Bradley 6-20 Tonight, 1 reb , 1 ast ...............

[Nerf DPOY]

He shot the ball when he was suppose to , but missed a crap load. 
AB is a streaky shooter.  There is nothing you can do.  You can only blame the coach if he shot 6-20 and we lost the game

  he's not a streaky shooter. he takes bad contested shots that go in on occasion. when he makes 'em it doesn't make him a great player or a great shooter....they're still bad shots

So you're chalking up his career percentages to being a bunch of 'lucky makes'. Gotcha.

[pearljammer10]

He shot the ball when he was suppose to , but missed a crap load. 
AB is a streaky shooter.  There is nothing you can do.  You can only blame the coach if he shot 6-20 and we lost the game

  he's not a streaky shooter. he takes bad contested shots that go in on occasion. when he makes 'em it doesn't make him a great player or a great shooter....they're still bad shots

So your chalking up his career percentages to being a bunch of 'lucky makes'. Gotcha.

Of course there is something you can do. Tell him to stop shooting the freakin' ball and focus on defense. You can also trade him. Both options I'd be happy with, more so with number 2.

[GzUP617]

 Anyone in here watch any nba games outside of the Celtics ?   I mean a bad jumpshooting nights is a daily occurrence in the NBA.  6 from 20 is nothing unusual for anyone in the nba, it's just one game.

Bradley will never get his shots off in a fancy way. His issue is not being a dynamic enough player in our eyes, in assist, rebounds and steals to alleviate bad shooting nights.  Than  again a dynamic player who can defend and get at least 15ppg is worth more than 8M in today's NBA.

A player like Wes Matthews who is paid at 6M is underpaid.  He will get much more than 8M  in his next contract.

A player like Alec Burks will be getting a little over 9M per year who is in the realm of Avery Bradley's production.

 Bradley's "honeybadger" type defense that we all loved is gone, more due to the officiating than his ability.  He should stop gambling as much on reaches but his defense is still good, just called more tightly now.  He is much better with a better supporting cast that can play defense better. 
He tries to do too much with over helping on someone else's "man" than he should.

[pearljammer10]

Bradley is shooting 38% from 2 and 28% from 3 so far this month (8 games). So sure 6-20 is only one bad game, but with his overall PER of 9.79 added to his shooting percentage this month, it isnt just one game that is of concern.

[Kadin]

Bradley is no good. If we can get something of value for him, we should do it right now.

[Celtics4ever]

I saw him play some D last night first time in a long while.   How is it, he can only score or play D but not both?   Who does that?

His contract, looks less like a bargain each day.

[obnoxiousmime]

I've said this before but I'll repeat it. He's getting paid fairly if you compare him to other mediocre/above average players who got deals in that 8-10 range. He's the definition of middle class. It's more of a philosophy issue on how you choose to break down the salaries on your roster for each type of player, whether it be superstar, 2nd/3rd tier stars, and role players.

My problem with the deal is that I feel like that money could be better spent on either:

A: a player with potential to be a star or just below star status making 10-12/year, like Green a few years back when I think most Celtics fans thought optimistically he could be a little better than he has been. Green was athletic, a former 5th overall pick, had good measurements, and could score. He could be the 3rd option on a good team. Bradley should be no better than 4th or 5th option, and some might even argue on a really good team he's a bench guy.

B: two players in that 5-6 million range that are also above average and possibly even better than Bradley.

I get that Ainge just wants to keep his assets but the Bradley deal might hurt flexibility going forward. Like with Green the first three years of his deal when he was inconsistent, I'm not convinced his deal is easily moveable.

Furthermore, I was skeptical about how much Bradley would improve. With any deal for a young player the hope is that the player will improve or at least stay the same. His numbers this year are actually worse so far.

Since he doesn't have great athleticism, measurables, court vision, or a great handle, there are limitations on his ceiling. He could basically just improve his shot and get smarter with experience, but he's always going to be undersized and have low playmaking ability. In other words, a nice role player.

[jambr380]

I've said this before but I'll repeat it. He's getting paid fairly if you compare him to other mediocre/above average players who got deals in that 8-10 range. He's the definition of middle class. It's more of a philosophy issue on how you choose to break down the salaries on your roster for each type of player, whether it be superstar, 2nd/3rd tier stars, and role players.

My problem with the deal is that I feel like that money could be better spent on either:

A: a player with potential to be a star or just below star status making 10-12/year, like Green a few years back when I think most Celtics fans thought optimistically he could be a little better than he has been. Green was athletic, a former 5th overall pick, had good measurements, and could score. He could be the 3rd option on a good team. Bradley should be no better than 4th or 5th option, and some might even argue on a really good team he's a bench guy.

B: two players in that 5-6 million range that are also above average and possibly even better than Bradley.

I get that Ainge just wants to keep his assets but the Bradley deal might hurt flexibility going forward. Like with Green the first three years of his deal when he was inconsistent, I'm not convinced his deal is easily moveable.

Furthermore, I was skeptical about how much Bradley would improve. With any deal for a young player the hope is that the player will improve or at least stay the same. His numbers this year are actually worse so far.

Since he doesn't have great athleticism, measurables, court vision, or a great handle, there are limitations on his ceiling. He could basically just improve his shot and get smarter with experience, but he's always going to be undersized and have low playmaking ability. In other words, a nice role player.

TP - this is pretty much exactly how I feel. It's not like his deal is so horrific - as you explain, his per year average compares well to other players not on their rookie deals. Unfortunately, guys like him and Bass are much better pieces to add (or keep) when you already have your stars in place. I think anybody would choose to have two legit max contract guys with smaller 3-5 mill contracts filling out the roster than a bunch of 6-8 mill contract guys. The NBA is very star driven and while Bradley is a very good player, he is hardly a star (and doesn't really have the potential to become one).

[Nerf DPOY]

I've said this before but I'll repeat it. He's getting paid fairly if you compare him to other mediocre/above average players who got deals in that 8-10 range. He's the definition of middle class. It's more of a philosophy issue on how you choose to break down the salaries on your roster for each type of player, whether it be superstar, 2nd/3rd tier stars, and role players.

My problem with the deal is that I feel like that money could be better spent on either:

A: a player with potential to be a star or just below star status making 10-12/year, like Green a few years back when I think most Celtics fans thought optimistically he could be a little better than he has been. Green was athletic, a former 5th overall pick, had good measurements, and could score. He could be the 3rd option on a good team. Bradley should be no better than 4th or 5th option, and some might even argue on a really good team he's a bench guy.

B: two players in that 5-6 million range that are also above average and possibly even better than Bradley.

I get that Ainge just wants to keep his assets but the Bradley deal might hurt flexibility going forward. Like with Green the first three years of his deal when he was inconsistent, I'm not convinced his deal is easily moveable.

Furthermore, I was skeptical about how much Bradley would improve. With any deal for a young player the hope is that the player will improve or at least stay the same. His numbers this year are actually worse so far.

Since he doesn't have great athleticism, measurables, court vision, or a great handle, there are limitations on his ceiling. He could basically just improve his shot and get smarter with experience, but he's always going to be undersized and have low playmaking ability. In other words, a nice role player.

TP - this is pretty much exactly how I feel. It's not like his deal is so horrific - as you explain, his per year average compares well to other players not on their rookie deals. Unfortunately, guys like him and Bass are much better pieces to add (or keep) when you already have your stars in place. I think anybody would choose to have two legit max contract guys with smaller 3-5 mill contracts filling out the roster than a bunch of 6-8 mill contract guys. The NBA is very star driven and while Bradley is a very good player, he is hardly a star (and doesn't really have the potential to become one).

But aside from taking up cap space to sign a max FA(or 2), Bradley doesn't really hinder anything. Ainge hasn't made an effort in the past to clear salary, and while he's maintained flexibility throughout his tenure to either go young or go for it now, he's never put his eggs in the basket of trying to get the latest FA to save the day.

I suppose trading pick #7 in '06 was about a shorter contract, but as we know Ratliff's expiring was traded before it came off the books.

[GreenWarrior]

He shot the ball when he was suppose to , but missed a crap load. 
AB is a streaky shooter.  There is nothing you can do.  You can only blame the coach if he shot 6-20 and we lost the game

  he's not a streaky shooter. he takes bad contested shots that go in on occasion. when he makes 'em it doesn't make him a great player or a great shooter....they're still bad shots

So you're chalking up his career percentages to being a bunch of 'lucky makes'. Gotcha.

ok so if AB is just that guy that shoots better when he's taking contested shots? then I don't want him taking another open shot ever.

[Rondo9]

Bradley is shooting 38% from 2 and 28% from 3 so far this month (8 games). So sure 6-20 is only one bad game, but with his overall PER of 9.79 added to his shooting percentage this month, it isnt just one game that is of concern.

So far this month, but overall he's been okay.

[Rondo9]

I've said this before but I'll repeat it. He's getting paid fairly if you compare him to other mediocre/above average players who got deals in that 8-10 range. He's the definition of middle class. It's more of a philosophy issue on how you choose to break down the salaries on your roster for each type of player, whether it be superstar, 2nd/3rd tier stars, and role players.

My problem with the deal is that I feel like that money could be better spent on either:

A: a player with potential to be a star or just below star status making 10-12/year, like Green a few years back when I think most Celtics fans thought optimistically he could be a little better than he has been. Green was athletic, a former 5th overall pick, had good measurements, and could score. He could be the 3rd option on a good team. Bradley should be no better than 4th or 5th option, and some might even argue on a really good team he's a bench guy.

B: two players in that 5-6 million range that are also above average and possibly even better than Bradley.

I get that Ainge just wants to keep his assets but the Bradley deal might hurt flexibility going forward. Like with Green the first three years of his deal when he was inconsistent, I'm not convinced his deal is easily moveable.

Furthermore, I was skeptical about how much Bradley would improve. With any deal for a young player the hope is that the player will improve or at least stay the same. His numbers this year are actually worse so far.

Since he doesn't have great athleticism, measurables, court vision, or a great handle, there are limitations on his ceiling. He could basically just improve his shot and get smarter with experience, but he's always going to be undersized and have low playmaking ability. In other words, a nice role player.

Bradley's paid fine and with the salary cap rising, it shouldn't be too much of a problem. Obviously Anige sees something in Bradley, which why he gave him that contract.

[Neurotic Guy]

So glad to have another anti--Bradley thread.   After each bad shooting game, we need to bring up his bad salary (which some will argue isn't), his bad shooting (which some will argue isn't), and his bad defense (which some will argue isn't).   

Anyway, I don't think there has been anything new said about Bradley in months. Rehash of the same opinions over and over.  Same with Rondo.   Hopefully there will be some serious trade rumors soon and help us get our heads into something new and exciting.

[Nerf DPOY]

He shot the ball when he was suppose to , but missed a crap load. 
AB is a streaky shooter.  There is nothing you can do.  You can only blame the coach if he shot 6-20 and we lost the game

  he's not a streaky shooter. he takes bad contested shots that go in on occasion. when he makes 'em it doesn't make him a great player or a great shooter....they're still bad shots

So you're chalking up his career percentages to being a bunch of 'lucky makes'. Gotcha.

ok so if AB is just that guy that shoots better when he's taking contested shots? then I don't want him taking another open shot ever.

I just don't see Bradley's occasional woes having to do with taking bad contested shots. The bad games from my memory like last night's and more poignantly, the Portland game we lost at home; down the stretch of that game Bradley and Sully had a bunch of open looks. These were shots they're encouraged to take, that just everyone watching knew they were going to clang based off their obvious lack of confidence on that day.

[GreenWarrior]

He shot the ball when he was suppose to , but missed a crap load. 
AB is a streaky shooter.  There is nothing you can do.  You can only blame the coach if he shot 6-20 and we lost the game

  he's not a streaky shooter. he takes bad contested shots that go in on occasion. when he makes 'em it doesn't make him a great player or a great shooter....they're still bad shots

So you're chalking up his career percentages to being a bunch of 'lucky makes'. Gotcha.

ok so if AB is just that guy that shoots better when he's taking contested shots? then I don't want him taking another open shot ever.

I just don't see Bradley's occasional woes having to do with taking bad contested shots. The bad games from my memory like last night's and more poignantly, the Portland game we lost at home; down the stretch of that game Bradley and Sully had a bunch of open looks. These were shots they're encouraged to take, that just everyone watching knew they were going to clang based off their obvious lack of confidence on that day.

taking a pull up jumper with a hand in your face with 20 sec's left on the clock is a bad shot. and I never said I was happy that we encourage the wrong people to shoot.