Olynyk

[BballTim]

AB was awful as a rookie, he couldn't hit a shot! This kid can already stroke the long ball and is a great passer, like every rookie he has a LOT to learn.

I hear this truism a lot, but it's pretty wrong. AB rehabbed a broken ankle, set the D-league on fire, and then came in and played amazing defense for the C's in a handful of games, even though he sucked running the point. He even had a 20 point game. At the end of the 2010-11 season, most of us were extremely psyched and thought Bradley was a steal.

Olynyk has 2 20 point games, and hasn't played in the D-League. 

And there's usually a diverse set of opinions but I remember the consensus on AB being very different.  A few people were excited about his one decent game but he was generally regarded as a bust until midway through his second season.  He was much younger and on a much better team, though.

And when he saw the floor during his rookie year it was largely as a backup point, I think? Or at least a semi-prominent ball handler.

And his play was bad. Real bad.

  It's true he was bad that year. It's also true that anyone who offered reasons for his poor play (that turned out to be accurate) were killed (blind homer, green tinted glasses, unable to evaluate nba talent, you know the drill) and Danny probably got more grief for the AB pick than JR Giddens.

[Snakehead]

AB was awful as a rookie, he couldn't hit a shot! This kid can already stroke the long ball and is a great passer, like every rookie he has a LOT to learn.

I hear this truism a lot, but it's pretty wrong. AB rehabbed a broken ankle, set the D-league on fire, and then came in and played amazing defense for the C's in a handful of games, even though he sucked running the point. He even had a 20 point game. At the end of the 2010-11 season, most of us were extremely psyched and thought Bradley was a steal.

Olynyk has 2 20 point games, and hasn't played in the D-League. 

And there's usually a diverse set of opinions but I remember the consensus on AB being very different.  A few people were excited about his one decent game but he was generally regarded as a bust until midway through his second season.  He was much younger and on a much better team, though.

And when he saw the floor during his rookie year it was largely as a backup point, I think? Or at least a semi-prominent ball handler.

And his play was bad. Real bad.

  It's true he was bad that year. It's also true that anyone who offered reasons for his poor play (that turned out to be accurate) were killed (blind homer, green tinted glasses, unable to evaluate nba talent, you know the drill) and Danny probably got more grief for the AB pick than JR Giddens.

I was at the heart of the storm telling people he would eventually be a good midrange shooter because he had all the tools, and had been in college.  So I remember this well.

[kozlodoev]

Oops... don't look now but he has slightly better stats than Dirk had his rookie year.

Yeah, except Dirk was a 20-year-old fresh off the boat, and his claim to fame was dominating German tier 2 ball.

[Snakehead]

Oops... don't look now but he has slightly better stats than Dirk had his rookie year.

Yeah, except Dirk was a 20-year-old fresh off the boat, and his claim to fame was dominating German tier 2 ball.

Cool.  It again just proves the points: rookies.

His stats this season don't say anything negative about his future.  Even the greats often start as not so impressive rookies.

Olynyk is too skilled to not succeed.  If you're a rookie you are out there learning every game.

[nickagneta]

Oops... don't look now but he has slightly better stats than Dirk had his rookie year.

Haven't you heard?  Olynyk is a bum.  He's pale and has that floppy hair; he's inherently infuriating. 

The verdict has already been passed that he's a stiff.  Case closed.  Everybody knows that finesse big men never improve after their first season.

TP.

You guys are nuts yo.  It's truly unbelievable how little perspective this board has on rookies.

I think if I see this Dirk comparison one more time I will be sick.

Does anyone actually remember Dirk's rookie season? He was 20 years old. He went from school to military service to the NBA. He didn't have two years of college level basketball to prepare him for the NBA. He also came into a strike shortened season with no Summer League and very little training camp.

He was awful to begin with but there was steady progression and by seasons end, over the last 15 games or so he was averaging 12 PPG, 5 RPG, and had a TS% somewhere in the low to mid 50's and had taken over the starter's position.

Does anyone really see any progression in Olynyk's game?

Does anyone really see him taking over a starter's position because of improved play?

Does anyone really see him averaging over 12 PPG for a month while shooting a TS% of 55%?

Because then I think a comparison to Dirk would be meaningful. Otherwise, Olynyk isn't on the same planet as Dirk as a player as a rookie or otherwise.

[kozlodoev]

Oops... don't look now but he has slightly better stats than Dirk had his rookie year.

Yeah, except Dirk was a 20-year-old fresh off the boat, and his claim to fame was dominating German tier 2 ball.

Cool.  It again just proves the points: rookies.

His stats this season don't say anything negative about his future.  Even the greats often start as not so impressive rookies.

Olynyk is too skilled to not succeed.  If you're a rookie you are out there learning every game.

There are plenty of skilled college players that weren't cut to handle the grind of the NBA. As a matter of fact, I'd rather argue that he's too skilled to not be contributing more than he does right now, especially given the current ambitions of the Celtics.

[kozlodoev]

The verdict has already been passed that he's a stiff.  Case closed.  Everybody knows that finesse big men never improve after their first season.

I don't think any verdict is being passed. It's just that the "tremendous upside potential" guys patently refuse to even acknowledge that Olynyk may be short of the development curve right now, with all the implications thereof.

[D.o.s.]

AB was awful as a rookie, he couldn't hit a shot! This kid can already stroke the long ball and is a great passer, like every rookie he has a LOT to learn.

I hear this truism a lot, but it's pretty wrong. AB rehabbed a broken ankle, set the D-league on fire, and then came in and played amazing defense for the C's in a handful of games, even though he sucked running the point. He even had a 20 point game. At the end of the 2010-11 season, most of us were extremely psyched and thought Bradley was a steal.

Olynyk has 2 20 point games, and hasn't played in the D-League. 

And there's usually a diverse set of opinions but I remember the consensus on AB being very different.  A few people were excited about his one decent game but he was generally regarded as a bust until midway through his second season.  He was much younger and on a much better team, though.

And when he saw the floor during his rookie year it was largely as a backup point, I think? Or at least a semi-prominent ball handler.

And his play was bad. Real bad.

  It's true he was bad that year. It's also true that anyone who offered reasons for his poor play (that turned out to be accurate) were killed (blind homer, green tinted glasses, unable to evaluate nba talent, you know the drill) and Danny probably got more grief for the AB pick than JR Giddens.

I was at the heart of the storm telling people he would eventually be a good midrange shooter because he had all the tools, and had been in college.  So I remember this well.

To the average fan, though, there's not a whole lot to go by aside from on-the-court play and "the eye test"

[D.o.s.]

The verdict has already been passed that he's a stiff.  Case closed.  Everybody knows that finesse big men never improve after their first season.

I don't think any verdict is being passed. It's just that the "tremendous upside potential" guys patently refuse to even acknowledge that Olynyk may be short of the development curve right now, with all the implications thereof.

I thought Olynk was considered as more of a sure thing, polished player, rather than a "tremendous upside" guy, when he was drafted.

[fairweatherfan]

I think if I see this Dirk comparison one more time I will be sick.

Does anyone actually remember Dirk's rookie season? He was 20 years old. He went from school to military service to the NBA. He didn't have two years of college level basketball to prepare him for the NBA. He also came into a strike shortened season with no Summer League and very little training camp.

He was awful to begin with but there was steady progression and by seasons end, over the last 15 games or so he was averaging 12 PPG, 5 RPG, and had a TS% somewhere in the low to mid 50's and had taken over the starter's position.

Does anyone really see any progression in Olynyk's game?

Dirk is a silly comparison except to show that poor rookies can become excellent players, and Dirk's game is fairly similar to Olynyk's.  Obviously Olynyk will never become as good as Dirk.

But yes, Olynyk has clearly progressed since the start of the season.  Look at the month to month splits - points per-36, TS% and offensive ratings are all substantially better than they were in November.  Plus-minus is also better but that's way too noisy to read much into.  And this is as the team as a whole has kept getting worse.

Does anyone really see him taking over a starter's position because of improved play?

I don't think any of our bigs are moving up in the rotation until the trade situation is settled.  But on THIS team, would you really rule it out after that?  I wouldn't.

Does anyone really see him averaging over 12 PPG for a month while shooting a TS% of 55%

He already did this per-36 in December, albeit in seven games.  And was at 13.9 pts per-36 with a TS% of 52 in January. 

Honestly, I don't think Olynyk is going to be some great shakes or anything, I'm just baffled by the intense negativity that's coming from some angles.  The numbers don't really support it.

[Smitty77]

The verdict has already been passed that he's a stiff.  Case closed.  Everybody knows that finesse big men never improve after their first season.

I don't think any verdict is being passed. It's just that the "tremendous upside potential" guys patently refuse to even acknowledge that Olynyk may be short of the development curve right now, with all the implications thereof.

He was drafted at 13, right?  His efficiency rating of 12.1 is in the top 10!!  How exactly is Oly short of the development curve right now?  I sure seems as if he is on the curve or above it to me!!

Smitty77

[henr1k]

It's hard to evaluate a player properly if he doesn't know his role and is not getting minutes regularly. I can understand why Doc never played rookies, he was coaching a contender, but 8 minutes for Kelly vs pathetic Magic team is beyond me.

Look at some other rookies who are having good or decent seasons. Oladipo was terrible yesterday (3-16 FG), and it wasn't his first bad game this year, yet he played 38 minutes. He doesn't have to look over his shoulder if he misses a couple of shots. Btw, he is shooting .407% from the field. 2nd pick, yay.

Same with MCW in Philly. He is getting all the praise and is going to win rookie of the year while shooting .402% and jacking up almost 16 shots per game.(which tells us how bad 2013 draft class is)

We are in rebuilding mode just like those two teams, yet our rookie is stuck behind 2 veterans, Bass and Hump.

I understand Danny is probably hoping to get some kind of asset for those two, but if Olynyk is still playing sporadically after trade deadline I will be extremely disappointed in Danny and Stevens.

I would rather watch Kelly 25-30 minutes per game then a guy like Bass, who I know has no future in Boston.

[BballTim]

AB was awful as a rookie, he couldn't hit a shot! This kid can already stroke the long ball and is a great passer, like every rookie he has a LOT to learn.

I hear this truism a lot, but it's pretty wrong. AB rehabbed a broken ankle, set the D-league on fire, and then came in and played amazing defense for the C's in a handful of games, even though he sucked running the point. He even had a 20 point game. At the end of the 2010-11 season, most of us were extremely psyched and thought Bradley was a steal.

Olynyk has 2 20 point games, and hasn't played in the D-League. 

And there's usually a diverse set of opinions but I remember the consensus on AB being very different.  A few people were excited about his one decent game but he was generally regarded as a bust until midway through his second season.  He was much younger and on a much better team, though.

And when he saw the floor during his rookie year it was largely as a backup point, I think? Or at least a semi-prominent ball handler.

And his play was bad. Real bad.

  It's true he was bad that year. It's also true that anyone who offered reasons for his poor play (that turned out to be accurate) were killed (blind homer, green tinted glasses, unable to evaluate nba talent, you know the drill) and Danny probably got more grief for the AB pick than JR Giddens.

I was at the heart of the storm telling people he would eventually be a good midrange shooter because he had all the tools, and had been in college.  So I remember this well.

To the average fan, though, there's not a whole lot to go by aside from on-the-court play and "the eye test"

  That's true, but you also have microwave versions of scouting reports with very little sense of perspective on a regular basis.

[clover]

It's hard to evaluate a player properly if he doesn't know his role and is not getting minutes regularly. I can understand why Doc never played rookies, he was coaching a contender, but 8 minutes for Kelly vs pathetic Magic team is beyond me.

Look at some other rookies who are having good or decent seasons. Oladipo was terrible yesterday (3-16 FG), and it wasn't his first bad game this year, yet he played 38 minutes. He doesn't have to look over his shoulder if he misses a couple of shots. Btw, he is shooting .407% from the field. 2nd pick, yay.

Same with MCW in Philly. He is getting all the praise and is going to win rookie of the year while shooting .402% and jacking up almost 16 shots per game.(which tells us how bad 2013 draft class is)

We are in rebuilding mode just like those two teams, yet our rookie is stuck behind 2 veterans, Bass and Hump.

I understand Danny is probably hoping to get some kind of asset for those two, but if Olynyk is still playing sporadically after trade deadline I will be extremely disappointed in Danny and Stevens.

I would rather watch Kelly 25-30 minutes per game then a guy like Bass, who I know has no future in Boston.

I hear ya and I don't like it either, but six more games until the deadline. I know Danny's got to let the deals develop, but I'll be surprised if KH and BB aren't gone, with KO and VF playing liberally in their stead, by the 20th.

Also, I'm not sure they've got the big man coaching they need for KO and VF.

[kozlodoev]

The verdict has already been passed that he's a stiff.  Case closed.  Everybody knows that finesse big men never improve after their first season.

I don't think any verdict is being passed. It's just that the "tremendous upside potential" guys patently refuse to even acknowledge that Olynyk may be short of the development curve right now, with all the implications thereof.

I thought Olynk was considered as more of a sure thing, polished player, rather than a "tremendous upside" guy, when he was drafted.

Right. That's why his current level of play is somewhat disappointing.