Baynes needs to be part of the starting five

[Eddie20]

I don't think it is a coincidence that Embiid being able to do whatever he wanted against Baynes

This is true only in your mind.  Embiid is very good and clearly better than Baynes but CBS liked what Baynes did and he helped us win the series, no matter how you twist it....

Yeah, that is a complete rewriting of history. Embiid clearly got upset with Baynes’ physicality at stages, particularly near the end of the series

Sure he got upset that the fouls were harder then Embiid felt they needed to be.  But they were still fouls and they still put Embiid on the line.  If Baynes wasn't getting beat all the time, maybe he wouldn't have needed to foul Embiid at all.

No, Embiid got upset because Baynes held him to an atrocious 1.12 points per shot after he put up 1.4 points per shot in the regular season. Unlike your plus minus metrics, this stat actually measures Baynes effect on Embiid, not Embiids effect on the Sixers / Celtics. It’s really not that difficult.

Did you actually analyze Embiid's shots when being guarded by Baynes?  Like watch video of every possession to see when Baynes was on Embiid and when Embiid was being guarded by others.  Did that analysis include end of the shot clock type shots verse normal offense shots both with and without Baynes?  Did that analysis account for double teams and if so how did it account for double teams?  Just because Embiid had 1.12 points per shot, doesn't mean Baynes held him to that, especially since Embiid was in the game a lot without Baynes even being on the floor.  Of course, as indicated Embiid and the Sixers were a lot more effective on the scoreboard (the only thing that really matters) when Baynes was in the game then when Baynes wasn't in the game.

I don't have to do that, I just have to establish that my statistics are more relevant in regards to Baynes's abilities guarding Embiid than yours are, and I've done that, given the unanimous disagreement you've met in this thread from knowledgeable posters.

With unanimous support on my side, the burden of bearing evidence in the form of video analysis and statistical segmentation is on you.

EDIT - Here's a fun starting point.  Embiid played most teams in the East 4 times- against what teams did he average lower than 1.12 PPS in those 4 games?  If Baynes can't guard Embiid, surely you'll find lots of averages below 1.12 PPS.

Wouldn't be expecting a response to this, lol. Good post. Not sure why he's being obtuse in the face of pretty irrefutable stats

his stats are nonsense for what he is arguing.  If his argument was the Celtics did a great job guarding Embiid, I'd agree.  Embiid performed mostly below his regular season averages overall in that series.  My position is, it wasn't because of Baynes, as both Embiid and the Sixers performed significantly better when Baynes was in the game, then when Baynes wasn't in the game.  Every metric you can use, supports that position.  Boston was better when Baynes wasn't guarding Embiid.

Wrong.  That's factually incorrect, or at least you haven't proven it, because it isn't the same thing as saying the Sixers were better with Baynes off the floor.  Again, when Baynes was in the game, Embiid was in the game 100% OF THAT TIME.  Embiid is great, so Philly played well. 

When Baynes was out, Embiid was in for I'd bet only 40% of that time, and so in 60% of those minutes with Baynes off the floor, the Sixers relied on Simmons who played horribly and 3 point shooters who shot 30%.  So they performed worse then, duh.  If you understand basketball, or even common sense, you see that the +/- aren't informative about Baynes's play, the key there is who was playing 100% of the time Baynes was in, and who played (poorly) when he was out. 

So my question is, is that too complex or are you just trying really hard to zig when others zag?

I did actually prove it using Embiid's +- as compared to Baynes.  Embiid's +- was much worse when Baynes was on the bench.

That doesn't mean Baynes is bad at defending Embiid, it just means that the Celtics were better (offensivelt, defensively, or both) with Horford out there as the lone big. Given that Horford was the best player on our playoff roster, that hardly comes as a surprise

If someone wants to argue that Baynes is better for the team than Horford, then +/- could be a good stat for disproving that. But it doesn't tell you how well he defended Embiid

It tells you Boston was better as a team when Baynes was on the bench though.  My argument after watching the series was because Baynes didn't have the speed or quickness to effectively guard Embiid whereas Horford did.  I'm really surprised that position is a strange one on this board.  Baynes is tough, hard nosed, and very good in the paint at guarding less mobile players, but he really struggles with the new age centers, like Embiid, that stretch the floor, have decent ball handling skills, etc.

What are you talking about? You make it sound as though Embiid was blowing past Baynes on drives. That's obviously not the case. The new age center that shoots 3's that Baynes struggles with? Really? Are you talking about Embiid who shot 5 for 21 from 3's during the 5 game series or someone else?

[playdream]

Embiid is far away from a new age center, he can't guard the perimeter and he can't really shoot 3s, he is much more a traditional center who lives in the paint on both end

A new age center is like Horford, thats why we crushed Philly without two stars

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

I don't know what this disagreement between you two proves one way or the other about baynes but if does prove a belief I have had and tried to argue, we will be fine starting with Horford as the lone Big against Embiid. I keep saying that Horford can handle Embiid just fine and that we don't have to start Baynes against any team in today's league, it's not as if Horford will be playing 48m, Baynes can knock him around when horford rests because it's almost assured, if there are no injuries, (healthy) Embiid will get more minutes than Horford because CBS doesn't play our guys many minutes if he has the choice, because we have a bench with players like Baynes and Theis who are solid NBA bigs who deserve some PT.

I believe if any player is being underrated, it is certainly Horford. I think the only reason Horford won't start as the lone Big will maybe be for preservation during the regular season and/or based on how Hayward does. I still believe Baynes won't start if everyone is healthy and playing well. Embiid wants no parts of Horford. Horford said he added weight (muscle I believe) this season, because he'll be the 5. There are only a couple centers where that matters and Embiid and Howard are really the only ones he'll see more than a couple times that fit the bill, but he changed himself for that. He obviously believes it will be his job against them or else he would have stayed the same, knowing Baynes would handle it.

[playdream]

I don't know what this disagreement between you two proves one way or the other about baynes but if does prove a belief I have had and tried to argue, we will be fine starting with Horford as the lone Big against Embiid. I keep saying that Horford can handle Embiid just fine and that we don't have to start Baynes against any team in today's league, it's not as if Horford will be playing 48m, Baynes can knock him around when horford rests because it's almost assured, if there are no injuries, (healthy) Embiid will get more minutes than Horford because CBS doesn't play our guys many minutes if he has the choice, because we have a bench with players like Baynes and Theis who are solid NBA bigs who deserve some PT.

I believe if any player is being underrated, it is certainly Horford. I think the only reason Horford won't start as the lone Big will maybe be for preservation during the regular season and/or based on how Hayward does. I still believe Baynes won't start if everyone is healthy and playing well. Embiid wants no parts of Horford. Horford said he added weight (muscle I believe) this season, because he'll be the 5. There are only a couple centers where that matters and Embiid and Howard are really the only ones he'll see more than a couple times that fit the bill, but he changed himself for that. He obviously believes it will be his job against them or else he would have stayed the same, knowing Baynes would handle it.

Horford said he added weight when does he say that?

If anything we learn this 3 preseason game is at this point neither Baynes nor Theis can play alone at 5, simply too little rim protection, so you either go big with Baynes 5 and Horford/Theis 4, or go small with Horford/Williams at 5 alone

[nickagneta]

I don't think it is a coincidence that Embiid being able to do whatever he wanted against Baynes

This is true only in your mind.  Embiid is very good and clearly better than Baynes but CBS liked what Baynes did and he helped us win the series, no matter how you twist it....

Yeah, that is a complete rewriting of history. Embiid clearly got upset with Baynes’ physicality at stages, particularly near the end of the series

Sure he got upset that the fouls were harder then Embiid felt they needed to be.  But they were still fouls and they still put Embiid on the line.  If Baynes wasn't getting beat all the time, maybe he wouldn't have needed to foul Embiid at all.

No, Embiid got upset because Baynes held him to an atrocious 1.12 points per shot after he put up 1.4 points per shot in the regular season. Unlike your plus minus metrics, this stat actually measures Baynes effect on Embiid, not Embiids effect on the Sixers / Celtics. It’s really not that difficult.

Did you actually analyze Embiid's shots when being guarded by Baynes?  Like watch video of every possession to see when Baynes was on Embiid and when Embiid was being guarded by others.  Did that analysis include end of the shot clock type shots verse normal offense shots both with and without Baynes?  Did that analysis account for double teams and if so how did it account for double teams?  Just because Embiid had 1.12 points per shot, doesn't mean Baynes held him to that, especially since Embiid was in the game a lot without Baynes even being on the floor.  Of course, as indicated Embiid and the Sixers were a lot more effective on the scoreboard (the only thing that really matters) when Baynes was in the game then when Baynes wasn't in the game.

I don't have to do that, I just have to establish that my statistics are more relevant in regards to Baynes's abilities guarding Embiid than yours are, and I've done that, given the unanimous disagreement you've met in this thread from knowledgeable posters.

With unanimous support on my side, the burden of bearing evidence in the form of video analysis and statistical segmentation is on you.

EDIT - Here's a fun starting point.  Embiid played most teams in the East 4 times- against what teams did he average lower than 1.12 PPS in those 4 games?  If Baynes can't guard Embiid, surely you'll find lots of averages below 1.12 PPS.

Wouldn't be expecting a response to this, lol. Good post. Not sure why he's being obtuse in the face of pretty irrefutable stats

his stats are nonsense for what he is arguing.  If his argument was the Celtics did a great job guarding Embiid, I'd agree.  Embiid performed mostly below his regular season averages overall in that series.  My position is, it wasn't because of Baynes, as both Embiid and the Sixers performed significantly better when Baynes was in the game, then when Baynes wasn't in the game.  Every metric you can use, supports that position.  Boston was better when Baynes wasn't guarding Embiid.

Wrong.  That's factually incorrect, or at least you haven't proven it, because it isn't the same thing as saying the Sixers were better with Baynes off the floor.  Again, when Baynes was in the game, Embiid was in the game 100% OF THAT TIME.  Embiid is great, so Philly played well. 

When Baynes was out, Embiid was in for I'd bet only 40% of that time, and so in 60% of those minutes with Baynes off the floor, the Sixers relied on Simmons who played horribly and 3 point shooters who shot 30%.  So they performed worse then, duh.  If you understand basketball, or even common sense, you see that the +/- aren't informative about Baynes's play, the key there is who was playing 100% of the time Baynes was in, and who played (poorly) when he was out. 

So my question is, is that too complex or are you just trying really hard to zig when others zag?

I did actually prove it using Embiid's +- as compared to Baynes.  Embiid's +- was much worse when Baynes was on the bench.

Ok, we'll forget for a second the issues with that +/- stats, and that you said it means the Celtics played Embiid well, Baynes guarded Embiid for 65% of the minutes Embiid played, and Baynes was a top defender in some metrics in the NBA last year.  We'll ignore all those things.

Let's look at D Rating between Embiid and Baynes in the series.  Now, Embiid was 2nd in DPOY so I'm not saying Baynes is better than Embiid at defense, I'm just saying, let's look:

Embiid D Rating (by game)

119
113
96
100
115

Baynes:

105
116
97
107
115

Embiid's D Rating average per game: 108.6
Embiid on the season: 100

Baynes's D Rating average per game: 108
Baynes on the season: 103

So, the stats from the season clearly show Embiid as the superior defender, as they should, but in this series that Boston won 4-1, Baynes's D Rating was better than that of the DPOY runner up, who Baynes was guarding for 100% of his game time, just under 24 mins per game.  Baynes was also a top defender all year, and Embiid scored over 20% lower on his points per shot. 

I think 95% of the evidence points a certain way.  You keep doing your +/- thing though.

Because Boston was better than Philadelphia, but that doesn't say Baynes was better than Embiid.  He wasn't.

Again here are Embiid's +- stats when Baynes was in and when Baynes wasn't in

Game 1 - against Baynes +1, 29 minutes - against others -7, 6 minutes
Game 2 - against Baynes +16, 21 minutes - against others -24, 16 minutes
Game 3 - against Baynes +8, 23 minutes - against others -2, 18 minutes
Game 4 - against Baynes +9, 19 minutes - against others +13, 16 minutes
Game 5 - against Baynes +6, 25 minutes - against others -3, 14 minutes

The only game Baynes was more effective against Embiid then the rest of the C's was Game 4, which the Sixers won (which is the only game where Embiid was + against everyone else - he was + every game against Baynes in the series).  In the four Boston wins, Embiid's +- was significantly worse when Baynes was on the bench.

+/- stats are extremely noisy and have a lot to do with the 5 man groups you are playing with and not necessarily an indicator of personal play.

If you want to prove your point better, do the research and find out how many of Embiids points were scored with and without Baynes guarding him and Embiid's FG% when guarded by Baynes.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

I don't know what this disagreement between you two proves one way or the other about baynes but if does prove a belief I have had and tried to argue, we will be fine starting with Horford as the lone Big against Embiid. I keep saying that Horford can handle Embiid just fine and that we don't have to start Baynes against any team in today's league, it's not as if Horford will be playing 48m, Baynes can knock him around when horford rests because it's almost assured, if there are no injuries, (healthy) Embiid will get more minutes than Horford because CBS doesn't play our guys many minutes if he has the choice, because we have a bench with players like Baynes and Theis who are solid NBA bigs who deserve some PT.

I believe if any player is being underrated, it is certainly Horford. I think the only reason Horford won't start as the lone Big will maybe be for preservation during the regular season and/or based on how Hayward does. I still believe Baynes won't start if everyone is healthy and playing well. Embiid wants no parts of Horford. Horford said he added weight (muscle I believe) this season, because he'll be the 5. There are only a couple centers where that matters and Embiid and Howard are really the only ones he'll see more than a couple times that fit the bill, but he changed himself for that. He obviously believes it will be his job against them or else he would have stayed the same, knowing Baynes would handle it.

Horford said he added weight when does he say that?

If anything we learn this 3 preseason game is at this point neither Baynes nor Theis can play alone at 5, simply too little rim protection, so you either go big with Baynes 5 and Horford/Theis 4, or go small with Horford/Williams at 5 alone

He said it during the public practice thing, before Kyrie made his big announcement. I can't stand firm on if he said weight or muscle but from memory, I'd say it was muscle.

You can believe what you want to believe, I have no problem being wrong, I still say Horford will (has) guard him just fine being the lone big (technically Hayward will be a big in that case).

[GreenWarrior]

I believe baynes should be the starter and hayward should be on the bench. it's a more traditional starting line up, the line up we're starting now I think is one that comes during the course of the game not one that should start.

plus I fully believe those guys that played together, meshed and made it so far last yr. deserve to continue where they left off. there's chemistry there let's not mess with it.

[smokeablount]

I don't think it is a coincidence that Embiid being able to do whatever he wanted against Baynes

This is true only in your mind.  Embiid is very good and clearly better than Baynes but CBS liked what Baynes did and he helped us win the series, no matter how you twist it....

Yeah, that is a complete rewriting of history. Embiid clearly got upset with Baynes’ physicality at stages, particularly near the end of the series

Sure he got upset that the fouls were harder then Embiid felt they needed to be.  But they were still fouls and they still put Embiid on the line.  If Baynes wasn't getting beat all the time, maybe he wouldn't have needed to foul Embiid at all.

No, Embiid got upset because Baynes held him to an atrocious 1.12 points per shot after he put up 1.4 points per shot in the regular season. Unlike your plus minus metrics, this stat actually measures Baynes effect on Embiid, not Embiids effect on the Sixers / Celtics. It’s really not that difficult.

Did you actually analyze Embiid's shots when being guarded by Baynes?  Like watch video of every possession to see when Baynes was on Embiid and when Embiid was being guarded by others.  Did that analysis include end of the shot clock type shots verse normal offense shots both with and without Baynes?  Did that analysis account for double teams and if so how did it account for double teams?  Just because Embiid had 1.12 points per shot, doesn't mean Baynes held him to that, especially since Embiid was in the game a lot without Baynes even being on the floor.  Of course, as indicated Embiid and the Sixers were a lot more effective on the scoreboard (the only thing that really matters) when Baynes was in the game then when Baynes wasn't in the game.

I don't have to do that, I just have to establish that my statistics are more relevant in regards to Baynes's abilities guarding Embiid than yours are, and I've done that, given the unanimous disagreement you've met in this thread from knowledgeable posters.

With unanimous support on my side, the burden of bearing evidence in the form of video analysis and statistical segmentation is on you.

EDIT - Here's a fun starting point.  Embiid played most teams in the East 4 times- against what teams did he average lower than 1.12 PPS in those 4 games?  If Baynes can't guard Embiid, surely you'll find lots of averages below 1.12 PPS.

Wouldn't be expecting a response to this, lol. Good post. Not sure why he's being obtuse in the face of pretty irrefutable stats

his stats are nonsense for what he is arguing.  If his argument was the Celtics did a great job guarding Embiid, I'd agree.  Embiid performed mostly below his regular season averages overall in that series.  My position is, it wasn't because of Baynes, as both Embiid and the Sixers performed significantly better when Baynes was in the game, then when Baynes wasn't in the game.  Every metric you can use, supports that position.  Boston was better when Baynes wasn't guarding Embiid.

Wrong.  That's factually incorrect, or at least you haven't proven it, because it isn't the same thing as saying the Sixers were better with Baynes off the floor.  Again, when Baynes was in the game, Embiid was in the game 100% OF THAT TIME.  Embiid is great, so Philly played well. 

When Baynes was out, Embiid was in for I'd bet only 40% of that time, and so in 60% of those minutes with Baynes off the floor, the Sixers relied on Simmons who played horribly and 3 point shooters who shot 30%.  So they performed worse then, duh.  If you understand basketball, or even common sense, you see that the +/- aren't informative about Baynes's play, the key there is who was playing 100% of the time Baynes was in, and who played (poorly) when he was out. 

So my question is, is that too complex or are you just trying really hard to zig when others zag?

I did actually prove it using Embiid's +- as compared to Baynes.  Embiid's +- was much worse when Baynes was on the bench.

Ok, we'll forget for a second the issues with that +/- stats, and that you said it means the Celtics played Embiid well, Baynes guarded Embiid for 65% of the minutes Embiid played, and Baynes was a top defender in some metrics in the NBA last year.  We'll ignore all those things.

Let's look at D Rating between Embiid and Baynes in the series.  Now, Embiid was 2nd in DPOY so I'm not saying Baynes is better than Embiid at defense, I'm just saying, let's look:

Embiid D Rating (by game)

119
113
96
100
115

Baynes:

105
116
97
107
115

Embiid's D Rating average per game: 108.6
Embiid on the season: 100

Baynes's D Rating average per game: 108
Baynes on the season: 103

So, the stats from the season clearly show Embiid as the superior defender, as they should, but in this series that Boston won 4-1, Baynes's D Rating was better than that of the DPOY runner up, who Baynes was guarding for 100% of his game time, just under 24 mins per game.  Baynes was also a top defender all year, and Embiid scored over 20% lower on his points per shot. 

I think 95% of the evidence points a certain way.  You keep doing your +/- thing though.

Because Boston was better than Philadelphia, but that doesn't say Baynes was better than Embiid.  He wasn't.

Again here are Embiid's +- stats when Baynes was in and when Baynes wasn't in

Game 1 - against Baynes +1, 29 minutes - against others -7, 6 minutes
Game 2 - against Baynes +16, 21 minutes - against others -24, 16 minutes
Game 3 - against Baynes +8, 23 minutes - against others -2, 18 minutes
Game 4 - against Baynes +9, 19 minutes - against others +13, 16 minutes
Game 5 - against Baynes +6, 25 minutes - against others -3, 14 minutes

The only game Baynes was more effective against Embiid then the rest of the C's was Game 4, which the Sixers won (which is the only game where Embiid was + against everyone else - he was + every game against Baynes in the series).  In the four Boston wins, Embiid's +- was significantly worse when Baynes was on the bench.

+/- stats are extremely noisy and have a lot to do with the 5 man groups you are playing with and not necessarily an indicator of personal play.

If you want to prove your point better, do the research and find out how many of Embiids points were scored with and without Baynes guarding him and Embiid's FG% when guarded by Baynes.

He doesn’t understand those issues with +/- despite all our efforts on this thread, but I think he knows if he did that work he wouldn’t be happy with the findings.

[Moranis]

I don't think it is a coincidence that Embiid being able to do whatever he wanted against Baynes

This is true only in your mind.  Embiid is very good and clearly better than Baynes but CBS liked what Baynes did and he helped us win the series, no matter how you twist it....

Yeah, that is a complete rewriting of history. Embiid clearly got upset with Baynes’ physicality at stages, particularly near the end of the series

Sure he got upset that the fouls were harder then Embiid felt they needed to be.  But they were still fouls and they still put Embiid on the line.  If Baynes wasn't getting beat all the time, maybe he wouldn't have needed to foul Embiid at all.

No, Embiid got upset because Baynes held him to an atrocious 1.12 points per shot after he put up 1.4 points per shot in the regular season. Unlike your plus minus metrics, this stat actually measures Baynes effect on Embiid, not Embiids effect on the Sixers / Celtics. It’s really not that difficult.

Did you actually analyze Embiid's shots when being guarded by Baynes?  Like watch video of every possession to see when Baynes was on Embiid and when Embiid was being guarded by others.  Did that analysis include end of the shot clock type shots verse normal offense shots both with and without Baynes?  Did that analysis account for double teams and if so how did it account for double teams?  Just because Embiid had 1.12 points per shot, doesn't mean Baynes held him to that, especially since Embiid was in the game a lot without Baynes even being on the floor.  Of course, as indicated Embiid and the Sixers were a lot more effective on the scoreboard (the only thing that really matters) when Baynes was in the game then when Baynes wasn't in the game.

I don't have to do that, I just have to establish that my statistics are more relevant in regards to Baynes's abilities guarding Embiid than yours are, and I've done that, given the unanimous disagreement you've met in this thread from knowledgeable posters.

With unanimous support on my side, the burden of bearing evidence in the form of video analysis and statistical segmentation is on you.

EDIT - Here's a fun starting point.  Embiid played most teams in the East 4 times- against what teams did he average lower than 1.12 PPS in those 4 games?  If Baynes can't guard Embiid, surely you'll find lots of averages below 1.12 PPS.

Wouldn't be expecting a response to this, lol. Good post. Not sure why he's being obtuse in the face of pretty irrefutable stats

his stats are nonsense for what he is arguing.  If his argument was the Celtics did a great job guarding Embiid, I'd agree.  Embiid performed mostly below his regular season averages overall in that series.  My position is, it wasn't because of Baynes, as both Embiid and the Sixers performed significantly better when Baynes was in the game, then when Baynes wasn't in the game.  Every metric you can use, supports that position.  Boston was better when Baynes wasn't guarding Embiid.

Wrong.  That's factually incorrect, or at least you haven't proven it, because it isn't the same thing as saying the Sixers were better with Baynes off the floor.  Again, when Baynes was in the game, Embiid was in the game 100% OF THAT TIME.  Embiid is great, so Philly played well. 

When Baynes was out, Embiid was in for I'd bet only 40% of that time, and so in 60% of those minutes with Baynes off the floor, the Sixers relied on Simmons who played horribly and 3 point shooters who shot 30%.  So they performed worse then, duh.  If you understand basketball, or even common sense, you see that the +/- aren't informative about Baynes's play, the key there is who was playing 100% of the time Baynes was in, and who played (poorly) when he was out. 

So my question is, is that too complex or are you just trying really hard to zig when others zag?

I did actually prove it using Embiid's +- as compared to Baynes.  Embiid's +- was much worse when Baynes was on the bench.

Ok, we'll forget for a second the issues with that +/- stats, and that you said it means the Celtics played Embiid well, Baynes guarded Embiid for 65% of the minutes Embiid played, and Baynes was a top defender in some metrics in the NBA last year.  We'll ignore all those things.

Let's look at D Rating between Embiid and Baynes in the series.  Now, Embiid was 2nd in DPOY so I'm not saying Baynes is better than Embiid at defense, I'm just saying, let's look:

Embiid D Rating (by game)

119
113
96
100
115

Baynes:

105
116
97
107
115

Embiid's D Rating average per game: 108.6
Embiid on the season: 100

Baynes's D Rating average per game: 108
Baynes on the season: 103

So, the stats from the season clearly show Embiid as the superior defender, as they should, but in this series that Boston won 4-1, Baynes's D Rating was better than that of the DPOY runner up, who Baynes was guarding for 100% of his game time, just under 24 mins per game.  Baynes was also a top defender all year, and Embiid scored over 20% lower on his points per shot. 

I think 95% of the evidence points a certain way.  You keep doing your +/- thing though.

Because Boston was better than Philadelphia, but that doesn't say Baynes was better than Embiid.  He wasn't.

Again here are Embiid's +- stats when Baynes was in and when Baynes wasn't in

Game 1 - against Baynes +1, 29 minutes - against others -7, 6 minutes
Game 2 - against Baynes +16, 21 minutes - against others -24, 16 minutes
Game 3 - against Baynes +8, 23 minutes - against others -2, 18 minutes
Game 4 - against Baynes +9, 19 minutes - against others +13, 16 minutes
Game 5 - against Baynes +6, 25 minutes - against others -3, 14 minutes

The only game Baynes was more effective against Embiid then the rest of the C's was Game 4, which the Sixers won (which is the only game where Embiid was + against everyone else - he was + every game against Baynes in the series).  In the four Boston wins, Embiid's +- was significantly worse when Baynes was on the bench.

+/- stats are extremely noisy and have a lot to do with the 5 man groups you are playing with and not necessarily an indicator of personal play.

If you want to prove your point better, do the research and find out how many of Embiids points were scored with and without Baynes guarding him and Embiid's FG% when guarded by Baynes.

Sure, but what do you do with all of the double teams both when Embiid shoots and when Embiid passed?  How do you account for fouls, both shooting and non-shooting? 

At the end of the day, Boston was significantly worse when Baynes was in the game in that series. 

[Moranis]

I don't think it is a coincidence that Embiid being able to do whatever he wanted against Baynes

This is true only in your mind.  Embiid is very good and clearly better than Baynes but CBS liked what Baynes did and he helped us win the series, no matter how you twist it....

Yeah, that is a complete rewriting of history. Embiid clearly got upset with Baynes’ physicality at stages, particularly near the end of the series

Sure he got upset that the fouls were harder then Embiid felt they needed to be.  But they were still fouls and they still put Embiid on the line.  If Baynes wasn't getting beat all the time, maybe he wouldn't have needed to foul Embiid at all.

No, Embiid got upset because Baynes held him to an atrocious 1.12 points per shot after he put up 1.4 points per shot in the regular season. Unlike your plus minus metrics, this stat actually measures Baynes effect on Embiid, not Embiids effect on the Sixers / Celtics. It’s really not that difficult.

Did you actually analyze Embiid's shots when being guarded by Baynes?  Like watch video of every possession to see when Baynes was on Embiid and when Embiid was being guarded by others.  Did that analysis include end of the shot clock type shots verse normal offense shots both with and without Baynes?  Did that analysis account for double teams and if so how did it account for double teams?  Just because Embiid had 1.12 points per shot, doesn't mean Baynes held him to that, especially since Embiid was in the game a lot without Baynes even being on the floor.  Of course, as indicated Embiid and the Sixers were a lot more effective on the scoreboard (the only thing that really matters) when Baynes was in the game then when Baynes wasn't in the game.

I don't have to do that, I just have to establish that my statistics are more relevant in regards to Baynes's abilities guarding Embiid than yours are, and I've done that, given the unanimous disagreement you've met in this thread from knowledgeable posters.

With unanimous support on my side, the burden of bearing evidence in the form of video analysis and statistical segmentation is on you.

EDIT - Here's a fun starting point.  Embiid played most teams in the East 4 times- against what teams did he average lower than 1.12 PPS in those 4 games?  If Baynes can't guard Embiid, surely you'll find lots of averages below 1.12 PPS.

Wouldn't be expecting a response to this, lol. Good post. Not sure why he's being obtuse in the face of pretty irrefutable stats

his stats are nonsense for what he is arguing.  If his argument was the Celtics did a great job guarding Embiid, I'd agree.  Embiid performed mostly below his regular season averages overall in that series.  My position is, it wasn't because of Baynes, as both Embiid and the Sixers performed significantly better when Baynes was in the game, then when Baynes wasn't in the game.  Every metric you can use, supports that position.  Boston was better when Baynes wasn't guarding Embiid.

Wrong.  That's factually incorrect, or at least you haven't proven it, because it isn't the same thing as saying the Sixers were better with Baynes off the floor.  Again, when Baynes was in the game, Embiid was in the game 100% OF THAT TIME.  Embiid is great, so Philly played well. 

When Baynes was out, Embiid was in for I'd bet only 40% of that time, and so in 60% of those minutes with Baynes off the floor, the Sixers relied on Simmons who played horribly and 3 point shooters who shot 30%.  So they performed worse then, duh.  If you understand basketball, or even common sense, you see that the +/- aren't informative about Baynes's play, the key there is who was playing 100% of the time Baynes was in, and who played (poorly) when he was out. 

So my question is, is that too complex or are you just trying really hard to zig when others zag?

I did actually prove it using Embiid's +- as compared to Baynes.  Embiid's +- was much worse when Baynes was on the bench.

That doesn't mean Baynes is bad at defending Embiid, it just means that the Celtics were better (offensivelt, defensively, or both) with Horford out there as the lone big. Given that Horford was the best player on our playoff roster, that hardly comes as a surprise

If someone wants to argue that Baynes is better for the team than Horford, then +/- could be a good stat for disproving that. But it doesn't tell you how well he defended Embiid

Of course Baynes was in the game a lot with Horford.  The start of every game and every half in that series, they were both on the floor and it was generally around 6 minutes each time (though Baynes didn't even play in OT in game 3 or basically the last 9 minutes of the 4th quarter).  They also played together at other times.  So you could reasonably say at least half of Baynes time he was playing with Horford.

[Big333223]

I was reading a piece on Embiid on The Ringer and, fwiw, Jonathan Tjarks specifically brings up Baynes' defense on Embiid in the playoffs as a bit of an exposure for Embiid:

Embiid relied on overpowering opponents last season, and he didn’t have a Plan B when Aron Baynes stood him up in the post in the playoffs.

https://www.theringer.com/2018/10/5/17936026/star-track-joel-embiid

This definitely matches what I saw in the playoffs.