Carsen Edwards could be an interesting starter.
G: Edwards
G: Smart
F: Jaylen
F: Tatum
C: Theis
Keep Jeff Teague and Tristan Thompson to bench roles to provide experience and stability to an inexperienced bench. You have Grant Williams there as well.
Let Smart start at PG and run the team. Let Edwards come in and play a low pressure role next to the stars. He doesn't need to do anything fancy. Just take outside shots inside the flow of the offense. A minor role to let him / help him get comfortable. Let Smart defend SGs. Carsen defend PGs. Edwards gives you some extra ball handling security.
A bit similar to letting Scalabrine start when KG was injured. Move him into a 18mpg starting role. Let the main bench players keep their primary roles and keep the main rotation in tact. Put a lesser talent bench player in as starter. Someone who can spread the floor and just keep things ticking along.
I have no doubt that Carsen Edwards could be an interesting starter, in fact I'm sure Carsen Edwards would be an interesting starter. Talk about thinking outside the box. TP for the idea.
i think you misspelled the word "inadequate." 
i root for edwards a lot. but given his play last year, he would have to have one heck of a pre-season to earn a starting position.
He'd definitely be an interesting starter in China.
A TP for that wit. Well played, sir.
But I think that you’re underestimating him. Boston gave him a contract with a low risk to the team - and a recognition that it might take a while.
I think that a couple of things are clear going forward: he can get an open shot for himself; and he’s a competitor.
That first is more important than it might appear to the casual fan, who likely replies, “So what, he’s got to make them!” - which is a good point, as far as it goes. Does that mean his upside is Terry Rozier with less length? Maybe.
Terry’s role expanded in Charlotte, with a modest uptick in assist% - and also in turnover %. Those numbers look about like Marcus Smart’s. Mostly the shots he creates are for himself. He shot over .400 from 3, which is golden, especially for a guy who can get a shot off the dribble and isn’t afraid of the moment. As we saw when he was in Boston, he got into the paint off the dribble, too, though his finishing was uninspiring.
Carsen did one thing last year that Terry has never come close to and that is in fact rare in the NBA - he was effective on the dreaded long 2’s - .529 on a small but not useless sample size (17 shots). He’s got a couple of different ways of getting those shots off the dribble with a shot fake at the arc and one or two dribbles going either right or left into that big open area that NBA defenses are mostly conceding nowadays. A guy who can reliably get you more than a point on a possession is an asset on offense.
Will Edwards eventually shoot at least an average % from 3? I’d bet on it. The form is excellent, the drive to improve is there, and he’s already got sidestep moves to either side to get a good look at the rim. The safety valve move to the wide-open long 2 is golden if last year’s % is real. That alternative means he’s not stuck with having to take a challenged 3 on a short clock.
The rosiest scenario is something like: Isaiah Thomas with better defense. But he’s got two high bars to get over first: he’s got to get to the rim and finish; and he’s got to get shots for his teammates. The first of those looks more likely, but he’s got a long way to go with the second. For my money, those are the two things to watch.
He’s an NBA player. I wouldn’t predict that he’ll retire in Boston, but I would predict that he’ll have a long career.
Look at his shooting numbers at Perdue. I don't know why the C's thought he'd be an NBA player. He's tough, confident and can create his own shots, but wasn't an an efficient shooter in college, so why would he be better in the NBA?
It’s a safe bet that the Boston brass were aware of whatever shooting numbers you’re looking at when they decided to pick him.
Waters is better at everything. Pritchard almost certainly is too.
The coaching staff were raving about Waters after SL 2019. And yet management only gave him a 2-way contract, while giving Edwards long-term money. It’s worth asking why they did that.
You certainly seem sure of yourself.
He's only 5'11 but he has a 6'6 wingspan and he's built like a tank.
I would add that he's got exceptional lower body strength, balance, and burst; an explosive first step, and excellent handles. He can get open going to either hand. These characteristics are the result of his hard work.
His turnover % was under 10 - as a rookie. Had only four ballhandling turnovers on the season. Casual fans don't pay attention to things like that, but coaches sure do.
Edwards looked like he could be a rotation scorer coming off summer league. There was a job there for the taking.
There was no need for more bench scoring on last year's Celtics. On the contrary, they had
starters who should have gotten more shots - particularly Gordon Hayward, who opted out in order to play a greater role for the Hornets.
Not surprisingly, getting shots for Carsen Edwards was a low priority; his usage rate was under 19. No, there was no job available for yet another rotation scorer. They did get him some game reps being a lead guard, in NBA minutes comparable to Terry Rozier's rookie season.
I think its fair to say he played below expectations in the regular season.
You underestimate the Celtics' coaching staff and management. They do not lock players up for four years because of a SL performance. These are seasoned professionals. There were obviously fans who expected more scoring or higher shooting %s, but the people who are making these decisions are looking at a bigger view, both of what a player is doing and of what he could do in the future.
Mostly fans are looking at his outside shooting and declaring him below expectations, as you have done. This is turned around, in fact. It's his outside shooting that looks so promising for the future, while it's other aspects of his game that are holding him back and that he may never bring up to a rotation-player standard.
Management and coaches know that players get consistent results when they get consistent minutes; and there's no stat with more volatility than 3-pt%.
He was money above the right break, and worthy of a green light above the left break. So expanding into straight on and the corners is next; but this doesn't begin to account for why he's worth developing further, or why they gave him several years to develop.
All 3's are not created equal. He's getting his shots on his own, off the dribble. Spot-ups are easier. He's shooting the longer 3's, mostly not in the corners. Those are harder.
Furthermore, as I was saying above, he's got a shot fake and a dribble or two to get him an open shot at either elbow. These are the dreaded long 2's that the analytics people don't like; but he shot it at a high enough % that it's a good shot, and that is a very valuable skill in today's game, since most defenses don't defend it. League average is something like .8 points per shot, while Carsen shot 1.06 pps on long 2's, and even better with shot fake 3/dribble to the elbows.
He scored a lot (22.2 ppg), and shot 43% / 28% on 3's in the G-league.
I'm going to keep campaigning on this: we need to recognize that FG% in this era is not so much a worthless stat as a deceptive one - and this is a prime example, since Carsen shoots so many 3's.
He shot .567 from 2 in the G-League, largely because he was getting to the rim and finishing. This is reason to be optimistic about his ability to do that in the Big Show, as I was saying above.
Those numbers don't get you an NBA job.
Erm... he has an NBA job right now.
Numbers are important - it's a bottom line game, after all. But not all numbers are created equal. Carsen Edwards has a bright NBA future because he can create open shots off the dribble without turning it over. That's a big deal.
Topic: Full Ainge press conference - media day (Read 11627 times)