The Hayward S&T: Missed Opportunity? (Merged)

[tonydelk]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Turner is a good player.  He's have a career year of sorts.  Prior to this year he was an average to decent player.  It seems all of the trade chatter and how no one in the league wanted hit lit a fire under his ass.  Also the fact that you remove Dipo those shots have to go somewhere.  This is his best year since 2016/2017.  He's playing well defensively and hitting 3s at the highest clip of his career.  Most minutes he's averaged in his career.  He's still not a good rebounder.  People keep calling the trade a fail.  We have Theis at 5m this year putting up the same stats as Turner making 18m per year.  I am in the camp that didn't want him even if Danny couldn't use the TPE.  I'd rather the team sign Theis for 3 year extension at 10m per year.  Theis and Timelord are a better combo then having Turner.  The c's need a 3 and D PF.  Tucker, Barnes and Collins are great fits for this team.
   
Daniel Theis   
MIN         FG    FG%   3PT     3P%   FT       FT%   OR   DR   REB   
23.70   3.9-6.4   60.60   0.8-2.0   40.00   1.2-1.6   74.20   1.30   4.00   5.30   
AST   BLK   STL   PTS
1.40   1.00   0.60   9.70
   
   
Myles Turner
MIN         FG   FG%      3PT    3P%   FT     FT%   OR   DR   REB
31.90   5.0-9.8   51.30   1.6-4.6   34.10   2.4-3.2   76.20   1.30   5.40   6.70
AST   BLK   STL   PTS
1.20   3.80   1.30   14.00

[Roy H.]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Most never take a 3 point shot.  According to NBA.com only 69 centers have even attempted a 3 point shot this season.  Of the centers with at least 10 attempts, there are 40, Turner is 23rd in percentage.  He is 19th of 26 of the centers with at least 25 attempts on the season (so in the 1 to 2 attempts per game or greater).

In other words of the centers that actually shoot 3 point shots fairly consistently, Turner is most certainly below average if not just flat out bad.

This is the same argument this board has had for years regarding Marcus Smart.  If you don't account for volume, you miss the trees in the forest.     

Nope.  You determine whether somebody is a good shooter based upon both volume and percentage. The argument that we should not include centers who cannot shoot threes at all is bizarre to me. In determining whether Turner is above average among centers as an outside shooter, you think we should completely ignore guys like Tristan Thompson? 

You’re basically arguing the following, by analogy: a guy who hits 30 homeruns in MLB cannot be considered a good homerun hitter, because he is last among all the guys who hit 30+ HRs.  It makes zero sense to leave out the fact that most players cannot hit 30 homeruns at all.

[Moranis]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Most never take a 3 point shot.  According to NBA.com only 69 centers have even attempted a 3 point shot this season.  Of the centers with at least 10 attempts, there are 40, Turner is 23rd in percentage.  He is 19th of 26 of the centers with at least 25 attempts on the season (so in the 1 to 2 attempts per game or greater).

In other words of the centers that actually shoot 3 point shots fairly consistently, Turner is most certainly below average if not just flat out bad.

This is the same argument this board has had for years regarding Marcus Smart.  If you don't account for volume, you miss the trees in the forest.     

Nope.  You determine whether somebody is a good shooter based upon both volume and percentage. The argument that we should not include centers who cannot shoot threes at all is bizarre to me. In determining whether Turner is above average among centers as an outside shooter, you think we should completely ignore guys like Tristan Thompson? 

You’re basically arguing the following, by analogy: a guy who hits 30 homeruns in MLB cannot be considered a good homerun hitter, because he is last among all the guys who hit 30+ HRs.  It makes zero sense to leave out the fact that most players cannot hit 30 homeruns at all.

That isn't the same thing at all. 

Centers including Turner are 787 for 2197 from 3 this year or 35.82% (35.89% without Turner).  So Turner is well below the center 3 point average.   And for the record, those numbers include the 26 centers that have taken at least 1 and not made any (they are 0 for 62).  Even including that 0 for 62 from 26 centers, Turner just doesn't measure up as a shooter.  He is quite simple a below average to poor 3 point shooter.  He shoots them a lot and makes them with enough consistency that he has to be guarded, but the better move is to let him shoot as opposed to basically any other Pacer starter and several of the Pacer back-ups.  Turner shooting a 3 is a bad shot for Indiana offensively in much the same way that Smart shooting a 3 is a bad shot for the Celtics offensively as him shooting means the better players aren't shooting them. 

[Wretch]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Most never take a 3 point shot.  According to NBA.com only 69 centers have even attempted a 3 point shot this season.  Of the centers with at least 10 attempts, there are 40, Turner is 23rd in percentage.  He is 19th of 26 of the centers with at least 25 attempts on the season (so in the 1 to 2 attempts per game or greater).

In other words of the centers that actually shoot 3 point shots fairly consistently, Turner is most certainly below average if not just flat out bad.

This is the same argument this board has had for years regarding Marcus Smart.  If you don't account for volume, you miss the trees in the forest.     

Nope.  You determine whether somebody is a good shooter based upon both volume and percentage. The argument that we should not include centers who cannot shoot threes at all is bizarre to me. In determining whether Turner is above average among centers as an outside shooter, you think we should completely ignore guys like Tristan Thompson? 

You’re basically arguing the following, by analogy: a guy who hits 30 homeruns in MLB cannot be considered a good homerun hitter, because he is last among all the guys who hit 30+ HRs.  It makes zero sense to leave out the fact that most players cannot hit 30 homeruns at all.

Turner is good NBA player but a below average NBA 3pt shooter and at best an average 3pt shoot for his position. He's the 8th highest paid player at his position in the NBA and his bad contract runs until 2023 per Sportrac. Taking on his contract wasn't worth the opportunity cost and would hand cuff the Cs from a cap perspective for years.

[keevsnick]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Most never take a 3 point shot.  According to NBA.com only 69 centers have even attempted a 3 point shot this season.  Of the centers with at least 10 attempts, there are 40, Turner is 23rd in percentage.  He is 19th of 26 of the centers with at least 25 attempts on the season (so in the 1 to 2 attempts per game or greater).

In other words of the centers that actually shoot 3 point shots fairly consistently, Turner is most certainly below average if not just flat out bad.

This is the same argument this board has had for years regarding Marcus Smart.  If you don't account for volume, you miss the trees in the forest.     

Nope.  You determine whether somebody is a good shooter based upon both volume and percentage. The argument that we should not include centers who cannot shoot threes at all is bizarre to me. In determining whether Turner is above average among centers as an outside shooter, you think we should completely ignore guys like Tristan Thompson? 

You’re basically arguing the following, by analogy: a guy who hits 30 homeruns in MLB cannot be considered a good homerun hitter, because he is last among all the guys who hit 30+ HRs.  It makes zero sense to leave out the fact that most players cannot hit 30 homeruns at all.

Turner is good NBA player but a below average NBA 3pt shooter and at best an average 3pt shoot for his position. He's the 8th highest paid player at his position in the NBA and his bad contract runs until 2023 per Sportrac. Taking on his contract wasn't worth the opportunity cost and would hand cuff the Cs from a cap perspective for years.

Ya this point just isn't right. Career he's a 35.5% shooter which is JUST slightly below league average for that span OVERALL. For a Center he's a well above average shooter because most Centers can't shoot at all let alone at a league average rate.

I think people need to let the contract stuff go. he may be the leading candidate for DPOY right now. The Pacers play at a #1 defensive team average when he's on, average at best level when he's off. Say what you want about his overall game, he's not overpaid with that kind of impact.

Does that mean he's a better option than what the C's currently have? I don't know, Theis and R Williams have been extraordinary values this year at 5 and 3.6 million (TT not so much at 8.25).

But the idea that he isn't worth his money is kind of silly to me, he's good.

[gouki88]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Most never take a 3 point shot.  According to NBA.com only 69 centers have even attempted a 3 point shot this season.  Of the centers with at least 10 attempts, there are 40, Turner is 23rd in percentage.  He is 19th of 26 of the centers with at least 25 attempts on the season (so in the 1 to 2 attempts per game or greater).

In other words of the centers that actually shoot 3 point shots fairly consistently, Turner is most certainly below average if not just flat out bad.

This is the same argument this board has had for years regarding Marcus Smart.  If you don't account for volume, you miss the trees in the forest.     

Nope.  You determine whether somebody is a good shooter based upon both volume and percentage. The argument that we should not include centers who cannot shoot threes at all is bizarre to me. In determining whether Turner is above average among centers as an outside shooter, you think we should completely ignore guys like Tristan Thompson? 

You’re basically arguing the following, by analogy: a guy who hits 30 homeruns in MLB cannot be considered a good homerun hitter, because he is last among all the guys who hit 30+ HRs.  It makes zero sense to leave out the fact that most players cannot hit 30 homeruns at all.

Turner is better than big men who don't shoot, but is one of the worst when it comes to big men who do. Is that really such an important point?

[Moranis]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Most never take a 3 point shot.  According to NBA.com only 69 centers have even attempted a 3 point shot this season.  Of the centers with at least 10 attempts, there are 40, Turner is 23rd in percentage.  He is 19th of 26 of the centers with at least 25 attempts on the season (so in the 1 to 2 attempts per game or greater).

In other words of the centers that actually shoot 3 point shots fairly consistently, Turner is most certainly below average if not just flat out bad.

This is the same argument this board has had for years regarding Marcus Smart.  If you don't account for volume, you miss the trees in the forest.     

Nope.  You determine whether somebody is a good shooter based upon both volume and percentage. The argument that we should not include centers who cannot shoot threes at all is bizarre to me. In determining whether Turner is above average among centers as an outside shooter, you think we should completely ignore guys like Tristan Thompson? 

You’re basically arguing the following, by analogy: a guy who hits 30 homeruns in MLB cannot be considered a good homerun hitter, because he is last among all the guys who hit 30+ HRs.  It makes zero sense to leave out the fact that most players cannot hit 30 homeruns at all.

Turner is better than big men who don't shoot, but is one of the worst when it comes to big men who do. Is that really such an important point?

Nope and you could argue the Pacers would be better off if he shot them less or maybe not at all given everyone else in that starting lineup is a good to great 3 point shooter.

[nickagneta]

  Turner is a below average 3 point shooter.

Is he for a big?

Does it matter?

If you're kicking out to a player to hit a three, do you want Steph Curry or Turner? Why? If you're kicking out for a three do you pass it to Smart or Christian Wood? Why?

You kick it to the best shooter, regardless of how big they are. So, yeah, Turner is a below average shooter, it doesn't matter how tall he is or what position he plays.

And...I mean, if you're going to get a big and use him in a stretch big role, don't you want that big hitting at a league average or better from three?

Of course it matters. It’s the difference between a big man who can draw a defender out of the paint to cover him, versus one who cannot.

Turner credibly stretches the floor. That opens things up for others.

He can can credibly stretch the floor and still be a below average 3 point shooter.

Again, for a big or the average player?  Centers aren’t going to shoot like guards.  Turner is a credible floor stretcher.

The league average has been around 36% for the past several seasons.  Turner is shooting 34%, with a career average of 35.5%.  He’s close to (or at) average overall, and certainly above average for a big.

not among qualifying players.  he is 13th out of 14 qualifying centers.  He would be 19th out qualifying power forwards (and only 26 of them qualified).  So given his volume, he is a bad 3 point shooter, even for a big.  He keeps defenses honest especially given his volume of attempts, but his make rate is just not very good at all.

There are what, 180 - 200 bigs in the NBA?  And he’s in the top quadrant for 3PM and 3P%?  That’s not below average.

Most never take a 3 point shot.  According to NBA.com only 69 centers have even attempted a 3 point shot this season.  Of the centers with at least 10 attempts, there are 40, Turner is 23rd in percentage.  He is 19th of 26 of the centers with at least 25 attempts on the season (so in the 1 to 2 attempts per game or greater).

In other words of the centers that actually shoot 3 point shots fairly consistently, Turner is most certainly below average if not just flat out bad.

This is the same argument this board has had for years regarding Marcus Smart.  If you don't account for volume, you miss the trees in the forest.     

Nope.  You determine whether somebody is a good shooter based upon both volume and percentage. The argument that we should not include centers who cannot shoot threes at all is bizarre to me. In determining whether Turner is above average among centers as an outside shooter, you think we should completely ignore guys like Tristan Thompson? 

You’re basically arguing the following, by analogy: a guy who hits 30 homeruns in MLB cannot be considered a good homerun hitter, because he is last among all the guys who hit 30+ HRs.  It makes zero sense to leave out the fact that most players cannot hit 30 homeruns at all.

Turner is better than big men who don't shoot, but is one of the worst when it comes to big men who do. Is that really such an important point?

Nope and you could argue the Pacers would be better off if he shot them less or maybe not at all given everyone else in that starting lineup is a good to great 3 point shooter.

Which goes back to my original point, which is, it doesn't matter if he is average shooting threes for a big, if you are going to use him to stretch the floor, you want him being an above average three point shooter, regardless of his size or position. Otherwise, defenses, especially in the playoffs, will play loose on him from three and extra tight on much better three point shooters on the court.

If you are going to use any player to be a volume three point shooter, regardless of size, you need that guy being, at the very least, a slightly above average three point shooter. We have already seen with Smart the effects that a below average three point shooter can have on an offense if they shoot for volume, and it's not good.

[Roy H.]

I’ll take 34% - 36% 3PT% from a big man.  That equates to an eFG% of .510 to .540.  That’s quite efficient, particularly when the guy is super-efficient inside, as well.

It’s a bit laughable to compare Smart to Turner, isn’t it?  Smart is a .468 eFG%, compared to .592 for Turner.

Turner is an efficient scorer, and ranks 10th among centers in ppg.  And, that’s completely ignoring the defensive side, where he is a legit DPOY candidate.

[NKY fan]

I’ll take 34% - 36% 3PT% from a big man.  That equates to an eFG% of .510 to .540.  That’s quite efficient, particularly when the guy is super-efficient inside, as well.

It’s a bit laughable to compare Smart to Turner, isn’t it?  Smart is a .468 eFG%, compared to .592 for Turner.

Turner is an efficient scorer, and ranks 10th among centers in ppg.  And, that’s completely ignoring the defensive side, where he is a legit DPOY candidate.

But but but he is way overpaid at $18M lol I have heard it all on here 😂

[dannyboy35]

I’ll take 34% - 36% 3PT% from a big man.  That equates to an eFG% of .510 to .540.  That’s quite efficient, particularly when the guy is super-efficient inside, as well.

It’s a bit laughable to compare Smart to Turner, isn’t it?  Smart is a .468 eFG%, compared to .592 for Turner.

Turner is an efficient scorer, and ranks 10th among centers in ppg.  And, that’s completely ignoring the defensive side, where he is a legit DPOY candidate.

But but but he is way overpaid at $18M lol I have heard it all on here 😂

  If the end I don’t think Danny (and definitely not Brad ) regret not getting Turner , as long as they CAN use the TPE. ( Up to ownership) . Then people can stop drooling over Turner . Are we really believing he’s committed and isn’t going to just pull his Jeff Green act like he always does? Come on. He’s finally going to consistently play hard? Give it time.

[NKY fan]

I’ll take 34% - 36% 3PT% from a big man.  That equates to an eFG% of .510 to .540.  That’s quite efficient, particularly when the guy is super-efficient inside, as well.

It’s a bit laughable to compare Smart to Turner, isn’t it?  Smart is a .468 eFG%, compared to .592 for Turner.

Turner is an efficient scorer, and ranks 10th among centers in ppg.  And, that’s completely ignoring the defensive side, where he is a legit DPOY candidate.

But but but he is way overpaid at $18M lol I have heard it all on here 😂

  If the end I don’t think Danny (and definitely not Brad ) regret not getting Turner , as long as they CAN use the TPE. ( Up to ownership) . Then people can stop drooling over Turner . Are we really believing he’s committed and isn’t going to just pull his Jeff Green act like he always does? Come on. He’s finally going to consistently play hard? Give it time.

If it were up to me I would have jumped at the deal. Then I would have tried to trade Turner plus a pick or rookie contracts for better players. There would have been options. And I don’t understand the trashing of Turner. Do people legit think he is trash or try to prove that Danny was right?

[Moranis]

I’ll take 34% - 36% 3PT% from a big man.  That equates to an eFG% of .510 to .540.  That’s quite efficient, particularly when the guy is super-efficient inside, as well.

It’s a bit laughable to compare Smart to Turner, isn’t it?  Smart is a .468 eFG%, compared to .592 for Turner.

Turner is an efficient scorer, and ranks 10th among centers in ppg.  And, that’s completely ignoring the defensive side, where he is a legit DPOY candidate.

That is because Turner takes way more shots from 0-3 feet and makes them at a much higher percentage than Smart.  This year it is even more pronounced as Turner is well above his career average in attempts and percentage from that range taking 35.9% of his shots from 0-3 feet and making them at an uber elite 74.3% (Shaq for his career was 74% from that range for a point of comparison).  Smart on the other hand only takes 13.3% of his shots from 0-3 feet and only hits them at 40% this year.  Turner is also well above his career percentage from 3-10 feet hitting those 11.8% of his attempts at a very strong 52.2%. 

If anything that shows that Turner should in fact stay by the basket and not go out and take 3 pointers as he is far more efficient inside and is the worst 3 point shooter in the Pacers starting lineup.  Especially given Turner is a respectable foul shooter (76.8% for his career) and he gets fouled far more often down low than on the perimeter. 

[Big333223]

I was in favor of bringing in Turner. I thought he'd look a lot better playing his natural position in Boston and would be a defensive anchor.

That said, I'm confused (as others have voiced) as to why this is a conversation when Hayward was a free agent? Even if Ainge had agreed to the Pacer's deal, Hayward was still going to Charlotte because they offered him more money than the Pacers were willing to pay. Ainge's acceptance or refusal of a deal doesn't factor in.

Charlotte came in a little late out of nowhere. No one thought they would stretch Batums $27M deal to open cap space. If Danny agreed to the trade on day one of free agency Turner would be a Celtic .

My understanding is that you're wrong about that. Even if the Celtics and Pacers had agreed on a deal, they couldn't have executed the deal yet. When Charlotte made their offer, it was before any deal could officially have been, technically, finalized. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here but my understanding is that as long as Indy wasn't going to agree to a larger deal, Hayward was going to Charlotte and there isn't anything the Celts could've done about it.

Incidentally, I just read someone call Myles Turner, Jeff Green and I almost died. I like Turner but this feels very apt.

Nope. Ainge asked for better assets coming in and or hesitated so Charlotte came in a day or two after free agency started. So the window to get a deal done was tight that’s why Indy overpaid ( then Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ed about it lol)..

Nope - Jordan and Hayward spoke the 1st night of FA to 'close the deal'. That means other discussions had at least taken place when FA opened. I get it, it sucks that IND wouldn't match CHA's deal, but to pretend that you can trade and UFA to any team you desire just isn't true. Danny might have wanted more assets, but that is irrelevant if Hayward was able to accept a bigger deal elsewhere.

It is fine to talk about how Turner could have helped the Cs. Obviously he is a million times better than Thompson, but it is getting pretty annoying that people keep casually tossing out opinion as fact on the matter. If Hayward's agent was just immediately going to jump on the 1st offer without doing his due diligence, then he would have been doing a terrible job.

Besides, the same problem would have existed in IND as with the Cs. They already had Sabonis, Brogdon, Oladipo, and Warren. There were no guarantees he was going to be the top dog there. Going to CHA guaranteed him the #1 spot and they were offering the most money.

All I was pointing is that from everything out there being said publicly by figures involved in the discussions it sounded that: had Danny decided right away he would have had a deal done. The hornets landing Hayward news came 30hrs after free agency began. At the very beginning the Indy offer was the best for Hayward unless he told everyone involved that he is still waiting on charlotte to up his offer I don’t believe what you’re saying. I can see how Hayward would jump on Michael Jordan’s offer right away because that eliminates the uncertainty of sign and trades where 3 parties have to agree plus whatever has to be exchanged adds more uncertainty.
In Hayward signing with Charlotte he got comparable even more money and eliminated all uncertainty. If you account for taxes in Charlotte vs INdy it almost becomes a wash what he gets after tax.
Everything that Danny has said about this debacle is generic stuff he says when something doesn’t go thru. He won’t say we could have had a decent haul for Hayward but things happened out of nowhere.

In the end of the day it won’t matter that much because we would be getting a late first round pick - a player who wouldn’t have seen much playing time plus whatever limited minutes Turner would be getting if it’s true that Danny and Brad didn’t like his game.
McDermott can’t play defense so he would not be playing much either.

I'm not sure what sources you're citing here because I think that's wrong. Even if the C's and Indy had agree on a deal, it wouldn't have mattered because Hayward wasn't signed with the Celtics and never did. Charlotte was always going to offer more than Indy and so the C's were never going to have Hayward to trade, no matter how quickly Ainge agreed to a deal.

[NKY fan]

I was in favor of bringing in Turner. I thought he'd look a lot better playing his natural position in Boston and would be a defensive anchor.

That said, I'm confused (as others have voiced) as to why this is a conversation when Hayward was a free agent? Even if Ainge had agreed to the Pacer's deal, Hayward was still going to Charlotte because they offered him more money than the Pacers were willing to pay. Ainge's acceptance or refusal of a deal doesn't factor in.

Charlotte came in a little late out of nowhere. No one thought they would stretch Batums $27M deal to open cap space. If Danny agreed to the trade on day one of free agency Turner would be a Celtic .

My understanding is that you're wrong about that. Even if the Celtics and Pacers had agreed on a deal, they couldn't have executed the deal yet. When Charlotte made their offer, it was before any deal could officially have been, technically, finalized. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here but my understanding is that as long as Indy wasn't going to agree to a larger deal, Hayward was going to Charlotte and there isn't anything the Celts could've done about it.

Incidentally, I just read someone call Myles Turner, Jeff Green and I almost died. I like Turner but this feels very apt.

Nope. Ainge asked for better assets coming in and or hesitated so Charlotte came in a day or two after free agency started. So the window to get a deal done was tight that’s why Indy overpaid ( then Edited for profanity.  Please do not do it again.ed about it lol)..

Nope - Jordan and Hayward spoke the 1st night of FA to 'close the deal'. That means other discussions had at least taken place when FA opened. I get it, it sucks that IND wouldn't match CHA's deal, but to pretend that you can trade and UFA to any team you desire just isn't true. Danny might have wanted more assets, but that is irrelevant if Hayward was able to accept a bigger deal elsewhere.

It is fine to talk about how Turner could have helped the Cs. Obviously he is a million times better than Thompson, but it is getting pretty annoying that people keep casually tossing out opinion as fact on the matter. If Hayward's agent was just immediately going to jump on the 1st offer without doing his due diligence, then he would have been doing a terrible job.

Besides, the same problem would have existed in IND as with the Cs. They already had Sabonis, Brogdon, Oladipo, and Warren. There were no guarantees he was going to be the top dog there. Going to CHA guaranteed him the #1 spot and they were offering the most money.

All I was pointing is that from everything out there being said publicly by figures involved in the discussions it sounded that: had Danny decided right away he would have had a deal done. The hornets landing Hayward news came 30hrs after free agency began. At the very beginning the Indy offer was the best for Hayward unless he told everyone involved that he is still waiting on charlotte to up his offer I don’t believe what you’re saying. I can see how Hayward would jump on Michael Jordan’s offer right away because that eliminates the uncertainty of sign and trades where 3 parties have to agree plus whatever has to be exchanged adds more uncertainty.
In Hayward signing with Charlotte he got comparable even more money and eliminated all uncertainty. If you account for taxes in Charlotte vs INdy it almost becomes a wash what he gets after tax.
Everything that Danny has said about this debacle is generic stuff he says when something doesn’t go thru. He won’t say we could have had a decent haul for Hayward but things happened out of nowhere.

In the end of the day it won’t matter that much because we would be getting a late first round pick - a player who wouldn’t have seen much playing time plus whatever limited minutes Turner would be getting if it’s true that Danny and Brad didn’t like his game.
McDermott can’t play defense so he would not be playing much either.

I'm not sure what sources you're citing here because I think that's wrong. Even if the C's and Indy had agree on a deal, it wouldn't have mattered because Hayward wasn't signed with the Celtics and never did. Charlotte was always going to offer more than Indy and so the C's were never going to have Hayward to trade, no matter how quickly Ainge agreed to a deal.

So you’re saying if all three parties to the sign and trade deal agreed when free agency started Hayward would renege on his word and sign with Charlotte? He’s not deandre Jordan lol