Apparently Bradley is not good enough...

[Granath]

He seems fine to me.

Bradley isn't a superstar but he worked out nicely for being the 19th overall pick. He's signed to a very reasonable contract, plays good defense and has made himself into a respectable offensive weapon. Seriously, what more could someone want or reasonably expect?

Now if the Cs happen to draft a potential superstar as SG this offseason, or a great FA falls into their  lap then I'm all for upgrading. But if they don't I'm more than comfortable continuing to stick with Bradley.

All of what you say about Bradley is true, but that doesn't make him a championship level starting SG (unless the other positions include multiple HOF type players - I mean he would be fine starting on the Cavs for example).  He is on a reasonable contract and has more than lived up to his draft position, but that doesn't mean he should be the starting SG on Boston.  He shouldn't.  He should be the 6th man.

I'm not following your line of thinking. What's your point?

Your assertion seems to be "he's good, but not good enough". You're right in that he's not going to carry the Cs to a championship. You're right that the team needs other top talent. But that qualifier would apply to probably all but 30 or so NBA players including probably every single player on the team right now. Essentially, if you're not All-NBA you're probably not going to be capable of carrying a team for long stretches. But here's the rub. You're not going to assemble a team of 5 All-NBA players. There's always going to be guys who are the role players. If you have a chance to replace those role players with someone who is All-NBA, that's a no brainer. But until you have someone better you stick with the solid pro you already have.

I don't think anyone is saying Bradley is untouchable but he's certainly capable of being the starting SG on a championship team. He won't be "the man", but then again...is there anyone on the current Cs squad who would qualify as "the man" on a championship team? He's the starting SG on this squad until they find someone better. But finding someone better isn't an easy task because there's only a handful of guys in the world that are clear upgrades.

Frankly, he's not the weak spot on the starting 5. The Cs have bigger needs at PF and C than they do at SG.

[chilidawg]

By RPM, that's not the case.  Sully, Olynyk and Johnson have all been well above average for their positions, while AB has been only average.

I like Avery, but I certainly think it's a position we can upgrade.

[Ed Hollison]

Most of the responses are pretty reasoned and get to the heart of the matter: good player, but would be a great fit as a 3rd guard, a solid 3-and-D guy off the bench, and certainly an important piece on as possible championship team.

With that said, if you can get a dynamic scorer or playmaker at the SG position, you absolutely do it. Derozan, Beal, etc. Bradley just doesn't have those skills -- ball-handling, passing, playmaking, finishing at the rim, etc. It doesn't mean he's a garbage player, not at all. But he is what he is.

[danglertx]

Most of the responses are pretty reasoned and get to the heart of the matter: good player, but would be a great fit as a 3rd guard, a solid 3-and-D guy off the bench, and certainly an important piece on as possible championship team.

With that said, if you can get a dynamic scorer or playmaker at the SG position, you absolutely do it. Derozan, Beal, etc. Bradley just doesn't have those skills -- ball-handling, passing, playmaking, finishing at the rim, etc. It doesn't mean he's a garbage player, not at all. But he is what he is.

I don't know if you have watched the last few games, but Avery's finishing in transition and at the rim has been superb.  I don't know if something has clicked, he is healthy, or what but he has been nearly flawless driving and finishing or finishing in traffic during fast breaks.  There was one time I can recall he got blocked going one on two but I believe that should have been a goal tending that wasn't called.

[Ed Hollison]

Most of the responses are pretty reasoned and get to the heart of the matter: good player, but would be a great fit as a 3rd guard, a solid 3-and-D guy off the bench, and certainly an important piece on as possible championship team.

With that said, if you can get a dynamic scorer or playmaker at the SG position, you absolutely do it. Derozan, Beal, etc. Bradley just doesn't have those skills -- ball-handling, passing, playmaking, finishing at the rim, etc. It doesn't mean he's a garbage player, not at all. But he is what he is.

I don't know if you have watched the last few games, but Avery's finishing in transition and at the rim has been superb.  I don't know if something has clicked, he is healthy, or what but he has been nearly flawless driving and finishing or finishing in traffic during fast breaks.  There was one time I can recall he got blocked going one on two but I believe that should have been a goal tending that wasn't called.

That's true, he has been better driving/finishing of late.

[CapnDunks]

I think Crowder and Bradley are potentially both good enough to start on a championship team. But probably not together. Unless we get a good two-way big who can put up 20ppg and be a plus defender, we need a go-to scorer on the wing.

[PhoSita]

The "good enough to start on a championship team" thing doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  What does that really prove?

Derek Fisher was a championship caliber starting point guard on the 2009 and 2010 Lakers. 

[mmmmm]

I concur with what CapnDunks and Phosita both just stated.   The "good enough to start on a contender" threshold is a dubious, moving goal post that doesn't really mean anything.

Yes, of course we also DO need some sort of serious upgrade at at least one or more of our starting spots in order to be a title contender.  But we aren't likely to get - nor necessarily NEED - such an upgrade at _every_ position.

[LooseCannon]

Most of the responses are pretty reasoned and get to the heart of the matter: good player, but would be a great fit as a 3rd guard, a solid 3-and-D guy off the bench, and certainly an important piece on as possible championship team.

With that said, if you can get a dynamic scorer or playmaker at the SG position, you absolutely do it. Derozan, Beal, etc. Bradley just doesn't have those skills -- ball-handling, passing, playmaking, finishing at the rim, etc. It doesn't mean he's a garbage player, not at all. But he is what he is.

I'd probably take Bradley over a dynamic 20ppg guy who plays matador defense.

[Snakehead]

Most of the responses are pretty reasoned and get to the heart of the matter: good player, but would be a great fit as a 3rd guard, a solid 3-and-D guy off the bench, and certainly an important piece on as possible championship team.

With that said, if you can get a dynamic scorer or playmaker at the SG position, you absolutely do it. Derozan, Beal, etc. Bradley just doesn't have those skills -- ball-handling, passing, playmaking, finishing at the rim, etc. It doesn't mean he's a garbage player, not at all. But he is what he is.

I'd probably take Bradley over a dynamic 20ppg guy who plays matador defense.

And who shoots just about as well and makes less money.  Yeah I will.  I'd rather pay big money to a legit star and I think Bradley thrives off the catch and is a great fit next to players like that.

[Moranis]

So the top five players on the list are on teams who are all on the list; does this mean that those particular teams need a SG because their players are about to hit FA?

If so, that whittles the teams who have a SG under contract, but who isn't 'good enough' down to just a few teams. This I don't agree with. Bradley is at least average and actually proves his worth more on a good team than a bad one since he can adjust his game around other ball dominant players. When you also consider his defense, it makes the article a bit perplexing.

Yeah they include those teams on the list because in the event that their player leaves they would be in need. So I guess technically they are in need until they re-sign the player.

He seems fine to me.

Bradley isn't a superstar but he worked out nicely for being the 19th overall pick. He's signed to a very reasonable contract, plays good defense and has made himself into a respectable offensive weapon. Seriously, what more could someone want or reasonably expect?

Now if the Cs happen to draft a potential superstar as SG this offseason, or a great FA falls into their  lap then I'm all for upgrading. But if they don't I'm more than comfortable continuing to stick with Bradley.

All of what you say about Bradley is true, but that doesn't make him a championship level starting SG (unless the other positions include multiple HOF type players - I mean he would be fine starting on the Cavs for example).  He is on a reasonable contract and has more than lived up to his draft position, but that doesn't mean he should be the starting SG on Boston.  He shouldn't.  He should be the 6th man. 

Well what you say is confusing. He's not a starting SG on a championship team...unless he has other championship level players on the team? Are you saying he's not a number 1 option on a championship team? You'll find no argument here!
Bruce Bowen was a starting SG, Perkins was a starting C, DeShawn Stevenson started for the Mavs title run.

It's stating the obvious that you need some top level players on a team to win a championship. That doesn't make Bradley inadequate for starting

Well pretty much anyone can start on a title team if the other players are good enough.  Bradley isn't quite in that category, but he isn't a guy you would just pencil in as a starter on a title team.   He is like Ron Harper on the Bulls or more recently a guy like Mario Chalmers on the Heat (Bradley is better than Chalmers, but that type of player).  Good quality player, does some nice things but easily upgradeable and probably better suited for the bench. 

Put this way, how many players are better than Bradley on the Warriors, Spurs, Cavs, and Thunder.  Heck how many players are better than Bradley on the Raptors or Clippers?  Most of those teams Bradley wouldn't even crack the top 5. 

[CapnDunks]

I think it's worth reiterating that Bradley has consistently improved, including this year. I understand that he's 25 and most players are in their prime at this point, but I don't know why people insist that "He is what he is." If by that you mean he will never be an elite offensive player, I agree.

But compared to last year I definitely think that his finishing, handles, shooting and defense have all improved noticeably. I'm not frustrated while watching him play the way I was last year.

[CapnDunks]

So the top five players on the list are on teams who are all on the list; does this mean that those particular teams need a SG because their players are about to hit FA?

If so, that whittles the teams who have a SG under contract, but who isn't 'good enough' down to just a few teams. This I don't agree with. Bradley is at least average and actually proves his worth more on a good team than a bad one since he can adjust his game around other ball dominant players. When you also consider his defense, it makes the article a bit perplexing.

Yeah they include those teams on the list because in the event that their player leaves they would be in need. So I guess technically they are in need until they re-sign the player.

He seems fine to me.

Bradley isn't a superstar but he worked out nicely for being the 19th overall pick. He's signed to a very reasonable contract, plays good defense and has made himself into a respectable offensive weapon. Seriously, what more could someone want or reasonably expect?

Now if the Cs happen to draft a potential superstar as SG this offseason, or a great FA falls into their  lap then I'm all for upgrading. But if they don't I'm more than comfortable continuing to stick with Bradley.

All of what you say about Bradley is true, but that doesn't make him a championship level starting SG (unless the other positions include multiple HOF type players - I mean he would be fine starting on the Cavs for example).  He is on a reasonable contract and has more than lived up to his draft position, but that doesn't mean he should be the starting SG on Boston.  He shouldn't.  He should be the 6th man. 

Well what you say is confusing. He's not a starting SG on a championship team...unless he has other championship level players on the team? Are you saying he's not a number 1 option on a championship team? You'll find no argument here!
Bruce Bowen was a starting SG, Perkins was a starting C, DeShawn Stevenson started for the Mavs title run.

It's stating the obvious that you need some top level players on a team to win a championship. That doesn't make Bradley inadequate for starting

Well pretty much anyone can start on a title team if the other players are good enough.  Bradley isn't quite in that category, but he isn't a guy you would just pencil in as a starter on a title team.   He is like Ron Harper on the Bulls or more recently a guy like Mario Chalmers on the Heat (Bradley is better than Chalmers, but that type of player).  Good quality player, does some nice things but easily upgradeable and probably better suited for the bench. 

Put this way, how many players are better than Bradley on the Warriors, Spurs, Cavs, and Thunder.  Heck how many players are better than Bradley on the Raptors or Clippers?  Most of those teams Bradley wouldn't even crack the top 5.

I think a lot of the players who look so good on those teams, do so because they're surrounded by so much Talent. Even so, I only really agree in terms of Golden State. Every other team has a starter I like less than Bradley.

I'd take Bradley over Danny Green in a heartbeat this year.
I'd take him over JR smith or anyone else the Cavs would start at SG
Jeff Green?
Andre Roberson?

It's very possible to contend with a worse Wing player starting than Bradley.

Edit: If it's about the skill set, I want a 6th man to be a dynamic scorer and preferably a ball handler, Bradley is neither.

[mctyson]

Bradley is not good enough.  He is best suited for the 6th man role.

Of course that's why Doc benched a Hall of Famer and started Bradley.

[2short]

This year Bradley has played nicely.  Former years he was a defensive terror or a good shooter who if his shot wasn't falling he didn't do anything else but play nice defense.  This year his ball handling has improved, he's driving and his defense has stepped up closer to that crazy level he was playing early in career.
His problem is size, horrible passer for a guard.
You can make the argument for our entire team though, every starter is okay on this level team but no one we have starts on a top tier team.