Author Topic: Jabari? UPDATE: Jabari!  (Read 33654 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #195 on: April 19, 2021, 02:12:42 AM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501
Interesting side note on the Jabari signing:

At the trade deadline, the Celtics had enough tax room to sign one free agent and avoid the tax, unless the Celtics won the title, because then incentives would kick in for Fournier and Brown to put them over the tax.  However, Fournier and Brown both have games-played requirements attached to their postseason success incentives, and Fournier's Covid bout has dropped him below the minimum number of games played to reach his incentive, thus affording the C's $500k in extra tax space.  Jabari Parker's pro-rated salary is ~$417k.  In other words, Fournier's illness may have afforded the Celtics the ability to sign Parker.

Source?

My looking up Fournier's  incentives, noticing the games played aspect, and doing the math.  I suppose I could tweet it and cite myself, but then I'd have to create a Twitter account.

Where did you get the contract details then? Keith Smith?

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #196 on: April 19, 2021, 08:35:56 AM »

Online Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7142
  • Tommy Points: 979
Interesting side note on the Jabari signing:

At the trade deadline, the Celtics had enough tax room to sign one free agent and avoid the tax, unless the Celtics won the title, because then incentives would kick in for Fournier and Brown to put them over the tax.  However, Fournier and Brown both have games-played requirements attached to their postseason success incentives, and Fournier's Covid bout has dropped him below the minimum number of games played to reach his incentive, thus affording the C's $500k in extra tax space.  Jabari Parker's pro-rated salary is ~$417k.  In other words, Fournier's illness may have afforded the Celtics the ability to sign Parker.

Source?

My looking up Fournier's  incentives, noticing the games played aspect, and doing the math.  I suppose I could tweet it and cite myself, but then I'd have to create a Twitter account.

Where did you get the contract details then? Keith Smith?

Fournier’s I got from Spotrac, but it was also on Twitter around the time of the trade from a variety of sources, and what I saw on Spotrac was consistent with my memory.  Brown’s info there is likely incorrect, as Bobby Marks had different numbers that Keith Smith subsequently echoed, but it’s Fournier that matters most for this discussion.  It’s possible Jaylen’s also comes into play if he misses a few more games, but he’s not there yet, and it wouldn’t matter unless the Celtics made one more addition for the playoffs.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #197 on: April 19, 2021, 08:57:27 AM »

Online Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47135
  • Tommy Points: 2401
On bad defender role players,

I don't mind having some good offense / bad defense type role players but I do not like terrible defending role players. Below average is okay. Worst in the league at their position, no thank you.

It takes a huge amount of offense to overcome defense that is that is poor. Say Trae Young level offense. And those guys are stars. Someone will give them the ball and let them take 20 shots a night. They don't end up on benches playing 15mpg.

The guys who do end up on a bench playing 15mpg are the guys whose offense is not good enough to justify giving them 20 shots a night because of how bad their defense is. It is good offense but not good enough.

And these guys do not transition well to smaller bench role because the problem remains the same -- their bad defense is so bad that it outweighs their good offense which is not good enough to overcome the bad defense.

This is who I believe Jabari Parker is.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #198 on: April 19, 2021, 09:18:23 AM »

Offline No Nickname

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 772
  • Tommy Points: 81

I think people are overemphasizing his defensive struggles, especially last night. He wasn’t that bad.

No offense, but by saying that you obviously weren’t watching during his help defense situations.

If you want to focus on just his on-ball defense I’ll cut him a lot of slack. He’s a big dude, with a twice-reconstructed knee, trying to guard quicker players. He tried hard in those situations.

It was on three different off-ball defensive possessions where he was just atrocious and looked like a middle-schooler who had never been coached on sliding in to help a teammate. The biggest example was when Kemba got beat for a wide open layup and Jabari could have easily slid in to offer some help, but he literally moved in the opposite direction.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #199 on: April 19, 2021, 09:22:23 AM »

Offline No Nickname

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 772
  • Tommy Points: 81
A coach needs a bench to be like a toolbox. A whole bunch of different tools, some being in that box to do only specific jobs. So I don't have an issue with all offense/no defense guys similar to not having issues with all defense/no offense guys. It's up to the coach to use those tools properly.

My question before yesterday was whether Parker could still be that all offense/no defense guy. We knew he had no defense, last night showed that, but since leaving Atlanta, he had barely played and when he did he appeared to be overweight, not moving around well and his offense looked as it had taken a major step backwards.

If used right, like last night, and put into player groupings that hide his defensive deficiencies, he could be a nice addition. Now let's see if Stevens continues to use him right and if Parker can consistently do what he did against the Warriors.

Completely agree. People who are trashing my “atrocious defense” posts aren’t also seeing that I have the same sentiment as this.

Jabari’s offense is much-needed and I’m willing to live with some bad defense to get this offensive punch in the right situations.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #200 on: April 19, 2021, 09:43:25 AM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13002
  • Tommy Points: 1756
  • Everybody knows what's best for you
On bad defender role players,

I don't mind having some good offense / bad defense type role players but I do not like terrible defending role players. Below average is okay. Worst in the league at their position, no thank you.

It takes a huge amount of offense to overcome defense that is that is poor. Say Trae Young level offense. And those guys are stars. Someone will give them the ball and let them take 20 shots a night. They don't end up on benches playing 15mpg.

The guys who do end up on a bench playing 15mpg are the guys whose offense is not good enough to justify giving them 20 shots a night because of how bad their defense is. It is good offense but not good enough.

And these guys do not transition well to smaller bench role because the problem remains the same -- their bad defense is so bad that it outweighs their good offense which is not good enough to overcome the bad defense.

This is who I believe Jabari Parker is.

You make a solid argument, but there is also the possibility that somebody like Jabari has been knocked down a peg, now playing for his NBA life, rather than thinking he'll be a star. Also, he may have just a little more energy to give on the defensive side of the floor since his minutes will be drastically cut from his peak.

It sometimes takes time for these types of guys to acclimate to their new role; luckily we have him signed through next season (if we want), so both he and the team don't need to force anything.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #201 on: April 19, 2021, 10:31:20 AM »

Offline gift

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3984
  • Tommy Points: 291
A coach needs a bench to be like a toolbox. A whole bunch of different tools, some being in that box to do only specific jobs. So I don't have an issue with all offense/no defense guys similar to not having issues with all defense/no offense guys. It's up to the coach to use those tools properly.

My question before yesterday was whether Parker could still be that all offense/no defense guy. We knew he had no defense, last night showed that, but since leaving Atlanta, he had barely played and when he did he appeared to be overweight, not moving around well and his offense looked as it had taken a major step backwards.

If used right, like last night, and put into player groupings that hide his defensive deficiencies, he could be a nice addition. Now let's see if Stevens continues to use him right and if Parker can consistently do what he did against the Warriors.

Completely agree. People who are trashing my “atrocious defense” posts aren’t also seeing that I have the same sentiment as this.

Jabari’s offense is much-needed and I’m willing to live with some bad defense to get this offensive punch in the right situations.

As a micro-example, look at the Golden State game. His defense was terrible. But without his offense, Boston loses that game.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #202 on: April 19, 2021, 11:07:48 AM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11225
  • Tommy Points: 860
A coach needs a bench to be like a toolbox. A whole bunch of different tools, some being in that box to do only specific jobs. So I don't have an issue with all offense/no defense guys similar to not having issues with all defense/no offense guys. It's up to the coach to use those tools properly.

My question before yesterday was whether Parker could still be that all offense/no defense guy. We knew he had no defense, last night showed that, but since leaving Atlanta, he had barely played and when he did he appeared to be overweight, not moving around well and his offense looked as it had taken a major step backwards.

If used right, like last night, and put into player groupings that hide his defensive deficiencies, he could be a nice addition. Now let's see if Stevens continues to use him right and if Parker can consistently do what he did against the Warriors.

Completely agree. People who are trashing my “atrocious defense” posts aren’t also seeing that I have the same sentiment as this.

Jabari’s offense is much-needed and I’m willing to live with some bad defense to get this offensive punch in the right situations.

As a micro-example, look at the Golden State game. His defense was terrible. But without his offense, Boston loses that game.

And he was +6 in 16 minutes.  One game, small sample but all this clamoring about how bad his defense was, we came out ahead when he was on the court.  Semi is a really good defender but offers no offensive threat.  You live with that when you need to.  Parker is a offensive threat with limited defense.  Teams will exploit that but let's see how much.  We are talking about the third or fourth off the bench role (Fournier, then RWilliams, then Pritchard?).  Looking for an upgrade over what we have gotten from Grant and Semi.

I am really happy with what I saw from Parker after 1 game with respect to that role.  I think his defense will improve some as he gets used to playing within our team defense schemes.  If we get something close to game 1 plus even a little bit better defense, he is going to be a big help.  If he goes 1-8 and plays bad defense, not so much.  He has not even practiced with the team and pretty much walked off the plane on to the court.  There were "moments" on rotations and close outs that weren't great but as I said, I thought he looked great overall in game 1.  I will reassess as needed in a couple of weeks but for now, I am thrilled with the addition.

Re: Jabari? UPDATE: Jabari!
« Reply #203 on: April 19, 2021, 11:56:36 AM »

Offline tonydelk

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1845
  • Tommy Points: 467
Parker is like Kanter.  You take the good with the bad.  Great offensive rebounder, size with shooting.  If Parker put the same energy into defending as he did scoring he'd be passable.  Hopefully this offseason he can learn enough, work with the C's training staff to help become a legit bench option next year.  His close outs were atrocious in his 1st game.  Poor position on his close out let the defender blow by him on the base line.  I'm ok with him closing out but giving space to a jump shooter.  They have a 40% chance at making that shot versus blowing by him with a 70% chance at a layup.  Hopefully they can teach him to be less aggressive on his close out and more under control. 

And I ask this question.  Let's compare him to Grant.  Grant is the much better defender.  He hustles and makes some Marcus Smart type plays.  Grant and Semi at most times can't hit the broad side of a barn.  If they can't score any lead our starters get evaporates.  Their D isn't so good that they shut down the other team.  With Parker it's not like they are scoring on every possession against him.  If are bench is at least scoring as much as the other team's its a win.  Our biggest issue is our bench scoring is at the bottom of the league and can lose us games.

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #204 on: April 19, 2021, 12:14:38 PM »

Offline Moranis

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 33461
  • Tommy Points: 1533
A coach needs a bench to be like a toolbox. A whole bunch of different tools, some being in that box to do only specific jobs. So I don't have an issue with all offense/no defense guys similar to not having issues with all defense/no offense guys. It's up to the coach to use those tools properly.

My question before yesterday was whether Parker could still be that all offense/no defense guy. We knew he had no defense, last night showed that, but since leaving Atlanta, he had barely played and when he did he appeared to be overweight, not moving around well and his offense looked as it had taken a major step backwards.

If used right, like last night, and put into player groupings that hide his defensive deficiencies, he could be a nice addition. Now let's see if Stevens continues to use him right and if Parker can consistently do what he did against the Warriors.

Completely agree. People who are trashing my “atrocious defense” posts aren’t also seeing that I have the same sentiment as this.

Jabari’s offense is much-needed and I’m willing to live with some bad defense to get this offensive punch in the right situations.

As a micro-example, look at the Golden State game. His defense was terrible. But without his offense, Boston loses that game.

And he was +6 in 16 minutes.  One game, small sample but all this clamoring about how bad his defense was, we came out ahead when he was on the court.  Semi is a really good defender but offers no offensive threat.  You live with that when you need to.  Parker is a offensive threat with limited defense.  Teams will exploit that but let's see how much.  We are talking about the third or fourth off the bench role (Fournier, then RWilliams, then Pritchard?).  Looking for an upgrade over what we have gotten from Grant and Semi.

I am really happy with what I saw from Parker after 1 game with respect to that role.  I think his defense will improve some as he gets used to playing within our team defense schemes.  If we get something close to game 1 plus even a little bit better defense, he is going to be a big help.  If he goes 1-8 and plays bad defense, not so much.  He has not even practiced with the team and pretty much walked off the plane on to the court.  There were "moments" on rotations and close outs that weren't great but as I said, I thought he looked great overall in game 1.  I will reassess as needed in a couple of weeks but for now, I am thrilled with the addition.
As you sort of intimate, the problem with Parker isn't that he is bad defensively (he is), it is that he isn't super efficient offensively.  So he doesn't usually make up for his poor defense with great offense (like say IT4 or Kyrie did).  He was super efficient against the Warriors so his defense was made up for, but when he has a more typical Smart like offensive game, he probably won't make up for his poor defense.
2023 Historical Draft - Brooklyn Nets - 9th pick

Bigs - Pau, Amar'e, Issel, McGinnis, Roundfield
Wings - Dantley, Bowen, J. Jackson
Guards - Cheeks, Petrovic, Buse, Rip

Re: Jabari? UPDATE: Jabari!
« Reply #205 on: April 19, 2021, 12:26:49 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 36776
  • Tommy Points: 2961
I think we ll find out what he has left.   This might be his last NBA stop before he boards the ship to China .

Under pressure to rebuild his reputation and stock with nba teams , no doubt.  Find a  new niche for himself would be my plan if I was in his shoes.

cCeltics seem to be one of the best places to stop and recharge and focus  your career

Re: Jabari? UPDATE: Jabari!
« Reply #206 on: April 19, 2021, 01:24:14 PM »

Offline radiohead

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6486
  • Tommy Points: 1227
Parker is a reclamation project. While I do agree with all the negative takes on Jabari (particularly his very bad defense), we should remember that he was brought in to replace an end of the bench guy. If he proves to be a serviceable rotation player this year then I’d already consider that as a win for Danny. As Brad said, they’re gonna be patient with him and try to make him a better player beyond this year. Boston has been successful in rejuvenating players’ careers and Jabari’s case is certainly in line with that. This is a classic low risk, high reward gamble by Danny.

Re: Jabari? UPDATE: Jabari!
« Reply #207 on: April 19, 2021, 01:27:27 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Red Auerbach
  • *******************************
  • Posts: 31869
  • Tommy Points: 10047
Parker is a reclamation project. While I do agree with all the negative takes on Jabari (particularly his very bad defense), we should remember that he was brought in to replace an end of the bench guy. If he proves to be a serviceable rotation player this year then I’d already consider that as a win for Danny. As Brad said, they’re gonna be patient with him and try to make him a better player beyond this year. Boston has been successful in rejuvenating players’ careers and Jabari’s case is certainly in line with that. This is a classic low risk, high reward gamble by Danny.
this is my take on the situation as well.  He's already a win over Wagner.  If we can get something off the bench with so many players out, great.  if he plays and improves where he's worth keeping around next season, that's just gravy

Re: Jabari? UPDATE: Jabari!
« Reply #208 on: April 19, 2021, 01:28:15 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
I think we ll find out what he has left.   This might be his last NBA stop before he boards the ship to China .

Under pressure to rebuild his reputation and stock with nba teams , no doubt.  Find a  new niche for himself would be my plan if I was in his shoes.

cCeltics seem to be one of the best places to stop and recharge and focus  your career

Celtics added a solid bench piece if Parker can play like he did two nights ago. 

You can even clear out and dump it in for him to go to work from time to time.   That post up move was oldschool.  Good to see

I could see the bench rotation tightening up to

TT/TL or Grant
Parker or Grant
Romeo or Grant
Fournier
Pritchard

Re: Jabari?
« Reply #209 on: April 19, 2021, 03:17:12 PM »

Offline colincb

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5095
  • Tommy Points: 501
A coach needs a bench to be like a toolbox. A whole bunch of different tools, some being in that box to do only specific jobs. So I don’t have an issue with all offense/no defense guys similar to not having issues with all defense/no offense guys. It’s up to the coach to use those tools properly.

My question before yesterday was whether Parker could still be that all offense/no defense guy. We knew he had no defense, last night showed that, but since leaving Atlanta, he had barely played and when he did he appeared to be overweight, not moving around well and his offense looked as it had taken a major step backwards.

If used right, like last night, and put into player groupings that hide his defensive deficiencies, he could be a nice addition. Now let’s see if Stevens continues to use him right and if Parker can consistently do what he did against the Warriors.

Completely agree. People who are trashing my “atrocious defense” posts aren’t also seeing that I have the same sentiment as this.

Jabari’s offense is much-needed and I’m willing to live with some bad defense to get this offensive punch in the right situations.

As a micro-example, look at the Golden State game. His defense was terrible. But without his offense, Boston loses that game.

And he was +6 in 16 minutes.  One game, small sample but all this clamoring about how bad his defense was, we came out ahead when he was on the court.  Semi is a really good defender but offers no offensive threat.  You live with that when you need to.  Parker is a offensive threat with limited defense.  Teams will exploit that but let’s see how much.  We are talking about the third or fourth off the bench role (Fournier, then RWilliams, then Pritchard?).  Looking for an upgrade over what we have gotten from Grant and Semi.

I am really happy with what I saw from Parker after 1 game with respect to that role.  I think his defense will improve some as he gets used to playing within our team defense schemes.  If we get something close to game 1 plus even a little bit better defense, he is going to be a big help.  If he goes 1-8 and plays bad defense, not so much.  He has not even practiced with the team and pretty much walked off the plane on to the court.  There were “moments” on rotations and close outs that weren’t great but as I said, I thought he looked great overall in game 1.  I will reassess as needed in a couple of weeks but for now, I am thrilled with the addition.
As you sort of intimate, the problem with Parker isn’t that he is bad defensively (he is), it is that he isn’t super efficient offensively.  So he doesn’t usually make up for his poor defense with great offense (like say IT4 or Kyrie did).  He was super efficient against the Warriors so his defense was made up for, but when he has a more typical Smart like offensive game, he probably won’t make up for his poor defense.

Parker’s quite efficient within his shot profile. He’s predominantly a 2 point shooting power forward. Over the last two seasons (2019 and 2020), he shot 57.3% on 2 point attempts. That would tie him with Kyrie for 35th out of 126 qualifiers this season. If he qualified by his number of attempts, he would be 9th out of 22 PFs below Durant and above Barnes. He hasn’t been a passable 3 point shooter since he left MIL for whatever reason (I suspect it’s related to his injuries, but who knows). I don’t know that CBS can improve his shot profile like other players he’s coached.

Smart’s very inefficient within the arc (45.7% over the same period, which is awful), but passable as a 3 point shooter. But if you look at their respective FG%, which includes both shots, Parker shot 49.9% the last two years vs. Smart’s 37.5% (both are consistent with their career averages).

It doesn’t take away from your point about their respective defense, but Parker’s less likely to have the droughts that Smart regularly suffers and if Parker’s inside the arc, it’s a good shot. You want him to shoot, and he’s always been a volume shooter. Smart, not so much, and less is more.

One caveat, it’s tough to compare Parker to other players because of his injury/recovery history, so inevitably you have to cherry-pick his stats to separate his MIL numbers vs. his post-MIL numbers.
« Last Edit: April 19, 2021, 04:38:17 PM by colincb »