CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: Tr1boy on February 13, 2018, 04:57:26 PM
-
Kyrie performance so far = B or B+ . He is playing as advertised, though I thought he could do more...or show something different outside of Lebrons shadow
It will be interesting what happens after next season or even this upcoming offseason (the type of money Smart, Rozier will receive etc) that could determine how much money the Celts will throw at Kyrie in 2020-2021
-
No worries, since he is not eligible for the supermax...at least not until he is a 10+ year veteran. A supermax is nothing more than 35% of the salary cap. Players that are eligible need to be drafted by the team offering it AND need to make an All-NBA team the year before signing the contract.
What he will be eligible for is a Horford/Hayward type contract (30% of salary cap), but with a 5th year option. That seems reasonable for Kyrie and something he would no doubt get on the open market.
-
No worries, since he is not eligible for the supermax...at least not until he is a 10+ year veteran. A supermax is nothing more than 35% of the salary cap. Players that are eligible need to be drafted by the team offering it AND need to make an All-NBA team the year before signing the contract.
What he will be eligible for is a Horford/Hayward type contract (30% of salary cap), but with a 5th year option. That seems reasonable for Kyrie and something he would no doubt get on the open market.
thanks.
I didn't know all those criteria had to be met
so 10 years, stay with the team that drafted them and make an all nba squad the season prior?
-
No worries, since he is not eligible for the supermax...at least not until he is a 10+ year veteran. A supermax is nothing more than 35% of the salary cap. Players that are eligible need to be drafted by the team offering it AND need to make an All-NBA team the year before signing the contract.
What he will be eligible for is a Horford/Hayward type contract (30% of salary cap), but with a 5th year option. That seems reasonable for Kyrie and something he would no doubt get on the open market.
thanks.
I didn't know all those criteria had to be met
so 10 years, stay with the team that drafted them and make an all nba squad the season prior?
At 10 years any player is essentially eligible for the 'supermax'.
The other two criteria are required if a player wants to sign for 35% prior to the 10 year mark.
EDIT: I figured I should extrapolate on a few distinctions:
-Player needs to be drafted by original team or obtained by a team while still on rookie contract
AND
-Player needs to have made an All-NBA team in the previous year or 2 of the last 3 OR
Player needs to be DPOY in the previous year or 2 of the last 3 OR
Player needs to have been MVP in 1 of the last 3 years.
Since it is uncommon for such a player to be moved on a rookie contract and a player who is DPOY/MVP is almost always All-NBA, these details often get left out.
-
So AFTER next season, when Kyrie hits FA, what's the max-extension we can offer him?
5/162M? (5th year option) - Is that right? And what's the deal with Bird Rights here?
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
-
He’ll get paid whatever max salary is available. In an ideal world, a scoring PG wouldn’t be our highest paid player, but the market is what it is.
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
I agree... those quick 3s should stop
unless he is "feeling" it
otherwise all you are doing is sucking the air out of the team
He is mediocre in running a team also. I thought this part of his game would improve
-
He’ll get paid whatever max salary is available. In an ideal world, a scoring PG wouldn’t be our highest paid player, but the market is what it is.
yes. Max like the type of max Hayward, Horford are receiving is fine
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
That isn't quite what's happening, actually.
Kyrie is actually shooting at a pretty good percentage on contested shots. He has shot 39.2% on threes that are "tightly" covered (defender between 2 and 4 ft away) and 30% on "very tight" (defender within 2 ft). The latter is a very small sample of just 10 shots all season, but 30% is actually good on that kind of shot. And his 39.2% on tightly contested shots (which are his largest sample) is actually very good. Most player's efficiency tanks with defenders that close.
Where Kyrie is underperforming is, like a lot of our roster, on "wide open" threes. That is, on shots that have no defender within 6 ft and definitely NOT "contested". On those shots, Kyrie is shooting just 34.1%. That's well-below league average (~40%) for wide-open threes.
Unfortunately, Kyrie is not alone. Only Jayson (46.8%), Yabusele (45.5%), Horford (44.9%) and Jaylen (40.0%) are shooting league-average or above on wide-open threes. The rest of the roster are all shooting 36.1% or lower on what should be a much higher-percentage shot.
This is very much counter to what is 'normal'. Most players tend to shoot much, MUCH better on wide-open threes. Hence the league average is so much higher on that shot than on threes with tighter coverage. But other than for the 4 guys I mentioned, not so for the Celtics!
Our bizarre underperformance on these shots (which our offense has actually been very good at generating) and our paucity of attempts at the rim (and poor finishing at the rim) are the two glaring reasons our offense is so bad.
As a team, we rank near the bottom of the league in efficiency at these two shot types.
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
That isn't quite what's happening, actually.
Kyrie is actually shooting at a pretty good percentage on contested shots. He has shot 39.2% on threes that are "tightly" covered (defender between 2 and 4 ft away) and 30% on "very tight" (defender within 2 ft). The latter is a very small sample of just 10 shots all season, but 30% is actually good on that kind of shot. And his 39.2% on tightly contested shots (which are his largest sample) is actually very good. Most player's efficiency tanks with defenders that close.
Where Kyrie is underperforming is, like a lot of our roster, on "wide open" threes. That is, on shots that have no defender within 6 ft and definitely NOT "contested". On those shots, Kyrie is shooting just 34.1%. That's well-below league average (~40%) for wide-open threes.
Unfortunately, Kyrie is not alone. Only Jayson (46.8%), Yabusele (45.5%), Horford (44.9%) and Jaylen (40.0%) are shooting league-average or above on wide-open threes. The rest of the roster are all shooting 36.1% or lower on what should be a much higher-percentage shot.
This is very much counter to what is 'normal'. Most players tend to shoot much, MUCH better on wide-open threes. Hence the league average is so much higher on that shot than on threes with tighter coverage. But other than for the 4 guys I mentioned, not so for the Celtics!
Our bizarre underperformance on these shots (which our offense has actually been very good at generating) and our paucity of attempts at the rim (and poor finishing at the rim) are the two glaring reasons our offense is so bad.
As a team, we rank near the bottom of the league in efficiency at these two shot types.
TP, I was gonna dig but you saved me the time, thanks
-
trade him for Fultz
-
Kyrie performance so far = B or B+ . He is playing as advertised, though I thought he could do more...or show something different outside of Lebrons shadow
It will be interesting what happens after next season or even this upcoming offseason (the type of money Smart, Rozier will receive etc) that could determine how much money the Celts will throw at Kyrie in 2020-2021
Maybe the earth is not as flat in Boston as Cleveland .....he is getting use to going in circles .... ;)
-
We haven't seen Kyrie in the playoffs yet. I think he will convince everyone when they see him in the playoffs. Especially next year with Gordon and another big piece (hopefully) when we actually have a shot to win the championship. He will step up and his clutch gene will prove any doubters wrong.
-
You have to pay the man because he will be offered that max by some other team
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
That isn't quite what's happening, actually.
Kyrie is actually shooting at a pretty good percentage on contested shots. He has shot 39.2% on threes that are "tightly" covered (defender between 2 and 4 ft away) and 30% on "very tight" (defender within 2 ft). The latter is a very small sample of just 10 shots all season, but 30% is actually good on that kind of shot. And his 39.2% on tightly contested shots (which are his largest sample) is actually very good. Most player's efficiency tanks with defenders that close.
Where Kyrie is underperforming is, like a lot of our roster, on "wide open" threes. That is, on shots that have no defender within 6 ft and definitely NOT "contested". On those shots, Kyrie is shooting just 34.1%. That's well-below league average (~40%) for wide-open threes.
Unfortunately, Kyrie is not alone. Only Jayson (46.8%), Yabusele (45.5%), Horford (44.9%) and Jaylen (40.0%) are shooting league-average or above on wide-open threes. The rest of the roster are all shooting 36.1% or lower on what should be a much higher-percentage shot.
This is very much counter to what is 'normal'. Most players tend to shoot much, MUCH better on wide-open threes. Hence the league average is so much higher on that shot than on threes with tighter coverage. But other than for the 4 guys I mentioned, not so for the Celtics!
Our bizarre underperformance on these shots (which our offense has actually been very good at generating) and our paucity of attempts at the rim (and poor finishing at the rim) are the two glaring reasons our offense is so bad.
As a team, we rank near the bottom of the league in efficiency at these two shot types.
TP for the research and for injecting some reality into the discussion.
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
That isn't quite what's happening, actually.
Kyrie is actually shooting at a pretty good percentage on contested shots. He has shot 39.2% on threes that are "tightly" covered (defender between 2 and 4 ft away) and 30% on "very tight" (defender within 2 ft). The latter is a very small sample of just 10 shots all season, but 30% is actually good on that kind of shot. And his 39.2% on tightly contested shots (which are his largest sample) is actually very good. Most player's efficiency tanks with defenders that close.
Where Kyrie is underperforming is, like a lot of our roster, on "wide open" threes. That is, on shots that have no defender within 6 ft and definitely NOT "contested". On those shots, Kyrie is shooting just 34.1%. That's well-below league average (~40%) for wide-open threes.
Unfortunately, Kyrie is not alone. Only Jayson (46.8%), Yabusele (45.5%), Horford (44.9%) and Jaylen (40.0%) are shooting league-average or above on wide-open threes. The rest of the roster are all shooting 36.1% or lower on what should be a much higher-percentage shot.
This is very much counter to what is 'normal'. Most players tend to shoot much, MUCH better on wide-open threes. Hence the league average is so much higher on that shot than on threes with tighter coverage. But other than for the 4 guys I mentioned, not so for the Celtics!
Our bizarre underperformance on these shots (which our offense has actually been very good at generating) and our paucity of attempts at the rim (and poor finishing at the rim) are the two glaring reasons our offense is so bad.
As a team, we rank near the bottom of the league in efficiency at these two shot types.
How dare you infuse the conversation with facts!
Great points. I think you could argue that both of the problems you mentioned would be solved if we were hitting our open 3s. Hitting open 3s demands that you close hard on shooters, which opens straight line driving lanes.
-
I think some people need to read more carefully. The phrase "a contested 3's that he never comes close to making" doesn't mean he never comes close to making contested threes in general, it means he never comes close to making that particular contested three. Which is true, and it was also true it was a horrible heat-check shot that should never be taken -- and was typically not taken early in the year when (surprise, surprise) our offense was working a lot better.
-
I think some people need to read more carefully. The phrase "a contested 3's that he never comes close to making" doesn't mean he never comes close to making contested threes in general, it means he never comes close to making that particular contested three. Which is true, and it was also true it was a horrible heat-check shot that should never be taken -- and was typically not taken early in the year when (surprise, surprise) our offense was working a lot better.
Based on the stats, how many of those does he really take a game? 1? That's not wrecking our offense. Great players get the right to taking one of those a game.
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
That isn't quite what's happening, actually.
Kyrie is actually shooting at a pretty good percentage on contested shots. He has shot 39.2% on threes that are "tightly" covered (defender between 2 and 4 ft away) and 30% on "very tight" (defender within 2 ft). The latter is a very small sample of just 10 shots all season, but 30% is actually good on that kind of shot. And his 39.2% on tightly contested shots (which are his largest sample) is actually very good. Most player's efficiency tanks with defenders that close.
Where Kyrie is underperforming is, like a lot of our roster, on "wide open" threes. That is, on shots that have no defender within 6 ft and definitely NOT "contested". On those shots, Kyrie is shooting just 34.1%. That's well-below league average (~40%) for wide-open threes.
Unfortunately, Kyrie is not alone. Only Jayson (46.8%), Yabusele (45.5%), Horford (44.9%) and Jaylen (40.0%) are shooting league-average or above on wide-open threes. The rest of the roster are all shooting 36.1% or lower on what should be a much higher-percentage shot.
This is very much counter to what is 'normal'. Most players tend to shoot much, MUCH better on wide-open threes. Hence the league average is so much higher on that shot than on threes with tighter coverage. But other than for the 4 guys I mentioned, not so for the Celtics!
Our bizarre underperformance on these shots (which our offense has actually been very good at generating) and our paucity of attempts at the rim (and poor finishing at the rim) are the two glaring reasons our offense is so bad.
As a team, we rank near the bottom of the league in efficiency at these two shot types.
TP, spot on.
-
I'm sooooooo tired of these "X player is not worth the max" conversations.
-
Irving is a lazy player for the most part. The reason why i say that is because he can literally get to the rim and finish AT WILL, against ANYONE. Yet, he decides to take contested 3's that he never comes close to making. It's just lazy basketball.
I bet this changes when the playoffs come around.
-
How long do you suppose Kyrie's body would hold up if he went to the rim every single time he tried to score?
-
How long do you suppose Kyrie's body would hold up if he went to the rim every single time he tried to score?
I think we found out the answer last year with IT4 - 28 years old.
Besides, I don't know what people are so sour about. We had the ultimate playoff PG All-Star on our team for years in Rondo (no, I am not comparing Kyrie to Rondo). I would rather be a very very good team with the potential to be great in the playoffs than the Cs of the last couple of years who maxed out in the regular season.
-
Kyrie isn't the problem. The problem is Stevens allows his teams to shoot too many 3s. I've watched it for 3 years now. When they're dropping , the offense looks great. When they aren't, you better start moving, cutting, passing and getting easy buckets. The Warriors do this, the Celtics need to learn to do it.
-
How long do you suppose Kyrie's body would hold up if he went to the rim every single time he tried to score?
I think we found out the answer last year with IT4 - 28 years old.
Besides, I don't know what people are so sour about. We had the ultimate playoff PG All-Star on our team for years in Rondo (no, I am not comparing Kyrie to Rondo). I would rather be a very very good team with the potential to be great in the playoffs than the Cs of the last couple of years who maxed out in the regular season.
kind of a ridiculous conclusion considering they have different play styles and bodies. Kyrie tried to avoid contact whereas IT hits the Ground and tries to draw a foul each time he goes to the rim . The playstyles are so different and to conclude they both would end at 28 is ridiculous
-
How long do you suppose Kyrie's body would hold up if he went to the rim every single time he tried to score?
I think we found out the answer last year with IT4 - 28 years old.
Besides, I don't know what people are so sour about. We had the ultimate playoff PG All-Star on our team for years in Rondo (no, I am not comparing Kyrie to Rondo). I would rather be a very very good team with the potential to be great in the playoffs than the Cs of the last couple of years who maxed out in the regular season.
kind of a ridiculous conclusion considering they have different play styles and bodies. Kyrie tried to avoid contact whereas IT hits the Ground and tries to draw a foul each time he goes to the rim . The playstyles are so different and to conclude they both would end at 28 is ridiculous
I figured it was obvious I was joking as there is no way to tell when a player's career will take a huge downturn. However, I don't think it is ridiculous to think that if Kyrie went hard to the hoop considerably more often that there would be more opportunity for injury. I do appreciate that Kyrie tries to avoid contact and he isn't a high-flyer as he does have an injury history.
-
Of course he is. There isn't a legitimate argument that he's not worth a max. It's a forgone conclusion that the Celts will offer him all they can.
-
How long do you suppose Kyrie's body would hold up if he went to the rim every single time he tried to score?
It would benefit him tremendously. Last week vs. the Pacers: On two possessions he penetrated vs. Cory Joseph, then Myles Turner/Young, and was awarded FTs on both despite literally not being touched. It was kinda cringeworthy, but I suspect that's how it'd typically go, if he were to penetrate more, with the current hand-checking rules and his brand.
-
Kyrie performance so far = B or B+ . He is playing as advertised, though I thought he could do more...or show something different outside of Lebrons shadow
It will be interesting what happens after next season or even this upcoming offseason (the type of money Smart, Rozier will receive etc) that could determine how much money the Celts will throw at Kyrie in 2020-2021
Another slow day in the basement I see!
-
We have Kyrie's Bird Rights.... right??
And his next projected max-extension offer is 5/162M (5th year option)?
I guess it comes down to how much of a luxury tax the ownership is willing to pay.
But I mean, if you don't offer Kyrie a max.. I think another team offers it to him without second thought (unless if cap space is tight for most teams around the league).
-
We have Kyrie's Bird Rights.... right??
And his next projected max-extension offer is 5/162M (5th year option)?
I guess it comes down to how much of a luxury tax the ownership is willing to pay.
But I mean, if you don't offer Kyrie a max.. I think another team offers it to him without second thought (unless if cap space is tight for most teams around the league).
Kyrie absolutely gets a max offer...from several teams. If, for some reason, the Cs don't have Kyrie in their future plans, they should at least pull a 'Blake Griffin' and sign him, then trade him for assets.
However, if Kyrie isn't in our future plans, then that future must be really incredible or really awful!!
-
We have Kyrie's Bird Rights.... right??
And his next projected max-extension offer is 5/162M (5th year option)?
I guess it comes down to how much of a luxury tax the ownership is willing to pay.
But I mean, if you don't offer Kyrie a max.. I think another team offers it to him without second thought (unless if cap space is tight for most teams around the league).
Kyrie absolutely gets a max offer...from several teams. If, for some reason, the Cs don't have Kyrie in their future plans, they should at least pull a 'Blake Griffin' and sign him, then trade him for assets.
However, if Kyrie isn't in our future plans, then that future must be really incredible or really awful!!
Yeah, but is there a difference in what we can offer him, and what other teams can? In terms of a max offer obviously (years & $$$)
-
We have Kyrie's Bird Rights.... right??
And his next projected max-extension offer is 5/162M (5th year option)?
I guess it comes down to how much of a luxury tax the ownership is willing to pay.
But I mean, if you don't offer Kyrie a max.. I think another team offers it to him without second thought (unless if cap space is tight for most teams around the league).
Kyrie absolutely gets a max offer...from several teams. If, for some reason, the Cs don't have Kyrie in their future plans, they should at least pull a 'Blake Griffin' and sign him, then trade him for assets.
However, if Kyrie isn't in our future plans, then that future must be really incredible or really awful!!
Yeah, but is there a difference in what we can offer him, and what other teams can? In terms of a max offer obviously (years & $$$)
You are right - we can give him a 5th year and 8% raises. Other teams can only offer 4 years with 5% raises.
We should be a pretty competitive team with Kyrie as the leader so I really don't see the motivation of him giving up the extra money/years to leave for a worse situation. Hopefully he doesn't get bored with us!
-
We have Kyrie's Bird Rights.... right??
And his next projected max-extension offer is 5/162M (5th year option)?
I guess it comes down to how much of a luxury tax the ownership is willing to pay.
But I mean, if you don't offer Kyrie a max.. I think another team offers it to him without second thought (unless if cap space is tight for most teams around the league).
Kyrie absolutely gets a max offer...from several teams. If, for some reason, the Cs don't have Kyrie in their future plans, they should at least pull a 'Blake Griffin' and sign him, then trade him for assets.
However, if Kyrie isn't in our future plans, then that future must be really incredible or really awful!!
Yeah, but is there a difference in what we can offer him, and what other teams can? In terms of a max offer obviously (years & $$$)
You are right - we can give him a 5th year and 8% raises. Other teams can only offer 4 years with 5% raises.
We should be a pretty competitive team with Kyrie as the leader so I really don't see the motivation of him giving up the extra money/years to leave for a worse situation. Hopefully he doesn't get bored with us!
Lol hopefully he doesn't bolt in 2 years. :P