Tommy on Olynyk

[vinnie]

Im not a big fan of Olynyk either but who else was there at 13? The guy at Milwaukee would been nice but who else?

this is where I am on this.

[kozlodoev]

Im not a big fan of Olynyk either but who else was there at 13? The guy at Milwaukee would been nice but who else?

Moving up for Olynyk, when you could have stayed put and drafted Hardaway Jr. or Mason Plumlee. Hmm....

[nickagneta]

Some people decided the minute KO was drafted that they didn't like him and he was going to be another Adam Morrison.

Subsequently, they see what they want to see.

I see what I see because I see it not because its not there.

Here's a comparison between Morrison's first year and Olynyk's. Except for the rebounding, the comparison is pretty spot on especially given that both had very weak bodies and couldn't defend a chair.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=olynyke01&y1=2014&p2=morriad01&y2=2007

[PhoSita]

I'm not sold on Giannis yet.  Kid is all potential at the moment. If his body fills out and he polishes his game, then he's great.  But if he remains super skinny and a bit raw, well, is he a starter in this league?  Kind of similar to another Bucks player, Henson.  Same dilemma there.

Plumlee and Hardaway Jr. have been productive in limited bench stints, but I think they're probably energy guys off the bench at best.

KO has the tools to be more of an impact reserve along the lines of Luis Scola or Troy Murphy.  He also could end up being a poor man's Spencer Hawes or another Matt Bonner.

In any case, I think with how weak this draft was we should commend Danny for the pick as long as KO turns into a useful rotation player long term.  The bar is really low here.

[Cman]

Meh. Way too early to say one way or another about Olynyk.

Remember when Tony Allen was a bust? Or when Al Jefferson had ankles made of glass? or when Rondo sucked? Oh wait, about half the posters on celticsblog still seem to think Rondo sucks.

[PhoSita]

Some people decided the minute KO was drafted that they didn't like him and he was going to be another Adam Morrison.

Subsequently, they see what they want to see.

I see what I see because I see it not because its not there.

Here's a comparison between Morrison's first year and Olynyk's. Except for the rebounding, the comparison is pretty spot on especially given that both had very weak bodies and couldn't defend a chair.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=olynyke01&y1=2014&p2=morriad01&y2=2007

Looks to me like Kelly is pretty clearly superior in a lot of major categories.  Better shooting percentages (Morrison was a slightly better outside shooter), significantly higher PER, a positive WS/48, much better rebounder, 100/105 ORTG / DRTG compared to Morrison's atrocious 91/112, and Kelly actually comes close to averaging 1 steal and 1 block per 36, whereas Morrison barely moves the needle there.

Some of that may be due to the fact that Morrison played nearly 30 minutes a game even though he clearly shouldn't have been.  Maybe if he played closer to 18 minutes a game, as Kelly has, his numbers wouldn't be so painful.

In any case, I think Morrison did show some NBA skills back then, it's just that he never developed his game enough to be a useful player.  From what I understand about Morrison, a lot of his struggles were mental in nature.  I'd say Kelly's a lot closer to being a net positive than Morrison ever got.

[fairweatherfan]

Some people decided the minute KO was drafted that they didn't like him and he was going to be another Adam Morrison.

Subsequently, they see what they want to see.

I see what I see because I see it not because its not there.

Here's a comparison between Morrison's first year and Olynyk's. Except for the rebounding, the comparison is pretty spot on especially given that both had very weak bodies and couldn't defend a chair.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/play-index/pcm_finder.cgi?request=1&sum=0&p1=olynyke01&y1=2014&p2=morriad01&y2=2007

Looks to me like Kelly is pretty clearly superior in a lot of major categories.  Better shooting percentages (Morrison was a slightly better outside shooter), significantly higher PER, a positive WS/48, much better rebounder, 100/105 ORTG / DRTG compared to Morrison's atrocious 91/112, and Kelly actually comes close to averaging 1 steal and 1 block per 36, whereas Morrison barely moves the needle there.

Yeah, what the heck, that comparison is pretty blatantly in Olynyk's favor from nearly any angle one could choose to take.  This is such a weird debate.

[mmmmm]

Personally, I don't understand the negative view of Olynyk's game.  He's actually having a pretty decent rookie season.  Would I like to see his FG% and 3pt% go up, no doubt, but he's played pretty well for a rookie.  In fact, he's rebounded a lot better (9 per 36 minutes) than we all thought he would.

We need to remind ourselves that he's not a traditional big man, and that his game is more like a poor man's Keith Van Horn right now.  Van Horn shot .426 percent from the field in his rookie season and only .308 from deep. Olynyk's shooting #'s are pretty identical, and Kelly plays roughly half the time Van Horn did.  Having said all of that, can we give the kid at least three years before we make any judgments about him?  A lot of us were very quick to give up on Avery early on, but he's proved most of us to be wrong.

I think you've nailed the Olynyk assessment given his initial expectations. His rebounding is really the big positive surprise. The shooting and defensive struggles were to be expected.

I would shy away from the Van Horn and AB comparisons though:
1. Van Horn played 38mpg and averaged 20ppg his rookie year. Olynyk has given no indication that he's capable of that kind of sustained play at the NBA level.
2. AB was an untested 20 yr old as a rookie. Olynyk is a 22 yr old who took a year off to work on improving his physical capabilities.

Personally I think KO has a great shot at being a solid NBA role player. He does a lot of little things that could keep him in the league, and if you put him in a good environment, he might even become a valuable contributor on a good team.

It seems to me that he has to be in a situation where his offensive capabilities are maximized and his defensive limitations are covered - honestly I don't think he's ever going to be a quality NBA-level defender given his current performance, age and physical tools. But other players have has successful careers in the same circumstances.

He knows how to play D. At least he isn't lost like Fab Melo on D, just needs to be a little quicker and stronger.

Around a third of his rebounding is o-REBs from hustling and being 7 foot tall. But I haven't seen him get killed on the boards either.

I agree that he knows how to play D. I question whether he has the tools to do it.

Pick your metric, he's getting slaughtered on D so far this year. Maybe he'll improve, but until he does that, I don't think he is a legit NBA rotation player - on a good team, anyway.

Well, maybe it just depends on who he's playing with?  Just a little?

I don't have full results on all combinations tabulated, but while looking at our front-court combinations, I can't help but be encouraged by this one:

Green+Sully+Olynyk   
ORtg: 1.040   (points per possession)
DRtg:  0.981   
ORB% 25.9% 
DRB%:  79.9%   <--- yowsa

When Kelly has played without those two guys on the court, the DRtg balloons to 1.105 points per possession.

That's a net swing of 12 points on defense per 100 possessions.

Whether he's more 'comfortable' with those two guys, or they just plain have a more complementary set of skills, it seems to work.

EDIT:  Forgot to add the flip side:   When Green & Sully have been on the floor WITHOUT Kelly, their ORtg has dropped to 1.005 and their DRtg is a mediocre 1.027.    So they seem to play a little better with KO in turn.

I won't argue about the Fab comparison, but Fab might be the worst 1st round pick of the last decade by any NBA team.

Nah.  #22 picks aren't exactly blooming into all-stars.   Some 65% of picks at that spot turn out to be nothing more than 'deep bench' players.

Here is a nifty study:

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Even a fair share of picks much higher have turned out to be out-right busts and some never even played in the NBA.

From 1989-2008, 45% of picks at #15 have been no better than 'deep bench'.  Heck, even more frightening, that's been the outcome of some 35% of picks all the way up at #8!!!

Within that same draft, it's not as if a lot of the names taken _after_ Fab have done a lot.   Moultrie is literally the only 'big man' taken after Fab who has done anything worthwhile in the NBA yet.

I'm not saying Fab has turned out any good.  I'm just pointing out that picking quickly get slim in the bottom half of the first round and his outcome is not that unusual.

We Celtic fans have been spoiled by late-pick successes such as Rondo, Sully, Avery, Perkins, BBD & Powe.   But those are not really the 'norm' for that late in the draft.

[Monkhouse]

Personally, I don't understand the negative view of Olynyk's game.  He's actually having a pretty decent rookie season.  Would I like to see his FG% and 3pt% go up, no doubt, but he's played pretty well for a rookie.  In fact, he's rebounded a lot better (9 per 36 minutes) than we all thought he would.

We need to remind ourselves that he's not a traditional big man, and that his game is more like a poor man's Keith Van Horn right now.  Van Horn shot .426 percent from the field in his rookie season and only .308 from deep. Olynyk's shooting #'s are pretty identical, and Kelly plays roughly half the time Van Horn did.  Having said all of that, can we give the kid at least three years before we make any judgments about him?  A lot of us were very quick to give up on Avery early on, but he's proved most of us to be wrong.

I think you've nailed the Olynyk assessment given his initial expectations. His rebounding is really the big positive surprise. The shooting and defensive struggles were to be expected.

I would shy away from the Van Horn and AB comparisons though:
1. Van Horn played 38mpg and averaged 20ppg his rookie year. Olynyk has given no indication that he's capable of that kind of sustained play at the NBA level.
2. AB was an untested 20 yr old as a rookie. Olynyk is a 22 yr old who took a year off to work on improving his physical capabilities.

Personally I think KO has a great shot at being a solid NBA role player. He does a lot of little things that could keep him in the league, and if you put him in a good environment, he might even become a valuable contributor on a good team.

It seems to me that he has to be in a situation where his offensive capabilities are maximized and his defensive limitations are covered - honestly I don't think he's ever going to be a quality NBA-level defender given his current performance, age and physical tools. But other players have has successful careers in the same circumstances.

He knows how to play D. At least he isn't lost like Fab Melo on D, just needs to be a little quicker and stronger.

Around a third of his rebounding is o-REBs from hustling and being 7 foot tall. But I haven't seen him get killed on the boards either.

I agree that he knows how to play D. I question whether he has the tools to do it.

Pick your metric, he's getting slaughtered on D so far this year. Maybe he'll improve, but until he does that, I don't think he is a legit NBA rotation player - on a good team, anyway.

Well, maybe it just depends on who he's playing with?  Just a little?

I don't have full results on all combinations tabulated, but while looking at our front-court combinations, I can't help but be encouraged by this one:

Green+Sully+Olynyk   
ORtg: 1.040   (points per possession)
DRtg:  0.981   
ORB% 25.9% 
DRB%:  79.9%   <--- yowsa

When Kelly has played without those two guys on the court, the DRtg balloons to 1.105 points per possession.

That's a net swing of 12 points on defense per 100 possessions.

Whether he's more 'comfortable' with those two guys, or they just plain have a more complementary set of skills, it seems to work.

I won't argue about the Fab comparison, but Fab might be the worst 1st round pick of the last decade by any NBA team.

Nah.  #22 picks aren't exactly blooming into all-stars.   Some 65% of picks at that spot turn out to be nothing more than 'deep bench' players.

Here is a nifty study:

http://www.82games.com/nbadraftpicks.htm

Even a fair share of picks much higher have turned out to be out-right busts and some never even played in the NBA.

From 1989-2008, 45% of picks at #15 have been no better than 'deep bench'.  Heck, even more frightening, that's been the outcome of some 35% of picks all the way up at #8!!!

Within that same draft, it's not as if a lot of the names taken _after_ Fab have done a lot.   Moultrie is literally the only 'big man' taken after Fab who has done anything worthwhile in the NBA yet.

I'm not saying Fab has turned out any good.  I'm just pointing out that picking quickly get slim in the bottom half of the first round and his outcome is not that unusual.

We Celtic fans have been spoiled by late-pick successes such as Rondo, Sully, Avery, Perkins, BBD & Powe.   But those are not really the 'norm' for that late in the draft.

TP for all the data in the past few threads. Do you mind giving me some websites where I can plunge myself into studying the said statistical data oh wise guru?

[mmmmm]

Surprised this thread is still going, even though it became more focused on the logistics of stats than Olynyk.

Regardless, I don't even think stats are relevant in our evaluation of the dude. As D.o.s pointed out, Ainge has drafted terribly in recent years (minus Sully). I called the two Purdue boys scrubs the second they were drafted. Guess what? Scrubs. Same with Fab - that's not even worth discussing, in my book.

And as Koz mentioned, we've no reason whatsoever to give KO extended mins. We're a losing team this year, can't argue with that... but homers seem to fail to realize what is NBA caliber talent/athleticism and what isn't. I'd argue that pre-Rondo's return, Bass was the best on the roster at creating his own shot and Hump was as/more paramount to our success than anyone else on the roster(both of whom someone mentioned should both be sat for KO's development). They're not only better now, surpassed KO's ceiling long ago. I don't have numbers for that. I'm sure you can google it; I don't know what will come up, maybe sites and stats will differ. But honestly, it's just an eye test. Dude has no business in the league as anything other than a 7th man on a decent team.

I think this is absolute garbage. 

IMHO Olynyk is about a thousand times more skilled than Bass. 

7 footers with a nice shooting stroke AND a skilled post game don't come along often - much less ones who also have excellent hands, great passing skills, high IQ, and well above average ball handling.

Olynyk in the first half of the year was producing (on a per 36 minute basis) at about the same level as Sully.  If there is any player on this team who shouldn't project well with per-36 minute stats it's Sully, because his conditioning is so chronically poor (and hasn't made the slightest improvement) that I don't know if he will ever be able to average 36 minutes per game in a season.

Olynyk is nowhere near as limited as Sully from a conditioning standpoint, nor is he as slow and cumbersome.  He's actually reasonably mobile for a 7'0" guy, while Sully by comparison is horrendously slow and immobile for a 6'9" guy.

Somehow everybody here LOVES to quote Sully's per-36 minute numbers as an indication of where what they think he should be judged on.  Nobody here talks about sully as if he's a 13/8 guys...they all talk about him as if he's an 18/10 guy. 

To people here, the gold shines right out of Sully's behind...while everybody else on the team (who isn't getting opportunities to perform) is reportedly garbage.

Do you guys remember Sully's first month or two in the NBA as a rookie?  Do you remember how horrible he was on defense?  How badly he was getting torched by everybody with even the slightest hint of mobility?  How poorly he was shooting?  How frequently his shots were getting blocked? 

Sully picked up about half way through the season and started playing really well, and Olynyk hasn't really hit that same strike...but then Olynyk hasn't had the same opportunity.  Sully got a number of starts in his rookie year, and even as a backup he was usually playing significant minutes.  KO has mostly just gotten scrap minutes behind Bass, Sully and Humphreys. 

I'm not going to go out and predict that Sully is going to be an amazing superstar player, but I think he could be asolid starter in a couple of years time.  I don't see why he couldn't be just as productive as somebody like Andrea Bargnani, Channing Frye, Troy Murphy.  I don't se much that those guys had that Olynyk desn't.  His IQ is already well beyond what those guysever had, and neither one of them was especially athletic. 

Olynyk was taken 13th overall in what was considered the weakest draft in years - Danny could have done far, far worse.  Honestly, if he were to take another player beyong pick # 13, how many of those players would you guys say are better than Olynyk right now?

People criticise Danny's drafting but he's done very well in the past acquiring young guys like AB, Rondo, Sully, Big Baby, E'Twaun, etc.  Those guys all proved solid players for their draft position, and even if he didnt draft all of them.

He has misfired on some guys like JJ and Fab, yes.  How many GM's have had 100% in every single draft choice they have made?  Fab was a known gamble.  DA took that gamble because he had two first rounders, and after picking up a very NBA ready guy like Sully he could afford to take a camble on a raw prospect - in the end the gamble didn't work out.  So be it. It was worth the try.

I'm entirely with you on this formidable rant.

Ditto.

[mmmmm]

I don't like the PER 36 projection.   It does not account for fatigue and the like.  I think KO is better than Melo. But PER 36 are useless to project what he can do because he would foul out in 25 minutes because he is a rookie.

Once again. Per-36 stats are not projections.  They are measured rates.

All they are telling you is the rate of production in a normalized manner.

If a player can only stay on the floor for 24 minutes (for whatever reason, endurance, fouls, whatever) they nevertheless produced (points, rebounds, whatever) at a particular rate.   This is a tool for telling you what that rate was.

If you use it to try to project that they will maintain that rate when on the floor for much longer times, without taking into consideration mitigators such as what their endurance is or their propensity to foul, then that is your mis-application of the stat.

It should also be noted that bigs who come off the bench are often instructed to foul aggressively because they tend to not have enough time on the floor to use up all their fouls anyway.   KO has only started in 6  games so far, but his foul rate (yes, 'per-36') was lower in those games.


EDIT: fixed formatting of quote.

[kozlodoev]

IMHO Olynyk is about a thousand times more skilled than Bass. 

7 footers with a nice shooting stroke AND a skilled post game don't come along often - much less ones who also have excellent hands, great passing skills, high IQ, and well above average ball handling.

Perhaps. However, 7-footers who move like they're stuck in molasses and get pushed around like rag dolls typically don't last long in the NBA.

Also, Olynyk may be measuring at 7 feet, but his small wingspan and complete lack of leaping ability make him play smaller than his size. And so far it has looked that his small hands will cause serious issues with finishing around the rim.

[mmmmm]

TP for all the data in the past few threads. Do you mind giving me some websites where I can plunge myself into studying the said statistical data oh wise guru?

www.basketball-reference.com
www.82games.com
www.nbawowy.com
www.nba.com/stats

There are lots of others.  Those are four off the top of my head.

Note also that I added an EDIT to my original comment you replied to to add a bit more info.

[vinnie]

IMHO Olynyk is about a thousand times more skilled than Bass. 

7 footers with a nice shooting stroke AND a skilled post game don't come along often - much less ones who also have excellent hands, great passing skills, high IQ, and well above average ball handling.

Perhaps. However, 7-footers who move like they're stuck in molasses and get pushed around like rag dolls typically don't last long in the NBA.

Also, Olynyk may be measuring at 7 feet, but his small wingspan and complete lack of leaping ability make him play smaller than his size. And so far it has looked that his small hands will cause serious issues with finishing around the rim.

There is no sense arguing with the stat geeks. They have stats for everything and stats rule the world today. I honestly do not know why teams bother playing the games anymore. Just plug all of the nifty stats in the computer for each game and see who wins.... 

[kozlodoev]

IMHO Olynyk is about a thousand times more skilled than Bass. 

7 footers with a nice shooting stroke AND a skilled post game don't come along often - much less ones who also have excellent hands, great passing skills, high IQ, and well above average ball handling.

Perhaps. However, 7-footers who move like they're stuck in molasses and get pushed around like rag dolls typically don't last long in the NBA.

Also, Olynyk may be measuring at 7 feet, but his small wingspan and complete lack of leaping ability make him play smaller than his size. And so far it has looked that his small hands will cause serious issues with finishing around the rim.

There is no sense arguing with the stat geeks. They have stats for everything and stats rule the world today. I honestly do not know why teams bother playing the games anymore. Just plug all of the nifty stats in the computer for each game and see who wins.... 

I'm a stat geek, and I love to argue with myself.