POST GAME PORTLAND - HOME

I'm interested in hearing someone's opinion about how well Sully did against Aldridge.

I could see Sully growing into LaMarcus Aldridge, except with more range.  Sully's only in his 3rd year, Aldridge is in his 8th or 9th and while he was a man-child from the beginning it has only been the past few years that he has become an NBA monster 4.



bob


.

What will prevent Sully from becoming a monster is his weight issue.  He just cannot jump and could erode is upside.  He has better skill sets now then Aldridge.


112288

Bobh,
To answer your question - not good on defense, much better on offense.
Bass was defending Aldridge much better than Sully, and anyone else for that matter. Just my opinion.

As for the game in general, if Celtics could play all 4 quarters the same level as the first 3... Overall, the last night's game was complete opposite of the previous 2 games, especially on the D-end.

AK

Sully is a very good player but has some limitations.  He is not on the same level as Aldridge and no I do not think he will ever get there.

Sully is now averaging 16 PPG and 8 rebounds and shooting 47% from the field.

I stll have an issue with his persistency to take 3 point shots.  His 3 point shooting has improved to .270.  The problem goes right back to coaching.  Sully runs a lot of P and R with Rondo and that is the reason why he is open for 3 point attempts.  If the opposition is looking at this I am quite certain that they want Sully to take 3 point shots as opposed to being anchored in the low post where his # 1 skill is rebounding the basketball.

So the question is who should run the P and R with rondo.  

My first option would be Jeff Green.  My second option would be KO and my third option would be Zeller.

Some other observations.

Kelly is in a funk.  last night he only took 3 shots.  We know that he can make shots but I did not see the Celtics try to get him more envolved.  I think his center assignment is starting to wear on him.  He logged 27 minutes last night while our only true active center played 11 minutes.

Coach Stevens just doesn't get it.  Kelly cannot be effective at the 5 for long stretches of the game.

Another observation is the inability of Avery Bradley to knock down wide open shots.  Right now he is really hurting the offense.  He is shooting 30% from behind the arc and need to step in a few feet.  

Tyler only played 11 minutes last night.  WHY?

dboss

bobheckler wrote:I'm interested in hearing someone's opinion about how well Sully did against Aldridge.

I could see Sully growing into LaMarcus Aldridge, except with more range.  Sully's only in his 3rd year, Aldridge is in his 8th or 9th and while he was a man-child from the beginning it has only been the past few years that he has become an NBA monster 4.



bob


.

Bob

Sully really couldn't defend him well.  Not so much opinion, per se, as just the way it panned out.

Probably too soon to make much of a comparison of the two.  If you look at each of their first two seasons Albridge gets a fairly decent edge in blocks and also is ahead in scoring.  In rebounding, both per 36 minutes and per 100 possesions Sully rates a good edge on both ends.  3 pointers aren't Aldridge's thing, so Sully wins there by default.  

Physically, Sully is shorter and heavier at 6' 9" and 280 vs Aldridge at 6' 11" and 240, which somewhat helps account for his shortcomings (no pun intended, especially for a 6' 9" guy) on D vs Aldridge.  Sully obviously is more ground bound than Aldridge.

My guess is as Sully evolves it will continue to become apparent that , head to head or otherwise, they have different strengths.  If you're looking for someone to get position, box out and board, it's Sully.  If you're looking at someone to defend in the paint and around the basket, and get some buckets as Mr. inside, it's Aldridge.  Overall, in my opinion, I don't see Sully ever becoming the player Aldridge is.  I don't think Sully has the same potential, but I do see Sully having a long career.  I would expect Sully to eventually settle in as a very productive 2nd unit type of power forward, hopefully in Boston.

(Please also take note I said "defend in the paint and around the basket."  If I hear the recently trendy, much over-used, media generated term "rim-protector" one more time, I'm gonna puke)

Regards

Whether Sully eventually becomes as good as Aldrich may not be the issue.  Whether Sully is as valuable to his team, within his team's system as Aldrich is to his team and his team's system is more to the point.  For example, it's not possible to conjecture about how Sully's skills might contribute to a team with an intimidator at center until we see him on a team with an intimidator at center.  As nearly as I can recall, Paul Silas was not a great leaper either, and he was certainly able to contribute pretty heavily (no pun required) to the Celtics.

Sam

Sully needs a 7 foot rim protector next to him to really flourish, with his bulk his post defense is actually pretty good and he blocks more shots than you'd think for an earthbound player, but Zeller isn't that intimidator and when he plays with KO and Bass....well its not a pretty sight if you enjoy hardnosed fundamental defense.

BobH,

As for how Sully did against Aldridge, there's the statistical answer and the observational answer.  As for the statistics, the two were virtually tied in points scored (20-19 Aldridge), and Aldrich won the rebounding battle two-to-one (14-7).  Sully was somewhat more of a facilitator than Aldrich (4-2 in assists).  They each had a block; Sully had a steal; and Sully played turnover-free ball while Lemarcus had only one TO.

While they were playing head-to-head (or stomach to waist if you will), each made one-third of his two-point shots (Aldrich 5-15, Sully 4-12) and Sully added 3 of 6 three-pointers (Lemarcus had none).  Lemarcus scored on 6 of 7 free throws, and Sully didn't shoot a free throw all night.  Aldrich outrebounded Sully by a three-to-one margin (12-4).

So, statistically speaking, I'd say it was pretty much a standoff on offense and defense, but Lemarcus' main advantage was in the rebounding department.

Observationally, I thought Sully did a really job of bodying Aldrich away from the basket and a little outside Lemarcus' comfort zone.  I don't recall Aldrich spinning around Sully once, although Lemarcus did succeed several times in bulling his way to the hoop for each buckets.  The Blazers seemed content with not contesting Sully in the high post, which is why he was able to launch six three-pointers against Aldrich (four in the last quarter, when they were trying to play Heinz Catchup.

Considering the physical disadvantage he was at, I thought Jared played a very physical and effort-filled game.  The height discrepancy was apparent in the rebounding action.

Sam

I didn't see the Boston v. Portland game, but I did see Portland shred the Bulls last week on TNT or ESPN, wherever it was. It looked a lot like SAS did against MIA in 2014 Finals. No me ball, ball very seldom hitting the floor, Aldridge rebounding with Lopez...It was a late game, but I couldn't turn it off! It was that good and that entertaining. Portland has a great team. It will be interesting to see how they continue to play with a full deck.

I'm surprised Boston was as close as they were in this game. We may be better than we think!

db

NYCelt,

I'm someone who uses "the term that shall not be named" for a post player with particular defensive qualities (and used it recently on this forum, so I'll pick you up a replacement barf bag). I've used it for decades as far as I know, and it pains me to see that it has acquired a negative connotation through overuse because it is quite good at describing what attempts to convey and does it with the economy of two words. It has a wider meaning than "shot blocker." "Intimidator" is the best alternative I can think of at the moment, but that could apply to non-post players and has an unseemly patina to it, as if it involves trash-talking and attitude as much as actual play. "The term that shall not be named" is much more clinical.

Alas, many words, terms, and phrases suffer a similar fate at the hands of overuse. I'm sad to see it go the same route.

If AB and KO play even halfway decent games, the Celtics may come out with a win. Alas, that was not the case.

The Blazers are a big team.  Lopez is better than he gets credit for, Aldridge is a good offensive player (he plays zero defense, which is why I dont rate him very high in the big picture) and Kamen was a very good off season pick up.  I still dont see this team winning out west.  Good, not good enough.

Green and Sullinger had nice games - Wallace showed a physical presence and spark off the bench (he needs to get more minutes IMO) - Turner had a nice stretch, followed by a poor one.  In the end, Celtics are not nearly good enough to compete with a team like this unless they are all clicking, but their run in the 4th showed some heart - which is all I hope to see on a nightly basis.  At least go down swinging.

As for the Sully vs Lamarcus discussion - they are both good in their own way.  Sully cannot stop Aldridge when he gets the spot.  He is too slow to counter his lateral moves and too short to bother most of his shots.  Add to that the fact that the refs allow LaMarcus to ram into the defender and shuffle his feet all night - and it makes for a tough match up for anyone, not just Sully.  

At the same time, Aldridge is a pretty poor defender and he has no ability to come out and guard Sully - nor does he ever want to come close to fouling out.  As tough as he is on the offensive end, he is soft on the defensive end.  As Sully improves his strength and fitness - he will do better in matchups like this one...and in the long run, Sully is a more well rounded player but hard to say if he will be an all star.