When I watched Bradley his rookie year, I saw a guy who understood defensive schemes incredibly well and a guy who knew how to move without the ball. The form on his jumpshot also looked really, really good. His shot just wasn't falling for him.
He was also a guy who looked like he could barely dribble, couldn't stay on the court because he made one horrible play after another and was clearly looking over his shoulder and just waiting to be yanked by Doc. And when he came back for his second season, he didn't look a whit better until injuries literally forced Doc to let him play without fear of being benched.
Now, maybe you're some sort of basketball savant but go back and read what fans and media were saying when those injuries hit and what they were saying when Bradley started to play so well.
Mike
Jarred Sullinger looked pretty bad as a rookie too. Everybody on CB was bagging Danny for the decision of drafting a fat guy who cant move, can't defend and can't shoot at what - #21?
Then Olynyk last season - everyone was bagging Ainge for the first half of the season, until KO found his groove after the All Star game and all the haters instantly shut their mouths. Until now (they have started up again).
Avery Bradley's Rookie season should be pretty much completely ignored when judging his play. He came in to the NBA young, raw and injured on a team that had just made it to the NBA finals the two prior years. It was a given that he would get limited playing time and limited opportunity to get in to anything even resembling a groove.
If you write off his rookie season for the above reasons (which I do, since he practically didn't play in it) then you have a guard who, at 23 years old, has already:
* Shot at least 43/39/79 in two of his three NBA seasons
* Played well enough in his second season to steal the starting SG spot away from a future hall of famer and one of the greatest shooters the game has ever seen
* Contributed significantly to a team's playoff run (as a starter) in only his second season
* Has been voted to two NBA All-Defensive second teams
* Has been so irritating to opposing teams defensively that he's left talented veteran PG's with 5-10 dumbstruck to the point where they had to actually tell him to chill
This is for a guy who is only 2 years older RIGHT NOW (going in to his 5th season) than Kelly Olynyk and Fab Melo were in their rookie years.
It constantly amazes me how much people underrate Bradley. I don't think anybody on this forum is trying to argue that Bradley has All-Star or superstar potential. The problem is that every other person is trying to suggest that any young player who DOESN'T have All-Star or Superstar potential is useless and may as well be dumped.
With the way Avery Bradley has shot in two of his past three seasons, he is showing that he has the ability to be a well above average shooter both from three and from midrange. He's also shown without question that he has the ability to be a well above average defender. This shows that, at the very least, Bradley has all the tools to be a very good "3 and D" player. History has well and truly proven that players in that mould (think Derek Fisher, Shane Battier and Bruce Bowen) have the potential to be major contributors as starters on championship teams.
Now, there are two things that Bradley has that neither of those three guys ever had:
1) Above average athleticism
2) Ability to score at the basket of drives and cuts
Fisher, Battier and Bowen all had zero offensive game outside of spot up threes. Bradley is an above average cutter, a good midrange shooter, and will occasionally drive to the basket for layups / dunks.
Even if he never develops from who he is now, he still has the ability to be a VERY important contributor as a starter on a playoff team.
Factor in Bradley's age combined with the huge offensive improvement he made last year, and potential / upside becomes a significant factor to throw in to the argument. Suddenly his value skyrockets way beyond those guys.
So DA gives Bradley an $8M contract.
Worst case scenario (assuming he stays healthy) is that he doesn't improve, and that he becomes another Derek Fisher / Bruce Bowen / Shane Battier - all guys who would have been worth at least a midlevel exception in their primes. So basically worse case is you end up overpaying by $2-$3 million...big deal.
Best case is that AB makes use of his opportunity and improves significantly, develops in to a guy who gives you a consistent >18/5/2 on 45/40/80 shooting combined with elite, game changing defence. Suddenly you've paid $8M for a guy who is worth max contract money. Bargain.
If you end up half way in the middle, then you've got a guy who gives you 14/4/2 on 45/40/80 shooting with above average defence - in this case you've paid fair money so no loss, no gain.
I really don't get the issue. Looking at what other teams paid for guys like Gordon Hayward and Chadler Parsons...the AB signing looks like an outright bargain.