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 Jul 15, 2019 12:16:45 GMT -5
I think that Grant Williams will be considered a top 10 pick from this draft in future comparisons, probably higher. It seems like his floor is going to be pretty high. Edwards also seems like he will contribute way above his draft slot. Langford could be the wildcard, highest ceiling, lowest floor. Maybe if it turns out to be a poor draft but Williams is going to be limited. I’m excited about him, but in a he’s a good player kind of way, not that he’s a borderline all-star sort of way. His value will come a lot from him knowing his role and being an ultimate team player not from being able to take over games. |
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Jul 15, 2019 12:46:33 GMT -5
Maybe if it turns out to be a poor draft but Williams is going to be limited. I’m excited about him, but in a he’s a good player kind of way, not that he’s a borderline all-star sort of way. His value will come a lot from him knowing his role and being an ultimate team player not from being able to take over games. So just like Al Horford then, that's fine. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 15, 2019 12:52:36 GMT -5
The thing to remember is Langford is a one and done guy. Williams and Edwards played three years of College Ball. Still Langford scored more per game as a freshman than those two with an hand injury. He has size that will allow him to be a two way player. So I'm not sure his floor is the lowest.
Gotta be careful using summer league as a gauge, as it favors guards and experienced players
|
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 15, 2019 12:57:10 GMT -5
Maybe if it turns out to be a poor draft but Williams is going to be limited. I’m excited about him, but in a he’s a good player kind of way, not that he’s a borderline all-star sort of way. His value will come a lot from him knowing his role and being an ultimate team player not from being able to take over games. So just like Al Horford then, that's fine. Come on Don I know you really didn't like Horford, but the guys a borderline HOF type player that has made a ton of all-star teams. I'm a big Williams fan but I don't see that, he's just not athletic enough. |
|
|
|
Post by sarasoxer on Jul 15, 2019 13:21:05 GMT -5
I think that Grant Williams will be considered a top 10 pick from this draft in future comparisons, probably higher. It seems like his floor is going to be pretty high. Edwards also seems like he will contribute way above his draft slot. Langford could be the wildcard, highest ceiling, lowest floor. Maybe if it turns out to be a poor draft but Williams is going to be limited. I’m excited about him, but in a he’s a good player kind of way, not that he’s a borderline all-star sort of way. His value will come a lot from him knowing his role and being an ultimate team player not from being able to take over games. I agree with you having watched all of 4 summer league games..He looks heady and practiced ..cerebral. He has trouble finishing at the rim as he does not have long arms nor is he an explosive leaper. He will be a serviceable dirt dog. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 15, 2019 14:40:16 GMT -5
Cs ended up stretching Yabu. They did this to give Poirier more than the minimum (using space)
|
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Jul 15, 2019 14:41:56 GMT -5
Come on Don I know you really didn't like Horford, but the guys a borderline HOF type player that has made a ton of all-star teams. I'm a big Williams fan but I don't see that, he's just not athletic enough. Al is a really good player and his game is just so polished. He's great on defense and really solid on offense. I also think he's considerably overrated, he's the NBA version of Derek Jeter. Is he still really good? Yeah, but it just irks me that people need to get abstract to wax philosophical about his awesomeness. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 15, 2019 14:59:42 GMT -5
So you're not an advanced stats guy. Even then I don't know how you think he's overrated after watching him in last year's playoffs. He's not Jeter, no one thinks he's elite, more like a top 20-30 guy. Which he has easily been for years. He's the anti Irving and frankly a more impactful player. You just didn't see it in the raw stats in our system. I'd compare Irving to Jeter, that fits better. Has those crazy good stats, but his overall effect on the game doesn't match the hype. If anything I think Horford has been underrated for his career.
Still think your main issue is Stevens, not Horford. Steven's played him at center too much and didn't post him up much when Irving played. It was the big difference in last year's playoffs, Horford on the box more.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 15, 2019 15:27:39 GMT -5
Per Keith Smith, it went like this:
1. Signed Carsen Edwards (1.2m in Yr 1 hit) using space
2. Waived/Stretched Yabu
3. Signed Vincent Poirier (2.3M in Yr 1) using space
4. They have 1.1 they can use before signing Theis using his Bird Rights.
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 15, 2019 17:17:55 GMT -5
Per Keith Smith, it went like this: 1. Signed Carsen Edwards (1.2m in Yr 1 hit) using space 2. Waived/Stretched Yabu 3. Signed Vincent Poirier (2.3M in Yr 1) using space 4. They have 1.1 they can use before signing Theis using his Bird Rights. I can’t decide if I like Keith Smith. I feel like he’s kind of an idiot. As a side note |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 15, 2019 17:32:18 GMT -5
Per Keith Smith, it went like this: 1. Signed Carsen Edwards (1.2m in Yr 1 hit) using space 2. Waived/Stretched Yabu 3. Signed Vincent Poirier (2.3M in Yr 1) using space 4. They have 1.1 they can use before signing Theis using his Bird Rights. I can’t decide if I like Keith Smith. I feel like he’s kind of an idiot. As a side note In what way? That his numbers are wrong? |
|
|
|
Post by voiceofreason on Jul 15, 2019 17:54:04 GMT -5
I think that Grant Williams will be considered a top 10 pick from this draft in future comparisons, probably higher. It seems like his floor is going to be pretty high. Edwards also seems like he will contribute way above his draft slot. Langford could be the wildcard, highest ceiling, lowest floor. Maybe if it turns out to be a poor draft but Williams is going to be limited. I’m excited about him, but in a he’s a good player kind of way, not that he’s a borderline all-star sort of way. His value will come a lot from him knowing his role and being an ultimate team player not from being able to take over games. I kind of agree with you but I think Williams will have a longer career of being a real contributor in a way that stats don't always capture. Like Marcus he will contribute winning types of plays. He will be defined as a strong contributor on a winning team. Also don't forget he was the 2 time Sec POY, that isn't tiddlywinks. Edwards could be our microwave. |
|
|
|
Post by Don Caballero on Jul 15, 2019 18:11:09 GMT -5
So you're not an advanced stats guy. Even then I don't know how you think he's overrated after watching him in last year's playoffs. He's not Jeter, no one thinks he's elite, more like a top 20-30 guy. Which he has easily been for years. He's the anti Irving and frankly a more impactful player. You just didn't see it in the raw stats in our system. I'd compare Irving to Jeter, that fits better. Has those crazy good stats, but his overall effect on the game doesn't match the hype. If anything I think Horford has been underrated for his career. Still think your main issue is Stevens, not Horford. Steven's played him at center too much and didn't post him up much when Irving played. It was the big difference in last year's playoffs, Horford on the box more. I wouldn't say I'm a huge stats guy, but I'm mindful of them. I know Horford was really good, I just disagree with the notion that he was elite. IMO he's a step below that. Like I said, you need to get really abstract to defend Horford as a star (let alone as a HOFer), which to me just tells me that his actual production doesn't match what people have idealized out of him. And his mental game is frustrating. He'll do that big block against Giannis and then vanish for most of the series. I'm officially a broken record here, but he's a small baller. Kyrie at least will always have that Finals winning shot. Al Horford has a bunch of muscle flexing moves but not a lot of actual signature games. I have a bit of an issue with how Stevens used Horford and it's not like I think Horford wasn't really good. I just can't see the greatness. I see moments of it, but not a consistent body of work to match them. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 15, 2019 19:23:31 GMT -5
I can’t decide if I like Keith Smith. I feel like he’s kind of an idiot. As a side note In what way? That his numbers are wrong? In the way that I feel like he gets a lot of details wrong with stuff. Feels sloppy. |
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 15, 2019 20:58:43 GMT -5
Cs have rescinded Theis QO but retain his EB rights.
Sounds like this will give them a little more than the minimum to sign another player.
Speculation is that they may give Waters a full deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by texs31 on Jul 15, 2019 21:03:13 GMT -5
In what way? That his numbers are wrong? In the way that I feel like he gets a lot of details wrong with stuff. Feels sloppy. Having followed him for a while now, I think that's a product of what hes trying to do (give an estimate of how much a team really has in space given commitments not just official deals). This requires some assumptions/estimates which he clearly caveats. Pincus, for example, only shows completed deals and that has it's own merit. Smith projects in attempt to show what teams can do as the offseason moves along given deals that have been agreed to. That's myvread anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 16, 2019 7:15:17 GMT -5
So you're not an advanced stats guy. Even then I don't know how you think he's overrated after watching him in last year's playoffs. He's not Jeter, no one thinks he's elite, more like a top 20-30 guy. Which he has easily been for years. He's the anti Irving and frankly a more impactful player. You just didn't see it in the raw stats in our system. I'd compare Irving to Jeter, that fits better. Has those crazy good stats, but his overall effect on the game doesn't match the hype. If anything I think Horford has been underrated for his career. Still think your main issue is Stevens, not Horford. Steven's played him at center too much and didn't post him up much when Irving played. It was the big difference in last year's playoffs, Horford on the box more. I wouldn't say I'm a huge stats guy, but I'm mindful of them. I know Horford was really good, I just disagree with the notion that he was elite. IMO he's a step below that. Like I said, you need to get really abstract to defend Horford as a star (let alone as a HOFer), which to me just tells me that his actual production doesn't match what people have idealized out of him. And his mental game is frustrating. He'll do that big block against Giannis and then vanish for most of the series. I'm officially a broken record here, but he's a small baller. Kyrie at least will always have that Finals winning shot. Al Horford has a bunch of muscle flexing moves but not a lot of actual signature games. I have a bit of an issue with how Stevens used Horford and it's not like I think Horford wasn't really good. I just can't see the greatness. I see moments of it, but not a consistent body of work to match them. I really hate how you look at him and frankly players in general. It's all about big plays or big games. You overlook the value of Horford's D and team play because it's not an easy to see boxscore stat. Like you notice his worth next year when our D struggles and we don't have a huge advantage playing small ball. It's like you're arguing that the value of D is abstract and that's kinda crazy in today's advanced stats age. He's rated as one of the best defenders in the NBA for years and years litterally by all metrics. You can have your Irving's that have some big games and just as many where he litterally kills the team. I'll take guys like Horford all day long over that. Who ever said he was elite? For me elite in the NBA are Superstars, not All-Stars and there are very few elite players in my book. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 16, 2019 7:18:26 GMT -5
Cs have rescinded Theis QO but retain his EB rights. Sounds like this will give them a little more than the minimum to sign another player. Speculation is that they may give Waters a full deal. Well you can only give more than the minimum to a rookie right? 1.1 million isn't more than a year two veteran minimum is it? |
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,048
|
Post by mobaz on Jul 16, 2019 7:38:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 16, 2019 7:39:33 GMT -5
I wouldn't say I'm a huge stats guy, but I'm mindful of them. I know Horford was really good, I just disagree with the notion that he was elite. IMO he's a step below that. Like I said, you need to get really abstract to defend Horford as a star (let alone as a HOFer), which to me just tells me that his actual production doesn't match what people have idealized out of him. And his mental game is frustrating. He'll do that big block against Giannis and then vanish for most of the series. I'm officially a broken record here, but he's a small baller. Kyrie at least will always have that Finals winning shot. Al Horford has a bunch of muscle flexing moves but not a lot of actual signature games. I have a bit of an issue with how Stevens used Horford and it's not like I think Horford wasn't really good. I just can't see the greatness. I see moments of it, but not a consistent body of work to match them. I really hate how you look at him and frankly players in general. It's all about big plays or big games. You overlook the value of Horford's D and team play because it's not an easy to see boxscore stat. Like you notice his worth next year when our D struggles and we don't have a huge advantage playing small ball. It's like you're arguing that the value of D is abstract and that's kinda crazy in today's advanced stats age. He's rated as one of the best defenders in the NBA for years and years litterally by all metrics. You can have your Irving's that have some big games and just as many where he litterally kills the team. I'll take guys like Horford all day long over that. Who ever said he was elite? For me elite in the NBA are Superstars, not All-Stars and there are very few elite players in my book. You said he was borderline HOF which would indicate he was an elite player at some point in time. Unless the HOF isn’t for the elite players. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 16, 2019 7:43:37 GMT -5
In the way that I feel like he gets a lot of details wrong with stuff. Feels sloppy. Having followed him for a while now, I think that's a product of what hes trying to do (give an estimate of how much a team really has in space given commitments not just official deals). This requires some assumptions/estimates which he clearly caveats. Pincus, for example, only shows completed deals and that has it's own merit. Smith projects in attempt to show what teams can do as the offseason moves along given deals that have been agreed to. That's myvread anyway. I understand he tweets a ton and that’s basically my experience with him, and this is total feel on my part, but over time I’ve come to take his tweets with a grain of salt. That typically happens when you turn out to be wrong a bunch or when you tweet things enough that I, as a non expert, have already figured out to be incorrect. I tend to get annoyed when I know something a guy who’s career it is to know doesn’t. Like I said, initially. I don’t know how I feel about him. I read his tweets all the time but I’ve started to get annoyed by him and haven’t totally figured it out. |
|
mobaz
Veteran
Posts: 3,048
|
Post by mobaz on Jul 16, 2019 8:02:56 GMT -5
I really hate how you look at him and frankly players in general. It's all about big plays or big games. You overlook the value of Horford's D and team play because it's not an easy to see boxscore stat. Like you notice his worth next year when our D struggles and we don't have a huge advantage playing small ball. It's like you're arguing that the value of D is abstract and that's kinda crazy in today's advanced stats age. He's rated as one of the best defenders in the NBA for years and years litterally by all metrics. You can have your Irving's that have some big games and just as many where he litterally kills the team. I'll take guys like Horford all day long over that. Who ever said he was elite? For me elite in the NBA are Superstars, not All-Stars and there are very few elite players in my book. You said he was borderline HOF which would indicate he was an elite player at some point in time. Unless the HOF isn’t for the elite players. Mitch Richmond is in the Hall of Fame... That dude ruins it for me. He's the Jack Morris of basketball. |
|
|
|
Post by rjp313jr on Jul 16, 2019 9:27:26 GMT -5
You said he was borderline HOF which would indicate he was an elite player at some point in time. Unless the HOF isn’t for the elite players. Mitch Richmond is in the Hall of Fame... That dude ruins it for me. He's the Jack Morris of basketball. I get it but Richmond is 43rd on the career scoring list at 21ppg. Everyone ahead of him is either active, in the HOF or only played 6 years (Geoff Petrie). He was an all-around scorer. Could drive, slash and shoot from deep. Got to the line, was clutch. Was All-NBA 5 times. And if you ask the players he played against like Jordan they’ll tell you he was one of the best players of their era. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 16, 2019 11:47:55 GMT -5
I really hate how you look at him and frankly players in general. It's all about big plays or big games. You overlook the value of Horford's D and team play because it's not an easy to see boxscore stat. Like you notice his worth next year when our D struggles and we don't have a huge advantage playing small ball. It's like you're arguing that the value of D is abstract and that's kinda crazy in today's advanced stats age. He's rated as one of the best defenders in the NBA for years and years litterally by all metrics. You can have your Irving's that have some big games and just as many where he litterally kills the team. I'll take guys like Horford all day long over that. Who ever said he was elite? For me elite in the NBA are Superstars, not All-Stars and there are very few elite players in my book. You said he was borderline HOF which would indicate he was an elite player at some point in time. Unless the HOF isn’t for the elite players. Define elite, for me that is true Superstar type guys and no the HOF isn't just for those guys. |
|
|
|
Post by umassgrad2005 on Jul 16, 2019 11:57:34 GMT -5
Mitch Richmond is in the Hall of Fame... That dude ruins it for me. He's the Jack Morris of basketball. I get it but Richmond is 43rd on the career scoring list at 21ppg. Everyone ahead of him is either active, in the HOF or only played 6 years (Geoff Petrie). He was an all-around scorer. Could drive, slash and shoot from deep. Got to the line, was clutch. Was All-NBA 5 times. And if you ask the players he played against like Jordan they’ll tell you he was one of the best players of their era. I hate looking at scoring, it's like using wins to judge a pitcher. Little stat Horford has 85.7 career win shares in 786 games, Richmond has 79.3 in 976 games. Richmond never once posted a positive defensive plus minus box score in a single season and 80% of his value was offense. Horford's value is like 40 plus percent D, but as the win shares show it has a massive impact on winning. We've come so far with Baseball, yet it's like Basketball is still stuck in the past with advanced stats Richmond is like a lesser Melo type player. If that's the bar, it isn't very high for the HOF. |
|
|
