Was Big Al really that much better then Sully?

[Celtics4ever]

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.

Big Al skipped College so he was four years in before Sully's age?   That kind of blows up the KG arguments.

Your comparing a guy who had played two years of college than two years of NBA to a guy who played no college and 2 years of NBA.   Would not four years of NBA bring him up to speed in terms of age?   I think, taking this into account, he owns Sully at the similar age most definitely.

[#1P4P]

Sullinger was encouraged to take 3s by Stevens...

This isn't the case of a player not understanding his limitations, its a front office and coaching staff understanding the objectives of the season and putting an emphasis on player development. They understand Sully's potential as a 3PT shooter and encouraged him to have confidence in and shoot from 3PT range in game situations.

Regardless of college experience (a bigger stage than HS but vastly different from the NBA game), Al and Sully were close in age when they entered the NBA. Of course Al is going to be more valuable when comparing him in his 3rd full season after averaging 16 and 11 in more minutes to Sullinger in his 2nd season.

[byennie]

Drummond is a better prospect than Big Al ever was. We're talking about a guy who's ceiling is one of the top 3 or so players in the game.

Drummond averaged over 13/13 as a 20 year-old, shot 63%, 1.6 blocks, 1.2 steals, and was by far the best offensive rebounder in the entire league (1.4 more than any other player). Big Al averaged 8 and 5 in the season he turned 21 and didn't play a lick of defense.

Big Al had All-Star upside, but Drummond has MVP upside. Dude could legitimately average 20 & 15 in the near future just by getting a few more touches, let alone improving his game past age 20.

  Drummond doesn't have much of an offensive game beyond putbacks and transition offense. He has miles to go before he's close to the level of player you're talking about.

I'm not saying he's there yet, but the knocks on his offensive game cut both ways. He averaged 17 points per 40 on 63% FG with those put backs and transition buckets.

He's easily projectable to 20 and 15 with blocks, are you telling me that wouldn't make him an MVP candidate no matter how he got there?

[billysan]

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.

I said he was superior. Playing next to a dominant (at the time) rebounding post player like Perk made it an even bigger accomplishment to average double digit rebounds. You are right that playing next to Smith and Gomes and still averaging a double double reinforced that point.

[Celtics18]

There are a lot of posts referring to Big Al's vastly superior athleticism and conditioning.

Mmm . . .  no. 

[Celtics4ever]

Mmm . . .  no.

Surprisingly, your right I just looked it up.  +1

Al Jefferson max vert was 30"

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Al-Jefferson-2979/

Jared Sullinger max vert was 31"

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Jared-Sullinger-5029/

Now Al is taller slightly by .75", Al has longer wingspan by 1" and Al has longer standing reach by a good deal 9'2" for Al to Sully's 8'9.5.  So Al had almost a 4.5" on Sully.  Al was almost five pounds lighter.

I give the nod to Al in terms of footwork.  His post game seemed more polished and he seemed to move better.   I guess it helps not to have a caboose-sized butt.

Playing next to a dominant (at the time) rebounding post player like Perk

This has to be sarcasm.  Perk is not even top 20 in all time rebounds.  Perk had 4083 rebounds for a 6 RPG average.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/p/perkike01.html

Perk doesn't even make the all time 250 in rebounding.   Lenny Wilkens had more rebounds and Ray Allen and Paul Pierce have more rebounds than Perk.  BTW, Al Jefferson is 144.  I know Perk has been injured but even when healthy he could barely top  8 RPG on a good year.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leaders/trb_career.html

Sullinger was encouraged to take 3s by Stevens...

This isn't the case of a player not understanding his limitations, its a front office and coaching staff understanding the objectives of the season and putting an emphasis on player development. They understand Sully's potential as a 3PT shooter and encouraged him to have confidence in and shoot from 3PT range in game situations.

You really think putting a guy out there and watching him shoot in the high 20's% is going to help his confidence and development?   I wish you were GM of the Wolves, we'd had Love, and 10 years of draft picks.  I can't see how setting up a guy to fail miserably helped the season objective unless have him shoot them helped us to tank.  He didn't get any better at them and I don't think doing that poorly helped his confidence.  If anything it probably worsened it and in the back of their heads team mates probably think twice of passing to him on the perimeter.   I think Stevens was being a good coach when he said that and covered for him.

The ball does not even come off his hands well from that range.  His rotation is not bad from mid range but it's horrible from downtown.

[BballTim]

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.

  There were many reports about Stevens wanting Sully to shoot threes over the course of the season. If you don't know that you probably don't follow the team all that closely.

[mctyson]

Comparing stats is missing the point. At the time of the trade, big al was perceived to be a vastly superior prospect than sully today.

Key word here is "prospect."

Big Al was perceived to be, and at the time rightfully so, a potential All-Star PF with unique post-scoring skills for his age.  He was the centerpiece to the KG trade and the rest of the pieces were throw-ins.

Sully is not anywhere near that as a prospect.  However, he may eventually be equal to Big Al as a finished product.  That is good for us.  People don't value him highly as a trade piece so our draft picks become more valuable.  Fine.  Give them 2017 picks.  I'll take the 22 year-old on my team that I know is a double-double threat every game and pair him with Rondo and Love (or similar acquisition).

[LooseCannon]

Now Al is taller slightly by .75", Al has longer wingspan by 1" and Al has longer standing reach by a good deal 9'2" for Al to Sully's 8'9.5.  So Al had almost a 4.5" on Sully.  Al was almost five pounds lighter.

Those numbers come from when Al Jefferson was an eighteen-year-old coming out of high school.  There's a decent chance that he grew more and the gap on height and wingspan is taller.

People over-emphasize height in rating players.  That's a big reason why some people can't see Avery Bradley as a starting shooting guard even though his numbers say that he can handle the job.  An inch may not seem like much, but some people use the word "undersized" to describe Sullinger.  No one uses it to describe Jefferson (as a power forward....they'll call him an undersized center when he plays the five).  The perception that Sullinger is undersized but Jefferson is not automatically creates the perception that Jefferson is a better prospect at the same stage in his career as Sullinger, even if they have similar statistics.

[BballTim]

Now Al is taller slightly by .75", Al has longer wingspan by 1" and Al has longer standing reach by a good deal 9'2" for Al to Sully's 8'9.5.  So Al had almost a 4.5" on Sully.  Al was almost five pounds lighter.

Those numbers come from when Al Jefferson was an eighteen-year-old coming out of high school.  There's a decent chance that he grew more and the gap on height and wingspan is taller.

People over-emphasize height in rating players.  That's a big reason why some people can't see Avery Bradley as a starting shooting guard even though his numbers say that he can handle the job.  An inch may not seem like much, but some people use the word "undersized" to describe Sullinger.  No one uses it to describe Jefferson (as a power forward....they'll call him an undersized center when he plays the five).  The perception that Sullinger is undersized but Jefferson is not automatically creates the perception that Jefferson is a better prospect at the same stage in his career as Sullinger, even if they have similar statistics.

  Again, it didn't used to be that unusual for people here to call Al undersized before we traded him. People here were generally more critical of Al after his 2nd year than they are of Sully. In fact most of the time Al was on Minny and Utah he was considered an empty stats guy. This thread is fairly revisionist.

[Celtics4ever]

I'll be honest I hated to see Al go but I grew to love KG pretty darn fast.

[crimson_stallion]

Comparing stats is missing the point. At the time of the trade, big al was perceived to be a vastly superior prospect than sully today.

Key word here is "prospect."

Big Al was perceived to be, and at the time rightfully so, a potential All-Star PF with unique post-scoring skills for his age.  He was the centerpiece to the KG trade and the rest of the pieces were throw-ins.

Sully is not anywhere near that as a prospect.  However, he may eventually be equal to Big Al as a finished product.  That is good for us.  People don't value him highly as a trade piece so our draft picks become more valuable.  Fine.  Give them 2017 picks.  I'll take the 22 year-old on my team that I know is a double-double threat every game and pair him with Rondo and Love (or similar acquisition).

Comparing stats is missing the point. At the time of the trade, big al was perceived to be a vastly superior prospect than sully today.

Key word here is "prospect."

Big Al was perceived to be, and at the time rightfully so, a potential All-Star PF with unique post-scoring skills for his age.  He was the centerpiece to the KG trade and the rest of the pieces were throw-ins.

Sully is not anywhere near that as a prospect.  However, he may eventually be equal to Big Al as a finished product.  That is good for us.  People don't value him highly as a trade piece so our draft picks become more valuable.  Fine.  Give them 2017 picks.  I'll take the 22 year-old on my team that I know is a double-double threat every game and pair him with Rondo and Love (or similar acquisition).

Agreed.

To be brutally honest, I don't think anybody (outside of a large amount of Celtics fans) look at Sully as a guy with future All-Star potential.  I think most teams would see him as a guy who has the potential to be a really nice starter for many years and a nice contributor on a playoff team...but not the type of talent you would build around.  I guess a good comparison would be somebody like Paul Millsap or Andre Miller.   

On the other hand, at the time I think people people looked at Jefferson as a guy with with a very unique talent and with future All-Star potential and rightly so - he may not have become a franchise player, but he's been a borderline All-Star most his career. I think people saw him at the time in a similar light to the way they saw Demarcus Cousins a year ago - a highly skilled big man with sky high potential.

Sullinger was encouraged to take 3s by Stevens...

This isn't the case of a player not understanding his limitations, its a front office and coaching staff understanding the objectives of the season and putting an emphasis on player development. They understand Sully's potential as a 3PT shooter and encouraged him to have confidence in and shoot from 3PT range in game situations.

I disagree.

You can say all you want about the team encouraging Sully to shoot three's (as those Sully defenders always do) and that's fine.  When Sully is wide open at the three point line and takes the shot, the "Sully was encouraged to take threes" argument justifies that.

But what it doesn't justify is when he's taking bad shots.  I'm talking about off-balance fadeaway shots in the post when he has teammates wide open elsewhere on the court.  I'm talking chucking up a three with 18 seconds on the shot clock when other players are open with a better shot.  I'm talking about chucking up a three when there is a defender right up in his face.  Sully took far too many shots of that nature last season, and It frustrated the hell out of me.

I have absolutely no problems with him taking a wide open three, IF that wide open three is the best shot available.  Often the threes he took were either:

1) Not wide open

or

2) Not the best shot available

A very good or great three point shooter can get away with taking that type of shot, even if it is certainly not preferred.  If Green or Bradley take that shot, I can live with it - they have hit enough big three's that I have some trust in them taking that gamble.  Sully hasn't.  He should be taking three's by all means, but only if it's the right shot at the time. 

[LarBrd33]

Comparing stats is missing the point. At the time of the trade, big al was perceived to be a vastly superior prospect than sully today. No comparison. Al was widely believed (rightly or wrongly) to be a lock for 20-10 production and some felt he had the best low post moves in the league. If things broke right, he was a superstar big man you could build around. 

Now in retrospect we know that al capped out as a 20-10 guy and didn't reach superstardom

On the flip side, Sullinger isn't even widely regarded as a future starter. You'll see several folks saying he's a future role player. Glen Davis with the brain or Ryan Gomes.  Sure, some (in boston) think he has star potential... But the perception of him is nowhere near big al in 07.

  Big Al was a year older and a year more experienced than Sully was last year. If you compare Sully after his 2nd year to Al after his 2nd year you'd probably give the edge to Sully. Pretty much everything you're saying about Sully was said about Jefferson after his 2nd year, I can remember arguing with people who assured me Al would never start ahead of players like Ryan Gomes (whoever's comparing Sully to Gomes would fit in well with those posters if they aren't the same ones).

  Just to further my point, in Al's first 2 years he played a total of 130 games with 8 starts. He scored 10 or more points a total of 38 times, 20 or more once, and had 10 or more rebounds 10 times. In Sully's first 2 years he played 119 games, starting 49. He scored 10 or more points 64 times including 15 games of 20 or more points and 10 or more rebounds 31 times. Again, Al broke out in his 3rd year (which Sully hasn't played yet) but Sully's play in his first 2 years dwarfed Al's. What this means to the other GMs is anyone's guess but it's not as cut and dried as people think it is.

I can always count on you to bump my posts.

So I guess you are saying that since Sully is a year behind the Al trajectory, there is hope for his break out season next year?

Sure.  I guess.  Pretty much every young player in the league COULD break out in Year 3... doesn't mean it's going to happen.  Plenty of Ike Diogus.  Hometown fans say they are future stars... outside world ignores em... and they fail to get there.

Currently, the perception of Sully as a prospect is nowhere near the level of Big Al in 07.  Sounds like we are agreeing on that.  Next season if the magical basketball fairies grant our homer wishes ("alls he gotta do is lose weight like kevin love!... hella simple!"), maybe Sully takes a leap.

Right now, the #6 pick is at the center of any prospective trade.  Everything else is roulette wheel spins and role players.

  Sully wouldn't need to "break out", he'd just need to get more minutes. He went from 8/6 as a rookie to 13/8 last year, all he has to do is follow the trajectory he's already on. You don't seem to understand this at all. You spent much of his rookie year saying Sully was the same player as, who was it, Meyers Leonard? I think last year you called him a poor man's Ryan Gomes. Now he's another Ike Diogu, who never averaged more than 7 points or 3.5 rebounds a game and who's numbers *dropped* from his rookie to second year.

  Clearly you don't see why someone who went from 6/6 as a rookie to 13/8 the next year and became a regular starter is on a different trajectory than someone who went from 7/3 as a rookie to 6/3 the next year as his minutes dropped. One would think you'd need to have a better handle on such things (or why Sully isn't the same player as Leonard or Diogu) before you made any definitive statements about the perception of Sully or his relative value as an asset. Apparently not.

There you go again making stuff up again Tim... if you insist on following my CelticsBlog career, at least get the specifics right.

Anyways... you're not going to listen to anything I have to say without getting all grumpy and taking the opposite view.  Argue with crimson_stallion instead... he gets it.... you don't. 

Fwiw, I like Sully.  He might be a nice player some day.  He has some potential.  Right now he's a backup big, but he's young and could develop into something substantial.  As a Celtic fan, I tend to take the bias view that we have something nice.  People outside of Boston don't really care... they have their own binkies. 

Al Jefferson was considered an elite prospect.  Sully isn't considered an elite prospect.  There is a significant difference in their trade value.  I'm not saying it's fair... that's just the league-wide perception. 

Still you might be right in that there's some team out there who thinks Sully is a future star.  I find it unlikely, though.  You can't honestly think that Sully (right now) can be the centerpiece of a trade for a Top 3 player (like Al was for KG).  That just isn't the world we live in.

[BballTim]

Comparing stats is missing the point. At the time of the trade, big al was perceived to be a vastly superior prospect than sully today. No comparison. Al was widely believed (rightly or wrongly) to be a lock for 20-10 production and some felt he had the best low post moves in the league. If things broke right, he was a superstar big man you could build around. 

Now in retrospect we know that al capped out as a 20-10 guy and didn't reach superstardom

On the flip side, Sullinger isn't even widely regarded as a future starter. You'll see several folks saying he's a future role player. Glen Davis with the brain or Ryan Gomes.  Sure, some (in boston) think he has star potential... But the perception of him is nowhere near big al in 07.

  Big Al was a year older and a year more experienced than Sully was last year. If you compare Sully after his 2nd year to Al after his 2nd year you'd probably give the edge to Sully. Pretty much everything you're saying about Sully was said about Jefferson after his 2nd year, I can remember arguing with people who assured me Al would never start ahead of players like Ryan Gomes (whoever's comparing Sully to Gomes would fit in well with those posters if they aren't the same ones).

  Just to further my point, in Al's first 2 years he played a total of 130 games with 8 starts. He scored 10 or more points a total of 38 times, 20 or more once, and had 10 or more rebounds 10 times. In Sully's first 2 years he played 119 games, starting 49. He scored 10 or more points 64 times including 15 games of 20 or more points and 10 or more rebounds 31 times. Again, Al broke out in his 3rd year (which Sully hasn't played yet) but Sully's play in his first 2 years dwarfed Al's. What this means to the other GMs is anyone's guess but it's not as cut and dried as people think it is.

I can always count on you to bump my posts.

So I guess you are saying that since Sully is a year behind the Al trajectory, there is hope for his break out season next year?

Sure.  I guess.  Pretty much every young player in the league COULD break out in Year 3... doesn't mean it's going to happen.  Plenty of Ike Diogus.  Hometown fans say they are future stars... outside world ignores em... and they fail to get there.

Currently, the perception of Sully as a prospect is nowhere near the level of Big Al in 07.  Sounds like we are agreeing on that.  Next season if the magical basketball fairies grant our homer wishes ("alls he gotta do is lose weight like kevin love!... hella simple!"), maybe Sully takes a leap.

Right now, the #6 pick is at the center of any prospective trade.  Everything else is roulette wheel spins and role players.

  Sully wouldn't need to "break out", he'd just need to get more minutes. He went from 8/6 as a rookie to 13/8 last year, all he has to do is follow the trajectory he's already on. You don't seem to understand this at all. You spent much of his rookie year saying Sully was the same player as, who was it, Meyers Leonard? I think last year you called him a poor man's Ryan Gomes. Now he's another Ike Diogu, who never averaged more than 7 points or 3.5 rebounds a game and who's numbers *dropped* from his rookie to second year.

  Clearly you don't see why someone who went from 6/6 as a rookie to 13/8 the next year and became a regular starter is on a different trajectory than someone who went from 7/3 as a rookie to 6/3 the next year as his minutes dropped. One would think you'd need to have a better handle on such things (or why Sully isn't the same player as Leonard or Diogu) before you made any definitive statements about the perception of Sully or his relative value as an asset. Apparently not.

There you go again making stuff up again Tim... if you insist on following my CelticsBlog career, at least get the specifics right.

Anyways... you're not going to listen to anything I have to say without getting all grumpy and taking the opposite view.  Argue with crimson_stallion instead... he gets it.... you don't. 

Fwiw, I like Sully.  He might be a nice player some day.  He has some potential.  Right now he's a backup big, but he's young and could develop into something substantial.  As a Celtic fan, I tend to take the bias view that we have something nice.  People outside of Boston don't really care... they have their own binkies. 

Al Jefferson was considered an elite prospect.  Sully isn't considered an elite prospect.  There is a significant difference in their trade value.  I'm not saying it's fair... that's just the league-wide perception. 

Still you might be right in that there's some team out there who thinks Sully is a future star.  I find it unlikely, though.  You can't honestly think that Sully (right now) can be the centerpiece of a trade for a Top 3 player (like Al was for KG).  That just isn't the world we live in.

  I'll stay with my comments. When we were going into Al's 3rd year people here (and undoubtedly elsewhere) had a lower opinion of Al (who struggled in the summer league that offseason) than they do of Sully. The thought that he could have been the centerpiece of a trade for a top player would have been met with gales of laughter. People's opinion of him did change after he played a full healthy season as a starter (although not to the extent people are claiming).

  How Sully stacks up to Al depends on how you choose to compare them. He's pretty much in between where Al was at the same level of experience and where Al was at the same age (which was probably his 3rd year. I haven't been arguing that Sully's seen as the player Al was after Al's 3rd season (his breakout year). I've been saying that Sully is seen as a significantly better player than Al was at the end of his second season (similar nba experience).

  In terms of the trade, it's true that Sully wouldn't be the centerpiece like Al was. However the draft picks we gave Minny for KG were the equivalent of the Clip's pick and the pick from Philly we're due. Al was worth more than Sully is, but was he worth more than Sully and the #6? How about Sully, the #6 and a future Nets pick? Because that's the real comparison that should be made if you want to compare the deals.

[Jon]

All other arguments aside, I think one that is being overlooked is simply height. Jefferson was always looked at as legit 4/5 who is principally playing the 5 now at this point of his career. Sully is an undersized 4.  And despite the fact that he got some run at the 5 on this year's pathetic squad, no team is dealing for him with the intention of playing him at the 5.

And as we all know, guys who can play the 5 (particularly when they have a good post game) are always going to have more value than undersized 4s.