I'd like someone to make the case that they would have been better off with Phil Pressey and won by more. Seriously. People have argued that he is a better player and better fit for this team in this thread. If Pressey had played in lieu of Rondo last night, they would have lost by 10 or more.Kliq said:I didn't watch the game today, but statistically Rondo matched Wall and recorded another triple double, including 13 boards, and dominated the fourth quarter, against a "very good" PG and a good team.
Well, if Rondo had played the way he did against Atlanta and Detroit, they would have been better off with Pressey. If Pressey plays the way he did against the Lakers, he won't be in the league much longer.TheDeuce222 said:I'd like someone to make the case that they would have been better off with Phil Pressey and won by more. Seriously. People have argued that he is a better player and better fit for this team in this thread. If Pressey had played in lieu of Rondo last night, they would have lost by 10 or more.
Brickowski said:When Rondo walks the ball up, Pressey is a better fit for this team, because Pressey always pushes the pace. As I've said on a number of occasions, it's run or die with this roster. Some of their 4th quarter woes are because they stop running, trying to bleed clock and nurse a lead. That simply doesn't work for them.
Rondo has pushed the ball much more consistently during the last two games. The open trey by Braadley that iced last night's game was there because Rondo got the ball up the court quickly.
Powell has looked decent, but I feel like it's important to stay calibrated on what NBDL games look like. There's no such thing as defense and you can immediately pick out an NBA-caliber talent any time they're on the floor because of the huge disparity (any player in the NBA is the best player on a D-League team). I think everyone can agree that Powell's definitely an NBA-caliber talent, the question's just going to be where he ends up falling.04101Seadog said:Jumping in a midst the round and round on Rondo, one player who I think will show something in the next couple of years is Powell. He's averaging 22/11 over the 3 games in Maine but watching him during the Fort Wayne game he had a motor that wouldn't quit and was going to the basket at will. It was great to see a big man fake the 3 and drive hard to the rim not shying away from contact or trying to be cute. He may not be a starter, but for a rookie he may be a good piece in a couple seasons.
Rondo, 2nd best DRPM on the team 34th in the league.bowiac said:2015 RPM numbers are up, and Sullinger grades out extremely well, as a positive on both sides of the court. He could end up being very good if he keeps this up.
But Rondo had a bad game last night! And he only rebounds because he steals them from teammates!Cellar-Door said:Rondo, 2nd best DRPM on the team 34th in the league.
Congrats also to Evan Turner at 401 out of 420 in DRPM.
luckiestman said:Zeller and Olynyk both top 10 for centers
Not really what it means. What it really means is that they provide a lot of value to the Celtics, if they were on the Spurs they would have a different RPM. It means our small lineup is attrocious (not shocking considering Bass, Pressey and Turner are awful, and Jeff Green ranks poorly on this).wutang112878 said:
Thanks for pointing this out which really makes me dubious of this stat. According to this we have 2 of the top 10 centers in the league which is a very important position, yet we are on pace for 30 wins
In the way that wutang meant it? He was saying C is important, if we have 2 of the 10 with the most impact why do we suck? the answer of course being that there aren't many impact centers, so being top 10 doesn't mean much.Kliq said:The fact that there are not that many quality Centers doesn't mean it is the least valuable position on the court.
If he could fix his jumper footwork (his balance when shooting is awful) he'd be a superstar. As it is he's a culture changer and jesus does he have some Cassellian balls in big moments.Eddie Jurak said:Smart looks like he may be the real find. Right now, has lots of obvious problems in his game, yet manages to be a difference maker (in a good way) anyway. And unlike Kelly O, he is 20, with room for a leap. Some of his weaknesses will fade away with experience. I don't know what kind of player he will be, but he looks like he'll somehow be a good one.
I think that's a pretty big stretch. There's a good argument that Olynyk is one of the 2 or 3 best players to come out of his draft so far. Obviously he was one of the most advanced guys and the high upside guys might take more than 1.3 years to start breaking out, but.... they also might never reach their potential. It's hard to call a guy a miss when he's produced, an he's only 2 years older than a guy like Schroeder.Eddie Jurak said:Back to the thread topic, I like Sullinger, Smart, and Olynyk.
Even though I like him, I think Olynyk is probably a backup PF, though one who will frequently have flashes that make it seem like he should be better. Totally out of place as a starting C, though. If he was 20, I would think there is some growth potential in his game, but at 23 he may improve some but he won't take a leap. Can't really see him working out better than some of Danny's other options with the pick (Anttohgkdndvnvjduenndjosuhfkslalsnfjdlksdwrhghntoyupnfnhskadlksjgpo or even Schroder), I think Danny missed on this one even though I do like Olynyk.
Sully is a good solid player who can rebound, shoot, and pass, though too short to be an impact defender. Could maybe start on the right team (this ain't it).
Smart looks like he may be the real find. Right now, has lots of obvious problems in his game, yet manages to be a difference maker (in a good way) anyway. And unlike Kelly O, he is 20, with room for a leap. Some of his weaknesses will fade away with experience. I don't know what kind of player he will be, but he looks like he'll somehow be a good one.
I don't mean "miss" in the Fab Melo sense.Cellar-Door said:I think that's a pretty big stretch. There's a good argument that Olynyk is one of the 2 or 3 best players to come out of his draft so far. Obviously he was one of the most advanced guys and the high upside guys might take more than 1.3 years to start breaking out, but.... they also might never reach their potential. It's hard to call a guy a miss when he's produced, an he's only 2 years older than a guy like Schroeder.
Is what Olynyk currently is what Ainge said he would become - a rotational big?Cellar-Door said:I think that's a pretty big stretch. There's a good argument that Olynyk is one of the 2 or 3 best players to come out of his draft so far. Obviously he was one of the most advanced guys and the high upside guys might take more than 1.3 years to start breaking out, but.... they also might never reach their potential. It's hard to call a guy a miss when he's produced, an he's only 2 years older than a guy like Schroeder.
ALiveH said:the main thing holding KO back is he fouls way too much to keep on the floor. I don't see huge upside in his rate & efficiency stats, but with work in the gym & better defensive IQ he could foul much less, be able to stay on the floor much more and become a very above average rotation player.
Cellar-Door said:Not really what it means. What it really means is that they provide a lot of value to the Celtics, if they were on the Spurs they would have a different RPM. It means our small lineup is attrocious (not shocking considering Bass, Pressey and Turner are awful, and Jeff Green ranks poorly on this).
Of course I think C is probably at this point the least important position in the league as well. Other than the few elite players C is usually the worst position in a team's starting 5, so the Celtics rank high because our wings bring nothing to the table.
Cellar-Door said:In the way that wutang meant it? He was saying C is important, if we have 2 of the 10 with the most impact why do we suck? the answer of course being that there aren't many impact centers, so being top 10 doesn't mean much.
Though I still would say it is the least important right now. So many teams play small, that PF/C can be pretty interchangeable, true C tend to suffer with high pace, etc.
They aren't athletic enough to keep up with backup centers. Either one is fine as a rotational big. Boston's problem is that they're forced to roll them out there together.ALiveH said:KO & Sully's natural position is PF. It's a minutes crunch b/c neither are really long enough to go up against true centers, and neither are athletic enough to stay with SFs. I think Stevens is still trying to figure out this puzzle which is why he has KO coming off the bench.
I'm not even sure what this is supposed to mean. The C spot has been used defensively for a generation now. There aren't a lot of seven footers that shoot threes period. Anthony Davis is also not a C and the Pelicans go out of their way to keep him out of there.moly99 said:In my opinion this isn't the result of a lack of value in the position, but rather the league moving away from post offense to shooting. The supply of centers who can defend and shoot is really low; it's not that the NBA has selected against players who fill that role because they wouldn't be useful.
There probably isn't a single center in the league who is great at defending the post, the rim and shooting 3's. There are a few guys who are very good at two of the three, but I don't think there is one true stretch five who is also a good overall defender. LaMarcus Aldridge probably comes closest. Anthony Davis still needs to work on his outside shot and post defense to be a stretch five. If Joel Embiid can do all three of those things I think he will end up being the most valuable player in the league.
nighthob said:They aren't athletic enough to keep up with backup centers. Either one is fine as a rotational big. Boston's problem is that they're forced to roll them out there together.
I was referring to Sullinger and Olynyk, AliveH was clearly implying that they were both athletic enough to be PFs. They aren't. Zeller has the athleticism, he just isn't terribly good. Defensively he's the best PF/C they have (which should be terrifying).Koufax said:If Tyler Zeller continues to develop, that will no longer be true.
nighthob said:I was referring to Sullinger and Olynyk, AliveH was clearly implying that they were both athletic enough to be PFs. They aren't. Zeller has the athleticism, he just isn't terribly good. Defensively he's the best PF/C they have (which should be terrifying).
southshoresoxfan said:Zeller absolutely has some upside. He was a good faceup big at UNC who runs the floor extremely well. If he was this amazing rim protector too he would not have been traded to the cs for nada.
And i also do notice when zeller leaves the other team tends to go into attack mode. Dont have the stats handy but I feel zellers been just fine defensively this year.
This isn't how RPM works, no. Theoretically, Olynyk and Zeller would have the same RPM on any team. This is obviously not the case in real life, but that's the platonic ideal of what RPM is shooting for.wutang112878 said:In that case 'Real Plus Minus' becomes more of an indication of a players teammates rather than the players 'real' value in which case the stat is really misleading.
We're probably saying the same thing but the Center position is very important but with the given talent pool in the NBA there are some elite guys and some JAGs. It doesnt matter what JAG you have, but it certainly has a big impact on your team if you have an elite C.
If Sully is only good as a bench player then the Celtics are in worse shape than I originally posited. He's one of the best players on the team and the best of the young players who are supposed to be the team's future. So we are slipping from "We have nobody who is very good" to (barring Rondo) "We have nobody who should be a starter in the NBA."ALiveH said:I wasn't really trying to imply that KO or Sully were any great shakes defensively at PF. But, PF is probably their best fit defensively. At C they can't defend the rim. At SF they'd get completely torched by any above-average offensive player. At least at PF (or coming off the bench to look for favorable matchups), they have a shot at not being a clear defensive negative.
At the 5 neither can defend the rim. At the 4 neither of them can defend the perimeter. This is their problem not that they are playing out of position.ALiveH said:I wasn't really trying to imply that KO or Sully were any great shakes defensively at PF. But, PF is probably their best fit defensively. At C they can't defend the rim. At SF they'd get completely torched by any above-average offensive player. At least at PF (or coming off the bench to look for favorable matchups), they have a shot at not being a clear defensive negative.
That pretty much sums it up. Welcome to purgatory my friends.Koufax said:If Sully is only good as a bench player then the Celtics are in worse shape than I originally posited. He's one of the best players on the team and the best of the young players who are supposed to be the team's future. So we are slipping from "We have nobody who is very good" to (barring Rondo) "We have nobody who should be a starter in the NBA."
Oh, the misery.