Isaiah Thomas revisited...
- Thread starter 9x1x6
- Start date
The Suns won 9 less games the half season with IT and gave up on him after half a season. If he were so great, they would have kept him. IT saying he wants to start is not like most other players saying they want to start. His ego gets in the way and he affects the team negatively. It's why the Suns got rid of him. The only reason he is having success at Boston is because he is currently top dog, but if Boston gets their next star (they seem determined to land someone), then I guarantee you the same problems we had here (IT taking the most important shots, not passing when he should, freezing out Cuz, etc) will surface again. He simply cannot share the throne. His confidence/ego is what got him this far, and I applaud him for his efforts, but his ego is also his greatest limiting factor, not his height.
http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2015/03/goran_dragic_on_former_phoenix.html
http://hoopshabit.com/2014/10/09/isaiah-thomas-phoenix-suns-want-start/
http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2015/03/goran_dragic_on_former_phoenix.html
http://hoopshabit.com/2014/10/09/isaiah-thomas-phoenix-suns-want-start/
Oh no, Isaiah totes a USG% of 28.8, John Wall racks up a 29.0, Kyrie a 29.4, Chris Paul is at 27.1, Kemba Walker at 26.6, but IT of course does not dominate the ball.
On the current Kings team after you get past Cuz, who leads the league, the rest of the guys go:
Cousisn 35.5
Rudy 23.0
Collison 19.9
Belinelli 19.5
Rondo 19.1
Ben 16.8
etc.
if you go to Boston, and set aside a few guys who have barely played, you don't get that different a story:
Isaiah 28.8
Zeller 24.5 (37gms 10.0min per)
Lee 22.8 (30gms 16min per)
Olynk 21.4
Sullinger 21.4
Bradley 20.0
Turner 18.8
Smart 18.1
etc.
Yes, everyone else on that team is pseudo-spurred into a middling mush, but Isaiah is undoubtedly is the one guy left out of that and playing the "franchise player" role. The only two #2 guys on their own team with higher usage are Durant and Irving. Isaiah finally has a team where he gets to be "the man". He's home.
On the current Kings team after you get past Cuz, who leads the league, the rest of the guys go:
Cousisn 35.5
Rudy 23.0
Collison 19.9
Belinelli 19.5
Rondo 19.1
Ben 16.8
etc.
if you go to Boston, and set aside a few guys who have barely played, you don't get that different a story:
Isaiah 28.8
Zeller 24.5 (37gms 10.0min per)
Lee 22.8 (30gms 16min per)
Olynk 21.4
Sullinger 21.4
Bradley 20.0
Turner 18.8
Smart 18.1
etc.
Yes, everyone else on that team is pseudo-spurred into a middling mush, but Isaiah is undoubtedly is the one guy left out of that and playing the "franchise player" role. The only two #2 guys on their own team with higher usage are Durant and Irving. Isaiah finally has a team where he gets to be "the man". He's home.
Last edited:
He's the first option, he has numbers that indicate that. Is that dominating the ball? He's their best scorer you know, so those numbers don't indicate any kind of selfish play, which is what I associate with dominating the ball with and I think you did too. Could of misunderstood the implication, but considering the source I doubt it.
Dominating the ball doesn't have to be selfish. It is with Isaiah, but that's only half a point. Dominating a ball, selfish or not, makes it hard to fit with another ball dominant player. In other words, you have to be the star or there's stress. The only exceptions are the lead the league in assist type PGs, since what is ticking up their usg, the assists, should almost count half if its going to a high usage scorer (who also gets usg counted for taking the shot).
I don't get why you'd jump to the conclusion that he has to be the first option to be effective. When he was here and had to share the ball with other stars or high usage ball dominate players he did just that. And we had a better record when the big three of Gay, Cousins, and IT managed to play together that season then we do with the unselfish Rondo. Not to discount a small sample size and coaching, but nothing about his time here screams this guy can't be the third option or is some selfish player who only thrives when he's the only guy seeing the ball.
He's not going to be the first option on that Celtics team in the long run, hell maybe not even by the end of the week. We'll see how it plays out, but my bet is with Stevens and that organization he transition just fine to a secondary or even lesser role.
He's not going to be the first option on that Celtics team in the long run, hell maybe not even by the end of the week. We'll see how it plays out, but my bet is with Stevens and that organization he transition just fine to a secondary or even lesser role.
Well first of all, USG% doesn't include assists. Its why usage is a poor surrogate for ball dominance. Rondo is one of the most ball-dominant players in the NBA but his USG% doesn't reflect it.
Second, Cousins' USG% is out of control. There has never been a player taller than 6'9 who has the kind of usage Cousins is putting up right now for longer than 45 games. Its symptomatic of a bad offensive system.
Third, Isaiah certainly didn't stand in Cousins' way in putting up 30+ USG% seasons. That now he's at 28 USG% playing next to inferior offensive players doesn't erase that fact from the history books.
Second, Cousins' USG% is out of control. There has never been a player taller than 6'9 who has the kind of usage Cousins is putting up right now for longer than 45 games. Its symptomatic of a bad offensive system.
Third, Isaiah certainly didn't stand in Cousins' way in putting up 30+ USG% seasons. That now he's at 28 USG% playing next to inferior offensive players doesn't erase that fact from the history books.
The point of USG% is to track who is "using" possessions with a shot, FTs, or turnover, and comparing it as a percentage of all of a team's possessions. An assist is technically passing the ball to someone who "uses" the possession.
Basically, it only concerns itself with the end result of every possession. "Ball dominance" is typically about what happens before the end result of a possession. Again, the best example is Rondo, who is incredibly ball dominant by all the SportVU metrics (time of possession, average length of touch, touches per game) but barely registers on the USG% meter.
Basically, it only concerns itself with the end result of every possession. "Ball dominance" is typically about what happens before the end result of a possession. Again, the best example is Rondo, who is incredibly ball dominant by all the SportVU metrics (time of possession, average length of touch, touches per game) but barely registers on the USG% meter.
Actually usg% can include assists. I had forgotten that there is some strange split in what people mean by that stat. ESPN does it one way, bball-ref another:
Hollinger USG: Usage Rate - the number of possessions a player uses per 40 minutes. Usage Rate = {[FGA + (FT Att. x 0.44) + (Ast x 0.33) + TO] x 40 x League Pace} divided by (Minutes x Team Pace)
Basketball Reference Usg%: Usage Percentage the formula is 100 * ((FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV) * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * (Tm FGA + 0.44 * Tm FTA + Tm TOV)).
However, since those usage numbers I posted were bball-reference's, they would not have included assists.
Hollinger USG: Usage Rate - the number of possessions a player uses per 40 minutes. Usage Rate = {[FGA + (FT Att. x 0.44) + (Ast x 0.33) + TO] x 40 x League Pace} divided by (Minutes x Team Pace)
Basketball Reference Usg%: Usage Percentage the formula is 100 * ((FGA + 0.44 * FTA + TOV) * (Tm MP / 5)) / (MP * (Tm FGA + 0.44 * Tm FTA + Tm TOV)).
However, since those usage numbers I posted were bball-reference's, they would not have included assists.
Why was it Thomas that needed to defer further and who should he have been deferring to? That roster outside of the big three was not a good offensive unit. Our two main scorers were sporting healthy usage number and discounting the numbers were clearly involved offensively. And early in the season with Vasquez running things and prior to the Gay trade it was quickly apparent that you needed IT to play more and have a more substantive role, because nobody on the roster outside of Cuz could be trusted to do crap with those possessions.
Last edited:
Actually, the Suns won 4 less games through 54 games, the point at which IT and Dragic were traded. They went 29-26 with IT and 33-21 the year before. They were right on pace with their win total the previous year, but hit a slump right before the AS break.
So far, how has trading IT worked out for the Suns?
Cousins played better with IT on the court.
That's the entire quote from IT about starting.
So far, how has trading IT worked out for the Suns?
Cousins played better with IT on the court.
That's the entire quote from IT about starting.
Nope, just the majority of the fanbase on this board(which is a tiny minority). The majority of fans loved IT. There is just a few huge personalities on this board that seeem to sway the opinion of those here who cannot make an objective judgement for themselves. Instead they say "Well this person has been here forever and look at this wall of text and statistics, they must be right".
K
That doesn't make sense current Rondo compared to Thomas is a scrub why would Thomas be a 6th man to Rondo? I'd much rather have Thomas starting with Andre Miller backing him up combined they make less than Rondo, Rondo and Jeff Green basically tanked the Celtics and it took a great effort from IT and Jae Crowder to get them into the playoffs.
All I'll say here is that I was fooled. I actually thought IT was the problem. He was indeed a bad fit with Cuz, like he is with any superior player.
But he was far from THE problem. In fact, this season's all star stats are almost identical to when he was public enemy #1 among many fans. Guilty as charged here.
It's quite a feat by management to continue being able to blame one of the top talents on this team for the losing each season. It really is. The names change, but the deflection remains. And is shockingly effective.
It's deja vu with Cousins or Gay as the problem. Or Rondo. Right now, it's Cuz. When he's gone, it'll be one of the other 2 inevitably. Maybe both. Depends who remains after the trade deadline. Or maybe a new guy? That'd be fun.
As Pete Townshend once wrote.
"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!"
Or maybe Spinal Tap put it better.
"The more it stays the same, the less it changes."
Yeah, that's the King's fan experience right there.
But he was far from THE problem. In fact, this season's all star stats are almost identical to when he was public enemy #1 among many fans. Guilty as charged here.
It's quite a feat by management to continue being able to blame one of the top talents on this team for the losing each season. It really is. The names change, but the deflection remains. And is shockingly effective.
It's deja vu with Cousins or Gay as the problem. Or Rondo. Right now, it's Cuz. When he's gone, it'll be one of the other 2 inevitably. Maybe both. Depends who remains after the trade deadline. Or maybe a new guy? That'd be fun.
As Pete Townshend once wrote.
"I'll tip my hat to the new constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I'll get on my knees and pray
We don't get fooled again
Don't get fooled again
No, no!"
Or maybe Spinal Tap put it better.
"The more it stays the same, the less it changes."
Yeah, that's the King's fan experience right there.
the issue was never isaiah thomas exclusively. it was always an issue of fit. stuffing three extremely high usage, ball dominant scorers into the same starting lineup is simply not a recipe for success when two of your "big three" are not plus defenders. so either rudy gay needed to be traded so that thomas could be elevated to official #2 status in the pecking order, or thomas needed to be transitioned back into a sixth man's role, or thomas needed to be traded. of course, this is the kings we're talking about, so they went with the unthinkable option #4; they let thomas walk for nothing. it was foolish then. it remains foolish now. i was never IT's biggest fan while he was in sacramento, but even i made it clear that the kings needed to re-sign him to a fair deal that would be easily movable down the road as the salary cap continues to explode...
See...that's the narrative around here that based on a llie. IT never said he wouldn't come off the bench. It was Keith Smart's idea to play the trio of Thoroton, Evans and Thomas. It wasn't because Thomas was complaining about starting.
In Thomas' last season, he was the team's best point guard. Plain and simple. Fredette wasn't a starting material. McCallum wasn't the guy no matter how many of you delude yourselves into thinking he's a quality starting point guard.
In Thomas' last season, he was the team's best point guard. Plain and simple. Fredette wasn't a starting material. McCallum wasn't the guy no matter how many of you delude yourselves into thinking he's a quality starting point guard.
IT did say repeatedly that he wanted to be a starter. He said it here, he said it in Phoenix. He didn't refuse to come off the bench but he never played at the same level coming off the bench as he did when he started. And him starting was the problem for the long-term.
Him being the best point guard his last year here is like saying JT was our best power forward. While the statement is true, it's not something I felt very good about. We needed a quality point guard and bringing one in would take away minutes from IT that he truly thought he had earned (and to a great extent he was right in that regard).
I cannot fault his hunger or drive and I'm very happy that he's found a niche in Boston, but I'm not unhappy that he's gone.
Him being the best point guard his last year here is like saying JT was our best power forward. While the statement is true, it's not something I felt very good about. We needed a quality point guard and bringing one in would take away minutes from IT that he truly thought he had earned (and to a great extent he was right in that regard).
I cannot fault his hunger or drive and I'm very happy that he's found a niche in Boston, but I'm not unhappy that he's gone.
I'm sure this has been said before but can we really blame IT for wanting to be a starter? He was in his prime, clearly a gifted offensive player, created his own shot, good shooting percentages etc.
He has proven himself as one of the centerpieces of a playoff basketball team. Why should he have accepted a lesser role because THE forum said so? How is that selfish? Many blamed him for our issues and as Chubbs said here we are. I say good for him for not settling and if we had better leadership we could have been building around 2 all-stars right now.
He has proven himself as one of the centerpieces of a playoff basketball team. Why should he have accepted a lesser role because THE forum said so? How is that selfish? Many blamed him for our issues and as Chubbs said here we are. I say good for him for not settling and if we had better leadership we could have been building around 2 all-stars right now.
This is against my better judgement... but what the hell. Which of these players would you rather have on the team this year?
Player 1:....21.6 ppg....6.6apg....3.0rpg....1.2spg...0.1bpg.....422/.347/.897
Player 2:....12.2ppg....11.9apg...6.3rpg....2.0spg...0.2bpg.....454/.374/.580
Now I realize it's obvious who I'm talking about, but I just want to ask people -- all bullcrap aside -- is scoring so important to the game that you would prefer the first player even though player 2 is averaging twice as many assists, rebounds, steals, and blocks this season and actually connecting on a lot more of the shots he does take (free throws aside)? Add to that player 1 is the worst defender on his team according to defensive rating while player 2 is one of the best defenders on his team according to defensive rating. We have two 20ppg scorers already -- rarely do you find a successful team with more than that. Don't you think if we had player 1 this year that people would be clamoring for a trade that gets us a player who is significantly better as a playmaker, as a rebounder, and as a defender who doesn't eat up a ton of shots but converts the ones he does take at a respectable percentage?
There's a popular line of thinking that says the stats lie and that player 1 was an All-Star this year and his team is winning, therefore he's the better player. I think some people are just going to find something to be unhappy about no matter what. For the last two years I've been reading over and over again how we need to put more shooters around DeMarcus. Now we have not one but 2 PGs who are shooting 37% behind the arc and we're unhappy because they are't shooting enough of them? I've never considered it a virtue when a player shooting a lower percentage pumps out twice as many shots to compensate. In fact, check this out -- we have 8 rotation players who are average or better from three point range this year. Eight! (yes I'm including DeMarcus because he's close enough to the mark to be rounded up especially considering his position) Every big minute player except the two defensive bigs who have zero attempts between them and the guy we just signed this year as a shooting specialist (oh the irony).
That's 8 guys I would rather have shooting the three than Isaiah Thomas yet you know he would still lead the team in attempts. Am I mistaken or were hero-ball guards thowing up all kinds of long distance shots and making less than 35% of them exactly what we hated the most about our team 2 and 3 years ago? Have we forgotten already? Or was that just me?
Player 1:....21.6 ppg....6.6apg....3.0rpg....1.2spg...0.1bpg.....422/.347/.897
Player 2:....12.2ppg....11.9apg...6.3rpg....2.0spg...0.2bpg.....454/.374/.580
Now I realize it's obvious who I'm talking about, but I just want to ask people -- all bullcrap aside -- is scoring so important to the game that you would prefer the first player even though player 2 is averaging twice as many assists, rebounds, steals, and blocks this season and actually connecting on a lot more of the shots he does take (free throws aside)? Add to that player 1 is the worst defender on his team according to defensive rating while player 2 is one of the best defenders on his team according to defensive rating. We have two 20ppg scorers already -- rarely do you find a successful team with more than that. Don't you think if we had player 1 this year that people would be clamoring for a trade that gets us a player who is significantly better as a playmaker, as a rebounder, and as a defender who doesn't eat up a ton of shots but converts the ones he does take at a respectable percentage?
There's a popular line of thinking that says the stats lie and that player 1 was an All-Star this year and his team is winning, therefore he's the better player. I think some people are just going to find something to be unhappy about no matter what. For the last two years I've been reading over and over again how we need to put more shooters around DeMarcus. Now we have not one but 2 PGs who are shooting 37% behind the arc and we're unhappy because they are't shooting enough of them? I've never considered it a virtue when a player shooting a lower percentage pumps out twice as many shots to compensate. In fact, check this out -- we have 8 rotation players who are average or better from three point range this year. Eight! (yes I'm including DeMarcus because he's close enough to the mark to be rounded up especially considering his position) Every big minute player except the two defensive bigs who have zero attempts between them and the guy we just signed this year as a shooting specialist (oh the irony).
That's 8 guys I would rather have shooting the three than Isaiah Thomas yet you know he would still lead the team in attempts. Am I mistaken or were hero-ball guards thowing up all kinds of long distance shots and making less than 35% of them exactly what we hated the most about our team 2 and 3 years ago? Have we forgotten already? Or was that just me?
Last edited:
YOU are right, stats lie... while Rondo shoots better than I.T percentage wise .He is not a better shooter..PG13 is shooting worse than I.T this season but he is 3rd in 3's made...Rondo may average 5 more assists per game, but that's about it. His individual defense does not make up for his lack of offense, while I.T offense makes up on his end. They are different players, and to be honest I.T is winning with less talent on his team. The east is also better than the west this year..and Boston is beating West teams like OKC and Clippers... bottom line is I.T has worked hard to be starter, and as of right now he deserves to be..he does more for his team than Rondo..He may not get 12 apg but that's not what he is asked to do, but he can if he tries. Rondo could not average 21 ppg if he tries.. He is a terrible shooter!