Not signing Fournier…

[Sophomore]

Fournier had - literally - the best game of his career last night. I want to see more before I judge. What I remember from last year is a guy who often looked lost, especially on defense.

[tstorey_97]

I just don't see Fournier and Walker as a playoff level back court. He hit a bunch of threes last night?

What?!

Brown hit more threes, ran circles around him and plays defense with the best of them.

[RPGenerate]

We're jumping the gun on this, aren't we? He played very well last night, but it's just a game.

[rondofan1255]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

[gouki88]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

[Goldstar88]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

Guess you would have to ask Udoka that. Just like you’d have to ask him why he left Grant guarding Randle for 80% of the game, even though he was getting killed out there. Or why he didn’t use his challenge. Also curious why Jaylen, who was having a career game, didn’t get the last shot over Tatum who was struggling the whole game. A lot of questions.

[gouki88]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

Guess you would have to ask Udoka that. Just like you’d have to ask him why he left Grant guarding Randle for 80% of the game, even though he was getting killed out there. Or why he didn’t use his challenge. Also curious why Jaylen, who was having a career game, didn’t get the last shot over Tatum who was struggling the whole game. A lot of questions.

Many questions, but given we went to double OT with the improved Knicks, without Richardson and Horford, with Tatum shooting like a blindfolded man and with JB recovering from a COVID bout I thought we did alright.

[rondofan1255]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

I referred to the playoffs where games matter most. I agree with people who keep repeating  "defense/rebounding wins championships"

Playoff series and regular season are like two separate seasons. Kemba might not have looked terrible in the regular season defense metrics, but deep in the playoffs against the best he was abused by Miami. The Nets targeted Fournier in the Brooklyn series, and it got ugly because of his awful lateral movement.

Fournier has always been a really streaky shooter. He was hot last night, but that doesn't change his overall postseason outlook with regards to being a defensive weak link.

Not sure how it's a question that Kemba and Fournier is a very weak defensive backcourt pairing. Good teams will exploit that late in the playoffs, and I'd expect the C's to in a series. For example, getting Irving instead of Durant to guard Tatum.

[td450]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

Does Jaylen scoring 46 count?

[Goldstar88]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

Guess you would have to ask Udoka that. Just like you’d have to ask him why he left Grant guarding Randle for 80% of the game, even though he was getting killed out there. Or why he didn’t use his challenge. Also curious why Jaylen, who was having a career game, didn’t get the last shot over Tatum who was struggling the whole game. A lot of questions.

Many questions, but given we went to double OT with the improved Knicks, without Richardson and Horford, with Tatum shooting like a blindfolded man and with JB recovering from a COVID bout I thought we did alright.

Wasn’t really impressed with anyone other than Jaylen. Timelord was decent and Romeo’s shooting looks better. That’s all I got, though. Hopefully we get better play and coaching in the next game.

[Neurotic Guy]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

I referred to the playoffs where games matter most. I agree with people who keep repeating  "defense/rebounding wins championships"

Playoff series and regular season are like two separate seasons. Kemba might not have looked terrible in the regular season defense metrics, but deep in the playoffs against the best he was abused by Miami. The Nets targeted Fournier in the Brooklyn series, and it got ugly because of his awful lateral movement.

Fournier has always been a really streaky shooter. He was hot last night, but that doesn't change his overall postseason outlook with regards to being a defensive weak link.

Not sure how it's a question that Kemba and Fournier is a very weak defensive backcourt pairing. Good teams will exploit that late in the playoffs, and I'd expect the C's to in a series. For example, getting Irving instead of Durant to guard Tatum.

Yeah remember when he started out here not being able to hit a shot, and then had like a 10-10 night?   That was Fournier.  I had hopes for Fournier when he came here, and ended up pretty uninspired.  Glad the C's didn't invest the money in him. 

[Roy H.]

No thanks, his defense was exposed in the playoffs. Flashbacks to Fournier “reaching” while players just routinely blew by him.

Same with Kemba, no D. Good luck to NYK in the playoffs when that backcourt will be targeted over and over.

Why didn't we simply exploit it then?

I referred to the playoffs where games matter most. I agree with people who keep repeating  "defense/rebounding wins championships"

Playoff series and regular season are like two separate seasons. Kemba might not have looked terrible in the regular season defense metrics, but deep in the playoffs against the best he was abused by Miami. The Nets targeted Fournier in the Brooklyn series, and it got ugly because of his awful lateral movement.

Fournier has always been a really streaky shooter. He was hot last night, but that doesn't change his overall postseason outlook with regards to being a defensive weak link.

Not sure how it's a question that Kemba and Fournier is a very weak defensive backcourt pairing. Good teams will exploit that late in the playoffs, and I'd expect the C's to in a series. For example, getting Irving instead of Durant to guard Tatum.

Yeah remember when he started out here not being able to hit a shot, and then had like a 10-10 night?   That was Fournier.  I had hopes for Fournier when he came here, and ended up pretty uninspired.  Glad the C's didn't invest the money in him.

He shot almost 50% from 3PT here, despite dealing with Covid affecting his vision.  You’re a tough man to inspire.

[Moranis]

I bet the Celtics would of loved to still have Fournier the talent.


But they didn't want the contract.

The contract isn’t that bad though. It’s a three-year deal at half the max, barely more than we are paying Richardson.

The Celtics are paying Richardson and Schroder less than the Knicks are paying Fournier.  That isn't barely more.  And it is only half max for a 35% max player (which Fournier doesn't even qualify for).  At least be honest when you describe things.

Eh.  Fournier makes $17.1 million.  That makes him the 75th highest paid player in the NBA.  19 players are making double what he does.  And, he's making pretty much exactly half of the 30% max.

Those two are short term pieces that could be used as salary filler.   Fournier is a long term piece that could fill salary, is worth less in such a trade for a team that wants to clear cap.   


It depends on what the Celtics want to use the future cap.   I can only guess they want to aim higher then Fournier.   The question is can they actually hit such a target with those other pieces.

Is Richardson’s two year deal better than Fournier’s 3 years deal?  Is Schroder’s non-Bird deal that much more attractive?  And why is it either/or?  We could easily have both Schroder and Fournier, and even Richardson if we wanted him.

Yes Richardson's 2 year contract is better and easier to move than Fournier's especially when they are both going to mostly be included for salary.  So the team has one less year and a lot cheaper contract for the long term books.  And Fournier is overpaid as a 4th scoring option that is a poor defender, and he isn't good enough to be a 3rd option.

4th scoring option?  Since he would have been our third best scorer that seems like a silly way to use him.

And, I suspect that most teams would prefer a good player on a three year contract to a mediocre player on a two year deal.  Hopefully Richardson bounces back, but based upon last year Fournier is significantly better.

He was Boston's 4th scoring option last year and pretty similar to Smart who was the 5th option.  That is Fournier's sweet spot.  He has consistently shown he can't really handle more of a load than that, especially on a playoff level team.  He is a poor defender as well.  He isn't fast, he isn't strong.  He certainly can make shots and often does in bunches (though he does cold as well).  He is a more athletic but worse shooting version of Kyle Korver.  He isn't worth the money he got.

[footey]

I bet the Celtics would of loved to still have Fournier the talent.


But they didn't want the contract.

The contract isn’t that bad though. It’s a three-year deal at half the max, barely more than we are paying Richardson.

The Celtics are paying Richardson and Schroder less than the Knicks are paying Fournier.  That isn't barely more.  And it is only half max for a 35% max player (which Fournier doesn't even qualify for).  At least be honest when you describe things.

Eh.  Fournier makes $17.1 million.  That makes him the 75th highest paid player in the NBA.  19 players are making double what he does.  And, he's making pretty much exactly half of the 30% max.

Those two are short term pieces that could be used as salary filler.   Fournier is a long term piece that could fill salary, is worth less in such a trade for a team that wants to clear cap.   


It depends on what the Celtics want to use the future cap.   I can only guess they want to aim higher then Fournier.   The question is can they actually hit such a target with those other pieces.

Is Richardson’s two year deal better than Fournier’s 3 years deal?  Is Schroder’s non-Bird deal that much more attractive?  And why is it either/or?  We could easily have both Schroder and Fournier, and even Richardson if we wanted him.

Yes Richardson's 2 year contract is better and easier to move than Fournier's especially when they are both going to mostly be included for salary.  So the team has one less year and a lot cheaper contract for the long term books.  And Fournier is overpaid as a 4th scoring option that is a poor defender, and he isn't good enough to be a 3rd option.

4th scoring option?  Since he would have been our third best scorer that seems like a silly way to use him.

And, I suspect that most teams would prefer a good player on a three year contract to a mediocre player on a two year deal.  Hopefully Richardson bounces back, but based upon last year Fournier is significantly better.

He was Boston's 4th scoring option last year and pretty similar to Smart who was the 5th option.  That is Fournier's sweet spot.  He has consistently shown he can't really handle more of a load than that, especially on a playoff level team.  He is a poor defender as well.  He isn't fast, he isn't strong.  He certainly can make shots and often does in bunches (though he does cold as well).  He is a more athletic but worse shooting version of Kyle Korver.  He isn't worth the money he got.

He was last night.

[Roy H.]

He was Boston's 4th scoring option last year and pretty similar to Smart who was the 5th option.  That is Fournier's sweet spot.  He has consistently shown he can't really handle more of a load than that, especially on a playoff level team. 

?

The last five years in Orlando he was the Magic’s leading scorer twice, their secondary scorer twice, and tied for third once.  To you that says “he can’t be better than a 4th option”?