Celtics Blog Forums

Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: celtics2 on January 15, 2013, 07:49:03 AM

Title: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: celtics2 on January 15, 2013, 07:49:03 AM
Bradley has single handed turned the team around again. Say it ain't so even though this is the second time he did it. Pierce, KG and certainly Rondo didn't do it. Forget about the rest. Posters including myself have expoused it was our only hope. This team needed a stick of dynamite. How long can he keep this up with his present conditioning. Who knows. He is a diamond in the rough.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: PhoSita on January 15, 2013, 07:52:08 AM
The biggest thing I can point to Bradley doing is that he seems to have inspired Lee.  It's almost like Lee saw the way Bradley plays defense and went "Hey, wait, you mean I can play intense defense all game long?"

That has made it easier for the big men because the guards are doing a better job preventing penetration and trapping guards on the PnR.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Lightskinsmurf on January 15, 2013, 07:56:09 AM
Yup, I remember reading posts constantly ripping guys for "overrating" bradley. I think it was "The legend of ab" keeps growing and all this other nonsense. Some guys were looking forward to his return just so when we lose with him they can say "told ya so". Well, he comes back and almost instantly we go on our best run of the season. Just a coincidence tho right? ::)
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Bankshot on January 15, 2013, 08:04:13 AM
I knew the team would improve upon Bradley return, but I didn't think he the turnaround would be this huge. :o

I think his coming back not only helped the defense, but he brought life back to the team.  It also moved everyone back to their respective roles which helps as well.  They are exciting to watch now.

I can't remember who Tommy was talking about, by I remember a couple of years ago Tommy said that everytime he played this certain player whether he scored or not(he was a hustler and defensive player), they would win.  I can't remember which player he was talking about.  That's Bradley on the current team.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: alajet on January 15, 2013, 08:08:19 AM
If it's about him being the only reason, I'd say no. He's a part of it, though. Sullinger and Lee's improving performance, also, Green's better shooting has helped.
Now, we are waiting for Jet's contribution and the team should be all right moving forward.

Thank God it's not just because of him. We are already unable to handle the time when KG comes off. If Lee wasn't as good as he has been in this stretch, we wouldn't be winning game after game right now.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Lightskinsmurf on January 15, 2013, 08:16:34 AM
Sully was being sully before AB got back. Green was up and down. We said AB would influence everyone else to play better on the defensive end and that's what you're seeing. Ab is doing exactly what most were preaching for weeks. Playing elite defense and its rubbing off on everyone around him.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: azzenfrost on January 15, 2013, 08:18:44 AM
They see how hard he's working on defense. Any proud man wouldn't be worth his salt if that didn't make them want to play harder.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: slamtheking on January 15, 2013, 08:19:27 AM
Bradley has single handed turned the team around again. Say it ain't so even though this is the second time he did it. Pierce, KG and certainly Rondo didn't do it. Forget about the rest. Posters including myself have expoused it was our only hope. This team needed a stick of dynamite. How long can he keep this up with his present conditioning. Who knows. He is a diamond in the rough.
His return has helped but as others have mentioned, other members of the team have also improved such as Lee, Green and Sully.  Bass is also looking like his shot is coming back.  Heck, even JET is playing better D (last night not included) lately.

AB is part of the team's improvement but he's not the sole reason for it.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Lightskinsmurf on January 15, 2013, 08:25:26 AM
Saying AB isn't the sole reason is beyond laughable. Wait, so you're saying AB isn't the only one out there playing well? Obviously its a TEAM effort. However AB has SINGLE HANDEDLY lifted the TEAM. We were playing like TRASH before he came back 3 games under 500. He comes back and right away we start posting insane defensive numbers and start winning. None of this happens if AB doesn't come back, period.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: pearljammer10 on January 15, 2013, 08:37:03 AM
He is certainly the biggest part of the turnaround but I think he just came back at the right time. It worked out well. The biggest factors of Bradleys return:

1. Intensity. His all out play on every play inspires the rest of the team to do the same. It actually looks like the celts are having fun out there, and are actually giving a crap. While Bradley was gone we played like a bunch of zombies night in and night out just going through the motions.

2. Placing players in their right roles. Seeing Bradley return placed players into the roles that they are supposed to have on the team. Our starting 5 is back together. Lee, Sully, and Green's roles were all defined and we see Doc with a pretty set rotation for the most part.

3. Timing. Im sure chemistry issue were starting to come together. The new guys were getting more comfortable with rotations and their game play, then Bradley just exposed that more for the better.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: RJ87 on January 15, 2013, 08:44:17 AM
He is certainly the biggest part of the turnaround but I think he just came back at the right time. It worked out well. The biggest factors of Bradleys return:

1. Intensity. His all out play on every play inspires the rest of the team to do the same. It actually looks like the celts are having fun out there, and are actually giving a crap. While Bradley was gone we played like a bunch of zombies night in and night out just going through the motions.

2. Placing players in their right roles. Seeing Bradley return placed players into the roles that they are supposed to have on the team. Are starting 5 is back together. Lee, Sully, and Green's roles were all defined and we see Doc with a pretty set rotation for the most part.

3. Timing. Im sure chemistry issue were starting to come together. The new guys were getting more comfortable with rotations and their game play, then Bradley just exposed that more for the better.

Tp. Especially on #2.

People underestimate the value of having guys know & play their roles. Starting Jet all those games, that's not what he was used to at this point in his career.  There's no more flux with the guard rotation and guys can finally settle into roles we brought them here to fill.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Lightskinsmurf on January 15, 2013, 08:53:29 AM

pearljammer10 I agree with everything you said except AB just came at "the right time". That's a ridiculous claim to make. This team was showing no signs of life when he returned. That's the "right time"? Nah. I agree with everything else tho.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: tarheelsxxiii on January 15, 2013, 09:13:53 AM
I'm with Lightskinsmurf
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Chris on January 15, 2013, 09:21:56 AM

pearljammer10 I agree with everything you said except AB just came at "the right time". That's a ridiculous claim to make. This team was showing no signs of life when he returned. That's the "right time"? Nah. I agree with everything else tho.

While I agree they looked listless before he got there, I also think they were just hitting the point of bottoming out as well. 

I think what I would say about Bradley was that he was the tipping point.  This team clearly had this in them, but they were in their own heads, their confidence was dead, and they also were missing one piece to hold the defense together.

You add Bradley, and suddenly that gives them the burst of energy they needed to turn it around. 

Bradley certainly deserves all of the credit in the world for that.  I just am not sure I would say it is something you can count on from him regularly.  Sometimes a team just needs a guy like Bradley to make everything else fall into place. 
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Celtics18 on January 15, 2013, 09:26:29 AM
Saying AB isn't the sole reason is beyond laughable. Wait, so you're saying AB isn't the only one out there playing well? Obviously its a TEAM effort. However AB has SINGLE HANDEDLY lifted the TEAM. We were playing like TRASH before he came back 3 games under 500. He comes back and right away we start posting insane defensive numbers and start winning. None of this happens if AB doesn't come back, period.

Much credit to Avery.  His return has clearly helped this team start to play up to their potential. 

Obviously, he's not the sole reason for our improved play, though.  It's truly been a team effort over these last six games.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: bfrombleacher on January 15, 2013, 09:27:37 AM
Can't say it's not because of him...

But also can't say it's all because of him.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Cman on January 15, 2013, 09:28:32 AM
If it's about him being the only reason, I'd say no. He's a part of it, though. Sullinger and Lee's improving performance, also, Green's better shooting has helped.
Now, we are waiting for Jet's contribution and the team should be all right moving forward.

Thank God it's not just because of him. We are already unable to handle the time when KG comes off. If Lee wasn't as good as he has been in this stretch, we wouldn't be winning game after game right now.

^^This

AB is part of the team's improvement but he's not the sole reason for it.

^^And This.


Much credit to Avery.  His return has clearly helped this team start to play up to their potential. 

Obviously, he's not the sole reason for our improved play, though.  It's truly been a team effort over these last six games.

^^Aaaaaaannnnd This.

And on to the next topic.

:)
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 15, 2013, 09:39:48 AM
I think part of the reason people didn't think he would be a savior is cause they thought he was too limited on offense and thought the 3 point shooting was a fluke.

He already seems to be a reliable corner 3 shooter and being one of the best cutters.in the league is going to really open things up on offense.

I don't think he needs to proove anything more from the corner 3. Between last year and already this year he's proved enough. He's running to that corner 3 on fast breaks for a reason
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: wdleehi on January 15, 2013, 09:41:55 AM
I think part of the reason people didn't think he would be a savior is cause they thought he was too limited on offense and thought the 3 point shooting was a fluke.

He already seems to be a reliable corner 3 shooter and being one of the best cutters.in the league is going to really open things up on offense.

I don't think he needs to proove anything more from the corner 3. Between last year and already this year he's proved enough. He's running to that corner 3 on fast breaks for a reason


I think a lot of people just wanted to see more and had concerns putting so much hope on a player with a limited run of success coming off an injury.





I don't think anyone is upset over how he is playing and how the team is playing right now. 
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: thirstyboots18 on January 15, 2013, 09:42:42 AM
I have said before, Avery Bradley's defense is of utmost importance to the Celtics. 

However, I don't think his actual "play" was the reason for the turnaround.  The simple fact is that Bradley being available pushed the rest of the team back to their natural positions and rotations, corrected the timing and spacing and allowed them to contribute within a comfort level.  Rondo can go back to his role...distributing and directing play without having to be the defensive stopper on every play.  CLee/Bradley form a dynamic defensive duo, sharing that load, and the effect ripples through the team.  Sully's confidence has improved, too, and the offensive rebounding is refreshing now that everyone doesn't have to rush back on defense.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Rondo2287 on January 15, 2013, 09:47:04 AM
I think part of the reason people didn't think he would be a savior is cause they thought he was too limited on offense and thought the 3 point shooting was a fluke.

He already seems to be a reliable corner 3 shooter and being one of the best cutters.in the league is going to really open things up on offense.

I don't think he needs to proove anything more from the corner 3. Between last year and already this year he's proved enough. He's running to that corner 3 on fast breaks for a reason


I think a lot of people just wanted to see more and had concerns putting so much hope on a player with a limited run of success coming off an injury.





I don't think anyone is upset over how he is playing and how the team is playing right now.

I believe I owe you an apology for bashing a backcourt of Rondo/Bradley because they couldnt shoot.  Rondo has been pretty solid shooting this year and I have been very impressed by Bradley on the offensive end so far this year.

Bradley defense is also a game changer but we knew that already.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: dtrader on January 15, 2013, 09:53:59 AM
Bradley has made a big difference, and is playing better than I expected, but to say the streak is all on him misses a lot. We would've beaten Phoenix and Charlotte playing badly and without Bradley. With or without Bradley, I doubt we would've beaten Houston, new York, or Atlanta without big games from Paul pierce.  Add the development of sullinger, green finally putting together a good string of games, and lee finally waking up, and you have the streak.  AB played a part, but I wouldn't say it was any more than a piece of the whole.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: eja117 on January 15, 2013, 09:55:29 AM
Bradley has single handed turned the team around again. Say it ain't so even though this is the second time he did it. Pierce, KG and certainly Rondo didn't do it. Forget about the rest. Posters including myself have expoused it was our only hope. This team needed a stick of dynamite. How long can he keep this up with his present conditioning. Who knows. He is a diamond in the rough.
I totally agree.  How many times do we have to see this? And I guarantee if Bradley goes down for the season tomorrow the team will be horrid again. Notice Rondo specifically said "We're gonna turn things around when Bradley gets back".  He didn't say "We're gonna turn things around as soon as we can" or "We're gonna turn things around near the all-star break".   It was specifically when Bradley got back.  He may not be the best player but he's second most important after KG.  I think you could put almost any competent players around those two and you'd have a good playoff team.

I tell you one other thing Bradley did. He exposed Ray Allen and single handedly ended the legend of Ray. Ray met Avery and immediately went from first ballot HOFer to third ballot. Went from one of the best ever to one of the guys who was very good.  And he better hope Miami wins another ring this year because if they don't he goes from a reason you win rings to a reason you lose them.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: celticinorlando on January 15, 2013, 09:58:44 AM
He has helped quite a bit..like the way the compass is pointing for the Cs...still wanting to see them keep this up....some players are still not with it quite yet (Terry, Lee) and need to come around
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: RyNye on January 15, 2013, 10:07:17 AM
I tell you one other thing Bradley did. He exposed Ray Allen and single handedly ended the legend of Ray. Ray met Avery and immediately went from first ballot HOFer to third ballot. Went from one of the best ever to one of the guys who was very good.  And he better hope Miami wins another ring this year because if they don't he goes from a reason you win rings to a reason you lose them.

I think this is a pretty absurd claim. It just sounds like you are being childishly bitter over Ray leaving. Nothing about Avery Bradley has tarnished Ray's career, or his status as a first ballot Hall of Famer. And Ray was far from being the reason we didn't win rings; even when Bradley replaced him as a starter, he was one of our 5 best players. His defensive woes were overstated (his defensive efficiency metrics were all above average for a shooting guard, actually), and his offense was (and remains) brilliant.

There are a lot of reasons why Ray lost his starting job here and left the team. And I can understand that you don't root for him anymore. But to actually straight-faced claim that this somehow damages his legacy is beyond hyperbolic. Ray Allen will still be remembered as an all time great.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: SHAQATTACK on January 15, 2013, 10:15:58 AM
Sure , Bradley exposed Ray ALlen as old crippled has been.

Homers were closing their eyes . But Bradley was killing it , when Ray Allen looked like grandfather time.

Allen has no business starting,  his body can't take the abuse for 30-40 minutes and play real defense. .  He is a bench player now . a role player, sharp shooter.

WIsh they would have traded him to Memphis...but he fits right in with the thugs in south beach.

Glade Allen is gone (el-jerko) . PERIOD.

GLADE to have a young nice player with a nice attitude.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: mctyson on January 15, 2013, 11:31:14 AM
Bradley has single handed turned the team around again. Say it ain't so even though this is the second time he did it. Pierce, KG and certainly Rondo didn't do it. Forget about the rest. Posters including myself have expoused it was our only hope. This team needed a stick of dynamite. How long can he keep this up with his present conditioning. Who knows. He is a diamond in the rough.

I was amused at how many people on this board and how many pundits dismissed Bradley's return to the team.

Did everyone forget how incredible this team was playing when AB was starting last year?  Did everyone forget the historic defensive #'s the team was putting up? 

Did everyone forget that Ray Allen - the Hall Of Fame legendary shooter Jesus Shuttlesworth who won us a championship - was BENCHED in favor of the "he has no offensive ability" Avery Bradley, resulting in Ray throwing a fit and leaving to our most hated EC rival this summer?

Really, it was comical how quickly AB's play was tossed out as just a small sample size that really was driven by KG's return to the Center spot (and then these same people came out this year and said that the team's early struggle was due to the lack of a true Center...well what is it?  Did KG at the 5 make the difference last year or not?  He is still on the team, ya know?)

It is even more comical how people TO THIS DAY still say that AB has a limited offensive game, when everything he has done so far in the NBA has indicated that he is a very good shooter with 40%+ 3-pt range ability, on top of being a sick athlete that can cut on a dime.

But I will simply look at the team's record...The Boston Celtics are 26-9 in the 35 regular season games Avery has started over the past 2 years.  That is a 74% winning percentage.

Enough said.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 15, 2013, 11:43:29 AM
It is even more comical how people TO THIS DAY still say that AB has a limited offensive game, when everything he has done so far in the NBA has indicated that he is a very good shooter with 40%+ 3-pt range ability, on top of being a sick athlete that can cut on a dime.
Of course he's got limited offensive game -- he scores mostly on corner threes and cuts to the basket. That's limited. How is that relevant for anything?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Chris on January 15, 2013, 11:44:45 AM

I was amused at how many people on this board and how many pundits dismissed Bradley's return to the team.



First, let me just defend myself as one of those people.  He was a guy with a very short track record of success, and even then still had holes in his game, who was coming off two surgeries, and who wasn't really able to workout much over the offseason.  I think it was very reasonable to suspect that at the very least, it would take him time to get back up to speed.

Now, with that said I WAS WRONG!  Seriously, it can't be understated how incredible this start has been from Bradley.  Even established stars don't come back from that type of injury like they didn't miss a beat, and yet he did it.  So impressive.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 15, 2013, 11:50:33 AM

I was amused at how many people on this board and how many pundits dismissed Bradley's return to the team.



First, let me just defend myself as one of those people.  He was a guy with a very short track record of success, and even then still had holes in his game, who was coming off two surgeries, and who wasn't really able to workout much over the offseason.  I think it was very reasonable to suspect that at the very least, it would take him time to get back up to speed.

Now, with that said I WAS WRONG!  Seriously, it can't be understated how incredible this start has been from Bradley.  Even established stars don't come back from that type of injury like they didn't miss a beat, and yet he did it.  So impressive.
I am quite impressed with Bradley's ability to step back and be (mostly) himself right away -- and I concur it was anything but a given.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: eja117 on January 15, 2013, 11:57:23 AM
I tell you one other thing Bradley did. He exposed Ray Allen and single handedly ended the legend of Ray. Ray met Avery and immediately went from first ballot HOFer to third ballot. Went from one of the best ever to one of the guys who was very good.  And he better hope Miami wins another ring this year because if they don't he goes from a reason you win rings to a reason you lose them.

I think this is a pretty absurd claim. It just sounds like you are being childishly bitter over Ray leaving. Nothing about Avery Bradley has tarnished Ray's career, or his status as a first ballot Hall of Famer. And Ray was far from being the reason we didn't win rings; even when Bradley replaced him as a starter, he was one of our 5 best players. His defensive woes were overstated (his defensive efficiency metrics were all above average for a shooting guard, actually), and his offense was (and remains) brilliant.

There are a lot of reasons why Ray lost his starting job here and left the team. And I can understand that you don't root for him anymore. But to actually straight-faced claim that this somehow damages his legacy is beyond hyperbolic. Ray Allen will still be remembered as an all time great.
It wasn't just how Ray was playing in comparison to Avery. It was also how he handled it. People in New England won't ever remember him as a team player again. You can say I'm childish and bitter, but look at Ray.  Ray left the starting lineup and the team got better (at least when he wasn't pouting) and then he left altogether and the team didn't get worse and might be better. He had a long a good career but Avery clearly raises the question....hey wait...maybe we didn't need Ray so bad that whole time. Maybe we could have had any pretty good sg. Maybe like a Kevin Martin or something. Or Manu G. Manu G isn't first ballot, but it looks pretty similar to me.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: scaryjerry on January 15, 2013, 12:02:43 PM
anyone in denial about this is fraudulent...the players were even using the Avery excuse before he came back to accept losses..he comes back and his energy and defense has sparked the entire team and made players more comfortable with their roles, he directly makes rondo and kg better on defense and has let Lee thrive on a now thriving bench..not a coincidence
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 15, 2013, 12:07:02 PM
he comes back and his energy and defense has sparked the entire team and made players more comfortable with their roles, period.
He also cures influenza, and protects against the plague  ;D
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: wahz on January 15, 2013, 12:07:28 PM
Avery is the finger on the hand that stirs the drink. :P
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: scaryjerry on January 15, 2013, 12:09:56 PM
he comes back and his energy and defense has sparked the entire team and made players more comfortable with their roles, period.
He also cures influenza, and protects against the plague  ;D


don't even think he's an all star, just happens to be the perfect fit defensively when combined with our 2 most important players he is capable of making our entire team better without scoring a point
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: wahz on January 15, 2013, 12:23:11 PM
I don't understand why some folks want to downplay him. He is probably the best defensive guard in the league and if you think that's not true name someone more disruptive? Can you give him a top 3 nod? Can you see he is very disciplined and not a gambler as in Rondo's obvious weakness? Now, how about in transition, does he have weaknesses there? Finishing at the rim? Jump shooting?

The only things I see that aren't fantastic yet, are his dribbling in traffic and he tries to avoid it. He also doesn't try to create his own shot often. I think those things will come in time.

The all star thing is a bit misleading in a league where the media won't sing the praises of a great defensive guard and there are other obvious stars on his team

It's also true that he was the perfect fit on this team. His coming put everyone back in their respective rolls. Now if we had a great player to play d when KG is out we would nearly be perfect.  ;)
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Vermont Green on January 15, 2013, 12:32:33 PM
From 82games:

      Stat                             ON Court  OFF Court   Net
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.          93.2     103.6    -10.3
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.         89.6     105.8    -16.2
Net Points per 100 Possessions   +3.7     -2.2      +5.9

A big difference both defensively (for the positive) and offensive (for the negative).  Net Net though, he is still making a positive contribution but statically it is small.

What I see on the court is a good player but not so good he should make this difference.  His effort is contagious but it is not like they weren't playing good defense before.

All that said, I am not going to be the one to try and argue that he is not the man.  He comes back, we go 6 and 1.  Start the M  -  V  -  P chant.  Add him to the Big 4 group.  Avery is the man of the hour, player of the week (we will see if he is the man of the month or year).
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: MJohnnyboy on January 15, 2013, 12:34:28 PM
I'm not denying Bradley's defensive impact. It's played a huge role in this run. I kept telling people the Celtics shouldn't trade Bradley because his defense is among the league's best individually. What's surprised me most is how seamless he's fit back into the starting lineup.

However, other factors have played into it too.
-Pierce was in a slump at the beginning of the season. It almost got to the point where we all thought he looked finished, but now he's over it and has played as good as ever.
-Courtney Lee's 3s weren't falling (like Terry's aren't right now)and he seemed confused in the offense, but now his shots are falling and Lee has fit into his role as the Mini-Posey. I'm 100% confident Terry's stroke will come back too. Like Lee, we need to give the Jet some time.
-Green looks like he's coming out of his shell on both offense and defense. Advanced stats have proven Green is actually a capable 1-on-1 defender like we want him to be and he's being more aggressive on the offensive end. I expect things will get better for him from here.
-Sully looks like his game has adjusted to the NBA and more so. He's bringing more of what the C's need on a consistent basis and has been their most exciting rookie since Rajon Rondo. What's impressed me most is his defensive improvement. He looks much better on D now than at the beginning of the season. Like Green, things are going to get better for Sully too.

Factor in Wilcox coming back and we've got a great squad. And here's the tip of the iceberg people: This is just the beginning. the Celtics went on a streak with Avery returning just two weeks ago. I think this team is going to get a lot better even as time goes on.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: slamtheking on January 15, 2013, 12:43:24 PM
Saying AB isn't the sole reason is beyond laughable. Wait, so you're saying AB isn't the only one out there playing well? Obviously its a TEAM effort. However AB has SINGLE HANDEDLY lifted the TEAM. We were playing like TRASH before he came back 3 games under 500. He comes back and right away we start posting insane defensive numbers and start winning. None of this happens if AB doesn't come back, period.
wow, how condescending and arrogant can you get?   ::)

It is a TEAM effort.  Bradley is part of that.  How is that an argument?  Are you upset that I didn't say he's the world for this team?  He's not.  He's made a great impact on D.  His return has allowed Doc to move JET/Lee back to the bench where they fit better but that's still JET/Lee playing their own roles.  AB has really cut down on the opposition driving the lane which has helped the bigs not get pulled out of position and play their own defensive assignments.  The bigs still have to make their own plays defensively and within the team D concept so yes, it is a TEAM effort.  also, AB isn't responsible for Green, Lee and now Bass finally finding their offensive game.  again, that's the TEAM getting their act together. 

AB's been terrific since his return and it's really helped the team get it together but he's not the only person who has improved their play recently.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Fafnir on January 15, 2013, 12:47:01 PM
A +6 net rating isn't small. KG is a +7.

Though simple on/off court is a crude measure. Bradley also plays the vast majority of his minutes with Rondo/Pierce/Garnett/Bass. So teammate effects come into play rather quickly, especially with only a 162 minute sample size.

Anyways your 82games.com numbers are off what I pull though the net points is similar. (probably updated with last nights game which would swing things a lot.)
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: eja117 on January 15, 2013, 12:47:06 PM
he comes back and his energy and defense has sparked the entire team and made players more comfortable with their roles, period.
He also cures influenza, and protects against the plague  ;D
If I had to have a player stand in front of my house to defend against the plague during an outbreak I would totally want that defender to be Avery. 
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: fairweatherfan on January 15, 2013, 12:47:38 PM
I tell you one other thing Bradley did. He exposed Ray Allen and single handedly ended the legend of Ray. Ray met Avery and immediately went from first ballot HOFer to third ballot. Went from one of the best ever to one of the guys who was very good.  And he better hope Miami wins another ring this year because if they don't he goes from a reason you win rings to a reason you lose them.

I don't fully agree with this but Bradley did make it apparent how much Ray had lost on defense, how much effort our offense had to expend to keep Ray involved, and how expendable he was to the current team. 

None of that takes away from how good Ray was for us for most of the prior 4 years, though.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Fafnir on January 15, 2013, 12:48:33 PM
I tell you one other thing Bradley did. He exposed Ray Allen and single handedly ended the legend of Ray. Ray met Avery and immediately went from first ballot HOFer to third ballot. Went from one of the best ever to one of the guys who was very good.  And he better hope Miami wins another ring this year because if they don't he goes from a reason you win rings to a reason you lose them.

I don't fully agree with this but Bradley did make it apparent how much Ray had lost on defense, how much effort our offense had to expend to keep Ray involved, and how expendable he was to the current team. 

None of that takes away from how good Ray was for us for most of the prior 4 years, though.
Yup.

Ray Allen took the biggest hit to his role and usage when the Big 3 came together. He'll always get props for working so hard to fit in and delivering so many clutch shots.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: mmmmm on January 15, 2013, 12:48:58 PM
I tell you one other thing Bradley did. He exposed Ray Allen and single handedly ended the legend of Ray. Ray met Avery and immediately went from first ballot HOFer to third ballot. Went from one of the best ever to one of the guys who was very good.  And he better hope Miami wins another ring this year because if they don't he goes from a reason you win rings to a reason you lose them.

I think this is a pretty absurd claim. It just sounds like you are being childishly bitter over Ray leaving. Nothing about Avery Bradley has tarnished Ray's career, or his status as a first ballot Hall of Famer. And Ray was far from being the reason we didn't win rings; even when Bradley replaced him as a starter, he was one of our 5 best players. His defensive woes were overstated (his defensive efficiency metrics were all above average for a shooting guard, actually), and his offense was (and remains) brilliant.

There are a lot of reasons why Ray lost his starting job here and left the team. And I can understand that you don't root for him anymore. But to actually straight-faced claim that this somehow damages his legacy is beyond hyperbolic. Ray Allen will still be remembered as an all time great.
It wasn't just how Ray was playing in comparison to Avery. It was also how he handled it. People in New England won't ever remember him as a team player again. You can say I'm childish and bitter, but look at Ray.  Ray left the starting lineup and the team got better (at least when he wasn't pouting) and then he left altogether and the team didn't get worse and might be better. He had a long a good career but Avery clearly raises the question....hey wait...maybe we didn't need Ray so bad that whole time. Maybe we could have had any pretty good sg. Maybe like a Kevin Martin or something. Or Manu G. Manu G isn't first ballot, but it looks pretty similar to me.

There is just a bit of revisionist history here.

The turnaround last year started _before_ Avery replaced Ray with the starters.

The turnaround started after we got blown out by OKC on Feb 22, right before the AS break.   From that point, the team ripped off 5 straight wins on the way to a 10-5 stretch WITH RAY IN THE STARTING LINEUP.   Finally, Ray's injury forced him to the sideline and they inserted AB into the starting lineup on March 25.  They finished out 14-5 from that point.

AB is a great young player.  But he did nothing that tarnished Ray's 'legend'.  Ray's bone-spurs tarnished a lot of short-term memory fan's impressions last spring.  That is all.  He'll still be a first-ballot HoFer.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: celtics2 on January 15, 2013, 01:18:47 PM
If it's about him being the only reason, I'd say no. He's a part of it, though. Sullinger and Lee's improving performance, also, Green's better shooting has helped.
Now, we are waiting for Jet's contribution and the team should be all right moving forward.

Thank God it's not just because of him. We are already unable to handle the time when KG comes off. If Lee wasn't as good as he has been in this stretch, we wouldn't be winning game after game right now.

hey ya can lead em to the water, but can't make em drink it! Stats are stats until they say otherwise they are still stats. The guy's a winner. The Team was in a coma, slumber, dormant, paralyzed, before he appeared. Danny had more deals going than Monty Hall. Now can he turn that water into wine.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: mctyson on January 15, 2013, 03:28:13 PM
It is even more comical how people TO THIS DAY still say that AB has a limited offensive game, when everything he has done so far in the NBA has indicated that he is a very good shooter with 40%+ 3-pt range ability, on top of being a sick athlete that can cut on a dime.
Of course he's got limited offensive game -- he scores mostly on corner threes and cuts to the basket. That's limited. How is that relevant for anything?

That's like saying Bass has a limited offensive game because he only shoots open jumpshots and sometimes is effective in the post. Of course, no one hammers Bass as a limited offensive player because he does exactly what he is supposed to do. 

The facts are that AB is at worst an above-average 3 pt shooter, a capable ball handler, a dynamic cutter, and an overall quality shooter at the 2-guard.  Exactly what we need him to do.

If that is limited, then 90% of players in the NBA have limited offensive games, rendering the charge meaningless.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: mctyson on January 15, 2013, 03:32:07 PM

I was amused at how many people on this board and how many pundits dismissed Bradley's return to the team.



First, let me just defend myself as one of those people. 

I am more specifically criticizing those here that willfully ignored the major impact AB had on our season last year, in order to perpetuate the self-fulfilling analysis that the problem with the Celtics was that we lacked a defensive, rebounding big man. 

We didn't have one last year, we don't have one this year, and in the 35 games AB has started without that defensive, rebounding big man, the team plays like an NBA Finals contender. 

We are an average team without AB, we are an elite team with him. Plain and simple.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 15, 2013, 03:35:31 PM
We are an average team without AB, we are an elite team with him. Plain and simple.
Oh, if things only things were always "plain and simple".
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: j804 on January 15, 2013, 03:55:04 PM
I agree with most of the thread about Avery Bradley and have been saying how important he was long before we turned this thing around. No, people underestimated him though its ok though folks go ahead sit down and have a nice plate of crow.  :P
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: D.o.s. on January 15, 2013, 04:53:57 PM
I like Avery Bradley more than double negatives.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Lightskinsmurf on January 15, 2013, 05:02:57 PM

I was amused at how many people on this board and how many pundits dismissed Bradley's return to the team.



First, let me just defend myself as one of those people. 

I am more specifically criticizing those here that willfully ignored the major impact AB had on our season last year, in order to perpetuate the self-fulfilling analysis that the problem with the Celtics was that we lacked a defensive, rebounding big man. 

We didn't have one last year, we don't have one this year, and in the 35 games AB has started without that defensive, rebounding big man, the team plays like an NBA Finals contender. 

We are an average team without AB, we are an elite team with him. Plain and simple.
This ^ Idk if we're elite but we're really good.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Lightskinsmurf on January 15, 2013, 05:07:49 PM
I agree with most of the thread about Avery Bradley and have been saying how important he was long before we turned this thing around. No, people underestimated him though its ok though folks go ahead sit down and have a nice plate of crow.  :P
This ^ some people are still trying to downplay it as much as they can tho without looking too ignorant. I find that sad yet hilarious. Some people admitted to being wrong and i respect you for that. I was fully ready to admit i was wrong if AB came back and we played the same. Didn't happen tho, did it.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: alajet on January 15, 2013, 05:41:47 PM
Anyway, I don't really get the point of the thread. So, how is this any different than the guys that were ready to come for an "I said so" if we still sucked after Bradley came back? This is just from the opposite perspective and looks exactly like the same action to me.
Are there people overestimating/underestimating a respective player's value here? There is, and there will always be. And as long as no one in this board is a GM/coach/assistant coach for the Celtics, let them be.
It's just pointless to get into heated debates regarding our own players.

Back on the topic, the long-anticipated backcourt of Bradley/Lee is a huge reason we aren't having monumental collapses anymore. The rotations have changed and this way, it's a lot better. As I said in my previous post, we have to find a way to integrate Jet better and the team will look good for the time being.
Bradley is playing about half of a game at 23-24 mpg and from what I have seen during the streak, we aren't playing like we did before he came back in the other half, either. Let it be changed rotations, motivation or anything else, we have somehow turned it around. Honestly, I couldn't care less about making a math of who deserved how much when it comes to giving credit to our players :)
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 15, 2013, 05:47:57 PM
Rondo and the Celtics were blatantly using Bradley's absence as an excuse for their total lack of effort... so it doesn't totally surprise me that Bradley's return has them suddenly playing harder and winning some games. 

Bradley is a good defensive role player... weak offensive player.  High energy guy who at the moment has helped everyone on this team get out of their funk and start playing like the games matter. 
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Celtics18 on January 15, 2013, 06:01:48 PM
Rondo and the Celtics were blatantly using Bradley's absence as an excuse for their total lack of effort... so it doesn't totally surprise me that Bradley's return has them suddenly playing harder and winning some games. 

Bradley is a good defensive role player... weak offensive player.  High energy guy who at the moment has helped everyone on this team get out of their funk and start playing like the games matter.

"Rondo and the Celtics"?  Is that like "Dion and the Belmonts"  or "Bob Marley and the Wailers"?

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticsFan9 on January 15, 2013, 06:10:30 PM
Rondo and the Celtics were blatantly using Bradley's absence as an excuse for their total lack of effort... so it doesn't totally surprise me that Bradley's return has them suddenly playing harder and winning some games. 

Bradley is a good defensive role player... weak offensive player.  High energy guy who at the moment has helped everyone on this team get out of their funk and start playing like the games matter.

What concerns me is the fact that Bradley has everyone playing well.  Don't get me wrong, I'm loving this win streak, and I love the defensive intensity, but please tell me I'm not the only one who sees this.

A team that, without Bradley, shouldn't have been under .500 suddenly picks it up when he comes back?  To me, that seems to put the rest of the team in a bad light.

I've been saying it all year: Bradley isn't the key to winning a title this year.  The way our guys were playing before he returned made him look like that, and I think that's wrong.  They didn't show a whole lot of effort, and once Avery returned, we suddenly become good?

It's coming off as, "Look, Avery.  We need to put our title hopes on your surgically repaired shoulders.  So, until you return, we're going to play like crap.  Why, you ask?  So that when you return, it makes it look like you're our savior."

Now, Avery has helped a lot (more than I'd thought), but I still don't think it's enough.  The point remains: it hasn't been all Bradley, like a lot of people are saying.  I think our guys had been coasting until Avery returned.  To be frank, I find that a little disgusting on the player's (save Bradley) part.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: celtics2 on January 15, 2013, 06:17:05 PM
Anyway, I don't really get the point of the thread. So, how is this any different than the guys that were ready to come for an "I said so" if we still sucked after Bradley came back? This is just from the opposite perspective and looks exactly like the same action to me.
Are there people overestimating/underestimating a respective player's value here? There is, and there will always be. And as long as no one in this board is a GM/coach/assistant coach for the Celtics, let them be.
It's just pointless to get into heated debates regarding our own players.

Back on the topic, the long-anticipated backcourt of Bradley/Lee is a huge reason we aren't having monumental collapses anymore. The rotations have changed and this way, it's a lot better. As I said in my previous post, we have to find a way to integrate Jet better and the team will look good for the time being.
Bradley is playing about half of a game at 23-24 mpg and from what I have seen during the streak, we aren't playing like we did before he came back in the other half, either. Let it be changed rotations, motivation or anything else, we have somehow turned it around. Honestly, I couldn't care less about making a math of who deserved how much when it comes to giving credit to our players :)

Oh believe me if KG were knocking down 20 and pulling down 10 a nite we'd be building a statue of him. Facts are no matter the math, the Celts were ready for collapse prior to AB's return. The facts speak for themselves and have some precedent because he did it before.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: thirstyboots18 on January 15, 2013, 06:24:45 PM
I don't think opinions are pointless, but I do think this thread is pointless, unless unless the point  is to start arguments,  call people ignorant, and crow about assumed superiority.   Please be civil.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 15, 2013, 06:28:59 PM
Rondo and the Celtics were blatantly using Bradley's absence as an excuse for their total lack of effort... so it doesn't totally surprise me that Bradley's return has them suddenly playing harder and winning some games. 

Bradley is a good defensive role player... weak offensive player.  High energy guy who at the moment has helped everyone on this team get out of their funk and start playing like the games matter.

"Rondo and the Celtics"?  Is that like "Dion and the Belmonts"  or "Bob Marley and the Wailers"?

I'm just saying that this team has a tendency to make excuses.  Maybe I shouldn't call it excuses.  I think it's a mental barrier.  Like they kept telling themselves they had never lost a series with Perkins in the lineup... they convinced themselves that they were unbeatable with Perkins... which essentially like making an excuse for poor play without Perkins.  Basketball requires mental focus.  It requires confidence.  It's hard to be 100% focused and confident if you keep telling yourself your missing a key player.  To me, it seemed like they were doing the same thing with Bradley.  Rondo even said in an interview that they'd be better once Bradley came back.  I think at least partially that impacts the mental focus of the team... why try 100% if you know your team is gaining a key piece soon?   I think they were dogging it and waiting for Bradley to come back so they could lock in and start playing hard.   So far, everyone seems to be more focused now that Bradley is back. 

SO basically I'm saying the Celtics were coasting until the after the HOlidays and now they are actually taking games seriously.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Roy H. on January 15, 2013, 07:16:21 PM
Let's focus this thread on the impact Avery is having, rather than on the self-congratulatory back-patting and the I-told-you-sos.

I think Danny Ainge got it right regarding Bradley's impact:

Quote
I'll tell you, the biggest factor I think is that that guy plays so hard, he exposes everybody else on the court if they're not playing defense, just by his play. How can you not see that? How can you not see this guy working so hard, fighting over every screen, defending every dribble and every pass? And if somebody else isn't doing that, they're exposed, and I think that stands out, too, and I think that elevates the play of his teammates."

I guess the issue is whether the team can keep that spark up for the rest of the regular season + playoffs.  In the short term, I absolutely agree that Bradley has been the biggest reason for our recent streak, and it's remarkable that an undersized shooting guard who has been rusty offensively can have such a huge impact.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 15, 2013, 07:28:22 PM
I don't see why undersized would make him worse. He has huge wingspan, is extremely quick, athletic, and fast and he clearly has a passion for defense which is huge thing to go along with that. There are very very few guys in the league that pride themselves in defense.

The only potential problem regarding size would be a dominant bigger 2 guard I think the post maybe Kobe, joe johnson, or Dwade. Other than those guys I don't see why anyone would ever be worried about his size. I think Rondo would probably be better defensive player at the 2 than 75% shooting guards cause the fact is there aren't many good defensive players
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: MJohnnyboy on January 15, 2013, 09:07:25 PM
I don't see why undersized would make him worse. He has huge wingspan, is extremely quick, athletic, and fast and he clearly has a passion for defense which is huge thing to go along with that. There are very very few guys in the league that pride themselves in defense.

The only potential problem regarding size would be a dominant bigger 2 guard I think the post maybe Kobe, joe johnson, or Dwade. Other than those guys I don't see why anyone would ever be worried about his size. I think Rondo would probably be better defensive player at the 2 than 75% shooting guards cause the fact is there aren't many good defensive players

Ahem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ1xz-7OVh4
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Celtics18 on January 15, 2013, 09:35:18 PM
Rondo and the Celtics were blatantly using Bradley's absence as an excuse for their total lack of effort... so it doesn't totally surprise me that Bradley's return has them suddenly playing harder and winning some games. 

Bradley is a good defensive role player... weak offensive player.  High energy guy who at the moment has helped everyone on this team get out of their funk and start playing like the games matter.

"Rondo and the Celtics"?  Is that like "Dion and the Belmonts"  or "Bob Marley and the Wailers"?

I'm just saying that this team has a tendency to make excuses.  Maybe I shouldn't call it excuses.  I think it's a mental barrier.  Like they kept telling themselves they had never lost a series with Perkins in the lineup... they convinced themselves that they were unbeatable with Perkins... which essentially like making an excuse for poor play without Perkins.  Basketball requires mental focus.  It requires confidence.  It's hard to be 100% focused and confident if you keep telling yourself your missing a key player.  To me, it seemed like they were doing the same thing with Bradley.  Rondo even said in an interview that they'd be better once Bradley came back.  I think at least partially that impacts the mental focus of the team... why try 100% if you know your team is gaining a key piece soon?   I think they were dogging it and waiting for Bradley to come back so they could lock in and start playing hard.   So far, everyone seems to be more focused now that Bradley is back. 

SO basically I'm saying the Celtics were coasting until the after the HOlidays and now they are actually taking games seriously.

I got what you were saying.  I just thought it was funny that you referred to the team as "Rondo and the Celtics."
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: bfrombleacher on January 15, 2013, 09:39:31 PM
I don't see why undersized would make him worse. He has huge wingspan, is extremely quick, athletic, and fast and he clearly has a passion for defense which is huge thing to go along with that. There are very very few guys in the league that pride themselves in defense.

The only potential problem regarding size would be a dominant bigger 2 guard I think the post maybe Kobe, joe johnson, or Dwade. Other than those guys I don't see why anyone would ever be worried about his size. I think Rondo would probably be better defensive player at the 2 than 75% shooting guards cause the fact is there aren't many good defensive players

Ahem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ1xz-7OVh4

He's also defended JR Smith and Harden with great success this season. Both bigger with similar athleticism.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 15, 2013, 09:46:37 PM
I don't see why undersized would make him worse. He has huge wingspan, is extremely quick, athletic, and fast and he clearly has a passion for defense which is huge thing to go along with that. There are very very few guys in the league that pride themselves in defense.

The only potential problem regarding size would be a dominant bigger 2 guard I think the post maybe Kobe, joe johnson, or Dwade. Other than those guys I don't see why anyone would ever be worried about his size. I think Rondo would probably be better defensive player at the 2 than 75% shooting guards cause the fact is there aren't many good defensive players

Ahem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ1xz-7OVh4

He's also defended JR Smith and Harden with great success this season. Both bigger with similar athleticism.

Yeah my point was that I could see someone being worried about it. Dwayne wade hasn't been able to and I dont think Bradley has matched up with Kobe yet and JJ has played more SF when they're matched up.

Just in general I don't get why people think height is that relative a factor at any position. I think it usually has less to do with height and more to do with work ethic, athelticism, footwork, quickness, vertical leap, wingspan, strength etc.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: dark_lord on January 15, 2013, 09:50:14 PM
i think our recent success can be attributed to bradley's return, but i think theres a few other factors:

1. time to build chemistry and roles
2. sully is showing signs of "getting it" and playing great
3. a little success has create confidence
4. they have had some adversity (knicks game, rondo suspended, bad road trip after xmas game)
5. doc
6. pierce playing well
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: GreenFaith1819 on January 15, 2013, 10:00:39 PM
He's a big part of the turnaround.

And he won't be 23 until end of Nov... :o.

He's not even near his prime, yet.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: cman88 on January 15, 2013, 10:12:21 PM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: celtics2 on January 16, 2013, 08:15:19 AM
Some can't stand success unless it's because of their *guy* It is hard to believe a twice surgical cut player with a little rehab could come back and give us this huge boost. Well he has. Facts are facts.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Snakehead on January 16, 2013, 08:21:19 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He struggled early when he started playing last year and I guess people didn't notice his numbers came around.

This year he started a little rusty but he already is quickly turning it around, faster than last year.  Last game it was great to see him hit threes like that.  He is the type of player who is a nightmare in transition because he can hurt you form all ranges and manage to find open space.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: scaryjerry on January 16, 2013, 08:47:22 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He can't create his own and isnt the greatest ballhandler? yes he can shoot and cut to the basket and finish. Im a huge fan and agree he deserves a ton of the credit since his return but it doesnt mean hes some all world offensive player
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: bfrombleacher on January 16, 2013, 08:58:06 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He can't create his own and isnt the greatest ballhandler? yes he can shoot and cut to the basket and finish. Im a huge fan and agree he deserves a ton of the credit since his return but it doesnt mean hes some all world offensive player

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B160-NrWQvg
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Snakehead on January 16, 2013, 09:00:18 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He can't create his own and isnt the greatest ballhandler? yes he can shoot and cut to the basket and finish. Im a huge fan and agree he deserves a ton of the credit since his return but it doesnt mean hes some all world offensive player

This is and has been quite a few players on our team though.

Not saying he doesn't have areas to improve on or what you say isn't fair, but yeah, he has serious strengths as well.  The cutting is big to me, you don't see many guards cut like that these days.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Roy H. on January 16, 2013, 09:07:46 AM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

He's had some phenomenal offensive games, but for his career he's averaging 12.7 points per 36 minutes.  He had some great moments last year -- including a fantastic six game streak of 15+ point games -- but he needs to show scoring like that on a consistent basis before he can be described as a "great" or even "good" offensive player.

My expectation is that he'll eventually settle in somewhere in the low double-digits per game.  I'll gladly take that if he continues to play excellent defense.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: bfrombleacher on January 16, 2013, 09:17:02 AM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: scaryjerry on January 16, 2013, 09:18:44 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He can't create his own and isnt the greatest ballhandler? yes he can shoot and cut to the basket and finish. Im a huge fan and agree he deserves a ton of the credit since his return but it doesnt mean hes some all world offensive player

This is and has been quite a few players on our team though.

Not saying he doesn't have areas to improve on or what you say isn't fair, but yeah, he has serious strengths as well.  The cutting is big to me, you don't see many guards cut like that these days.

We're not talking about other players though? I tend to agree he's plenty effective on that end especially the way he fits with rondo, but when you cant really create your own shot youre not a great offensive player
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Fafnir on January 16, 2013, 09:18:56 AM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

He's had some phenomenal offensive games, but for his career he's averaging 12.7 points per 36 minutes.  He had some great moments last year -- including a fantastic six game streak of 15+ point games -- but he needs to show scoring like that on a consistent basis before he can be described as a "great" or even "good" offensive player.

My expectation is that he'll eventually settle in somewhere in the low double-digits per game.  I'll gladly take that if he continues to play excellent defense.
Yup.

He just needs to do what Kawhi Leonard does offensively and he's golden, that's what he did for us last year during our winning streak.

Corner 3s, transition layups, occasional jump shots, and cuts to the rim.

So far his shot selection has been good, his jumper has just been rusty.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: BballTim on January 16, 2013, 09:25:51 AM
From 82games:

      Stat                             ON Court  OFF Court   Net
Offense: Pts per 100 Poss.          93.2     103.6    -10.3
Defense: Pts per 100 Poss.         89.6     105.8    -16.2
Net Points per 100 Possessions   +3.7     -2.2      +5.9

A big difference both defensively (for the positive) and offensive (for the negative).  Net Net though, he is still making a positive contribution but statically it is small.

What I see on the court is a good player but not so good he should make this difference.  His effort is contagious but it is not like they weren't playing good defense before.


 Yes, while Bradley has been something of a defensive spark our defense was clearly showing improvement before he came back. In late November the Celts were 23rd in defense, in late December we were 11th. While the team was playing good defense in fits and starts we went through 3-4 game stretches where our defense was as good or better than it's been recently.

 In terms of his on/off numbers, that includes all of the games when we were playing bad defense (and better offense). For instance, our defense with Bradley on the bench the last 7 games is (ballpark) 97, so his defense would be closer to -8 than -16.

  Overall, according to nba.com, Bradley is a +18 over the last 7 games and he's playing almost 24 minutes a game. Over those 7 games we're a combined +54, so in the 24 minutes a game Avery plays we're a combined +18, in the 24 minutes he's on the bench we're a combined +16. So if you want to attribute our recent play to Avery and not to the team (as a whole) playing better you need to claim that the "Bradley effect" extends to how the team plays when he's on the bench.

  And, for the record, I'm a AB supporter, I've always claimed that the Celts with Bradley would have beaten the Heat with Bosh, and I think he's going to be a pretty good offensive player.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Snakehead on January 16, 2013, 09:31:03 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He can't create his own and isnt the greatest ballhandler? yes he can shoot and cut to the basket and finish. Im a huge fan and agree he deserves a ton of the credit since his return but it doesnt mean hes some all world offensive player

This is and has been quite a few players on our team though.

Not saying he doesn't have areas to improve on or what you say isn't fair, but yeah, he has serious strengths as well.  The cutting is big to me, you don't see many guards cut like that these days.

We're not talking about other players though? I tend to agree he's plenty effective on that end especially the way he fits with rondo, but when you cant really create your own shot youre not a great offensive player

And I wouldn't say he was great, never did.

He's good though.  And he should only improve.  He has shown he can create his own shot he just doesn't do it consistently.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Roy H. on January 16, 2013, 09:41:57 AM
Regarding Bradley's offense, he currently ranks 189th in the NBA among guys playing 150+ minutes in terms of points per 36 minutes.  That's very close to the 50th percentile.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: BballTim on January 16, 2013, 09:43:36 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He can't create his own and isnt the greatest ballhandler? yes he can shoot and cut to the basket and finish. Im a huge fan and agree he deserves a ton of the credit since his return but it doesnt mean hes some all world offensive player

  I don't think it's true that he can't create his own shot, more than he does it rarely because he has a smallish role in the offense.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Snakehead on January 16, 2013, 09:55:17 AM
Regarding Bradley's offense, he currently ranks 189th in the NBA among guys playing 150+ minutes in terms of points per 36 minutes.  That's very close to the 50th percentile.

He's not being asked to score that much so I don't find that very relevant to saying how he's really performing offensively.  We already don't have enough points to go around really in our guard and forward rotation.

More interested in the types of shots he's getting or creating and his efficiency.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 16, 2013, 10:13:39 AM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 16, 2013, 10:26:06 AM
Regarding Bradley's offense, he currently ranks 189th in the NBA among guys playing 150+ minutes in terms of points per 36 minutes.  That's very close to the 50th percentile.

I think he's improved offensively quite a bit in a couple years so seeing quick improvement like that leads people to believe that there's "more where that came from" and that his flashes would be more consistent if he played a bigger role in the offense and got more shots.

His per 36 minutes point are still ahead of Sully, Terry and Rondo who are all considered to be at least pretty good offense players.

If you think that after 3 games that Bradley will plateau or decline id just disagree and guess that that ranking will steadily rise as the year goes on and as his career goes on.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: mctyson on January 16, 2013, 10:38:54 AM
Let's focus this thread on the impact Avery is having, rather than on the self-congratulatory back-patting and the I-told-you-sos.

I think Danny Ainge got it right regarding Bradley's impact:

Quote
I'll tell you, the biggest factor I think is that that guy plays so hard, he exposes everybody else on the court if they're not playing defense, just by his play. How can you not see that? How can you not see this guy working so hard, fighting over every screen, defending every dribble and every pass? And if somebody else isn't doing that, they're exposed, and I think that stands out, too, and I think that elevates the play of his teammates."

I guess the issue is whether the team can keep that spark up for the rest of the regular season + playoffs.  In the short term, I absolutely agree that Bradley has been the biggest reason for our recent streak, and it's remarkable that an undersized shooting guard who has been rusty offensively can have such a huge impact.

I think we overlook that one guy, even a non-superstar who is exceptional at one thing (on-ball defense), can have a major impact on the team overall.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: mctyson on January 16, 2013, 10:40:45 AM
can someone tell me why people keep posting that bradley is a "weak offensive player"

Everything Bradley has shown me in the nba(and college so far) is that he can shoot, and he can finish around the rim....he averaged double digits last year starting.

as he is getting his timing back, he's scoring in double digits again...averaging 8.7ppg so far on the season

He can't create his own and isnt the greatest ballhandler? yes he can shoot and cut to the basket and finish. Im a huge fan and agree he deserves a ton of the credit since his return but it doesnt mean hes some all world offensive player

  I don't think it's true that he can't create his own shot, more than he does it rarely because he has a smallish role in the offense.

More importantly, we don't need him to create his own shot.  Ray Allen couldn't create his own shot.  We have one of the best distributing PGs of the past 2 decades on our roster for creating shots.  We just need guys who can make shots.

Avery can make shots.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 10:46:13 AM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: BballTim on January 16, 2013, 11:51:02 AM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

  It's not really true that he's only shown the ability to hit corner threes and cut without the ball, he's shown himself to have a fairly solid mid-range jumper.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 12:03:58 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

  It's not really true that he's only shown the ability to hit corner threes and cut without the ball, he's shown himself to have a fairly solid mid-range jumper.
Oh, but it is. He's shooting in the low .400s over the last two seasons from 16-23 feet, and has no game whatosever inside 15 feet unless it's at the rim.

Some midrange game? Sure. Fairly solid? I wouldn't say so.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: KGs Knee on January 16, 2013, 12:08:14 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

  It's not really true that he's only shown the ability to hit corner threes and cut without the ball, he's shown himself to have a fairly solid mid-range jumper.

Even still, that's relatvely "limited" in terms of overall ways to score.

It's irrelevant though.  There's no reason Bradley can't be successful with just those tools.  Hitting 3's, long 2's, getting layups off cuts and/or the fastbreak is enough variety to consistently score 10-15 ppg.

Bradley isn't being counted on, nor will he likely ever be, to be a primary scorer.  He won't need to playing next to Rondo and coupled with his elite defense.

Is he a great or elite offensive player?  No.  He is a completely compitent and capable offensive player though.  15 PPG is not at all out the question for him.  He does also still have room to improve at the young age of 22.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Fafnir on January 16, 2013, 12:11:34 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

  It's not really true that he's only shown the ability to hit corner threes and cut without the ball, he's shown himself to have a fairly solid mid-range jumper.
Oh, but it is. He's shooting in the low .400s over the last two seasons from 16-23 feet, and has no game whatosever inside 10 feet unless it's at the rim.

Some midrange game? Sure. Fairly solid? I wouldn't say so.
10-23 feet he shot 41% last year and 48% this year.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 12:14:03 PM
10-23 feet he shot 41% last year and 48% this year.
41% is not good. That's Rondo-esque from the time when Rondo was getting bashed for his poor midrange game.

Also, this year's numbers are on what, 20 shots total?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 16, 2013, 12:16:03 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

So he's an exceptional cutter, very good on the break and converting at the basket, and is a good corner 3 point shot.

This is from the guy who a year ago was hitting shots off the side of the backboard.

What does limited mean exactly? Id be willing to argue that there are a ton of guys on our team that are limited offensively.

To me limited basically implies being a liability. Every offensive player in the game is "limited" so what else would it mean?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Fafnir on January 16, 2013, 12:20:46 PM
10-23 feet he shot 41% last year and 48% this year.
41% is not good.

Also, this year's numbers are on what, 20 shots total?
41% is about average for shooting guards.

And yes this year its 21 shots and last year's sample was small too.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: j804 on January 16, 2013, 12:21:12 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

So he's an exceptional cutter, very good on the break and converting at the basket, and is a good corner 3 point shot.

This is from the guy who a year ago was hitting shots off the side of the backboard.

What does limited mean exactly? Id be willing to argue that there are a ton of guys on our team that are limited offensively.

To me limited basically implies being a liability. Every offensive player in the game is "limited" so what else would it mean?
Yeah unless you're Kobe, Pierce or Carmelo and can score from anywhere would this mean you're "limited offensively"?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 12:23:45 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

So he's an exceptional cutter, very good on the break and converting at the basket, and is a good corner 3 point shot.

This is from the guy who a year ago was hitting shots off the side of the backboard.

What does limited mean exactly? Id be willing to argue that there are a ton of guys on our team that are limited offensively.

To me limited basically implies being a liability. Every offensive player in the game is "limited" so what else would it mean?
Limited implies exactly what it says. And yes, there are other guys on our roster that are limited. I don't understand  why people get bent out of shape about this -- are we all supposed to grovel about Bradley being the greatest thing since sliced cheese.

Having Bradley on the floor clearly limits what you can do offensively -- you can't run 1-2 high picks, can't run him off of screens, can't give him the ball and move out of the way. These things alter the playbook considerably.

Does Bradley bring other stuff to the table? Sure he does. But let's call a spade a spade here.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Snakehead on January 16, 2013, 12:26:47 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

So he's an exceptional cutter, very good on the break and converting at the basket, and is a good corner 3 point shot.

This is from the guy who a year ago was hitting shots off the side of the backboard.

What does limited mean exactly? Id be willing to argue that there are a ton of guys on our team that are limited offensively.

To me limited basically implies being a liability. Every offensive player in the game is "limited" so what else would it mean?
Yeah unless you're Kobe, Pierce or Carmelo and can score from anywhere would this mean you're "limited offensively"?

Yeah I agree with you guys here.

Bradley can improve as a scorer no question but because he is missing parts of an offensive game in his repertoire... well that makes him like almost every other player in the league.

There are very few complete offensive players.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 12:29:58 PM
41% is about average for shooting guards.
Actually it seems to be slightly above league average for guards from last year (playing with min minutes played and PG vs. SG doesn't seem to alter the outcome). I'm surprised that the those guys only shoot ~39% from that range. I expected something closer to 44%.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Fafnir on January 16, 2013, 12:32:45 PM
41% is about average for shooting guards.
Actually it seems to be slightly above league average for guards from last year (playing with min minutes played and PG vs. SG doesn't seem to alter the outcome). I'm surprised that the those guys only shoot ~39% from that range. I expected something closer to 44%.
Rondo was 39%, 38%, 40%, and 40% the past four years.

A few percentage points matters a lot. Guys like Kobe Bryant/Paul Pierce/Korver/etc. will shoot 43-45% on those shots all the time.

Rondo's kind of a special case I think in that he was shooting that percentage when he was often left uncontested and visibly hesitated to take them often.

Anyways the moral of the story is that mid range jump shots are the worst shot. (Unless you're KG)
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: mctyson on January 16, 2013, 12:37:24 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

First, the facts are that he shoots at a good percentage from 3pt range and from the floor in general.  That includes all of his shots, not just corner threes and backdoor layups.  What he gets from our offense is what he gets from our offense.  You can't say that he is limited when it may very well be that our offense is what limits him. 

Second, your definition of limited would probably apply to over half of the guards in the league, particularly those on good teams with All-Stars who dominate the ball like Pierce and Rondo do.  We can critique Avery's ability to create his own shot off the dribble, but how many times a game does he actually get a chance to dribble when he plays with Pierce and Rondo? 

Third - everyone who thought AB was going to produce this kind of a change in our team believed so because of his defense, but also I would point out that the stats from last year indicated we were a superior offensive team with AB on the floor as well.  Whether this is a function of the defensive improvement (something Doc and Rondo say often) or this is a function of AB's offensive contributions, or a little of both, no one really knows.  However, you cannot discount that the team is better both offensively and defensively with him on the floor, and he deserves credit for that.



Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 12:46:17 PM
First, the facts are that he shoots at a good percentage from 3pt range and from the floor in general.  That includes all of his shots, not just corner threes and backdoor layups.
Right, and close to 57% of his shots last season were at the rim or from the three. Your point?

What he gets from our offense is what he gets from our offense.  You can't say that he is limited when it may very well be that our offense is what limits him.
This is ridiculous. Do I even need to address it?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: BballTim on January 16, 2013, 01:06:50 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

  It's not really true that he's only shown the ability to hit corner threes and cut without the ball, he's shown himself to have a fairly solid mid-range jumper.
Oh, but it is. He's shooting in the low .400s over the last two seasons from 16-23 feet, and has no game whatosever inside 15 feet unless it's at the rim.

Some midrange game? Sure. Fairly solid? I wouldn't say so.

  Being in the low 40s for fg% doesn't sound great, unless you compare it to the league average which is in the high 30s. Above average = fairly solid.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 01:10:59 PM
41% is about average for shooting guards.
Rondo's kind of a special case I think in that he was shooting that percentage when he was often left uncontested and visibly hesitated to take them often.
Well, the metric doesn't really specify whether shots are contested or not. For all I know half of the shots taken may have been poorly contested.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Chris on January 16, 2013, 01:13:33 PM
Being in the low 40s for fg% doesn't sound great, unless you compare it to the league average which is in the high 30s. Above average = fairly solid.
Well I guess Rondo has had a "solid midrange game" for most of his career then...

He has actually.  His shooting percentages have always been decent from midrange.  The problem is, in the past, he would only take those shots when he had no other option, and was wide open, so it just wasn't as effective.  Now, he is better, because not only is he shooting well, but he is confident enough in his shooting take those shots to keep the defense honest.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 01:17:14 PM
Being in the low 40s for fg% doesn't sound great, unless you compare it to the league average which is in the high 30s. Above average = fairly solid.
Well I guess Rondo has had a "solid midrange game" for most of his career then...

He has actually.  His shooting percentages have always been decent from midrange.  The problem is, in the past, he would only take those shots when he had no other option, and was wide open, so it just wasn't as effective.  Now, he is better, because not only is he shooting well, but he is confident enough in his shooting take those shots to keep the defense honest.
I'm confused, he was taking shots wide open, supposedly had decent midrange game, but wasn't as effective?

I'm more inclined to believe that the league, on average, doesn't have a decent midrange game :P
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Chris on January 16, 2013, 01:23:46 PM
Being in the low 40s for fg% doesn't sound great, unless you compare it to the league average which is in the high 30s. Above average = fairly solid.
Well I guess Rondo has had a "solid midrange game" for most of his career then...

He has actually.  His shooting percentages have always been decent from midrange.  The problem is, in the past, he would only take those shots when he had no other option, and was wide open, so it just wasn't as effective.  Now, he is better, because not only is he shooting well, but he is confident enough in his shooting take those shots to keep the defense honest.
I'm confused, he was taking shots wide open, supposedly had decent midrange game, but wasn't as effective?

I'm more inclined to believe that the league, on average, doesn't have a decent midrange game :P

Yes.  He was still hitting a similar percentage of the shots he took, but instead of taking maybe 5 of 10 of the open shots he had, which he probably does now, he was taking MAYBE 1 of 10.  So, defenses were more easily able to play off him, go under picks, sit in the passing lanes, etc.  And that made him less effective as a player. 
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: BballTim on January 16, 2013, 01:26:43 PM
First, the facts are that he shoots at a good percentage from 3pt range and from the floor in general.  That includes all of his shots, not just corner threes and backdoor layups.
Right, and close to 57% of his shots last season were at the rim or from the three. Your point?

  57% is close to average for a shooting guard. He took about 2.5 times as many longish jumpers as 3s, if we can say he's a decent 3 point shooter we should be able to say the same about his mid-range jumpers.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 16, 2013, 01:30:51 PM
What's controversial about saying Avery isn't a great offensive player?

Might be because they're implying that he's not just not great but inept.

Yeah what's controversial is saying something like all he can do is cut to the basket and that anyone can do that
That whole discussion started from the statement that "Bradley is limited offensively". It's not controversial, it's factual. He has shown no consistent offensive game other than the short three pointer and cutting without the ball. That's limited.

I'm not saying that won't be a successful without ever developing more tools, but I don't see how something so self-evident can be controversial. Unless of course you think Bradley is the greatest thing since sliced bread, in which case discussion is pretty much pointless.

So he's an exceptional cutter, very good on the break and converting at the basket, and is a good corner 3 point shot.

This is from the guy who a year ago was hitting shots off the side of the backboard.

What does limited mean exactly? Id be willing to argue that there are a ton of guys on our team that are limited offensively.

To me limited basically implies being a liability. Every offensive player in the game is "limited" so what else would it mean?
Limited implies exactly what it says. And yes, there are other guys on our roster that are limited. I don't understand  why people get bent out of shape about this -- are we all supposed to grovel about Bradley being the greatest thing since sliced cheese.

Having Bradley on the floor clearly limits what you can do offensively -- you can't run 1-2 high picks, can't run him off of screens, can't give him the ball and move out of the way. These things alter the playbook considerably.

Does Bradley bring other stuff to the table? Sure he does. But let's call a spade a spade here.

Its just a very vague and bizarre comment.

You might as well preface every statement about a player mentioning how they are limited offensively.

Is there evidence to suggest that the Celtics offense is worse with AB on the floor? I actually thought last year it was a lot better with him on the floor.

Yes hes limited in thethe sense that he isn't polished in every facet of the offensive game.

For someone that defends of all people Bass ,one of the most limited offensive players on our team is just bizarre.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 01:38:52 PM
First, the facts are that he shoots at a good percentage from 3pt range and from the floor in general.  That includes all of his shots, not just corner threes and backdoor layups.
Right, and close to 57% of his shots last season were at the rim or from the three. Your point?

  57% is close to average for a shooting guard. He took about 2.5 times as many longish jumpers as 3s, if we can say he's a decent 3 point shooter we should be able to say the same about his mid-range jumpers.
Um, no? Unlike long jumpers, his eFG% on three pointers last year is considerably higher than the league average for SGs playing at least 20 minutes per game.

So yeah, good (corner) three point shooter, but unremarkable midrange jump shooter.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: BballTim on January 16, 2013, 01:46:22 PM
First, the facts are that he shoots at a good percentage from 3pt range and from the floor in general.  That includes all of his shots, not just corner threes and backdoor layups.
Right, and close to 57% of his shots last season were at the rim or from the three. Your point?

  57% is close to average for a shooting guard. He took about 2.5 times as many longish jumpers as 3s, if we can say he's a decent 3 point shooter we should be able to say the same about his mid-range jumpers.
Um, no? Unlike long jumpers, his eFG% on three pointers last year is considerably higher than the league average for SGs playing at least 20 minutes per game.

So yeah, good (corner) three point shooter, but unremarkable midrange jump shooter.

  Sorry, I misspoke. What I meant was that he took enough 2 point jumpers to come to a conclusion about whether he can hit them or not.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 16, 2013, 01:47:08 PM
Limited implies exactly what it says. And yes, there are other guys on our roster that are limited. I don't understand  why people get bent out of shape about this -- are we all supposed to grovel about Bradley being the greatest thing since sliced cheese.

Having Bradley on the floor clearly limits what you can do offensively -- you can't run 1-2 high picks, can't run him off of screens, can't give him the ball and move out of the way. These things alter the playbook considerably.

Does Bradley bring other stuff to the table? Sure he does. But let's call a spade a spade here.

Its just a very vague and bizarre comment.

You might as well preface every statement about a player mentioning how they are limited offensively.

Is there evidence to suggest that the Celtics offense is worse with AB on the floor? I actually thought last year it was a lot better with him on the floor.

Yes hes limited in the sense that he isn't polished in every facet of the offensive game.

For someone that defends of all people Bass ,one of the most limited offensive players on our team is just bizarre.
It's only bizarre if you for some reason think that being limited offensively is the end of the world.

Bradley is limited. There are sets that you can run with Terry (or Ray Allen) that you'll never run with Bradley. There is barely anything that you can run with Bradley which you can't run with Terry or Lee.

I'd be the first to agree that Bass is limited offensively (of course, there are probably less sets we cannot run because of Bass than because of Bradley, but that's a different story altogether). As a matter of fact though, if he was playing more within his limitations, he'd probably be as useful this season as he was last season.



Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: CelticG1 on January 16, 2013, 02:11:21 PM
Limited implies exactly what it says. And yes, there are other guys on our roster that are limited. I don't understand  why people get bent out of shape about this -- are we all supposed to grovel about Bradley being the greatest thing since sliced cheese.

Having Bradley on the floor clearly limits what you can do offensively -- you can't run 1-2 high picks, can't run him off of screens, can't give him the ball and move out of the way. These things alter the playbook considerably.

Does Bradley bring other stuff to the table? Sure he does. But let's call a spade a spade here.

Its just a very vague and bizarre comment.

You might as well preface every statement about a player mentioning how they are limited offensively.

Is there evidence to suggest that the Celtics offense is worse with AB on the floor? I actually thought last year it was a lot better with him on the floor.

Yes hes limited in the sense that he isn't polished in every facet of the offensive game.

For someone that defends of all people Bass ,one of the most limited offensive players on our team is just bizarre.
It's only bizarre if you for some reason think that being limited offensively is the end of the world.

Bradley is limited. There are sets that you can run with Terry (or Ray Allen) that you'll never run with Bradley. There is barely anything that you can run with Bradley which you can't run with Terry or Lee.

I'd be the first to agree that Bass is limited offensively (of course, there are probably less sets we cannot run because of Bass than because of Bradley, but that's a different story altogether). As a matter of fact though, if he was playing more within his limitations, he'd probably be as useful this season as he was last season.

Okay as long as we agree that everyone in the league is limited offensively than its not bizarre.

It is bizarre that when a more limited offensive player such as AB was playing that the Celtics offense was better than with Terry or Ray.

Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Snakehead on January 16, 2013, 02:20:08 PM
Limited implies exactly what it says. And yes, there are other guys on our roster that are limited. I don't understand  why people get bent out of shape about this -- are we all supposed to grovel about Bradley being the greatest thing since sliced cheese.

Having Bradley on the floor clearly limits what you can do offensively -- you can't run 1-2 high picks, can't run him off of screens, can't give him the ball and move out of the way. These things alter the playbook considerably.

Does Bradley bring other stuff to the table? Sure he does. But let's call a spade a spade here.

Its just a very vague and bizarre comment.

You might as well preface every statement about a player mentioning how they are limited offensively.

Is there evidence to suggest that the Celtics offense is worse with AB on the floor? I actually thought last year it was a lot better with him on the floor.

Yes hes limited in the sense that he isn't polished in every facet of the offensive game.

For someone that defends of all people Bass ,one of the most limited offensive players on our team is just bizarre.
It's only bizarre if you for some reason think that being limited offensively is the end of the world.

Bradley is limited. There are sets that you can run with Terry (or Ray Allen) that you'll never run with Bradley. There is barely anything that you can run with Bradley which you can't run with Terry or Lee.

I'd be the first to agree that Bass is limited offensively (of course, there are probably less sets we cannot run because of Bass than because of Bradley, but that's a different story altogether). As a matter of fact though, if he was playing more within his limitations, he'd probably be as useful this season as he was last season.

Okay as long as we agree that everyone in the league is limited offensively than its not bizarre.

It is bizarre that when a more limited offensive player such as AB was playing that the Celtics offense was better than with Terry or Ray.

It isn't really bizarre to me.

What Bradley does well, cut off ball and run the floor on the break, is a better compliment to what everyone else does.

We have enough jump shooters.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: OmarSekou on January 16, 2013, 06:26:57 PM
Bradley is the driving force, but our turnaround has been a team effort.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: LooseCannon on January 16, 2013, 08:12:09 PM
A few percentage points matters a lot. Guys like Kobe Bryant/Paul Pierce/Korver/etc. will shoot 43-45% on those shots all the time.

In the past 4 seasons, from 10-23 feet:
Paul Pierce: 44.4%, 39.6%, 45.6%, 36.6%
Kobe Bryant: 43.0% 45.4%, 42.9%, 41.0%
Kyle Korver: 47.7%, 47.8%, 46.3%, 40.1%
Dwyane Wade: 43.3%, 35.8%, 37.3%, 38.1%
Ray Allen: 48.6%, 48.5%, 47.9%, 38.7%
Andre Iguodala: 36.1%, 37.8%, 36.3%, 35.0%
Monta Ellis: 35.8%, 38.2%, 37.6%, 40.3%
Eric Gordon: 41.6%, 34.5% 39.6% 41.9%
Chris Paul: 45.3% 48.5% 45.0% 47.7%
Russell Westbrook: 36.5%, 35.9%, 36.8%, 42.1%
Deron Williams: 47.5%, 41.8%, 42.5%, 40.2%
Rudy Gay: 41.3%, 42.2%, 42.4%, 39.2%
Joe Johnson: 39.2%, 40.9%, 37.6%, 41.0%


Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Vermont Green on January 17, 2013, 04:56:05 PM
So I am surprised that this thread did not get fired up again after last night's game.  Avery started and we jumped out to a lead looking like another win to add to Avery's streak.

Avery gets hurt, sits out the rest of the game, we lose our lead and lose the game.

It doesn't seem to make any sense but it appears we can only win games when Avery plays and plays the full game.

Unbelievable!
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: j804 on January 17, 2013, 05:22:28 PM
So I am surprised that this thread did not get fired up again after last night's game.  Avery started and we jumped out to a lead looking like another win to add to Avery's streak.

Avery gets hurt, sits out the rest of the game, we lose our lead and lose the game.

It doesn't seem to make any sense but it appears we can only win games when Avery plays and plays the full game.

Unbelievable!
He also came out the game and nailed a jumper off a pin down, but he we can't run those types of plays for him when he's in the game right?!
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: celtics2 on January 18, 2013, 06:59:31 AM
So I am surprised that this thread did not get fired up again after last night's game.  Avery started and we jumped out to a lead looking like another win to add to Avery's streak.

Avery gets hurt, sits out the rest of the game, we lose our lead and lose the game.

It doesn't seem to make any sense but it appears we can only win games when Avery plays and plays the full game.

Unbelievable!

Jack said, "you can't handle the truth"
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: hpantazo on January 18, 2013, 07:59:04 AM
A few percentage points matters a lot. Guys like Kobe Bryant/Paul Pierce/Korver/etc. will shoot 43-45% on those shots all the time.

In the past 4 seasons, from 10-23 feet:
Paul Pierce: 44.4%, 39.6%, 45.6%, 36.6%
Kobe Bryant: 43.0% 45.4%, 42.9%, 41.0%
Kyle Korver: 47.7%, 47.8%, 46.3%, 40.1%
Dwyane Wade: 43.3%, 35.8%, 37.3%, 38.1%
Ray Allen: 48.6%, 48.5%, 47.9%, 38.7%
Andre Iguodala: 36.1%, 37.8%, 36.3%, 35.0%
Monta Ellis: 35.8%, 38.2%, 37.6%, 40.3%
Eric Gordon: 41.6%, 34.5% 39.6% 41.9%
Chris Paul: 45.3% 48.5% 45.0% 47.7%
Russell Westbrook: 36.5%, 35.9%, 36.8%, 42.1%
Deron Williams: 47.5%, 41.8%, 42.5%, 40.2%
Rudy Gay: 41.3%, 42.2%, 42.4%, 39.2%
Joe Johnson: 39.2%, 40.9%, 37.6%, 41.0%

Wow, Pierce has taken almost a 10 percent drop this year! Come on captain!
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 18, 2013, 03:39:04 PM
So I am surprised that this thread did not get fired up again after last night's game.  Avery started and we jumped out to a lead looking like another win to add to Avery's streak.

Avery gets hurt, sits out the rest of the game, we lose our lead and lose the game.

It doesn't seem to make any sense but it appears we can only win games when Avery plays and plays the full game.

Unbelievable!
Unbelievable -- because it isn't exactly true.

I don't know when Bradley returned, but he never "sat out the rest of the game" -- he subbed in in fourth, and played until we pulled the starters.

In any case, after the first quarter out ability to hold the lead was pretty loosely related to whether Bradley was or wasn't on the court.

The team maintained the lead for most of the second quarter without Bradley, then fell behind when he returned, came back and fell back again with him on the court.

In the third quarter, we were falling behind at exactly the same rate, whether or not he was on the court.

I am also wondering what the story is in the injury altogether, since what Doc said yesterday in his WEEI appearance was that "Avery for some reason got tired", and it wasn't until today that we heard he supposedly had a rib injury.

What gives?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: BballTim on January 18, 2013, 03:57:13 PM
Being in the low 40s for fg% doesn't sound great, unless you compare it to the league average which is in the high 30s. Above average = fairly solid.
Well I guess Rondo has had a "solid midrange game" for most of his career then...

He has actually.  His shooting percentages have always been decent from midrange.  The problem is, in the past, he would only take those shots when he had no other option, and was wide open, so it just wasn't as effective.  Now, he is better, because not only is he shooting well, but he is confident enough in his shooting take those shots to keep the defense honest.
I'm confused, he was taking shots wide open, supposedly had decent midrange game, but wasn't as effective?

I'm more inclined to believe that the league, on average, doesn't have a decent midrange game :P

Yes.  He was still hitting a similar percentage of the shots he took, but instead of taking maybe 5 of 10 of the open shots he had, which he probably does now, he was taking MAYBE 1 of 10.  So, defenses were more easily able to play off him, go under picks, sit in the passing lanes, etc.  And that made him less effective as a player.

  The whole "Rondo needs to take those shots" thing was fairly overblown. He was taking reasonably close to the league average (for point guards) shots a game. People would say he needed to take the shot when he was open to keep the defense honest but the defense would give him that shot every time the Celts had the ball.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 20, 2013, 10:32:08 PM
So was it a turnaround or was it just law of averages?  We're back to being .500... we followed up a stretch where we lost 8 of 10 by winning 6 in a row... and now we've lost 3 in a row. 

Is this all just about the ups and downs of a mediocre team or are we still calling Avery Bradley a savior?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: slamtheking on January 20, 2013, 11:00:26 PM
So was it a turnaround or was it just law of averages?  We're back to being .500... we followed up a stretch where we lost 8 of 10 by winning 6 in a row... and now we've lost 3 in a row. 

Is this all just about the ups and downs of a mediocre team or are we still calling Avery Bradley a savior?
beat me to reviving this thread for that very question.  AB is back and they're back to they're old ways. 

As I've said before, it's going to take a TEAM effort to turn this season around.  AB alone won't get it done
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: slamtheking on January 23, 2013, 01:32:33 PM
So was it a turnaround or was it just law of averages?  We're back to being .500... we followed up a stretch where we lost 8 of 10 by winning 6 in a row... and now we've lost 3 in a row. 

Is this all just about the ups and downs of a mediocre team or are we still calling Avery Bradley a savior?
beat me to reviving this thread for that very question.  AB is back and they're back to they're old ways. 

As I've said before, it's going to take a TEAM effort to turn this season around.  AB alone won't get it done
kicking this thread down the road some more so that those people pinning the improved play on just AB returning can step up and explain why this team is back to sucking wind even with him back and healthy.

as I stated previously on this thread, it's a TEAM effort that led to the win streak and it's a TEAM lack of effort leading to the renewed crappy play.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: LarBrd33 on January 23, 2013, 01:41:55 PM
So was it a turnaround or was it just law of averages?  We're back to being .500... we followed up a stretch where we lost 8 of 10 by winning 6 in a row... and now we've lost 3 in a row. 

Is this all just about the ups and downs of a mediocre team or are we still calling Avery Bradley a savior?
beat me to reviving this thread for that very question.  AB is back and they're back to they're old ways. 

As I've said before, it's going to take a TEAM effort to turn this season around.  AB alone won't get it done
kicking this thread down the road some more so that those people pinning the improved play on just AB returning can step up and explain why this team is back to sucking wind even with him back and healthy.

as I stated previously on this thread, it's a TEAM effort that led to the win streak and it's a TEAM lack of effort leading to the renewed crappy play.
Yeah pretty much.   I stick by what I said which is that Bradley's return gave everyone kind of a playoff boost.  They had been using his absence as an excuse for their struggles.  Actually it wasn't really an excuse... i more think it was a mental barrier that they refused to crack through... a sort of way of telling themselves it was acceptable to half-ass it, because they weren't a full team until Bradley returned.   

Once he returned, they were locked in and motivated. You can ride that adrenaline burst for a short period of time, but I don't think it's that sustainable when your team is mediocre.   This team is mediocre... 

Don't be shocked if we rattle off another 6 game win streak.  Don't be shocked if everyone then jumps back on the brandwagon and starts claiming we merely had a little "hiccup".   But I still think it's just all the predictable ups and downs of a .500 team.   
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: kozlodoev on January 23, 2013, 01:44:13 PM
I stick by what I said which is that Bradley's return gave everyone kind of a playoff boost.
I'm not sure this team realizes this wasn't really a "playoff boost". This was the level at which they're supposed to play the entire regular season, and then turn it up a notch in the playoffs.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: KGs Knee on January 23, 2013, 02:09:36 PM
So was it a turnaround or was it just law of averages?  We're back to being .500... we followed up a stretch where we lost 8 of 10 by winning 6 in a row... and now we've lost 3 in a row. 

Is this all just about the ups and downs of a mediocre team or are we still calling Avery Bradley a savior?
beat me to reviving this thread for that very question.  AB is back and they're back to they're old ways. 

As I've said before, it's going to take a TEAM effort to turn this season around.  AB alone won't get it done
kicking this thread down the road some more so that those people pinning the improved play on just AB returning can step up and explain why this team is back to sucking wind even with him back and healthy.

as I stated previously on this thread, it's a TEAM effort that led to the win streak and it's a TEAM lack of effort leading to the renewed crappy play.
Yeah pretty much.   I stick by what I said which is that Bradley's return gave everyone kind of a playoff boost.  They had been using his absence as an excuse for their struggles.  Actually it wasn't really an excuse... i more think it was a mental barrier that they refused to crack through... a sort of way of telling themselves it was acceptable to half-ass it, because they weren't a full team until Bradley returned.   

Once he returned, they were locked in and motivated. You can ride that adrenaline burst for a short period of time, but I don't think it's that sustainable when your team is mediocre.   This team is mediocre...   

This team definitely doesn't put forth very much effort on a night to night basis.  It's rather sickening.

I pretty much have come to the same conclusion.  Bradley's return was a "shot in the arm" that has now worn off.  Just watch, next game out against the Knicks we'll probably end up seeing the enthusiastic and engaged Celtics.  Motivating this team has proven rather difficult.

The biggest question I have is, who is most to blame for the Celtics lack of motivation and how does it get fixed?
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: slamtheking on January 24, 2013, 08:48:53 AM
So was it a turnaround or was it just law of averages?  We're back to being .500... we followed up a stretch where we lost 8 of 10 by winning 6 in a row... and now we've lost 3 in a row. 

Is this all just about the ups and downs of a mediocre team or are we still calling Avery Bradley a savior?
beat me to reviving this thread for that very question.  AB is back and they're back to they're old ways. 

As I've said before, it's going to take a TEAM effort to turn this season around.  AB alone won't get it done
kicking this thread down the road some more so that those people pinning the improved play on just AB returning can step up and explain why this team is back to sucking wind even with him back and healthy.

as I stated previously on this thread, it's a TEAM effort that led to the win streak and it's a TEAM lack of effort leading to the renewed crappy play.
Yeah pretty much.   I stick by what I said which is that Bradley's return gave everyone kind of a playoff boost.  They had been using his absence as an excuse for their struggles.  Actually it wasn't really an excuse... i more think it was a mental barrier that they refused to crack through... a sort of way of telling themselves it was acceptable to half-ass it, because they weren't a full team until Bradley returned.   

Once he returned, they were locked in and motivated. You can ride that adrenaline burst for a short period of time, but I don't think it's that sustainable when your team is mediocre.   This team is mediocre...   

This team definitely doesn't put forth very much effort on a night to night basis.  It's rather sickening.

I pretty much have come to the same conclusion.  Bradley's return was a "shot in the arm" that has now worn off.  Just watch, next game out against the Knicks we'll probably end up seeing the enthusiastic and engaged Celtics.  Motivating this team has proven rather difficult.

The biggest question I have is, who is most to blame for the Celtics lack of motivation and how does it get fixed?
considering this has been how they've played since the 2010 season, I'd put the motivational issues on Doc and the vet players.  these guys shouldn't need motivational speeches to play hard every game but it seems that they do.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Moranis on January 25, 2013, 09:45:12 AM
sure you can.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: pearljammer10 on January 25, 2013, 09:48:02 AM
sure you can.

times 2
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: scaryjerry on January 25, 2013, 09:56:34 AM
Bradley has played like crap since he hurt his ribs and on top of it was getting over the flU, which really isn't an excuse just more concern he will never stay healthy at this point, because his  return and the Celtics improvement wasn't a fluke but it's not a huge surprise who bumped this thread.
Shall we bump the ones where the lakers would never lose again because of the hire of the fraudulent mike dantoni? I'll spare ya
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Chris on January 25, 2013, 09:59:23 AM
This is from the locked thread, but seems relevant here...


Quote
I think its the injury.  Though he is starting to become the Jacoby Ellsbury of the Celtics.

This is my problem with Bradley longterm (and the reason I would strongly consider trading him if anyone values him high enough).

When he is healthy, and playing 100%, he is a gamechanger.  However, if he is nicked up a bit, he drops from a gamechanger to just a really good defensive role player, and then there are the times when he can't even get on the floor.

He is just so small to play as physically as he does, and he isn't skilled enough in the other parts of the game to not be that physical, without being much less effective overall.

So what it comes down to is that he likely has to be a part time player.  The chances of him staying healthy, and being able to give the full effort that we need from him are so slim. 

Unfortunately, I am not sure anyone else is high enough on him to give up the value thats needed to make a trade worthwhile for the C's.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: clover on January 25, 2013, 10:09:06 AM
This is from the locked thread, but seems relevant here...


Quote
I think its the injury.  Though he is starting to become the Jacoby Ellsbury of the Celtics.

This is my problem with Bradley longterm (and the reason I would strongly consider trading him if anyone values him high enough).

When he is healthy, and playing 100%, he is a gamechanger.  However, if he is nicked up a bit, he drops from a gamechanger to just a really good defensive role player, and then there are the times when he can't even get on the floor.

He is just so small to play as physically as he does, and he isn't skilled enough in the other parts of the game to not be that physical, without being much less effective overall.

So what it comes down to is that he likely has to be a part time player.  The chances of him staying healthy, and being able to give the full effort that we need from him are so slim. 

Unfortunately, I am not sure anyone else is high enough on him to give up the value thats needed to make a trade worthwhile for the C's.

I agree.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: pearljammer10 on January 25, 2013, 10:19:42 AM
This is from the locked thread, but seems relevant here...


Quote
I think its the injury.  Though he is starting to become the Jacoby Ellsbury of the Celtics.

This is my problem with Bradley longterm (and the reason I would strongly consider trading him if anyone values him high enough).

When he is healthy, and playing 100%, he is a gamechanger.  However, if he is nicked up a bit, he drops from a gamechanger to just a really good defensive role player, and then there are the times when he can't even get on the floor.

He is just so small to play as physically as he does, and he isn't skilled enough in the other parts of the game to not be that physical, without being much less effective overall.

So what it comes down to is that he likely has to be a part time player.  The chances of him staying healthy, and being able to give the full effort that we need from him are so slim. 

Unfortunately, I am not sure anyone else is high enough on him to give up the value thats needed to make a trade worthwhile for the C's.

I agree.

I agree as well. And it seems that because of his physical play and because he is so small he gets hurt more easily. There must be teams out there that value his presence and are looking at him. I wish we would have traded him this offseason when his value was at its peak.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Lightskinsmurf on January 25, 2013, 10:24:55 AM
All the bradley haters were dead silent not long ago and now they wanna talk again. The celtics start winning the second AB returns. The celtics start losing the second AB gets hurt. To say hes been fully healthy since returning is ignorant. Again nobody ever said he was the savior the only people saying that are the people against AB ironically. I've said numerous times this team needed AB & a Big next to KG. We actually played with good effort last night we just lost. If you really wanna identify the problems with this team, look no further than pierce bass terry & sometimes rondo when hes playing lazy pathetic defense.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Chris on January 25, 2013, 10:37:04 AM
All the bradley haters were dead silent not long ago and now they wanna talk again. The celtics start winning the second AB returns. The celtics start losing the second AB gets hurt. To say hes been fully healthy since returning is ignorant. Again nobody ever said he was the savior the only people saying that are the people against AB ironically. I've said numerous times this team needed AB & a Big next to KG. We actually played with good effort last night we just lost. If you really wanna identify the problems with this team, look no further than pierce bass terry & sometimes rondo when hes playing lazy pathetic defense.

Is anyone really hating on him though?  I am mostly seeing just people concerned about his durability, and acknowledging that he isn't a savior.

Yes, there were a lot of us who doubted his ability to come back and not miss a beat, because even veterans take a while to get back up to speed.  But, we were wrong about that, and thats a tribute to Avery.
Title: Re: Ya can't say it's not because of Bradley
Post by: Evantime34 on January 25, 2013, 10:39:23 AM
In my eyes he is certainly injured. Last year near the end he showed that he can create his own shot, knock down jumpers and attack the rim. This year he has only knocked down open shots nothing else (offensively).

Bradley is my favorite player on the team, but we need more from him on offense if he is to be the savior.