Report: C's unlikely to return to 4-year, $24mill deal for Bradley

[Sketch5]

I love Bradley, what he brings to the court and attitude.

However, very few people have hit this point. While people are talking about his numbers and how he's not in his prime yet, some are forgetting that he's miss a good deal of games every year since he's come into the league.

This right there is why they wont offer what they had before. The first couple injuries could have been seen as flukes. But he got hurt again this year. You have to question his durability. Everyone does with with Gordan, and don't want to pay the money for him worrying that he wont see the court.

He's a small guard that plays tough, and will take a beating a lot because of it. He's also better off coming off the bench and sparking the second unit. This is why I wouldn't go over 3 years 5 mill with a 4th year team option if he stays healthier.

If an other team wants to offer him 6 or more so be it, just not smart given his history so far. He still needs to prov he can play a solid season, and play at least 70 games.

[mmmmm]

Bradley is a volume shooter and the more shot he takes his defense becomes worse
he will regret for turning down the previous contract

No, according to an article I read somewhere (can't remember where) Coach Steven's told A/B that he did not want him to apply the same intense ball pressure that he has in the past, and wants him to instead sag off the ball more and rely more on team defense.

Don't know why he'd ask this, but apparently he also asked Sully to shoot more three's and we can all see how that went...

Tank = success.

Yeah, I remember that report as well.  As well as Danny's comments in one of the games he sat with Mike Gorman where he basically said they outright had Green specifically working on taking shots that were out of his comfort zone (including a lot more 3s than even HE was used to taking).  The implication was that they were doing this (pushing players in 'development' directions) with several players.

Sully's 3PT shot attempts per 36 went way up post-AS break, jumping from 3.35 per 36 all the way up to 4.38 per 36. That's an increase of 30%.  That kind of thing doesn't happen unless the coach wants it to happen.  (It should be noted that as bad as it was, his 3PT% DID go up quite a bit from an atrocious 25.6% up to a 'just bad' 28.9%, before & after.  So it did have at least that small positive effect.)

When you also factor in some of the bizarre 5-man combinations used, it's pretty clear that, at least from somewhere around the time that the Asik deal fell through, that "winning" was not at all the top priority list with this team.

What I find odd is that several bloggers who were so vocally FOR purposely tanking won't also acknowledge the impact that doing so might have had on the performance of individual players.

[PhoSita]

What I find odd is that several bloggers who were so vocally FOR purposely tanking won't also acknowledge the impact that doing so might have had on the performance of individual players.

Some people seem to have soured a lot on Sullinger this season due to his proclivity for launching it from deep.  Personally, it never bothered me, and I don't hold the low shooting percentage against him.  I think when all is said and done he'll be a guy who takes a couple shots from deep a game, totally in the flow of the offense, and he'll hit a respectable percentage of them.  Just enough to keep defenses honest.

As for Bradley, I get that he relaxed a bit with the on-ball pressure and focused on taking more shots in part because the coaching staff was urging him to do so.  My problem with Bradley is his tendency to get injured, and the fact that when pressed to take more shots and become more comfortable taking on a larger scoring load, he ended up relying a great deal on deep mid-range shots.  He still hasn't improved much as a finisher at the rim, unless he's totally uncovered. 

I do expect that he'd have taken a higher percentage of three point shots if he'd been playing with Rondo more often, though.


As for Green, his shooting percentages clearly suffered due to being treated much of the time as the primary scoring option.  He simply doesn't have the offensive repertoire to be equal to that task.  Nor does he seem to have the consistent aggressive mentality required to be an offensive leader on the floor, either.  In lieu of developing a more varied or skilled offensive game, I would have liked to see Green show some growth in other areas (passing, committing to rebounding, trying to shut down opposing scorers, generally making hustle plays or acting as a leader on the court), but I can't say that I noticed much of that at all.

[mmmmm]

What I find odd is that several bloggers who were so vocally FOR purposely tanking won't also acknowledge the impact that doing so might have had on the performance of individual players.

As for Bradley, I get that he relaxed a bit with the on-ball pressure and focused on taking more shots in part because the coaching staff was urging him to do so.  My problem with Bradley is his tendency to get injured, and the fact that when pressed to take more shots and become more comfortable taking on a larger scoring load, he ended up relying a great deal on deep mid-range shots.  He still hasn't improved much as a finisher at the rim, unless he's totally uncovered. 

I do expect that he'd have taken a higher percentage of three point shots if he'd been playing with Rondo more often, though.

I guess you don't really read as much on the front page of CelticsBlog because this (Bradley's shot selection migration) was specifically talked about in various articles and it's very clear that they (the team) very specifically wanted him to increase his volume of outside shots but started him within the arc and worked him out gradually.

Through the end of January, Bradley took 58% of his shots as mid-range 2s and only 21% as 3PT shots.  His 3PT% was 'ok' at 36%.

From Feb 1, onward, he took only 53% of his shots as mid-range 2s and 31.3% as 3PT shots.  His 3PT% was dramatically better at 45%.

As for Green, his shooting percentages clearly suffered due to being treated much of the time as the primary scoring option.  He simply doesn't have the offensive repertoire to be equal to that task.  Nor does he seem to have the consistent aggressive mentality required to be an offensive leader on the floor, either.  In lieu of developing a more varied or skilled offensive game, I would have liked to see Green show some growth in other areas (passing, committing to rebounding, trying to shut down opposing scorers, generally making hustle plays or acting as a leader on the court), but I can't say that I noticed much of that at all.

Blah blah "aggressive mentality".  Whatever.  How are you measuring "aggressive mentality"?   How are you measuring whether a players was "a leader on the court"?   Were you there in the huddles?

We've been through these debates before.   Your lying eyes are not my lying eyes and vice versa.  Mine can't see into the thoughts of players and I don't trust yours do either.

Based on comments made by both Brad and Danny, it's pretty clear that Green was working on the things they wanted him to work on, to good or bad result.  That may not have correlated with your personal priority list.