My biggest beef is the double standard of not giving Sullinger a fair shake among some posters. Not only that, but twisting facts.
I think you are guilty of this yourself, to a large degree .
Why because I like Sullinger? I have no hidden agenda, I have been up front of why I like and don't like certain players. On why and why I don't give players more leeway than others, and I don't use falseness to present my points.
My differences with you have never been about you disliking Sullinger, but all the things you dismissed and omitted. If we disagree we disagree, but for the most part all your arguments have always been reduced to... but but but AT THE COMBINES! but but but AT THE AMATEUR GAME!
And of course, but he's FAT!
I mean, we're on a thread in which the thesis of it was that Thompson out played Sullinger when they were on the floor about 2 minutes or so together. (Uneventful 2 minutes at that) O.o
You'd recall our discussion on Sullinger's defense... I presented you with all the evidence from his rookie season, which you dismissed. Look at us now...
Anyways, my main things is not about having differing stances but how they're reached and how people reach their conclusions.
budweiserceltic the chances that Sully stays are slim. He is not a true PF and not a true C. Undersized center basically with incapability to shoot the long range jump shot/inconsistent jump shooter.
the two things going for him are his ability to rebound the ball on the defensive end and good bbiq for a big guy.
Another team will take him on and limit his game, which is the right thing to do. Like if Sully was traded to the clippers, Rivers would have him play the way he did in year one. Just park himself under the basket on both ends. Shoot the open mid range. Under CBS he is not used the right way on the offensive end, but CBS can't change Sullys game bc it can mess up the "system".
If CBS was hired before Sully was drafted, I doubt Sully would of been chosen. Not a great fit under CBS. So there you go. The team tried to make it "fit" . Remember also last season without Sully in the later part of the year, the Celtics were just fine. Actually pretty darn decent and thats how we made the playoffs.
We need to move on. Sound good?
Whatever chances there are of him staying are in total control of Ainge as Sullinger is a Restricted Free Agent, it'll be up to him. That you don't like Sullinger has no bearing on what Ainge might currently feel as his value to this team.
I don't see us getting much value on him on the trade market, so all your "dump him" ideas are of no interest to me. Now if your suggestion would be for him to be part of a package for an actual upgrade, then we can talk. But for a couple of 2nd rounders or such as you've suggested would be pointless. Sullinger would be more valuable to use during the Draft and Moratorium if in the end Ainge decides he's not part of the equation. So the risk of letting him go for nothing vs. what we might game from him in dump move as you've suggested is of no value to me.
You're sadly mistaken if you think we wouldn't have drafted Sullinger with CBS here. This CBS worship is going a bit overboard with all the "fit" narrative people are making about his system. Sullinger was one of the top prospects of that draft, and as played as such even if you don't like him. We were lucky to have him at the 20s picks.
For all the Sullinger doesn't fit CBS's style, Sullinger is the player CBS is playing the most this year of the bigs, Sully is the player starting ahead of your binkie Olynyk. It was an rusty out of shape Sullinger who CBS turned to in the playoffs when Olynyk was found to be wanting. So stop projecting your ideals to what's actually happening.
As for making the playoffs last year, with the reasoning that it was the absence of Sullinger that produced it, let me repost some of the rebukes to that observation:
"Since Green was traded we went 8-8 with Sullinger. That's a 50% record, so the improvement trend was already on-going. Our loses? Seven of those loses were against playoff teams, and five being among the powerhouses: Chicago, Golden State, Hawks, Houston, Clippers.
But the fact remains that the team that's been playing without Sullinger is significantly different from a personnel standpoint to the team that Sullinger was part of prior to going down.
Considering that we had a 50% record going into his injury after the latest roster change, including winning his final ugly game against arguably the best team in the NBA at the time, the Hawks. After the trio of loses against Chicago, Atlanta, Clippers, we went 7-5 over his final twelve games, and even then we were already discussing playoff aspirations.
So this comparison about "this team" with and without Sullinger is creating a false dichotomy in the way it's being discussed, with little allowance on context while completely ignoring the upward trend the team was already enjoying prior to Sully going down for us right before the influx of additional talent."
All this to say the team was already playing better WITH Sullinger figuring as part of the rotation, and after Sullinger went down (right on the money exactly) we made the trade for Thomas, etc. which really changed the makeup of the team in the first place. So there's no real bases of comparison between a team that was winning vs the team that was losing in that particular season up to that point, other than the fact that as I've illustrated after Green was traded the team was already in an upwards trend and playing better with Sully being part of it. An overwieght Sully at that of course.
omg. He is not staying long term.
Ok if Danny signs him to a 5 year at 14 million per season. I will be the first to say I was wrong to you
Danny might just sign him to a 1 year deal to extend this matter with Sully (maybe by some miracle he is going to come in Blake Griffin like shape next season). Then he becomes a UFA the year after. But that is risky. Another team offers 13-14 million per season and you lose him for nothing. Some dummy team may actually do that
Not sure what you're currently arguing in here in all honestly. I have never posited that Sullinger is a shoe-in or such to be here long term. All I've said that we have long ways still to decide on what to do for him, and that dumping him for some measly asset has no real value for us. Losing him for nothing is not a problem at all to make all this fuss about it. Having as a restricted free-agent, even if we decide not to keep him, is of more value to us than anything I've seen you suggest so far.
As I've said, if your position is to "dump him" because we may lose him for nothing, then that's of little value to the organization to consider. It's honestly pointless in the scheme of things.
Consider also that next year the salary cap will be about $90 million, and Sullinger's cap hold will only be $5.6 million of it. It means that we have a ton of money to make all our decisions while Sullinger is not really getting in the way of acquiring the players we are interested in. Much like Crowder this season that was signed after we used all our cap space. Having that flexibility and options is valuable to the organization whether you like it or not.
Losing Sullinger for nothing is really of little importance. Not using him in a larger deal to get more talent, that might be something worth considering and in the end probably the best decision to make. But if all you have to offer is the idea of dumping him so we can give more playing time to the players you like to cheerlead, then I have no interested in buying what you're selling.
If we follow your logic, we might as well trade Olynyk right now since he'll be in precisely the same spot next Summer as Sullinger was this Summer, so why delay the decision? Just dump him already by your logic. But wait... can't do that because you love Olynyk, let's not apply your reasoning to his case.
Topic: Trade Sully while his value is perceived to be decent (Read 20851 times)