POLL: Kelly or Sully

[Donoghus]

Kelly.  I still think there is more growth to be had for his game.

I think what we're seeing from Sully now is close to what his ceiling is. 

That being said, I'd have no problem moving either of them in a package deal.

This claim is pretty baseless. Sully has become really, really underrated on this forum.

Sully is around the same age Olynyk is, if I'm correct. I don't think we expect either of them to greatly improve their individual skills. Sully is already a great post player, a great rebounder, a good shooter, an adept passer with court vision, a solid face-up threat from the elbow and a solid defender. Olynyk is a great shooter, a great passer with court vision, an above-average ball-handler for his position, a decent rebounder, an OK post player and a bad defender. Sully probably has room to grow as a face-up threat from the elbow and Olynyk can improve his post game but all in all, it looks like their individual skills have peaked.

However the intrigue surrounding Olynyk is his potential to put all of this together. Can he shoot  50/35+/85, grab 5 or so assists and 8 or so rebounds all on the same night? If so, he's a potent offensive player. But the same can be said for Sully. There is no reason to suggest that Sully doesn't have the potential to put up 18-20 points/game, grab 10 rebounds and dish 3-4 assists on 50/32/80 shooting while playing respectable defense. Again, as with Olynyk, the potential IMO comes from his ability to put it all together, not necessarily any major improvement to individual aspects of his game. So if Olynyk has potential at 23 with relatively peaked skills, why doesn't Sully?

So subjective = baseless now?  That's a new one.  Jeez....   So I guess that makes your argument just as baseless too, right?  There's actually no reason to suggest that he does have the potential either to put up your numbers, either.   Outside the eyeball test, which, again, is completely subjective.

I think his game will make incremental improvements but I don't think its going to grow leaps & bounds from what I've seen on the court.

I don't think my claim is baseless. We've seen Sully have 20/20 games, seen him have multiple-assist games, seen him defend the best power forwards... etc. My point is just that your perspective of Olynyk's potential lies in your faith that he'll put all of his near-maxed individual skills together night after night. He already shoots great percentages and has great passing statistics, so there's not much room for improvements to individual aspects of his game. So if you believe this, why doesn't it apply to Sullinger? He has great individual skills too (low post, rebounding) and a lot of very good ones too (three-point shooting, face-up threat, court vision)... if he puts all of them together night after night, why doesn't he have a lot of potential as well?

My problem with your post was that you said something pretty controversial and didn't provide any line of reasoning, never mind stats.

Hence, illustrating the completely subjective nature of this thread.

What's so controversial about it?  That I chose Kelly over Sully?  That I felt that Kelly has a higher ceiling?  Is Sully becoming such a binky around here that any perceived slight of him makes you against him or something?  I mean, 'cmon. 

[Fred Roberts]

I'm going to admit I'm lost on figuring out which one will be the better bet.

Sully's weight and back surgery worry me. Kelly's short arms and lack of toughness worry me.

But all things considered, both show a great mix of skills on the court and appear to be good guys and teammates. Right now it's too close to call. Both show signs of breaking out but it seems something will have to give at the PF spot. Maybe Kelly can grow into the 5 and play well with Sully, but it seems the defensive liability makes that no good in the near term. 

[TheFlex]

Kelly.  I still think there is more growth to be had for his game.

I think what we're seeing from Sully now is close to what his ceiling is. 

That being said, I'd have no problem moving either of them in a package deal.

This claim is pretty baseless. Sully has become really, really underrated on this forum.

Sully is around the same age Olynyk is, if I'm correct. I don't think we expect either of them to greatly improve their individual skills. Sully is already a great post player, a great rebounder, a good shooter, an adept passer with court vision, a solid face-up threat from the elbow and a solid defender. Olynyk is a great shooter, a great passer with court vision, an above-average ball-handler for his position, a decent rebounder, an OK post player and a bad defender. Sully probably has room to grow as a face-up threat from the elbow and Olynyk can improve his post game but all in all, it looks like their individual skills have peaked.

However the intrigue surrounding Olynyk is his potential to put all of this together. Can he shoot  50/35+/85, grab 5 or so assists and 8 or so rebounds all on the same night? If so, he's a potent offensive player. But the same can be said for Sully. There is no reason to suggest that Sully doesn't have the potential to put up 18-20 points/game, grab 10 rebounds and dish 3-4 assists on 50/32/80 shooting while playing respectable defense. Again, as with Olynyk, the potential IMO comes from his ability to put it all together, not necessarily any major improvement to individual aspects of his game. So if Olynyk has potential at 23 with relatively peaked skills, why doesn't Sully?

So subjective = baseless now?  That's a new one.  Jeez....   So I guess that makes your argument just as baseless too, right?  There's actually no reason to suggest that he does have the potential either to put up your numbers, either.   Outside the eyeball test, which, again, is completely subjective.

I think his game will make incremental improvements but I don't think its going to grow leaps & bounds from what I've seen on the court.

I don't think my claim is baseless. We've seen Sully have 20/20 games, seen him have multiple-assist games, seen him defend the best power forwards... etc. My point is just that your perspective of Olynyk's potential lies in your faith that he'll put all of his near-maxed individual skills together night after night. He already shoots great percentages and has great passing statistics, so there's not much room for improvements to individual aspects of his game. So if you believe this, why doesn't it apply to Sullinger? He has great individual skills too (low post, rebounding) and a lot of very good ones too (three-point shooting, face-up threat, court vision)... if he puts all of them together night after night, why doesn't he have a lot of potential as well?

My problem with your post was that you said something pretty controversial and didn't provide any line of reasoning, never mind stats.

Hence, illustrating the completely subjective nature of this thread.

What's so controversial about it?  That I chose Kelly over Sully?  That I felt that Kelly has a higher ceiling?  Is Sully becoming such a binky around here that any perceived slight of him makes you against him or something?  I mean, 'cmon.

If anything, Sullinger is underrated on this forum. You understate the implication of your claim about Sully. You didn't just say you chose Olynyk over him (which is fine), you said you thought Sully reached his ceiling. You didn't provide any reasoning. I provided reasoning in my rebuttal. That's the difference. Yes, my reasoning is subjective, but not baseless. Baseless, in my opinion, would mean I attacked you and said you were wrong without giving any explanation.

[positivitize]

Any way you slice it, this is a good problem to have.

[fairweatherfan]

Any way you slice it, this is a good problem to have.

Yeah, they're both talented players.  I think a lot of it comes down to if whether you see more value in a guy whose ceiling is a poor man's Dirk, or a guy whose ceiling is a poor man's Barkley.  Hard to say who'll reach their ceiling but either piece can be a nice asset for the team.

[Donoghus]

Kelly.  I still think there is more growth to be had for his game.

I think what we're seeing from Sully now is close to what his ceiling is. 

That being said, I'd have no problem moving either of them in a package deal.

This claim is pretty baseless. Sully has become really, really underrated on this forum.

Sully is around the same age Olynyk is, if I'm correct. I don't think we expect either of them to greatly improve their individual skills. Sully is already a great post player, a great rebounder, a good shooter, an adept passer with court vision, a solid face-up threat from the elbow and a solid defender. Olynyk is a great shooter, a great passer with court vision, an above-average ball-handler for his position, a decent rebounder, an OK post player and a bad defender. Sully probably has room to grow as a face-up threat from the elbow and Olynyk can improve his post game but all in all, it looks like their individual skills have peaked.

However the intrigue surrounding Olynyk is his potential to put all of this together. Can he shoot  50/35+/85, grab 5 or so assists and 8 or so rebounds all on the same night? If so, he's a potent offensive player. But the same can be said for Sully. There is no reason to suggest that Sully doesn't have the potential to put up 18-20 points/game, grab 10 rebounds and dish 3-4 assists on 50/32/80 shooting while playing respectable defense. Again, as with Olynyk, the potential IMO comes from his ability to put it all together, not necessarily any major improvement to individual aspects of his game. So if Olynyk has potential at 23 with relatively peaked skills, why doesn't Sully?

So subjective = baseless now?  That's a new one.  Jeez....   So I guess that makes your argument just as baseless too, right?  There's actually no reason to suggest that he does have the potential either to put up your numbers, either.   Outside the eyeball test, which, again, is completely subjective.

I think his game will make incremental improvements but I don't think its going to grow leaps & bounds from what I've seen on the court.

I don't think my claim is baseless. We've seen Sully have 20/20 games, seen him have multiple-assist games, seen him defend the best power forwards... etc. My point is just that your perspective of Olynyk's potential lies in your faith that he'll put all of his near-maxed individual skills together night after night. He already shoots great percentages and has great passing statistics, so there's not much room for improvements to individual aspects of his game. So if you believe this, why doesn't it apply to Sullinger? He has great individual skills too (low post, rebounding) and a lot of very good ones too (three-point shooting, face-up threat, court vision)... if he puts all of them together night after night, why doesn't he have a lot of potential as well?

My problem with your post was that you said something pretty controversial and didn't provide any line of reasoning, never mind stats.

Hence, illustrating the completely subjective nature of this thread.

What's so controversial about it?  That I chose Kelly over Sully?  That I felt that Kelly has a higher ceiling?  Is Sully becoming such a binky around here that any perceived slight of him makes you against him or something?  I mean, 'cmon.

If anything, Sullinger is underrated on this forum. You understate the implication of your claim about Sully. You didn't just say you chose Olynyk over him (which is fine), you said you thought Sully reached his ceiling. You didn't provide any reasoning. I provided reasoning in my rebuttal. That's the difference. Yes, my reasoning is subjective, but not baseless. Baseless, in my opinion, would mean I attacked you and said you were wrong without giving any explanation.

Correction, I said he was "close to his ceiling".  There is a difference.  Go back and re-read it if you need to. 

Apparently, you have a problem with what I wrote if you got you to calling it baseless in the first line of your post.  My claim was completely on what I've seen.  Evidently, the understanding wasn't there for everyone in my initial post.

That being said, I'm not going to battle semantics on here.

[Asher77]

To me it a toss up and I hope both excel in the amount of action they see. One key is these guys can both shoot the 3 ( Sully is on record as saying it was his finger that effected him last year, if so why did he keep shooting before it healed ). I will give Sully the benefit of the doubt.  A key to them being high percentage three point shooters is in the value it places on them in the eyes of league wide GM's. 

We can only put 5 guys in a starting lineup and chances are one of these two will not be on the team when we hang our next banner. I hope they are as I tend to get attached to players ( the fan in me is rooting hard for Kelly ) but in a rebuild phase the most important aspect is to build a foundation that will increase equity. I hope these guys just continue there upward trajectory as this will impact the team on the court and the effectiveness of Danny off it.

[2short]

Any way you slice it, this is a good problem to have.

I'd voted both!  I'd be fine with trading either guy to better the team BUT I like what both bring us.  KO's offensive skill set is very unique, almost european and is not easy to replace.  Sully will be a double double guy this year.  The good thing is both guys are good passers (ko gets nod) but because we don't have a CENTER    we can start both and benefit from both their games. 

[mmmmm]

I think, as some have pointed out, it's still too early to say who will reach a higher ceiling or even, as the OP asks, who will have a better year.   A lot depends on who stays healthy and how Stevens uses them.

Both have shown flashes with individual skills in individual games where, if they were to put it all together and perform those skills at the the highest level they've demonstrated on a consistent basis, would make them 'star' players.   But until we see one of them both get the chance to do so and to actually _DO_ so, it's potential for either of them.

I do concur with the sentiment that, at least on the blog, Sullinger is severely underrated.  I think folks overstate his weight issues and also tend to forget that he is still the 3rd youngest player on the roster (behind only Marcus Smart and James Young) when discussing his potential.  And I think a lot of modern fans don't appreciate the value of strong, power low-post skills like Sully has because, well, they are rare today.

Of course, Olynyk's ability to dribble and drive is pretty darn rare for a 7 footer as well.

Both of them have high upside.  I like to think Olynyk's peak upside might be a hybrid of Dirk & McHale.   I'd like to think Sullinger's might be Wes Unseld with an outside shot.

But upside is not always reached.

I do think both have established that their 'floor' is at least as rotation players, and that's pretty solid to build on.

[Neurotic Guy]

As much as I like KO, my eyes tell me that Sully is a more solid player at the moment.  I hope KO becomes all it seems he could be, but I see Sully as a probable 18/10 guy and Kelly as a 'who knows?' guy.   Defensively, I like Sully a little better but not crazy about either one defensively.  Obviously, Sully is the more skilled rebounder.

To change my thinking, I'd need to see KO as a guy who can shoot lights out consistently and with people in his face.  Using height like Nowitski does (not saying he could ever be in Dirk's stratosphere), he needs to be able to hit shots over guys, and leaning away.  And he needs to do it consistently.  I am not convinced he can do that.  If he can, then he becomes extremely dangerous with the ball in his hands.   I see him also as too slow on drives to the hoop and thus can't finish after he's past the initial defender.

[greece66]

Hence, illustrating the completely subjective nature of this thread.

This is exactly what's so cool about it. There is no objectively right answer, so we can go on debating forever. Actually, if Sullynyk stick with the team long enough, I can imagine this thread remaining open long after we are both dead. 

[SHAQATTACK]

If Sully was to go wild on a strength and fitness routine .  Be more concerned about his stamina etc....I like what he brings.

Baring serious injury ...KO is improving , looking more relaxed nearly every game.   He is a not a show off type of guy .  I think he wants to gain respect though play and not his mouth.

[td450]

The numbers say that KO is much closer to the kind of efficiency on offense you need to be a high quality player. The problem with Sullinger is that as the intensity of the games goes up, his ability to finish just isn't there. He looks very smooth against lesser players, but those moves aren't working against better post defenders. He ended up shooting under 43% last year.

KO shoots 2s, 3s and foul shots several points better than Sullinger and does it while pulling big men out of the lane.

[Bingbangbarros]

First of all, Sully still doesn't look to be in shape. I don't understand how he's not where he wants to be yet he's had 5 months! Are you kidding me? It's tough to say who's better, who I would want or even who will have the better season. I strongly feel that neither has reached their potential. They each have their strengths and weaknesses that i think we can all agree on.

I think with Sully, you already have a sense of what his game is. I think he can easily put up 15p 10r right now as well as hold his own on defense. You can go to him in the post to get buckets. The question marks for me are his conditioning, his improving 3 point shot and whether he can make the leap to all-star level. Can he learn to draw more fouls and finish against length? That might sound contradictory but I just think you know or at least have a good idea of what he can do, but how much will he improve?

Olynyk to me is still a question mark. I like his game and potential but he's still trying to figure out what his total game will be in the NBA (how to finish around the basket, play against athletic players and just learning how to play against overall tougher competition). Currently, I don't think you can really go to him to score, so I'm not really seeing the Dirk comparison. He plays well off others and scores more off opportunities, keeps the ball moving, hits the open shots, makes timely cuts. I'd like to see what he can do one on one (Face ups in the mid-post, post ups, etc.) but it doesn't seem like he will get many of those opportunities. He's obviously not great defensively but I'm confident he will be passable. And the fact that he seems to get every call against him doesn't help.

So I really don't have an answer for the long term but I will after this season! I like them both and hope they can play 30+ minutes per game so we can really see how good they are.

[BudweiserCeltic]

The numbers say that KO is much closer to the kind of efficiency on offense you need to be a high quality player. The problem with Sullinger is that as the intensity of the games goes up, his ability to finish just isn't there. He looks very smooth against lesser players, but those moves aren't working against better post defenders. He ended up shooting under 43% last year.

KO shoots 2s, 3s and foul shots several points better than Sullinger and does it while pulling big men out of the lane.

The problem with the premise of your post is that it's made from a point of ignorance on Sully's abilities to shoot.

First, he was a 49% scorer in his rookie year.

Secondly, when the 2013-2014 began, he shot 48% from the field which included 32% from 3-point land, a shot he really hadn't focused on up to that point, which is quite impressive when you consider he was coming off a back surgery and very little practice during the summer/training camp.

Then during the last portion of that first month he suffered a hand injury, a hand injury which pretty much lingered for the remainder of the season which also worsened during late December and the proof is in the pudding of how his shot efficiency sharply deteriorated since then.

So no, I wouldn't take last year's performance as an indication of how skillful of a shooter Sullinger is when you consider all the factors, back surgery, lack of practice, hand injury, etc.

Lastly, Sully is a full year younger.