Analysis of Celtics Games, '21-'22 Season

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I personally don't see the huge gains that they do, but I think he can help this team

That said, I wouldn't write him off, I just wouldn't count on him. I think that's probably how most C's fans feel about him at this point.
That’s fair. As high as I have been on his growth as a player there is the reliability factor which is critical moving forward.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,530
I personally don't see the huge gains that they do, but I think he can help this team

That said, I wouldn't write him off, I just wouldn't count on him. I think that's probably how most C's fans feel about him at this point.
Yep, that's a good summary. I hope he figures it out, but I certainly don't count on it at this point. It would be very encouraging to see him string together a 40 game stretch of simply being available.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Well I don’t really understand what you’re watching as Romeo from a year or two years ago is unrecognizable as a player compared to where he is today. It’s clear to Ime as Romeo is a key part of the rotation on a deep team.
It's clear because he's played in 2 of 4 games. Maybe he will be, but you are projecting.

And I don't really understand what you're watching either. Other people on this board agree with me so I'm not on an island.

Is he better? Sure. Is he vastly better? Meh.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
The difference is that Kemba and Pritchard are terrible when hunted. Last night in OT, Charlotte got the Schroder switch on Oubre and locked him up like Draymond would. When did Schroder become a bad defender when motivated? His biggest issue is taking possessions off during the course of the game but has always been a very good on-the-ball defender. Not sure how/when this image changed.
I don't think that it did. He's fine on ball, better than fine actually. But his team defense looks like Jabari's. That's why he's not a problem when the other guys are good defenders.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I don't think that it did. He's fine on ball, better than fine actually. But his team defense looks like Jabari's. That's why he's not a problem when the other guys are good defenders.
I’m a strong believer in that an individual defender is only going to look at good as the teams defense with the obvious exceptions both by the eye test as well as analytically. We’ve seen sooooo many examples of this over the years and Schroder is a prime one just as George Hill was when he was allegedly cooked 5 years ago prior to his resurgence that “coincidentally” came once he got out of a shit storm. Steven Adam’s, who I defended vigorously this summer, is in the process of doing the same in Memphis this year.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
And what if he doesn't play? When do you write him off due to injures?
I'd give Romeo his full rookie contract, this year and next. If his 3pt stroke is real, he'll get more rope.

The NBA season/game is a rough place, especially for youngsters. I'd bet TL plays more minutes this season than his first 3 seasons combined. He's a little thicker and understands how to play at the NBA level now. Just takes time. If there is a glint of talent you keep them around on those cheap controlled deals

How would you use Romeo's salary slot if you cut him?
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
The evidence that he cannot stay on the floor is that he hasn't stayed on the floor. It's been one thing after another. Freak or not, he needs to play and has yet to do so since getting drafted.
Guys coming out of college with a significant injury is not very predictive. Simmons, Embiid, and MPJ are examples of guys who got past their injuries.

You can be down on Romeo because you don't like his skillset or size or whatever, but I don't think that your "he's made of glass" foundation is as solid as you think it is.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
What stat does tell you much over 20 games? Doesn't every stat tell you less over 4 games?

Tired of the +/- police scolding every time it gets used. I think we're adult enough here to understand the limitations of most stats in small sample sizes.
that's cool, use whatever you like, but +/- is completely meaningless over 4 games

You're better off looking at points scored by a player to see their effectiveness over 4 games

Is it shocking that the lineup with the JAYs has a positive +/- and the ALL smurf lineup was a negative? why don't we project out 82 games while we're at it
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
that's cool, use whatever you like, but +/- is completely meaningless over 4 games

You're better off looking at points scored by a player to see their effectiveness over 4 games

Is it shocking that the lineup with the JAYs has a positive +/- and the ALL smurf lineup was a negative? why don't we project out 82 games while we're at it
I’d argue that without any additional data that +/- is completely worthless over 20 games and many more. It’s painful to see it used at all.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
This team is likely to surprise people to the upside. That's my analysis from the first four games. Point Tatum plus the veteran additions along with progression from the rest of the roster are what gets them there.

Beyond that we are trying to determine the depth of a body of water using a droplet. Too early to even look at data for me.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,991
Newton
Can someone explain what the hell happened with the Toronto game? While they've been playing around with roles and rotations, that absolute tire fire (the only game I haven't seen) seems like quite the outlier as they've mostly improved game to game.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Can someone explain what the hell happened with the Toronto game? While they've been playing around with roles and rotations, that absolute tire fire (the only game I haven't seen) seems like quite the outlier as they've mostly improved game to game.
Just one of those things. An egg. Sometimes there's no reason.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
Can someone explain what the hell happened with the Toronto game? While they've been playing around with roles and rotations, that absolute tire fire (the only game I haven't seen) seems like quite the outlier as they've mostly improved game to game.
It's not that hard. BOS came off an emotional loss, was playing a team that they beat in pre-season, and had a letdown.

BOS had 25 TOs and TOR got 21 offensive rebounds. I didn't watch the game closely but it seemed like every TO (and many long rebounds) ended up in lay-ups or dunks because BOS didn't get back. In fact, it wouldn't shock me if the entire difference between the two teams consisted of points off of offensive rebounds/turnovers.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
Can someone explain what the hell happened with the Toronto game? While they've been playing around with roles and rotations, that absolute tire fire (the only game I haven't seen) seems like quite the outlier as they've mostly improved game to game.
Jaylen played like crap (and was an injury scratch in the next game), Ime tried an "all small" lineup that got destroyed by Toronto, the refs swallowed their whistles (they weren't biased against the C's or anything but they were very... permissive), and the Celtics put on a turnover show and then lost focus while whining about the refs. Hard to take much from it is was so uniformly terrible.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,463
Somewhere
Tired of the +/- police scolding every time it gets used. I think we're adult enough here to understand the limitations of most stats in small sample sizes.
I mean, it's been four games. The Celtics are juggling their rotations. One of the games was a blowout. I don't think it can tell us anything at this point.
 

Bleedred

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 21, 2001
9,963
Boston, MA
let's see Romeo play the next few months before writing his obit, if his 3pt shot is real he'll be more than a nice rotational player
"More than a nice rotational player?" Then who in the league does he project to, in your view, if he stays healthy? I respect the hell out of your basketball knowledge and you're one of the handful of posters here that I seek out for information and opinion, but if this doesn't smack of extreme bias or at least massive wishcasting, I don't know what does. Yes, if his 3 pt shot is real (whatever that means), and he can stay on the court for more than 10 games in a row (so far, 0 for 2 seasons, season no. 3 not starting in a promising way), then maybe he's a useful rotational player. But more than? I wish people evaluating my work performance were as generous.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
that's cool, use whatever you like, but +/- is completely meaningless over 4 games

You're better off looking at points scored by a player to see their effectiveness over 4 games

Is it shocking that the lineup with the JAYs has a positive +/- and the ALL smurf lineup was a negative? why don't we project out 82 games while we're at it
No, it's not surprising in the least. Doesn't the fact that it meets the eye test tell you something positive?

Again I'll ask, what stats are more meaningful? It just seems +/- has to meet some higher standard everything else.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
No, it's not surprising in the least. Doesn't the fact that it meets the eye test tell you something positive?

Again I'll ask, what stats are more meaningful? It just seems +/- has to meet some higher standard everything else.
+/- for rotation/pairings analysis is great, which is what you were doing BUT I like to start using it a little further into the season
I like your approach just think it's noise now.

My bigger +/- issue was a poster using it at halftime of the Toronto debacle to pin that game on one player
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
"More than a nice rotational player?" Then who in the league does he project to, in your view, if he stays healthy? I respect the hell out of your basketball knowledge and you're one of the handful of posters here that I seek out for information and opinion, but if this doesn't smack of extreme bias or at least massive wishcasting, I don't know what does. Yes, if his 3 pt shot is real (whatever that means), and he can stay on the court for more than 10 games in a row (so far, 0 for 2 seasons, season no. 3 not starting in a promising way), then maybe he's a useful rotational player. But more than? I wish people evaluating my work performance were as generous.
Ha. In the past Romeo had a hitch with his 3, looks like he ironed that out. I'm obsessed with Ime finding Celtics that can shoot the Corner 3 since Tatum/Brown/Schroder getting downhill will lead to plenty of open corner 3s for the complimentary players (JRich, Romeo, Grant, Nesmith, PP).

I'm definitely guilty of being optimistic on the young guys, the NBA is just a beast the first few seasons. It's even harder when dealing with injuries/surgery/COVID/compressed schedules/barely any practices. Some guys take a few seasons to figure it out, a lottery pick that was a top player coming out of HS are worth waiting on IMO. The Celtics are now being rewarded by being patient with Rob Williams, I expect they'll take the same approach with Romeo

That being said I actually like Nesmith more than Romeo, so what do I know.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Ha. In the past Romeo had a hitch with his 3, looks like he ironed that out. I'm obsessed with Ime finding Celtics that can shoot the Corner 3 since Tatum/Brown/Schroder getting downhill will lead to plenty of open corner 3s for the complimentary players (JRich, Romeo, Grant, Nesmith, PP).

I'm definitely guilty of being optimistic on the young guys, the NBA is just a beast the first few seasons. It's even harder when dealing with injuries/surgery/COVID/compressed schedules/barely any practices. Some guys take a few seasons to figure it out, a lottery pick that was a top player coming out of HS are worth waiting on IMO. The Celtics are now being rewarded by being patient with Rob Williams, I expect they'll take the same approach with Romeo

That being said I actually like Nesmith more than Romeo, so what do I know.
Hey I’m as tough on young players as they come but this kid, despite the physical setbacks, worked his way into a key rotational piece for us. Yes, the injuries we know. The shot and injuries were his issues……the shot is fixed. If he can figure out the health part than he’s prime James Posey to start.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,016
Hey I’m as tough on young players as they come but this kid, despite the physical setbacks, worked his way into a key rotational piece for us. Yes, the injuries we know. The shot and injuries were his issues……the shot is fixed. If he can figure out the health part than he’s prime James Posey to start.
Romeo is three inches shorter than Posey, but otherwise that's an apt comparison.
 

SteveF

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
1,930
I'm obsessed with Ime finding Celtics that can shoot the Corner 3
To your point, the Celtics are second in the league at 12.95% of their field goal attempts being corner 3s. They are shooting 44% on them. They are third worst in the league at getting to the rim though (23.06%) but are decent (7th, 66.29%) at finishing when they do get there (thanks mostly to Jaylen Brown).
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,156
My surprises so far:

1) Al Horford has looked great on defense. I definitely wasn't expecting the level of blocks he has been getting (SSS I know, but all early season analysis is SSS)
2) Grant Williams has been a very pleasant surprise. He's getting A LOT more playing time than I would have expected going in, and of course he been slaying the 3s.
3) Nesmith seems to be banished to the far end of the bench so far. He and Kanter are playing a lot less than I might have expected.
4) Josh Richardson has been pretty awful / a non-entity. If his contract extension becomes a negative asset I'll be really pissed.
5) Schroeder's 3 point shot has been hurting them more than I expected, I think. He is open for it a lot, and he hasn't been hitting it well at all.
6) The guy has a broken nose, but PP has been both used less, and produced less, than I was expecting (also based on the preseason)
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
My surprises so far:

1) Al Horford has looked great on defense. I definitely wasn't expecting the level of blocks he has been getting (SSS I know, but all early season analysis is SSS)
2) Grant Williams has been a very pleasant surprise. He's getting A LOT more playing time than I would have expected going in, and of course he been slaying the 3s.
3) Nesmith seems to be banished to the far end of the bench so far. He and Kanter are playing a lot less than I might have expected.
4) Josh Richardson has been pretty awful / a non-entity. If his contract extension becomes a negative asset I'll be really pissed.
5) Schroeder's 3 point shot has been hurting them more than I expected, I think. He is open for it a lot, and he hasn't been hitting it well at all.
6) The guy has a broken nose, but PP has been both used less, and produced less, than I was expecting (also based on the preseason)
I'd agree with the above. The one I'd add would be TL playing 34 minutes a night. Obviously that's in part because of the OT games, but he's looked good late in games after playing big minutes.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
A lot to digest on this chart, most of which we can probably just chalk up to SSS. Also, it says 2020-2021 TPA but I'm pretty sure it's just the first 4 games this year.

Marcus Island party of 1. Yikes that is bad.

Grant! Holy cow. He is definitely impressing those Euro league scouts :)

We STINK on D. Even the Jays. Tatum has been BAD.
 

Attachments

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
A lot to digest on this chart, most of which we can probably just chalk up to SSS. Also, it says 2020-2021 TPA but I'm pretty sure it's just the first 4 games this year.

Marcus Island party of 1. Yikes that is bad.

Grant! Holy cow. He is definitely impressing those Euro league scouts :)

We STINK on D. Even the Jays. Tatum has been BAD.
If you watched these games and are big down on Grant, I think that you have a mental block on him. Christ, Crespo almost complimented him today and he'd give the guy a free ride to the airport.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
4) Josh Richardson has been pretty awful / a non-entity. If his contract extension becomes a negative asset I'll be really pissed.
Even if J-Rich produces nothing, which would be disappointing, his extension crested a nice mid-level expiring contract that can be extremely valuable in navigating the market for trades as it will also coincide with decisions being made on some of the young players. It’s likely a multi-player deal gets done involving some of these pieces that won’t be part of our long-term future (I’m pointing at you Nesmith and Pritchard).
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,622
If you watched these games and are big down on Grant, I think that you have a mental block on him. Christ, Crespo almost complimented him today and he'd give the guy a free ride to the airport.
I’m not down his play at all this year, though I think it’s way too small of a sample to get particularly excited about. Hoping for the best.

Just pointing out the stats back up he’s looked good, but couldn’t resist a joke about his potential Euro league future.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
I’m not down his play at all this year, though I think it’s way too small of a sample to get particularly excited about. Hoping for the best.

Just pointing out the stats back up he’s looked good, but couldn’t resist a joke about his potential Euro league future.
Yeah 4 games caveats count for guys playing well too.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Toronto is the type of team that could give the Cs trouble. Long, athletic, emotional. The worst of both worlds collided. An emotional athletic team got hot and in an high energy high, and the Cs withdrew and were blasted, outworked, outjumped, outran.
The positive is the Cs seems to have addressed some of it, with
My surprises so far:

5) Schroeder's 3 point shot has been hurting them more than I expected, I think. He is open for it a lot, and he hasn't been hitting it well at all.
He is shooting almost 5 a game, way too many. I expect he will shoot fewer 3s as the season progresses.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
My surprises so far:

4) Josh Richardson has been pretty awful / a non-entity. If his contract extension becomes a negative asset I'll be really pissed.
5) Schroeder's 3 point shot has been hurting them more than I expected, I think. He is open for it a lot, and he hasn't been hitting it well at all.
I think JRich has been okay. He hasn't been asked to do much on offense and he looks passable on defense. We're all hoping he gets better but I'm not sure what his role on offense is going to be.

As for Schroder, you're correct he's wide open. NBA.com has him taking 3.8 wide open 3s per game (closest defender more than 6 feet away). That attests to how much attention JT (and JB) get. You're also correct that he's not shooting them well - NBA.com has him at 20%. That will go up as he hit 35% of wide open 3Ps last year and 44.6% the year before. If he can get to 40% I think we'll all be super happy.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
I think JRich has been okay. He hasn't been asked to do much on offense and he looks passable on defense. We're all hoping he gets better but I'm not sure what his role on offense is going to be.

As for Schroder, you're correct he's wide open. NBA.com has him taking 3.8 wide open 3s per game (closest defender more than 6 feet away). That attests to how much attention JT (and JB) get. You're also correct that he's not shooting them well - NBA.com has him at 20%. That will go up as he hit 35% of wide open 3Ps last year and 44.6% the year before. If he can get to 40% I think we'll all be super happy.
DS 3pt shooting % is really going to determine this season for the C's and his next payday. If he hits 40% (agreed, he'll see tons of wide-open ones with the JAYs) he could be in for a huge windfall.

Also agree with JRich. He's adjusting to a new team/system. Brad got him since he didn't want Ime putting all his eggs in the kid basket. It's nice to have a vet off the bench.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,950
Isle of Plum
DS 3pt shooting % is really going to determine this season for the C's and his next payday. If he hits 40% (agreed, he'll see tons of wide-open ones with the JAYs) he could be in for a huge windfall.

Also agree with JRich. He's adjusting to a new team/system. Brad got him since he didn't want Ime putting all his eggs in the kid basket. It's nice to have a vet off the bench.
Agree having DS and Richardson is vastly superior to Celtics Romper Room, and both could have value at both ends.

Richardson is a career 35.9 from three, which could bode well given the space to be found in this offense, but Schroder gives me much less optimism at a career 33.6. He had a good 2019 with the Thunder (38.5), but otherwise pretty meh. Unless there’s some contextual stat for open threes, etc. then I don’t know why there would be fewer bricks.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Agree having DS and Richardson is vastly superior to Celtics Romper Room, and both could have value at both ends.

Richardson is a career 35.9 from three, which could bode well given the space to be found in this offense, but Schroder gives me much less optimism at a career 33.6. He had a good 2019 with the Thunder (38.5), but otherwise pretty meh. Unless there’s some contextual stat for open threes, etc. then I don’t know why there would be fewer bricks.
DS is a really good FT shooter and for his career is a .419 shooter from 10'-16' and a .433 from 16-3'. There's small hope for improvement.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
Looking into his stats, DS is considerably better at catch and shoot 3s than pull up 3s.

He hits catch and shoot 3s around 36-38% for his career and he's under 30% for pull ups. He shot both with the same frequency up until 18/19 when he started to take way more catch and shoots. In that time, he's been a .354 shooter. Prior he was at .320.

He also hits his wide open 3s around the same 36-38% mark. NBA.com only has season by season numbers so I had to guesstimate career numbers.

The numbers are total % of shots that were catch and shoot 3s and the % at which he made them, and the total % of shots that were pull up 3s, and the % he made them.

14/15: 15.9%/31.9%, 8.6%/43.1%.
15/16: 18.7%/38.3%, 14.7%/24.8%
16/17: 14.0%/39.6%, 11.8%/29.2%
17/18: 12.3%/28.0%, 12.0%/29.5%
18/19: 22.7%/35.0%, 9.3%/28.7%.
19/20: 24.0%/41.4%, 8.5%/26.8%.
20/21: 21.3%/36.3%, 5.3%/20.0%.

17/18 looks like an outlier compared to every year but 14/15, his first year of shooting the 3 with any volume.

If he continues the trend of shooting 3+ catch and shoots for every 1 pull up, he'll be fine. I don't see him taking too many pull up 3s on the C's so he should be fine, % wise anyway.

In the early going this year, he's at 31.3%/33.3% and 8.3%/25.0%. 39.6% of his shots this year are from 3, which would easily be a career high. HIs current career high is .337, followed by .330. He was one other season were 30%+ of his shots were 3s.

I'm not posting these numbers as they are similar to catch and shoot, but with 0 dribbles he's closer to a 37-38% 3 point shooter. Generally speaking, the more dribbles, the worst he gets. When he gets to 7+ dribbles though, he starts to shoot better.

Is that a sample size thing or is there a reason after 7 dribbles he starts to shoot the 3 significantly better than with 2-6 dribbles? Not quite as good as with 0 though. Odd. I wonder if that's everyone or just DS. If it's everyone, I'm missing something obvious that would cause that.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,156
The good news is that he seems to be getting wide open looks in the C's system. So, the bricks are hopefully just being unlucky and the shots will fall more eventually.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,156
Even if J-Rich produces nothing, which would be disappointing, his extension crested a nice mid-level expiring contract that can be extremely valuable in navigating the market for trades as it will also coincide with decisions being made on some of the young players.
He's got 2 more years after this one, right? At $12 million/year? IF, and I realize that's a big if, he's truly as bad as he has looked so far this season (which is hopefully unlikely), I would think that has negative trade value.

Fairly unrelated, but somewhat related as it pertains to early season surprises, I'm a little surprised how bad Kemba Walker has been for NY. He did have a better game last night, but his first 3 were pretty poor.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,946
The good news is that he seems to be getting wide open looks in the C's system. So, the bricks are hopefully just being unlucky and the shots will fall more eventually.
Assuming everyone stays healthy, he's going to get a TON of open looks from 3, and I'd rather he be shooting them than Marcus. The other night, I thought DS' stroke looked great, and he went 4/9 from deep, including a couple of huge ones that kept the C's in that game against Charlotte. If he makes 38% of his 3's when he's open, he's probably going to shoot 36% or better this season, at least that's my guess. And that's more than what we need from him, IMO.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,482
He's got 2 more years after this one, right? At $12 million/year? IF, and I realize that's a big if, he's truly as bad as he has looked so far this season (which is hopefully unlikely), I would think that has negative trade value.

Fairly unrelated, but somewhat related as it pertains to early season surprises, I'm a little surprised how bad Kemba Walker has been for NY. He did have a better game last night, but his first 3 were pretty poor.
I believe he signed through 22-23 season, so just this year plus one more.

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2021/08/23/celtics-reportedly-extend-josh-richardson-for-one-more-year/
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I believe he signed through 22-23 season, so just this year plus one more.

https://nba.nbcsports.com/2021/08/23/celtics-reportedly-extend-josh-richardson-for-one-more-year/
Yes.

I'm not worried but I think its at least fair to worry about JRich even if it is a SSS. It's not related to shooting or a box score stat. One bad game in the early going can skew things a lot so worrying about 3 point % or DRtg 4 games in when it comes to guys like Tatum and Horford seem rich.

Right now all we can really use is the eyeball test and I would guess most of the eyeballs here are seeing the same thing when it comes to JRich.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
He's got 2 more years after this one, right? At $12 million/year? IF, and I realize that's a big if, he's truly as bad as he has looked so far this season (which is hopefully unlikely), I would think that has negative trade value.

Fairly unrelated, but somewhat related as it pertains to early season surprises, I'm a little surprised how bad Kemba Walker has been for NY. He did have a better game last night, but his first 3 were pretty poor.
No he was expiring this year and the extension almost surely was for the purpose of creating a mid-level expiring deal that can be valuable in a trade. So even if he is awful which I feel is being exaggerated early as an expiring contract next year that can’t be a negative……unless he’s not moved.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,111
Santa Monica
Looking into his stats, DS is considerably better at catch and shoot 3s than pull up 3s.

He hits catch and shoot 3s around 36-38% for his career and he's under 30% for pull ups. He shot both with the same frequency up until 18/19 when he started to take way more catch and shoots. In that time, he's been a .354 shooter. Prior he was at .320.

He also hits his wide open 3s around the same 36-38% mark. NBA.com only has season by season numbers so I had to guesstimate career numbers.

The numbers are total % of shots that were catch and shoot 3s and the % at which he made them, and the total % of shots that were pull up 3s, and the % he made them.

14/15: 15.9%/31.9%, 8.6%/43.1%.
15/16: 18.7%/38.3%, 14.7%/24.8%
16/17: 14.0%/39.6%, 11.8%/29.2%
17/18: 12.3%/28.0%, 12.0%/29.5%
18/19: 22.7%/35.0%, 9.3%/28.7%.
19/20: 24.0%/41.4%, 8.5%/26.8%.
20/21: 21.3%/36.3%, 5.3%/20.0%.

17/18 looks like an outlier compared to every year but 14/15, his first year of shooting the 3 with any volume.

If he continues the trend of shooting 3+ catch and shoots for every 1 pull up, he'll be fine. I don't see him taking too many pull up 3s on the C's so he should be fine, % wise anyway.

In the early going this year, he's at 31.3%/33.3% and 8.3%/25.0%. 39.6% of his shots this year are from 3, which would easily be a career high. HIs current career high is .337, followed by .330. He was one other season were 30%+ of his shots were 3s.

I'm not posting these numbers as they are similar to catch and shoot, but with 0 dribbles he's closer to a 37-38% 3 point shooter. Generally speaking, the more dribbles, the worst he gets. When he gets to 7+ dribbles though, he starts to shoot better.

Is that a sample size thing or is there a reason after 7 dribbles he starts to shoot the 3 significantly better than with 2-6 dribbles? Not quite as good as with 0 though. Odd. I wonder if that's everyone or just DS. If it's everyone, I'm missing something obvious that would cause that.
thanks, nice work.

DS should launch open catch and shoot 3s. DS's step-in shooter's pocket looks worlds better than Marcus or JRich.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,950
Isle of Plum
Looking into his stats, DS is considerably better at catch and shoot 3s than pull up 3s.

He hits catch and shoot 3s around 36-38% for his career and he's under 30% for pull ups. He shot both with the same frequency up until 18/19 when he started to take way more catch and shoots. In that time, he's been a .354 shooter. Prior he was at .320.

He also hits his wide open 3s around the same 36-38% mark. NBA.com only has season by season numbers so I had to guesstimate career numbers.

The numbers are total % of shots that were catch and shoot 3s and the % at which he made them, and the total % of shots that were pull up 3s, and the % he made them.

14/15: 15.9%/31.9%, 8.6%/43.1%.
15/16: 18.7%/38.3%, 14.7%/24.8%
16/17: 14.0%/39.6%, 11.8%/29.2%
17/18: 12.3%/28.0%, 12.0%/29.5%
18/19: 22.7%/35.0%, 9.3%/28.7%.
19/20: 24.0%/41.4%, 8.5%/26.8%.
20/21: 21.3%/36.3%, 5.3%/20.0%.

17/18 looks like an outlier compared to every year but 14/15, his first year of shooting the 3 with any volume.

If he continues the trend of shooting 3+ catch and shoots for every 1 pull up, he'll be fine. I don't see him taking too many pull up 3s on the C's so he should be fine, % wise anyway.

In the early going this year, he's at 31.3%/33.3% and 8.3%/25.0%. 39.6% of his shots this year are from 3, which would easily be a career high. HIs current career high is .337, followed by .330. He was one other season were 30%+ of his shots were 3s.

I'm not posting these numbers as they are similar to catch and shoot, but with 0 dribbles he's closer to a 37-38% 3 point shooter. Generally speaking, the more dribbles, the worst he gets. When he gets to 7+ dribbles though, he starts to shoot better.

Is that a sample size thing or is there a reason after 7 dribbles he starts to shoot the 3 significantly better than with 2-6 dribbles? Not quite as good as with 0 though. Odd. I wonder if that's everyone or just DS. If it's everyone, I'm missing something obvious that would cause that.
Thanks for the deep dive! Looks like with the combination of potential increased open and catch & shoot opportunities there’s some room for optimism. I’d have to be squinting pretty hard through green lenses to get to 40…but even near it with good D and good distribution makes a valuable asset.
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
20,530