The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 12:57 pm

The Celtics have a lot of decisions to make over the next several months. Kelly Olynyk has a qualifying offer on the table for approximately $4.3 million. I do not think he will sign the one year offer which is a good move for him. I think that the Celtics will let the market set the price because their preference is to get another look at him before committing to a long term contract. Also they have a lot of holes to fill at the 4/5 positions so if he leaves it will make that project more difficult.

If another team puts a $12-$15 million offer on the table Boston will have to look long and hard before they make a decision to match that offer.

The expectations that I have regarding Kelly's long term future is not encouraging. He has been with the Celtics for 4 years.

He appears to be locked into a rotational role with virtually no upside.

Over the past 4 years he has averaged 20.7 MPG, 9.5 PPG, 4.7 Boards, 1.7 assists, 0.5 blocks and 0.7 steals.
He has been a pretty solid shooter at .477% from the field, .368% from behind the arc and .743% from the line.

His playoff numbers are more problematic.

In 26 playoff games we have seen Kelly's production decline.

His scoring average is 7.1 PPG and his rebounds dips to 2.5 per game. He has shot a below average 32% from behind the arc. Those numbers are his 3 year average but to get a better understanding about his ability to perform let's just look at the 18 games that he played during the 2017 playoffs.

He averaged 9.2 PPG and 3.2 rebounds while shooting 51% from the field, .32% from behind the arc and 73% from the line.

I have seen one noticeable improvement in his game. He has establish a low post presence in mis-matched situations where he is able to shield a smaller player, receive the post pass and score on a layin. Otherwise his play is level but during the playoff where the competition is significantly better he has fallen short, below his average.

He is never going to be an a good player because he is indecisive, lacks confidence has limited basketball skills and is severely limited by his lack of athleticism. He is a stretch 5 but only takes 2.5 three point attempts per game. There is no volume there. How many times do we see him pass up a good look to either swing the ball or attempt an awkward drive to the rim even when they are playing off of him. He lacks the ability to rebound in space and will consistently get beat by smaller players. He has zero chance against other 7 foot centers. The Celtics will lose those battles on most plays when Kelly is involved.

The question for the Celtics and the fans... Has he earned a $10 million dollar per year raise based on his past contribution and projected future contribution?

In my opinion there are two possible answers. No and hell no.

The way I see it he has earned the qualifying offer for one year.

The Celtics desperately need to upgrade their from line. Should we pass, raise or fold.

Let the debate begin.

dboss

by **red16russ11** Tue Jun 06, 2017 1:27 pm

Sounds to me like you don't think anyone should make him an offer north of the QO. It only takes one team. I hope Danny is out in front of this, and, like bob says, we use Kelly in a sign and trade.

Who do we get to replace him is the question. While that is a lot of money to play for a backup player, who starts, and who comes in off the bench for us at his position. We have Zizic coming and maybe Yabba..........who else? Green? Johnson?

Raise!

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 1:51 pm

red16russ11 wrote:Sounds to me like you don't think anyone should make him an offer north of the QO. It only takes one team. I hope Danny is out in front of this, and, like bob says, we use Kelly in a sign and trade.

Who do we get to replace him is the question. While that is a lot of money to play for a backup player, who starts, and who comes in off the bench for us at his position. We have Zizic coming and maybe Yabba..........who else? Green? Johnson?

Raise!

As I did state, I think it is in his interest to test the market. Then the Celtics will decide if they want to match an offer he gets from another team.

Ideally I would love to see him just sign the one year qualifying offer because it will give the Celtics a low cost frontline option as they continue to address the deficiencies with their front line rotation.

I would not match the offer if it is in excess of $8 million per year.

The Celtics should spend money on a front line player not named Kelly Olynyk. The Celtic will not be able to upgrade their front line by simply resigning KO to a big contract. The Celtics will need to trade for a quality big and also hope that the rookies are rotational ready.

Both Zizic and Yabu will get their shot but they will both be rookies so I really do not anticipate getting a lot of production from them. Maybe they will surprise us. who knows?

The Celtics have to close the gap between the truly elite teams and the front line upgrades needs will to be part of that solution.

dboss

by **red16russ11** Tue Jun 06, 2017 1:57 pm

I agree if we got Blake or someone to come in. But the 4/5 market is pretty barren this off-season, which is why KO will get and offer WELL above 8. I'd match to 15.

by **gyso** Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:40 pm

red16russ11 wrote:I agree if we got Blake or someone to come in. But the 4/5 market is pretty barren this off-season, which is why KO will get and offer WELL above 8. I'd match to 15.

I agree, for the record.

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:51 pm

red16russ11 wrote:I agree if we got Blake or someone to come in. But the 4/5 market is pretty barren this off-season, which is why KO will get and offer WELL above 8. I'd match to 15.

I agree. He is going to get over-paid

I also agree that the market for 4/5 is hard. The Celtics can give him whatever they think. It does not mean it is a good decision. Why not take the $15 mill and add 5 to it an go after Ibaka?

Danny already regrets trading up and by-passing the Greek freak for KO. Why compound the error?

Why spend big money on a player that cannot decide to wear his hair up or down and cannot decide to take the shot or pass it on?

dboss

by **red16russ11** Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:59 pm

dboss wrote:
red16russ11 wrote:I agree if we got Blake or someone to come in. But the 4/5 market is pretty barren this off-season, which is why KO will get and offer WELL above 8. I'd match to 15.

I agree. He is going to get over-paid

I also agree that the market for 4/5 is hard. The Celtics can give him whatever they think. It does not mean it is a good decision. Why not take the $15 mill and add 5 to it an go after Ibaka?

Danny already regrets trading up and by-passing the Greek freak for KO. Why compound the error?

Why spend big money on a player that cannot decide to wear his hair up or down and cannot decide to take the shot or pass it on?

dboss

Rumor has it Ibaka, who I love, for the record, loves TOR and they love him. They want to keep that team together. I think he stays even if they lose Lowry.

by **sinus007** Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:01 pm

Hi,
I'm afraid that projected salary of 12-15M is too much to keep KO.
I say try to S&T him if there is a good trade on the table, if not keep him for a year to see how Y and Z perform

AK

by **gyso** Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:03 pm

I think Danny already passed on Ibaka at the deadline when he could have gotten him for a second round pick or two.

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:29 pm

I doubt that. Toronto had to part with a pretty good player in Ross. Plus DA would rather deal from a free agency situation than a trade which makes sense to me.

Serge is an unrestricted free agent. Toronto does not have the right to match. Danny could be on the phone with his agent at 12:01 AM July 1st and cut a deal. Many still feel the real target is Hayward. However Utah can blow us out of the water money wise but Toronto has the Lowry issue to contend with. They are going to want to pay Serge less than Lowry which does open the door for DA to get him, if that is who he would like.

Or Danny may just sit on his cap space and do nothing of significance.

dboss

by **red16russ11** Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:33 pm

dboss wrote:I doubt that. Toronto had to part with a pretty good player in Ross. Plus DA would rather deal from a free agency situation than a trade which makes sense to me.

Serge is an unrestricted free agent. Toronto does not have the right to match. Danny could be on the phone with his agent at 12:01 AM July 1st and cut a deal. Many still feel the real target is Hayward. However Utah can blow us out of the water money wise but Toronto has the Lowry issue to contend with. They are going to want to pay Serge less than Lowry which does open the door for DA to get him, if that is who he would like.

Or Danny may just sit on his cap space and do nothing of significance.

dboss

That is all true, but I believe TOR has his Bird rights. Not 100% sure, but I think they too could blow us out of the water. You're right about Lowry, but they won't lose two free agents. They'll do what MIA did last year after losing Wade.
I'd love Serge, but I'm not getting my hopes up. I think Blake is a more realistic target, along with JaMychal Green

by **red16russ11** Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:36 pm

How about a sign and trade of Kelly to POR, close to his home, for Harkles and #15?

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 3:46 pm

red16russ11 wrote:
dboss wrote:I doubt that. Toronto had to part with a pretty good player in Ross. Plus DA would rather deal from a free agency situation than a trade which makes sense to me.

Serge is an unrestricted free agent. Toronto does not have the right to match. Danny could be on the phone with his agent at 12:01 AM July 1st and cut a deal. Many still feel the real target is Hayward. However Utah can blow us out of the water money wise but Toronto has the Lowry issue to contend with. They are going to want to pay Serge less than Lowry which does open the door for DA to get him, if that is who he would like.

Or Danny may just sit on his cap space and do nothing of significance.

dboss

That is all true, but I believe TOR has his Bird rights. Not 100% sure, but I think they too could blow us out of the water. You're right about Lowry, but they won't lose two free agents. They'll do what MIA did last year after losing Wade.
I'd love Serge, but I'm not getting my hopes up. I think Blake is a more realistic target, along with JaMychal Green

Yes I do believe that Tor has bird rights but again they have 2 unrestricted free agents to deal with and one of them is an All star. Lowry is going get $25+ plus mill and they probably hope to keep Serge for $15-18.

Griffin is more than likely to resign with LAC if CP stays. But absolutely he would be my # 1 target big.

dboss

by **wideclyde** Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:08 pm

Kelly Olynyk????

There are some nights that I would love to see him in Celtics green for his entire career, and then there are other nights that he just does not seem to show up. His issues with consistency have nearly driven me insane. I often wonder what the conversations between Olynyk and Stevens are like because I am sure that Stevens has mentioned the inconsistency stuff a million times.

It is always nice, as a coach, to be able to count on players for about the same kind of performance from game to game even if the guy is not an all time great player. If you know what you are going to get from night to night it is easy to allot minutes and keep your rotations in position while considering play above average as a giant bonus for the night.

But, here is where Olynyk kills me! One night he can get 18 or 20 with 8 boards, 4 assists and maybe only one turnover in 24 minutes and the next night he might only get to play for 10 minutes while giving the team 3 or 4 points, one rebound, no assists and 3 turnovers. This is not a criticism of Stevens, but rather of Olynyk because it is he who "earns" both the 24 minutes and the 10 minutes. If he is injured as the reason for such drastic "up and down" type of play I have not read it.

IF he could average 10.5 per game (and, of course, perform in rebounding, assists, etc in the same manner from game to game) by scoring: 13, 7, 10, 12 and then 13 in successive games (you get the point) he would become much more dependable while still only give the team 10.5 per game. To me, this would make him much more valuable, AND easier to judge for future contracts (like now). Unfortunately, he still is the 22, 3, 4, 19, 3, 12 = 10.4 per game scorer.

I guess the question Ainge has to answer is....."is this guy ever going to become a consistent NBA player?"

An 18 to 20 point per game (22, 19, 17, 15, 19, etc, etc) Olynyk is worth the upper levels of what has been ($15M/year) mentioned already, but the 10.5 ppg (3, 16, 5, 18, 11, 7, 4, 20, etc, etc Olynyk is certainly not worth such a salary from the Cs.

I have very much liked his improved skills and is continuing hustle during his four years with the Cs as such improvement has only come with lots of hard work, but???????????

by **BaronV** Tue Jun 06, 2017 4:26 pm

I think the key here is that Kelly is a known quantity on the court and in the locker room. As Danny said, the team has lots of good players, but needs to upgrade to great ones. There isn't a game-changing center / PF available as a free agent this year except Blake. So that more or less dictates that whoever they put in this position is another 'good' player. If you can get someone you think will give you similar or more consistent production for a lower price, giving more room to sign a 'great' player at another position, then maybe you let Kelly go. However, if you think that substituting a known player for someone new won't upgrade the team much, and could hurt chemistry, then you keep what you have.

by **Shamrock1000** Tue Jun 06, 2017 5:32 pm

dboss wrote:

Over the past 4 years he has averaged 20.7 MPG, 9.5 PPG, 4.7 Boards, 1.7 assists, 0.5 blocks and 0.7 steals.
He has been a pretty solid shooter at .477% from the field, .368% from behind the arc and .743% from the line.

His playoff numbers are more problematic.

In 26 playoff games we have seen Kelly's production decline.

He is never going to be an a good player because he is indecisive, lacks confidence has limited basketball skills and is severely limited by his lack of athleticism.

The question for the Celtics and the fans... Has he earned a $10 million dollar per year raise based on his past contribution and projected future contribution?

In my opinion there are two possible answers. No and hell no.

The way I see it he has earned the qualifying offer for one year.

dboss

This is an important topic, and you did a nice job laying out your argument. Above, I have quoted some statements I don't necessarily agree with. First, the numbers you quote above for the regular season translate to ~ 16/8/3 per 36. In today's NBA, those numbers are worth much more than 4.3 million (they got Al a max contract - I know, I know, he's a defensive anchor...). Regarding playoff numbers - not terrible at all, and too small a sample size to draw any meaningful conclusions. Thus, I disagree that he will never be a good player, because he is already a good player. As Rambone has demonstrated many times, advanced stats show that Kelly is actually a very good player. Part of his indecisiveness likely is due to the inconistency in his playing time - I love Brad, but this is one area he could improve on as a coach. Also, Kelly is playing out of position at the 5 - he would do better with more minutes at the 4. Is he a starter on a contender? Probably not, but possibly depending on how the rest of the team is constructed. Can he be a valuable contributor - absofuckinglutley, he already played a huge role in helping us advance to the ECF. He is also a smart dude, and doesn't need a ton of attention. Obviously, it all depends on what is available to Danny, but I personally feel like Kelly is a good guy to have on your team, and can help alot. If you were talking about whether he is worth the max, then I would agree, but I think you are grossly underestimating his worth.

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:37 pm

I have never felt comfortable using 36 minute projections or 40 minute projections to determine production.

I find it absurd in many instances.

Those projections assume that a particular player would average X if they play x minutes. But they are actually playing Y minutes per game.

There is no way to actually know what production would be at 36 minutes PG for a player that plays 20 MPG. I think it can be useful when projecting production from a young player.

KO has been stuck on 20 MPG. Perhaps his marginal utility of production would begin to decline if he played over 20 MPG.

dboss

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:41 pm

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/657235-the-value-of-per-36-statistics-and-future-breakthrough-stars

by **Shamrock1000** Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:54 pm

dboss wrote:I have never felt comfortable using 36 minute projections or 40 minute projections to determine production.

I find it absurd in many instances.

Those projections assume that a particular player would average X if they play x minutes. But they are actually playing Y minutes per game.

There is no way to actually know what production would be at 36 minutes PG for a player that plays 20 MPG. I think it can be useful when projecting production from a young player.

KO has been stuck on 20 MPG. Perhaps his marginal utility of production would begin to decline if he played over 20 MPG.

dboss

I would agree if the player in question is averaging 5 or 10 minutes per game, but at 20, its probably a realtistic projection.

by **dboss** Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:07 pm

I have an opposite view. I think in the case of young players, factoring in their upside, Projecting production is a reasonable variable to consider. But this is related specifically to KO and to the notion of a 36 minute fantasy cycle to evaluate production.

Maybe Brad should be playing him 28-30 mpg. After all, our frontline line is collectively pathetic. That will not happen because Brad already knows that KO is not good enough physically to play too many more minutes. He plays less than 1/2 the game, around 40 %.

Which brings us right back to the $

dboss

by **wideclyde** Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:53 pm

DBOSS,

It may sound like a good idea to play Olynyk 28-30 minutes on his 'good' nights, but a terrible idea to try to play him even 8 or 10 minutes on his 'bad' nights.

by **cowens/oldschool** Tue Jun 06, 2017 11:59 pm

He's had some good games, but when he's bad he's so terrible any coach would be an idiot to play him even 15 minutes....was it me or how bad was he in our last game of the season?

by **KyleCleric** Wed Jun 07, 2017 12:00 am

There are certainly players in free agency that I would have the Celtics sign and as a result, give up the rights to Olynyk. If we aren't able to add Ibaka, Gallo, Milsap, Griffin, Monroe, Hayward, or Noel, I'd look to keep Olynyk, pretty much regardless of price. This is our last chance in free agency unless we're giving up on Isaiah and Bradley. Signing Horford last year and having the success that we had this past season, I see us extending Isaiah and staying over the cap for the foreseeable future.

by **kdp59** Wed Jun 07, 2017 7:24 am

KyleCleric wrote:There are certainly players in free agency that I would have the Celtics sign and as a result, give up the rights to Olynyk. If we aren't able to add Ibaka, Gallo, Milsap, Griffin, Monroe, Hayward, or Noel, I'd look to keep Olynyk, pretty much regardless of price. This is our last chance in free agency unless we're giving up on Isaiah and Bradley. Signing Horford last year and having the success that we had this past season, I see us extending Isaiah and staying over the cap for the foreseeable future.

you are correct about this being the last chance for a big dollar outside FA. But many Celtic fans seems to not understand that the big cap increases were last year and this year. The coming years will more less generous increases.

however, as to your list of possible FA signings, you can scratch Monroe, Gallinari and Hayward from that list for me.

by **fierce** Wed Jun 07, 2017 8:10 am

Keep Olynyk.

He's only 26 years old.

It's not like he's already 30 years old.

I think he will still improve.

by Sponsored content

The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum

Re: The Kelly Olynyk Conundrum