The True Value of BBD ?

[Casperian]

All valid points.  

However, my point is still that people on this site over-hype (and over-value) BBD.  My gut feeling is that he's not as important of a cog as others have stated.

Well, maybe you´re not around that long, but 6 months ago, it was the complete opposite.
The terms "over-hype" and "over-value" are pretty subjective. As I said, for the most part I´ve experienced the opposite.

You can say that the statistics are very limited, but if you step back even further you will see that regardless of the matchups the GENERAL THEME is that BBD in a lineup does not necessarily make it better.  I only selected two separate lineups to compare the two players.  Again, if you go to all lineups with this past year, replacing BBD would likely result in a benefit.  Btw, 361 minutes is not a small sample for the season.  That lineup was the 2nd most used lineup by the C's and had a net result of -39 points, and a losing record.  

Again, you´re comparing BBD to Kevin Garnett, MVP and DPOY.
And you "compared" line-ups, which means that both minutes have to be enough to prove your point. Even 360 minutes is less than 5 minutes per game in a 82-game-season.

No matter how you sugar-coat it with nice words, your argument is non-valid.
All your stats do is prove what you want them to prove.

[Mr October]

Davis is ahead of Scal on the depth chart. If the C's resign Davis I can see a rough minutes breakdown of:

KG 32
Perkins 28
Wallace 28
Davis 8 ..... now mind that KG, Perkins and Wallace will probably each need to miss some games due to injuries - say 10 each. Then Davis's MPG hop up to 15-20 over the course of the season.

He can backup both the 4 and 5 fairly effectively, and the C's don't have many other options. Bass signed for 18/4. Davis is probably worth that.

[Chris]

I'm sure that BBD's numbers look better when he plays center alongside Garnett than when he plays power forward alongside Perkins.

Yup, that was my first thought too.  Davis' productivity has very little to do with the position he is playing (which is often doesn't mean a thing, because the C's mix and match bigs for matchups, and generally don't differentiate much between a Center and PF), it has to do with who he is playing next to.  Perk and Davis as a combo is really a pretty terrible match against most teams, because of their lack of offense, and lack of mobility.  But if you pair either of them with a more mobile, and offensively diverse player like Garnett, or Powe, then it works out much better.  

I actually think a combo of Wallace and Davis coming off the bench would be a very nice combination, regardless of who you want to call the center, and who you want to call the PF.

[GKC]

I agree with most of the opinions, however I have one main problem with matching a high offer for big baby.

Most teams looking for Big Baby such as Detroit and Utah are looking for their first big off the bench. Us however already have Rasheed, who is expected to at least play 20-25 minutes off the bench.

For a conservative estimate, lets say KG and Perk plays 32 minutes and Rasheed plays 20. For the frontcourt rotation (unless we go big at times), that takes up 84 minutes a game.

Do we really want to pay BBD 3-4 million to only play 12 minutes a game (+injury or foul minutes)?

[paintitgreen]

That's all fair. I'm using my eyes to judge. Posey was better in 08 than Davis was in 09, that's what I saw. That was my response to one statement - that Davis was better and therefore people should be looking to sign Davis for just as much money as we wanted to sign Posey for. And in my opinion, Davis wasn't better, and isn't worth as much RIGHT NOW as Posey is. It's clearly a matter of opinion, I'll just leave it there. It's really not what this topic is about so as much as I want to go further, I'll say let's agree to disagree and focus on the situation at hand. Posey's not coming back - but should Davis?

I already said that I think Davis should be extended at anything up to $4 million. While that comes to $8 mil with the tax (I hate saying that since I think it's unfair to say Davis's contract counts for double but Garnett's just is what it is - everybody's contract is more expensive than it seems when the tax is in play, not just the most recent additions), I think it brings us good value because he's a young asset, something we don't have much of.

I'll go back to the Posey situation for a comparison. Unlike in the Posey situation, we have picked somebody up who can do much of what Davis did for us - bodying up on real centers and floor spacing, but Wallace spaces the floor and defends better. Last year, we just never picked up anybody who could do the things Posey did - give us defensive minutes on bigger perimeter players while keeping defenses honest with outside shooting and allow us to go small.

However, also unlike the Posey situation, where we were dealing with a player who would bring us diminishing returns, here we're dealing with a young guy who can give us increasing returns.

This year, based on bringing in Wallace, Davis seems more expendable than Posey did last year. Losing Posey cost us a core rotation player. Losing Davis probably wouldn't do that. Most likely it costs us a role player who might be valuable in case of injury.

But that doesn't justify letting him walk in my opinion. I just say, why not hold onto a guy you know can help in case of injury and foul trouble, and who you know fits in? Tim and Bud made good points about how even if I think Posey was better, Davis did certain things that nobody else on our roster could have done. What if we get in that situation again? Why not prepare for it?

Davis is a solid - not great or even above average - improving young power forward who's a bit undersized in height but bulky enough in weight to pound with bigger guys. He has rebounding liabilities that make him somebody you don't want to rely on, but he still brings something to the table. Why let him go? We need young assets like him, either to step in if/when we need or to bring in somebody at a position of need down the line?

I just wanted to reiterate those points because my defense of Posey seems to have overshadowed my defense of keeping Davis. I don't think Davis will be as essential a player this year as he was last year. But I think he's an affordable young big man to have, and while a lot of guys are better than him at what he does (i.e., Bass, Landry, Hayes, Millsap), we can't get them. We can get/keep Davis. I say do it. He brings value, don't let value walk when we have limited ability to bring more value in.

[Spilling Green Dye]

[/quote]

Yup, that was my first thought too.  Davis' productivity has very little to do with the position he is playing (which is often doesn't mean a thing, because the C's mix and match bigs for matchups, and generally don't differentiate much between a Center and PF), it has to do with who he is playing next to.  
[/quote]

If it has to do with who he is playing next to, then why is it that most every lineup he steps into is not as good as if Scal, Powe, or any other player stepped into it?  My overall point is that the theme remains the same.  He should not be overpaid for, and contrary to what people think $4-5million/year will most definitely negatively affect the Celtics budget next year... especially considering he's a backup to a backup.

[ben]

I don't think baby will help us much this year.  I'd rather a proven veteran like Ben Wallace.  I'd also rather Powe. 

[paintitgreen]

He should not be overpaid for, and contrary to what people think $4-5million/year will most definitely negatively affect the Celtics budget next year... especially considering he's a backup to a backup.

By next year do you mean in 09-10 or 10-11? I can see the latter, but I can't see how it affects the former, since we don't exactly have other money to spend anyway. Maybe we hold off on using the LLE and forego a minimum signing, but I just don't see anything out there we could get for that money who's superior to what Baby will bring us, even if he is overpaid for his role.

Like I said, I'd offer him 2 years, $5-6 million now so he becomes an unrestricted free agent in a couple years while making some money in the short term. And it doesn't hit the $4/5 level you're talking about.

I don't think baby will help us much this year.  I'd rather a proven veteran like Ben Wallace.  I'd also rather Powe. 

I'd love to get Powe back, but I do have to disagree. Ben Wallace is proven to be finished. Powe doesn't have trade value (Davis does) and may not be able to play even those 8 minutes we're talking about at any point next year.

I'd rather have Powe than much of our dead weight, but Davis isn't dead weight.

[BballTim]

If it has to do with who he is playing next to, then why is it that most every lineup he steps into is not as good as if Scal, Powe, or any other player stepped into it?  My overall point is that the theme remains the same.  He should not be overpaid for, and contrary to what people think $4-5million/year will most definitely negatively affect the Celtics budget next year... especially considering he's a backup to a backup.

  Because they're stepping into the lineup against different pllayers, and they're playing at different points in the game.

[Chris]

If it has to do with who he is playing next to, then why is it that most every lineup he steps into is not as good as if Scal, Powe, or any other player stepped into it?  My overall point is that the theme remains the same.  He should not be overpaid for, and contrary to what people think $4-5million/year will most definitely negatively affect the Celtics budget next year... especially considering he's a backup to a backup.

Is that true?  Considering he did not play much with KG or even Powe after about halfway through his season (when his shot started to come around), I don't think the stats are very valid for making that statement.  

I do agree that he is not worth $4-5 million on this team.  But I just think you are taking liberties with the stats, and making conclusions that are not really accurate IMO.

In the words of Mark Twain, "There are liars, [dang]ed liars and statisticians"

[Casperian]

If it has to do with who he is playing next to, then why is it that most every lineup he steps into is not as good as if Scal, Powe, or any other player stepped into it?  My overall point is that the theme remains the same.  He should not be overpaid for, and contrary to what people think $4-5million/year will most definitely negatively affect the Celtics budget next year... especially considering he's a backup to a backup.

Because he completely changed his game in one off-season. The jumper he made against Orlando wasn`t there in his rookie season. Davis was abysmal in the beginning, but excellent at the end of the season.

I guess you just want the best for the Celtics, but your argument is complete nonsense, imo. Comparing lineups is in itself not a viable measuring tool (and certainly not with such a small sample size), as the games have to be played, not simulated, if you catch my drift. There are matchups, day-to-day form, injuries, development, intangibles, Doc´s strategies and what he wants Baby to do, and so on and so forth.

[GKC]

I personally think the bottom line is, since this is a 10-15 minute player (and recognize we will have KG, Sheed and Perk for a while, so this person will be a 10-15 minute player for a few seasons), can we get something better than BBD at a lower cost?

If the market dictates that Chris Wilcox for example, only demands 5 million over 2 years, whereas BBD might want 12 million over 4 years, do we still want to match?

We need to consider alternatives before deciding big baby's worth, because it's the market that determines worth and other PF's are part of that.

[Spilling Green Dye]

Is that true?  Considering he did not play much with KG or even Powe after about halfway through his season (when his shot started to come around), I don't think the stats are very valid for making that statement.  

I do agree that he is not worth $4-5 million on this team.  But I just think you are taking liberties with the stats, and making conclusions that are not really accurate IMO.

In the words of Mark Twain, "There are liars, [dang]ed liars and statisticians"

I am very reluctant to place much emphasis on statistics because you're right, they can be manipulated.  But I felt frustrated that what my instincts were telling me were different than what many people here saw.  On the flip side of stats, I have a difficult time finding any general themed stats that show my instincs were wrong.  

Paintitgreen:  I was referring to next years ('10-'11) salaries.  Having BBD at 4-5mil / year as a 5th big does not make much sense when Rondo and Perkins' contracts are coming up.  Now is the time to save some $.  If it were possible to give BBD a 1-year contract I'd be all for it... but I doubt it is.

[GKC]

Is that true?  Considering he did not play much with KG or even Powe after about halfway through his season (when his shot started to come around), I don't think the stats are very valid for making that statement.  

I do agree that he is not worth $4-5 million on this team.  But I just think you are taking liberties with the stats, and making conclusions that are not really accurate IMO.

In the words of Mark Twain, "There are liars, [dang]ed liars and statisticians"

I am very reluctant to place much emphasis on statistics because you're right, they can be manipulated.  But I felt frustrated that what my instincts were telling me were different than what many people here saw.  On the flip side of stats, I have a difficult time finding any general themed stats that show my instincs were wrong.  

Paintitgreen:  I was referring to next years ('10-'11) salaries.  Having BBD at 4-5mil / year as a 5th big does not make much sense when Rondo and Perkins' contracts are coming up.  Now is the time to save some $.  If it were possible to give BBD a 1-year contract I'd be all for it... but I doubt it is.

I agree with the stats comment, only because most people don't have the information available, and BBD noticably improved as the season went on.

Again though, 3-4 million for a player who may not top 20 minutes a game may not be worth it.

[fairweatherfan]

In the words of Mark Twain, "There are liars, [dang]ed liars and statisticians"

"Lies, [dang]ed lies, and statistics" and it was a Benjamin Disraeli quote that Twain popularized.  And there's a big difference between the type of stats that get thrown around in the public realm and legitimate statistical analysis.  I've worked with and am friends with a lot of statisticians and every last one of them has been absolutely OCD about proper methodology and drawing valid conclusions.

Back on topic though, while BBD will be the 4th big man next year if we sign him, he'll be crucial if any of our bigs are injured.  More importantly, Sheed is not a part of our long-term plans, but Baby would be.  We need to develop a core going forward as well.  At a few million a year, a signing would put us a big baby step closer to that goal too.