CelticsStrong

Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: emilgold on January 09, 2013, 04:34:52 PM

Title: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: emilgold on January 09, 2013, 04:34:52 PM
I think that there is some perception in the media (and also here from time to time :)) that sully is undersized for the power forward position.

This perception was a huge part of his fall in the draft and it is the main reason that many people are discounting his upside.

well, every time I hear about it, I immediately thing about kevin love. love was drafted 5th overall, was on the all-rookie team, is a two time all-star, a 2nd team all-nba. yet he is basiclly identical to sully both physically and athletically and no one is talking about his size.

look it up, their measurements are freakishly similar:

here are their measurements from draftexpress:

    "height" "Wingspan"  "body Fat"   "no step vertical"   

sully   6'9       7' 1.25          10.7          29.5

love    6'9       6' 11.2              12.9          29.5

I believe that sully has a huge upside and to trade him now would be incredibly shortsighted.

one more thing: his numbers bear a lot of resemblance to love's rookie numbers. aside from the fact that due to being on a crappy team, love played and shot more than sully, their stats show that sully's level play as a rookie is not far (and in some measurments even better) than that of love's.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=sullija01&y1=2013&p2=loveke01&y2=2009








Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: kozlodoev on January 09, 2013, 04:58:18 PM
There's no use cherry-picking stats to prove a point that's not there.

DraftExpress measurements clearly indicate that Sullinger is less athletic than Love in every aspect, despite the fact Love had higher % of body fat at measurement time (sprint, lane agility, max vertical).

Also, Love's rookie stats bear zero resemblance to Sullinger's. He nearly averaged a double-double (11 and 9) in just 25 minutes of play. Sullinger averages 6 and 5 in 19 minutes. And the stat that most spectacularly doesn't compare are Sullinger's 3.1 fouls per game.

Also, athleticism wasn't at all huge in his slide. Getting red-flagged for back issues was.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: Chris on January 09, 2013, 05:05:19 PM
Sully is not an undersized PF.  He is either an undersized center, or a slow PF. 

Although, as we have been seeing lately, he is still deceptively quick, and his high BBIQ helps make up for his lack of speed.

Kevin Love is the same way way actually.  He is an undersized Center or slow PF.  Although, he got a lot quicker as he got in better shape once he was in the NBA a couple years, to combat that a bit. 
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: kozlodoev on January 09, 2013, 05:10:13 PM
Kevin Love is the same way way actually.  He is an undersized Center or slow PF.  Although, he got a lot quicker as he got in better shape once he was in the NBA a couple years, to combat that a bit.
Note that Love was considered slow and unathletic when he entered the league -- and he measured as appreciably more athletic than Sullinger at the same juncture of their respective careers.

No-one will confuse Sullinger for Kenny Thomas size-wize, but there are certain limitations for big men who are 6'9 and can neither jump too high nor run very fast.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: Chris on January 09, 2013, 05:15:53 PM
Kevin Love is the same way way actually.  He is an undersized Center or slow PF.  Although, he got a lot quicker as he got in better shape once he was in the NBA a couple years, to combat that a bit.
Note that Love was considered slow and unathletic when he entered the league -- and he measured as appreciably more athletic than Sullinger at the same juncture of their respective careers.

No-one will confuse Sullinger for Kenny Thomas size-wize, but there are certain limitations for big men who are 6'9 and can neither jump too high nor run very fast.

True.  Also note that Love is STILL relatively unathletic, and it is one reason a lot of people give for him being a terrible defender, and still not being an elite player in a lot of peoples minds, despite the numbers.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: PhoSita on January 09, 2013, 05:26:47 PM
Sullinger is a legit 6'9'' with a 7 foot wingspan.  In my mind he is not at all undersized for the PF position.  He certainly isn't the quickest or most athletic player, though, and isn't much of a threat as a shot-blocker. 

All of that means he's pretty solidly a PF, not a C, despite the fact that offensively his game is more like a center.  You need to put him next to a center with good size, shot-blocking ability, and some ability to stretch the floor.  He's a great fit next to a guy like KG.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: Kane3387 on January 09, 2013, 05:30:10 PM
I think that there is some perception in the media (and also here from time to time :)) that sully is undersized for the power forward position.

This perception was a huge part of his fall in the draft and it is the main reason that many people are discounting his upside.

well, every time I hear about it, I immediately thing about kevin love. love was drafted 5th overall, was on the all-rookie team, is a two time all-star, a 2nd team all-nba. yet he is basiclly identical to sully both physically and athletically and no one is talking about his size.

look it up, their measurements are freakishly similar:

here are their measurements from draftexpress:

    "height" "Wingspan"  "body Fat"   "no step vertical"   

sully   6'9       7' 1.25          10.7          29.5

love    6'9       6' 11.2              12.9          29.5

I believe that sully has a huge upside and to trade him now would be incredibly shortsighted.

one more thing: his numbers bear a lot of resemblance to love's rookie numbers. aside from the fact that due to being on a crappy team, love played and shot more than sully, their stats show that sully's level play as a rookie is not far (and in some measurments even better) than that of love's.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=1&p1=sullija01&y1=2013&p2=loveke01&y2=2009

I have been screaming this to anyone that will listen lol... TP

I really see Kevin Love, when he first entered the league, with a tan when I watch Sully this year. His rebounding and overall game are eerily similar.

There is a reason he was projected to go top 5 before the injuries scared people away. This guy has the potential to be a multi-time All-Star.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: SHAQATTACK on January 09, 2013, 05:36:22 PM
Yup..I would love to see  AB, SULLY , and Cousins on the Celtics.  It would be a nice starting core.

Giving up AB and Sully just plain sucks for anybody.   

Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: KGs Knee on January 09, 2013, 06:17:42 PM
Anything under 6'10" is undersized for a PF in my book.

Undersized does not necessarily equate to an inability to play the position, however.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: Celtics4ever on January 09, 2013, 06:20:48 PM
He fell in the draft for multiple reasons, lack of size, not a pure athlete and bad back.  So yes, he is undersized but he has a big heart and plays hard.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: LooseCannon on January 09, 2013, 06:32:50 PM
Sullinger and Love both have less than the ideal height for a power forward, so both can be considered undersized.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: Mr October on January 09, 2013, 06:33:13 PM
Anything under 6'10" is undersized for a PF in my book.

Undersized does not necessarily equate to an inability to play the position, however.

6-10 is ideal. But I bet the average is around 6-9.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: Chief Macho on January 09, 2013, 06:42:45 PM
yeah.  he is.  but i would compare him to other recent celtics like big baby, bass and powe.   once you learn the timing(nba speed) and how much body you need to create space, he'll be good.  He's way ahead of most those dudes. 
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: RyNye on January 09, 2013, 06:51:15 PM
There's no use cherry-picking stats to prove a point that's not there.

DraftExpress measurements clearly indicate that Sullinger is less athletic than Love in every aspect, despite the fact Love had higher % of body fat at measurement time (sprint, lane agility, max vertical).

What measurements are you referring to, exactly? You accuse the OP of cherry-picking stats and you don't even provide your own? From looking at DraftExpress, overall their measurements are incredibly similar. The only clear advantage I see is Love's maximum vertical is higher; everything else the measurements are so close as to be broadly considered analogous.



Quote
Also, Love's rookie stats bear zero resemblance to Sullinger's. He nearly averaged a double-double (11 and 9) in just 25 minutes of play. Sullinger averages 6 and 5 in 19 minutes. And the stat that most spectacularly doesn't compare are Sullinger's 3.1 fouls per game.

I wouldn't say "zero" resemblance. In fact, a lot of the advanced metrics rate the two rookie campaigns fairly similarly. Love was better offensively, but Sully is better defensively.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: erisred on January 09, 2013, 06:51:38 PM
I don't think size is Sullinger's problem. He's tall enough at 6'9" to play PF, he has fairly long arms and enough elevation on his jump to play the PF position both offensively and defensively. Sully's problem, in my mind, was his quickness, or lack there of, which I thought would make him too slow to play good defense against other PF's in the league and not having quite enough length to make his power post game translate to the NBA against Centers.

What were my expectations? Role player PF off the bench playing 15 minutes a game behind a good PF on a good team, or marginal starter on a poor team.  I am more optimistic in my view of Sullinger's upside, but he's going to have to continue to improve his defense and his craftiness around the hoop to go above those expectations.

OTOH, if he can continue to improve on defense and start to make 15 foot jump shots with consistency, and especially if he can stretch his jump shot out to the 3 pt line he is going to vastly exceed my expectations for him.

He's doing better than I thought he would on both defensive rotations and getting his shot into the basket instead of getting it blocked. I've always liked his "intangibles", but BBIQ and grit aren't enough to be in the core of a championship team. To make the core Sully is going to have to bring one, preferably two, skills to the party: +rebounding, +post game, +defense, +mid-range shot, and/or +3 pt shot.

If I were Danny I wouldn't trade him now. Give him this season to develop. By next year I think DA & Doc will have a very good handle on Sully's top level. If it is "core worthy" then keep him...like DA did with Perk and Rondo. If it is "role player" then he's trade fodder for someone better.

I will say, though, that no matter what Sullinger will need a different type of front court mate than Bass. Those two don't go together at all! Both of them need to be playing with somebody like KG to be most effective.  Okay, we are *very* unlikely to get a young KG, but the type needed is a very long, lean, athletic, rim protector. I think someone like Blatche or Mcgee would be a good choice. Fab Melo would be ideal, but he's a project and may never pan out...although signs look pretty good.

Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: kozlodoev on January 09, 2013, 06:52:49 PM
Anything under 6'10" is undersized for a PF in my book.

Undersized does not necessarily equate to an inability to play the position, however.

6-10 is ideal. But I bet the average is around 6-9.
This is a curious question, and I could find very little on it around the net. But I did find this tool:

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?page=avepos&year=2008&source=All&draft=100&sort=

Apparently, the average height of drafted PFs for the last 4 years is 6'7.5 to 6'8.5 without shoes. Given that by rule you can only add 1'25 to height for shoes, this translates to something like 6'9-6'10, give or take a quarter of an inch.

This is, of course, biased, given that a lot of big men get drafted solely on size, and then wash out. But I haven't found anything better, surprisingly enough.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: kozlodoev on January 09, 2013, 07:01:58 PM
There's no use cherry-picking stats to prove a point that's not there.

DraftExpress measurements clearly indicate that Sullinger is less athletic than Love in every aspect, despite the fact Love had higher % of body fat at measurement time (sprint, lane agility, max vertical).

What measurements are you referring to, exactly? You accuse the OP of cherry-picking stats and you don't even provide your own? From looking at DraftExpress, overall their measurements are incredibly similar. The only clear advantage I see is Love's maximum vertical is higher; everything else the measurements are so close as to be broadly considered analogous.
I've listed the measurements in the post you cited: max vertical, 3/4 court sprint, lane agility. Toss bench press to that if you'd like. The differences are not at all trivial, and Love clearly has the edge in all of these. Love also has the higher standing reach.

They're only equal in no-step vertical, and Sullinger has a couple of inches of wingspan extra, the only two stats that the original poster conveniently cites as proof of his thesis -- clear cherry picking.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: ScottHow on January 09, 2013, 07:28:51 PM
I don't think their rookie numbers are comparable. I think fans should stop trying to say he is a Love type. Comparing players to others is too hard bc no one player is the same.

Trying to guess future stats is fine, but trying to fit him into a Love mold gets tricky. He's just gonna be Sully
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: kozlodoev on January 09, 2013, 08:38:14 PM
He's just gonna be Sully
And he's going to be great. Maybe not 20/12 great, but still.
Title: Re: Is sully really undersized? (a kevin love comparison)
Post by: danglertx on January 09, 2013, 08:47:49 PM
Not sure why people seem to want to put Sully into the All Star or top player slot.  Can't he just be a really solid 4 who gobbles up rebounds and uses his IQ to be a good defender and score when needed?

You don't need to have all stars at every position, you need role players at at least two spots, if not three and then on the bench.

I'd be thrilled if Sully really never gets appreciably better than he is now and we get a cheap role guy for 5 years and maybe more. 

If the guy does get better, icing.