Tobias Harris started following Marcus Smart on Twitter, C's players follow him

[RockinRyA]

No I'm one of those guys that likes to see what a guy does on the court and judge how he fits into our teams needs not whether or not he statitisticslly measure up.  Maybe you didn't see the nba finals because you were crunching numbers but Andre IGuidala had the worse statistics of any nba mvp and was worse than curry and lebron.  But if iggy isn't  on the floor, isn't playing his role for his team,  the Warriors may not win.  Harris give this team, by your own admission, something it needs, rebounding and wing scoring.  So if your searching your stats for someone that has all the numbers all in the percentages hat would qualify them as suitable for you standards, then please continue to search and let us know when you find one that will fit our system, our needs, and that you can get for around 15 mil a year.

Andre Iguodala in 2014/15 had an Offensive RPM of +0.18 and a Defensive RPM of +0.73, with his total RPM of +0.91 ranking him 24/100 (if you put him at SG) or 21/87 (if you put him at Small Forward).   Regardless of which position you put him at, that ranks him in the top 25% of players at his position and clearly indicates that his team was better while he was on the court then it was when he was on the bench.

These are regular season numbers - if you were to find a source that lists these figures specifically for the playoffs (or better yet, finals) then I imagine you would find his overall RPM (and especially his Defensive RPM) would increase dramatically.

You aren't really helping your argument for Harris here.  If he offered something his team needed so much (shooting and rebounding) as you say. then WHY did his team get worse rather than better - on both ends of the floor - any time he was on the court?

I mean his Offensive RPM is only slightly in the negative, so I'm willing to cut him some slack there and just call him even (i.e. a non factor), but his defensive rating is so bad that it absolutely cannot be ignored.  A player needs to have a MASSIVE impact on the offensive end of the floor in order to offset such poor defense, and while Harris may be a 'decent' offensive player, he certainly isn't a great one. 

Take Carmelo Anthony as a perfect example.  The Knicks were one of the bottom 4 teams in the NBA last year, and Carmelo Anthony was almost as bad defensively as Tobias Harris was (-2.09 Defensive RPM).  But Carmelo Anthony is one of the best offensive players of this generation, as evidenced by his Offensive RPM of +4.81 (good enough to rank him 6th in the entire league).

So as much as Anthony hurts his team on defense, he move than makes up for that with the way he carries them on offense.  The end result is an overall RPM of +2.72 which is 11th among Small Forwards and which shows that (despite his defensive issues) the Knicks are still much better with him than they are without him.

But Harris (in contrast) doesn't come close to improving the Magic enough offensively, in order to make up for how much he hurts them defensively.   He's offensive game is probably somewhat limited by that fact that he's not a good passer (1.9 assists per 36, 1.1 Assits/Turnover, on par with Avery Bradley).  In fact if you look at his offensive profile, he's almost dead on par with Avery Bradley as an offensive player.

You can argue that Harris had value over Bradley because of his size and rebounding, but that's offset by Bradley's (obviously) far superior defense.

So considering the fact that nobody on the fact of this earth seems to consider Avery Bradley anywhere near deserving of a max contract...how could you possible make that same argument for Harris?

This is what I don't understand - the double standards.  Why do Celtics fans (who seem to widely regard themselves as the best and most loyal fans in all sports) seem to love throwing dirt on our own players (e.g. Bradley), yet obsess and fall in love with similar quality players on other teams (like Harris). 

The biggest knocks everybody here has on Bradley is that he can't pass, he can't dribble, and he'll never be a go-to scorer.   How does Harris in any way escape those same criticisms?

How is it that guys here were fuming about Bradley getting $8m - $9m, but are all for throwing $15m at Harris?

None of this makes any sense at all. 

Based on the type of comments I always see on CB about our own players, if Harris actually DID come here then it would take all of about 1 months before all the guys who are praising him right now suddenly start bagging him out for being a black hole, for being a chucker, and for being a horrible defensive player.

Stats are good and important, however one should also take into account that stats have flaws, and sometimes they dont count in other factors. According to RPM Zaza Pachulia is NBA 3rd team caliber fwiw. I mean who needs Cousins and Aldridge when you can have Zaza effin Pachulia for far less cheap right? Heck Kelly Olynyk is better than Blake Griffin, why trade him?

[crimson_stallion]

1. Those stats do not account for quality of coach, or if the scheme, his teammates are a good fit.

A fair argument, and one factor that can have SOME impact.  However ultimately, I don't believe this impacts a stat like RPM very much.

Why?

Because again, it doesn't go off how bad your team is, but how much you IMPACT how bad your team is.

If the team's defense sucked while Harris was on the floor due to poor defensive schemes, then that defense should have also sucked just as badly when Harris was not on the floor.  If that were the case, then Harris would not have a negative Defensive RPM.  Same goes for offense.

If Harris has a poor Defensive RPM then there are really only a handful of things that could explain this:

a) The player who replaces Harris on the court when he sits is an outstanding defensive player - this may make Harris 'appear' to be a poor defensive player, because the team would get worse defensively when his replacement steps off the court (and hence, Harris steps on)

b) One (or more) players who step on the court when Harris does are horrendous defensive players.  This would mean that when Harris steps on the court player X also steps on the court, and this could cause the team's defense to suffer badly even though Harris himself is not a horrible defensive player.   

c) Harris is a horrible defensive player

Scenario A is not likely because there is no other player on the Magic roster (at SF or PF - the two positions Harris would normally play) who has an overwhelmingly positive Defensive RPM.  The only guys who do are Elfrid Payton and victor Oladipo but they are both starters, and hence will (more often than not) be on the court when Harris is.  If anything this should INFLATE Harris' Defensive RPM and make him look like a better defender than he really is...sothat's not a good sign for Harris.

Scenario B is not likely because Harris averaged 36 MPG last year, meaning that he is on the court for Orlando for 75% of the time each game.  Given that not many guys play huge minutes on that Orlando roster, you can be almost every guy who plays for Orlando spends a significant amount of time on the court with Harris.  Except for, of course, his direct replacements - who we've already determined are not great defensive players.  So this doesn't explain it.

Scenario C is, therefore, then only possible conclusion that I can come to. 

2. Harris is great at knocking down 3's off the catch, creating offense in the pick and roll as well as driving close outs and posting up smaller 3's (due to his strength). The problem is Orlando seriously lacked shooting and thus floor spacing. This made scoring in the pick and roll and driving close outs much more difficult and posting up significantly more difficult. As one of the only good 3 point shooters on his team he was a lot less likely to find clean looks.

A fair argument if Boston had a lot of good shooters, as this would suggest we are a better fit for Harris.  However we don't - Boston was statistically one of the worst three point shooting teams in the league last year.  So coming here likely presents him with most of the same issues he has in Orlando UNLESS Boston can pick up some nice shooters in the offseason - which we haven't done so far.

3. The fact that he is 22 can't simply be brushed off because he has had similar production over the first few years of his career. If a 22 year old coming out of college had similar production by advanced metrics over his last few years of college, you wouldn't assume he isn't going to get better in the NBA.

But when Avery Bradley was 22 and just had a great year, EVERYBODY here was brushing him off as a guy who "is who he is" based on the fact that he had already played 3-4 years in the league and had yet to show promise.  When he had a career year at age 23 in 2013/14 (while shooting 39.5% form three and averaging nearly 16 PPG) everyone said those were just inflated numbers because he was playing on a bad team. 

How is Harris' situation any different?

4. Usually when players increase their attempts, their efficiency goes down that is not the case with Harris. This year his effective field goal percentage and 3 point percentage increased despite taking a career high in 3's. His overall numbers didn't improve by much due to the cluster (expletive) of spacing that the magic had this year. Harris had many less opportunities inside yet he increased his percentages, think about what he will do when he takes his current 3 point shooting to a team that spaces the court well.

Again, Avery Bradley's shooting took a very big leap in terms of both attempts (from 2.5 per game up to 3.3 per game) and percentage (from 31.7% to 39.5%) between 2012/13 and 2013/14 and he was only one year older than Harris when he made that leap. 

This year (one season later) Bradley's attempts increased again (from 3.3 3PA to 4.6 3PA) but his percentage went down (from 39.5% to 35.2%).

I don't see any pattern here that indicates that Harris is any better a shooter than Bradley is, or that he has any greater potential as a offensive player than Bradley has.  So for all those who look at Bradley now as an average offensive player, how is Harris that much better?

5. Those stats (for the most part) take into account opponents and some of them even take into account teammates but they do not take into account the style, spacing and coaching of a team, which is why Harris is greatly undervalued by those stats.

Again, a valid point if you are arguing that Harris' replacement player in Orlando fits their 'offensive system' better than he himself does.  That's still really the only way you can justify the fact that their offense doesn't get any better at all when Harris steps on the court. 

Plus even if that is true, I still don't see how that factor does anything to justify his horrible defensive rating which (from what I have seen so far) cannot be explained in any way except by concluding that he is simply a poor defensive player at his position.

Either way I am happy to see that you responded with some thought and rationale and raised some good points - I can actually respect (and dignify) such a response.

[Ilikesports17]

Harris is Jeff Green if Jeff Green were better.

and young

Tobias Harris gave Orlando this year basically the same thing Green gave 2 years ago. 17 ppg the athleticism and profile to be a stud and not a noticeable impact in the w/l column. Now at 10 mil he was about correctly priced and we were able to move him for positive assets.

I would be happy to sign a 7 years younger Jeff Green of that to a 15 million dollar deal.

[kozlodoev]

After lamenting Jeff Green's contract for years, CB fans now pull for signing an inferior player to a worse contract.

Well done. 

Harris is not jeff Green.

Correct, he's worse -- he doesn't play defense.

[walker834]

Harris is Jeff Green if Jeff Green were better.

and young

Tobias Harris gave Orlando this year basically the same thing Green gave 2 years ago. 17 ppg the athleticism and profile to be a stud and not a noticeable impact in the w/l column. Now at 10 mil he was about correctly priced and we were able to move him for positive assets.

I would be happy to sign a 7 years younger Jeff Green of that to a 15 million dollar deal.

He also shot the ball better and rebounded.

[Tr1boy]

After lamenting Jeff Green's contract for years, CB fans now pull for signing an inferior player to a worse contract.

Well done. 

Harris is not jeff Green.

Correct, he's worse -- he doesn't play defense.

You sure Green plays defense?

[PhoSita]

Similarly effective sign-reading.

[Future Celtics Owner]

I only read a few pages but here is a video I saw a few months ago. I think there is another one of them going against each other .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUlSNqQQTck

Tobias reminds me of a PP lite. Now he is young but if we get him, and he continues to improve his 3pt shooting and overall game, I think he could be a keeper.

He would ensure James Young plays the 2...which I am all over. James Young plays the best at 2.

[crimson_stallion]

Stats are good and important, however one should also take into account that stats have flaws, and sometimes they dont count in other factors. According to RPM Zaza Pachulia is NBA 3rd team caliber fwiw. I mean who needs Cousins and Aldridge when you can have Zaza effin Pachulia for far less cheap right? Heck Kelly Olynyk is better than Blake Griffin, why trade him?

There is a flaw in this logic.

RPM does not tell you how good a player is, it merely tells you what impact that player has for their team when they are on / off the court.

When they get on the court, do they make their team better?

Sometimes you can have a player with elite talent and skills, but who (due to other reasons) has a negative impact on his team when he steps on the floor.  This could happen for a variety of reasons, such as:

* He could have a personality that creates a negative impact on team chemistry
* He may be spending too much time playing at an off-position where he routinely gets abused
* He could be costing his team leads through lack of effort or by taking plays off
* He could be a 'black hole' who makes halts ball movement the instant he gets on the court.
* He could take too many long jumpers on a team that lacks rebounders (which leads to many  defensive rebounds and more opponent possessions)

Likewise there can be guys who aren't exceptionally talented/skilled, but who have an overwhelmingly positive impact on their team when they step on the court.  This can happen for a bunch of reasons too, such as:

* Sets lots of great screens which lead to open shots for teammates, but don't show up in stats
* Makes a lot of good 'hockey passes' - passes that lead to assists, but don't show up in stats
* Saves/creates a great deal of possessions with hustle plays, like diving after loose balls
* Excellent team defense, always in the right place at the right time (doesn't show up on stats)
* Great at taking charges, which creates possessions but doesn't show on basic stats
* Great on ball defender who affects (but doesn't block) many shots - doesn't show up on stats
* Great vocal leader who directs offense/defense when on the court - doesn't show up on stats
* Intimidates / distracts opponents, taking them out of their game - doesn't show up in stats

A guy who does all of these things, despite putting up very mediocre box score stats, may well contribute far more to team wins than a guy who does puts up pretty nice stats but who doesn't do any of these things.

When I look at the game of basketball, the only thing that matters is winning at the end of the day.  As long as you make your better every time you step on the court, then you increasing your team's chance of winning.  It doesn't matter how you do that, all that matters is that you do.

In direct response to your point above Zaza Pachulia, when he's on the court, may well do more to help his team win than Aldridge does.  However Pachilia only plays 23 MPG, so he may not have the fitness to stay on the court for a full 35 minutes (as Aldridge does).  Or his skill set may be very narrow, meaning he can only play to this level of effectiveness if he's on the court with Player X (who covers up his flaws well).  If he played with Player Y his flaws may get exposed, and his RPM numbers may drop significantly.

These are all valid points, however like any stat RPM gets more effective as the sample size gets larger. 

The RPM numbers for a guy who plays 35 MPG (like Harris does) are going to give much more accurate feedback than the RPM numbers for a guy who plays 20 MPG or (even moreso) an end of bench guy who plays 5 MPG.

As with any statistic, you need to take factors like this in to account. 

[Ilikesports17]

Stats are good and important, however one should also take into account that stats have flaws, and sometimes they dont count in other factors. According to RPM Zaza Pachulia is NBA 3rd team caliber fwiw. I mean who needs Cousins and Aldridge when you can have Zaza effin Pachulia for far less cheap right? Heck Kelly Olynyk is better than Blake Griffin, why trade him?

There is a flaw in this logic.

RPM does not tell you how good a player is, it merely tells you what impact that player has for their team when they are on / off the court.

When they get on the court, do they make their team better?

Sometimes you can have a player with elite talent and skills, but who (due to other reasons) has a negative impact on his team when he steps on the floor.  This could happen for a variety of reasons, such as:

* He could have a personality that creates a negative impact on team chemistry
* He may be spending too much time playing at an off-position where he routinely gets abused
* He could be costing his team leads through lack of effort or by taking plays off
* He could be a 'black hole' who makes halts ball movement the instant he gets on the court.
* He could take too many long jumpers on a team that lacks rebounders (which leads to many  defensive rebounds and more opponent possessions)

Likewise there can be guys who aren't exceptionally talented/skilled, but who have an overwhelmingly positive impact on their team when they step on the court.  This can happen for a bunch of reasons too, such as:

* Sets lots of great screens which lead to open shots for teammates, but don't show up in stats
* Makes a lot of good 'hockey passes' - passes that lead to assists, but don't show up in stats
* Saves/creates a great deal of possessions with hustle plays, like diving after loose balls
* Excellent team defense, always in the right place at the right time (doesn't show up on stats)
* Great at taking charges, which creates possessions but doesn't show on basic stats
* Great on ball defender who affects (but doesn't block) many shots - doesn't show up on stats
* Great vocal leader who directs offense/defense when on the court - doesn't show up on stats
* Intimidates / distracts opponents, taking them out of their game - doesn't show up in stats

A guy who does all of these things, despite putting up very mediocre box score stats, may well contribute far more to team wins than a guy who does puts up pretty nice stats but who doesn't do any of these things.

When I look at the game of basketball, the only thing that matters is winning at the end of the day.  As long as you make your better every time you step on the court, then you increasing your team's chance of winning.  It doesn't matter how you do that, all that matters is that you do.

In direct response to your point above Zaza Pachulia, when he's on the court, may well do more to help his team win than Aldridge does.  However Pachilia only plays 23 MPG, so he may not have the fitness to stay on the court for a full 35 minutes (as Aldridge does).  Or his skill set may be very narrow, meaning he can only play to this level of effectiveness if he's on the court with Player X (who covers up his flaws well).  If he played with Player Y his flaws may get exposed, and his RPM numbers may drop significantly.

These are all valid points, however like any stat RPM gets more effective as the sample size gets larger. 

The RPM numbers for a guy who plays 35 MPG (like Harris does) are going to give much more accurate feedback than the RPM numbers for a guy who plays 20 MPG or (even moreso) an end of bench guy who plays 5 MPG.

As with any statistic, you need to take factors like this in to account.

True but Zaza plays 23 mpg that should be more than enough for a solid sample size.

I think RPM is a valuable stat but the fact remains that you have a 22 year old player with the physical tools to be a great SF.

I don't love his game and I think you make a good argument but signing him seems to make too much sense for me to not do it because he didn't have the effect he should have on a disaster of an orlando magic team.

[crimson_stallion]

Did you really just say that Smart at 33.5% is a "significantly" better 3pt. shooter than Harris at 32.1%?

That is what they call a credibility killer.

When you take in to account the fact that:

1) Smart's biggest criticism going in to the draft was that he 'couldn't shoot'
2) It was Smart's rookie year
3) Smart took almost twice as many attempts

Then yes, that fact that he STILL shot a higher percentage than Harris is very significant. 

[crimson_stallion]

I agree I'd rather have Butler or Leonard. Middleton and Harris are close, Middleton would be cheaper, but unless we move a guard, not sure if he would be a good three, were Harris could play some four.

Middleton and Harris really aren't close. 

Middleton is already one of the best shooters and defenders at his position in the NBA.

Harris is (so far) an entirely average shooter and well below average defender.

Middleton is a far, far superior option right now...and likely cheaper as well. 

[Ilikesports17]

I agree I'd rather have Butler or Leonard. Middleton and Harris are close, Middleton would be cheaper, but unless we move a guard, not sure if he would be a good three, were Harris could play some four.

Middleton and Harris really aren't close. 

Middleton is already one of the best shooters and defenders at his position in the NBA.

Harris is (so far) an entirely average shooter and well below average defender.

Middleton is a far, far superior option right now...and likely cheaper as well.

Harris has a far better physical profile/upside

They will cost probably roughly the same

Middleton has only been a good defender for 1 year. This could be a fluke.

again, RPM is a good stat but it's not the be all end all.

Harris addresses a position of need. Middleton does not.

[crimson_stallion]

True but Zaza plays 23 mpg that should be more than enough for a solid sample size.

I think RPM is a valuable stat but the fact remains that you have a 22 year old player with the physical tools to be a great SF.

I don't love his game and I think you make a good argument but signing him seems to make too much sense for me to not do it because he didn't have the effect he should have on a disaster of an orlando magic team.

I understand what you're saying, and i am all for using up cap space this year due to the upcoming cap rise.

BUT a max contract (which I believe would be about 3 x $16.75M, or at least $50M in total) is a lot to commit to a guy when all you have to go off is the hope that he might one day become a player who could help you win games.

Greg Monroe and Khris Middleton are guys who are making their teams better right now and who also have the upside to one day become stars.  That's a gamble I'm happy to take because if you know these guys are already making their current teams better, then that is proof that they have the ability to make a team better.  That means that even if these guys aren't good enough right now to deserve a big contract, the fact that they are probably going add wins to your team is still enough to justify taking the gamble.

With a guy like Harris I'm less eager because as much as the potential may be there, he's yet to really show any indication that he can help a team win games.   If I'm buying in to a guy for the long term on the hope he one day becomes something special, I still want to know that if they doesn't happen I can at least bank on the fact that he's going to make you better.

With Harris I'm just not convinced that he will. I could be wrong, but if I put myself in Danny's shoes...that's a big gamble to take. 

If i have a chance to sign pretty much any other big name free agent (Greg Monroe, Khris Middleton, etc) then I wouldn't dream of signing Harris to an offer sheet until I have tried every one of those other guys first...because if using my cap space on a guy like Harris led to me losing out on a chance to sign a Monroe / Middleton / Butler then I would be one very depressed man.

[crimson_stallion]

I agree I'd rather have Butler or Leonard. Middleton and Harris are close, Middleton would be cheaper, but unless we move a guard, not sure if he would be a good three, were Harris could play some four.

Middleton and Harris really aren't close. 

Middleton is already one of the best shooters and defenders at his position in the NBA.

Harris is (so far) an entirely average shooter and well below average defender.

Middleton is a far, far superior option right now...and likely cheaper as well.

Harris has a far better physical profile/upside

They will cost probably roughly the same

Middleton has only been a good defender for 1 year. This could be a fluke.

again, RPM is a good stat but it's not the be all end all.

Harris addresses a position of need. Middleton does not.

How can you possibly argue that Harris addresses a position of need, and Middleton doesn't?

Middleton is a SG/SF and Harris is a SF/PF.  Our biggest positions of need are SF and C.  Middleton and Harris both cover a position at need because they can both play the SF spot.

What is our biggest need at the SF spot?  Shooting.  Middleton last year shot:

* 62.1% inside 3 feet
* 47.4% from 3-10 feet
* 44.9% from 10-16 feet
* 44.1% from 16 feet to 3PT
* 40.7% from 3PT

Those are elite numbers - you'll struggle to find 10 guys in the entire NBA who have shot percentages that high from all over the court like Middleton has.  He's put up numbers like that in two of his first three years, and Harris hasn't even shown potential to ever become that good a shooter.

Defensively maybe you're right - maybe it is a fluke.  If that's the case, then it makes it's no worse than Harris (who hasn't had ANY good defensive years - fluke or not).

Physical profile is nice when you're going from college to the NBA.  Once you've been in the NBA for four years, you get a pretty good idea of who somebody is likely to be.

Look at Josh Smith - the world was salivating at his upside forever.  Did he ever realise that potential?  Not even close, though he remained a pretty solid player.  I'd still take him over Harris because at least he a multi-dimensional player.

I look at Harris and i don't see as much potential as other's do.  How many star SF's are there in the NBA who are average 1.5 assists per game?   Not many.  SF is one of those 'swiss army knife' positions where you need to be able to do a little bit of everything, and one of the biggest knocks against Jeff Green was his lack of skills as a passer, which significantly hurt is versatility.  That's also one of the biggest strengths of guys like Paul Pierce, Lebron James, Kevin Durant, James Harden, Carmelo Anthony, Paul George, Rudy G.ay, Josh Smith, Joe Johnson, etc.   

In fact I think you'll struggle to find any star SG or SF in recent times who wasn't at least a competent passer.   

Anyway I'm starting to feel like there is a dead horse around here somewhere being beaten, so I'll put a stop to this debate from my end now - I just hope that some of the information I have posted might at least open up a new perspective for some people on who Harris is as a player, and some of the reasons why signing him may not be the best idea. 

Likewise many here have made some solid points to highlight some of his strengths and some reasons why he may be worth looking at.

Either way I'm sure that somebody here has learned something (either positive or negative) about Harris that they didn't already know as a result of this debate, and if so that's good enough for me!