Is Amir Johnson under-rated in this forum?

[LooseCannon]

Here are some advanced stats for last season (from basketball-reference.com):

Player A: .177 WS/48, 3.0 BPM, 3.3 VORP
Player B: .152, 2.8, 2.8
Player C: .158, 3.0, 2.3

Player A is All-Star Isaiah Thomas.  Player B is Jae Crowder.  Player C is Amir Johnson.  (For comparison, Al Horford was at .172, 4.1, 4.1)

A lot of trade ideas seem to treat Johnson as a nearly worthless throw-in who is only there to match salaries.  Some posters seemed to think he was an easily replaceable player who was likely to be cut before his contract became guaranteed.  In reality, Amir Johnson was arguably about as valuable as Jae Crowder and both were close to IT, so the Celtics starting lineup might consist of a top 20 player in the league, an All-Star, two players who give you almost the same production as the All-Star, and an All-Defensive 1st-Teamer.

[walker834]

I don't think I underrate him. He's a pro and a good one.  I think out of all our players Crowder is a bit overvalued.  That's not to say Crowder isn't good either.  I think he and Amir are pretty comparable as far as players.  It's questionable who actually is better.

Crowder had a good year last year and wins over fans with some of his defensive plays he makes.  Amir the stuff he does isn't as noticeable.

Both are really solid pros.  I think both guys what you see is what you get though.  They are playing to their abilities.

[Surferdad]

Here are some advanced stats for last season (from basketball-reference.com):

Player A: .177 WS/48, 3.0 BPM, 3.3 VORP
Player B: .152, 2.8, 2.8
Player C: .158, 3.0, 2.3

Player A is All-Star Isaiah Thomas.  Player B is Jae Crowder.  Player C is Amir Johnson.  (For comparison, Al Horford was at .172, 4.1, 4.1)

A lot of trade ideas seem to treat Johnson as a nearly worthless throw-in who is only there to match salaries.   Some posters seemed to think he was an easily replaceable player who was likely to be cut before his contract became guaranteed.  In reality, Amir Johnson was arguably about as valuable as Jae Crowder and both were close to IT, so the Celtics starting lineup might consist of a top 20 player in the league, an All-Star, two players who give you almost the same production as the All-Star, and an All-Defensive 1st-Teamer.

That of course is to trade for a max player.  Nobody else (beside Horford who is not being traded under any circumstances) has that size of contract.  However, I do not see people saying or even implying "worthless throw-in", "easily replaceable".  Not sure where that comes from...

[loco_91]

Yes, I do think he's underrated. His plantar fascitis kept him from playing too many minutes, but he was easily our best big man last year. He's a bargain for $12m.

[Evantime34]

I thought Amir was really good last year, but his inability to play a lot of minutes kind of diminished his accomplishments in my eyes.

[jambr380]

Yes, we do underrate him. He does not demand the ball, but is adequate offensively, he is physical, rebounds, and loves playing for the Cs. He would need to be included in a trade for a max-contract player, but that doesn't make him a Wallace/Lee/Ratliff caliber of player; he actually should be of value if we are trading him, at least to a third team.

I am glad we brought him and JJ back.

[celticsclay]

I like him a lot to, but will he ever be able to play more minutes?

[LooseCannon]

Here are some advanced stats for last season (from basketball-reference.com):

Player A: .177 WS/48, 3.0 BPM, 3.3 VORP
Player B: .152, 2.8, 2.8
Player C: .158, 3.0, 2.3

Player A is All-Star Isaiah Thomas.  Player B is Jae Crowder.  Player C is Amir Johnson.  (For comparison, Al Horford was at .172, 4.1, 4.1)

A lot of trade ideas seem to treat Johnson as a nearly worthless throw-in who is only there to match salaries.   Some posters seemed to think he was an easily replaceable player who was likely to be cut before his contract became guaranteed.  In reality, Amir Johnson was arguably about as valuable as Jae Crowder and both were close to IT, so the Celtics starting lineup might consist of a top 20 player in the league, an All-Star, two players who give you almost the same production as the All-Star, and an All-Defensive 1st-Teamer.

That of course is to trade for a max player.  Nobody else (beside Horford who is not being traded under any circumstances) has that size of contract.  However, I do not see people saying or even implying "worthless throw-in", "easily replaceable".  Not sure where that comes from...

People act like he has to be involved in any big deal when they should consider him to be good enough to explore other options.  For example, in a proposed trade for DeMarcus Cousins, it didn't seem like anyone was motivated to keep together a strong three-big rotation of Boogie-Horford-Johnson, when you could send out Jerebko, Smart, Mickey, Young, and Holland to match salaries, along with picks.  Losing Johnson was seen as a better alternative than losing Crowder.  I don't think people tried hard enough to explore the idea of losing neither, when I think he is valuable enough to motivate creative ideas such as bringing in a third team to make salaries work.

[mctyson]

Here are some advanced stats for last season (from basketball-reference.com):

Player A: .177 WS/48, 3.0 BPM, 3.3 VORP
Player B: .152, 2.8, 2.8
Player C: .158, 3.0, 2.3

Player A is All-Star Isaiah Thomas.  Player B is Jae Crowder.  Player C is Amir Johnson.  (For comparison, Al Horford was at .172, 4.1, 4.1)

A lot of trade ideas seem to treat Johnson as a nearly worthless throw-in who is only there to match salaries.  Some posters seemed to think he was an easily replaceable player who was likely to be cut before his contract became guaranteed.  In reality, Amir Johnson was arguably about as valuable as Jae Crowder and both were close to IT, so the Celtics starting lineup might consist of a top 20 player in the league, an All-Star, two players who give you almost the same production as the All-Star, and an All-Defensive 1st-Teamer.

Amir Johnson was an advanced-stats all-star in Detroit too.  I think the main problem with Amir is that his body is not in the condition where he can give you that kind of production for as long as we need it. 

He was 7th on the team in minutes played per game and actually played less than Sullinger - a guy who is ridiculed for being out of shape.

One of the reasons I love the Horford signing is that he will give us the 30+ min or so we need at that role with equivalent or better production.  Then we can bring in Amir off the bench, and he can go ALL OUT for 20 mins, knowing that is the max he will get every game. 

[Moranis]

Johnson is included in trade talks because he has a fairly large expiring contract, is still useful enough that he has a positive and not negative value, and doesn't have a place long term on the team.  He can't really play more than 24 minutes a game, which makes him a role player.  A good role player, but a role player none-the-less.  Role players can be replaced rather easily. 

Oh and what your three player ratings indicate is that Thomas is the only guy worth keeping.  That gap between Thomas and Johnson is .19 WS/48, which equates to over 9 wins per 48.  Thomas is valuable, Johnson is much less valuable especially given how few minutes he actually plays. 

[The Oracle]

Johnson is included in trade talks because he has a fairly large expiring contract, is still useful enough that he has a positive and not negative value, and doesn't have a place long term on the team.  He can't really play more than 24 minutes a game, which makes him a role player.  A good role player, but a role player none-the-less.  Role players can be replaced rather easily. 

Oh and what your three player ratings indicate is that Thomas is the only guy worth keeping.  That gap between Thomas and Johnson is .19 WS/48, which equates to over 9 wins per 48.  Thomas is valuable, Johnson is much less valuable especially given how few minutes he actually plays. 

.019

[Moranis]

Johnson is included in trade talks because he has a fairly large expiring contract, is still useful enough that he has a positive and not negative value, and doesn't have a place long term on the team.  He can't really play more than 24 minutes a game, which makes him a role player.  A good role player, but a role player none-the-less.  Role players can be replaced rather easily. 

Oh and what your three player ratings indicate is that Thomas is the only guy worth keeping.  That gap between Thomas and Johnson is .19 WS/48, which equates to over 9 wins per 48.  Thomas is valuable, Johnson is much less valuable especially given how few minutes he actually plays. 

.019

thanks. Did it quickly at work and didn't pay close enough attention

[Surferdad]

Here are some advanced stats for last season (from basketball-reference.com):

Player A: .177 WS/48, 3.0 BPM, 3.3 VORP
Player B: .152, 2.8, 2.8
Player C: .158, 3.0, 2.3

Player A is All-Star Isaiah Thomas.  Player B is Jae Crowder.  Player C is Amir Johnson.  (For comparison, Al Horford was at .172, 4.1, 4.1)

A lot of trade ideas seem to treat Johnson as a nearly worthless throw-in who is only there to match salaries.   Some posters seemed to think he was an easily replaceable player who was likely to be cut before his contract became guaranteed.  In reality, Amir Johnson was arguably about as valuable as Jae Crowder and both were close to IT, so the Celtics starting lineup might consist of a top 20 player in the league, an All-Star, two players who give you almost the same production as the All-Star, and an All-Defensive 1st-Teamer.

That of course is to trade for a max player.  Nobody else (beside Horford who is not being traded under any circumstances) has that size of contract.  However, I do not see people saying or even implying "worthless throw-in", "easily replaceable".  Not sure where that comes from...

People act like he has to be involved in any big deal when they should consider him to be good enough to explore other options.  For example, in a proposed trade for DeMarcus Cousins, it didn't seem like anyone was motivated to keep together a strong three-big rotation of Boogie-Horford-Johnson, when you could send out Jerebko, Smart, Mickey, Young, and Holland to match salaries, along with picks.  Losing Johnson was seen as a better alternative than losing Crowder.  I don't think people tried hard enough to explore the idea of losing neither, when I think he is valuable enough to motivate creative ideas such as bringing in a third team to make salaries work.

Perhaps folks could have been more creative, but in the scenario you laid out, Sac might want a center in return rather than a bag o balls. At least Amir could fill the gap created by Boogie leaving. I'm not sure what Sac would do with all those players.  As Moranis said, he is a fairly large expiring contract so they could just let him go as an alternative.

[Rosco917]

When Amir is perfectly healthy, and properly motivated he's a valuable player. When he's actually aggressive, yes I like him.

Unfortunately he is seldom perfectly healthy, and at times looks unmotivated. The Celtics need a 4/5 that can score the ball, and defend at a high level. Amir isn't that guy. He's ok while we look for that big that will put us over the hump. 

[timpiker]

I like Amir.  Just wish he played more.