How good is our “supporting cast”?

[Who]

I see him as a high level bench player on a good playoff team. Think Kleber or Looney.

Not about the Celtics or the comparison above.

I just wanted to talk about Kleber for a second. I feel the league has passed him by - not just him but players of his ilk.

To explain this I will described Kleber as a slow footed PF who does not have the size or interior defense to play C regularly. He has good physical size and strength to matchup against old-school PFs as a stretch PF but lacks the quickness to matchup against SFs and combo forwards that now dominate the PF landscape. This puts him at a quickness deficit on defense and leads him to being a net negative on defense.

When we look at his offense, we see that Kleber has a three point shot but he has no handles, no driving capacity, limited passing ability. He offers little to no offense outside of spot up shooting and he only does that at low volume which 7-8pts in 25mpg or so. Something like that.

How much value does that three point shooting offer compared to being a sizeable net negative on defense + a non-contributor to net negative at everything else on offense outside of spot up shooting?

I don't think it offers much at all. I consider Kleber a below average bench player. Possibly even a 3rd stringer.

Then there is the fit issue with Luka. Luka is a slow footed SF who struggles on defense. He can't play with Kleber because Kleber also is a slow-footed forward who struggles on defense. When they play together, they lose more on defense than Dallas gains on offense.

This is why Finney-Smith is so valuable for them - not because he is any great shakes as a player but just because he has enough foot-speed to play alongside Luka for Dallas to have an effective defense.

-----------------------

This example is interesting to me because players like Kleber looked so valuable just a few years ago but ... I believe the PF position has evolved so much since then that players like Kleber have quickly gone the way of the dinosaur.

The PF position now has so much more speed & athleticism. So much more ball-handling, passing and shot-creation from the perimeter. It has been taken over by more skilled SFs and combo forwards (like Harrison Barnes).

... and those old stretch PFs of previous years who were so valuable for matching up against bigger bodied PFs while stretching the court on offense simply aren't as valuable anymore in today's league.


This is also for our own Grant Williams - not a replica but he is one of those old school undersized non-athletic beefy PFs. Luckily for him, he does have more foot-speed and one-on-one perimeter D functionality than Kleber but there are still a lot of limitations that lead to low value there (questionable team D quickness, lack of offensive diversity).

[PhoSita]

I think the overall talent level is pretty much appropriate to where the team is at in the standings -- middle of the road. Mediocre, not terrible.

But of course, we should probably compare the talent and depth on the roster to the teams that we would like the Celtics to be able to compete against.

From that angle, this is how I see the rotation:

Player / Current Role / Appropriate Role on a Very Good Team

- Tatum / Top dog (primary creator) / lead scorer & supporting star
- Brown / Secondary creator & star / Secondary or tertiary scorer
- Smart / Starting guard & emotional leader / 6th-7th man or utility role player
- Rob / Starting role player center / Starting role player center
- Schroder / Starting PG (3rd scorer) / 6th-8th man (microwave scorer)
- Horford / Starting big (key defensive piece) / 3rd big man (utility role player)
- Grant / 5th starter or 8th man / 7th-8th man
- Richardson / 7th-8th man (3rd wing) / 7th-8th man or 5th starter
- Pritchard / 4th guard / backup point guard
- Langford / 9th-10th man (4th wing) / 10th-12th man
- Kanter / 9th-10th man (4th big) / 11th-12th man (out of the rotation)


In short, the way I see it, the Celtics have maybe 3-4 guys in their 10th man rotation who are in the role that their skillset and talent level would warrant on a really good team.  They have a couple guys at the end of the rotation who ideally would not be getting playing time and would be replaced by guys with more reliable / useful skillsets.

The biggest issue is the lack of a player truly suited to occupying the lead creator / crunch time shot maker role.  But there's also an issue in that they have a few guys who should really be supporting pieces (i.e. Schroder, Smart, Horford) playing important starting roles and getting heavy minutes.

[CFAN38]

I see him as a high level bench player on a good playoff team. Think Kleber or Looney.

Not about the Celtics or the comparison above.

I just wanted to talk about Kleber for a second. I feel the league has passed him by - not just him but players of his ilk.

To explain this I will described Kleber as a slow footed PF who does not have the size or interior defense to play C regularly. He has good physical size and strength to matchup against old-school PFs as a stretch PF but lacks the quickness to matchup against SFs and combo forwards that now dominate the PF landscape. This puts him at a quickness deficit on defense and leads him to being a net negative on defense.

When we look at his offense, we see that Kleber has a three point shot but he has no handles, no driving capacity, limited passing ability. He offers little to no offense outside of spot up shooting and he only does that at low volume which 7-8pts in 25mpg or so. Something like that.

How much value does that three point shooting offer compared to being a sizeable net negative on defense + a non-contributor to net negative at everything else on offense outside of spot up shooting?

I don't think it offers much at all. I consider Kleber a below average bench player. Possibly even a 3rd stringer.

Then there is the fit issue with Luka. Luka is a slow footed SF who struggles on defense. He can't play with Kleber because Kleber also is a slow-footed forward who struggles on defense. When they play together, they lose more on defense than Dallas gains on offense.

This is why Finney-Smith is so valuable for them - not because he is any great shakes as a player but just because he has enough foot-speed to play alongside Luka for Dallas to have an effective defense.

-----------------------

This example is interesting to me because players like Kleber looked so valuable just a few years ago but ... I believe the PF position has evolved so much since then that players like Kleber have quickly gone the way of the dinosaur.

The PF position now has so much more speed & athleticism. So much more ball-handling, passing and shot-creation from the perimeter. It has been taken over by more skilled SFs and combo forwards (like Harrison Barnes).

... and those old stretch PFs of previous years who were so valuable for matching up against bigger bodied PFs while stretching the court on offense simply aren't as valuable anymore in today's league.


This is also for our own Grant Williams - not a replica but he is one of those old school undersized non-athletic beefy PFs. Luckily for him, he does have more foot-speed and one-on-one perimeter D functionality than Kleber but there are still a lot of limitations that lead to low value there (questionable team D quickness, lack of offensive diversity).

The PF in general has gone endangered in the current NBA. The position has transitioned to another Wing with the exception of a few guys who don’t have the lateral quickness or skill to truly be a wing or the size/length for the 5 but are to good to be pushed out of the league. ( Randle, Collins, or Zion)

The fact that Ime insists on keeping AL in the out of date PF role rather then starting Richardson and sliding Tatum to big wing is becoming very frustrating

[Jvalin]

I think the talent and ability of the top 10 players is good.


The fit on the other end is terrible.   There are certain skills (shooting, passing) that is lacking at the role positions. 


After the top 10, I think there is a drop off in terms of players being able to play a role.

This is pretty much my take as well, except I trust 7-8 players instead of 10. If the playoffs started today, my rotation would have been the following:

PG: Smart (16) - Schroder (32)
SG: JRich (32) - Smart (16)
SF: Brown (36) - Tatum (12)
PF: Tatum (24) - Horford (12) - Grant (12)
C: Timelord (32) - Horford (16)

(or something along these lines)

[liam]

I think the talent and ability of the top 10 players is good.


The fit on the other end is terrible.   There are certain skills (shooting, passing) that is lacking at the role positions. 


After the top 10, I think there is a drop off in terms of players being able to play a role.

This is pretty much my take as well, except I trust 7-8 players instead of 10. If the playoffs started today, my rotation would have been the following:

PG: Smart (16) - Schroder (32)
SG: JRich (32) - Smart (16)
SF: Brown (36) - Tatum (12)
PF: Tatum (24) - Horford (12) - Grant (12)
C: Timelord (32) - Horford (16)

(or somethjing along these lines)

That's pretty much our regular season rotation ...

[Jvalin]

I think the talent and ability of the top 10 players is good.


The fit on the other end is terrible.   There are certain skills (shooting, passing) that is lacking at the role positions. 


After the top 10, I think there is a drop off in terms of players being able to play a role.

This is pretty much my take as well, except I trust 7-8 players instead of 10. If the playoffs started today, my rotation would have been the following:

PG: Smart (16) - Schroder (32)
SG: JRich (32) - Smart (16)
SF: Brown (36) - Tatum (12)
PF: Tatum (24) - Horford (12) - Grant (12)
C: Timelord (32) - Horford (16)

(or somethjing along these lines)

That's pretty much our regular season rotation ...

Not really. We start 2 bigs in Timelord and Horford and bring JRich off the bench.

Btw, it's impossible to come up with a firm rotation this season with all the covid-related issues.

[droopdog7]

I'd say the talent level after the top 2 is fairly flat

[GreenlyGreeny]

A. The supporting cast is not good enough to consistently win against good teams.

B. The supporting cast is probably not good enough to trade around with our picks in order to have a good enough supporting cast to consistently win against good teams.

C. There is no cap room given the supporting cast.

D. Given A, B and C, in order to have a good enough supporting cast in the future around Tatum that can win consistently against good teams, we must deal JB. Plenty of such ideas have been proposed to that effect, ideas to change us so we can move away from this .500 destiny of the past 100+ games. Notice how none of the JKJB crew can propose a path forward that overcomes A, B and C?

[Kuberski33]

In terms of raw talent, we have good raw talent: Schroder, Jrich, Smart, Timelord and Horford are all good enough to be rotation players on any team. They’d probably start on many teams too, particularly Smart and Timelord. So we have 5 starter-level quality players on top of our 2 allstars.

As for fit though, I think it’s a poor fit. Those 5 guys are average shooters at best (granted that’s not TL’s game) and can be duds from the outside if they don’t have it going. Horford was more consistent when he was younger but his allstar days are behind him.

The C’s offense is nowhere near dynamic enough to consistently cover up for the poor fit, unless JB and/or JT are making tough shots or going nuclear in some other stretch. When one of those 5 get hot too (like Schroder has in some games), he can also kick the team up into playing above its potential.

So essentially, inconsistency is the real identity of this team, bolstered by its roster construction. The 0.500 ish record is indicative of that
—

Grant, Pritchard, Freedom and Langford - I could see getting minutes here and there on other rosters but they’d undoubtedly be weak points on the roster. Nesmith has looked pretty garbage for the most part when he’s seen minutes

I'm going to agree with this with one exception - Grant (who I really couldn't stand prior to this season) has turned himself into a solid rotation guy who could fill that role for most teams.

As for the rest, the 'fit' part really applies to Freedom. He would have made a nice chunk of change had his prime years occured any time up until about 2016 - but the NBA's current style of play has made him a vet minimum talent.

The remainder are all below average vs their counterparts on upper half teams.

Pritchard I don't think is a long term answer. He's not athletic enough to fully compensate for his lack of size.  Nesmith is going the way of James Young. And Romeo can't shoot, which means he's a liability if he's on the court in the final 6 minutes of a close game.

The roster needs to be fixed to get a better set of skills among 3-8 to compliment the Jays and get another set of guys with upside potential at the end of the bench. I can take or leave Romeo at this point. If I had to guess I'd say he'll be out of the league in 2 years.

[nickagneta]

Guys I would keep around the Jays are Timelord, Grant and maybe Richardson, depending on what you have to give up in trades.

Guys I would target in trades or free agency are Malcolm Brogdon, Harrison Barnes, Fred VanVleet, Kelly Olynyk, Josh Hart, Christian Wood, Montrezl Harrell, and a couple other glue guys.

Maybe bring in Yam or Begarin as your 15th man to develop.