was.

My approach was pretty straightforward - I looked at how Kidd rebounded when Boone was on the floor with him versus when he wasn't. (All data through January 31st, 2008.)

It turns out the offensive rebounding differences aren't significant in any way (3.2% without Boone versus 3.0% with him) but on the defensive end there's a decently significant difference of about 2% (21.4% without Boone versus 19.0% with him). The sample sizes are on the small side, but the 90% confidence intervals suggest there's still value to be had from the data (19.1%-23.8% without Boone and 16.5%-21.4%). The lower bound on the "without Boone" numbers is still higher than the observed defensive rebound percentage with Boone.

This finding does suggest diminishing returns on rebounds (obviously it's just one case, but it does fall in line with the theory). However, the magnitude of the effect isn't too large - even if Kidd lost 2% off his DR% by going to a team with a better rebounding frontcourt, that would still put him at about 17% DR%, on par with the likes of Chris Wilcox. That's obviously unbelievably good for a PG, and something that will undoubtedly have an impact on the Mavs if he ends up there.

Now, as to whether that impact will really help them, that's up in the air. Dallas already ranks 9th in the league in DR%, so it's not like that was a problem. Their biggest issue on the defensive end is forcing TOs (they're 28th overall in that department). If we use steals as a proxy for forced turnovers, the Kidd trade won't help them at all - Harris is one of the best in the league at getting steals, thieving about 2.5 times per 100 opponent possessions, while Kidd's rate is about 2.1.

jemagee · Joined: 05 Nov 2005 Posts: 98

Charles · Joined: 16 May 2005 Posts: 108