Poll

Can GS reach Perk's skill-level or greater?

Yes
80 (60.6%)
No
32 (24.2%)
Undecided
20 (15.2%)

Total Members Voted: 130

Author Topic: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?  (Read 65689 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #135 on: April 11, 2012, 04:23:23 PM »

Offline Finkelskyhook

  • NCE
  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2892
  • Tommy Points: 285
I loved that Stiemsa looked comfortable taking his shot in a big game on the road last night.


it was awsome. No hesitation. I rarely seen him miss a jumper so far. Excellent shooter. People state he has a near non existent inside game. But honestly i don't even see him needing one as long as he can shoot the mid range and run the fast break. 

He needs one.

Most encouraging thing was to see him dunk the ball.  He's missed too many bunnies he should have dunked.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #136 on: April 11, 2012, 04:25:49 PM »

Offline biggs

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 806
  • Tommy Points: 71
I think the bigger question is "Why haven't we gone to the d league more often"?  

There seems to be a lot of talent there.  Stiesma came out of no where and has done more for us than any rookie has done in years (ps I love our rookies this year). If there is talent out there why haven't we gone to the d-league before, or is Stiesma really a diamond in the rough?

Most d leaguers don't pan out in the nba. Guys like Lasme and Miki Moore where defensive players of the year in the d league at one point. Hardly that great defensively when they played in the nba.

Its rare to find a career d leaguer to be able to do well in the nba. Thats why stiesma is such a great find.

TP ;D
Truuuuuuuuuth!

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #137 on: April 11, 2012, 04:35:16 PM »

Offline LooseCannon

  • NCE
  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11833
  • Tommy Points: 950
Most d leaguers don't pan out in the nba. Guys like Lasme and Miki Moore where defensive players of the year in the d league at one point. Hardly that great defensively when they played in the nba.

Mikki Moore had a perfectly acceptable career as a journeyman backup and is proof that the D-League contains useful players.  A younger version of Moore as some sort of better-rebounding version of Ryan Hollins would be better than, um, Ryan Hollins. 
"The worst thing that ever happened in sports was sports radio, and the internet is sports radio on steroids with lower IQs.” -- Brian Burke, former Toronto Maple Leafs senior adviser, at the 2013 MIT Sloan Sports Analytics Conference

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #138 on: April 11, 2012, 04:41:37 PM »

Offline the_Bird

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3244
  • Tommy Points: 176
I think the bigger question is "Why haven't we gone to the d league more often"?  

There seems to be a lot of talent there.  Stiesma came out of no where and has done more for us than any rookie has done in years (ps I love our rookies this year). If there is talent out there why haven't we gone to the d-league before, or is Stiesma really a diamond in the rough?

Most d leaguers don't pan out in the nba. Guys like Lasme and Miki Moore where defensive players of the year in the d league at one point. Hardly that great defensively when they played in the nba.

Its rare to find a career d leaguer to be able to do well in the nba. Thats why stiesma is such a great find.

We also haven't really been in "development mode" for a while.  I don't think Steimer was brought aboard as much more than a practice body; if all had gone according to plan (with good health from JO and Chris Wilcox), he probably never would have gotten any floor time.

I'm not sure they even knew that Steimer was this good, or expected him to even make the team out of camp.  Sure seems like Doc and Danny have been more (pleasantly) surprised with his development than "oh, this is exactly why we signed him!"

For most of the past five years, there really haven't been that many roster spots to dedicate to young, developmental players (and all things being equal, a young D-leaguer is usually going to be better-off signing with a team with fewer veterans in front of them).

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #139 on: April 11, 2012, 04:43:23 PM »

Offline SHAQATTACK

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37858
  • Tommy Points: 3033
Greg is in good heath it seems , no ACL or such so far ,is a good advantage.  Greg needs confidence , and the attention to detail that Doc and KG can provide .  He doesn;t need more weight, maybe more muscle , and this will incrrease his speed and rebounding potiental. He has alot of room for improvement...its all about natural BB instincts and combine that with the  desire to be that player you envision.

I envision him being 20-30 % better next year after a summer of training, coaching and getting all the fine points of what Doc expects down , so it is second nature.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #140 on: April 11, 2012, 04:43:42 PM »

Offline clover

  • Front Page Moderator
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6130
  • Tommy Points: 315
I loved that Stiemsa looked comfortable taking his shot in a big game on the road last night.


it was awsome. No hesitation. I rarely seen him miss a jumper so far. Excellent shooter. People state he has a near non existent inside game. But honestly i don't even see him needing one as long as he can shoot the mid range and run the fast break. 

He's now got the highest FG% of the C's rotation players.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #141 on: April 11, 2012, 04:45:34 PM »

Offline clover

  • Front Page Moderator
  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6130
  • Tommy Points: 315
I think the bigger question is "Why haven't we gone to the d league more often"?  

There seems to be a lot of talent there.  Stiesma came out of no where and has done more for us than any rookie has done in years (ps I love our rookies this year). If there is talent out there why haven't we gone to the d-league before, or is Stiesma really a diamond in the rough?

Most d leaguers don't pan out in the nba. Guys like Lasme and Miki Moore where defensive players of the year in the d league at one point. Hardly that great defensively when they played in the nba.

Its rare to find a career d leaguer to be able to do well in the nba. Thats why stiesma is such a great find.

We also haven't really been in "development mode" for a while.  I don't think Steimer was brought aboard as much more than a practice body; if all had gone according to plan (with good health from JO and Chris Wilcox), he probably never would have gotten any floor time.

I'm not sure they even knew that Steimer was this good, or expected him to even make the team out of camp.  Sure seems like Doc and Danny have been more (pleasantly) surprised with his development than "oh, this is exactly why we signed him!"

For most of the past five years, there really haven't been that many roster spots to dedicate to young, developmental players (and all things being equal, a young D-leaguer is usually going to be better-off signing with a team with fewer veterans in front of them).

Doc had even proudly proclaimed his 'final rotation' for the season--and Stiemer wasn't in it until Wilcox went down.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #142 on: April 11, 2012, 04:52:48 PM »

Offline erisred

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 650
  • Tommy Points: 37
I think KG plans on coming back to Boston next season and is just desperate for the Celtics to have as many centers on the roster as possible so he doesn't have to play at the 5 so much.
probably closer to the truth than KG would like to admit
Well, I think KG plans to retire after this year and wants to go out with another ring. He needs Hollins and Stiemsma to be good enough to eat up some playoff minutes NOW and is willing to just about do anything needed for that to happen.

OTOH, I *hope* he wants to come back to the Celtics next year.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #143 on: April 11, 2012, 05:00:55 PM »

Offline 2short

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6080
  • Tommy Points: 428
I've posted on this one before.  Here is a different way to think on it.  Stiemsma is a year younger than Perk.  He has room to improve as it is only his rookie year.  I actually think he could be a starter right now for a handful of nba teams.  
Perk is a starter who plays limited minutes for possibly the best team in nba.  Perk is not going to improve his game from where he is now.  I'd love to say he will start averaging 10 rebounds a game (which he should) but it isn't going to happen.  So Perks peak was with us prior to injury.

Now if you are the captain for a pickup ball game who would you pick.  Greg at his current level, CURRENT.  Or Perk at his peak.  To me its stiemsma .  Perk at his peak would play good low post positional defense, block shots well, he'd rebound and set picks ok..no better.  His offensive game was horrible , couldn't pass at the top of key, couldn't shoot at free throw level or further.  His interior offensive game was bad, he couldn't shoot free throws.

Greg can play good low post defense (not in perks class), call him an equal shot blocker to be nice to perk, rebounds better or boxes out, sets picks about equal.  Can hit the outside shot, an average passer,can also run the floor much better, hasn't shown an interior offensive game except pick and rolls, can shoot free throws.

I honestly don't think they compare at perks peak.  Greg is going to get better (resign him!) while Perk has leveled out and okc is going to be looking hard at that contract for the rest of it.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #144 on: April 11, 2012, 05:01:00 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
Its sad how doc manages his lineup at times. It has to take injuries for the lineup to become optimal. If it weren't for Ray Allens injury, Bradley would still be lost trying to be a backup pg, when he is clearly a much more effective sg and as a starter also.

No knock on wilcox, bc his game is pretty good, but without him  and j oneil going down, Stiesma would of prob been a bench warmer , never seen a light of day in the nba, no option picked up and back to the d league.

Doc's issue is that he is enormed by vets. It doesn't matter if you win 6 games in a row with Bradley, he still has to start ray allen in his first day back. Great in the loyalty department, ineffective in optimizing his rotation.

I'm glad things has turned out the way it has, but doc has to learn. If not pp and kg will be the oldest starters in a few years and hamper the teams progress

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #145 on: April 11, 2012, 05:01:49 PM »

Offline thestackshow

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1349
  • Tommy Points: 112
I think KG plans on coming back to Boston next season and is just desperate for the Celtics to have as many centers on the roster as possible so he doesn't have to play at the 5 so much.
probably closer to the truth than KG would like to admit
Well, I think KG plans to retire after this year and wants to go out with another ring. He needs Hollins and Stiemsma to be good enough to eat up some playoff minutes NOW and is willing to just about do anything needed for that to happen.

OTOH, I *hope* he wants to come back to the Celtics next year.

KG retiring after this year wouldnt make sense...

A 35 year old KG is still better then a prime Chris Bosh, so it wouldnt make sense for him to retire, when hes still a top 5 Center/PF in the east...
[img width= height=]http://oi43.tinypic.com/2afde6p.jpg[/img]

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #146 on: April 11, 2012, 05:05:17 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
delete

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #147 on: April 11, 2012, 05:17:31 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 63554
  • Tommy Points: -25456
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley
In his best year, Perk averaged 10 points, 8 rebounds, and 60% shooting while playing elite defense as the starting center on a team that reached the NBA finals.

In his best full month, Stiemsma averaged 3.9 points and 3.9 rebounds on 50.9% shooting, coming off the bench.  Stiemsma is an excellent shot-blocker, but is far from an elite defender.

Right now, Stiemsma has a long way to go before he reaches Perk's level.  It's exciting to see the level GS is playing at, because he basically came out of nowhere.  However, he just hasn't come close to the impact Perk had.



I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER... AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #148 on: April 11, 2012, 06:00:13 PM »

Offline Tr1boy

  • Paul Pierce
  • ***************************
  • Posts: 27260
  • Tommy Points: 867
In his best year, Perk averaged 10 points, 8 rebounds, and 60% shooting while playing elite defense as the starting center on a team that reached the NBA finals.

In his best full month, Stiemsma averaged 3.9 points and 3.9 rebounds on 50.9% shooting, coming off the bench.  Stiemsma is an excellent shot-blocker, but is far from an elite defender.

Right now, Stiemsma has a long way to go before he reaches Perk's level.  It's exciting to see the level GS is playing at, because he basically came out of nowhere.  However, he just hasn't come close to the impact Perk had.



can;t agree with you roy. Look perk this year, and his stats on avg are no better than Stiesma. Stiesma also has played some games 10 mins and others 20. But perk consistantly plays/played 25-30 minutes as a starter.

Like i stated its the type of defender you prefer. Both are good, but i still like stiesmas style a little better. Not sure about the criticism about stiesma rebounding. Offensively not as good as perk but defensively he has been a vacuum.

Re: Greg Stiemsma's Potential = Perk or Better?
« Reply #149 on: April 11, 2012, 06:05:05 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30863
  • Tommy Points: 1330
In his best year, Perk averaged 10 points, 8 rebounds, and 60% shooting while playing elite defense as the starting center on a team that reached the NBA finals.

In his best full month, Stiemsma averaged 3.9 points and 3.9 rebounds on 50.9% shooting, coming off the bench.  Stiemsma is an excellent shot-blocker, but is far from an elite defender.

Right now, Stiemsma has a long way to go before he reaches Perk's level.  It's exciting to see the level GS is playing at, because he basically came out of nowhere.  However, he just hasn't come close to the impact Perk had.



can;t agree with you roy. Look perk this year, and his stats on avg are no better than Stiesma. Stiesma also has played some games 10 mins and others 20. But perk consistantly plays/played 25-30 minutes as a starter.

Like i stated its the type of defender you prefer. Both are good, but i still like stiesmas style a little better. Not sure about the criticism about stiesma rebounding. Offensively not as good as perk but defensively he has been a vacuum.
He's not very good on the defensive glass for a C.

Edit: He's 44th and out 57 qualifying centers, just ahead of Perkins this year who's having the worst rebounding year of his career (as a rotation player). In fact he's rebounding at essentially the exact same rate as Perkins this year.