Author Topic: Sully vs Julius Randle  (Read 14364 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #45 on: July 24, 2014, 08:21:25 PM »

Offline sofutomygaha

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2586
  • Tommy Points: 343

In a second. I would do that deal in a second.

This talk about potential and double-doubles is overblown. If Randle gets 30 minutes a game, he will average a double double. So would Jordan Hill have. He rebounded well enough in college, and rebounding does translate (particularly early on in a career). If Boozer and Kelly get the lion's share of the minutes at the 4, he won't.

LA would not take your deal. They'd prefer the rookie with 2 more years of cost control and no health issues.

Jeff Green has been getting many many 30 minutes. Had like 2 double doubles.

Bass has also had many 30+ minute games.

I don't get your point

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #46 on: July 24, 2014, 08:25:26 PM »

Offline sofutomygaha

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2586
  • Tommy Points: 343
Physically Randle is the same size and weight as Brandon Bass.
So we don't need another Bass.

Lebron James: Hey, Chris22, I've been thinking I'd like to play for the Celtics. What do you think?
Chris22:  Well, physically you're the same size and weight as Brandon Bass, so... (sips drink and averts gaze)

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #47 on: July 24, 2014, 08:28:32 PM »

Offline pokeKingCurtis

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3733
  • Tommy Points: 280

In a second. I would do that deal in a second.

This talk about potential and double-doubles is overblown. If Randle gets 30 minutes a game, he will average a double double. So would Jordan Hill have. He rebounded well enough in college, and rebounding does translate (particularly early on in a career). If Boozer and Kelly get the lion's share of the minutes at the 4, he won't.

LA would not take your deal. They'd prefer the rookie with 2 more years of cost control and no health issues.

Jeff Green has been getting many many 30 minutes. Had like 2 double doubles.

Bass has also had many 30+ minute games.

I don't get your point

You make it sound like getting 30 minutes will almost definitely guarantee double doubles.

We have two big, athletic guys who've played 30+ minutes without a double double.

Jeff Green drifts to the 3 point line so you could make an exception for him. But Bass bangs inside and doesn't rebound well despite his physical attributes.

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #48 on: July 24, 2014, 08:49:41 PM »

Offline Vox_Populi

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4468
  • Tommy Points: 346
Quote from: pokeKingCurtis
Jeff Green has been getting many many 30 minutes. Had like 2 double doubles.

Bass has also had many 30+ minute games.

I don't get your point

You make it sound like getting 30 minutes will almost definitely guarantee double doubles.

We have two big, athletic guys who've played 30+ minutes without a double double.

Jeff Green drifts to the 3 point line so you could make an exception for him. But Bass bangs inside and doesn't rebound well despite his physical attributes.
In the last 30 seasons, only 9 power forwards or centers have played at least 30 minutes a game and managed to average a double-double in their rookie season. They are: the Admiral, Shaq, Duncan, Mourning, Sampson, Olajuwon, Emeka Okafor and Dwight Howard.

So, yeah....if Randle averages a double double, then L.A. have probably drafted a future Hall of Famer.  :(

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #49 on: July 24, 2014, 08:56:12 PM »

fitzhickey

  • Guest
Think of it this way... do u really think any team in the league would trade a 7th pick in any draft for Sullinger? The answer is no, they wouldn't. Sullyv isn't as good as most of you think. He is out of shape, shot like 42 percent or something like that from the field which is awful for a big, and seems like a jerk (but don't really care about his attitude that much)

Exactly, Sullinger is a scrub that Celticsblog overrates. Smart is Marcus Banks 2.0 and Julius Randle will be a multiple time all star. Ainge screwed up this draft by picking the worst player by far in the top 10.
Glad to see you're remaining optimistic  ::)

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #50 on: July 24, 2014, 09:01:03 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
This idea is dumb.
Sully is a proven nba player, (near) double double machine.
Randle still a rookie, don't even played an nba game.
Nash: old guy, often injuried, not sure if he can ball
Jeff Green: Good guy, can ball & be a great contributor in any team (i.e Indy, Houston).
Your trade will make you & LA happy but not us.

We could buyout Nash, replace Sullinger with Randle, and get Evan Turner and James Young (especially) more playing time.  What's the downside?

Giving Turner and James Young more playing time.

Like I said, where's the downside in that scenario?

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #51 on: July 24, 2014, 09:02:21 PM »

fitzhickey

  • Guest
This idea is dumb.
Sully is a proven nba player, (near) double double machine.
Randle still a rookie, don't even played an nba game.
Nash: old guy, often injuried, not sure if he can ball
Jeff Green: Good guy, can ball & be a great contributor in any team (i.e Indy, Houston).
Your trade will make you & LA happy but not us.

We could buyout Nash, replace Sullinger with Randle, and get Evan Turner and James Young (especially) more playing time.  What's the downside?

Giving Turner and James Young more playing time.

Like I said, where's the downside in that scenario?
Well if you want to lose more there is no downside

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #52 on: July 24, 2014, 09:03:33 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
Randle has a long way to go.  His best offensive skill is bullying his way to the basket.  Worked in college, but in the NBA,  yeah... a long way to go.

I know that everyone says that, but he at least has the jump hook and up and under down, so it's not like he's clueless.

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #53 on: July 24, 2014, 09:03:37 PM »

Offline pokeKingCurtis

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3733
  • Tommy Points: 280
This idea is dumb.
Sully is a proven nba player, (near) double double machine.
Randle still a rookie, don't even played an nba game.
Nash: old guy, often injuried, not sure if he can ball
Jeff Green: Good guy, can ball & be a great contributor in any team (i.e Indy, Houston).
Your trade will make you & LA happy but not us.

We could buyout Nash, replace Sullinger with Randle, and get Evan Turner and James Young (especially) more playing time.  What's the downside?

Giving Turner and James Young more playing time.

Like I said, where's the downside in that scenario?

You might end up blind because you might gouge your eyes out at the ugly basketball.

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #54 on: July 24, 2014, 09:24:17 PM »

Offline Beat LA

  • NCE
  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8338
  • Tommy Points: 896
  • Mr. Emoji
I get the Randle vs. Sullinger comparisons, it is a fair debate.  Sully is doing fine so far, Randle may be better may not be.  Who knows.  A good topic to debate.

But this trade has us also "throwing in" Green and getting back Nash.  I don't see equal value in that at all.  I think Green has a lot more value than that whether in a trade or if he stays with the team.

I see where you're coming from, but I don't think that Sullinger alone will be enough for Randle, and the Lakers need a sf.  Anyone, really.  They also need to win now with Kobe, and that guy has never been interested in mentoring younger guys or been willing to wait for them to develop, so that's why it might work.  Green is the classic Robin, and Sullinger will be around after Boozer leaves, but I don't think that this would ever get done.  Unless of course, Jim Buss gets involved ;D  Then, and only then, would we have a chance.  I just don't trust guys with weight issues, like when Big Baby fired his nutritionist a month or so before the 2011 playoffs, and he was ridiculously ineffective for us when we needed his 6th man of the year like production off the bench.  That's what I'm concerned about with Sullinger.  Now, if Sully had Randle's body, we wouldn't be having this discussion, but after all of the reports of him ballooning during the offseason, all I can think of is this, unfortunately -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9AvVu-P6Do

which then becomes this -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zp-JEkWJhXs

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #55 on: July 25, 2014, 01:27:23 PM »

Offline Boston Garden Leprechaun

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18464
  • Tommy Points: 1550
Randle has a lot more potential than Sullinger. No way Lakers do that

The problem with "potential" is that everyone got a potential... and not everyone reached their potential or even got half of that...

Sully is a proven NBA player.. almost a double-double overall stats...
that's not a potential that's actual stats...

bingo
LET'S GO CELTICS!

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #56 on: July 25, 2014, 01:41:56 PM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
Quote from: pokeKingCurtis
Jeff Green has been getting many many 30 minutes. Had like 2 double doubles.

Bass has also had many 30+ minute games.

I don't get your point

You make it sound like getting 30 minutes will almost definitely guarantee double doubles.

We have two big, athletic guys who've played 30+ minutes without a double double.

Jeff Green drifts to the 3 point line so you could make an exception for him. But Bass bangs inside and doesn't rebound well despite his physical attributes.
In the last 30 seasons, only 9 power forwards or centers have played at least 30 minutes a game and managed to average a double-double in their rookie season. They are: the Admiral, Shaq, Duncan, Mourning, Sampson, Olajuwon, Emeka Okafor and Dwight Howard.

So, yeah....if Randle averages a double double, then L.A. have probably drafted a future Hall of Famer.  :(
so if i get this correctly reading between the lines….you are saying we should sign emeka okafor  ;)

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #57 on: July 25, 2014, 02:28:56 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1323
Quote
hink of it this way... do u really think any team in the league would trade a 7th pick in any draft for Sullinger? The answer is no, they wouldn't. Sullyv isn't as good as most of you think. He is out of shape, shot like 42 percent or something like that from the field which is awful for a big, and seems like a jerk (but don't really care about his attitude that much)

+1

We do over rate him, I think as well.

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #58 on: July 25, 2014, 02:55:07 PM »

Offline Mr October

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6129
  • Tommy Points: 247
Right now Randle projects as the better player. His body edges out Sully's in a big way.

If Sullinger actually does the work to be in prime shape, i think his ceiling rockets up. He is such a smart versatile player. And in that case i would place my bets on Sully.

In short i need to see what these guys look like in the fall before i make a pick.

If Sully doesn't get in shape over this summer, he will probably never do it.

Re: Sully vs Julius Randle
« Reply #59 on: July 25, 2014, 03:27:06 PM »

Offline kraidstar

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5368
  • Tommy Points: 2478
sullinger obviously needs to lose weight. he's a far more skilled player, but because of his weight the athleticism isn't close. IMO sullinger has "bust" potential due to the weight, but i think he might have a higher ceiling than randle due to his skill level.
randle is strong and motivated, and is a sure-fire NBA player due to his hustle, strength, and moderate skill. but he got away with a lot of garbage, below-the-rim shots in college that won't work in the NBA. he's not nearly as skilled inside as a z-bo or barkley-type, and he doesn't have a jumpshot like a karl malone or david west. in the NBA he won't be able to push guys around nearly as easily as college. he plays kind of like a shorter, less-skilled greg monroe, though he's tougher.
he's a mediocre defender, and with his body type i doubt he ever becomes more than slightly above average at D.
also, he has the foot problem, which may or may not become significant.
in short, i don't get why he's so hyped. he might be a very nice role player, maybe a good starter, but i don't see his ceiling as being all-star level. guys with his body and skillset rarely become all-stars in this league, more often they're garbagemen who rebound and clean up missed shots for putbacks around the rim.