Celtics in 18-19

[TripleOT]

If Durant wanted to force his way to Boston, the Celtics could send Horford back their way. If GS had to choose between KD leaving in FA for no compensation, or receiving one year of an opted in Horford plus a first rounder or two, that should be a no-brainer for the Warriors.

If the CP3 style forceout worked for Durant, and the Celtics packaged Tatum and Hayward with the Memphis pick, plus to the Pels, the Celtics would have their new Big Three of a resigned Kyrie, KD, and AD.

 

[BigSoxFan]

If Durant wanted to force his way to Boston, the Celtics could send Horford back their way. If GS had to choose between KD leaving in FA for no compensation, or receiving one year of an opted in Horford plus a first rounder or two, that should be a no-brainer for the Warriors.

If the CP3 style forceout worked for Durant, and the Celtics packaged Tatum and Hayward with the Memphis pick, plus to the Pels, the Celtics would have their new Big Three of a resigned Kyrie, KD, and AD.

Problem is that there is going to be so much money out there this summer that Horford may not want to opt in to the last year of his deal. He's going to be positioned to be somebody's consolation prize and get that final big contract of his career, something like 3/65 or so.

 

[nighthob]

If Durant wanted to force his way to Boston, the Celtics could send Horford back their way. If GS had to choose between KD leaving in FA for no compensation, or receiving one year of an opted in Horford plus a first rounder or two, that should be a no-brainer for the Warriors.

If the CP3 style forceout worked for Durant, and the Celtics packaged Tatum and Hayward with the Memphis pick, plus to the Pels, the Celtics would have their new Big Three of a resigned Kyrie, KD, and AD.

Horford and Durant are friends, they’re not unloading his friend in the deal. If Durant CP3s his way to Boston it’s going to be Hayward and a minor draft pick or two. If he doesn’t then Durant and Irving are teaming up somewhere else and Boston will need to go back to the drawing board (probably Beal).

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Horford and Durant are friends, they’re not unloading his friend in the deal. If Durant CP3s his way to Boston it’s going to be Hayward and a minor draft pick or two. If he doesn’t then Durant and Irving are teaming up somewhere else and Boston will need to go back to the drawing board (probably Beal).

Again, I will disagree on the cost of Durant.

If Durant picks up his option, its almost certainly because he/Warriors have agreement in place to send him somewhere else. And the Warriors won't do all this unless they are getting value. Unless Bob Myers has designs on taking over from Ainge in Boston, he isn't going to go through all of those hoops so he can replace Durant with a maxed-out for two more seasons, depleted Gordon Hayward, who may well recover to be equal or even better than he was his final season in Utah but isn't anywhere close yet, plus minor picks. Instead, it will cost the C's a real asset. The only reason Golden State would take Hayward is because he makes the money work.

 

[nighthob]

The Warriors are most certainly free to replace Durant and Cousins with a Morrii and roll from there.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

The Warriors are most certainly free to replace Durant and Cousins with a Morrii and roll from there.

You keep saying that but I don't think they want either Morris brother. The Warriors will sign some ring chasers but I doubt it include Mook or Kieff.


Edit: though I think they would prefer either versus paying Hayward max money for one (if they flip him) or two years and hope he recovers. If the only deal with Boston is for Hayward plus minor picks, I think they say hard pass.

 

[nighthob]

The Warriors are going to find the ring chaser market a little on the dry side once Durant and Cousins are gone. Not when teams like Denver and Milwaukee are going to be out there waiting. There aren’t going to be a lot of NBA starter quality players looking to take vet min deals to play there.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

The Warriors are going to find the ring chaser market a little on the dry side once Durant and Cousins are gone. Not when teams like Denver and Milwaukee are going to be out there waiting. There aren’t going to be a lot of NBA starter quality players looking to take vet min deals to play there.

Durant is almost certainly gone and Cousins is absolutely gone. The latter is about to get a 5X raise.

 

[lovegtm]

I seriously don't even know what's going on anymore. Missed the game because of timezone, woke up to this result.

Hell, maybe Kyrie is right and nothing matters except the playoffs (and Gordon). Who the hell knows.

 

[Imbricus]

Grousbeck is right. This is a team that could be in the NBA finals. Or it could be eliminated in the first round. Last night they showed why they could easily be in the finals.

 

[BaseballJones]

Yep and let’s be honest - the past few years the Celtics have played the Warriors very tough. So not only does this team have a chance to get to the finals, they could legit win it all.

But they could lose in the first round. But this game demonstrates what this team is capable of. And the ceiling is....quite high.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Cs are 13-2 when GH scores more than 15 points. They are 18-2 when GH shoots > 50%.

 

[Red Averages]

Depends which team shows up: the team that has defensive intensity, moves on offense, actually drives into the paint and shots near 40% or the team that stands around and hesitates on offense when they are given the ball, then shoots 20-30% from 3 and gets frustrated enough to stop caring on defense.

This isn’t the worst path to their playoff run:
Round 1: Pacers
Round 2: Bucks
Round 3: Raptors/76ers

Raptors scare me the most so getting them last is ideal.

 

[Philip Jeff Frye]

I don't know how to feel about last night's result:

1) excited that when they put things together, this team can really play

Or

2) even more angry that a team capable of this has stunk things up so badly for the last month.

 

[lovegtm]

I don't know how to feel about last night's result:

1) excited that when they put things together, this team can really play

Or

2) even more angry that a team capable of this has stunk things up so badly for the last month.

(1) is obviously the more important, as we’ve seem so many times in the NBA playoffs.

The key to me, more than the makes, was that Gordon was getting shots up. Means he’s being aggressive and decisive, and his plus playmaking flows out of that.

 

[BaseballJones]

To my earlier point, here's how the Celtics have played the Warriors the past four seasons:

2015-16
home: L, 124-119, 2 ot
away: W, 109-106

2016-17
home: L, 104-88
away: W, 99-86

2017-18
home: W, 92-88
away: L, 109-105

2018-19
home: L, 115-111
away: W, 128-95

So in the last four seasons, Boston is 4-4 against Golden State (1-3 in Boston, 3-1 in GS, interestingly enough).

Total score over these 8 games: Bos 851, GS 827
Average score over these 8 games: Bos 106.4, GS 103.4

Don't know if it means anything come NBA Finals time (which is the only place they could meet in the playoffs), but it would give me some optimism for sure.

 

[CoffeeNerdness]

Great win for sure, I just hope that the unity and comradery they showed wasn't just a fake, one night thing. The announcers were gushing about how they had "turned a corner" chemistry-wise because everyone was off the bench cheering and there were lots of smiles, but it's going to take more than one night for this to become a trend.

 

[bosockboy]

The 2010 team sputtered and only won 50, then flipped the switch. That’s the model to hope for.

 

[DJnVa]

I will add that they mentioned that Stevens said they also had a really good short practice before they left, that it seemed guys were "connected"--maybe so and then maybe that carries over to the long flight. Who knows?

Tonight seems huge though.

 

[HowBoutDemSox]

I will add that they mentioned that Stevens said they also had a really good short practice before they left, that it seemed guys were "connected"--maybe so and then maybe that carries over to the long flight. Who knows?

Tonight seems huge though.

Kyrie agreed on the long flight:

When asked about it after Tuesday's win, Kyrie Irving said the difference was the bonding that went on during the cross-country flight.

"That long plane ride helped us out," Irving said. "I'll just say that. That long plane ride helped us out.

"We needed it. It was just we were going to get to a point where we were just going to get tired of fighting each other, fighting the outside world. And it doesn't even really matter. So, we just wanted to come out here and just play basketball. This is our sanctuary. And we have to do everything to protect it. We can't let anybody infiltrate it."

"Well, I mean, it gets a little overwhelming, like I said, but this is just the business I'm in," Irving said. "The business part of it is what makes it terrible for me, honestly, dealing with all this s---. I'm going to be honest with you guys. The basketball part, I have to keep that fun. That's where I'm great, that's where I love to play and be around my teammates, that's what makes me happy.

"The business part of it is going to be the business. Personal side of being out here with my teammates is the only thing that should matter. It wasn't really a change of perspective; it was letting the guard down completely and just not thinking I'm at odds with everybody. It's not a competition in this locker room; it's a competition out there. That's the most important thing."

"Talking with Brad was very helpful, talking with Danny was very helpful, and just expressing myself rather than keeping it all in," Irving continued. "That made it very easy to just go out and just have fun playing basketball."

http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/26148521/hayward-long-plane-ride-help-celtics-funk

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

So playing around on BRef and unless I am doing something wrong (which I'm sure someone will point out if I am), here is a pretty telling statistic.

The Cs are 29-1 when they have a net 3P% > .025. http://bkref.com/tiny/G4qrM.
Leaguewide the numbers are 621-193.

Cs are 32-4 when net 3P% > 0; 22 when net 3P% < 0. This league has kind of turned into a jump shooting contest.

 

[BaseballJones]

So playing around on BRef and unless I am doing something wrong (which I'm sure someone will point out if I am), here is a pretty telling statistic.

The Cs are 29-1 when they have a net 3P% > .025. http://bkref.com/tiny/G4qrM.
Leaguewide the numbers are 621-193.

Cs are 32-4 when net 3P% > 0; 22 when net 3P% < 0. This league has kind of turned into a jump shooting contest.

"It's a make or miss league." That claim has been around for quite a while.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

So playing around on BRef and unless I am doing something wrong (which I'm sure someone will point out if I am), here is a pretty telling statistic.

The Cs are 29-1 when they have a net 3P% > .025. http://bkref.com/tiny/G4qrM.
Leaguewide the numbers are 621-193.

Cs are 32-4 when net 3P% > 0; 22 when net 3P% < 0. This league has kind of turned into a jump shooting contest.

Make or miss...

And that is not a reference to TimeLord's commercial flight history.

 

[bakahump]

has there been a better, more recent, example of a team that plays to its opponents level then this Celtics team?

 

[saintnick912]

has there been a better, more recent, example of a team that plays to its opponents level then this Celtics team?

Could point at the team they played last night

 

[DJnVa]

has there been a better, more recent, example of a team that plays to its opponents level then this Celtics team?

I don't know. With the #3 point differential in the league, I don't think that's actually the case. Last night nearly boosted them to #2 ahead of Warriors.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

"It's a make or miss league." That claim has been around for quite a while.

IMO, "make or miss" is a bit different than turning the NBA into a three-point shooting contest. In fact, it appears from the numbers that if anyone could figure out whether the Cs were going to out-shoot their opponent from 3P, they could make a lot of money in Vegas.

Not trying to hijack the thread so I'll just have one more comment - the fact that no one can shoot well enough from midrange to compare to a .400 3P shooter is probably not right so I agree with this article that the 3P line needs to be moved back.

 

[BaseballJones]

IMO, "make or miss" is a bit different than turning the NBA into a three-point shooting contest. In fact, it appears from the numbers that if anyone could figure out whether the Cs were going to out-shoot their opponent from 3P, they could make a lot of money in Vegas.

Not trying to hijack the thread so I'll just have one more comment - the fact that no one can shoot well enough from midrange to compare to a .400 3P shooter is probably not right so I agree with this article that the 3P line needs to be moved back.

I know lines need to be drawn, but does it make sense that a 24 foot shot is worth a full point more (50% more, in fact) than a 23 foot shot is worth?

 

[DJnVa]

I know lines need to be drawn, but does it make sense that a 24 foot shot is worth a full point more (50% more, in fact) than a 23 foot shot is worth?

Does it make sense that a ball traveling 1 foot further in baseball could be a grand slam as opposed to a fly out? There has to be some line. And I know you weren't arguing otherwise, but at some point there has to be a differentiation point.

Although if someone could program software to give each shot a value based on distance from hoop and then track a game, it'd be interesting. "Celtics down 3.68...less than 10 seconds...Kyrie crosses the 4.0 threshold, now at 3.78...3.77...shoots---GOT IT!!! Wait, replay--it's actually a 3.75 value shot, but still enough!! Celtics win!! 113.65 to 113.58!!"

 

[BaseballJones]

Does it make sense that a ball traveling 1 foot further in baseball could be a grand slam as opposed to a fly out? There has to be some line. And I know you weren't arguing otherwise, but at some point there has to be a differentiation point.

Although if someone could program software to give each shot a value based on distance from hoop and then track a game, it'd be interesting. "Celtics down 3.68...less than 10 seconds...Kyrie crosses the 4.0 threshold, now at 3.78...3.77...shoots---GOT IT!!! Wait, replay--it's actually a 3.75 value shot, but still enough!! Celtics win!! 113.65 to 113.58!!"

To me, it's a little like the idea that has occasionally been put out there to make longer field goals worth more in football. The idea of football is to score touchdowns. Field goals were designed to be a bit of a consolation prize. The closer you get, the easier it is to score, so that's why moving the ball down the field is what you're trying to do. Progress. Advancing the ball. In the "longer FGs are worth more" you drive to a certain point and then when you stall, it's better to move *backward* to kick a longer FG to make it worth more. Which seems absurd and a violation of the intent and spirit of the game.

Now basketball isn't football. Nor is it baseball. But still, generally speaking, it's easier to shoot from closer than from further away, so the idea has always been to get the ball as close to the basket as possible for your shot attempts, in order to increase your odds of scoring. Outside shooting was meant as a kind of "consolation prize" - if we can't get it inside, we'll have to look for the best, closest shot. But as guys got so big, they wanted to open up the floor (to make post play and driving easier, actually, both of which get you closer to the rim) and so awarding an extra point encouraged defenses to step out and create more floor space.

But now, it's no longer a "consolation prize" of sorts. It's primary strategy. You have a 3-on-1 fast break and the wings fan out to the three point line instead of taking it to the paint. Which is fine, whatever, it's not my cup of tea but who cares what I think about that? We all have our preferences. But it does seem to go against the kind of intent of the game.

In baseball, you're trying to hit the ball as far as possible (sluggers, anyway), so yes, you get rewarded for hitting the ball that extra foot. But in basketball, you find that guys who are wide open for mid-range shots (well, maybe a little outside midrange), instead of taking the shot or driving closer, actually step BACK to take a shot that's worth an extra point. It's just counterintuitive, kind of counter to how the game was designed.

But get off my lawn and all that, I suppose.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

To me, it's a little like the idea that has occasionally been put out there to make longer field goals worth more in football. The idea of football is to score touchdowns. Field goals were designed to be a bit of a consolation prize. The closer you get, the easier it is to score, so that's why moving the ball down the field is what you're trying to do. Progress. Advancing the ball. In the "longer FGs are worth more" you drive to a certain point and then when you stall, it's better to move *backward* to kick a longer FG to make it worth more. Which seems absurd and a violation of the intent and spirit of the game.

Now basketball isn't football. Nor is it baseball. But still, generally speaking, it's easier to shoot from closer than from further away, so the idea has always been to get the ball as close to the basket as possible for your shot attempts, in order to increase your odds of scoring. Outside shooting was meant as a kind of "consolation prize" - if we can't get it inside, we'll have to look for the best, closest shot. But as guys got so big, they wanted to open up the floor (to make post play and driving easier, actually, both of which get you closer to the rim) and so awarding an extra point encouraged defenses to step out and create more floor space.

But now, it's no longer a "consolation prize" of sorts. It's primary strategy. You have a 3-on-1 fast break and the wings fan out to the three point line instead of taking it to the paint. Which is fine, whatever, it's not my cup of tea but who cares what I think about that? We all have our preferences. But it does seem to go against the kind of intent of the game.

In baseball, you're trying to hit the ball as far as possible (sluggers, anyway), so yes, you get rewarded for hitting the ball that extra foot. But in basketball, you find that guys who are wide open for mid-range shots (well, maybe a little outside midrange), instead of taking the shot or driving closer, actually step BACK to take a shot that's worth an extra point. It's just counterintuitive, kind of counter to how the game was designed.

But get off my lawn and all that, I suppose.

I agree with what you are saying but I don't think basketball is getting rid of the 3P line anytime soon. At this point, a 22' corner 3 (which NBA is shooting over 40%) is worth something like 118 points per 100 possessions but a 21' shot from the baseline is worth about 81.9 points per 100 possessions (information from here; not sure what year it is for but it is illustrative enough) and that doesn't seem correct to me.

 

[BaseballJones]

I agree with what you are saying but I don't think basketball is getting rid of the 3P line anytime soon. At this point, a 22' corner 3 (which NBA is shooting over 40%) is worth something like 118 points per 100 possessions but a 21' shot from the baseline is worth about 81.9 points per 100 possessions (information from here; not sure what year it is for but it is illustrative enough) and that doesn't seem correct to me.

Yeah for sure they're not getting rid of it. It's just a different game, but intuitively for me (and I know I'm old school, hence the "get off my lawn" comment), rewarding a shot one foot further back an extra point is a pretty significant change in the game and goes against everything I was ever taught. Granted, my high school days ended before the three-point line, so there's that.

 

[the moops]

Cs are 13-2 when GH scores more than 15 points. They are 18-2 when GH shoots > 50%.

Not to pick on you, but I goddamn hate these cherry picked stats. You can go through nearly every player on the team, and you will find that when they do something good, the team wins. Examples...

11-4 Horford has 9 or more rebounds
10-2 Smart has 7 or more assists
6-2 Kyrie scores 32 or more
13-6 Jaylen shoots 4 or more FTs
14-4 Tatum has 2 or more steals

 

[DJnVa]

Yes, but you have to see a slight difference here...

 

[azsoxpatsfan]

Not to pick on you, but I goddamn hate these cherry picked stats. You can go through nearly every player on the team, and you will find that when they do something good, the team wins. Examples...

11-4 Horford has 9 or more rebounds
10-2 Smart has 7 or more assists
6-2 Kyrie scores 32 or more
13-6 Jaylen shoots 4 or more FTs
14-4 Tatum has 2 or more steals

I think the purpose of these stats is to show that the team does well when a certain player does well. Hayward scoring 15+ is much more indicative of him having a good game than is Tatum having 2+ steals or Jaylen shooting 4+ FT. And of course you can typically find stats like this for every player, but that's because when good players play well the team tends to play well. I don't really think that saying player X playing well leads to more wins is cherry picking.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Toxic...

 

[benhogan]

It was brought up on the game thread last night that Theis was worse this year than last.

While Theis was pretty useless last night, he's having a very good season as a 3rd string 5. He's shooting over 40% on 3s and 75% on FTs. He plays physical (fouls too much), hustles, sets screens/picks and does a lot of little things that show up with his net rating.

'17-18 101.4 off rating / 101 def rating / plus .4 / RPM .38
'18-19 108.6 off rating / 98.5 def rating / plus 10.1 / RPM 2.94

At $2MM/yr he's a bargain, shown improvement and I hope the Celtics can retain him for next season as a veteran bench piece.

edit: corrected typo

 

[Cesar Crespo]

I could see TL taking Theis's minutes next year, or Baynes for that matter. Theis as an option for 1.8 but I think he can get more than that, and more playing time, else where.

 

[benhogan]

I could see TL taking Theis's minutes next year, or Baynes for that matter. Theis as an option for 1.8 but I think he can get more than that, and more playing time, else where.

Yep. I'd like the Celts retain either Theis or Baynes and pencil TL into the 3rd string 5. My only concern is TL's ability to stay healthy, he seems to have small nagging injuries crop up a lot.

Back up/classic centers really aren't in demand. I could see teams spending their caps on wings/guards, leaving us one of Baynes/Theis on the cheap.

 

[teddykgb]

I don’t think Baynes and Theis are from the same mold. Baynes excels against the truly big 5s. He can body them and give a different look. Theis really seems to struggle against size at the five because he’s really not tall enough. He’s really useful when matched up appropriately. I think any team who tries to expand his role and give a bigger contract would be disappointed. Baynes would likely have a different market in contender teams who could use a big body which is essentially how we view/use him.

 

[chilidawg]

I don’t think Baynes and Theis are from the same mold. Baynes excels against the truly big 5s. He can body them and give a different look. Theis really seems to struggle against size at the five because he’s really not tall enough. He’s really useful when matched up appropriately. I think any team who tries to expand his role and give a bigger contract would be disappointed. Baynes would likely have a different market in contender teams who could use a big body which is essentially how we view/use him.

Both have been very useful, but I think this is spot on about their respective roles. You need someone to fill the Baynes role in particular because that's not Horford's forte.

I love garbage time TL, he's highly entertaining to watch, but penciling him in for a meaningful role on a contending team is a huge leap of faith.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Both have been very useful, but I think this is spot on about their respective roles. You need someone to fill the Baynes role in particular because that's not Horford's forte.

I love garbage time TL, he's highly entertaining to watch, but penciling him in for a meaningful role on a contending team is a huge leap of faith.

Leap of faith but I wouldn’t rule it out either. Just depends on how much he works and improves this summer. My guess is that he’ll be on more of a slower Perkins-esque development plan so I would bet on TL being higher than the 4th big on the depth chart coming into camp.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Both have been very useful, but I think this is spot on about their respective roles. You need someone to fill the Baynes role in particular because that's not Horford's forte.

I love garbage time TL, he's highly entertaining to watch, but penciling him in for a meaningful role on a contending team is a huge leap of faith.

A lot can happen between now and the start of next season, but I'd be surprised if Williams didn't get around 800 minutes of play next year in the NBA. If he spends the majority of next year in the G league, he's not worth the fan fare. He may not replace their roles, but he's going to replace someone's minutes.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

It was brought up on the game thread last night that Theis was worse this year than last.

While Theis was pretty useless last night, he's having a very good season as a 3rd string 5. He's shooting over 40% on 3s and 75% on FTs. He plays physical (fouls too much), hustles, sets screens/picks and does a lot of little things that show up with his net rating.

'17-18 101.4 off rating / 100 def rating / plus .4 / RPM .38
'18-19 108.6 off rating / 98.5 def rating / plus 10.1 / RPM 2.94

At $2MM/yr he's a bargain, shown improvement and I hope the Celtics can retain him for next season as a veteran bench piece.

Where are you getting these numbers?

B-Ref has his '17-18 O- rtg at 117 and D-rtg at 100. This year he is at 130 and 106 respectively. So in short, better on offense and worse on defense. The net result is that he is slightly better player in BPM terms and marginally worse in VORP terms.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Where are you getting these numbers?

B-Ref has his '17-18 O- rtg at 117 and D-rtg at 100. This year he is at 130 and 106 respectively. So in short, better on offense and worse on defense. The net result is that he is slightly better player in BPM terms and marginally worse in VORP terms.

I think B-references o-rtg and d-rtg are trash. His numbers are off of NBA.com. He made a typo though, in 2017/18 it was 101.4/101.0, not 101.4/100.0 Not that it makes a difference. The 2018/19 numbers are correct. That is a significantly better basketball player if you buy into the numbers.

 

[NomarsFool]

I think if Williams can get just a bit better in his basketball skills and knowledge, he could be an effective reserve 5. He doesn't have the physical heft of Baynes, but he is an extremely talented shot blocker. So, while he can't muscle the opposing 5s like Baynes can, he also is going to cause the other teams a lot of headaches with his superior speed and mobility.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I think B-references o-rtg and d-rtg are trash. His numbers are off of NBA.com. He made a typo though, in 2017/18 it was 101.4/101.0, not 101.4/100.0 Not that it makes a difference. The 2018/19 numbers are correct. That is a significantly better basketball player if you buy into the numbers.

Thanks. I use B-ref as shorthand and tbh. O rating and D rating isn't that great regardless of source to begin with.

That said, I think BH is spot on that hot takes about Theis playing worse this year aren't supported by the data.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Thanks. I use B-ref as shorthand and tbh. O rating and D rating isn't that great regardless of source to begin with.

That said, I think BH is spot on that hot takes about Theis playing worse this year aren't supported by the data.

Yeah, I think he's been pretty much the same, just less misses and more makes. His passing seems to be a spot better too.

 

[benhogan]

I think B-references o-rtg and d-rtg are trash. His numbers are off of NBA.com. He made a typo though, in 2017/18 it was 101.4/101.0, not 101.4/100.0 Not that it makes a difference. The 2018/19 numbers are correct. That is a significantly better basketball player if you buy into the numbers.

Yes, thanks.
DeJesus, I used NBA.com advanced stats and ESPN RPM. Like bosox79 said Theis is shooting a bit better this year, but I also think he is little more experienced and understands the system better (I recall Theis bumbling around a bit last season). In short minutes he is quick enough to front the big bodies, but agree Baynes is better at that
I also like Theis' German compatriot, Max Kleber, as a potential cheap bench piece if Baynes/Theis go elsewhere. I wouldn't trust TL as my back-up 5, but would like to see him start getting consistent minutes next season.

 

[bowiac]

Thanks. I use B-ref as shorthand and tbh. O rating and D rating isn't that great regardless of source to begin with.

That said, I think BH is spot on that hot takes about Theis playing worse this year aren't supported by the data.

This is mostly of a failure of Basketball-reference's labeling. The ORtg and DRtg numbers in the "Per 100 Poss" section are not team offensive/defense rating when the player is on the court. They're instead an early advanced box-score metric developed by Dean Oliver. BBref should just take them off the page, since they're both worse than other box-score metrics, and confusing.

You can find Theis' on/off numbers here. They're a bit different than the NBA.com numbers (higher on both offense and defense) but essentially consistent at +10.1 net. The difference between NBA.com and BBRef is a function of how to allocate free throw points when the players sub on/off, as well as the fact that BBRef doesn't use true possession numbers, while NBA.com does. This mostly comes out in the wash, and I still mostly use BBRef because it's so much more user friendly than NBA.com.