Brad Stevens Negatives?

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

[bfrombleacher]

http://hardwoodhoudini.com/2013/07/03/what-type-of-coach-the-celtics-are-getting-in-brad-stevens/

As far as his [Stevens's] scheme’s go, we’ll find out what he  is going to do with Rajon Rondo, Jeff Green, Jared Sullinger and Kelly Olynyk when the time comes. His offenses at Butler weren’t very fluid or the most efficient. Some of them were extremely hard to watch because of the shot selection that was involved. There seemed to be a premium on the midrange jump shot–something that won’t work at the NBA level.

But I've also read their offense is a high octane offense that should fit our younglings.

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

http://www.winninghoops.com/pages/Breaking-News---Breaking-Down-Butlers-Brad-Stevens-Advanced-Statistics.php

He does care about rebounding. Perhaps more defensive rebounding than offensive rebounding.

The scary thing about the team in the Doc era, especially towards the end, was how many offensive boards they gave up. Quite a few heartbreakers and crucial games lost on the glass (but not on the offensive end).

An interesting quote:

For a poor offensive rebounding forward, Stevens said, "You're beating a dead horse if you say, 'Go to the glass, go to the glass.' " Instead, the coach said, show that he went to the boards three times out of 50. Either the forward is not in shape or not trying. "One more possession might mean winning the game," Stevens said.

Seems like effort and conditioning are areas of emphasis. So, no more easing into shape like Paul Pierce did, perhaps? And hopefully we'd never see another BBD (meaning we don't draft another one and, if we do, he gets whipped into shape).

I'm also hoping Jeff Green and Bass would start rebounding more. This quote gives me hope.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

http://hardwoodhoudini.com/2013/07/03/what-type-of-coach-the-celtics-are-getting-in-brad-stevens/

As far as his [Stevens's] scheme’s go, we’ll find out what he  is going to do with Rajon Rondo, Jeff Green, Jared Sullinger and Kelly Olynyk when the time comes. His offenses at Butler weren’t very fluid or the most efficient. Some of them were extremely hard to watch because of the shot selection that was involved. There seemed to be a premium on the midrange jump shot–something that won’t work at the NBA level.

But I've also read their offense is a high octane offense that should fit our younglings.

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

http://www.winninghoops.com/pages/Breaking-News---Breaking-Down-Butlers-Brad-Stevens-Advanced-Statistics.php

He does care about rebounding. Perhaps more defensive rebounding than offensive rebounding.

The scary thing about the team in the Doc era, especially towards the end, was how many offensive boards they gave up. Quite a few heartbreakers and crucial games lost on the glass (but not on the offensive end).

An interesting quote:

For a poor offensive rebounding forward, Stevens said, "You're beating a dead horse if you say, 'Go to the glass, go to the glass.' " Instead, the coach said, show that he went to the boards three times out of 50. Either the forward is not in shape or not trying. "One more possession might mean winning the game," Stevens said.

Seems like effort and conditioning are areas of emphasis. So, no more easing into shape like Paul Pierce did, perhaps? And hopefully we'd never see another BBD (meaning we don't draft another one and, if we do, he gets whipped into shape).

I'm also hoping Jeff Green and Bass would start rebounding more. This quote gives me hope.

He seems to put an emphasis on defensive rebounding, which is great, because as you said, Boston suffered from some spectacularly bad defensive rebounding at crucial point last season (not to mention the 2010 Finals), so I will for sure be happy if they can at least take care of the defensive boards.

[SHAQATTACK]

Hope he is able to work with  "EGO" kids and spoiled KIDS,   the kids he coached at college level were not the McDonalds ALL American players .   Boston tends to look for the best all around kids which helps , but at some point if you want to win you are gonna have to have the Westbtooks and KObes to get a banner

He coached excellent athletes to extraordinary levels ,  not gifted players with big heads

Being able to    "TURN on the CHARM"  and have PLayers that are used to having EVERYTHING their way do your bidding is the key .

Just not sure , he has any experience with MEGA dollar personalities  and how to blend them .,  can he be a WET NURSE to their whines and whims and still feel like he is in control and establish HIS game plan.

He could have benefited being an assistant for a couple years like THIBS from watching someone like RIvers  smooth over the players and media night after night and control the locker room.

Lack of dealing with over the top personalities like KObe, CP3 , ROndo , D12 ,  that defy the coach or system is something he is untested at.

[clover]

So after meeting the players working out up here in Waltham today, he'll be down in FL observing summer league, where he'll get to meet the rooks, Melo, Shav and Sully at least, as well.

Then I imagine two solid months of wonking out with his combined new (NBA veteran) and old (neophyte) staffers to become familiar with his players come up with the team's offensive and defensive schemes.

How could that not be incredible fun for a coach like him?

[Celtics4ever]

The NBA learning curve, it's a different game.  He is brilliant and should adapt.  I also think he plays to his strengths and opponents weaknesses and not his system like Pitino.   

[Evantime34]

My worry is about his offense. At Butler he ran a slow down offense that usually didn't shoot until a layup presented itself. Those layups are even less likely to present themselves in the nba.

Will he speed up the offense, spread the floor and take more 3's like the analytics guys will suggest he does? Or will his offense be more reminiscent of his college days and end up being more similar to the Pacers than Rockets?

Someone quoted an article from the front page where Kevin O'Connor said that Stevens doesn't attack the offensive glass. This is not the sense I got from watching Butler play (11th in rebounding margin in the country). That they were able to be the 11th rebounding team in the country while running an extremely slow pace seems like it indicates he does in fact crash the glass.

[LooseCannon]

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

If the Celtics under Stevens don't attack the offensive boards, it will be because the statistics strongly suggest that it is not as valuable as some people believe.

[Evantime34]

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

If the Celtics under Stevens don't attack the offensive boards, it will be because the statistics strongly suggest that it is not as valuable as some people believe.

I don't see that happening, since Sullinger and Humphries most valuable contributions will probably be on the offensive glass.

[LooseCannon]

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

If the Celtics under Stevens don't attack the offensive boards, it will be because the statistics strongly suggest that it is not as valuable as some people believe.

I don't see that happening, since Sullinger and Humphries most valuable contributions will probably be on the offensive glass.

Humphries is not a long-term part of this roster.  He might even be gone before the season starts.  Sullinger has many ways he can contribute.  The best way is if he can develop an NBA three-point shot.

[Evantime34]

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

If the Celtics under Stevens don't attack the offensive boards, it will be because the statistics strongly suggest that it is not as valuable as some people believe.

I don't see that happening, since Sullinger and Humphries most valuable contributions will probably be on the offensive glass.

Humphries is not a long-term part of this roster.  He might even be gone before the season starts.  Sullinger has many ways he can contribute.  The best way is if he can develop an NBA three-point shot.

I will not be happy if they have Sullinger shooting a lot of 3's. His biggest asset to the team is his offensive rebounding and post play, if they have him hanging around the perimeter instead of in the paint it will hurt my opinion of Stevens.

[LooseCannon]

From Kevin O'Connor's front-page article:

[Stevens'] technique to not attack the offensive boards aligns with what Doc Rivers and Tom Thibodeau had preached in their time in Boston.

This concerns me. I understand the philosophy behind getting everyone back on defense, but it's disappointing to me that Boston will continue to rarely take advantage of second-chance opportunities. Especially when the Cs have a great offensive rebounder in Sully.

If the Celtics under Stevens don't attack the offensive boards, it will be because the statistics strongly suggest that it is not as valuable as some people believe.

I don't see that happening, since Sullinger and Humphries most valuable contributions will probably be on the offensive glass.

Humphries is not a long-term part of this roster.  He might even be gone before the season starts.  Sullinger has many ways he can contribute.  The best way is if he can develop an NBA three-point shot.

I will not be happy if they have Sullinger shooting a lot of 3's. His biggest asset to the team is his offensive rebounding and post play, if they have him hanging around the perimeter instead of in the paint it will hurt my opinion of Stevens.

Sullinger will reach his greatest value if he can develop into a well-rounded offensive player who can score both inside and outside.  It would be mis-using him if you told him to never leave the paint.

[fantankerous]

Sullinger will reach his greatest value if he can develop into a well-rounded offensive player who can score both inside and outside.  It would be mis-using him if you told him to never leave the paint.

I agree.  He will maximize his value as a jack of all trades kind of player.  He lacks the height and athleticism to be a good enough post player that he won't need a perimeter game.  Sullinger probably doesn't need to extend his range to the three point line though. But it would be nice if he did.  What was his range like in college?

[LooseCannon]

Sullinger will reach his greatest value if he can develop into a well-rounded offensive player who can score both inside and outside.  It would be mis-using him if you told him to never leave the paint.

I agree.  He will maximize his value as a jack of all trades kind of player.  He lacks the height and athleticism to be a good enough post player that he won't need a perimeter game.  Sullinger probably doesn't need to extend his range to the three point line though. But it would be nice if he did.  What was his range like in college?

He made 16 of 40 threes (40%) in 37 games as a sophomore.  If he could be a guy who averages about one attempt per game and making 35% of them, that would help spread the floor.  A shooting lineup of Olynyk, Sullinger, Green, and Bradley, if everyone can shoot well enough that they can't be left alone in their favorite spots on the perimeter, could create interesting spaces for someone like Rondo to operate.

[Evantime34]

Sullinger will reach his greatest value if he can develop into a well-rounded offensive player who can score both inside and outside.  It would be mis-using him if you told him to never leave the paint.

I agree.  He will maximize his value as a jack of all trades kind of player.  He lacks the height and athleticism to be a good enough post player that he won't need a perimeter game.  Sullinger probably doesn't need to extend his range to the three point line though. But it would be nice if he did.  What was his range like in college?

He made 16 of 40 threes (40%) in 37 games as a sophomore.  If he could be a guy who averages about one attempt per game and making 35% of them, that would help spread the floor.  A shooting lineup of Olynyk, Sullinger, Green, and Bradley, if everyone can shoot well enough that they can't be left alone in their favorite spots on the perimeter, could create interesting spaces for someone like Rondo to operate.

Ok, I can absolutely get on board with one to three attempts a game. I thought you were suggesting that most of his offense come from 3s. I was clearly wrong, and I agree with you.