Monroe......

They said Evan Turner couldn't play defense. Isaiah played with grit for his size. Irving got no respect. He comes here and looks decent at it. Brown is already a defensive menace in his second year.

The general consensus is that this was a big move. Baynes is still important. This means down the stretch Horford can be pampered for minutes and fresh for the playoffs. It gives Stevens a full arsenal of bigs with no redundancy. Tatum is a big too. Getting Monroe looks potentially historic for this season.

Getting to the finals and winning it just got a lot more realistic, imho.

https://hardwoodhoudini.com/2018/02/02/boston-celtics-instant-analysis-greg-monroe-a-solid-pickup-for-celtics-bench/

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:Monroe is an upgrade over Baynes.  This does not mean I do not like Baynes. We have seen the value of having a large slab of beef however he is pretty ineffective on offense and he regularly gets beat on defense.  He makes stupid fouls every game.  

Monroe is an upgrade at center.  He is not a backup for Baynes.

Danny made a great decision to acquire Monroe and in doing so has confirmed that this is hardly a bridge year.

dboss

dboss,

Do you now finally believe that the C's are a legitimate contender?

No I do not.  If this is not a bridge year the Celtics will make one more move to add a scorer off the bench.

Such as Evans for example.  Then yes they are a contender.

Dboss

dboss wrote:

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:Monroe is an upgrade over Baynes.  This does not mean I do not like Baynes. We have seen the value of having a large slab of beef however he is pretty ineffective on offense and he regularly gets beat on defense.  He makes stupid fouls every game.  

Monroe is an upgrade at center.  He is not a backup for Baynes.

Danny made a great decision to acquire Monroe and in doing so has confirmed that this is hardly a bridge year.

dboss

dboss,

Do you now finally believe that the C's are a legitimate contender?

No I do not.  If this is not a bridge year the Celtics will make one more move to add a scorer off the bench.

Such as Evans for example.  Then yes they are a contender.

Dboss

Well, I guess I don't understand what your definition of a legitimate contender is then.

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:Monroe is an upgrade over Baynes.  This does not mean I do not like Baynes. We have seen the value of having a large slab of beef however he is pretty ineffective on offense and he regularly gets beat on defense.  He makes stupid fouls every game.  

Monroe is an upgrade at center.  He is not a backup for Baynes.

Danny made a great decision to acquire Monroe and in doing so has confirmed that this is hardly a bridge year.

dboss

dboss,

Do you now finally believe that the C's are a legitimate contender?

Sandpd

What is your definition of a legitimate contender ?

swish

swish wrote:

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:Monroe is an upgrade over Baynes.  This does not mean I do not like Baynes. We have seen the value of having a large slab of beef however he is pretty ineffective on offense and he regularly gets beat on defense.  He makes stupid fouls every game.  

Monroe is an upgrade at center.  He is not a backup for Baynes.

Danny made a great decision to acquire Monroe and in doing so has confirmed that this is hardly a bridge year.

dboss

dboss,

Do you now finally believe that the C's are a legitimate contender?

 Sandpd

  What is your definition of a legitimate contender ?



  swish

A team that has a feasible and reasonable chance to vie for the title. With the addition of Monroe they have now filled that deficiency in the middle and have a player who can rebound and score. The C's have the 3rd best record in the league and have led in the East for most of the season. If their record alone doesn't give them legitimacy, then please tell me why not. What is your definition of a legitimate contender, what is your criteria? If the C's are not legitimate contenders, then what teams in your view are? IMHO the C's are legitimate contenders.

Sandpd wrote:

swish wrote:

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:Monroe is an upgrade over Baynes.  This does not mean I do not like Baynes. We have seen the value of having a large slab of beef however he is pretty ineffective on offense and he regularly gets beat on defense.  He makes stupid fouls every game.  

Monroe is an upgrade at center.  He is not a backup for Baynes.

Danny made a great decision to acquire Monroe and in doing so has confirmed that this is hardly a bridge year.

dboss

dboss,

Do you now finally believe that the C's are a legitimate contender?

 Sandpd

  What is your definition of a legitimate contender ?



  swish

A team that has a feasible and reasonable chance to vie for the title. With the addition of Monroe they have now filled that deficiency in the middle and have a player who can rebound and score. The C's have the 3rd best record in the league and have led in the East for most of the season. If their record alone doesn't give them legitimacy, then please tell me why not. What is your definition of a legitimate contender, what is your criteria? If the C's are not legitimate contenders, then what teams in your view are? IMHO the C's are legitimate contenders.

Sandpd

As of today I give them a legitimate chance to make the play offs - Things are looking great right now - but to win it all - Well, see me in mid April. - when I will know what the playoff teams final rosters will look like. The injury bug of the current year has become a major factor - and we still have to see how trades will effect the races.

swish

YOU CAN NEVER BE SHORT ON BIGS. THIS MAKES THE ROSTER DEEPER AND INSURANCE IN CASE ONE OF OUR BIGS GOES DOWN FOR A GAME OR TWO. IT CREATES COUNTLESS PAIRINGS WITH THE OTHER BIGS AS WELL.

THIS ALSO HELPS US MAINTAIN OFFENSIVE PRESSURE CONSISTENTLY OVER THE ENTIRE GAME WHEN THE FIRST UNIT GOES OUT. MANY OF OUT LOSSES CAME FROM GOING STONE COLD IN SHOOTING DURING LONG PERIODS IN A GAME.

MONROE SOLVES THAT PROBLEM!

GOT MY HOTEL RESERVATIONS DIALED IN FOR MARRIOTT LONG WHARF HOTEL BOSTON MID JUNE!

112288

swish wrote:

Sandpd wrote:

swish wrote:

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:Monroe is an upgrade over Baynes.  This does not mean I do not like Baynes. We have seen the value of having a large slab of beef however he is pretty ineffective on offense and he regularly gets beat on defense.  He makes stupid fouls every game.  

Monroe is an upgrade at center.  He is not a backup for Baynes.

Danny made a great decision to acquire Monroe and in doing so has confirmed that this is hardly a bridge year.

dboss

dboss,

Do you now finally believe that the C's are a legitimate contender?

 Sandpd

  What is your definition of a legitimate contender ?



  swish

A team that has a feasible and reasonable chance to vie for the title. With the addition of Monroe they have now filled that deficiency in the middle and have a player who can rebound and score. The C's have the 3rd best record in the league and have led in the East for most of the season. If their record alone doesn't give them legitimacy, then please tell me why not. What is your definition of a legitimate contender, what is your criteria? If the C's are not legitimate contenders, then what teams in your view are? IMHO the C's are legitimate contenders.

Sandpd

   As of today I give them a legitimate chance to make the play offs - Things are looking great right now - but to win it all - Well, see me in mid April. - when I will know what the playoff teams final rosters will look like. The injury bug of the current year has become a major factor - and we still have to see how trades will effect the races.

 swish

swish,

Thank you, all I am saying is that I believe the C's are a legitimate contender. I maintain that there is a distinction between a team being a "legitimate contender" and a team being "favored to win" it all - they are not one and the same. I think often times we inadvertently mix one with the other. The C's may not be favored to win in some playoff matchups but they would still have a legitimate and competitive chance to win, regardless of the odds.

Monroe fits the bill for what we need. I think Phil pointed out above that this will allow Horford to gt some time off later this year to be fresher come playoff time.

I do think Monroe will get most of his minutes from Baynes myself. We've seen in recent games how his game has stagnated (though I think its just what he is) while Morris has gotten healthy and showed that he IS a legit NBA starter. Theis has also moved ahead of Baynes in my opinion now also.

unlike most here, I can actually see Monroe replacing Baynes in the Starting lineup (when Brad uses his big lineup). IN fact I see our primary playoff lineup like this:

Starters

Monroe
Horford
Tatum
Brown
Irving

Main bench rotation

Morris
Smart
Rozier

Deep bench /per game rotation issues

Theis
Baynes
Semi
Larkin

kdp59 wrote:Monroe fits the bill for what we need. I think Phil pointed out above that this will allow Horford to gt some time off later this year to be fresher come playoff time.

I do think Monroe will get most of his minutes from Baynes myself. We've seen in recent games how his game has stagnated (though I think its just what he is) while Morris has gotten healthy and showed that he IS a legit NBA starter. Theis has also moved ahead of Baynes in my opinion now also.

unlike most here, I can actually see Monroe replacing Baynes in the Starting lineup (when Brad uses his big lineup). IN fact I see our primary playoff lineup like this:

Starters

Monroe
Horford
Tatum
Brown
Irving

Main bench rotation

Morris
Smart
Rozier

Deep bench /per game rotation issues

Theis
Baynes
Semi
Larkin

I agree, Monroe gets his minutes at the expense of Baynes. Baynes may get a spot start now and then due to matchups. If we have Horford sit out a game or two, there is another possibility of a Baynes start.

I do not want to see Theis' minutes decrease. He is playing very well as of late.

gyso

Sandpd

The Celtics are 12-8 over their past 20 games.  One of the issues that surfaced was not getting enough production from the bench and also having matchups issues against teams with big physical centers.

The addition of Monroe addresses the depth issue at the 5.  I think another scorer who can make shots at all levels would push us over the top.  I think the Celtics would have enough fire power to beat every team out there provided our defense remains rigid.

My saying that I do not think they are a contender actually means that I do not believe they can win the championship this year.  Of course I expect a playoff run.  I expected that even before the Monroe addition.  In that regards yes they are a contender.  A legitimate contender.

If they add one more piece they have an excellent opportunity to get to the finals and win this year.

dboss

Way to get it done Danny. Good use of the DPE. Way to go Monroe.
leave some $ on the table in an effort to get a ring.

Some are starting to see that with this addition, the Celtics have the bastards chance (Illegitimate as they think it may be) to get to the Finals and compete for the championship. For me, style of play is just as important as the pieces who implement that style.

And the winner of this year's PJ Brown award is...

"His D is way better than KO and Zeller"

Cowens gets the understatement of the year award.

Does Monroe make the Celtics a legitimate contender? In my opinion, yes, absolutely.

There are only four or so teams with a real finals shot; same as every NBA season. Adding a few extreme dark horses to the mix, I might stretch that to as many as nine. I think the question comes down to, have we got the defense and shooting to go deep in a series against...

Toronto? Yes
Cleveland? Yes
Washington? Yes

Then, how about...

Minnesota? Yes
OKC? Yes
San Antonio? Yes
Houston? Yes
Golden State? No one does.

So in my view, among the top eight or nine teams, we're very much in the fight. Looking like best in the East unless Cleveland makes a serious move, or a miracle similar to the '69 Mets happens.

Golden State is the true obstacle and measure of excellence right now. If, arguably, we now need just a shooter off the bench, does that give us enough to take them 7 games? Would Hayward? Maybe no on both counts.

I think we can conceivably get to the finals as we are. Even without Hayward, this is a well rounded, defensively capable team. But I also think it will take a very well laid out strategy to have any chance against Golden State.

That strategy, in my opinion, means better ball movement and distribution without the predictability of Irving ISOs time and again. It will need more low-post scoring. 1-3-1 offensive sets have had some success against GSW, maybe Brad looks there at times. It will have to have strong perimeter defense. Pressing and trapping will be needed, alternatively and strategically, to slow their wings. Smart and Rozier will need to be heavily involved as ball-handlers.

Legit contenders? Yes, without question, I believe. Golden State is what Boston or any team needs to gear up for. That's a tall order right now. But, as someone once said, anything is possible.

dboss wrote:Sandpd

The Celtics are 12-8 over their past 20 games.  One of the issues that surfaced was not getting enough production from the bench and also having matchups issues against teams with big physical centers.

The addition of Monroe addresses the depth issue at the 5.  I think another scorer who can make shots at all levels would push us over the top.  I think the Celtics would have enough fire power to beat every team out there provided our defense remains rigid.

My saying that I do not think they are a contender actually means that I do not believe they can win the championship this year.  Of course I expect a playoff run.  I expected that even before the Monroe addition.  In that regards yes they are a contender.  A legitimate contender.

If they add one more piece they have an excellent opportunity to get to the finals and win this year.

dboss

dboss,

Thanks for explaining your definition of terms. I think we can now find a common ground from which to understand each other. Yes, attaining another scorer would be ideal to have an optimum chance to win it all, but even if the C's don't get that scoring piece, I'd take their scintilla of a chance to win.

worcester wrote:"His D is way better than KO and Zeller"

Cowens gets the understatement of the year award.

Cow and Worcester,

I'm not so sure.  Monroe's defense is pretty putrid.

Forgetting about the 5 games he played for Milwaukee this season and only looking at the 20 games he played for Phoenix this year (he started 14 of them) his offensive rating (an estimate of how many points the team would have scored if he was on the floor per 100 possessions) was 117 and his defensive rating (an estimate of how many points the team would have given up if he was on the floor per 100 possessions) was 110.  That's a +7, which is good, but a 110 defensive rating is nothing to write home about.  His defensive rating in 5 years in Detroit and 3 years in Milwaukee was 106, both places.  Hopefully he'll be another successful Brad Stevens reclamation project.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/monrogr01.html#all_per_poss

By comparison, Kelly's defensive rating for the 4 years he was in Boston was 105 (it's 105 so far this year in Miami too) and Zeller's was 105 for the 3 seasons he was here (109 for both his time in Cleveland and now in Brooklyn).  So let's wait and see what happens to Greg Monroe's defense under Brad.  Detroit was a middle-of-the-pack defensive team.  Milwaukee played better defense, vs the rest of the league, before they got Monroe.  Phoenix?  No, since that sneaky little Canadian left they don't know whether to be an offensive team or a defensive team and, as a result, are neither.  Kelly's defense, whatever it is, didn't get worse under a different coach and a different system.  Zeller's did but his team is significantly worse in every way than the Celtic teams he was on AND he has started most of the games in Brooklyn so he's playing against starters and not deep bench.

I'm liking what Monroe brings us on offense. I'm leery of what we'll lose on defense but overall, between Morris and Monroe, we won't have those icy cold spells that put us in a hole. Brad has another BIG dart to throw.


bob



.

Bob without going all analytics, when he played at Detroit, he was playing with Drummond, that’s 2 centers that want to not chase and stay in the paint, not his game, he’s a 5. He also has had many big rebounding games, he’s not a rag doll getting thrown to the floor from contact by any means....I know you like those kind of players, but your in the minority, which is why those guys are finally gone.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Bob without going all analytics, when he played at Detroit, he was playing with Drummond, that’s 2 centers that want to not chase and stay in the paint, not his game, he’s a 5. He also has had many big rebounding games, he’s not a rag doll getting thrown to the floor from contact by any means....I know you like those kind of players, but your in the minority, which is why those guys are finally gone.

Cow,

He's not a ragdoll, true, but if he's not a rag doll then why is he such a poor defender? If the reason why he wasn't a good defender in Detroit because he played with Drummond and neither wanted to leave the paint (but that's where the NBA is going, ergo he's a shitty defender in today's NBA) then why hasn't Monroe averaged a lot more blocks/minute than Kelly? If he spends more time in the paint on defense he should be there for the blocks, no?

He's not a good defender or, at least, he hasn't been so far in his career.

And I'm just fine with being in the minority. It makes me dig in, get my facts right and fight back harder. Ever see The 300? Well, I'm freaking Leonidas. Bring it, convivially, and say hi to the boatman when you see him and pay your fare across.


bob



.

OMG, a debate about what a great defender Kelly Olynk is. The rapture is coming! These are the end of days!

worcester wrote:OMG, a debate about what a great defender Kelly Olynk is. The rapture is coming! These are the end of days!

No, it's a debate about how poor a defender Greg Monroe is. Kelly is just a mile stone.


bob


.

If Monroe brings us quality scoring and rebounding his defense will be good enough.

Every player that has come in contact with Coach Stevens has developed into a better player, and I think that Stevens will bring out the best in Monroe on the defensive end of the floor if only by using him in ways that accentuate his strengths and preventing his weaknesses from being so exposed.

Another note that may help Monroe to play the best defense of his career is that he now has about 4-5 months to help himself achieve a much better contract going into next season.  Improving his defensive game while playing on a first place team can only help him this summer ($).

Either way, he is ours now! Moving towards #18

Bob you are a pit bull, why you gravitate to soft players is beyond me. Dave Cowens and Charles Oakley weren’t particularly great shot blockers, but they earned their reputations as great defenders by playing great defense. I think your too much of a stats guy, I don’t care how many blocks per minute or game KO might average, anyone who’s seen him play knows he sucks on defense and I don’t need to break it down more than that. While I haven’t followed Monroe’s career intensely, the times I saw him play he wasn’t KO thankfully.

I agree Bob. Kelly is just a mill stone.

"Statistics rarely drive me. Feelings, intuition, and gut instinct do."

Jason Fried

At this time, I'll opt for the simple eye test regarding Monroe. Albeit past performances are a useful barometer to project future performance, how he does from here on in will be how I'll assess him. Most of the reason why the C's are where they are now is due to their team defense. Integrating Monroe into that team defense concept may result in a better outcome for his defensive performance because of the different players that will be around him. I'll give him the benefit of doubt. Having an opportunity to vie for the title with a good team may be the only spark he needs to up his defense.