RealGM

I've been doing a lot of lurking around here and the various blogs since the big trade, trying to get a feel for everyone's expectations. I've seen threads predicting records, and I've seen threads predicting who will be the best player. I've read a lot about how Williams finished strong after being injured early, about how Lopez is a star on the rise. I've read Celtics fans talking about how great Pierce will be. I've seen a lot of conversation about how old Garnett and Pierce are, and I've seen a lot of 24 - 28 minute time limit predictions for them. I've seen team results predictions ranging from a '13 Lakers-like implosion to the 64-win analytics prediction.

But. What I HAVEN'T seen yet is much discussion about HOW these various individual predictions might play out on the court next season. What will the team look like? How will their units perform? What will be their team identity? Will it be Deron and the gang? The coming out party for Lopez in a center-out offense? A defensive juggernaut? An offense-heavy squad? Balanced attack?

I laid out some of my post-trade thoughts here: http://www.netsdaily.com/2013/7/3/44890 ... the-league

Cliffnotes version:

*Offensively speaking, I think the Nets' style will be most similar to this year's Spurs. They'll have a free-flowing offense led by a dynamic point guard, with solid inside scoring options and wings who will alternate primary scoring efforts. This isn't the "dynamic duo" or "big three" foundation, but instead a more equal-opportunity offense where Deron will be the most consistently important option but there will be many nights where any of the other four will play the lead role.

*Defensively, I expect a quantum leap forward for the Nets this year. I think their defense will go from the bottom portion of the league to looking remarkably like the Celtics' defense of the last few years. I'm expecting Garnett to lead the defense for his 30 minutes or so on the court, much as he did in Boston, which will make it much easier for Lopez, the wings, and even Deron to be more effective at what they do.

*And just on the whole, I think the Nets will have a different on-court feel this year. I'm expecting them to be edgy, more energetic, and more aggressive. If you recall, in 2007 the expectations for the Celtics pre-season turned out to be a lot lower than the actual results. And I think a good chunk of the reason for that was that aggressive, team-first, us-and-not-you, work-hard-all-the-time philosophy that permeated from the practice to the real court. It's the "culture change" that Doc Rivers so often talks about, and I think that next week it officially occurs in Jersey.

So bottom line, I think next year's Nets look like the '13 Spurs on offense with the Celtics' edge and defense.

What do you think?

drza wrote:I
*Offensively speaking, I think the Nets' style will be most similar to this year's Spurs. They'll have a free-flowing offense led by a dynamic point guard, with solid inside scoring options and wings who will alternate primary scoring efforts. This isn't the "dynamic duo" or "big three" foundation, but instead a more equal-opportunity offense where Deron will be the most consistently important option but there will be many nights where any of the other four will play the lead role.

I can't imagine us playing anything like the spurs... the spurs are the most polished team in the NBA. their core has been running that pick and roll for like a decade. its easy for them to plug in the peripheral pieces. One of the things that makes us a poor fit for the spurs pnr game is we dont really have any decent pick and roll bigs. we have PLENTY of pick and pop bigs with KG, lopez, and mirza... but none who roll well. KG can but often prefers the 18 footer off the screen. lopez is really poor rolling to the basket. maybe blatche can, he prefers to take alot jumpers off it as well. we also have a lot of really low iq players... although pierce and KG help that and ball movement ideally

I think we are much more suited to run an offense like the celtics offense. a ton of baseline screening, and a ton of bigman slips off a baseline screen. I think we have the personal to set screens off the ball and take advantage of cheating and switching. I also think we are going to play at a snails pace again - which i think is a good thing. we should execute even better offensively and limiting total possesions takes pressure/honus off our defense.

*Defensively, I expect a quantum leap forward for the Nets this year. I think their defense will go from the bottom portion of the league to looking remarkably like the Celtics' defense of the last few years. I'm expecting Garnett to lead the defense for his 30 minutes or so on the court, much as he did in Boston, which will make it much easier for Lopez, the wings, and even Deron to be more effective at what they do.

Defensively i dont see a big leap. INTENSITY i do think will see an extremely large leap. KG should make a really big impact. we will be better defensively. much better? hard to really say. we still have williams and lopez as negative impact defenders, and we dont really have any defense coming off the bench as of this moment. with limited minutes for KG we could see similar on/off drop offs when garnett isnt in... as mentioned above i think playing at a super slow pace will help mask this again, and a jump in intensity will also help. i think we will be good enough defensively, but not a top 10 type defense

my biggest fear right now is rebounding. Lopez was nightmarishly bad as a defensive rebounder the second half of the season, and really poor overall on the year. Garnett has become an average rebounder and i fear with reggie having a lesser role we may take a hit on the boards(not advocating he play more, just pointing it out).

the celtics got KILLED last year by opponents beasting them on the offensive glass. as see that as being this teams biggest hurdle to overcome

So bottom line, I think next year's Nets look like the '13 Spurs on offense with the Celtics' edge and defense.

that is just absurd... even a homer would be crazy to spout something like that. i love this teams ceiling. maybe 58-62 wins if things all fall into place. but a spurs offense and celtics defense? thats just being silly.

PetroNet wrote:

drza wrote:So bottom line, I think next year's Nets look like the '13 Spurs on offense with the Celtics' edge and defense.

that is just absurd... even a homer would be crazy to spout something like that. i love this teams ceiling. maybe 58-62 wins if things all fall into place. but a spurs offense and celtics defense? thats just being silly.

??? There's a lot of good stuff in your post that I'm hoping either springboards some other conversation or I'll follow up on later, but this part confused me. Last season the Spurs were the 7th ranked offense in the league, and the Celtics were the 7th ranked defense. I'm not sure how pairing the two of them would make some type of homer-tastic, silly combination? Especially if you think the team capable of 60 wins. Aren't most 60-win teams either uber-dominant on one end of the court, or else flirting with the top-5 on both ends?

Well, as you point out, the defense will be heavily dependent on a 37 year old KG who will have his minutes monitored, so a jump from the #17 defense in the league to #7ish would be a huge improvement, maybe more than I'm willing to expect...imo, I'm more expecting a top 10-12 defense, with an offense that's easily top 3 and very well could be #1 in the league.

But great write-up as always, drza.

therealbig3 wrote:Well, as you point out, the defense will be heavily dependent on a 37 year old KG who will have his minutes monitored, so a jump from the #17 defense in the league to #7ish would be a huge improvement, maybe more than I'm willing to expect...imo, I'm more expecting a top 10-12 defense, with an offense that's easily top 3 and very well could be #1 in the league.

But great write-up as always, drza.

Thanks for the compliment. Was interesting when I realized you were a Nets fan, that we might have more in common this year.

One rebuttal to your initial point is that the #7ish Celtics defense last year was heavily dependent on a 36-year old KG who was having his minutes monitored. That was in large part why it was #7 instead of #1, which IIRC their defensive rating with him actually on the court really was.

I don't think it'd be KG alone, though he'd be the catalyst and the engine for it. The Nets have some solid defensive pieces to work with if they can be fit into roles that work for them. Lopez might not be the greatest rebounder, but he's both really big and really mobile. Johnson can play reasonable man defense, at least on par with Ray. And Pierce is still Pierce. With KG back at the 4 and more able to roam than he was at C, I think that forms the nucleus for a strong 1st team defense.

drza wrote:

therealbig3 wrote:Well, as you point out, the defense will be heavily dependent on a 37 year old KG who will have his minutes monitored, so a jump from the #17 defense in the league to #7ish would be a huge improvement, maybe more than I'm willing to expect...imo, I'm more expecting a top 10-12 defense, with an offense that's easily top 3 and very well could be #1 in the league.

But great write-up as always, drza.

Thanks for the compliment. Was interesting when I realized you were a Nets fan, that we might have more in common this year.

One rebuttal to your initial point is that the #7ish Celtics defense last year was heavily dependent on a 36-year old KG who was having his minutes monitored. That was in large part why it was #7 instead of #1, which IIRC their defensive rating with him actually on the court really was.

I don't think it'd be KG alone, though he'd be the catalyst and the engine for it. The Nets have some solid defensive pieces to work with if they can be fit into roles that work for them. Lopez might not be the greatest rebounder, but he's both really big and really mobile. Johnson can play reasonable man defense, at least on par with Ray. And Pierce is still Pierce. With KG back at the 4 and more able to roam than he was at C, I think that forms the nucleus for a strong 1st team defense.

lopez is not mobile. he is slow and plodding. occasionally he will show some signs of athletcism, but those moments are very few and very far in between. and to say he isnt the greatest rebounder is an incredible understatement. Lopez is an extremely weak defensive rebounder and overall sub par defender. without evans on the floor we may very well have some serious rebounding issues.

defensively im sure we get better... but #7 better seems like a pipe dream to me with subpar play defensively at the point and at center

PetroNet wrote:

drza wrote:

therealbig3 wrote:Well, as you point out, the defense will be heavily dependent on a 37 year old KG who will have his minutes monitored, so a jump from the #17 defense in the league to #7ish would be a huge improvement, maybe more than I'm willing to expect...imo, I'm more expecting a top 10-12 defense, with an offense that's easily top 3 and very well could be #1 in the league.

But great write-up as always, drza.

Thanks for the compliment. Was interesting when I realized you were a Nets fan, that we might have more in common this year.

One rebuttal to your initial point is that the #7ish Celtics defense last year was heavily dependent on a 36-year old KG who was having his minutes monitored. That was in large part why it was #7 instead of #1, which IIRC their defensive rating with him actually on the court really was.

I don't think it'd be KG alone, though he'd be the catalyst and the engine for it. The Nets have some solid defensive pieces to work with if they can be fit into roles that work for them. Lopez might not be the greatest rebounder, but he's both really big and really mobile. Johnson can play reasonable man defense, at least on par with Ray. And Pierce is still Pierce. With KG back at the 4 and more able to roam than he was at C, I think that forms the nucleus for a strong 1st team defense.

lopez is not mobile. he is slow and plodding. occasionally he will show some signs of athletcism, but those moments are very few and very far in between. and to say he isnt the greatest rebounder is an incredible understatement. Lopez is an extremely weak defensive rebounder and overall sub par defender. without evans on the floor we may very well have some serious rebounding issues.

defensively im sure we get better... but #7 better seems like a pipe dream to me with subpar play defensively at the point and at center

Mis-typed slightly because I rushed that message out with my wife calling me upstairs. Would have caught that (really mobile) part on re-read. Where I was going with that is that Lopez is big and able to take up space near the rim, much like Perkins was in Boston. Perk, too, was a big, not-especially-mobile body. He also wasn't a great rebounder, though slightly better by percentage than Lopez (outside of Lopez's 2011, which I'm going to assume won't happen again). But there's a reason that so many thought of Perk as being a really good defender when he was paired with KG, when he wasn't nearly as effective without him.

Which was the point I was trying to make, that KG's type of help defense would allow Lopez to concentrate more on what he's good at (being big near the rim) and should lessen his need to help quite as much. Which puts him in better position to rebound, lets him match up against any real big bodies (like Hibbert or Howard) without forcing KG to stay in the paint, and lets him be more of a rim help than paint help. These should help Lopez be much more effective in the team defensive scheme than he ever was previously, and also helps the team because Lopez filling those big guy roles allows KG to not have to...much like what Perk once did for him.

PetroNet wrote:

drza wrote:I
*Offensively speaking, I think the Nets' style will be most similar to this year's Spurs. They'll have a free-flowing offense led by a dynamic point guard, with solid inside scoring options and wings who will alternate primary scoring efforts. This isn't the "dynamic duo" or "big three" foundation, but instead a more equal-opportunity offense where Deron will be the most consistently important option but there will be many nights where any of the other four will play the lead role.

I can't imagine us playing anything like the spurs... the spurs are the most polished team in the NBA. their core has been running that pick and roll for like a decade. its easy for them to plug in the peripheral pieces. One of the things that makes us a poor fit for the spurs pnr game is we dont really have any decent pick and roll bigs. we have PLENTY of pick and pop bigs with KG, lopez, and mirza... but none who roll well. KG can but often prefers the 18 footer off the screen. lopez is really poor rolling to the basket. maybe blatche can, he prefers to take alot jumpers off it as well. we also have a lot of really low iq players... although pierce and KG help that and ball movement ideally

I think we are much more suited to run an offense like the celtics offense. a ton of baseline screening, and a ton of bigman slips off a baseline screen. I think we have the personal to set screens off the ball and take advantage of cheating and switching. I also think we are going to play at a snails pace again - which i think is a good thing. we should execute even better offensively and limiting total possesions takes pressure/honus off our defense.

You raise some good stylistic points here. My point with the Spurs comparison was more about the shared responsibilities than necessarily their exact style. And in that sense I still think the Spurs are the better comp than recent Celtics vintages on offense. In the last few years, the Celtics' offense was becoming overly Rondo-centric as far as ball-handling and decision-making. His abilities in some respects made Pierce/KG/Ray's jobs easier because they mainly had to finish (which each are good at). But the team offense suffered because (at least in part) running everything through Rondo made the offense predictable and easy to defend, and because so much of the offense was designed (through the off-ball movement that you speak of) to lead to open jumpers instead of more dynamic action.

I do see this current Nets group of bigs tending more towards popping instead of rolling to the rim, but I could still see the off-ball action leading to more opportunities at the rim. If Deron and either KG or Brook are pick-and-popping, then the other big and/or one of the wings can be moving towards the rim while the other shooter(s) also head for their marks around the arc. Otherwise, as you suggest, I think the team will play to the strengths of the personnel to create the types of mismatches that you describe.

Back to my stylistic Spurs comp, I could see Deron's level of responsibility being roughly similar to Parker's where he's doing the most heavy lifting on a regular basis. Deron doesn't have Rondo's offensive short-comings, which makes the potential of the resultant offense much higher than anything that Boston has done in recent years. But I also think that on any given night any of the main guys on this team could be the most important offensive player. There aren't many teams for which this is regularly true, but I think that this team will be one.

So drza, what do you think of the GB consensus of KG's move to center last season?

Most people say that he moved to center because he COULDN'T play PF anymore, wasn't quick enough anymore. Not because Boston NEEDED him to move to center.

I assume you think that's BS, lol, because that's DEFINITELY what I think of that train of thought

drza wrote:I've been doing a lot of lurking around here and the various blogs since the big trade, trying to get a feel for everyone's expectations. I've seen threads predicting records, and I've seen threads predicting who will be the best player. I've read a lot about how Williams finished strong after being injured early, about how Lopez is a star on the rise. I've read Celtics fans talking about how great Pierce will be. I've seen a lot of conversation about how old Garnett and Pierce are, and I've seen a lot of 24 - 28 minute time limit predictions for them. I've seen team results predictions ranging from a '13 Lakers-like implosion to the 64-win analytics prediction.

But. What I HAVEN'T seen yet is much discussion about HOW these various individual predictions might play out on the court next season. What will the team look like? How will their units perform? What will be their team identity? Will it be Deron and the gang? The coming out party for Lopez in a center-out offense? A defensive juggernaut? An offense-heavy squad? Balanced attack?

I laid out some of my post-trade thoughts here: http://www.netsdaily.com/2013/7/3/44890 ... the-league

Cliffnotes version:

*Offensively speaking, I think the Nets' style will be most similar to this year's Spurs. They'll have a free-flowing offense led by a dynamic point guard, with solid inside scoring options and wings who will alternate primary scoring efforts. This isn't the "dynamic duo" or "big three" foundation, but instead a more equal-opportunity offense where Deron will be the most consistently important option but there will be many nights where any of the other four will play the lead role.

*Defensively, I expect a quantum leap forward for the Nets this year. I think their defense will go from the bottom portion of the league to looking remarkably like the Celtics' defense of the last few years. I'm expecting Garnett to lead the defense for his 30 minutes or so on the court, much as he did in Boston, which will make it much easier for Lopez, the wings, and even Deron to be more effective at what they do.

*And just on the whole, I think the Nets will have a different on-court feel this year. I'm expecting them to be edgy, more energetic, and more aggressive. If you recall, in 2007 the expectations for the Celtics pre-season turned out to be a lot lower than the actual results. And I think a good chunk of the reason for that was that aggressive, team-first, us-and-not-you, work-hard-all-the-time philosophy that permeated from the practice to the real court. It's the "culture change" that Doc Rivers so often talks about, and I think that next week it officially occurs in Jersey.

So bottom line, I think next year's Nets look like the '13 Spurs on offense with the Celtics' edge and defense.

What do you think?

Great right up. My intuition of the team itself has been pretty spot on since last year. I predicted 50-32 record and was 1 game short of that prediction, I predicted and actually saw the whole Avery not knowing what the hell he was doing thing since preseason of last year, I expected Mirza to have difficulty adjusting and I predicted the Bulls were a nightmare matchup due to their activity on defense and ability to realize our blackholes in Wallace/Evans.

What I honestly believe is the samething. While it sounds nutty for lighting to strike twice, I really do have a feeling KG and Pierce will change the culture and give the team a 07-08 Celtics vibe. Most importantly, it will give certain guys a "I don't want to let these guys down" mindset when it comes to Kidd, KG, Pierce.

We added three emotional leaders to this team. Terry counts because he is an non-stop talking positive guy. He comes off like a Mark Jackson type of guy on the floor and in every interview. He will be another guy who won't let the team hand it's head in big games. The biggest issue that was noticeable wasn't about heart, it was about personality. The team simply did not have a 90s Knicks, 90s Bulls or 08' Celtics personality of toughness and grit which represents the fans and It was so obvious in that Chicago series this team did not have an emotional leader. Wallace was the best at it and he sucked and pretty much checked out because he didn't like his role.


In terms of the offense, I agree and Kidd confirmed he would like it to be where everyone touches the ball, moves the ball and it's unselfish all the time. Pierce posted near career highs in assists and rebounds in the absence of Rondo, so he has proven he can make plays for Deron, JJ, Lopez and keep the defense honest. There is a ton of potential for unpredictability within the lineup. Positions 1 through 3 can handle the ball and run plays with KG/Lopez in pick and rolls, pick and pops and straight up post possessions.

In terms of defense, KG will make an impact and he will certainly push Brook to make an impact defensively. Brook credited Reggie Evans for making him talk and be more aware on defense, so image KG and Roy Rogers working with him.

Another underrated aspect people never will point out: Lawrence Frank has and was apart of the Celtics during there run together and understands what schemes they run, what KG likes to do defensively and he can easily incorporate his principles and create defensive schemes WITH KG to benefit interior defense. Interior defense should be much better and I'm going to say we're finishing 12th in defense. #2 in offense.

KG, Terry, PP will get the crowd going and it will most certainly rub off on the rest of the team, It's going to be very fun watching this team. I think it will be more fun for them experiencing by far the best cast of talent they have probably ever played with together which means we might see the best hunger and drive out of KG/PP since their 2010 Boston days when everyone was excited to have a chance to win it all.

Bojans ability to play this year will be key. We don't have any other reliable backup wings other than Terry, and he can't spell Pierce. Our big man rotation is good, and we will probably get a suitable backup PG, but if we want to keep Pierce's minutes low, the guys behind him are giant question marks, and it concerns me.

therealbig3 wrote:So drza, what do you think of the GB consensus of KG's move to center last season?

Most people say that he moved to center because he COULDN'T play PF anymore, wasn't quick enough anymore. Not because Boston NEEDED him to move to center.

I assume you think that's BS, lol, because that's DEFINITELY what I think of that train of thought

That's utter nonsense.

It's more effective to have KG play C defensively than it is for him to play PF. There are more stretch 4s in the game and if KG is out on the wing guarding some of those guys, it limits his ability to be a consistent anchor for the BOS defense.

They had no one good enough offensively or defensively to warrant keeping KG at the PF position. Might as well move him to C especially with the lack of skilled Cs we have in today's game.

Defensively we improve in the half court, but our transition D against uptempo teams is going to be atrocious the only one that will be able to run back on defense is Dwill

drza wrote:Mis-typed slightly because I rushed that message out with my wife calling me upstairs. Would have caught that (really mobile) part on re-read. Where I was going with that is that Lopez is big and able to take up space near the rim, much like Perkins was in Boston. Perk, too, was a big, not-especially-mobile body. He also wasn't a great rebounder, though slightly better by percentage than Lopez (outside of Lopez's 2011, which I'm going to assume won't happen again). But there's a reason that so many thought of Perk as being a really good defender when he was paired with KG, when he wasn't nearly as effective without him.

Which was the point I was trying to make, that KG's type of help defense would allow Lopez to concentrate more on what he's good at (being big near the rim) and should lessen his need to help quite as much. Which puts him in better position to rebound, lets him match up against any real big bodies (like Hibbert or Howard) without forcing KG to stay in the paint, and lets him be more of a rim help than paint help. These should help Lopez be much more effective in the team defensive scheme than he ever was previously, and also helps the team because Lopez filling those big guy roles allows KG to not have to...much like what Perk once did for him.

the problems with that comparison are:

1) Perkins was a SIGNIFICANTLY better defensive rebounder. i wouldnt say 24.4% DRB% is slightly better then Lopez at 16%. To say perkins was only slightly better on the defensive glass or brush it off as negligible is really a bad point to try and make

2) "taking up space near the rim" is one of those cliches thrown out there that really doesnt mean anything. Maybe if this eas fiba or the NCAA where you can camp in the lane in a 2-3 zone it might have some weight. but in the NBA, you cant, and thus, rotating and moving is much more vital. Also. While lopez has VERY good volume blocked shot stats, he isnt a good rim protector as he too often allows smalls to either finish over him, get around him and finish, or stop their penetration on switches or hedges in the pick and roll. Perkins on the other hand was an average to slightly above rim protector who did a good job keeping smalls from finishing or getting all the way to the rim in screen situations. This is really lopez biggest flaw defensively, and maybe biggest flaw overall after rebounding and consistent effort.

3) Lopez BBIQ is on the low side. Perkins, outside of tons of moving screens(seems to be a theme for boston big men) has a solid bbiq and especially defensively was always in his spots.

Obviously KG will help. and as i said, i think that while defensively we wont get a ton better intensity wise we will and that will help the bottom line. KG is going to have a really big impact on the defensive end... but it will still only be for like 25-28 minutes and we still have 2 poor defenders in the starting lineup and as of now no real defenders coming off our bench. I'm not saying its going to haunt us, we will be good enough defensively with the slow pace we play at, but i cant see us being a top 10 defensive team. luckily, we probably wont have to. we DO need to find a way to rebound, and prevent teams from owning our backboard like bostons was last year

drza wrote:
You raise some good stylistic points here. My point with the Spurs comparison was more about the shared responsibilities than necessarily their exact style. And in that sense I still think the Spurs are the better comp than recent Celtics vintages on offense. In the last few years, the Celtics' offense was becoming overly Rondo-centric as far as ball-handling and decision-making. His abilities in some respects made Pierce/KG/Ray's jobs easier because they mainly had to finish (which each are good at). But the team offense suffered because (at least in part) running everything through Rondo made the offense predictable and easy to defend, and because so much of the offense was designed (through the off-ball movement that you speak of) to lead to open jumpers instead of more dynamic action.

this is all true, and i wasnt arguing bostons offensive style was better... just that we are pretty ill equiped to run a spurs system, and somewhat incapable with our roster to do so.

PetroNet wrote:

drza wrote:Mis-typed slightly because I rushed that message out with my wife calling me upstairs. Would have caught that (really mobile) part on re-read. Where I was going with that is that Lopez is big and able to take up space near the rim, much like Perkins was in Boston. Perk, too, was a big, not-especially-mobile body. He also wasn't a great rebounder, though slightly better by percentage than Lopez (outside of Lopez's 2011, which I'm going to assume won't happen again). But there's a reason that so many thought of Perk as being a really good defender when he was paired with KG, when he wasn't nearly as effective without him.

Which was the point I was trying to make, that KG's type of help defense would allow Lopez to concentrate more on what he's good at (being big near the rim) and should lessen his need to help quite as much. Which puts him in better position to rebound, lets him match up against any real big bodies (like Hibbert or Howard) without forcing KG to stay in the paint, and lets him be more of a rim help than paint help. These should help Lopez be much more effective in the team defensive scheme than he ever was previously, and also helps the team because Lopez filling those big guy roles allows KG to not have to...much like what Perk once did for him.

the problems with that comparison are:

1) Perkins was a SIGNIFICANTLY better defensive rebounder. i wouldnt say 24.4% DRB% is slightly better then Lopez at 16%. To say perkins was only slightly better on the defensive glass or brush it off as negligible is really a bad point to try and make

But 24.4% DRB% isn't who Perkins consistently was. In every season that Perkins was a full-time player (e.g. at least 20 mpg, 30 games played) his DRB% was:

07: 20.1
08: 19.3
09: 21.4
10:24.4
12:18.8
13: 19.5

On the whole, outside of the 2010 season (which deserves an asterisk and relates to the point I'm making) Perkins has generally been a ~20% DRB% kind of guy.

Lopez started his career as a 21.2% DRB guy, then dropped to 17.5%, went through the WTF 2011 season, got hurt in 2012, then bounced back up to 16.1% this year. My contention is that his actual DRB% level is maybe an ~18% DRB kind of guy. Which isn't far at all from Perkins' norm.

Back to 2010 Perkins, that peak happened during a season when Garnett was coming off knee surgery, which left him able to use his length/defensive IQ to provide still strong help D (if far below his norm) but he lacked the lateral/vertical explosiveness to rebound very well (especially as the season went along, and into the playoffs). 2010 Garnett is likely what he will look like again whenever age catches up to him. But my point on-topic is that Garnett's horizontal/help abilities allow big, non-mobile centers to have better defense/rebounding efforts because they can operate closer to the rim and stay in higher percentage rebounding areas.

In other words, the same elements that conspired to allowed Perkins to be a big-minute better defensive rebound presence are the same elements that will help Lopez have percentages closer to his first couple of seasons as well.

PetroNet wrote:2) "taking up space near the rim" is one of those cliches thrown out there that really doesnt mean anything. Maybe if this eas fiba or the NCAA where you can camp in the lane in a 2-3 zone it might have some weight. but in the NBA, you cant, and thus, rotating and moving is much more vital. Also. While lopez has VERY good volume blocked shot stats, he isnt a good rim protector as he too often allows smalls to either finish over him, get around him and finish, or stop their penetration on switches or hedges in the pick and roll. Perkins on the other hand was an average to slightly above rim protector who did a good job keeping smalls from finishing or getting all the way to the rim in screen situations. This is really lopez biggest flaw defensively, and maybe biggest flaw overall after rebounding and consistent effort.

3) Lopez BBIQ is on the low side. Perkins, outside of tons of moving screens(seems to be a theme for boston big men) has a solid bbiq and especially defensively was always in his spots.

Obviously KG will help. and as i said, i think that while defensively we wont get a ton better intensity wise we will and that will help the bottom line. KG is going to have a really big impact on the defensive end... but it will still only be for like 25-28 minutes and we still have 2 poor defenders in the starting lineup and as of now no real defenders coming off our bench. I'm not saying its going to haunt us, we will be good enough defensively with the slow pace we play at, but i cant see us being a top 10 defensive team. luckily, we probably wont have to. we DO need to find a way to rebound, and prevent teams from owning our backboard like bostons was last year

The thing is, so much of your premise is built on Perkins presumably being a good defender when compared to Lopez, but that wasn't what the Celtics' D of the last six years was built on. Piggy-backing on an old comparison that I made of Celtics' defensive line-ups focusing on the big men, it seemed pretty clear to me that having Perkins in that 2nd big man slot was not a necessity at all for a strong team D.

From 2007 - 2011, for line-ups featuring Rondo/Ray Allen/Pierce, this is the Defensive rating based on the big men:

KG/Perk combo: D Rating 97.3 pts allowed in almost 3500 minutes

Perk without KG: D Rating 112.1 in more than 900 minutes (Big Baby, Sheed Wallace, Scalabrine, Posey, Powe as 2md big)

KG without Perk: D Rating of 99.3 pts allowed in almost 2000 minutes (Posey, Baby, Scal, Powe, Sheed, Shaq, J. O'Neal, Krstic, Semih, Green as 2nd big)

Obviously the 2012 and 2013 seasons have happened since then, but without going into the previous level of detail, KG's on-court defensive rating has been at the very top of the league for the past 2 seasons despite playing with 2nd big men like Brandon Bass, Sullinger, Wilcox, Collins, Greg Stiesma, Jermaine O'Neal, etc.

The point is, I think you're being too hard on Lopez here. Even if we stipulate that he's not as good defensively as Perkins, KG has been able to anchor top defenses next to almost ANY big man of almost ANY package of strengths/weaknesses over the past 6 years. And a reason for that is that KG's defensive versatility allows that 2nd big to play to their strengths. Even with big, non-mobile, non strong rebounding types like Stiesma, Collins, Krstic, Semih Erden, etc. And I think that playing next to KG, Brook will surprise you this year.

NyCeEvO wrote:

therealbig3 wrote:So drza, what do you think of the GB consensus of KG's move to center last season?

Most people say that he moved to center because he COULDN'T play PF anymore, wasn't quick enough anymore. Not because Boston NEEDED him to move to center.

I assume you think that's BS, lol, because that's DEFINITELY what I think of that train of thought

That's utter nonsense.

It's more effective to have KG play C defensively than it is for him to play PF. There are more stretch 4s in the game and if KG is out on the wing guarding some of those guys, it limits his ability to be a consistent anchor for the BOS defense.

They had no one good enough offensively or defensively to warrant keeping KG at the PF position. Might as well move him to C especially with the lack of skilled Cs we have in today's game.

His minutes restriction started when he played C. It's taxing on the body.

They didn't even play any stretch fours. They played Bass/Sullimger next to him. So, whats the difference if KG plays PF?

The only teams with dedication to small ball is NY and Miami. Which has shown not to be so great come playoff time since the Pacers exploited both teams, I don't see why it's an issue to stay big.

40-42 and another first round exit. The future is really bleak for this team. Trading away your draft picks for a bunch of washed up has been jerks and signing a woman beater with no coaching experience to coach is not a way to impress New York fans. Boy this Ruski sure is dumb!

three2theD wrote:40-42 and another first round exit. The future is really bleak for this team. Trading away your draft picks for a bunch of washed up has been jerks and signing a woman beater with no coaching experience to coach is not a way to impress New York fans. Boy this Ruski sure is dumb!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jUgWCAXxTQ[/youtube]

KG made Perkins look like a good defender. Kudos to Perk for being smart enough to take advantage of that and create this whole tough guy attitude + gaining the confidence to defend guys like D12 one on one and actually being good at it as well. But I think a more mobile guy like Brooke would be even better next to KG, especially on offense where Perk was non-existent.
As for KG playing PF/C: Playing KG at the 5 was all about match-ups. I don't think he has the legs for a full season chasing the better opposing PF''s (especially in 'small ball' line-ups).. For him being able to play closer to the rim on the defensive end (better rebounding position and as a help defender) by guarding the 5 and the fact he has the range and speed to shoot and score against opposing centers on offense, has made it possible for KG to stay effective. Right now KG's biggest strengths: a fantastic defensive anchor and a great jump shooter --> two things that are very effective as a 5 in the NBA right now.
Last thing I want to share: I'm very excited about this team. I've been following KG through his whole NBA career and eventhough it would have been great to see him retire as a Celtic (or as a Timberpuppy), seeing him getting traded together with the Truth to a great team/franchise gets me all pumped up. Go Nets!