Rozier spilts starter/off bench

[droopdog7]

Roziers counting stats obviously go up when he starts.  But man do I hate his game.  Zero vision AND zero eagerness to move the ball.  I can’t count the number of times per game where other players (especially Hayward) extend their hands for the ball only to get denied.

Looking forward to him being gone frankly.

[tonydelk]

We don't need Kyrie. We don't need Davis.

We just need to learn how to win on the road.

Agree about AD.  Disagree about Kyrie. 

I do not want the C's to trade the team for AD.  Even if he resigns the contending window is 4 years.  If they build around JB and JT and develop the picks they are getting then they will contend for 10 years. 

[Chris22]

We don't need Kyrie. We don't need Davis.

We just need to learn how to win on the road.

Agree about AD.  Disagree about Kyrie. 

I do not want the C's to trade the team for AD.  Even if he resigns the contending window is 4 years.  If they build around JB and JT and develop the picks they are getting then they will contend for 10 years.

This is exactly my point. We can build around our young core, and be good for a long time.

[LilRip]

Meh not the biggest fan of Rozier. He plays much better when he’s a starter but he usually seems to be a negative when he’s off the bench.

Would love it if we could get some value for him before the deadline because he’s as good as gone but I doubt it.

[Sophomore]

But as to the point of the thread: yes, it is rather obvious Rozier plays better when he is starting (i.e. playing alongside the Celtics' best players more often and getting a larger share of minutes overall). But it's not really acceptable in my opinion that he plays so selfishly, and poorly, when he is a substitute.

But this is not surprising, and something we knew since last season. Terry will likely (hopefully) get a starters job next year somewhere else, and the Celtics won't miss a beat without him.

This is what I wonder. Why is he so much better as a starter? Is it because he’s surrounded by better players? Possibly. In which case, the team that gets him might have a rude surprise.

If instead it’s all in his head and he just presses too hard when he’s on the bench... I don’t know what to think. Clearly a major loss for the Cs and Terry’s chances of contributing to a title this year — which you you would think an NBA player would really want...

[Monkhouse]

Honestly, I just want Rozier gone so I don't have to hear any more users here proclaim that Rozier is better than Kyrie any longer...

[droopdog7]

Why can’t we match any offer he gets and then trade him, even if we have to wait a couple of months?

For one thing, we’d be adding salary that we could otherwise shed.

[PhoSita]

Honestly, I just want Rozier gone so I don't have to hear any more users here proclaim that Rozier is better than Kyrie any longer...

You and me both.

[droopdog7]

We don't need Kyrie. We don't need Davis.

We just need to learn how to win on the road.

Agree about AD.  Disagree about Kyrie. 

I do not want the C's to trade the team for AD.  Even if he resigns the contending window is 4 years.  If they build around JB and JT and develop the picks they are getting then they will contend for 10 years.

This is exactly my point. We can build around our young core, and be good for a long time.

So four years of legit contention versus 10 years of maybe contention?  Yeah, give me the four years.

And where are we getting four years from anyway?  Kyrie and Davis young enough for much longer run.

[Chris22]

We don't need Kyrie. We don't need Davis.

We just need to learn how to win on the road.

Agree about AD.  Disagree about Kyrie. 

I do not want the C's to trade the team for AD.  Even if he resigns the contending window is 4 years.  If they build around JB and JT and develop the picks they are getting then they will contend for 10 years.

This is exactly my point. We can build around our young core, and be good for a long time.

So four years of legit contention versus 10 years of maybe contention?  Yeah, give me the four years.

And where are we getting four years from anyway?  Kyrie and Davis young enough for much longer run.

No one can see the future.
But I would rather not put max money into a point guard. Wings and bigs win championships, not point guards.

[droopdog7]

We don't need Kyrie. We don't need Davis.

We just need to learn how to win on the road.

Agree about AD.  Disagree about Kyrie. 

I do not want the C's to trade the team for AD.  Even if he resigns the contending window is 4 years.  If they build around JB and JT and develop the picks they are getting then they will contend for 10 years.

This is exactly my point. We can build around our young core, and be good for a long time.

So four years of legit contention versus 10 years of maybe contention?  Yeah, give me the four years.

And where are we getting four years from anyway?  Kyrie and Davis young enough for much longer run.

No one can see the future.
But I would rather not put max money into a point guard. Wings and bigs win championships, not point guards.

And we have maybe one championship level wing in Tatum.  Brown ain't the guy.  So give me two sure stars for $200.

[The Oracle]

The most impressive thing about Rozier last night was his defense. He, in combination with Al Horford, made Walker uncomfortable in the pick-and-roll game. Walker still had a decent game, but that's what great offensive players do.

You could definitely argue Rozier just outplayed an allstar starter last night on both ends of the court.

Rozier outplaying whoever he is matched up against as a starter is starting to become a theme. He's done that to George Hill, Eric Bledsoe, Kemba Walker, De'aron Fox, Kyle Lowry, Jrue Holliday, Ricky Rubio, D'angelo Russell, and more over the past two seasons.

We must have been watching a different game because what I saw was a bunch of defensive lapses from Rozier.  Kemba shed Rozier very easily leaving Horford, Morris and others to defend him.  Whatever Kemba wanted he got against Terry without much of a fight, not to mention leaving him wide open on multiple occasions.