Author Topic: celts to benefit by long season  (Read 3067 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #15 on: February 08, 2016, 10:25:16 PM »

Offline CelticPride2016

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 776
  • Tommy Points: 247
I think depth can make a difference even though it seems rare.

Ten is better than eight if the ten guys are good.

Brad Stevens got nobody Butler teams to the top of the NCAA.

I kind of trust this team. Lot of people would have rather had a late lottery pick than getting swept by Cleveland. That experience will pay off. It looks like we will have a tune-up series or two before having to face Toronto or Cleveland.

Brad has settled on ten guys, all important. Soon enough the trade deadline will end and we'll have to accept the roster and root for a championship.

It's definitely possible. All these guys are improving in real time in regards to team play.

PF/C Amir, Sully, Kelly, Tyler
SF Crowder, Jerebko
SG Bradley, Turner
PG Thomas, Smart

Why can't we win the title? I agree with the new rankings that say we are the 6th best team in the league. The Celtics have arrived. Now they can pad their record with some more easy wins.

I don't think Danny will make any trades. I don't have a crystal ball, but most GM's probably know Danny is on a hot streak for making trades. The Brooklyn pick is not definite until the ping pong balls.

It's doubtful we beat the team from the West. It has a feeling of the Pierce/Antoine run where we almost made it to the Finals, but the Nets beat us. That stuff is fun even when you don't get the title. I liked Big Baby in place of KG finishing off Orlando.

Isaiah Thomas is on the all-star team. Other players have that kind of potential. Zeller is a capable back-up. You need those guys. Leon Powe helped us win a ring. We have a lot of gritty talented players who remind me of Leon Powe right now.

Knock on wood for continued health for the ten above. If we started the season today with that as the core, it would be a 55 win team on paper. That's what I think. I saw the other day some stat that since we got Isaiah, the team record is 50-31 or maybe it's now 51-31. Anyway, apparently the Celtics are a 50 win team. I'll take that. This is a fun team.

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #16 on: February 08, 2016, 10:26:54 PM »

Offline Chief

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21216
  • Tommy Points: 2450
I'm not sure that much depth matters in the playoffs. I'm still for making a trade.
Once you are labeled 'the best' you want to stay up there, and you can't do it by loafing around.
 
Larry Bird

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #17 on: February 08, 2016, 10:52:24 PM »

Offline vjcsmoke

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3173
  • Tommy Points: 182
I believe we are on pace for 48 wins at the moment.  That's an incredible achievement considering where we were last year.  I would have been happy if we had broken the 40 wins mark.

Will we make a trade?  Only if the price is right and we can land a true star.  Example - Blake Griffin, but most likely that won't happen until the summer.

Most likely we will sit tight and win as many games as possible, and then make the big trade during the summer, before the draft.

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #18 on: February 08, 2016, 10:53:50 PM »

Offline CelticPride2016

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 776
  • Tommy Points: 247
I'm not sure that much depth matters in the playoffs. I'm still for making a trade.

Depth is good for stamina. Ten players for a rotation would be my limit. UMASS won a lot of games one year running the opponent off the court.

Everyone says it's always different in the post-season. The half-court game takes over.

Maybe the refs take over.

I don't see what the benefit of eight is over ten. To me that might be an outdated way of thinking. If you have ten rotation quality guys, why not use them? It will throw off the opponent relying on the same two divas every game in a star not team system.

It'll be something to look for in the playoffs, if Brad is shortening the rotation to 8 for the playoffs. I doubt it and a trade would change things. I checked. It is nine more days and then trading conjecture is over. I won't miss it.

I think teams shorten their rotations just like the best pitchers throw three games in series if necessary. The ten players I listened above are solid, very good proven NBA players. We are a 50 win team. Maybe Marcus Smart will emerge. Maybe Crowder, Avery, and Turner are as good as they look to the eye test. Maybe the Kelly Olynyk haters are wrong and he will someday make the all-star team.

Someone will have to relocate this thread when we win the title this year.  :D

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #19 on: February 08, 2016, 11:05:14 PM »

Offline vjcsmoke

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3173
  • Tommy Points: 182
We beat Cleveland, even if it was by the skin of our teeth.  I feel this team is legit.  We will be there in round 2. 

I'm not sure if we can get into round 3 however.  That would make us a top 4 team in the entire NBA.  Wow.  What a difference a year makes.

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #20 on: February 09, 2016, 05:55:37 PM »

Offline Chief

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21216
  • Tommy Points: 2450
I'm not sure that much depth matters in the playoffs. I'm still for making a trade.

Depth is good for stamina. Ten players for a rotation would be my limit. UMASS won a lot of games one year running the opponent off the court.

Everyone says it's always different in the post-season. The half-court game takes over.

Maybe the refs take over.

I don't see what the benefit of eight is over ten. To me that might be an outdated way of thinking. If you have ten rotation quality guys, why not use them? It will throw off the opponent relying on the same two divas every game in a star not team system.

It'll be something to look for in the playoffs, if Brad is shortening the rotation to 8 for the playoffs. I doubt it and a trade would change things. I checked. It is nine more days and then trading conjecture is over. I won't miss it.

I think teams shorten their rotations just like the best pitchers throw three games in series if necessary. The ten players I listened above are solid, very good proven NBA players. We are a 50 win team. Maybe Marcus Smart will emerge. Maybe Crowder, Avery, and Turner are as good as they look to the eye test. Maybe the Kelly Olynyk haters are wrong and he will someday make the all-star team.

Someone will have to relocate this thread when we win the title this year.  :D

Depth definitely helps this time of year but not in the playoffs.  Denver tried the same model several years ago and it didn't work out well.
Once you are labeled 'the best' you want to stay up there, and you can't do it by loafing around.
 
Larry Bird

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #21 on: February 10, 2016, 08:43:51 AM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33430
  • Tommy Points: 1532
I'm not sure that much depth matters in the playoffs. I'm still for making a trade.

Depth is good for stamina. Ten players for a rotation would be my limit. UMASS won a lot of games one year running the opponent off the court.

Everyone says it's always different in the post-season. The half-court game takes over.

Maybe the refs take over.

I don't see what the benefit of eight is over ten. To me that might be an outdated way of thinking. If you have ten rotation quality guys, why not use them? It will throw off the opponent relying on the same two divas every game in a star not team system.

It'll be something to look for in the playoffs, if Brad is shortening the rotation to 8 for the playoffs. I doubt it and a trade would change things. I checked. It is nine more days and then trading conjecture is over. I won't miss it.

I think teams shorten their rotations just like the best pitchers throw three games in series if necessary. The ten players I listened above are solid, very good proven NBA players. We are a 50 win team. Maybe Marcus Smart will emerge. Maybe Crowder, Avery, and Turner are as good as they look to the eye test. Maybe the Kelly Olynyk haters are wrong and he will someday make the all-star team.

Someone will have to relocate this thread when we win the title this year.  :D
Because you play your best players more in the playoffs.  The Spurs are the classic example of this.  Take the 13-14 season, not a single player averaged 30 mpg.  In the playoffs they had 3 above 30.  They went from basically a 11 man rotation down to 9.  Last year the Warriors went from 3 guys above 30 but below 33 in the regular season to 5 guys above 30 and 3 above 35 in the playoffs. 

Those are the last two title teams, but they aren't alone.  Come the playoffs teams almost always increase the minutes of their best players which invariably squeezes a couple of guys out of the rotation.
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: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #22 on: February 10, 2016, 05:17:34 PM »

Offline CelticPride2016

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 776
  • Tommy Points: 247
I'm not sure that much depth matters in the playoffs. I'm still for making a trade.

Depth is good for stamina. Ten players for a rotation would be my limit. UMASS won a lot of games one year running the opponent off the court.

Everyone says it's always different in the post-season. The half-court game takes over.

Maybe the refs take over.

I don't see what the benefit of eight is over ten. To me that might be an outdated way of thinking. If you have ten rotation quality guys, why not use them? It will throw off the opponent relying on the same two divas every game in a star not team system.

It'll be something to look for in the playoffs, if Brad is shortening the rotation to 8 for the playoffs. I doubt it and a trade would change things. I checked. It is nine more days and then trading conjecture is over. I won't miss it.

I think teams shorten their rotations just like the best pitchers throw three games in series if necessary. The ten players I listened above are solid, very good proven NBA players. We are a 50 win team. Maybe Marcus Smart will emerge. Maybe Crowder, Avery, and Turner are as good as they look to the eye test. Maybe the Kelly Olynyk haters are wrong and he will someday make the all-star team.

Someone will have to relocate this thread when we win the title this year.  :D
Because you play your best players more in the playoffs.  The Spurs are the classic example of this.  Take the 13-14 season, not a single player averaged 30 mpg.  In the playoffs they had 3 above 30.  They went from basically a 11 man rotation down to 9.  Last year the Warriors went from 3 guys above 30 but below 33 in the regular season to 5 guys above 30 and 3 above 35 in the playoffs. 

Those are the last two title teams, but they aren't alone.  Come the playoffs teams almost always increase the minutes of their best players which invariably squeezes a couple of guys out of the rotation.

This team is different. There isn't enough separation between players. The Celtics are more than the sum of of their parts. I'm not saying play ten or twelve as an underdog with a run them off the court approach.

Teams don't play ten in the playoffs mostly because of what you say. The games are for all the marbles and who wants to lose because of scrubs.

Amir has weak feet. He has to play, but he is looking fragile like KG.

Sully is out of shape. He can't play more than a certain amount of minutes.

Our all-star can be streaky or it's just not working at times with him on defense. He can't play 48 minutes.

Other players are young and still inconsistent.

I could see maybe Brad reducing it to Smart, Isaiah, Bradley, Turner, Crowder, Amir, Sully and Kelly. It seems you are saying we need to go with eight in the playoffs.

The above leaves out Jerebko and Zeller. I'd include them and go with the ten. It doesn't mean it's set in stone. There's no proof eight is better than ten. I admit it is usually that way. This team feels unique.

Of course, such conjecture becomes meaningless if Danny makes a move or two. I'm basing my opinion on the current snapshot. Let the other team get tired and thrown off their groove. Stevens is a master at cooking up five man combos. We shall see.

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #23 on: February 11, 2016, 12:50:01 PM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
The more we run the harder it will be on Jared

The more we run, the better shape Jared will be forced to get into.  Better for us down the line, or fetches us more value in a trade.

I thought this also for most of this season, but exercise alone will not help one lose weight. I have given up on him long-term based on his weight alone. I think he's a good, smart player, but he's out of shape in a way that says he will always be out of shape.

He has been trying to lose weight since late Spring? He must have an eating disorder? Plenty of time has elapsed. It's not as if he is 40 with a slowing metabolism. Maybe check his thyroids. Something here is not adding up. I wanted him to work out. He's unique and natural. He needs to thin down. To me this is a deal breaker. I see this team heading towards a specific team philosophy Sullinger won't be able to handle.

I think injuries have been a factor.  Hasn't had long stretches of being healthy ever since he got into the league.

I don't expect or even want him to be working his butt off to lose weight during the season.  I want him well-rested and fully fed for games.  Needs a few healthy off-seasons to get in shape (losing say 10 pounds per summer).
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #24 on: February 11, 2016, 03:14:44 PM »

Offline CelticPride2016

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 776
  • Tommy Points: 247

I think injuries have been a factor.  Hasn't had long stretches of being healthy ever since he got into the league.

I don't expect or even want him to be working his butt off to lose weight during the season.  I want him well-rested and fully fed for games.  Needs a few healthy off-seasons to get in shape (losing say 10 pounds per summer).

I don't think ten pounds is enough. It would certainly help. It is a bit confusing. He is basically doing aerobics about three days a week during games. He is huffing and puffing while sweating profusely. Yet, he seems to be getting heavier as the season continues.

I hope you're correct Sully just needs a full healthy off-season to get in shape. But I doubt it. He faked us out last Summer. He posted photos making himself look like he was working hard and getting there.

If he loses the weight, he loses what makes him effective? I don't think so. I'd rather him be an in-shape power forward than this bad path started when he figured out center minutes were up for grabs.

He is a natural. He was a top five college pick if he hadn't had back issues.

I like him for this team right now for obvious reasons. For the narrow vision of this year, he is essential along with seven to nine other players.

I am rooting for him but am realistic. Sully probably imagines himself as a much more crucial piece of the puzzle to a quality NBA team than is true.

I think the only way Sullinger becomes a consistent above average starter is if he becomes a fitness freak. Otherwise, perhaps look to Big Baby as to where his career is probably headed. I doubt he will get as big as that. I do think Sully is the rich man's version of Davis. However, as the season proceeds and the day of decision for Sully approaches, I am not too happy with Sully's conditioning. No one can explain why it's a good idea to have an overweight player on a running team with an emphasis on defense.

A lot of us disagree. It'll be interesting to see how Danny feels or what happens. I guess it's interesting for right now in that Sully might be a piece in a big trade.

Do we always have to get "value" out of expiring contracts? Danny has done well with that, no doubt.

Again, I see this debate as lasting one more week until the trade deadline. Then it will become more of a debate once the season ends. And we'll have more info at that point.

I think Sully has an eating disorder. If I was Danny and Sully guarantees to tackle that, I might be inclined to resign him.

We have a million draft picks coming in. Sully is a true Celtic, but if he can be moved for a real center along with mediocre crap shoot draft picks for say Horford, I'm all for it. Or Dwight Howard. I see Sully as neither a positive or negative asset. If his rebounding and usefulness against just a few big centers could be replaced, he would not be missed and we would immediately become a much faster team.

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #25 on: February 11, 2016, 04:08:03 PM »

Offline mgent

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7567
  • Tommy Points: 1962
I'm talking about 10 pounds per offseason.  3 years from now (when he's 26 years old) he'd be 30 pounds lighter (from 280-290 to 250-260).  How much do you need him to lose?

Intermittent aerobics for a total of 20 minutes a night for 3 nights a week is hardly anything, and much less than the average "fit" or "in shape" person does.

And we're not exactly talking anything more than light aerobics here (don't compare his activity on the court to IT).  Less than half of the game is spent running up/down the court, and much of that time "running up the court" is really either jogging or walking up the court.  The clock runs after scored baskets, eating up several minutes that you're in the game.  And there's lots of standing around in the half court, not to mention tons of breaks due to fouls/fts/out of bounds/time outs/turnovers/replay reviews/commercials/end of periods/etc.

Eating disorder/thyroid problem isn't the only explanation.

You could just be seeing what every person with a slower than average metabolism has to deal with.

I imagine Sullinger eats relatively close to what the average PF/C with significant muscle mass eats in the NBA (2750-3500 calories).  For someone who probably doesn't do much, if any, physical activity outside of games and practice so as to remain as fresh as possible for games, it's not hard to see why he's maintaining his weight.  I think that lack of activity is normal among most players due to the grueling schedules and physicality of games.

And remember, just because he's not losing weight by being forced to run hard and often, that doesn't mean he's not getting in "better shape."  (speed, quickness, agility, stamina, vertical, lateral, explosiveness, etc.)
« Last Edit: February 11, 2016, 04:13:41 PM by mgent »
Philly:

Anderson Varejao    Tiago Splitter    Matt Bonner
David West    Kenyon Martin    Brad Miller
Andre Iguodala    Josh Childress    Marquis Daniels
Dwyane Wade    Leandro Barbosa
Kirk Hinrich    Toney Douglas   + the legendary Kevin McHale

Re: celts to benefit by long season
« Reply #26 on: February 13, 2016, 12:03:07 AM »

Offline CelticPride2016

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 776
  • Tommy Points: 247
Thanks for the response, mgent.

Yes, you said ten pounds per season.

That doesn't make sense to me.

It sounds like we are coming from different angles.

If he couldn't get into shape by now, it doesn't seem he ever will.

Neither of us has inside info and can only go by our respective eye tests.

I suppose we could agree to disagree and maybe give Sully a grade when the season ends. to give him an incomplete. This isn't Kelly Olynyk who we can wait another year and a half to make a decision. The long-term clock for making decisions is ticking fast for almost half of the team.

Then again, I like to live in the now and appreciate each season for its own story. Thus, I am not a big fan of speculating. I don't mind giving an opinion. Unfortunately, I can have wrong opinions such as giving up on Evan Turner prematurely or promoting Sully too soon earlier in the year when he peaked.

It doesn't matter what we think anyway. It's on Brad and Danny.

All or most eye tests seem to suggest Sully is too big. Put him on a different team with a slower style, he'd be great. If he was this good when we still had KG and Pierce, who knows, the window may have stayed open or there wouldn't have been a blow up the team kind of rebuild. I'm thinking Big Baby who became Bass. Or Leon Powe looked good, but injuries stopped his career. I see fat Sully having a limited ceiling. I think an in-shape Sully could make the all-star team rather easily as a power forward. He is a natural. It can't be denied.

It seems we are in agree to disagree territory or let's table this a while.

I hope I'm wrong and you are correct. Good to great players who play for the love of the game are few and far between.

Sully could be one of those. I just need a little more proof he doesn't have an eating disorder or doesn't care what anyone thinks about his weight in regards to playing professional basketball.