Author Topic: Bradley or Sullinger?  (Read 5172 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #30 on: January 07, 2013, 02:05:06 PM »

Offline Snakehead

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3862
  • Tommy Points: 214

It seems that he always has an opportunity to cut to the rim unnoticed because his man is not paying attention to him. There is no threat to Bradley's offensive game. If the defenders actually paid attention to him i doubt he would get so many easy uncontested layups.

I don't buy that assessment.  Players who cut well off the ball are not all great jump shooters or anything.  In fact many aren't.  And Bradley has had bad spells but his jump shooting percentage last year was not poor.  It was average or a little above.

There is more to cutting than your man losing you and allowing an uncontested basket.  It's a skill.  He knows how to attack space opened up in defenses.  He is not being ignored by defenders, the eye test shows me that.

As far as your assessment of Sully, I don't disagree.  I quite like both players.


"I really don't want people to understand me." - Jordan Crawford

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #31 on: January 07, 2013, 02:05:16 PM »

Offline ssspence

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • ****
  • Posts: 4588
  • Tommy Points: 264
  • James Naismith to Dickey Betts for the jam.....
Bradley would hurt more, without question.

I like Sully, but his skillset is replaceable.  I don't know anybody else in this league who consistently plays the suffocating defense that we see with Bradley.

This. Though I'd say Courtney Lee is a better trade asset than people imagine. I'd rather trade Terry, but I'd say Lee + Melo or a pick could net a decent front court player.

I really have a very hard time imagining Ainge parting with either guy.
 


Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #32 on: January 07, 2013, 02:42:21 PM »

Offline twistedrico14

  • Gerald Wallace
  • Posts: 122
  • Tommy Points: 8
I would absolutely not trade either. They are great young building blocks with small salaries.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #33 on: January 07, 2013, 02:49:38 PM »

Offline Atzar

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2976
  • Tommy Points: 190
It seems that he always has an opportunity to cut to the rim unnoticed because his man is not paying attention to him. There is no threat to Bradley's offensive game. If the defenders actually paid attention to him i doubt he would get so many easy uncontested layups. I find Sullingers rebounding to be more useful to this team because lets be honest, they are one of the worst rebounding teams there is. So if we're talking trade, i would rather trade the defensive specialist who gets replaced by a guy who is a decent defender, rather than replace the only guy on the entire squad who can rebound the ball.

Well, the scenario that prompted this thread (correct me if I'm wrong OP) was the rumor that a deal for Cousins was in the works.  Sully's a good rebounder, but DMC is even better. 

Also, I'm not sure what you want Bradley to do on offense.  Rondo has the ball on this team, and if it's not Rondo with the rock then it's Pierce.  Bradley needs to be able to score off the ball, and there are two basic ways for a guard to do that - cutting and spot-up shooting.  Bradley is the best cutter on the team, and we have a sample of evidence that indicates he is a good shooter as well.  The kid shot 40% from three during the regular season last year.  For reference, there are 24 people who are shooting as well or better from deep this year than Bradley did last year. 

It's going to take him some time to recapture his shooting stroke, but there's reason to believe that a healthy Bradley is a capable shooter. 


Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #34 on: January 07, 2013, 03:11:19 PM »

Offline RyNye

  • NGT
  • Jeff Green
  • Posts: 716
  • Tommy Points: 97
Well, the scenario that prompted this thread (correct me if I'm wrong OP) was the rumor that a deal for Cousins was in the works.  Sully's a good rebounder, but DMC is even better. 

Although you are right, the difference is actually quite small. And, in fact, Sullinger is currently rebounding better than Cousins did during HIS rookie campaign. The trick is to look at rebound percentages, not totals ... the latter is a function of minutes played, the former is purely a function of skill.

Sully: 17.6% TRB, 12.7% ORB, and 22.4% DRB.
Cousins, this season: 18.9% TRB, 12.8% ORB, and 25.4% DRB.
Cousins, rookie season: 17.2% TRB, 10.4% ORB, and 24.4% DRB.

So Cousins has a slight edge on defensive rebounds, but by a slim margin, whereas Sully has the edge with offensive rebounds, by an equally slim margin. They are comparable rebounders.

In fact, for those of you who like Cousins and his development so much, compare the REST of Cousins' rookie year with Sully's. Remember, you can't look at TOTALS, because Cousins got 10 more minutes per game than Sully.

Cousins: 43% shooting (TS% = 48.4)
Sully: 47.1% shooting (TS% = 51.9)

Cousins: 68.7% free throw shooting
Sully: 76.1% free throw shooting

Cousins: 18.5% turnover percentage (percent of plays ending in turnover)
Sully: 10.7% turnover percentage

Cousins: 2.1% block percentage (percent of plays ending in block)
Sully: 2.1% block percentage

Cousins: offensive rating of 94, defensive rating of 105
Sully: offensive rating of 110, defensive rating of 102

Cousins: 1.14 PPS (number of points generated per shot attempt)
Sully: 1.17 PPS

Sully, now, is better, or at least more efficient, than Cousins was as a rookie at almost every measurable level of basketball. The only difference is he gets significantly fewer minutes (which is to be expected due to the differences between being drafted to the Boston Celtics versus the Kings).

All the numbers indicate that Sully is a special player. And I think he has more upside than DMC, in all honesty, simply by virtue of not being insane. Everyone says Sully has great BBIQ, has anyone ever said the same about Cousins?

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #35 on: January 07, 2013, 03:26:39 PM »

Offline Spicoli

  • Rajon Rondo
  • Posts: 873
  • Tommy Points: 111
Maybe i'm alone on this, but i find Avery Bradley to be incredibly overrated. His defense is top notch, but his offense is pretty bad. He cannot shoot (i've seen quite a few of his jumpers hit no rim and nothing but the backboard) he has no handles, is small for a 2 guard, and he cannot finish in traffic. Maybe he will get better, but i'm not impressed with his overall game. Sullinger impresses me when i watch him. He makes dumb fouls, but he is a very good rebounder and he has a good looking jump shot. Bradley makes a pretty huge difference for them on the defensive end, but he is a defensive specialist, nothing more. I am fine with moving Bradley and allowing Lee to get more minutes.
Bradley finished at 64% at the rim last year, that's very good for a guard, and he took 40% of his shots there too. He can finish just fine, the question is can he recapture his corner three prowess this year.

Just being an active and agressive cutter and hitting corner threes is offense enough, especially since he's dangerous in transition as well.

He finished with a high percentage at the rim because of the uncontested layups he was being fed from Rondo. I do give him credit for being a good cutter but if we're talking about a guy being untradeable Bradley shouldn't be in the discussion IMO. His defensive skill set is unique, but everything else about him screams average. There is no flow to his offensive game. Everything seems rushed and out of control, except for when he cuts to the rim.

On a team full of jump shooters, running the floor and attacking the rim and cutting to the rim are quite valuable.

It seems that he always has an opportunity to cut to the rim unnoticed because his man is not paying attention to him. There is no threat to Bradley's offensive game. If the defenders actually paid attention to him i doubt he would get so many easy uncontested layups. I find Sullingers rebounding to be more useful to this team because lets be honest, they are one of the worst rebounding teams there is. So if we're talking trade, i would rather trade the defensive specialist who gets replaced by a guy who is a decent defender, rather than replace the only guy on the entire squad who can rebound the ball.

1. If we are getting a big man in a trade (I.e. Cousins, Varejao) he replaces rebounding and post offense so sullys production will be replaced and improved in that sense.

2. I think you are underselling B's offense. He showed that he is more offensively gifted than just a cutter on offense when he started last year.

3. I can't believe how much you are negating his cutting ability. Im sorry but its not as simple as "no one is guarding him"

1. In my opinion it's only smart to trade Sullinger if you are getting back a dominate rebounder like Varajao. Like the above poster mentioned, Cousins isn't that much better at rebounding than Sullinger is at the moment and Sullinger is only a rookie.

2. I remember the game that Bradley had against the Hawks but that was literally the only time i've ever seen him play like that. I would like him more if he played that well more often, but he honestly doesn't.

3. Okay, i'm probably selling him short in his ability to cut, but that's not the portion of his game that's irreplaceable. There are other wings in the league who cut just as well (Matt Barnes). The only irreplaceable part of his game is perimeter defense.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #36 on: January 07, 2013, 03:32:43 PM »

Online danglertx

  • Rajon Rondo
  • Posts: 809
  • Tommy Points: 70
I like that someone brought out the fact that Sullinger is still a rookie.  Which one would I part with?  Bradley.  Bradley is two years closer to a big pay day.  Sully is already a contributing member of the Celtics.  Sully has already played in more games as a rookie than Bradley did his entire rookie season.

Do you know how good a rookie has to be to play meaningful minutes for Doc Rivers?  It is practically unheard of since the Big Three got together.

I think we see what Bradley is and what he is going to be, and I like it don't get me wrong.  But we are just now seeing the very tip of the iceberg that is Sully's game.  The Celtics go to him maybe twice a game on the post and he rarely looks to score.  When he gets the green light and the refs start giving him some respect his game should easily go up another level or two.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #37 on: January 07, 2013, 03:33:48 PM »

Offline Spicoli

  • Rajon Rondo
  • Posts: 873
  • Tommy Points: 111

It seems that he always has an opportunity to cut to the rim unnoticed because his man is not paying attention to him. There is no threat to Bradley's offensive game. If the defenders actually paid attention to him i doubt he would get so many easy uncontested layups.

I don't buy that assessment.  Players who cut well off the ball are not all great jump shooters or anything.  In fact many aren't.  And Bradley has had bad spells but his jump shooting percentage last year was not poor.  It was average or a little above.

There is more to cutting than your man losing you and allowing an uncontested basket.  It's a skill.  He knows how to attack space opened up in defenses.  He is not being ignored by defenders, the eye test shows me that.

As far as your assessment of Sully, I don't disagree.  I quite like both players.

Bradley has good form on his jump shot, but i've honestly never seen a player completely miss iron more than Bradley does. I have seen him draw nothing but backboard from a straight away angle. How is that possible? Have you ever seen a good shooter draw nothing but backboard on a shot from the top of the key? There is something about his offensive game that is erratic and out of control. There is no "smoothness" or so to speak. Maybe i was spoiled by seeing Ray shoot the ball for the C's.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #38 on: January 07, 2013, 03:34:43 PM »

Offline Spicoli

  • Rajon Rondo
  • Posts: 873
  • Tommy Points: 111
I like that someone brought out the fact that Sullinger is still a rookie.  Which one would I part with?  Bradley.  Bradley is two years closer to a big pay day.  Sully is already a contributing member of the Celtics.  Sully has already played in more games as a rookie than Bradley did his entire rookie season.

Do you know how good a rookie has to be to play meaningful minutes for Doc Rivers?  It is practically unheard of since the Big Three got together.

I think we see what Bradley is and what he is going to be, and I like it don't get me wrong.  But we are just now seeing the very tip of the iceberg that is Sully's game.  The Celtics go to him maybe twice a game on the post and he rarely looks to score.  When he gets the green light and the refs start giving him some respect his game should easily go up another level or two.

Totally agree here.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #39 on: January 07, 2013, 04:44:41 PM »

Offline Atzar

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2976
  • Tommy Points: 190
Well, the scenario that prompted this thread (correct me if I'm wrong OP) was the rumor that a deal for Cousins was in the works.  Sully's a good rebounder, but DMC is even better. 

Although you are right, the difference is actually quite small. And, in fact, Sullinger is currently rebounding better than Cousins did during HIS rookie campaign. The trick is to look at rebound percentages, not totals ... the latter is a function of minutes played, the former is purely a function of skill.

Sully: 17.6% TRB, 12.7% ORB, and 22.4% DRB.
Cousins, this season: 18.9% TRB, 12.8% ORB, and 25.4% DRB.
Cousins, rookie season: 17.2% TRB, 10.4% ORB, and 24.4% DRB.

So Cousins has a slight edge on defensive rebounds, but by a slim margin, whereas Sully has the edge with offensive rebounds, by an equally slim margin. They are comparable rebounders.

In fact, for those of you who like Cousins and his development so much, compare the REST of Cousins' rookie year with Sully's. Remember, you can't look at TOTALS, because Cousins got 10 more minutes per game than Sully.

Cousins: 43% shooting (TS% = 48.4)
Sully: 47.1% shooting (TS% = 51.9)

Cousins: 68.7% free throw shooting
Sully: 76.1% free throw shooting

Cousins: 18.5% turnover percentage (percent of plays ending in turnover)
Sully: 10.7% turnover percentage

Cousins: 2.1% block percentage (percent of plays ending in block)
Sully: 2.1% block percentage

Cousins: offensive rating of 94, defensive rating of 105
Sully: offensive rating of 110, defensive rating of 102

Cousins: 1.14 PPS (number of points generated per shot attempt)
Sully: 1.17 PPS

Sully, now, is better, or at least more efficient, than Cousins was as a rookie at almost every measurable level of basketball. The only difference is he gets significantly fewer minutes (which is to be expected due to the differences between being drafted to the Boston Celtics versus the Kings).

All the numbers indicate that Sully is a special player. And I think he has more upside than DMC, in all honesty, simply by virtue of not being insane. Everyone says Sully has great BBIQ, has anyone ever said the same about Cousins?

The part you're leaving out is that Cousins is asked to create a lot of the offense for the Kings.  This is what leads to the low FG% and high turnover rates.  We only ask Sully to rebound, make his rotations and take wide open shots.  Naturally, he's going to turn the ball over less and shoot a higher percentage. 

That's not to say that Cousins' FG% isn't a valid concern.  It is, and given his occasional tendency to think he's a shooting guard, it may not get a lot better.  That's one of my biggest worries with Cousins. 

Other than that, I disagree that Sully has a higher ceiling.  DMC is bigger and more athletic than Sully, and he's just as skilled.  He has the tools to be a star.  The question is whether he'll get his head right and make a commitment to consistently do the things that winning teams do. 

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #40 on: January 07, 2013, 04:47:43 PM »

Offline Birdman

  • Ray Allen
  • **
  • Posts: 2392
  • Tommy Points: 138
i trade both for cousins

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #41 on: January 07, 2013, 04:54:37 PM »

Offline Mr October

  • Antoine Walker
  • *****
  • Posts: 5983
  • Tommy Points: 234
I like that someone brought out the fact that Sullinger is still a rookie.  Which one would I part with?  Bradley.  Bradley is two years closer to a big pay day.  Sully is already a contributing member of the Celtics.  Sully has already played in more games as a rookie than Bradley did his entire rookie season.

Do you know how good a rookie has to be to play meaningful minutes for Doc Rivers?  It is practically unheard of since the Big Three got together.

I think we see what Bradley is and what he is going to be, and I like it don't get me wrong.  But we are just now seeing the very tip of the iceberg that is Sully's game.  The Celtics go to him maybe twice a game on the post and he rarely looks to score.  When he gets the green light and the refs start giving him some respect his game should easily go up another level or two.

Bear in mind, Bradley had Rondo and Ray Allen in 2010-11 ahead of him at the 1/2. A struggling Bass was ahead of Sullinger.

Glen Davis even got some minutes as a rookie during the title run.

I still agree that Sullinger is a player though. And he has potential to be as impactful overall as Bradley.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #42 on: January 07, 2013, 04:55:25 PM »

Offline Snakehead

  • Bailey Howell
  • ***
  • Posts: 3862
  • Tommy Points: 214

It seems that he always has an opportunity to cut to the rim unnoticed because his man is not paying attention to him. There is no threat to Bradley's offensive game. If the defenders actually paid attention to him i doubt he would get so many easy uncontested layups.

I don't buy that assessment.  Players who cut well off the ball are not all great jump shooters or anything.  In fact many aren't.  And Bradley has had bad spells but his jump shooting percentage last year was not poor.  It was average or a little above.

There is more to cutting than your man losing you and allowing an uncontested basket.  It's a skill.  He knows how to attack space opened up in defenses.  He is not being ignored by defenders, the eye test shows me that.

As far as your assessment of Sully, I don't disagree.  I quite like both players.

Bradley has good form on his jump shot, but i've honestly never seen a player completely miss iron more than Bradley does. I have seen him draw nothing but backboard from a straight away angle. How is that possible? Have you ever seen a good shooter draw nothing but backboard on a shot from the top of the key? There is something about his offensive game that is erratic and out of control. There is no "smoothness" or so to speak. Maybe i was spoiled by seeing Ray shoot the ball for the C's.

He is not textbook smooth like Ray but he can make shots.  The fact that his percentages are pretty good are proof of a turnaround because yes he had an ugly stretch.

He seems rusty again right now but the kid can shoot.

A lot of it, to me, is the speed with which he plays.  It's also what allows him to fly past people on the break and cut with such quickness.

I think he will improve as a shooter, this year and going forward.


"I really don't want people to understand me." - Jordan Crawford

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #43 on: January 07, 2013, 04:57:55 PM »

Offline ScottHow

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1712
  • Tommy Points: 354
  • It's what I do! It's who I am!
    • Sports Paintings
I think Bradley is more important to this team, but I have an unhealthy love affair with Sully.

Re: Bradley or Sullinger?
« Reply #44 on: January 07, 2013, 06:16:53 PM »

Online danglertx

  • Rajon Rondo
  • Posts: 809
  • Tommy Points: 70
I like that someone brought out the fact that Sullinger is still a rookie.  Which one would I part with?  Bradley.  Bradley is two years closer to a big pay day.  Sully is already a contributing member of the Celtics.  Sully has already played in more games as a rookie than Bradley did his entire rookie season.

Do you know how good a rookie has to be to play meaningful minutes for Doc Rivers?  It is practically unheard of since the Big Three got together.

I think we see what Bradley is and what he is going to be, and I like it don't get me wrong.  But we are just now seeing the very tip of the iceberg that is Sully's game.  The Celtics go to him maybe twice a game on the post and he rarely looks to score.  When he gets the green light and the refs start giving him some respect his game should easily go up another level or two.

Bear in mind, Bradley had Rondo and Ray Allen in 2010-11 ahead of him at the 1/2. A struggling Bass was ahead of Sullinger.

Glen Davis even got some minutes as a rookie during the title run.

I still agree that Sullinger is a player though. And he has potential to be as impactful overall as Bradley.

Glenn Davis played 13 minutes a game in his rookie season.  And most of that was 4th quarter mop up duty as we were blowing teams out almost nightly back then.  Avery's rookie year Nate Robinson was getting 18min/game.

Sullinger has Bass, Collins,  Green, KG, and Wilcox fighting for playing time.  All veterans and all outplayed with the exception of KG.

Plus you have to factor in that refs haven't been kind to Sully and he has lost some playing time to questionable fouls.

My overall point being, name another rookie who Doc has given significant time to their rookie season.  Maybe back in Rondo's first year, but since the big three got together he has barely let rookies see the floor.