Big Baby Must Stay!

[guava_wrench]

Glen Davis continues to be unimpressive in big minutes.

He is an end of bench player and I would be very reluctant to give him a large/long contract.

Agreed.  Baby is too much of a liability on the boards and too vulnerable defensively to lock in as a 25-30 minute player. 

His versatility and intelligence on both sides of the ball make him a great fill-in player for a frontcourt as injury-ravaged as ours has been, but I think his skill level and flair for the dramatic can blind people to his weaknesses. 

For every charge taken, hustle board and clutch J, there's an easy big man score, easy offensive board and bricked J.  Baby at his best is often a net 0, giving and taking away in equal quantities.  That's actually something of a compliment, as so many back-up bigs are consistent net negatives (Erden, Sheed last year), but it certainly doesn't make him building block material.

Make sure you are comparing Baby's defense to other players around the league, not to KG. I'm not seeing him as a defensive liability, especially when I compare him to what I see around the league.

Every jumpshooter misses a considerable number of J's. Is he any worse? I don't see how referencing a bricked J can be taken seriously. Pierce airballed a 3 last game, yet he gets well over 30 mpg.

I agree that on a team with KG, he should be a bench guy. But I'm not sure he couldn't be a decent starter at PF with a legitimate Center that has size.

[Larry for 3]

Here's the problem people are missing with Glen DAvis. If you let him go then who do you replace him with?? Your taking a step backward.  There's no garuntee that whoever you bring in will be as good as Davis.  ANd as of right now, we have his Bird rights so we can offer him whatever we need to. Ijust think its a step in the wrong direction, unless Glen wants crazy money.  And i think people's idea of him getting this crazy offer is not reality.  ANd even if he gets a mid level deal,  i'm sure Danny will match.  It makes sense.  Guys who avg 14 and 7 in the NBA and actually CARE and can PLAY in Boston dont grow on trees.  It's a no brainer to keep him i think.

[Chris]

4-2 when Davis plays 30+ minutes.

2-0 when he plays 37+ minutes.

That makes them what, 6-2 when Davis plays more than 30 minutes, and 12-2 when he doesn't?  I think I will take Davis for fewer minutes if we are throwing these kind of stats out.

[Fan from VT]

Here's the problem people are missing with Glen DAvis. If you let him go then who do you replace him with?? Your taking a step backward.  There's no garuntee that whoever you bring in will be as good as Davis.  ANd as of right now, we have his Bird rights so we can offer him whatever we need to. Ijust think its a step in the wrong direction, unless Glen wants crazy money.  And i think people's idea of him getting this crazy offer is not reality.  ANd even if he gets a mid level deal,  i'm sure Danny will match.  It makes sense.  Guys who avg 14 and 7 in the NBA and actually CARE and can PLAY in Boston dont grow on trees.  It's a no brainer to keep him i think.

Let's just remember, he's averaging 11.5 and 5.5. I'm very pleased and impressed with how well he's playing, but adding 2.5/1.5 to his averages is quite significant.

[Fafnir]

4-2 when Davis plays 30+ minutes.

2-0 when he plays 37+ minutes.

That makes them what, 6-2 when Davis plays more than 30 minutes, and 12-2 when he doesn't?  I think I will take Davis for fewer minutes if we are throwing these kind of stats out.

Actually we're 4-2 when he plays big minutes, the 2-0 is just a subset of the 30+.

[celtics2]

As much as I like Glen's contributions this is still a business. Whatever it takes to keep the Celts competitive I'm for. He has improved each season and now has his jumper working. He does find a way to play bigger than he is. My gut is we keep him.

[snively]

Glen Davis continues to be unimpressive in big minutes.

He is an end of bench player and I would be very reluctant to give him a large/long contract.

Agreed.  Baby is too much of a liability on the boards and too vulnerable defensively to lock in as a 25-30 minute player. 

His versatility and intelligence on both sides of the ball make him a great fill-in player for a frontcourt as injury-ravaged as ours has been, but I think his skill level and flair for the dramatic can blind people to his weaknesses. 

For every charge taken, hustle board and clutch J, there's an easy big man score, easy offensive board and bricked J.  Baby at his best is often a net 0, giving and taking away in equal quantities.  That's actually something of a compliment, as so many back-up bigs are consistent net negatives (Erden, Sheed last year), but it certainly doesn't make him building block material.

Make sure you are comparing Baby's defense to other players around the league, not to KG. I'm not seeing him as a defensive liability, especially when I compare him to what I see around the league.

Every jumpshooter misses a considerable number of J's. Is he any worse? I don't see how referencing a bricked J can be taken seriously. Pierce airballed a 3 last game, yet he gets well over 30 mpg.

I agree that on a team with KG, he should be a bench guy. But I'm not sure he couldn't be a decent starter at PF with a legitimate Center that has size.

Defensive liability isn't relative.  Just because there are a lot of other defensive liabilities around the league doesn't mean Baby isn't one.

As for his J, his 40% rate is slightly below average for power forwards this season, though I'd guess he'd be average among back-up forwards.

He could be a decent starter in the same way that Matt Bonner can be a decent starter: if his 4 other teammates are stars.  That's true for a ton of guys in this league.

[BballTim]

Glen Davis continues to be unimpressive in big minutes.

He is an end of bench player and I would be very reluctant to give him a large/long contract.

Agreed.  Baby is too much of a liability on the boards and too vulnerable defensively to lock in as a 25-30 minute player. 

His versatility and intelligence on both sides of the ball make him a great fill-in player for a frontcourt as injury-ravaged as ours has been, but I think his skill level and flair for the dramatic can blind people to his weaknesses. 

For every charge taken, hustle board and clutch J, there's an easy big man score, easy offensive board and bricked J.  Baby at his best is often a net 0, giving and taking away in equal quantities.  That's actually something of a compliment, as so many back-up bigs are consistent net negatives (Erden, Sheed last year), but it certainly doesn't make him building block material.

Make sure you are comparing Baby's defense to other players around the league, not to KG. I'm not seeing him as a defensive liability, especially when I compare him to what I see around the league.

Every jumpshooter misses a considerable number of J's. Is he any worse? I don't see how referencing a bricked J can be taken seriously. Pierce airballed a 3 last game, yet he gets well over 30 mpg.

I agree that on a team with KG, he should be a bench guy. But I'm not sure he couldn't be a decent starter at PF with a legitimate Center that has size.

Defensive liability isn't relative.  Just because there are a lot of other defensive liabilities around the league doesn't mean Baby isn't one.

  I'd say it's pretty relative. How else do you judge players other than comparing them to other players?

[snively]

Glen Davis continues to be unimpressive in big minutes.

He is an end of bench player and I would be very reluctant to give him a large/long contract.

Agreed.  Baby is too much of a liability on the boards and too vulnerable defensively to lock in as a 25-30 minute player. 

His versatility and intelligence on both sides of the ball make him a great fill-in player for a frontcourt as injury-ravaged as ours has been, but I think his skill level and flair for the dramatic can blind people to his weaknesses. 

For every charge taken, hustle board and clutch J, there's an easy big man score, easy offensive board and bricked J.  Baby at his best is often a net 0, giving and taking away in equal quantities.  That's actually something of a compliment, as so many back-up bigs are consistent net negatives (Erden, Sheed last year), but it certainly doesn't make him building block material.

Make sure you are comparing Baby's defense to other players around the league, not to KG. I'm not seeing him as a defensive liability, especially when I compare him to what I see around the league.

Every jumpshooter misses a considerable number of J's. Is he any worse? I don't see how referencing a bricked J can be taken seriously. Pierce airballed a 3 last game, yet he gets well over 30 mpg.

I agree that on a team with KG, he should be a bench guy. But I'm not sure he couldn't be a decent starter at PF with a legitimate Center that has size.

Defensive liability isn't relative.  Just because there are a lot of other defensive liabilities around the league doesn't mean Baby isn't one.

  I'd say it's pretty relative. How else do you judge players other than comparing them to other players?

I guess it is relative when you really break it down.  I should have said that just because a guy like Carlos Boozer is a defensive liability, it doesn't make Glen Davis any less of one. 

[billysan]

I think there are a few people that equate Glen Davis performance as a role player off the bench to that of a starter and assume he will be that effective or more as a starter. I dont see him being ever worthy of a contract for the full midlevel. If he believes he is this will propel him off the Celtics roster next year as Danny will not pay him that kind of money.

I see Davis having a serious shortcoming that may prevent him from being an effective starter on any team. The fact is that he is undersized and not a great leaper. There are exactly two veteran undersized starting PF currently in the league who put up great numbers and who earn the midlevel or higher. Carlos Boozer and Elton Brand, make big money. There is no way Glen Davis can perform at their level or be worthy of a contract like theirs, let alone the midlevel.

Glen Davis has performed admirably as a back up big for us. His success has hinged largely on his ability to carve out space inside, provide energy, and hit open shots off the bench. He has not been effective with any consistency with avoiding having his shot blocked at the rim or being a shot blocker. Longer PF and Centers with any kind of reliable elbow jumper torch him regularly.


He simply has a physical limitation and it will not allow him to be a top level or long term starting PF in this league. Any team that pays him the midlevel or near it will find this out the hard way. It is my hope that we keep him on our roster for the long term, but not anywhere near the midlevel.

[guava_wrench]

Glen Davis continues to be unimpressive in big minutes.

He is an end of bench player and I would be very reluctant to give him a large/long contract.

Agreed.  Baby is too much of a liability on the boards and too vulnerable defensively to lock in as a 25-30 minute player. 

His versatility and intelligence on both sides of the ball make him a great fill-in player for a frontcourt as injury-ravaged as ours has been, but I think his skill level and flair for the dramatic can blind people to his weaknesses. 

For every charge taken, hustle board and clutch J, there's an easy big man score, easy offensive board and bricked J.  Baby at his best is often a net 0, giving and taking away in equal quantities.  That's actually something of a compliment, as so many back-up bigs are consistent net negatives (Erden, Sheed last year), but it certainly doesn't make him building block material.

Make sure you are comparing Baby's defense to other players around the league, not to KG. I'm not seeing him as a defensive liability, especially when I compare him to what I see around the league.

Every jumpshooter misses a considerable number of J's. Is he any worse? I don't see how referencing a bricked J can be taken seriously. Pierce airballed a 3 last game, yet he gets well over 30 mpg.

I agree that on a team with KG, he should be a bench guy. But I'm not sure he couldn't be a decent starter at PF with a legitimate Center that has size.

Defensive liability isn't relative.  Just because there are a lot of other defensive liabilities around the league doesn't mean Baby isn't one.

  I'd say it's pretty relative. How else do you judge players other than comparing them to other players?

I guess it is relative when you really break it down.  I should have said that just because a guy like Carlos Boozer is a defensive liability, it doesn't make Glen Davis any less of one. 

I'm also not sure how Davis is a defensive liability when our team can play very solid defense with him on the floor. I do not see teams taking advantage of him as I would expect to happen if he is truly a liability.

Saying that Davis is not a great rebounder is not enough to say he is a defensive liability as Perkins is not a great rebounder, despite playing great defense in our system.

I have been very surprised this season to see the incredible improvement in Baby's post moves. His offensive skill level has exploded over the past year.

[aporel#18]

Glenn is a very good 3rd/4th big, and I'd love the Celtics to sign him to a contract about Perk's current money. I don't think he would be a good starter, but he'll keep improving his shot and skills, so he could end being a 6th man averaging 15 and 7 (he's not there yet) in respectable minutes.

If he's willing to take that money the Celtics must resign/extend him long term, he'll never be a star, but he's solid, and that will be much needed in the Rondo Era.

If he wants more money, let him expire, I don't think there will be a good offer for him at the deadline. If a good trade (big if) happened, the Celtics will need to pull Sheed from retirement.

[LB3533]

Glen Davis is averaging 14/7 in the month of December and is actually playing less minutes than he did in the month of November.

16/7 tonight in 26 minutes of action.

[snively]

Glen Davis continues to be unimpressive in big minutes.

He is an end of bench player and I would be very reluctant to give him a large/long contract.

Agreed.  Baby is too much of a liability on the boards and too vulnerable defensively to lock in as a 25-30 minute player. 

His versatility and intelligence on both sides of the ball make him a great fill-in player for a frontcourt as injury-ravaged as ours has been, but I think his skill level and flair for the dramatic can blind people to his weaknesses. 

For every charge taken, hustle board and clutch J, there's an easy big man score, easy offensive board and bricked J.  Baby at his best is often a net 0, giving and taking away in equal quantities.  That's actually something of a compliment, as so many back-up bigs are consistent net negatives (Erden, Sheed last year), but it certainly doesn't make him building block material.

Make sure you are comparing Baby's defense to other players around the league, not to KG. I'm not seeing him as a defensive liability, especially when I compare him to what I see around the league.

Every jumpshooter misses a considerable number of J's. Is he any worse? I don't see how referencing a bricked J can be taken seriously. Pierce airballed a 3 last game, yet he gets well over 30 mpg.

I agree that on a team with KG, he should be a bench guy. But I'm not sure he couldn't be a decent starter at PF with a legitimate Center that has size.

Defensive liability isn't relative.  Just because there are a lot of other defensive liabilities around the league doesn't mean Baby isn't one.

  I'd say it's pretty relative. How else do you judge players other than comparing them to other players?

I guess it is relative when you really break it down.  I should have said that just because a guy like Carlos Boozer is a defensive liability, it doesn't make Glen Davis any less of one. 

I'm also not sure how Davis is a defensive liability when our team can play very solid defense with him on the floor. I do not see teams taking advantage of him as I would expect to happen if he is truly a liability.

Saying that Davis is not a great rebounder is not enough to say he is a defensive liability as Perkins is not a great rebounder, despite playing great defense in our system.

I have been very surprised this season to see the incredible improvement in Baby's post moves. His offensive skill level has exploded over the past year.

Shaq is a defensive liability and we play good defense with him on the floor.  Baby is very solid as a pick and roll defender, has great hands for steals, a good base for denying post position, and has quick enough feet to bother a lot of face-up power forwards.  But he's really short with really short arms.  Any PF with a J can shoot over him with ease and then get him flying with pump fakes every ensuing possession.  Bigs have no problem finishing around him on the move or if they get decent post position.  And guards have no fear of him when they attack the paint. 

He's not a liability against everyone, but his weaknesses are very exploitable by most team's starters.  And while he's a nice versatile offensive player who, as you pointed out, has transformed himself into an excellent finisher in the paint, he's not good enough offensively to consistently (and efficiently) outscore his opponent if they are of any quality.

A good 4th big, a decent 3rd big, a below average 2nd big (which is the role he's playing now with Perk and JO out).

[LB3533]

How can anyone say Baby is a defensive liability?

Baby is our 2nd best big man defender, behind KG.

Yes he is short, but you can't fault him for that. Blame his parents or god.