ECSF: P1 | (2) Boston Celtics vs Philadelphia 76ers (3) | BOS 1-0

[cl2117]

The problem with this 2nd round matchup is that both teams that could face the Sixers have such serious holes that the Sixers can exploit so easily that it's going to be really hard to put up a legit fight.

The Bucks are much more impressive when they get solid play from roleplayers, but even in games where you get that level of production if the other team can limit Giannis they have no chance. The Sixers are uniquely positioned to give Giannis some real trouble and if they can limit him even marginally better than the Celtics, they should have no problem.

The C's might actually be able to cause some offensive problems for the Sixers. I think Brad can scheme with the best of them and with guys like Horford/Smart/Ojeleye/Brown you're going to be able to try different things througout the series. Even if they do manage to keep Philly from blowing the doors off of them, there is just ZERO chance that offensively the Celtics will be able to do enough to take the series. They go too cold for too long and don't have a guy consistent enough to pull them out of it. Guys like Morris, Smart, Tatum, Rozier might be able to carry the load in small stretches, but what will really kill them is offensive rebounds. Philly is going to have a ton of second chance points and Boston isn't going to muster many at all.

I wish the brackets shook out differently. BOS/MIL has been fun, but the 2nd round will be a bit lackluster on this side of the bracket. I think the teams that will be in the 2nd round on the other side of the bracket would have had a better series against the Sixers and I think the winner of MIL/BOS would have a more interesting series against IND/TOR/CLE than they would against Philly.

[LloydFree]

1. Embiid
2. Simmons
3. Irving
4. Horford
5. Hayward
6. Brown
7. Covington
8. Tatum
9. Rozier
10. Ilyasova

This is a pretty silly ranking (if that's what it is). In what world is Simmons a better player than Kyrie? He might not even be better than Hayward or Horford.

If Colangelo offered Danny Ainge Ben Simmons for Kyrie Irving, he'd say "deal" before Colangelo finished saying Kyrie's last name.

[cl2117]

1. Embiid
2. Simmons
3. Irving
4. Horford
5. Hayward
6. Brown
7. Covington
8. Tatum
9. Rozier
10. Ilyasova

This is a pretty silly ranking (if that's what it is). In what world is Simmons a better player than Kyrie? He might not even be better than Hayward or Horford.

If Colangelo offered Danny Ainge Ben Simmons for Kyrie Irving, he'd say "deal" before Colangelo finished saying Kyrie's last name.

Yup. It'd be one of the "I'll drive him to the airport" type deals. But that doesn't mean that Ben is better than Kyrie now. I'd say they're pretty close due to Ben's defensive impact, but I wouldn't put Simmons ahead due to Kyrie's playoff pedigree (Simmons can change that during these playoffs). It just means that he has more value by being younger, cheaper, controlled longer and more unique positionally (health etc. too).

I have no problem saying Simmons has a ton more value than Kyrie, but I think it's a bit too soon to claim he's the better player already (even if he might be soon enough).

It's the same as this Dario nonsense. Hayward is definitely better right now. Doesn't mean that you can't say that Saric is on a path to be better than Hayward or that you can't argue that the gap isn't as wide as people make it out to be. But it's ok to say Hayward is better right now.

[Wilfried]

1. Embiid
2. Simmons
3. Irving
4. Horford
5. Hayward
6. Brown
7. Covington
8. Tatum
9. Rozier
10. Ilyasova

This is a pretty silly ranking (if that's what it is). In what world is Simmons a better player than Kyrie? He might not even be better than Hayward or Horford.

If Colangelo offered Danny Ainge Ben Simmons for Kyrie Irving, he'd say "deal" before Colangelo finished saying Kyrie's last name.

Well, that would be stupid, because Colangelo was probably going to offer the LA pick too

[Snotbubbles]

This is a pretty silly ranking (if that's what it is). In what world is Simmons a better player than Kyrie? He might not even be better than Hayward or Horford.

Haven't seen much of Simmons I assume?

I don’t really see any argument for Simmons being better than Kyrie at this point. Seems a tad reactionary.

Agree. Right now, Kyrie is slightly ahead of Simmons. What I'm surprised about is the lack of Dario Saric in that post. I have him rated above both Brown and Tatum this year.

[Snotbubbles]

This is a pretty silly ranking (if that's what it is). In what world is Simmons a better player than Kyrie? He might not even be better than Hayward or Horford.

If Colangelo offered Danny Ainge Ben Simmons for Kyrie Irving, he'd say "deal" before Colangelo finished saying Kyrie's last name.

Yup. It'd be one of the "I'll drive him to the airport" type deals. But that doesn't mean that Ben is better than Kyrie now. I'd say they're pretty close due to Ben's defensive impact, but I wouldn't put Simmons ahead due to Kyrie's playoff pedigree (Simmons can change that during these playoffs). It just means that he has more value by being younger, cheaper, controlled longer and more unique positionally (health etc. too).

I have no problem saying Simmons has a ton more value than Kyrie, but I think it's a bit too soon to claim he's the better player already (even if he might be soon enough).

It's the same as this Dario nonsense. Hayward is definitely better right now. Doesn't mean that you can't say that Saric is on a path to be better than Hayward or that you can't argue that the gap isn't as wide as people make it out to be. But it's ok to say Hayward is better right now.

It's almost like making an apples to oranges comparison. Irving and Hayward are a few years ahead in their development. Trying to compare Simmons and Saric to them is just speculative at this point. Both players are on a path to being at least comparable level players.

[cl2117]

Haven't seen much of Simmons I assume?

I don’t really see any argument for Simmons being better than Kyrie at this point. Seems a tad reactionary.

Agree. Right now, Kyrie is slightly ahead of Simmons. What I'm surprised about is the lack of Dario Saric in that post. I have him rated above both Brown and Tatum this year.

Why? They've all got almost identical stats. Like eerily similar stat. I'd say it's a push at best.

Dario (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV/FG%/3P%/TS%):
14.6/6.7/2.7/0.7/0.3/1.9 on .453 / .393 / .582

Jaylen (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
14.5/4.9/1.6/1/0.4/1.8 on .465/ .395 / .562

Jayson (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
13.9/5/1.6/1.0/0.7/1.4 on .475 / .434 / .586

Their advanced stats are all relatively close as well. I think it's pretty even across the board with those 3 guys.

I was surprised he didn't make it on the list as well, but those 3 would be clustered on my list (I'd sandwich Dario just for fairness and take your pick of the C's player you put ahead of them since it's all equal in my mind).

It's almost like making an apples to oranges comparison. Irving and Hayward are a few years ahead in their development. Trying to compare Simmons and Saric to them is just speculative at this point. Both players are on a path to being at least comparable level players.

It is and it isn't. The problem here is that everyone is talking about different things. If we are talking about the quality of the players THIS year then it's apples to apples. If we are talking about the relative values of them in trades right now, then it's still apples to apples. If we're talking about development curves etc., well now it's apples and oranges since each pair is in a different stage of their careers.

Everyone is arguing about different things, which is why no one is ever going to agree. Take a look at Simmons vs. Kyrie. Kyrie is the better player now, Simmons has higher trade value now, it's up for debate long-term which is the better horse (I'd go Simmons, but think Kyrie has a decent argument). There's 3 ways of looking at it and you can get 3 different answers. You've got guys in this thread arguing at it from 2 different perspectives and they can therefore both be right and wrong at the same time (and round and round we go).

[XtremeDunkz]

Haven't seen much of Simmons I assume?

I don’t really see any argument for Simmons being better than Kyrie at this point. Seems a tad reactionary.

Agree. Right now, Kyrie is slightly ahead of Simmons. What I'm surprised about is the lack of Dario Saric in that post. I have him rated above both Brown and Tatum this year.

Lloyd is a known Saric hater until the day he dies. Same with Fultz. They could both become hall of famers and he would still die on that hill.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

[LloydFree]

If Colangelo offered Danny Ainge Ben Simmons for Kyrie Irving, he'd say "deal" before Colangelo finished saying Kyrie's last name.

Yup. It'd be one of the "I'll drive him to the airport" type deals. But that doesn't mean that Ben is better than Kyrie now. I'd say they're pretty close due to Ben's defensive impact, but I wouldn't put Simmons ahead due to Kyrie's playoff pedigree (Simmons can change that during these playoffs). It just means that he has more value by being younger, cheaper, controlled longer and more unique positionally (health etc. too).

I have no problem saying Simmons has a ton more value than Kyrie, but I think it's a bit too soon to claim he's the better player already (even if he might be soon enough).

It's the same as this Dario nonsense. Hayward is definitely better right now. Doesn't mean that you can't say that Saric is on a path to be better than Hayward or that you can't argue that the gap isn't as wide as people make it out to be. But it's ok to say Hayward is better right now.

It's almost like making an apples to oranges comparison. Irving and Hayward are a few years ahead in their development. Trying to compare Simmons and Saric to them is just speculative at this point. Both players are on a path to being at least comparable level players.

Comparing Saric to Hayward is silly. They aren't in the same universe. Comparing Simmons to Kyrie isn't speculative, in the way I think you are using the word. I've seen Ben Simmons lead his team to a playoff victory. I haven't seen Kyrie do that without James.

[lambchop]

Yup. It'd be one of the "I'll drive him to the airport" type deals. But that doesn't mean that Ben is better than Kyrie now. I'd say they're pretty close due to Ben's defensive impact, but I wouldn't put Simmons ahead due to Kyrie's playoff pedigree (Simmons can change that during these playoffs). It just means that he has more value by being younger, cheaper, controlled longer and more unique positionally (health etc. too).

I have no problem saying Simmons has a ton more value than Kyrie, but I think it's a bit too soon to claim he's the better player already (even if he might be soon enough).

It's the same as this Dario nonsense. Hayward is definitely better right now. Doesn't mean that you can't say that Saric is on a path to be better than Hayward or that you can't argue that the gap isn't as wide as people make it out to be. But it's ok to say Hayward is better right now.

It's almost like making an apples to oranges comparison. Irving and Hayward are a few years ahead in their development. Trying to compare Simmons and Saric to them is just speculative at this point. Both players are on a path to being at least comparable level players.

Comparing Saric to Hayward is silly. They aren't in the same universe. Comparing Simmons to Kyrie isn't speculative, in the way I think you are using the word. I've seen Ben Simmons lead his team to a playoff victory. I haven't seen Kyrie do that without James.

well, to be fair, James didn't miss games. Kyrie's team has already shown that they can have a team on the brink of elimination without him. So imo it will be interesting to see if he can get a team to the finals, cause this team with hayward would have beaten milwaukee convincingly

[cl2117]

Yup. It'd be one of the "I'll drive him to the airport" type deals. But that doesn't mean that Ben is better than Kyrie now. I'd say they're pretty close due to Ben's defensive impact, but I wouldn't put Simmons ahead due to Kyrie's playoff pedigree (Simmons can change that during these playoffs). It just means that he has more value by being younger, cheaper, controlled longer and more unique positionally (health etc. too).

I have no problem saying Simmons has a ton more value than Kyrie, but I think it's a bit too soon to claim he's the better player already (even if he might be soon enough).

It's the same as this Dario nonsense. Hayward is definitely better right now. Doesn't mean that you can't say that Saric is on a path to be better than Hayward or that you can't argue that the gap isn't as wide as people make it out to be. But it's ok to say Hayward is better right now.

It's almost like making an apples to oranges comparison. Irving and Hayward are a few years ahead in their development. Trying to compare Simmons and Saric to them is just speculative at this point. Both players are on a path to being at least comparable level players.

Comparing Saric to Hayward is silly. They aren't in the same universe. Comparing Simmons to Kyrie isn't speculative, in the way I think you are using the word. I've seen Ben Simmons lead his team to a playoff victory. I haven't seen Kyrie do that without James.

That's specious reasoning just like saying Kyrie drained one of the clutches shots of all-time in the Finals, I haven't seen Simmons do that.

I think he means it's speculative in the sense that Kyrie is better now, Simmons is on track to surpass him in the near future, but there is no guarantee that happens. Same with Hayward/Saric. We know who is better now, we can assume who will be better in the future, but no guarantee it happens (even if it's got a strong likelihood).

[Snotbubbles]

I don’t really see any argument for Simmons being better than Kyrie at this point. Seems a tad reactionary.

Agree. Right now, Kyrie is slightly ahead of Simmons. What I'm surprised about is the lack of Dario Saric in that post. I have him rated above both Brown and Tatum this year.

Why? They've all got almost identical stats. Like eerily similar stat. I'd say it's a push at best.

Dario (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV/FG%/3P%/TS%):
14.6/6.7/2.7/0.7/0.3/1.9 on .453 / .393 / .582

Jaylen (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
14.5/4.9/1.6/1/0.4/1.8 on .465/ .395 / .562

Jayson (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
13.9/5/1.6/1.0/0.7/1.4 on .475 / .434 / .586

Their advanced stats are all relatively close as well. I think it's pretty even across the board with those 3 guys.

I was surprised he didn't make it on the list as well, but those 3 would be clustered on my list (I'd sandwich Dario just for fairness and take your pick of the C's player you put ahead of them since it's all equal in my mind).

Dario
PER: 15.8
BPM: 1.4
VORP: 2.0

Brown
PER: 13.6
BPM: -0.2
VORP: 1.0

Tatum
PER: 15.3
BPM: 1.0
VORP: 1.8

That's why I have Dario over those two. No one said it wasn't close.

[Snotbubbles]

Yup. It'd be one of the "I'll drive him to the airport" type deals. But that doesn't mean that Ben is better than Kyrie now. I'd say they're pretty close due to Ben's defensive impact, but I wouldn't put Simmons ahead due to Kyrie's playoff pedigree (Simmons can change that during these playoffs). It just means that he has more value by being younger, cheaper, controlled longer and more unique positionally (health etc. too).

I have no problem saying Simmons has a ton more value than Kyrie, but I think it's a bit too soon to claim he's the better player already (even if he might be soon enough).

It's the same as this Dario nonsense. Hayward is definitely better right now. Doesn't mean that you can't say that Saric is on a path to be better than Hayward or that you can't argue that the gap isn't as wide as people make it out to be. But it's ok to say Hayward is better right now.

It's almost like making an apples to oranges comparison. Irving and Hayward are a few years ahead in their development. Trying to compare Simmons and Saric to them is just speculative at this point. Both players are on a path to being at least comparable level players.

Comparing Saric to Hayward is silly. They aren't in the same universe. Comparing Simmons to Kyrie isn't speculative, in the way I think you are using the word. I've seen Ben Simmons lead his team to a playoff victory. I haven't seen Kyrie do that without James.

Dario
MP: 29.6
FG%: .453
3P%: .393
FT%: .860
TRB: 6.7
AST: 2.6
PTS: 14.6
PER: 15.8
TS%: .582
USG: 20.9
BPM: 1.4
VORP: 2.0

Hayward (age 23)
MP: 36.4
FG%: .413
3P%: .304
FT%: .816
TRB: 5.1
AST: 5.2
PTS: 16.2
PER: 16.2
TS%: .520
USG: 23.1
BPM: 1.0
VORP: 2.1

I'd say they're pretty similar.

[cl2117]

Agree. Right now, Kyrie is slightly ahead of Simmons. What I'm surprised about is the lack of Dario Saric in that post. I have him rated above both Brown and Tatum this year.

Why? They've all got almost identical stats. Like eerily similar stat. I'd say it's a push at best.

Dario (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV/FG%/3P%/TS%):
14.6/6.7/2.7/0.7/0.3/1.9 on .453 / .393 / .582

Jaylen (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
14.5/4.9/1.6/1/0.4/1.8 on .465/ .395 / .562

Jayson (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
13.9/5/1.6/1.0/0.7/1.4 on .475 / .434 / .586

Their advanced stats are all relatively close as well. I think it's pretty even across the board with those 3 guys.

I was surprised he didn't make it on the list as well, but those 3 would be clustered on my list (I'd sandwich Dario just for fairness and take your pick of the C's player you put ahead of them since it's all equal in my mind).

Dario
PER: 15.8
BPM: 1.4
VORP: 2.0

Brown
PER: 13.6
BPM: -0.2
VORP: 1.0

Tatum
PER: 15.3
BPM: 1.0
VORP: 1.8

That's why I have Dario over those two. No one said it wasn't close.

Didn't say that you said it wasn't close, just asking why. Still not seeing anything enough to give one the edge over the others. Tatum is on par with those advanced stats (and is more efficient overall) and Brown has outplayed them both during the playoffs while taking the bronze in advanced stats. I say it's splitting hairs, but was just curious why you had Dario rated above both when they're all so close statistically.

Dario
MP: 29.6
FG%: .453
3P%: .393
FT%: .860
TRB: 6.7
AST: 2.6
PTS: 14.6
PER: 15.8
TS%: .582
USG: 20.9
BPM: 1.4
VORP: 2.0

Hayward (age 23)
MP: 36.4
FG%: .413
3P%: .304
FT%: .816
TRB: 5.1
AST: 5.2
PTS: 16.2
PER: 16.2
TS%: .520
USG: 23.1
BPM: 1.0
VORP: 2.1

I'd say they're pretty similar.

Sure if you turn the clock back 5 years, but that's a terrible way to compare two players now. Hayward took the next step after the season you're referencing, Saric will have to do that to stay on pace. And this brings us back to what are we really talking about? Are the similar players now? NO. Hayward is definitely a notch above. Are the on similar development paths? Sure. But unless people start being more specific when talking about one over the other this is all just a pointless circle-jerk.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Exactly zero Celtics fans were acting like, or saying that, Hayward was a transcendent talent. Exactly zero Celtics fans were regarding (your words) Hayward as a transcendent talent. You overreacted and argued against a straw man. No worries, man, it happens.

And like I said, 1st round is far from over. You might be playing the Bucks lol.

By exaggerating the gap between Hayward/Saric, they acted like Hayward was a transcendent talent. That's my assertion. In no way is that a straw man argument considering (a)"acting like" in this case is subject to my valuation of each player and (b) it was an isolated point within a much bigger argument.

Example of a straw man argument: the people arguing that Saric isn't as good as Hayward. Nobody in this thread ever said he was, and unlike my point that's not a matter of subjective opinion. Get it?

Literally no one acted like Hayward was a transcendent talent, dude. It was a strawman argument. Get over it.

The Hayward of last year was the lead option on a team that won a playoff round in the much more difficult WC, and he scored 24ppg in the playoffs doing it. Transcendent talent? No. Top 20 player? Sure!

Meanwhilw, Saric is the 4th option on the Sixers, sometimes 5th depending on how RoCo or Bellinelli is playing. There is a sizable gap, sorry if the truth hurts the feelings of a poster named SuperDario. Good Lord I am just done here lol

Sorry to burst your bubble but I "literally" just explained to you why it wasn't. Feel free to argue against one of my points rather than rehash the same faulty argument. Otherwise you're 'grasping for straws' given your obsession with the phrase

Anyway, if you believe Saric is ever the 5th option behind Covington then you are beyond redemption. George Hill scored 17ppg for the Jazz last year so I'm not sure that's the best argument to use either. Somebody had to score for that team but just like this year, it's Gobert's defense that translates to success.

[cl2117]

By exaggerating the gap between Hayward/Saric, they acted like Hayward was a transcendent talent. That's my assertion. In no way is that a straw man argument considering (a)"acting like" in this case is subject to my valuation of each player and (b) it was an isolated point within a much bigger argument.

Example of a straw man argument: the people arguing that Saric isn't as good as Hayward. Nobody in this thread ever said he was, and unlike my point that's not a matter of subjective opinion. Get it?

Literally no one acted like Hayward was a transcendent talent, dude. It was a strawman argument. Get over it.

The Hayward of last year was the lead option on a team that won a playoff round in the much more difficult WC, and he scored 24ppg in the playoffs doing it. Transcendent talent? No. Top 20 player? Sure!

Meanwhilw, Saric is the 4th option on the Sixers, sometimes 5th depending on how RoCo or Bellinelli is playing. There is a sizable gap, sorry if the truth hurts the feelings of a poster named SuperDario. Good Lord I am just done here lol

Sorry to burst your bubble but I "literally" just explained to you why it wasn't. Feel free to argue against one of my points rather than rehash the same faulty argument. Otherwise you're 'grasping for straws' given your obsession with the phrase

Anyway, if you believe Saric is ever the 5th option behind Covington then you are beyond redemption. George Hill scored 17ppg for the Jazz last year so I'm not sure that's the best argument to use either. Somebody had to score for that team but just like this year, it's Gobert's defense that translates to success.

Mate you're wrong. Get over it. No one EVER suggested Hayward is a transcendent talent. You saying that people were is absolutely a strawman. Following it up and saying that it was inferred by "exaggerating the gap between Hayward/Saric" is dumb. Stop digging, it just makes you look even worse.

Say Saric is underrated or Hayward overrated? Sure. But when you start saying that people said outlandish things like "Hayward is a transcendent talent" when "literally" no one but you did, that's a strawman.

[SmartWentCrazy]

Agree. Right now, Kyrie is slightly ahead of Simmons. What I'm surprised about is the lack of Dario Saric in that post. I have him rated above both Brown and Tatum this year.

Why? They've all got almost identical stats. Like eerily similar stat. I'd say it's a push at best.

Dario (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV/FG%/3P%/TS%):
14.6/6.7/2.7/0.7/0.3/1.9 on .453 / .393 / .582

Jaylen (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
14.5/4.9/1.6/1/0.4/1.8 on .465/ .395 / .562

Jayson (PTS/TRB/AST/STL/BLK/TOV):
13.9/5/1.6/1.0/0.7/1.4 on .475 / .434 / .586

Their advanced stats are all relatively close as well. I think it's pretty even across the board with those 3 guys.

I was surprised he didn't make it on the list as well, but those 3 would be clustered on my list (I'd sandwich Dario just for fairness and take your pick of the C's player you put ahead of them since it's all equal in my mind).

Dario
PER: 15.8
BPM: 1.4
VORP: 2.0

Brown
PER: 13.6
BPM: -0.2
VORP: 1.0

Tatum
PER: 15.3
BPM: 1.0
VORP: 1.8

That's why I have Dario over those two. No one said it wasn't close.

RPM:
Tatum- 2.28
Brown- 2.03
Saric- 0.84

[SmartWentCrazy]

1. Embiid
2. Simmons
3. Irving
4. Horford
5. Hayward
6. Brown
7. Covington
8. Tatum
9. Rozier
10. Ilyasova

This is a pretty silly ranking (if that's what it is). In what world is Simmons a better player than Kyrie? He might not even be better than Hayward or Horford.

If Colangelo offered Danny Ainge Ben Simmons for Kyrie Irving, he'd say "deal" before Colangelo finished saying Kyrie's last name.

Couldnt you repeat this exercise with RoCo and Tatum?

Edit- For the record, I largely agree with your list and think its more than fair. Only change would maybe be to swap Illy with Saric.

[GeorgeMarcus]

I don’t really see any argument for Simmons being better than Kyrie at this point. Seems a tad reactionary.

Way better defender, way better at creating for his teammates, bigger, faster, stronger... There are plenty of arguments to be made whether or not you agree with the conclusion.

Kyrie, with all of his deficiencies (defense, vision, etc) is still less of a flawed player than Simmons (though that is to be expected: Simmons is a rookie). Simmons is an elite playmaker and has proven to be a budding defensive talent but he is essentially a non-threat from outside of the restricted area. His game is still very unrefined: obviously his range is limited but he doesn’t have a semblance of a post game or the touch from floater range. He’s an elite finisher and is able to use his strength/handle to create space but he still has a way to go as a scorer.

Simmons is in the perfect situation for his abilities. He’s surrounded by excellent shooting and an elite big he can feed in the post. He’s basically the team’s only playmaker so he doesn’t have to play off-ball. I’m not sure his game translates on other teams. The Bucks, for example, are worse if you replace Giannis with Ben. Kyrie’s game is as portable as anyone else in the league. He’s an elite shot-maker that can play off-ball if necessary. He doesn’t need the spacing Ben does to be effective. That’s evident when you look at how seamless his transition has been from Cleveland to Boston.

He lacks an outside shot but I adamantly disagree with your other points. Unrefined? Absolutely not. He's a magician out there in terms of court vision and decision-making. It's amazing how calm, cool and collected he is as a rookie. No semblance of a post game? Also false. One of our go to plays is to create mismatches for Ben to do work in the post. Even the part about lacking shooting touch outside the restricted area is false. He has developed a nice pull-up J from about 12 feet and under over the course of the season.

[GeorgeMarcus]

Literally no one acted like Hayward was a transcendent talent, dude. It was a strawman argument. Get over it.

The Hayward of last year was the lead option on a team that won a playoff round in the much more difficult WC, and he scored 24ppg in the playoffs doing it. Transcendent talent? No. Top 20 player? Sure!

Meanwhilw, Saric is the 4th option on the Sixers, sometimes 5th depending on how RoCo or Bellinelli is playing. There is a sizable gap, sorry if the truth hurts the feelings of a poster named SuperDario. Good Lord I am just done here lol

Sorry to burst your bubble but I "literally" just explained to you why it wasn't. Feel free to argue against one of my points rather than rehash the same faulty argument. Otherwise you're 'grasping for straws' given your obsession with the phrase

Anyway, if you believe Saric is ever the 5th option behind Covington then you are beyond redemption. George Hill scored 17ppg for the Jazz last year so I'm not sure that's the best argument to use either. Somebody had to score for that team but just like this year, it's Gobert's defense that translates to success.

Mate you're wrong. Get over it. No one EVER suggested Hayward is a transcendent talent. You saying that people were is absolutely a strawman. Following it up and saying that it was inferred by "exaggerating the gap between Hayward/Saric" is dumb. Stop digging, it just makes you look even worse.

Say Saric is underrated or Hayward overrated? Sure. But when you start saying that people said outlandish things like "Hayward is a transcendent talent" when "literally" no one but you did, that's a strawman.

"Celtics fans are acting like" ≠ "Celtics fans said." A definitive claim versus a speculative claim; that's where you're wrong. At worst the transcendent talent remark was hyperbole (even that I'm not convinced of) but seeing as it was never my argument it most certainly isn't a straw man argument.

I'm sorry if you guys don't understand what a straw man argument is.