Does it matter who the 4th-best player is? I'd say our 4th through 7th or 8th are all pretty equal in terms of what they bring to the team. I think that's probably a good thing.
I'm really not sure either, and I think the definition of the question is at issue as well. Are we saying, "Which player outside of the big 3..." ...would be most capable of leading his own team? (Napier?) ...will be most productive on this squad? (Harkless?) ...has the best overall combination of skills? (Turner?) ...will probably have the best career? (Collins?) ...is most likely to contribute to a team's victories? (Aminu?) ...is best suited to be a starter (this season) on a contender? (Swanigan?) I think it's arguable that you could have a different answer for each of these, and any of those answers would be debatable.
I mean, lets be honest, he was pretty trash for the Celtics too, so maybe he's the piece that doesn't fit, not the team
ET's skills should fit really well with Nurkic in the lineup. He very well could become the distributor and playmaker we need, making him the 4th best player...possibly. I know it's a stretch. But I don't know if we HAVE to have a legitimate 4th best. Deeper is better. Say's Mrs HCP. Dammit! Sorry HCP, I don't have enough posts to make that comment.
Are you serious with this? I am pretty sure Brad Stevens would disagree with that. Top 5 in the 6th man of the year vote might not be that impressive, but if you read any of the articles when he was a Celtic, you would know that he was not viewed as "trash" by them.
I mentioned in the Zach Lowe thread that ET had his worst PER since 2012-13 season for us. He's certainly not "trash" but he does need to be used properly and find his niche here. I have no doubt he's a really good player.
10 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 4.4 APG in 28 minutes. He also shot .456 and .827 FT. His DRtg was a fine 104. That PER and those stats are from the year before we signed him. 4.9/4.4 for a backup who's not a PG are extremely good.
LOL. Not exactly my point. I'm saying that having a bunch of guys at 4-8 who are pretty damned good, and who may in any given game be the next best player after our top 3, may be more important to team success than having a clearly defined 4th best guy and then a bunch of stiffs.
Interesting that Ed, Aminu, and Turner all had "career" years (I use that term loosely) the year before we signed them, and then regressed...
Davis was outstanding for us in reduced minutes his first season. Aminu's minutes jumped from 1366 to 2341 when he joined the Blazers. His PER was above his career PER that season. He was dinged up last season, but I think he's been a terrific acquisition. If it were up to me, ET would have been the starter at SF from day 1 with us. I don't think he's been misused, but rather he's been forced to sub for lack of anyone else. On a 2nd unit that wasn't very good (as a unit/together). We're probably in worse shape this season on the 2nd unit because we don't have Crabbe.
The fact that y'alls are saying Harkless is both a credit and a slam to Olshey. 1) A credit, because like RoLo, Plumlee and now Nurk, he has proven he can turn another team's castoff into a valuable contributor 2) a slam, because the guy he gave a SEVENTEEN MILLION A YEAR contract to is easily being beaten out by a player the other team didn't want
Contracts given out last summer stick out like a sore thumb. MEM: Parsons- 23 mil, 2nd highest WAS: Mahimi- 17 mil, 4th highest ORL: Biyombo- 17 mil, tied for highest HOU: Anderson- 20 mil, 3rd highest BRK: Crabbe- 19 mil, highest BRK: Mozgov- 15 mil, 2nd highest LAL: Deng- 17 mil, 2nd highest NYK: Noah- 17 mil, 2nd highest These guys made out like bandits.
Caleb plays with a huge motor and at a position where he might start. Zach looks great: mobile, agile, instinctive playmaking. I think Caleb is getting hype because he could crack the starting lineup which is an exciting Cinderella story. Zach is awesome too though. It’s just a great all round draft.
