RealGM

Guys, I'm pretty sure looking at the amount of usage in comparison to his assists/turnovers, you're not going to see anyone comparable especially guards

Middling passer, but overall he has always been efficient on O while being bad on D, with the good outweighing the bad.

This is not new. It has shown up in the stats every single year he has been in the league. Danny knew this and almost didn't trade for him because he was projected to make the team better. Honestly, both sides have positions in this debate that are strange.

He far and away has a lower turnover percentage in comparison to other guards with similar usage. It's not close from what I'm seeing. Always willing to see something new here though.

SmartWentCrazy wrote:

Me in this thread after reading OP then seeing how it evolved

Yeah, the OP was awesome lol.

DoubleHappiness wrote:Middling passer, but overall he has always been efficient on O while being bad on D, with the good outweighing the bad.

Thomas is efficient on O? Is that what we are calling it now? Efficienct? He just had the highest scoring average for a season, for any Celtic since Larry Bird. That's like 30 years. He is 3rd in the league in scoring. 1st in the league in points scored in the 4th quarter. He is second in the league in FT%. He is the only player in the past 60 years to to make 9 or more FTs in a game without a miss, 16 times or more in a single season.

Efficient? More like remarkable, especially for his height.

Marvel wrote:

I don't think it's at all unreasonable to say that he should at least lead us to more then 5-6 playoff wins in a weak East this year. Really not a very high standard for players of that alleged caliber.

Remember when Dirk got MVP in 06-07 then got bounced in the 1st round to the Warriors? Steve Nash winning b2b MVPs? Both historical poor defenders, great offensive players, both MVPs. Difference is those guys were playing on superior teams. IT is a legit MVP candidate in the same but not so bright and shining light because of this teams flaws.

Well, don't agree. We've seen IT on bad teams and it wasn't like this. This is a well-coached team with a lot of good players on it, and unlike the Mavs, it's not playing in a historically elite conference.

Seems to me that people want to take victory laps based on regular season stats and not playoff success. Wasn't like I said they had to make the Finals. Said we should get more than 5-6 playoff wins and people started walking their "MVP, historically elite" claims back so fast they were almost running lol.

tlee324 wrote:He far and away has a lower turnover percentage in comparison to other guards with similar usage. It's not close from what I'm seeing. Always willing to see something new here though.

Your attempts to mock my lists of comparable guys was already dead after I pointed out half of them had better Asst-to-TO ratios.

And now we are on to usage, as if those guys like Curry, Paul, Wall, Butler, Walker, Irving, Lillard, Lowry, Conley are spot-up shooters who barely get their touches?

Kalela wrote:

return2glory wrote:

Kalela wrote:Jaylen has a 7'0" wingspan which is awesome.

And the motor of Jeff Green which isn't to awesome.

No. Jaylen is the opposite of Jeff Green.

Yeah 100%. Jeff was barely engaged. Jaylen is all in. Have no idea how anyone could say they have the same motor. Jaylen acts like he really wants to become great and win every game. Jeff just looked like he thought basketball was a good past time and was there because he had nothing better to do

Squigglepuffin wrote:

Kalela wrote:

return2glory wrote:
And the motor of Jeff Green which isn't to awesome.

No. Jaylen is the opposite of Jeff Green.

Yeah 100%. Jeff was barely engaged. Jaylen is all in. Have no idea how anyone could say they have the same motor. Jaylen acts like he really wants to become great and win every game. Jeff just looked like he thought basketball was a good past time and was there because he had nothing better to do

Acting like and being are two different things. Jaylen disappears in long stretches just like he did in Cal. Green disappeared in long stretches. Currently Brown isn't as good as fans here think.

Green averaged about 20 a game his last year with the Celtics. He was enganged enough. Not enough to be a star.

Brown needs to work on his game in a big way over the summer. Don't expect much from him in the playoffs.

Captain_Caveman wrote:

Marvel wrote:

I don't think it's at all unreasonable to say that he should at least lead us to more then 5-6 playoff wins in a weak East this year. Really not a very high standard for players of that alleged caliber.

Remember when Dirk got MVP in 06-07 then got bounced in the 1st round to the Warriors? Steve Nash winning b2b MVPs? Both historical poor defenders, great offensive players, both MVPs. Difference is those guys were playing on superior teams. IT is a legit MVP candidate in the same but not so bright and shining light because of this teams flaws.

Well, don't agree. We've seen IT on bad teams and it wasn't like this. This is a well-coached team with a lot of good players on it, and unlike the Mavs, it's not playing in a historically elite conference.

Seems to me that people want to take victory laps based on regular season stats and not playoff success. Wasn't like I said they had to make the Finals. Said we should get more than 5-6 playoff wins and people started walking their "MVP, historically elite" claims back so fast they were almost running lol.

Just keep moving those goal posts. Nobody moves the goal posts like you do Cave...

Again for some reason this is about people claiming victory over you? Like you have some skin in this game? It's such a joke. The best part about this whole thing, is if the Celtics, you know the team people are actually rooting for on this forum, make it to the ECF then you'll have your built in excuse about how you only root for banners because Bird, McHale yada, yada, yada. If they don't make it to the ECF you will actually be happier than a pig in **** because you will lord it over the Celtics' fans on the Celtics' forum. What a win win situation for you.

PS - I never walked my statements back, you can check the thread. Go ahead call me a weak poster again, I am not going to lose any sleep over it, I'll just consider the source.

Writebloc wrote:

Captain_Caveman wrote:

Marvel wrote:
Remember when Dirk got MVP in 06-07 then got bounced in the 1st round to the Warriors? Steve Nash winning b2b MVPs? Both historical poor defenders, great offensive players, both MVPs. Difference is those guys were playing on superior teams. IT is a legit MVP candidate in the same but not so bright and shining light because of this teams flaws.

Well, don't agree. We've seen IT on bad teams and it wasn't like this. This is a well-coached team with a lot of good players on it, and unlike the Mavs, it's not playing in a historically elite conference.

Seems to me that people want to take victory laps based on regular season stats and not playoff success. Wasn't like I said they had to make the Finals. Said we should get more than 5-6 playoff wins and people started walking their "MVP, historically elite" claims back so fast they were almost running lol.

Just keep moving those goal posts. Nobody moves the goal posts like you do Cave...

Again for some reason this is about people claiming victory over you? Like you have some skin in this game? It's such a joke. The best part about this whole thing, is if the Celtics, you know the team people are actually rooting for on this forum, make it to the ECF then you'll have your built in excuse about how you only root for banners because Bird, McHale yada, yada, yada. If they don't make it to the ECF you will actually be happier than a pig in **** because you will lord it over the Celtics' fans on the the Celtics' forum. What a win win situation for you.

PS - I never walked my statements back, you can check the thread. Go ahead call me a weak poster again, I am not going to lose any sleep over it, I'll just consider the source.

No one cares.

When is the last time you saw Jeff Green dive on the floor for a loose ball? Brown shows up every night on defense.

Captain_Caveman wrote:

Writebloc wrote:

Captain_Caveman wrote:
Well, don't agree. We've seen IT on bad teams and it wasn't like this. This is a well-coached team with a lot of good players on it, and unlike the Mavs, it's not playing in a historically elite conference.

Seems to me that people want to take victory laps based on regular season stats and not playoff success. Wasn't like I said they had to make the Finals. Said we should get more than 5-6 playoff wins and people started walking their "MVP, historically elite" claims back so fast they were almost running lol.

Just keep moving those goal posts. Nobody moves the goal posts like you do Cave...

Again for some reason this is about people claiming victory over you? Like you have some skin in this game? It's such a joke. The best part about this whole thing, is if the Celtics, you know the team people are actually rooting for on this forum, make it to the ECF then you'll have your built in excuse about how you only root for banners because Bird, McHale yada, yada, yada. If they don't make it to the ECF you will actually be happier than a pig in **** because you will lord it over the Celtics' fans on the the Celtics' forum. What a win win situation for you.

PS - I never walked my statements back, you can check the thread. Go ahead call me a weak poster again, I am not going to lose any sleep over it, I'll just consider the source.

No one cares.

You do, that's why you quoted...

Writebloc wrote:

Captain_Caveman wrote:

Writebloc wrote:
Just keep moving those goal posts. Nobody moves the goal posts like you do Cave...

Again for some reason this is about people claiming victory over you? Like you have some skin in this game? It's such a joke. The best part about this whole thing, is if the Celtics, you know the team people are actually rooting for on this forum, make it to the ECF then you'll have your built in excuse about how you only root for banners because Bird, McHale yada, yada, yada. If they don't make it to the ECF you will actually be happier than a pig in **** because you will lord it over the Celtics' fans on the the Celtics' forum. What a win win situation for you.

PS - I never walked my statements back, you can check the thread. Go ahead call me a weak poster again, I am not going to lose any sleep over it, I'll just consider the source.

No one cares.

You do, that's why you quoted...

No, it's true. You can get me to reply to you by going personal on me in discussions I am having with other people, but I don't care, and no one else does, either. You are tedious, a bad thinker, totally lacking in sports knowledge, and you post more sarcastic gifs than a 14yo girl.

But your worst offense is being boring. PAINFULLY boring. Like, really, really boring. Every poorly-written post of yours makes me want to go kick a puppy, and I barely even read them.

I have honestly never even considered blocking anyone in ten years posting here, and I am blocking you right now simply because you are such a bad poster that your thoughts make me want to shoot myself in the face with a flare gun. You literally have nothing offer this board and bring absolutely no value to any discussion you are in.

Enjoy writing a reply I will never read.

Have a nice liiiiiiife.

Captain_Caveman wrote:

tlee324 wrote:He far and away has a lower turnover percentage in comparison to other guards with similar usage. It's not close from what I'm seeing. Always willing to see something new here though.

Your attempts to mock my lists of comparable guys was already dead after I pointed out half of them had better Asst-to-TO ratios.

And now we are on to usage, as if those guys like Curry, Paul, Wall, Butler, Walker, Irving, Lillard, Lowry, Conley are spot-up shooters who barely get their touches?

They don't have the level of usage was the whole point I know I said usage from the jump It's not something I just brought in lol.

Thomas has the fifth highest amount of usage in the league with a low turnover percentage especially among guards.

Lmao this thread

Captain_Caveman wrote:

Writebloc wrote:

Captain_Caveman wrote:
No one cares.

You do, that's why you quoted...

No, it's true. You can get me to reply to you by going personal on me in discussions I am having with other people, but I don't care, and no one else does, either. You are tedious, a bad thinker, totally lacking in sports knowledge, and you post more sarcastic gifs than a 14yo girl.

But your worst offense is being boring. PAINFULLY boring. Like, really, really boring. Every poorly-written post of yours makes me want to go kick a puppy, and I barely eve

I can't lie, right at this point I swear you were going to say you barely ever kick puppies.

return2glory wrote:

DoubleHappiness wrote:Middling passer, but overall he has always been efficient on O while being bad on D, with the good outweighing the bad.

Thomas is efficient on O? Is that what we are calling it now? Efficienct? He just had the highest scoring average for a season, for any Celtic since Larry Bird. That's like 30 years. He is 3rd in the league in scoring. 1st in the league in points scored in the 4th quarter. He is second in the league in FT%. He is the only player in the past 60 years to to make 9 or more FTs in a game without a miss, 16 times or more in a single season.

Efficient? More like remarkable, especially for his height.

Whoa whoa whoa. Cool your jets dude. I'm taking the middle ground on this one but let's check out the sentence construction my man. I said he has *always* been efficient. *Efficient* in this case is the adjective with *always* being the adverb. This means I am pro IT having been a positive contributor for his career. It was a response to the people insinuating that Stevens is the sole reason for IT's success (it's not). This season IS remarkable and I'm a huge IT fan.

You all can look up the stats on BBref yourselves. On the other side of the coin is the argument that this year is an outlier at the top. I attribute this to IT being in his absolute prime, and also having spacing. His season was a top ten season this year in the league no doubt, but I was talking about his career as a whole when I called him efficient. I think the answer lies in between both camps, but that shouldn't take away from the fact that this year IT absolutely deserves to be held in high regard and is a huge part of our getting the one seed. I am rooting for him.

He is the only player in the past 60 years to to make 9 or more FTs in a game without a miss, 16 times or more in a single season.

Also, this stat comes off as cherry picking to fit the narrative.

Man, I told myself earlier today I wasn't going to post in this nonsense thread. I should have just woo-sah'd and walked away...

Captain_Caveman wrote:

Banks2Pierce wrote:I agree that IT is the least underrated player on this team and people in general don't seem to realize that defense is at least 40% of a player's impact. Comparing him to prime Monta Ellis and then whining about stats is a good example for someone who really needs stats to help their way through analysis, though.

Brad Stevens could win more games with any of the following in IT's role:

Curry
Westbrook
Harden
Paul
DeRozan
Irving
Butler
Wall
Lillard
Giannis
Klay

Would still win 48+ with any of these guys in IT's role:

Lowry
CJ McCollum
Bradley Beal
Booker
Kemba
Dragic
Conley

Good player. Chill out, already.

Assuming these players were healthy....
If we are just talking about regular season, I agree with everyone on your first list except Kyrie who I would take heading into the playoffs over IT but just in terms of regular season impact on winning not sure Kyrie is capable of doing what IT has done this year. Kyrie had his chances pre Lebron and pretty much failed as a regular season all around performer as far as I am concerned. IT limits turnovers better than Kyrie and while Kyrie at his best is the better defender and is capable of scoring against better competition, I don't think those things are real factors until the playoffs.

Gun to my head I take (if healthy) IT over an 82 game regular season if he is going to perform like this but gun to my head, I take (if healthy) Kyrie in a 7 game playoff series.

I would add Rubio to your second list. Rubio has problems scoring but frankly right now I think Towns is overrated -- offense great for a big but his defense not so good and that hurts since he is a big --, Wiggins correctly rated(no one is expecting him to be a future MVP) and Rubio a bit underrated. Rubio is obviously nowhere near the scorer of IT but he can defend better than most PG's in the NBA and he can pass the ball. And while he can't shoot well from the perimeter with any consistency, he can at least hit his free throws....89% this year....

48 wins is still 5 less than what the Celtics will win with a healthy Rubio replacing IT -- assuming they played the same amount of games, I would be very surprised/frankly shocked with less than 49-50 wins. Call it 48 games since Rubio has missed more games. The games would just be won differently with much more defense and less offense. The Wolves don't win more since they are in the tougher conference and 4-10 their team is much worse than the Celtics.

Admittedly, I am biased against Monta Ellis, for regular season basketball at least I would easily take this version of IT over Ellis. IT just better at not turning the ball over and shooting free throws and 3's. Ellis may have better tools for defense but from what I saw he didn't use them enough to be a major upgrade on that end like a Rubio.

I do agree with the folks who are saying the stats for a lot of these stars nowadays are inflated given the improved spacing. Another reason is with 30 teams, teams are less likely to have 2-3 stars so a great player can simply have the ball in his hand much more. If you have bigs that can shoot 3's, it opens up the court much more for guards who can penetrate. Obviously easier to beat 1 or 2 players in the paint than 2 or 3.

And I do think its very fair to say you were the biggest advocate of the Nets trade paying off big time. I was the biggest advocate of making a trade like that and called for a trade like that before I saw anyone else do it on the forum and it happened exactly how I wanted but I wasn't as optimistic as you on the Nets picks ending up so high. I was simply more conservative projecting the payoff. I incorrectly thought the Nets owner would spend enough money making 3 high lottery picks pretty darn close to impossible. I always thought these 3 last Nets picks had a chance to be great but I never thought it was realistic to have 3 picks in the top 3-4 3 seasons in a row and now that isn't unrealistic.... Even if the Nets improve next year and finish with the 7th or 8th worst record from some good FA signings, obviously with lottery luck the pick could still be top 3.