Ok D. Not good, but not Kanter-ian either. I didn't watch him with laser focus tbf, so maybe I missed some obvious breakdowns beyond the one where he chased his man way out past the three line leading to an easy bucket.
Putting the C in 'Arsen
- Thread starter Cesar Crespo
- Start date
SSS and it's only one stat, but according to DBPM in the early going, he is just as bad as Kanter.
edit: Sample is so small it's meaningless.
edit: Sample is so small it's meaningless.
I don't think he'll ever be a regular NBA starter. Too many weaknesses in his game. But what he does well, he does really well. He can heat up in a nanosecond and absolutely pour it in. And his range is nearly limitless, which opens up all kinds of opportunities for other players. I know this analogy was used when the Cs first drafted him, but he is a smaller Vinnie Johnson (for you young'uns who don't remember, he was the Microwave on the great Pistons teams in the mid-late 80s; he was bigger than Edwards, but played a similar role...come off the bench and if he got hot, could absolutely go off). I think he is that kind of weapon. If he has it that night, great, ride the wave. If he doesn't, fine, he sits.
I mean Steve Kerr had a long, successful NBA career. Bad defender, not a great ball-handler, not big, but could shoot. If Edwards can be this kind of instant-offense generator, he can play in the NBA.
I mean Steve Kerr had a long, successful NBA career. Bad defender, not a great ball-handler, not big, but could shoot. If Edwards can be this kind of instant-offense generator, he can play in the NBA.
Boredom digression. Steve Kerr had a SIXTEEN year NBA career. Never averaged more than 8.6 ppg. Only 5 seasons over 7 ppg. Career 6.6 ppg. There can't be too many guards with that combination of longevity and production.
Kerr was actually 6'3--only started 30 games in his entire career, and 20 of those came in one season. I can't find anyone else that played in more than 900 games that had as few starts as Kerr. Although Scott Brooks started only 7 of 680--6 in his rookie year.
Carson is a deep 3 sniper. This will open and spread the floor. It will increase his assist total.
Edwards already has 10 assists and 9 3pts in 9 games. His ORtg/DRtg is positive and the kid has clearly been nervous to start the year. VanVleet averaged .9 apg and had a grand total of 35 assists his rookie year, along with 11 3pt shots made. Fred had a negating ORtg/DRtg.
VanVleet was a year older his rookie year, actually Edwards is tracking to be BETTER.
The whole concept of DNPing CE just won't happen, Brad is way too smart for that.
I'll double down, Brad should up his minutes and I expect he will.
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/e/edwarca01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/v/vanvlfr01.html
Patty Mills is another good comp that Edwards is exceeding at the same age
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/m/millspa02.html
I'm not sure why you would use those instead of assist % where VanVleet was at 17.5% his rookie year and Edwards is currently at 13.2%. Edwards is probably going to get way more playing time than VanVleet did his rookie year so of course he's going to have much higher counting stats. VanVleet also averaged 4.5 apg in college, Edwards 2.5.
VanVleet was at 4.3 assist per 36 minutes his rookie season, Edwards is currently at 3.4. He's not far off but he's definitely not tracking better than VanVleet as a passer unless you are just looking at raw totals. VanVleet also had 37 DNPs his first season and only played in 37 games. Toronto must be pretty dumb for DNPing VanVleet.
Toronto was smart to keep him, develop him and not cut him. Fred probably needed some time to adjust to the NBA game. using asst% in such a SSS is also kind of silly.
The point is Carsen is getting pushed forward at a younger age and his assist rate will increase with makes
Wait, you don't think he'll be a good NBA player...but his upside is a Sixth Man of the Year award winner? (All three have done that.)
Those just seem like really generic SG comps, is it because they're all offense/no defense? Even so, I think that's mostly a result of effort with them rather than physical limitations, J.R. is 6'6"...
He will have a role as a 3 point specialist in the NBA, at the very least, he has shown a special ability there. It isn't really hyperbole to say he's shown potential Steph/Dame/Trae range as a shooter. Beyond that will take some development, obviously, but his floor is relatively high for a 5'11" player.
I'm on board with the VanVleet comp, it isn't perfect but in terms of shooting and body type it's very fitting.
Picked only 4 spots behind Edwards, this guy turned into a valuable bench piece for the Celtics last title:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/houseed01.html
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/h/houseed01.html
I think Ben Gordon is his ceiling. It doesn't mean I think he reaches it. And the SG comps weren't all offense/no defense, it's all shoot. Guys who average maybe 2 assists and 2 rebounds a game. They don't really do anything other than score so if their shot isn't falling, they aren't contributing.
And while it may be tempting to think of bench shooters as fungible commodities, good ones are still useful. House was part of the Celtics comeback in Game 4 of the first Finals series with the Lakers, which allowed them to take command of the series (3-1). And in the 2009 playoffs (sans Garnett), he helped the team immensely in the Game 7 win against the Bulls in the first round, and poured in 31 in an almost-must-win Game 2 against the Magic in the 2nd round.
Given the cost, I'd be OK if that's where Edwards ended up. Anything above that is house money.
Given the cost, I'd be OK if that's where Edwards ended up. Anything above that is house money.
Eddie is a nice comp. small/can shoot
Except Eddie skills would be more appreciated in today's pace and space game.
If he was born 20yrs later, he would have started more, played bigger minutes and been a larger focus. Instead of being a bench role player.
The game/rules have changed to favor long-distance shooting. Comparing players from different eras could distort projections due to usage.
Last edited:
another small (163lbs), great shooting guard born 30yrs early
a career .411% 3pt shooter when the shot was not nearly as encouraged as it is now.
Tim Legler pops up on TV all the time, so he comes to mind. Also Fred Hoiberg, kind of a Kerr-minus (only as a player; as a coach he's Kerr-minus-minus).
Also Brent Barry, but he was a 2nd tier star whose career was sidetracked by injury and then remade himself as a Kerr type.
Last night, in a game where the Celtics scored 140 points, nobody on the whole team had more than 5 assists. Instead, they had 3 guys with 5 assists (Kemba, Smart, Wanamaker), 2 guys with 4 (Jaylen and Jayson), and 2 guys with 3 (Edwards and, weirdly enough, Poirier). They out-assisted the Wizards, 32 to 28, even though the Wizards had guys with 7 and 6 assists. And they did it without arguably their second-best playmaker on the floor (Hayward) or their best passing big (Rob Williams).
Edwards can fit here because the Celtics aren't asking him to be Rondo or even Kyrie. They don't even ask that of Kemba, who is averaging a career-low assists per 36 and nearly a career low assists per game.
Edwards has a long way to go, but that's true of most kids 8 games in to their careers.
It really isn't for those that were paying close attention all summer. It was preseason but this kid has shown flashes of being an elite, elite long range shooter.
Derek Fisher strikes me as a similar type player. He was a great fit next to Kobe because he could shoot, didn't have to play make, and could defend smaller points. Fisher is certainly a highly optimistic outcome for Arsen.
I’m going to keep beating this drum, but raw 3pt percentage comparisons are pure, undiluted anti-knowledge. Difficulty and frequency and nature of the attempts are incredibly important.
agreed...Blame Steph Curry if you like, but the 3pt shot and the distance you're capable of hitting them at a high rate helps extend defenses, it throws off rotations and leads to more assists (hockey or direct).
We're all looking for small guards (defensively challenged) that can hit the 3 as comps, which is fine. I just think it's probably more helpful to look for current shrimpy shooters usage/role, since the game has changed so much in the last 20-30 years (heck the last 10yrs).
Also, you can't ignore the job Brad did in developing defensively challenged IT4 from a good bench piece in Phoenix into an MVP level player here. Not saying that's going to happen with Carson, other then I expect Brad to develop, utilize and extract the most out of Edwards. These are the type of situations CBS is very good at exploiting. It doesn't shock me that smart organizations like Toronto and coaches like Popovich unearthed gems like VanVleet and Mills from UDR or late 2nd round.
Last edited:
Yup and I'm scared to read the rest of this thread so I'll just post my thoughts.
Carsen is a specialist with major flaws in other areas of his game.
Specialists require a unique role and function on a team or their flaws become fatal.
Young players typically need time to figure out how to best mask their weaknesses before teams identify them as a specialist on a winning team.
For this reason it is unlikely that Carsen ever finds his niche in Boston as his ascend will likely take several years which is longer than most deep bench players are given
Losing teams are typically dysfunctional.
Role players are at their worse in dysfunctional situations.
Ok, now that's out of the way who is Carsen and who can he become? Citing his <40% college shooting is laughable as he was constantly asked to score against zone and trapping defenses who knew that Purdue had few other options. This criticism of Carsen reminds me of how people here were critical of Jaylen's freshman year at Cal without knowing of or simply ignoring the context surrounding his role on that team. To me, I see Carsen as a young Eddie House who faced similar circumstances in college as an undersized guard being asked to do so much since they were their teams best shooters/scorers.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/carsen-edwards-1.htmlhttps://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/eddie-house-1.html
House spent his first 3 years in Miami shooting 3's at around a 32% clip. He then bounced around some lottery teams (I saw him live in two Bobcat games and felt bad for him he was so out of place in an awful situation) until finding a limited role in Sacramento on a 50-win team with structure and great passers......and suddenly 32% shooting House shot 45% from 3! Wow, just like magic.....well, not really if you don't put the 32% or his college numbers into proper context and only look at a spreadsheet. This led House to find a consistent 2nd unit niche with a good Phoenix team then the Nets until finally landing in Boston and we know how that all played out from there on a team where a specialist filled a role with his unique skillset while having a strong supporting cast along with proper usage to mask his limitations.
This is the Carsen Edwards ceiling or better yet, his most likely successful role in this league. His floor is the House who never gets that opportunity to play on a team like Sacramento to open up eyes to him being able to become a specialist in this league. It's all about opportunity in 3-5 years for him...….if he never finds it/earns it, he'll fade away like many others. If he does find it/earn it like an Eddie House he can make a nice career out of this NBA thing for himself. As mentioned earlier, I highly doubt that place ends up being in Boston.
Last edited:
This can't be stressed enough. The game has changed so much. Comps like Ben Gordon and J.R. Smith make absolutely no sense to me, they only compare if you judge players solely by their box score totals. Their body type and style of play makes them very different players to me.
House is a good comparison. Except we shouldn't be comparing the development path of a 3pt specialist in 2001 to one in 2019. The league takes twice as many 3s as it did then, 3pt shooting has suddenly been recognized as one of the single most important skills in the last 5 years. Through 9 games, Carsen is taking 2.8 3PA/g, House didn't take that many per game until his 6th year in the league, and only took 1.1 /game his rookie year in similar minutes to what Edwards has so far.
Seriously, those of you doubting Edwards have watched video footage of him playing prior to this NBA regular season, right?
View: https://youtu.be/ZrYPpxF1Ln0
This is as much entertainment as serious analysis but does a good job of outlining what Edwards does well and what makes him unique offensively.
EDIT to add: I think what stuck out to me over the summer was the way Carsen moves off-ball. There was some commentator or player recently that said something to the effect of the hardest player in the league to guard was Steph Curry without the ball. Obviously he's not Curry, but he can be very slippery with his size and quickness.
Last edited:
So a 50-win team, with a good supporting cast, found a role for House to flourish? sounds familiar
If Eddie House was playing today he wouldn't be bouncing around from team to team. A smart team would exploit House's skills. In today's NBA, they would keep him, use him more than the 17mpg he averaged and he'd play a bigger role.
^^what @PedrosRedGlove said ^^
I agree with everything about the environment that role players need in order to thrive. The thing is, Boston seems pretty committed to getting Edwards those minutes, and not just with scrubs. For that reason, I think if he makes it, it likely happens or starts to happen in Boston.
Because video footage of a player in college/overseas/HS is always the best way to evaluate players. Give me a break.
Sure told us a lot about Fultz, Josh Jackson and a plethora of other lottery picks. I'm probably wording myself wrong but highlight clips are garbage.
If by video footage you mean full games, yes.
edit: I assumed by video footage you meant youtube scouting. Maybe you didn't.
Last edited:
preseason games last month against NBA starters is > college/overseas/HS .
I believe you have brought up college stats, numerous times, as a way to evaluate Carsen to support your argument that he is assist challenged and not a good shooter.
Also if we want to ding CE for fewer assists, we should give him the benefit of lack of TOV
Carsen's challenge, as I referred to above, is that of slowing the game down while figuring out the nuances of the NBA to mask his shortcomings. He could maybe get away with being on the floor during the regular season however in a playoff setting when teams are specifically gameplanning for 2 weeks I strongly doubt he is a guy I want out there over veterans who are much further advanced than Carsen and less of a liability.
Fair enough. Kerr and Barros are widely regarded as among the best in history. Shooting%% aside, as a general rule it's close to useles to compare any non immediate-star in the first month of their career to "among the best in history."
I'm not sure that I agree with the bolded, especially when it's "among the best in history at X skill" and not "among the best in history."
Players like Edwards who are getting a shot in the league despite other severe liabilities (height, defense, whatever) usually do have some really elite skill, and it's useful to comp that skill to others who have been elite at it. It doesn't mean he's as good at it, or that he hits that, but it's helpful for understanding where his success might come from in the 5-15% chance he has success.
I think too often we dismiss any upside comparisons for young players as stupid, and then if the guy starts to hit that, act like the success was inevitable.
He's still very nervous, the game hasn't slowed down yet for Carsen. That will come with minutes/experience, which Brad seems committed to
We're kind of putting the cart before the horse here talking about Carsen's usage in the playoffs
BUT Eddie was more than helpful in the playoffs to the Celtics
Last edited:
House had a limited role because he gave it all up on the other end. Dana Barros too. I'm not sure it would be much different in today's NBA. Seth Curry and Quinn Cook don't play much more than 15-20 a night.
I agree with the last sentence, but there a pretty wide gap between "upside comparison" and comparing him to the "best in history at X skill." The former can be useful. The latter, IMO, not so much. But YMMV.
Right, my point is that the more narrowly you define a skill, the less crazy it is to talk about someone being close to the best in history at it. Like, I could say that Carsen Edwards is one of the best in history at having thicc quads while jacking tough 3s. Kerr's historically great skill (shooting assisted 3s at a high percentage at low volume) is similarly narrow.
Now, I don't think Kerr is a particularly good comp AT ALL for Edwards, so I'm not arguing for it.
I never said it was the best way, but you seem to be evaluating him solely by looking at his college stat line without much context, which doesn't seem thorough either. I'm mostly referring to the game footage from the Summer League and preseason, stuff he was doing against at least almost-NBA competition, if you haven't watched the game highlights of him lighting up Virginia in the tournament that is also must watch Edwards porn.
Also, it seems lost on people that Carsen was at the top of the NBA combine this year with his strength and quickness numbers. He isn't exactly your typical 2nd round upperclassman, he is an athlete...just a short one.
Benhogan articulated a point that I think drives my belief in Edwards. The game changed significantly 5 years ago in a way that makes the one skill that Carsen has shown flashes of (long range 3pt shooting) very valuable when it literally wasn't a thing ten years ago. He's shown he can get hot from 30+ feet, no one was shooting, ever, from that range prior to Steph. It makes finding comps from the past a difficult exercise.
I'm just not going to wring my hands about Edward's defense. Brad figured out how to have the #1 defense with IT4 on the floor.
All Carsen has to do in Brad's
Will Carsen be a plus defender? doubtful, but he won't get too exposed against 2nd stringers. As long as he plays hard, helps, and rotates within Brads' system CE will be OK.
I will give you this, I'd like Carsten and Kemba's time on the floor together to be limited
So he'll probably max out at 20mpg this season.
Huge CE fan, but I think that he'll never average more than 20mpg. Eddie didn't break 20 in a full season, unless I read that wrong. Yeah the 3pt is more valued now, but Carsen's liabilities limit his time.
20mpg as a microwave sniper is valuable.
20mpg as a microwave sniper is valuable.
This is mostly spot on, IMO, but I think you have the wrong spin on why he will likely have his best years elsewhere. He's an asset (or likely to be one) in Boston in the short term because he's cheap and has one playable skill that happens to be a very important skill.
If he develops, and assuming his ultimate role is bench offense/6th man, he'll probably hit just a point where he can command more dollars that the Celtics want to give him.
Hitting unassisted threes at a plus rate is a valuable skill to have, especially off the bench. In the extremely small sample, CE has five unassisted threes to four assisted. Jaylen Brown had only 10 unassisted threes his first two seasons combined. If Edwards can learn to heat up quickly, he could have value.
I saw him in person on Wednesday, his best game so far. He played more under control, and instead of gunning, found his opportunities within the offense. Edwards moves well on defense, and can cover with a low base, like Semi does. A lot of small players can move around well, but don't have much base strength.
I saw him in person on Wednesday, his best game so far. He played more under control, and instead of gunning, found his opportunities within the offense. Edwards moves well on defense, and can cover with a low base, like Semi does. A lot of small players can move around well, but don't have much base strength.
If he develops consistency, he'll have value. I think he already has the ability to heat up quickly, it's not something he needs to learn. If he was on a really short leach, he could probably get by without consistency too.
I thought of another not perfect former Celtics comp yesterday in Nate Robinson.
Like the guy or not, his shot selection needs some serious work.
Maybe he was under instructions to fire away at will yesterday to try and get the C's into the game.
Maybe he was under instructions to fire away at will yesterday to try and get the C's into the game.
Not a complete shocker, Carsen and Grant looked very rough on their first NBA Westcoast road trip. 5th and final game in Denver. Brad will need to figure out the best spots on the floor to feed Edwards. Step in 3s, kicked out from the paint would be better for Carsen/Grant at the moment. Try to create some confidence with both from 3.
Just note: How many games on this trip did the starters look lost for their first 10minutes? Now imagine being a first-year player coming cold off the bench on the road.
It's going to be a season-long process with both Grant and Carsen (and the rest of the rookies: Romeo, Waters, Green, Tacko).
Patience will be key. Take the Toronto Raptors approach to development it will pay off in the end.
They should take that approach anyway even if it doesn't pay off with Edwards and/or Williams in particular.
I'd argue they have been taking that approach too with mixed results. I think sometimes people forget about players like Abdel Nader, RJ Hunter, PJ Dozier, Jabari Bird, James Young, Kadeem Allen, Yabu etc. Not everyone develops and the further you get away from the top of the draft, the truer that becomes.
Just like some of (or even most of) Williams, Edwards, Tacko, Romeo, Waters, and Green won't work out.