Ok D. Not good, but not Kanter-ian either. I didn't watch him with laser focus tbf, so maybe I missed some obvious breakdowns beyond the one where he chased his man way out past the three line leading to an easy bucket.
Why yes, yes it is.With all the Edwards talk, a "Putting the C in 'Arsen" thread is probably overdue.
Boredom digression. Steve Kerr had a SIXTEEN year NBA career. Never averaged more than 8.6 ppg. Only 5 seasons over 7 ppg. Career 6.6 ppg. There can't be too many guards with that combination of longevity and production.I don't think he'll ever be a regular NBA starter. Too many weaknesses in his game. But what he does well, he does really well. He can heat up in a nanosecond and absolutely pour it in. And his range is nearly limitless, which opens up all kinds of opportunities for other players. I know this analogy was used when the Cs first drafted him, but he is a smaller Vinnie Johnson (for you young'uns who don't remember, he was the Microwave on the great Pistons teams in the mid-late 80s; he was bigger than Edwards, but played a similar role...come off the bench and if he got hot, could absolutely go off). I think he is that kind of weapon. If he has it that night, great, ride the wave. If he doesn't, fine, he sits.
I mean Steve Kerr had a long, successful NBA career. Bad defender, not a great ball-handler, not big, but could shoot. If Edwards can be this kind of instant-offense generator, he can play in the NBA.
Carson is a deep 3 sniper. This will open and spread the floor. It will increase his assist total.If things work out really well, I have him compared to players like JR Smith, Ben Gordon, Eric Gordon. Maybe he's going to be a lot better defensively than I give him credit for or develop a decent passing game.
Players like that are fine in the right role, even if they are maddening to watch because if there shots aren't falling they are bringing nothing else.
I know your comp is VanVleet. If he develops into a VanVleet level passer, that would help.
Patty Mills is another good comp that Edwards is exceeding at the same agePatty Mills would be my choice comp for Edwards. He could absolutely win you a playoff game down the line.
I'm not sure why you would use those instead of assist % where VanVleet was at 17.5% his rookie year and Edwards is currently at 13.2%. Edwards is probably going to get way more playing time than VanVleet did his rookie year so of course he's going to have much higher counting stats. VanVleet also averaged 4.5 apg in college, Edwards 2.5.Carson is a deep 3 sniper. This will open and spread the floor. It will increase his assist total.
Edwards already has 10 assists and 9 3pts in 9 games. His ORtg/DRtg is positive and the kid has clearly been nervous to start the year. VanVleet averaged .9 apg and had a grand total of 35 assists his rookie year, along with 11 3pt shots made. Fred had a negating ORtg/DRtg.
VanVleet was a year older his rookie year, actually Edwards is tracking to be BETTER.
The whole concept of DNPing CE just won't happen, Brad is way too smart for that.
I'll double down, Brad should up his minutes and I expect he will.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/edwarca01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/v/vanvlfr01.html
Toronto was smart to keep him, develop him and not cut him. Fred probably needed some time to adjust to the NBA game. using asst% in such a SSS is also kind of silly.Toronto must be pretty dumb for DNPing VanVleet.
Wait, you don't think he'll be a good NBA player...but his upside is a Sixth Man of the Year award winner? (All three have done that.)If things work out really well, I have him compared to players like JR Smith, Ben Gordon, Eric Gordon. Maybe he's going to be a lot better defensively than I give him credit for or develop a decent passing game.
Players like that are fine in the right role, even if they are maddening to watch because if there shots aren't falling they are bringing nothing else.
I know your comp is VanVleet. If he develops into a VanVleet level passer, that would help.
I think Ben Gordon is his ceiling. It doesn't mean I think he reaches it. And the SG comps weren't all offense/no defense, it's all shoot. Guys who average maybe 2 assists and 2 rebounds a game. They don't really do anything other than score so if their shot isn't falling, they aren't contributing.Wait, you don't think he'll be a good NBA player...but his upside is a Sixth Man of the Year award winner? (All three have done that.)
Those just seem like really generic SG comps, is it because they're all offense/no defense? Even so, I think that's mostly a result of effort with them rather than physical limitations, J.R. is 6'6"...
He will have a role as a 3 point specialist in the NBA, at the very least, he has shown a special ability there. It isn't really hyperbole to say he's shown potential Steph/Dame/Trae range as a shooter. Beyond that will take some development, obviously, but his floor is relatively high for a 5'11" player.
I'm on board with the VanVleet comp, it isn't perfect but in terms of shooting and body type it's very fitting.
That's the best comp I've seen.Picked only 4 spots behind Edwards, this guy turned into a valuable bench piece for the Celtics last title:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/houseed01.html
Eddie is a nice comp. small/can shootPicked only 4 spots behind Edwards, this guy turned into a valuable bench piece for the Celtics last title:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/houseed01.html
another small (163lbs), great shooting guard born 30yrs earlyDana Barros would probably be my ceiling for Edwards. I didn't know Dana was such a productive player, in 94-95 he averaged 20 ppg and 7.5 apg and came within a whisker of 50/40/90 (49/46/89).
Tim Legler pops up on TV all the time, so he comes to mind. Also Fred Hoiberg, kind of a Kerr-minus (only as a player; as a coach he's Kerr-minus-minus).Boredom digression. Steve Kerr had a SIXTEEN year NBA career. Never averaged more than 8.6 ppg. Only 5 seasons over 7 ppg. Career 6.6 ppg. There can't be too many guards with that combination of longevity and production.
Last night, in a game where the Celtics scored 140 points, nobody on the whole team had more than 5 assists. Instead, they had 3 guys with 5 assists (Kemba, Smart, Wanamaker), 2 guys with 4 (Jaylen and Jayson), and 2 guys with 3 (Edwards and, weirdly enough, Poirier). They out-assisted the Wizards, 32 to 28, even though the Wizards had guys with 7 and 6 assists. And they did it without arguably their second-best playmaker on the floor (Hayward) or their best passing big (Rob Williams).I'm not sure why you would use those instead of assist % where VanVleet was at 17.5% his rookie year and Edwards is currently at 13.2%. Edwards is probably going to get way more playing time than VanVleet did his rookie year so of course he's going to have much higher counting stats. VanVleet also averaged 4.5 apg in college, Edwards 2.5.
It really isn't for those that were paying close attention all summer. It was preseason but this kid has shown flashes of being an elite, elite long range shooter.Barros (19th) and Kerr (1st) are two of the best 3pt shooters in league history. Suggesting them as comps or ceilings (Kerr is theoretically every long-bomber's ceiling) is about as appropriate as suggesting Edwards is a bust.
I’m going to keep beating this drum, but raw 3pt percentage comparisons are pure, undiluted anti-knowledge. Difficulty and frequency and nature of the attempts are incredibly important.Barros (19th) and Kerr (1st) are two of the best 3pt shooters in league history. Suggesting them as comps or ceilings (Kerr is theoretically every long-bomber's ceiling) is about as appropriate as suggesting Edwards is a bust.
agreed...Blame Steph Curry if you like, but the 3pt shot and the distance you're capable of hitting them at a high rate helps extend defenses, it throws off rotations and leads to more assists (hockey or direct).I’m going to keep beating this drum, but raw 3pt percentage comparisons are pure, undiluted anti-knowledge. Difficulty and frequency and nature of the attempts are incredibly important.
Yup and I'm scared to read the rest of this thread so I'll just post my thoughts.This is horribly out of context, which has unfortunately become the norm on this board. He was a volume shooter taking an astronomical number of threes per game (10.6!). It's not like he was a bit her out there: he shot under 40% because of the difficulty of those shots. He only managed 44% on 2's but shot 50% the season before. College seasons are short and he was the only talent on his team. I could go on and on.
I mean, we're eight games in. He hit 9 threes in a quarter in preseason action against NBA players. What does "not long for the NBA" even mean? They're gonna cut him tomorrow?
This can't be stressed enough. The game has changed so much. Comps like Ben Gordon and J.R. Smith make absolutely no sense to me, they only compare if you judge players solely by their box score totals. Their body type and style of play makes them very different players to me.We're all looking for small guards (defensively challenged) that can hit the 3 as comps, which is fine. I just think it's probably more helpful to look for current shrimpy shooters usage/role, since the game has changed so much in the last 20-30 years (heck the last 10yrs).
So a 50-win team, with a good supporting cast, found a role for House to flourish? sounds familiarHouse spent his first 3 years in Miami shooting 3's at around a 32% clip. He then bounced around some lottery teams (I saw him live in two Bobcat games and felt bad for him he was so out of place in an awful situation) until finding a limited role in Sacramento on a 50-win team with structure and great passers......and suddenly 32% shooting House shot 45% from 3! Wow, just like magic.....well, not really if you don't put the 32% or his college numbers into proper context and only look at a spreadsheet. This led House to find a consistent 2nd unit niche with a good Phoenix team then the Nets until finally landing in Boston and we know how that all played out from there on a team where a specialist filled a role with his unique skillset while having a strong supporting cast along with proper usage to mask his limitations.
This is the Carsen Edwards ceiling or better yet, his most likely successful role in this league. His floor is the House who never gets that opportunity to play on a team like Sacramento to open up eyes to him being able to become a specialist in this league. It's all about opportunity in 3-5 years for him...….if he never finds it/earns it, he'll fade away like many others. If he does find it/earn it like an Eddie House he can make a nice career out of this NBA thing for himself. As mentioned earlier, I highly doubt that place ends up being in Boston.
I agree with everything about the environment that role players need in order to thrive. The thing is, Boston seems pretty committed to getting Edwards those minutes, and not just with scrubs. For that reason, I think if he makes it, it likely happens or starts to happen in Boston.Yup and I'm scared to read the rest of this thread so I'll just post my thoughts.
Carsen is a specialist with major flaws in other areas of his game.
Specialists require a unique role and function on a team or their flaws become fatal.
Young players typically need time to figure out how to best mask their weaknesses before teams identify them as a specialist on a winning team.
For this reason it is unlikely that Carsen ever finds his niche in Boston as his ascend will likely take several years which is longer than most deep bench players are given
Losing teams are typically dysfunctional.
Role players are at their worse in dysfunctional situations.
Ok, now that's out of the way who is Carsen and who can he become? Citing his <40% college shooting is laughable as he was constantly asked to score against zone and trapping defenses who knew that Purdue had few other options. This criticism of Carsen reminds me of how people here were critical of Jaylen's freshman year at Cal without knowing of or simply ignoring the context surrounding his role on that team. To me, I see Carsen as a young Eddie House who faced similar circumstances in college as an undersized guard being asked to do so much since they were their teams best shooters/scorers.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/carsen-edwards-1.htmlhttps://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/eddie-house-1.html
House spent his first 3 years in Miami shooting 3's at around a 32% clip. He then bounced around some lottery teams (I saw him live in two Bobcat games and felt bad for him he was so out of place in an awful situation) until finding a limited role in Sacramento on a 50-win team with structure and great passers......and suddenly 32% shooting House shot 45% from 3! Wow, just like magic.....well, not really if you don't put the 32% or his college numbers into proper context and only look at a spreadsheet. This led House to find a consistent 2nd unit niche with a good Phoenix team then the Nets until finally landing in Boston and we know how that all played out from there on a team where a specialist filled a role with his unique skillset while having a strong supporting cast along with proper usage to mask his limitations.
This is the Carsen Edwards ceiling or better yet, his most likely successful role in this league. His floor is the House who never gets that opportunity to play on a team like Sacramento to open up eyes to him being able to become a specialist in this league. It's all about opportunity in 3-5 years for him...….if he never finds it/earns it, he'll fade away like many others. If he does find it/earn it like an Eddie House he can make a nice career out of this NBA thing for himself. As mentioned earlier, I highly doubt that place ends up being in Boston.
Because video footage of a player in college/overseas/HS is always the best way to evaluate players. Give me a break.This can't be stressed enough. The game has changed so much. Comps like Ben Gordon and J.R. Smith make absolutely no sense to me, they only compare if you judge players solely by their box score totals. Their body type and style of play makes them very different players to me.
House is a good comparison. Except we shouldn't be comparing the development path of a 3pt specialist in 2001 to one in 2019. The league takes twice as many 3s as it did then, 3pt shooting has suddenly been recognized as one of the single most important skills in the last 5 years. Through 9 games, Carsen is taking 2.8 3PA/g, House didn't take that many per game until his 6th year in the league, and only took 1.1 /game in similar minutes to what Edwards has so far.
Seriously, those of you doubting Edwards have watched video footage of him playing prior to this NBA regular season, right?
View: https://youtu.be/ZrYPpxF1Ln0
This is as much entertainment as serious analysis but does a good job of outlining what Edwards does well and what makes him unique offensively.
EDIT to add: I think what stuck out to me over the summer was the way Carsen moves off-ball. There was some commentator or player recently that said something to the effect of the hardest player in the league to guard was Steph Curry without the ball. Obviously he's not Curry, but he can be very slippery with his size and quickness.
preseason games last month against NBA starters is > college/overseas/HS .Because video footage of a player in college/overseas/HS is always the best way to evaluate players. Give me a break.
Sure told us a lot about Fultz, Josh Jackson and a plethora of other lottery picks. I'm probably wording myself wrong but highlight clips are garbage.
If by video footage you mean full games, yes.
Carsen's challenge, as I referred to above, is that of slowing the game down while figuring out the nuances of the NBA to mask his shortcomings. He could maybe get away with being on the floor during the regular season however in a playoff setting when teams are specifically gameplanning for 2 weeks I strongly doubt he is a guy I want out there over veterans who are much further advanced than Carsen and less of a liability.So a 50-win team, with a good supporting cast, found a role for House to flourish? sounds familiar
If Eddie House was playing today he wouldn't be bouncing around from team to team. A smart team would exploit House's skills. In today's NBA, they would keep him, use him more than the 17mpg he averaged and he'd play a bigger role.
^^what @PedrosRedGlove said ^^
Fair enough. Kerr and Barros are widely regarded as among the best in history. Shooting%% aside, as a general rule it's close to useles to compare any non immediate-star in the first month of their career to "among the best in history."I’m going to keep beating this drum, but raw 3pt percentage comparisons are pure, undiluted anti-knowledge. Difficulty and frequency and nature of the attempts are incredibly important.
I'm not sure that I agree with the bolded, especially when it's "among the best in history at X skill" and not "among the best in history."Fair enough. Kerr and Barros are widely regarded as among the best in history. Shooting%% aside, as a general rule it's close to useles to compare any non immediate-star in the first month of their career to "among the best in history."
He's still very nervous, the game hasn't slowed down yet for Carsen. That will come with minutes/experience, which Brad seems committed toCarsen's challenge, as I referred to above, is that of slowing the game down while figuring out the nuances of the NBA to mask his shortcomings. He could maybe get away with being on the floor during the regular season however in a playoff setting when teams are specifically gameplanning for 2 weeks I strongly doubt he is a guy I want out there over veterans who are much further advanced than Carsen and less of a liability.
House had a limited role because he gave it all up on the other end. Dana Barros too. I'm not sure it would be much different in today's NBA. Seth Curry and Quinn Cook don't play much more than 15-20 a night.So a 50-win team, with a good supporting cast, found a role for House to flourish? sounds familiar
If Eddie House was playing today he wouldn't be bouncing around from team to team. A smart team would exploit House's skills. In today's NBA, they would keep him, use him more than the 17mpg he averaged and he'd play a bigger role.
^^what @PedrosRedGlove said ^^
I agree with the last sentence, but there a pretty wide gap between "upside comparison" and comparing him to the "best in history at X skill." The former can be useful. The latter, IMO, not so much. But YMMV.I'm not sure that I agree with the bolded, especially when it's "among the best in history at X skill" and not "among the best in history."
Players like Edwards who are getting a shot in the league despite other severe liabilities (height, defense, whatever) usually do have some really elite skill, and it's useful to comp that skill to others who have been elite at it. It doesn't mean he's as good at it, or that he hits that, but it's helpful for understanding where his success might come from in the 5-15% chance he has success.
I think too often we dismiss any upside comparisons for young players as stupid, and then if the guy starts to hit that, act like the success was inevitable.
Right, my point is that the more narrowly you define a skill, the less crazy it is to talk about someone being close to the best in history at it. Like, I could say that Carsen Edwards is one of the best in history at having thicc quads while jacking tough 3s. Kerr's historically great skill (shooting assisted 3s at a high percentage at low volume) is similarly narrow.I agree with the last sentence, but there a pretty wide gap between "upside comparison" and comparing him to the "best in history at X skill." The former can be useful. The latter, IMO, not so much. But YMMV.
I never said it was the best way, but you seem to be evaluating him solely by looking at his college stat line without much context, which doesn't seem thorough either. I'm mostly referring to the game footage from the Summer League and preseason, stuff he was doing against at least almost-NBA competition, if you haven't watched the game highlights of him lighting up Virginia in the tournament that is also must watch Edwards porn.Because video footage of a player in college/overseas/HS is always the best way to evaluate players. Give me a break.
Sure told us a lot about Fultz, Josh Jackson and a plethora of other lottery picks. I'm probably wording myself wrong but highlight clips are garbage.
If by video footage you mean full games, yes.
edit: I assumed by video footage you meant youtube scouting. Maybe you didn't.
I'm just not going to wring my hands about Edward's defense. Brad figured out how to have the #1 defense with IT4 on the floor.House had a limited role because he gave it all up on the other end. Dana Barros too. I'm not sure it would be much different in today's NBA. Seth Curry and Quinn Cook don't play much more than 15-20 a night.
This is mostly spot on, IMO, but I think you have the wrong spin on why he will likely have his best years elsewhere. He's an asset (or likely to be one) in Boston in the short term because he's cheap and has one playable skill that happens to be a very important skill.Yup and I'm scared to read the rest of this thread so I'll just post my thoughts.
Carsen is a specialist with major flaws in other areas of his game.
Specialists require a unique role and function on a team or their flaws become fatal.
Young players typically need time to figure out how to best mask their weaknesses before teams identify them as a specialist on a winning team.
For this reason it is unlikely that Carsen ever finds his niche in Boston as his ascend will likely take several years which is longer than most deep bench players are given
Losing teams are typically dysfunctional.
Role players are at their worse in dysfunctional situations.
Ok, now that's out of the way who is Carsen and who can he become? Citing his <40% college shooting is laughable as he was constantly asked to score against zone and trapping defenses who knew that Purdue had few other options. This criticism of Carsen reminds me of how people here were critical of Jaylen's freshman year at Cal without knowing of or simply ignoring the context surrounding his role on that team. To me, I see Carsen as a young Eddie House who faced similar circumstances in college as an undersized guard being asked to do so much since they were their teams best shooters/scorers.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/carsen-edwards-1.htmlhttps://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/eddie-house-1.html
House spent his first 3 years in Miami shooting 3's at around a 32% clip. He then bounced around some lottery teams (I saw him live in two Bobcat games and felt bad for him he was so out of place in an awful situation) until finding a limited role in Sacramento on a 50-win team with structure and great passers......and suddenly 32% shooting House shot 45% from 3! Wow, just like magic.....well, not really if you don't put the 32% or his college numbers into proper context and only look at a spreadsheet. This led House to find a consistent 2nd unit niche with a good Phoenix team then the Nets until finally landing in Boston and we know how that all played out from there on a team where a specialist filled a role with his unique skillset while having a strong supporting cast along with proper usage to mask his limitations.
This is the Carsen Edwards ceiling or better yet, his most likely successful role in this league. His floor is the House who never gets that opportunity to play on a team like Sacramento to open up eyes to him being able to become a specialist in this league. It's all about opportunity in 3-5 years for him...….if he never finds it/earns it, he'll fade away like many others. If he does find it/earn it like an Eddie House he can make a nice career out of this NBA thing for himself. As mentioned earlier, I highly doubt that place ends up being in Boston.
If he develops consistency, he'll have value. I think he already has the ability to heat up quickly, it's not something he needs to learn. If he was on a really short leach, he could probably get by without consistency too.Hitting unassisted threes at a plus rate is a valuable skill to have, especially off the bench. In the extremely small sample, CE has five unassisted threes to four assisted. Jaylen Brown had only 10 unassisted threes his first two seasons combined. If Edwards can learn to heat up quickly, he could have value.
I saw him in person on Wednesday, his best game so far. He played more under control, and instead of gunning, found his opportunities within the offense. Edwards moves well on defense, and can cover with a low base, like Semi does. A lot of small players can move around well, but don't have much base strength.
Not a complete shocker, Carsen and Grant looked very rough on their first NBA Westcoast road trip. 5th and final game in Denver. Brad will need to figure out the best spots on the floor to feed Edwards. Step in 3s, kicked out from the paint would be better for Carsen/Grant at the moment. Try to create some confidence with both from 3.Like the guy or not, his shot selection needs some serious work.
Maybe he was under instructions to fire away at will yesterday to try and get the C's into the game.
They should take that approach anyway even if it doesn't pay off with Edwards and/or Williams in particular.Patience will be key. Take the Toronto Raptors approach to development it will pay off in the end.