Author Topic: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas  (Read 29507 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #60 on: March 03, 2015, 01:20:35 PM »

Online Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30940
  • Tommy Points: 1607
  • What a Pub Should Be
IT is the latest player in the Nate Robinson/Stephon Marbury/Jordan Crawford/Jerryd Bayless mold. Ainge loves players like this, but I don't think he's really looking for that sort of player to be the starting point guard.

One assumes that Stevens is on board with this evaluation and decision making.
Except Thomas is better than all off these guys ever were, so we'll see how this pans out.

Thomas is better than Marbury as a Celt for sure, but I definitely wouldn't say he's better than Marbury ever was.  22+ point/8+ assist guys don't grow on trees.  But I get your point.

I've seen Thomas as kind of a rich man's Nate-Rob since he got here, which is a pretty good thing to be, but not a guy you ultimately want as your #1 option.  Explosive bench playmaker who finishes most games is a very nice piece though, especially on his contract.

Nailed my feelings.  Helluva a offensive sparkplug to have.  Ideally, sixth man/microwave type of a playoff contender.

Agreed on the Marbury thing too.  He was a shell of his former self by the time he passed thru Boston.


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #61 on: March 03, 2015, 01:21:57 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
IT is the latest player in the Nate Robinson/Stephon Marbury/Jordan Crawford/Jerryd Bayless mold. Ainge loves players like this, but I don't think he's really looking for that sort of player to be the starting point guard.

One assumes that Stevens is on board with this evaluation and decision making.
Except Thomas is better than all off these guys ever were, so we'll see how this pans out.

Well, he's younger. Definitely not as good as Marbury was in his prime, though. Not even close.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #62 on: March 03, 2015, 01:22:52 PM »

Offline TA9

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2712
  • Tommy Points: 118
  • I Bleed Green
I really can't see the problem regarding coming off the bench/starting if you are getting "starter" like minutes anyway.
Isaiah played seconds more than Turner and only 4 minutes less than Avery in the last game against the Warriors. I think that he'll be fine here in Boston, and I am expecting him to stick around for a long time coming ::)
Jack of all trades, master of none.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #63 on: March 03, 2015, 01:30:43 PM »

Online Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33464
  • Tommy Points: 1533
I like Smart, Bradley, and Turner starting.  The identity of this team should be defense.  The first unit sets the tone with defense and ball movement.  Then Stevens has the flexibility to sub in IT for any spot 1-3 depending on matchups and who has the hot hand. 

Notice how the team's offensive identity completely changes when IT comes in, for better or worse?  The ball doesn't move as much.  The team looks for IT on almost every possession.  He's becoming a crutch.  Of course, he's a very good offensive player and we might improve if we just ran IT pnr's on every play, but that's not the identity we're trying to establish.  We have to build something more sustainable.  Isaiah is better as a spark plug than a floor general.  If we're ever going to be serious, Smart or some player not yet on the roster needs to grow as a floor general.

Granted, our team is 2 legitimate frontcourt players away from realizing any defensive identity.
And what does being a "floor general" really mean? Did the Golden State Warriors have one the other day? Or was the team just looking for Curry and Thompson on every possession?
Curry is definitely a floor general.  He's the de facto ball handler.  He can break pressure.  He advances it quickly and finds transition baskets.  He gets the team into their sets early.  He penetrates and creates for others (8apg).  He scores 24 a game without being selfish.  He's not a ball stopper.  He's a gunner but he rarely shoots his team out of their rhythm.  He shows good awareness, knows when to defer.  And so on. 

Of course, you can freelance a lot when you have 2 of the greatest shooters of the last 20 years.
So no love for Thomas's 22 ppg (on about the same number of shots as Curry) and 7.5 assists per 36 minutes?

Of course the identity changes. When Isaiah Thomas steps on the court, he's automatically the best scoring option by a HUGE margin.
Thomas is great, but he's dominating the ball like 86' MJ.  His usage rate is astronomical, 33.8%.  Higher than Curry (28.3) and even higher than James Harden (31%). 

I doubt his efficiency is sustainable at that rate, especially if he were a starter. I don't think it's healthy for any starter to dominate the ball like that.  I think if you want to win with a hodgepodge group like the Celtics have, you better be sharing the ball and executing in the half court, like Atlanta.  Nobody over 25% and hyper-efficient guys like Korver at 14%.

Now, if IT can come off the bench and score in bursts like Jamal Crawford (another high usg% guy) then I'm fine with it.  Do they both deserve to start?  Yeah, probably.

His size issues are also less likely to be an issue on both ends vs second units.
you are 100% spot TP.
His size issues weren't an issue at all in Sacramento.  It is a silly argument.
I know that he wasn't the only reason the Kings were awful on defense when he was on the team, but his size issues certainly didn't help.

Had his size issues not been present do you think a guy averaging 20/6 would get a contract that is closer to Brandon Bass than other 20 point scorers.
He plays the deepest position in basketball and he isn't the only guy with that sort of contract.  For example, Monta Ellis didn't sign for much more than that he has a much longer history with that sort of play than Thomas does.
So his small size doesn't effect him at all?

I think it's "silly" (as you so aptly put it) to think that size doesn't negatively effect his defense. The Suns were 3.5 points per 100 possessions worse with him on defense this year.

There has to be a reason that players with worse numbers than him have been signed to much larger contracts and it because his height limits his ceiling as a defender.
and they were something like 5 points better on offense.  He was a net positive.  That is sort of the point.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #64 on: March 03, 2015, 01:37:46 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
IT is the latest player in the Nate Robinson/Stephon Marbury/Jordan Crawford/Jerryd Bayless mold. Ainge loves players like this, but I don't think he's really looking for that sort of player to be the starting point guard.

One assumes that Stevens is on board with this evaluation and decision making.
Except Thomas is better than all off these guys ever were, so we'll see how this pans out.

Thomas is better than Marbury as a Celt for sure, but I definitely wouldn't say he's better than Marbury ever was.  22+ point/8+ assist guys don't grow on trees.  But I get your point.

I've seen Thomas as kind of a rich man's Nate-Rob since he got here, which is a pretty good thing to be, but not a guy you ultimately want as your #1 option.  Explosive bench playmaker who finishes most games is a very nice piece though, especially on his contract.
Yeah, forgot about the good version of Marbury. I hear what you're saying, but I see this a little bit like a James Harden situation -- just because he can and did come off the bench doesn't mean that we necessarily want to keep him there.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #65 on: March 03, 2015, 01:39:10 PM »

Online Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33464
  • Tommy Points: 1533
IT is the latest player in the Nate Robinson/Stephon Marbury/Jordan Crawford/Jerryd Bayless mold. Ainge loves players like this, but I don't think he's really looking for that sort of player to be the starting point guard.

One assumes that Stevens is on board with this evaluation and decision making.
Except Thomas is better than all off these guys ever were, so we'll see how this pans out.

Well, he's younger. Definitely not as good as Marbury was in his prime, though. Not even close.
I don't know about that.  Thomas is a much better shooter.  Thomas' career TRB% of 4.9% is also better than Marbury's career high (which is 4.7%).  Win Shares per 48, Thomas has a better average (by a pretty wide margin).  In fact aside from one year in NY where Marbury went .171, Thomas' last two years are higher than any year in Marbury's career.  Marbury was a better passer both in totals and AST%, but that really is the only area he is clearly better than Thomas.  Neither is what you would call a good defender. 

Thomas really is being undersold a great deal in this thread.  He is BY FAR Boston's best player.  It isn't close. 
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #66 on: March 03, 2015, 02:46:48 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Of course, but look at his competition.

I actually quite like Thomas (and Nate Rob, and Crawford, and so on) as a player: I think combo guards coming off the bench are a great thing for a team to have. I'm not underselling his talent, just pointing out his place in the pattern of teambuilding that Ainge seems to follow.

Would have to dive into the numbers and footage between Marbury + IT22 a little more, because it's definitely an interesting investigation, but my point was that Starbury was a much better player than the version we got in Boston (who arguably passed too often, weird as that sounds)
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #67 on: March 03, 2015, 03:08:24 PM »

Online hwangjini_1

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17837
  • Tommy Points: 2661
  • bammokja
Of course, but look at his competition.

I actually quite like Thomas (and Nate Rob, and Crawford, and so on) as a player: I think combo guards coming off the bench are a great thing for a team to have. I'm not underselling his talent, just pointing out his place in the pattern of teambuilding that Ainge seems to follow.

Would have to dive into the numbers and footage between Marbury + IT22 a little more, because it's definitely an interesting investigation, but my point was that Starbury was a much better player than the version we got in Boston (who arguably passed too often, weird as that sounds)
good points above. let's also consider defense in this discussion. as dynamic as thomas is as a scorer, his defense is suspect. he does not defense well, one reason being his height.

if thomas had to match up against the best starting pg in the nba night after night, i think his defensive limitations would become more apparent. against 2nd string pgs, he has a better chance of holding his own, or at least not being owned.

add to this his and he does need a high use % to score as much as he does. off the bench, it is ok for him to have the ball at a 31% rate, he is THE primary scoring option. but as a starter? he would need to pass the ball more and shoot less.

it seems to me that thomas' strength and weakness best position him coming off the bench.
I believe Gandhi is the only person who knew about real democracy — not democracy as the right to go and buy what you want, but democracy as the responsibility to be accountable to everyone around you. Democracy begins with freedom from hunger, freedom from unemployment, freedom from fear, and freedom from hatred.
- Vandana Shiva

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #68 on: March 03, 2015, 03:12:44 PM »

Offline fairweatherfan

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20738
  • Tommy Points: 2365
  • Be the posts you wish to see in the world.
One thing I really like about IT so far is that he has the kind of game where you expect him to shoot you into some games and out of others, but so far he's done a good bit of the former and little if any of the latter.  It won't stay that way forever, but it's very promising so far.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #69 on: March 03, 2015, 04:11:19 PM »

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1822
  • Tommy Points: 219
Quote
if thomas had to match up against the best starting pg in the nba night after night, i think his defensive limitations would become more apparent. against 2nd string pgs, he has a better chance of holding his own, or at least not being owned.

Good news! The thing you're speculating about as if it hasn't already happened, has already happened. Isaiah Thomas has already been matched up against the NBA's best starting point guards, night after night. Bad news: What you're assuming would happen, did not happen. He held his own defensively about as well as any other PG in the league.
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #70 on: March 03, 2015, 04:15:51 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Quote
if thomas had to match up against the best starting pg in the nba night after night, i think his defensive limitations would become more apparent. against 2nd string pgs, he has a better chance of holding his own, or at least not being owned.

Good news! The thing you're speculating about as if it hasn't already happened, has already happened. Isaiah Thomas has already been matched up against the NBA's best starting point guards, night after night. Bad news: What you're assuming would happen, did not happen. He held his own defensively about as well as any other PG in the league.

This is in reference to his play with which franchise, exactly? the world beating Scramento Kings, widely  regarded for their excellent backcourt defense by no one ever?
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #71 on: March 03, 2015, 04:38:43 PM »

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1822
  • Tommy Points: 219
Quote
if thomas had to match up against the best starting pg in the nba night after night, i think his defensive limitations would become more apparent. against 2nd string pgs, he has a better chance of holding his own, or at least not being owned.

Good news! The thing you're speculating about as if it hasn't already happened, has already happened. Isaiah Thomas has already been matched up against the NBA's best starting point guards, night after night. Bad news: What you're assuming would happen, did not happen. He held his own defensively about as well as any other PG in the league.

This is in reference to his play with which franchise, exactly? the world beating Scramento Kings, widely  regarded for their excellent backcourt defense by no one ever?

Did you do a single minute of research before puking up that irrelevant snark? Or did you figure it was sufficient to move the goalposts miles away from judging IT's defense based on individual head-to-head performances to judging the entire ******* Sacramento franchise?
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #72 on: March 03, 2015, 04:41:09 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
The Golden State game is the first one of the Thomas era I've been able to watch.

I paid particular attention to size. 

My first thought was... I actually like the Smart, Bradley, Thomas, Bass, Zeller lineup.   It addresses several of my concerns from earlier in the year.   It shouldn't be a surprise that a lineup featuring borderline-proper NBA size would have our most success of the season.  We started the season throwing out random arbitrary mis-matched lineups.  It was clear from the beginning that injuries and roster consolidation would have an addition by subtraction effect.   Some thoughts on our current starting lineup:

#1 - Zeller, though mediocre, is the closest thing we've had to a true center in a long time.  He's competent.  Proper size.

#2 - Though Turner has taken on ball-handling duties, it doesn't matter much in Brad's version of the pace-and-space offense.  My first reaction to the Turner acquisition was that he made Jeff Green expendable.  He's playing SF and it's a role that makes sense for him.

#3 - Bass is a competent PF.  Not a center.  Playing Sully or Oly in that slot would make sense as well.  There's minimal difference between the three of them.  They all have their pros and cons.  None (not even healthy Sully) is a lock as starter... so Bass is just as effective there as anyone we could trot out this season.

#4 - I've always hated Bradley as a starting SG, due to his size.  6'2 180 pounds is too small to be a serious SG.   This is negated by Marcus Smart as the starting PG.  Smart (6'4 220) is slightly undersized, but he's got enough size/strength and know-how to cause trouble for most shooting guards.  It's why a Turner/Bradley starting "backcourt" made sense as well.  Turner's size negating Bradley's.  Turner could cover the SG's and Bradley could cover the PGs.


So low and behold... Boston has been trotting out the first lineup all season that makes sense from a size perspective. 

Bradey (6'2 180) = Point guard size
Smart (6'4 220) = shooting guard size
Turner (6'7 220) = Small forward size
Bass (6'8 250) = Power forward size
Zeller (7'0 250) = Center size

They still are slightly on the small size, but it's the closest we've had to 1-5 proper size since the days of Rondo, Ray, Pierce, KG and Perk.   

So instinctively I expected us to use Bradley to guard Curry (6'3 190) and Smart to cover Thompson (6'7 215) even though Smart is technically our PG and Bradley is technically our SG.  That's exactly what I saw happening.  In the early part of the game, Smart was all over Thompson while Bradley was doing his best to slow Curry.  They still outsize us, but it's pretty close to even. 

So then, I was curious what would happen when Isaiah Thomas entered the game.

Predictably, that was a bit sketchy.     Thomas was doing a fine job scoring, but when it was him and Bradley on the court you had a bit of an issue.

You could have Thomas (5'9 185) do his best to cover Curry (6'2 190).   You could have Avery Bradley (6'2 180) do his best to cover Klay (6'7 215)

Now both guys are covering players who are 5 inches taller.  That's a significant size mis-match... and when you're dealing with elite shooters, using defenders half a foot shorter means they are basically going to rain barely contested jumpers on us all day.  It's the reason why a 7 footer like Dirk can dominate a guy like Evan Turner.  Too much size to get up and take uncontested shots.   By using Avery and Isaiah, you're basically giving the splash brothers a Dirkvantage.    It shouldn't be shocking that those two dropped 57 on us.

So yeah... I'm not sure how you can start Thomas.   Playing him and Bradley together is probably going to give most teams a major size advantage.   You could maybe negate Thomas' lack of size by starting him with Marcus Smart and sticking Bradley on the bench, but I'm not sure that makes sense either.  The Smart/Bradley starting lineup with the micro-microwave off the bench is probably the best play moving forward.  Guys like Thomas/Earl Boykins are great at giving you an offensive lift off the bench, but you'll need to be prepared to pay the consequences on the defensive end.  I do think the positives outweigh the negatives with Baby Napolean, though.  He's a heck of a finisher.

« Last Edit: March 03, 2015, 04:49:00 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #73 on: March 03, 2015, 04:53:08 PM »

Offline Dino Pitino

  • NCE
  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1822
  • Tommy Points: 219
So, you're using a single game against the league's most elite shooting backcourt to judge Thomas's viability as a starting PG, and he failed in your eyes because one of the best shooters in NBA history wound up shooting the ball well? Against whom does Curry not shoot the ball well? If being burned by Curry's shooting were something that disqualified a player from being a starting PG, the league would only have one starting PG, Curry himself.
"Young man, you have the question backwards." - Bill Russell

"My guess is that an aggregator of expert opinions would be close in terms of results to that of Danny." - Roy H.

Re: Brad Stevens has no intentions of starting Isaiah Thomas
« Reply #74 on: March 03, 2015, 05:00:36 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21238
  • Tommy Points: 2016
So, you're using a single game against the league's most elite shooting backcourt to judge Thomas's viability as a starting PG, and he failed in your eyes because one of the best shooters in NBA history wound up shooting the ball well? Against whom does Curry not shoot the ball well? If being burned by Curry's shooting were something that disqualified a player from being a starting PG, the league would only have one starting PG, Curry himself.
I'm using the entire history of NBA basketball to say that undersized shooting guards like Bradley rarely have long-term starter potential.   Micro-guards like Earl Boykins/Isaiah Thomas can typically only be used as change-of-pace bench players, because they become a liability defensively.  There's a reason why Thomas is playing on his 3rd team in a couple years and it's due to his size.   The Golden State game was a wonderful example of why the world is the way it is.

One solution... trading Bradley for a larger guard?  Or if someone like James Young (6'6 215) supplants Bradley and we trade Bradley in a package to upgrade one of our other major needs (SF, PF, C), that means no matter what the combo (Thomas + Young, Thomas + Smart, Smart + Young) you'll have almost enough size to deal with the opposing team's back court.   Our issue is the Thomas + Bradley lineup.  That's a size mis-match no matter who they are going against. 

Find me a team that has successfully started a 5'9 PG next to a 6'2 shooting guard.