Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticGreenLP. Show CelticGreenLP's posts

    Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    Per 36 mins comparisons.


                                     G GS  FG  FGA FG%   2P 2PA  2P% FT%  ORB DRB TRB   AST STL  BLK  PTS


    Tyler Zeller


    2013-14 24 CLE       C 70 9  5.4 10.0  .538  5.4  9.9  .549 .719    3.5 6.1  9.7   1.2  0.6.  1.3   13.7


    Jared Sullinger


    2013-14 21 BOS     PF 74 44 6.8 15.9 .427  5.8 12.2 .475  .778   4.3 6.3 10.6   2.1  0.6   0.9  17.3


    Kelly Olynyk


    2013-14 22 BOS      C 70   9 6.0 12.9 .466  5.0 10.0 .500  .811   3.6 5.8  9.4    2.8  0.9   0.7  15.6


    Greg Monroe


    2013-14 23 DET     PF 82 82 6.7 13.6 .497  6.7 13.6 .490  .657   3.4 6.7 10.2    2.3  1.2   0.6  16.7


     

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticGreenLP. Show CelticGreenLP's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    It's impossible to format this correctly but you get the gist.


     


    Since the Celtics have officially backed off from the Kevin Love sweepstakes a lot of Celtics fans are suggesting we go after Greg Monroe as a consolation prize. The Celtics do not have the cap space to sign Monroe outright, so they would have to trade some combination of Olynyk, Sully, Young, Wallace, Bogans, picks ect.  


     


    Looking at the per 36 mins stats it is evident that, given the same opportunities, the three young bigs we already have are as good if not better in many statistical categories.  


     


    If Monroe were some defensive juggernaught he might have an edge on our guys, but he actually may be the worst defender of the bunch. And he definitely has the least amount of range on his shot out of the four, meaning he is probably the worst fit in an offense where the guards MUST get to the rim to be effective. 


     


    Would you guys give up assets like Olynyk, Young, and/or 1st round picks for the privilege to pay Monroe 4 times more than any of the big guys we already have on the team?

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from CeltsFanInNH. Show CeltsFanInNH's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    In response to CelticGreenLP's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's impossible to format this correctly but you get the gist.

    Since the Celtics have officially backed off from the Kevin Love sweepstakes a lot of Celtics fans are suggesting we go after Greg Monroe as a consolation prize. The Celtics do not have the cap space to sign Monroe they would have to trade some combination of Olynyk, Sully, Young, Wallace, Bogans, picks ect.  

    Looking at the per 36 mins stats it is evident that, given the same opportunities, the three young bigs we already have are as good if not better in many statistical categories.  

    If Monroe were some defensive juggernaught he might have an edge on our guys, but he actually may be the worst defender of the bunch. And he definitely has the least amount of range on his shot out of the four, meaning he is probably the worst fit in an offense where the guards MUST get to the rim to be effective. 

    Would you guys give up assets like Olynyk, Young, and/or 1st round picks for the privilege to pay Monroe 4 times more than any of the guys we already have on the team?

    [/QUOTE]


    No

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    It is very strange and very telling at the same time that NO ONE has offered this guy a contract.....I'd stay away now, as you said.

     

    "Climb on my back, boys, and I'll take you home." - Cedric Maxwell

    "You show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser." - Red Auerbach

    "My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought, cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives." - Hedley Lamarr

    If no Bynum injury, no Gasol trade - last word!!

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticGreenLP. Show CelticGreenLP's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    Yeah, I think teams really are waiting to see if Detroit trades Smith like they are trying to do.  If they can't, they will have a hard time matching offers from teams with more cap space.


    When it becomes evident that Smith has no real suitors then you will see some teams come with offers for Monroe.  But I foresee The Pistons ending up having to sign & trade him. He may be a good fit with some team, just definitely not THIS team. 

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from satchsanders. Show satchsanders's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    Very interesting and well done research . I personally feel that there is  really nobody available on other teams ( kevin Love included ) who if acquired would make us contenders. That being said I also feel that we have some very good young and affordable talent on the team and would be wise to give them major minutes this year and let them develop.Who knows we might be very happy with the results long term.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PHX85014. Show PHX85014's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    In response to CelticGreenLP's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    It's impossible to format this correctly but you get the gist.

     

     

     

    Since the Celtics have officially backed off from the Kevin Love sweepstakes a lot of Celtics fans are suggesting we go after Greg Monroe as a consolation prize. The Celtics do not have the cap space to sign Monroe outright, so they would have to trade some combination of Olynyk, Sully, Young, Wallace, Bogans, picks ect.  

     

     

     

    Looking at the per 36 mins stats it is evident that, given the same opportunities, the three young bigs we already have are as good if not better in many statistical categories.  

     

     

     

    If Monroe were some defensive juggernaught he might have an edge on our guys, but he actually may be the worst defender of the bunch. And he definitely has the least amount of range on his shot out of the four, meaning he is probably the worst fit in an offense where the guards MUST get to the rim to be effective. 

     

     

     

    Would you guys give up assets like Olynyk, Young, and/or 1st round picks for the privilege to pay Monroe 4 times more than any of the big guys we already have on the team?

    [/QUOTE]


    I guess not. I wouldn't give up Olynyk either.

    Still think Rondo for Eric Bledsoe is the best solution

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticGreenLP. Show CelticGreenLP's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    In response to satchsanders' comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Very interesting and well done research . I personally feel that there is  really nobody available on other teams ( kevin Love included ) who if acquired would make us contenders. That being said I also feel that we have some very good young and affordable talent on the team and would be wise to give them major minutes this year and let them develop.Who knows we might be very happy with the results long term.

    [/QUOTE]

    Thanks Satch! 

    (I met the real Satch Sanders at the Nelson Sanders basketball camp in Henniker NH when I was younger. What monstrously wide shoulders! And an incredibly nice gentleman.)

    I do feel, that the per 36 mins is a very telling resource when comparing players. 

    For example, Monroe is widely considered a beast on the glass, conversely Olynyk is considered by most an average, or below average rebounder. But if given the same opportunities Monroe only grabs 0.8 more rebounds a game!  And is actually a worse offensive rebounder than The Klynyk.

    Also this shows that confidence plays a part as well.  Zeller and Olynyk (even though they tend to shoot further away on average) both have more efficient percentages. Sully and Monroe just take more shots.  If Zeller and Kelly were as aggressive as the other two they would easily average more PPGs. Especially Olynyk who is by far the most competent 3pt shooter.

    if given the same amounts of shots as Monroe, and adjusted to his percentage of three pointers taken and made, Olynyk's PPG per 36 would be 19.6!

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from dhs1950. Show dhs1950's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

     


     


    Per 36 mins comparisons.


     


                                     G GS  FG  FGA FG%   2P 2PA  2P% FT%  ORB DRB TRB   AST STL  BLK  PTS


     


    Tyler Zeller


     


    2013-14 24 CLE       C 70 9  5.4 10.0  .538  5.4  9.9  .549 .719    3.5 6.1  9.7   1.2  0.6.  1.3   13.7


     


    Jared Sullinger


     


    2013-14 21 BOS     PF 74 44 6.8 15.9 .427  5.8 12.2 .475  .778   4.3 6.3 10.6   2.1  0.6   0.9  17.3


     


    Kelly Olynyk


     


    2013-14 22 BOS      C 70   9 6.0 12.9 .466  5.0 10.0 .500  .811   3.6 5.8  9.4    2.8  0.9   0.7  15.6


     


    Greg Monroe


     


    2013-14 23 DET     PF 82 82 6.7 13.6 .497  6.7 13.6 .490  .657   3.4 6.7 10.2    2.3  1.2   0.6  16.7


     


     


    [/QUOTE]

    Celtic Green


    While using 36 minutes to level the playing field is very useful to reconcile numbers there can be a problem or two to  deal with. In this case the difference in actual minutes played by Monroe and Olynyk is quite significant.   2690 minutes by Monroe vs 1400 for Olynyk. Its quite likely, that while Monroe played most of his minutes against the starters, Olynyk spent considerable time playing against the bench. As a matter of fact, Monroe started all 82 games while Olynyk started 7 of 79 games


    dhs 1950

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from billge. Show billge's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    I think Monroe would make the Celts better, so we don't want him, cause he would not make them better enough.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticGreenLP. Show CelticGreenLP's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    [/QUOTE]


    Celtic Green

     

    While using 36 minutes to level the playing field is very useful to reconcile numbers there can be a problem or two to  deal with. In this case the difference in actual minutes played by Monroe and Olynyk is quite significant.   2690 minutes by Monroe vs 1400 for Olynyk. Its quite likely, that while Monroe played most of his minutes against the starters, Olynyk spent considerable time playing against the bench. As a matter of fact, Monroe started all 82 games while Olynyk started 7 of 79 games

     

    dhs 1950

    [/QUOTE]

    I would agree with you if...

    *Teams all had equally talented starting lineups.

    *Players never stepped in and out of starting lineups during the season.

    *Starters never got injured.

    *Starters were ALWAYS better than bench players.

    *Teams always used wholesale substitutions: Starters vs Starters & Bench vs Bench only.

    *Players never played more productively as a starter if/when the are moved from a bench role. (This happens often)

    For every Blake Griffin type starter there is a Bargnani type of starter. Throughout the course of a season if a guy is in the top say...8 in his teams rotation, he will see a comparible and widely varied level of competition that includes starters, 6th men, superstars, and scrubs.

    Also as mentioned above, just as a starter must at times face stiffer competition, a starter also has the benefit of playing with higher level teammates, which makes this argument a wash.

    In a lot of cases this results in players being more efficient and productive because the guys they are playing with space the floor, pass the ball, and cover their back on defense better than the players who would be coming off the bench with them.

    These variables lead me to the opinion that the per 36 min stat in this case is fair and accurate in its assessment that Kelly O, Sully, and even Zeller would be just as, if not more productive if given the same opportunities that Greg Monroe has been blessed with in Detriot.  

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from SportsGenius1. Show SportsGenius1's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    I liked Zeller when he was balling at UNC, Fav hopefully will blossom, Colt Iverson may have to play in turkey for another year. Olynyk isn't a center per se, more of a SF who just happens to be 7'0 tall. Sully is the proverbial bull in a china shop PF, I don't know what Anthony has for game. So do I think Monroe is worth selling the farm for? No.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from myurkus. Show myurkus's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    I am in the minority, but I would still like to get him.  There just aren't that many guys like him around. Is he a great rim protector?  No, but he is a good rebounder and scorer.  He is very young, and he has had no injury issues.  I think he is a piece you can build around.  I also think the only way we would get him would be by trading rondo.  I do not think this will happen.  If it did, though, you would have a 4-5 rotation of Monroe, Zeller, KO, Sully, and Bass if he is around.  That is pretty solid.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dhs1950. Show dhs1950's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    In response to CelticGreenLP's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]


    Celtic Green

     

    While using 36 minutes to level the playing field is very useful to reconcile numbers there can be a problem or two to  deal with. In this case the difference in actual minutes played by Monroe and Olynyk is quite significant.   2690 minutes by Monroe vs 1400 for Olynyk. Its quite likely, that while Monroe played most of his minutes against the starters, Olynyk spent considerable time playing against the bench. As a matter of fact, Monroe started all 82 games while Olynyk started 7 of 79 games

     

    dhs 1950

    [/QUOTE]

    I would agree with you if...

    *Teams all had equally talented starting lineups.

    *Players never stepped in and out of starting lineups during the season.

    *Starters never got injured.

    *Starters were ALWAYS better than bench players.

    *Teams always used wholesale substitutions: Starters vs Starters & Bench vs Bench only.

    *Players never played more productively as a starter if/when the are moved from a bench role. (This happens often)

    For every Blake Griffin type starter there is a Bargnani type of starter. Throughout the course of a season if a guy is in the top say...8 in his teams rotation, he will see a comparible and widely varied level of competition that includes starters, 6th men, superstars, and scrubs.

    Also as mentioned above, just as a starter must at times face stiffer competition, a starter also has the benefit of playing with higher level teammates, which makes this argument a wash.

    In a lot of cases this results in players being more efficient and productive because the guys they are playing with space the floor, pass the ball, and cover their back on defense better than the players who would be coming off the bench with them.

    These variables lead me to the opinion that the per 36 min stat in this case is fair and accurate in its assessment that Kelly O, Sully, and even Zeller would be just as, if not more productive if given the same opportunities that Greg Monroe has been blessed with in Detriot.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I have no opinion on this subject since it is pure speculation. I thought I would just mention minutes played as an important factor to be considered. Your certainly correct in listing 6 other factors to also be considered.  Perhaps some day there will be statistical data factoring in these 6 other issues and a clearer opinion can be formed.  But for now its all pure speculation and perhaps even biased by fan hometown loyalty.  Never the less its great conversational subject matter to pass the time of day during the offseason.

    dhs1950  

     

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from CelticGreenLP. Show CelticGreenLP's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    In response to dhs1950's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to CelticGreenLP's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    [/QUOTE]


    Celtic Green

     

    While using 36 minutes to level the playing field is very useful to reconcile numbers there can be a problem or two to  deal with. In this case the difference in actual minutes played by Monroe and Olynyk is quite significant.   2690 minutes by Monroe vs 1400 for Olynyk. Its quite likely, that while Monroe played most of his minutes against the starters, Olynyk spent considerable time playing against the bench. As a matter of fact, Monroe started all 82 games while Olynyk started 7 of 79 games

     

    dhs 1950

    [/QUOTE]

    I would agree with you if...

    *Teams all had equally talented starting lineups.

    *Players never stepped in and out of starting lineups during the season.

    *Starters never got injured.

    *Starters were ALWAYS better than bench players.

    *Teams always used wholesale substitutions: Starters vs Starters & Bench vs Bench only.

    *Players never played more productively as a starter if/when the are moved from a bench role. (This happens often)

    For every Blake Griffin type starter there is a Bargnani type of starter. Throughout the course of a season if a guy is in the top say...8 in his teams rotation, he will see a comparible and widely varied level of competition that includes starters, 6th men, superstars, and scrubs.

    Also as mentioned above, just as a starter must at times face stiffer competition, a starter also has the benefit of playing with higher level teammates, which makes this argument a wash.

    In a lot of cases this results in players being more efficient and productive because the guys they are playing with space the floor, pass the ball, and cover their back on defense better than the players who would be coming off the bench with them.

    These variables lead me to the opinion that the per 36 min stat in this case is fair and accurate in its assessment that Kelly O, Sully, and even Zeller would be just as, if not more productive if given the same opportunities that Greg Monroe has been blessed with in Detriot.  

    [/QUOTE]

    I have no opinion on this subject since it is pure speculation. I thought I would just mention minutes played as an important factor to be considered. Your certainly correct in listing 6 other factors to also be considered.  Perhaps some day there will be statistical data factoring in these 6 other issues and a clearer opinion can be formed.  But for now its all pure speculation and perhaps even biased by fan hometown loyalty.  Never the less its great conversational subject matter to pass the time of day during the offseason.

    dhs1950  

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Agreed, cheers!

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from mellymel3. Show mellymel3's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    In response to SportsGenius1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I liked Zeller when he was balling at UNC, Fav hopefully will blossom, Colt Iverson may have to play in turkey for another year. Olynyk isn't a center per se, more of a SF who just happens to be 7'0 tall. Sully is the proverbial bull in a china shop PF, I don't know what Anthony has for game. So do I think Monroe is worth selling the farm for? No.

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree with you on everything except Fav...he sucks...the Faux Hawk will NEVER fly in the NBA...I'd love to see it, I really would, but just don't ever see it happening. Oh yes, Anthony has no game - how do you think we got him?

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from FierceBrand. Show FierceBrand's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    Greg Monroe is NOT going to be a Boston Celtic this season.

    That's a guarantee!

    And when this prediction of mine comes true, those who don't like Fierce will pretend that I never said anything about Greg Monroe.

    HAHAHA

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BrandBreaker8. Show BrandBreaker8's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    Hahaha ^ he wants premature credit for being right on something that is statistically 100 to 1 in his favor if not much more. The odds of any one player out of hundreds available in a trade, coming to one team out of dozens, is patently extremely low if not exponentially unlikely. Vegas takes the $ on a sucker bet like that every day, that's why when one pays off it's usually epic. Want fans want for themselves or their team is one thing but the odds of that event happening will always be in favor of the naysayers. Not a very impressive stance taken by the local Negative Nancy or if he prefers, Bummer Bob.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rajon-Hondo. Show Rajon-Hondo's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    In response to mellymel3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to SportsGenius1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I liked Zeller when he was balling at UNC, Fav hopefully will blossom, Colt Iverson may have to play in turkey for another year. Olynyk isn't a center per se, more of a SF who just happens to be 7'0 tall. Sully is the proverbial bull in a china shop PF, I don't know what Anthony has for game. So do I think Monroe is worth selling the farm for? No.

    [/QUOTE]

    Agree with you on everything except Fav...he sucks...the Faux Hawk will NEVER fly in the NBA...I'd love to see it, I really would, but just don't ever see it happening. Oh yes, Anthony has no game - how do you think we got him?

    [/QUOTE]

    I got to say MEL , when you don't like a player you almost make it personal. Fav isn't a cornerstone center but he looked OK in most games he played last year for a rookie. I'm not saying Fav a decent player but I will reserve judgment till I see a bigger sampling of what he can do.

    I ain't hating , actually you can be pretty funny, but man I got ask JG, Fav and Rondo are they your neighbors? and they, I don't know, let their dogs crap on your lawn and clean up after? Cause you got nothing nice to say about any of them.:)

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Rajon-Hondo. Show Rajon-Hondo's posts

    Re: Is Moose Monroe any better than what we already have?

    I'm not all that impressed with Munroe.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share