SHOULD WE BE LOOKING FOR ANOTHER BIG?

I cannot believe this guy is in D Ball. This guy should be on an NBA team He has great movement for a big and can score outside and down low. Forget the injuries, Ainge should have him up with the big club regardless.

112288

POB / Mikki Moore like

http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Magnum-Rolle-501/

He appears to struggle to take away position on the block against even average forwards, though, not gaining much ground when boxing out, proving to be a much more effective shot blocker coming over from the weakside, and having a tendency not to finish plays once his man gets him on his hip –a problematic habit for a shotblocker with his quickness.


From DraftExpress.com http://www.draftexpress.com/profile/Magnum-Rolle-501/#ixzz15Y5pcAbq
http://www.draftexpress.com

http://www.nbadraft.net/players/magnum-rolle

Not a physical player, he lacks the strength and mass to battle inside ... Gets thrown around and has a hard time fighting for position on both ends ... Not a go-to scoring threat in the post ... Has struggled with inconsistent play ... Must cut down on mistakes ... Born in 1986, Rolle is an older player so his upside isn't that of other prospects

That's why he is in the D-league

The clip of this kid is pretty impressive. On the flip side I'd like to see the outtakes.

But certainly he will be on a NBA roster soon I'd think. D league games start soon I think.

Come on DA, make like Roy Rodgers and pull the Trigger

beat

beat wrote:Come on DA, make like Roy Rodgers and pull the Trigger

beat

I give you my nomination, above, for quote of the day.

I hope they give a quick look at Tiny Gallon with the big club should we open a roster spot. He's been slated as a PF by many scouting services since the draft, but having seen him play as a 4/5 in college I think he might have the skills needed at this level as a 5. He's a little short but compensates by positioning well and is surprisingly nimble and can handle the ball well for a big man.

Either way; Magnum or Tiny, we're still in the hunt to make the all-NBA "name team" if we add one of them.

One merely has to look at Rolle's physical stats to see why he's not playing center in the NBA right now. He's not built for it. He's built more for PF. Almost any NBA center would bounce him around like a pinball. Hell, even Erden's not really built for it.

I am NOT a big Dampier fan, I saw enough of him with GSW to have developed an opinion, but he is a legitimate NBA center who might still give you 15 decent minutes. What I'd like to do is sign him to a 10-day contract, then a second, and then have JO back, but I doubt Damp's agent would go for that.

bob

.

bobh,

It is too early to sign any players to 10 day contracts. They can sign him to a non-guaranteed contract, which is basically a game to game contract. You are right that Dampier won't sign that deal for any team.

Sam wrote:Bob,

Thanks for posting that article. Perk certainly deserves to come back strong after being so diligent in his rehab. And his hopes for free throw progress sound great, even if he only makes it to something like 72%.

None of this dissuades me from thinking that the Celtics should have another big on board. Some of my reasoning has been expressed before, and some hasn't.

1. There's no guarantee that Perk will be back when he hopes, and even less guarantee that he'll be fully recovered until at least a year later.

2. In the meantime, things at center are precarious because the most reliable center (from a health standpoint) is the PF on the bench—and an increasing essential element of the bench's effectiveness.

3. As I've stated before, having enough healthy big men to practice is getting to be a real crapshoot, and practice is not as useful if people have to play out of position just to facilitate it.

4. Semih may satisfy my desire that the Celtics always have the next front line big man developing in the wings. But (1) there's no guarantee about his long-term health either and (2) he's been at the game, at a reasonably high level, for quite a while, which may mean he's already at or near his ceiling.

5. If the center position seems to be a revolving door-door-door now, think what another year could bring. I'd surely like to have another big developing as a hedge against catastrophe. If he showed a good upside, the worst that could happen would be that he might be good trade bait.

6. My preference for this "developing big" would be a younger guy whose age and physical condition are not question marks.

7. I don't claim this young guy would have to be with the parent team. The DL could do nicely, with him being available in emergencies up to three times during the season. I'm not all that bullish on the bigs the Celtics now have up in Portland.

By the way, until today, I wasn't sure where Lasme wound up. He's with the Celtics' Portland Red Claws, which reinforces my desire that the Celts dump Wafer. (Maybe he's potential trade bait, but probably only if they've lost a bolt for the parquet floor and need to barter for a new one.)

Sam

sam,

I agree the situation at center is precarious. Two weeks or so ago we started the season feeling good about having 3 centers, two of them all-stars. Now we're down to a dinged up 38 year old and a dinged up rookie. Granted, Perk was never the Fred Astaire type, but he'll be even less mobile when he comes back. At least, though, he'll have his NBA smarts, experience and NBA-ready 280#. I will be tickled pink if he shoots even 70% from the line.

I agree about Erden being at or near his potential. If he was going to develop an outside shot, especially playing in Europe where shooting is next-to-godliness, I think he would have by now. He has NBA center height, but not NBA center weight. I don't see him ever playing more than 20mpg for a season in his NBA career, I don't think he could handle that much punishment over a season. He is what he is and, at this point, I'm grateful to have him. Imagine where we'd be right now without him! We'd have Shaq, and we'd have Shaq and then there'd be Shaq.

Some people have mentioned Tiny Gallon. At 6'8", 320# he sounds like a wider, less mobile and without the shooting range Glen Davis. Would it be better to have Magnum Rolle, who has the height but can't defend his man in the low post (which is where they generally like to play), or Tiny Gallon, who is 3-4 inches short but can hold his position. To be honest, reading Tiny Gallon's Draftexpress profile is quite troubling. Lack of lateral speed makes him a liability on pick-and-rolls. This means that if our perimeter defense isn't perfect when he's in there his man is going to get a lot of dunks. It said he doesn't use his weight to try to keep his men further away from the hoop, but rather tries after they are already there (uh, wrong...). If that's true, and he doesn't figure it out soon, then what I said above about him being able to hold his position, isn't true.

If Von Wafer stays with the club, it'll mean that Bradley or Luke are assigned to the Red Claws. I can't see what happens in practice or in the locker room, but if that happens then I gotta believe Von Wafer has some pictures Doc doesn't want to become public. I'll especially stand by that statement if Luke is the one assigned due to our predicament with bigs. Bradley is somewhat redundant at this time. He's not going to be taking much time away from Nate and Delonte can play point and defend and is NBA-proven.

Q may miss the game in Washington tonight. That leaves our depth chart at 3 at one. Pierce. I'm not happy about that. Then again, this might be Luke's big chance. I'm not that comfortable with him at 3, his lack of speed makes him an undersized 4, but beggars can't be choosers. I should be honest, however, and admit that I have a blindspot when it comes to tweeners. I thought Chris Mullin wasn't going to make it because he was too short and light for 3 and not quick enough for 2. Obviously, I didn't foresee his advantage of being taller than most 2s and his ability to take it outside on 3s. Maybe that's Luke, lurking in my blindspot.

One of Danny's fair-haired boys, Robert Swift, is playing for the Tokyo Apaches. Tokyo Apaches? That's like renaming the Washington Wizards the Ainu. Huh? What the hell do the japanese know (or care!) about native american nations? WTF? Unfortunately, the Apaches play until April and I doubt they'll let their center go early UNLESS they're really short of pain-in-the-ass 6'4" shooting guards. Then we're in business.

Art Parakhouski and Kravstov (I'm not even going to try to spell his first name) played for the Celtics in summer league. I can't find where Kravstov is, so he's probably not anywhere (obviously, if I don't know something it just must not exist), but Art is playing in Latvia. Not NBA-ready, I think, but they have NBA center bodies. Art is craftier but Kravstov was MASSIVE. He's listed at 270#, but he looked much bigger.

Here are some summer league stats, courtesy of "Red's Army", on the relative performances of those centers per 40 mins of play:

CENTERS
Erden- 9.0 ppg, 6.3 rebs, 1.6 blk
Parakhouski- 10.7 ppg, 11.3 rebs, 1.1 blk
Kravstov- 15.4 ppg, 8.4 rebs, 2.2 blk

Both Parakhouski and Kravstov had better numbers than Erden.

bob

.

bobheckler wrote:One of Danny's fair-haired boys, Robert Swift, is playing for the Tokyo Apaches. Tokyo Apaches? That's like renaming the Washington Wizards the Ainu. Huh? What the hell do the japanese know (or care!) about native american nations? WTF?

Maybe the folks in Toyko looked at the Utah Jazz, LA Lakers, and (dare I say?) Boston Celtics and figured that displaced team names were a tradition in basketball and a way to extend your fan base.

As far as another big goes, there is another approach to consider while the walking wounded heal -- go small. Yes, it's a disadvantage defensively, but it can be a countering advantage offensively because the other team's bigs can't keep up with your quickness. Numerous people here wanted to bring in Nellie as a coach for the offense; here's a chance to adopt one of his strategies on a short-term basis. Think of it as a hypothetical matching of Shaq and Russell -- there doesn't appear to be any way that Russell could stop Shaq, but my guess is that Russell would turn that equation around and say there's no way Shaq could keep up with him.

Another reason to consider it -- there's aren't that many quality power centers out there to worry about. The Lakers, who are also short-handed at center at the moment, had trouble dealing with Andrew Bogut last night, but the idea is that when you're faced with that prospect, you swarm on defense.

It sounds like fun to me, but maybe my meds need to be adjusted.

Outside

Outside wrote:

bobheckler wrote:One of Danny's fair-haired boys, Robert Swift, is playing for the Tokyo Apaches. Tokyo Apaches? That's like renaming the Washington Wizards the Ainu. Huh? What the hell do the japanese know (or care!) about native american nations? WTF?

Maybe the folks in Toyko looked at the Utah Jazz, LA Lakers, and (dare I say?) Boston Celtics and figured that displaced team names were a tradition in basketball and a way to extend your fan base.

As far as another big goes, there is another approach to consider while the walking wounded heal -- go small. Yes, it's a disadvantage defensively, but it can be a countering advantage offensively because the other team's bigs can't keep up with your quickness. Numerous people here wanted to bring in Nellie as a coach for the offense; here's a chance to adopt one of his strategies on a short-term basis. Think of it as a hypothetical matching of Shaq and Russell -- there doesn't appear to be any way that Russell could stop Shaq, but my guess is that Russell would turn that equation around and say there's no way Shaq could keep up with him.

Another reason to consider it -- there's aren't that many quality power centers out there to worry about. The Lakers, who are also short-handed at center at the moment, had trouble dealing with Andrew Bogut last night, but the idea is that when you're faced with that prospect, you swarm on defense.

It sounds like fun to me, but maybe my meds need to be adjusted.

Outside

outside,

I wish nothing but the best of luck to the Tokyo franchise in their efforts to recruit Native American fans.

bob

.

Bob,

Hey, maybe they thought Fort Apache was in the Bronx that they'd get millions of New Yorkers.

But the Apaches are just one of the quizzically named teams in the (I kid you not) bj league (for "basketball japan").

Northern Akita Happinets -- they're a happy or happenin' bunch of netsters
Sendai 89ers -- because they're that much better than the 49ers
Toyama Grouses -- nothing more fierce than a cornered grouse

And you thought you saw strange things in Nepal.

Outside

I Like the idea regardless NEED. Shifting gears and going "small" for portions of games would be interesting, I can think of several options we could throw out there. And as you say there really are few bulky quality centers out there right now.

A pti bull can be a pretty mean dog but if he can't catch a greyhound really doesn't matter.

beat

beat wrote:Outside

I Like the idea regardless NEED. Shifting gears and going "small" for portions of games would be interesting, I can think of several options we could throw out there. And as you say there really are few bulky quality centers out there right now.

A pti bull can be a pretty mean dog but if he can't catch a greyhound really doesn't matter.

beat

beat,

I hear your metaphor about the pit bull and the greyhound. The difference here, I think, is that with basketball, the pit bull gets to fight inside a phonebooth every other possession and every time he gets to do that it takes a little bit more out of the greyhound and by the second half of the 4th quarter you end up with a pit bull that has tasted blood going up against a greyhound with a couple of pieces gone (or, at least, a couple of pieces with 5 fouls each). This means if the pit bull can hit free throws...

Still, it's hard to argue against fast scores...

bob

.

Bob

Of course the phone booth reference is good! But still love the idea of making the bigs on other teams run.

I remember when Marcus was 6-7 years old and was pee-wee wrestling. We were watching a kid (same age and a little lighter) destroy the other kids in his bracket, was pinning them all some pretty quickly. As we were watching him in one match I remember leaning over and asking Marcus how long he thought he could keep from getting pinned against this kid. His reply "10 seconds" My response..." If you can stay away from him for at least 5"

beat

BBD is one of the "smaller" (height) guys that can play center for periods and be effective. I don't see any small centers on the open market that are like greyhounds that would frustrate a big.
Come playoff time, the game slows and the smaller big men have a hard time defending and rebounding.
Perk is not real tall for a center but he does have long arms, is very strong and knows how to play defense which all together makes him a top defensive center. There are very few of those guys in the league that are 6-9" or 6-10".
Garnett can play center but at some point his minutes should go down, not up like they are this season.

TJ,

A couple of things:

-- I wasn't proposing this as a long-term solution, just a short-term, stopgap measure until JON is capable of resuming 15-20 minutes a game. I certainly wouldn't recommend it as a strategy to carry into the playoffs. Nellie used it effectively in the regular season, but it lost its effectiveness in the playoffs, when teams slow down and play more of a half-court game.

-- It wouldn't require signing anyone but would instead use the players on the current roster. It's basically allocating more playing time to perimeter players and using more of the roster, so that you'd see a lineup like this:

Three from this group: Rondo, Ray, West, Daniels, Nate, Bradley
Two from this group: KG, Pierce, Davis, Harangody

You wouldn't use this all game, just when you don't have Shaq or Erden. With Shaq or Erden in the game, you use a traditional lineup.

Anyway, that's the idea I had in mind.

I think Boston could do some damage with 3 guards (Rondo, Ray and Nate) but they would be giving up a lot if you used PP at the 4 and KG or BBD at the 5.
If you took out PP for KG, that helps Boston with rebounding, but hurts them offensively. Harangody can't really be brought into this conversation until we see what he can do in non-garbage time game situations.

TJ

like outside said this would only be for short periods not a lenglty period of time. 4-5 minutes a couple times a game is all. Creates mismatches both ways. Sort of like Nolan Ryan throwing a changeup once to a batter each at bat.

beat

beat,

I agree that this could work well.
When Bradley gets up an running, the speed and athleticism of Boston's guards could really be effective for periods each game.
I know this thread is about Bigs but Boston has real advantages over other teams from their guards.
Rondo rebounds like a forward. He, Nate, and Bradley are superior athletes and Ray is still a tremendous athlete even at his age.

TJ,

It's easy to give reasons why it wouldn't work. But did you ever see Nellie's teams play with their odd lineups? They wound up causing a lot of trouble for the other team, which would often go small in response, thereby negating the size advantage.

Nellie even played a lineup with Manute Bol and four greyhounds where Bol wouldn't go past the top of the key on offense and often didn't even enter the offensive area of play, so that it was basically 4 on 5, yet it was such a departure from a traditional lineup that other teams had difficulty adapting. The point is that Nellie's use of unusual lineups was often much more effective than you'd think because NBA teams are so conditioned to playing against the standard PG-SG-SF-PF-C lineup that playing against something drastically different puts them way outside their comfort zone, for both opposing players and coaches. Trust me, Andray Blatche does not want to guard Paul Pierce -- Pierce will embarass him on offense, and when Blatche has the ball, he'll wind up turning the ball over more because he's forcing the issue of using his height, which gets him out of his comfort zone. When that happens twice in 4-5 possessions, the Celtics convert the turnovers into fast breaks, and the next thing you know, Saunders calls time out and subs Blatche out. It doesn't work that way all the time, but I've seen it often enough to know that it works more often than it logically should.

Heck, try it for five minutes at a time and see how it goes. It's worth a shot, and it's a way for the team to get by with the center corps hobbling. To me, it's a less drastic measure than desperately signing any center who can walk and chew gum.

Outside,

Gimmick line ups can work for periods. I agree with what you and beat are saying.
When Don Nelson or Paul Westhead try to do it for a whole season, it never works. I don't blame them for their lineups because they play the players that they have been given.
Golden State in the early 90's were a super fun team to watch but not real contenders because they had a bag of rocks playing center.
Richmond, Mullin, Hardaway and Marciulionis were very good/great offensive players but they were always killed near the basket.
Especially with West coming back, I can't see what value at all Wafer will have to Boston. It's not like they need to keep him because he has a potential huge upside. I say let him go and bring in another big. It's not that Boston can't go small but what will happen to Boston in back to back games or the games that Shaq won't play? There will probably be many games with no Shaq, JO, Perk and a physically limited/injured rookie in Erden. Also, why put extra minutes on KG during the long regular season?

There are some precedents with the Celtics for the small lineup concept.

According to Bill Russell, Red Auerbach thought there was a certain time in the course of a game when, in a few minutes of maniacal play, the Celtics could, as Russ described it, tear the heart out of the other team.

That's the reason why, from his first season in the league, Red had a full-court press lineup, usually small guys with speed and quickness: Red always had a special team that he threw out there at certain points in the game, such as when the ballhandlers on the other team were vulnerable, or, when the opposing five were slow afoot, that type of situation.

When Bill Russell arrived in December, 1956, Red's small, full-court press unit started to evolve into the most dangerous weapon of mass destruction ever seen in sports. It evolved over the championship years into the unstoppable thing that Larry Siegfried describes in the quote below. It's from the interview on celtic-nation.com, and, includes the tell-tale statement, " There were nights when teams literally couldn’t get the ball past half court."

Siggy: "Russell’s imprint was everywhere with that team. There were nights in the Boston Garden, when Red would press with a small lineup For example, he might put me, KC, Havlicek, Sanders and Russell out there, and order us to press on every possession. There were nights when teams literally couldn’t get the ball past half court. I was a part of that – you can’t imagine the pressure. Put yourself on the opposing team; we steal the ball, make the shot, and you have to bring the ball up the court. And we’re right there in your face. Then, if you’re somehow able to beat us, you know the chances are pretty good that you’re going to get your shot blocked. The next time you don’t take it inside because you’re afraid you’ll get your shot blocked by Russell. So you sag back to get a little breathing room, and then we apply even more pressure. And that’s the way we won. And all of that pressure was possible because of Russell.

"Red always used to say that whenever we had offensive lapses we had a defensive problem. We weren’t focusing on defense. We were too preoccupied with offense. So how did he rectify that problem? He’d call timeout and go to full court pressure, which would eliminate the offensive focus entirely. Trust me, you can’t press like that and focus on your offensive game. It was to come as a result of the defensive pressure – points off of turnovers, quick baskets, whatever. And if you weren’t out there pressing, then you were coming out of the game. It was that simple. It was a great weapon for us. And all of that pressure was magnified tenfold with Russell on the floor. He was that good. There will never be another Bill Russell."

____________________________________________________________

There'll never be another Russell, but the Celtics of the Seventies, with Cowens, Havlicek, Sanders/Silas, Chaney, Jo Jo, et al, were a small starting lineup that was capable of turning on tremendous pressure and running opponents off the court.

Could a Celtics full-court press special team put that kind of defensive pressure on opposing teams these days? Why not? Russell and Auerbach felt that it only had to last for a few minutes, if properly timed.

Rondo hasn't won enough (yet) to be compared to Russell, but he's a defensive force like no other and is still a long way from being properly utilized. Their defense in Game 6 to win the championship was a team effort, but Rondo's steals were the equivalent of Russell's blocks in terms of turning momentum in the Celtics' favor.

This team is so deep and they seem to have bought full-tilt into the team concept, so a full-court press unit could turn into something more than a gimmick.

Scratch him off the list:

http://twitter.com/ESPNForsberg#

According to Red Claws, Stephane Lasme had surgery for a stress fracture in his left foot and is sidelined "indefinitely."

more on stephane lasme being out 'indefinitely' and maine's final 10-man roster as the D-League season opens: http://es.pn/aYU1UH [c's blog]

http://espn.go.com/blog/BostonCeltics/post/_/id/4678172/lasme-out-indefinitely-after-surgery

Lasme, who signed with Maine, the Celtics' NBA Development League affiliate, and hoped to work his way back to the parent club, will be sidelined "indefinitely." His surgery was performed by Dr. Gregory Pomeroy at Mercy Hospital in Portland, Maine.

Mercy hospital . . . I've been to their ER a couple of times . . . details at 11:00 (not!)