Who is our best player?

[gift]

What I want to know is if Brown is just going to continue to be an elite mid-range shooter now. Is that his future or is he just hot right now? Because if his mid-range is going to be elite, he's going to be All NBA level.

[Big333223]

What I want to know is if Brown is just going to continue to be an elite mid-range shooter now. Is that his future or is he just hot right now? Because if his mid-range is going to be elite, he's going to be All NBA level.

He's had a really strong mid range game for as long as I can remember. I don't see any reason to think he can't be elite there.

[mmmmm]

What I want to know is if Brown is just going to continue to be an elite mid-range shooter now. Is that his future or is he just hot right now? Because if his mid-range is going to be elite, he's going to be All NBA level.

He's had a really strong mid range game for as long as I can remember. I don't see any reason to think he can't be elite there.

Yes.  Jaylen shot a fantastic 48.8% on 10-16 ft jumpers last season -- that's Kevin Garnett territory.

Now, so far this year, he's gone insane and he's been hitting those at a 70.6% clip!   That's ... unfortunately probably not sustainable.

But he can drop off a lot from that crazy number and he'd still be elite at that shot.

[RodyTur10]

What I want to know is if Brown is just going to continue to be an elite mid-range shooter now. Is that his future or is he just hot right now? Because if his mid-range is going to be elite, he's going to be All NBA level.

He's had a really strong mid range game for as long as I can remember. I don't see any reason to think he can't be elite there.

Yes.  Jaylen shot a fantastic 48.8% on 10-16 ft jumpers last season -- that's Kevin Garnett territory.

Now, so far this year, he's gone insane and he's been hitting those at a 70.6% clip!   That's ... unfortunately probably not sustainable.

But he can drop off a lot from that crazy number and he'd still be elite at that shot.

The midrange-game is still very important and Brown is able to make a living there. He can shoot over most guys who regularly defend him.

[gift]

What I want to know is if Brown is just going to continue to be an elite mid-range shooter now. Is that his future or is he just hot right now? Because if his mid-range is going to be elite, he's going to be All NBA level.

He's had a really strong mid range game for as long as I can remember. I don't see any reason to think he can't be elite there.

Yes.  Jaylen shot a fantastic 48.8% on 10-16 ft jumpers last season -- that's Kevin Garnett territory.

Now, so far this year, he's gone insane and he's been hitting those at a 70.6% clip!   That's ... unfortunately probably not sustainable.

But he can drop off a lot from that crazy number and he'd still be elite at that shot.

The midrange-game is still very important and Brown is able to make a living there. He can shoot over most guys who regularly defend him.

Yeah it’s not just his efficiency. It’s that he can create the shot for himself and hit it at an insane rate (so far).

[Moranis]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close. 

[Roy H.]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

[Moranis]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

It is a 3 year trend.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench.  That is a fact.

[MICeltsfan]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

It is a 3 year trend.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench.  That is a fact.

I am intrigued by this. Is your position, then, that Brown is fools’ gold- in that you genuinely think the team is better when he is not playing? Or are you just indicating via +/- that Tatum must be superior due to the +/- differential? Not trying to be contrary - just never honestly considered that we might be a better team with Brown on the bench.

[Roy H.]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

It is a 3 year trend.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench.  That is a fact.

Since he and Tatum start together, you would have to look at the players they’re surrounded by when the other is on the bench.  Jaylen is often asked to lead pretty terrible squads out there with inferior spacing.

It amazes me that somebody could watch the game tonight and come to the conclusion that we don’t need Brown, that we’d be roughly equally as good without him.  Lies, dang lies and statistics, right?

[Moranis]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

It is a 3 year trend.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench.  That is a fact.

I am intrigued by this. Is your position, then, that Brown is fools’ gold- in that you genuinely think the team is better when he is not playing? Or are you just indicating via +/- that Tatum must be superior due to the +/- differential? Not trying to be contrary - just never honestly considered that we might be a better team with Brown on the bench.

Over the last 3 full seasons, in games Brown has missed Boston is 26-9 (74.3%).  Over the same timeframe, in games Brown has played Boston is 126-75 (62.7%).  If you take out 3 years ago when Boston was 8-4 without Brown and 47-23 with him, the C's have been 18-5 (78.3%) without Brown vs. 79-52 (60.3%) with Brown.

Brown's on/off differential per 100 possessions during that time period was +8.4 (3 years ago when Boston was slightly worse with him out), but -3.2 and -0.8 the last two seasons.  In the playoffs those 3 years, Brown is negative all 3 years at -0.1, -16.7, and -4.7. 

Contrast that with Tatum +8.5, +4.8, and then an elite +11.1 last year.  During the playoffs those 3 seasons, +12.9, +3.7, +4.9.

Before tonight so far this year, Brown is -3.1 and Tatum is +22.8.  After tonight, the gap will probably widen. 

The simple reality is, Boston has just been a better team when Brown hasn't been in the game the last 2 seasons and thus far this year.  That isn't to say I necessarily think the team will be better if Brown just wasn't on it, but I also don't think the team would fall off a cliff, like it would if Tatum missed significant time.  Tatum is the guy that makes the team go, Brown does not.  But this is one of the reasons, I would be perfectly fine with trading Brown for someone like Harden.  I think Harden would more than make-up for Brown, and I don't think it is all that close.  Brown just doesn't impact winning all that much because he has functioned much more so like a role player than a franchise player and role players just aren't that important.  And unlike most suped up role players, Brown isn't elite at anything.  He is a jack of all trades but master of none type player, and most suped up role players and the ones that hold the most value are the guys that have an elite skill.   

[gouki88]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

It is a 3 year trend.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench.  That is a fact.

I am intrigued by this. Is your position, then, that Brown is fools’ gold- in that you genuinely think the team is better when he is not playing? Or are you just indicating via +/- that Tatum must be superior due to the +/- differential? Not trying to be contrary - just never honestly considered that we might be a better team with Brown on the bench.

Over the last 3 full seasons, in games Brown has missed Boston is 26-9 (74.3%).  Over the same timeframe, in games Brown has played Boston is 126-75 (62.7%).  If you take out 3 years ago when Boston was 8-4 without Brown and 47-23 with him, the C's have been 18-5 (78.3%) without Brown vs. 79-52 (60.3%) with Brown.

Brown's on/off differential per 100 possessions during that time period was +8.4 (3 years ago when Boston was slightly worse with him out), but -3.2 and -0.8 the last two seasons.  In the playoffs those 3 years, Brown is negative all 3 years at -0.1, -16.7, and -4.7. 

Contrast that with Tatum +8.5, +4.8, and then an elite +11.1 last year.  During the playoffs those 3 seasons, +12.9, +3.7, +4.9.

Before tonight so far this year, Brown is -3.1 and Tatum is +22.8.  After tonight, the gap will probably widen. 

The simple reality is, Boston has just been a better team when Brown hasn't been in the game the last 2 seasons and thus far this year.  That isn't to say I necessarily think the team will be better if Brown just wasn't on it, but I also don't think the team would fall off a cliff, like it would if Tatum missed significant time.  Tatum is the guy that makes the team go, Brown does not.  But this is one of the reasons, I would be perfectly fine with trading Brown for someone like Harden.  I think Harden would more than make-up for Brown, and I don't think it is all that close.  Brown just doesn't impact winning all that much because he has functioned much more so like a role player than a franchise player and role players just aren't that important.  And unlike most suped up role players, Brown isn't elite at anything.  He is a jack of all trades but master of none type player, and most suped up role players and the ones that hold the most value are the guys that have an elite skill.   

Hahahahaha

[MICeltsfan]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

It is a 3 year trend.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench.  That is a fact.

I am intrigued by this. Is your position, then, that Brown is fools’ gold- in that you genuinely think the team is better when he is not playing? Or are you just indicating via +/- that Tatum must be superior due to the +/- differential? Not trying to be contrary - just never honestly considered that we might be a better team with Brown on the bench.

Over the last 3 full seasons, in games Brown has missed Boston is 26-9 (74.3%).  Over the same timeframe, in games Brown has played Boston is 126-75 (62.7%).  If you take out 3 years ago when Boston was 8-4 without Brown and 47-23 with him, the C's have been 18-5 (78.3%) without Brown vs. 79-52 (60.3%) with Brown.

Brown's on/off differential per 100 possessions during that time period was +8.4 (3 years ago when Boston was slightly worse with him out), but -3.2 and -0.8 the last two seasons.  In the playoffs those 3 years, Brown is negative all 3 years at -0.1, -16.7, and -4.7. 

Contrast that with Tatum +8.5, +4.8, and then an elite +11.1 last year.  During the playoffs those 3 seasons, +12.9, +3.7, +4.9.

Before tonight so far this year, Brown is -3.1 and Tatum is +22.8.  After tonight, the gap will probably widen. 

The simple reality is, Boston has just been a better team when Brown hasn't been in the game the last 2 seasons and thus far this year.  That isn't to say I necessarily think the team will be better if Brown just wasn't on it, but I also don't think the team would fall off a cliff, like it would if Tatum missed significant time.  Tatum is the guy that makes the team go, Brown does not.  But this is one of the reasons, I would be perfectly fine with trading Brown for someone like Harden.  I think Harden would more than make-up for Brown, and I don't think it is all that close.  Brown just doesn't impact winning all that much because he has functioned much more so like a role player than a franchise player and role players just aren't that important.  And unlike most suped up role players, Brown isn't elite at anything.  He is a jack of all trades but master of none type player, and most suped up role players and the ones that hold the most value are the guys that have an elite skill.   

Thank you.

I like to think of myself as an objective and data driven individual so this has given me something to chew on. You make a very strong argument that contrasts pretty significantly with what I see when I watch the games. Makes me wonder if I’m watching checkers while others are watching chess.

May I ask where you get your statistics? At the risk of creating a major time sink for myself, I would be very interested in looking at some of these numbers in different context(s).

[Moranis]

Yet another game where the team is better with Brown on the bench (+4 in the 17 minutes with him, but also +4 in the 7 minutes without him so a better rate).  Boston is -5 with Tatum on the bench in 6 minutes and +13 in his 18 minutes.  This just continues the multi-year trend of the team needing Tatum and not needing Brown.  It just doesn't matter how good Brown plays, the team does just fine without him and it really doesn't matter how poorly Tatum plays as they just play better with him on the floor overall.  Tatum is the guy.  It isn't close.

This is silly.  It’s just an out of context misuse of +/-.  If Brown had played like garbage in that first half, we wouldn’t be leaving right now.

It is a 3 year trend.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench.  That is a fact.

I am intrigued by this. Is your position, then, that Brown is fools’ gold- in that you genuinely think the team is better when he is not playing? Or are you just indicating via +/- that Tatum must be superior due to the +/- differential? Not trying to be contrary - just never honestly considered that we might be a better team with Brown on the bench.

Over the last 3 full seasons, in games Brown has missed Boston is 26-9 (74.3%).  Over the same timeframe, in games Brown has played Boston is 126-75 (62.7%).  If you take out 3 years ago when Boston was 8-4 without Brown and 47-23 with him, the C's have been 18-5 (78.3%) without Brown vs. 79-52 (60.3%) with Brown.

Brown's on/off differential per 100 possessions during that time period was +8.4 (3 years ago when Boston was slightly worse with him out), but -3.2 and -0.8 the last two seasons.  In the playoffs those 3 years, Brown is negative all 3 years at -0.1, -16.7, and -4.7. 

Contrast that with Tatum +8.5, +4.8, and then an elite +11.1 last year.  During the playoffs those 3 seasons, +12.9, +3.7, +4.9.

Before tonight so far this year, Brown is -3.1 and Tatum is +22.8.  After tonight, the gap will probably widen. 

The simple reality is, Boston has just been a better team when Brown hasn't been in the game the last 2 seasons and thus far this year.  That isn't to say I necessarily think the team will be better if Brown just wasn't on it, but I also don't think the team would fall off a cliff, like it would if Tatum missed significant time.  Tatum is the guy that makes the team go, Brown does not.  But this is one of the reasons, I would be perfectly fine with trading Brown for someone like Harden.  I think Harden would more than make-up for Brown, and I don't think it is all that close.  Brown just doesn't impact winning all that much because he has functioned much more so like a role player than a franchise player and role players just aren't that important.  And unlike most suped up role players, Brown isn't elite at anything.  He is a jack of all trades but master of none type player, and most suped up role players and the ones that hold the most value are the guys that have an elite skill.   

Hahahahaha

Nothing meaningful to add.  People said similar things when I made these arguments when Irving was on the team i.e. that the team wasn't necessarily better without Irving just not appreciably worse (and that is just with removing him without replacing him).  Irving's last year in Boston, I was pushing that narrative pretty hard, and low and behold, Boston was actually better without Irving by replacing him with a lesser player. 

The reality is, historically the on/off differential is the greatest indicator of importance and value to a team.  Time and time again it is the one stat that doesn't really lie, when you are dealing with starters playing big minutes.  Contrary to Roy's assertion it just doesn't lie over the long term (you obviously need a decent enough sample size, but we have that with over 2+ seasons).  For as good as Brown is and his numbers are, he just doesn't meaningfully impact Boston on the scoreboard and hasn't for the last couple of seasons.  And the fact that they both start, have played similar minutes, etc. and have that sort of discrepancy is incredibly telling.  And for the record the leaders in that stat entering the game tonight were Tatum, Teague, Pritchard, R. Williams, and Semi with the latter 4 all playing between 116 and 185 minutes.  While the 5 biggest minute players in the negative are Brown, G. Williams, Thompson, Smart, and Theis.  Obviously you can't put much stock in this year as the sample size is small, but the last 2 years don't lie.  That is plenty of time for these things to even out if they are going to and they just didn't.  Tatum incredibly important, Brown not so much.

[Roy H.]

The reality is, historically the on/off differential is the greatest indicator of importance and value to a team.  Time and time again it is the one stat that doesn't really lie

Do you know which starter was our leader in net rating (I.e., point differential per 100 possessions) was?

Daniel Theis, and it wasn’t close.

Strangely, I’m not sure he was our most important or valuable player last year.  But, the numbers don’t lie, I suppose.

   And the fact that they both start, have played similar minutes, etc. and have that sort of discrepancy is incredibly telling.  And for the record the leaders in that stat entering the game tonight were Tatum, Teague, Pritchard, R. Williams, and Semi with the latter 4 all playing between 116 and 185 minutes.  While the 5 biggest minute players in the negative are Brown, G. Williams, Thompson, Smart, and Theis.  Obviously you can't put much stock in this year as the sample size is small, but the last 2 years don't lie.  That is plenty of time for these things to even out if they are going to and they just didn't.  Tatum incredibly important, Brown not so much.

How are minutes distributed / staggered when Brown and Tatum aren’t playing together?  Who are their teammates they most regularly play with?

You cite to two years ago, when Tatum was playing as a starter and JB was trying to stabilize the bench.  Is there any wonder why Jaylen’s +/- is worse than JT’s under those circumstances?