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

Bulls-Pacers trade analysis

Expand Messages
  • mikel_ind
    Rose and Best now have 13 games with the Bulls; Artest and B.Miller have played 11 games in Indiana. My intuitive overview is that Rose and Best have done
    Message 1 of 2 , Mar 14, 2002
      Rose and Best now have 13 games with the Bulls; Artest and B.Miller
      have played 11 games in Indiana. My intuitive overview is that Rose
      and Best have done better since the trade, and Artest has not. This
      seems indeed to be the case:

      "Standardized" production rates

      Ron Artest
      tm. min. pct. sco. reb ast stl (TO.) Blk
      Chi 30.5 .506 18.4 6.1 3.7 3.3 (3.0) 1.0 .. 31.3
      Ind 31.4 .526 15.3 6.1 1.5 2.6 (2.6) 0.5 .. 24.4

      Brad Miller
      tm. min. pct. sco. reb. ast stl (TO.) Blk
      Chi 29.0 .527 16.2 10.9 2.8 1.3 (1.8) .7 .. 31.4
      Ind 30.8 .587 18.2 >8.8 1.4 1.2 (1.7) .8 .. 29.6

      Both Indiana acquisitions are getting a tad more minutes (and
      totalling more minutes than Rose and Best). Both have improved
      shooting efficiencies (meaning, I think, the Pacers have a more
      structured offense). And both are at this point uninvolved in ball-
      movement (typical of new team situation).

      Artest's numbers in Indiana are about what they were last season.
      But this guy has offensive game, and will be picking it up, I predict.

      Travis Best
      tm. min. pct. sco. reb ast stl (TO.) Blk
      Ind 21.7 .511 10.3 2.4 6.2 2.0 (2.0) .2 .. 21.2
      Chi 27.5 .511 11.7 4.3 7.4 1.3 (1.6) .0 .. 25.6

      Jalen Rose
      tm. min. pct. sco. reb ast stl (TO.) Blk
      Ind 36.5 .510 18.7 4.8 3.9 0.8 (2.0) .5 .. 28.2
      Chi 40.3 .526 23.1 4.0 5.8 1.1 (2.7) .6 .. 34.1

      Now Jalen again looks like a borderline allstar, and Travis again
      looks like he should be starting somewhere. Go figure.

      The fact that these guys are not just more involved (and playing more
      minutes), but also have improved their shooting pct (or not
      diminished) makes me think they have just been concentrating more.

      Rose has picked up his FT shooting (.839 in Indy, .887 in Chicago),
      as has Best (.877 to .933). This means concentration, to me -- not
      just changing roles and responsibilities, but renewed dedication.

      Both guys assists are noticably up, (so my comment about the other
      guy's being 'typically' down sounds bogus); but Rose and Best are
      apparently the prime ballhandlers now.

      So far, my predictions (coup for Indiana) have been thrashed; but I
      expect the former Pacers may grow weary of losing, while the ex-Bulls
      may flourish in a more positive situation.

      (Standing by my prediction in spite of the early returns.)


      Mike Goodman
    • harlanzo
      When assessing the Bulls Pacers trade I think we have to look at on two levels. First, does the trade improve either team from what they were before the
      Message 2 of 2 , Mar 14, 2002
        When assessing the Bulls Pacers trade I think we have to look at on
        two levels. First, does the trade improve either team from what they
        were before the trade? Second, does the trade create a team that is
        better off in the future?

        In regards to the first question:

        1)PAcers seem about as good as before the trade. Miller is another
        decent wide body but nothing great. Artest has been good because he
        is another defender. Rose's departure definitely hurt their scoring a
        little but I think if Miller and Artest pick it up they can make up
        for most of what Rose brings to the table. SO, to me the pacers are
        slightly better now than they were before the trade.

        2)Bulls are clearly better now than they werer before the trade.
        Rose is the kind number scoring option we have talked (dubious value
        in terms of making a team very good but is the kind that can push a
        bad team to adequacy). Scoring on the Bulls is up and they are now
        as good as most fo the poor teams in the east.

        As for the future:

        1)the PAcers look very good in the future. The got $70 mill of the
        cap and got players who can help your team without demanding the ball-
        -whihc is very useful to an already good team. Artest, I think, also
        has an outside shot of becoming a good scorer whihc we be a bonus.

        2)Whether the future looks good for the Bulls really depends on your
        perspective. Acquiring Rose guarantees a modicum of acceptability
        that Krause pissed away when he traded Brand. So the heat is off of
        Krause a little because he can at least move his team towards .500.
        but Rose is already 29 and is locked into an expensive contract. His
        ceiling as a player is clearly reached and I don't think anoyone
        would argue that such a player should take up so much camp room and
        be the cornerstone to a franchise. In effect the trade tells you
        that Krause can't stand the heat of starting over. This should be
        viewed as a major error on Krause's part because he had Brand a
        better, younger, and cheaper player than Rose locked in and traded
        him away. So, the trade is a victory for the diminished expectations
        in chicago.

        The Mavs-Nuggets trade is less difficult to analyze

        The question from the Nuggets point of view is whether it is better
        to have lafrentz and some miserable contracts (Avery, VAn Exel, and
        Abdul-Wahad) or lose Lafrentz, a clearly good player, and start over
        with cap room. I do not love lafrentz's long term potential. He is
        injury prone and plays the same position as Mcdyess (a better
        player). I also would not have paid Lafrentz the Max ($70mill) to
        keep him. Some may disagree but it is a no-brainer trade for the
        Nuggs. (incidentally, this trade is also a mounment to how
        hopelessely dumb Issel was for paying long-term deals to mediocre
        players).

        The Mavs are taking a similar shot to the one Philly did last year
        with Mutombo. (Ironically, the trade has been great for philly with
        Ratliff's injury problems). The MAvs roster is now a bit of a mess.
        Lafrentz clearly helps the team but how will they ever get rid of the
        other crap they are stuck? (incidentally, I think VanExel is
        marginally better than T hardaway)if you keep acquiring so many bad
        long term deals it is possible that the mavs could be completely
        stuck like the Knicks are until the deals expire. Even this being
        the case, the trade could be good for the Mavs if they reach the holy
        land. The question then becomes what kind of success is enough to
        justify the long term commitments Cuban made to Vanexel et al. I
        assume they would have to beat the lakers to justify the deal. I
        think this is highly unlikely given that the Mavs still cannot guard
        anyone and Lafrentz on shaq just seems cruel to poor Raef. In fact,
        even after the trade I wonder whether the Mavs are better than
        Sacramento, the San Antonio, or Portland. So while I applaud the
        Mavs for going for it I think this will be a mistake that does not
        yield any tangible results in the playoffs. Especially when Cuban is
        faced with the question of whether or not to pay Lafrentz this
        summer.


        --- In APBR_analysis@y..., "mikel_ind" <msg_53@h...> wrote:
        > Rose and Best now have 13 games with the Bulls; Artest and B.Miller
        > have played 11 games in Indiana. My intuitive overview is that
        Rose
        > and Best have done better since the trade, and Artest has not.
        This
        > seems indeed to be the case:
        >
        > "Standardized" production rates
        >
        > Ron Artest
        > tm. min. pct. sco. reb ast stl (TO.) Blk
        > Chi 30.5 .506 18.4 6.1 3.7 3.3 (3.0) 1.0 .. 31.3
        > Ind 31.4 .526 15.3 6.1 1.5 2.6 (2.6) 0.5 .. 24.4
        >
        > Brad Miller
        > tm. min. pct. sco. reb. ast stl (TO.) Blk
        > Chi 29.0 .527 16.2 10.9 2.8 1.3 (1.8) .7 .. 31.4
        > Ind 30.8 .587 18.2 >8.8 1.4 1.2 (1.7) .8 .. 29.6
        >
        > Both Indiana acquisitions are getting a tad more minutes (and
        > totalling more minutes than Rose and Best). Both have improved
        > shooting efficiencies (meaning, I think, the Pacers have a more
        > structured offense). And both are at this point uninvolved in ball-
        > movement (typical of new team situation).
        >
        > Artest's numbers in Indiana are about what they were last season.
        > But this guy has offensive game, and will be picking it up, I
        predict.
        >
        > Travis Best
        > tm. min. pct. sco. reb ast stl (TO.) Blk
        > Ind 21.7 .511 10.3 2.4 6.2 2.0 (2.0) .2 .. 21.2
        > Chi 27.5 .511 11.7 4.3 7.4 1.3 (1.6) .0 .. 25.6
        >
        > Jalen Rose
        > tm. min. pct. sco. reb ast stl (TO.) Blk
        > Ind 36.5 .510 18.7 4.8 3.9 0.8 (2.0) .5 .. 28.2
        > Chi 40.3 .526 23.1 4.0 5.8 1.1 (2.7) .6 .. 34.1
        >
        > Now Jalen again looks like a borderline allstar, and Travis again
        > looks like he should be starting somewhere. Go figure.
        >
        > The fact that these guys are not just more involved (and playing
        more
        > minutes), but also have improved their shooting pct (or not
        > diminished) makes me think they have just been concentrating more.
        >
        > Rose has picked up his FT shooting (.839 in Indy, .887 in Chicago),
        > as has Best (.877 to .933). This means concentration, to me -- not
        > just changing roles and responsibilities, but renewed dedication.
        >
        > Both guys assists are noticably up, (so my comment about the other
        > guy's being 'typically' down sounds bogus); but Rose and Best are
        > apparently the prime ballhandlers now.
        >
        > So far, my predictions (coup for Indiana) have been thrashed; but I
        > expect the former Pacers may grow weary of losing, while the ex-
        Bulls
        > may flourish in a more positive situation.
        >
        > (Standing by my prediction in spite of the early returns.)
        >
        >
        > Mike Goodman
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.