CelticsStrong
Around the League => Transaction Ideas and Rumors => Topic started by: Roy H. on December 06, 2012, 11:11:56 AM
-
I've seen numerous fans say that they wouldn't give up Sullinger for the likes of Gortat or Varejao.
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
-
Yeah, I think Sully is one of those guys whose main value is as a trade chip, because of his limited upside due to his lack of athleticism, as well as his back issues.
Now, I do have problems with certain combinations of players going out in a trade that includes Sully. But he certainly shouldn't be untouchable in a deal that brings back an impact big man like Varajao or Gortat.
-
Delusions of grandeur?
The guy is good, no doubt. He might even some day make an all-star team. I just don't see him as having anything more than boder-line all-star at best, as his ceiling.
I'm highly skeptical he'll ever reach the level of players like Josh Smith or Zach Randolph. Guess what, those two guys have zero all-star appearances combined.
He is not a cornerstone type player. Thus, if an opportunity presents itself to move him in a "win now" type of deal, you jump at it.
-
People keep talking about his back issues but so far i see no issues at all. Seems like alot of people overreacted to it. As far as being untouchable goes, im on record saying id trade him for the right guy.
-
As a note; sometimes I wonder if the Joe Johnson trade has permanently scarred some Celttics fans.
-
SUlly is like gold . He is a new found mother load at age 20. I think DA belives he is gonna be worth more as the months go by. The longer he holds on to him the cash registar just keep ringing. He looks better everygame and more comfortable in ANY role other than 5 postion. He just plays ball , never panicks, very steady . I think Sully has made Bass's improve his game. He is a great compliment for KG on the floor. He makes FAR less mistakes than Pierce , who I'd like to strangle with the needless turnovers.
I don't consider him "UNTOUCHBLE" , I'd trade him in some deal for Josh Smith or Varejao or a deal for an IMPACT PLAYER that fits the Celtics.
Bradley and Sully are well worth protecting until the "RIGHT" piece is available .
ALso...take the opposite view...IF BRadley and Sully are over rated as some posters think , then WHY is it that the FIRST players most people seem to think GM's would want would be Rondo ,Sully , and Bradley and to as lesser extent Fab. They are diamonds in the ruff and unless your getting a REAL high grade player , its better to kept what you got, the value is only going to increase..
I'm not so confused on Sully. It's Green that I'm not sure what the Celtics truely have. ;D
-
The hope (or delusion) that a team built around Rondo, AB, Green and Sully is some sort of title contender when KG and Pierce are gone.
-
The hope (or delusion) that a team built around Rondo, AB, Green and Sully is some sort of title contender when KG and Pierce are gone.
They will be title contenders I tell you.
IT'S GONNA HAPPEN.
-
I'd trade Sully but would offer Bass first.
-
The hope (or delusion) that a team built around Rondo, AB, Green and Sully is some sort of title contender when KG and Pierce are gone.
Contenders for the division, maybe. (And maybe is optimistic.)
-
Hes not untouchable whatsoever....but why do so many overrate varejao and gortat? Id possibly trade him depending what else we were sending for either of those guys but I believe he will be better than both in the long term and is already contributing.
The deals being proposed smell like a Joe Johnson for Tony delk and Rodney rogers...especially if Bradley was involved.
-
Agreed , its a start, but when KG and Paul are gone, a big Super star is gonna be needed.
Look at the NUGGETS ... lots of nice pieces ...this is what I see the Celtics being uless we get a ALstar player. to go with Rondo
-
I don't see him as untouchable its more common sense. He is good, not as good as Bass (right now). Sully is signed to rookie contract. If we are going to get anyone of note we need a contract going out. Bass makes more period
-
Yeah, I think Sully is one of those guys whose main value is as a trade chip, because of his limited upside due to his lack of athleticism, as well as his back issues.
Now, I do have problems with certain combinations of players going out in a trade that includes Sully. But he certainly shouldn't be untouchable in a deal that brings back an impact big man like Varajao or Gortat.
I agree with everything you say in the second paragraph, but I am hesitant to say his main value is as a trade chip. He seems like a steal to me at the moment related to his draft position and could develop nicely. He is giving us some production. He could be a valuable trade chip but I would prefer move other chips like Bass, Fab, or future picks.
I just wonder what it would take to grab Gortat. Could we get him for Bass, Fab and a 2013? I would do that before Bass and Sully.
-
Sully and Avery are our two most attractive trade pieces - they will be brought up a lot and it is important for Ainge and company to know their value
this might be a story on the front page sooner or later - bank on sooner
-
The hope (or delusion) that a team built around Rondo, AB, Green and Sully is some sort of title contender when KG and Pierce are gone.
Contenders for the division, maybe. (And maybe is optimistic.)
I don't know that it's so much that people actually think a team built around those players would win much of anything, but rather that people like to feel that the team has some kind of a young core in place for when the old guys retire / suffer a sudden decline.
Especially when your team isn't necessarily playing at an elite level (and the Celtics are not right now, though signs are pointing up), it's nice to be able to watch younger players develop and hope they might turn into something really nice.
I don't know that Sully is really ever going to a "great" player, but so far I'd say it's not overly optimistic to think he has a good chance of becoming at least an above average starter at his position. Those who say that his upside is so limited by his lack of athleticism should take a look at some guys around the league who have been very productive recently despite a lack of athleticism (Randolph, Love, Scola, Lee etc).
All of that said, though I would hate to see Sully go, getting a player like Varejao or Gortat could actually give this team a much better shot at doing something significant in the playoffs, and maximizing competitiveness in the next few years should be the primary goal. After Pierce, Garnett, and Terry retire, it's not going to matter much who else is on the team . . . we're going to be in free fall.
-
"After Pierce, Garnett, and Terry retire, it's not going to matter much who else is on the team . . . we're going to be in free fall. "
Unless we use their ~32 million (~20 mill to stay under the cap?) to grab a high impact player out of free agency then team him with our all-star RR, rising stud AB and solid role players Lee, Sully, Green.
-
I don't think he is untradable, but I would like the Celtics to hold on to him unless it nets a big win now player.
I'm really interested to see how good Sully can be once/if he loses 15 lbs. If he can shed that baby fat I think he can be a really good allstar type player.
-It'd help him with his defensive quickness(even though he is already becoming an underrated defender as he's already getting into the right spots to take charges)
-Let's not forget he has a pretty good post game that we have yet to see and he's showing a jumper that is surprisingly good.
-He's already looking like one of our better rebounders and losing the weight can only help.
I can see him at his best being a 18 and 12 guy.
I would also like to note that I have green tinted glasses on for Sully already and I realize that all statements above probably point to me being a homer, lol.
-
Roy,
I am a little surprised to read you comparing Gerald Green with Sully. They could not be different in terms of basketball IQ. Sully has perhaps the highest basketball IQ of any 20 year old to ever play in the NBA.
Smitty77
-
We obviously should trade him, if we hope to contend this year. We all know Doc never plays rookies!
-
I agree with SHAQATTACK that having a rookie player who actually contributes to the team feels like striking gold after a couple of "lost" years. It doesn't have to be the mother load, even if it's only a small vein, this is our gold. And who knows?
Furthermore, almost all players that are considered available to us through trade are flawed or haven't proven themselves as impact players for a contender. Gortat and Varejao weren't starting players, while they were on contending teams, and Varejao has a story of injuries for the last couple of seasons that shines like a big red warning light.
-
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
I don't think that a Gerald Green analogy is apt. Sully is partly potential, but Sully actually knows how to play ball. He's earning time, playing like 18 MPG as a rookie on a Doc Rivers championship contending team, which ought to merit some sort of trophy.
We know he can score, he can rebound, he has range, he is a good passer, he doesn't turn the ball over, he's smart, he's picking up the D, he's taking charges like a boss. These aren't things he might do, these are things he DOES do, we've seen it in actual NBA games. That's not to say he doesn't have obvious downsides, since he does, but there you go, not really a GG in my opinion.
To your original question, I think people are just overly attached to him for non-business reasons. He's as tradeable as any other asset on the roster. This poster is not gonna disparage anyone who gets excited about a promising young rookie, though.
I'd personally be OK seeing Sully go if we got value back. Sideshow Bob would be awesome, so would Gortat.
-
I've seen numerous fans say that they wouldn't give up Sullinger for the likes of Gortat or Varejao.
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
I don't think that Sully will be a star but he seems like he'll be a fairly solid rotation player. Comparing him to Green (when Green was on the Celts) is just plain cold.
But I'd trade him for Gortat or AV.
-
Roy,
I am a little surprised to read you comparing Gerald Green with Sully. They could not be different in terms of basketball IQ. Sully has perhaps the highest basketball IQ of any 20 year old to ever play in the NBA.
Smitty77
Wow.
-
Wow?
-
I've seen numerous fans say that they wouldn't give up Sullinger for the likes of Gortat or Varejao.
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
I don't know that he's untouchable but I wouldn't include him for either of these two. Gortat is much more over valued than Sully in my opinion. He's a desent big that's probably a backup on a team with a good center. Varejao is having an excellent season, but he's been around a while and until I see these numbers continue I have my doubts, not to mention his injury history.
Sullinger looks to be impoving with playing time. He rebounds pretty well and shows a desent shot. I think once he stops getting so many rookie fouls he could be a good defender. He draws a fair amount of charges and shows a pretty good basketball IQ.
So while not untouchable, I certainly wouldn't trade him for another decent player. I would be looking for a team changer, which I don't believe either of these guys are.
-
And I am not saying that I would not put him on the table to help us win now!!
I do strongly believe he has a high b-ball IQ, being a coach's son and all.
Smitty77
-
I'd trade Sully but would offer Bass first.
My thoughts too. Love the kid, love his game, and I think he is going to be a Boozerlike player in the league; but if AV or Gortat are available to nab and the deal includes Sully then I ship him off.
-
Wow?
I kept my response brief because I was fairly certain you were kidding. Magic was in the league when he was 20, I don't think anyone would say Sully has a BBIQ that's anywhere close to Magic's.
-
I've seen numerous fans say that they wouldn't give up Sullinger for the likes of Gortat or Varejao.
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
I don't know that he's untouchable but I wouldn't include him for either of these two. Gortat is much more over valued than Sully in my opinion. He's a desent big that's probably a backup on a team with a good center. Varejao is having an excellent season, but he's been around a while and until I see these numbers continue I have my doubts, not to mention his injury history.
Sullinger looks to be impoving with playing time. He rebounds pretty well and shows a desent shot. I think once he stops getting so many rookie fouls he could be a good defender. He draws a fair amount of charges and shows a pretty good basketball IQ.
So while not untouchable, I certainly wouldn't trade him for another decent player. I would be looking for a team changer, which I don't believe either of these guys are.
Couldn't of said it better myself
-
People keep talking about his back issues but so far i see no issues at all. Seems like alot of people overreacted to it. As far as being untouchable goes, im on record saying id trade him for the right guy.
and you are? ::)
-
People keep talking about his back issues but so far i see no issues at all. Seems like alot of people overreacted to it. As far as being untouchable goes, im on record saying id trade him for the right guy.
They said the same thing about Roy and his knee early in his career and look how that turned out.
I hope the back never gives out but saying since it hasn't happened yet, it must not be a worry isn't true.
-
The deals being proposed smell like a Joe Johnson for Tony delk and Rodney rogers...especially if Bradley was involved.
I see at least one person here is guilty
As a note; sometimes I wonder if the Joe Johnson trade has permanently scarred some Celttics fans.
Trading away Sullinger and/or Bradley is in no way comparable to trading away Joe Johnson, particularly Sullinger. Neither player have any hope of ever being on Johnson's level.
-
The deals being proposed smell like a Joe Johnson for Tony delk and Rodney rogers...especially if Bradley was involved.
I see at least one person here is guilty
As a note; sometimes I wonder if the Joe Johnson trade has permanently scarred some Celttics fans.
Trading away Sullinger and/or Bradley is in no way comparable to trading away Joe Johnson, particularly Sullinger. Neither player have any hope of ever being on Johnson's level.
and why is that? JJ wasn't projected to get to the level he's at which is why they traded him. seems really premature to say that neither Avery or Sully can get to that level. Bradley still has a lot of untapped potential and his D can mke him a real game changer.
-
The deals being proposed smell like a Joe Johnson for Tony delk and Rodney rogers...especially if Bradley was involved.
I see at least one person here is guilty
As a note; sometimes I wonder if the Joe Johnson trade has permanently scarred some Celttics fans.
Trading away Sullinger and/or Bradley is in no way comparable to trading away Joe Johnson, particularly Sullinger. Neither player have any hope of ever being on Johnson's level
Couldn't be any more wrong....Johnson was midway through his rookie season and no one had any hope he would be what he is.. we kept another rookie wing at the time who we could've used in the trade instead but thought he had more potential...he soon after was out of the league.....sully and Bradley both have more potential then anyone thouhght Joe potentialltly had then....as evidenced by the players we fit in return. Sorry.
-
Excuse me, but my permanent scarring came from Chauncey Billups being traded halfway through his rookie season.
For Kenny Anderson. :'(
-
Where did I say that Sully was the same player as Gerald Green?
There are dozens of reasons why a player's potential might not work out. There's an argument that, even best case scenario, Sully will never be as good as Varejao or Gortat. When you add the substantial risk that Sully will never reach that upside, trading him for legit talent doesn't seem all that risky to me.
-
The deals being proposed smell like a Joe Johnson for Tony delk and Rodney rogers...especially if Bradley was involved.
I see at least one person here is guilty
As a note; sometimes I wonder if the Joe Johnson trade has permanently scarred some Celttics fans.
Trading away Sullinger and/or Bradley is in no way comparable to trading away Joe Johnson, particularly Sullinger. Neither player have any hope of ever being on Johnson's level.
Couldn't be any more wrong....Johnson was midway through his rookie season and no one had any hope he would be what he is.. we kept another rookie wing at the time who we could've used in the trade instead but thought he had more potential...he soon after was out of the league.....sully and Bradley both have more potential then anyone thouhght Joe potentialltly had then....sorry
And I dont really think Joe Johnson is that great, especially anymore. Iso - Joe. Thats all he does. He rebounded well for a few years but at this point in his career he is an isolation player that has a horrible shot selection and a painfully low basketball IQ.
-
Sully has perhaps the highest basketball IQ of any 20 year old to ever play in the NBA.
Smitty77
(http://www.salem-news.com/stimg/january102008/bill-walton-three1.jpg)
That's maybe overstating things a little?
-
Where did I say that Sully was the same player as Gerald Green?
There are dozens of reasons why a player's potential might not work out. There's an argument that, even best case scenario, Sully will never be as good as Varejao or Gortat. When you add the substantial risk that Sully will never reach that upside, trading him for legit talent doesn't seem all that risky to me.
That argument is overrating varejao and gortat. At their best they were backups on playoff teams/contenders....and starters on crap teams. Pretty sure Jared can do that already.
-
Where did I say that Sully was the same player as Gerald Green?
There are dozens of reasons why a player's potential might not work out. There's an argument that, even best case scenario, Sully will never be as good as Varejao or Gortat. When you add the substantial risk that Sully will never reach that upside, trading him for legit talent doesn't seem all that risky to me.
I don't see where anyone accused you of it, I just think it's not an apt comparison. Sully is not some amorphous ball of athletic potentiality; he's rookie that's 18 games into his NBA career, and is already delivering on his promise, somewhere on a TV screen near you.
There's an argument that Sully will never be as good as Bob/Gortat... given certain criteria. Not criteria like "shooting range" or "free throws", though. I think it's important to keep in perspective that he will probably be a different kind of player, even if it's in the same position.
-
Where did I say that Sully was the same player as Gerald Green?
There are dozens of reasons why a player's potential might not work out. There's an argument that, even best case scenario, Sully will never be as good as Varejao or Gortat. When you add the substantial risk that Sully will never reach that upside, trading him for legit talent doesn't seem all that risky to me.
That argument is overrating varejao and gortat. At their best they were backups on playoff teams/contenders....and starters on crap teams. Pretty sure Jared can do that already.
You see Sullinger putting up 15/15 as a starter on a poor team? I think that's a bit optimistic.
-
I'd trade Sully but would offer Bass first.
My thoughts too. Love the kid, love his game, and I think he is going to be a Boozerlike player in the league; but if AV or Gortat are available to nab and the deal includes Sully then I ship him off.
This where I'm at too. We kinda know Bass is at his prime . Man ...I just can't wait to see Sully and Bradley in 1-2 years. I just hope they are STILL Celtics so I don't have to cringe watching them on the Lakers or Bulls stomping the Bug-Juice out of the Celtics one day ...
-
I've seen numerous fans say that they wouldn't give up Sullinger for the likes of Gortat or Varejao.
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
Epitome of homerism, really. That's the only explanation. Sully is solid. He's in the Bass/Glen Davis mold. Should be a solid role player for many years to come. Could eventually crack a starting lineup by default (like Bass and Davis). He's the 10th best rookie this year so far which is somewhat encouraging. He's up there with the likes of Kyle Singler and Alexey Shved. I'd trade either one of those guys for a legit starter as well.
-
Where did I say that Sully was the same player as Gerald Green?
There are dozens of reasons why a player's potential might not work out. There's an argument that, even best case scenario, Sully will never be as good as Varejao or Gortat. When you add the substantial risk that Sully will never reach that upside, trading him for legit talent doesn't seem all that risky to me.
That argument is overrating varejao and gortat. At their best they were backups on playoff teams/contenders....and starters on crap teams. Pretty sure Jared can do that already.
You see Sullinger putting up 15/15 as a starter on a poor team? I think that's a bit optimistic.
Don't think its unreasonable for him to in a stretch of games in his career(all av has done). I think he can be consitenty better than varejao has been where there's an argument(more like fact) this year is a fluke...hes never before averaged over 10 points and its his 9th season...I have no doubt in my mind Jared can have a better career....but I don't think hes untouchable but find it completely unfathomable that best case scenario he wont be as good as varejao...uh
-
Sully has a unique skillset, fills a key position on the court (it's all about the PF spot, IMO), is improving incredibly as a rookie and belongs out there already, has a low-allstar/6POY candidate ceiling and could get there very soon, and could complement any C and SF in style and substance due to his versatility and BBIQ. He can score and rebound. And he's a rookie on a rookie contract.
That's about it. Trading him for someone like Gortat would be, according to this upside-only take on him, a lateral move, especially if he's starting over Bass to start next season.
And that's a possiblity, which would have us look like a nice mix of talented youth and experience:
Rondo/Terry
Lee/Bradley
Pierce/Green
Sully/Bass
KG/Wilcox
If Sully comes around over the course of this season like he might be starting to, we're retty darn well set.
The only thing we could do is try to get bigger, and then only if we're not happy with giving any minutes at all to Collins.
In that case (wanting another C), we ship out Bass, Barbosa, Collins, and a pick. I actually would rather keep Joseph than a 1st rounder, and perhas Melo as well.
I dunno...does that sound nuts?
-
Good one Roy:-)))) I did overstate it:-)) Forgot about Magic and I am sure a few others. I do like his b-ball IQ though and will stand by that part of it.
I am spinning and spinning this and it is still not working:-))
Smitty77
-
We'll all just have wait till AB , Green , and the whole mess of who is who becomes more clear.
I just thinking....AB , Sully, Fab, Joseph are some nice young pieces , that are being TRAINED CORRECTLY and schooled by the best Pierce, Doc and KG .
The Celtics mold players in indiviuals other teams enjoy getting.
-
I've seen numerous fans say that they wouldn't give up Sullinger for the likes of Gortat or Varejao.
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
Clearly, u avoid trading impact rookies- if u can trade veterans with similar roles or skill level. I don't think most fans see him as untouchable. However, Westphaul for Charlie Scott, or Joe Johnson as a last minute throw in scenarios should be avoided. Varejaeo would be a coup. But move Bass over Sullinger, is what most people r saying!
-
I've seen numerous fans say that they wouldn't give up Sullinger for the likes of Gortat or Varejao.
What am I missing? Sullinger has some potential, but so did Gerald Green. What do people see in Sullinger that suggests that he holds more value than an above-average starting center?
First...please do not compare Sullinger to Gerald Green. Sully was an All-American and a legit top-10 projection before the health issues arose.
Second: we just drafted the guy. He is getting significant minutes under a coach who NEVER plays rookies. I like what I see every game. He is what, 21? I don't want to trade a guy like that, a guy this franchise needs to as part of its foundation for the next 5 years, for Marcin Gortat, who may or may not improve this team.
Nobody is untouchable. But my ranks of untouchability for this roster are:
1) Rondo
2) KG
3) Pierce (only because he is a lifer)
4) Avery
5) Sully
Everyone else is very touchable.
-
But move Bass over Sullinger, is what most people r saying!
I think many fans think that Cleveland would reject a deal centered around Bass out of hand.
-
I think many fans think that Cleveland would reject a deal centered around Bass out of hand.
In general, or for Bob specifically? I think that Bass has a nice contract (3y for only 6-7m/yr) and is a pretty good player, so that makes him a pretty decent trade piece in a void. Admittedly I don't know how well he would fit on Cleveland's roster.
-
"After Pierce, Garnett, and Terry retire, it's not going to matter much who else is on the team . . . we're going to be in free fall. "
Unless we use their ~32 million (~20 mill to stay under the cap?) to grab a high impact player out of free agency then team him with our all-star RR, rising stud AB and solid role players Lee, Sully, Green.
This has been discussed a lot before, but the Celtics don't have a great track record with attracting top free agents. Plus, we've seen how much of a crap-shoot that can be (see: Mavericks).
-
Where did I say that Sully was the same player as Gerald Green?
There are dozens of reasons why a player's potential might not work out. There's an argument that, even best case scenario, Sully will never be as good as Varejao or Gortat. When you add the substantial risk that Sully will never reach that upside, trading him for legit talent doesn't seem all that risky to me.
All true, but I think people kind of have a point when they reference guys like Joe Johnson (or Chauncey Billups!).
We're not talking Al Jefferson for KG here. Though Varejao is playing like a total beast this season.
-
I think many fans think that Cleveland would reject a deal centered around Bass out of hand.
In general, or for Bob specifically? I think that Bass has a nice contract (3y for only 6-7m/yr) and is a pretty good player, so that makes him a pretty decent trade piece in a void. Admittedly I don't know how well he would fit on Cleveland's roster.
For AV. Presumably, Cleveland will be able to add better talent than Bass in any Varejao trade.
To get someone good, you (usually) have to give up somebody good, or add another tangible benefit. A trade centered around Bass without giving up either Sullinger or Bradley probably won't happen.
-
my problem is, this isnt anything like Al Jefferson for KG...with that trade you are getting an All-star and one of the best PF's of all time
most of the trades people are throwing out here are for guys like Gortat or Verajo...for the talent you are giving up to mak, im not sure how much better it makes you this year
and, it certainly doesnt make you better for the future
-
my problem is, this isnt anything like Al Jefferson for KG...with that trade you are getting an All-star and one of the best PF's of all time
most of the trades people are throwing out here are for guys like Gortat or Verajo...for the talent you are giving up to mak, im not sure how much better it makes you this year
and, it certainly doesnt make you better for the future
It's also pretty unlikely that Sullinger is ever as good as Big Al.
-
my problem is, this isnt anything like Al Jefferson for KG...with that trade you are getting an All-star and one of the best PF's of all time
most of the trades people are throwing out here are for guys like Gortat or Verajo...for the talent you are giving up to mak, im not sure how much better it makes you this year
and, it certainly doesnt make you better for the future
It's also pretty unlikely that Sullinger is ever as good as Big Al.
maybe not, but I think alot of people are selling Sullinger short...
before news about his 'back" came out he was a projected top 10pick in this draft, and was a top3 projected pick had he come out last year.
you arent projected that high without having upside...best case scenario he becomes a david west...worst case scenario a baby davis/Brandon bass...which is still a 10ppg/6rpg player
i'm just more in favor of trading our future youth in Bradley/Sullinger if it nets us an impact player...not a stopgap for now
especially when those guys are already shown to be rotation worth NBA players
-
Bass is a KNOWn quanity, What you see is what get.
What makes Sully ...has he even finished growing ??? and AB intriguing is their upside is not known to anybody, alot of us were totally wrong about Bradley his first year amd would have traded him for a donut.. He is a dynamite player , but knowbody knows where his ceiling is now , and same for Sully , Fab or Joseph...you can guess all you want , but you never know how somebody might turn out.
I would gamble keeping AB and Sully and Fab. I never felt this way about JJJ or Moore.
-
I think Sully is touchable but he has shown some flashes of ability and that makes it where one does not want to part with him casually..
-
We're not talking Al Jefferson for KG here. Though Varejao is playing like a total beast this season.
If the Celtics had Al Jefferson, I would trade him for Varejao.
-
To answer your qeustion, i'd say it would be like Chauncey Billups again if we traded him.
Man it would suck to see Sully perform very well with another team.
Him, rondo and bradley are the future faces of the Celtics
-
To answer your qeustion, i'd say it would be like Chauncey Billups again if we traded him.
Man it would suck to see Sully perform very well with another team.
Him, rondo and bradley are the future faces of the Celtics
:'(Billups was an incredible screwup. :'( :'(
Keep Sully , AB , Fab and Joseph and see what s what...
Gotta see what all these kids can bring to the table by the years end.
-
Where did I say that Sully was the same player as Gerald Green?
There are dozens of reasons why a player's potential might not work out. There's an argument that, even best case scenario, Sully will never be as good as Varejao or Gortat. When you add the substantial risk that Sully will never reach that upside, trading him for legit talent doesn't seem all that risky to me.
you may be right that sullinger will never match gortat. it is hard to say. however, i dont think it a lock that he wont at least rival gortat.
right now....
sullinger
18:11 min/game
5.6 pts/game
4.7 reb/game
.06 block/game
gortat
31:18 min/game
11.7 pts/game
8.3 reb/game
2.1 blocks/game
gortat is 28, sully is 20. only time will tell.
-
We're not talking Al Jefferson for KG here. Though Varejao is playing like a total beast this season.
If the Celtics had Al Jefferson, I would trade him for Varejao.
Yep, me too.
-
best case scenario he becomes a david west...worst case scenario a baby davis/Brandon bass...which is still a 10ppg/6rpg player
I would argue that for significant stretches this year Sully has already outplayed Brandon Bass. Which means there's no question he's better than Glen Davis already.
I really like the David West comparison. I could see Sully becoming that kind of player. David West was never a superstar, but he's been an All-Star caliber player a number of years now. Right now he's probably the best player on the Pacers. He's shown that he's a lot more than a guy who caught passes from Chris Paul for a while.
-
I think Sullinger has a chance to be a starter for a contending team, with the potential to average a double-double in points and rebounds. Those guys to do grow on trees. When you have them at 21 on rookie contracts you keep them, unless someone blows you away with a trade offer.
And no: Gortat or Varejao are not the kind of players that blow me away.
-
Delusions of grandeur?
The guy is good, no doubt. He might even some day make an all-star team. I just don't see him as having anything more than boder-line all-star at best, as his ceiling.
I'm highly skeptical he'll ever reach the level of players like Josh Smith or Zach Randolph. Guess what, those two guys have zero all-star appearances combined.
He is not a cornerstone type player. Thus, if an opportunity presents itself to move him in a "win now" type of deal, you jump at it.
I guess you missed the 2010 all-star game. :)
-
There are a few reasons I don't think he's likely to get traded. Some of the intangibles are:
1. He's only 20 years old, and he's already good enough to start for most teams.
2. He's a hard worker, he's modest and he has a willingness to learn.
3. He has incredibly high IQ - guys with high IQ tend to have long effective careers because their skills are not dependant on their athletic ablity.
Now the tangibles:
1. He is versatile offensively he can score off offensive rebounds, he can score in the post, he shoots well from midragen, he has three point range and he's currently shooting > 90% from the Free Throw line. He shoots at a higher percentage from the floor than Bass does in just about ever area.
2. He is probably the best rebounder on our team. His rebound rate is equal first on the team (with KG), but while KG is an elite defensive rebounder he is a below average offensive rebounder. Sully rebounds on both ends of the floor. He's probably our only genuine offensive rebounding threat, with his OREB rate of 11% being very good.
3. He has excellent hands. He doesn't bounce the ball of his feet, and he is very good at catching Rondo's uncatchable bullet passes. He turns the ball over maybe once in every 3 games if that.
4. He's picking up a knack for drawing charges (in the mould of Big Baby) and his individual defense is improving by the day.
Now most important of all, he's on a cheap rookie contact. What vet is out there on a $2m contract that we can trade Sully for and who is actually WORTH tading him for?
-
There are a few reasons I don't think he's likely to get traded. Some of the intangibles are:
1. He's only 20 years old, and he's already good enough to start for most teams
Which 16+ teams would he start on?
-
Bobcats or Wizards?
-
We're not talking Al Jefferson for KG here. Though Varejao is playing like a total beast this season.
If the Celtics had Al Jefferson, I would trade him for Varejao.
Yep, me too.
I will bite
-
To answer your qeustion, i'd say it would be like Chauncey Billups again if we traded him.
Man it would suck to see Sully perform very well with another team.
Him, rondo and bradley are the future faces of the Celtics
:'(Billups was an incredible screwup. :'( :'(
Keep Sully , AB , Fab and Joseph and see what s what...
Gotta see what all these kids can bring to the table by the years end.
Billups bounced around the league for years and was on like his 5th team before he even remotely played like an above average starter. And Kenny Anderson was a pretty solid player for Boston. He came over in his prime (27), stayed 5 years, and was a key member of some nice Celtics' playoff runs.
-
To answer your qeustion, i'd say it would be like Chauncey Billups again if we traded him.
Man it would suck to see Sully perform very well with another team.
Him, rondo and bradley are the future faces of the Celtics
:'(Billups was an incredible screwup. :'( :'(
Keep Sully , AB , Fab and Joseph and see what s what...
Gotta see what all these kids can bring to the table by the years end.
Billups bounced around the league for years and was on like his 5th team before he even remotely played like an above average starter. And Kenny Anderson was a pretty solid player for Boston. He came over in his prime (27), stayed 5 years, and was a key member of some nice Celtics' playoff runs.
exactly. Billups wasn't a screwup. trading a young player that needs 5-6 years to develop for a solid veteran that improves your team immediately isn't a mistake.
Trading JJ, now that was a mistake for several reasons.
1. He had shown NBA-level skills before he was traded whereas Kedrick Brown had not.
2. C's had another lesser player (Brown) that PHX would have taken instead.
3. Although Rogers and Delk were major players in the playoff run that year, not keeping Rogers for more than a partial-season rental (thus necessitating the Gin Baker trade the following year) compounded the mistake of trading JJ.
a team with a prime Kenny Anderson and young JJ, PP and Toine would have been a really solid foundation for the next several years.
-
There are a few reasons I don't think he's likely to get traded. Some of the intangibles are:
1. He's only 20 years old, and he's already good enough to start for most teams
Which 16+ teams would he start on?
Is it really hard to believe when DOC RIVERS wanted to start him going into his rookie season? May not have been entirely ready and needs a little refinement but going forward don't think its a stretch.
-
There are a few reasons I don't think he's likely to get traded. Some of the intangibles are:
1. He's only 20 years old, and he's already good enough to start for most teams
Which 16+ teams would he start on?
Is it really hard to believe when DOC RIVERS wanted to start him going into his rookie season? May not have been entirely ready and needs a little refinement but going forward don't think its a stretch.
Doc Rivers hate rookies but he hates drama even more
Ray Allen and Rondo was in that moment coming into drama territory
p.s. I am not sure if I trust Doc desitions at all
-
if Sully is untouchable and Jeff Green is untradable does that mean they're destined to be packaged off as a package? LOL
-
Where does this notion that Doc Rivers hates rookies come from? I mean seriously, Doc Rivers has consistently played rookies since he arrived here. He doesn't play rookies that aren't ready to play, but if the rookie shows he can contribute he will play.
2004-05 - Won Atlantic
Allen - 16.4
Jefferson - 14.8
West - 13
05-06 - Crappy Team
Gomes - 22.6
Greene - 15.4
Green - 11.7
06-07 - Crappy Team
Rondo - 23.5
Powe - 11.4
Ray - 15.1 (about half the games)
Pinkney - 16.7 (only 6 games)
07-08 - NBA Champs
Davis - 13.6 (8.1 in the playoffs)
Pruitt - 6.3 (only 15 games)
08-09 - ECF Semis
Walker - 7.4 (29 games)
Giddens - 1.3 (6 games)
09-10 - NBA Finals
Hudson - 4.4 (16 games)
Lafayette - 22 (1 game)
Landry - 3 (1 game - also played 17 games for NY)
10-11 - ECF Semis
Bradley - 5.2 (only healthy about half)
Erden - 14.4 (about half)
Harangody - 8.6 (28 games)
Johnson - 8 (4 games - mid season injury add)
11-12 - ECF Finals
Stiemsma - 13.9 (most when healthy)
Johnson - 8.3 (about a third)
Moore - 8.7 (about half)
In other words, guys who were solid NBA level players got plenty of time as rookies. Guys that were not, did not. Pretty much what you would hope and expect your coach to do. You certainly could question how much development Doc does with young guys, but if they can play as rookies he doesn't hesitate to play them.
-
Where does this notion that Doc Rivers hates rookies come from? I mean seriously, Doc Rivers has consistently played rookies since he arrived here. He doesn't play rookies that aren't ready to play, but if the rookie shows he can contribute he will play.
2004-05 - Won Atlantic
Allen - 16.4
Jefferson - 14.8
West - 13
05-06 - Crappy Team
Gomes - 22.6
Greene - 15.4
Green - 11.7
06-07 - Crappy Team
Rondo - 23.5
Powe - 11.4
Ray - 15.1 (about half the games)
Pinkney - 16.7 (only 6 games)
07-08 - NBA Champs
Davis - 13.6 (8.1 in the playoffs)
Pruitt - 6.3 (only 15 games)
08-09 - ECF Semis
Walker - 7.4 (29 games)
Giddens - 1.3 (6 games)
09-10 - NBA Finals
Hudson - 4.4 (16 games)
Lafayette - 22 (1 game)
Landry - 3 (1 game - also played 17 games for NY)
10-11 - ECF Semis
Bradley - 5.2 (only healthy about half)
Erden - 14.4 (about half)
Harangody - 8.6 (28 games)
Johnson - 8 (4 games - mid season injury add)
11-12 - ECF Finals
Stiemsma - 13.9 (most when healthy)
Johnson - 8.3 (about a third)
Moore - 8.7 (about half)
In other words, guys who were solid NBA level players got plenty of time as rookies. Guys that were not, did not. Pretty much what you would hope and expect your coach to do. You certainly could question how much development Doc does with young guys, but if they can play as rookies he doesn't hesitate to play them.
tp but i think many of us have tried in vain to explain over and over that
"doc hates rookies" just isn't true, notice the guys who got minutes are nba players most the other guys aren't even in the league anymore
but don't worry in 2 seconds another thread will have a line doc won't play rookies
-
Where does this notion that Doc Rivers hates rookies come from? I mean seriously, Doc Rivers has consistently played rookies since he arrived here. He doesn't play rookies that aren't ready to play, but if the rookie shows he can contribute he will play.
2004-05 - Won Atlantic
Allen - 16.4
Jefferson - 14.8
West - 13
05-06 - Crappy Team
Gomes - 22.6
Greene - 15.4
Green - 11.7
06-07 - Crappy Team
Rondo - 23.5
Powe - 11.4
Ray - 15.1 (about half the games)
Pinkney - 16.7 (only 6 games)
07-08 - NBA Champs
Davis - 13.6 (8.1 in the playoffs)
Pruitt - 6.3 (only 15 games)
08-09 - ECF Semis
Walker - 7.4 (29 games)
Giddens - 1.3 (6 games)
09-10 - NBA Finals
Hudson - 4.4 (16 games)
Lafayette - 22 (1 game)
Landry - 3 (1 game - also played 17 games for NY)
10-11 - ECF Semis
Bradley - 5.2 (only healthy about half)
Erden - 14.4 (about half)
Harangody - 8.6 (28 games)
Johnson - 8 (4 games - mid season injury add)
11-12 - ECF Finals
Stiemsma - 13.9 (most when healthy)
Johnson - 8.3 (about a third)
Moore - 8.7 (about half)
In other words, guys who were solid NBA level players got plenty of time as rookies. Guys that were not, did not. Pretty much what you would hope and expect your coach to do. You certainly could question how much development Doc does with young guys, but if they can play as rookies he doesn't hesitate to play them.
tp but i think many of us have tried in vain to explain over and over that
"doc hates rookies" just isn't true, notice the guys who got minutes are nba players most the other guys aren't even in the league anymore
but don't worry in 2 seconds another thread will have a line doc won't play rookies
Heck he gave Orien Greene over 15 minutes a game (he played in 80 games I think). OG has been out of the league for years. Allan Ray got heavy minutes as well and he played about half of the games. He too sucks.
Doc Rivers plays the players he thinks will help the team win, whether it is a rookie or a 20 year veteran doesn't matter. He plays the best players on the team. He won't necessarily over play rookies to help them develop faster or anything like that, but he certainly plays them.
-
Where does this notion that Doc Rivers hates rookies come from? I mean seriously, Doc Rivers has consistently played rookies since he arrived here.
The notion comes from much of the board (not always the same people) consistently heavily overrating our rookies. Since Doc doesn't play them as much as the overrating indicates, he must have a vendetta against them.
I'd think Sully's role would tamper that kind of talk down this year though. And I hope no one seriously believes Melo or Joseph are ready for real minutes.
-
Doc plays who he's got - in some cases the best he's got is rookies and that may or may not be a good thing but ultimately that is Danny's responsibility
-
Some Spurs fans believe that Gregg Popovich hates rookies.
-
Where does this notion that Doc Rivers hates rookies come from? I mean seriously, Doc Rivers has consistently played rookies since he arrived here. He doesn't play rookies that aren't ready to play, but if the rookie shows he can contribute he will play.
2004-05 - Won Atlantic
Allen - 16.4
Jefferson - 14.8
West - 13
05-06 - Crappy Team
Gomes - 22.6
Greene - 15.4
Green - 11.7
06-07 - Crappy Team
Rondo - 23.5
Powe - 11.4
Ray - 15.1 (about half the games)
Pinkney - 16.7 (only 6 games)
07-08 - NBA Champs
Davis - 13.6 (8.1 in the playoffs)
Pruitt - 6.3 (only 15 games)
08-09 - ECF Semis
Walker - 7.4 (29 games)
Giddens - 1.3 (6 games)
09-10 - NBA Finals
Hudson - 4.4 (16 games)
Lafayette - 22 (1 game)
Landry - 3 (1 game - also played 17 games for NY)
10-11 - ECF Semis
Bradley - 5.2 (only healthy about half)
Erden - 14.4 (about half)
Harangody - 8.6 (28 games)
Johnson - 8 (4 games - mid season injury add)
11-12 - ECF Finals
Stiemsma - 13.9 (most when healthy)
Johnson - 8.3 (about a third)
Moore - 8.7 (about half)
In other words, guys who were solid NBA level players got plenty of time as rookies. Guys that were not, did not. Pretty much what you would hope and expect your coach to do. You certainly could question how much development Doc does with young guys, but if they can play as rookies he doesn't hesitate to play them.
Which one of those rookies do you think hes liked more than Jared? Went into the season wanting to start him on a suppose to be contending team over a guy who helped turn the season around last year and got a new contract? Granted it didn't work at first with Jared and lee but it says a lot....those crap teams rookies mean little to nothing.
-
There is the possibility that Danny has managed to rebuild through the draft and a couple of modest trades right in front of our eyes?
Rondo/Bradley
Lee/Bradley
Green/Joseph
Sullinger/Green
Melo (we pray one day)
So...if KG is an allstar C, we're set for a few years there. And Pierce and JET are here as long as KG is, making us should-be contenders.
The trick is going to be filling the middle spot, not just now, but for the next few years and beyond the KG years, and possibly as Pierce and KG hang around for an extra year or two off the bench.
What we have available doesn't include Sully; he's the keeper over Bass. Keeping both is a possiblity, and then we're pretty well all set there, too.
As long as KG/Wilcox/Collins works at the C position, there is really no reason we should be thinking trades unless we can pick up an allstar, preferably at the C position.
And at that point, anyone is available.
-
Sully is part of the future of this franchise. Wae have to build our own team and get away from the model that got us #17. That is not a lasting model for dominance ...
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
Sully's ceiling is extremely high despite the fact that he's not athletic. Similar to athleticism, size and health setting your physical ceiling, IQ, attitude and work ethic set your mental ceiling. Andre Miller, Paul Pierce, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Boris Diaw, Elton Brand, Glen Davis etc. are guys who achieved way more than their physical profiles predicted thanks to their work ethic/IQ/attitude.
Sullinger's skill level is unbelievable for a 20 year old. How many 20 year olds shoot like this kid? make free throws like him? Rebound like him? Pass like him? understand defensive rotations like him? know and accept their roles on offense like him? He doesn't get frustrated when the officials rob him. He doesn't care if he starts or comes off the bench. He works with Rondo every day after practice. He does everything KG tells him to do. Doc already trusts him more than any rookie EVER including Rondo.
In the future, he will develop a post game, become a much better defender, improve his range and shooting, improve his physique etc. his ceiling is incredibly high and he has given us NO REASON to doubt that he won't reach it.
I don't believe any player is untouchable, but the price for Bradley and Sullinger are very, very high. I wouldn't trade both of them together unless it nets us a player at least in the MVP conversation.
-
He's not untouchable, but he is putting up really nice numbers for a rookie PF and is cheaper than Bass.
Only thing Bass has on Sully is his athleticism.
Bass's contract is what make him trade bate, high enough contract you can use in a package, but not too big to scare the other teams away.
-
I actually think that Danny would rather keep Sully than Bradley.
I just repeated this in another thread, but Sully is starting look like we could have an All Star version of Carlos Boozer on our hands in a few years.
Big, strong, dropping weight quickly, decent jumpshot that will only get better.
But obviously the difference is that Sully can rebound and play defense like a 3-4 year NBA veteran. He's getting some fluff rookie calls from the refs but in 20 games his defense has gone from horrid to solid and he literally gets better every game. Watching him off the ball, he's continually watching his man and getting to his spot on rotations whilst finding, sealing and boxing out whoever comes near the key to rebound.
He's the most impressive addition we've had this season for me, even more than Green or Terry because we knew what they were capable of.
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
Sully's ceiling is extremely high despite the fact that he's not athletic. Similar to athleticism, size and health setting your physical ceiling, IQ, attitude and work ethic set your mental ceiling. Andre Miller, Paul Pierce, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Boris Diaw, Elton Brand, Glen Davis etc. are guys who achieved way more than their physical profiles predicted thanks to their work ethic/IQ/attitude.
Sullinger's skill level is unbelievable for a 20 year old. How many 20 year olds shoot like this kid? make free throws like him? Rebound like him? Pass like him? understand defensive rotations like him? know and accept their roles on offense like him? He doesn't get frustrated when the officials rob him. He doesn't care if he starts or comes off the bench. He works with Rondo every day after practice. He does everything KG tells him to do. Doc already trusts him more than any rookie EVER including Rondo.
In the future, he will develop a post game, become a much better defender, improve his range and shooting, improve his physique etc. his ceiling is incredibly high and he has given us NO REASON to doubt that he won't reach it.
I don't believe any player is untouchable, but the price for Bradley and Sullinger are very, very high. I wouldn't trade both of them together unless it nets us a player at least in the MVP conversation.
TP for Yogi.
I share a similar sentiment for Sully. I mean I'd give him up to get a game changer like Josh Smith, Verajao or Gortat-but I wouldn't give up much more.
His combination of skill, size, intelligence on the court and work ethic are extremely rare. He's a coaches son with a nose for the ball and I can't remember seeing a Celtics rookie with rebounding ability and hunger like him for a while. I think if he dropped another 20 pounds he'd be starting by next season.
I don't think he's untouchable, but he's dumping over most rookies. Larbrd33 mentioned Meyers Leonard, but Sully's ceiling has surely got to be considered much higher than Leonards? I mean Leonards getting minutes and doing alright but in 5 years time Sully is much more likely to be an all star because of the assetts he brings as mentioned earlier.
I think we may be able to get Josh Smith by moving Sully and Bradley and I'd have to think veeeerrryyy long and hard to say no to that.
Even Cleveland rebuilding and getting something for Verajao. We have two lottery/borderline lottery level talent kids in Sully/Bradley and we'll probably have to give up one to get a game changing big man.
At the end of the day, we can't get too caught up in the future, because we only have KG and Pierce for 2, maybe 3 years and if we need to move a young stud to get an immediate contributor to banner 18 Danny will and must pull the trigger.
Gonna be bitter sweet though.
-
Didn't read through the rest of the posts but Roy, I find it interesting that you don't see the obviousness of it given you knowledge of our cap situation. All you have to do is compare contracts and age. We have Sully locked up for 3 years on a very affordable rookie contract. Doesn't make sense to trade for Varejao given how our roster has been making huge strides together on the court.
Getting a "steal" in the draft doesn't only mean getting a player with great potential but it also means having that player locked up at a very affordable rate for a good amount of time. To trade for someone with his equivalent "value" on the court, you'd be gutting some of the team just for the sake of matching numbers. It doesn't make him untradeable in my eyes, but it does make him a very good commodity for a better trade in the future.
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
Sully's ceiling is extremely high despite the fact that he's not athletic. Similar to athleticism, size and health setting your physical ceiling, IQ, attitude and work ethic set your mental ceiling. Andre Miller, Paul Pierce, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Boris Diaw, Elton Brand, Glen Davis etc. are guys who achieved way more than their physical profiles predicted thanks to their work ethic/IQ/attitude.
Sullinger's skill level is unbelievable for a 20 year old. How many 20 year olds shoot like this kid? make free throws like him? Rebound like him? Pass like him? understand defensive rotations like him? know and accept their roles on offense like him? He doesn't get frustrated when the officials rob him. He doesn't care if he starts or comes off the bench. He works with Rondo every day after practice. He does everything KG tells him to do. Doc already trusts him more than any rookie EVER including Rondo.
In the future, he will develop a post game, become a much better defender, improve his range and shooting, improve his physique etc. his ceiling is incredibly high and he has given us NO REASON to doubt that he won't reach it.
I don't believe any player is untouchable, but the price for Bradley and Sullinger are very, very high. I wouldn't trade both of them together unless it nets us a player at least in the MVP conversation.
Lol. Wow. We'd be lucky to get Gortat for a package including Sully, Melo and multiple first rounders... and you're talkin "MVP".
So again... you'd refuse to give up Meyers Leonard for anything less than an MVP candidate. Holy crap.
-
Larbrd33 mentioned Meyers Leonard, but Sully's ceiling has surely got to be considered much higher than Leonards?
Curious why you think that. Is it simply because you've watched Sully for 20 games and his 5 points 5 rebounds per game is more impressive than Meyers Leonard's 5 points and 5 rebounds per game? I have a hard time calling that anything other than total homerism.
-
during rookie season i like seraphin
-
Larbrd33 mentioned Meyers Leonard, but Sully's ceiling has surely got to be considered much higher than Leonards?
Curious why you think that. Is it simply because you've watched Sully for 20 games and his 5 points 5 rebounds per game is more impressive than Meyers Leonard's 5 points and 5 rebounds per game? I have a hard time calling that anything other than total homerism.
I think both of those guys have great futures and it would be silly to trade either of them.
-
Larbrd33 mentioned Meyers Leonard, but Sully's ceiling has surely got to be considered much higher than Leonards?
Curious why you think that. Is it simply because you've watched Sully for 20 games and his 5 points 5 rebounds per game is more impressive than Meyers Leonard's 5 points and 5 rebounds per game? I have a hard time calling that anything other than total homerism.
Well you could argue that Sullinger has been slotted into a championship contending squad and achieved better stats in the same minutes, grasping a much more difficult defensive scheme and has dramatically improved since game one. Leonard is doing okay as well out there with a team of bums, racing towards mediocrity/the lottery and the best he's putting up is 5 ppg and 3.5 rpg.
Not sure if you've read the earlier posts in this discussion but if you're looking for a reason as to why Sully's ceiling might be higher after 20 games, go up a few posts and read what Yogi wrote.
Here it is again:
Yogi
Sully's ceiling is extremely high despite the fact that he's not athletic. Similar to athleticism, size and health setting your physical ceiling, IQ, attitude and work ethic set your mental ceiling. Andre Miller, Paul Pierce, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Boris Diaw, Elton Brand, Glen Davis etc. are guys who achieved way more than their physical profiles predicted thanks to their work ethic/IQ/attitude.
Sullinger's skill level is unbelievable for a 20 year old. How many 20 year olds shoot like this kid? make free throws like him? Rebound like him? Pass like him? understand defensive rotations like him? know and accept their roles on offense like him? He doesn't get frustrated when the officials rob him. He doesn't care if he starts or comes off the bench. He works with Rondo every day after practice. He does everything KG tells him to do. Doc already trusts him more than any rookie EVER including Rondo.
In the future, he will develop a post game, become a much better defender, improve his range and shooting, improve his physique etc. his ceiling is incredibly high and he has given us NO REASON to doubt that he won't reach it.
Do Leonards physical assets and attitude give him a shot at being a stud? Of course.
As you said, it's only been 20 games, but you've seen Leonard play, probably from watching Lillard like myself. So who would you take to build a championship team with.
Sully or Leonard?
And who is more likely to become an All Star?
I smell an anti-homer response coming, and I've said numerous times that I'd move Sully for a game changing big. But I do understand why some 'homers' worry about moving him when he has more going for him than 70% of those guys picked in front of him in the draft.
-
Where does this notion that Doc Rivers hates rookies come from? I mean seriously, Doc Rivers has consistently played rookies since he arrived here. He doesn't play rookies that aren't ready to play, but if the rookie shows he can contribute he will play.
2004-05 - Won Atlantic
Allen - 16.4
Jefferson - 14.8
West - 13
05-06 - Crappy Team
Gomes - 22.6
Greene - 15.4
Green - 11.7
06-07 - Crappy Team
Rondo - 23.5
Powe - 11.4
Ray - 15.1 (about half the games)
Pinkney - 16.7 (only 6 games)
07-08 - NBA Champs
Davis - 13.6 (8.1 in the playoffs)
Pruitt - 6.3 (only 15 games)
08-09 - ECF Semis
Walker - 7.4 (29 games)
Giddens - 1.3 (6 games)
09-10 - NBA Finals
Hudson - 4.4 (16 games)
Lafayette - 22 (1 game)
Landry - 3 (1 game - also played 17 games for NY)
10-11 - ECF Semis
Bradley - 5.2 (only healthy about half)
Erden - 14.4 (about half)
Harangody - 8.6 (28 games)
Johnson - 8 (4 games - mid season injury add)
11-12 - ECF Finals
Stiemsma - 13.9 (most when healthy)
Johnson - 8.3 (about a third)
Moore - 8.7 (about half)
In other words, guys who were solid NBA level players got plenty of time as rookies. Guys that were not, did not. Pretty much what you would hope and expect your coach to do. You certainly could question how much development Doc does with young guys, but if they can play as rookies he doesn't hesitate to play them.
tp but i think many of us have tried in vain to explain over and over that
"doc hates rookies" just isn't true, notice the guys who got minutes are nba players most the other guys aren't even in the league anymore
but don't worry in 2 seconds another thread will have a line doc won't play rookies
thanks for the stats moranis, and i agree with 2short. i posted similar stats about rookies a number of times. but it seems no one cares to read the stats. it is simply easier to continue the chat about doc and rookies.
doc plays rookies when they are good enough to play a role.
-
Larbrd33 mentioned Meyers Leonard, but Sully's ceiling has surely got to be considered much higher than Leonards?
Curious why you think that. Is it simply because you've watched Sully for 20 games and his 5 points 5 rebounds per game is more impressive than Meyers Leonard's 5 points and 5 rebounds per game? I have a hard time calling that anything other than total homerism.
Well you could argue that Sullinger has been slotted into a championship contending squad and achieved better stats in the same minutes, grasping a much more difficult defensive scheme and has dramatically improved since game one. Leonard is doing okay as well out there with a team of bums, racing towards mediocrity/the lottery and the best he's putting up is 5 ppg and 3.5 rpg.
Not sure if you've read the earlier posts in this discussion but if you're looking for a reason as to why Sully's ceiling might be higher after 20 games, go up a few posts and read what Yogi wrote.
Here it is again:
Yogi
Sully's ceiling is extremely high despite the fact that he's not athletic. Similar to athleticism, size and health setting your physical ceiling, IQ, attitude and work ethic set your mental ceiling. Andre Miller, Paul Pierce, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Boris Diaw, Elton Brand, Glen Davis etc. are guys who achieved way more than their physical profiles predicted thanks to their work ethic/IQ/attitude.
Sullinger's skill level is unbelievable for a 20 year old. How many 20 year olds shoot like this kid? make free throws like him? Rebound like him? Pass like him? understand defensive rotations like him? know and accept their roles on offense like him? He doesn't get frustrated when the officials rob him. He doesn't care if he starts or comes off the bench. He works with Rondo every day after practice. He does everything KG tells him to do. Doc already trusts him more than any rookie EVER including Rondo.
In the future, he will develop a post game, become a much better defender, improve his range and shooting, improve his physique etc. his ceiling is incredibly high and he has given us NO REASON to doubt that he won't reach it.
Do Leonards physical assets and attitude give him a shot at being a stud? Of course.
As you said, it's only been 20 games, but you've seen Leonard play, probably from watching Lillard like myself. So who would you take to build a championship team with.
Sully or Leonard?
And who is more likely to become an All Star?
I smell an anti-homer response coming, and I've said numerous times that I'd move Sully for a game changing big. But I do understand why some 'homers' worry about moving him when he has more going for him than 70% of those guys picked in front of him in the draft.
I think arguing that Sully is a superior prospect to leonard is a massive stretch. But truth be told, I only picked Leonard, because he was the closest I could come to making my point... Would you rather have a late lotto pick or a borderline allstar big man? Try to forget about your emotional attachment to SUlly and see him for what he is... A late lotto talent at the most (who was picked #21) and might turn into a good DeJuan Blair type. It's very unlikely he'll become a star, but fwiw I had the same trouble convincing Celtic fans that Obese Davis wasn't going to be a star. At most I think Sully will be a solid starter. I'm excited to have him, but I'd give him up for an impact player.
Some have suggested his ceiling is Carlos Boozer. Fine... I'd gladly give up a guy who is 5 years away from being Carlos Boozer if it will net me a guy who is Josh Smith today.
-
I take Meyers Leonard over Sully.
-
I don't see him as "untouchable", however when you look at this team you have to wonder how long we can extend "the window". Having said that, when people mention Bradley, Green, or Sully in trades you have to ask yourself if the player we'd receive in return would extend the window or open a new one?
As much as I like Gortat/Varejo I see those players as extenders, Josh Smith, however IMO would open a new one. And even if we could obtain Smith, it would be nice to keep at least one of our future starters.
-
Larbrd33 mentioned Meyers Leonard, but Sully's ceiling has surely got to be considered much higher than Leonards?
Curious why you think that. Is it simply because you've watched Sully for 20 games and his 5 points 5 rebounds per game is more impressive than Meyers Leonard's 5 points and 5 rebounds per game? I have a hard time calling that anything other than total homerism.
Well you could argue that Sullinger has been slotted into a championship contending squad and achieved better stats in the same minutes, grasping a much more difficult defensive scheme and has dramatically improved since game one. Leonard is doing okay as well out there with a team of bums, racing towards mediocrity/the lottery and the best he's putting up is 5 ppg and 3.5 rpg.
Not sure if you've read the earlier posts in this discussion but if you're looking for a reason as to why Sully's ceiling might be higher after 20 games, go up a few posts and read what Yogi wrote.
Here it is again:
Yogi
Sully's ceiling is extremely high despite the fact that he's not athletic. Similar to athleticism, size and health setting your physical ceiling, IQ, attitude and work ethic set your mental ceiling. Andre Miller, Paul Pierce, Larry Bird, Magic Johnson, Steve Nash, Boris Diaw, Elton Brand, Glen Davis etc. are guys who achieved way more than their physical profiles predicted thanks to their work ethic/IQ/attitude.
Sullinger's skill level is unbelievable for a 20 year old. How many 20 year olds shoot like this kid? make free throws like him? Rebound like him? Pass like him? understand defensive rotations like him? know and accept their roles on offense like him? He doesn't get frustrated when the officials rob him. He doesn't care if he starts or comes off the bench. He works with Rondo every day after practice. He does everything KG tells him to do. Doc already trusts him more than any rookie EVER including Rondo.
In the future, he will develop a post game, become a much better defender, improve his range and shooting, improve his physique etc. his ceiling is incredibly high and he has given us NO REASON to doubt that he won't reach it.
Do Leonards physical assets and attitude give him a shot at being a stud? Of course.
As you said, it's only been 20 games, but you've seen Leonard play, probably from watching Lillard like myself. So who would you take to build a championship team with.
Sully or Leonard?
And who is more likely to become an All Star?
I smell an anti-homer response coming, and I've said numerous times that I'd move Sully for a game changing big. But I do understand why some 'homers' worry about moving him when he has more going for him than 70% of those guys picked in front of him in the draft.
I think arguing that Sully is a superior prospect to leonard is a massive stretch. But truth be told, I only picked Leonard, because he was the closest I could come to making my point... Would you rather have a late lotto pick or a borderline allstar big man? Try to forget about your emotional attachment to SUlly and see him for what he is... A late lotto talent at the most (who was picked #21) and might turn into a good DeJuan Blair type. It's very unlikely he'll become a star, but fwiw I had the same trouble convincing Celtic fans that Obese Davis wasn't going to be a star. At most I think Sully will be a solid starter. I'm excited to have him, but I'd give him up for an impact player.
Some have suggested his ceiling is Carlos Boozer. Fine... I'd gladly give up a guy who is 5 years away from being Carlos Boozer if it will net me a guy who is Josh Smith today.
Well as I've said, twice in this thread- I'd gladly give up Sully for an All Star big man. You don't have to convince me. Our window is 2 years at the moment. When KG and Pierce are gone, so are we. So if it must be done, no worries.
You're arguing that people are over rating Sully, and I'm saying you may be severely under rating him given the system he's in, his physical and mental attributes and nose for rebounding. To many observers, not only those wearing green glasses, Sully is much closer than 5 years to being a better player than Carlos Boozer.
Comparing Sully to big baby almost seems like you're reaching for straws. We're talking about a lottery level talent in a very good draft, already getting it done in a solid pattern of minutes per game vs an overweight, egotistical athlete with potential that barely played his first season.
Sully has the IQ, shooting touch and awareness that big baby could only dream of.
I also remember when you called Steimsma a bum, and Avery Bradley a bum- they were both far from that within 6 months. I sometimes wonder if you're still hoping Avery Bradley doesn't pan out so you could be right lol.
-
I feel that the 20 year old Sullinger has a tremendous feel for the game of basketball, and that, along with his work ethic, is what's going to define his career.
He's a big body who can shoot, rebound, pass, finish at the rim, and seems to have the instincts to become a good team defender. What's not to like about what we've seen from Sully so far.
Once he figures out how to use his big body to post up, and figures out how to convert shots in the 3-9 foot range (28% this year), Sullinger could become a legit low post option.
All that said, if you could package Sullinger with someone like Green to bring in a Josh Smith or Handy Andy, you do it, especially in the case of Smith, who gives you a legitimate chance of a title this year and next, and also some long term stability when Pierce and K retire.
One thing I don't like about Varejao is his productivity goes down in the playoffs, when teams concentrate more on the little things, and play with higher energy than a regular season game.
-
To many observers, not only those wearing green glasses, Sully is much closer than 5 years to being a better player than Carlos Boozer.
Who other than Celtics fans is saying that Sully is going to be better than Boozer in five years?
If you mean 25 year old Sully is likely to be better than 36 year old Boozer, I think you're probably right. 36 year old Boozer probably isn't going to be a great player.
If you mean 25 year old (or younger) Sully is likely to ever be better than prime Boozer (21 points, 12 rebounds, 56% shooting while being the best player on a 50 win team), I think that's not very probable. Possible, but not "much closer than 5 years to being a better player" than Boozer.
-
We're talking about a lottery level talent in a very good draft, already getting it done in a solid pattern of minutes per game vs an overweight, egotistical athlete with potential that barely played his first season.
Both were overweight, and both were picked in pretty good drafts. As for minutes, Sully is averaging about 4 more minutes per game than BBD his rookie season.
I agree that Sully is seen as having a higher ceiling.
-
I'll be happy if a 25yo Sullinger can be half the player a 25yo Boozer was -- the 12-rebound half.
-
If you mean 25 year old (or younger) Sully is likely to ever be better than prime Boozer (21 points, 12 rebounds, 56% shooting while being the best player on a 50 win team), I think that's not very probable. Possible, but not "much closer than 5 years to being a better player" than Boozer.
You really think Boozer was better than Deron Williams?
I'll be happy if a 25yo Sullinger can be half the player a 25yo Boozer was -- the 12-rebound half.
I'll take that. And hopefully a better defender. That's always been my issue with Boozer.
-
To many observers, not only those wearing green glasses, Sully is much closer than 5 years to being a better player than Carlos Boozer.
Who other than Celtics fans is saying that Sully is going to be better than Boozer in five years?
If you mean 25 year old Sully is likely to be better than 36 year old Boozer, I think you're probably right. 36 year old Boozer probably isn't going to be a great player.
If you mean 25 year old (or younger) Sully is likely to ever be better than prime Boozer (21 points, 12 rebounds, 56% shooting while being the best player on a 50 win team), I think that's not very probable. Possible, but not "much closer than 5 years to being a better player" than Boozer.
Sorry. I should re-state that to; Sullingers ceiling leading up to the NBA draft was that he was a potential All Star, akin to Carlos Boozer (same style of game) If he reaches that ceiling, I can't see why he wouldn't be the number 2 option on a 50 win team like Boozer...
Sully was overweight coming in, but he's already dropped at least 15 pounds and hasn't had any problems with his diet reported unlike baby.
I still don't think you can compare Sully to Big Baby. Sully is an immediate contributor, with an NBA ready basketball IQ. Baby was a strong, big athletic project that turned out reasonably well for the Celtics.
But yeah, I'd say that most agree Sully's got a much higher ceiling than Big Baby.
-
I'll be happy if a 25yo Sullinger can be half the player a 25yo Boozer was -- the 12-rebound half.
Sully (20 year old rookie) has a 16.5% rebound rate, Boozer (21 year old rookie) had a 16.6% rate and a career rate of 18.1%. I don't think Sully being a similar rebounder to Boozer is out of the question.
-
1. sully isnt untouchable. he's tradeable, but only in the right deal.
2. sullinger is a top ten pick essentially. you only move a top ten pick for a superstar.
3. even with gortat this team isnt going to win. green is horrible. bass and lee are mediocre. pierce is having his worst season in years. the only ones who can play on this team atm are kg, rondo, and wilcox.
4. before trading sully i would trade bass, green, lee - without question.
5. this is the year danny blows it up. this is the transition year. you gather assets to land a star in the future. sully is an asset. unless you can trade for dwight howard and sign him to a 5 yr deal, i doubt sully goes anywhere. his worth is only improving.
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
i hope all general managers (other than danny) think like you do, because man that would be great. allow me to educate you.
taking off the homer goggles: sully should have gone about number 7 in the draft. leonard went at 11.
per is a flawed metric to use in evaluating a players ability. position adjusted winscore per 40 minutes or 48 minutes is a lot more reliable. Sullinger has a current winscore per48 of .140 whereas leonard has a current winscore of .097 - that is to say, sullinger is playing a lot better than meyers leonard.
as far as potential goes, meyers leonard may be more athletic, but as to whether he has as much potential as sullinger, that is debateable. personally i would go with sullinger. i think sullinger has the chance to make an all-star team eventually. i dont think leonard does.
as far as alexy sheved and kyle singler go: they are both about 4 years older than sullinger and are much closer to reaching their peak than sullinger who is only 20 (yes, you are comparing two 24 year old bench players close to their peak with a 20 year old future borderline all-star)
futhermore - pau gasol is done. he's not worth the money, and isnt gonna be the difference between a ring or no ring. al jefferson cant play defense, and yes, i'd rather have sullinger over both of these guys. josh smith - i'd take him, but i'd rather give up jeff green and lee or bass. josh smith is no better than sullinger will eventually become.
-
Sully is definitely not an untouchable. I would trade him for Gortat in 1 second. There are many guys i would trade him for
For me the untouchables are:
Bradley and Rondo
Thats it. Unless we get an offer you cant refuse (say James Harden for Bradley)
Everyone else i'm open to make a trade if we can get the pieces we need. Right now, we need upfront manpower. I would trade Pierce for Gortat if the suns would do such a trade. Like i mentioned on the trade forum, I would trade Pierce for Ezeli, Draymond Green and 1st, 2nd round pick
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
i hope all general managers (other than danny) think like you do, because man that would be great. allow me to educate you.
taking off the homer goggles: sully should have gone about number 7 in the draft. leonard went at 11.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5pho1y7at1rwcc6bo1_400.gif)
lol. ok
-
I'm not trying to argue that Sully is a bad prospect. I'm giving the benefit of the doubt here and pretending he's a legit late lotto pick. The kid can play... reminds me of a young Ryan Gomes. I'm saying that just because he can play and is young doesn't make him untouchable. I'd move him in the right deal. I feel the same way about Bradley. Just because she's a young player who has shown sign of life doesn't automatically mean he's a future superstar who is untouchable. That's nonsense.
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
i hope all general managers (other than danny) think like you do, because man that would be great. allow me to educate you.
taking off the homer goggles: sully should have gone about number 7 in the draft. leonard went at 11.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5pho1y7at1rwcc6bo1_400.gif)
lol. ok
if you think thats lol - then you just dont know your stuff. draft express had him going at 7, espn had him going at 10 before the phantom (aka relatively non-existent) back problems surfaced. the year before that he was projected to be top three in the draft, and some said #1... if you want links for any of these i have them... oh yeah, and ryan mcdonough had sully in the top 10 of the draft too - he's dannys right hand man.
im being very objective - giving evidence rather than opinions, the epitome of taking off the homer glasses. point anything i said out, i can give you links, or just go thru my previous posts - theyre all there... where am i going wrong?
-
Sullinger is higher value to me then Leonard because of two critical aspects:
1. IQ
2. Attitude
Leonard has size and athleticism, and on paper he has more potential than Sullinger. People thought the same about Ryan Hollins when he came into the league - he had size and athleticism but questionable mentality and lacking in IQ. Look where Hollins is now.
Sullinger is putting up similar numbers but he's doing so on a better (adn deeper) team where he gets less opportunities.
He's less athletic, but the style of game he plays is not very dependant on athleticism - he plays to his strengths. He's very good at moving the ball, plays with smarts, and he's started to get very good at taking charges. He does the 'little things' that makes the coach like him because it's those things that allow a player to work well in a team, and this team focussed mentality is something any coach would love to see in a 20 year old rookie.
Sully's understanding of the game is out of this world for a player of his age and experience, and his exceptional rebounding is a skill that some team will always have a need for.
Offensively he may not be big but he knows how to use his weight and body to get a good shot, he's talented around the basket, and he's got a solid jumpshot out to the three point line.
He's very much a young Boris Diaw in terms of skillset, and I'd probably take Boris Diaw over Ryan Hollins.
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
i hope all general managers (other than danny) think like you do, because man that would be great. allow me to educate you.
taking off the homer goggles: sully should have gone about number 7 in the draft. leonard went at 11.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5pho1y7at1rwcc6bo1_400.gif)
lol. ok
if you think thats lol - then you just dont know your stuff. draft express had him going at 7, espn had him going at 10 before the phantom (aka relatively non-existent) back problems surfaced. the year before that he was projected to be top three in the draft, and some said #1... if you want links for any of these i have them... oh yeah, and ryan mcdonough had sully in the top 10 of the draft too - he's dannys right hand man.
im being very objective - giving evidence rather than opinions, the epitome of taking off the homer glasses. point anything i said out, i can give you links, or just go thru my previous posts - theyre all there... where am i going wrong?
Well, I think it's hard to describe a kid as the #7 pick in the draft, and essentially trumpet that as a fact, when he fell to #21.
Maybe in a re-draft, Sully would go #7. (I don't think so; the top-7 should be some combo of Davis, MKG, Lillard, Waiters, Beal, Barnes and Drummond. Robinson probably goes ahead of Sully, too.) However, to state it like it's basically a fact seems counter to the actual reality of the situation.
-
Leonard has size and athleticism, and on paper he has more potential than Sullinger. People thought the same about Ryan Hollins when he came into the league - he had size and athleticism but questionable mentality and lacking in IQ. Look where Hollins is now.
I think this is pretty flawed analysis. People also said the same thing about Javale McGee and DeAndre Jordan. Would you also take Boris Diaw over them?
-
To many observers, not only those wearing green glasses, Sully is much closer than 5 years to being a better player than Carlos Boozer.
Who other than Celtics fans is saying that Sully is going to be better than Boozer in five years?
If you mean 25 year old Sully is likely to be better than 36 year old Boozer, I think you're probably right. 36 year old Boozer probably isn't going to be a great player.
If you mean 25 year old (or younger) Sully is likely to ever be better than prime Boozer (21 points, 12 rebounds, 56% shooting while being the best player on a 50 win team), I think that's not very probable. Possible, but not "much closer than 5 years to being a better player" than Boozer.
No love for D-Will?
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
i hope all general managers (other than danny) think like you do, because man that would be great. allow me to educate you.
taking off the homer goggles: sully should have gone about number 7 in the draft. leonard went at 11.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5pho1y7at1rwcc6bo1_400.gif)
lol. ok
if you think thats lol - then you just dont know your stuff. draft express had him going at 7, espn had him going at 10 before the phantom (aka relatively non-existent) back problems surfaced. the year before that he was projected to be top three in the draft, and some said #1... if you want links for any of these i have them... oh yeah, and ryan mcdonough had sully in the top 10 of the draft too - he's dannys right hand man.
im being very objective - giving evidence rather than opinions, the epitome of taking off the homer glasses. point anything i said out, i can give you links, or just go thru my previous posts - theyre all there... where am i going wrong?
Well, I think it's hard to describe a kid as the #7 pick in the draft, and essentially trumpet that as a fact, when he fell to #21.
Maybe in a re-draft, Sully would go #7. (I don't think so; the top-7 should be some combo of Davis, MKG, Lillard, Waiters, Beal, Barnes and Drummond. Robinson probably goes ahead of Sully, too.) However, to state it like it's basically a fact seems counter to the actual reality of the situation.
so let me get this straight - you're saying that draft position completely dictates reality, and because of that, there's no way that sullinger was in reality the seventh best player in the draft? or are you saying that perhaps due to having now seen him play in the nba, he was the seventh best player in the draft, former draft position aside? your post is a little confusing as it seems to state both...
going a little further with that point, that would be like saying that there's no way anyone can say that manu ginobilli was one of the top ten players of the 1999 draft since he was number 57 overall because to state it like it's an actual fact seems counter to the actual reality of the situation.... additionally, just out of curiosity, what is the reality of the situation regarding sullinger? isn't that what we're debating?
-
I said this in another thread... I think this is a good place for it, though.
Let me ask the "SULLY IS UNTOUCHABLE!" crowd a serious question.
Sully probably had late lotto talent, but slipped to #21. Fine, let's pretend he was a legit late lotto pick. At the moment he's #11 in Efficiency amongst rookies... behind the likes of Alexey Shved and Kyle Singler. That's nice.
Take off the homer goggles for a second. Meyers Leonard is the same age, is over 7 feet tall, was picked 10 spots higher than Sully (legit lotto pick), probably has more potential, and is putting up the same type of stats in the same type of minutes.
Would you rather have Meyers Leonard or Pau/Big Al/Josh Smith/etc?
I'm curious if people are that attached to Sully simply because he's played 20 games as a Celtic and they are emotionally invested... or if they'd legitimately rather have a late lotto pick with perceived potential who averages 5 points/5 boards (Leonard)... over a guy who can contribute 20 and 10 immediately.
So who would consider Meyers Leonard untouchable? Serious question.
i hope all general managers (other than danny) think like you do, because man that would be great. allow me to educate you.
taking off the homer goggles: sully should have gone about number 7 in the draft. leonard went at 11.
(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m5pho1y7at1rwcc6bo1_400.gif)
lol. ok
if you think thats lol - then you just dont know your stuff. draft express had him going at 7, espn had him going at 10 before the phantom (aka relatively non-existent) back problems surfaced. the year before that he was projected to be top three in the draft, and some said #1... if you want links for any of these i have them... oh yeah, and ryan mcdonough had sully in the top 10 of the draft too - he's dannys right hand man.
im being very objective - giving evidence rather than opinions, the epitome of taking off the homer glasses. point anything i said out, i can give you links, or just go thru my previous posts - theyre all there... where am i going wrong?
Well, I think it's hard to describe a kid as the #7 pick in the draft, and essentially trumpet that as a fact, when he fell to #21.
Maybe in a re-draft, Sully would go #7. (I don't think so; the top-7 should be some combo of Davis, MKG, Lillard, Waiters, Beal, Barnes and Drummond. Robinson probably goes ahead of Sully, too.) However, to state it like it's basically a fact seems counter to the actual reality of the situation.
so let me get this straight - you're saying that draft position completely dictates reality, and because of that, there's no way that sullinger was in reality the seventh best player in the draft? or are you saying that perhaps due to having now seen him play in the nba, he was the seventh best player in the draft, former draft position aside? your post is a little confusing as it seems to state both...
going a little further with that point, that would be like saying that there's no way anyone can say that manu ginobilli was one of the top ten players of the 1999 draft since he was number 57 overall because to state it like it's an actual fact seems counter to the actual reality of the situation.... additionally, just out of curiosity, what is the reality of the situation regarding sullinger? isn't that what we're debating?
I think you might want to focus on the "maybe" vs. "fact" part of my post.
You seem to leave no room for any other reality than that Sullinger was absolutely the 7th best player in the draft. Reasonable minds can disagree on that. Clearly, when NBA GMs were asked to weigh in, they valued him much lower than you did.
-
just a side note on sully
compare his stats to brandon bass' , in 10 more minutes of playing time bass is beating sullinger in points per game by 3, all other stats are pretty much even
while this does not make him untouchable i think bass is a more likely candidate to be traded with contracts etc
sully has improved his team defense already and shows the iq to continue to improve
-
just a side note on sully
compare his stats to brandon bass' , in 10 more minutes of playing time bass is beating sullinger in points per game by 3, all other stats are pretty much even
while this does not make him untouchable i think bass is a more likely candidate to be traded with contracts etc
sully has improved his team defense already and shows the iq to continue to improve
And he's only 20
-
I see Sully as a poor man's Boozer; good post player, solid rebounder, below-average defender.
I'd love to see him develop here because I think Rondo needs a good post man and shooters to be successful in the future, but if the right deal comes along, then I'd be willing to ship him out.
-
at one point in time, Sullinger was projected to be the #1 pick in the 2011 (not 2012) draft. he was projected top 10 for 2012 before the medical report.