Nice job, gift.
I wonder, what players don't impact winning from Brad's POV? (Other than JB, the only guy on the team to have a ECF or Finals MVP).
76 year old Mike Conley does it, so the bar is probably not as high as we might assume? (I really like Conley's leadership qualities and he's a very smart player. I'm just not sure how much he's going to be determining wins and losses at this stage of his career.)
must be the ones he doesn't mention in the press conferences
You mean other than Jaylen Brown (who he clearly does not feel impacts winning enough to warrant a max contract extension)? How about Vucevic or Simons or Boucher or Tillman or Minott or any other player that Stevens moved on from? I don't think he sees these players as impacting winning.
I don't see this as all that controversial. Stevens has an idea of what he believes impacts winning and what players it applies to. He has done pretty well over the years using whatever analysis he has been using. In the case of Paul George, I can see how he impacts winning, the question is if he can stay on the court. Stevens must feel he can get enough out of him the next season or two. That part is a risk. But I don't think it is so hard to see that Paul George is still a good player, when he plays. Just go back and watch the series vs BOS last spring.
Eh... I wouldn't go that far. He's moved on from Smart and Timelord and KP and Horford and Jrue and Kornet, etc., etc. The last four of those guys won a title, and of course JB won a title, ECF MVP, and Finals MVP.
Pretty hard to argue that none of those guys "impact winning". But, I guess we'll see. We've replaced that overpaid "contributes to losing" deadbeat Jaylen Brown with a true winner (despite no titles) in Paul George. So, a championship seems imminent.
He has done pretty well over the years using whatever analysis he has been using.
I think that analysis was "take the two superstars that Danny drafted and give them a coach that wasn't admittedly burnt out". That seemed to pay off with a title and another Finals appearance.
I am not really sure the point here. Yes, the core of the team was drafted by Ainge. But Stevens has applied whatever he uses to determine "contributes to wining" to bring in players like White, Holiday, Horford, and Porzingis. Now of course they had to move on from Holiday, Horford, and Porzingis for financial reasons and/or health reasons but I don't think that had anything to do with their contribution to winning. Robert Williams has not contributed to winning in some time due to injuries. And Smart was traded for Porzingis only after Malcolm Brogdon failed a physical. Again, I don't see that as a refection on how Marcus Smart contributes to winning.
I think Derrick White is a prototypical example of good Brad Stevens. He identified a player that he feels contributes to winning and went out and got him. Not every GM was seeing Derrick White as a key piece to a title team. But Stevens did. Holiday too, they saw an opportunity to get a player they had like for sometime and pounced and got him.
Stevens is talking up Paul George now after the trade. To me, what Stevens is saying leads me to think he is hoping that George is similar to Jrue Holiday or Derrick White. A kind of under the radar player who contributes to winning in ways that don't alway show up in the the box score. I don't see this as an unrealistic ceiling for George. Durability is going to be the issue regarding just how much he can contribute to winning. What do you expect Stevens to say? I actually think Stevens believes Paul George will be good, not just saying it. A lot of people thought the Derrick White trade was a bad trade at first.
Of course the Celtics would be a better team right now if they had Jaylen Brown instead of Paul George and future picks. But I don't see it as a reason to give up on Brad Stevens.
