celtics biggest weakness: no quality 3 pt sharpshooter

[Celtics4ever]

I like that Danny has Sullinger and Olynyk as bigs on the team, as they can shoot.

KO yes, Sully no, the times I have seen him shoot the three it has been painful at best.  He has nice mid range but he can't shoot the three well.

I think we will struggle mightily to score folks.   We did last year with KG and PP at times.   It is only going to get worse this year.   We will probably get out and break more and that will help but our SGs in general cannot shoot well.

[mmmmm]

The problem guy here might bradley. Say even if rondo is traded, for a chris paul like pg who can shoot.

Bradley cant create his own offense, penetrate well, mediocre passer, cant shoot threes. He can shoot the mid range pretty good but has to be spoonfed the ball. Before his shoulder injury when he was able to cut and finish under the basket it made a big difference for his offensive game and also help open things up for others. But last year he stopped doing this.

Even though he is a great defender, if he cant shoot the 2 and cut frequently at least, i dont think he will be a celtic after this year.  Brooks def has a chance to steal the starting sg position from ab.

When ainge drafted ab i wonder what was his plan for him. Wasnt it initially be the teams backup pg?

Cuts rarely work if there isn't penetration to create the openings. He cut less because when Rondo was out there was less open space for him to cut to.

Bradley's mid range shooting was decent last year, and his three point shooting was good playing with Rondo the last year. WIth his first full healthy offseason I expect Bradley to take leaps forward and only secure his starting spot but be the unquestioned third best player on the team behind Rondo and Green.

I would bet you Tommy points that Bradley won't lose his starting job to Brooks, I would even give you odds.

Fair enough. Maybe he didnt cut bc there was a lack of players that could penetrate. I could see him do alot more of it being out there with rondo, brooks or pressey.

I also want ab to be back to his old self. But why dont you feel brooks has a chance to steal the starting sg spot? Brooks defense is not as elite but he seems competent and everyone knows his offense can be deadly. (Some have already said he plays like a poor man kobe out there)

Who is this 'everyone' that 'knows [Brooks] offense can be deadly'?

He certainly hasn't been even a poor homeless man's Kobe so far in the NBA.

Brooks is a classic inefficient volume scorer who's game worked in the NCAA because at that level his superior athleticism made up for his poor shot selection.

But in the NBA, that only works if you have the absolute elite athleticism and body control of a Kobe or a Wade.

Brooks is not Kobe.

Brooks was a 25th pick (by the Nets.  Not Danny.) for a reason.  He's not that good.

I would not be surprised to see Brooks traded for cap relief.   If he stays, he's at best the 4th string SG behind AB, Lee & Bogans.

Why dont you look at his stats in year one. For a vol shooter his fg per was decent. He also rebounded, passed the ball and had decent turnover numbers. Several games last year and year 1 when he got a chance to play he scored  25 or more pts.

Dont use the 25th pick to think this guy cant play nba ball. He also had a 52 pts and 42 pts game in college. Volume shooter or not that is quite impressive.

For year one, Brooks' FG% was 42.8%.  That's not decent.  His 3PT shooting that year was 31.3%.  It was 27.3% this last year.   In college, Brooks shot 33.3% from the 3PT line.   He's certainly not given any indication he's the answer to our 3PT shooting needs.

So far, in his short NBA career, Brooks has scored a little more than a point per shot (1.1 pts/FGA).  That's not terrible.   It's just sort of mediocre.  For comparison to a great scorer, his role model Kobe has scored 1.3 points per FGA.  And Kobe was at that ratio as of his rookie season (when Kobe was only 19, mind you!).   That may not sound like a lot -- but off 20 shots in a game, that's a 4 point difference on the scoreboard.   That's big gap in an important metric for a volume shooting scorer.

And he doesn't bring much of anything more to the table.   His rebounding is nice, but not what I'm looking for from a 2 guard.  His defense is mediocre to matador.   So he only adds value if he takes shots and makes them.  If he makes them at a lower rate than his teammates, he's hurting his team.

In comparison, both Bradley (1.05) and Lee(1.16) also each have scored a little more than a point per shot, but both bring (a) far superior defensive value and (b) both shoot better from the 3PT line, which helps provide spacing.   The shots they take help space the floor for their teammates.  And with their defensive value they don't have to be taking shots to contribute towards winning.

The simple, hard facts are that both Bradley and Lee are far more talented players than Brooks.  So unless one of them gets traded, they are going to be the first & second SGs on this team getting most of the minutes at that position.   And Bogans cannot be traded.   And 'potential' aside, Bogans is a more consistent, better player than Brooks.  He scores the same points/FGA efficiency as Brooks and, again, is a better 3PT shooter. And again a much better defender.

That is three slots of our 15 man roster dedicated to SG already.   So at best, Brooks is the 4th deep SG option - if we even keep him around.

It makes no sense to keep all 5 SGs.  Unless we do a trade to move Bradley or Lee, Crawford and Brooks are the odd men out on this roster.   I would not fall in love with either.

It is certainly possible for either to stay on.  But until something changes, I wouldn't put high odds on it.

[mmmmm]

As much as i hate to say it, the team hasnt been the same with the loss of ray allen. Its a guy who can go off shooting threes and play solid defense. The shooting threat alone opens up the floor to confuse opponents defense and also give other guys on the team to operate.

As of now a rondo and ab combination is bad in terms of opening things up. And with rondo last year and with his injury less likely to run more in transition, the worry is magnified. Eventually i wouldnt mind brooks on the floor more with rondo bc at least he can create his own shot.

Anyone else feel this is going to become a problem again?

I agree with you that AB is a bad fit with Rondo, at least based on his shooting to this point in his career. A player in the style of Reddick seems like a much better fit to me.

AB on the other hand seems like he'd be great with a guy like Curry or Irving.

I dunno.   There's more to it than just having Rondo's backcourt partner be a big, 3PT shooting SG when it comes to what makes for an 'ideal' pair.

When Rondo & Bradley are on the floor together, our defense has been absolutely stunning.

In 701 minutes of floor time together over the last two seasons, Rondo and Bradley have posted a Defensive Rating of 94.6 points per 100 possessions.   

And note - it wasn't just because they were playing with KG.  KG was NOT on the floor for about a third of those minutes, during which the two posted a sub-90 DRtg!!

Offensively, sure, they haven't been an elite pairing.  But their ORtg of 101.6 is not bad.  And that's +7 for a Net rating.

I can live with that.

I think Bradley's offense really suffered by NOT having Rondo on the floor.   And he's just plain still young and inconsistent.  Over time, I'm pretty confident Bradley will become a more consistent offensive player.

I think the samples you're talking about are pretty small - maybe too small to draw any real conclusions. I don't disagree with what you're saying, I just think we don't really know for sure what was responsible for AB's troubles last season.

I'm certainly hopeful that Bradley can find a way to turn his offensive struggles around, whether it's because of his own development or Rondo's return. I love Bradley's style of play and tenacity.

700 minutes is small?

That spans almost 1400 possessions against a wide variety of opponents with a wide variety of teammates.

No other PG+SG tandem that played >400 minutes together posted a lower DRtg in 2011-12 than their 92.1.  This last season, 2012-13, the top defensive back court tandem was Tony Allen and Mike Conley with a 95.4 rating.

Whatever +/- variance you want to assign to that 94.6 number to account for the 'small sample size', I think it's pretty safe to say that Rondo & Bradley are an elite defensive back court tandem.   

[LooseCannon]

I have my suspicions that Ainge has secret data from his advanced analytics department that tells him that a Rondo-Bradley backcourt is something that he can build a team around.

[Tr1boy]

The problem guy here might bradley. Say even if rondo is traded, for a chris paul like pg who can shoot.

Bradley cant create his own offense, penetrate well, mediocre passer, cant shoot threes. He can shoot the mid range pretty good but has to be spoonfed the ball. Before his shoulder injury when he was able to cut and finish under the basket it made a big difference for his offensive game and also help open things up for others. But last year he stopped doing this.

Even though he is a great defender, if he cant shoot the 2 and cut frequently at least, i dont think he will be a celtic after this year.  Brooks def has a chance to steal the starting sg position from ab.

When ainge drafted ab i wonder what was his plan for him. Wasnt it initially be the teams backup pg?

Cuts rarely work if there isn't penetration to create the openings. He cut less because when Rondo was out there was less open space for him to cut to.

Bradley's mid range shooting was decent last year, and his three point shooting was good playing with Rondo the last year. WIth his first full healthy offseason I expect Bradley to take leaps forward and only secure his starting spot but be the unquestioned third best player on the team behind Rondo and Green.

I would bet you Tommy points that Bradley won't lose his starting job to Brooks, I would even give you odds.

Fair enough. Maybe he didnt cut bc there was a lack of players that could penetrate. I could see him do alot more of it being out there with rondo, brooks or pressey.

I also want ab to be back to his old self. But why dont you feel brooks has a chance to steal the starting sg spot? Brooks defense is not as elite but he seems competent and everyone knows his offense can be deadly. (Some have already said he plays like a poor man kobe out there)

Who is this 'everyone' that 'knows [Brooks] offense can be deadly'?

He certainly hasn't been even a poor homeless man's Kobe so far in the NBA.

Brooks is a classic inefficient volume scorer who's game worked in the NCAA because at that level his superior athleticism made up for his poor shot selection.

But in the NBA, that only works if you have the absolute elite athleticism and body control of a Kobe or a Wade.

Brooks is not Kobe.

Brooks was a 25th pick (by the Nets.  Not Danny.) for a reason.  He's not that good.

I would not be surprised to see Brooks traded for cap relief.   If he stays, he's at best the 4th string SG behind AB, Lee & Bogans.

Why dont you look at his stats in year one. For a vol shooter his fg per was decent. He also rebounded, passed the ball and had decent turnover numbers. Several games last year and year 1 when he got a chance to play he scored  25 or more pts.

Dont use the 25th pick to think this guy cant play nba ball. He also had a 52 pts and 42 pts game in college. Volume shooter or not that is quite impressive.

For year one, Brooks' FG% was 42.8%.  That's not decent.  His 3PT shooting that year was 31.3%.  It was 27.3% this last year.   In college, Brooks shot 33.3% from the 3PT line.   He's certainly not given any indication he's the answer to our 3PT shooting needs.

So far, in his short NBA career, Brooks has scored a little more than a point per shot (1.1 pts/FGA).  That's not terrible.   It's just sort of mediocre.  For comparison to a great scorer, his role model Kobe has scored 1.3 points per FGA.  And Kobe was at that ratio as of his rookie season (when Kobe was only 19, mind you!).   That may not sound like a lot -- but off 20 shots in a game, that's a 4 point difference on the scoreboard.   That's big gap in an important metric for a volume shooting scorer.

And he doesn't bring much of anything more to the table.   His rebounding is nice, but not what I'm looking for from a 2 guard.  His defense is mediocre to matador.   So he only adds value if he takes shots and makes them.  If he makes them at a lower rate than his teammates, he's hurting his team.

In comparison, both Bradley (1.05) and Lee(1.16) also each have scored a little more than a point per shot, but both bring (a) far superior defensive value and (b) both shoot better from the 3PT line, which helps provide spacing.   The shots they take help space the floor for their teammates.  And with their defensive value they don't have to be taking shots to contribute towards winning.

The simple, hard facts are that both Bradley and Lee are far more talented players than Brooks.  So unless one of them gets traded, they are going to be the first & second SGs on this team getting most of the minutes at that position.   And Bogans cannot be traded.   And 'potential' aside, Bogans is a more consistent, better player than Brooks.  He scores the same points/FGA efficiency as Brooks and, again, is a better 3PT shooter. And again a much better defender.

That is three slots of our 15 man roster dedicated to SG already.   So at best, Brooks is the 4th deep SG option - if we even keep him around.

It makes no sense to keep all 5 SGs.  Unless we do a trade to move Bradley or Lee, Crawford and Brooks are the odd men out on this roster.   I would not fall in love with either.

It is certainly possible for either to stay on.  But until something changes, I wouldn't put high odds on it.

He shot 43 fg per in his rookie year. What did bradley or lee shoot last year? Anything above 44% fg per for pg or sg is considered acceptable in the nba.

Brooks also had a dozen 5 and more assists in year 1 when he got time to play. How many over 5 assist Or more games did bradley have last year?

Brooks is a talented scorer that can learn to play better d. Ab is a very good defender that has limited offensive upside. Brooks has more potential imo

[Boris Badenov]

As much as i hate to say it, the team hasnt been the same with the loss of ray allen. Its a guy who can go off shooting threes and play solid defense. The shooting threat alone opens up the floor to confuse opponents defense and also give other guys on the team to operate.

As of now a rondo and ab combination is bad in terms of opening things up. And with rondo last year and with his injury less likely to run more in transition, the worry is magnified. Eventually i wouldnt mind brooks on the floor more with rondo bc at least he can create his own shot.

Anyone else feel this is going to become a problem again?

I agree with you that AB is a bad fit with Rondo, at least based on his shooting to this point in his career. A player in the style of Reddick seems like a much better fit to me.

AB on the other hand seems like he'd be great with a guy like Curry or Irving.

I dunno.   There's more to it than just having Rondo's backcourt partner be a big, 3PT shooting SG when it comes to what makes for an 'ideal' pair.

When Rondo & Bradley are on the floor together, our defense has been absolutely stunning.

In 701 minutes of floor time together over the last two seasons, Rondo and Bradley have posted a Defensive Rating of 94.6 points per 100 possessions.   

And note - it wasn't just because they were playing with KG.  KG was NOT on the floor for about a third of those minutes, during which the two posted a sub-90 DRtg!!

Offensively, sure, they haven't been an elite pairing.  But their ORtg of 101.6 is not bad.  And that's +7 for a Net rating.

I can live with that.

I think Bradley's offense really suffered by NOT having Rondo on the floor.   And he's just plain still young and inconsistent.  Over time, I'm pretty confident Bradley will become a more consistent offensive player.

I think the samples you're talking about are pretty small - maybe too small to draw any real conclusions. I don't disagree with what you're saying, I just think we don't really know for sure what was responsible for AB's troubles last season.

I'm certainly hopeful that Bradley can find a way to turn his offensive struggles around, whether it's because of his own development or Rondo's return. I love Bradley's style of play and tenacity.

700 minutes is small?

That spans almost 1400 possessions against a wide variety of opponents with a wide variety of teammates.

No other PG+SG tandem that played >400 minutes together posted a lower DRtg in 2011-12 than their 92.1.  This last season, 2012-13, the top defensive back court tandem was Tony Allen and Mike Conley with a 95.4 rating.

Whatever +/- variance you want to assign to that 94.6 number to account for the 'small sample size', I think it's pretty safe to say that Rondo & Bradley are an elite defensive back court tandem.

Oh yeah, I have no disagreement about the defense - for one thing in much larger samples both Bradley and Rondo have shown that they are very good to elite.

It's the offense I wonder about. Bradley's performance in particular has been so volatile that I think the jury's still out. Like I said above though I am certainly hoping they can make it work over the course of a full season (or whatever part Rondo plays).

[CelticConcourse]

Courtney Lee.

[tenn_smoothie]

in case you haven't heard - we want to have as many weaknesses as possible this year in order to acquire a good draft position next summer.

so don't suggest any solutions unless they will contribute to more losses.

[mmmmm]

As much as i hate to say it, the team hasnt been the same with the loss of ray allen. Its a guy who can go off shooting threes and play solid defense. The shooting threat alone opens up the floor to confuse opponents defense and also give other guys on the team to operate.

As of now a rondo and ab combination is bad in terms of opening things up. And with rondo last year and with his injury less likely to run more in transition, the worry is magnified. Eventually i wouldnt mind brooks on the floor more with rondo bc at least he can create his own shot.

Anyone else feel this is going to become a problem again?

I agree with you that AB is a bad fit with Rondo, at least based on his shooting to this point in his career. A player in the style of Reddick seems like a much better fit to me.

AB on the other hand seems like he'd be great with a guy like Curry or Irving.

I dunno.   There's more to it than just having Rondo's backcourt partner be a big, 3PT shooting SG when it comes to what makes for an 'ideal' pair.

When Rondo & Bradley are on the floor together, our defense has been absolutely stunning.

In 701 minutes of floor time together over the last two seasons, Rondo and Bradley have posted a Defensive Rating of 94.6 points per 100 possessions.   

And note - it wasn't just because they were playing with KG.  KG was NOT on the floor for about a third of those minutes, during which the two posted a sub-90 DRtg!!

Offensively, sure, they haven't been an elite pairing.  But their ORtg of 101.6 is not bad.  And that's +7 for a Net rating.

I can live with that.

I think Bradley's offense really suffered by NOT having Rondo on the floor.   And he's just plain still young and inconsistent.  Over time, I'm pretty confident Bradley will become a more consistent offensive player.

I think the samples you're talking about are pretty small - maybe too small to draw any real conclusions. I don't disagree with what you're saying, I just think we don't really know for sure what was responsible for AB's troubles last season.

I'm certainly hopeful that Bradley can find a way to turn his offensive struggles around, whether it's because of his own development or Rondo's return. I love Bradley's style of play and tenacity.

700 minutes is small?

That spans almost 1400 possessions against a wide variety of opponents with a wide variety of teammates.

No other PG+SG tandem that played >400 minutes together posted a lower DRtg in 2011-12 than their 92.1.  This last season, 2012-13, the top defensive back court tandem was Tony Allen and Mike Conley with a 95.4 rating.

Whatever +/- variance you want to assign to that 94.6 number to account for the 'small sample size', I think it's pretty safe to say that Rondo & Bradley are an elite defensive back court tandem.

Oh yeah, I have no disagreement about the defense - for one thing in much larger samples both Bradley and Rondo have shown that they are very good to elite.

It's the offense I wonder about. Bradley's performance in particular has been so volatile that I think the jury's still out. Like I said above though I am certainly hoping they can make it work over the course of a full season (or whatever part Rondo plays).

Okay - yeah, that's fair.

My optimism on his offense is founded less on the small NBA sample than on the larger collective sample of his HS, college, D-League & NBA numbers combined along with just trying to give him a break on the obvious extenuating circumstances.   It is totally fair to keep the jury out on it, though.   After all, even if it's fair to say his shooting suffered due to coming back from injury ... we don't know if that won't have a longer term impact.

[CelticsFan9]

Courtney Lee.

Lee really disappointed me to start out the year, but after Rondo went down and Bradley and Lee were starting, he really seemed to find a groove.  Then he got that injury vs. Dallas, and he fell into a slump.  A slump compounded by Doc benching him in the playoffs.

I wonder if something was going on behind the scenes.

[mmmmm]

The problem guy here might bradley. Say even if rondo is traded, for a chris paul like pg who can shoot.

Bradley cant create his own offense, penetrate well, mediocre passer, cant shoot threes. He can shoot the mid range pretty good but has to be spoonfed the ball. Before his shoulder injury when he was able to cut and finish under the basket it made a big difference for his offensive game and also help open things up for others. But last year he stopped doing this.

Even though he is a great defender, if he cant shoot the 2 and cut frequently at least, i dont think he will be a celtic after this year.  Brooks def has a chance to steal the starting sg position from ab.

When ainge drafted ab i wonder what was his plan for him. Wasnt it initially be the teams backup pg?

Cuts rarely work if there isn't penetration to create the openings. He cut less because when Rondo was out there was less open space for him to cut to.

Bradley's mid range shooting was decent last year, and his three point shooting was good playing with Rondo the last year. WIth his first full healthy offseason I expect Bradley to take leaps forward and only secure his starting spot but be the unquestioned third best player on the team behind Rondo and Green.

I would bet you Tommy points that Bradley won't lose his starting job to Brooks, I would even give you odds.

Fair enough. Maybe he didnt cut bc there was a lack of players that could penetrate. I could see him do alot more of it being out there with rondo, brooks or pressey.

I also want ab to be back to his old self. But why dont you feel brooks has a chance to steal the starting sg spot? Brooks defense is not as elite but he seems competent and everyone knows his offense can be deadly. (Some have already said he plays like a poor man kobe out there)

Who is this 'everyone' that 'knows [Brooks] offense can be deadly'?

He certainly hasn't been even a poor homeless man's Kobe so far in the NBA.

Brooks is a classic inefficient volume scorer who's game worked in the NCAA because at that level his superior athleticism made up for his poor shot selection.

But in the NBA, that only works if you have the absolute elite athleticism and body control of a Kobe or a Wade.

Brooks is not Kobe.

Brooks was a 25th pick (by the Nets.  Not Danny.) for a reason.  He's not that good.

I would not be surprised to see Brooks traded for cap relief.   If he stays, he's at best the 4th string SG behind AB, Lee & Bogans.

Why dont you look at his stats in year one. For a vol shooter his fg per was decent. He also rebounded, passed the ball and had decent turnover numbers. Several games last year and year 1 when he got a chance to play he scored  25 or more pts.

Dont use the 25th pick to think this guy cant play nba ball. He also had a 52 pts and 42 pts game in college. Volume shooter or not that is quite impressive.

For year one, Brooks' FG% was 42.8%.  That's not decent.  His 3PT shooting that year was 31.3%.  It was 27.3% this last year.   In college, Brooks shot 33.3% from the 3PT line.   He's certainly not given any indication he's the answer to our 3PT shooting needs.

So far, in his short NBA career, Brooks has scored a little more than a point per shot (1.1 pts/FGA).  That's not terrible.   It's just sort of mediocre.  For comparison to a great scorer, his role model Kobe has scored 1.3 points per FGA.  And Kobe was at that ratio as of his rookie season (when Kobe was only 19, mind you!).   That may not sound like a lot -- but off 20 shots in a game, that's a 4 point difference on the scoreboard.   That's big gap in an important metric for a volume shooting scorer.

And he doesn't bring much of anything more to the table.   His rebounding is nice, but not what I'm looking for from a 2 guard.  His defense is mediocre to matador.   So he only adds value if he takes shots and makes them.  If he makes them at a lower rate than his teammates, he's hurting his team.

In comparison, both Bradley (1.05) and Lee(1.16) also each have scored a little more than a point per shot, but both bring (a) far superior defensive value and (b) both shoot better from the 3PT line, which helps provide spacing.   The shots they take help space the floor for their teammates.  And with their defensive value they don't have to be taking shots to contribute towards winning.

The simple, hard facts are that both Bradley and Lee are far more talented players than Brooks.  So unless one of them gets traded, they are going to be the first & second SGs on this team getting most of the minutes at that position.   And Bogans cannot be traded.   And 'potential' aside, Bogans is a more consistent, better player than Brooks.  He scores the same points/FGA efficiency as Brooks and, again, is a better 3PT shooter. And again a much better defender.

That is three slots of our 15 man roster dedicated to SG already.   So at best, Brooks is the 4th deep SG option - if we even keep him around.

It makes no sense to keep all 5 SGs.  Unless we do a trade to move Bradley or Lee, Crawford and Brooks are the odd men out on this roster.   I would not fall in love with either.

It is certainly possible for either to stay on.  But until something changes, I wouldn't put high odds on it.

He shot 43 fg per in his rookie year. What did bradley or lee shoot last year? Anything above 44% fg per for pg or sg is considered acceptable in the nba.

Brooks also had a dozen 5 and more assists in year 1 when he got time to play. How many over 5 assist Or more games did bradley have last year?

Brooks is a talented scorer that can learn to play better d. Ab is a very good defender that has limited offensive upside. Brooks has more potential imo

A 43% FG% would be okay if you took mainly 3PT shots and completed them at a decent rate.   It is not a decent FG% if you are taking mainly 2PT shots.   That's why eFG% is a more useful metric because it weights the extra value of 3PT shots accordingly.

Marshon's eFG% his first year, which you think was so great was 46.5%.   Not a disaster.  But not really acceptable.  He did much better this last year, actually, at 48.5%.  His overall eFG% for his career is 47.2%.  That's not terrible.  It's not good, either.  It is mediocre.

Bradley's career eFG% is nearly identical:  47.1%   

Lee's shooting is significantly better.  His career eFG% is 50.6% and last year it was 51.9%.

So Bradley is overall the same efficiency at shooting as Brooks and Lee is better.  Both are more consistent from behind the 3PT arc.   And both are simply way, way more valuable on defense.

Hmm ... since you ask, Bradley had only 3 games of 5 or more assists last year (of course he only played in 50 games, and in most of the time he was on the floor, Pierce was the true 'point').    He did manage 10 games of 4+ assists, though.

As to who has more 'upside'?  Avery is still 2 years younger than Brooks.

The chances that Brooks is ever remotely as close to Bradley on defense is about the same as my winning the lottery.  And I don't buy lottery tickets.

[LooseCannon]

in case you haven't heard - we want to have as many weaknesses as possible this year in order to acquire a good draft position next summer.

so don't suggest any solutions unless they will contribute to more losses.

Bench Sullinger and Olynyk.  Play a smallball lineup of Green at center and four guards.

[bfrombleacher]

It's not just crappy shooters. It's a series of holes that weren't plugged.

No DEFENSIVE REBOUNDING. That really kills momentum. You can't honestly say momentum isn't a thing after watching the "new big 3" era of basketball, especially in the latter years.

The entire offense was based on jump shooting, prone to streakiness and affected by momentum.

Doc is like Phil Jackson in a way. Needs specific players for his system. The team was getting killed on the pick and roll, which is horrible for a defensively oriented team. As per usual, the team won't rebound, won't play inside, and was demotivated... ON TOP of all that is the shooting.




Spacing didn't seem like an issue anyway. There's just a lot of standing around, allowing opposing defenses to set. I'd say Doc's system has at least some blame. Personnel problems - Darko was a mistake we couldn't afford with the little margin for error we had - also played a part.

Chemistry was another issue. Players had no identity. Certainly a problem on offense. AB's return helped and we were looking up...until injuries became a problem. It was just a mess.

Slightly unrelated but when people isolate the .500 record last year to project this year's record, they really have to consider how badly last year's team underachieved. They really, really underachieved.




I can't believe people are asserting that AB will be a bad fit with Rondo. AB played his best basketball was when he playing off Rondo. AB cut to the rim and gave Rondo a fast break partner. His at rim attempts were plentiful and assisted. I'd say AB being hot from the perimeter was definitely not the only reason he was so good:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bradlav01/shooting/2012/

Wilcox isn't a shooter. But he's been one of the best finishers with Rondo and was an actual factor offensively. As was Shaq.

I'm praying Brad Stevens has the offense going towards the basket. Rondo being helpless without 3 or 4 shooters seems more conjecture than anything and hopefully it'll die with Doc's departure.





Finally, context for AB.

Coming off a double shoulder injury gave him a slow start. Then he had to shoulder the offense with Sully, Rondo and even Barbosa out. People are too quick to write him off.

[Tr1boy]

The problem guy here might bradley. Say even if rondo is traded, for a chris paul like pg who can shoot.

Bradley cant create his own offense, penetrate well, mediocre passer, cant shoot threes. He can shoot the mid range pretty good but has to be spoonfed the ball. Before his shoulder injury when he was able to cut and finish under the basket it made a big difference for his offensive game and also help open things up for others. But last year he stopped doing this.

Even though he is a great defender, if he cant shoot the 2 and cut frequently at least, i dont think he will be a celtic after this year.  Brooks def has a chance to steal the starting sg position from ab.

When ainge drafted ab i wonder what was his plan for him. Wasnt it initially be the teams backup pg?

Cuts rarely work if there isn't penetration to create the openings. He cut less because when Rondo was out there was less open space for him to cut to.

Bradley's mid range shooting was decent last year, and his three point shooting was good playing with Rondo the last year. WIth his first full healthy offseason I expect Bradley to take leaps forward and only secure his starting spot but be the unquestioned third best player on the team behind Rondo and Green.

I would bet you Tommy points that Bradley won't lose his starting job to Brooks, I would even give you odds.

Fair enough. Maybe he didnt cut bc there was a lack of players that could penetrate. I could see him do alot more of it being out there with rondo, brooks or pressey.

I also want ab to be back to his old self. But why dont you feel brooks has a chance to steal the starting sg spot? Brooks defense is not as elite but he seems competent and everyone knows his offense can be deadly. (Some have already said he plays like a poor man kobe out there)

Who is this 'everyone' that 'knows [Brooks] offense can be deadly'?

He certainly hasn't been even a poor homeless man's Kobe so far in the NBA.

Brooks is a classic inefficient volume scorer who's game worked in the NCAA because at that level his superior athleticism made up for his poor shot selection.

But in the NBA, that only works if you have the absolute elite athleticism and body control of a Kobe or a Wade.

Brooks is not Kobe.

Brooks was a 25th pick (by the Nets.  Not Danny.) for a reason.  He's not that good.

I would not be surprised to see Brooks traded for cap relief.   If he stays, he's at best the 4th string SG behind AB, Lee & Bogans.

Why dont you look at his stats in year one. For a vol shooter his fg per was decent. He also rebounded, passed the ball and had decent turnover numbers. Several games last year and year 1 when he got a chance to play he scored  25 or more pts.

Dont use the 25th pick to think this guy cant play nba ball. He also had a 52 pts and 42 pts game in college. Volume shooter or not that is quite impressive.

For year one, Brooks' FG% was 42.8%.  That's not decent.  His 3PT shooting that year was 31.3%.  It was 27.3% this last year.   In college, Brooks shot 33.3% from the 3PT line.   He's certainly not given any indication he's the answer to our 3PT shooting needs.

So far, in his short NBA career, Brooks has scored a little more than a point per shot (1.1 pts/FGA).  That's not terrible.   It's just sort of mediocre.  For comparison to a great scorer, his role model Kobe has scored 1.3 points per FGA.  And Kobe was at that ratio as of his rookie season (when Kobe was only 19, mind you!).   That may not sound like a lot -- but off 20 shots in a game, that's a 4 point difference on the scoreboard.   That's big gap in an important metric for a volume shooting scorer.

And he doesn't bring much of anything more to the table.   His rebounding is nice, but not what I'm looking for from a 2 guard.  His defense is mediocre to matador.   So he only adds value if he takes shots and makes them.  If he makes them at a lower rate than his teammates, he's hurting his team.

In comparison, both Bradley (1.05) and Lee(1.16) also each have scored a little more than a point per shot, but both bring (a) far superior defensive value and (b) both shoot better from the 3PT line, which helps provide spacing.   The shots they take help space the floor for their teammates.  And with their defensive value they don't have to be taking shots to contribute towards winning.

The simple, hard facts are that both Bradley and Lee are far more talented players than Brooks.  So unless one of them gets traded, they are going to be the first & second SGs on this team getting most of the minutes at that position.   And Bogans cannot be traded.   And 'potential' aside, Bogans is a more consistent, better player than Brooks.  He scores the same points/FGA efficiency as Brooks and, again, is a better 3PT shooter. And again a much better defender.

That is three slots of our 15 man roster dedicated to SG already.   So at best, Brooks is the 4th deep SG option - if we even keep him around.

It makes no sense to keep all 5 SGs.  Unless we do a trade to move Bradley or Lee, Crawford and Brooks are the odd men out on this roster.   I would not fall in love with either.

It is certainly possible for either to stay on.  But until something changes, I wouldn't put high odds on it.

He shot 43 fg per in his rookie year. What did bradley or lee shoot last year? Anything above 44% fg per for pg or sg is considered acceptable in the nba.

Brooks also had a dozen 5 and more assists in year 1 when he got time to play. How many over 5 assist Or more games did bradley have last year?

Brooks is a talented scorer that can learn to play better d. Ab is a very good defender that has limited offensive upside. Brooks has more potential imo

A 43% FG% would be okay if you took mainly 3PT shots and completed them at a decent rate.   It is not a decent FG% if you are taking mainly 2PT shots.   That's why eFG% is a more useful metric because it weights the extra value of 3PT shots accordingly.

Marshon's eFG% his first year, which you think was so great was 46.5%.   Not a disaster.  But not really acceptable.  He did much better this last year, actually, at 48.5%.  His overall eFG% for his career is 47.2%.  That's not terrible.  It's not good, either.  It is mediocre.

Bradley's career eFG% is nearly identical:  47.1%   

Lee's shooting is significantly better.  His career eFG% is 50.6% and last year it was 51.9%.

So Bradley is overall the same efficiency at shooting as Brooks and Lee is better.  Both are more consistent from behind the 3PT arc.   And both are simply way, way more valuable on defense.

Hmm ... since you ask, Bradley had only 3 games of 5 or more assists last year (of course he only played in 50 games, and in most of the time he was on the floor, Pierce was the true 'point').    He did manage 10 games of 4+ assists, though.

As to who has more 'upside'?  Avery is still 2 years younger than Brooks.

The chances that Brooks is ever remotely as close to Bradley on defense is about the same as my winning the lottery.  And I don't buy lottery tickets.

How many more attempts and shots made did brooks have vs bradley even though they have the same fg per your research?

I know u like ab better, esp due to his defense. But u have to look at the bigger picture. opposing teams sg/pg will usually sag off ab/rondo , help d on everyone else. Our offense will have a tough time to score, unless stevens comes up with something genius.

Now if you replace ab with brooks, u get a guy you cant really sag off. He can create his own shots, teardrops, mix speeds and get into the lane etc.

On the defensive end brooks just has to try harder and at least can get help worse case

[Gomesfan]

didn't Lee have the highest, or one of the highest % from beyond the arc two years ago? It may have been from the corner?