Lester Hudson is a keeper

[greenwise]

I liked Pruitt better.  Hudson reminds me of a poor man's Tony Delk.  A decent defender, not a great handle with the ball and not a playmaker.  Pruitt was a smooth ball handler, taller defender and had a decent stroke.  I think his shooting percentage last year was a result of never having time to get into a rhythm.  I would have liked Pruitt as a guy to cover players like Devin Harris and Lou Williams.  We still don't have a guy that can do that.  He played Harris well in a preseason game because of his length and quickness.

I thought the same. Though Delk was a great shooter

[celticsclay]

delk had a nice long career. If I am not mistaken he once had a a 50 point game.

[thebirdman]

If Hudson turns into Tony Delk we should be pretty happy...

http://www.nba.com/playerfile/tony_delk/index.html

[2short]

I liked Pruitt better.  Hudson reminds me of a poor man's Tony Delk.  A decent defender, not a great handle with the ball and not a playmaker.  Pruitt was a smooth ball handler, taller defender and had a decent stroke.  I think his shooting percentage last year was a result of never having time to get into a rhythm.  I would have liked Pruitt as a guy to cover players like Devin Harris and Lou Williams.  We still don't have a guy that can do that.  He played Harris well in a preseason game because of his length and quickness.

I liked Pruitt also, but Pruitt didn't seem to have any killer instinct. Maybe Hudson has it maybe he doesn't. Pruitt never grabbed a spot for himself. It's the NBA you have to take it.

agreed on pruitt , liked  him better and no killer instinct
i did notice he was released by knicks, if we can sign him to the minimum...why not 
he is 6'4" or 5" , knows the offense,  has good d

[the_Bird]

delk had a nice long career. If I am not mistaken he once had a a 50 point game.

Without benefit of a single three pointer, IIRC. 

Delk was a heckuva defender, too, mostly because he had freakishly-long arms.  Even though he was "undersized" to be a 2 guard, he was a pretty good defender at the position because of this. 

[billysan]

delk had a nice long career. If I am not mistaken he once had a a 50 point game.

Without benefit of a single three pointer, IIRC. 

Delk was a heckuva defender, too, mostly because he had freakishly-long arms.  Even though he was "undersized" to be a 2 guard, he was a pretty good defender at the position because of this. 

Tony Delk was a decent bench player but definitely undersized for the SG. Much like our own Eddie House from my memories of him. Delk thrived in the right system as a bench/role player that could put up points for the second unit. In the wrong system or in the wrong role such as a starter or one of the primary options on the first unit, Eddie wouldnt look so hot either. Funny that both of them seemed to thrive in a running type offense such as Phoenix, but Eddie seems to be a little more versastile at this point.


Lester Hudson seems to have two clear advantages over both of them to start with IMO. He is bigger/taller/stronger and looks to have better defensive tools. It took Eddie and Tony a couple of years in the league to find the right roles for their success as under sized SG's or combo guards. I expect it will be the same for Hudson. The question is, will he get the opportunities to find that niche with the Celtics or elsewhere?

[Brickowski]

Well, I liked Pruitt better than Marbury, but I agree that he lacked the killer instinct (for want of a better term).  There are better options, and Hudson may be one of them.  Note that I said "may."  We'll just have to see how he performs for the rest of the preseason.

Hudson has little value to the Celtics as presently constituted as an undersized shooting guard.  That role belongs to House.  He would have considerable value as a backup point guard, because the Damiels/House combo won't work against certain matchups, and if Daniels plays the point, Pierce and Allen will play too many minutes.

So I'm looking, first, for an understanding of the offense: being where he is supposed to be and making the right choices with the ball. He's got to move the ball, not dribble around on the perimeter, and to know where his shooters are.  I want to see some penetrate and dish, and maybe a little creativity.  So far I haven't seen any of these things, just a guy who is scrappy on defense and looks for his own shot.

[CoachBo]

It's always a good thing to be fired up and optimistic.  However, people were saying the same types of things about Orien Greene not too long ago.  I'm going to see how things play out before making too many conclusions, one way or the other.

And one. Everyone loves Danny's draft picks at first. Nowhere near enough sample size to evaluate Lester.

[billysan]

Well, I liked Pruitt better than Marbury, but I agree that he lacked the killer instinct (for want of a better term).  There are better options, and Hudson may be one of them.  Note that I said "may."  We'll just have to see how he performs for the rest of the preseason.

Hudson has little value to the Celtics as presently constituted as an undersized shooting guard.  That role belongs to House.  He would have considerable value as a backup point guard, because the Damiels/House combo won't work against certain matchups, and if Daniels plays the point, Pierce and Allen will play too many minutes.

So I'm looking, first, for an understanding of the offense: being where he is supposed to be and making the right choices with the ball. He's got to move the ball, not dribble around on the perimeter, and to know where his shooters are.  I want to see some penetrate and dish, and maybe a little creativity.  So far I haven't seen any of these things, just a guy who is scrappy on defense and looks for his own shot.

Good point Brick....I think a lot of us are focused on his just playing defense (like we have in the past with Tony Allen) and we forget how important a role he plays on offense as regards facillitating, passing, ball movement and handling. That is basic guard play regardless of PG or SG that cannot be taken for granted.

Not to bash Tony Allen any further, but this key area pointed out by Brick is where the Tony Allen experiment has failed in combination with his injuries of course. Lester should learn from this example of 'what not to do' if you want to make the team. TP4U

[Brickowski]

Tony Allen is a wing player, not a facilitator.  Tony never was and never will be a point guard.  You might as well bash Perkins for not being a point guard either.

[Tai]

I liked Pruitt better.  Hudson reminds me of a poor man's Tony Delk.  A decent defender, not a great handle with the ball and not a playmaker.  Pruitt was a smooth ball handler, taller defender and had a decent stroke.  I think his shooting percentage last year was a result of never having time to get into a rhythm.  I would have liked Pruitt as a guy to cover players like Devin Harris and Lou Williams.  We still don't have a guy that can do that.  He played Harris well in a preseason game because of his length and quickness.

I liked Pruitt also, but Pruitt didn't seem to have any killer instinct. Maybe Hudson has it maybe he doesn't. Pruitt never grabbed a spot for himself. It's the NBA you have to take it.

agreed on pruitt , liked  him better and no killer instinct
i did notice he was released by knicks, if we can sign him to the minimum...why not 
he is 6'4" or 5" , knows the offense,  has good d

Pruitt was released by the Knicks? Jeez!

Thank you Wiki, and it looks like it's true.

http://www.newsday.com/blogs/sports/the-knicks-fix-1.812055/yue-pruitt-among-four-waived-by-knicks-1.1507645

So, he didn't even get pre-season minutes when the Knicks played the Nets on Sunday. He couldn't get PRE-SEASON minutes while being a Knick! 

I wish nothing more but success for Gabe Pruitt, I really do, but seriously, does anyone STILL think cutting him was a mistake?

Man, I sure hope Hudson doesn't disappoint like Pruitt has. I do have faith in Hudson, though.

[kozlodoev]

It's always a good thing to be fired up and optimistic.  However, people were saying the same types of things about Orien Greene not too long ago.  I'm going to see how things play out before making too many conclusions, one way or the other.

While I am not quite ready to proclaim Hudson as the second coming of Gilbert Arenas, I don't think stacking him together with Greene is right, either. Greene didn't have offensive skills whatsoever. His jump shots reminded me of Ben Wallace shooting free throws.

I certainly think though that he's better than Pruitt, and that he's definitely more prepared mentally to handle the pressures of playing in the NBA. I can easily see him as the sixth perimeter player off the bench, playing 5-10 minutes in certain games. Hardly anything to write home about, but still...

[BudweiserCeltic]

It's always a good thing to be fired up and optimistic.  However, people were saying the same types of things about Orien Greene not too long ago.  I'm going to see how things play out before making too many conclusions, one way or the other.

And one. Everyone loves Danny's draft picks at first. Nowhere near enough sample size to evaluate Lester.

Except for Giddens. Everyone has been against him since day one. Maybe that's why I've been pulling for him.

[Brickowski]

It's always a good thing to be fired up and optimistic.  However, people were saying the same types of things about Orien Greene not too long ago.  I'm going to see how things play out before making too many conclusions, one way or the other.

And one. Everyone loves Danny's draft picks at first. Nowhere near enough sample size to evaluate Lester.

Except for Giddens. Everyone has been against him since day one. Maybe that's why I've been pulling for him.

You go by what you see.  Giddens has not played well.  I'd like to see him play well too, but wishing won't make it so.

[DarkAzcura]

I disagree with both posts here. For the first list..Greene, Allan Ray, Pruitt, Green, and Banks. Take a look at their stats in college (or lack of stats in college..Green). None of them were too impressive with the exception of one good season from Banks. It's pretty easy to see that we were just straight up stupid to expect anything from these guys. None of them proved anything at the college level (produce consistently, ability to control a game, or dominate even..).

For the second list..Dee Brown was a bust? He was the 19th pick of the draft, was pretty good in college, and has a 11 PPG average over 600 games. I'd say that's a pretty decent career. Not all star, but a good role player. Same with Michael Smith. He was the 35th pick in the draft. You usually don't get anything from your 2nd round picks..yet he played over 400 NBA games. Not a bust by any means. Can't say much for Klack or McMillan. I don't remember them.

It's pretty easy, imo, to identify who's going to cross over into the NBA (the hard part is identifying who will be a star..that's why lottery picking is so much harder, imo). IMO Leon Powe, Ryan Gomes, and Big Baby were nearly obviously going to make it as at least rotation players. They put up huge stats, all are very talented, good IQ's, etc. This is the group Lester Hudson is in. Lester Hudson doesn't belong in the group of Pruitt, Greene, and Allan Ray. Greene hardly did anything of any worth in college. Pruitt and Allan Ray were completely one-dimensional and undersized. Lester Hudson, though, was crazy in college, no matter what conference he played in. 2nd leading scorer and first quad double ever.

wait wait wait. 

Allen Ray didnt have good college stats?  18.5 ppg in 32 minutes, shooting the 3 at 37% in his senior year.  career totals of: 16 ppg and 37% from 3 isnt good to you?

Pruitt was semi similar, a career 40% 3 point shooter (45% his senior year), almost 14 points a game.

Banks avg'd 18 ppg, shot almost 50%, 33% from 3 for his college career.

I mean, I dont think those guys were expected to be all stars coming out of college (maybe banks had high hopes), but they all had good numbers out of college. 


Hudson is just like all of them.  the flavor of the month.  he's new, it's exciting to think we may have gotten a steal, that he could blossum, etc...(I am not saying he is bad, or that he wont be a steal). 

Let's wait to see what happens when the real games start

You missed my point in calling them all one-dimensional. Great..they scored a good amount of points, but what else did they do on the court?

That's why I said Lester belongs in the group of Gomes, Davis, and Powe. Hudson was a multi-categorical producer. He did it all. Pass, rebound, defend, score (and score efficiently). He does not belong in the group of Pruitt and Ray..both of whom only scored and did not much else. No way does he belong in a group with Greene..who I'm still surprised even got drafted.