Report: Celtics 'quickly' shot down trade offer for Gordon Hayward

don't bother Cow, he won't agree with you, no matter what you say. Easier to look on the dark side, so let him be shocked when this team outplays last years team, period. Shockingly, there is no mention of a Hayward trade in his reply to you, that is next.

I will be waiting to say I told you so when Hayward becomes one of the best, if not the best, players on this team, I agree with you about Al, I loved the guy, but not for $100plus million dollars for four years. I wish him the best except against the Celtics.

This is all a matter of opinion. KDP's opinion has differed from mine for over a year. He may be right, but I will stick with ours!

Agreed Rosie, bottom line, was time to make a move, Al and Baynes were good for us, but we had to get younger. Morris again is a tweener, if his shot is off, he doesn’t give you much else, Rozier....please

For the circumstances, what he had to do and what was out there, Danny exceeded my expectations....

RosalieTCeltics wrote:don't bother Cow, he won't agree with you, no matter what you say. Easier to look on the dark side, so let him be shocked when this team outplays last years team, period.  Shockingly, there is no mention of a Hayward trade in his reply to you, that is next.  

I will be waiting to say I told you so when Hayward becomes one of the best, if not the best, players on this team,  I agree with you about Al, I loved the guy, but not for $100plus million dollars for four years. I wish him the best except against the Celtics.

This is all a matter of opinion. KDP's opinion has differed from mine for over a year. He may be right, but I will stick with ours!

I do hope you are correct and I will be shocked and surprised by how well this team is. and yes I would prefer to be pleasantly surprised and not hugely disappointed ( thought not sure that is the dark side, LOL), just perhaps my philosophy on life (such that it is).

cowens/oldschool wrote:Will be nice to have an old school big like Kantor that can score in the paint and rebound, 2 things Al was not particularly good at....

Cow,

I agree, it will be a nice change.  Let's hope the league hasn't completely left paint monsters like Kanter behind.

Al's Net Rating (offensive rating (points scored/100 possessions when he was on the court) - defensive rating (points given up/100 possessions when he was on the court)) last year was +15 (122 - 107).  Kanter's was +5 (117 -112) when he was in NY and a +13 (122 - 109) in Portland.  I'm willing to cut him slack with NY, since that team was a raging dumpster fire, and look more at his Portland numbers, since that was a good team that made it to the WC Finals.  In his 2 full years in OKC he was a +18 (123 - 105) and a +9 (116 - 107).  So, he is capable of putting up points and, with defensive ratings like 107 and 109 and 105, he shows he can be part of an effective defensive scheme.

The reason why I am using these ratings is because it is a more comprehensive view of the player vs individual stats.  For example, your observation that Al's scoring and rebounding don't measure up doesn't take into account his passing and floor generalship.  Kanter, to date, has been a black hole.  His career average is .8 assists/game.  For a player that has averaged over 22mpg that is an abysmal assist record.

I am confident Brad will figure out what to do with Kanter.  I don't think he has ever had such an effective low post scorer before, neither in college at Butler nor in Boston.  We do know, however, that he can turn mediocre, even poor, defenders into better defenders.


bob



.

Good points bob, as you know I’m not a stat guy, but what I liked about your stats was Kantors defense was not that terrible, obviously he’s not Perk or KG, but he’s not a Kelly O or Bender either. Defensive stopper, no but I have seen him play, he can get on a roll and score and board surprisingly effective and he can score on the behemoths. He might not stop them, but they can’t stop him either. Also excited about RW and Poirer, I see no reason we won’t be better in the paint this coming year.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Good points bob, as you know I’m not a stat guy, but what I liked about your stats was Kantors defense was not that terrible, obviously he’s not Perk or KG, but he’s not a Kelly O or Bender either. Defensive stopper, no but I have seen him play, he can get on a roll and score and board surprisingly effective and he can score on the behemoths. He might not stop them, but they can’t stop him either. Also excited about RW and Poirer, I see no reason we won’t be better in the paint this coming year.

Cow,

I know you loved Perk (and, in other news, water is wet) but he wasn't that much of an asset before KG arrived.  His inability to score made him a boutique player, he could only be on a team where you could still score enough to win while playing 4-on-5.

Year..........Offrtg.........Defrtg.......Netrtg
03-04.......103............101..........+2
04-05.......96..............102..........-6
05-06.......100----------103..........-3
06-07.......94..............105...........-9
07-08.......110............97.............+13 (1st year with KG, Championship)
08-09.......105............100...........+5
09-10.......105............101...........+4
10-11........95.............103............-8 (traded to OKC mid-year)
11-12........96.............103...........-7 (OKC)
12-13........94.............102...........-8 (OKC)
13-14........88.............104...........-16 (OKC)


As you can see, Perk wasn't helping the team when he was on the floor before KG and Ray showed up, became part of an excellent defensive unit when they were here (and a big improvement in scoring as well) and then fell apart again when he went to another team that was a good team but didn't have KG as the backbone of their defense and THREE elite scorers.  Not Perk, KG, made that team special because he kept the defense elite while significantly upping the offense.

You and I love defense, defense wins championships, but to be more specific what wins championships is scoring more points than the other guys.  Perk did nothing to help us do that.  Pierce and Employee #8 couldn't score enough to compensate for Perk's lack of offense.  It took 3 future HOFers.

Getting back to the present, this is where I'm liking Kanter and Poirier.  I think Kanter might "get it" defensively here, between Brad and Smart being in his ear all the time about it, and I think Poirier will show us something too.  Many of us want Williams to be Kanter's backup but, at this point, he is just a more raw, less experienced Clint Capela.  That worked great on a team with two penetrators to draw the defenders like Westbrook and Paul, but here?  I think Poirier will be Kanter's primary backup with Theis playing more 4 (which, I believe, is his more natural NBA position) and less 5.  What's exciting me about Williams is not only his rim protecting skills but his passing.  Against summer league competition, true, but he showed nice court vision.


bob


.

Bob I’m not gonna get in a pissing contest with you and rehash all the past. Perk made KG’s job easier by covering the biggest mofo, like Dwight Howard at his peak, one on one, so KG could roam all over and wreak further havoc, that’s what made that defense elite....

I know this started as a GH thread, but it morphed a little into an Al Horford thread. Al was a good player, but I honestly get a little worried when too much of of a player's supposed value 'cannot be measured in stats'. Almost everything is recorded and quantified now. Not a huge fan on net ratings either, since they reflect the perfomance of 9 other players (4 team mates and 5 opposing players). Guys on starting units of good teams will always have good net ratings. Enes is a much better value at 5 million per year than Al is at 27.5 million a year. Enes scores more, gets more rebounds, and actually has a considerably better PER (23.5 for Enes vs 20 for Al), and PER takes offense and defense into consideration. So even IF Al is little better, and does a lot of things that 'cannot be measured', are those things worth 22.5 million more per year? If you think of things in terms of value, Kanter is a much better value than Al. I also predict Brad will get even more from Enes, and next year, if not the end of this year, Philly will take heat for giveing Al 4 yrs at 110 million.

Shamrock1000 wrote:I know this started as a GH thread, but it morphed a little into an Al Horford thread. Al was a good player, but I honestly get a little worried when too much of of a player's supposed value 'cannot be measured in stats'. Almost everything is recorded and quantified now. Not a huge fan on net ratings either, since they reflect the perfomance of 9 other players (4 team mates and 5 opposing players). Guys on starting units of good teams will always have good net ratings. Enes is a much better value at 5 million per year than Al is at 27.5 million a year. Enes scores more, gets more rebounds, and actually has a considerably better PER (23.5 for Enes vs 20 for Al), and PER takes offense and defense into consideration. So even IF Al is little better, and does a lot of things that 'cannot be measured', are those things worth 22.5 million more per year? If you think of things in terms of value, Kanter is a much better value than Al. I also predict Brad will get even more from Enes, and next year, if not the end of this year, Philly will take heat for giveing Al 4 yrs at 110 million.

Rock,

PER is a notoriously weak stat for defense. That's because it only gives credit to discrete, quantifiable events like steals and blocks. It doesn't give credit for pass deflections, swift rotations, etc. What's Smart's PER?


bob


.

Dave Mason song comes to mind, We Just Disagree was the title Great song. Good discussion. I think that most posters have a realistic outlook on where this team is .Forgive me, but song lyrics keep popping into my head. "Pretty good, not bad, can' t complain."----John Prine. Sums up my feelings about the current squad. I think they'll be fun to watch, but aren't championship caliber. Kanter and Horford completely different skill sets. I'm just hungry for rebounds. Rebuild, renovate, whatever. Not the Philly process, for sure, but Ainge is awfully good at rebooting on the fly.

bobheckler wrote:

Shamrock1000 wrote:I know this started as a GH thread, but it morphed a little into an Al Horford thread. Al was a good player, but I honestly get a little worried when too much of of a player's supposed value 'cannot be measured in stats'. Almost everything is recorded and quantified now. Not a huge fan on net ratings either, since they reflect the perfomance of 9 other players (4 team mates and 5 opposing players). Guys on starting units of good teams will always have good net ratings. Enes is a much better value at 5 million per year than Al is at 27.5 million a year. Enes scores more, gets more rebounds, and actually has a considerably better PER (23.5 for Enes vs 20 for Al), and PER takes offense and defense into consideration. So even IF Al is little better, and does a lot of things that 'cannot be measured', are those things worth 22.5 million more per year? If you think of things in terms of value, Kanter is a much better value than Al. I also predict Brad will get even more from Enes, and next year, if not the end of this year, Philly will take heat for giveing Al 4 yrs at 110 million.

Rock,

PER is a notoriously weak stat for defense.  That's because it only gives credit to discrete, quantifiable events like steals and blocks.  It doesn't give credit for pass deflections, swift rotations, etc.  What's Smart's PER?


bob


.

No doubt Bob. I always say PER is a stat designed to prove Michael Jordon was a great player, and yes, it emphasizes offensive contributions. The point of my post is that although Al is probably a better player than Enes, he is not 5X better; Al is getting paid 5X Enes....