SoxProspects News
|
|
|
|
Legal
Forum Ground Rules
The views expressed by the members of this Forum do not necessarily reflect the views of SoxProspects, LLC.
© 2003-2024 SoxProspects, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Home | Search | My Profile | Messages | Members | Help |
Welcome Guest. Please Login or Register.
2019 Celtics Offseason Thread
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 24, 2019 7:00:09 GMT -5
If Vucevic’s increased effort on D wasn’t just a contract year thing then he seems to be the best fit for the team this offseason.
He’s turned himself into a stretch 5. Shot over 36%, highest of his career. He had been improving tho and he’s been a good free throw shooter so it should be legit. You definitely down grade on individual defense but he’s one of the best defensive rebounders in the league which would be a huge improvement for the team. Giving up fewer possessions should make up for, maybe more than make up for his individual D. He also had almost 4 assists per game which leads me to believe he’s a decent and willing passer.
Randle on the other hand isn’t nearly as good of a rebounder. He did however hit almost 35% of his 3s and is younger. He’s not as good a free throw shooter though but did average over 3 assists as well.
Considering they use Tatum a lot at the 4 and they drafted Grant Williams and I seem to have big plans for him. They may not feel Randle is the best fit. Assuming they keep him, Semi is another guy they feel can play down low; if they believe his shot is developing more like it looks to be than what the numbers show then they may shy away from a power forward such as Randle in favor of a Center such as Vucevic.
Personally, I prefer Randle due to his age and athleticism and I believe he’s still getting better. He also gets to the line more while taking a similar number of 3s. But if you can get last years Vucevic for the next 4 years that’s going to be a really good fit with the players they have so I get the interest.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 24, 2019 7:02:59 GMT -5
Leaving out the center spot, if the Celtics resigned Terry what would your starting lineup be?
Would he even start?
Should he start? If so, is that only because he can’t play well off the bench versus what the ideal starting lineup would be?
In a vacuum:
Smart - Brown - Hayward - Tatum
Or
Rozier - Brown - Hayward - Tatum
Or
Rozier - Smart - Hayward - Tatum
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 24, 2019 10:54:04 GMT -5
Isn't the first question with Vucevic even can you sign him? The Magic could offer a 5 year max deal. Given the state of both teams you don't have a massive advantage, were not seen as a top contender. They didn't trade him at the deadline. He's in play for sure we have no idea what he wants or what the Magic will do. Like I'm not coming close to offering him a full max level deal! The Magic easily can, they won't have to renounce guys to do it either. So even if he's a top target like reports say, you need a bunch of back up plans because I don't see the Magic just walking away from their best player after finally having a good year.
Second question do you really want to lock yourself into a big money center long-term? Today's NBA is all about small ball and match-ups. Making Vucevic your highest paid player really takes away that ability, he's going to be a 30 plus minute a night guy. While he might have improved his D, he's never been a great defender in my book. Like why are the Thunder and Rockets looking at moving Adams and Capela? In today's NBA playing true centers 30 plus minutes a night limits you. A guy making what Capela makes isn't bad, but if you start getting close to 20 to 25% of your cap space, it limits you.
If you look at what worked during that great run we had in the playoffs it was a great mix of going big with Baynes and Horford, while also a ton of small ball with Horford. Allowed us to create mismatches, get out and run and play a ton of defenders that could switch. Like Vucevic changes the whole system in a major way. Like I want the ability to go big, but I also want the ability to go small also. Who is your small ball center? I don't know if Williams can play that role given his size and athletic ability. How are our slashers going to do with a big center that likes to be in the paint a ton? Like Randle gets assisted on under 50% of his FGs, Vucevic is almost at 65%. Vucevic is much more of an old school type guy, back to the Basket scorer in the post, Randle while he can do that, also he can drive by defenders. He doesn't have to live in the paint as much. He's just a lot more like Horford and the role he played without Irving.
I get the interest, it makes sense. Yet I don't see it as a clear cut best path either. Certainly wouldn't be my first option and frankly given the way Danny does business I wonder about the leaks in information. He's gotta have a ton of guys he's thinking about, yet we get just one name. It almost feels like a leverage play while having trade talks with other teams about centers. Like no way on that price, we'll just sign Vucevic. That might be totally wrong, but if someone knows what Danny is planning why only one name so far? Just like the information about Rozier being a top target is likely so teams don't come out firing offers at Rozier and give Danny time to work. Usually we don't hear a lot from the Celtics side unless Danny wants you to know something.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 24, 2019 11:14:25 GMT -5
You don't sign Rozier unless he's your starter and frankly as a starter he done things Smart never has done. So that's an easy one in my book.
After this past year I would hope Stevens learned his lesson with Hayward. You can't just hand him a starting spot unless he's a different player next year. Right now I'd have him as my 6th man. If he's better make the move, but he needs to earn it. Him sucking and getting major minutes was an issue last year. All the way to the end of the season, he just had no athletic ability to do anything he used to.
Right now I'd say Williams, Williams, Tatum, Brown, and Rozier. Which is why you need bigs. During the playoff run Tatum was a SF most of the time. No way I want him starting at PF. Only when teams go small ball, yet that usually happens as the games go along, not at the start. Even then we played a ton of Horford, Morris, Tatum, Brown and Rozier where Morris played the PF position.
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 24, 2019 11:38:56 GMT -5
Another Steven Adams article today from NESN. Decent player, but he's way overpaid, like he wouldn't get close to his 26 million on the open market right now, he'd be closer to half that. So is this a Danny fallback option to get assets? At the same time it makes no sense for the Thunder to trade a first and Adams for nothing just to lower a luxury tax bill and it has to cost a first even though he's good given how scarce cap space is. I'm just confused by these rumors. Like you can't send them assets and take on that contract with cap space.
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Jun 24, 2019 19:07:08 GMT -5
Came here to talk about Vucevic and find you all have beaten me to it. He is a poor mans Joker and even being older I would go get him for reasonable money so who knows what that is.
Just remember, almost every player who has played for Stevens has had some of their best years if not their very best years. Get Vucezic to buy in on D and that is a big problem solved for the C's. He can stretch, he can pass and he is a top D rebounder which always gets the C's in trouble.
The C's have obviously taken a step back but I am looking forward to seeing how they react next year. They could end up being very good. Liking the upside of the draft.
Hoping also to see a big jump for Robert Williams, it is possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 25, 2019 4:36:03 GMT -5
Horford just got a max deal with the Celtics 3 years ago. Vucevic is a different player, but he's worth 20 million a year easy. I don't know how you can point to Vucevic and say how he limits you when Horford was a max salary guy who didn't limit you at any point and he was making more.
I don't know why the magic would give him a max deal. He's not that kind of player, and if they do, then let him stay with the Magic. Move onto the next guy.
I want Randle and DLo Russell first, but Vucevic is a great alternative if plan A and plan B goes to crap on you.
|
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Jun 25, 2019 5:52:58 GMT -5
I bet Vucevic gets at least 25 million, look at the numbers and they compare pretty well.
|
|
|
|
Post by pedrofanforever45 on Jun 25, 2019 5:55:53 GMT -5
I bet Vucevic gets at least 25 million, look at the numbers and they compare pretty well. 25 million is a tougher call. I would still try for the young kids with DLo Russell and Randle first, but ultimately, I guess I would bite at that price and go in on Vucevic for that money if there's no better alternatives. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 25, 2019 7:15:23 GMT -5
Isn't the first question with Vucevic even can you sign him? The Magic could offer a 5 year max deal. Given the state of both teams you don't have a massive advantage, were not seen as a top contender. They didn't trade him at the deadline. He's in play for sure we have no idea what he wants or what the Magic will do. Like I'm not coming close to offering him a full max level deal! The Magic easily can, they won't have to renounce guys to do it either. So even if he's a top target like reports say, you need a bunch of back up plans because I don't see the Magic just walking away from their best player after finally having a good year. Second question do you really want to lock yourself into a big money center long-term? Today's NBA is all about small ball and match-ups. Making Vucevic your highest paid player really takes away that ability, he's going to be a 30 plus minute a night guy. While he might have improved his D, he's never been a great defender in my book. Like why are the Thunder and Rockets looking at moving Adams and Capela? In today's NBA playing true centers 30 plus minutes a night limits you. A guy making what Capela makes isn't bad, but if you start getting close to 20 to 25% of your cap space, it limits you. If you look at what worked during that great run we had in the playoffs it was a great mix of going big with Baynes and Horford, while also a ton of small ball with Horford. Allowed us to create mismatches, get out and run and play a ton of defenders that could switch. Like Vucevic changes the whole system in a major way. Like I want the ability to go big, but I also want the ability to go small also. Who is your small ball center? I don't know if Williams can play that role given his size and athletic ability. How are our slashers going to do with a big center that likes to be in the paint a ton? Like Randle gets assisted on under 50% of his FGs, Vucevic is almost at 65%. Vucevic is much more of an old school type guy, back to the Basket scorer in the post, Randle while he can do that, also he can drive by defenders. He doesn't have to live in the paint as much. He's just a lot more like Horford and the role he played without Irving. I get the interest, it makes sense. Yet I don't see it as a clear cut best path either. Certainly wouldn't be my first option and frankly given the way Danny does business I wonder about the leaks in information. He's gotta have a ton of guys he's thinking about, yet we get just one name. It almost feels like a leverage play while having trade talks with other teams about centers. Like no way on that price, we'll just sign Vucevic. That might be totally wrong, but if someone knows what Danny is planning why only one name so far? Just like the information about Rozier being a top target is likely so teams don't come out firing offers at Rozier and give Danny time to work. Usually we don't hear a lot from the Celtics side unless Danny wants you to know something. I just want to be clear when I’m talking about a Vucevic I’m just making an argument as to what the Celtics could be thinking or seeing. I don’t want this to turn into a “he’s my guy argument”. I think the first question always is if you can sign a guy. So that kind of goes without saying. It’s certainly fair to question if the money is worth it, no doubt. It’s just off base to compare him to Capela and Adams though. Adams and Capela both averaged 0 threes per game. Vuc, averaged the same as Horford and shot pretty much the same percentage. He’s turned himself into a stretch 5. The fact he has a really strong post up game doesn’t change that. It just gives you the option to do both. In other words he’s not a lane clogger in any way like the other 2 guys are and like Robert Williams likely is. What I question most about him is the number of shots he’s used to getting. I like his post game, I like his ability to stretch the floor and I love he’s one of the premier defensive rebounders in the game. We can use all that. I just don’t like that he’s used to getting 15-17 shots a game. Al was perfect in his ability to not take many shots, pick his spots and still be efficient there. Where he was less than perfect was the rebounding department and we did feel that at times. |
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,044
|
Post by mobaz on Jun 25, 2019 8:42:54 GMT -5
My priority would be Russell, but I really don't know how you fill out the bigs rotation. Anyone know what they could have gotten if they renounced Rozier but had kept Baynes? Would that have been enough for a Randle/Russell max? Because Baynes is who you'd want on a team like that.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 25, 2019 9:20:57 GMT -5
He's not one (typically) for reporting rumors but Keith Smith said that there is chatter that Brodgon, Satoransky and my guy* Bryant are C's targets.
Note - this is in the context of the suggestion that Boston could go the route of offering to RFAs like Brooklyn did following the KG/Pierce deal.
* To be clear, Bryant isn't my guy but I've mentioned him as a possibility. Who is and who isn't "my guy" is an utterly useless discussion imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 25, 2019 9:23:56 GMT -5
Keeping Rozier (but not Baynes) would result in 25.8 in Cap Space. Renouncing Rozier would result in 34.
If they had kept Baynes and renounced Rozier, they'd have 29.5.
I think those numbers are correct (close if not).
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,044
|
Post by mobaz on Jun 25, 2019 10:35:27 GMT -5
Keeping Rozier (but not Baynes) would result in 25.8 in Cap Space. Renouncing Rozier would result in 34. If they had kept Baynes and renounced Rozier, they'd have 29.5. I think those numbers are correct (close if not). Found this estimate for Max contracts: A player signing with a new team (5% annual raises, up to four years): Year 6 years or less 7-9 years 10+ years
2019/20 $27,250,000 $32,700,000 $38,150,000 2020/21 $28,612,500 $34,335,000 $40,057,500 2021/22 $29,975,000 $35,970,000 $41,965,000 2022/23 $31,337,500 $37,605,000 $43,872,500 Total $117,175,000 $140,610,000 $164,045,000
So MAYBE could have maxed a Russell/Randle just by renouncing Rozier. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 25, 2019 12:02:13 GMT -5
Stein reporting that C's are "emerging as a stealth suitor for Kemba Walker"
|
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,044
|
Post by mobaz on Jun 25, 2019 12:27:36 GMT -5
Stein reporting that C's are "emerging as a stealth suitor for Kemba Walker" That was a natural possibility once they renounced Baynes since he's in that second max range. I like him in concept. Still have no idea about big man rotation and depth. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 25, 2019 12:43:07 GMT -5
As Keith Smith points out, Boston playing with a scoring guard, a bunch of wings that are all interchangeable and 1 big who just screens, blocks and plays D is a very Brad Stevens team.
Of course, who that big is would remain to be seen.
Not that it helps answer that question (not in a starting 5 anyway) but Boston COULD keep the hold for Theis and still have enough room to sign Kemba to a max deal (assuming, of course, that Rozier is renounced)
EDIT - They would have the MLE ($4M or so) and veteran exceptions to find that big that Keith describes but that's not a ton, of course. Meanwhile they'd probably want to save some room to sign, at least, Carsen Edwards.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 25, 2019 12:44:41 GMT -5
This is going to sound completely insane and I’m not sure I buy it but long term is Brogdon even if over paid make more sense than Kemba?
Kemba is better no question but Brogdon is very efficient and doesn’t require a lot of touches. Are we going young trying to turn the team over to Brown and Tatum or not? Brogdon can also switch around on D better. If you maxed him, renounce Rozier. Then you still have 2 solid size salary slots for bigs.
Just a thought
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 25, 2019 12:46:30 GMT -5
By the way, I think Charlotte would be dumb to max out Kemba or sign him at all, but they should have traded him and I think Kemba unless given the super max is silly to stay in Charlotte. But it appears Charlotte wants to sign him and Kemba has said he’d take less to stay so I don’t know what’s up.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 25, 2019 12:47:48 GMT -5
This is going to sound completely insane and I’m not sure I buy it but long term is Brogdon even if over paid make more sense than Kemba? Kemba is better no question but Brogdon is very efficient and doesn’t require a lot of touches. Are we going young trying to turn the team over to Brown and Tatum or not? Brogdon can also switch around on D better. If you maxed him, renounce Rozier. Then you still have 2 solid size salary slots for bigs. Just a thought I get what you mean. If you're brining in Kemba, I wonder if you would try and package Brown in a deal for a big. Not sure who is out there that would make sense admittedly. Capela would fit the description of the big that Keith refers to but is the deal really a fit for either team? I haven't done the math but would it even work financially? Not sure. EDIT - Only meant this as an additional thought to the same point of adding a high volume player to a team that already has high volume (or projected) high volume players. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jun 25, 2019 12:53:53 GMT -5
This is going to sound completely insane and I’m not sure I buy it but long term is Brogdon even if over paid make more sense than Kemba? Kemba is better no question but Brogdon is very efficient and doesn’t require a lot of touches. Are we going young trying to turn the team over to Brown and Tatum or not? Brogdon can also switch around on D better. If you maxed him, renounce Rozier. Then you still have 2 solid size salary slots for bigs. Just a thought I get what you mean. If you're brining in Kemba, I wonder if you would try and package Brown in a deal for a big. Not sure who is out there that would make sense admittedly. Capela would fit the description of the big that Keith refers to but is the deal really a fit for either team? I haven't done the math but would it even work financially? Not sure. EDIT - Only meant this as an additional thought to the same point of adding a high volume player to a team that already has high volume (or projected) high volume players. The math doesn’t work in a Brown for a Capela deal when neither team has space |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 25, 2019 12:54:08 GMT -5
By the way, I think Charlotte would be dumb to max out Kemba or sign him at all, but they should have traded him and I think Kemba unless given the super max is silly to stay in Charlotte. But it appears Charlotte wants to sign him and Kemba has said he’d take less to stay so I don’t know what’s up. Always thought the Kemba takes less comment (yes, by Kemba himself) was silly. If you take all the guaranteed contracts plus the hold for Washington, his $18M hold puts them 8.8 OVER the salary cap. A full max puts them at or close to the Luxury cap which, I think changes the exception they can use. But other than that, unless there is a trade for them to make, Kemba taking a discount does nothing but leave money on the table. Doesn't really help their ability to improve around him. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 25, 2019 12:54:48 GMT -5
Horford just got a max deal with the Celtics 3 years ago. Vucevic is a different player, but he's worth 20 million a year easy. I don't know how you can point to Vucevic and say how he limits you when Horford was a max salary guy who didn't limit you at any point and he was making more. I don't know why the magic would give him a max deal. He's not that kind of player, and if they do, then let him stay with the Magic. Move onto the next guy. I want Randle and DLo Russell first, but Vucevic is a great alternative if plan A and plan B goes to crap on you. It locks you into playing a center 30 plus minutes a night, in a league where more and more teams aren't doing that. Horford could play PF and small ball center, it's night and day. Horford has rated as a top defender for years, Vucevic only has one year of rating well, which was last year. I don't know maybe because they are the Magic and can't attract free agents. Haven't been good in so long, just finished above .500 and Vucevic was their best player that just made the All-Star team. I don't think he's close to a max guy, but the NBA overpays a ton of players. Heck reports say Horford is getting four years 112 million at his age. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jun 25, 2019 12:54:56 GMT -5
I get what you mean. If you're brining in Kemba, I wonder if you would try and package Brown in a deal for a big. Not sure who is out there that would make sense admittedly. Capela would fit the description of the big that Keith refers to but is the deal really a fit for either team? I haven't done the math but would it even work financially? Not sure. EDIT - Only meant this as an additional thought to the same point of adding a high volume player to a team that already has high volume (or projected) high volume players. The math doesn’t work in a Brown for a Capela deal when neither team has space Sorry. Thought the 'filler' would be assumed. My fault. Brown, Guerschon, RWilliams and Semi get you within the amount needed. Granted, are Semi and RWill just filler or are you now giving up too much. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jun 25, 2019 13:57:21 GMT -5
Isn't the first question with Vucevic even can you sign him? The Magic could offer a 5 year max deal. Given the state of both teams you don't have a massive advantage, were not seen as a top contender. They didn't trade him at the deadline. He's in play for sure we have no idea what he wants or what the Magic will do. Like I'm not coming close to offering him a full max level deal! The Magic easily can, they won't have to renounce guys to do it either. So even if he's a top target like reports say, you need a bunch of back up plans because I don't see the Magic just walking away from their best player after finally having a good year. Second question do you really want to lock yourself into a big money center long-term? Today's NBA is all about small ball and match-ups. Making Vucevic your highest paid player really takes away that ability, he's going to be a 30 plus minute a night guy. While he might have improved his D, he's never been a great defender in my book. Like why are the Thunder and Rockets looking at moving Adams and Capela? In today's NBA playing true centers 30 plus minutes a night limits you. A guy making what Capela makes isn't bad, but if you start getting close to 20 to 25% of your cap space, it limits you. If you look at what worked during that great run we had in the playoffs it was a great mix of going big with Baynes and Horford, while also a ton of small ball with Horford. Allowed us to create mismatches, get out and run and play a ton of defenders that could switch. Like Vucevic changes the whole system in a major way. Like I want the ability to go big, but I also want the ability to go small also. Who is your small ball center? I don't know if Williams can play that role given his size and athletic ability. How are our slashers going to do with a big center that likes to be in the paint a ton? Like Randle gets assisted on under 50% of his FGs, Vucevic is almost at 65%. Vucevic is much more of an old school type guy, back to the Basket scorer in the post, Randle while he can do that, also he can drive by defenders. He doesn't have to live in the paint as much. He's just a lot more like Horford and the role he played without Irving. I get the interest, it makes sense. Yet I don't see it as a clear cut best path either. Certainly wouldn't be my first option and frankly given the way Danny does business I wonder about the leaks in information. He's gotta have a ton of guys he's thinking about, yet we get just one name. It almost feels like a leverage play while having trade talks with other teams about centers. Like no way on that price, we'll just sign Vucevic. That might be totally wrong, but if someone knows what Danny is planning why only one name so far? Just like the information about Rozier being a top target is likely so teams don't come out firing offers at Rozier and give Danny time to work. Usually we don't hear a lot from the Celtics side unless Danny wants you to know something. I just want to be clear when I’m talking about a Vucevic I’m just making an argument as to what the Celtics could be thinking or seeing. I don’t want this to turn into a “he’s my guy argument”. I think the first question always is if you can sign a guy. So that kind of goes without saying. It’s certainly fair to question if the money is worth it, no doubt. It’s just off base to compare him to Capela and Adams though. Adams and Capela both averaged 0 threes per game. Vuc, averaged the same as Horford and shot pretty much the same percentage. He’s turned himself into a stretch 5. The fact he has a really strong post up game doesn’t change that. It just gives you the option to do both. In other words he’s not a lane clogger in any way like the other 2 guys are and like Robert Williams likely is. What I question most about him is the number of shots he’s used to getting. I like his post game, I like his ability to stretch the floor and I love he’s one of the premier defensive rebounders in the game. We can use all that. I just don’t like that he’s used to getting 15-17 shots a game. Al was perfect in his ability to not take many shots, pick his spots and still be efficient there. Where he was less than perfect was the rebounding department and we did feel that at times. I only brought up those guys to show how teams are valuing centers. You need to make a change, get rid of the center because it can limit you. Just because a guy can stretch the floor doesn't change that, it certainly helps. Yet going small ball isn't just about adding a shooter either, it's about creating mismatches and forcing teams to play different ways, in different lineups. Example Embiid is a great player, yet Horford's ability to guard him and allow us to go small meant we could take away their shooters in a way other teams couldn't without Embiid killing them. They couldn't do anything about it, which is why they decided to redo that team, get guys that can score one on one and not just shooters. They call today's NBA position less Basketball, yet a true center locks you into traditional Basketball. For a guy like Embiid you do everything to make that work. I'm not rushing to lock the Celtics into that for a guy 1/3 as good as Embiid if we have other Options. At a certain point it might make sense given lack of options and what it takes to sign him. I just have a hard time thinking he's Danny's first option. One of the reasons Horford didn't rebound well at times was the way they used him and the way he plays. Things Vucevic can't do. Like Horford could help create offense from the top of the three point line, Vucevic does it in the post. I don't care about made three's or attempts, Vucevic lives in the post in a way Horford never did for us. He won't be as good of a rebounder if he played like Horford. Yet Horford switching on D so much made us very good on D, yet hurt his rebounding numbers. Which is why we needed to play a guy like Baynes more with him. Not 30 plus minutes a night, but sometimes like against the Bucks we hardly played those two together. Heck they didn't play much together most of the year, which was a massive difference from the prior year and it showed in our D and rebounding. Steven's just went small ball most of the year so he could play Hayward major minutes. I don't think rim running centers clog the lane if used correctly setting screens and rolling to the rim. Not like low post centers always in the paint calling for the ball. Capela didn't stop Houston from going to the Basket a ton. That's the advantage of a super athletic big like Capela, he could set screens and then quickly get to the Basket in a way most centers can't. Yet without Irving and Horford I'm not really interested in Capela anymore. Even though I'd love our D with him on the team. A guy like Williams can play 10 minutes or 25 based on match up. Which is perfect for today's NBA. We won't be a true title contender next year so let's given Williams the minutes and find out what we have. If his upside is what I think it is he could be huge for us, which kinda comes back to not wanting to lock up a center long-term also. Maybe I'm too high on Williams, yet he really impressed me last year. Like get the guy some playing time and experience because he looks like a rebounding, defensive, shot blocking beast in the making. Watching him block Anthony Davis multiple times in a game was a joy to watch. Like how many times has that happened to Davis? |
|
|
