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

Re: Adrian Dantley study

Expand Messages
  • msg_53@hotmail.com
    Good work, Ed! Scanning the Dantley history line does show some things. For one, Dantley seems to raise the team shooting pct., which is not surprising, and
    Message 1 of 7 , May 2, 2001
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Good work, Ed!
      Scanning the Dantley history line does show some things. For one,
      Dantley seems to raise the team shooting pct., which is not
      surprising, and the opponents' pct. as well.
      I have the opinion that a coach's job is to substitute players; at
      the pro level, this is perhaps his main job. If a player is getting
      minutes, it must be for a reason. Certainly a player does not get
      playing time because he is hurting his own team.
      A team with very few scoring options goes out and gets a scorer.
      Then, they utilize that guy's abilities. AD was near the league
      leaders in minutes his entire stay in Utah, yet nowhere else.
      In Detroit, where his playoff legacy was made, AD led the Pistons
      in scoring in '87 and '88 despite being 3rd/4th in minutes. Bill
      Laimbeer was the only other frontline scoring threat.
      In 23 playoff games in 1988, Dantley shot 52% while Detroit's
      other Big 3 (Thomas, Dumars, Laimbeer) shot 46%. In the Eastern
      finals, AD's offensive wizardry totally confounded the Celtics, and
      basically ended their dynasty.
      On a bad team, everybody takes the blame, even the player who
      carries the team. Utah was nothing when Dantley arrived (well, some
      nice scenery there); he gave way to the Malone/Stockton era.
      Dantley is at the top of all-time players for career shooting
      pct. When you factor in FTs, he shot over 60%, 2nd only to Gilmore,
      and maybe Reggie Miller (another great one-dimensional player).

      --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Ed Weiland <weiland1029@y...> wrote:
      >
      > Here's some stuff I dug up. I din't format anything,
      > so I hope it all is at least semi-comprehensible.
      >
      > Buffalo:
      >
      > Records
      > Before Dantley ('75-76): 46-36
      > With Dantley ('76-77): 30-52
      > After Dantley ('77-78): 27-55
      >
      > Offense PPG FG%
      > Before Dantley: 107.3 .476
      > With Dantley: 105.0 .450
      > After Dantley: 105.3 .466
      >
      > Defense
      > Before Dantley: 106.4 .461
      > With Dantley: 109.5 .478
      > After Dantley: 109.0 .476
      >
      > Note: Twenty games into the '76-77 season, Buffalo
      > sent Bob McAdoo to the Knicks for John Gianelli and
      > cash. They also dealt Jim McMillian--third leading
      > scorer in '75-76--before the season. I suspect these
      > two deals had something to do with the 16-game drop in
      > the standings. Dantley was voted Rookie-of-the-year.
      >
      > Dantley was dealt to the Pacers after his rookie
      > season, '76-77, who sent him to the Lakers after 23
      > games that same season. I have no idea what the with
      > and without Dantley breakdowns are for each team, but
      > here's how they did for the entire season:
      >
      > Indiana:
      >
      > Records
      > BD ('76-77): 36-46
      > WD ('77-78): 31-51
      > AD ('78-79): 38-44
      >
      > Offense
      > BD: 106.8 .449
      > WD: 108.6 .450
      > AD: 108.6 .475
      >
      > Defense
      > BD: 108.6 .472
      > WD: 111.1 .474
      > AD: 110.2 .478
      >
      > I don't know how much Dantley could have affected
      > Indiana in just 23 games. He was their leading scorer
      > at 26.5 ppg. The 7-game increase in '78-79 could have
      > been due to the Pacers signing Alex English off of
      > Milwaukee's bench as a free agent moreso than ridding
      > themselves of Dantley in exchange for James Edwards,
      > Earl Tatum and cash.
      >
      > Los Angeles
      >
      > Records:
      > BD ("76-77): 53-29
      > WD ('77-78): 45-37
      > ('78-79): 47-35
      > AD ('79-80): 60-22 NBA Champs
      >
      > Offense:
      > BD: 106.9 .478
      > WD: 110.3 .487
      > 112.9 .517
      > AD: 115.1 .529
      >
      > Defense:
      > BD: 104.1 .452
      > WD: 107.6 .463
      > 109.9 .484
      > AD: 109.2 .470
      >
      > Before and during the '77-78 season the Lakers
      > replaced four of their five leading scorers--Cazzie
      > Russell, Lucious Allen, Kermit Washington and Earl
      > Tatum--from the previous season. They replaced these
      > four with Dantley, Jamaal Wilkes, Norm Nixon and
      > Charlie Scott. It would be difficult, IMO, to lay any
      > blame on Dantley for the decrease in wins based on
      > this. The year Dantley left for Utah, Magic Johnson
      > came aboard via the draft. The rest, as they say, is
      > history.
      >
      > Utah
      >
      > Records
      > BD ('78-79): 26-56
      > WD ('79-80): 24-58
      > ('80-81): 28-54
      > ('81-82): 25-57
      > ('82-83): 30-52 Dantley injured, played 22 games
      > ('83-84): 45-37
      > ('84-85): 41-41
      > ('85-86): 42-40
      > AD ('86-87): 44-38
      >
      > Offense
      > BD: 108.3 .468
      > WD: 102.4 .496
      > 101.2 .488
      > 110.9 .494
      > 109.0 .480
      > 115.0 .498
      > 109.0 .476
      > 108.2 .488
      > AD: 107.9 .464
      >
      > Defense
      > BD: 114.6 .481
      > WD: 108.4 .496
      > 107.1 .489
      > 116.6 .509
      > 113.2 .478
      > 113.8 .476
      > 109.1 .464
      > 108.5 .473
      > AD: 107.5 .456
      >
      > In '82-83, when the def. FG% dropped .031, legendary
      > shot-blocker Mark Eaton joined the team. After moving
      > from New orleans in '79, the Jazz almost entirely
      > rebuilt the team. After that, they went with a
      > rotation featuring mainly Dantley, Darrell Griffith
      > and Rickey Green, with the likes of Dan Schayes, Ben
      > Poquette and John Drew sprinkled in here and there.
      > They got as good as mediocre with Dantley as the top
      > gun.
      >
      >
      > Detroit
      > Dantley was dealt from Detroit to Dallas for Mark
      > Aguirre midway through the '88-89 season.
      >
      > Records
      > BD ('85-86): 46-36
      > WD ('86-87): 52-30
      > ('87-88): 54-28
      > WD/AD ('88-89): 63-19 NBA Champions
      > AD ('89-90): 59-23 NBA Champions
      >
      > Offense
      > BD: 114.2 .484
      > WD: 111.2 .490
      > 109.2 .493
      > W/AD 106.6 .494
      > AD: 104.3 .478
      >
      > Defense
      > BD: 113.0 .492
      > WD: 107.8 .462
      > 104.1 .467
      > A/WD 100.8 .447
      > AD: 98.3 .447
      >
      > The defense did improve dramatically when Dantley
      > arrived. But Dantley replaced Kelly Tripucka, who was
      > never confused with a great defender, and added Dennis
      > Rodman that year. Since the defense suffered no
      > noticeable lapse when Dantley left, I think we can
      > safely cradit the improvement to both Rodman and coach
      > Chuck Daly. The team did take a great Lakers team to 7
      > games in the '88 finals with Dantley playing a major
      > role.
      >
      > Dallas
      >
      > records
      > BD ('87-88): 53-29
      > B/WD ('88-89): 38-44
      > WD: ('89-90): 47-35
      > AD: ('90-91): 28-54
      >
      > offense
      > BD: 109.3 .475
      > B/WD: 103.5 .469
      > WD: 102.2 .475
      > AD: 99.9 .471
      >
      > defense
      > BD: 104.9 .470
      > B/WD: 104.7 .469
      > WD: 102.2 .469
      > AD: 104.5 .482
      >
      > Dallas kept the same Blackman-Harper-Donaldson-Perkins
      > core intact during Dantley's stay. Roy Tarpley was an
      > infrequent, but impact, roster member. In fact, just
      > briely going through the late-eighties Mavs, it seems
      > that they were fine as long as Roy Tarpley was healthy
      > and in the lineup. It didn't matter if Dantley,
      > Aguirre or Morlon Wiley was the SF.
      >
      > Milwaukee
      >
      > Dantley played ten games for Milwaukee during the
      > '90-91 season. As if it matters:
      >
      > records
      > BD ('89-90): 44-38
      > WD ('90-91): 48-34
      > AD ('91-92): 31-51
      >
      > offense
      > BD: 106.0 .473
      > WD: 106.4 .480
      > AD: 105.0 .460
      >
      > defense
      > BD: 106.8 .479
      > WD: 104.0 .486
      > AD: 106.7 .498
      >
      >
      >
      > Dantley's most impressive career numbers are 23,177
      > points, 24.3 ppg and a .540 career FG%. Pretty
      > impressive, but it's appears he didn't have a huge
      > effect on the teams he was on. This doesn't even get
      > into the seemingly low standards already in place for
      > the HOF.
      >
      > Ed Weiland
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > __________________________________________________
      > Do You Yahoo!?
      > Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
      > http://auctions.yahoo.com/
    • Dean Oliver
      ... Thanks, Ed. Exactly what I was curious about. It can be difficult to evaluate players this way because players who are traded often are traded for
      Message 2 of 7 , May 2, 2001
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In APBR_analysis@y..., Ed Weiland <weiland1029@y...> wrote:

        Thanks, Ed. Exactly what I was curious about.

        It can be difficult to evaluate players this way because players who
        are traded often are traded for something viewed as equivalent (at
        least before this era of sign-and-trade/free agency threats). But
        your numbers pretty much rule out Dantley being a significant impact
        team player.

        Dean Oliver
        Journal of Basketball Studies
      • harlanzo@yahoo.com
        Just wondering if Bernard King comes up any differently than Dantley. They are very similar players--with the exception that King wasn t really considered
        Message 3 of 7 , May 3, 2001
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Just wondering if Bernard King comes up any differently than
          Dantley. They are very similar players--with the exception that King
          wasn't really considered selfish or a malcontent. He also has the NY
          ethos on his side. (Who could forget his duel with Bird in 84).
          Most of the teams he played on improved when he came. But he never
          made a team more than a solid first round playoff team. I am not
          sure if an objective look at the evidence indicates he (as the focus
          of team) pushes a team towards a championship. The question is
          whether that makes him better, worse, or the same as Dantley.


          > Thanks, Ed. Exactly what I was curious about.
          >
          > It can be difficult to evaluate players this way because players
          who
          > are traded often are traded for something viewed as equivalent (at
          > least before this era of sign-and-trade/free agency threats). But
          > your numbers pretty much rule out Dantley being a significant
          impact
          > team player.
          >
          > Dean Oliver
          > Journal of Basketball Studies
        • bchaikin@aol.com
          not quite sure on the topic of this dantley discussion, other than dean asking early about whether he belonged in the HOF, but on the comment ...your numbers
          Message 4 of 7 , May 4, 2001
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment

            not quite sure on the topic of this dantley discussion, other than dean
            asking early about whether he belonged in the HOF, but on the comment
            "...your numbers pretty much rule out dantley being a significant impact team
            player...", i'm really not quite sure i understand that statement...

            was dantley a "team" player? in the strictest sense i'd say no and i believe
            most would agree on that. he got his points and i'd bet half were on
            isolation plays as opposed to being in what most would think of as the "flow"
            of a team offense. he looked to score, and like most players that think of
            scoring first those points probably came at the expense of other teammates
            getting involved in the team offense....

            keep in mind, however, that a scorer like dantley, when surrounded by
            complementary players, is a huge asset to a team. if you didn't know i was
            talking about dantley, and i told you a player averaged 24 pts/g while
            shooting 54% over his entire and very long 15-16 year career, and for one
            long seven year stretch upped those numbers to 30 pts/g and 56% shooting,
            you'd think that player was great. we're not talking about dominique wilkins
            here who despite a ton of dunks shot 46% for his career. over his career
            dantley played on teams that totaled about a .500 record, but he was the
            leading scorer and offensive threat on almost all of those teams...

            i remember around 1989-90 alot of people saying michael jordan would never
            win anything - that he was a scorer (at that point 6 years in the league and
            career avgs of 33 pts/g and 52% shooting) but not a "team" player. well as
            soon as he got a decent team around him chicago won big. now dantley was not
            michael jordan, but when surrounded by a great team (detroit) he did win
            games...

            but was he an "impact" player? that depends on what your definition of an
            impact player is. if your definition of an impact player is bird, magic, and
            m.j., then no he was not....

            but when i think of an "impact" player i think of someone who has an impact
            on the game itself whenever they play, and believe me - for a 10 year stretch
            there, for every team he played on, the opponents of those teams geared their
            defense to stopping him and him specifically, and few did. in the early and
            mid 1980s, i specifically remember dantley being considered a true superstar
            in the league, and i remember how very often he got double teamed and still
            scored while shooting a high FG%....

            i remember chuck daly was quoted once as saying that what dantley did - score
            without taking time off the clock, i.e. he got to the free throw line late in
            games - was extremely important. and its true (however i also remember
            dantley sitting alot of 4th quarters because he didn't play D for
            detroit).....

            he won two scoring crowns, had amazing stats, and played little if any
            defense. does he belong in the hall of fame? well if similar players like
            george gervin, dominique wilkins, and alex english do, then so does
            dantley....

            bob chaikin
            bchaikin@...











          • Dean Oliver
            ... impact team ... statement... What we didn t see were substantial increases in team wins when Dantley arrived, nor did we see substantial decreases in team
            Message 5 of 7 , May 5, 2001
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In APBR_analysis@y..., bchaikin@a... wrote:
              > "...your numbers pretty much rule out dantley being a significant
              impact team
              > player...", i'm really not quite sure i understand that
              statement...

              What we didn't see were substantial increases in team wins when
              Dantley arrived, nor did we see substantial decreases in team wins
              when Dantley left. That does not mean that he wasn't a good player.
              It means several _possible_ things:

              1. When he was traded, he was traded for talent that was about the
              same as his (Billy Knight in 77, James Edwards in 77, Spencer Haywood
              in 79, Kelly Tripucka and Kent Benson in 86, Mark Aguirre in 89 - No
              HOFers)
              2. His individual skills, as good as they were, did not elevate team
              performance because his offense was very isolated or because his
              defense wasn't particularly good (not sure about that).
              3. Simple bad luck. Detroit and Utah both probably could have
              gotten great with him sticking around.

              Before the entire Dantley discussion, his election to the Hall was a
              foregone conclusion. I remember thinking that he was a legit star of
              the '80's. Both the numbers and the general discussion of his
              attitude and style have changed my opinion some. He probably will
              go, in part because of the consistency argument (similarity to
              'Nique, Gervin, English), an argument I really dislike. My numbers
              do indicate he was an excellent offensive (not just good) player and
              I have a hard time holding team mediocrity against those kind of
              numbers. I have no problem with him being in the Hall.

              Dean Oliver
              Journal of Basketball Studies
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.