Sixers' players parents heckling/criticizing organization

[Jonny CC]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

Ha! That's funny.

A legend in your own mind, man. 

Why do you have one of LarBrd33's posts as part of your signature??  Maybe LarBrd33 is a "legend".

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

Ha! That's funny.

A legend in your own mind, man. 

Why do you have one of LarBrd33's posts as part of your signature??  Maybe LarBrd33 is a "legend".

He's one of three that I know of.   The LB33 fan club.  After joining they get a Nerlens Noel sticker book and a commemorative hat with printed screencaps of me whining about the Celtics.   

[Jonny CC]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times without the out-of-context rabblerousing. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

TP for you for answering a bunch of questions from your fan club.  It seems like some folks have an agenda (whenever you start digging up old posts to try to make a point, you may have a problem).

[Jonny CC]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

Ha! That's funny.

A legend in your own mind, man. 

Why do you have one of LarBrd33's posts as part of your signature??  Maybe LarBrd33 is a "legend".

He's one of three that I know of.   The LB33 fan club.  After joining they get a Nerlens Noel sticker book and a commemorative hat with printed screencaps of me whining about the Celtics.

Congrats on getting inside their heads. 

[Vox_Populi]

There is apparently no way to have a non-delusional discussion about Philly. At least they're always humorous.

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

Ha! That's funny.

A legend in your own mind, man. 

Why do you have one of LarBrd33's posts as part of your signature??  Maybe LarBrd33 is a "legend".

He's one of three that I know of.   The LB33 fan club.  After joining they get a Nerlens Noel sticker book and a commemorative hat with printed screencaps of me whining about the Celtics.

Congrats on getting inside their heads.

That's really not my intention.   I'm just an admitted pessimist and that causes my views to naturally upset some people.   Also, I probably overcompensate a little with anti-homer stances.  Jordan MIckey is dominating d-league.  You aren't going to see me create any threads calling him the next franchise player.   But Nik Stauaskas has a couple decent games and I suggest he might have untapped potential.   Does Nik Stauskas contributing 29 decent starter minutes tonight in a Philly win outshine Jordan Mickey owning the children's league?  Eh... depends... 

I do give credit to Boston guys way more than I get credit for.  I've commented positively about Lee's per-minute production, Olynyk's future, consistently praised Marcus Smart as our best asset, was first in line to point out Avery Bradley's all-star month, was leading the Evan Turner bandwagon well before it was trendy, etc...   

But instead you'll have little instigating rabblerousers who want to take things I say out of context and pretend like I'm an undercover 76er fan, because my interest in Nerlens Noel carried over into him being acquired by the 76ers.

[LarBrd33]

There is apparently no way to have a non-delusional discussion about Philly. At least they're always humorous.

Carl Landry with 16 points tonight.  They've won 3 of their last 6... The tank is over!

[Vox_Populi]

There is apparently no way to have a non-delusional discussion about Philly. At least they're always humorous.

Carl Landry with 16 points tonight.  They've won 3 of their last 6... The tank is over!

I just meant in general. They're a very difficult team to talk about because their practices are strange and it's hard to predict whether or not they've succeeded or will succeed in their goal - draft a potential superstar.

[LarBrd33]

If I can just touch on OP's original post again...

The idea that Nik Stauskas is getting minutes over Kendall Marshall for racial reasons is absurd.   

Okafor's dad getting mad is interesting, but Okafor's defense has been atrocious and I can at least see the argument that the team is better off with Noel getting minutes (he projects as an elite defensive center).  They play the same position.  It's going to remain a problem as long as those two together.  I imagine Okafor hates playing there.   He's an outstanding offensive player, but it's a tough position for Philly to be in for the short-term.  Long-term, it's not going to matter... but in the short-term... it's a problem that Brett Brown is going to struggle to deal with.

This was the Yahoo status update about them: 

Brett Brown admitted that the Nerlens Noel-Jahlil Okafor pairing remains "a mystery right now."

It's clear the two bigs cannot share the court together, and the Sixers have recently worked to do as much as possible in order to stagger Okafor and Noel's minutes. "I think we are going to have this conversation throughout the whole year," Brown added. "Trying to grow those two guys is a challenge." Noel is a defensive presence who is worlds better at center than power forward, and Okafor doesn't play defense well enough to justify what he does offensively.

Tonight Noel had another solid 30 minutes with Ish Smith running the show.  Noel had 10 points, 9 rebounds and 3 blocks with 5-6 shooting.  That's what you want from the defensive stud.  Okafor was limited to 20 minutes... I'm sure it's got to be frustrating for both of them, but it was still the best choice drafting Okafor.  Always go with best player available and figure it out later.   

[wiley]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times without the out-of-context rabblerousing. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

One comment and a few questions for you LB.

Comment: There was zero reason to bring up Smart in this thread.  Stop fighting against your imaginary enemy (people who like what Smart brings to a basketball court).

Questions:  What is about Stauskas that encourages you to say: Kid Still has potential, and then not be able to utter the same about Terry Rozier?  I agree with you that Stauskas still has potential.  Why don't you agree with me that Rozier does?  My opinion on the matter is that Rozier has much more longterm potential than Stauskas because he can bring it on defense.  For example, I'll bet he could shut Stauskas down pretty well and I'll bet Stauskas couldn't shut Rozier down.  Of course there's more to it...the guys have to play in a system and to me the jury's out on who does that better...

And lastly, you were very high on Ben MacLemore during a time when you were calling AB "our trash". It's pretty clear that AB is and never was trash.  He was young and inexperienced and had a lot of injuries.  But AB aside, who would you take today, MacLemore or Stauskas?

First a comment on your comment.   Bringing up Smart's dismal offensive performance is less about dumping on him as a player (I'm a fan... he's still our most valuable trade asset) and more about pointing out the hypocrisy of Celtic fans claiming guys like Nik Stauskas will never be better than they currently are.   The point whooshes over most heads, because it's a combative bunch of fans who get their feathers ruffled anytime anyone says anything realistic about whoever happens to be wearing a Celtic jersey this year.  OP said he didn't understand why Stauskas was still playing minutes.   It's because Stauskas still conceivably will improve... just like Smart conceivably will improve. 

Did I call Avery Bradley trash?  I've never been big on AB, but I don't recall calling him trash.   He's been impressive this year, though... put up some really impressive numbers and has developed into a really solid two-way guy.  There was a stretch this year where he played like a borderline all-star.

I'd take McLemore over Stauskas.  McLemore is shooting really well this year.  I liked McLemore way more than Stauskas last year as well even in the face of the majority of this board claiming Stauskas was going to be vastly superior.  I didn't buy it.   I had Stauskas 10th on my draft board.  I was never a big fan.   But the kid obviously had some potential.  He still obviously has some potential.  I like his potential more than Rozier's potential.

OK thanks for answering.  I feel like Ben McL.  is just not cutting it over in Sac and if they had a better SG starting they'd fare a lot better.  Rondo, Bradley, Casspi (great year), Gay, Cousins.  would be a handful for any team, especially if WCS can put together some decent production/defense.

Can we agree that if Ben Mac were on the Celtcs you'd have lost hope?   
You really seem to favor offense (even undelivered potential offense) over defense unless we're talking
Noel or Biyombo.  Glad you're warming to Smart.  Soon you'll see he was the right pick over Randle!

[BballTim]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried.

You referring to my out-of-context comment in which I said the Cavs should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett instead of trading them for Love?   Funny that you choose to highlight this example when not even two years later there seems to be a widespread consensus agreement that the Cavs messed up and should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett.    Once again, I was ahead of the curve.  Thanks for pointing it out.

The Full quote was in reference to Cleveland giving up the young guys:

Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership.

Kyrie/LeBron/Love should dominant the east for the foreseeable future, though.  It would be interesting if Love got injured and Wiggins/Bennett reached their full potential in Minny.  It will be one of those ultimate "what-ifs"

  Just out of curiosity, are you really familiar with the phrase "out of context"? If so, how does the rest of that post change the meaning of what I quoted? Do you think the bolded "It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership." somehow keeps "I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett." from meaning you could see Bennett ending up a star? If so, why?

One will never know what kind of future Bennett would have had with LeBron's mentorship.  Real shame.

  The fun never ends. If you read your quote (which you even bolded for emphasis), it says "It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership". You're now operating under the impression that it reads "It will be a lot of fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership".

  Your post talks about Wiggins and Bennett playing with LeBron in the past tense, yet you're claiming that I took your quote "out of context" (a phrase I'm still not sure you're familiar with) because I didn't include something (them growing under LeBron's leadership) that you never wrote. This obviously isn't correct.

   Likewise you're trying to imply that your assessment about Bennett wasn't wrong because "we'll never know what kind of future Bennett would have had with LeBron's mentorship" when your post was specifically talking about his future without LeBron. It's  been my experience that this is the point in the discussion that you've confused yourself enough to declare victory in the discussion, talk about how you're always right and how you're making other posters look silly (as far as you can tell).

[guava_wrench]

I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong.

That is because you conveniently forget when you are wrong

[guava_wrench]

Imagine how [random bad player] would have been under Lebron's leadership. Future all star!

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried. Player evaluations and team record predictions are clearly not his forte. To his credit, he continues offering misguided, yet highly confident opinions, despite his track record.

Perhaps LrdBrd would have been close to correct IF the guard with the best defensive RPM and 10th best overall real plus minus for guards had not gotten injured.  His name is Rondae Hollis-Jefferson.  And to think he was taken at #23 and we could have had him instead of Terry Rozier at #16!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Smitty77

There's a transparent little clique of rabblerousers who LooOoOoooove taking what I say out of context.   Most just have an ax to grind, because I made their stances on guys like Rondo look silly over the past 10 years in countless of other debates and they are looking for something to cling to that makes me look equally as silly.  Trust me, I'll make myself look silly plenty of times without the out-of-context rabblerousing. No need to grasp at straws.  I stand by everything I say on these forums.  I'm not always right, but I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. I shall not be making any apologies for thinkin it was potentially worthwhile to dump the #16 pick for a buy-low candidate like Bennett or Stauskas... certainly not while Rozier is spending all of his time in the children's league, because he's not ready to sniff an NBA court.

OP asked why Philly still plays Stauskas.   I answered.   Kid still has potential.  Gotta give him a shot to see if he can live up to it.  He probably won't, but you still gotta see if he does.  I liked Stauksas potential more than the potential of what was available at #16... I like Stauskas potential more than Rozier's potential.  Is what it is.

One comment and a few questions for you LB.

Comment: There was zero reason to bring up Smart in this thread.  Stop fighting against your imaginary enemy (people who like what Smart brings to a basketball court).

Questions:  What is about Stauskas that encourages you to say: Kid Still has potential, and then not be able to utter the same about Terry Rozier?  I agree with you that Stauskas still has potential.  Why don't you agree with me that Rozier does?  My opinion on the matter is that Rozier has much more longterm potential than Stauskas because he can bring it on defense.  For example, I'll bet he could shut Stauskas down pretty well and I'll bet Stauskas couldn't shut Rozier down.  Of course there's more to it...the guys have to play in a system and to me the jury's out on who does that better...

And lastly, you were very high on Ben MacLemore during a time when you were calling AB "our trash". It's pretty clear that AB is and never was trash.  He was young and inexperienced and had a lot of injuries.  But AB aside, who would you take today, MacLemore or Stauskas?

First a comment on your comment.   Bringing up Smart's dismal offensive performance is less about dumping on him as a player (I'm a fan... he's still our most valuable trade asset) and more about pointing out the hypocrisy of Celtic fans claiming guys like Nik Stauskas will never be better than they currently are.   The point whooshes over most heads, because it's a combative bunch of fans who get their feathers ruffled anytime anyone says anything realistic about whoever happens to be wearing a Celtic jersey this year.  OP said he didn't understand why Stauskas was still playing minutes.   It's because Stauskas still conceivably will improve... just like Smart conceivably will improve. 

Did I call Avery Bradley trash?  I've never been big on AB, but I don't recall calling him trash.   He's been impressive this year, though... put up some really impressive numbers and has developed into a really solid two-way guy.  There was a stretch this year where he played like a borderline all-star.

I'd take McLemore over Stauskas.  McLemore is shooting really well this year.  I liked McLemore way more than Stauskas last year as well even in the face of the majority of this board claiming Stauskas was going to be vastly superior.  I didn't buy it.   I had Stauskas 10th on my draft board.  I was never a big fan.   But the kid obviously had some potential.  He still obviously has some potential.  I like his potential more than Rozier's potential.

OK thanks for answering.  I feel like Ben McL.  is just not cutting it over in Sac and if they had a better SG starting they'd fare a lot better.  Rondo, Bradley, Casspi (great year), Gay, Cousins.  would be a handful for any team, especially if WCS can put together some decent production/defense.

Can we agree that if Ben Mac were on the Celtcs you'd have lost hope?   

No.   Because I always have a soft spot for guys who shoot high percentages.  It's why I have consistently shown faith in Kelly Olynyk and repeatedly said I would love to see him average 30+ minutes per night, because I believe he's capable of averaging 17 and 7.   With McLemore, I feel like a lot of it is role.  He still has potential.  WIth Olynyk, it's a gluttony of mediocre bigs preventing him from putting up bigger stats.

If Boston had a 22 year old shooting 46%/40%/77% ... I'd be pretty annoyed he wasn't getting a bigger opportunity.

Can we agree that if James Young was on a different team, the majority of this forum would have no idea who he was?

[LarBrd33]

Nik is just playing in his second year, being the 8th pick in last years draft. As of right now he has his ups and downs, as is to be expected of any young player, but the potential is still there to be an effective scorer in this league. Just look at the type of production he had during the clippers game: http://espn.go.com/nba/boxscore?id=400828392
Its clearly evident that Nik has a great future in the NBA, and Kendall at best is a second or third option the arguably worst team in NBA history.

I don't think it's clearly evident that a guy whose calling card is shooting but has career percentages of .359/.311/.796 has any kind of future in the NBA.

Did you intentionally add the "calling card is shooting" bit to shelter you from the rebuttal that Marcus Smart is shooting 34%/22%/70%?

This is kind of pathetic. Stauskas averages 1.2 turnovers and 1.7 assists. His defense has repeatedly been blasted by Brown

http://articles.philly.com/2015-12-16/sports/69065473_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-nerlens-noel
http://articles.philly.com/2015-11-18/sports/68356892_1_brett-brown-nik-stauskas-raft

He is possibly the worst rotation player in the NBA this season. He is supposed to decent at one thing and he hasn't been able to do that. You use that as a segway to bring in Marcus Smart's shooting percentages? Again, absolutely pathetic.

He is 302nd out of 324 qualified players for PER rating at 7.68

And he's coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds and 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.

So it will be interesting to see if he finds a rhythm.

You have to know more about basketball based on how much you post here than you have exhibited in your last couple of posts...

What do you know about basketball? 

Not a question that should ever be asked by someone who wrote an enthusiastic post about the amazing potential of Anthony Bennett.

Mike

I liked Bennett's potential more than what was available at #16.   I'm still not sure Rozier has more potential than Anthony Bennett.  At best, it's a toss-up. 

I'd still probably trade Rozier for Stauskas.   Maybe that comment ends up looking stupid... i dunno...  Stauskas is coming off a game with 18 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists with 6-8 shooting from three.   Rozier is coming off a game with 0 points, 0 rebounds, 1 assist with 0-1 shooting.   At gunpoint, I'm takin Sauce Castillo.  Sue me.

  He's probably referring to something like:

  http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=72982.msg1718477#msg1718477

  "Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. "

Wow. I don't think someone could be more wrong about so many things if they tried.

You referring to my out-of-context comment in which I said the Cavs should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett instead of trading them for Love?   Funny that you choose to highlight this example when not even two years later there seems to be a widespread consensus agreement that the Cavs messed up and should have just kept Wiggins and Bennett.    Once again, I was ahead of the curve.  Thanks for pointing it out.

The Full quote was in reference to Cleveland giving up the young guys:

Shame about Wiggins and Bennett... both of them have really bright futures, imo.  I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett. It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership.

Kyrie/LeBron/Love should dominant the east for the foreseeable future, though.  It would be interesting if Love got injured and Wiggins/Bennett reached their full potential in Minny.  It will be one of those ultimate "what-ifs"

  Just out of curiosity, are you really familiar with the phrase "out of context"? If so, how does the rest of that post change the meaning of what I quoted? Do you think the bolded "It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership." somehow keeps "I could see them both ending up stars.  Yes, even Bennett." from meaning you could see Bennett ending up a star? If so, why?

One will never know what kind of future Bennett would have had with LeBron's mentorship.  Real shame.

  The fun never ends. If you read your quote (which you even bolded for emphasis), it says "It would have been a lot more fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership". You're now operating under the impression that it reads "It will be a lot of fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership".

 

False.  Post was made in the context of Cavs trading away Wiggins and Bennett.  Within context, I was saying that it was a shame, because it WOULD HAVE been a lot of fun watching them grow under LeBron's leadership.  Unfortunately, they never got the opportunity to grow under LeBron's leadership.  We'll never know how Bennett could have developed catching lobs from LeBron.  Who knows what could have happened.

If we're going to be super specific, the funny part of those quotes was that I made them a month before the Kevin Love trade was even official.  At the time of those comments, people here still thought Kevin Love to Boston was a possibility.  I was pretending like it was a done deal and that the Cavs had locked it up.  In part, my comments were made with a "woe-is-me" defeatest tone that that Cleveland had beaten us to the punch... even thought that quote was July 26th, 2014 and the Cavs finally traded for Kevin Love on August 23, 2014.  Here was the post I made just a couple minutes earlier:

This has been over for a couple weeks.  Love will be a Cav.  Have to wait 30 days until Wiggins can be traded.  Cavs also have to wait until they can re-trade those non-guaranteed contracts they just brought in.  So the assets are there... the framework is probably in place... but nobody can admit to it for at least another month.

Basic framework will be Wiggins + Bennett + 1st.  It might be a little more convoluted as the Cavs include nonguaranteed contracts and the Wolves try to dump salary (Kevin Martin/Barea, for example)... might even require a 3rd team and a few more picks bouncing around.   But this is happening.

Once again... basically nailed it.