Can Mickey please take all Zeller's minutes?

[Celtics4ever]

Zeller has had some bad games but some fine ones too.  One thing a lot of people need to realize is he has effects from just being in the game.  If there's anything Zeller does well, it's catch and finish and roll on the pick and roll (he can pop some as well).  That changes how defenses have to play the pick and roll and it collapses the defense and gives room for shooters and drives.  That's helping us out even if he hasn't been great.

He has helped us win games, but he is a second to  third string center really.

Last night his D, was terrible.  He changed the way the other team attacked, it was a drive fest to the rim.   I do not think Mickey is necessarily ready to jump into a game like last night.   But could he have done worse at protecting the rim, I doubt it.

[hagar55voa]

Sounds to me like from reading most of these posts that this guy Mickey is all NBA...I'm surprised that with his talent that all the other NBA teams aren't in hot pursuit of his services...

[BudweiserCeltic]

Sounds to me like from reading most of these posts that this guy Mickey is all NBA...I'm surprised that with his talent that all the other NBA teams aren't in hot pursuit of his services...

If deeming playing time over Zeller makes him All-NBA, then sure...

[Ogaju]

Zeller offers no rim protection at all , and on offense is either a pick and roll a running hook or a mid range J. I think Mickey could offer just as much on offense , while being able to be a real defensive anchor for the 2nd unit .

Please just play the kid .

to whom are you addressing this plea? to the cb community? sure, the next time we can substitute players in a live game, we will do so. or maybe you are addressing this to CBS? if so, you might want to email him personally because i don't think he visits here often. 

lol TP

[hwangjini_1]

Zeller has had some bad games but some fine ones too.  One thing a lot of people need to realize is he has effects from just being in the game.  If there's anything Zeller does well, it's catch and finish and roll on the pick and roll (he can pop some as well).  That changes how defenses have to play the pick and roll and it collapses the defense and gives room for shooters and drives.  That's helping us out even if he hasn't been great.

He has helped us win games, but he is a second to  third string center really.

Last night his D, was terrible.  He changed the way the other team attacked, it was a drive fest to the rim.   I do not think Mickey is necessarily ready to jump into a game like last night.   But could he have done worse at protecting the rim, I doubt it.

good points, and this is the key isnt it? he is a second to third string center. that means, by definition, that he will be inconsistent, up and down, not be terribly versatile, and have a limited game.

if we use THAT as our standard for looking at zeller, suddenly he looks ok, not good, but ok.

if, on the other hand, we use good starting centers on other teams as our standard, well then, we are simply engagin in an exercise guaranteed to make us all wail, gnash our teeth, rend our garments, and pull out our hair...collectively.

i think the celtics would benefit by keeping zeller. but i wouldnt be surprised if they decided to let him move on either. he is, after all, a back up player.

[nickagneta]

He is just not that good yet or ready to play. If he was better than Zeller right now he would be playing. People just need to get it. The kid isn't ready yet. We have to wait until next year to see what he can do. This year is about winning and Stevens feels playing the best players wins games. Mickey isn't one of our ten best players, so he doesn't play.

You really need to get away from that argument you've closed yourself into.

Whether it be true or not in this case.

Why exactly? It makes complete sense. If Mickey were playing better than Zeller he would be playing because Stevens wants to win games.

Sorry if I believe that Mickey's game should be more than just being able to block a couple shots a night, but I do. Mcikey has to learn to block out better, switch on the outside better without getting lost, play the pick and roll and pick and pop better, box out better, throw the outlet pass better, roll to the basket better, set screens better, pass better, and know his overall role better.

Mickey still needs developmental time and you can't get that on a team fighting for home court advantage in the playoffs. He  can shine in the D-League all he wants but the NBDL is not the NBA. The Red Claws are not the Celtics. His defensive mistakes he constantly makes in the D-League can be covered up quick with athleticism in the D-League but not in the big league. NBA players will actually play NBA defense against him and not that horrid brand of defense they play in the NBDL.

When his game exceeds that of Zeller as a total player, he will play because Stevens wants to win.

It's a sound argument and makes logical sense. What's the argument to play him? Zeller is bad? Well, my guess is that Stevens feels that if he gives Mickey regular minutes he will be worse than Zeller. I'll go with what the coach thinks and does and from what I have seen of Mickey thus far.

He is just not ready.

All I'm saying, irrespective of this particular situation, is that you need to step away from that argument because it's the one you ALWAYS use to explain why a player doesn't get on the floor.

The league is littered with players who are ready to contribute but just don't get the playing time. There's a real hierarchy in the NBA that influences this types of decisions as well. 

You seem to hold a coach on a pedestal without room for other explanations, as in, maybe he's wrong about what certain player might provide on the game as opposed to another regardless of their development level at that point.

That's my issue with the argument, not necessarily with this case, but with you throwing it around every time a scenario like this comes up.

Sorry, you don't like the argument but it happens to be true for teams trying to win games. I have brought this argument out in defense of Doc and Stevens because both have had that philosophy during times when this team wasn't tanking. You did not see me using this argument prior to 2007-2008 or during the season over the last two years. While coaches can be wrong, I have yet to see Doc or Stevens be wrong on this point. Both have for the most part played young

[BudweiserCeltic]

He is just not that good yet or ready to play. If he was better than Zeller right now he would be playing. People just need to get it. The kid isn't ready yet. We have to wait until next year to see what he can do. This year is about winning and Stevens feels playing the best players wins games. Mickey isn't one of our ten best players, so he doesn't play.

You really need to get away from that argument you've closed yourself into.

Whether it be true or not in this case.

Why exactly? It makes complete sense. If Mickey were playing better than Zeller he would be playing because Stevens wants to win games.

Sorry if I believe that Mickey's game should be more than just being able to block a couple shots a night, but I do. Mcikey has to learn to block out better, switch on the outside better without getting lost, play the pick and roll and pick and pop better, box out better, throw the outlet pass better, roll to the basket better, set screens better, pass better, and know his overall role better.

Mickey still needs developmental time and you can't get that on a team fighting for home court advantage in the playoffs. He  can shine in the D-League all he wants but the NBDL is not the NBA. The Red Claws are not the Celtics. His defensive mistakes he constantly makes in the D-League can be covered up quick with athleticism in the D-League but not in the big league. NBA players will actually play NBA defense against him and not that horrid brand of defense they play in the NBDL.

When his game exceeds that of Zeller as a total player, he will play because Stevens wants to win.

It's a sound argument and makes logical sense. What's the argument to play him? Zeller is bad? Well, my guess is that Stevens feels that if he gives Mickey regular minutes he will be worse than Zeller. I'll go with what the coach thinks and does and from what I have seen of Mickey thus far.

He is just not ready.

All I'm saying, irrespective of this particular situation, is that you need to step away from that argument because it's the one you ALWAYS use to explain why a player doesn't get on the floor.

The league is littered with players who are ready to contribute but just don't get the playing time. There's a real hierarchy in the NBA that influences this types of decisions as well. 

You seem to hold a coach on a pedestal without room for other explanations, as in, maybe he's wrong about what certain player might provide on the game as opposed to another regardless of their development level at that point.

That's my issue with the argument, not necessarily with this case, but with you throwing it around every time a scenario like this comes up.

Sorry, you don't like the argument but it happens to be true for teams trying to win games. I have brought this argument out in defense of Doc and Stevens because both have had that philosophy during times when this team wasn't tanking. You did not see me using this argument prior to 2007-2008 or during the season over the last two years. While coaches can be wrong, I have yet to see Doc or Stevens be wrong on this point. Both have for the most part played young

It's not that I don't like the argument because it is valid in many instances. It's that it's thin and not an explain-all either.

If someone isn't ready, he isn't ready. It also doesn't precludes him from out-playing someone who has more experience than him, and that being the case it shouldn't be a reason for a coach (a win-now coach) to not play him.

For me though, I haven't argued much of playing him over Zeller, but definitely over Jerebko against certain match-ups. Against Thompson/Love combo was one of them.

The reality of it though is that in the limited showings Mickey has had for us, he's been by a good degree quite useful on the floor.

Maybe he's not all that ready, but he's ready enough to get spot minutes particularly when match-ups demand it.

[nickagneta]

He is just not that good yet or ready to play. If he was better than Zeller right now he would be playing. People just need to get it. The kid isn't ready yet. We have to wait until next year to see what he can do. This year is about winning and Stevens feels playing the best players wins games. Mickey isn't one of our ten best players, so he doesn't play.

You really need to get away from that argument you've closed yourself into.

Whether it be true or not in this case.

Why exactly? It makes complete sense. If Mickey were playing better than Zeller he would be playing because Stevens wants to win games.

Sorry if I believe that Mickey's game should be more than just being able to block a couple shots a night, but I do. Mcikey has to learn to block out better, switch on the outside better without getting lost, play the pick and roll and pick and pop better, box out better, throw the outlet pass better, roll to the basket better, set screens better, pass better, and know his overall role better.

Mickey still needs developmental time and you can't get that on a team fighting for home court advantage in the playoffs. He  can shine in the D-League all he wants but the NBDL is not the NBA. The Red Claws are not the Celtics. His defensive mistakes he constantly makes in the D-League can be covered up quick with athleticism in the D-League but not in the big league. NBA players will actually play NBA defense against him and not that horrid brand of defense they play in the NBDL.

When his game exceeds that of Zeller as a total player, he will play because Stevens wants to win.

It's a sound argument and makes logical sense. What's the argument to play him? Zeller is bad? Well, my guess is that Stevens feels that if he gives Mickey regular minutes he will be worse than Zeller. I'll go with what the coach thinks and does and from what I have seen of Mickey thus far.

He is just not ready.

All I'm saying, irrespective of this particular situation, is that you need to step away from that argument because it's the one you ALWAYS use to explain why a player doesn't get on the floor.

The league is littered with players who are ready to contribute but just don't get the playing time. There's a real hierarchy in the NBA that influences this types of decisions as well. 

You seem to hold a coach on a pedestal without room for other explanations, as in, maybe he's wrong about what certain player might provide on the game as opposed to another regardless of their development level at that point.

That's my issue with the argument, not necessarily with this case, but with you throwing it around every time a scenario like this comes up.

First, I feel I am right so am going to continue this argument so if you don't like it, don't read my posts.

Second, you have seen me have this argument mostly during years the Celtics have attempted to win games and not tank. I didn't make this argument prior to 2007-08 or much over the last two seasons. When Doc and Stevens have wanted to win games they played the best players and sometimes those players were young and unproven. Also, I can't recall a major player that didn't get time here that went on to become something special elsewhere. This pretty much proves I am right.

Say what you want about Zeller, but as of right this very minute, he is a better basketball player than Mickey and provides Stevens with better overall performance on the floor than Mickey. When Zeller is gone next year, and possibly Sully too, the Celtics might have some minutes for Mickey as I am sure his game will develop more over this summer and next fall. Maybe he earns the time then. But it's fairly obvious to anyone paying attention he isn't going to get the opportunity this year because he just isn't ready

[chilidawg]

I don't see how anyone who isn't at practice everyday can have any idea if Mickey is better than Zeller.  We just haven't seen Mickey play enough.

[GreenWarrior]

the young inexperienced guy is always better.

[jpd985]

the young inexperienced guy is always better.

Stevens mentioned after the Utah game when Mickey played that he hasn't had the practice time to learn the offensive sets. I feel this is the biggest reason we aren't seeing Mickey. Defensively he seems to be ready, he just needs to get the offense down.

[Green4ever]

He is just not that good yet or ready to play. If he was better than Zeller right now he would be playing. People just need to get it. The kid isn't ready yet. We have to wait until next year to see what he can do. This year is about winning and Stevens feels playing the best players wins games. Mickey isn't one of our ten best players, so he doesn't play.

You really need to get away from that argument you've closed yourself into.

Whether it be true or not in this case.

Why exactly? It makes complete sense. If Mickey were playing better than Zeller he would be playing because Stevens wants to win games.

Sorry if I believe that Mickey's game should be more than just being able to block a couple shots a night, but I do. Mcikey has to learn to block out better, switch on the outside better without getting lost, play the pick and roll and pick and pop better, box out better, throw the outlet pass better, roll to the basket better, set screens better, pass better, and know his overall role better.

Mickey still needs developmental time and you can't get that on a team fighting for home court advantage in the playoffs. He  can shine in the D-League all he wants but the NBDL is not the NBA. The Red Claws are not the Celtics. His defensive mistakes he constantly makes in the D-League can be covered up quick with athleticism in the D-League but not in the big league. NBA players will actually play NBA defense against him and not that horrid brand of defense they play in the NBDL.

When his game exceeds that of Zeller as a total player, he will play because Stevens wants to win.

It's a sound argument and makes logical sense. What's the argument to play him? Zeller is bad? Well, my guess is that Stevens feels that if he gives Mickey regular minutes he will be worse than Zeller. I'll go with what the coach thinks and does and from what I have seen of Mickey thus far.

He is just not ready.

All I'm saying, irrespective of this particular situation, is that you need to step away from that argument because it's the one you ALWAYS use to explain why a player doesn't get on the floor.

The league is littered with players who are ready to contribute but just don't get the playing time. There's a real hierarchy in the NBA that influences this types of decisions as well. 

You seem to hold a coach on a pedestal without room for other explanations, as in, maybe he's wrong about what certain player might provide on the game as opposed to another regardless of their development level at that point.

That's my issue with the argument, not necessarily with this case, but with you throwing it around every time a scenario like this comes up.

First, I feel I am right so am going to continue this argument so if you don't like it, don't read my posts.

Second, you have seen me have this argument mostly during years the Celtics have attempted to win games and not tank. I didn't make this argument prior to 2007-08 or much over the last two seasons. When Doc and Stevens have wanted to win games they played the best players and sometimes those players were young and unproven. Also, I can't recall a major player that didn't get time here that went on to become something special elsewhere. This pretty much proves I am right.

Say what you want about Zeller, but as of right this very minute, he is a better basketball player than Mickey and provides Stevens with better overall performance on the floor than Mickey. When Zeller is gone next year, and possibly Sully too, the Celtics might have some minutes for Mickey as I am sure his game will develop more over this summer and next fall. Maybe he earns the time then. But it's fairly obvious to anyone paying attention he isn't going to get the opportunity this year because he just isn't ready

To be honest, BudweiserCeltic has a point. I agree with your assessment in some cases, but how many times have we seen a bench player "A" who isn't a significant part of the rotation gets playing time because the player "B",  who is ahead of player "A," got injured. Then the player "A" turns out to be better and more effective than player "B." Prime example is Draymond Green over David Lee. And Rondo over telfair? .. Bottom line is practice is not always a perfect test for what a players true impact in games will be. Im sure you would argue dray and rondo wouldve make it to the starting lineup eventually, and you're probably right, but it wouldn't have happened as quickly.
I agree that coaches dont have much to go on other than practice and maybe they don't want to risk giving someone a shot in a real game, but to say that Mickey is definitely a worse player and would be playing if he was better isn't always accurate logic. Sometimes coaches go with whats safe and what they know.

[Snakehead]

Zeller has had some bad games but some fine ones too.  One thing a lot of people need to realize is he has effects from just being in the game.  If there's anything Zeller does well, it's catch and finish and roll on the pick and roll (he can pop some as well).  That changes how defenses have to play the pick and roll and it collapses the defense and gives room for shooters and drives.  That's helping us out even if he hasn't been great.

He has helped us win games, but he is a second to  third string center really.

Last night his D, was terrible.  He changed the way the other team attacked, it was a drive fest to the rim.   I do not think Mickey is necessarily ready to jump into a game like last night.   But could he have done worse at protecting the rim, I doubt it.

I think Mickey would be better at it than Zeller was at defending the rim, although keep in mind his size disadvantage.  I am defending Zeller but trust me I have not been a fan of him this year.  Last year I felt like Zeller put together parts of his game like rebounding and defense more, but this year he is just really contributing on the pick and roll and running the floor.  He is good at those things.  Mickey has that area to learn still.  Mickey could be playing more minutes but I think what Zeller is bringing has value when we are missing Olynyk.

Now with Kelly back?  Maybe what the team needs changes.

good points, and this is the key isnt it? he is a second to third string center. that means, by definition, that he will be inconsistent, up and down, not be terribly versatile, and have a limited game.

if we use THAT as our standard for looking at zeller, suddenly he looks ok, not good, but ok.

if, on the other hand, we use good starting centers on other teams as our standard, well then, we are simply engagin in an exercise guaranteed to make us all wail, gnash our teeth, rend our garments, and pull out our hair...collectively.

i think the celtics would benefit by keeping zeller. but i wouldnt be surprised if they decided to let him move on either. he is, after all, a back up player.

You're right.  I'm only disappointed because it seemed like Zeller could make a jump last year. 

[Forza Juventus]

I wish Mickey played more but Zeller and Jerebko are pretty good so it's whatever. I'm sure he will play more next year because both of those guys and Sullinger and Amir are all free agents

[j804]

https://vine.co/v/iHuJmHpe3VV

I thought this was fitting for this thread, post practice 3v3 session Mickey with the stuff on Zeller