Contract year for Baby makes for a tough decision for the Celtics.

[Roy H.]

I love how we got several pages of people arguing about rebounds and rebounding rates and how they don´t want to overpay for a big man with this kind of flaw. Every Baby thread turns into a lecture about the fine art of interpreting singular stats.

It´s as if Davis, or any big man for that matter, has no value for the team besides rebounding.

Nobody talks about the things he does well, which there are plenty.
If you want a lot of rebounds, maybe we should get Sheldon Williams back, that guy was a great rebounder...

I think that´s called "can´t see the forest for the trees".

Eh...  I think people focus on rebounding because it's a pretty big flaw.  However, I think almost everyone in this thread has pointed out that overall he has played well this year, and that if the money is reasonable, they'd like to see him remain a Celtic.

I mean, if people here have an agenda, rather than a legit concern, there's plenty of ammunition to back that up.  There's the general immaturity.  There's the talk about how basketball is a "business".  There's the poor rebounding.  There's the fact that he's 12th on the team in eFG% and TS%.  There's the fact that among all bigs and forwards on the team, he blocks the least percentage of shots. 

In other words, there are lots of stats out there that can be used to criticize BBD.  However, you're not seeing those arguments in this thread, because people *aren't* doing what you claim. 

[mmbaby]

I disagree, Roy, about 'plenty of ammunition'. Immaturity is a favorite catch-word some use and it doesn't fly when you've got every other player (most much older than he) acting immature at times too - except for Ray. Secondly talking about basketball as a business is pretty intelligent in my book. Because that's exactly what it is.

The rebounding could get better but there are lots of reasons for that drop in production.

It is deceptive to only look at the stats and to say he blocks the least percentage of shots. Are the 40 charges taken, the stopping Dwight or other pfs from making it to the basket, the walling off of the paint are all ways to block shots.

A player can only do so many things at once. Let's see if any player could (all at the same time) defend a player from going to the basket while blocking a shot at the basket while making a rebound. If Baby is standing 12 feet away wrapped around a player trying to catch the ball or right under the basket holding a player back so a Celtic can get the rebound, how is Baby going to get that rebound? Think about it. It makes sense.

 

[Roy H.]

I disagree, Roy, about 'plenty of ammunition'. Immaturity is a favorite catch-word some use and it doesn't fly when you've got every other player (most much older than he) acting immature at times too - except for Ray. Secondly talking about basketball as a business is pretty intelligent in my book. Because that's exactly what it is.

The rebounding could get better but there are lots of reasons for that drop in production.

It is deceptive to only look at the stats and to say he blocks the least percentage of shots. Are the 40 charges taken, the stopping Dwight or other pfs from making it to the basket, the walling off of the paint are all ways to block shots.

A player can only do so many things at once. Let's see if any player could (all at the same time) defend a player from going to the basket while blocking a shot at the basket while making a rebound. If Baby is standing 12 feet away wrapped around a player trying to catch the ball or right under the basket holding a player back so a Celtic can get the rebound, how is Baby going to get that rebound? Think about it. It makes sense.

 

That was sort of my point, though.  The allegation is that people are manipulating stats to cast BBD in a negative light.  If they were truly doing that, and ignoring his positive attributes, you'd see people pointing to exactly the stuff I mentioned above, without any sort of context.

As you just mentioned, a lot of the statistical negatives in BBD's game have reasons, or are off-set by other things he does well.  If people were just grasping at straws for reasons to hate on the kid, though, they're exactly the things you'd be seeing here.  However, that hasn't been the focus.  Almost everyone is in agreement that BBD has played pretty well this year (at least when coming off the bench), but almost everyone can acknowledge that they'd like to see him improve his rebounding, particularly on the defensive end. 

[mmbaby]

Oh, I see, Roy. Yes, that makes sense. But your saying if we wanted just to put him down, there would be plenty of ammunition, is putting him down, isn't it? 

[Chris]

Oh, I see, Roy. Yes, that makes sense. But your saying if we wanted just to put him down, there would be plenty of ammunition, is putting him down, isn't it? 

Does it matter?  We can talk negatively about players...and we do.  Everything is relative, and I would say that the "putting down" of Davis is incredibly tame when compared to pretty much everyone else. 

Much worse things are said about KG, Rondo, Perk, Nate, etc. every day. 

Honestly, if we did not speak negatively about these guys at times and discuss their flaws as well as their positives, this would be a heck of a boring place to come to.   

[indeedproceed]

Personally I know that I bring up Glen Davis's rebounding problems because people keep on claiming that it is not a problem. I don't agree with laying a guy out under a bus with criticism he doesn't deserve, but I also don't agree with completely one sided analysis if you're just going to pretend that Glen Davis is a total package player that could be a starter on a championship team.

I said this in the game recap from last night:

We give Glen Davis a lot of crap for his play. He doesn't rebound well, he takes too many shots sometimes..but we don't give that guy enough credit for defending guys who have 6 to 7 inch height advantages on him night in and night out. He might have little T-Rex arms and a small vertical, but he's got a big ol heart.

Glen Davis does a lot of very good things, but he's also frustrating in his limitations.

[Donoghus]

Personally I know that I bring up Glen Davis's rebounding problems because people keep on claiming that it is not a problem. I don't agree with laying a guy out under a bus with criticism he doesn't deserve, but I also don't agree with completely one sided analysis if you're just going to pretend that Glen Davis is a total package player that could be a starter on a championship team.

I said this in the game recap from last night:

We give Glen Davis a lot of crap for his play. He doesn't rebound well, he takes too many shots sometimes..but we don't give that guy enough credit for defending guys who have 6 to 7 inch height advantages on him night in and night out. He might have little T-Rex arms and a small vertical, but he's got a big ol heart.

Glen Davis does a lot of very good things, but he's also frustrating in his limitations.

Exactly and that's where I'm coming from also.

The guy has his limitations and I think some react the wrong way to posters' like myself being critical of BBD.  We're being critical of a facet of his game.  Not necessarily hating on the player.  Just trying to be levelheaded and realize the guy has his limitations. 

I think some's expectations for the guy are unrealistic and people take offense to any criticism of the guy. 

[Fan from VT]

Personally I know that I bring up Glen Davis's rebounding problems because people keep on claiming that it is not a problem. I don't agree with laying a guy out under a bus with criticism he doesn't deserve, but I also don't agree with completely one sided analysis if you're just going to pretend that Glen Davis is a total package player that could be a starter on a championship team.

I said this in the game recap from last night:

We give Glen Davis a lot of crap for his play. He doesn't rebound well, he takes too many shots sometimes..but we don't give that guy enough credit for defending guys who have 6 to 7 inch height advantages on him night in and night out. He might have little T-Rex arms and a small vertical, but he's got a big ol heart.

Glen Davis does a lot of very good things, but he's also frustrating in his limitations.

Exactly and that's where I'm coming from also.

The guy has his limitations and I think some react the wrong way to posters' like myself being critical of BBD.  We're being critical of a facet of his game.  Not necessarily hating on the player.  Just trying to be levelheaded and realize the guy has his limitations. 

I think some's expectations for the guy are unrealistic and people take offense to any criticism of the guy. 

And just to add, this is why the thread title makes sense. And to reiterate my previous point: a player like davis looks great when he is a 6th man on a team like the celtics making 3 million. But making 8 million? 9 million? suddenly the shortcomings are greatly multiplied. Think about a guy like posey: he didn't lose much of anything in his first year in NO, but he was on a worse team (magnifying his shortcomings) and in the first year of a contract paying him over 6 million a year for several years, instead of 3 million. Same player, drastically different perceptions.

[mmbaby]

Yes, we discuss things we'd like to see improved upon with all the players and yes, we put them down sometimes when we are upset.
When I used the term, 'putting down', I meant it in the real sense. And what I mean by that is putting someone down just because you don't like him and not responding to specific arguments put forth.
When one says something generalized like 'there's plenty of ammunition to use for back up (for those who have an agenda against Baby), that's where the train goes off the tracks, leaves the argument hanging and becomes a whole 'nother argument.

 

[indeedproceed]

Yes, we discuss things we'd like to see improved upon with all the players and yes, we put them down sometimes when we are upset.
When I used the term, 'putting down', I meant it in the real sense. And what I mean by that is putting someone down just because you don't like him and not responding to specific arguments put forth.
When one says something generalized like 'there's plenty of ammunition to use for back up (for those who have an agenda against Baby), that's where the train goes off the tracks, leaves the argument hanging and becomes a whole 'nother argument.

 

Can you give me an example of a post where someone 'put baby down'?

[Chris]

Yes, we discuss things we'd like to see improved upon with all the players and yes, we put them down sometimes when we are upset.
When I used the term, 'putting down', I meant it in the real sense. And what I mean by that is putting someone down just because you don't like him and not responding to specific arguments put forth.
When one says something generalized like 'there's plenty of ammunition to use for back up (for those who have an agenda against Baby), that's where the train goes off the tracks, leaves the argument hanging and becomes a whole 'nother argument.

 

In that case, I think you are projecting onto other posters, because it is a tiny minority on this site who actually don't like him.  

Clearly you are a huge Davis fan, which is great, but I think you are being blinded by that a bit, and making things personal when there is nothing there.  

[Celtics4ever]

Davis was a steal where we got him.  He is a good basketball player but he is not really a man with an NBA position.  Too short for ideal Center or PF, too hefty for ideal SF.  But he produces night in and night out and buys us minutes.  Yes, he is too short, gets blocked a ton and some nights rebounds poorly.   But he is our best player off the bench.   I say let him play out and see what he draws.  We always have his bird rights. 

I like Big Baby.  He does have a lot of heart.  My biggest beef with him is that he should rebound better with all that butt to box out with!

[Casperian]

That was sort of my point, though.  The allegation is that people are manipulating stats to cast BBD in a negative light.  If they were truly doing that, and ignoring his positive attributes, you'd see people pointing to exactly the stuff I mentioned above, without any sort of context.

As you just mentioned, a lot of the statistical negatives in BBD's game have reasons, or are off-set by other things he does well.  If people were just grasping at straws for reasons to hate on the kid, though, they're exactly the things you'd be seeing here.  However, that hasn't been the focus.  Almost everyone is in agreement that BBD has played pretty well this year (at least when coming off the bench), but almost everyone can acknowledge that they'd like to see him improve his rebounding, particularly on the defensive end.  

No, the allegation was that people use the same stat (his weakest area, as everyone knows) over and over again, nobody´s "manipulating" stats here. I also don´t know the motivation behind this focus on his rebounding, it could be just a matter of perception, but if you look at the post I quoted earlier, someone called him "pretty bad in many ways".
Let´s also not forget the topic of this thread, which is "what to do with him when his contract is up". In that context, we have to point out both sides of the coin, which didn´t really happen even after 5 pages.

What I was trying to say is that Baby does a lot of things well, and I feel we´re not focusing on these things enough when discussing his value for the team, there´s always a caveat. Be honest, how often have you read about his bad rebounding rate in a Baby thread?

He is, for example, a very good free throw shooter for a big, can play (and defend) multiple positions, is not afraid of the big moment, his spin move is incredibly hard to guard, he can post up and nail the open jump shot. If Baby was an 11 rebounds per game player, he would be an all-star, not our 6th man.

And to defend mmbaby here, I´ve seen a lot of negative (and sometimes defintely not justified) posts just recently when he was filling in for KG, despite the fact that he had several good games in between a few admittedly bad games.

I apologize if anyone felt offended by my post, that wasn´t my intention.

[indeedproceed]

That was sort of my point, though.  The allegation is that people are manipulating stats to cast BBD in a negative light.  If they were truly doing that, and ignoring his positive attributes, you'd see people pointing to exactly the stuff I mentioned above, without any sort of context.

As you just mentioned, a lot of the statistical negatives in BBD's game have reasons, or are off-set by other things he does well.  If people were just grasping at straws for reasons to hate on the kid, though, they're exactly the things you'd be seeing here.  However, that hasn't been the focus.  Almost everyone is in agreement that BBD has played pretty well this year (at least when coming off the bench), but almost everyone can acknowledge that they'd like to see him improve his rebounding, particularly on the defensive end. 

No, the allegation was that people use the same stat (his weakest area, as everyone knows) over and over again, nobody´s "manipulating" stats here. I also don´t know the motivation behind this focus on his rebounding, it could be just a matter of perception, but if you look at the post I quoted earlier, someone called him "pretty bad in many ways".
Let´s also not forget the topic of this thread, which is "what to do with him when his contract is up". In that context, we have to point out both sides of the coin, which didn´t really happen even after 6 pages.

What I was trying to say is that Baby does a lot of things well, and I feel we´re not focusing on these things enough when discussing his value for the team, there´s always a caveat. Be honest, how often have you read about his bad rebounding rate in a Baby thread?

He is, for example, a very good free throw shooter for a big, can play (and defend) multiple positions, is not afraid of the big moment, his spin move is incredibly hard to guard, he can post up and nail the open jump shot.

And to defend mmbaby here, I´ve seen a lot of negative (and sometimes defintely not justified) posts just recently when he was filling in for KG, despite the fact that he had several good games in between a few admittedly bad games.

I apologize if anyone felt offended by my post, that wasn´t my intention.

No no, I think your post is right in line with the kind of conduct we expect around here.

Rebounding is not Glen Davis's only weakness as a player. He's got others. When he relies too heavily on his jumpshot for instance, he's a net negative for our team. He relies too much on his jumpshot when we ask him to assume too much of a burden offensively. We ask him to assume to much of a burden offensively when he's the starter at the 4, and Rondo is out of the game.

Defensively, Glen Davis will attempt to guard any player without fear. In application though, he will get abused by starting caliber players on a regular basis if a team can game-plan around him. Avery Johnson didn't tell Brook Lopez how to deal best with Baby, because between Shaq, KP, Jermaine O'Neal, and Semih..Glen Davis shouldn't face Brook Lopez.

But, if a team games plans around that matchup, Glen Davis gets exposed sometimes. Teams game plan around him when he'll play significant predictable minutes. He plays steady significant predictable minutes when he's a starter...Glen Davis is not a good option as a starter.

One of Glen Davis's greatest assets is that he brings hard energy, a solid jumper, and tough defense in the place of the first unit with one of them rests. If he plays too much though, he can't sustain that energy. Without that energy, he's less effective. He loses that energy when he plays too many minutes..he plays too many minutes when he starts..he's not a good fit as a starter.

Glen "Big Baby" Davis is big enough for any moment...in the role of 6th man.

This, from after the Rockets game:

As for Davis, Rivers believes Davis' problems is quite simple: He's playing too many minutes.

On Monday, Davis played just more than any other Celtics player (including Rajon Rondo) with just under 38 minutes of action.

"He's getting too many minutes, honestly," said Rivers, who was quick to blame himself. "Thirty-eight minutes is too many for Baby. That's too many minutes and that's on me. Baby shouldn't play more than in the thirty-range, because I think the fatigue is bothering him."

EDIT: It should also bear mentioning that at this stage in his career, Davis is a reluctant leader, and he is more comfortable when there are lower expectations for him.

Davis acknowledged Thursday after the team’s practice that the shift in roles affected him mentally.

“It’s all mental,” he said. “I was kind too hard on myself when I was starting. I wanted to prove to Doc [Rivers] and prove to my teammates … The difference between that and the playoffs is I just went and played. That’s what I do when I come off the bench, I just go out and play. I put a lot of pressure on myself.  I got out of myself and tried to be something [else]. That’s now how it works. You have to be yourself. I had a couple of good games, but as far as all-around games, the way I know I can play, I didn’t bring it. Now being on the bench you get back to the same mentality.”

[Casperian]

No no, I think your post is right in line with the kind of conduct we expect around here.

Rebounding is not Glen Davis's only weakness as a player. He's got others. When he relies too heavily on his jumpshot for instance, he's a net negative for our team. He relies too much on his jumpshot when we ask him to assume too much of a burden offensively. We ask him to assume to much of a burden offensively when he's the starter at the 4, and Rondo is out of the game.

Defensively, Glen Davis will attempt to guard any player without fear. In application though, he will get abused by starting caliber players on a regular basis if a team can game-plan around him. Avery Johnson didn't tell Brook Lopez how to deal best with Baby, because between Shaq, KP, Jermaine O'Neal, and Semih..Glen Davis shouldn't face Brook Lopez.

But, if a team games plans around that matchup, Glen Davis gets exposed sometimes. Teams game plan around him when he'll play significant predictable minutes. He plays steady significant predictable minutes when he's a starter...Glen Davis is not a good option as a starter.

One of Glen Davis's greatest assets is that he brings hard energy, a solid jumper, and tough defense in the place of the first unit with one of them rests. If he plays too much though, he can't sustain that energy. Without that energy, he's less effective. He loses that energy when he plays too many minutes..he plays too many minutes when he starts..he's not a good fit as a starter.

Glen "Big Baby" Davis is big enough for any moment...in the role of 6th man.

This, from after the Rockets game:

As for Davis, Rivers believes Davis' problems is quite simple: He's playing too many minutes.

On Monday, Davis played just more than any other Celtics player (including Rajon Rondo) with just under 38 minutes of action.

"He's getting too many minutes, honestly," said Rivers, who was quick to blame himself. "Thirty-eight minutes is too many for Baby. That's too many minutes and that's on me. Baby shouldn't play more than in the thirty-range, because I think the fatigue is bothering him."

EDIT: It should also bear mentioning that at this stage in his career, Davis is a reluctant leader, and he is more comfortable when there are lower expectations for him.

Davis acknowledged Thursday after the team’s practice that the shift in roles affected him mentally.

“It’s all mental,” he said. “I was kind too hard on myself when I was starting. I wanted to prove to Doc [Rivers] and prove to my teammates … The difference between that and the playoffs is I just went and played. That’s what I do when I come off the bench, I just go out and play. I put a lot of pressure on myself.  I got out of myself and tried to be something [else]. That’s now how it works. You have to be yourself. I had a couple of good games, but as far as all-around games, the way I know I can play, I didn’t bring it. Now being on the bench you get back to the same mentality.”

As a wise man once said: "It doesn´t matter who starts the game, what matter is who ends the game" (more or less). And Baby does matter. The success of our team this season is also because of Baby´s improved play. His contribution is not as big as that of the starting five, but it does play a role. This is something that gets swept under the rug far too often for my taste (as a Baby fan), while we´re always quick to point out his flaws.

I think the whole "BBD as a starter" discussion suffers from different definitions of the term "starter". Bill Wennington was a starter. Eric Montross was a starter. I think what most people mean when they say starter is actually "key player". Big Baby will never be a key player on a championship team, anything else is just delusional. But he can definitely be a starter, given the right circumstances. I´m pretty sure a lot of teams would love to have a 5th option with Baby´s talent.

In the hypothetical scenario that we trade KG for Dwight Howard tomorrow, I don´t see a problem with Baby at the 4, if we only look at his skill-set. Energy is a different story. Baby was abused by Lopez because he´s simply a very skilled post player and a bad matchup for Davis.
However, to use his dip in performance when he filled in for KG as evidence to say he can´t be a starter is not logical, imo. Baby played great early this season and was averaging over 30 minutes a game. Those are "starter" minutes.

I think Baby´s performance during that KG-less stretch was to be expected. Many former "stars" had problems adjusting to a bench role, because you need a different mentality. He never was in that position in the NBA before. I don´t think it´s easy to find your game mid-season on a star-studded team like the Celtics when you have to fill KG´s shoes.

That Davis quote shows me one thing: he´s self-critical, reflecting, learning (ok, that´s three things).
When he first showed his jump-shot two seasons ago, he was pretty bad at it. However, over time, he became a lot better, to the point that it is now a legit option in his arsenal. Who knows, maybe he will play a lot better the next time he has to take over for KG (heaven forbid)?!

To simply say he can never be a "starter" in this league means to ignore what Baby does best: to surprise us all.