Celtics hire Ime Udoka as HC
- Thread starter RedOctober3829
- Start date
There are no perfect comps but Clint Capela comes to mind. People will say "oh but the passing" but he uses it so infrequently and I doubt any team is going to use his play making skills anymore than the C' do.
Besides that, the history of the NBA pretty much says players are what they are at 25. He's 25 in October. I don't see much room for growth.
He probably doesn't have a massive leap in total production. However you can see him adding a face up jumper, maybe like a Camby or Battie, that's able to create a bit of space around the rim for drivers.
His stroke from the stripe is fairly smooth. And maybe he adds an effective (albeit deliberate) 3pt shot as he ages - but the 12 ft face up he could add in the next 18 months or so. In addition to opening space underneath, it could unlock more of his passing... I don't think he ends up a 14 ppg scorer or anything, but he can improve.
His stroke from the stripe is fairly smooth. And maybe he adds an effective (albeit deliberate) 3pt shot as he ages - but the 12 ft face up he could add in the next 18 months or so. In addition to opening space underneath, it could unlock more of his passing... I don't think he ends up a 14 ppg scorer or anything, but he can improve.
I think Capela is a superficial and lazy comp for Rob.
First of all, Capela isn't in Rob's league as a shot blocker. For his career, he averages 2 blocks per 36 with a block rate of 4.8%. If you just look at him through age 24 (to maych him with Williams) those numbers are about the same. Rob is at 3.1 per 36 with a block rate of 8.0%. Rob's worst block rate, 6.8% this year, is better than any single Capela season outside of his rookie year when he played 90 minutes.
Capela is a bit better of a rebounder, mostly due to what he does on the defensive end.
Rob is also better at steals. Capela has 0.9 steals per 36 for his career with a steal rate of 1.3%; Rob is at 1.4 per 36 and 1.8%.
And Rob is far better at passing the ball. Capela averages 1.3 assists per 36, assist rate of 6.2%; Rob is at 2.5 per 36 (2.7 since his rookie year) with an assist rate of 10.5%. He has about one-quarter of the NBA playing time that Capela has, but more than half the assists. In 471 NBA games (410 starts), Capela has a career high of 6 assists, which he did once. Once in 471. Rob has done 6 assists or more 4 times in 174 NBA games (77 starts). And it isn't just that he gets assist but the type of assists. In his whole career, Capela has generated 1,164 points off of his assists, 3.3 points per 36. For Rob's career, he has generated 613 points off of his assists, or 6.4 points per 36.
Finally, Ime has wanted the Celtics to play fast, 0.5 second basketball. Get the ball and make your decision to drive, shoot, or pass immediately, within 0.5 seconds. Derek White is the Celtic who most exemplifies this, but Rob is right there behind him. The ball rarely sticks in his hands in any situation on the court.
Rob does a lot that Capela has never done and won't ever do.
That's great, but he's unlikely to improve that much on what he already does. No comp would satisfy you. He's going to be 25 in October. How much room for growth do you really see?
None of what you said actually matters and neither do any comps. It's age related, unless you want to ignore what history tells us about players once they turn 25.
Again, name one player who made huge advances after 25. You might be able to name 1. They are not the rule.
He’s also only played 174 career regular season games, so basically 2 full seasons, plus another half season of playoff games. And under 3,500 regular season minutes (so just 100-120 games at “starter” level minutes). I think it’s reasonable to assume he has more growth left in him, especially since you can see skill that he hasn’t yet learned to translate into performance on offense in both his passing ability and shooting stroke.
Also, players don’t stop growing at 25, or 27, or whatever, they just generally start to see declines in some skills that offset improvements in others. Timelord has a lot of potential to become quite good at the skills that make bigs valuable into their 30s, which he mostly has not developed yet. He also has tremendous athleticism and shot blocking ability that will presumably start to decline not too far into the future. How that plays out in the long haul is hard to see and there’s a ton of variability, especially once you later in health, on what can be reasonably expected of Timelord going forward. But it’s hard to see a scenario where he’s done growing as a player even though it’s plausible that he might be close to done improving.
That isn't the argument.
The thesis proposed is that Tatum is better at every single aspect of basketball than Wiggins. And I believe that Tatum's mother was a faster runner than Wiggin's mom (skipped some of that, refs gave Wiggin's mom the medals or something)
I have received death threats since I suggested, Wiggins is a better defender. I have not yet proposed formally this, but suggest Wiggin's may be a better athlete, at least better leaper.
I recognize I am treading into religion and faith here. I understand some believe (and are free to believe) if they blaspheme their chosen team's best player, they will be punished. There is a tinkerbell element here too, that if they stop beliiving Tatum loses his wings.
Wilford Brimley voice/ Why I remember a time when your team's best player would get outplayed by and older more athletic guy, and goddam it it was acceptable to allow that this by-product of an olympic medal winner and NBA player may just be dang good defender, and your 24 year old guy had something to learn. People could see things were not simple good and bad. And everybody didn''t get so all fired bent out of shape at accepting there was this thing called nuance, and not to simply pick sides. There used to be this place , Lily's was it's name, Lily herself cooked everything, I mean for on 4 decades every poached egg I eat, I think "not as good as Ol Lily made." Most of the menu just as good. Damn I loved eatin' there. But, you know across the street this place Geno had damn good pecan pie. It wern't no insult to Lily to suggest Geno's Pecan pie was better than Lily's, hell making Pecan Pie wasn;'t even her thing. Nowdays some whippersnapper on these infernal buzzboxes gonna suggest I have to say 100% of Lily's menu was better than 100% of Geno's or I somehow I hate Lily. Well I say to those goddam fools they can get bent. I hate to say But I said it and there it is.
I wasn't trying to be a jerk by saying that. I'm just saying what Time Lord can do at age 24 vs what Capela can do at age 24 doesn't really matter when it comes to how they are going to develop going forward. The age is the big factor. The vast majority of players don't make anything more than incremental improvement once they hit 25.
JakeRae said it best, really. He'll improve in some areas while getting worse in others, staying mostly the same player. I would expect incremental improvement from here on out. And that's fine. He's already pretty good. He just needs to stay on the court.
For the people who think he has a lot of room for significant growth, what do you think his ceiling is? If he adds an offensive move or two, maybe he scores 14 a game instead of 10?
He's already one of the best bigs in the game if he's on the court. Give him a real offensive game and he leap frogs Jaylen Brown.
This is a rather dogmatic position, especially since the typical NBA player is supposed to peak in their year 27-29 season and big men traditionally develop late. It is also curious that you seem to imply that the hammer comes down on your 25th birthday and its all over. But anyway, three big men who had significant development after age 25 were Detlef Schrempf, Ben Wallace and Dennis Rodman.
The only real question to TimeLord is can he stay on the court? To deny his almost prenatural shot blocking skills and how it impacts the team's defense and how it impacts the decison making of an opponent seems foolhardy or being contrary just to be contrary. TL does not need a 3 point shot or a mid-range jumper to be a starting 5 on a NBA championship contender. On a team with Tatum and Brown and Al and Smart, he's a 4th 5th option. And I want him in paint proxmity to O-board. I assume with some time and tutelage he can add some low post moves and paint skills on the offense. And if he finds a 12-15 foot jumper great. And the guy can shoot as evidenced by his decent FT %. What he needs is good health. His elite level of shot blocking and timing/reaction is rare and he is a marvel to watch.
By the age of 25, Al Horford had made a total of 3 three pointers in his career.
Ok, and do you think he was materially better from 29-35 than he was from 24-26? Brook Lopez and Horford declined in other areas to offset their gains.
They improve in some areas, and get worse in others. Most players don't get materially better at 25. If you think TL is going to be the exception, that's cool.
I get that players are less likely to improve as they age. However, the reason I'm confused by your take is because we just saw TL take a huge leap. Before I declare someone's progression to be finished, I'd probably wait for their current explosive growth to show some signs of levelling off first. TL may very well come back next year as the exact same player. I just don't know how anyone can say that with certainty given recent events.
I don't know why you moved the goal posts from after age 25, to from age 29-35, but I believe Al Horford was a better player after age 25 than he was before age 25.
Marginally or incrementally. Not materially. I mean, how much better do you think he's going to get? Gonna make ALL NBA 3rd team? Top 30 player? Any real improvement puts him ahead of Jaylen Brown.
I also didn't move the goalpost. He started shooting 3s in his age 29 season. If you want to use 24-28 to compare him to 29-35, feel free. You are the one who brought up his 3 point shooting, you should know when he started to take 3s. But yeah, I'm moving the goal post. I mean whatever, maybe know the goal post you are establishing.
If you judge Al Horford by box plus/minus, admittedly not the perfect measure of anything, but it is handy, he's very clearly a better player after age 25 than up to age 25. His best season before age 25 was his age 24 year: 3.6. He exceeded that 5 times since then.
I want to use after age 25, because that's the age you said "the history of the NBA pretty much says players are what they are at 25"
Which is why I brought up Al Horford materially changing his offensive game after age 25.
He learned how to shoot a 3. I already made an exception for the 3, unless he shoots it like Daniel Theis. That would probably hurt his game over all. Also. Al Horford didn't improve his overall game with the 3. Adding the 3 helped hide any decline. So, no real overall improvement.
Again, how good do you think TL is going to get? What's his ceiling if you think there is so much room for growth? Where do you rank him now? Top 100? top 60?
Horford’s probably not the player to use as a counter argument here. Per DARKO, admittedly just one metric, Horford’s overall performance plateaued at age 24. On the other hand, Brook Lopez is a great counter argument as he kept getting better into his 30s.
Completely disagree with saying Horford hasn't improved since age 25. I think that's absurd.
And I have no idea how good TL is going to get. Just think it's ridiculous to say he can't because he's now 25 years old.
If there is a metric that says Horford’s overall performance plateaued at age 24, it's not a metric I'm interested in because I think that's incorrect.
Up until his age 27 season, Horford averaged 4.0 assists per 100 possessions. After his age 27 season he averaged 6.3. That's a pretty significant increase.
Well, history says it's not. If you want to argue against history, that's cool. And I think it's absurd to say Al got materially better after 25. Any metric that says otherwise I'm not interested in because I think it's incorrect. I can play that game too.
But I think all in one metrics tend to suck anyway so I won't.
edit: He peaked in WS and VORP at age 23 and 24 too. Agrees with Darko. BPM doesn't.
LOL
You: I think all in one metrics suck.
Also you: On the other hand, here's a bunch of all in one metrics that agree with me, therefore I'll use them.
Classic
The absolute worst faith argument.
There is a lot of data out there that suggests NBA players peak in their latter twenties and that age may even be creeping up given the overall conditioning as well as the recovery regimes out there. Digging around, the thing I kept coming across were the exceptions as well as conflicting data. In other words, there is no settled science around the question.
That said, and assuming health, its unreasonable to say Robert Williams won't continue to make significant improvements. Next year, for the first time in Williams' career, he will arrive at camp with a defined role and pretty firm understanding of what will be asked of him. That plus the added seasoning of playing as an NBA regular for another full year will almost certainly help him refine his game.
Again, the caveat as always with Williams is his health.
That said, and assuming health, its unreasonable to say Robert Williams won't continue to make significant improvements. Next year, for the first time in Williams' career, he will arrive at camp with a defined role and pretty firm understanding of what will be asked of him. That plus the added seasoning of playing as an NBA regular for another full year will almost certainly help him refine his game.
Again, the caveat as always with Williams is his health.
Last edited:
They do suck, but I listed them anyway because they are there. It's more data points and it doesn't matter if I agree with it or not. People will make their own conclusions about said stats.
"It doesn't agree with me so it's of no use to me." That's your argument. That's good faith? Ok
Last edited:
He's had one year as an ever game NBA starter. I doubt there are many players in the NBA who after one year starting. And he has some low hanging fruit in terms of potential improvements. And in this thread we're talking about an (arbitrary) age 25 cutoff for a player who is... 24. Even that would suggest capacity for improvement.
No, this isn't my argument.
I never use all in one metrics, whether they agree with me or not, because I think they're mostly useless. You apparently also feel this way, unless they agree with your opinions.
Like, a metric that says Al Horford without the ability to shoot from the perimeter is actually more valuable than that same Al Horford who can shoot from the perimeter makes zero sense.
It's not like developing more skills takes away from other skills you have. You're not building a Dungeons and Dragons character where if you put more points into charisma you have less points to add to strength.
That’s probably true if you hold everything else constant, but that’s not how the world works. Player skills, athleticism, usage, and approach all change over time in ways that impact value. Isolating just a single skill that improves doesn’t mean the player improved (just like a single declining skill doesn’t signal a decline).
Also, fixating on whether Horford improved after age 24 or plateaued is really not the point. The operative inquiry here wasn’t ever Al Horford’s career trajectory. And, even if you accept that he plateaued at 24, which I know there is disagreement about, that really says nothing about Robert Williams. Horford came into the league a fairly polished player who had led a team to 2 NCAA titles. Timelord was a raw athlete with a really high ceiling who had attitude and injury question marks. Horford was an NBA starter from day 1, an All Star by age 23, and had no significant injuries his first 4 seasons in the league. Timelord barely played his first 2 seasons and was pretty limited last year. His overall NBA career involves only 30% or so more minutes than Horford played in each of his first 4 seasons. They also have very different games. There’s really no reason that Horford’s career trajectory should tell us anything about what to expect from Timelord.
On that issue, there is a lot of reason to expect he can improve as an offensive player in a lot of ways that aren’t about rim running. I’m struggling to come up with a good comp for him because while his performance so far shares a lot with guys like DeAndre Jordan or JaVale McGee, he clearly has undeveloped skills neither of those players came close to, so I don’t think either would be particularly useful to set future expectations. Also, both of those players took until about 500 games and into their late 20s to early 30s to peak, again supporting that it is entirely premature to think Timelord has peaked because he’s 24.