Author Topic: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game  (Read 17181 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #45 on: May 28, 2015, 05:44:06 PM »

Offline Future Celtics Owner

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3097
  • Tommy Points: 191
  • Celtic's only raise championship Banners
Trade KO to TOR.

Bruno Caboclo (maybe a pick) for KO

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #46 on: May 28, 2015, 05:45:39 PM »

Offline Forza Juventus

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 964
  • Tommy Points: 70
Trade KO to TOR.

Bruno Caboclo (maybe a pick) for KO

Interesting idea.
Azzurri | Juventus | Boston Celtics | Kentucky Basketball

"All the negativity that’s on Celticsblog sucks. I’ve been around when Kyrie Irving was criticized. I’ve been around when Al Horford was insulted. And it stinks. It makes the greatest team, greatest fans in the world, lousy."

Celticsblog=sports radio

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #47 on: May 28, 2015, 05:50:16 PM »

Offline DarkAzcura

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 644
  • Tommy Points: 100
A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
Have you ever actually watched him play or taken a look at his box score lines?

Also he needs a haircut. Every time I look at him I wonder why he isn't out smoking a dooby and trying to solve mysteries with Scooby.

A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
He's a big man that shoots less that 50%, barely better than average from deep, and had a terrible ft%

Do you know what TS% is? Do you know what real +/- is? These numbers support my eye test. That he is a solid efficient big man who makes his team perform better than not. No statistics matchup with your eye test so maybe you should be doing some re-evaulating. I can actually use statistics to back up my eye test. All you can do is make comments about his hair and whatever else demeaning thing you feel like saying.

and yes, I've watched him play. Like I said, your judgement is oddly clouded by some weird hatred. Per typical of KO haters, you went straight to his hair. I should make a checklist/bingo chart for "things people who hate KO say"

His efficiency was really great before his injury also. He was at 60% TS for most of the season on 50/40 shooting. You should really pay attention more and stop being blinded by little meaningless things like the length of his hair.

The goalposts you went moved to not qualify KO as a playmaker was really odd too. Everyone know being a playmaker in the NBA means. Why play dumb about that?
« Last Edit: May 28, 2015, 05:56:22 PM by DarkAzcura »

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #48 on: May 28, 2015, 05:55:45 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
Have you ever actually watched him play or taken a look at his box score lines?

Also he needs a haircut. Every time I look at him I wonder why he isn't out smoking a dooby and trying to solve mysteries with Scooby.

A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
He's a big man that shoots less that 50%, barely better than average from deep, and had a terrible ft%

Do you know what TS% is? Do you know what real +/- is? These numbers support my eye test. That he is a solid efficient big man who makes his team perform better than not. No statistics matchup with your eye test so maybe you should be doing some re-evaulating. I can actually use statistics to back up my eye test. All you can do is make comments about his hair and whatever else demeaning thing you feel like saying.

and yes, I've watched him play. Like I said, your judgement is oddly clouded by some weird hatred. Per typical of KO haters, you went straight to his hair. I should make a checklist/bingo chart for "things people who hate KO say"

His efficiency was really great before his injury also. He was at 60% TS for most of the season on 50/40 shooting. You should really pay attention more and stop being blinded by little meaningless things like the length of his hair.
I know what TS is. Not impressed. Not buying it. Do you have any defensive stats or just irrational mommy love?

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #49 on: May 28, 2015, 05:57:21 PM »

Offline DarkAzcura

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 644
  • Tommy Points: 100
A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
Have you ever actually watched him play or taken a look at his box score lines?

Also he needs a haircut. Every time I look at him I wonder why he isn't out smoking a dooby and trying to solve mysteries with Scooby.

A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
He's a big man that shoots less that 50%, barely better than average from deep, and had a terrible ft%

Do you know what TS% is? Do you know what real +/- is? These numbers support my eye test. That he is a solid efficient big man who makes his team perform better than not. No statistics matchup with your eye test so maybe you should be doing some re-evaulating. I can actually use statistics to back up my eye test. All you can do is make comments about his hair and whatever else demeaning thing you feel like saying.

and yes, I've watched him play. Like I said, your judgement is oddly clouded by some weird hatred. Per typical of KO haters, you went straight to his hair. I should make a checklist/bingo chart for "things people who hate KO say"

His efficiency was really great before his injury also. He was at 60% TS for most of the season on 50/40 shooting. You should really pay attention more and stop being blinded by little meaningless things like the length of his hair.
I know what TS is. Not impressed. Not buying it. Do you have any defensive stats or just irrational mommy love?

This thread is about KO as a playmaker on the offensive end of the floor. Stop moving around just to discredit KO. You don't "buy" TS% or not. It's the accepted measuring stick for efficiency in the NBA now.

Like I said, you can keep going towards insults and whatever else you feel like doing because nothing really backs up your eye test when it comes to KO as a playmaker. He fits the exact definition of what a playmaking 4 entails in the modern NBA. Stop talking about his defense like it is even relevant to this particular topic.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #50 on: May 28, 2015, 05:57:22 PM »

Offline aingeforthree

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2013
  • Tommy Points: 134
Lots of overreactions IMO. Kelly still has a substantial upside. I don't know why people think he's such a poor rebounder. That being said, he has very little value. He could easily have value if he makes a leap next year. Too in his own head, when he's locked in he looks pretty [dang] good.

I'm baffled as to why Olynyk is graded out like a finished product by most fans.  The guy is just starting his development.  He can still get better.

I personally would keep him, just based on his skill set. I'd look to move Sullinger before Kelly, especially if Love comes here.  I would love the Love/Olynyk combo at the 4.

Typically players that spend four years in college are treated as more finished than, say, a player entering the league fresh out of high school or after having a cup of coffee in the NCAA.

If you look at his college days though, he was on the bench as a frosh and sophomore, and then red shirted his junior year in order to get stronger and improve.  After his red shirt year, he went on to be an all American & wound up forgoing his senior year for the draft.

That's not really your typical college career.  He's still getting stronger and improving.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #51 on: May 28, 2015, 05:59:46 PM »

Offline aingeforthree

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2013
  • Tommy Points: 134
Lots of overreactions IMO. Kelly still has a substantial upside. I don't know why people think he's such a poor rebounder. That being said, he has very little value. He could easily have value if he makes a leap next year. Too in his own head, when he's locked in he looks pretty [dang] good.

I'm baffled as to why Olynyk is graded out like a finished product by most fans.  The guy is just starting his development.  He can still get better.

I personally would keep him, just based on his skill set. I'd look to move Sullinger before Kelly, especially if Love comes here.  I would love the Love/Olynyk combo at the 4.
Because he largely regressed this year, while most other people on the team either got better or got better over the course of the year.

I didn't see a large regression.  He missed almost 20 games though due to injury.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #52 on: May 28, 2015, 06:01:49 PM »

Offline aingeforthree

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2013
  • Tommy Points: 134
Lots of overreactions IMO. Kelly still has a substantial upside. I don't know why people think he's such a poor rebounder. That being said, he has very little value. He could easily have value if he makes a leap next year. Too in his own head, when he's locked in he looks pretty [dang] good.

I'm baffled as to why Olynyk is graded out like a finished product by most fans.  The guy is just starting his development.  He can still get better.

I personally would keep him, just based on his skill set. I'd look to move Sullinger before Kelly, especially if Love comes here.  I would love the Love/Olynyk combo at the 4.

I agree he was really behind developmentally.  He took his junior year off to remake his game and his body.  He was a stick figure who thought he was a shooting guard before that.  He's still improving his game.  I don't think he will ever be an above average starter, but I think he could be a very good big off the bench who who can take advantage of matchups.  He just needs to make some improvements and play consistently with confidence.

I'm with you.  That's why I love the combo at the 4 with him and Love.  Love getting the major minutes of course, with Olynyk backing him up.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #53 on: May 28, 2015, 06:16:58 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
Have you ever actually watched him play or taken a look at his box score lines?

Also he needs a haircut. Every time I look at him I wonder why he isn't out smoking a dooby and trying to solve mysteries with Scooby.

A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
He's a big man that shoots less that 50%, barely better than average from deep, and had a terrible ft%

Do you know what TS% is? Do you know what real +/- is? These numbers support my eye test. That he is a solid efficient big man who makes his team perform better than not. No statistics matchup with your eye test so maybe you should be doing some re-evaulating. I can actually use statistics to back up my eye test. All you can do is make comments about his hair and whatever else demeaning thing you feel like saying.

and yes, I've watched him play. Like I said, your judgement is oddly clouded by some weird hatred. Per typical of KO haters, you went straight to his hair. I should make a checklist/bingo chart for "things people who hate KO say"

His efficiency was really great before his injury also. He was at 60% TS for most of the season on 50/40 shooting. You should really pay attention more and stop being blinded by little meaningless things like the length of his hair.
I know what TS is. Not impressed. Not buying it. Do you have any defensive stats or just irrational mommy love?

This thread is about KO as a playmaker on the offensive end of the floor. Stop moving around just to discredit KO. You don't "buy" TS% or not. It's the accepted measuring stick for efficiency in the NBA now.

Like I said, you can keep going towards insults and whatever else you feel like doing because nothing really backs up your eye test when it comes to KO as a playmaker. He fits the exact definition of what a playmaking 4 entails in the modern NBA. Stop talking about his defense like it is even relevant to this particular topic.
Do you have any evidence at all that he can be a "playmaker"? Any assists to TOs stats or anything? Nope

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #54 on: May 28, 2015, 06:22:58 PM »

Offline Eja117

  • NCE
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19274
  • Tommy Points: 1254
A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
Have you ever actually watched him play or taken a look at his box score lines?

Also he needs a haircut. Every time I look at him I wonder why he isn't out smoking a dooby and trying to solve mysteries with Scooby.

A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
He's a big man that shoots less that 50%, barely better than average from deep, and had a terrible ft%

Do you know what TS% is? Do you know what real +/- is? These numbers support my eye test. That he is a solid efficient big man who makes his team perform better than not. No statistics matchup with your eye test so maybe you should be doing some re-evaulating. I can actually use statistics to back up my eye test. All you can do is make comments about his hair and whatever else demeaning thing you feel like saying.

and yes, I've watched him play. Like I said, your judgement is oddly clouded by some weird hatred. Per typical of KO haters, you went straight to his hair. I should make a checklist/bingo chart for "things people who hate KO say"

His efficiency was really great before his injury also. He was at 60% TS for most of the season on 50/40 shooting. You should really pay attention more and stop being blinded by little meaningless things like the length of his hair.
I know what TS is. Not impressed. Not buying it. Do you have any defensive stats or just irrational mommy love?

This thread is about KO as a playmaker on the offensive end of the floor. Stop moving around just to discredit KO. You don't "buy" TS% or not. It's the accepted measuring stick for efficiency in the NBA now.

Like I said, you can keep going towards insults and whatever else you feel like doing because nothing really backs up your eye test when it comes to KO as a playmaker. He fits the exact definition of what a playmaking 4 entails in the modern NBA. Stop talking about his defense like it is even relevant to this particular topic.
So if we're using TS% as the measure of whether KO can be a playmaker...he's at .558 and Bass is .557 so Bass is a playmaker now too....but both of them are far below Jared Dudley at ..572, so Dudley is a playmaker now too. Biyombo is above that.....

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #55 on: May 28, 2015, 06:40:24 PM »

Offline jaketwice

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1384
  • Tommy Points: 102
He simply lacks the elite quickness to compete against the top low post defenders. He is not, himself, a terrific defender - although he is much better (as most would be) when he makes an effort.

The wisest course for him would be to become an expert marksman from deep. He clearly has that latent ability, it's just bringing it out in games. A coach could do wonderful things with him if he was a .350+ 3Pt. shooter. A guy his size is taking a practice shot if he isn't guarded by a decently sized defender. You give PGs and Centers a real outlet from the post (like Frye was in PHX) with that size and quality from the corners.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #56 on: May 28, 2015, 06:43:37 PM »

Offline DarkAzcura

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 644
  • Tommy Points: 100
A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
Have you ever actually watched him play or taken a look at his box score lines?

Also he needs a haircut. Every time I look at him I wonder why he isn't out smoking a dooby and trying to solve mysteries with Scooby.

A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, if you're going to define doing anything productive on the floor as a "play," then yes, there will be a number of players better than Olynyk by that measure, though KO is a fairly productive big man.  He just doesn't dominate in any one category, aside from being one of the few 7 footers in the league who regularly takes and makes threes.

Just know that this is not what other people are talking about when they talk about "playmakers."
People can think of KO as a playmaker as much as they want to. I don't consider him much of a playmaker or facilitator or a lead forward or point forward or any other possible euphemism for "Not really a reliable scorer, defender, or rebounder. Not at all intimidating or much of a leader on the court. Just kinda a liability".

I'm not sure what you mean by he's a fairly productive big man. His shooting numbers aren't that great. Neither are any of his other numbers.

Even if he is a "playmaker" ....at the expense of what? If you never have the ball because you don't rebound it or take it from the other team then how many plays can you make?

Sounds like you are changing the definition in your head because you likely have some weird agenda/hatred against Olynyk like a few people on this forum have. Everyone knows what people mean when they are talking about playmakers in basketball. Playmakers are those who can score, dribble, and pass. You are trying way too hard.

Anyway, before his injury he had a 58-60% TS, which is really good. He ended the season at 56%, which is still pretty good so you are pretty wrong to say he doesn't shoot that well. He's fairly efficient with pretty good potential to be very efficient. He's also the best ball mover in the Celtics' front court by a pretty healthy margin, though, Sully is obviously right there with him. There is a reason KO ranks so highly on the Celtics in terms of real +/-. More often than not, the Celtics play their best basketball with KO on the floor. That's just the truth of it. Sorry if he doesn't fit your ideal model or you can't see the good things he does. Plenty of others do, and yes, he does fit the description posted in the OP to a T.
He's a big man that shoots less that 50%, barely better than average from deep, and had a terrible ft%

Do you know what TS% is? Do you know what real +/- is? These numbers support my eye test. That he is a solid efficient big man who makes his team perform better than not. No statistics matchup with your eye test so maybe you should be doing some re-evaulating. I can actually use statistics to back up my eye test. All you can do is make comments about his hair and whatever else demeaning thing you feel like saying.

and yes, I've watched him play. Like I said, your judgement is oddly clouded by some weird hatred. Per typical of KO haters, you went straight to his hair. I should make a checklist/bingo chart for "things people who hate KO say"

His efficiency was really great before his injury also. He was at 60% TS for most of the season on 50/40 shooting. You should really pay attention more and stop being blinded by little meaningless things like the length of his hair.
I know what TS is. Not impressed. Not buying it. Do you have any defensive stats or just irrational mommy love?

This thread is about KO as a playmaker on the offensive end of the floor. Stop moving around just to discredit KO. You don't "buy" TS% or not. It's the accepted measuring stick for efficiency in the NBA now.

Like I said, you can keep going towards insults and whatever else you feel like doing because nothing really backs up your eye test when it comes to KO as a playmaker. He fits the exact definition of what a playmaking 4 entails in the modern NBA. Stop talking about his defense like it is even relevant to this particular topic.
So if we're using TS% as the measure of whether KO can be a playmaker...he's at .558 and Bass is .557 so Bass is a playmaker now too....but both of them are far below Jared Dudley at ..572, so Dudley is a playmaker now too. Biyombo is above that.....

No one said TS% is a measure of being a playmaker or not. You are the one who said KO is not that efficient so I told you his TS%. He is. I'd love to see what you think of Sullinger if you are crapping on KO's shooting percentage this much. KO was up at 60% before his injury anyway. He's a much better shooter than you realize or are giving credit for.

Playmaking wise...almost every single person complains about KO's pump fakes and dribbles for drives, but KO has proven pretty successful at the rim and is decent at driving. That's all the OP is about. 4s who can not only shoot the ball, but put it on the floor for drives (and kicks). It's about versatility, and even the biggest KO hater should be able to admit that KO is fairly versatile on the offensive end. I have no idea why you are trying to make this whole thread into something it is not about.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #57 on: May 28, 2015, 07:22:21 PM »

Offline Future Celtics Owner

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3097
  • Tommy Points: 191
  • Celtic's only raise championship Banners
Trade KO to TOR.

Bruno Caboclo (maybe a pick) for KO

Interesting idea.
Ya very interesting. I'd do it. At least KO has hometown ties there and you know what your getting. Bruno would be a good prospect for us but could turn out to be nothing.

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #58 on: May 28, 2015, 07:48:36 PM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
Quote
KO was pretty good on the boards in his last year of college and first year in the NBA

NBA and college is night and day.  The best players most often play in high school, the best of those go to college often, the best of those make it to the NBA.  Each level guys lose skills as the elite skills and athletic ability and size become more common and they seem less special.

Definitely a good point.

As to Olynyk, I think he's well suited to being a playmaking 4 -- he's like a taller (and worse) version of Kyle Korver, in that regard, particularly/only if he can start hitting from outside with any consistency.

He's nothing like Kyle Korver.  Korver's a guy who runs off screens, looking to get a sliver of daylight to hoist up threes.  He's one of the best pure shooters the game has ever seen, but he doesn't put the ball on the floor and drive to the hoop with any frequency.

Korver's a finisher, not a creator. 

Kelly's not the shooter that Korver is.  Nobody is, but he's a much more multi-dimensional offensive player.

that's you underselling Korver. The whole reason he flourished this season (as opposed to the million years he's been in the league) is because Atlanta's coaching staff used him as much more than just a great three point shooter.

Lowe did a great piece on this about a year ago, it's worth reading:
http://grantland.com/features/kyle-korver-nba-atlanta-hawks/

I think you missed my point.   I don't believe I'm underselling Korver at all.  I guess I should say that I have a ton of respect for Kyle Korver's game, I think he deserved to be an all star this year, and that at this point in their respective careers, Kyle Korver is a considerably more valuable player than Kelly Olynyk.

My comments were more about offensive styles than about comparative value.  I only skimmed Lowe's article, but it doesn't seem to point out anything that refutes the points I made above. 

Kyle Korver is very predominantly a catch and shoot player, though.  That doesn't mean he doesn't score in a variety of ways.   It doesn't mean he just stands in the corner and waits for the ball to come to him.  He runs of screens, he curls, he even upfakes when defenders rush at him, takes a dribble, resets and drains threes.

What he doesn't do very often is put the ball on the floor and drive to the hoop.

According to NBA.COM's Player Tracking stats, Kyle Korver scored 0.2 PPG on drives to the basket. On the other hand, he led the league in Catch and Shoot PPG at 8.5.

Kyle Korver's main source of scoring absolutely came from catching the ball off a pass and shooting it.

Kelly Olynyk, on the other hand, 2.5 PPG off drives to the basket and 3.3 PPG off the Catch and Shoot.  The drive to the hoop is an important part of Kelly's game.

This is why I find Kyle Korver a poor comparison for Kelly Olynyk.  They don't play the same way or do the same things on the court offensively.

It's not about over or underselling anyone. 


DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson

Re: The value of Kelly Olynyk in the modern NBA game
« Reply #59 on: May 28, 2015, 07:53:44 PM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
A rebound is a play. Getting a steal or a block is a play. Forcing your man to pass or take a bad shot is a play. Hitting an open shot is a play.

Most of these guys are better play makers than KO most of the time.

Well, Kelly does a number of the things on your list, but apparently the terms need to be defined a little more clearly.

By "playmaker" what most of us are referring to is a player who is skilled at creating shots and scores, either for himself or others, off the dribble. 

I thought that was common basketball parlance.  It has been ever since I started playing and following basketball, well before anyone was talking about analytics. 

DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson