Does BS give IT the opportunity to start this season

[Moranis]

I've been saying since the trade was made that IT and Smart should be the starting backcourt with Bradley as the perfect 1st guard off the bench (in that he could come in for either).  I'd start Turner at SF and let Crowder come in for the defensive situations.  Sullinger and Johnson seem like the most likely starters down low with Lee, Zeller, and Olynyk getting the rest of the bench time (match-ups will dictate minutes, but I expect all 5 to play).  Jonas I don't see playing much at all. 


EDIT: This is what I had in the top 10 thread a couple of weeks ago.  Still think this is the way to go.

I would do something like this

PG - Thomas 30, Smart 18
SG - Smart 18, Bradley 30
SF - Turner 28, Crowder 20
PF - Sullinger 24, Lee 15, Olynyk 9
C - Johnson 28, Zeller 15, Olynyk 5

Total
Smart - 36
Thomas - 30
Bradley - 30
Turner - 28
Johnson - 28
Sullinger - 24
Crowder - 20
Lee - 15
Zeller - 15
Olynyk - 14

Team clearly needs a real legit starter at center and needs to consolidate the PF's.

[CelticsFanFromNYC]

I've been saying since the trade was made that IT and Smart should be the starting backcourt with Bradley as the perfect 1st guard off the bench (in that he could come in for either).  I'd start Crowder with Smart and IT and let Turner take over as the instant offense off the bench role filled by IT last year.  Sullinger and Johnson seem like the most likely starters down low with Lee, Zeller, and Olynyk getting the rest of the bench time (match-ups will dictate minutes, but I expect all 5 to play).  Jonas I don't see playing much at all.

I think were are sorta n the same page with our lineups. As far as a backup SF is concerned  I think Jerebko might get some decent minutes. I mean he's not great. but he doesn't really do anything wrong. And with ET taking ball handling duties and possibility to be traded. I see him getting some OK minutes especially when we need size at the 3 with 2nd unit. Who else do we have to consider that position? I See him playing a Sefolosha glue guy kinda role for the 2nd unit (when I refer to Thabo I don't mean his skill set to a Tee)


EDIT: I also cant see turner with IT for needing the ball to thrive purposes

[kozlodoev]

There is no way Olynyk or Sullinger should start over Lee and Zeller.

KO could well be a more valuable starter than Zeller this year, and I'd be kind of surprised if Lee starts.

Which is odd, because even in his diminished state he may well be the best scorer on the team.

[CelticsFanFromNYC]

There is no way Olynyk or Sullinger should start over Lee and Zeller.

KO could well be a more valuable starter than Zeller this year, and I'd be kind of surprised if Lee starts.

Which is odd, because even in his diminished state he may well be the best scorer on the team.

Which brings me back to the original question. IT is our best scoring guard and Lee,  by his resume may as well be our best scoring big. Why would our best two scorers be  in 2nd unit  especially together?  seems other bigs may complement Amir better though.  Honestly, I think Lee or IT has to go into the starting line up.  Maybe not have to.

WE NEED A TRADE!!!!!!

[Csfan1984]

We absolutely need a trade.

[Dedalus]

Only if he wants the opposing PG to have a career night offensively. IT's skilled and a good offensive player, but he's a liability on defense. It seems like starting two defensive guards is conducive to IT scoring more points & allowing fewer. If we're playing against R Westbrook, there's no way that starting IT over Marcus is a good idea.

[Csfan1984]

I'd rather not start IT & have him come off the bench.  I really think that's the ideal role for him. Offensive spark plug.

That is ideal in terms of NBA rosters but this team has no good starting scorers. It is why there were so many slow starts for this team last year. And also why three guards were even used. I do like Smart but if SG and SF can't score efficiently then you need IT in the lineup. C's need a big scoring upgrade at SG or SF before I say that IT is better off the bench for this team.

[Donoghus]

I'd rather not start IT & have him come off the bench.  I really think that's the ideal role for him. Offensive spark plug.

That is ideal in terms of NBA rosters but this team has no good starting scorers. It is why there were so many slow starts for this team last year. And also why three guards were even used. I do like Smart but if SG and SF can't score efficiently then you need IT in the lineup. C's need a big scoring upgrade at SG or SF before I say that IT is better off the bench for this team.

If you're badly in need of scoring, you just sub in IT4.  I don't think this team is so bad offensively that they need him out of the gate.  With Smart & Bradley, I think you have the best back-court to handle things from both ends.  IT4 is a defensive liability for them. 

To be honest, I'm more interested to see how they start things upfront.

I do agree that, eventually, this team is going to need to get themselves a bonafide wing scorer.

[PhoSita]

I don't think Thomas and Turner should see the floor together.  For the purpose of the rotation, they should be a platoon.  Those are the primary ball-handlers for the team until Smart and Rozier develop further.  Neither of them is really worth having on the floor (and putting up with their weaknesses) if they are playing off the ball.

Thomas is difficult to put in the starting lineup because his size is a liability; tougher to score against generally bigger, more talented starting guards, and tougher to defend against the same.

[Csfan1984]

I'd rather not start IT & have him come off the bench.  I really think that's the ideal role for him. Offensive spark plug.

That is ideal in terms of NBA rosters but this team has no good starting scorers. It is why there were so many slow starts for this team last year. And also why three guards were even used. I do like Smart but if SG and SF can't score efficiently then you need IT in the lineup. C's need a big scoring upgrade at SG or SF before I say that IT is better off the bench for this team.

If you're badly in need of scoring, you just sub in IT4.  I don't think this team is so bad offensively that they need him out of the gate.  With Smart & Bradley, I think you have the best back-court to handle things from both ends.  IT4 is a defensive liability for them. 

To be honest, I'm more interested to see how they start things upfront.

I do agree that, eventually, this team is going to need to get themselves a bonafide wing scorer.

Im good with Smart also starting if he has improved his offense. Based on the small summer sample his offense may be streaky if that is the case you are right just bring in IT off the bench. However summer sample is too small a sample to use for me, so Im just going off last year on this. Do hope Smart explodes and becomes an elite guard.

[nickagneta]

IT is a high usage rate player. He needs the ball in his hands a lot to be effective and to maximize his effectiveness he needs to score because his defense is bad. When he played for the C's last year IT's usage rate was over 32% which if he did that all year would put him in the top 5 in the league.

This type player will fit better with a second unit that can't score as well as a first starting unit. IT's usage rate just isn't compatible with Steven's offensive system as a starter. The ball has to move and everyone needs to be shooting. One player shouldn't be dominating the ball and the shooting.

I think he comes off the bench as an offensive spark and plays big minutes towards the end of halves and end of games where needing to get the "one" shot created is more important.

[PhoSita]

IT is a high usage rate player. He needs the ball in his hands a lot to be effective and to maximize his effectiveness he needs to score because his defense is bad. When he played for the C's last year IT's usage rate was over 32% which if he did that all year would put him in the top 5 in the league.

This type player will fit better with a second unit that can't score as well as a first starting unit. IT's usage rate just isn't compatible with Steven's offensive system as a starter. The ball has to move and everyone needs to be shooting. One player shouldn't be dominating the ball and the shooting.

I think he comes off the bench as an offensive spark and plays big minutes towards the end of halves and end of games where needing to get the "one" shot created is more important.

Agreed with all of the above.

In the starting lineup, the team can get by with Evan Turner serving as the primary pick and roll ball-handler, and when things break down, ET is a passable isolation scorer.  ET is more of a passer than IT, so he fits better with the starting lineup, and he's harder to take advantage of on defense (though he's not exactly Tony Allen).

[Moranis]

IT is a high usage rate player. He needs the ball in his hands a lot to be effective and to maximize his effectiveness he needs to score because his defense is bad. When he played for the C's last year IT's usage rate was over 32% which if he did that all year would put him in the top 5 in the league.

This type player will fit better with a second unit that can't score as well as a first starting unit. IT's usage rate just isn't compatible with Steven's offensive system as a starter. The ball has to move and everyone needs to be shooting. One player shouldn't be dominating the ball and the shooting.

I think he comes off the bench as an offensive spark and plays big minutes towards the end of halves and end of games where needing to get the "one" shot created is more important.

Agreed with all of the above.

In the starting lineup, the team can get by with Evan Turner serving as the primary pick and roll ball-handler, and when things break down, ET is a passable isolation scorer.  ET is more of a passer than IT, so he fits better with the starting lineup, and he's harder to take advantage of on defense (though he's not exactly Tony Allen).

I'd start them both as they are probably the two best players in Boston's guard/wing rotation.

[clover]

There is no way Olynyk or Sullinger should start over Lee and Zeller.

KO could well be a more valuable starter than Zeller this year, and I'd be kind of surprised if Lee starts.

Which is odd, because even in his diminished state he may well be the best scorer on the team.

Which brings me back to the original question. IT is our best scoring guard and Lee,  by his resume may as well be our best scoring big. Why would our best two scorers be  in 2nd unit  especially together?  seems other bigs may complement Amir better though.  Honestly, I think Lee or IT has to go into the starting line up.  Maybe not have to.

WE NEED A TRADE!!!!!!

I think IT is going to be there--and be the team's best scorer. I don't however particularly want to see IT and DL on the floor together. Better to have Amir's D out there with IT, while KO can spread the floor and help to create offense.

[PhoSita]

IT is a high usage rate player. He needs the ball in his hands a lot to be effective and to maximize his effectiveness he needs to score because his defense is bad. When he played for the C's last year IT's usage rate was over 32% which if he did that all year would put him in the top 5 in the league.

This type player will fit better with a second unit that can't score as well as a first starting unit. IT's usage rate just isn't compatible with Steven's offensive system as a starter. The ball has to move and everyone needs to be shooting. One player shouldn't be dominating the ball and the shooting.

I think he comes off the bench as an offensive spark and plays big minutes towards the end of halves and end of games where needing to get the "one" shot created is more important.

Agreed with all of the above.

In the starting lineup, the team can get by with Evan Turner serving as the primary pick and roll ball-handler, and when things break down, ET is a passable isolation scorer.  ET is more of a passer than IT, so he fits better with the starting lineup, and he's harder to take advantage of on defense (though he's not exactly Tony Allen).

I'd start them both as they are probably the two best players in Boston's guard/wing rotation.

That would leave the bench lineup without a proven pick and roll ball-handler, though, which is a big no-no.

Also, what exactly are IT and Turner good at when they aren't handling the ball?  Not a heck of a lot.

Turner is far from being one of the best players in the rotation, but he provides a necessary skillset, at least until Smart and / or Rozier turn become effective at running the pick and roll.