|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jul 15, 2017 18:22:44 GMT -5
Listening to some radio folks talk about Avery Bradley, they talk as if we're losing a star player. What I'm getting annoyed at is hearing how many folks are saying after all the moves we've made, we are just a tick better than we were last year -- and the main reason is because we lost Bradley (and to a lesser extent, because we lost Kelly Olynyk -- but that's another conversation for another time).
No doubt that defensively, we've relied a lot on Bradley, and he's been one of the very best defenders in the NBA -- but he was effective guarding smaller players. We couldn't consistently put him up against SF's, and even taller guards were shooting over him. He can't guard from 1 - 4 like Smart can. But he was darn good at guarding players 6'4" and shorter.
But nonetheless, he was one of the very best at doing what he did. I do not take credit away from him, for that.
Now, my semi-gripe is what the radio folks say how important he was to us offensively. It's as if these radio guys were watching our games and know our players intimately. Yes, Bradley did give us 16 ppg, and he was our 2nd leading scorer -- but that's not saying much. Avery really wasn't versatile -- he was a limited scorer. Basically, you could only run a handful of plays for him -- make him come off a curl, do a handoff, backdoor cuts, or spot him up. That's basically it. You couldn't iso him, you couldn't post him up, you couldn't have him run pick and rolls, you couldn't open up driving lanes and ask him to attack, he couldn't shake and bake his man (Bradley couldn't free himself from his defender on his own), etc.
Bradley was a complementary scorer, but because we greatly lacked scorers, by default he became our [HASH]2 scorer. This explains why we were so deficient against CLE in the ECF. This is why our coaching staff desperately wanted to add scoring punch, even if that scoring help would come in the form of Carmelo Anthony.
I don't think anyone doubts we will certainly feel the loss of Bradley -- like when Kyrie and Curry are on fire and going off for 10 straight points. We're going to be like, "man, I wish we still had Bradley".
But to say that we only marginally improved, when Danny has done a marvelous job of getting better pieces this summer (Hayward, Baynes, Morris, Tatum), mainly because they say we lost Bradley, I think they're overvaluing what Bradley meant to us offensively.
|
|
|
|
Post by runrondo on Jul 15, 2017 21:30:36 GMT -5
Yea I don't quite get it. Bradley may be underrated around the league, but I'm pretty sure he's overrated among Celtic fans. I think you hit the nail on the head with the fact that he could guard your point guard, but that's about it due to his size. We seem to be trending towards guys who can defend multiple positions and give Brad flexibility with his rotations and matchups. Our offense was pretty pathetic without IT last year. I'd assume we'll look much sharper this year as we actually added scorers which is something our team severely lacked and Avery was never a solution for that problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Jul 15, 2017 21:53:04 GMT -5
We lost Avery and Olynyk and Jerebko, all of whom were big parts of the rotation. But, all three were inconsistent and limited. Mostly with Avery was that he couldn't stay on the court. He was injured a lot. I agree that the moves that they made this summer makes them much more versatile and we have guys who can guard multiple positions where Avery in particular was limited to guarding point guards and shooting guards. He is one of the best on ball defenders in the league, but he was inconsistent on offense.
|
|
|
|
Post by afceltic on Jul 16, 2017 4:19:53 GMT -5
To win Championships today's NBA you need to be able to score at an elite level, this is due to all of the rules changes over the past decade that pretty much penalize good defense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 16, 2017 13:43:41 GMT -5
To win Championships today's NBA you need to be able to score at an elite level, this is due to all of the rules changes over the past decade that pretty much penalize good defense. Afceltic, I agree with you. I was watching a clip the other day, TOR vs. DET, Derozan vs. Morris. Morris played effective defense, Derozan basically lunged forward and shot (no good). No foul, end of the game. Next day, the NBA reversed the call (2:00 minute review report). |
|
|
|
Post by jhvos7979 on Jul 16, 2017 16:55:50 GMT -5
Listening to some radio folks talk about Avery Bradley, they talk as if we're losing a star player. What I'm getting annoyed at is hearing how many folks are saying after all the moves we've made, we are just a tick better than we were last year -- and the main reason is because we lost Bradley (and to a lesser extent, because we lost Kelly Olynyk -- but that's another conversation for another time). No doubt that defensively, we've relied a lot on Bradley, and he's been one of the very best defenders in the NBA -- but he was effective guarding smaller players. We couldn't consistently put him up against SF's, and even taller guards were shooting over him. He can't guard from 1 - 4 like Smart can. But he was darn good at guarding players 6'4" and shorter. But nonetheless, he was one of the very best at doing what he did. I do not take credit away from him, for that. Now, my semi-gripe is what the radio folks say how important he was to us offensively. It's as if these radio guys were watching our games and know our players intimately. Yes, Bradley did give us 16 ppg, and he was our 2nd leading scorer -- but that's not saying much. Avery really wasn't versatile -- he was a limited scorer. Basically, you could only run a handful of plays for him -- make him come off a curl, do a handoff, backdoor cuts, or spot him up. That's basically it. You couldn't iso him, you couldn't post him up, you couldn't have him run pick and rolls, you couldn't open up driving lanes and ask him to attack, he couldn't shake and bake his man (Bradley couldn't free himself from his defender on his own), etc. Bradley was a complementary scorer, but because we greatly lacked scorers, by default he became our [HASH]2 scorer. This explains why we were so deficient against CLE in the ECF. This is why our coaching staff desperately wanted to add scoring punch, even if that scoring help would come in the form of Carmelo Anthony. I don't think anyone doubts we will certainly feel the loss of Bradley -- like when Kyrie and Curry are on fire and going off for 10 straight points. We're going to be like, "man, I wish we still had Bradley". But to say that we only marginally improved, when Danny has done a marvelous job of getting better pieces this summer (Hayward, Baynes, Morris, Tatum), mainly because they say we lost Bradley, I think they're overvaluing what Bradley meant to us offensively. Bradley is definitely a good player and above-average starting SG in this league. I agree with majority sports media that we did not get the best player out of the DET deal but, it is was a necessary evil in order to sign a top 25 player in this league. Far as the drop-off in defense isn't necessarily true as Marcus Smart was a better defender than Bradley and like you said he can defense 1-4 unlike AB. Far as the media goes, they'll come up with a gripe no matter whatever move Ainge decide to make. If we kept AB, they'll complain that we didn't move him to get PG13 so it's a lose-lose scenario as they'll critique the scenario anyway they want to put Ainge in bad light. |
|
|
|
Post by freshnthehouse on Jul 16, 2017 18:03:17 GMT -5
The one thing that scared me the most with bradley is his injury history. Dude has trouble staying healthy through the rigors of the playoffs. If I'm gonna commit a big part of my salary cap to a player with injury issues, he's gonna be a transcendent player (ex Anthony Davis). AB is not that kind of player.
Also, he didn't fit our roster all that well. He would be best served on a team with a taller PG that guards SGs, so AB can then handle the responsibility of guarding PGs. Or on a team like Philly or Cleveland where one of the forwards runs the offense.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 16, 2017 22:46:19 GMT -5
The one thing that scared me the most with bradley is his injury history. Dude has trouble staying healthy through the rigors of the playoffs. If I'm gonna commit a big part of my salary cap to a player with injury issues, he's gonna be a transcendent player (ex Anthony Davis). AB is not that kind of player. Also, he didn't fit our roster all that well. He would be best served on a team with a taller PG that guards SGs, so AB can then handle the responsibility of guarding PGs. Or on a team like Philly or Cleveland where one of the forwards runs the offense. Bradley either played all 82-games, then got hurt in the playoffs, or played 60+ games, then played in the playoffs. His injuries, I thought were because of his style of play. |
|
|
|
Post by DERRENMATTS on Jul 16, 2017 23:51:42 GMT -5
The point is, we've improved in many areas, including getting a big upgrade in Gordon Hayward, becoming more versatile, adding more height and bulldog type players, ridding ourselves of poodle type players -- and yet because we lose Avery Bradley, the pundits are saying we only marginally improved.
Depending on how this team gels, and how everyone accepts their new roles, and how much our young players develop and contribute, I think we've definitely shortened the gap between us and the Cavs.
If all falls into place, I feel we are between 57 - 60 wins.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roadrunner on Jul 17, 2017 18:14:55 GMT -5
I think when evaluating new versus old players, one has to look at efficiency, as well as how another player effects the outcome of another player. Example - Al Horford; IT does not have the season he had in 2016-2017 if not for Horford.
|
|
|
|
Post by FLCeltsFan on Jul 17, 2017 19:50:39 GMT -5
I think when evaluating new versus old players, one has to look at efficiency, as well as how another player effects the outcome of another player. Example - Al Horford; IT does not have the season he had in 2016-2017 if not for Horford. I agree RR. Some players just make everyone else around them better. |
|
