kdrake11 0 Report post Posted June 28, 2009 looking at the per game stats is one thing, but when you look at season totals it's clear that we got the better deal on the trade... tony battie, rafer alston, and c-lee combined for: 1366 pts 539 reb 270 ast 153 st 42 blk vince carter and ryan anderson combined for: 2149 pts 721 reb 428 ast 126 st 58 blk just thought some of you might want to see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kdrake11 0 Report post Posted June 28, 2009 looking at the per game stats is one thing, but when you look at season totals it's clear that we got the better deal on the trade... tony battie, rafer alston, and c-lee combined for: 1366 pts 539 reb 270 ast 153 st 42 blk vince carter and ryan anderson combined for: 2149 pts 721 reb 428 ast 126 st 58 blk just thought some of you might want to see. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
New Guy 11 Report post Posted June 28, 2009 You cant look at this deal that way. Two of the players we gave up (Battie/Alston) were for contractual reasons. They might as well be too backups and essentially, that's what they are. It's expiring contracts and potential for Carter and potential. You shouldnt expect those numbers to compare. It's pretty pointless. We'd obviously get the better end from a statistical stand point, that's the whole point. The real argument or what you really should be thinking about is...Lee and Hedo vs. Carter and potentially a PF, say Bass or Wallace. And to delve into that deeper, that would lead into the discussion of double SFs in your lineup (Hedo/Rashard) vs conventional lineup. (true PF) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kramer 0 Report post Posted June 28, 2009 quote: Originally posted by New Guy:You cant look at this deal that way. Two of the players we gave up (Battie/Alston) were for contractual reasons. They might as well be too backups and essentially, that's what they are. It's expiring contracts and potential for Carter and potential. You shouldnt expect those numbers to compare. It's pretty pointless. We'd obviously get the better end from a statistical stand point, that's the whole point. The real argument or what you really should be thinking about is...Lee and Hedo vs. Carter and potentially a PF, say Bass or Wallace. And to delve into that deeper, that would lead into the discussion of double SFs in your lineup (Hedo/Rashard) vs conventional lineup. (true PF) While I agree with you initially, I think the better comparison is between the starting line-up as it stands now. Dwight/Lewis/Pietrus/Carter/Nelson is clearly better in my mind than Dwight/Lewis/Hedo/Lee/Nelson While the bench takes a hit, come playoff time there is no reason why the atheletic freak that is Pietrus can't play 40+ minutes a game so his presence will still be felt. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
New Guy 11 Report post Posted June 28, 2009 I cant agree with that. Pietrus is extremely foul prone. And you take him off our bench, and we literally, have nothing. He's the perfect 6th man and Otis knows this. If we're looking at a guy like Wallace...we're looking for a starting PF. The same could be said for Bass who is expected to land a starting gig this year. We're going conventional. That seems clear now with the news of us looking at these PFs. So, that would be Pietrus off the bench, and rightfully so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kramer 0 Report post Posted June 28, 2009 I can't imagine anybody outside of Turkey really believing that a starting line-up with Carter/Pietrus instead of Lee/Hedo isn't significantly better. That is superior offensively, defensively, and a lot better on the glass. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
New Guy 11 Report post Posted June 28, 2009 It's not better because, you'd have zero bench. No one. Zip. And Pietrus is majorly foul prone. That would mean many games with many minutes for Redick. Yup. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
