Who's available that we can get at C

[ozgod]

Jay King had an interesting take on The Athletic when asked a question about whether the Celtics needed to find a big man. His take might disappoint some of the wrist slitters though. I will post the article as it's subscription based.

Do the Celtics need a big man? What big man? A realistic trade for said big man? — @Porkman.

This is the question everyone asks me, no matter where I am or what I’m doing. I could be on the side of the road, all alone, recovering from a devastating rollerblade fall, and a friend would shout out a nearby window, “But do you think the Celtics need another center? Which one?”

Do the Celtics need to acquire another big man to achieve regular-season success? No. They have the No. 6 offense and No. 8 defense. They have allowed fewer points in the paint than every team except the Bucks and Raptors. They rank just 26th in defending the low post, but whatever, right? That’s the only major blemish on their defensive profile and post-ups are still inefficient in most cases. Hardly any dominant centers still exist. During the regular season, Boston’s primary defensive weakness will only matter – really matter – once or twice a month.

It could matter a lot more in certain playoff matchups, which is why I go back and forth on whether the Celtics need to find a bulkier big man. The internal conversation goes something like this:

Me: Daniel Theis is a capable starting center and the Enes Kanter/Robert Williams combo isn’t half bad. The Celtics have gotten enough from their centers so far. They shouldn’t sacrifice assets to fix an issue that hasn’t held them back.

Also me: Did you see what Joel Embiid did to the Celtics last week, you moron? What will happen if they run into him during a playoff series? How much destruction will Giannis Antetokounmpo leave behind if he plays Boston’s tiny frontcourt for seven straight games? Can any of Boston’s centers hold up against the highest level of competition?

Me, striking a different tone: But what would the Celtics trade? Because of their salary situation, they would probably need to move one of their best players to acquire an established, sturdy center. Another year removed from his ankle injury, Gordon Hayward has been good enough that he’s a piece to build on, not punt away for a little more size. Should the Boston front office deal Marcus Smart or another key player just to acquire a center who might only be a major upgrade during one playoff series? No, right? They should probably just add more bench shooting and see if they can get by with what they have in the middle. This is a league driven by wings, after all. It might not be wise to overreact to one dominant Embiid performance. He was human the other time he played the Celtics this season. So was Antetokounmpo during his only matchup with Boston to date. LaMarcus Aldridge, another top post threat, did nothing against the Celtics defense. Boston’s defense is different, but maybe it’s good enough as is.

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

https://theathletic.com/1461954/2019/12/16/celtics-mailbag-the-question-that-wont-go-away-do-the-celtics-need-another-big-man/

[gpap]

Jay King had an interesting take on The Athletic when asked a question about whether the Celtics needed to find a big man. His take might disappoint some of the wrist slitters though. I will post the article as it's subscription based.

Do the Celtics need a big man? What big man? A realistic trade for said big man? — @Porkman.

This is the question everyone asks me, no matter where I am or what I’m doing. I could be on the side of the road, all alone, recovering from a devastating rollerblade fall, and a friend would shout out a nearby window, “But do you think the Celtics need another center? Which one?”

Do the Celtics need to acquire another big man to achieve regular-season success? No. They have the No. 6 offense and No. 8 defense. They have allowed fewer points in the paint than every team except the Bucks and Raptors. They rank just 26th in defending the low post, but whatever, right? That’s the only major blemish on their defensive profile and post-ups are still inefficient in most cases. Hardly any dominant centers still exist. During the regular season, Boston’s primary defensive weakness will only matter – really matter – once or twice a month.

It could matter a lot more in certain playoff matchups, which is why I go back and forth on whether the Celtics need to find a bulkier big man. The internal conversation goes something like this:

Me: Daniel Theis is a capable starting center and the Enes Kanter/Robert Williams combo isn’t half bad. The Celtics have gotten enough from their centers so far. They shouldn’t sacrifice assets to fix an issue that hasn’t held them back.

Also me: Did you see what Joel Embiid did to the Celtics last week, you moron? What will happen if they run into him during a playoff series? How much destruction will Giannis Antetokounmpo leave behind if he plays Boston’s tiny frontcourt for seven straight games? Can any of Boston’s centers hold up against the highest level of competition?

Me, striking a different tone: But what would the Celtics trade? Because of their salary situation, they would probably need to move one of their best players to acquire an established, sturdy center. Another year removed from his ankle injury, Gordon Hayward has been good enough that he’s a piece to build on, not punt away for a little more size. Should the Boston front office deal Marcus Smart or another key player just to acquire a center who might only be a major upgrade during one playoff series? No, right? They should probably just add more bench shooting and see if they can get by with what they have in the middle. This is a league driven by wings, after all. It might not be wise to overreact to one dominant Embiid performance. He was human the other time he played the Celtics this season. So was Antetokounmpo during his only matchup with Boston to date. LaMarcus Aldridge, another top post threat, did nothing against the Celtics defense. Boston’s defense is different, but maybe it’s good enough as is.

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

https://theathletic.com/1461954/2019/12/16/celtics-mailbag-the-question-that-wont-go-away-do-the-celtics-need-another-big-man/

I would agree about LaMarcus Aldridge. I've mentioned his name (I think in this thread) but as you mentioned, he was useless when we played San Antonio. Doesn't seem to have alot left in the tank.

[Moranis]

Jay King had an interesting take on The Athletic when asked a question about whether the Celtics needed to find a big man. His take might disappoint some of the wrist slitters though. I will post the article as it's subscription based.

Do the Celtics need a big man? What big man? A realistic trade for said big man? — @Porkman.

This is the question everyone asks me, no matter where I am or what I’m doing. I could be on the side of the road, all alone, recovering from a devastating rollerblade fall, and a friend would shout out a nearby window, “But do you think the Celtics need another center? Which one?”

Do the Celtics need to acquire another big man to achieve regular-season success? No. They have the No. 6 offense and No. 8 defense. They have allowed fewer points in the paint than every team except the Bucks and Raptors. They rank just 26th in defending the low post, but whatever, right? That’s the only major blemish on their defensive profile and post-ups are still inefficient in most cases. Hardly any dominant centers still exist. During the regular season, Boston’s primary defensive weakness will only matter – really matter – once or twice a month.

It could matter a lot more in certain playoff matchups, which is why I go back and forth on whether the Celtics need to find a bulkier big man. The internal conversation goes something like this:

Me: Daniel Theis is a capable starting center and the Enes Kanter/Robert Williams combo isn’t half bad. The Celtics have gotten enough from their centers so far. They shouldn’t sacrifice assets to fix an issue that hasn’t held them back.

Also me: Did you see what Joel Embiid did to the Celtics last week, you moron? What will happen if they run into him during a playoff series? How much destruction will Giannis Antetokounmpo leave behind if he plays Boston’s tiny frontcourt for seven straight games? Can any of Boston’s centers hold up against the highest level of competition?

Me, striking a different tone: But what would the Celtics trade? Because of their salary situation, they would probably need to move one of their best players to acquire an established, sturdy center. Another year removed from his ankle injury, Gordon Hayward has been good enough that he’s a piece to build on, not punt away for a little more size. Should the Boston front office deal Marcus Smart or another key player just to acquire a center who might only be a major upgrade during one playoff series? No, right? They should probably just add more bench shooting and see if they can get by with what they have in the middle. This is a league driven by wings, after all. It might not be wise to overreact to one dominant Embiid performance. He was human the other time he played the Celtics this season. So was Antetokounmpo during his only matchup with Boston to date. LaMarcus Aldridge, another top post threat, did nothing against the Celtics defense. Boston’s defense is different, but maybe it’s good enough as is.

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

https://theathletic.com/1461954/2019/12/16/celtics-mailbag-the-question-that-wont-go-away-do-the-celtics-need-another-big-man/

His internal debate really boils down to him not knowing if Boston is a real legit contender. If you think Boston is a legit contender, then they absolutely need to acquire a center better able to play against the Sixers and Bucks.  But if you don't think Boston is a legit contender then Boston should not give up real pieces to upgrade at center.  So the internal debate he is having is based on the fact that he can't figure out if Boston can realistically make the finals (or even win the title) or if it is just a solid team having a nice season.

[keevsnick]

Jay King had an interesting take on The Athletic when asked a question about whether the Celtics needed to find a big man. His take might disappoint some of the wrist slitters though. I will post the article as it's subscription based.

Do the Celtics need a big man? What big man? A realistic trade for said big man? — @Porkman.

This is the question everyone asks me, no matter where I am or what I’m doing. I could be on the side of the road, all alone, recovering from a devastating rollerblade fall, and a friend would shout out a nearby window, “But do you think the Celtics need another center? Which one?”

Do the Celtics need to acquire another big man to achieve regular-season success? No. They have the No. 6 offense and No. 8 defense. They have allowed fewer points in the paint than every team except the Bucks and Raptors. They rank just 26th in defending the low post, but whatever, right? That’s the only major blemish on their defensive profile and post-ups are still inefficient in most cases. Hardly any dominant centers still exist. During the regular season, Boston’s primary defensive weakness will only matter – really matter – once or twice a month.

It could matter a lot more in certain playoff matchups, which is why I go back and forth on whether the Celtics need to find a bulkier big man. The internal conversation goes something like this:

Me: Daniel Theis is a capable starting center and the Enes Kanter/Robert Williams combo isn’t half bad. The Celtics have gotten enough from their centers so far. They shouldn’t sacrifice assets to fix an issue that hasn’t held them back.

Also me: Did you see what Joel Embiid did to the Celtics last week, you moron? What will happen if they run into him during a playoff series? How much destruction will Giannis Antetokounmpo leave behind if he plays Boston’s tiny frontcourt for seven straight games? Can any of Boston’s centers hold up against the highest level of competition?

Me, striking a different tone: But what would the Celtics trade? Because of their salary situation, they would probably need to move one of their best players to acquire an established, sturdy center. Another year removed from his ankle injury, Gordon Hayward has been good enough that he’s a piece to build on, not punt away for a little more size. Should the Boston front office deal Marcus Smart or another key player just to acquire a center who might only be a major upgrade during one playoff series? No, right? They should probably just add more bench shooting and see if they can get by with what they have in the middle. This is a league driven by wings, after all. It might not be wise to overreact to one dominant Embiid performance. He was human the other time he played the Celtics this season. So was Antetokounmpo during his only matchup with Boston to date. LaMarcus Aldridge, another top post threat, did nothing against the Celtics defense. Boston’s defense is different, but maybe it’s good enough as is.

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

https://theathletic.com/1461954/2019/12/16/celtics-mailbag-the-question-that-wont-go-away-do-the-celtics-need-another-big-man/

His internal debate really boils down to him not knowing if Boston is a real legit contender. If you think Boston is a legit contender, then they absolutely need to acquire a center better able to play against the Sixers and Bucks.  But if you don't think Boston is a legit contender then Boston should not give up real pieces to upgrade at center.  So the internal debate he is having is based on the fact that he can't figure out if Boston can realistically make the finals (or even win the title) or if it is just a solid team having a nice season.

I think the bigger issue is he's asking two different questions. "Does Boston NEED an upgrade at Center" vs "Can Boston GET an upgrade at Center without creating new holes." I think the first answer may very well be "YES, to get past Mil/Phi a better center is needed" while the simple fact may be the Celtics dont have the ability to get one without trading hayward/smart which just creates a whole elsewhere.

[mmmmm]

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

To me, this portrays the 'irrational' response.   It points out exactly the kind of reactive (emotional) thinking that we should hope Danny & Brad do NOT follow.

Because while Embiid was indeed great, we did not lose that game because of our center position.   In a combined 48 minutes, Kanter & Theis combined to post 36 points on _very_ efficient shooting and grabbed 14 rebounds -- all without consuming very many possessions.   They didn't stop Embiid.  But nobody was stopping them either.

We lost the game because we had the convergence of the occasional bad game by not just one but both our two Jays.   When both those two guys produce stinkers in the same game, that's just too high of an obstacle to overcome, especially against a good team.

If either Jaylen or Jayson had produced his average output, we probably win.  If they both do, then we definitely win.

So while it's fair to ask the question of whether Boston needs to add a center, it's important to not over-react to one game like that.

[Vermont Green]

If you step back from the "do we need a center" question and consider what are the areas that the team could/should improve the most, it is very clear that the area with the largest potential for improvement is the front court.  And further, if we want to be a true title contender we need to improve the team.  When your most talented big man is Daniel Theis, you have a lot of room for improvement.

Now can we pull off a trade?  Will we pull off a trade?  Probably, but probably not something big (meaning involving Smart or Hayward or other key piece).  I would focus on just getting a little better by shopping Langford, our picks, things that are not going to help us anytime soon.  That isn't going to get us LeMarcus Aldridge but maybe something better than Daniel Theis.

[Surferdad]

If you step back from the "do we need a center" question and consider what are the areas that the team could/should improve the most, it is very clear that the area with the largest potential for improvement is the front court.  And further, if we want to be a true title contender we need to improve the team.  When your most talented big man is Daniel Theis, you have a lot of room for improvement.

Now can we pull off a trade?  Will we pull off a trade?  Probably, but probably not something big (meaning involving Smart or Hayward or other key piece).  I would focus on just getting a little better by shopping Langford, our picks, things that are not going to help us anytime soon.  That isn't going to get us LeMarcus Aldridge but maybe something better than Daniel Theis.

That's what I would do too.  After all, how/when is Langford going to crack the wing rotation?  It will be next season, at the earliest.  Beyond that, the team is now in desperate need for center depth, even if that new person is not better than Theis.

Because while Embiid was indeed great, we did not lose that game because of our center position.

I'm just going to go ahead and disagree with that, mmmmm.  The game was pretty close, so you can point to any number of individual factors and say that made the difference but that doesn't mean that factor was THE difference. In that respect, there is no reason to not blame the center position, after all Embiid did score 38 points and he dominated the last 4 minutes of the game which are the most important minutes in a close game.

[footey]

Brad acknowledges our "short comings" and feels that we must compensate by excess and early ball pressure.

Our small personnel requires us to double team big guy stars.

Sixers, Bucks and Lakers have been really good at finding open 3 point shooter when their big star (Embiid, Giannis and Davis) gets double teamed. 

The early and excessive ball pressure is intended to minimize getting the ball into the big with too much time left on shooting clock.

It works sometimes, but the returns seem to be diminishing as the good teams learn to pass out of it quickly.

[keevsnick]

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

To me, this portrays the 'irrational' response.   It points out exactly the kind of reactive (emotional) thinking that we should hope Danny & Brad do NOT follow.

Because while Embiid was indeed great, we did not lose that game because of our center position.   In a combined 48 minutes, Kanter & Theis combined to post 36 points on _very_ efficient shooting and grabbed 14 rebounds -- all without consuming very many possessions.   They didn't stop Embiid.  But nobody was stopping them either.

We lost the game because we had the convergence of the occasional bad game by not just one but both our two Jays.   When both those two guys produce stinkers in the same game, that's just too high of an obstacle to overcome, especially against a good team.

If either Jaylen or Jayson had produced his average output, we probably win.  If they both do, then we definitely win.

So while it's fair to ask the question of whether Boston needs to add a center, it's important to not over-react to one game like that.

I'd say this is actually a good argument for why we DO need a center upgrade. Because despite that performance from our centers the Cs  still got outplayed at center, and you can't expect that production from our centers during the course of a 7 game series.  Embiid ability too be the focal point of his offense and generate easy points for others in part because the C's had to double team is a major reason the Phili offense which is usually medicore was good that night.

[Fafnir]

76ers have one of the lowest 3 point attempt rates in the league.

They're actually quite bad at generating 3 point shots, though they are shooting a good clip as a team.

[SHAQATTACK]

Jay King had an interesting take on The Athletic when asked a question about whether the Celtics needed to find a big man. His take might disappoint some of the wrist slitters though. I will post the article as it's subscription based.

Do the Celtics need a big man? What big man? A realistic trade for said big man? — @Porkman.

This is the question everyone asks me, no matter where I am or what I’m doing. I could be on the side of the road, all alone, recovering from a devastating rollerblade fall, and a friend would shout out a nearby window, “But do you think the Celtics need another center? Which one?”

Do the Celtics need to acquire another big man to achieve regular-season success? No. They have the No. 6 offense and No. 8 defense. They have allowed fewer points in the paint than every team except the Bucks and Raptors. They rank just 26th in defending the low post, but whatever, right? That’s the only major blemish on their defensive profile and post-ups are still inefficient in most cases. Hardly any dominant centers still exist. During the regular season, Boston’s primary defensive weakness will only matter – really matter – once or twice a month.

It could matter a lot more in certain playoff matchups, which is why I go back and forth on whether the Celtics need to find a bulkier big man. The internal conversation goes something like this:

Me: Daniel Theis is a capable starting center and the Enes Kanter/Robert Williams combo isn’t half bad. The Celtics have gotten enough from their centers so far. They shouldn’t sacrifice assets to fix an issue that hasn’t held them back.

Also me: Did you see what Joel Embiid did to the Celtics last week, you moron? What will happen if they run into him during a playoff series? How much destruction will Giannis Antetokounmpo leave behind if he plays Boston’s tiny frontcourt for seven straight games? Can any of Boston’s centers hold up against the highest level of competition?

Me, striking a different tone: But what would the Celtics trade? Because of their salary situation, they would probably need to move one of their best players to acquire an established, sturdy center. Another year removed from his ankle injury, Gordon Hayward has been good enough that he’s a piece to build on, not punt away for a little more size. Should the Boston front office deal Marcus Smart or another key player just to acquire a center who might only be a major upgrade during one playoff series? No, right? They should probably just add more bench shooting and see if they can get by with what they have in the middle. This is a league driven by wings, after all. It might not be wise to overreact to one dominant Embiid performance. He was human the other time he played the Celtics this season. So was Antetokounmpo during his only matchup with Boston to date. LaMarcus Aldridge, another top post threat, did nothing against the Celtics defense. Boston’s defense is different, but maybe it’s good enough as is.

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

https://theathletic.com/1461954/2019/12/16/celtics-mailbag-the-question-that-wont-go-away-do-the-celtics-need-another-big-man/

I would agree about LaMarcus Aldridge. I've mentioned his name (I think in this thread) but as you mentioned, he was useless when we played San Antonio. Doesn't seem to have alot left in the tank.

reminds me of KGs last years .  Can feel good one game and dominate , then let a nobody beat ya up.  I don't think he has the gas to play the minutes we need .  We need YOUNG healthy 7 ft legs

[ozgod]

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

To me, this portrays the 'irrational' response.   It points out exactly the kind of reactive (emotional) thinking that we should hope Danny & Brad do NOT follow.

Because while Embiid was indeed great, we did not lose that game because of our center position.   In a combined 48 minutes, Kanter & Theis combined to post 36 points on _very_ efficient shooting and grabbed 14 rebounds -- all without consuming very many possessions.   They didn't stop Embiid.  But nobody was stopping them either.

We lost the game because we had the convergence of the occasional bad game by not just one but both our two Jays.   When both those two guys produce stinkers in the same game, that's just too high of an obstacle to overcome, especially against a good team.

If either Jaylen or Jayson had produced his average output, we probably win.  If they both do, then we definitely win.

So while it's fair to ask the question of whether Boston needs to add a center, it's important to not over-react to one game like that.

It's also the question of what would we give up to get the center and would it be a net gain. That's really the main question. I'm sure we could probably make a run at KAT if we gave up Jaylen AND Jayson, and threw Smart in for salaries. Or maybe famed Embiid stopper Marc Gasol who's been mentioned here as well. But would it be wise?

Or shipping out Kanter for Poeltl - does that really move the needle or just move around deck chairs on the Titanic?

[mmmmm]

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

To me, this portrays the 'irrational' response.   It points out exactly the kind of reactive (emotional) thinking that we should hope Danny & Brad do NOT follow.

Because while Embiid was indeed great, we did not lose that game because of our center position.   In a combined 48 minutes, Kanter & Theis combined to post 36 points on _very_ efficient shooting and grabbed 14 rebounds -- all without consuming very many possessions.   They didn't stop Embiid.  But nobody was stopping them either.

We lost the game because we had the convergence of the occasional bad game by not just one but both our two Jays.   When both those two guys produce stinkers in the same game, that's just too high of an obstacle to overcome, especially against a good team.

If either Jaylen or Jayson had produced his average output, we probably win.  If they both do, then we definitely win.

So while it's fair to ask the question of whether Boston needs to add a center, it's important to not over-react to one game like that.

I'd say this is actually a good argument for why we DO need a center upgrade. Because despite that performance from our centers the Cs  still got outplayed at center, and you can't expect that production from our centers during the course of a 7 game series.  Embiid ability too be the focal point of his offense and generate easy points for others in part because the C's had to double team is a major reason the Phili offense which is usually medicore was good that night.

No, that's not what those numbers tell us.   Kanter and Theis produced nearly those points in the same 48 minutes -- but with far fewer possessions being used.   During those same 48 minutes, Embiid (and Quinn) used far more possessions.  On the BOS offensive side, the difference in those possessions used (within those same 48 minutes) was being utilized through other players:  mainly Kemba, Jaylen, Jayson & Gordon.

What needed to happen within the difference of those possessions was for our actual stars to produce more with them.   
 
You don't need to win at all 5 positions.   You need to win at the positions you are great at and hold serve on the others.   We held serve at the 5, but we didn't win at two of our wing slots.

 

[mmmmm]

Me, confused: Maybe not, though. Man, I don’t know. I just don’t. Embiid was incredible the other night. He really was.

To me, this portrays the 'irrational' response.   It points out exactly the kind of reactive (emotional) thinking that we should hope Danny & Brad do NOT follow.

Because while Embiid was indeed great, we did not lose that game because of our center position.   In a combined 48 minutes, Kanter & Theis combined to post 36 points on _very_ efficient shooting and grabbed 14 rebounds -- all without consuming very many possessions.   They didn't stop Embiid.  But nobody was stopping them either.

We lost the game because we had the convergence of the occasional bad game by not just one but both our two Jays.   When both those two guys produce stinkers in the same game, that's just too high of an obstacle to overcome, especially against a good team.

If either Jaylen or Jayson had produced his average output, we probably win.  If they both do, then we definitely win.

So while it's fair to ask the question of whether Boston needs to add a center, it's important to not over-react to one game like that.

It's also the question of what would we give up to get the center and would it be a net gain. That's really the main question. I'm sure we could probably make a run at KAT if we gave up Jaylen AND Jayson, and threw Smart in for salaries. Or maybe famed Embiid stopper Marc Gasol who's been mentioned here as well. But would it be wise?

Or shipping out Kanter for Poeltl - does that really move the needle or just move around deck chairs on the Titanic?

On the idea of Jaylen or Jayson for KAT:  Let's re-affirm the point that Jaylen, because he signed the extension, is not really tradable until next Summer.

Kemba is almost certainly not going to be flipped (and basketball-wise it makes no sense to try to improve the 5 by trading away your stud at the 1).   Gordon, because he has a player option, is very difficult to trade unless he opts-in.

So of our 'top players', the only ones that are really movable (in season) are Jayson or Smart.   So any KAT deal does boil down to having to say goodbye to those guys.   That seems .... pretty expensive, imho.  If Danny pulled that trigger, I could buy the argument.  But assuming such a deal happened, while it solves the 5, it kinda creates a hole somewhere else.   With both Tatum and Smart gone, and KAT really replacing Theis, you need to plug someone into either the 4 or the 2 (assuming Hayward & Jaylen cover the 3 and one of the 4 or 2).  I.E., that creates a starting lineup of:

KAT
?
Gordon
Jaylen
Kemba

Who is the 5th starter?

I do like Poeltl a lot.   And I would say that long term, swapping Kanter for him may be more than moving deck chairs.  But I think not enough to move the needle. 

[liam]

Is Noah Vonleh just trash? I haven't seen him play for a while. He could be had for next to nothing.