Gobert to bos w/mil

[Rapcity_11]

http://www.espn.com/nba/statistics/rpm/_/sort/RPM/position/5

...that's ONE stat.

You said "advanced metrics".

Crowder smokes him in RAPM, too:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1CiOqGlz6zjjmjUlJBNOXflG6wYAS1RLjZjtZSQHraF4/htmlview

He also has a better on/off +/- per 100, too.

Again, you're kind of proving my point here, kid -- you can cherry pick all sorts of statistics to paint a picture that isn't true. Advanced metrics are supposed to be used in conjunction with the eye test. Paul George is clearly better than Covington and Crowder. And Kyrie is better than Kemba.

So basically multiple variations of the same kind of stat. That isn't an advanced metric case. That's a +/- case.

My eye test has Kemba as better than Kyrie.

[Cappy_Smurf]

Are you a Jazz fan? If yes how on Earth do you spell it Haywood over Hayward?

It's a joke that kinda goes back to Bryan Russell. In an interview during the time Utah was battling Jordan's Bulls, some body called him Byron instead of Bryon, and it offended him. The same thing happens with Haywood all the time. Not just with fans on a message board, but sometimes during games, some announcers call him Haywood.

So yeah, it's kind of a salty thing for jazz fans, like he's not important enough to get his name right(we didn't start it, it's just something that happens and we ran with it when he left the team).

Anyway, I don't really care what anybody thinks of it. From now on he will forever be known as Haywood as far as I'm concerned, and if you pay attention to games, you will notice announcers calling him Haywood fairly frequently.

Yah, but that's just because Tommy Heinsohn has a wicked Boston accent

I can't remember if Tommy called him Haywood, but it's not just one person saying it. I think a lot of them have got Brendan Haywood stuck in their brain.

[Andre Roberstan]

Yes, the two things they value most highly are spacing and positional versatility, anyone can see this by looking at their roster or listening to a single interview.

Agreed, which is why they started Amir Johnson at center last year and will likely start Baynes this year

[SmartWentCrazy]

It's a joke that kinda goes back to Bryan Russell. In an interview during the time Utah was battling Jordan's Bulls, some body called him Byron instead of Bryon, and it offended him. The same thing happens with Haywood all the time. Not just with fans on a message board, but sometimes during games, some announcers call him Haywood.

So yeah, it's kind of a salty thing for jazz fans, like he's not important enough to get his name right(we didn't start it, it's just something that happens and we ran with it when he left the team).

Anyway, I don't really care what anybody thinks of it. From now on he will forever be known as Haywood as far as I'm concerned, and if you pay attention to games, you will notice announcers calling him Haywood fairly frequently.

Yah, but that's just because Tommy Heinsohn has a wicked Boston accent

I can't remember if Tommy called him Haywood, but it's not just one person saying it. I think a lot of them have got Brendan Haywood stuck in their brain.

Haha I'm just making a joke, but Tommy will call him Haywahd all year.

[bondom34]

Wait its a luxury not playing with Lebron...

[SmartWentCrazy]

Wait its a luxury not playing with Lebron...

If we're twisting my words into something I didn't say, it sure is

[bondom34]

Wait its a luxury not playing with Lebron...

If we're twisting my words into something I didn't say, it sure is

So Kembas luxury was...

[SmartWentCrazy]

Wait its a luxury not playing with Lebron...

If we're twisting my words into something I didn't say, it sure is

So Kembas luxury was...

Playing in a system built to maximize his statistical production

Edit- I mean, do you think it's a coincidence that RW just had his far and away best statistical season once the system was designed around him? It doesn't mean it's a luxury to not play with KD. But keep twisting my words...

[Drax]

Spoiler:

People calling Horford a bad contract is just awesome. I love it.

But yes Utah passes, Gobert is their building block no way the trade him.

Some teams would definitely consider Horford a bad contract and completely justifiably.

For Boston no he's not, because they're winning now and willing to pay for him. But for teams like Milwaukee, and other rebuilding/up and coming teams that have no use for him, why shouldn't they consider his deal bad for them?

Unselfish quality veterans are bad for up and coming teams? Interesting theory.

When i go through the T&T board threads i see a lot of untouchables players for bad teams or up and coming teams. People claim they are the foundation of the respecitve franchise and rightfully so, case Giannis and the Bucks (Jokic/Nuggets, KP/Knicks, Booker/Suns, ...). He's a young star potentially superstar (knock on wood for good health for the greek freak) and will never be traded. But when you have a player like him don't you want to the best help you can? Who is the veteran to lead the young Bucks? Who can they lean on night in and night out, on the court and of the court? Old (34-39) journeyman playing 40 games a season 10 minutes a game? Or young (25-30) vets who never have or will be stars? Give me the player who Giannis can lean on?

By the way the Celtics are the third youngest team in the NBA why are they winning now and are not an up and coming team? Wanna know the age of our five oldest players (Horford 31, Baynes 30, Morris 28, Hayward 27, Kyrie 25). Horford is mega valueable to this young team. A former allstar still good enough for 30 minutes a night, doesn't moan & b**** and leads by example.

If you want to build a team and think you have your foundational piece (especially on his rookie deal/extension) but you can't just aquire an allstar via trade or FA then trading for overpaid but not washed up former star is the way to go. But thats just my humble opinion.

[Baller1234a]

Yes, the two things they value most highly are spacing and positional versatility, anyone can see this by looking at their roster or listening to a single interview.

Agreed, which is why they started Amir Johnson at center last year and will likely start Baynes this year

Yeah it's not like AJ couldn't stretch the floor and shoot 3s right?

[Andre Roberstan]

Yes, the two things they value most highly are spacing and positional versatility, anyone can see this by looking at their roster or listening to a single interview.

Agreed, which is why they started Amir Johnson at center last year and will likely start Baynes this year

Yeah it's not like AJ couldn't stretch the floor and shoot 3s right?

He shot 66 threes for the year. That's hardly stretching. His percentage was pretty good on those 66, but no one's panicking over him taking them at that kind of volume. That's less than one a game.

(Honestly if Gobert went to Boston, I'd expect him to get a few 3PA. His shot form's not bad, and getting the kind of open looks Johnson got they might think it worthwhile).

[loserX]

The question is why Boston signed Baynes at all. Yes, he's cheap, but he can't shoot from outside and is not remotely versatile positionally.

He's a C who provides defence and rebounding. Why sign him at all if that's not what they value? It's hard to argue that they would want Baynes but not want an elite version of him.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Yes, the two things they value most highly are spacing and positional versatility, anyone can see this by looking at their roster or listening to a single interview.

Agreed, which is why they started Amir Johnson at center last year and will likely start Baynes this year

Yeah it's not like AJ couldn't stretch the floor and shoot 3s right?

He'd hit wide open threes at an above 30% clip, but an Amir Johnson 3 is a win for the opposing defense every time.

[Baller1234a]

Agreed, which is why they started Amir Johnson at center last year and will likely start Baynes this year

Yeah it's not like AJ couldn't stretch the floor and shoot 3s right?

He shot 66 threes for the year. That's hardly stretching. His percentage was pretty good on those 66, but no one's panicking over him taking them at that kind of volume. That's less than one a game.

(Honestly if Gobert went to Boston, I'd expect him to get a few 3PA. His shot form's not bad, and getting the kind of open looks Johnson got they might think it worthwhile).

First my bad for the snarky tone

Second I agree but I feel at least it keeps defenses honest and he has the range to knock down really open ones

[Andre Roberstan]

Yeah it's not like AJ couldn't stretch the floor and shoot 3s right?

He shot 66 threes for the year. That's hardly stretching. His percentage was pretty good on those 66, but no one's panicking over him taking them at that kind of volume. That's less than one a game.

(Honestly if Gobert went to Boston, I'd expect him to get a few 3PA. His shot form's not bad, and getting the kind of open looks Johnson got they might think it worthwhile).

First my bad for the snarky tone

Second I agree but I feel at least it keeps defenses honest and he has the range to knock down really open ones

You're all good. I was being a little snarky myself.

I just get really annoyed by the fact that people talk about Stevens and Ainge as if any center they get has to be prime David Robinson. There are guys with skillsets that would fit really well that are being discounted cause they don't shoot 3s and people think of them as lob catchers (e.g. Gobert).

Watch how Quin Snyder uses his big men and then watch how Brad Stevens uses his big men. There's enough overlap there that saying Gobert would be a good fit is not an unreasonable assumption, especially when they started Johnson and will probably start Baynes to not get murdered every night on the glass. (If they don't start Baynes, their rebounding is going to suuuuuuuuuuuuck even worse than it already does). Going small except in rare cases is a tradeoff of offensive firepower for defense and rebounding, and though Boston's average height has gone up across the board this offseason, starting small is still going to be problematic.

[GregB]

The question is why Boston signed Baynes at all. Yes, he's cheap, but he can't shoot from outside and is not remotely versatile positionally.

He's a C who provides defence and rebounding. Why sign him at all if that's not what they value? It's hard to argue that they would want Baynes but not want an elite version of him.

Baynes can shoot from the midrange and he is a solid fundamental player. Plus, I wouldn't be shocked to see him shooting 3s playing under Brad. Also, Baynes likely won't be starting. He's a matchup player for us. Most nights, I would imagine Morris and Horford will be starting.

[bondom34]

If we're twisting my words into something I didn't say, it sure is

So Kembas luxury was...

Playing in a system built to maximize his statistical production

Edit- I mean, do you think it's a coincidence that RW just had his far and away best statistical season once the system was designed around him? It doesn't mean it's a luxury to not play with KD. But keep twisting my words...

Kemba isn't maximizing his statisitcal production playing with worse teammates.

And Westbrook didn't have far and away his best season, it's up for debate, but close. If you solely base everything off box score stats sure, but I don't, and nobody really should.

Kemba can run an offense without Lebron there, that's what he doesn't have. Kemba can keep an O at a 112 O rating by actually running an offense and finding guys, Kyrie sees the Cavs die down to around 107 without Lebron.

Put it this way again, its a bad sign when your offense is better with Love and no Lebron/Kyrie than it is Kyrie and no Lebron/Love. Kyrie just ball stops without doing anything but high volume iso scoring, he doesn't help out other guys, doesn't improve his team's performance to nearly the same level, and saying someone has "freedom" is great, but doesn't explain why a guy can or can't run an offense. Guys put up box score stats on bad teams. Kemba isn't doing that.

Edit:

Compare this:

Read on Twitter

To this:

Read on Twitter

[Baller1234a]

He shot 66 threes for the year. That's hardly stretching. His percentage was pretty good on those 66, but no one's panicking over him taking them at that kind of volume. That's less than one a game.

(Honestly if Gobert went to Boston, I'd expect him to get a few 3PA. His shot form's not bad, and getting the kind of open looks Johnson got they might think it worthwhile).

First my bad for the snarky tone

Second I agree but I feel at least it keeps defenses honest and he has the range to knock down really open ones

You're all good. I was being a little snarky myself.

I just get really annoyed by the fact that people talk about Stevens and Ainge as if any center they get has to be prime David Robinson. There are guys with skillsets that would fit really well that are being discounted cause they don't shoot 3s and people think of them as lob catchers (e.g. Gobert).

Watch how Quin Snyder uses his big men and then watch how Brad Stevens uses his big men. There's enough overlap there that saying Gobert would be a good fit is not an unreasonable assumption, especially when they started Johnson and will probably start Baynes to not get murdered every night on the glass. (If they don't start Baynes, their rebounding is going to suuuuuuuuuuuuck even worse than it already does). Going small except in rare cases is a tradeoff of offensive firepower for defense and rebounding, and though Boston's average height has gone up across the board this offseason, starting small is still going to be problematic.

I think Baynes will start only against ELITE offensive/defensive rebounders otherwise we will rely on group rebounding (as you said we got bigger in every position) otherwise we will try to run teams off the court (GS/HOU) style. Hopefully we get bogut and he stays healthy he fills these holes and has the passing skill which would make it a great passing frontcoart which leads to less of a burden on Kyrie to create (at least in the RS) and he can do what he does best : score. I'm holding out hope for a great big man with the LAL pick if we don't just follow the GS path (who were really bad at reb last year) and just get someone like Zaza

[bondom34]

Are we really comparing Baynes to Gobert because I'm getting dumber reading this. I don't know if people know who Baynes even is.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Kemba isn't maximizing his statisitcal production playing with worse teammates.

He's playing on a team built for him which, in turn, amplifies his statistical output. Rather than just stating 'naw uh', make a counterargument.

And Westbrook didn't have far and away his best season, it's up for debate, but close. If you solely base everything off box score stats sure, but I don't, and nobody really should.

I said he had his best statistical season. Everything you just said agrees with my point. Given that I was arguing about advanced stats, I'm not sure what your argument is.

Also, I don't know why your insisting on putting words into mouth, only to disagree with the words I didn't say and agree with those that I did, but it's rather annoying. Please stop.

Kemba can run an offense without Lebron there, that's what he doesn't have. Kemba can keep an O at a 112 O rating by actually running an offense and finding guys,

Because he's playing in his system that's designed to best utilize his skills.

Kyrie sees the Cavs die down to around 107 without Lebron.

Because he's playing in a system that isn't designed to best optimize his production.

Put it this way again, its a bad sign when your offense is better with Love and no Lebron/Kyrie than it is Kyrie and no Lebron/Love. Kyrie just ball stops without doing anything but high volume iso scoring, he doesn't help out other guys, doesn't improve his team's performance to nearly the same level, and saying someone has "freedom" is great, but doesn't explain why a guy can or can't run an offense. Guys put up box score stats on bad teams. Kemba isn't doing that.

Or, it's a sign of a really poor fit implemented by a really poor coach.

He hasn't had a team built for him since he was 21. Saying he can't run a team that's built for someone else isn't a valid criticism. You're not a worse driver because your put into a stick-shift when you don't know how to drive stick.

And Kemba has spent the majority of his career playing on a lottery team. By definition, that's good stats, bad team.