Should Jermaine come off the bench?

[Potapenko Boxout]

Given the decline in Jermaine O'Neal's defensive abilities (DPOY candidate to good defender) and his rebounding (good-to-very good rebounder to slightly below average rebounding).

Given those marginal defense/rebounding contributions ... negative offensive contribtions can negate all his positive play. Making Jermaine O'Neal a non-factor (or worse depending on the number of touches/shot attempts).

-------------------------------------------------

Controlling and limiting Jermaine O'Neal's shot-creation opportunities is the only way to stop him from being an offensive liability.

Given the Celtics lack of alternative post presences + their desire for a post presence + the unselfishness and team orientated offensive play of the Celtics + O'Neal's mental makeup (his aggressiveness, self-belief) ... I have little to no confidence in that happening (limiting his shot-creation enough to stop him from being an offensive liability).

--------------------------------------------

If Jermaine O'Neal simply accepted his weaknesses and became a complementary player who doesn't try to create his own offense he could still be a valuable role player in this league.

Unfortunately, he hasn't been able to accept that yet.  

Perhaps (and this is very much a skeptical perhaps), if we define post play as simply passing the ball into the post and letting the post player make a move AND we took into account (as you mentioned) that Perk didn't take many bad shots because he wasn't given the opportunity, then maybe (and again, I'm still not buying it) you could have an argument.  However, I think you're forgetting a number of things:

1) Jermaine O'Neal was asked to be the 2nd best player on the Heat.  Thus, he was expected to take a lot of shots.

2) While Doc will probably look to utilize whatever post game he has (because the C's are pretty desperate for one), simple basketball logistics state that even if Doc tries to utilize it more, he'll still get fewer shots than last year.  There's no way he can put up as many shots as he did last year when he's going to have to share the floor with 4 double digit scorers.  

3) I think you're letting our first round playoffs series influence your opinion about him too much.  I'm guessing that outside of that series and the games Boston played the Heat, you didn't see too many Heat games.  I'm thinking if we took Jermaine off that squad, inserted KG, and then made KG matchup with a defense as good as the Celtics upfront, with the teammates he had on the Heat, he probably would've had a pretty crappy series too.  (Let's also not forget that all of our superstars had some pretty crappy, and even crappy stretches of games, in the playoffs). 

4) Let's not forget what a dramatic difference O'Neal can make in other areas.  While he doesn't have three point range, he can spread the floor much better than Perk.  While he may have lost some athleticism, when Rondo or PP finds him under the basket, he will finish.  

I really expect Jermaine to find himself again here.  He did try to do too much at times last year.  I just don't see how that's going to happen here.  Stephon Marbury, despite sucking, bought into the team concept here.  I don't understand why you think that Jermaine won't.  Quite frankly, prior to this year, there really was no reason for him to shoot less since he was playing on mediocre teams that were expecting him to score a lot.  

#3 -- this is incorrect. I have watched Jermaine play somewhere between 125-150 games over the last three years. Watching the same flaws each year in different situations (Indiana, Toronto and Miami).

#1 -- Jermaine O'Neal was not asked to be the second best player in Miami + was not asked to create his own shot in Miami ... outside of that playoff series.

He only got as many touches and shot attempts in that series because their offense flat-lined and they lacked go-to options.

Miami did an outstanding job of limiting Jermaine's post touches and shot-creation responsibilities -- especially when you consider how limited their supporting cast was in that department.

#2 -- I do not expect Boston to do as a good job as Miami did in controlling Jermaine's offensive responsibilities. I also do not expect Boston to do as bad of a job as Toronto or Indiana did.

I have a tough time believing anyone watched 125-150 Pacers, Raptors, and Heat games, over the past three years, especially given that Jermaine only played in 191 games (including the playoffs) the past 3 years and even more especially when a lot of those games would've been on at the same time as the Celtics.  However, I'll take your word; you must DVR a lot of games. 

Still, I don't understand why you make the claims you do.

You say Jermaine wasn't the #2 option last year for the Heat.  Well then who was? 

You say that Miami did a good job of restraining him, but that we won't.  Why?  What did Miami magically do that we won't? 

This will be far and away the most talented team he's ever played on; he won't be asked to carry a load.  Even if Doc doesn't attempt to restrain him, the fact that he'll get the ball far less than he's ever had it (due to Rondo, Ray, PP, and KG) should pretty much control the situation itself. 

Since the Big Three have gotten here, we've had all sorts of alarmist reactions to guys like Sam Cassell, Stephon Marbury, Rasheed Wallace, and Nate Robinson.  And while there have been varying degrees of success with those guys, none of them came in here and disrupted what happened on the court. 

And given that Jermaine is far less of a polarizing figure than any of them, I don't see why you think he's going pull this team apart. 

That was the quickest Tommy Point I've given in quite some time.

I have to say, I feel better about Jermaine after reading that post. So thank you.

[Who]

You say Jermaine wasn't the #2 option last year for the Heat.  Well then who was? 

Miami didn't have a second option last season. Just complementary pieces that were put around D-Wade. The offensive responsibilities between Beasley, Jermaine and Haslem were all comparable. So too with D.Wright and Q.Rich.

They weren't built ... they just didn't have anyone good enough to be a go-to option outside of Wade. Beasley was the closest thing to it but Miami didn't run many plays for him either.

In terms of quality, I would rank Jermaine O'Neal as Miami's fifth or sixth best player last season. And I expect his performance to decline here in Boston.

You say that Miami did a good job of restraining him, but that we won't.  Why?  What did Miami magically do that we won't? 

I went into this in the other thread -- or is this the same thread? -- the other day.

Basically, Miami have a ball-dominating superstar who is a better fit for Jermaine than an unselfish team orientated offense like the Celtics.

That type of star is a better fit because (1) he dominates the ball keeping it away from Jermaine and limiting his opportunities to make mistakes (2) he sets up many easy scoring opportunities where Jermaine can just catch and finish. No need for him to create.

I expect Boston to do just as well in the second category as Miami did but not as well in the first one.

Since the Big Three have gotten here, we've had all sorts of alarmist reactions to guys like Sam Cassell, Stephon Marbury, Rasheed Wallace, and Nate Robinson.  And while there have been varying degrees of success with those guys, none of them came in here and disrupted what happened on the court. 

I don't think Jermaine is comparable to any of those guys. It is a different set of issues.

I have no concerns about what he is going to do off the court.

I also had no concerns about Nate, Sam or Steph. I did have concerns about Rasheed's but that was about whether he had enough juice left in his legs.

Edit: The issues I have with Jermaine or more like the issues I have with Shaquille. Based around their game - their style of play and how they fit into this team.

[Who]

Field Goal Percentage = Jermaine O'Neal hit 53% of his shots last season. He has never been above 49% before. In the previous six years he has been between 43.5% and 47.5% from the field.

True Shooting Percentage = Jermaine went for 56.3% TS% last season. He has never been above 54% and only was above 52% twice. In the previous four seasons, Jermaine was at 49-53% TS%. Jermaine also posted his lowest turnover numbers in 5 years.

Dwyane Wade had a huge positive effect on Jermaine O'Neal's offensive efficiency last season.

[snively]

Field Goal Percentage = Jermaine O'Neal hit 53% of his shots last season. He has never been above 49% before. In the previous six years he has been between 43.5% and 47.5% from the field.

True Shooting Percentage = Jermaine went for 56.3% TS% last season. He has never been above 54% and only was above 52% twice. In the previous four seasons, Jermaine was at 49-53% TS%. Jermaine also posted his lowest turnover numbers in 5 years.

Dwyane Wade had a huge positive effect on Jermaine O'Neal's offensive efficiency last season.

Other than Sheed (whose decline was tied to his steep decline in wide open 3-pt shooting; fluky), can you name a player that has reduced his shooting efficiency from his prior team playing for Doc Rivers and with Rondo?  (Midseason acquisitions like Starbury don't count).

Look at guys like Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, KG, Eddie House, Marquis Daniels... Doc is good at getting his players to maximize their efficiency and recognize their limits, as evidenced by the team's 3 consecutive placements in the top 5 of eFG%.  Even players who don't recognize such limits, like Big Baby, tend to be minimized or disciplined.  As in many things, Sheed was the exception, but I don't see too many parallels between Sheed's situation last year (historically solid 3-pt shooter allowed to chuck his way out of major shooting slump) and JO this year (historically inefficient shot-creator who gets to play with a great playmaker - especially for big men - and an offense that has enough options to go elsewhere instead of continuing to pursue an inefficient option).

The C's are not going to stand around and watch JO pound the ball into the ground and shoot 40% on baseline turnarounds for a ton of possessions just because they like the idea of a post presence.

I'll use Baby for one more example.  As a bench player, Baby has shown a lot of the offensively destructive habits of a guy like O'Neal.  He gets in modes where he shoulders far too much of the offensive burden and starts jacking Js out of rhythm, trying to post-up regardless of match-up, preferring to shoot instead of pass... In stark contrast, when he got to play with the starters more (his 16 starts in 09, both playoff runs), his %s went way up as his inefficient opportunities dwindled.  I believe it will be the same way for JO.  If he's asked to be the scorer for the 2nd unit, he'll be about as inefficient as Baby.  If he's allowed to play off Rondo and members of the big 3, he'll be even more efficient than he was in Miami.

[Birdbrain]

Field Goal Percentage = Jermaine O'Neal hit 53% of his shots last season. He has never been above 49% before. In the previous six years he has been between 43.5% and 47.5% from the field.

True Shooting Percentage = Jermaine went for 56.3% TS% last season. He has never been above 54% and only was above 52% twice. In the previous four seasons, Jermaine was at 49-53% TS%. Jermaine also posted his lowest turnover numbers in 5 years.

Dwyane Wade had a huge positive effect on Jermaine O'Neal's offensive efficiency last season.

Other than Sheed (whose decline was tied to his steep decline in wide open 3-pt shooting; fluky), can you name a player that has reduced his shooting efficiency from his prior team playing for Doc Rivers and with Rondo?  (Midseason acquisitions like Starbury don't count).

Look at guys like Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, KG, Eddie House, Marquis Daniels... Doc is good at getting his players to maximize their efficiency and recognize their limits, as evidenced by the team's 3 consecutive placements in the top 5 of eFG%.  Even players who don't recognize such limits, like Big Baby, tend to be minimized or disciplined.  As in many things, Sheed was the exception, but I don't see too many parallels between Sheed's situation last year (historically solid 3-pt shooter allowed to chuck his way out of major shooting slump) and JO this year (historically inefficient shot-creator who gets to play with a great playmaker - especially for big men - and an offense that has enough options to go elsewhere instead of continuing to pursue an inefficient option).

The C's are not going to stand around and watch JO pound the ball into the ground and shoot 40% on baseline turnarounds for a ton of possessions just because they like the idea of a post presence.

I'll use Baby for one more example.  As a bench player, Baby has shown a lot of the offensively destructive habits of a guy like O'Neal.  He gets in modes where he shoulders far too much of the offensive burden and starts jacking Js out of rhythm, trying to post-up regardless of match-up, preferring to shoot instead of pass... In stark contrast, when he got to play with the starters more (his 16 starts in 09, both playoff runs), his %s went way up as his inefficient opportunities dwindled.  I believe it will be the same way for JO.  If he's asked to be the scorer for the 2nd unit, he'll be about as inefficient as Baby.  If he's allowed to play off Rondo and members of the big 3, he'll be even more efficient than he was in Miami.

Very good point.  Not so much because of Doc will he get even better looks than last year but, because the C's have a boatload of good passers and JO will think he's in heaven with all of the good looks he'll get.  I suspect his FG% will be even higher this year.  I still have no idea how someone can deduce that playing alongside Wade is better for a big mans FG% as opposed to playing alongside Rondo, KG and Pierce who are all just as good or better passers.  Anyone notice Perkins has just about set the Franchise FG% the past few seasons.lol.  Too each his own though... Oh and as for the title no you don't bring your best big man off the bench.

[Vermont Green]

I can't believe that this has generate this much discussion.  To the original question, JO could be a very nice bench player but only if we have someone better to start.  I think he will start at least until Perk is back, subject to any other signings or trades that may introduce a new center.

The thing I really don't get is the concern that our overall team offense will somehow be worse with JO over Perk.  The NBA is all about team defense and offensive balance these days.  Last year, we had two guys (Rondo and Perk) who could be sagged off making things harder for the guys who can shoot (Pierce, Allen, KG).  This sagging results in Rondo and Perk getting quite a few easy baskets but that is the trade off.

Having JO out there will mean that the defense will have to stay closer to him than they did Perk and that will open things up for others, probably primarily Rondo (there won't be a big just waiting for him when he drives to the basket).  If the defenses don't pay more attention to JO, he will get a lot of points because all of the other Celtic starters are good passers.

On defense, JO will match up better against some of the quicker 5's and worse than Perk against some of the beefier ones.  Until Perk is back and "de-rusted" our alternatives to JO are Davis and Erden, not great center-defender options.  This is why I think they will get another center who can play defense if they can find one and get a reasonable deal worked out.

[Who]

Even players who don't recognize such limits, like Big Baby, tend to be minimized or disciplined.

When was Glen Davis ever disciplined for forcing his own offense?

[snively]

Even players who don't recognize such limits, like Big Baby, tend to be minimized or disciplined.

When was Glen Davis ever disciplined for forcing his own offense?

I guess disciplined is too a strong word, but Doc frequently called out the bench for their undisicplined offensive play and I remember several occasions when Davis got an early recall for forcing things.  Same for TA and Nate.

[Who]

Even players who don't recognize such limits, like Big Baby, tend to be minimized or disciplined.

When was Glen Davis ever disciplined for forcing his own offense?

I guess disciplined is too a strong word, but Doc frequently called out the bench for their undisicplined offensive play and I remember several occasions when Davis got an early recall for forcing things.  Same for TA and Nate.

I always felt that BBD consistently got away with those bad shots / forced plays.

[Who]

Other than Sheed (whose decline was tied to his steep decline in wide open 3-pt shooting; fluky)

Agreed on Rasheed. That was just decline. He was taking a lot of good or at least similar shots to what he had taken in the past.

There is no good example for Jermaine O'Neal on recent Celtics.

I'll use Baby for one more example.  As a bench player, Baby has shown a lot of the offensively destructive habits of a guy like O'Neal.  He gets in modes where he shoulders far too much of the offensive burden and starts jacking Js out of rhythm, trying to post-up regardless of match-up, preferring to shoot instead of pass... In stark contrast, when he got to play with the starters more (his 16 starts in 09, both playoff runs), his %s went way up as his inefficient opportunities dwindled.  I believe it will be the same way for JO.  If he's asked to be the scorer for the 2nd unit, he'll be about as inefficient as Baby.

Which speaks to my first post on this thread -- Jermaine O'Neal should play wherever he does the least damage and that is with the starters because it is where he'll be asked to create the least amount of his own offense.

It'll give Jermaine O'Neal the most possible protection from his self-destructive habits.

[Who]

Field Goal Percentage = Jermaine O'Neal hit 53% of his shots last season. He has never been above 49% before. In the previous six years he has been between 43.5% and 47.5% from the field.

True Shooting Percentage = Jermaine went for 56.3% TS% last season. He has never been above 54% and only was above 52% twice. In the previous four seasons, Jermaine was at 49-53% TS%. Jermaine also posted his lowest turnover numbers in 5 years.

Dwyane Wade had a huge positive effect on Jermaine O'Neal's offensive efficiency last season.

Other than Sheed (whose decline was tied to his steep decline in wide open 3-pt shooting; fluky), can you name a player that has reduced his shooting efficiency from his prior team playing for Doc Rivers and with Rondo?  (Midseason acquisitions like Starbury don't count).

Look at guys like Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, KG, Eddie House, Marquis Daniels... Doc is good at getting his players to maximize their efficiency and recognize their limits, as evidenced by the team's 3 consecutive placements in the top 5 of eFG%.  Even players who don't recognize such limits, like Big Baby, tend to be minimized or disciplined.  As in many things, Sheed was the exception, but I don't see too many parallels between Sheed's situation last year (historically solid 3-pt shooter allowed to chuck his way out of major shooting slump) and JO this year (historically inefficient shot-creator who gets to play with a great playmaker - especially for big men - and an offense that has enough options to go elsewhere instead of continuing to pursue an inefficient option).

The C's are not going to stand around and watch JO pound the ball into the ground and shoot 40% on baseline turnarounds for a ton of possessions just because they like the idea of a post presence.

I'll use Baby for one more example.  As a bench player, Baby has shown a lot of the offensively destructive habits of a guy like O'Neal.  He gets in modes where he shoulders far too much of the offensive burden and starts jacking Js out of rhythm, trying to post-up regardless of match-up, preferring to shoot instead of pass... In stark contrast, when he got to play with the starters more (his 16 starts in 09, both playoff runs), his %s went way up as his inefficient opportunities dwindled.  I believe it will be the same way for JO.  If he's asked to be the scorer for the 2nd unit, he'll be about as inefficient as Baby.  If he's allowed to play off Rondo and members of the big 3, he'll be even more efficient than he was in Miami.

Very good point.  Not so much because of Doc will he get even better looks than last year but, because the C's have a boatload of good passers and JO will think he's in heaven with all of the good looks he'll get.  I suspect his FG% will be even higher this year.  I still have no idea how someone can deduce that playing alongside Wade is better for a big mans FG% as opposed to playing alongside Rondo, KG and Pierce who are all just as good or better passers.  Anyone notice Perkins has just about set the Franchise FG% the past few seasons.lol.  Too each his own though... Oh and as for the title no you don't bring your best big man off the bench.

If Jermaine O'Neal accepted Perkins' role offensively, he would shoot 60-65% from the floor and be an extremely effective complementary role offensively.

Jermaine O'Neal would also have more energy to spend on the defensive end of the floor and on the backboards ... so I would expect to see improvement from him there too.

Thus making Jermaine O'Neal a very valuable role player.

Unfortunately, Jermaine has been unwilling to accept that role so far. If that ever changes, I'd love to have that player on my team.

[Jon]

Field Goal Percentage = Jermaine O'Neal hit 53% of his shots last season. He has never been above 49% before. In the previous six years he has been between 43.5% and 47.5% from the field.

True Shooting Percentage = Jermaine went for 56.3% TS% last season. He has never been above 54% and only was above 52% twice. In the previous four seasons, Jermaine was at 49-53% TS%. Jermaine also posted his lowest turnover numbers in 5 years.

Dwyane Wade had a huge positive effect on Jermaine O'Neal's offensive efficiency last season.

Other than Sheed (whose decline was tied to his steep decline in wide open 3-pt shooting; fluky), can you name a player that has reduced his shooting efficiency from his prior team playing for Doc Rivers and with Rondo?  (Midseason acquisitions like Starbury don't count).

Look at guys like Paul Pierce, Ray Allen, KG, Eddie House, Marquis Daniels... Doc is good at getting his players to maximize their efficiency and recognize their limits, as evidenced by the team's 3 consecutive placements in the top 5 of eFG%.  Even players who don't recognize such limits, like Big Baby, tend to be minimized or disciplined.  As in many things, Sheed was the exception, but I don't see too many parallels between Sheed's situation last year (historically solid 3-pt shooter allowed to chuck his way out of major shooting slump) and JO this year (historically inefficient shot-creator who gets to play with a great playmaker - especially for big men - and an offense that has enough options to go elsewhere instead of continuing to pursue an inefficient option).

The C's are not going to stand around and watch JO pound the ball into the ground and shoot 40% on baseline turnarounds for a ton of possessions just because they like the idea of a post presence.

I'll use Baby for one more example.  As a bench player, Baby has shown a lot of the offensively destructive habits of a guy like O'Neal.  He gets in modes where he shoulders far too much of the offensive burden and starts jacking Js out of rhythm, trying to post-up regardless of match-up, preferring to shoot instead of pass... In stark contrast, when he got to play with the starters more (his 16 starts in 09, both playoff runs), his %s went way up as his inefficient opportunities dwindled.  I believe it will be the same way for JO.  If he's asked to be the scorer for the 2nd unit, he'll be about as inefficient as Baby.  If he's allowed to play off Rondo and members of the big 3, he'll be even more efficient than he was in Miami.

Very good point.  Not so much because of Doc will he get even better looks than last year but, because the C's have a boatload of good passers and JO will think he's in heaven with all of the good looks he'll get.  I suspect his FG% will be even higher this year.  I still have no idea how someone can deduce that playing alongside Wade is better for a big mans FG% as opposed to playing alongside Rondo, KG and Pierce who are all just as good or better passers.  Anyone notice Perkins has just about set the Franchise FG% the past few seasons.lol.  Too each his own though... Oh and as for the title no you don't bring your best big man off the bench.

If Jermaine O'Neal accepted Perkins' role offensively, he would shoot 60-65% from the floor and be an extremely effective complementary role offensively.

Jermaine O'Neal would also have more energy to spend on the defensive end of the floor and on the backboards ... so I would expect to see improvement from him there too.

Thus making Jermaine O'Neal a very valuable role player.

Unfortunately, Jermaine has been unwilling to accept that role so far. If that ever changes, I'd love to have that player on my team.

Well, I still don't agree with your assessment of him.  But I don't think we're going to get over that. 

However, I also think this is the first time in his career that he's truly going to be asked to be a role player.  And I think that can make all the difference in the world.