Ah. I should have known.
Brad is good at finding the right matchups for Kanter.A key question with Kanter is what the team can do to limit the damage he does in the defensive end.
Offensively, he's a tremendous asset coming off the bench with his ability to crash the boards and with his effective post game. I think he's had a key role in the recent stabilization of the bench units.
Probably more than anyone could ever see.I do wonder what the security detail for something like this must be.
I need to watch film more closely to see if this is actually the case, but my guess is that playing guys like Tatum who can rear-view contest makes drop coverage more viable.22 points allowed in the 13 minutes Kanter was on the floor in the first half in Toronto, 25 points in the 11 when he was off the floor. Kanter put up 10 points in the half. He played 7 minutes in the third, and the Raps put up only 8 points, after scoring 14 in the first five minutes.
Kanter is always going to have a spotlight on his defensive play, especially in p/r, but defense is a team thing, and with so many long, quick defenders around him, they can still get good defensive results with him on the floor.
Brad has some old man strength, built like a tank, active hands whenever anyone dribbles in the lane. He's a nice counter piece with Kemba when CBS wants to go double small and have Kemba play off the ball.(Wannamaker also had some great defensive clips, and I can see why he’s getting so much run.)
Since Williams' injury, though, Kanter has played more minutes (with Brad less able to play matchups) and been more productive. And as bad as his defense may be, his on-off stats are way better than TL's.Brad is good at finding the right matchups for Kanter.
Which leads to limiting his minutes against perimeter shooting 5s.
EK is a plus rebounder, so we can't discount that in regards to his defense.
BUT he is still dreadful in the PnR, and the entire league knows it. Teammates that get screened/picked need to go over the screen and stay with their man as Enes drops back to guard the lane/rim. Kanter is not capable of guarding anyone on the perimeter, best if he stays close to the rim.
I think (hope?) everyone expects TimeLord’s contribution to winning to be negative until he learns the game fully. That’s normal for young raw guys, and his minutes should be seen as developmental.Since Williams' injury, though, Kanter has played more minutes (with Brad less able to play matchups) and been more productive. And as bad as his defense may be, his on-off stats are way better than TL's.
yep, I was answering your question:Since Williams' injury, though, Kanter has played more minutes (with Brad less able to play matchups) and been more productive. And as bad as his defense may be, his on-off stats are way better than TL's.
Not surprising that Kanter's defense has been improving over the years. With the changing game, center defense takes longer than most to learn. CBS understands what Enes can and can't do. So while he sucks on the perimeter, when he drops back towards the rim he swallows up most rebounds at a high rate. Limiting 2nd chances has been a defensive weakness for the Celtics in the past.A key question with Kanter is what the team can do to limit the damage he does in the defensive end.
He is a nice player, but at times (recently) he takes on too much. For example (purely anecdotal) it seems like he is looking for his offense as opposed to being opportunistic. I think he needs to shoot wide open threes - but shouldn't take pull up threes...Brad has some old man strength, built like a tank, active hands whenever anyone dribbles in the lane. He's a nice counter piece with Kemba when CBS wants to go double small and have Kemba play off the ball.
In control going to the rim on the break, nails FTs and is effective on catch/shoot 3s (according to my eye test). Nice veteran, deep depth, ball-handler at that salary, good job Danny.
Still don't get the snipe Wanamaker receives in the game thread.
I can only think of 2-3 pull-up threes he’s taken recently. It’s really nitpicking imo.He is a nice player, but at times (recently) he takes on too much. For example (purely anecdotal) it seems like he is looking for his offense as opposed to being opportunistic. I think he needs to shoot wide open threes - but shouldn't take pull up threes...
Haha - you are probably right. But even one makes me cringe a bit. Regardless I think he has proven to be an NBA player - and expect him to be back in the league next year. I wonder if it comes down to him versus waters next year for the last ball handler on the team or whether they can continue like this.I can only think of 2-3 pull-up threes he’s taken recently. It’s really nitpicking imo.
Regardless of what they do with Waters, I think Wannamaker will be back.Haha - you are probably right. But even one makes me cringe a bit. Regardless I think he has proven to be an NBA player - and expect him to be back in the league next year. I wonder if it comes down to him versus waters next year for the last ball handler on the team or whether they can continue like this.
Wannamaker is a decent player, but he’s not the kind of guy teams typically shell out for.He could be up for a big salary increase next year as an UFA. The C's have no Bird rights with him, so I think there's a good chance he moves on to another city.
Speculating 3MM-5MM a year isn't too far off though is it? Agreed that I would like him back and is a quality deep depth guy. Just wondering if another team might like him as the primary back up.Wannamaker is a decent player, but he’s not the kind of guy teams typically shell out for.
I think it's because he looks awkward doing everything if that makes any sense.Still don't get the snipe Wanamaker receives in the game thread.
Theis got 2/10. I don't see why Wanamaker couldn't get that much.Speculating 3MM-5MM a year isn't too far off though is it? Agreed that I would like him back and is a quality deep depth guy. Just wondering if another team might like him as the primary back up.
see Larkin, ShaneHe could be up for a big salary increase next year as an UFA. The C's have no Bird rights with him, so I think there's a good chance he moves on to another city.
Then you say thanks Brad, good luck with the KnicksTheis got 2/10. I don't see why Wanamaker couldn't get that much.
Yeah, it looks like he could barely touch his knees if he tried to touch his toes.I think it's because he looks awkward doing everything if that makes any sense.
I'm guessing Brad and Ainge will use all of Waters 45 days at the NBA level to see what they have. I don't think they'd go with Edwards as a back up PG next year barring some miracle. It's not his game.see Larkin, Shane
Then you say thanks Brad, good luck with the Knicks
find the next veteran PG from Europe that's overlooked or go with Waters or Edwards or draft pick...lots of options.
Paying 2yrs for $10MM isn't one of them
Established bench players are usually divisive because bench players have flaws. It's why they are bench players. I hated Wanamaker at the start of last year, now I don't really care. I'd rather he get 15 minutes a game than 20-25 but there's really no one else to give the minutes to unless Waters is on the roster.Yeah, it looks like he could barely touch his knees if he tried to touch his toes.
But he's good at basketball (for how much he's paid and his role), and it's annoying when people can't see that.
The data and the eye test match up in this case - he seems to be missing a lot more around the cup (and clearly overall) than he did in his OKC days.Kanter's limitations in the PnR are well documented, but what's up with his issues around the rim this year? He's shooting .565 from 0-3 feet vs. .653 for his career. He keeps getting blocked on his put backs or missing bunnies. He has no lift at all, it's painful to watch. His offensive rebounding isn't as valuable if he can't finish. I'd like to see him dish back out to the perimeter for a wide open 3 rather than repeatedly get stuffed.
It looks pretty real. 67% of all of his 127 shots so far are in the 0-3 ft range, per bref. That's like 8 misses or so and would mean he made ~15+% more of his close-in shots. He's never had a full or partial season below .630 before.What's the number of shots hes taken from 0 to 3 feet? I'd check now but about to board a plane. Variance is highest around 50% - he missed a straight up dunk yesterday, I wonder how confident we can be his lower numbers this year aren't purely due to a few fluky misses like that.
Bref has him at 23.6% of his shots coming in 3-10 vs. a career average of 22.3%, so it looks pretty in-line. Not sure what it says about his knee. He's been around for a while but he's only 27.The data and the eye test match up in this case - he seems to be missing a lot more around the cup (and clearly overall) than he did in his OKC days.
Some of it may be rust but he is also taking - and to be fair making - more midrange-ish (3-10 feet) shots than in years past.
For me it raises questions about whether his knee is healthy or if there is something else going on. I have a hard time believing that the Celtics want him taking more shots further out longterm unless he magically develops a credible three point shot this late in his career.
I have defended Wanamaker since training camp from the Edwards/Waters believers but there isn't anyone going to give him 2/10 imho. Theis plays a position that has always paid top dollar for reserves/rotation players as their are a limited number of human beings who possess the size/skillset to compete at this level. There are many many many more players you can acquire on the cheap to provide what Wanamaker does...….that list just may not include an Edwards or Waters just yet (if ever).Theis got 2/10. I don't see why Wanamaker couldn't get that much.
So what's the probability a coin flipped 85 is times with true probability heads of 63% would produce a sample of observed heads < 55%? Id guess its actually a pretty good chance.It looks pretty real. 67% of all of his 127 shots so far are in the 0-3 ft range, per bref. That's like 8 misses or so and would mean he made ~15+% more of his close-in shots. He's never had a full or partial season below .630 before.
Bref has him at 23.6% of his shots coming in 3-10 vs. a career average of 22.3%, so it looks pretty in-line. Not sure what it says about his knee. He's been around for a while but he's only 27.
His career average from the 3-10 range seems heavily weighted by his time in Utah which was right before the league movement to eschew midranges in favor of higher percentage shots or threes. It was also bumped up by his stint with the Knicks - my .02 is that you can dismiss those prints given the state of that franchise.It looks pretty real. 67% of all of his 127 shots so far are in the 0-3 ft range, per bref. That's like 8 misses or so and would mean he made ~15+% more of his close-in shots. He's never had a full or partial season below .630 before.
Bref has him at 23.6% of his shots coming in 3-10 vs. a career average of 22.3%, so it looks pretty in-line. Not sure what it says about his knee. He's been around for a while but he's only 27.
We're in luck. I found a binomial and cumulative probability calculator on the interwebs.So what's the probability a coin flipped 85 is times with true probability heads of 63% would produce a sample of observed heads < 55%? Id guess its actually a pretty good chance.
Established bench players aren't divisive when they accept their role, which both Kanter and Wannamaker have done. People didn't like MaMo and TRoz because they not only saw themselves as starters, they both wanted to play roles far beyond what the team needed them to do (or what they were good at, well at least last year).Established bench players are usually divisive because bench players have flaws. It's why they are bench players. I hated Wanamaker at the start of last year, now I don't really care. I'd rather he get 15 minutes a game than 20-25 but there's really no one else to give the minutes to unless Waters is on the roster.
Back to the thread, the same thing can be said about Kanter. Some love him, some hate him. At one point, you could have said the same about Rozier and Morris but by the end of their stay, they were pretty much universally hated.
This should be framed.Established bench players aren't divisive when they accept their role, which both Kanter and Wannamaker have done. People didn't like MaMo and TRoz because they not only saw themselves as starters, they both wanted to play roles far beyond what the team needed them to do (or what they were good at, well at least last year).
Not that Brad needs defending, but it's awfully hard to define roles and establish rotations when three of the first seven players were all too willing to, well, go off on their own.Up and down the roster, roles were not defined last season. Rotations were bizarre and the players were confused. Frankly, that falls on Danny and Brad, which they have admitted to not handling well numerous times.
I supported and felt for MaMo because he was a starter prior to arriving in Boston and was going to be a starter wherever he signed last summer. I supported and felt for Rozier because he proved that he was a starter in this league and was going to be a starter wherever he signed last summer. They were bad fits on the roster.....that doesn't make them bad people it just meant they were terrible fits to be taking a back seat in their FA year to be rah-rah team-first guys. Frankly, I don't blame them. They were in their FA year and in frustrating spots on the team Ainge put together.Established bench players aren't divisive when they accept their role, which both Kanter and Wannamaker have done. People didn't like MaMo and TRoz because they not only saw themselves as starters, they both wanted to play roles far beyond what the team needed them to do (or what they were good at, well at least last year).
I agree with pretty much all of this and give you huge credit for seeing this problem before it happened. The lion's share of the blame for last year's shitstorm belongs to Ainge.I supported and felt for MaMo because he was a starter prior to arriving in Boston and was going to be a starter wherever he signed last summer. I supported and felt for Rozier because he proved that he was a starter in this league and was going to be a starter wherever he signed last summer. They were bad fits on the roster.....that doesn't make them bad people it just meant they were terrible fits to be taking a back seat in their FA year to be rah-rah team-first guys. Frankly, I don't blame them. They were in their FA year and in frustrating spots on the team Ainge put together.
Edit: Responding to above......I don't feel Brad really believes he made mistakes with that roster. It's standard coach-speak alternative to saying his boss placed him in a position to fail and not succeed. Doc is as good as I've ever seen at managing personalities to get the best out of them and I don't think he would have succeeded with that cluster of a roster.
We're in luck. I found a binomial and cumulative probability calculator on the interwebs.
Probability of success on a single trial: 65.3% (his career rate 0-3ft)
Number of trials: 85
Number of successes (x): 48
Cumulative probability [P(X U] x) ]: 5.7%
It could be normal variance but it looks pretty real.*
*unless i'm misinterpreting something in the calculator. I don’t think I am but it’s been a hot minute since I took probability and statistics.
No, the thesis was that he was the greatest player of all time. It was by the guy who works at 538 now.Does anybody have a link to that old piece on the statistical analaysis of Dennis Rodman possibly being the most underrated player in the league? I can’t find it now, but the Kanter discussion has me thinking of it now and I can’t find it on Lord Google.