Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Vin Baker Trade

Expand Messages
  • harlanzo
    At first blush this trade makes little sense for the Celtics. Baker is declining and will not put them over the top in the east. His contract is also an
    Message 1 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      At first blush this trade makes little sense for the Celtics. Baker
      is declining and will not put them over the top in the east. His
      contract is also an albatross that will hamstring the Celts for four
      years whereas Kenny Anderson was coming off the cap after the 02-03
      season.

      I have read some claims that Baker might return to form against
      weaker east conference centers and power forwards. does anyone have
      numbers that could confirm or refute this?
    • Michael K. Tamada
      ... [...] ... I don t have the numbers but I agree with your observation: as a Sonics fan I am cackling with glee to be rid of Baker. The Sonics have made
      Message 2 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, harlanzo wrote:

        > At first blush this trade makes little sense for the Celtics. Baker

        [...]

        > I have read some claims that Baker might return to form against
        > weaker east conference centers and power forwards. does anyone have
        > numbers that could confirm or refute this?

        I don't have the numbers but I agree with your observation: as a Sonics
        fan I am cackling with glee to be rid of Baker. The Sonics have made
        plenty of boneheaded moves over the years, but in many cases they have
        been able to unload their garbage on an even more boneheaded team: they
        robbed Jerry West of Sam Perkins for Benoit Benjamin (I think Doug
        Christie was in there too but in those days he was even more useless than
        Benoit); they got rid of Kendall Gill and got Hersey Hawkins in return;
        they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm
        spit would make the deal worthwhile.


        --MKT
      • Charles L. Steinhardt
        ESPN has numbers showing Baker much better (about 5 PPG) against the East while on the Sonics.
        Message 3 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
        • 0 Attachment
          ESPN has numbers showing Baker much better (about 5 PPG) against the East
          while on the Sonics.

          On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Michael K. Tamada wrote:

          >
          >
          > On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, harlanzo wrote:
          >
          > > At first blush this trade makes little sense for the Celtics. Baker
          >
          > [...]
          >
          > > I have read some claims that Baker might return to form against
          > > weaker east conference centers and power forwards. does anyone have
          > > numbers that could confirm or refute this?
          >
          > I don't have the numbers but I agree with your observation: as a Sonics
          > fan I am cackling with glee to be rid of Baker. The Sonics have made
          > plenty of boneheaded moves over the years, but in many cases they have
          > been able to unload their garbage on an even more boneheaded team: they
          > robbed Jerry West of Sam Perkins for Benoit Benjamin (I think Doug
          > Christie was in there too but in those days he was even more useless than
          > Benoit); they got rid of Kendall Gill and got Hersey Hawkins in return;
          > they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm
          > spit would make the deal worthwhile.
          >
          >
          > --MKT
          >
          >
          >
          > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          > APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >
          >
          >
          > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
          >
          >
          >
        • john wallace craven
          ... Numbers can be somewhat deceiving, though. Vin was benched around halfway through the season, but for a variety of reasons (primarily schedule, but he
          Message 4 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
          • 0 Attachment
            On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Charles L. Steinhardt wrote:

            > ESPN has numbers showing Baker much better (about 5 PPG) against the East
            > while on the Sonics.

            Numbers can be somewhat deceiving, though. Vin was benched around halfway
            through the season, but for a variety of reasons (primarily schedule, but
            he suffered a second bout with injury from Feb. 16-March 19 as well)
            played just one Eastern Conference team after February 2nd. In addition to
            losing playing time, he also seemed to look a lot worse as the season
            progressed. I think that playing time and touches alone will give him a
            boost, but a return to 20 and 10 is pushing it a bit.

            John Craven

            >
            > On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Michael K. Tamada wrote:
            >
            > >
            > >
            > > On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, harlanzo wrote:
            > >
            > > > At first blush this trade makes little sense for the Celtics. Baker
            > >
            > > [...]
            > >
            > > > I have read some claims that Baker might return to form against
            > > > weaker east conference centers and power forwards. does anyone have
            > > > numbers that could confirm or refute this?
            > >
            > > I don't have the numbers but I agree with your observation: as a Sonics
            > > fan I am cackling with glee to be rid of Baker. The Sonics have made
            > > plenty of boneheaded moves over the years, but in many cases they have
            > > been able to unload their garbage on an even more boneheaded team: they
            > > robbed Jerry West of Sam Perkins for Benoit Benjamin (I think Doug
            > > Christie was in there too but in those days he was even more useless than
            > > Benoit); they got rid of Kendall Gill and got Hersey Hawkins in return;
            > > they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm
            > > spit would make the deal worthwhile.
            > >
            > >
            > > --MKT
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > > APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            > >
            > >
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
            >
            >
          • harlanzo
            ... warm ... I remember it being to the Nets for Don Maclean. Boy was that one a blockbuster for the nets.
            Message 5 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of
              warm
              > spit would make the deal worthwhile.
              >
              >
              > --MKT

              I remember it being to the Nets for Don Maclean. Boy was that one a
              blockbuster for the nets.
            • bchaikin@aol.com
              ...they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm spit would make the deal worthwhile.... great line...i love it.... but isn t this
              Message 6 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
              • 0 Attachment

                "...they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm spit would make the deal worthwhile...."

                great line...i love it....

                but isn't this the same team that after the mcilvaine disaster turns right around and signs calvin booth - a guy who played all of 70 some games and 1100 minutes in 3 NBA seasons - to some ungodly contract?...

                hope they don't phone stanley roberts to see what he's up to....

                bob chaikin
                bchaikin@...



              • thedawgsareout
                ... If by right around you mean two and a half years later, yes. ;) Michael, the Sonics also got Michael Cage in that deal with New Jersey, but he was
                Message 7 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- In APBR_analysis@y..., bchaikin@a... wrote:
                  > but isn't this the same team that after the mcilvaine disaster
                  > turns right around and signs calvin booth - a guy who played all
                  > of 70 some games and 1100 minutes in 3 NBA seasons - to some
                  > ungodly contract?...

                  If by 'right around' you mean two and a half years later, yes. ;)

                  Michael, the Sonics also got Michael Cage in that deal with New
                  Jersey, but he was immediately released.

                  John, I'm glad you brought up that point about the East/West numbers
                  being inequivalent. I made note of it in my column today at
                  Hoopsworld.com, as it seems to be a common defense of the deal, but
                  is misleading at best.
                • john wallace craven
                  ... In fairness to the Sonics, Booth s per-minute numbers are a LOT better than McIlvaine s ever were. Still, it wasn t exactly the greatest signing in the
                  Message 8 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 bchaikin@... wrote:

                    >
                    > "...they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm
                    > spit would make the deal worthwhile...."
                    >
                    > great line...i love it....
                    >
                    > but isn't this the same team that after the mcilvaine disaster turns right
                    > around and signs calvin booth - a guy who played all of 70 some games and
                    > 1100 minutes in 3 NBA seasons - to some ungodly contract?...

                    In fairness to the Sonics, Booth's per-minute numbers are a LOT better
                    than McIlvaine's ever were. Still, it wasn't exactly the greatest signing
                    in the world, I agree - especially not now that Jerome James, a guy who
                    looks like he might actually be something is there.

                    John

                    >
                    > hope they don't phone stanley roberts to see what he's up to....
                    >
                    > bob chaikin
                    > bchaikin@...
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  • bchaikin@aol.com
                    calvin booth s per minute numbers are twice that of jim mcilvaine s because booth s possession factor (touches per min) is twice that of mcilvaine. what the
                    Message 9 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
                    • 0 Attachment

                      calvin booth's per minute numbers are twice that of jim mcilvaine's because booth's possession factor (touches per min) is twice that of mcilvaine. what the "experts" who signed these CBA lifers failed to realize and continue to fail to realize is that you can't just project their numbers obtained playing few minutes and saying "...look what he'd do if given more playing time..." without taking into consideration that they commit fouls at not just a high rate, but at an exorbitant rate, upwards of 8-10 per 48 minutes, and thus even if given starter's roles couldn't play major minutes as they're always on the bench in foul trouble. each of these player's stats showed this prior to their signing of huge contracts. these two should kiss the ground their agents walk on...

                      that's why i brought up the example of stanley roberts. great "..per minute ..." numbers but always on the sidelines in foul trouble. teams bought into it with him and will assuredly buy into it for other big men in the future - because they don't seem to learn their lessons...

                      bob chaikin
                      bchaikin@...
                    • Andy Finkelstein
                      ... Or Oliver Miller!! ... ADVERTISEMENT
                      Message 10 of 19 , Jul 23, 2002
                      • 0 Attachment
                         

                        bchaikin@... wrote:

                         
                        "...they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm spit would make the deal worthwhile...."

                        great line...i love it....

                        but isn't this the same team that after the mcilvaine disaster turns right around and signs calvin booth - a guy who played all of 70 some games and 1100 minutes in 3 NBA seasons - to some ungodly contract?...

                        hope they don't phone stanley roberts to see what he's up to....

                        Or Oliver Miller!!
                         

                        bob chaikin
                        bchaikin@...
                         
                         
                         


                        To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                        APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                         
                         

                        Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

                      • Michael K. Tamada
                        ... [...] ... Oliver Miller s playing in the Long Beach Summer Pro League, as large as ever. He s on a free agent team, not one of the NBA affiliated ones.
                        Message 11 of 19 , Jul 24, 2002
                        • 0 Attachment
                          On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Andy Finkelstein wrote:

                          > bchaikin@... wrote:

                          [...]

                          > > hope they don't phone stanley roberts to see what he's up to....
                          >
                          > Or Oliver Miller!!

                          Oliver Miller's playing in the Long Beach Summer Pro League, as large as
                          ever. He's on a "free agent" team, not one of the NBA affiliated ones.


                          --MKT
                        • Michael K. Tamada
                          ... It s a good point, and indeed many Sonics fans had the same reaction that Bob C does: is the Booth signing simply McIlvaine II? But in Booth s defense,
                          Message 12 of 19 , Jul 24, 2002
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Wed, 24 Jul 2002 bchaikin@... wrote:

                            > calvin booth's per minute numbers are twice that of jim mcilvaine's because
                            > booth's possession factor (touches per min) is twice that of mcilvaine. what

                            It's a good point, and indeed many Sonics fans had the same reaction
                            that Bob C does: is the Booth signing simply McIlvaine II?

                            But in Booth's defense, McIlvaine was the kind of player who you
                            would not WANT to give any more touches to. Because he couldn't do
                            anything with the ball except screw up or throw a pass back to the PG at
                            midcourt. In rebounding he was like Superman -- rebounds would bounce off
                            his hands like bullets off steel.

                            I am not sure, because I have seen him so little, but I suspect that Booth
                            can be given twice as many touches as McIlvaine without bogging down the
                            offense. Not that he's the second coming of Bob McAdoo, just that I
                            believe that it is not a coincidence that Booth got more touches per
                            minute than McIlvaine.

                            One of the reasons that Michael Jordan scored more than John Salley was
                            that Jordan got more touches than Salley. But a large part of that was
                            because a team would WANT to give more touches to Jordan.

                            Booth can at least be the 5th option on offense, which is better than
                            being totally useless.

                            > the "experts" who signed these CBA lifers failed to realize and continue to
                            > fail to realize is that you can't just project their numbers obtained playing
                            > few minutes and saying "...look what he'd do if given more playing time..."
                            > without taking into consideration that they commit fouls at not just a high
                            > rate, but at an exorbitant rate, upwards of 8-10 per 48 minutes, and thus
                            > even if given starter's roles couldn't play major minutes as they're always
                            > on the bench in foul trouble. each of these player's stats showed this prior
                            > to their signing of huge contracts. these two should kiss the ground their
                            > agents walk on...

                            The foul issue is indeed an important one, and for the Sonics it's been an
                            major limitation of both Booth and Jerome James.

                            I haven't looked at the stats, but is a high-foul, low-minute player
                            doomed to such a role throughout his career? Or can they change their
                            styles, roles, and tactics and become legitimate starters?

                            And a boon to future scouting if it could be done, though I suspect it
                            can't be done purely with statistics: can we distinguish between the
                            23-year old player destined to be a parttimer from the 23-year old who can
                            potentially develop into the next Ben Wallace or Jayson Williams? Or Bill
                            Laimbeer, James Donaldson, or other slow-starting players who eventually
                            developed into starters and even all-stars. I don't have the stats handy,
                            but I think Donaldson was an 8-fouls-per-48-minutes type of player when he
                            first played in the NBA.

                            > that's why i brought up the example of stanley roberts. great "..per minute
                            > ..." numbers but always on the sidelines in foul trouble. teams bought into
                            > it with him and will assuredly buy into it for other big men in the future -
                            > because they don't seem to learn their lessons...

                            One of the key issues is how much they're paying these players. They're
                            not bad pickups if you get them for cheap -- teams gotta have big men.
                            James especially made good constributions for the Sonics this past season.

                            But yes, the mega-contracts given to the Stanley Roberts, Booths, Michael
                            Stewarts, etc. of the world give one pause.


                            --MKT
                          • alleyoop2
                            Hey, some very interesting takes on the Baker trade, thought I d throw in my $0.02. Basically, I don t think any of the guys in this deal are particularly good
                            Message 13 of 19 , Jul 24, 2002
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hey, some very interesting takes on the Baker trade, thought I'd
                              throw in my $0.02.

                              Basically, I don't think any of the guys in this deal are
                              particularly good players, and don't expect any of them to be next
                              year. I rated Baker, Anderson and Williams all slightly below the
                              league average last year, and Potapenko a fair bit below the average.

                              As a result, this deal comes down strictly to finances. From
                              Seattle's end, it's easy. The Sonics miraculously jettisoned Baker's
                              contract and got to take on an ending deal in the process.

                              Boston made this deal because they HAD to. They were going to pay the
                              luxury tax, which is also what left them in the position of trading
                              two first round picks for three months of Rodney Rogers last year.
                              They avoided the tax; that was their only objective. They'll cobble
                              together a point guard combo between Delk, Shammond Williams (who may
                              do well in Beantown) and perhaps a re-signed Erick Strickland, and
                              make the best of it. Those three still will be as good as Kenny would
                              have been, since it's unlikely he would repeat last year's effort,
                              and he wasn't that good anyway.

                              What I don't get is why Boston didn't come away from this deal with a
                              future draft choice. They were taking on all the risk with Baker's
                              contract, and they got no freebies in return. That's bad negotiating.

                              There was also a side discussion on Calvin Booth. Personally, I think
                              Booth can play if he ever gets healthy. Bob brought up foul trouble,
                              but Booth's foul out rate of 38 minutes in Dallas in 2000-01 was
                              hardly excessive for a center. It seems like the Seattle folks in
                              here like Jerome James, but I was surprised they paid as much as they
                              did for James, who was overrated last year and has Oliver Miller Risk
                              written all over him, and if both are healthy I would start Booth in
                              a heartbeat.


                              --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
                              >
                              >
                              > On Wed, 24 Jul 2002 bchaikin@a... wrote:
                              >
                              > > calvin booth's per minute numbers are twice that of jim
                              mcilvaine's because
                              > > booth's possession factor (touches per min) is twice that of
                              mcilvaine. what
                              >
                              > It's a good point, and indeed many Sonics fans had the same reaction
                              > that Bob C does: is the Booth signing simply McIlvaine II?
                              >
                              > But in Booth's defense, McIlvaine was the kind of player who you
                              > would not WANT to give any more touches to. Because he couldn't do
                              > anything with the ball except screw up or throw a pass back to the
                              PG at
                              > midcourt. In rebounding he was like Superman -- rebounds would
                              bounce off
                              > his hands like bullets off steel.
                              >
                              > I am not sure, because I have seen him so little, but I suspect
                              that Booth
                              > can be given twice as many touches as McIlvaine without bogging
                              down the
                              > offense. Not that he's the second coming of Bob McAdoo, just that I
                              > believe that it is not a coincidence that Booth got more touches per
                              > minute than McIlvaine.
                              >
                              > One of the reasons that Michael Jordan scored more than John Salley
                              was
                              > that Jordan got more touches than Salley. But a large part of that
                              was
                              > because a team would WANT to give more touches to Jordan.
                              >
                              > Booth can at least be the 5th option on offense, which is better
                              than
                              > being totally useless.
                              >
                              > > the "experts" who signed these CBA lifers failed to realize and
                              continue to
                              > > fail to realize is that you can't just project their numbers
                              obtained playing
                              > > few minutes and saying "...look what he'd do if given more
                              playing time..."
                              > > without taking into consideration that they commit fouls at not
                              just a high
                              > > rate, but at an exorbitant rate, upwards of 8-10 per 48 minutes,
                              and thus
                              > > even if given starter's roles couldn't play major minutes as
                              they're always
                              > > on the bench in foul trouble. each of these player's stats showed
                              this prior
                              > > to their signing of huge contracts. these two should kiss the
                              ground their
                              > > agents walk on...
                              >
                              > The foul issue is indeed an important one, and for the Sonics it's
                              been an
                              > major limitation of both Booth and Jerome James.
                              >
                              > I haven't looked at the stats, but is a high-foul, low-minute player
                              > doomed to such a role throughout his career? Or can they change
                              their
                              > styles, roles, and tactics and become legitimate starters?
                              >
                              > And a boon to future scouting if it could be done, though I suspect
                              it
                              > can't be done purely with statistics: can we distinguish between
                              the
                              > 23-year old player destined to be a parttimer from the 23-year old
                              who can
                              > potentially develop into the next Ben Wallace or Jayson Williams?
                              Or Bill
                              > Laimbeer, James Donaldson, or other slow-starting players who
                              eventually
                              > developed into starters and even all-stars. I don't have the stats
                              handy,
                              > but I think Donaldson was an 8-fouls-per-48-minutes type of player
                              when he
                              > first played in the NBA.
                              >
                              > > that's why i brought up the example of stanley roberts.
                              great "..per minute
                              > > ..." numbers but always on the sidelines in foul trouble. teams
                              bought into
                              > > it with him and will assuredly buy into it for other big men in
                              the future -
                              > > because they don't seem to learn their lessons...
                              >
                              > One of the key issues is how much they're paying these players.
                              They're
                              > not bad pickups if you get them for cheap -- teams gotta have big
                              men.
                              > James especially made good constributions for the Sonics this past
                              season.
                              >
                              > But yes, the mega-contracts given to the Stanley Roberts, Booths,
                              Michael
                              > Stewarts, etc. of the world give one pause.
                              >
                              >
                              > --MKT
                            • bchaikin@aol.com
                              ....I haven t looked at the stats, but is a high-foul, low-minute player doomed to such a role throughout his career? Or can they change their styles, roles,
                              Message 14 of 19 , Jul 24, 2002
                              • 0 Attachment

                                "....I haven't looked at the stats, but is a high-foul, low-minute player doomed to such a role throughout his career?  Or can they change their styles, roles, and tactics and become legitimate starters?...." 

                                both james donaldson and bill laimbeer played over 90% of their team's games their first 3 seasons in the league, laimbeer at 29 min/g and donaldson at 19 min/g (i.e. plenty of PT to evaluate them). laimbeer fouled at the rate of about 5 pfs per 48 min and laimbeer 6.5 per 48 min, both high but not exorbitant (not 8-10 fouls per 48 min). so the numbers showed for them early that they could play extended minutes without constantly being on the bench in foul trouble...

                                my point is that the stats (too high fouls) clearly showed early in their careers the major risk associated with signing of players like mcilvaine, booth, and roberts, moreso than people like donaldson and laimbeer. since two of these didn't have major PT, the next best thing would be to look at historical stats - they simply fouled too often - meaning the statistical evidence was clear. giving these kind of players huge money was a mistake easily avoidable if the teams had simply looked at the stats, especially the statistical history of big men and these fouling numbers. who would be crazy enough to invest that kind of money on someone if the stats of previous players that were similar showed rarely if ever that this kind of player panned out significantly to substantiate that kind of monetary outlay?...

                                looking thru the stats database at ABPR from the late 1970s on, and just going thru those last names beginning with A-B-C, i could find only three big men (6'8"+) who were able to cut down their fouling significantly from their 1st 3 seasons in the league to later in their careers:

                                isaac austin        7-10 fouls per 48 min to 5-5.5 per 48
                                randy breuer        6-10 fouls per 48 min to 4.5-6 per 48
                                kelvin cato          8-9 fouls per 48 min to 5.5 per 48

                                and for these players i certainly wouldn't have paid the kind of money mcilvaine and booth were (are being) paid. in the short time i looked i could find only one player who consistently fouled at the rate of 8-10 fouls per 48 min but that actually did play major minutes, and that was darryl dawkins. in his 6th and 7th seasons in the league (with the Nets) he played 26 min/g and 30 min/g while averaging 8-9 fouls per 48 min. steve johnson was at 10 fouls per 48 min early in his career and he got that down to 7 per 48 later, but i think he averaged as much as 30 min/g only once in his career. if these two are the best, would you have paid them mcilvaine/booth kind of dollars?....

                                the point is that had the teams or individuals who signed mcilvaine or booth (or roberts) bothered to look at the historical numbers of similar players they would have seen that rarely do big men who foul that much early in their careers significantly reduce their fouling, or go on to play major time, and the few that did were not great, nor good, but at best adequate big men (and i think i'm being generous here for breuer, austin, and cato)...

                                bob chaikin
                                bchaikin@...






                              • HoopStudies
                                ... the East ... I saw these, too. Haven t done my own analysis. I don t know how much faith to put on these E vs. W stats. We talked about it last year for
                                Message 15 of 19 , Jul 24, 2002
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Charles L. Steinhardt" <charles@p...>
                                  wrote:
                                  > ESPN has numbers showing Baker much better (about 5 PPG) against
                                  the East
                                  > while on the Sonics.
                                  >

                                  I saw these, too. Haven't done my own analysis. I don't know how
                                  much faith to put on these E vs. W stats. We talked
                                  about it last year for Elton Brand, moving from the East to the
                                  West. David Aldridge originally said it would make a big difference
                                  and we debated it here. I
                                  generally thought (incorrectly) that Brand would struggle. Well,
                                  Brand kicked butt in the West. OK, relative to a lot of guys in the
                                  west, he didn't kick butt, but he held his own and played
                                  legitimately very well. A few things helped -


                                  1. Maturity, which helped Brand and won't help Baker
                                  2. Better teammates, which dramatically helped Brand. Offensively,
                                  Seattle and Boston are probably about the same for Baker.
                                  3. Attitude. Amazingly, the Clippers were a step up in attitude over
                                  anything, but it was the Tim Floyd Bulls. Boston is better for Vin.
                                  Vin hated it in Seattle, though no one ever could say exactly why.

                                  No one wishes Vin ill will from the Seattle organization. No one
                                  really thinks he'll bounce back and be the Baker of 1998 either. But
                                  they will be mighty upset if he does.

                                  DeanO
                                • john wallace craven
                                  ... In the true sadness/stupidity arena, the Sonics actually did give Miller a look-see a couple years ago. Had he not shown up to the try-out weighing close
                                  Message 16 of 19 , Jul 24, 2002
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On Wed, 24 Jul 2002, Andy Finkelstein wrote:

                                    >
                                    >
                                    > bchaikin@... wrote:
                                    >
                                    > >
                                    > > "...they got rid of Jim McIlvaine for I forget who but even a bucket of warm spit would make the
                                    > > deal worthwhile...."
                                    > >
                                    > > great line...i love it....
                                    > >
                                    > > but isn't this the same team that after the mcilvaine disaster turns right around and signs calvin
                                    > > booth - a guy who played all of 70 some games and 1100 minutes in 3 NBA seasons - to some ungodly
                                    > > contract?...
                                    > >
                                    > > hope they don't phone stanley roberts to see what he's up to....
                                    >
                                    > Or Oliver Miller!!

                                    In the "true sadness/stupidity" arena, the Sonics actually did give Miller
                                    a look-see a couple years ago. Had he not shown up to the try-out weighing
                                    close to 400 pounds, he might have been signed to a contract, too...

                                    John Craven

                                    >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > bob chaikin
                                    > > bchaikin@...
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
                                    > ADVERTISEMENT
                                    >
                                    > >
                                    > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                    > > APBR_analysis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > >
                                    > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
                                    >
                                  • alleyoop2
                                    If there is any east-west effect at all, I would expect it be pretty muted for one simple reason: the schedules aren t that much different. Baker played 30
                                    Message 17 of 19 , Jul 25, 2002
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      If there is any east-west effect at all, I would expect it be pretty
                                      muted for one simple reason: the schedules aren't that much different.

                                      Baker played 30 games against the East last year. This year he will
                                      play 54. In other words, 24 of his games will be against an Eastern
                                      team instead of a Western team, but the other 58 will be exactly the
                                      same as a year ago. Because of that, it would take a fairly large
                                      east-west difference for anything consequential to show up in his
                                      stats.





                                      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "HoopStudies" <deano@r...> wrote:
                                      > --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Charles L. Steinhardt" <charles@p...>
                                      > wrote:
                                      > > ESPN has numbers showing Baker much better (about 5 PPG) against
                                      > the East
                                      > > while on the Sonics.
                                      > >
                                      >
                                      > I saw these, too. Haven't done my own analysis. I don't know how
                                      > much faith to put on these E vs. W stats. We talked
                                      > about it last year for Elton Brand, moving from the East to the
                                      > West. David Aldridge originally said it would make a big
                                      difference
                                      > and we debated it here. I
                                      > generally thought (incorrectly) that Brand would struggle. Well,
                                      > Brand kicked butt in the West. OK, relative to a lot of guys in
                                      the
                                      > west, he didn't kick butt, but he held his own and played
                                      > legitimately very well. A few things helped -
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > 1. Maturity, which helped Brand and won't help Baker
                                      > 2. Better teammates, which dramatically helped Brand. Offensively,
                                      > Seattle and Boston are probably about the same for Baker.
                                      > 3. Attitude. Amazingly, the Clippers were a step up in attitude
                                      over
                                      > anything, but it was the Tim Floyd Bulls. Boston is better for
                                      Vin.
                                      > Vin hated it in Seattle, though no one ever could say exactly why.
                                      >
                                      > No one wishes Vin ill will from the Seattle organization. No one
                                      > really thinks he'll bounce back and be the Baker of 1998 either.
                                      But
                                      > they will be mighty upset if he does.
                                      >
                                      > DeanO
                                    • Michael K. Tamada
                                      ... Yes, this apparently applies to teams as well. Some people in rec.sport.basketball.pro have concluded that the Eastern teams, due to their easier
                                      Message 18 of 19 , Jul 25, 2002
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, alleyoop2 wrote:

                                        > If there is any east-west effect at all, I would expect it be pretty
                                        > muted for one simple reason: the schedules aren't that much different.
                                        >
                                        > Baker played 30 games against the East last year. This year he will
                                        > play 54. In other words, 24 of his games will be against an Eastern
                                        > team instead of a Western team, but the other 58 will be exactly the
                                        > same as a year ago. Because of that, it would take a fairly large
                                        > east-west difference for anything consequential to show up in his
                                        > stats.

                                        Yes, this apparently applies to teams as well. Some people in
                                        rec.sport.basketball.pro have concluded that the Eastern teams, due to
                                        their easier schedules, get more wins than they would get if the schedule
                                        were 50-50 East-West. But only 1 or 2 more wins, not a huge impact.
                                        West teams of course also lose 1-2 extra games, but even the combined
                                        impact, though not negligible, is not huge.


                                        --MKT
                                      • HoopStudies
                                        ... to ... schedule ... impact. ... combined ... Ken Massey suggests that the point difference between schedules in the NBA is a little over a point per game.
                                        Message 19 of 19 , Jul 25, 2002
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "Michael K. Tamada" <tamada@o...> wrote:
                                          > Yes, this apparently applies to teams as well. Some people in
                                          > rec.sport.basketball.pro have concluded that the Eastern teams, due
                                          to
                                          > their easier schedules, get more wins than they would get if the
                                          schedule
                                          > were 50-50 East-West. But only 1 or 2 more wins, not a huge
                                          impact.
                                          > West teams of course also lose 1-2 extra games, but even the
                                          combined
                                          > impact, though not negligible, is not huge.

                                          Ken Massey suggests that the point difference between schedules in
                                          the NBA is a little over a point per game. Lakers had the toughest
                                          and the Bucks had the weakest. About 1 ppg is equivalent to about 3
                                          wins, as a lot of people have pointed out. The difference between
                                          the west and the east, according to Massey, was about 0.5 ppg, which
                                          is 1-2 extra games. So good call by those guys in rsbp.

                                          I would personally think that the the effect on individuals would be
                                          greater, but I've never thought enough about it to really know how to
                                          study it.

                                          DeanO
                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.