Author Topic: Danny Was Right  (Read 13008 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #60 on: April 12, 2016, 11:40:51 AM »

Offline Hank Finkel

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 392
  • Tommy Points: 41
I think everyone must calm down a little bit...we are a second in a row playoffteam which is good... we have improved our record which is also good... we have won some games against contenters which is promising... we will face a team we can compete at the playoffs.. wait and see
A voice of reason.  I expect to battle in the first round of the playoffs this year and possibly move on to round 2.  This is an improvement over last year as the C's continue to build on their much improved season of a year ago.  This team is not winning the title this year as much as I would love that.  However,  next season my expectations will be even higher with the draft picks and cap room we have to sign a player to get us to the promised land.  Watching the team this year is fun but also frustrating, knowing the C's are still a player or 2 away from really competing for the big prize.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #61 on: April 12, 2016, 12:01:15 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
I think everyone must calm down a little bit...we are a second in a row playoffteam which is good... we have improved our record which is also good... we have won some games against contenters which is promising... we will face a team we can compete at the playoffs.. wait and see
A voice of reason.  I expect to battle in the first round of the playoffs this year and possibly move on to round 2.  This is an improvement over last year as the C's continue to build on their much improved season of a year ago.  This team is not winning the title this year as much as I would love that.  However,  next season my expectations will be even higher with the draft picks and cap room we have to sign a player to get us to the promised land.  Watching the team this year is fun but also frustrating, knowing the C's are still a player or 2 away from really competing for the big prize.

Fair assessment.

We know this team needs 1 or 2 additional pieces to get over the hump.  We know we have an ideal off-season coming for adding those pieces (draft picks, tradable assets and cap room).   It will indeed be a bit disappointing if we don't continue to improve on where we are.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #62 on: April 12, 2016, 03:23:46 PM »

Offline passesofftodj

  • Kristaps Porzingis
  • Posts: 195
  • Tommy Points: 20
I hear a lot of people offended by the idea of IT as a 6th man.  To me it is patently obvious that is what his position should be on a great team.  It has nothing to do with where he stacks in terms of pg's in the league (somewhere between 9-12) and does not preclude him from being on the floor in crunch time.

Celtics fans if anyone should understand the possibilities and importance within that role.  Hello McHale, Havlicek, and Walton.  If 3 of the best players in the league's history can come off the bench to win championships then IT can't?  It has nothing to do with how good he is (All Star good) and more to do with ideal role on a championship caliber team.

IT has been fantastic in his current role, the leading scorer on a middling playoff team that has essentially zero chance of getting a championship, but once this team gets a guy of Durant's prowess IT should be 6th man.  It is called progress.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #63 on: April 12, 2016, 03:27:10 PM »

Offline Rondo9

  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5379
  • Tommy Points: 277
This is the first time I've heard an All Star player is a sixth man at best on a good team.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #64 on: April 12, 2016, 04:30:57 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 51955
  • Tommy Points: 3186
This was always a concern with our team, because IT can be taken out of his game so easily.

Yeah which is why he was their leading scorer 17 games in a row.

And has been a primary reason why we have lost the last 6 quarters...

Easy to do things in the season. How was IT again in the playoffs last year when he was taken out of his game?



Please, an exaggeration he was their leading scorer in the playoffs and their ONLY scorer. You're ragging on him for be the leading scorer on the eighth who got swept by the best team in the east. Where was his help? Where was Bradley? Crowder? Turner? When the Cavs were honing their defense on him, how come others didn't step up. If they did, it would take some burden off him.

Yeah, real impressive when you're the leading scorer shooting 33 fg% and 17 3PFG%.  ::)

It just shows what his role truly is: a sixth man volume scorer.

Sixth man?! The man is averaging 22 and 6 is this season are those sixth man numbers?

Yes, he is ideally a sixth man. His size and defense are too big of a disadvantage and his game is too easy to game plan for to be a legitimate starting point guard on a contending team.
I disagree.

Hes more than a sixth man and can certainly be a starter. When he is taken out of his game, we cant afford to see everyone else be garbage too.

Where was Jae? AB didnt generate any offense, Turner was garbage, Kelly was garbage, neither Sully nor Amir did jack.

IT is not really the problem.

Hes not Chris Paul or Steph obviously, but to say hes not starting caliber is too much.

Sure, he's starting caliber on THIS TEAM (at least this year - Smart should take back his starting position next year). But can you really say that he's an ideal starting caliber point guard? No, his game is totally tailored to be a sixth man, which is why it's his ideal position.

You are completely wrong.

The reason why he is such a dangerous scorer is because he is so DIFFICULT to gameplan against.  He's a guy who can score in just about ever imaginable way.  He can hit the three, he has a deadly midrange game, can shoot off spot-ups or off the dribble, can get into the paint and finish at the basket, gets to the line at an elite rate, makes his free throws at an elite percentage, etc.

Isaiah Thomas is probably one of the top 5 scorers in the entire NBA for all of the above reasons. I'm not talking in terms of pure scoring numbers, but in terms of scoring talent/skill/ability. 

The guy has been on an absolute tear since the All-Star break and has been nothing short of elite.   The game today was a terrible effort, but you can't blame Thomas for that - one or two bad games in 20 is hardly something to get frustrated about.

Putting a lanky, athletic defender on him isn't exactly rocket science. Pretty much every time that has happened IT has been limited - Shumpert, Livingston, MCW, etc. He's struggled against every single one of those guys. Further, it's amazing that more teams don't do it and then take advantage of him offensively more often.

This is just mythology.  First off, in regards to last year's playoffs, the ONLY game that Isaiah got 'limited' in was Game 3, in which for whatever reason the refs would not give him a foul call.  This became extremely obvious very early in the game and he only played 21 minutes in that game.

In the other three playoff games Isaiah scored 22, 22 &  21 points and dished out 10, 7 & 9 assists.  He got to the FT line 8, 10 & 12 times, nailing every one of them.

In their last 2 regular season matches, Shumpert has gotten large minutes (34:47 & 34:42) and was on the floor against Isaiah as much as possible (35:47 & 34:02), I suppose in some misguided attempt to have him 'limit' Isaiah.   Isaiah has lit him up for 49 points in those two games, getting to the FT line 19 times and dealing out 8 assists.  Isaiah's combined scoring efficiency (TS%) in those two games was .578.

Yeah, Shumpert did a fantastic job of limiting Isaiah there.  He was called for 9 PFs in those two games.  Meanwhile, he scored 16 points of his own on miserable .508 TS efficiency, so there is that.

If teams want to put a defensive specialist on the floor to try to shut down Isaiah, then they have to also incur the cost to their own offense for doing so.

This is what you call confirmation bias.

1) You're really going to use the last two games of the regular season last year - you know the games where their stars sat because they were resting - as evidence for your claim? Yeah, that's not a fair assessment to use. Using those games as an example, you could argue that we're a better team than Cleveland, which is an illogical argument to make given the context. Thus, you also can't use that argument here. Put Bradley out there on Kyrie with our three rookies and Young. How do you think his defensive stats are going to look then?

2) Speaking of context, it's funny that you don't mention the percentages that IT shot in the playoffs. Could there be a reason for that - perhaps because they don't fit your narrative? Let's take a look at his shooting percentages to find out:

                        FG%  3P%  2P%  eFG%  FT%  PTS   AST  TOV
2015 Playoffs: .333   .167  .417  .361   .967  19.0  5.4    3.5

2015 Season: .411   .345  .473  .495   .861  17.5  7.0    2.6

I'm not sure what your definition of the word "limited" is, but this pretty categorically characterizes being limited in a playoff series. Other than FT% and assists, he was significantly limited to a much lower standard than his regular season statistics. It doesn't matter if he's scoring 20 points if he's shooting 33% and 17% from the field to get there. Only Kobe apologists look at those numbers and say they are good..
Recovering Joe Skeptic, but inching towards a relapse.

Check out my Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Yakin_Bassin/shorts

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #65 on: April 12, 2016, 04:43:26 PM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
This was always a concern with our team, because IT can be taken out of his game so easily.

Yeah which is why he was their leading scorer 17 games in a row.

And has been a primary reason why we have lost the last 6 quarters...

Easy to do things in the season. How was IT again in the playoffs last year when he was taken out of his game?



Please, an exaggeration he was their leading scorer in the playoffs and their ONLY scorer. You're ragging on him for be the leading scorer on the eighth who got swept by the best team in the east. Where was his help? Where was Bradley? Crowder? Turner? When the Cavs were honing their defense on him, how come others didn't step up. If they did, it would take some burden off him.

Yeah, real impressive when you're the leading scorer shooting 33 fg% and 17 3PFG%.  ::)

It just shows what his role truly is: a sixth man volume scorer.

Sixth man?! The man is averaging 22 and 6 is this season are those sixth man numbers?

Yes, he is ideally a sixth man. His size and defense are too big of a disadvantage and his game is too easy to game plan for to be a legitimate starting point guard on a contending team.
I disagree.

Hes more than a sixth man and can certainly be a starter. When he is taken out of his game, we cant afford to see everyone else be garbage too.

Where was Jae? AB didnt generate any offense, Turner was garbage, Kelly was garbage, neither Sully nor Amir did jack.

IT is not really the problem.

Hes not Chris Paul or Steph obviously, but to say hes not starting caliber is too much.

Sure, he's starting caliber on THIS TEAM (at least this year - Smart should take back his starting position next year). But can you really say that he's an ideal starting caliber point guard? No, his game is totally tailored to be a sixth man, which is why it's his ideal position.

You are completely wrong.

The reason why he is such a dangerous scorer is because he is so DIFFICULT to gameplan against.  He's a guy who can score in just about ever imaginable way.  He can hit the three, he has a deadly midrange game, can shoot off spot-ups or off the dribble, can get into the paint and finish at the basket, gets to the line at an elite rate, makes his free throws at an elite percentage, etc.

Isaiah Thomas is probably one of the top 5 scorers in the entire NBA for all of the above reasons. I'm not talking in terms of pure scoring numbers, but in terms of scoring talent/skill/ability. 

The guy has been on an absolute tear since the All-Star break and has been nothing short of elite.   The game today was a terrible effort, but you can't blame Thomas for that - one or two bad games in 20 is hardly something to get frustrated about.

Putting a lanky, athletic defender on him isn't exactly rocket science. Pretty much every time that has happened IT has been limited - Shumpert, Livingston, MCW, etc. He's struggled against every single one of those guys. Further, it's amazing that more teams don't do it and then take advantage of him offensively more often.

This is just mythology.  First off, in regards to last year's playoffs, the ONLY game that Isaiah got 'limited' in was Game 3, in which for whatever reason the refs would not give him a foul call.  This became extremely obvious very early in the game and he only played 21 minutes in that game.

In the other three playoff games Isaiah scored 22, 22 &  21 points and dished out 10, 7 & 9 assists.  He got to the FT line 8, 10 & 12 times, nailing every one of them.

In their last 2 regular season matches, Shumpert has gotten large minutes (34:47 & 34:42) and was on the floor against Isaiah as much as possible (35:47 & 34:02), I suppose in some misguided attempt to have him 'limit' Isaiah.   Isaiah has lit him up for 49 points in those two games, getting to the FT line 19 times and dealing out 8 assists.  Isaiah's combined scoring efficiency (TS%) in those two games was .578.

Yeah, Shumpert did a fantastic job of limiting Isaiah there.  He was called for 9 PFs in those two games.  Meanwhile, he scored 16 points of his own on miserable .508 TS efficiency, so there is that.

If teams want to put a defensive specialist on the floor to try to shut down Isaiah, then they have to also incur the cost to their own offense for doing so.

This is what you call confirmation bias.

1) You're really going to use the last two games of the regular season last year - you know the games where their stars sat because they were resting - as evidence for your claim? Yeah, that's not a fair assessment to use. Using those games as an example, you could argue that we're a better team than Cleveland, which is an illogical argument to make given the context. Thus, you also can't use that argument here. Put Bradley out there on Kyrie with our three rookies and Young. How do you think his defensive stats are going to look then?

2) Speaking of context, it's funny that you don't mention the percentages that IT shot in the playoffs. Could there be a reason for that - perhaps because they don't fit your narrative? Let's take a look at his shooting percentages to find out:

                        FG%  3P%  2P%  eFG%  FT%  PTS   AST  TOV
2015 Playoffs: .333   .167  .417  .361   .967  19.0  5.4    3.5

2015 Season: .411   .345  .473  .495   .861  17.5  7.0    2.6

I'm not sure what your definition of the word "limited" is, but this pretty categorically characterizes being limited in a playoff series. Other than FT% and assists, he was significantly limited to a much lower standard than his regular season statistics. It doesn't matter if he's scoring 20 points if he's shooting 33% and 17% from the field to get there. Only Kobe apologists look at those numbers and say they are good..

Ouch!! Somebody's upset with "the little guy."  He struggled against the Cavs in last year's playoffs; no doubt about that.

I suspect he will see more aggressive traps and doubles again in the playoffs this year than he did during the regular season.  I expect him to be more prepared and handle it better. 

Our team also has to create up-tempo, open floor opportunities off the defense to help get Isaiah going.

He's had a fantastic season.  A good playoff run where the team advances at least past the first round would be a nice capper.

DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #66 on: April 12, 2016, 04:47:11 PM »

Online Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8729
  • Tommy Points: 855
This was always a concern with our team, because IT can be taken out of his game so easily.

Yeah which is why he was their leading scorer 17 games in a row.

And has been a primary reason why we have lost the last 6 quarters...

Easy to do things in the season. How was IT again in the playoffs last year when he was taken out of his game?



Please, an exaggeration he was their leading scorer in the playoffs and their ONLY scorer. You're ragging on him for be the leading scorer on the eighth who got swept by the best team in the east. Where was his help? Where was Bradley? Crowder? Turner? When the Cavs were honing their defense on him, how come others didn't step up. If they did, it would take some burden off him.

Yeah, real impressive when you're the leading scorer shooting 33 fg% and 17 3PFG%.  ::)

It just shows what his role truly is: a sixth man volume scorer.

Sixth man?! The man is averaging 22 and 6 is this season are those sixth man numbers?

Yes, he is ideally a sixth man. His size and defense are too big of a disadvantage and his game is too easy to game plan for to be a legitimate starting point guard on a contending team.
I disagree.

Hes more than a sixth man and can certainly be a starter. When he is taken out of his game, we cant afford to see everyone else be garbage too.

Where was Jae? AB didnt generate any offense, Turner was garbage, Kelly was garbage, neither Sully nor Amir did jack.

IT is not really the problem.

Hes not Chris Paul or Steph obviously, but to say hes not starting caliber is too much.

Sure, he's starting caliber on THIS TEAM (at least this year - Smart should take back his starting position next year). But can you really say that he's an ideal starting caliber point guard? No, his game is totally tailored to be a sixth man, which is why it's his ideal position.

You are completely wrong.

The reason why he is such a dangerous scorer is because he is so DIFFICULT to gameplan against.  He's a guy who can score in just about ever imaginable way.  He can hit the three, he has a deadly midrange game, can shoot off spot-ups or off the dribble, can get into the paint and finish at the basket, gets to the line at an elite rate, makes his free throws at an elite percentage, etc.

Isaiah Thomas is probably one of the top 5 scorers in the entire NBA for all of the above reasons. I'm not talking in terms of pure scoring numbers, but in terms of scoring talent/skill/ability. 

The guy has been on an absolute tear since the All-Star break and has been nothing short of elite.   The game today was a terrible effort, but you can't blame Thomas for that - one or two bad games in 20 is hardly something to get frustrated about.

Putting a lanky, athletic defender on him isn't exactly rocket science. Pretty much every time that has happened IT has been limited - Shumpert, Livingston, MCW, etc. He's struggled against every single one of those guys. Further, it's amazing that more teams don't do it and then take advantage of him offensively more often.

This is just mythology.  First off, in regards to last year's playoffs, the ONLY game that Isaiah got 'limited' in was Game 3, in which for whatever reason the refs would not give him a foul call.  This became extremely obvious very early in the game and he only played 21 minutes in that game.

In the other three playoff games Isaiah scored 22, 22 &  21 points and dished out 10, 7 & 9 assists.  He got to the FT line 8, 10 & 12 times, nailing every one of them.

In their last 2 regular season matches, Shumpert has gotten large minutes (34:47 & 34:42) and was on the floor against Isaiah as much as possible (35:47 & 34:02), I suppose in some misguided attempt to have him 'limit' Isaiah.   Isaiah has lit him up for 49 points in those two games, getting to the FT line 19 times and dealing out 8 assists.  Isaiah's combined scoring efficiency (TS%) in those two games was .578.

Yeah, Shumpert did a fantastic job of limiting Isaiah there.  He was called for 9 PFs in those two games.  Meanwhile, he scored 16 points of his own on miserable .508 TS efficiency, so there is that.

If teams want to put a defensive specialist on the floor to try to shut down Isaiah, then they have to also incur the cost to their own offense for doing so.

This is what you call confirmation bias.

1) You're really going to use the last two games of the regular season last year - you know the games where their stars sat because they were resting - as evidence for your claim? Yeah, that's not a fair assessment to use. Using those games as an example, you could argue that we're a better team than Cleveland, which is an illogical argument to make given the context. Thus, you also can't use that argument here. Put Bradley out there on Kyrie with our three rookies and Young. How do you think his defensive stats are going to look then?

2) Speaking of context, it's funny that you don't mention the percentages that IT shot in the playoffs. Could there be a reason for that - perhaps because they don't fit your narrative? Let's take a look at his shooting percentages to find out:

                        FG%  3P%  2P%  eFG%  FT%  PTS   AST  TOV
2015 Playoffs: .333   .167  .417  .361   .967  19.0  5.4    3.5

2015 Season: .411   .345  .473  .495   .861  17.5  7.0    2.6

I'm not sure what your definition of the word "limited" is, but this pretty categorically characterizes being limited in a playoff series. Other than FT% and assists, he was significantly limited to a much lower standard than his regular season statistics. It doesn't matter if he's scoring 20 points if he's shooting 33% and 17% from the field to get there. Only Kobe apologists look at those numbers and say they are good..
Yea they are definitely bad. Then you have to look at the why. I think the why here was that playoff defenses realize we had no good scorers.

Look at our offense.

Id say our best offensive players(outside Isaiah) are Kelly, Turner, Sully, Crowder, Bradley.

Bradley shot 26% from deep and is an improved offensive player this year (imo)
Crowder obviously is tremendously improved from last year, specifically as a floor spacer
Turner was pretty much the same, but Id say hes had a pretty good improvement
Sully was hurt and unable to play big minutes
Kelly was benched basically the whole series
after that you had probably Tyler Zeller, Brandon Bass and then Marcus Smart.

Not an impressive list of offensive talent.

I think its a valid concern about Isaiah, that when its come to big games he has struggled. This was the concern all along. Is he a gimmick guy who can get shut down when defenses tighten up?

I think it is more likely that he is simply not a dominant player. He is a very good one. He isnt at the LBJ level where you can surround him with Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline. and he can play really well and carry a team to wins.

You just mentioned that you are surprised more teams dont throw Iman Shumpert, Livingston and other long defenders on him.

Well they can only do that because their point gaurds can cover Avery Bradley and because they dont need to worry about putting a defensive stopper on anyone else. If you had a 20 ppg wing scorer on the squad then teams would not be able to take their longest wing defender on IT.

Lastly, I dont think teams are just to lazy to post up IT. Unless you have a huge guard (MCW) it really hasnt been that successful.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #67 on: April 12, 2016, 05:26:34 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
This was always a concern with our team, because IT can be taken out of his game so easily.

Yeah which is why he was their leading scorer 17 games in a row.

And has been a primary reason why we have lost the last 6 quarters...

Easy to do things in the season. How was IT again in the playoffs last year when he was taken out of his game?



Please, an exaggeration he was their leading scorer in the playoffs and their ONLY scorer. You're ragging on him for be the leading scorer on the eighth who got swept by the best team in the east. Where was his help? Where was Bradley? Crowder? Turner? When the Cavs were honing their defense on him, how come others didn't step up. If they did, it would take some burden off him.

Yeah, real impressive when you're the leading scorer shooting 33 fg% and 17 3PFG%.  ::)

It just shows what his role truly is: a sixth man volume scorer.

Sixth man?! The man is averaging 22 and 6 is this season are those sixth man numbers?

Yes, he is ideally a sixth man. His size and defense are too big of a disadvantage and his game is too easy to game plan for to be a legitimate starting point guard on a contending team.
I disagree.

Hes more than a sixth man and can certainly be a starter. When he is taken out of his game, we cant afford to see everyone else be garbage too.

Where was Jae? AB didnt generate any offense, Turner was garbage, Kelly was garbage, neither Sully nor Amir did jack.

IT is not really the problem.

Hes not Chris Paul or Steph obviously, but to say hes not starting caliber is too much.

Sure, he's starting caliber on THIS TEAM (at least this year - Smart should take back his starting position next year). But can you really say that he's an ideal starting caliber point guard? No, his game is totally tailored to be a sixth man, which is why it's his ideal position.

You are completely wrong.

The reason why he is such a dangerous scorer is because he is so DIFFICULT to gameplan against.  He's a guy who can score in just about ever imaginable way.  He can hit the three, he has a deadly midrange game, can shoot off spot-ups or off the dribble, can get into the paint and finish at the basket, gets to the line at an elite rate, makes his free throws at an elite percentage, etc.

Isaiah Thomas is probably one of the top 5 scorers in the entire NBA for all of the above reasons. I'm not talking in terms of pure scoring numbers, but in terms of scoring talent/skill/ability. 

The guy has been on an absolute tear since the All-Star break and has been nothing short of elite.   The game today was a terrible effort, but you can't blame Thomas for that - one or two bad games in 20 is hardly something to get frustrated about.

Putting a lanky, athletic defender on him isn't exactly rocket science. Pretty much every time that has happened IT has been limited - Shumpert, Livingston, MCW, etc. He's struggled against every single one of those guys. Further, it's amazing that more teams don't do it and then take advantage of him offensively more often.

This is just mythology.  First off, in regards to last year's playoffs, the ONLY game that Isaiah got 'limited' in was Game 3, in which for whatever reason the refs would not give him a foul call.  This became extremely obvious very early in the game and he only played 21 minutes in that game.

In the other three playoff games Isaiah scored 22, 22 &  21 points and dished out 10, 7 & 9 assists.  He got to the FT line 8, 10 & 12 times, nailing every one of them.

In their last 2 regular season matches, Shumpert has gotten large minutes (34:47 & 34:42) and was on the floor against Isaiah as much as possible (35:47 & 34:02), I suppose in some misguided attempt to have him 'limit' Isaiah.   Isaiah has lit him up for 49 points in those two games, getting to the FT line 19 times and dealing out 8 assists.  Isaiah's combined scoring efficiency (TS%) in those two games was .578.

Yeah, Shumpert did a fantastic job of limiting Isaiah there.  He was called for 9 PFs in those two games.  Meanwhile, he scored 16 points of his own on miserable .508 TS efficiency, so there is that.

If teams want to put a defensive specialist on the floor to try to shut down Isaiah, then they have to also incur the cost to their own offense for doing so.

This is what you call confirmation bias.

1) You're really going to use the last two games of the regular season last year - you know the games where their stars sat because they were resting - as evidence for your claim? Yeah, that's not a fair assessment to use. Using those games as an example, you could argue that we're a better team than Cleveland, which is an illogical argument to make given the context. Thus, you also can't use that argument here. Put Bradley out there on Kyrie with our three rookies and Young. How do you think his defensive stats are going to look then?

Umm.... nope.  Those two games were from THIS year.  But nice try.

Quote

2) Speaking of context, it's funny that you don't mention the percentages that IT shot in the playoffs. Could there be a reason for that - perhaps because they don't fit your narrative? Let's take a look at his shooting percentages to find out:

                        FG%  3P%  2P%  eFG%  FT%  PTS   AST  TOV
2015 Playoffs: .333   .167  .417  .361   .967  19.0  5.4    3.5

2015 Season: .411   .345  .473  .495   .861  17.5  7.0    2.6

I'm not sure what your definition of the word "limited" is, but this pretty categorically characterizes being limited in a playoff series. Other than FT% and assists, he was significantly limited to a much lower standard than his regular season statistics. It doesn't matter if he's scoring 20 points if he's shooting 33% and 17% from the field to get there. Only Kobe apologists look at those numbers and say they are good..

Sure, because ultimately scoring efficiency is far more relevant (because it measures effect on the scoreboard) than shooting efficiency.  In case you missed it, Isaiah got to the FT line a ton in those three games.  And he also dished out a ton of assists.   Even though Isaiah didn't shoot all that efficient, he still created points very efficiently.

But if you are of the school that still worships batting average, RBI's and the Game Winning RBI stats, more power to you.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #68 on: April 12, 2016, 05:31:41 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • NCE
  • Rajon Rondo
  • *****
  • Posts: 5308
  • Tommy Points: 862
I hear a lot of people offended by the idea of IT as a 6th man.  To me it is patently obvious that is what his position should be on a great team.  It has nothing to do with where he stacks in terms of pg's in the league (somewhere between 9-12) and does not preclude him from being on the floor in crunch time.

Celtics fans if anyone should understand the possibilities and importance within that role.  Hello McHale, Havlicek, and Walton.  If 3 of the best players in the league's history can come off the bench to win championships then IT can't?  It has nothing to do with how good he is (All Star good) and more to do with ideal role on a championship caliber team.

IT has been fantastic in his current role, the leading scorer on a middling playoff team that has essentially zero chance of getting a championship, but once this team gets a guy of Durant's prowess IT should be 6th man.  It is called progress.

I have absolutely zero problem with the idea of Isaiah being a "6th man" -- just a soon as we have a better point guard on the roster.

I am not at all offended by that idea.  I would be offended by the idea that we would push him to the bench in favor of a lesser talent based solely on the fact that he is 5' 9".
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #69 on: April 12, 2016, 05:33:55 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 51955
  • Tommy Points: 3186
(Response to all of you - thread was getting a bit too long to keep hitting quote.  ;D)

Don't get me wrong, I'm actually a big fan of IT - but in the ideal role as a perennial sixth man of the year contender, similar to Jamal Crawford. Jamal Crawford is both a very good player and an important piece to the Clips, and he plays the perfect role that I envision IT in.

But without a doubt our environment has been absolutely perfect for him to thrive in, but you also have to admit that we have a rather limited ceiling with him as our best player AND primary scorer and decision-maker. For example, if we hit the jackpot and added a Durant and a Cousins or Horford type down low, then I would immediately move Smart to the starting lineup and IT to the sixth man role. Why? Because we're much less in need of his scoring and playmaking and much more in need of size, perimeter D to stop penetration at the top of the key, and smart decisions with the ball, which I think Smart is a much better decision-maker already than IT (outside of his shot selection on threes - which is coincidentally not an issue when he's the primary ball-handler). Further, you then have the most dangerous bench scoring option as a weapon off the bench when your other stars sit down.

I think we're all in agreement with IT's skill level and utility, but we just have differing opinions on what his ideal role is.
Recovering Joe Skeptic, but inching towards a relapse.

Check out my Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Yakin_Bassin/shorts

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #70 on: April 12, 2016, 05:44:27 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
The Celts are undeniably at their best right now with IT running the show and playing as many minutes as he can manage, since the alternative is Fun Times With Evan Turner.

How good that best is, at least in the context of the playoffs, remains to be seen.


It's a fair question what IT's ideal role would be on a team with some more scoring talent, where having him rock a 30% usage rate for 30+ minutes a game might not make as much sense.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #71 on: April 12, 2016, 05:49:22 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 51955
  • Tommy Points: 3186
This was always a concern with our team, because IT can be taken out of his game so easily.

Yeah which is why he was their leading scorer 17 games in a row.

And has been a primary reason why we have lost the last 6 quarters...

Easy to do things in the season. How was IT again in the playoffs last year when he was taken out of his game?



Please, an exaggeration he was their leading scorer in the playoffs and their ONLY scorer. You're ragging on him for be the leading scorer on the eighth who got swept by the best team in the east. Where was his help? Where was Bradley? Crowder? Turner? When the Cavs were honing their defense on him, how come others didn't step up. If they did, it would take some burden off him.

Yeah, real impressive when you're the leading scorer shooting 33 fg% and 17 3PFG%.  ::)

It just shows what his role truly is: a sixth man volume scorer.

Sixth man?! The man is averaging 22 and 6 is this season are those sixth man numbers?

Yes, he is ideally a sixth man. His size and defense are too big of a disadvantage and his game is too easy to game plan for to be a legitimate starting point guard on a contending team.
I disagree.

Hes more than a sixth man and can certainly be a starter. When he is taken out of his game, we cant afford to see everyone else be garbage too.

Where was Jae? AB didnt generate any offense, Turner was garbage, Kelly was garbage, neither Sully nor Amir did jack.

IT is not really the problem.

Hes not Chris Paul or Steph obviously, but to say hes not starting caliber is too much.

Sure, he's starting caliber on THIS TEAM (at least this year - Smart should take back his starting position next year). But can you really say that he's an ideal starting caliber point guard? No, his game is totally tailored to be a sixth man, which is why it's his ideal position.

You are completely wrong.

The reason why he is such a dangerous scorer is because he is so DIFFICULT to gameplan against.  He's a guy who can score in just about ever imaginable way.  He can hit the three, he has a deadly midrange game, can shoot off spot-ups or off the dribble, can get into the paint and finish at the basket, gets to the line at an elite rate, makes his free throws at an elite percentage, etc.

Isaiah Thomas is probably one of the top 5 scorers in the entire NBA for all of the above reasons. I'm not talking in terms of pure scoring numbers, but in terms of scoring talent/skill/ability. 

The guy has been on an absolute tear since the All-Star break and has been nothing short of elite.   The game today was a terrible effort, but you can't blame Thomas for that - one or two bad games in 20 is hardly something to get frustrated about.

Putting a lanky, athletic defender on him isn't exactly rocket science. Pretty much every time that has happened IT has been limited - Shumpert, Livingston, MCW, etc. He's struggled against every single one of those guys. Further, it's amazing that more teams don't do it and then take advantage of him offensively more often.

This is just mythology.  First off, in regards to last year's playoffs, the ONLY game that Isaiah got 'limited' in was Game 3, in which for whatever reason the refs would not give him a foul call.  This became extremely obvious very early in the game and he only played 21 minutes in that game.

In the other three playoff games Isaiah scored 22, 22 &  21 points and dished out 10, 7 & 9 assists.  He got to the FT line 8, 10 & 12 times, nailing every one of them.

In their last 2 regular season matches, Shumpert has gotten large minutes (34:47 & 34:42) and was on the floor against Isaiah as much as possible (35:47 & 34:02), I suppose in some misguided attempt to have him 'limit' Isaiah.   Isaiah has lit him up for 49 points in those two games, getting to the FT line 19 times and dealing out 8 assists.  Isaiah's combined scoring efficiency (TS%) in those two games was .578.

Yeah, Shumpert did a fantastic job of limiting Isaiah there.  He was called for 9 PFs in those two games.  Meanwhile, he scored 16 points of his own on miserable .508 TS efficiency, so there is that.

If teams want to put a defensive specialist on the floor to try to shut down Isaiah, then they have to also incur the cost to their own offense for doing so.

This is what you call confirmation bias.

1) You're really going to use the last two games of the regular season last year - you know the games where their stars sat because they were resting - as evidence for your claim? Yeah, that's not a fair assessment to use. Using those games as an example, you could argue that we're a better team than Cleveland, which is an illogical argument to make given the context. Thus, you also can't use that argument here. Put Bradley out there on Kyrie with our three rookies and Young. How do you think his defensive stats are going to look then?

Umm.... nope.  Those two games were from THIS year.  But nice try.

Quote

2) Speaking of context, it's funny that you don't mention the percentages that IT shot in the playoffs. Could there be a reason for that - perhaps because they don't fit your narrative? Let's take a look at his shooting percentages to find out:

                        FG%  3P%  2P%  eFG%  FT%  PTS   AST  TOV
2015 Playoffs: .333   .167  .417  .361   .967  19.0  5.4    3.5

2015 Season: .411   .345  .473  .495   .861  17.5  7.0    2.6

I'm not sure what your definition of the word "limited" is, but this pretty categorically characterizes being limited in a playoff series. Other than FT% and assists, he was significantly limited to a much lower standard than his regular season statistics. It doesn't matter if he's scoring 20 points if he's shooting 33% and 17% from the field to get there. Only Kobe apologists look at those numbers and say they are good..

Sure, because ultimately scoring efficiency is far more relevant (because it measures effect on the scoreboard) than shooting efficiency.  In case you missed it, Isaiah got to the FT line a ton in those three games.  And he also dished out a ton of assists.   Even though Isaiah didn't shoot all that efficient, he still created points very efficiently.

But if you are of the school that still worships batting average, RBI's and the Game Winning RBI stats, more power to you.

Bro, I think you're thinking of last year, because Shump didn't start in the games this year, so it's not like he was on him all that much. How the hell is he supposed to "limit" IT when he's not even guarding him or even on the floor with him for the majority of the time? Can we say that Marcus Smart didn't limit a guy when the guy didn't score at all on him, but he did score when Smart was on the bench or guarding another play? No, that's non-sense.
Recovering Joe Skeptic, but inching towards a relapse.

Check out my Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Yakin_Bassin/shorts

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #72 on: April 12, 2016, 05:50:44 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 51955
  • Tommy Points: 3186
The Celts are undeniably at their best right now with IT running the show and playing as many minutes as he can manage, since the alternative is Fun Times With Evan Turner.

How good that best is, at least in the context of the playoffs, remains to be seen.


It's a fair question what IT's ideal role would be on a team with some more scoring talent, where having him rock a 30% usage rate for 30+ minutes a game might not make as much sense.

And that's exactly what I've been arguing the entire time. TP.
Recovering Joe Skeptic, but inching towards a relapse.

Check out my Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Yakin_Bassin/shorts

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #73 on: April 12, 2016, 05:54:54 PM »

Offline Monkhouse

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6932
  • Tommy Points: 814
  • A true Celtic plays with heart.
I hated IT incredibly, but he has surpassed my expectations. What more can people ask out of him? Yes he can put up those amazing numbers, but unfortunately with him as our best player, we're a 1st/2nd round exit. We need more pieces, and IT is certainly a great player to have starter/sixth man.
"I bomb atomically, Socrates' philosophies and hypotheses
Can't define how I be dropping these mockeries."

Is the glass half-full or half-empty?
It's based on your perspective, quite simply
We're the same and we're not; know what I'm saying? Listen
Son, I ain't better than you, I just think different

Re: Danny Was Right
« Reply #74 on: April 12, 2016, 05:58:27 PM »

Offline Celtics18

  • Ed Macauley
  • ***********
  • Posts: 11688
  • Tommy Points: 1469
(Response to all of you - thread was getting a bit too long to keep hitting quote.  ;D)

Don't get me wrong, I'm actually a big fan of IT - but in the ideal role as a perennial sixth man of the year contender, similar to Jamal Crawford. Jamal Crawford is both a very good player and an important piece to the Clips, and he plays the perfect role that I envision IT in.

But without a doubt our environment has been absolutely perfect for him to thrive in, but you also have to admit that we have a rather limited ceiling with him as our best player AND primary scorer and decision-maker. For example, if we hit the jackpot and added a Durant and a Cousins or Horford type down low, then I would immediately move Smart to the starting lineup and IT to the sixth man role. Why? Because we're much less in need of his scoring and playmaking and much more in need of size, perimeter D to stop penetration at the top of the key, and smart decisions with the ball, which I think Smart is a much better decision-maker already than IT (outside of his shot selection on threes - which is coincidentally not an issue when he's the primary ball-handler). Further, you then have the most dangerous bench scoring option as a weapon off the bench when your other stars sit down.

I think we're all in agreement with IT's skill level and utility, but we just have differing opinions on what his ideal role is.

I wouldn't hate starting Isaiah Thomas next to Kevin Durant.  Remember that Durant is starting next to a high usage point guard currently, and they have had some fairly decent success together. 

In that scenario, I might try to start Jae Crowder at the two.
DKC Seventy-Sixers:

PG: G. Hill/D. Schroder
SG: C. Lee/B. Hield/T. Luwawu
SF:  Giannis/J. Lamb/M. Kuzminskas
PF:  E. Ilyasova/J. Jerebko/R. Christmas
C:    N. Vucevic/K. Olynyk/E. Davis/C. Jefferson