NBA Chatter Thread

Simpleton said:
Yes, either that or drive into the paint for a layup or dunk.
Click to expand...
That's NBA basketball in a nutshell over the last 20 years. The mid-range jumper is a lost art that practically died with Kobe's retirement. The only guys that even attempt them now are the occasional big men.
 
Deuce said:
That's NBA basketball in a nutshell over the last 20 years. The mid-range jumper is a lost art that practically died with Kobe's retirement. The only guys that even attempt them now are the occasional big men.
Click to expand...

The only guards/forwards who I can think of who make most of their money from midrange are D-Wade and Demar Derozan......and Westbrook to a lesser degree.
 
1bigfan13 said:
Taking 50 3-point shots per game isn't an entertaining brand of basketball to me, but unfortunately it looks like the game is headed down that road because the analytics geeks have devalued the midrange shot.
Click to expand...

Yeah basically it's not that much more difficult to shoot from 3 as it is to shoot from mid range. So analytics are going to tell you, take the shot worth 150% more points. The close stuff is still there because the shooting percentage on those shots basically sky rockets up.
 
Deuce said:
That's NBA basketball in a nutshell over the last 20 years. The mid-range jumper is a lost art that practically died with Kobe's retirement. The only guys that even attempt them now are the occasional big men.
Click to expand...

Yea but I think the Rockets style of play is more exaggerated.
 
As everyone predicted, Kelly Olynyk is the difference maker to lead the C's to the ECF.

:towel
 
Simpleton said:
They'd be better off trading it for an established player, either Butler or George if they don't think they'll land Hayward or a PF/big.
Click to expand...
I think Hayward is a lock. If he weren't, I would be all in on Jackson. I love the player.

Not sure what bigs can be made available at that price. I still love Boogie Cousins, but pickings are thin.
 
Genghis Khan said:
Hopefully the sixers are smart and draft Jackson.
Click to expand...
I think he's great and would be a great fit.

Personally, I hope you draft Ball and have to watch Stephen A. Smith talk with him constantly on Philly TV.

Ok, nevermind...I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
 
BipolarFan said:
Of course, no dominant big man for the Celtics draft #1.
Click to expand...

I don't think a dominant big man is as big of a need as a dominant wing player. There just aren't dominant big guys anymore and you can easily win with Al Horford types. But when the entire scoring load is put on one players shoulders and you have inconsistent, defensive minded players at both the 2 and 3, you likely won't go far. IT4 needs a player on the floor with him that can do more than just spot up shoot. Fultz or Jackson could be that player.
 
Deuce said:
I think he's great and would be a great fit.

Personally, I hope you draft Ball and have to watch Stephen A. Smith talk with him constantly on Philly TV.

Ok, nevermind...I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
Click to expand...

:lol

:fyou
 
Deuce said:
I don't think a dominant big man is as big of a need as a dominant wing player. There just aren't dominant big guys anymore and you can easily win with Al Horford types. But when the entire scoring load is put on one players shoulders and you have inconsistent, defensive minded players at both the 2 and 3, you likely won't go far. IT4 needs a player on the floor with him that can do more than just spot up shoot. Fultz or Jackson could be that player.
Click to expand...

I'm hearing conflicting reports on Jackson's shooting. Some people seem to think, I guess partly because of his free throw percentage, that Jackson can't shoot and his shot is broken. Honestly it looks fine to me.

I think Fultz is a great fit for the Celtics. I can see why some people have said Jackson is the better fit, but I think Fultz is simply the better player and he should fit fine with Thomas.
 
Deuce said:
I don't think a dominant big man is as big of a need as a dominant wing player. There just aren't dominant big guys anymore and you can easily win with Al Horford types. But when the entire scoring load is put on one players shoulders and you have inconsistent, defensive minded players at both the 2 and 3, you likely won't go far. IT4 needs a player on the floor with him that can do more than just spot up shoot. Fultz or Jackson could be that player.
Click to expand...

The conundrum that faces the Celtics is that there isn't a player in this draft who projects to have the impact of an Anthony Davis or Karl Anthony-Towns within the first year or two. I think you're likely to get a Jabari Parker or Andrew Wiggins level player who is kind of up and down to start and then starts to become established Year 2 going into Year 3, although still not quite as an elite player.

Basically I don't think Fultz, Ball, Jackson or who ever will be "starter on a Finals contender" good until about Year 3, if that, at which point Horford will be like 34, Thomas (a player who probably won't age gracefully) will be about 31 and alot of the depth that is currently on rookie deals (Smart, Olynyk, Rozier) will be gone or nearly gone, not to mention one or both of Avery Bradley/Jae Crowder as well.

So at that point you're left with:

1: Aging Thomas
2: Year 3 or 4 Fultz
3: Hayward if they sign him
4:??
5: Shell of his former self Horford, and not much depth because Thomas, Horford and Hayward are on gigantic contracts.

The main reason the Celtics are where they are (aside from how shit the East is) is their depth and the fact that Thomas, Bradley and Crowder are on extremely team-friendly deals. Thomas and Bradley will both be unrestricted FA's after next season and will likely both be looking for max deals.

Where they're at right now, next year, and maybe 2018-19 is probably their peak unless whoever they take at 1 surprisingly ends up being a transcendent player.

That's why I think trading it for an established star, if possible, is the best route to go.
 
Yeah, if I was the Celtics I would strongly consider flipping BOTH Nets picks for Butler.

Or would have. Having him to face the Cavs this year would make the Celtics the favorites IMO.
 
Simpleton said:
The conundrum that faces the Celtics is that there isn't a player in this draft who projects to have the impact of an Anthony Davis or Karl Anthony-Towns within the first year or two. I think you're likely to get a Jabari Parker or Andrew Wiggins level player who is kind of up and down to start and then starts to become established Year 2 going into Year 3, although still not quite as an elite player.

Basically I don't think Fultz, Ball, Jackson or who ever will be "starter on a Finals contender" good until about Year 3, if that, at which point Horford will be like 34, Thomas (a player who probably won't age gracefully) will be about 31 and alot of the depth that is currently on rookie deals (Smart, Olynyk, Rozier) will be gone or nearly gone, not to mention one or both of Avery Bradley/Jae Crowder as well.

So at that point you're left with:

1: Aging Thomas
2: Year 3 or 4 Fultz
3: Hayward if they sign him
4:??
5: Shell of his former self Horford, and not much depth because Thomas, Horford and Hayward are on gigantic contracts.

The main reason the Celtics are where they are (aside from how shit the East is) is their depth and the fact that Thomas, Bradley and Crowder are on extremely team-friendly deals. Thomas and Bradley will both be unrestricted FA's after next season and will likely both be looking for max deals.

Where they're at right now, next year, and maybe 2018-19 is probably their peak unless whoever they take at 1 surprisingly ends up being a transcendent player.

That's why I think trading it for an established star, if possible, is the best route to go.
Click to expand...

You're forgetting about the greatness that is Kelly Olynyk. :unsure

I honestly don't have a problem trading this pick (or next years sure fire top 3 pick) for an established player...but I'm just not doing it for a 1 year rental or someone who has a similar skill set to what we already have. As I said, I think Hayward will happen and I don't think they plan to trade the pick for Butler instead of going that route, even if Butler is a more complete player. Stevens is familiar with him and wants to reunite. So who do we trade the pick for? Big men are so sparse, good ones don't come cheap and certainly not for just a 1st overall pick. I would be more than happy to work a sign an trade with the Jazz for Hayward and include more than the #1 if it also lands Gobert. But other than he or Cousins, the pickings are slim.
 
mschmidt64 said:
Yeah, if I was the Celtics I would strongly consider flipping BOTH Nets picks for Butler.

Or would have. Having him to face the Cavs this year would make the Celtics the favorites IMO.
Click to expand...

Wait, you mean one or the other to have landed him, right? Not both.
 
Deuce said:
Wait, you mean one or the other to have landed him, right? Not both.
Click to expand...

I would have considered offering both. Or both in a package for Butler and more.

I DEFINITELY would have offered one or the other.

Maybe wouldn't do both now, because at this point I'm down a playoff run with him. And for a 27 year old player in his prime you are expecting 4-5 more top years, so his value to you as a franchise by not having him for this playoff run is decreased 20-25%.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom