What types of players are good and bad fits under Brad Stevens?

[LooseCannon]

Now that we've had a few months, maybe we have an idea of what sort of roster fits into the Brad Stevens coaching philosophy.

The MarShon Brooks experience strongly suggests to me that a no-defense, offense-only player is probably a bad target to bring in, especially if he is an inefficient iso-ball scorer.

The Gerald Wallace experience mildly suggests to me that it might make sense to avoid a strong-willed veteran set in his ways who might have problems respecting a relatively young and inexperienced coach who never played in the NBA until Stevens builds up a reputation around the league.

The Jordan Crawford experience suggests to me that maybe it isn't such a great idea to bring in every headcase under the premise that Stevens can teach them.

[Atzar]

Now that we've had a few months, maybe we have an idea of what sort of roster fits into the Brad Stevens coaching philosophy.

The MarShon Brooks experience strongly suggests to me that a no-defense, offense-only player is probably a bad target to bring in, especially if he is an inefficient iso-ball scorer.

The Gerald Wallace experience mildly suggests to me that it might make sense to avoid a strong-willed veteran set in his ways who might have problems respecting a relatively young and inexperienced coach who never played in the NBA until Stevens builds up a reputation around the league.

The Jordan Crawford experience suggests to me that maybe it isn't such a great idea to bring in every headcase under the premise that Stevens can teach them.

Brad Stevens turned Jordan Crawford from a scrub into a tradeable asset.  He did a wonderful job with Crawford. 

Aside from that, he's about team ball and solid fundamentals, so most me-first improvisational guys probably wouldn't fare too well with him (which is why I'd caution against wishing for Melo too hard). 

His best teams at Butler revolved around strong team play and a guard who can create (either Gordon Hayward or Shelvin Mack).  I've never actually seen him with a dominant big man, so I actually don't know how he'd do with one. 

[D.o.s.]

What is, LooseCannon trying to define the kinds of players he likes as the guys who fit in under Stevens' system by listing players he doesn't and why they're not "good Celtics under Brad Stevens" for $500, Trebek? 

I think Stevens' system so far reflects the kinds of players he largely coached at Butler--a defense first system that focuses on a couple of scoring options and doesn't focus on or necessarily reward feats of athleticism. With a fairly pedestrian offense.

[Atzar]

What is, LooseCannon trying to define the kinds of players he likes as the guys who fit in under Stevens' system by listing players he doesn't and why they're not "good Celtics under Brad Stevens" for $500, Trebek? 

I think Stevens' system so far reflects the kinds of players he largely coached at Butler--a defense first system that focuses on a couple of scoring options and doesn't focus on or necessarily reward feats of athleticism. With a fairly pedestrian offense.

To be fair, he's never had a wealth of offensive players to use, either. 

[D.o.s.]

There's also the fact that he's a really young guy--it's not like we have a lot of tape on him in general; five years as a college head coach from a good school (but not really an NBA destination) and half a season of NBA head coaching.

I really dig Stevens, though. Anyone who's enough of a lifer to give up a solid day job to be a volunteer assistant coach is someone I'll definitely give props to.

[pokeKingCurtis]

Re: Crash...I'll admit I have been hating on him. But after reading an article, I can empathize with his situation. He's a seasoned vet who's helped his teams, putting in 100% every night, and has been climbing up the ladder helping better and better teams. He was so close to being on a contender last year. Then everything came crashing (pun unintended) down.

From a fan's point of view, Wallace should just shut the (*#@)($* up.

But from his perspective, he's a guy who speaks his mind. He just wants to win at this point and doesn't really care what other people think or anything else (being a multi-millionaire and all). He's doing the right things.

Yet he's a victim of "the business". It's nothing personal. It's misfortune. He hit a wall with his athleticism fading. It's not his fault that BKN overpaid him. His agent deals with money, he focuses on basketball.

He was coveted by BKN and was then a part of the Nets' plans. What was Wallace to do? It probably felt right, to be on a contender, to spend his last years contributing for a championship...

But now, kids who don't know how to play the game, players who don't put in the effort, players who don't do the right things...are overtaking him.

I (now) don't think Gerald Wallace is being defiant or disrespecting Brad Stevens. It's just a bad situation for him.

Thing is, building a locker room bomb like this (a vet who's basically had the floor taken from underneath him) will probably result in problems, regardless of who's coaching in my opinion.



Marshon Brooks didn't get minutes with BKN and isn't getting minutes with the Dubs either. Might be the simple fact that he's unable to stay on the floor.

As for J-Craw, it's interesting. From what I've read, Stevens doesn't seem to be a system coach. From what I've seen, Stevens is very much able to adapt to players and put them in the best possible situation.

This roster was a mess before with [insert number] SGs and [insert number] PFs. It's still a mess despite shedding some of the excess SGs. Now all of a sudden with injuries to 2 SGs we have no SGs. Despite the roster being so wretched, Stevens still has the team fighting night in, night out.

All in all, from what I've seen so far, I think players who won't buy in would be a problem. But unlike Pitino, Stevens seems to truly understand what it takes to accomplish this, even right now despite being in the worst slump of the season. I don't think the list of active players on the roster has stayed the same for more than 3 games in the past month or so.

[LooseCannon]

Now that we've had a few months, maybe we have an idea of what sort of roster fits into the Brad Stevens coaching philosophy.

The MarShon Brooks experience strongly suggests to me that a no-defense, offense-only player is probably a bad target to bring in, especially if he is an inefficient iso-ball scorer.

The Gerald Wallace experience mildly suggests to me that it might make sense to avoid a strong-willed veteran set in his ways who might have problems respecting a relatively young and inexperienced coach who never played in the NBA until Stevens builds up a reputation around the league.

The Jordan Crawford experience suggests to me that maybe it isn't such a great idea to bring in every headcase under the premise that Stevens can teach them.

Brad Stevens turned Jordan Crawford from a scrub into a tradeable asset.  He did a wonderful job with Crawford. 

Aside from that, he's about team ball and solid fundamentals, so most me-first improvisational guys probably wouldn't fare too well with him (which is why I'd caution against wishing for Melo too hard). 

A headcase on a relatively cheap contract who you might be able to salvage into a tradeable asset might be okay, but I am not sure I would want to bring a big-money headcase who will be an albatross contract if Stevens can't make him play good basketball.

I'd be wary of the idea that Stevens is exactly the sort of change of scenery needed by every troubled but talented guy out there.

[tstorey_97]

"Celtics Roster...." (noun)..Misnomer, fluid, unidentified, subject to change, difficulty in meeting necessary requirements needed to be actually considered a "roster," loaded with guards (5) for awhile, now featuring a 10 year vet at 6'7" 220 lbs playing guard because there aren't enough guards, welcomes returning NBA all star point guard at mid season to watch him miss important shots, equipped with "bigs" who don't play all that "big," star scorer who varies from 4PPG to 39 PPG, 7' rookie who's really a shooting guard, three trades already, above star player subject to nationally debated trade rumors on an hourly basis...

....Two other starters have been suggested in deals monthly since September, GM's nickname?"Trader"...hasn't had the same starting lineup in more that two games straight, starting center and star point guard were thrown out game last year for starting a brawl...with each other, one of the surplus guards from above just went home one day and never came back despite $61,000 game checks...

This Stevens guy gets a freaking medal for being "in" ANY NBA basketball game this season. The fact that the Celtics were "flirting with .500" earlier this season is a miracle.

A future booth in the Naismith Hall of Fame in Springfield, Massachusetts...titled>

Brad Stevens, "Got more with less than any other coach ever. Coach actually won 16 games and stayed within 5 points in ten others with the above constantly shifting group of players (The HOF officially refuses to recognize said group as a "roster") merits this small shrine.."

(I apologize for trending slightly OT...This overstatement is intended as humor...thank you)   

[BleedGreen1989]

Most important I think is ball movement.

Rondo can hold the ball because he's the QB and you can tell Stevens puts a lot of trust into him but "ball stoppers" certainly aren't going to work.

"The sets they run are more read-and-react type things than the normal execution of go from point A to B and then go on with this. He's got terminology of actions. But he's not going to play the two-man game or three-man game to see what the defense is going to give him. Instead he'll run an action and leave it to his players to read the defense. "That has made it difficult to get a handle on what he's doing, because he might get three different things on three possessions all on the same play call. What they ran the first time with that terminology isn't going to be the same thing they run the second time he makes that call.

[pokeKingCurtis]

Most important I think is ball movement.

Rondo can hold the ball because he's the QB and you can tell Stevens puts a lot of trust into him but "ball stoppers" certainly aren't going to work.

"The sets they run are more read-and-react type things than the normal execution of go from point A to B and then go on with this. He's got terminology of actions. But he's not going to play the two-man game or three-man game to see what the defense is going to give him. Instead he'll run an action and leave it to his players to read the defense. "That has made it difficult to get a handle on what he's doing, because he might get three different things on three possessions all on the same play call. What they ran the first time with that terminology isn't going to be the same thing they run the second time he makes that call.

I think that might be something new that Stevens whipped up, as the article you quoted is about the offense the Celtics currently run and not an article about Brad Stevens's offense.

Seeing as the roster is untalented as it is, it's not inconceivable he'd try something that involves 5 people rather than primarily showcasing 2 or 3 main guys.

Again, I don't think Stevens is much of a system coach. From what I've read he seems to adjust a lot. I reckon if a "ballstopper" where to be added, he'd adjust and allow the players to play more.

You talk about ball stopping, J-Craw was a pretty big ball stopper and, hell, he even ended up being a plus player.

[PhoSita]

I think it's best to stay away from making any sweeping judgments about the character or personality of players and how they mesh with Stevens, because we really just don't have enough info.

As for the type of player in on-court terms -- I think the best fit for Stevens are guys that can defend, rebound, pass, and knock down a three.  He seems to want to play a fairly slow, half-court style. 

He seems to value guys who are good rebounders for their size, guys who make a lot of hustle plays.  That's why Humphries and Wallace have secured prominent roles on the team while guys like Lee and Bass have fallen out of favor.

[CFAN38]

Now that we've had a few months, maybe we have an idea of what sort of roster fits into the Brad Stevens coaching philosophy.

The MarShon Brooks experience strongly suggests to me that a no-defense, offense-only player is probably a bad target to bring in, especially if he is an inefficient iso-ball scorer.

The Gerald Wallace experience mildly suggests to me that it might make sense to avoid a strong-willed veteran set in his ways who might have problems respecting a relatively young and inexperienced coach who never played in the NBA until Stevens builds up a reputation around the league.

The Jordan Crawford experience suggests to me that maybe it isn't such a great idea to bring in every headcase under the premise that Stevens can teach them.

Brad Stevens turned Jordan Crawford from a scrub into a tradeable asset.  He did a wonderful job with Crawford. 

Aside from that, he's about team ball and solid fundamentals, so most me-first improvisational guys probably wouldn't fare too well with him (which is why I'd caution against wishing for Melo too hard). 

His best teams at Butler revolved around strong team play and a guard who can create (either Gordon Hayward or Shelvin Mack).  I've never actually seen him with a dominant big man, so I actually don't know how he'd do with one.

x2

I would also add that stevens seems to work well with guys who can take on a few different roles on offense. I think this is why he has been open to sully shooting 3s. Placing the 4/5 on the perimeter opens things up from a traditional set.

[wdleehi]

At this point, good talent would be a good fit under Stevens.


Bad talent would be a bad fit under Stevens.





How can you even tell when he has not had the benefit of having a team with enough talent?  The examples you bring up is a young guy that is a fringe NBA talent and a vet on the bottom of a really big slide.

[PhoSita]

At this point, good talent would be a good fit under Stevens.


Bad talent would be a bad fit under Stevens.





How can you even tell when he has not had the benefit of having a team with enough talent?  The examples you bring up is a young guy that is a fringe NBA talent and a vet on the bottom of a really big slide.

Heheh, good point.

Can't really judge what Stevens has done so far with a completely mismatched roster totally lacking in high end talent.

Stevens' gameplan and rotation strategy could be completely different if he had a loaded roster.

[Celtics4ever]

Anyone who is bad defensively and bad at Eff is a bad fit for Stevens.