Celtics need to target Bryn Forbes

[Celtics2021]

He’s of the best shooters in the league (41% from 3 for his career, 9th among active players), a former Spur so he has familiarity with Coach Udoka, and might be available at the taxpayer MLE.  He’s still unsigned, and would be a great fit on the roster.

[gouki88]

Agree! He's an elite shooter, is very durable and would complement Smart a lot I reckon (among others).

Might even prefer him for the MLE to Patty Mills, as much as that pains me as an Australian.

[jpotter33]

He’s of the best shooters in the league (41% from 3 for his career, 9th among active players), a former Spur so he has familiarity with Coach Udoka, and might be available at the taxpayer MLE.  He’s still unsigned, and would be a great fit on the roster.

Agreed, dependent upon what happens with our other sharp-shooting targets like Mills. Definitely if we don't get Mills.

Brad loves him, too. Always talked him up when playing against him.

If missing out on Mills, nabbing both Otto Porter and Forbes would somewhat make up for this lackluster day. They at least have a chance to make things work. Still waiting to see about the TT trade, though. Hoping some upgrade comes from there.

[Muzzy66]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

[Celtics2021]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

[Muzzy66]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

The guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that he hovered around 39% - 42% which is good.  But I don't generally get excited about one dimensional role players, and it seems like shooting is about the only thing he's any good for.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing though.

[gouki88]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

A guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that had hovered around 39% - 42% which is good, but as far as I can tell three point shooting seems to be about the only thing he's good for.  At least it looks that way on paper.  I don't get excited about one dimensional role players generally.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing

Say you've never watched him play without explicitly saying you've never watched him play

[Muzzy66]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

A guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that had hovered around 39% - 42% which is good, but as far as I can tell three point shooting seems to be about the only thing he's good for.  At least it looks that way on paper.  I don't get excited about one dimensional role players generally.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing

Say you've never watched him play without explicitly saying you've never watched him play

No, I openly admit that I've never seen him play, that's why I said I'm open to being convinced otherwise if there's more to him then I'm seeing.

But on paper I don't see anything even remotely exciting.

[gouki88]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

A guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that had hovered around 39% - 42% which is good, but as far as I can tell three point shooting seems to be about the only thing he's good for.  At least it looks that way on paper.  I don't get excited about one dimensional role players generally.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing

Say you've never watched him play without explicitly saying you've never watched him play

No, I openly admit that I've never seen him play, that's why I said I'm open to being convinced otherwise if there's more to him then I'm seeing.

But on paper I don't see anything even remotely exciting.

He's an MLE-level guy. We were never in the game for any big earners in free agency (besides Fournier). He'd give us elite shooting - which we desperately need - and he's durable. That's worth a lot

[Muzzy66]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

A guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that had hovered around 39% - 42% which is good, but as far as I can tell three point shooting seems to be about the only thing he's good for.  At least it looks that way on paper.  I don't get excited about one dimensional role players generally.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing

Say you've never watched him play without explicitly saying you've never watched him play

No, I openly admit that I've never seen him play, that's why I said I'm open to being convinced otherwise if there's more to him then I'm seeing.

But on paper I don't see anything even remotely exciting.

He's an MLE-level guy. We were never in the game for any big earners in free agency (besides Fournier). He'd give us elite shooting - which we desperately need - and he's durable. That's worth a lot

But does he do ANYTHING else at all?

What's his defense like?  Is he a liability on that end or is he at least average?

If he can defend passably and shoot I'm ok with that, but if he's a defensive liability who can't pass, doesn't draw fouls and literally does nothing but stand around shooting jumpers then sorry, but I'm not thrilled.

Edit:
Don't get me wrong there could be worse things. But after how bad Brad has handled things so far I need more then a  poor man's Eddie House to get me excited.

[Celtics2021]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

The guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that he hovered around 39% - 42% which is good.  But I don't generally get excited about one dimensional role players, and it seems like shooting is about the only thing he's any good for.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing though.

3-point shooting is absolutely what he’s best at.  No question about it.  In his four seasons in an NBA rotation, he’s finished top 10 twice.  Again, he’s 9th amongst active players in 3%.  That’s not just very good.  That’s elite, and if teams lose him on the floor, they’ll pay.  He’s one of the best bench shooters in the game, and his presence stresses defenses as he runs around the perimeter, creating easier opportunities for his teammates due to his off-ball movement.

People are worried (rightly) about our shooting.  One of the best shooters in the game is available.  We should get him.

[gouki88]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

A guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that had hovered around 39% - 42% which is good, but as far as I can tell three point shooting seems to be about the only thing he's good for.  At least it looks that way on paper.  I don't get excited about one dimensional role players generally.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing

Say you've never watched him play without explicitly saying you've never watched him play

No, I openly admit that I've never seen him play, that's why I said I'm open to being convinced otherwise if there's more to him then I'm seeing.

But on paper I don't see anything even remotely exciting.

He's an MLE-level guy. We were never in the game for any big earners in free agency (besides Fournier). He'd give us elite shooting - which we desperately need - and he's durable. That's worth a lot

But does he do ANYTHING else at all?

What's his defense like?  Is he a liability on that end or is he at least average?

If he can defend passably and shoot I'm ok with that, but if he's a defensive liability who can't pass, doesn't draw fouls and literally does nothing but stand around shooting jumpers then sorry, but I'm not thrilled.

Edit:
Don't get me wrong there could be worse things. But after how bad Brad has handled things so far I need more then a  poor man's Eddie House to get me excited.

His defence is mediocre, but we've beefed up our defence a lot by turning Kemba and Fournier into Horford and Richardson (in a roundabout way). I think having a JJ Redick level shooter off the bench is something we should clamour for. Smart is a ... erratic shooter, Richardson is bang average, getting a top-10 shooter would shore up some weaknesses.

I have no worries about our defence with this group. I do have worries about our shooting.

[Muzzy66]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

The guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that he hovered around 39% - 42% which is good.  But I don't generally get excited about one dimensional role players, and it seems like shooting is about the only thing he's any good for.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing though.

3-point shooting is absolutely what he’s best at.  No question about it.  In his four seasons in an NBA rotation, he’s finished top 10 twice.  Again, he’s 9th amongst active players in 3%.  That’s not just very good.  That’s elite, and if teams lose him on the floor, they’ll pay.  He’s one of the best bench shooters in the game, and his presence stresses defenses as he runs around the perimeter, creating easier opportunities for his teammates due to his off-ball movement.

People are worried (rightly) about our shooting.  One of the best shooters in the game is available.  We should get him.

Yes, I understand he can shoot.  That's not my concern.  My concern is what else can he offer?

If he's having a bad shooting night and the shots aren't falling, is there ANYTHING else at all the that he can actually do?

Or more importantly, what liabilities does that shooting potentially bring with it?

I don't care if he's the best shooter in the world if the guy's defense is so bad that mediocre offensive players are going to be scoring 25 on us when he's on the court.

I guess on paper his turnover rate is reasonably low?  But surely there's got to be something else has not terrible at right?

Because so far the picture I'm getting is a guy who's horribly undersized, can't defend, can't pass the ball, can't get to the foul line, can't rebound...and the only caveat is that it's he's really good shooter.  That sounds to me like a complete waste of cap space.

Given how bad this team looks like it will be, I'd rather just give more minutes to Nesmith and Pritchard and see if they can reach their shooting potential.  Both have potential to be outstanding shooters and unlike this guy they can actually do other things too.  We also have Tatum, Brown and Horford who are all excellent shooters.  And Mills (if we can get him) is a quality shooter too.

[pearljammer10]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

A guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that had hovered around 39% - 42% which is good, but as far as I can tell three point shooting seems to be about the only thing he's good for.  At least it looks that way on paper.  I don't get excited about one dimensional role players generally.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing

Say you've never watched him play without explicitly saying you've never watched him play

No, I openly admit that I've never seen him play, that's why I said I'm open to being convinced otherwise if there's more to him then I'm seeing.

But on paper I don't see anything even remotely exciting.

He's an MLE-level guy. We were never in the game for any big earners in free agency (besides Fournier). He'd give us elite shooting - which we desperately need - and he's durable. That's worth a lot

But does he do ANYTHING else at all?

What's his defense like?  Is he a liability on that end or is he at least average?

If he can defend passably and shoot I'm ok with that, but if he's a defensive liability who can't pass, doesn't draw fouls and literally does nothing but stand around shooting jumpers then sorry, but I'm not thrilled.

Edit:
Don't get me wrong there could be worse things. But after how bad Brad has handled things so far I need more then a  poor man's Eddie House to get me excited.

His defence is mediocre, but we've beefed up our defence a lot by turning Kemba and Fournier into Horford and Richardson (in a roundabout way). I think having a JJ Redick level shooter off the bench is something we should clamour for. Smart is a ... erratic shooter, Richardson is bang average, getting a top-10 shooter would shore up some weaknesses.

I have no worries about our defence with this group. I do have worries about our shooting.

Forbes would be perfect in Boston. He is an elite volume shooter and is also now an NBA champion.

We need a volume shooter that can knock down threes like this. The complaints about, “can he do N E Thing else?!?!” Are absurd. So what if he can’t? He fills a need and isn’t costly.

[gouki88]

Another nobody. Nice.  Sounds like a standard Celtics offseason.

If being 4th in 3% last year is a nobody to you, then you probably should pay a little more attention.

6'2" shooting guard who's 28 years old, has never averaged 12 PPG or 3 APG, shot under 43% FG most of his career, one of the lowest free throw rates I've ever seen in my life.  Could be wrong but I'm guessing he's probably nothing special defensively.

The guy had one single season shooting 45% - prior to that he hovered around 39% - 42% which is good.  But I don't generally get excited about one dimensional role players, and it seems like shooting is about the only thing he's any good for.

Happy to be convinced otherwise though if there is more to the guy then what I'm seeing though.

3-point shooting is absolutely what he’s best at.  No question about it.  In his four seasons in an NBA rotation, he’s finished top 10 twice.  Again, he’s 9th amongst active players in 3%.  That’s not just very good.  That’s elite, and if teams lose him on the floor, they’ll pay.  He’s one of the best bench shooters in the game, and his presence stresses defenses as he runs around the perimeter, creating easier opportunities for his teammates due to his off-ball movement.

People are worried (rightly) about our shooting.  One of the best shooters in the game is available.  We should get him.

Yes, I understand he can shoot.  That's not my concern.  My concern is what else can he offer?

If he's having a bad shooting night and the shots aren't falling, is there ANYTHING else at all the that he can actually do?

Or more importantly, what liabilities does that shooting potentially bring with it?

I don't care if he's the best shooter in the world if the guy's defense is so bad that mediocre offensive players are going to be scoring 25 on us when he's on the court.

I guess on paper his turnover rate is reasonably low?  But surely there's got to be something else has not terrible at right?

Why are you griping about player limitations when we're talking about MLE candidates? TT can't do anything but rebound really, for last year's example. They're all flawed