C's pick Aaron Nesmith #14 overall

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
Really?

Maybe age is affecting my recall but I remember Jaylen being brought along in a limited role, impressing with his shot making, athleticism and defense especially as the season came along. I recall us discussion re-drafts on here and most if not all having Jaylen 2nd or 3rd. I was as high as anyone on him coming out of Cal and was impressed as to where he was as a 20-yr old rookie. What part am I missing or forgetting?
Most of us were impressed by his rookie year but very few people had him 3rd and many were disappointed it was him, even though that is who was projected.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,654
where I was last at
Re: Nesmith

He was basically a DNP or a why the fuck is he playing until about a month ago, as he perpetually looked lost, and then he seemed to have had an NBA epiphany and started to play with energy and purpose.

Jaylen had a bumpy freshman year, but the raw talent was evident, and he was getting a steady 15-20 minutes a night most of the season.

Lets hope Nesmith continues the trajectory he found about a month ago.
 

Jimbodandy

Well-Known Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
5,436
around the way
Most of us were impressed by his rookie year but very few people had him 3rd and many were disappointed it was him, even though that is who was projected.
Jury was definitely split. I was on the train with either him or Murray, for very different reasons. Never bought into Hield, Dunn, or Bender hype. But there were great differences of opinion in this regard. And Murray turned out great obviously, and Hield isn't terrible either.

During the year, on defense he was as lost as Nesmith, although he definitely stayed in front of guys better. Terrible BBIQ defensively and not much of one offensively. Lots of surprise that his shot showed more hope than expected.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
4,358
Re: Nesmith

He was basically a DNP or a why the fuck is he playing until about a month ago, as he perpetually looked lost, and then he seemed to have had an NBA epiphany and started to play with energy and purpose.

Jaylen had a bumpy freshman year, but the raw talent was evident, and he was getting a steady 15-20 minutes a night most of the season.

Lets hope Nesmith continues the trajectory he found about a month ago.
Nesmith was totally lost for the first half of the season, then had a stretch in which he showed flashes of what he could do. Then, for whatever reason, Brad stapled him to the bench again.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
2,975
Cultural hub of the universe
Nesmith was totally lost for the first half of the season, then had a stretch in which he showed flashes of what he could do. Then, for whatever reason, Brad stapled him to the bench again.
It seems Langford went through something similar. My sense was that Brad wanted to give them enough run to see what they could do, then sat them to see what else he had. When nothing else panned out he went back to Neesmith. PP on the other hand has had a pretty steady role throughout. Who knows what the rationale really is.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
21,143
Most of us were impressed by his rookie year but very few people had him 3rd and many were disappointed it was him, even though that is who was projected.
I was responding to lovegtm’s post about how many issues Jaylen had as a rookie not how people felt about him being drafted 3rd. I thought he had a very good rookie year and his performance made me even more confident that Ainge nailed this one. It did feel like I was fighting nearly the entire board though on that pick on draft night and beyond.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
13,106
Of all the criticisms we can levy at Brad for this season, his handling of Nesmith is definitely towards the bottom.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,651
Can we also say... this Grant thing... as recently as the start of the year we had threads about how promising Grant was as a rookie and how he was going to break out this year. It isn't like handing minutes to one of the youngest guys on the team, whom you picked in the first round last year, and who landed a rotation spot during an ECF run was somehow surprising.
I mean, if Nesmith starts slow next year will there be a call to immediately bench him forever in favor of whoever we draft?
 

RG33

Potty Mouth
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2005
4,811
CA
He was basically a DNP or a why the fuck is he playing until about a month ago, as he perpetually looked lost . . . .
Yep.

Honestly, I have barely watched a Celtics game the last 4-5 weeks, and I am having a hard time picturing this *good* version of Nesmith based on how lost and how bad he was. I am happy to hear obviously — but I don’t think there is any question that he didn’t belong on an NBA court the first 3-4 months of the season.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
21,143
Of all the criticisms we can levy at Brad for this season, his handling of Nesmith is definitely towards the bottom.
I’ve been vocal on my Brad criticisms most of the year and his handling of Nesmith is near the top of my list of his successes.

He took a player who was a lost deer and one of the worst players in the league to begin the year, convinced him that defense would get him on the floor. Then he saw a little success, gave him another breather when it became too much, and brought him back to be a somewhat productive 2nd unit guy. Now the kid will go into the most important offseason of his career with the confidence that he hadn’t shown up until that point.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,654
where I was last at
As a QnD theory re Grant. IMO the very quick turnaround time from the '20 bubble post-season to a Dec.'20 season start impacted his conditioning and he never recovered. It struck me as weird that a rookie who seemed to catch on quick, particularly on D, (he had a court presence and feel that a lot of rookies don't) could look disoriented and out of shape in his soph year.

My hope is that a normal off-season this year will serve the small army of 1st round picks well as they prep for the '22 season.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,651
As a QnD theory re Grant. IMO the very quick turnaround time from the '20 bubble post-season to a Dec.'20 season start impacted his conditioning and he never recovered. It struck me as weird that a rookie who seemed to catch on quick, particularly on D, (he had a court presence and feel that a lot of rookies don't) could look disoriented and out of shape in his soph year.

My hope is that a normal off-season this year will serve the small army of 1st round picks well as they prep for the '22 season.
I think that's part of it.
Part of it is... he wasn't actually that good last year
Part of it is... when he was decent it was usually as a smallball 5, he didn't get to play that often this year because we had more bigs, and we played TL with the small unit when we could for the rim protection.
 

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
3,047
Or Grant Williams sucked last year too.
Yeah. This, kind of. I think rookies are like really small children, where as adults we project a lot of hopefulness on the little promising signs that we see. I don't remember Grant doing all that much last season, but I think people tended to interpret quite favorably the small things he did right. And then, from there, you start thinking, "Ah, second year, he'll show us how he can create offense ... etc."

And then he showed up a bit fat and regressed a little. But he wasn't that good to begin with.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,681
Nesmith was totally lost for the first half of the season, then had a stretch in which he showed flashes of what he could do. Then, for whatever reason, Brad stapled him to the bench again.
Thank you. This is the exact timeline.

His flashes were a glimpse of what he is now. He was always hustling and working hard but was tentative on offense.

Maybe benching him after that flash allowed him to clear his mind and gain more confidence. Or maybe that benching just delayed him getting more comfortable and he could have been this player sooner.

None of us will ever know but I really struggle with this narrative that Nesmith was complete shit all year and that Brad is some kind of miracle worker
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
1,681
Or Grant Williams sucked last year too. I never understood the love affair for Grant Williams.
Yeah...I didn’t mind Grant last year and was kind of confused about the hoopla he received.
This year he’s been absolutely awful
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
11,745
Santa Monica
Or Grant Williams sucked last year too. I never understood the love affair for Grant Williams.
He didn't suck last year.

He was a rookie that took the first half of the season to get up to NBA speed.
Played well enough in the 2nd half of last season to be part of the rotation.
Then by the playoffs, he developed into a key bench piece that shot the 3 well and played good D.

He showed up, after a shortened offseason, fat and out of shape this year. He was a step slow all season and sucked this year

The optimism was for him to be a solid rotational bench player this season. Not sure how that's considered a love affair.
 
Last edited:

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
25,476
Yeah, I agree---it's just wrong to say Grant was bad last year. He was limited, but useful. And he improved as the year went on, noticeably so in the playoffs.

This year's guy is the worst-case scenario people projected when drafted: too slow to defend reliably on perimeter, too small to be effective down low or on boards, and limited offensively (in spite of decent 3 pt shooting and occasionally good passing).

He has to have close to zero trade value and he is reliable as an end of the bench guy so the only realistic play with him is to hope he's a little quicker next year, continues the shooting improvement, and rebuilds ability to be a rotation guy at least. But he's surely behind Nesmith in that rotation now!
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,654
where I was last at
Or Grant Williams sucked last year too. I never understood the love affair for Grant Williams.
I thought he turned into an effective defensive player, guarding mostly 4s and 5s, with a very decent court sense on how to play PnR switching defense. By bubble time he had earned CBS' trust and his late 4th qtr minutes.

His offensive game was far less developed.

But I liked what I saw from his rookie year.

YMMV
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
He didn't suck last year.

He was a rookie that took the first half of the season to get up to NBA speed.
Played well enough in the 2nd half of last season to be part of the rotation.
Then by the playoffs, he developed into a key bench piece that shot the 3 well and played good D.

He showed up, after a shortened offseason, fat and out of shape this year. He was a step slow all season and sucked this year

The optimism was for him to be a solid rotational bench player this season. Not sure how that's considered a love affair.
Agree to disagree. He was terrible last year. I think people just wanted someone to root for since Langford was M.I.A and Carsen sucked. Or at least that's what I tell myself. I dunno. He was awful.

Just like Langford has sucked both years, yet people will convince themselves otherwise. "But he got play off minutes."
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
11,745
Santa Monica
Agree to disagree. He was terrible last year. I think people just wanted someone to root for since Langford was M.I.A and Carsen sucked. Or at least that's what I tell myself. I dunno. He was awful.

Just like Langford has sucked both years, yet people will convince themselves otherwise. "But he got play off minutes."
It took me longer than most to give up on him this season. BUT dancing on Grant's head this season has been deserved. Last season was different.

Preview of Brad's post-season conversation with Grant:
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkoPq5AOCOA
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
21,143
Thank you. This is the exact timeline.

His flashes were a glimpse of what he is now. He was always hustling and working hard but was tentative on offense.

Maybe benching him after that flash allowed him to clear his mind and gain more confidence. Or maybe that benching just delayed him getting more comfortable and he could have been this player sooner.

None of us will ever know but I really struggle with this narrative that Nesmith was complete shit all year and that Brad is some kind of miracle worker
The second benching came after like a 7 minute appearance when he was aimlessly jogging up and down the court without an idea what was happening. Yes, this was after he showed some flashes and was working his ass off......but the idea that he was sat for no reason is a false narrative.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
35,789
The second benching came after like a 7 minute appearance when he was aimlessly jogging up and down the court without an idea what was happening. Yes, this was after he showed some flashes and was working his ass off......but the idea that he was sat for no reason is a false narrative.
IIRC (definitely an open question) I think Scal or whomever cited him being lost on a sequence in this very game.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
27,571
Here
Nesmith still looks pretty lost defensively to me. He has too much energy on that end and not enough focus. I have confidence he'll figure it out, but in terms of his minutes being limited, that's probably why.

Then again, not like anyone else is exactly bringing the perimeter D...
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
2,975
Cultural hub of the universe
I thought he turned into an effective defensive player, guarding mostly 4s and 5s, with a very decent court sense on how to play PnR switching defense. By bubble time he had earned CBS' trust and his late 4th qtr minutes.

His offensive game was far less developed.

But I liked what I saw from his rookie year.

YMMV
Which is why I remain somewhat optimistic about him moving forward. He's shown he can be an effective guy in a 8/9 bench role. It's not crazy to think he can do that again. And his 3 point shooting has continued to improve, so there's that. It's not a high ceiling, but he could be useful.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
5,199
Palo Alto
What is this Grant Williams revisionism? He was fantastic defensively in last year's playoffs I thought, or at least legitimately good - which for a rookie is fantastic.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
10,645
What is this Grant Williams revisionism? He was fantastic defensively in last year's playoffs I thought, or at least legitimately good - which for a rookie is fantastic.
There might be a little recency bias swinging the other way on Grant now. Last year he flashed some above average switchable defensive ability, which is admittedly somewhat exciting for a non-lotto pick.

His offense was terrible last year, and has been terrible again this year. Combine that with the D regression and you get a very ugly end result.

I do think too much was made of his bubble play, how much playing time he got, how much Brad trusted him, etc. He was beating out a pretty motley crew, someone had to get the minutes.

The posters who thought the fact that he was getting consistent playing time meant he was on the rookie fast-track were overly optimistic. He wouldn't have gotten any playing time on most half decent teams last season. The Celtics depth absolutely cratered after the top 6 last year.

To get this back to Nesmith, if I had to rank the last 2 seasons first round picks by future optimism (not current on-court value), I would say.

Nesmith > Pritchard >>> Grant > Romeo
 
Last edited:

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
5,199
Palo Alto
There might be a little recency bias swinging the other way on Grant now. Last year he flashed some above average switchable defensive ability, which is admittedly somewhat exciting for a non-lotto pick.

His offense was terrible last year, and has been terrible again this year. Combine that with the D regression and you get a very ugly end result.

I do think too much was made of his bubble play, how much playing time he got, how much Brad trusted him, etc. He was beating out a pretty motley crew, someone had to get the minutes.

The posters who thought the fact that he was getting consistent playing time meant he was on the rookie fast-track were overly optimistic. He wouldn't have gotten any playing time on most half decent teams last season. The Celtics depth absolutely cratered after the top 6 last year.
I agree the argument that he got minutes therefore mustve been good is bad. I am going off of what we saw though. The Celtics defense was really good in the playoffs and he was playing many minutes on that very good defense.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
I agree the argument that he got minutes therefore mustve been good is bad. I am going off of what we saw though. The Celtics defense was really good in the playoffs and he was playing many minutes on that very good defense.
10.0 mpg. I guess that's many.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,654
where I was last at
GW was the 9th guy last year, but it seems as the year progressed he found disproporitionate time playing in higher leverage situations (late close 4Q). He was a good defensive player. IMO the current sense of gloom and doom has clouded memories. Not everything about the Celts suck.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
GW was the 9th guy last year, but it seems as the year progressed he found disproporitionate time playing in higher leverage situations (late close 4Q). He was a good defensive player. IMO the current sense of gloom and doom has clouded memories. Not everything about the Celts suck.
Not mine. I never liked the guy. I also clearly remember everyone taking it for granted that Grant and Smart would work their way into game shape and I was being ridiculous for suggesting otherwise.

But yes, the vast majority of the board loved the guy... which is why I said I never understood the Grant love. To me, he was never deserving. Most people think otherwise and I found it incredibly confusing. He is awful and has always been awful.

Also, if you are used for 10 minutes a game in the playoffs, you are probably being used in a situation that heavily favors you. The spots were carefully picked.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,654
where I was last at
Not mine. I never liked the guy. I also clearly remember everyone taking it for granted that Grant and Smart would work their way into game shape and I was being ridiculous for suggesting otherwise.
I generally give a lot of slack to rookies. So my expectations (for most) are low and I hope for the best. And IMO last year the Celts appeared to have gototen a decent role player at 22 with GW possessing decent instincts for the game and some upside to be more of a contributor in the future.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
I generally give a lot of slack to rookies. So my expectations (for most) are low and I hope for the best. And IMO last year the Celts appeared to have gototen a decent role player at 22 with GW possessing decent instincts for the game and some upside to be more of a contributor in the future.
Compare GW's rookie year to PP this year. If GW was good, what is PP? A future HOFer?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
11,745
Santa Monica
Not mine. I never liked the guy. I also clearly remember everyone taking it for granted that Grant and Smart would work their way into game shape and I was being ridiculous for suggesting otherwise.

But yes, the vast majority of the board loved the guy... which is why I said I never understood the Grant love. To me, he was never deserving. Most people think otherwise and I found it incredibly confusing. He is awful and has always been awful.
Grant and Smart never did get back into game shape and the results are in. :(

They both sucked this season. Grant especially. Expect major turnover throughout the roster, but I wouldn't be shocked to see GW back in the Garden next season. Maybe some Miami fitness boot camp should be put in place this offseason
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,654
where I was last at
Compare GW's rookie year to PP this year. If GW was good, what is PP? A future HOFer?
PP is a bench player (8-9-10) with a decent 3 pt shot. I've no idea who will have the better career. But bench scorers who can hit 3s probably get paid better than defensive role players.

But to finish your silly comp, I suspect the Celts will not go as far with PP this year as they did with GW last year.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
23,313
GW pre-bubble wasn't great - he missed his first, what, 25 3Ps but he did show flashes of being able to guard big guys and small guys credibly.

In the playoffs, he hit 58% of 3Ps :)eek:), had that big block against FVV and overall looked like someone who really could help in Brad's defense.

This year he's flashed some good but probably more bad and he is still trying to learn what he can and cannot get away with in the NBA.

Everyone's comp for him PJ Tucker; not sure that's off the table but he needs to tick up his shooting to get there.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,526
I think the optimism on Grant Williams was that he overcame that horrific start at the beginning of his rookie year and worked his way into the 9th spot of the rotation, mainly due to his efforts on the defensive end against the opponents' reserves. So folks were hoping for an uptick in his sophomore year, which is not an unreasonable expectation. Had he improved over his rookie year, he would have been good value for the 22nd pick.

Right now, it's not clear he's going to get a 2nd contract, but very few people (either here or elsewhere) would have said the same at the conclusion of last year's playoffs.

Back on topic: people criticizing Stevens for his handling of Nesmith are just looking for things to criticize Stevens about.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
25,476
The other thing we see on Grant---last year in particular---is that there's a segment of the board that really fixates on 3pt% as the primary criteria for value. And so guys like last year's Grant and Smart get underweighted relative to what NBA teams value. Ironically, as Grant's 3pt% moved up this year the rest of his game collapsed, but the original detractors largely haven't changed their view while some who saw the broader view last year now recognize he's lost ground on everything else.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
3,085
Saint Paul, MN
Right now, it's not clear he's going to get a 2nd contract, but very few people (either here or elsewhere) would have said the same at the conclusion of last year's
I think this is an unreasonably pessimistic view. He may not get a 2nd contract from Boston, but he is most assuredly playing in the NBA somewhere over the next 1/2 dozen years.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
23,313
Right now, it's not clear he's going to get a 2nd contract, but very few people (either here or elsewhere) would have said the same at the conclusion of last year's playoffs.
Right now, as Moops said, I'd expect that GW would be signed somewhere after his first contract is up but there are two "buts" here: (i) I admit that includes some amount of projection in him just from the experience of playing two additional years of NBA ball and having two full off-seasons to work on his game and (ii) he may get more money overseas.

I mean PJ Tucker played 17 games as a 21 year old rookie and then spent the next 5 seasons oversees. It wasn't until his second season back with PHO that he shot over league average on 3Ps (he shot .314 his first year back and .387 his second year). I mean his career 3P% is only .360, which is basically what GW is shooting this year.

If GW can tick his shooting up a bit on both % and volume, I think teams will always need someone who can play as a big in small ball lineups.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
14,709
Somewhere
Younger, cost controlled guys hold a lot more value than they used to around the league, so there’s a good chance that all the Celtics’ mediocrities will hang around for a while. Even guys like Waters and Edwards.

Regardless, it seems that Nesmith is at least a cut above that, which is what most of us were hoping for. Especially after he looked like trash to start the year. (Before anyone argues, there are hundreds of G-league caliber guys who will put in max effort but still lack positional awareness or the ability to contribute at the NBA level).
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,651
Grant's on/off's as a rookie were legit good... his defense graded out very well both regular season and particularly playoffs, his offensive was mediocre in the regular season and bad in the playoffs.

Now, part of that is he often was playing as a smallball big with 4 of our best players and not matching up with the opponent's best big (where we struggled most). But... anyone saying his D was bad is definitely playing the revisionism game. Grant's offense wasn't good, his D was. This year his offense is worse and his defense is also worse, hence why he went from limited but decent to just plain bad.

Compare GW's rookie year to PP this year. If GW was good, what is PP? A future HOFer?
PP is a guy who can hit 3s, but not defend much. GW's rookie year actually graded out as considerably more positively impactful to the team because the team was significantly better on D with him.
Now I don't really think that tells the whole story, which is more that he was the smallball big and our team was built such that playing smallball was an advantage at 4 positions, but he got that job generally done decently.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
PP is a guy who can hit 3s, but not defend much. GW's rookie year actually graded out as considerably more positively impactful to the team because the team was significantly better on D with him.
Now I don't really think that tells the whole story, which is more that he was the smallball big and our team was built such that playing smallball was an advantage at 4 positions, but he got that job generally done decently.
Any stats that say GW had a better rookie year than PP should be taken with a grain of salt or looked at in a completely different context. Anyone here who honestly think GW's rookie year graded out more positively is using some type of stat wrong. Nothing will convince me otherwise.

PP's rookie year was way better than GW. He just was. GW was not good.

Doing things like rebounding, scoring, passing and other things that actually show up in the box score do matter. I know people on this board like to give Radsox shit for Pointz but he isn't completely wrong. Grant Williams is basically Dragan Bender. Another guy where people loved his defense as a rookie but he couldn't do shit on O... and really wasn't even good on D... but he was a rookie so he got a pass because he didn't look completely loss on that end like he did on O.

edit: Grant's per 36's are worse than Benders and Bender got soooo much shit around here for putting up lines like 4 points, 1 rebound, 0 everything else in 30 minutes. That's a Grant Williams line.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
21,651
Any stats that say GW had a better rookie year than PP should be taken with a grain of salt or looked at in a completely different context. Anyone here who honestly think GW's rookie year graded out more positively is using some type of stat wrong. Nothing will convince me otherwise.

PP's rookie year was way better than GW. He just was. GW was not good.

Doing things like rebounding, scoring, passing and other things that actually show up in the box score do matter. I know people on this board like to give Radsox shit for Pointz but he isn't completely wrong. Grant Williams is basically Dragan Bender. Another guy where people loved his defense as a rookie but he couldn't do shit on O... and really wasn't even good on D... but he was a rookie so he got a pass because he didn't look completely loss on that end like he did on O.
I think PP has had a better rookie year (though in fairness he's also older), but it's closer than people think. PP really only does 1 thing well, shoot 3s. He's pretty terrible in terms of assist rate for a PG (13% is awful, Grant playing mostly C was putting up 9% as a rookie) rebounding, and all things defense.
GW was a bad offensive player who was good for a rookie on D (and I think both the stats and eye-test backed up that he was a solid smallball big on that end). PP is a mediocre offensive player who is bad on D.
Grant is probably going to wash out, because if you're a smallball big only you need to rebound better than he does to justify minutes, and he can't play the wing.
PP needs a lot of work to be a good player too. His shooting is great, but he needs to either take a leap as a distributor, or improve his D, otherwise he's bound for 12 minutes as a gunner.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
That one thing is the most important in the NBA.

I think he's far more likely to show improvement in year 2 than Grant was and he'll have the far better career.

I doubt either one washes out in the age of 15+2 rosters, though. GSW wanted to keep Bender. He left on his own accord.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,526
Any stats that say GW had a better rookie year than PP should be taken with a grain of salt or looked at in a completely different context. Anyone here who honestly think GW's rookie year graded out more positively is using some type of stat wrong. Nothing will convince me otherwise.

PP's rookie year was way better than GW. He just was. GW was not good.

Doing things like rebounding, scoring, passing and other things that actually show up in the box score do matter. I know people on this board like to give Radsox shit for Pointz but he isn't completely wrong. Grant Williams is basically Dragan Bender. Another guy where people loved his defense as a rookie but he couldn't do shit on O... and really wasn't even good on D... but he was a rookie so he got a pass because he didn't look completely loss on that end like he did on O.

edit: Grant's per 36's are worse than Benders and Bender got soooo much shit around here for putting up lines like 4 points, 1 rebound, 0 everything else in 30 minutes. That's a Grant Williams line.
Most rookies look terrible on defense. The fact that Grant Williams was better than terrible on defense his rookie year was a cause for optimism. You may not agree with our assessment of his defense, but there are at least some numbers that back the eye test there. And both show regression this season defensively, which is why people are disappointed. But there's no need to rewrite his rookie year in a way that makes him worse than he was, which you seem to be doing.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
16,019
Most rookies look terrible on defense. The fact that Grant Williams was better than terrible on defense his rookie year was a cause for optimism. You may not agree with our assessment of his defense, but there are at least some numbers that back the eye test there. And both show regression this season defensively, which is why people are disappointed. But there's no need to rewrite his rookie year in a way that makes him worse than he was, which you seem to be doing.
You can find posts of me shitting on him his rookie year too. I was the same guy laughing hysterically at the Draymond Green comparisons. I was the same guy asking what people saw in him and what his ceiling was. Same guy who said his weight was a real issue and that it shouldn't be brushed off nor should anyone assume he'd get back into game shape.

Sorry, but he was awful last year too. I'm not rewriting anything, I just disagreed with all of you.

And as for his defense, people judge rookies differently on defense so when a player doesn't look completely lost on that end... people mistake it for being good.


I have a feeling RL is going to suck too. I guess if/when he does, it'll be revisionist history talking about how awful his first 2 seasons were.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,526
I have a feeling RL is going to suck too. I guess if/when he does, it'll be revisionist history talking about how awful his first 2 seasons were.
I will not be one to disagree with you on Langford. I mean the best I can say about him is that for numerous reasons he hasn't had much opportunity to show he's an NBA player. While I do feel there's still a chance he could improve next season, those feelings are rapidly approaching those in the infamous meme of the guy saying "you mean, there's still a chance?!".

The bright side is that ideally the Celtics just need 2 of their 3 consecutive #14 picks to work out ;)
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
20,654
where I was last at
Langford needs to stay on the court. IMO its near impossible to judge what he can be given his time healing and not playing. But the sands are draining on him and he's got to show something next year or he'll be in playing ball in Europe by '23, replaced by the next new shiny #14.
 
Last edited: