Still think we should try to trade for Larry Sanders...

[pearljammer10]

Would love to have him but after his knuckle head season and the contract he starts Im only buying low on him. Wallace's contract and a future heavily protected first round pick is all I would probably go at this point. He isn't the game changer we should be looking for and I don't think the Bucks even think about that package.

[hpantazo]

The problem with paying Sanders 11 million a year for the next several years to anchor our defense is that he's not a great defender. He's an excellent shot blocker, but not a very good defender, don't let the flashiness of the blocks fool you.
[/quote

Can Larry sanders really anchor the center position?

Sure he gets a lot of blocks, but he also commits a lot of fouls. He also has a thin body for a center.

Has anyone seen him play outstanding basketball against guys like Dwight, Marc Gasol, Pau Gasol, Cousins, Drummond, Noah, Duncan, hibbert, or Bogut?

I haven't actually seen much of Sanders outside of highlights.

exactly, TP. He's not a top tier defensive big man by any stretch. If we want to legitimately contend, we need a top tier defensive big.

______

Dunno where you figured that...

This is from the ESPN Bucks blog, who has information from MIT and Sloan Sports analytic Science..

In reducing shooting efficiency near the basket, Sanders is the second best defensive big man in the league just behind Roy Hibbert. NBA shooters make 49.7% of their shots when one of the big men in the study was five feet within the basket. When Sanders is five feet away from the basket, shooting percentages drop to 38.4%.

In terms of reducing frequency of shots near the basket, Sanders is among the worst in the study. Opponents take 61.9% of their shots near the basket when Sanders is five feet from the basket. This accounts for Sanders high number of blocks. He has more opportunities to block opponent’s shots than someone who discourages a lot of attempts near the basket like Dwight Howard. A lot of this measurement is based off of reputation: if Sanders can keep preventing points in the paint, less players will want to shoot near the basket when he’s in the game. But Sanders can still do a lot to prevent shots near the basket.

that is a shot blocking stat, not a defensive stat analysis. He is simply not a top tier defensive big man. He's not bad, but not the type of defensive big to anchor a legit contender at 11 million/year

[Monkhouse]

Again I don't know where you get that is only a shot blocking stat...

http://www.sloansportsconference.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/The%20Dwight%20Effect%20A%20New%20Ensemble%20of%20Interior%20Defense%20Analytics%20for%20the%20NBA.pdf

Take a look at that...

Yes I don't like how much of a knuckle head Sanders is...

But put yourself in his shoes...

You've just been given a 44 million dollar contract, and your team has constantly belittled you for every little mistake you've made... James Harden/Paul George has done some pretty dumb things too, but because their superstars those rumors and stories get blown away... You're now playing for the worst team that is on pace to be the worst in the history of the NBA, and you were on the trade block. Would you want to play for this team?

Sanders is a great defender... Every stat you see backs that up... He was foul prone the year before, and cut it down to 1.7...

I just think Sanders could be had for Green/a few low first round picks and possibly someone else.

The Bucks are clearly re-building. No matter what they say that they want to reach the playoffs, its all lies.

We have the picks, and taking on Sanders who has the potential to be the most lethal shot blocker is worth taking a risk on...

Yes he is overpaid, but I would take Sanders over Asik any day. Asik is a great top 5 rebounding, and top 7 defender at the C, but... Sanders has the agility and speed to keep up with most point guards.... Sanders spent some time at the PF, and that kind of stunted his growth allowing him to take a few mid range shots.

Sanders can finish well inside, and once he improves his shooting touch inside, I can see him going back to averaging a double double in 28-30 minutes.

[Mr October]

Here is a hypothetical. If sanders has all the potential to be a defensive anchor on a contender, and he only costs 10 mil per year, why would the Bucks trade him?

In this coming draft, if i am Milwaukee, i would grab Andrew Wiggins. That team needs a scoring wing in the worst way.

In theory, this is an intriguing line up:

knight
Mayo
Wiggins
Henson
Sanders

Top bench guys: Antetokounmpo, Pachulia, Delfino, Sessions.

Do the celtics have anything to offer to improve that team? If they traded for Sullinger, then they have a big hole at center, the hardest position to fill with a quality player.

[mmmmm]

Can Larry sanders really anchor the center position?

Sure he gets a lot of blocks, but he also commits a lot of fouls. He also has a thin body for a center.

Has anyone seen him play outstanding basketball against guys like Dwight, Marc Gasol, Pau Gasol, Cousins, Drummond, Noah, Duncan, hibbert, or Bogut?

I haven't actually seen much of Sanders outside of highlights.

exactly, TP. He's not a top tier defensive big man by any stretch. If we want to legitimately contend, we need a top tier defensive big.

I'm not really sure where you got the idea that Sanders doesn't play defense.

Now, this year, given the current state of the Bucks, is not a very useful measure.

But last year, when Sanders was on the floor, the Bucks gave up 9.2 fewer points per 100 possessions.   That's just plain freaking gigantic.

When Sanders was OFF the floor, opponents took 35.9% of their shots as dunks, layups & tip-ins and converted 59.4% of their layups.  When he was ON the floor, the Bucks allowed their opponents to take just 32.7% of their shots as dunks, layups & tip ins, and in particular convert only 51.5% of their layups.      THAT, is "protecting the rim".

I'm not going to say he's not without question marks.  But Sanders is without question an elite defensive big man.

(Just fyi - both the ON and OFF sample sizes for Sanders' 2012-13 season are over 2000 minutes.  So these are not small samples)

[Monkhouse]

Here is a hypothetical. If sanders has all the potential to be a defensive anchor on a contender, and he only costs 10 mil per year, why would the Bucks trade him?

In this coming draft, if i am Milwaukee, i would grab Andrew Wiggins. That team needs a scoring wing in the worst way.

In theory, this is an intriguing line up:

knight
Mayo
Wiggins
Henson
Sanders

Top bench guys: Antetokounmpo, Pachulia, Delfino, Sessions.

Do the celtics have anything to offer to improve that team? If they traded for Sullinger, then they have a big hole at center, the hardest position to fill with a quality player.

Maybe cause their the Bucks, and every FO decision they have made this year made absolutely no sense?

The Bucks have a weak FO, I'm pretty sure Danny Ainge can weasel a great lopsided deal out of them.

[mmmmm]

Here is a hypothetical. If sanders has all the potential to be a defensive anchor on a contender, and he only costs 10 mil per year, why would the Bucks trade him?

In this coming draft, if i am Milwaukee, i would grab Andrew Wiggins. That team needs a scoring wing in the worst way.

In theory, this is an intriguing line up:

knight
Mayo
Wiggins
Henson
Sanders

Top bench guys: Antetokounmpo, Pachulia, Delfino, Sessions.

Do the celtics have anything to offer to improve that team? If they traded for Sullinger, then they have a big hole at center, the hardest position to fill with a quality player.

It all depends on what the Bucks end up doing in the draft.  If they take Wiggins or Parker, then I think it plays out like you say and they don't move Sanders.  If, however, they end up taking Embiid, they may see that as a way to replace Sanders with a dirt-cheap alternative.

They may then look at Antetokounmpo as their SF solution.  In that mode, they are going to build from youth all around, obviously.  So they could be interested in a player like Sully plus picks to give them a young frontcourt threesome of Henson, Embiid & Sullinger  to build with up front.   They'd also have cash and picks to continue to build with.

[Mr October]

Here is a hypothetical. If sanders has all the potential to be a defensive anchor on a contender, and he only costs 10 mil per year, why would the Bucks trade him?

In this coming draft, if i am Milwaukee, i would grab Andrew Wiggins. That team needs a scoring wing in the worst way.

In theory, this is an intriguing line up:

knight
Mayo
Wiggins
Henson
Sanders

Top bench guys: Antetokounmpo, Pachulia, Delfino, Sessions.

Do the celtics have anything to offer to improve that team? If they traded for Sullinger, then they have a big hole at center, the hardest position to fill with a quality player.

It all depends on what the Bucks end up doing in the draft.  If they take Wiggins or Parker, then I think it plays out like you say and they don't move Sanders.  If, however, they end up taking Embiid, they may see that as a way to replace Sanders with a dirt-cheap alternative.

They may then look at Antetokounmpo as their SF solution.  In that mode, they are going to build from youth all around, obviously.  So they could be interested in a player like Sully plus picks to give them a young frontcourt threesome of Henson, Embiid & Sullinger  to build with up front.   They'd also have cash and picks to continue to build with.

Yeah if the Bucks pick Embiid, that would also be the only reason i would think the bucks would trade Sanders to the celtics.

The centerpiece from Boston would probably have to be Sullinger. So maybe a package of Sully, this year's 18th pick, and next year's Clipper pick, and Bass's expiring to round out the numbers would get it done. Both sides would have to consider this.

The Celtics could grab Randle with the 5th pick, maybe make a run at Gordon Hayward and start a team like this:

Rondo
Hayward
Green
Randle
Sanders

Then they could still try to lure a max player in the summer of 2016. Getting Sanders and resigning Rondo kills the 2015 cap space anyway.

In the end i dont think i make that move to get Sanders. I want to give this team either a shot at another lottery pick next year, or enough cap space to make an attempt at Love, Aldridge, M Gasol, Hibbert etc in 2015.

Anyway the first domino to fall is to find out what draft slot the Celtics get when ping pong day rolls around in May.

[hpantazo]

Can Larry sanders really anchor the center position?

Sure he gets a lot of blocks, but he also commits a lot of fouls. He also has a thin body for a center.

Has anyone seen him play outstanding basketball against guys like Dwight, Marc Gasol, Pau Gasol, Cousins, Drummond, Noah, Duncan, hibbert, or Bogut?

I haven't actually seen much of Sanders outside of highlights.

exactly, TP. He's not a top tier defensive big man by any stretch. If we want to legitimately contend, we need a top tier defensive big.

I'm not really sure where you got the idea that Sanders doesn't play defense.

Now, this year, given the current state of the Bucks, is not a very useful measure.

But last year, when Sanders was on the floor, the Bucks gave up 9.2 fewer points per 100 possessions.   That's just plain freaking gigantic.

When Sanders was OFF the floor, opponents took 35.9% of their shots as dunks, layups & tip-ins and converted 59.4% of their layups.  When he was ON the floor, the Bucks allowed their opponents to take just 32.7% of their shots as dunks, layups & tip ins, and in particular convert only 51.5% of their layups.      THAT, is "protecting the rim".

I'm not going to say he's not without question marks.  But Sanders is without question an elite defensive big man.

(Just fyi - both the ON and OFF sample sizes for Sanders' 2012-13 season are over 2000 minutes.  So these are not small samples)

I never said he doesn't play defense, don't misquote or misrepresent my comments. I said he is not a top defensive big man. That is a huge difference. I like him, he is a good defender, but not the type of big man defender I would spend legit cap space on when building a contender. Just my opinion, but Sanders wouldn't cut it to defend top tier big men in playoff series when it's all on the line. Basically, defensively, he is nowhere near KG's level in 2008.

When you use that money to pay someone like Sanders, you are taking it away from money that you could otherwise use to sign another star to anchor your team. Yea, you won't get a KG type for 11 million, but you will take away 11 million out of the 14/15 million you could potentially pay a better big man.

[D.o.s.]

I like him, he is a good defender, but not the type of big man defender I would spend legit cap space on when building a contender.

I disagree, but that's a legit position to have.

[hpantazo]

I like him, he is a good defender, but not the type of big man defender I would spend legit cap space on when building a contender.

I disagree, but that's a legit position to have.

fair enough, I can understand that

[Mr October]

[
Basically, defensively, he is nowhere near KG's level in 2008.

We might not be able to get quite that picky with our future center. KG was one of the best defenders of all time, and the 2008 team was a statistically historically great defensive team, above many other championship teams.

Noah is probably the only player i would compare to KG's defense.

I get your point though. You want someone who does more than block shots.

Other centers that are at least good on D, and i think capable of anchoring a title team:

Howard
m Gasol
Hibbert
Duncan
Bogut
Asik

Guys that have potential:

Davis
Drummond
Jordan
Cousins
Favors
Chandler - can he turn back the clock and do it one more time?
Sanders

[hpantazo]

[
Basically, defensively, he is nowhere near KG's level in 2008.

We might not be able to get quite that picky with our future center. KG was one of the best defenders of all time, and the 2008 team was a statistically historically great defensive team, above many other championship teams.

Noah is probably the only player i would compare to KG's defense.

I get your point though. You want someone who does more than block shots.

Other centers that are at least good on D, and i think capable of anchoring a title team:

Howard
m Gasol
Hibbert
Duncan
Bogut
Asik

Guys that have potential:

Davis
Drummond
Jordan
Cousins
Favors
Chandler - can he turn back the clock and do it one more time?
Sanders

Yea, it's tough to get someone at KG's level, but we should aim for as close to that as we can. Very few teams win championships, and it's because there are very few players that can get it done defensively. I would pay through the nose to get Noah, he's worth it and more. He would totally transform our team.

Asik is a good backup plan if we can't get someone on Noah's level or Marc Gasol's level. Sanders is at the bottom of that list for me and I would have to consider passing on him at his price.

[Mr October]

[
Basically, defensively, he is nowhere near KG's level in 2008.

We might not be able to get quite that picky with our future center. KG was one of the best defenders of all time, and the 2008 team was a statistically historically great defensive team, above many other championship teams.

Noah is probably the only player i would compare to KG's defense.

I get your point though. You want someone who does more than block shots.

Other centers that are at least good on D, and i think capable of anchoring a title team:

Howard
m Gasol
Hibbert
Duncan
Bogut
Asik

Guys that have potential:

Davis
Drummond
Jordan
Cousins
Favors
Chandler - can he turn back the clock and do it one more time?
Sanders

Yea, it's tough to get someone at KG's level, but we should aim for as close to that as we can. Very few teams win championships, and it's because there are very few players that can get it done defensively. I would pay through the nose to get Noah, he's worth it and more. He would totally transform our team.

Asik is a good backup plan if we can't get someone on Noah's level or Marc Gasol's level. Sanders is at the bottom of that list for me and I would have to consider passing on him at his price.

Yeah those are my thoughts as well.

 I have a hard time signing up for a 40 million dollar player with only the possibility of potential. We should aim higher for the next year before pulling triggers on settling moves based on if the Cs are forced to go all in on surrounding Rondo.

[Monkhouse]

I respect everyone's opinions, and I understand there is an alarming sense of uncertainty considering the price tag on Sanders contract.

But what I want to say is I've watched a few Bucks games last year, (unfortunately...) You guys have to really see it to believe it. Sanders does everything right. When the defense is slowing down, Sanders holds the ball tightly, and doesn't move until the defense is set. When the pick and roll is called, he immediately helps out on his man, and sets off the cutter, or sets a screen to cut off the cutter.

There was this one instance where Jennings got hit hard by an screen on the left side of court, and Lamb had the open shot for a 3, and Sanders quickly ran to the middle to contest with his hands up, and with his large wing span anticipated the ball and stole it, then threw a half court pass to a running Ellis who slammed it down.

Its just the small things he does that really seems to cover all the bases. I don't know, maybe I'm seeing things. I just really like how Sanders runs on the floor too. Hes so quick, its almost impossible to believe hes 6'11, the way he runs... He runs like a gazelle, and seems to have an endless motor. I can't count how many times Sanders has run up and down the court looking for the pass, but Jennings never did of course.

I would love to see a duo of Sanders/Rondo. Sanders does extremely well on receiving the ball and finishing during a pick and roll.