Should Joe keep playing Kornet?

[Vermont Green]

Luke Kornet has been the best big not named Porzingis or Horford so why would he not keep playing him?  Queta appears as though he could challenge Kornet for those minutes, but he has not beaten him out at this point.

Has he? I think Queta is better and has a real chance to be A LOT better given minutes.

Has he what?  Been the best big other than Porzingis and Horford?  Absolutely.  Queta has been decent too, and may well have more ceiling, but he is 24, not 20 or something.  Being "raw" still at 24 means you are starting to put some limits on your ceiling.

The main question was whether or not Kornet should play.  I think they both should play.  But Kornet is going to be better than Queta as a fill in starter, as demonstrated by the TOR game.  What he lacks in raw physical athletic ability relative to Queta, he makes up for with basketball IQ or whatever you want to call it.

I feel like Kornet is a great value at $2.4M for the role they ask of him.  He can step in and start and help the team win.  And then go back to the bench for several games without getting a bad attitude.  That is valuable.  Queta is also a great value as a 2-way.  To be able to plug him in as a bench big and have him actually help the team, puts him in the upper 95th percentile of all 2-way players.  That is great, extremely valuable in its own right.  But he is raw, and raw is hard to have play with the starters.

[BitterJim]

Considering that Luke being on the court generally means Al and KP are off the court, I'm not sure why anyone would expect his On/Off stats to be anything but negative. KP and Al are so much better than him (and any other 3rd string center we could bring in) that looking at those stats is always going to make him look bad.

The real question isn't if Kornet is a net positive compared to KP and Al, it's if he's more of a net positive (or less of a net negative) than the other 3rd string Center/big options we have. And right now, the answer is a clear yes (except maybe Queta). I'd love for us to bring in a better 3rd string big, but until then Kornet should continue playing when Al and KP need rest, even though he isn't as good as them.

Also, for Offensive and Defensive rating basketball-reference uses a different formula than everyone else (IIRC it's to allow calculating those for players that played before possessions were tracked) so they are less accurate.

Bingo. It's a huge step down from Porzingis to Kornet.

One of these guys is Queta and one is Kornet

+- per 100 possessions
+2.1 vs. +13.3

on/off +- per 100 possessions
-9.2 vs. +3.9

so in roughly the same role, their impact is much different on the floor.

I’m sorry, but on-off splits are trash for guys who largely appear in garbage time.

They have roughly the same role on the same team though, which makes it a better comparison.  Queta is an excellent rebounder. Much better than Kornet, that sort of thing matters to playing winning basketball.  Queta is obviously much more raw than Kornet, but he has far more potential and should be getting the minutes as the 3rd big.

Neither one of them is good enough to lock down the 3rd string big minutes. We should pick who plays based on the matchups, but there's some matchups where both will be a disaster.

We need a legit 3rd big that can actually earn all of the 3rd string minutes, but until then we need to mix in both of them, especially on nights where we don't have KP and/or Horford.

[jambr380]

Considering that Luke being on the court generally means Al and KP are off the court, I'm not sure why anyone would expect his On/Off stats to be anything but negative. KP and Al are so much better than him (and any other 3rd string center we could bring in) that looking at those stats is always going to make him look bad.

The real question isn't if Kornet is a net positive compared to KP and Al, it's if he's more of a net positive (or less of a net negative) than the other 3rd string Center/big options we have. And right now, the answer is a clear yes (except maybe Queta). I'd love for us to bring in a better 3rd string big, but until then Kornet should continue playing when Al and KP need rest, even though he isn't as good as them.

Also, for Offensive and Defensive rating basketball-reference uses a different formula than everyone else (IIRC it's to allow calculating those for players that played before possessions were tracked) so they are less accurate.

Bingo. It's a huge step down from Porzingis to Kornet.

One of these guys is Queta and one is Kornet

+- per 100 possessions
+2.1 vs. +13.3

on/off +- per 100 possessions
-9.2 vs. +3.9

so in roughly the same role, their impact is much different on the floor.

I’m sorry, but on-off splits are trash for guys who largely appear in garbage time.

They have roughly the same role on the same team though, which makes it a better comparison.  Queta is an excellent rebounder. Much better than Kornet, that sort of thing matters to playing winning basketball.  Queta is obviously much more raw than Kornet, but he has far more potential and should be getting the minutes as the 3rd big.

Neither one of them is good enough to lock down the 3rd string big minutes. We should pick who plays based on the matchups, but there's some matchups where both will be a disaster.

We need a legit 3rd big that can actually earn all of the 3rd string minutes, but until then we need to mix in both of them, especially on nights where we don't have KP and/or Horford.

Yeah, the problem isn’t really that either is the 3rd big, it’s that one of them is often counted on to be the 2nd big because of one of KP/Horford sitting or because those two are playing together.

Until the time comes that we acquire a legit backup big, I prefer to give more minutes to Queta, but I acknowledge Kornet might be better in some matchups.

[Moranis]

Luke Kornet has been the best big not named Porzingis or Horford so why would he not keep playing him?  Queta appears as though he could challenge Kornet for those minutes, but he has not beaten him out at this point.

Has he? I think Queta is better and has a real chance to be A LOT better given minutes.

Has he what?  Been the best big other than Porzingis and Horford?  Absolutely.  Queta has been decent too, and may well have more ceiling, but he is 24, not 20 or something.  Being "raw" still at 24 means you are starting to put some limits on your ceiling.

The main question was whether or not Kornet should play.  I think they both should play.  But Kornet is going to be better than Queta as a fill in starter, as demonstrated by the TOR game.  What he lacks in raw physical athletic ability relative to Queta, he makes up for with basketball IQ or whatever you want to call it.

I feel like Kornet is a great value at $2.4M for the role they ask of him.  He can step in and start and help the team win.  And then go back to the bench for several games without getting a bad attitude.  That is valuable.  Queta is also a great value as a 2-way.  To be able to plug him in as a bench big and have him actually help the team, puts him in the upper 95th percentile of all 2-way players.  That is great, extremely valuable in its own right.  But he is raw, and raw is hard to have play with the starters.

I agree that if one has to start it should be Kornet, but Queta should be the 3rd big in the normal rotation.  Those are different things.

[droopdog7]

Luke Kornet has been the best big not named Porzingis or Horford so why would he not keep playing him?  Queta appears as though he could challenge Kornet for those minutes, but he has not beaten him out at this point.

Has he? I think Queta is better and has a real chance to be A LOT better given minutes.

Has he what?  Been the best big other than Porzingis and Horford?  Absolutely.  Queta has been decent too, and may well have more ceiling, but he is 24, not 20 or something.  Being "raw" still at 24 means you are starting to put some limits on your ceiling.

The main question was whether or not Kornet should play.  I think they both should play.  But Kornet is going to be better than Queta as a fill in starter, as demonstrated by the TOR game.  What he lacks in raw physical athletic ability relative to Queta, he makes up for with basketball IQ or whatever you want to call it.

I feel like Kornet is a great value at $2.4M for the role they ask of him.  He can step in and start and help the team win.  And then go back to the bench for several games without getting a bad attitude.  That is valuable.  Queta is also a great value as a 2-way.  To be able to plug him in as a bench big and have him actually help the team, puts him in the upper 95th percentile of all 2-way players.  That is great, extremely valuable in its own right.  But he is raw, and raw is hard to have play with the starters.

I agree that if one has to start it should be Kornet, but Queta should be the 3rd big in the normal rotation.  Those are different things.

You’re trying to be way too cute with it.  Kornet is better, we’re trying to win a title. If it has to be one, it’s kornet.  Real simple.

[Roy H.]

Stat comparison:

https://stathead.com/basketball/versus-finder.cgi?request=1&seasons_type=forall&year_min=2024&player_id1=quetane01&player_id2=kornelu01

Kornet is better at just about everything other than rebounding on a per-minute basis.

[SCeltic34]

Couldn't watch the game live, but just finished watching the replay.  Great job by Kornet being in the right spots and making himself available around the basket.  He's played some important stretches so far this season. 

JB with some high praise for Kornet after the game.  Called him the "ultimate teammate".  Gets along with everyone, reliable on the court, plays hard and does his job.

[Kuberski33]

You can run an offense with Kornet. Queta is a nice extra part who rebounds and can make a shot in close when the ball winds up in his hands. They were both solid last night.

To the anti-Kornet crew haven't you noticed that when he's in, the other teams never seem to go on big runs against them? In fact, it often goes the other way - the lead increases. I don't have the stats to back that up but it sure seems that way based on just watching these guys night in night out.

That's one way you judge the effectiveness of bench guys. Even a year ago when they were playing really well prior to Rob returning, Kornet was getting regular minutes with the 2nd team. That ended in January when Joe stopped playing him.

[mobilija]

Quetta is often out of position on defense, Kornet often is in the right place. Quetta can occasionally make up for his poor positioning through athleticism/hustle, but Kornet is a better defender.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Queta is a project. Still developing his positioning. He got eaten up the other day against other athletes like Wiseman and Duren. He has his moments, and there are plenty of available minutes for him to keep getting reps and try to learn a consistent role.

Kornet is extremely reliable.

I still would like to have one more 4-5 with a bit more athleticism and feel.

[Big333223]

Queta is a project. Still developing his positioning. He got eaten up the other day against other athletes like Wiseman and Duren. He has his moments, and there are plenty of available minutes for him to keep getting reps and try to learn a consistent role.

Kornet is extremely reliable.

I still would like to have one more 4-5 with a bit more athleticism and feel.

Yeah, I wish Kornet were a better rebounder but he is definitely reliable.

Queta has a lot of talent but just look at the LA games. He looked great again the Clippers and 2 days later he was unplayable against the Lakers. With more time, Queta might still develop into a good rotation player but he's still hit-and-miss.

[Moranis]

You can run an offense with Kornet. Queta is a nice extra part who rebounds and can make a shot in close when the ball winds up in his hands. They were both solid last night.

To the anti-Kornet crew haven't you noticed that when he's in, the other teams never seem to go on big runs against them? In fact, it often goes the other way - the lead increases. I don't have the stats to back that up but it sure seems that way based on just watching these guys night in night out.

That's one way you judge the effectiveness of bench guys. Even a year ago when they were playing really well prior to Rob returning, Kornet was getting regular minutes with the 2nd team. That ended in January when Joe stopped playing him.

I put the numbers in this thread. Boston is better with Queta in the game and worse with Kornet.

[Big333223]

16 minutes for Kornet tonight in the blow-out against the Spurs and Kornet went 5-7 from the floor and 2-2 from the line. They've started to use Kornet like Rob Williams: throw up lobs and let him go get the ball because he's probably taller than whoever is in front of him and it's giving the offense a nice new angle.

[Muzzy66]

I'm been happy with what I've seen from thw two of them collectively as of late.  Both have given us some nice efforts and I think it's nice to know we have two bigs on the bench who can potentially come in and make an impact if either Porzingis or Horford is out.  The two have different plays styles and if anything having both just gives the coach some extra flexibility in choosing how he's going to play. 

For the moment Kornet is probably a bit more reliable, but I dont think he has any upside at all and pretty much is who he is.  Queta is young and a little inconsistent, but he looks to have solid upside.  He is a strong rebounder, decent rim protector and seems to have a knack for offensive rebounds / putbacks and he seems to have a good motor.  I feel like he could have the potential to develop into a Clint Capella / Steven Adams type if he's given the chance.   

[ozgod]

I'm been happy with what I've seen from thw two of them collectively as of late.  Both have given us some nice efforts and I think it's nice to know we have two bigs on the bench who can potentially come in and make an impact if either Porzingis or Horford is out.  The two have different plays styles and if anything having both just gives the coach some extra flexibility in choosing how he's going to play. 

For the moment Kornet is probably a bit more reliable, but I dont think he has any upside at all and pretty much is who he is.  Queta is young and a little inconsistent, but he looks to have solid upside.  He is a strong rebounder, decent rim protector and seems to have a knack for offensive rebounds / putbacks and he seems to have a good motor.  I feel like he could have the potential to develop into a Clint Capella / Steven Adams type if he's given the chance.

This is it really…one is a Phillips screwdriver the other is a flathead. Which one you deploy might depend on the type of screw you need to turn.