Can we talk about Olynyk? Is he an elite shooter? Can he be a go-to scorer?

[mgent]

To answer the OP's questions from my POV, no, he's not an elite scorer, maybe, he could be a go-to scorer, but not for a while, and it's highly improbable.

For the record, the OP asked if he was an elite shooter.

[Csfan1984]

I don't know why it always comes down to, "one has to be traded". Wouldn't it make more sense if you had both and drafted or signed a starting true center. Say C's sign Jordan the rotation would be Sully, Jordan or Olynyk, Jordan or Sully, Olynyk.

Three awesome big rotations. The goal should be to keep it together and just use cap next year to get Jordan or Gasol.

Edit: Can probably add Hibbert if he opts out.

Because "rotations" are extremely overrated.  Really good players play for 35-40 minutes... often 40+ in the playoffs.  Say you had a 3 big rotation.   Better to have two really good bigs playing 38 minutes a night (with some backup getting 15-20 off the bench) than three good players getting 30 a night.  Say one of them is really exceptional... why limit him to a mere 30 a night?  If you had DeAndre Jordan getting 36 a night, are you going to limit Sully to 30 just so Oly can get 30 off the bench?    Or are you going to let Sully play for 40 minutes... leaving Oly (potentially  his equal) with a mere 20 minutes?   Seems like a waste to do that.   Better to have two really great starters and a mediocre backup than 3 solid players in a rotation.

It's the same problem we'll have with Rondo/Bradley/Smart.   The idea that you can win a title with an average starting lineup and equal talent on the bench is wrong.  You need to have the best 5 starters you can...  bench depth is overrated.

Bench depth is not over-rated when it is a teams 6-8 man. After that yes the depth becomes over-rated. Not over playing guys also means better production. 27-35 minutes is ideal playing time for aggressive play more than that an a guy just fizzles or coast at points.

[BballTim]

I don't know why it always comes down to, "one has to be traded". Wouldn't it make more sense if you had both and drafted or signed a starting true center. Say C's sign Jordan the rotation would be Sully, Jordan or Olynyk, Jordan or Sully, Olynyk.

Three awesome big rotations. The goal should be to keep it together and just use cap next year to get Jordan or Gasol.

Edit: Can probably add Hibbert if he opts out.

Because "rotations" are extremely overrated.  Really good players play for 35-40 minutes... often 40+ in the playoffs.  Say you had a 3 big rotation.   Better to have two really good bigs playing 38 minutes a night (with some backup getting 15-20 off the bench) than three good players getting 30 a night.

  Very few bigs play 38 minutes a night.

[Surferdad]

I don't know why it always comes down to, "one has to be traded". Wouldn't it make more sense if you had both and drafted or signed a starting true center. Say C's sign Jordan the rotation would be Sully, Jordan or Olynyk, Jordan or Sully, Olynyk.

Three awesome big rotations. The goal should be to keep it together and just use cap next year to get Jordan or Gasol.

It's no different than people saying that either Rondo or Bradley has to go to make room for Smart (which isn't true).

A reasonable concern is that, at some point, Sullinger and Olynyk reach free agency and one or the other would prefer going elsewhere for a guaranteed starting job, but that time is still a few years away, if it happens.

I'd be happy if a year or two from now, the Celtics have a three-guard rotation of Rondo/Bradley/Smart, a three-big rotation of Sullinger/Olynyk/legitimate center, an upgrade on Jeff Green at SF who can function as point forward or a secondary ball-handler beside Rondo, a solid backup SF who can score, and maybe a guy like Evan Turner who can be your third-string guy at three positions.

I think a lot of posters in this thread are missing the point entirely.  The reason you "have to" trade one is that they are both good but they don't give you everything you need and you have to give up something to get something. They both represent good chips -- proven young NBA forwards. Gasol or Hibbert are not coming as free agents, we have gone over this many times. They would only get here via trade and Sully or Olynyk would likely have to go out in that trade, assuming of course that you would not trade Rondo.

[kozlodoev]

Very few bigs play 38 minutes a night.

This. Most teams like to have at least 4 bigs that are good enough to play 20+ mpg. For one, bigs typically rack up more fouls, and then you get fatigued more easily when you're lugging 250-300 lbs around.

[vjcsmoke]

it looks like a consensus is building in favor of Kelly. If it is this close then you have to go with the 7 footer that does not have a history of weight and lumbar spine issues. If KO had McHale length arms we would not even be having this discussion, then again if he did he probably would not have the handles he has right now. Who knows.

I would vote to keep KO if it came down to a vote.

If he did have McHale length arms there's probably no way he lasted to #13 for us to take.  I think KO looks like he will be a very effective scorer.  Yes, he is on a bit of a hot streak.  But he has performed at this level before, ie post-allstar break last season and at the collegiate level.  The shooting ability is not a fluke.

The question is how will KO adjust when defenses start focusing on him, throwing double teams at him, when they realize he is taking on a bigger role in our offene.  If he can still shoot well when teams focus on him as a top 2 scoring option, well we then we've really struck gold.

I am very high on KO's chances to become a top scoring option for us.  7 footers who can handle, pass, and score don't grow on trees.  That's a pretty unique offensive piece.  And when he makes the opposing big come out of the paint to guard him, that just opens things up for the rest of our offense as well.

[indeedproceed]

To answer the OP's questions from my POV, no, he's not an elite scorer, maybe, he could be a go-to scorer, but not for a while, and it's highly improbable.

For the record, the OP asked if he was an elite shooter.

Same answer though.

[Csfan1984]

I don't know why it always comes down to, "one has to be traded". Wouldn't it make more sense if you had both and drafted or signed a starting true center. Say C's sign Jordan the rotation would be Sully, Jordan or Olynyk, Jordan or Sully, Olynyk.

Three awesome big rotations. The goal should be to keep it together and just use cap next year to get Jordan or Gasol.

It's no different than people saying that either Rondo or Bradley has to go to make room for Smart (which isn't true).

A reasonable concern is that, at some point, Sullinger and Olynyk reach free agency and one or the other would prefer going elsewhere for a guaranteed starting job, but that time is still a few years away, if it happens.

I'd be happy if a year or two from now, the Celtics have a three-guard rotation of Rondo/Bradley/Smart, a three-big rotation of Sullinger/Olynyk/legitimate center, an upgrade on Jeff Green at SF who can function as point forward or a secondary ball-handler beside Rondo, a solid backup SF who can score, and maybe a guy like Evan Turner who can be your third-string guy at three positions.

I think a lot of posters in this thread are missing the point entirely.  The reason you "have to" trade one is that they are both good but they don't give you everything you need and you have to give up something to get something. They both represent good chips -- proven young NBA forwards. Gasol or Hibbert are not coming as free agents, we have gone over this many times. They would only get here via trade and Sully or Olynyk would likely have to go out in that trade, assuming of course that you would not trade Rondo.

Sure you have to give to get but you can wait to make sure.  Look at the Knicks situation they should have waited to sign Melo in FA a few years back but rush to trade for him and it cost them big.

Also given Hibbert's past situation he could bolt from Pacers. He is more likely to bolt than Lance was this past off season when Lance left. C's should have the $ to sign him. Gasol may be tired of 2nd round exits and an organization that won't spend into the tax to win, so he could leave. Jordan may end up too expensive for LAC to resign. So nothing is set in stone when it comes to FA.

[MBunge]

I don't know why it always comes down to, "one has to be traded". Wouldn't it make more sense if you had both and drafted or signed a starting true center. Say C's sign Jordan the rotation would be Sully, Jordan or Olynyk, Jordan or Sully, Olynyk.

Three awesome big rotations. The goal should be to keep it together and just use cap next year to get Jordan or Gasol.

It's no different than people saying that either Rondo or Bradley has to go to make room for Smart (which isn't true).

A reasonable concern is that, at some point, Sullinger and Olynyk reach free agency and one or the other would prefer going elsewhere for a guaranteed starting job, but that time is still a few years away, if it happens.

I'd be happy if a year or two from now, the Celtics have a three-guard rotation of Rondo/Bradley/Smart, a three-big rotation of Sullinger/Olynyk/legitimate center, an upgrade on Jeff Green at SF who can function as point forward or a secondary ball-handler beside Rondo, a solid backup SF who can score, and maybe a guy like Evan Turner who can be your third-string guy at three positions.

I think a lot of posters in this thread are missing the point entirely.  The reason you "have to" trade one is that they are both good but they don't give you everything you need and you have to give up something to get something. They both represent good chips -- proven young NBA forwards. Gasol or Hibbert are not coming as free agents, we have gone over this many times. They would only get here via trade and Sully or Olynyk would likely have to go out in that trade, assuming of course that you would not trade Rondo.

Sure you have to give to get but you can wait to make sure.  Look at the Knicks situation they should have waited to sign Melo in FA a few years back but rush to trade for him and it cost them big.

Also given Hibbert's past situation he could bolt from Pacers. He is more likely to bolt than Lance was this past off season when Lance left. C's should have the $ to sign him. Gasol may be tired of 2nd round exits and an organization that won't spend into the tax to win, so he could leave. Jordan may end up too expensive for LAC to resign. So nothing is set in stone when it comes to FA.

And let's not forget about Greg Monroe.

The best move may be to open up cap space for the coming off-season by sending out a 1st rounder with Wallace.

Mike

[LooseCannon]

The best move may be to open up cap space for the coming off-season by sending out a 1st rounder with Wallace.

If that trade is necessary, there is no good reason to do it before July.

[TheFlex]

The best move may be to open up cap space for the coming off-season by sending out a 1st rounder with Wallace.

If that trade is necessary, there is no good reason to do it before July.

^

[footey]

His offense is ok, defensively is another matter.

Sounds like a prior skeptic. 

[gpap]

No and no.

Olynyk is a good role player.

[footey]

I don't know why it always comes down to, "one has to be traded". Wouldn't it make more sense if you had both and drafted or signed a starting true center. Say C's sign Jordan the rotation would be Sully, Jordan or Olynyk, Jordan or Sully, Olynyk.

Three awesome big rotations. The goal should be to keep it together and just use cap next year to get Jordan or Gasol.

Edit: Can probably add Hibbert if he opts out.

I agree, I don't think getting a good center means trading one of them. Can create a nice rotation.  Can't always play big.

[footey]

No and no.

Olynyk is a good role player.

Do you mean off the bench?  What is a "role player"?  All players have a "role" on the team.  I know Danny has used this term too, but not sure what it really means.  That he is not going to be leading scorer on the team?  Well, I think we are seeing a guy who has the ability.  Not sure if he has the personality though, like Bird, for example, who from day one, you knew he was going to be the team leader.