I don't understand the KO and Sully bashing on this board. Sure they won't become Anthony Davis or Tim Duncan or KG but how many other pf's and centers out there will be?
My point is they are both starting caliber players. If you put any real center next to either of them they can flourish since neither are really fit to battle down low for 30+ minutes a game. Also by keeping them at the 4 we can invest more cap space(Leonard, Butler, Green) / draft choices( SJohnson, Winslow) into the 2 and 3 spots.
I disagree completely with your point. Sully is flawed on D. You think KO is a starter? Sully is a starter on a bad team, one that other teams routinely exploit. Sure he puts up numbers, but he is still taking ill advised threes and arguably gives up more points than he makes and is routinely the focus of the other team's attack. I would argue that both are bench players ideally. We really only need one of them going forward when our talent upgrades.
I find the the concept that either one one them is good enough that they require a particular type of center behind as evidence that both are deeply flawed as players. The NBA where we hope to couple two players into a complete player? That is what your proposing. Why not get a non flawed player, who is athlete and can play? I would not get too attached to these guys they are both completely upgradeable.
When did this become the compensate for a player league? I could see it if they were better players but they are not. Bird was not fast but he could anticipate and impact the game in s about fell out of my chair laughing when you said Olynyk is a starting caliber player. Sully is a deeply flawed player and I have not even mentioned weight or conditioning issues which are a problem for him. The are starters, maybe with the passive tanking that has been going on as your going to lose plenty with those two in there. I would not even remotely consider them starters on a championship level team.
Celtics4ever apparently believe athleticism is the sole determinant of basketball impact. He ignores all indicators of Sullinger's competent D (his "statistical" argument for Sullinger being a bad defender is Sully's poor results on some draft day workouts) as well as all indicators of both Sully + Kelly's good-to-really-good offensive skills.
You completely ignore the eyetest TheFlex. Most of the times, other teams let him shoot because Sully is such a poor shooter. Here are some stats and you have ignored them every time I posted them so I do not know why I bother.
Sully is only shooting .45% from the field and .30% from the three point line. Since when did those shooting numbers constitute good shooting for a big? I am not even going to waste the time on the Olynyk stats because is that big of a joke.
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/sullija01.html
Other teams, seem to score more in the clutch when he is on the court and his clutch shooting percentages seem to shot not real good offensive skills that you are presenting. They are mediocre. I suppose if that that is what you like.
Opposing Cs are average 18 PPG against him and PF are averaging 21 PPG. He scores 14 PPG. Please take note of Opponent Counterpart 48-Minute Production:
http://www.82games.com/1415/14BOS15.HTM#pstats
Minus -7 points. 39% FG and a 7 and 8 Win Loss record in the clutch. Clutch has often been the decider of a player's mettle. Are those really that good? Maybe for your standards which are apparently much lower than mine.
http://www.82games.com/1213/12BOS15.HTM#clutch
We're a bad team and he is one of the best players we have on a bad team. That does mean he is good NBA player like you present. How is he doing with the All Star voting and the team? Springfield MASS here Sully comes.
I think your in the minority here and more and more people are seeing it. Does he pay you post this drivel? Are you one of those folks that post positive reviews to counter truthful ones? NOTE what you posted was opinion and the above is actual stats.
ON TOPIC, I think having talent is a problem I wish we had. I think they could play together and if not they will be easier to move for an asset than our flawed talent.
We've gone back and forth on this a number of times, I don't think it's worth rehashing again. I appreciate you laying out your argument and respect your views. I'd just like to address one thing, quickly:
I don't "ignore" the eye test, I just don't rush to assumptions when I see things on the court that make me think one thing or another. Many people have complained about Sullinger's three-point shooting this season (despite the fact that he still takes 75% of his shots within two-point range, and 50% within ten feet of the rim). It's easy to point to Sully taking a three a few times a game and harp on him being an undisciplined player who will never learn to play to his strengths. It's harder to recognize that Sully is one of just two Celtics who has consistently held his starting spot over the past two seasons (him and Bradley). Do you think if Sullinger was playing an offensive game that Stevens didn't call for he would still have his starting spot? You don't think he'd get yanked after every three he took and screamed at on the bench by all of the coaches? This is the NBA, not rec ball. You don't get to do what you want unless you're good enough. And Sullinger, as big a fan as I am of him, is not good enough to just do his own thing on either end of the floor.
The Sixers employ a coaching method in which they essentially realize how bad they are and play games as if they are practice. MCW and Noel repeatedly take shots they know they can't efficiently make in order to a) build confidence and b) build muscle memory. You don't think there is some of that going on between Stevens and his players? How about Smart launching threes at the beginning of the year when it was far from proven that he had that type of range? And continuing to do so, while simultaneously receiving more playing time each month, after missing 16 of 21 threes in November?
I agree with you, Sullinger is a flawed player, but you could say that about probably every NBA player not named LBJ. It doesn't really present much of an argument for me to work with. I, too, would like to see Sullinger curb his three-point shooting to 1-2 per game, to keep the defense honest and space the floor. I think, unless Sullinger morphs into Kevin Love this summer, he will do just that with Coach Stevens' approval, and if he doesn't, CBS will discipline him with less playing time. So far, Sullinger hasn't seen any less playing time. That to me is the ultimate indicator that he's doing what his coaches want him to do.
As I said, there's other portions of your argument (didn't really address our disagreements on his defensive play in this post) that I'm not fond of, but we've already discussed those. Here's hoping Sullinger becomes the player that he has the talent to become.
Topic: noel and embid cannot play together (Read 6113 times)