Jared Sullinger: What do we have here?

[Eddie Jurak]

Jared Sullinger's rate stats have taken a huge leap compared to last year.
 
As a rookie, he averaged 10.9 points and 10.7 rebounds per 36 minutes (though he played only 45 games and averaged under 20 minutes per game).
 
This year, he's at 19.5 points and 10.4 rebounds per 36.  He also leads the team in usage rate and PER. 
 
Of course, he's only playing 23.5 minutes per game, and until recently, he was coming off of the bench.  And the Celtics are not exactly a normal team situation right now, so it's hard to say how doing what he does on this Celtic team translates into a winning environment.
 
But there aren't that many guys who can contribute 20/10 per 36 in any situation.  
 
Going forward, is he a building block guy?
 
 

 

[Blacken]

His current output may not be sustainable on an actually-functioning team, but Sullinger is at the worst a serviceable starter on a decent team. I wouldn't put him in the first/second/third-option category but at the same time I don't think he needs to be in order to contribute effectively.

Direct comparisons are often tough with a guy like him, because he's not particularly athletic and he has no above-the-rim game to speak of. I can't really think of a player who fits, even playing the rich man/poor man game. My first instinct was to say "ceiling of Serge Ibaka", despite the athleticism difference, but I think Sullinger's offensive game translates better long-term than Ibaka's (and that Sullinger will never replicate Ibaka's block party). Right now their ORB/36 is pretty close, but having watched a lot of the Thunder over the last couple of years I think Sullinger has a better natural form to it that will age well. Most of his offense comes from in close, so that's a pretty steady option. I do like that they're encouraging him to shoot threes this year; I don't know if he'll ever be good at it but if he can move from .250 to .350 3P% that is sufficient efficiency to make him a "you have to stay home on him" perimeter threat and that raises his value significantly.

He's never going to be a star, but he'll be an effective player for a long time barring injury. He's definitely a building block unless somebody wants to give you a lot (relative to his draft position) for him.

 

[radsoxfan]

I think he's currently the best player on the team (non-Rondo division), and have been impressed this season.
 
I doubt he'll ever be a star, but I think he can be a starter on a good team, particularly if there is another athletic big for him to play alongside.  He and Olynyk might not be the best pair, though they can both be part of the same big man rotation.
 
He still needs to get in better shape, and he'll never be a great athlete.  But his rebounding instincts are superb, and he uses his body well.  He has extended his range, and may even be a good 3PT shooter at some point. I think its fair to expect him to a good 18-20 foot shooter for sure.  He also isn't a total black hole, as he sees the floor reasonably well for a big guy and knows how to pass.
 
I don't think it's crazy to think that he could be the 3rd or 4th best player on a very good team. I like Rondo, Parker and Sullinger as a nice core, with Embiid as a project big man.  Maybe we can trade these future Net picks to move up a few spots in the draft this year?  A guy can dream.....

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Direct comparisons are often tough with a guy like him, because he's not particularly athletic and he has no above-the-rim game to speak of. I can't really think of a player who fits, even playing the rich man/poor man game. My first instinct was to say "ceiling of Serge Ibaka", despite the athleticism difference, but I think Sullinger's offensive game translates better long-term than Ibaka's (and that Sullinger will never replicate Ibaka's block party).
 

 
Personally, I couldn't think of player more unlike Sullinger than Serge Ibaka. 
 
Of players of the same playing type, Sullinger will likely have a better career than Big Baby Davis and Brandon Bass, to name a couple.  The question is whether he will be anywhere close to Zach Randolph, Elton Brand, or Kevin Love - three NBA stars who have the same type of game/athleticism.
 
Sullinger mentioned that he feels much healthier this season, which plays into his increased stats.

 

[Blacken]

Personally, I couldn't think of player more unlike Sullinger than Serge Ibaka.

I meant mostly in terms of production. 15/10 player on a good team, making most of his own offense on the boards and in the mid-range (hence the throw-in about the additional value if he can shoot the three better). Sorry, that was unclear of me.

Randolph is further for me than a guy like Ibaka though (look at the shot charts from this year; Randolph is single-side and shoots in-close more often). If Sullinger can learn to make that three, though, I will take "poor man's Kevin Love" all day long.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Shitty Al Jefferson?

 

[Brickowski]

Shitty Al Jefferson?

Sullinger is already better than Jefferson, who is a black hole.  Can you imagine Jefferson playing Horford as well as Sullinger did last night?  Come to think of it, Sullinger is a lot like Horford, except that Sullinger is a better passer and has more range on his shot.

 

[DannyDarwinism]

  Come to think of it, Sullinger is a lot like Horford, except that Sullinger is a better passer and has more range on his shot.

 
No he's not.  Horford is at 2.7 assists/36 and 12.7 Assist%, Sully is at 1.5/36 and 7.1 Assist%.  And Sullinger doesn't protect the rim nearly as well.

 

[Devizier]

If Sullinger can develop his three point shot into a legitimate weapon - say, making 33% of his 3PA - then he could be an excellent complimentary player. He can never be a star, but the Celtics knew that when they drafted him.

 

[nighthob]

If Sullinger can develop his three point shot into a legitimate weapon - say, making 33% of his 3PA - then he could be an excellent complimentary player. He can never be a star, but the Celtics knew that when they drafted him.

 
I think is the realistic assessment of him. His upside is crack whore's Kevin Love. He's never going to be a great defensive player, and his best matchups are likely ones like Atlanta where he can play C because the other team is running a little guy out there. Overall he might be best as the first big off the bench where you can control his matchups more carefully.

 

[bowiac]

Paul Millsap is the more established comp that come to mind.

 

[Brickowski]

 
No he's not.  Horford is at 2.7 assists/36 and 12.7 Assist%, Sully is at 1.5/36 and 7.1 Assist%.  And Sullinger doesn't protect the rim nearly as well.

IMHO the passing stats are an artifact of the offenses that the respective teams run.  Boston does not have the shooters to play inside out very much.  As for rim protection, yes, Horford is better.

 

[radsoxfan]

Paul Millsap is the more established comp that come to mind.

 
I like this one, though Sullinger is currently a better rebounder (17.5 and 16.4 rebound rate in his 2 brief seasons).  
 
Millsap actually started out rebounding similarly, but has fallen off in recent years as his usage rates went up and offense improved (last few years in the 12-15 range).  Maybe the same thing will happen with Sully.
 
However you want to say it.... Paul Millsap with the potential for a 3PT shot, very poor man's Kevin Love, or some other variation... those are all pretty great outcomes for a pick in the 20s.  Hopefully it pans out.

 

[DannyDarwinism]

IMHO the passing stats are an artifact of the offenses that the respective teams run.  Boston does not have the shooters to play inside out very much.  As for rim protection, yes, Horford is better.

 
That's a fair point.  FWIW, Sully averaged 1.2 APG while averaging 31 minutes at OSU, while Horford was at 1.7 APG in 25 minutes at Florida.  Of course, Horford had some serious talent with him at Florida.

 

[Brickowski]

 
That's a fair point.  FWIW, Sully averaged 1.2 APG while averaging 31 minutes at OSU, while Horford was at 1.7 APG in 25 minutes at Florida.  Of course, Horford had some serious talent with him at Florida.

Actually the player Sullinger most reminds me of is Wes Unseld, although I don't know how well Unseld's game would translate to today's NBA.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Sullinger is already better than Jefferson, who is a black hole.  Can you imagine Jefferson playing Horford as well as Sullinger did last night?  Come to think of it, Sullinger is a lot like Horford, except that Sullinger is a better passer and has more range on his shot.

He's probably a better defender, though tough to tell in their respective defenses, and with their different offensive load carrying. (I will say Sullinger is definitely better defensively than Jefferson was at the same time in his career).
Jefferson rebounds the same, passes more efficiently, blocks more shots, turns the ball over less and all with a higher usage.

 

[Brickowski]

Sullinger played half of last year with a bad back-- on a second unit running Rivers' offense.  This year he's been  starting for part of the year. I'm inclined to believe my eyes, not the numbers, when it comes to Sullinger's very incomplete body of work.  Absent his back issues he would have been a top 5 pick, and he's a starting pf on a contending team-- if not the Celtics, then with someone else.

 

[Sprowl]

Sullinger is already better than Jefferson, who is a black hole.  Can you imagine Jefferson playing Horford as well as Sullinger did last night?  Come to think of it, Sullinger is a lot like Horford, except that Sullinger is a better passer and has more range on his shot.

 

 
No he's not.  Horford is at 2.7 assists/36 and 12.7 Assist%, Sully is at 1.5/36 and 7.1 Assist%.  And Sullinger doesn't protect the rim nearly as well.

 
Sullinger can't really get off the ground, but his positioning and hands are outstanding, and he has skills on a range of shots. Rebounding and scoring seem to be his forte.
 
I think of Horford as a long, lean, springy defender. Sullinger isn't that long or that lean. Jefferson has a better post game than either of them, but that's all he has. His knee injury after arriving in Minnesota appears to have foreclosed any prospect of improvement on defense.

 

[Lose Remerswaal]

Sullinger played half of last year with a bad back-- on a second unit running Rivers' offense.  This year he's been  starting for part of the year. I'm inclined to believe my eyes, not the numbers, when it comes to Sullinger's very incomplete body of work.  Absent his back issues he would have been a top 5 pick, and he's a starting pf on a contending team-- if not the Celtics, then with someone else.

 
This.
 
He was a great college player with a bad back that caused him to drop in the draft.  If he could get healthy he was SUPPOSED to be a good NBA player.  This is what we hoped for when he got drafted by the C's.

 

[ALiveH]

there was some really great video a while ago of Sully's rehab / offseason program.  It showed just how messed up his body was and how he had to re-learn to do the most basic physical movements.

 

[Blacken]

Don't have a link right here, but Stevens said he didn't think Sullinger was making enough 3PA. This bodes well.

 

[radsoxfan]

Don't have a link right here, but Stevens said he didn't think Sullinger was making enough 3PA. This bodes well.

 
Kevin Love 2.0 here we come.....

 

[Blacken]

I'll settle for Kevin Love 0.75.3.

 

[Kliq]

I like the Elton Brand comparison, Wes Unseld is a little bit dramatic.
 
I think what we sometimes forget is how good of a college player Sullinger was, his freshman year at Ohio State was simply fantastic. I loved the way he played in the 4th last night. He straight up out-played an all-star in Randolph and led a mini-comeback to make the game at least a little interesting.

 

[DourDoerr]

I've only seen pieces of a few C's games this year.  Sullinger's been filling the boxscores of late, but how has his defense been?  What have you guys' been seeing?

 

[Cellar-Door]

I've only seen pieces of a few C's games this year.  Sullinger's been filling the boxscores of late, but how has his defense been?  What have you guys' been seeing?

Good scorer, mediocre rebounder, poor defender, not explosive plays below the rim so he's rarely fouled. Not in great shape.
He's basically a little above league average player. Not a terrible guy to have in the rotation, but he's unlikely to ever be an impact player for a good team.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Good scorer, mediocre rebounder, poor defender, not explosive plays below the rim so he's rarely fouled. Not in great shape.
He's basically a little above league average player. Not a terrible guy to have in the rotation, but he's unlikely to ever be an impact player for a good team.

Good analysis.

 

[DourDoerr]

Good scorer, mediocre rebounder, poor defender, not explosive plays below the rim so he's rarely fouled. Not in great shape.
He's basically a little above league average player. Not a terrible guy to have in the rotation, but he's unlikely to ever be an impact player for a good team.

Thanks for this.  So he's pretty much as I remember him, with just more experience.  Well, I hate players like this.  IMO power forwards need to play tough D and be a help protecting the rim.  It's why I was so against getting Love.  
 
I'd say trade him eventually for draft pick(s), but that's the last thing C's need now.  Maybe they could package Sullinger with a draft pick to move up in a draft.

 

[tbrown_01923]

Well, they also need above league average players.  Is he as offensively skilled as boozer was as a young player?

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Well, they also need above league average players.  Is he as offensively skilled as boozer was as a young player?

Not even remotely close. Not only was Boozer better at creating off the dribble, he was a better perimeter shooter who has consistently had an eFG around 57% from when he first entered the league. Sullinger struggles to break 50%.

 

[moly99]

Thanks for this.  So he's pretty much as I remember him, with just more experience.  Well, I hate players like this.  IMO power forwards need to play tough D and be a help protecting the rim.  It's why I was so against getting Love.  
 
I'd say trade him eventually for draft pick(s), but that's the last thing C's need now.  Maybe they could package Sullinger with a draft pick to move up in a draft.

 
Big men need to either space the floor or defend, so we are OK as long as we pick up rim protectors to start opposite of Sullinger and Olynyk. There's nothing wrong with keeping him around as a backup PF.

I personally am quite happy with the players the Celtics have because they should theoretically fit well as role players on a good team. We have to get lucky with our picks, but if we do players like Sullinger should be able to round out the team effectively.
 
The Magic are a good counter example of a team full of promising young guys that are troublesome to construct a winning team out of. Payton's a terrible shooter, so they will have the same issues moving forward as we did with Rondo. Vucevic can't spread the floor or defend, so they need to find someone like Serge Ibaka who can do both of those things to play with him. Good luck with that.

 

[Blacken]

Yikes. I knew Elfrid had troubles, but 53% FT% is surprisingly bad. Wonder if they can get Mark Price from the Hornets.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Elfrid looks really good out there for a 20-year old taking a major leap in competition. I'm not worried about a low FT% if he was at 70% for the year that would be a total of 20 additional points.......over the course of 53 games. He shot low 60's in college so if he bumps it back up to there this will be of little factor.

 

[moly99]

Elfrid looks really good out there for a 20-year old taking a major leap in competition. I'm not worried about a low FT% if he was at 70% for the year that would be a total of 20 additional points.......over the course of 53 games. He shot low 60's in college so if he bumps it back up to there this will be of little factor.

 
You're only considering it from the perspective of one player, though. From a team-building perspective having a point guard who can't shoot worth a damn creates huge problems, particularly in the 4th quarter. He can't be your primarily ball-handler down the stretch of a close game, defenders are free to go under the pick and roll, defenders are free to drift down when he doesn't have the ball, etc.
 
He can still learn to shoot, of course. Kidd did later on in his career. But right now I don't think much of the Magic's chances of turning things around in the next few years.

 

[Sprowl]

I like the Elton Brand comparison, Wes Unseld is a little bit dramatic.
 
I think what we sometimes forget is how good of a college player Sullinger was, his freshman year at Ohio State was simply fantastic. I loved the way he played in the 4th last night. He straight up out-played an all-star in Randolph and led a mini-comeback to make the game at least a little interesting.

Good scorer, mediocre rebounder, poor defender, not explosive plays below the rim so he's rarely fouled. Not in great shape.
He's basically a little above league average player. Not a terrible guy to have in the rotation, but he's unlikely to ever be an impact player for a good team.

I'd push back on 'mediocre rebounder'. It's true that Sullinger has no lift, but he has real ability at carving out space. He doesn't have the immobiity of an Unseld, but he's not far from it. If he can keep extending his range and solidifying his post-up game (the jump hook has promise), I think that his role on an impact team can be more than incidental.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I'd push back on 'mediocre rebounder'. It's true that Sullinger has no lift, but he has real ability at carving out space. He doesn't have the immobiity of an Unseld, but he's not far from it. If he can keep extending his range and solidifying his post-up game (the jump hook has promise), I think that his role on an impact team can be more than incidental.

There are 130 qualified PF/C in Rebound Rate.......and Sullinger's 15.4 ranks 59th. That's pretty mediocre no matter how much space he carves.

 

[tbrown_01923]

Not even remotely close. Not only was Boozer better at creating off the dribble, he was a better perimeter shooter who has consistently had an eFG around 57% from when he first entered the league. Sullinger struggles to break 50%.

 
You are right, Boozer looks more efficient his first years in the league.  Albeit what looks like one year younger.   I am not sussed about this.  I was mainly responding to the "I hate slightly above league average players - trade him" comment.  I don't really remember boozer when he was super young - I remember him being a good offensive player, with no defensive skills. That said, the numbers w.r.t. being a better perimeter shooter aren't necessarily there,
 
I spent too long trying to paste the tables in (why isn't there an edit in HTML mode) -
 
but here are sully shooting stats:
 
      http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/s/sullija01.html#shooting::none
 
Here are boozers: 
 
     http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/b/boozeca01.html#shooting::none
 
Looks like Boozer is better 3-16 and sullys is better 16+.  

 

[lexrageorge]

Sullinger is also 22.  There is likelihood of improvement in some of these areas, in particular defense. He's not the player you dump for yet another fungible draft pick just yet. 

 

[Blacken]

There are 130 qualified PF/C in Rebound Rate.......and Sullinger's 15.4 ranks 59th. That's pretty mediocre no matter how much space he carves.

Rebound Rate is effectively a team and gameplan stat (barring a few extreme outliers), so I'm not sure it supports your claim.

 

[Cellar-Door]

Isn't it actually average, if not a bit better?

Mediocre is a synonym of average.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Rebound Rate is effectively a team and gameplan stat (barring a few extreme outliers), so I'm not sure it supports your claim.

Factoring that he Sully competing for rebounds with Olynyk and typically a poor rebounding 3 I feel these numbers actually strengthen my claim some, He's a big who gets destroyed by length an athelticism to where he can't be on the floor under normal circumstances on a competitive team in certain matchups.

Either way you slice it his numbers bleed mediocre rebounder.

 

[nighthob]

Rebound Rate is effectively a team and gameplan stat (barring a few extreme outliers), so I'm not sure it supports your claim.

It's just the approximate percentage of available rebounds a player accounts for. Better rebounders accumulate a higher percentage of boards. He's not bad, but he's wildly overrated in this regard, given how much of his offensive rebounding is Walkeresque. As in Antoine, who had this patented chuck & duck play where he would send a looping shot over his defender and duck under them to position himself for the o-reb. At least once a game he'd fire up one of those and end up with 2-4 boards on the same shot attempt. This artificially padded his rebound numbers while artificially depressing the scoring efficiency. Sully's the same way, as he's 6'8" with a 2.5" vertical leap when he shoots over a defender in the paint it's way over the defender and gives him a shot at some extra o-rebs. And, no, it's not a statpadding thing so much as a "short, floor-bound, post player needing to score over taller, longer, athletes" sort of thing.

EDIT: Anyway, Boston can't keep putting Sullinger and Olynyk on the floor together because neither of them has a real defensive position in the modern NBA. Sullinger has the strength and girth to offer some resistance in the post, but he's short, floorbound, and unlong. If you try and use him to flash out onto the perimeter he adds to those weaknesses the fact that he's slower than frozen molasses. He's useful off the bench, but if you're starting him you have a real exploitable weakness.

 

[radsoxfan]

Overall I agree with the analysis, but I'll side with those who say Sullinger is better than mediocre/average as a rebounder.  
 
Sullinger is pretty clearly not a center, so I wouldn't really look at the PF/C numbers and combine them.  Among 70 qualified PF, Sullinger's 15.4 rebound rate ranks #21. This is actually the worst rate of his career, which probably isn't surprising given the added offensive responsibility.  But even this slightly worse rebounding version of Sullinger is solidly above average.
 
His biggest problem is that he can't seem to get in good enough shape to play 35 minutes a game. He looks noticeably less effective the longer he's out on the court, and when he's forced to play big minutes consecutive games.  Sullinger might be able to take the next step if he can somehow conquer his conditioning issues, but thats looking less and less likely with each passing year. 

 

[DourDoerr]

 
 I was mainly responding to the "I hate slightly above league average players - trade him" comment. 

Geez, I think you're mischaracterizing my original comment.  To be clear, I don't like starting 4's who can't defend and protect the rim.  Also, I'd agree that Sullinger is useful in the proper role coming off the bench and he would have been just fine in the Big Baby role with the Garnett-Pierce squads.  My concern is the FO overrating him and rewarding him with a contract that overpays for those things he does well.  And I'd also agree - and stated it in the original post as well - that I wouldn't trade him for just a draft pick right now as we have plenty of those already.  If you can package him with a pick to move up in a draft, then that might be a good use of resources.  Or, as others have stated, and as he's certainly affordable now, you hold on to him and slide him into a role he's better suited for when you get a superior player.

 

[Blacken]

It's hard to really overpay people right now with the cap spike looming, so I'm not sure I'd worry that much about it. And almost any contract is tradeable in this league.