Author Topic: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"  (Read 2053 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #30 on: April 15, 2019, 03:07:43 PM »

Offline Ogaju

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10438
  • Tommy Points: 1113
Quote
I'm gonna say Paul, because I just went into my analytics group the other day and I asked them that question," Ainge said Wednesday morning during his weekly interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub's "Toucher & Rich."

That's right: Not only did Ainge not dismiss the debate, he enlisted the Celtics' analytics team to settle it. Here's how:

"We have an analysis called Adjusted Plus/Minus," Ainge said. "That's probably the best number you can come up with for a player's impact in the game. ... (Pierce and Wade) were very high in the prime of their career in adjusted plus/minus, meaning they were in the 10-11 range per 100 possessions, which is enormous."

According to Ainge, Wade was "slightly better" from age 20 to 29 than Pierce, with an Adjusted Plus/Minus of 6.4 compared to Pierce's 5.4. But if you look at both players in their 30s...

"Pierce was actually better than he was in 20s," Ainge said. "Pierce was 5.8, and Dwyane Wade was minus-0.4.

"And that was my initial feeling: that Pierce was a little more consistent for longer than Dwyane."

So, there you have it. Ainge and his stat geeks ran the numbers, and they chose the Celtics star over the Heat legend.

"I think everybody came to the conclusion that they would have to give the nod to Pierce, on our staff," Ainge said.

Remember the saying...

There are three types of lies...lies, darn lies, and statistics. Wade had the better career, period.

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #31 on: April 15, 2019, 03:57:10 PM »

Offline gift

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1969
  • Tommy Points: 180
Quote
I'm gonna say Paul, because I just went into my analytics group the other day and I asked them that question," Ainge said Wednesday morning during his weekly interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub's "Toucher & Rich."

That's right: Not only did Ainge not dismiss the debate, he enlisted the Celtics' analytics team to settle it. Here's how:

"We have an analysis called Adjusted Plus/Minus," Ainge said. "That's probably the best number you can come up with for a player's impact in the game. ... (Pierce and Wade) were very high in the prime of their career in adjusted plus/minus, meaning they were in the 10-11 range per 100 possessions, which is enormous."

According to Ainge, Wade was "slightly better" from age 20 to 29 than Pierce, with an Adjusted Plus/Minus of 6.4 compared to Pierce's 5.4. But if you look at both players in their 30s...

"Pierce was actually better than he was in 20s," Ainge said. "Pierce was 5.8, and Dwyane Wade was minus-0.4.

"And that was my initial feeling: that Pierce was a little more consistent for longer than Dwyane."

So, there you have it. Ainge and his stat geeks ran the numbers, and they chose the Celtics star over the Heat legend.

"I think everybody came to the conclusion that they would have to give the nod to Pierce, on our staff," Ainge said.

Remember the saying...

There are three types of lies...lies, darn lies, and statistics. Wade had the better career, period.

Hey, don't criticize the type of statistical evaluation that drafted us Kelly Olynyk over Giannis.

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #32 on: April 15, 2019, 10:22:53 PM »

Online Somebody

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2409
  • Tommy Points: 69
  • KANSEI DORIFUTO
Quote
I'm gonna say Paul, because I just went into my analytics group the other day and I asked them that question," Ainge said Wednesday morning during his weekly interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub's "Toucher & Rich."

That's right: Not only did Ainge not dismiss the debate, he enlisted the Celtics' analytics team to settle it. Here's how:

"We have an analysis called Adjusted Plus/Minus," Ainge said. "That's probably the best number you can come up with for a player's impact in the game. ... (Pierce and Wade) were very high in the prime of their career in adjusted plus/minus, meaning they were in the 10-11 range per 100 possessions, which is enormous."

According to Ainge, Wade was "slightly better" from age 20 to 29 than Pierce, with an Adjusted Plus/Minus of 6.4 compared to Pierce's 5.4. But if you look at both players in their 30s...

"Pierce was actually better than he was in 20s," Ainge said. "Pierce was 5.8, and Dwyane Wade was minus-0.4.

"And that was my initial feeling: that Pierce was a little more consistent for longer than Dwyane."

So, there you have it. Ainge and his stat geeks ran the numbers, and they chose the Celtics star over the Heat legend.

"I think everybody came to the conclusion that they would have to give the nod to Pierce, on our staff," Ainge said.

Remember the saying...

There are three types of lies...lies, darn lies, and statistics. Wade had the better career, period.

Hey, don't criticize the type of statistical evaluation that drafted us Kelly Olynyk over Giannis.
To be fair Giannis had really little exposure back then in Greece and the Celtics scouted him out multiple times, so it's not like they completely whiffed on him lol.

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #33 on: April 15, 2019, 11:32:02 PM »

Offline CptZoogs

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 366
  • Tommy Points: 41
Quote
I'm gonna say Paul, because I just went into my analytics group the other day and I asked them that question," Ainge said Wednesday morning during his weekly interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub's "Toucher & Rich."

That's right: Not only did Ainge not dismiss the debate, he enlisted the Celtics' analytics team to settle it. Here's how:

"We have an analysis called Adjusted Plus/Minus," Ainge said. "That's probably the best number you can come up with for a player's impact in the game. ... (Pierce and Wade) were very high in the prime of their career in adjusted plus/minus, meaning they were in the 10-11 range per 100 possessions, which is enormous."

According to Ainge, Wade was "slightly better" from age 20 to 29 than Pierce, with an Adjusted Plus/Minus of 6.4 compared to Pierce's 5.4. But if you look at both players in their 30s...

"Pierce was actually better than he was in 20s," Ainge said. "Pierce was 5.8, and Dwyane Wade was minus-0.4.

"And that was my initial feeling: that Pierce was a little more consistent for longer than Dwyane."

So, there you have it. Ainge and his stat geeks ran the numbers, and they chose the Celtics star over the Heat legend.

"I think everybody came to the conclusion that they would have to give the nod to Pierce, on our staff," Ainge said.

Remember the saying...

There are three types of lies...lies, darn lies, and statistics. Wade had the better career, period.

Hey, don't criticize the type of statistical evaluation that drafted us Kelly Olynyk over Giannis.
To be fair Giannis had really little exposure back then in Greece and the Celtics scouted him out multiple times, so it's not like they completely whiffed on him lol.

Extrapolation always comes with a larger degree of risk.

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #34 on: April 16, 2019, 06:25:43 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21845
  • Tommy Points: 1041
Quote
I'm gonna say Paul, because I just went into my analytics group the other day and I asked them that question," Ainge said Wednesday morning during his weekly interview with 98.5 The Sports Hub's "Toucher & Rich."

That's right: Not only did Ainge not dismiss the debate, he enlisted the Celtics' analytics team to settle it. Here's how:

"We have an analysis called Adjusted Plus/Minus," Ainge said. "That's probably the best number you can come up with for a player's impact in the game. ... (Pierce and Wade) were very high in the prime of their career in adjusted plus/minus, meaning they were in the 10-11 range per 100 possessions, which is enormous."

According to Ainge, Wade was "slightly better" from age 20 to 29 than Pierce, with an Adjusted Plus/Minus of 6.4 compared to Pierce's 5.4. But if you look at both players in their 30s...

"Pierce was actually better than he was in 20s," Ainge said. "Pierce was 5.8, and Dwyane Wade was minus-0.4.

"And that was my initial feeling: that Pierce was a little more consistent for longer than Dwyane."

So, there you have it. Ainge and his stat geeks ran the numbers, and they chose the Celtics star over the Heat legend.

"I think everybody came to the conclusion that they would have to give the nod to Pierce, on our staff," Ainge said.

Remember the saying...

There are three types of lies...lies, darn lies, and statistics. Wade had the better career, period.

Hey, don't criticize the type of statistical evaluation that drafted us Kelly Olynyk over Giannis.
To be fair Giannis had really little exposure back then in Greece and the Celtics scouted him out multiple times, so it's not like they completely whiffed on him lol.
Sure but KO was never going to get much better than he was as a rookie and that has borne out to be true.  KO always projected as a quality rotational player and not much more.  He was the safer pick, but in that spot, Boston should have been trying to hit the home run even if it meant striking out, especially trading up.  You don't trade up for a player like KO.  That is really the big problem I've always had with the KO pick, is Boston moved up to draft him.

To get us back on track, I'm fine with Pierce.  He was certainly a better fit with Allen and Garnett than Wade would have been, but Wade was the better player with the better career.

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #35 on: April 16, 2019, 09:23:59 AM »

Offline Silky

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1923
  • Tommy Points: 110
Even by his own numbers he is really just saying Pierce was better for longer, but Wade had a higher peak.  Also a very good chance that number is skewed by Pierce playing on better teams far longer into his 30's than Wade did.

Pretty much.  I dislike Wade but he gets the edge if we are picking either player at their absolute peak.  There's no way Pierce could have ever lead a title run that is equivalent to Wade's in 2005-06.  Wade could take a team further as the clear cut best player.

While I suspect that you’re right, it’s impossible to say. In Wade’s run, he still had Shaq, who averaged 18 points, 10 rebounds and 60% shooting in those playoffs.

Pierce never had that inside presence or efficiency in a teammate. Could Prime Pierce have won a title with Sub-Prime Shaq? I think there’s a strong possibility.

Pierce was a superior shooter, so I would think, that just swapping Wade and Pierce, that both Shaq and he would have had better numbers.

Also, if the refs would have pocketed their whistles a little, Wade would have failed that playoffs.
Dallas
PG:Kemba/Brunson/Barea  SG:Brogdon/Snell/Broekhoff  SF: Doncic/Batum/Finley-smith  PF: White/Kleber/Dirk  C: Jordan/Powell/Sejri

Bucks
G-Hill, Bledsoe, Matthews, Snell, DiVincenzo, Connaughton, Brown F-Greek, Middleton, Illyasova, Smith, Maker, Spalding, Wood C- Lopez,

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #36 on: April 16, 2019, 09:35:01 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • Global Moderator
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21845
  • Tommy Points: 1041
Even by his own numbers he is really just saying Pierce was better for longer, but Wade had a higher peak.  Also a very good chance that number is skewed by Pierce playing on better teams far longer into his 30's than Wade did.

Pretty much.  I dislike Wade but he gets the edge if we are picking either player at their absolute peak.  There's no way Pierce could have ever lead a title run that is equivalent to Wade's in 2005-06.  Wade could take a team further as the clear cut best player.

While I suspect that you’re right, it’s impossible to say. In Wade’s run, he still had Shaq, who averaged 18 points, 10 rebounds and 60% shooting in those playoffs.

Pierce never had that inside presence or efficiency in a teammate. Could Prime Pierce have won a title with Sub-Prime Shaq? I think there’s a strong possibility.

Pierce was a superior shooter, so I would think, that just swapping Wade and Pierce, that both Shaq and he would have had better numbers.

Also, if the refs would have pocketed their whistles a little, Wade would have failed that playoffs.
That team needed Wade's superior ability to get to the hole and create shots that way.  Being a better shooter doesn't always mean a better fit and this is one of those situations where I think that fit.  That Heat team really had no one that could create his own shot except for Wade (and Shaq if you got him the ball down in the deep post) and that is absolutely what that team needed.

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #37 on: April 16, 2019, 09:41:56 AM »

Offline IDreamCeltics

  • NCE
  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1200
  • Tommy Points: 115
Even by his own numbers he is really just saying Pierce was better for longer, but Wade had a higher peak.  Also a very good chance that number is skewed by Pierce playing on better teams far longer into his 30's than Wade did.
Since when does playing on good teams helps ones individual stats?
It is the exact opposite.

Just a few examples:
Booker would play 17 mins and average 8 points here. Not 35 and 27.
M. Jordan had his best statistical years when he didn't win.
Manu was the 3rd best guard of his generation, he averaged 15. Elsewhere (when he wasn't in SAS) he got 26.
Pierce averaged better numbers when we were tanking.
RW got his TD's when Thunder stopped to exist as a contender.
I don't know exactly what is in his adjusted +- stat, but +- in general is pretty team dependent.

It's basically another name for ESPN's Real plus minus

Since we know Danny's looking at it here are some Celtics' rankings from this year in real plus/minus:

Kyrie Irving: 17th overall, 6th among point guards
Al Horford: 21st overall, 6th among centers
Marcus Smart: 38th overall, 12th among point guards
Jason Tatum: 85th overall, 14th among small forwards
Gordon Hayward: 126th overall, 24th among small forwards

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #38 on: April 16, 2019, 09:49:12 AM »

Offline Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38772
  • Tommy Points: -27376
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Even by his own numbers he is really just saying Pierce was better for longer, but Wade had a higher peak.  Also a very good chance that number is skewed by Pierce playing on better teams far longer into his 30's than Wade did.
Since when does playing on good teams helps ones individual stats?
It is the exact opposite.

Just a few examples:
Booker would play 17 mins and average 8 points here. Not 35 and 27.
M. Jordan had his best statistical years when he didn't win.
Manu was the 3rd best guard of his generation, he averaged 15. Elsewhere (when he wasn't in SAS) he got 26.
Pierce averaged better numbers when we were tanking.
RW got his TD's when Thunder stopped to exist as a contender.
I don't know exactly what is in his adjusted +- stat, but +- in general is pretty team dependent.

It's basically another name for ESPN's Real plus minus

Since we know Danny's looking at it here are some Celtics' rankings from this year in real plus/minus:

Kyrie Irving: 17th overall, 6th among point guards
Al Horford: 21st overall, 6th among centers
Marcus Smart: 38th overall, 12th among point guards
Jason Tatum: 85th overall, 14th among small forwards
Gordon Hayward: 126th overall, 24th among small forwards

I think they’re different metric. Real +/- uses things like age, height, and prior years’ statistics in its formula.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #39 on: April 16, 2019, 11:26:15 AM »

Offline Csfan1984

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6318
  • Tommy Points: 111
Pierce did more with less and was a better teammate. I'd say he had a better career in some regards but Wade was a phenomenal talent when healthy.
Trade deadline mock team: Celtics,
Irving, Rozier, Wanna
Smart, Robinson, Dozier
Tatum, Morris, Semi
Griffin, Theis, Yab
Horford, Baynes, Williams

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #40 on: April 16, 2019, 11:41:15 AM »

Offline playdream

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1663
  • Tommy Points: 88
Danny Ainge speaking the TRUTH

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #41 on: April 16, 2019, 12:08:03 PM »

Offline GreenEnvy

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3965
  • Tommy Points: 974
Even by his own numbers he is really just saying Pierce was better for longer, but Wade had a higher peak.  Also a very good chance that number is skewed by Pierce playing on better teams far longer into his 30's than Wade did.

Pretty much.  I dislike Wade but he gets the edge if we are picking either player at their absolute peak.  There's no way Pierce could have ever lead a title run that is equivalent to Wade's in 2005-06.  Wade could take a team further as the clear cut best player.

While I suspect that you’re right, it’s impossible to say. In Wade’s run, he still had Shaq, who averaged 18 points, 10 rebounds and 60% shooting in those playoffs.

Pierce never had that inside presence or efficiency in a teammate. Could Prime Pierce have won a title with Sub-Prime Shaq? I think there’s a strong possibility.

Pierce was a superior shooter, so I would think, that just swapping Wade and Pierce, that both Shaq and he would have had better numbers.

Also, if the refs would have pocketed their whistles a little, Wade would have failed that playoffs.
That team needed Wade's superior ability to get to the hole and create shots that way.  Being a better shooter doesn't always mean a better fit and this is one of those situations where I think that fit.  That Heat team really had no one that could create his own shot except for Wade (and Shaq if you got him the ball down in the deep post) and that is absolutely what that team needed.

Not sure why you’re getting at, Pierce in his prime got to the line upwards of 9-10 times per game, so he was clearly as effective at getting to the hole too (and converted at the line at a better clip).

Pierce also created his own shot rather easily for the majority of his career, but especially in his prime.

He may not have attacked the rim as often as Wade, but he didn’t have to. He was a threat from everywhere, whereas Wade was not. Shaq’s passing ability would have made life a lot easier for Pierce to get some easy buckets and open looks. And of course Pierce stretches the floor better, allowing Shaw more room to operate before getting doubled.

Not very hard to imagine a 2006 Pierce - who averaged nearly 27/7/5 on a .583 TS% - would have been able to do the same with Shaq and the Heat.
I AM A CELTIC

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #42 on: April 16, 2019, 12:43:29 PM »

Offline Green-18

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1133
  • Tommy Points: 121
Pierce did more with less and was a better teammate. I'd say he had a better career in some regards but Wade was a phenomenal talent when healthy.

I'd say they had roughly the same success when  you look at each players weakest teams.

Prior to the big three era, Pierce had Antoine in every season that the Celtics finished above .500.  The only time Pierce made the playoffs without Toine was in 2003-04, where the Celtics grabbed the 8th seed with only 36 wins.  Wade never had a supporting cast that was this bad.

Wade's best example of winning without talent was in 2008-09 and 2009-10.  The 2009 Heat managed to take the Hawks to 7 games with an inferior but more experienced roster.  Wade had a past his prime Jermaine O'Neal and rookie Michael Beasley to provide scoring help.  2010 was probably Wade's best overall season as the sole leader of a team.  The same roster managed to win 47 games and got bounced by our 2010 Celtics in 5 games.  Wade went off in most of those games, but the Celtics completely shut down the rest of their team.  The highlight of that series was the Pierce game winner on the road in game 3  8)

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #43 on: April 16, 2019, 01:09:51 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30037
  • Tommy Points: 2274
Just THE TRUTH

nothing but " THE TRUTH "

Amen

Re: Ainge: "Pierce had a better career then Wade"
« Reply #44 on: April 16, 2019, 01:23:56 PM »

Offline GreenFaith1819

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13120
  • Tommy Points: 2493
  • Welcome Kemba!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MMzd40i8TfA

Jack said it, so that's that.
Marcus Smart "Impacts Winning." Boston Celtics Coach Brad Stevens

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required