Who's available that we can get at C

[Fierce1]

Now why would you need a guy like Drummond? It’s so that the “others” like a Jarrett Allen or Serge Ibaka or Montrez Harrell or whoever don’t start routinely looking like all stars against you.

That's a fine thing to want, but it's not worth giving up any of the core of the team in order to get it.

The Celtics can win games despite role player big men putting up double doubles.

I agree.

I also don't believe the Celts will move any of the core 5.

But winning games is not enough.
Winning the championship is the goal.

Right now the NBA is wide open, any team can win the championship because the GSW dynasty is over.

So the Celts must make sure that heading into the playoffs, they made every move possible to put the Celts in a position to win.

[Scottiej23]

I'm for giving Bogut a call. Can't see anyone getting waived or bought out that would move the needle any more than he would (unless things fell into place and we could get Baynes, gosh I miss Baynes.)

[nickagneta]

The question is are the Celts willing to pay the price for Drummond.

I think the question is a bit different:

Are the Celtics stupid enough to pay the price for Drummond?

The answer: No.

That's your personal assessment.

Celts were stupid enough to trade Perk for Jeff Green back in 2011.

Right now anything's possible.

Unless you're going to tell me you have a source inside the Celtic front office.

While I don't think the Celts will trade any of the core 5, I think the Celts will make a minor move to upgrade.

If they make a minor move, fine.

But Drummond is a major move that means moving at least one core 5 player. That price is too high for what might be, as a whole, a sideway or step back move.

Drummond can't guard the likes of Embiid, KAT, Davis, Jokic, etc. And, he just doesn't show up way, way too often for my liking. He doesn't move the needle for the Celtics into top title contender, especially given what we would need to give up for him. 

[Fierce1]

The question is are the Celts willing to pay the price for Drummond.

I think the question is a bit different:

Are the Celtics stupid enough to pay the price for Drummond?

The answer: No.

That's your personal assessment.

Celts were stupid enough to trade Perk for Jeff Green back in 2011.

Right now anything's possible.

Unless you're going to tell me you have a source inside the Celtic front office.

While I don't think the Celts will trade any of the core 5, I think the Celts will make a minor move to upgrade.

If they make a minor move, fine.

But Drummond is a major move that means moving at least one core 5 player. That price is too high for what might be, as a whole, a sideway or step back move.

Drummond can't guard the likes of Embiid, KAT, Davis, Jokic, etc. And, he just doesn't show up way, way too often for my liking. He doesn't move the needle for the Celtics into top title contender, especially given what we would need to give up for him.

I agree.

Right now the price to pay would have to be Marcus Smart, not Hayward, for Drummond.

I don't think Ainge will do that.

[Fierce1]

Center is not this team's most immediate problem.  They're fine with that they have.
Last night Theis had 16, Kanter 20 and Embid had 38.  They held their own.

The bigger problem is their wing depth sucks. 

Simply tallying up the points scored of each team's centers is such a poor way to illustrate the actual impact of any of the individual players.

I agree, there's more to it than just numbers.

We can look at it this way, Kanter and Theis can put numbers, sure, but on the other end, Theis and Kanter just give up the 2 points back because they can't defend the opposing bigs.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Center is not this team's most immediate problem.  They're fine with that they have.
Last night Theis had 16, Kanter 20 and Embid had 38.  They held their own.

The bigger problem is their wing depth sucks. 

Simply tallying up the points scored of each team's centers is such a poor way to illustrate the actual impact of any of the individual players.

I agree, there's more to it than just numbers.

We can look at it this way, Kanter and Theis can put numbers, sure, but on the other end, Theis and Kanter just give up the 2 points back because they can't defend the opposing bigs.

Except many of the defensive stats for those guys indicate that isn't happening.

[Fierce1]

Center is not this team's most immediate problem.  They're fine with that they have.
Last night Theis had 16, Kanter 20 and Embid had 38.  They held their own.

The bigger problem is their wing depth sucks. 

Simply tallying up the points scored of each team's centers is such a poor way to illustrate the actual impact of any of the individual players.

I agree, there's more to it than just numbers.

We can look at it this way, Kanter and Theis can put numbers, sure, but on the other end, Theis and Kanter just give up the 2 points back because they can't defend the opposing bigs.

Except many of the defensive stats for those guys indicate that isn't happening.

Opposing bigs like Sabonis and Jarrett Allen look like All-Stars if they're facing the Celtics.

Even Ibaka had a rare 20-10 game against the Celts in Boston.

Also, why are the Celts double teaming a lot inside the paint if their bigs are good enough?

When the Celts had Horford, the Celts dominated the Sixers and Horford played Embiid 1 on 1.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Center is not this team's most immediate problem.  They're fine with that they have.
Last night Theis had 16, Kanter 20 and Embid had 38.  They held their own.

The bigger problem is their wing depth sucks. 

Simply tallying up the points scored of each team's centers is such a poor way to illustrate the actual impact of any of the individual players.

I agree, there's more to it than just numbers.

We can look at it this way, Kanter and Theis can put numbers, sure, but on the other end, Theis and Kanter just give up the 2 points back because they can't defend the opposing bigs.

Except many of the defensive stats for those guys indicate that isn't happening.

Opposing bigs like Sabonis and Jarrett Allen look like All-Stars if they're facing the Celtics.

Even Ibaka had a rare 20-10 game against the Celts in Boston.

Also, why are the Celts double teaming a lot inside the paint if their bigs are good enough?

When the Celts had Horford, the Celts dominated the Sixers and Horford played Embiid 1 on 1.

Allen, Ibaka, and Sabonis are good players. They played pretty well against us, but its not like they had their best games of the year.

Check out their splits. Allen has similar numbers this year against New Orleans and Memphis and way better numbers against teams like Charlotte, Cleveland, Denver, and San Antonio. In these games, he matched up against players like Zeller, Love, Jokic, Plumlee, Aldridge, and Poeltl.

Ibaka has similar numbers against us as against Brooklyn, Chicago, Miami, and Utah. He has way better numbers against teams like Detroit, Indiana, Sacramento, and Washington. Again, that includes matchups against Gobert, Drummond, Sabonis, and Turner.

Sabonis has been tearing it up this year. Still, his numbers against us are similar to against Washington, Sacramento, Philadelphia, Orlando, and Memphis. That includes matchups against Vucevic, Embiid, Horford, Jackson, etc.

My point to all this is not that Kanter and Theis are better defenders, or even equal defenders to the guys I listed. My point is that you cannot look at the results of any one game or matchup. Basketball is very much a game of matchups. Some nights a guy has it against the Cs. Sometimes that's because of team energy level, coaching, individual play, or general talent.

In general, Theis and Kanter have been cogs in a really good team defense this year. Obviously, it'd be great if we had anchors or stoppers at their position, but they've been able to play good team defense so far. This has led to the Cs having the 4th best defensive rating in the NBA.

[nickagneta]

Sabonis went for 15 and 14 against us. He averages 17.4 and 13.4. He had a fairly average for him game against us. He wasn't close to the reason we lost. Heck, we outrebounded Indy that night. We lost that game because the Holidays went 15-23 for a combined 35 points off the bench.

Ibaka is averaging 15 and 8.7 against us when he averages 13.8 and 7.9 a game for the year. Again, he played about at his average rate against us and was a non factor in the two games we beat the Raptors when we thoroughly thumped them on the boards both games. We only lost to the Raptors because the Celtics didn't show up for the game and showed zero effort or energy all game.

Allen averages 15.5 and 12.5 against us while averaging 12 and 10.2 for the year. He plays slightly better against us than he does on average but not by much. The Celtics drummed the Nets on the boards in the win versus the Nets and only lost the battle of the boards by 1 rebound in the loss. The loss to the Nets had a ton more to do with Dinwiddie playing like a superstar than anything else.

The idea that these guys and their performances were at All-Star levels against us or were the major reasons for those 3 losses is a fantasy concocted to try to push a point that our bigs are leading to losses because the opposing bigs are killing us. The stats, and the context of the games tell a completely different story.

[wiley]

I'm coming at this from ignorance....so just a question for the last two posters..Who and Nick.  But are those numbers against our double teams, draining our wing defense?  Verses against single team coverage used by other teams with more reputable big man defenders?  Teams who thus don't suck guys away from their perimeter defense?  Again I don't know the numbers. 

BTW, If all our bigs are healthy (including RWill and Poirier, then I'm ready to ride that out).

[nickagneta]

I'm coming at this from ignorance....so just a question for the last two posters..Who and Nick.  But are those numbers against our double teams, draining our wing defense?  Verses against single team coverage used by other teams with more reputable big man defenders?  Teams who thus don't suck guys away from their perimeter defense?  Again I don't know the numbers. 

BTW, If all our bigs are healthy (including RWill and Poirier, then I'm ready to ride that out).

I have seen claims of double teaming guys inside, but have not seen evidence of this in games.

The Celtics covering on the backside of the defense always cheat towards the paint, off their guys to help weakside if the ball goes down low. This is how the defense runs on the regular. It also allows for those players, almost always wings, to crash the defensive boards.

I have not seen actual double teaming on guys down low, just the regular defense happening

[wiley]

I'm coming at this from ignorance....so just a question for the last two posters..Who and Nick.  But are those numbers against our double teams, draining our wing defense?  Verses against single team coverage used by other teams with more reputable big man defenders?  Teams who thus don't suck guys away from their perimeter defense?  Again I don't know the numbers. 

BTW, If all our bigs are healthy (including RWill and Poirier, then I'm ready to ride that out).

I have seen claims of double teaming guys inside, but have not seen evidence of this in games.

The Celtics covering on the backside of the defense always cheat towards the paint, off their guys to help weakside if the ball goes down low. This is how the defense runs on the regular. It also allows for those players, almost always wings, to crash the defensive boards.

I have not seen actual double teaming on guys down low, just the regular defense happening

Thanks Nick.  TP.

[greg683x]

Look at team rebounding numbers Were not in the bottom of the league, were right in the middle.  Average.

Points in the paint allowed per game were in the Top 5.

Blocked shots per game, were in the top 6.

Could our bigs be better?  Yes.  But theyre not bad.  We have All Star caliber players literally playing every other starting 5 position.  Our backup center would start on a lot of teams

[Jvalin]

Look at team rebounding numbers Were not in the bottom of the league, were right in the middle.  Average.

Points in the paint allowed per game were in the Top 5.

Blocked shots per game, were in the top 6.

Could our bigs be better?  Yes.  But theyre not bad.  We have All Star caliber players literally playing every other starting 5 position.  Our backup center would start on a lot of teams

In a vacuum, Kanter is our best Center though. Only reason Theis starts is cause he's a better fit next to Kemba-Brown-Hayward-Tatum.

Would Theis be starting ''on a lot of teams''? I don't think he would.

[greg683x]

Look at team rebounding numbers Were not in the bottom of the league, were right in the middle.  Average.

Points in the paint allowed per game were in the Top 5.

Blocked shots per game, were in the top 6.

Could our bigs be better?  Yes.  But theyre not bad.  We have All Star caliber players literally playing every other starting 5 position.  Our backup center would start on a lot of teams

In a vacuum, Kanter is our best Center though. Only reason Theis starts is cause he's a better fit next to Kemba-Brown-Hayward-Tatum.

Would Theis be starting ''on a lot of teams''? I don't think he would.

Fair Enough, we need scoring off the bench, so Kanter fits better there.  We still have an NBA caliber starting center on the team logging minutes at the position

The point is though, we dont have scrubs at the Center position.  We have league average players, which is more than adequate considering the players we have surrounding them.

its like some folks are trying find a way to construct an All Star team