Was Big Al really that much better then Sully?

[kozlodoev]

Sully's a nice player, but his upside is probably something around Carlos Boozer--which is nice, but not a player who is going to transform your franchise.

Well, the Kevin Love situation is different for the Timberwolves as well. While they don't want to give Love away, they are still trying to get value for a player that plans to walk next year.

[Jon]

Sully's a nice player, but his upside is probably something around Carlos Boozer--which is nice, but not a player who is going to transform your franchise.

Well, the Kevin Love situation is different for the Timberwolves as well. While they don't want to give Love away, they are still trying to get value for a player that plans to walk next year.

I know.  That's what I said later in the post. 

[Celtics4ever]

Sully is better at seeing the court and finding his teammates

Also better than missing,  A big that shoots 43% is not good.

[D.o.s.]

Sully's a nice player, but his upside is probably something around Carlos Boozer--which is nice, but not a player who is going to transform your franchise.

Provided your franchise isn't Utah or Cleveland.

Too soon?

[Moranis]

Sully is better at seeing the court and finding his teammates

Also better than missing,  A big that shoots 43% is not good.

Yeah but that is skewed because of all the three pointers.  That said he is only 47.5% from 2 point range which isn't good either (though he does take a lot of jump shots). 

[billysan]

Personally, I don't like throwing away draft picks because that always seems to come back to haunt us down the road, but, on the other hand, I don't trust that Ainge will get the best players, which is why he tried to acquire as many selections as possible.

Trading picks for Love is not "throwing away draft picks". Throwing away draft picks is tacking them on to Gerald Wallace to entice someone to take his obligation.

I don't see how the number of picks is related to "trusting Ainge". He acquired picks because he could, so that he can trade them when someone becomes available, and because you don't pay salary to draft picks (before you draft them, that is).

I'm not sure that all the draft picks in the world could entice someone to take Crash's contract, unfortunately.  Throwing away, giving them up, whatever, the term you prefer, the bottom line is that we'd no longer have the picks, and I'd rather keep them.

Right, but in one case you have Kevin Love, in the other one you have... cap relief.

The bottom line is that the chances of getting a player with the 6th that will ever be as good as Kevin Love is right now are pretty slim.

Still, the only reason we are having this conversation is that the T Wolves are desperate to get something in return for Kevin Love. He has said he will walk and his future in not in Minnesota. A sensible GM will get a mix of the best draft picks and players/prospects who are available to mitigate the loss. It will still be a loss in most cases. Looks like the number 6 pick is going to be the ceiling at this point because he is not going to resign with any of the teams above us. A young prospect superior to Sullinger hasn't been mentioned as far as big men are concerned.

Sorry for restating the obvious.

I do think Jefferson was the superior player in the eyes of the league at this stage. Sullinger is behind IMO because of conditioning and his back issues. I remember Jefferson having conditioning issues and we used to discuss his 'baby fat' before we had a big baby. I also remember Jefferson putting up double doubles playing next to Kendrick Perkins. I don't recall Sullinger playing next to a Celtic big man who was as tough in the paint as Perk.

As to numbers comparison, Sullinger cannot play enough minutes to compare to Jefferson yet because of conditioning issues. He has been limited due to recovery of his surgically repaired back. This is another reason for using per projections. Maybe he will be equal to Jefferson in rebounding when he does, but I don't see the offensive glass work being on the level of Big Al.

[Celtics4ever]

Yeah but that is skewed because of all the three pointers.  That said he is only 47.5% from 2 point range which isn't good either

Agree, he has to take the jumpers though because he struggles a lot against tall guys.  That being said he uses his body well and has great hands.  But because he is not optimal height or length he has to make adjustments.   He is not real a solid athletic guy which further complicates this weakness.   Now he is cagy, smart and wily and uses his body well and really a classic Ainge tweener guy who can play but gives great value because he dropped and has weakness that scared other teams off.


http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/sullija01.html

[BudweiserCeltic]

Yeah but that is skewed because of all the three pointers.  That said he is only 47.5% from 2 point range which isn't good either

Agree, he has to take the jumpers though because he struggles a lot against tall guys.  That being said he uses his body well and has great hands.  But because he is not optimal height or length he has to make adjustments.   He is not real a solid athletic guy which further complicates this weakness.   Now he is cagy, smart and wily and uses his body well and really a classic Ainge tweener guy who can play but gives great value because he dropped and has weakness that scared other teams off.


http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/sullija01.html

He's also often guarded by centers... so...

Big Al played his natural position with us.

[kozlodoev]

I do think Jefferson was the superior player in the eyes of the league at this stage. Sullinger is behind IMO because of conditioning and his back issues. I remember Jefferson having conditioning issues and we used to discuss his 'baby fat' before we had a big baby. I also remember Jefferson putting up double doubles playing next to Kendrick Perkins. I don't recall Sullinger playing next to a Celtic big man who was as tough in the paint as Perk.

And then Al Jefferson proceeded to average 20 and 10 for the Timberwolves playing next to Craig Smith and Ryan Gomes. This point is moot -- Al Jefferson was viewed as the superior player because he was, in fact, a superior player.

[droopdog7]

Sully is better at seeing the court and finding his teammates

Also better than missing,  A big that shoots 43% is not good.

Yeah but that is skewed because of all the three pointers.  That said he is only 47.5% from 2 point range which isn't good either (though he does take a lot of jump shots).

Shooting percentage has much more to do with quality of shot than ability to shoot.  And quality of shot is mostly affected by you ability to get them.  So, excusing Sully because he doesn't take good shots is not a point in his favor.  It just merely highlights the fact that he cannot get good shots.  And it is not a good sign that, in his second year, Sully has already migrated to the 3-point line.   

[MBunge]

I do think Jefferson was the superior player in the eyes of the league at this stage. Sullinger is behind IMO because of conditioning and his back issues. I remember Jefferson having conditioning issues and we used to discuss his 'baby fat' before we had a big baby. I also remember Jefferson putting up double doubles playing next to Kendrick Perkins. I don't recall Sullinger playing next to a Celtic big man who was as tough in the paint as Perk.

And then Al Jefferson proceeded to average 20 and 10 for the Timberwolves playing next to Craig Smith and Ryan Gomes. This point is moot -- Al Jefferson was viewed as the superior player because he was, in fact, a superior player.

At 23, Jefferson put up 20 and 10 for the TWolves.  At 21, Sully's numbers last year project out to 17 and 10 per 36 minutes, and that's playing often out of position at center and shooting way too many 3s.  Big Al's per 36 at 21 years old?  15 and 10.

Mike

[Rondo9]

Sully is better at seeing the court and finding his teammates

Also better than missing,  A big that shoots 43% is not good.

Yeah but that is skewed because of all the three pointers.  That said he is only 47.5% from 2 point range which isn't good either (though he does take a lot of jump shots).

Shooting percentage has much more to do with quality of shot than ability to shoot.  And quality of shot is mostly affected by you ability to get them.  So, excusing Sully because he doesn't take good shots is not a point in his favor.  It just merely highlights the fact that he cannot get good shots.  And it is not a good sign that, in his second year, Sully has already migrated to the 3-point line.

Do you even know why? Because Stevens wanted him to take those shots, because he felt he had the potential make them. It's not like Sullinger went Antoine Walker on the three point line, he shot it when he was wide open. Everywhere else he shot just fine.

[MBunge]

And it is not a good sign that, in his second year, Sully has already migrated to the 3-point line.

Has there not been some reporting that Stevens specifically WANTED Sully to take all those 3s?  I can't imagine him letting it continue if he didn't, given how willing Stevens was to play Bass and Hump as the season went on.

Mike

[Celtics4ever]

Has there not been some reporting that Stevens specifically WANTED Sully to take all those 3s?  I can't imagine him letting it continue if he didn't, given how willing Stevens was to play Bass and Hump as the season went o

Nice Try.   They played and they didn't take them and it did not hurt their minutes.   When bigs shoot outside, it is often because they are tired or have trouble down low.   They don't want to post up which takes more work than arcing up a jumper or they can't shot over guys or get their moves off.   His conditioning may be part of it as well.  It is easier to from three point line back on d than the low post box.   A lot of Sully's points down low are putbacks where he used his zip code sized rear to carve up space.   The move he often used when he posts up is the jump hook which is the classic shot of those who want to protect the ball from being blocked as it puts your body between the blocker and ball.   

Humph and Bass know what they are good at.   Bass 's jumper is better than Sully's anyways.  He attempted 6 threes last year and made 2 but he still played.   He also shot better than Sully from the field.   48%

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/bassbr01.html

But wait that is not all.  Humph shot  .50% from the field.  They still played.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/humphkr01.html

So it clear that Sully shot them and was horrible at them.   That really helped us in what way?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VrFV5r8cs0&feature=kp

Sully would be a better player if he knew his limitations.

[Nef-Oracle]

Big Al was better than Sully at his age. However its only because Sully was injured, played lesser minutes & was lost in the rotation with Oly, Humph & Bass.