First of all: I prefer winning games than playing well. We just need to win to reach the playoffs, not playing good. But since we have a positive record (9-8) after the trade that got us Salmons and Miller, does that mean we are playing better than before? I came up with this question because I have the feeling that not everything got better. And my suspicious became true when I started to make some equations.
If I recall, the trade with Sacramento happened on January 18th, the day we played at Milwaukee. So, I didn't included that game on the equations - because Noce and Gooden did not played -, neither the Denver game, since the new guys only played after that one, in Indiana.
Now, before we got Salmons and Miller - the others don't really count and Tim Thomas was injured for a few games -, we averaged 100,26 points and conceded near 102,06 per game, in 53 games. Since the one in Indiana, played on January 22nd, we averaged 103,24 points and allowed the opponent to score 103,29 per game, in 17 games.
We got fire power with the trade and are averaging almost 2,98 points more than before. Nothing strange there, since Salmons exceed our expectations and we new Miller could score. But, as strange as it may seem - since we all kept criticizing Noc and Gooden for not playing D -, our defense is worst (1,23 points worst). I know that most of the fault lies in Vinny, because he doesn't seem to have any strategy to stop the opponents. But what do you guys think?
Are we playing worst than before? Better? Or just winning games?