Do we not have a thread for Sam? Looked good against the hapless Hornets.
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzN0w8tfXyg
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzN0w8tfXyg
He really does feel like one of the Miami 3-Point Project Players, doesn't he?You have to be encouraged by what Hauser showed yesterday. Knocking down threes, nice cut for a layup, good lob to Kabangele, and some encouraging signs on defense. If this were Miami, he might start for a year, shoot 40% from three, and then get a $90 million contract.
It was only a preseason game, but that was not garbage time yesterday. He heated up in the first half.I have two concerns about Hauser, and I have no idea if either is fair.
One, could he consistently hit shots when it's not garbage time? We have not seen him much when games were on the line. I get that it shouldn't matter to someone who looks like a pure shooter. But it might.
Two, would he get victimized/targeted on defense if he was part of the regular rotation?
Thoughts welcomed!
True but I'm viewing all of pre-season as a kind of garbage time. I mean: can he do this when the score really matters?It was only a preseason game, but that was not garbage time yesterday. He heated up in the first half.
Both teams were playing pretty hard. Charlotte's bad defensively, but I saw Rozier literally hang his head after Hauser hit his fourth.True but I'm viewing all of pre-season as a kind of garbage time. I mean: can he do this when the score really matters?
Theres no reason to think he is any different from any other guy trying to break into the league in this regard.True but I'm viewing all of pre-season as a kind of garbage time. I mean: can he do this when the score really matters?
Obviously, how he shoots when minutes count will determine whether he will be in the rotation or whether he will be on the back of the bench. His best game last year was the game against TOR that most the starters didn't attend; he played over 20 mostly meaningful minutes and went 2-3.I have two concerns about Hauser, and I have no idea if either is fair.
One, could he consistently hit shots when it's not garbage time? We have not seen him much when games were on the line. I get that it shouldn't matter to someone who looks like a pure shooter. But it might.
Two, would he get victimized/targeted on defense if he was part of the regular rotation?
Thoughts welcomed!
That would be the same for any guy in this role. Nesmith as well, for example.I have two concerns about Hauser, and I have no idea if either is fair.
One, could he consistently hit shots when it's not garbage time? We have not seen him much when games were on the line. I get that it shouldn't matter to someone who looks like a pure shooter. But it might.
Two, would he get victimized/targeted on defense if he was part of the regular rotation?
Thoughts welcomed!
One could argue that preseason is not garbage time for a guy like Hauser. He plays bad and he's cut/buried, etc.True but I'm viewing all of pre-season as a kind of garbage time. I mean: can he do this when the score really matters?
Depth wise you’re right, but as an ACC bball fanboy I can’t let this go unanswered. ACC has better top end talent than the G league. As for defensive schemes and defensive talent, I’ll obviously take your word for it that shooting in the G league is tougher than the ACC.To me Hauser has a better track record than future HOFer Nesmith since he has shot the ball really well at a level higher than NCAA. He was a 40% shooter in the g-league.
You just comped him to the $90 million man.He seems like a carbon copy of Duncan Robinson to me. Not very athletic 6'7 wing with good shooting mechanics and a quick release but will struggle to defend consistently. I think the shot is very real so he'll get some run, but how much will depend on how big a black hole he is on the defensive end.
Carbon copies are less than the original, messier, not as sharp.You just comped him to the $90 million man.
Hopefully for Sam his agent has Pat Riley on speed dial.You just comped him to the $90 million man.
Charlotte made a point to go after him with the quicker wings off the dribble four or five times in the second quarter. They came up empty all but one time, when one of the Charlotte players forces his way through Hauser’s chest for a layup.In yesterday's tiny sample size...
In my eyes, he looked a lot less stiff than he did last season.
Looked a lot more decisive on where to be on both ends.
His shot is real.
He's still not going to be able to guard anyone.
There’s no reason to question his shot. He shot .439 over his college career, with no season below .400. Last year he shot over .400 in the G League. He can shoot and if he gets shots he will make them. I think there is an open question as to how dangerous his shot is in the NBA. He doesn’t have a lightning release like Duncan Robinson, but he isn’t slow either and he has good size, which makes an ultra quick release less important. If he’s shooting less due to close outs that will obviously impact his value, but the offensive downside is closer to Grant Williams last year (a dangerous corner spacer but one who isn’t going to beat you on his own unless your team is coached by Bud), not Nesmith. The upside is Duncan Robinson (the two years ago version).I have two concerns about Hauser, and I have no idea if either is fair.
One, could he consistently hit shots when it's not garbage time? We have not seen him much when games were on the line. I get that it shouldn't matter to someone who looks like a pure shooter. But it might.
Two, would he get victimized/targeted on defense if he was part of the regular rotation?
Thoughts welcomed!
I think your post is very bullish on Brad's work, which I have to agree has been borderline brilliant.I'm higher on Hauser than Carsen Edwards and Tremont Waters, but all of preseason is pretty much garbage time. Hauser has height going for him and fits the role of spot shooter considerably better. He needs the ball far less often than those 2 and is a better pure shooter. Waters and Edwards were not only bad, they were miscast.
Hauser's probably going to give a lot back on defense but they have 15+2 roster spots. If anything, I think the C's have shied away from offense only players over the years. Sometimes, you need a guy who can hit a 3 as much as you need a guy to get a stop. Preferably, they have a few 1 sided players of both varieties at the end of the roster. If they could play both sides, they aren't at the end of the bench.
What's Hauser's absolute ceiling? Tall JJ Reddick? Kyle Korver? Not talking 5% outcome or likely outcome. Talking best possible. Maybe it's closer to Strus or Duncan? If Hauser works out, it's nice to have options like him and PP. You can never have enough shooting. They may not see big minutes in the playoffs but they probably will see situational minutes.
It would be a far cry from teams of the past where we are always crying for another shooter. It may be that even without Hauser. We can afford to have him at the end of the bench, though. In years past, there were too many end of bench spots going to developmental players, some of which had no real basketball skills. End of the bench isn't great shakes this year either but they are older players with basketball skills. I'd rather go with Brodric Thomas than the next Tremont Waters. When you are a competing team, you really shouldn't be wasting 5+ roster spots on projects.
I guess you could say that's what Hauser, Thomas, Kabangele are.. but not really. They may not be good, but they have considerably more basketball experience than Waters, Edwards, Langford, Nesmith did when they were employed here. This was a team trying to win basketball games. The regular season is long. They may not matter much come the playoffs, but they matter with seeding. Despite what any team says, it's always best to end up with a 1 or 2 seed than a 3 or 4. And nowadays, the 6th seed is a pretty big deal too. Every win matters. I'm guessing veteran bums are better than rookie scrubs. Obviously, if we have to rely on any of them in the playoffs, we are probably screwed barring some very positive and unexpected player development.
Even if Hauser develops into a 25 minute rotation player who averages 12/3/2 on .450/.420/.840 shooting, he's not going to be the difference maker come playoff time. He could win a few games for us over Aaron Nesmith in the regular season though. That has value.
Here's hoping he works. His skill set matches well with the role he's going to play so I like his chances more than the Smurfs. Still like him a bit less than I initially liked Nesmith and Langford but so did everyone else. That was based off projectability more than actual skill, though. The real problem with Nesmith and Langford was that there were also other players lacking in the skill department in Carsen, Waters, Bruno, Semi, Tacko. Say what you want about Thomas, Hauser, Kabangele but they do have actual basketball skills. Hauser isn't developing his 3 point shot, he has one. Will it translate? We'll see. Thomas is probably still working on his decision making skills, but is far further along than Tremont Waters was. Kabangele is light years from Tacko Fall. It looks like he could possibly be the 3rd big we wanted to sign this offseason and possibly a better option than Theis.
I'm not saying they are going to be good (or even average) basketball players, but they should be far more useful to winning than the crap Ainge was filling the end of roster spots with the last few years.
Stevens mostly traded away the end of the bench last year, a few of which were Danny Ainge holdovers. Not shocking there were a few hold overs, considering Stevens took over last year. Really though, Stevens traded away the entire bench last year, not just the end of it. Schroder, Richardson, Nesmith, Langford, Bruno, Enes, Juancho etc.
This team is build so much better than the start of last year. Though at the time, many of us thought the 21/22 team was built better than the previous couple year teams. Maybe that wasn't wrong, as they C's started to win games prior to trading some of them away. They won 7 games in a row when they had traded Schroder. Just took them awhile to hit their stride.
Anyway, really long post about Sam Hauser.
Agree that Brad seems to have a stronger theory of what he wants at the end of the bench/rotation. Fewer projects, and more "one question away from being a rotation player" type guys.I'm higher on Hauser than Carsen Edwards and Tremont Waters, but all of preseason is pretty much garbage time. Hauser has height going for him and fits the role of spot shooter considerably better. He needs the ball far less often than those 2 and is a better pure shooter. Waters and Edwards were not only bad, they were miscast.
Hauser's probably going to give a lot back on defense but they have 15+2 roster spots. If anything, I think the C's have shied away from offense only players over the years. Sometimes, you need a guy who can hit a 3 as much as you need a guy to get a stop. Preferably, they have a few 1 sided players of both varieties at the end of the roster. If they could play both sides, they aren't at the end of the bench.
What's Hauser's absolute ceiling? Tall JJ Reddick? Kyle Korver? Not talking 5% outcome or likely outcome. Talking best possible. Maybe it's closer to Strus or Duncan? If Hauser works out, it's nice to have options like him and PP. You can never have enough shooting. They may not see big minutes in the playoffs but they probably will see situational minutes.
It would be a far cry from teams of the past where we are always crying for another shooter. It may be that even without Hauser. We can afford to have him at the end of the bench, though. In years past, there were too many end of bench spots going to developmental players, some of which had no real basketball skills. End of the bench isn't great shakes this year either but they are older players with basketball skills. I'd rather go with Brodric Thomas than the next Tremont Waters. When you are a competing team, you really shouldn't be wasting 5+ roster spots on projects.
I guess you could say that's what Hauser, Thomas, Kabangele are.. but not really. They may not be good, but they have considerably more basketball experience than Waters, Edwards, Langford, Nesmith did when they were employed here. This was a team trying to win basketball games. The regular season is long. They may not matter much come the playoffs, but they matter with seeding. Despite what any team says, it's always best to end up with a 1 or 2 seed than a 3 or 4. And nowadays, the 6th seed is a pretty big deal too. Every win matters. I'm guessing veteran bums are better than rookie scrubs. Obviously, if we have to rely on any of them in the playoffs, we are probably screwed barring some very positive and unexpected player development.
Even if Hauser develops into a 25 minute rotation player who averages 12/3/2 on .450/.420/.840 shooting, he's not going to be the difference maker come playoff time. He could win a few games for us over Aaron Nesmith in the regular season though. That has value.
Here's hoping he works. His skill set matches well with the role he's going to play so I like his chances more than the Smurfs. Still like him a bit less than I initially liked Nesmith and Langford but so did everyone else. That was based off projectability more than actual skill, though. The real problem with Nesmith and Langford was that there were also other players lacking in the skill department in Carsen, Waters, Bruno, Semi, Tacko. Say what you want about Thomas, Hauser, Kabangele but they do have actual basketball skills. Hauser isn't developing his 3 point shot, he has one. Will it translate? We'll see. Thomas is probably still working on his decision making skills, but is far further along than Tremont Waters was. Kabangele is light years from Tacko Fall. It looks like he could possibly be the 3rd big we wanted to sign this offseason and possibly a better option than Theis.
I'm not saying they are going to be good (or even average) basketball players, but they should be far more useful to winning than the crap Ainge was filling the end of roster spots with the last few years.
Stevens mostly traded away the end of the bench last year, a few of which were Danny Ainge holdovers. Not shocking there were a few hold overs, considering Stevens took over last year. Really though, Stevens traded away the entire bench last year, not just the end of it. Schroder, Richardson, Nesmith, Langford, Bruno, Enes, Juancho etc.
This team is build so much better than the start of last year. Though at the time, many of us thought the 21/22 team was built better than the previous couple year teams. Maybe that wasn't wrong, as they C's started to win games prior to trading some of them away. They won 7 games in a row when they had traded Schroder. Just took them awhile to hit their stride.
Anyway, really long post about Sam Hauser.
When you have 15 roster spots and rarely more than 10 "regulars." it's borderline negligent not to have a couple of legitimate one-skill players on the bench. It would be like an MLB team with a 35 man roster not having a 3rd catcher.Agree that Brad seems to have a stronger theory of what he wants at the end of the bench/rotation. Fewer projects, and more "one question away from being a rotation player" type guys.
Feels very Miami in many ways, and I wonder to what degree Brad admired their approach over the years.
Yes. Jury is out on how much of an exposure he is on defense. But on days where the ball isn't moving great and they need a guy who can bomb, it will be nice to have a guy who doesn't need to escape dribble and step back just to try to get a shot off.If this guy can really shoot in games that matter (to the Celtics, though I appreciate the point made upthread that for Hauser, THESE games matter too), that's a huge asset for Boston. There were times in the playoffs last year where they just could not score, and sorely needed SOMEONE to make a three. If they can get that from Hauser, that's gold.
So once you weed out the really terrible defenders, you get a list of 15 ... with a lot of NBA players on there. Curry, of course. Kispert. Duncan Robinson. Cameron Johnson. Desmond Bane. Of the bunch, Hauser has the best three-point shooting percentage. His block rate is also near the top. When I first saw him in summer league, I thought he was a crap defender and wouldn't last long in the NBA. Since then, I've seen some promising signs that have left me less sure.There have been 104 college players since 2008 to make over 40% of their threes on 500+ attempts while shooting 80% from the free-throw line. The list consists of many undersized 4-year mid-major guards who simply never had a chance of defending at the NBA level. So, let’s set some incredibly low statistical thresholds to try to weed some of these guys out. When we exclude players with steal rates and block rates both lower than 0.5% and Defensive BPM’s below 1, the list shrinks to just 15 players. These 15 are sorted by total BPM below.
Great find, thanks. Interesting that we're the exactly the type of team the scout says he'd be a good fit for.Found the Hauser analysis. This was the interesting part to me:
So once you weed out the really terrible defenders, you get a list of 15 ... with a lot of NBA players on there. Curry, of course. Kispert. Duncan Robinson. Cameron Johnson. Desmond Bane. Of the bunch, Hauser has the best three-point shooting percentage. His block rate is also near the top. When I first saw him in summer league, I thought he was a crap defender and wouldn't last long in the NBA. Since then, I've seen some promising signs that have left me less sure.
Good thing he's on a 3/$6m contract. I'm not that optimistic, though.You have to be encouraged by what Hauser showed yesterday. Knocking down threes, nice cut for a layup, good lob to Kabangele, and some encouraging signs on defense. If this were Miami, he might start for a year, shoot 40% from three, and then get a $90 million contract.
Agreed. There are plenty of regular season minutes available for a guy like Hauser if he's not Nesmith'ing his open looks. Ditto for Pritchard. If TL can actually be available in the spring, you're looking at a playoff rotation of:Being a detriment defensively on a team like the Celtics is really only going to be a major factor during the postseason when teams are way more aggressive in hunting those matchups. During the regular season Hauser can be a weak link, but as long as he shoots like, 39% or greater from three, he will get playing time and be good for the Celtics. There is a way for Hauser to be an asset to the Celtics while also maybe not being a rotation player in the playoffs.
Being a detriment defensively on a team like the Celtics is really only going to be a major factor during the postseason when teams are way more aggressive in hunting those matchups. During the regular season Hauser can be a weak link, but as long as he shoots like, 39% or greater from three, he will get playing time and be good for the Celtics. There is a way for Hauser to be an asset to the Celtics while also maybe not being a rotation player in the playoffs.
Down with both of these. Size matters. If Hauser were 6'10" barefoot, there would already be consternation in this thread about him going to RFA. If he were 5'11", we'd be calling him Carsen Hauser. At his height, he's not as much of a black hole as a smurf. His wingspan, while only +2.5" is still over 6'9", unlike the 6'4"ish that guys like Kemba and PP sport. 8'6" standing reach. I guess what I'm saying is that there's a continuum of "black hole on defense".Agree that weak individual defense doesn't get as exposed in the regular season.
It also doesn't get as exposed when playing against 2nd units. Bench opponents are mostly looking for the first good shot to score. Bench players want points, PT and to get paid. They aren't looking to give the ball up to teammates to get some sort of small edge.
Hiding a shrimpy starting PG with a bum knee or hip is 10X harder than hiding a young, healthy 6'8" bench wing
I think Ainge overlooked the end of the bench because they don't really matter. That's the thing though, they don't matter... individually. As a whole, it's probably the difference between a game or three. And come post season, it won't matter because they aren't going to play. So it has the benefit of possibly better seeding and better rested players. Regular season players aren't an awful thing as long as you aren't paying them 5/90.Being a detriment defensively on a team like the Celtics is really only going to be a major factor during the postseason when teams are way more aggressive in hunting those matchups. During the regular season Hauser can be a weak link, but as long as he shoots like, 39% or greater from three, he will get playing time and be good for the Celtics. There is a way for Hauser to be an asset to the Celtics while also maybe not being a rotation player in the playoffs.
There is also a benefit to getting Hauser more NBA experience. He is only played 158 minutes; if you give him some time to really adjust to the NBA level, he can then be more useful in the playoffs. Even if he has a bunch of DNPs come playoff time, there very well might be a situation where the Celtics are clanging threes and they really just need someone to come on to the court and make a few shots, regardless of defense, and you'd feel much better if Hauser actually had some NBA experience before he is called upon to do that.I think Ainge overlooked the end of the bench because they don't really matter. That's the thing though, they don't matter... individually. As a whole, it's probably the difference between a game or three. And come post season, it won't matter because they aren't going to play. So it has the benefit of possibly better seeding and better rested players. Regular season players aren't an awful thing as long as you aren't paying them 5/90.
It felt like Ainge went with ceiling at every end of the bench position. Fit didn't really matter. Stevens appears focused on floor, with fit playing a role. Like, Carsen Edwards AND Tremont Waters? On a team with Kemba, no less. And Pritchard. Ugh. "But it's the end of the bench and these guys don't play." Yeah, individually.
It's finding value around the margins.
Yea Danny was using the end of the bench in the hunt for young lottery tickets. Taco, Tremont, Semi, Carsen, even Romeo and Nesmith. TILT... You have to give Danny credit for finding value in TimeLord and GrantI think Ainge overlooked the end of the bench because they don't really matter. That's the thing though, they don't matter... individually. As a whole, it's probably the difference between a game or three. And come post season, it won't matter because they aren't going to play. So it has the benefit of possibly better seeding and better rested players. Regular season players aren't an awful thing as long as you aren't paying them 5/90.
It felt like Ainge went with ceiling at every end of the bench position. Fit didn't really matter. Stevens appears focused on floor, with fit playing a role. Like, Carsen Edwards AND Tremont Waters? On a team with Kemba, no less. And Pritchard. Ugh. "But it's the end of the bench and these guys don't play." Yeah, individually.
It's finding value around the margins.
Yes to this. DA was doing what is super hard to do - developing multiple younger players while still trying to win. I think he did this because he saw the tax implications of the Jays and was trying to develop cheap rotation players to complement them.Yea Danny was using the end of the bench in the hunt for young lottery tickets. Taco, Tremont, Semi, Carsen, even Romeo and Nesmith. TILT... You have to give Danny credit for finding value in TimeLord and Grant
Have to like Brad's approach. He doesn't hesitate for a second or binky players.
JRich, DS, AN, RL, late 1sts, or sentimental favorites like Theis all sent packing for immediate and future upgrades.
He signs Hauser long-term after 158 minutes of floor time. Maybe he sees something in Kornet that we're missing?
Wyc has said Brad is more analytical in his approach than Danny. It has certainly played out like that.
Maybe Brad's greatest strength at Butler was uncovering undervalued HS kids that the Majors didn't recruit
Ainge also had a lot of draftees to try to work into the lineup. Langford and Nesmith were going to get their chances to crack the rotation, and I can see why Ainge didn't want to walk away from Waters, Edwards, Ojeleye, etc. I mean, posters still bring up Max Strus as one that got away. To be fair, the players occupying spots 11-17 were not going to make up for Hayward's injuries, Kyrie's Kyrie-ness, Kemba's knee or Al Horford's exile to Philly and OKC.Yes to this. DA was doing what is super hard to do - developing multiple younger players while still trying to win. I think he did this because he saw the tax implications of the Jays and was trying to develop cheap rotation players to complement them.
Too bad it didn't work out.