Timelord Injury Watch

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I wouldn't be shocked to see TL's FT shooting improve with more minutes, his form is OKish. But 3pt shooting? He'll be a threat from distance much like that coward Ben Simmons.
To be clear, I always liked TL’s face-up potential which isn’t to say I like those mechanics to translate to 3-pointers bc I don’t. He has a nice wind-up high release that can be effective from the FT area while Allen has more of a push shot that has potential to play better from 3 and not the mid-range.
 

Bernie Carbohydrate

writes the Semi-Fin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2001
4,047
South Carolina via Dorchestah
@JakeRae I would love to hear what your formula says about Ben Simmons and some other "If on that guy could only shoot 3s" (langford is another).
A Ben Simmons who can shoot the three (say at 40%, like Rondo or Jamal Murrary) is a top ten player in the league, right?

For fun check out 76ers twitter in the summer. Every offseason Simmons posts workout videos in which he drains three after three. It's like he's trolling his own fans....
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,460
A Ben Simmons who can shoot the three (say at 40%, like Rondo or Jamal Murrary) is a top ten player in the league, right?

For fun check out 76ers twitter in the summer. Every offseason Simmons posts workout videos in which he drains three after three. It's like he's trolling his own fans....
He's a top 10 probably undersells it. He's in the conversation for best defender in the league, he's a good passer and has a sold attacking the basket game.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
@JakeRae I would love to hear what your formula says about Ben Simmons and some other "If on that guy could only shoot 3s" (langford is another).
Since Simmons doesn’t attempt threes, doesn’t make them on the rare instances he does, and is a bad FT shooter, any projection of his shooting will say he will remain awful at it. On Langford, I think it would be foolish to try to project him based on statistics so far. He’s shot a total of 45 threes and 37 free throws in his NBA career and we also know has been working on remaking his shot. A projection would be a little less negative about him because he shoots at modest volume and his FT% is not terrible (but not good).

The short version is there are probably four things worth looking at to project future three point shooting. Past three point shooting, past volume, free throw shooting, and form/scouting. I’m not convinced that any of these are consistent with optimism that either Allen or Timelord will develop a three point shot.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,154
San Francisco
Since Simmons doesn’t attempt threes, doesn’t make them on the rare instances he does, and is a bad FT shooter, any projection of his shooting will say he will remain awful at it. On Langford, I think it would be foolish to try to project him based on statistics so far. He’s shot a total of 45 threes and 37 free throws in his NBA career and we also know has been working on remaking his shot. A projection would be a little less negative about him because he shoots at modest volume and his FT% is not terrible (but not good).

The short version is there are probably four things worth looking at to project future three point shooting. Past three point shooting, past volume, free throw shooting, and form/scouting. I’m not convinced that any of these are consistent with optimism that either Allen or Timelord will develop a three point shot.
Out of curiosity can you share the formula? I am curious what method and data they used and what the error was.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
The short version is there are probably four things worth looking at to project future three point shooting. Past three point shooting, past volume, free throw shooting, and form/scouting. I’m not convinced that any of these are consistent with optimism that either Allen or Timelord will develop a three point shot.
What does that say about Marcus Smart as a 3 point shooter?

I hope someday he can match DeMarcus Cousin's three point %....
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
Out of curiosity can you share the formula? I am curious what method and data they used and what the error was.
I don’t know that I can relocate it. There are a lot of studies on the existence of the correlation around these metrics and I looked for an easy to apply formula to produce a rough estimate. This was never intended to be precise on my part but to simply illustrate the rather obvious point that Allen’s FT shooting this far in his career (or any other measurable aspect of his past shooting performance) doesn’t support a belief he will develop the ability to shoot threes in a value positive way.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,405
around the way
He's a top 10 probably undersells it. He's in the conversation for best defender in the league, he's a good passer and has a sold attacking the basket game.
Yeah Simmons at .400, even if only on wide open takes, is a top5 player. If you have to cover that guy 23 feet from the basket, God help us all.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
What does that say about Marcus Smart as a 3 point shooter?

I hope someday he can match DeMarcus Cousin's three point %....
I’m not in the projection business. My personal expectation would be that Smart’s last three years form a reasonable baseline for what one should expect from him. There’s a pretty clear jump in all his shooting categories, threes, FT, long 2s, from his first 4 seasons to his last 3. That means I’d guess about .350 on a going forward basis. I should be clear that isn’t a projection, just like my post about Allen wasn’t a projection but a summary of why I didn’t understand the basis for a belief in him developing an outside shot based on purportedly good FT shooting that isn’t actually good or indicative of an ability to develop an outside shot.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I’m not in the projection business. My personal expectation would be that Smart’s last three years form a reasonable baseline for what one should expect from him. There’s a pretty clear jump in all his shooting categories, threes, FT, long 2s, from his first 4 seasons to his last 3. That means I’d guess about .350 on a going forward basis. I should be clear that isn’t a projection, just like my post about Allen wasn’t a projection but a summary of why I didn’t understand the basis for a belief in him developing an outside shot based on purportedly good FT shooting that isn’t actually good or indicative of an ability to develop an outside shot.
I’m not sure anyone was saying Allen “would” provide value as a 3-point shooter……..only that he has a better chance than TL. I haven’t read entire thread but that was my only point which was more of a TL 3-point fade than Allen being a net positive out there.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
I’m not in the projection business. My personal expectation would be that Smart’s last three years form a reasonable baseline for what one should expect from him. There’s a pretty clear jump in all his shooting categories, threes, FT, long 2s, from his first 4 seasons to his last 3. That means I’d guess about .350 on a going forward basis. I should be clear that isn’t a projection, just like my post about Allen wasn’t a projection but a summary of why I didn’t understand the basis for a belief in him developing an outside shot based on purportedly good FT shooting that isn’t actually good or indicative of an ability to develop an outside shot.
From your fingertips to God's ears. I'll take .350. The fact that he's only done it once in his career, and on less volume than he has taken in the past 2 years makes me a bit skeptical.

Of course, I never thought Lonzo Ball would turn into a respectable 3 point shooter (or free throw shooter) and he blew all that out of the water last year. So there is always a chance.
 

JM3

often quoted
SoSH Member
Dec 14, 2019
14,283
He's always wide open and his release looks slow to me.
Obviously posting the video was a joke, but he's got a 7'6 wingspan & doesn't do this that much so neither of those things are a surprise, & there's a few steps between becoming a semi-competent shooter of wide open 3s & a shooter with gravity who people will come flying at.

The idea would be even if he becomes a 38% 3 point shooter or whatever, that still wouldn't be at high volume & would just be these open type looks where you can take your time.

If he gets good enough that people would come flying at him, that opens up a whole lot more for the offense, even if he literally never shot when that was something that was happening.

He's 22. It's possible. I certainly wouldn't go so far as to say likely, though.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
He's always wide open and his release looks slow to me.
That’s the only time he’d be taking them, when he’s wide open stretching the floor, so the slow release will rarely matter. This isn’t like a Pritchard who will be pressured with the ball behind the arc.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,951
Isle of Plum
48 looks even better.
It does indeed. One of SOSH's capologists upthread quoted the max variable component (or was that specifically 'unlikely to be earned' variable?) at 15% of contract value, which would be just over 7m so it seems like they pretty much hit that limit.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,017
Imaginationland
Timelord had a career high minutes tonight (by a mile), and was still impossibly efficient - 16 points on 5 shots, 3 assists, no turnovers, no missed shots, one foul. He also had 10 rebounds, 5 blocks and 3 steals and (along with Brown) was a bright light in the opener. Stating the obvious here, but health is the only thing standing in the way of his deal being a great one for the Celtics.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,500
Timelord had a career high minutes tonight (by a mile), and was still impossibly efficient - 16 points on 5 shots, 3 assists, no turnovers, no missed shots, one foul. He also had 10 rebounds, 5 blocks and 3 steals and (along with Brown) was a bright light in the opener. Stating the obvious here, but health is the only thing standing in the way of his deal being a great one for the Celtics.
45 minutes in the first game after knee soreness is an interesting decision. Let's hope this is just a good omen as to how many games he is going to play this year.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,476
Melrose, MA
Timelord had a career high minutes tonight (by a mile), and was still impossibly efficient - 16 points on 5 shots, 3 assists, no turnovers, no missed shots, one foul. He also had 10 rebounds, 5 blocks and 3 steals and (along with Brown) was a bright light in the opener. Stating the obvious here, but health is the only thing standing in the way of his deal being a great one for the Celtics.
After Brown, he was the best Celtic in this one. Impressive stats across the board, and this was a game where the stats don't tell the whole story. His defense on Randle was the key to the comeback, and at least 2 of his 5 blocks were of outside shots.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
2,445
Seattle
The only bad thing about this extension is that I miss seeing the I Believe in Timelord, Why Can’t You? thread on the first page.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
I'll rain on the parade, but I was hoping to see him able to make a simple move around the hoop and score without dunking. Even minor improvement in this area and we have a much more valuable player. People stay home when he catches it because either he blasts it or makes a pass.
On a positive note (I hope) the team must think his minute totals are fitness, not injury risk because it seems like they are 'playing him into shape' leaving him in the game.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
TL has played passive, but believe that's his attempt at pacing himself.

It was one of the things he mentioned in pre-season interviews

Looks like Horford is OUT tonight so we'll lean heavily on Rob

Also still not a fan of playing Al & TL together, but Ime likes it and at least he is now staggering them
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,017
Imaginationland
I actually like the two of them together, but in addition to staggering them, it only works if Kanter gets some time. I completely understand his limitations but I don't see how he can't be helpful for 10-15 minutes against backups in the regular season. He averaged a double double in 24 mpg last year and there's no confidence in our ability to rebound when Grant is the center.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
I actually like the two of them together, but in addition to staggering them, it only works if Kanter gets some time. I completely understand his limitations but I don't see how he can't be helpful for 10-15 minutes against backups in the regular season. He averaged a double double in 24 mpg last year and there's no confidence in our ability to rebound when Grant is the center.
We should have zero confidence in Grant rebounding as our 5. He's not long or athletic enough to play Center. Zero vertical. GW will probably start at the 4/swing tonight

Kanter will be a better option at the 5 for 15mins against CHA
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
They play together fine but they can’t be out there together all the time because at least one of them has to be out there most of the time.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
They play together fine but they can’t be out there together all the time because at least one of them has to be out there most of the time.
Having them out there together makes us easier to defend especially when Smart is at the 1. You have 60% of the lineup who aren’t threats against their man off the dribble which is compounded by a more ball movement offense. The other thing is if you play them together to start then stagger you are giving TL an expanded minutes role and if he feels that he must “pace himself” then we aren’t getting optimal production out of his minutes.

I wonder if Brad gave Ime full autonomy on minutes and rotations. Basically who ok’d TL to play 46 min on opening night? That seems kinda negligent for a guy with his history with 81 regular season games ahead of us. We may go back to this later in the season.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
32,620
Having them out there together makes us easier to defend especially when Smart is at the 1. You have 60% of the lineup who aren’t threats against their man off the dribble which is compounded by a more ball movement offense. The other thing is if you play them together to start then stagger you are giving TL an expanded minutes role and if he feels that he must “pace himself” then we aren’t getting optimal production out of his minutes.

I wonder if Brad gave Ime full autonomy on minutes and rotations. Basically who ok’d TL to play 46 min on opening night? That seems kinda negligent for a guy with his history with 81 regular season games ahead of us. We may go back to this later in the season.
Thats a good point about them being out there with Smart. What do you think is the best lineup to close out close games.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Thats a good point about them being out there with Smart. What do you think is the best lineup to close out close games.
Aside from final minute Off/Def substitutions and anything unusual with Opp lineup there are three absolutes……Tatum, Jaylen and Schroder (yes I’m aware of the warts and he’s not ideal but we don’t have better on this roster to run the team as it stands). I prefer Horford over TL right now with the other wing slot being Smart if he can get his head right.

I place this mess on Smart being mentally preparing to play out of position at the point rather than keep him solely in his comfort zone as a secondary initiator and wing defender. This isn’t a new position as I warned of this all summer. I hate how Smart was handled leading into this year.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
I place this mess on Smart being mentally preparing to play out of position at the point rather than keep him solely in his comfort zone as a secondary initiator and wing defender. This isn’t a new position as I warned of this all summer. I hate how Smart was handled leading into this year.
It felt like a PR move with Smart, "build him up/big role/main piece" in a prelude to a deal this January or next Summer. This team is still a star away, as much as people don't want to hear it, we're still in bridge mode. It would be nice if they could build some sort of asset value from the 4 youngsters (PP, AN, RL, GW). The entire roster is available, ex-JAYs, come January or Summer
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
Pritchard should start with the Jays, one of TL/AL, and one of Smart/JRich. There is enough defensive heft to cover for PP, and his range opens up the floor for the Jays.

AL, Tatum, JRich, Brown, PP starting
TL, Grant, Smart, DS, Nesmith/Romeo bench unit

Every PG option on this roster has flaws. That second unit should be one of the better ones in the league.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
It felt like a PR move with Smart, "build him up/big role/main piece" in a prelude to a deal this January or next Summer. This team is still a star away, as much as people don't want to hear it, we're still in bridge mode. It would be nice if they could build some sort of asset value from the 4 youngsters (PP, AN, RL, GW). The entire roster is available, ex-JAYs, come January or Summer
I don't think they need a "star" like Beal, though he would help. They need a 3 & D player who can do both the 3 and the D, not one or the other. If that player could pass a little, all the better.
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,957
Saskatoon Canada
Pritchard should start with the Jays, one of TL/AL, and one of Smart/JRich. There is enough defensive heft to cover for PP, and his range opens up the floor for the Jays.

AL, Tatum, JRich, Brown, PP starting
TL, Grant, Smart, DS, Nesmith/Romeo bench unit

Every PG option on this roster has flaws. That second unit should be one of the better ones in the league.
I doubt Pritchard ever starts in his whole career. He is just too small and too much of a guy you can pick on. He isn't a rocket that can blow by and create. He will play against the right matchups, and make lots of shots. Most teams just go at him without mercy. Unlike other smaller guys he is just adequate on the ball. Adequate on ball defender and exceptional shooter is a very valuable guy, but he'll be 24 in January, doubt there is huge growth (pun intended) in his defensive abilities.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
It felt like a PR move with Smart, "build him up/big role/main piece" in a prelude to a deal this January or next Summer. This team is still a star away, as much as people don't want to hear it, we're still in bridge mode. It would be nice if they could build some sort of asset value from the 4 youngsters (PP, AN, RL, GW). The entire roster is available, ex-JAYs, come January or Summer
The problem with that is changing Smart’s role and position isn’t without consequence. There is an enormous difference from his prior role and what they wanted him to become (or thought he was capable of becoming) and I’d argue that going from a 2 to a 1 and back to a 2 is the biggest challenge for a player to make due to the change in responsibilities and simply that everything that you were accustomed to playing off the ball has now changed. The game may be becoming positionless but not for awkward fit of a 2 being asked to be a primary 1 on both ends.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I doubt Pritchard ever starts in his whole career. He is just too small and too much of a guy you can pick on. He isn't a rocket that can blow by and create. He will play against the right matchups, and make lots of shots. Most teams just go at him without mercy. Unlike other smaller guys he is just adequate on the ball. Adequate on ball defender and exceptional shooter is a very valuable guy, but he'll be 24 in January, doubt there is huge growth (pun intended) in his defensive abilities.
I agree with this. If ever there was a guy made for a second-unit role it is Pritchard.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,112
Santa Monica
The problem with that is changing Smart’s role and position isn’t without consequence. There is an enormous difference from his prior role and what they wanted him to become (or thought he was capable of becoming) and I’d argue that going from a 2 to a 1 and back to a 2 is the biggest challenge for a player to make due to the change in responsibilities and simply that everything that you were accustomed to playing off the ball has now changed. The game may be becoming positionless but not for awkward fit of a 2 being asked to be a primary 1 on both ends.
I imagine they will eventually put Schroder with Smart in the starting and/or closing lineup. Smart, should return to being a wing/secondary ballhandler, I wouldn't worry about it too much.

As Dennis gets more comfortable playing with Tatum/Brown he'll improve/add more value. He'll figure out his spots, lanes, and where Tatum/Brown want the ball. You could even see it last night, Dennis was much better in the 2nd half.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,476
Melrose, MA
I doubt Pritchard ever starts in his whole career. He is just too small and too much of a guy you can pick on. He isn't a rocket that can blow by and create. He will play against the right matchups, and make lots of shots. Most teams just go at him without mercy. Unlike other smaller guys he is just adequate on the ball. Adequate on ball defender and exceptional shooter is a very valuable guy, but he'll be 24 in January, doubt there is huge growth (pun intended) in his defensive abilities.
I think this is right on. Unless he takes the weird unpredictable leap, his role is somewhere between shooter off the banch and backup PG.