Built for the Regular Season?

[smastroyin]

Sure, and they paid a ton for Horford. Those seem to be the skills they value. And Horford is a star, and the Celtics have used him in a way that moves away from being in the paint. So if the Celtics are a "star" center away, I think probably the people who hate the makeup of this team are never going to be satisfied.

A guy who does all of things you are identifying and is not a "star" is not also a traditional big. The guys who can do all of the things are stars. The guys who can't are Kelly Olynyk or Serge Ibaka.

I do also think it's ridiculous to think the team *needs* a star center and a star wing, unless we are really diluting what star means. (I know the Horford haters will say I've already done that in this very post).

 

[PedroKsBambino]

The Celtics weren't in on Boogie, Ibaka, or Noah.

The point being, I don't think Ainge and Stevens agree with SoSH consensus that a hole at C is the problem. At least, they didn't at the deadline.

Of course, the reality is that we actually have no idea whether they were actually in on any of those guys-- just because it wasn't leaked to local media does not mean they weren't sniffing around, and there's literally dozens of examples of this being the case.

I am not sure what they think of the Center spot; agree it is possible they don't see a hole there. I don't think those three players really tell us much about how they are thinking, though, either.

Cousins' lack of appeal was (I think it is safe to say) due to his personality---his game is much broader than a typical center.

Ibaka is not really a center, and never has been. He's played smallball C sometimes, but that's really not the problem people are talking about on the team anyway.

Noah...I mean, let's face it I think most teams viewed him as broken down and a huge gamble last summer. I don't think any good organization was going to touch him for any real money so I'm not sure what lack of interest in him says other than that Celts are not totally incompetent.

I think lack of interest in Nurkic perhaps would be more telling, though he's a tricky fit for Stevens' scheme. And of course, they could have sniffed around there though given price paid one imagines they'd have won the bidding if they cared to play. I suspect salary is problem there

 

[Cellar-Door]

So a side note on the Porzingis stuff. He doesn't rebound at all either. He had the same Rebounding rates this year as Al Horford, and significantly worse than Olynyk. I love his potential and think he's going to be a star but other than blocking shots, he didn't really do much of anything better than Olynyk this season.

 

[RetractableRoof]

Sure, and they paid a ton for Horford. Those seem to be the skills they value. And Horford is a star. So if the Celtics are a "star" center away, I think probably the people who hate the makeup of this team are never going to be satisfied.

A guy who does all of things you are identifying and is not a "star" is not also a traditional big. The guys who can do all of the things are stars. The guys who can't are Kelly Olynyk or Serge Ibaka.

Yeah, I kinda reached that conclusion (what I want isn't 12-14 range it's likely higher into star territory) responding to others and you as well. Light dawns on marblehead and all that.

Quibble: part of the Horford overpay is Ainge wanted to guarantee his signing so he could reel in Durant - because surely Ainge didn't believe Horford to be a rim protector or high end rebounder.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Yes, useful to separate out the specific skills/role. For example, Ibaka is a rim protector, but not really a center or a terrific rebounder. He solves some problems but not others.

 

[smastroyin]

Both sides of the Nurkic Plumlee trade are valid.

I just look at the way Stevens is utilizing the players he already has and I don't think they have any desire to go out and get bigs to bang in the paint and just be rebound/rim defenders. And if you want a guy that can play traditional big man defense in the paint, that can rebound, and then on the offensive end can run the floor and also play the halfcourt, that can hit their shots and be effective in the pick and roll...those guys are really rare. Are there even 10 of them in the league?

A lot of this comes down to the idea we've expressed many times - is Stevens doing what he can with the guys he has, or did the Celtics specifically target guys to try and build a kind of mini-GSW? I think there is more to the latter than Ainge simply acquiring assets. Problem is, of course, IT4 can't play both ends like Steph Curry, and the Celtics don't have another great shooter to take the pressure off of him in the halfcourt.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Both sides of the Nurkic Plumlee trade are valid.

I just look at the way Stevens is utilizing the players he already has and I don't think they have any desire to go out and get bigs to bang in the paint and just be rebound/rim defenders. And if you want a guy that can play traditional big man defense in the paint, that can rebound, and then on the offensive end can run the floor and also play the halfcourt, that can hit their shots and be effective in the pick and roll...those guys are really rare. Are there even 10 of them in the league?

Yes, I do think quite fair comment on Stevens' system. Cousins I think would actually fit scheme-wise, I just think Stevens didn't want to deal with the personality (or Ainge didn't, or perhaps most likely netiher did). Many reports they sniffed around him two years ago.

For me the rebounding is the biggest of these needs. An elite rim protector would of course be nice, but Amir Johnson and Horford both bring something there and are already on the roster. The problem is the only plus rebounder on the team for their position is Bradley, and he's 6-2. We've seen them killed on boards for a long time now and I don't see an answer on the roster. But as you note, even if we just say a rebounding big who can play (more or less) high post offense credibly is not all that common a skillset.

 

[RetractableRoof]

So a side note on the Porzingis stuff. He doesn't rebound at all either. He had the same Rebounding rates this year as Al Horford, and significantly worse than Olynyk. I love his potential and think he's going to be a star but other than blocking shots, he didn't really do much of anything better than Olynyk this season.

My perception there was off then. I guess I just view him differently in the sense that I don't see him getting run over or shoved off his spot like KO.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

They worked out Larry Sanders, who was a very interesting potential fit. It does not seem like he's got his life together enough to play NBA basketball, sadly.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Larry signed with the Cavs and was released. He looks done as a player.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Yes, I do think quite fair comment on Stevens' system. Cousins I think would actually fit scheme-wise, I just think Stevens didn't want to deal with the personality (or Ainge didn't, or perhaps most likely netiher did). Many reports they sniffed around him two years ago.

For me the rebounding is the biggest of these needs. An elite rim protector would of course be nice, but Amir Johnson and Horford both bring something there and are already on the roster. The problem is the only plus rebounder on the team for their position is Bradley, and he's 6-2. We've seen them killed on boards for a long time now and I don't see an answer on the roster. But as you note, even if we just say a rebounding big who can play (more or less) high post offense credibly is not all that common a skillset.

Boogie was literally the perfect fit from a scheme point of view. I'd have rolled the dice with him, but it clearly wasn't on court related issues that caused the Celtics to pass.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Larry signed with the Cavs and was released. He looks done as a player.

Yes, that's why I commented he's not seem like he's got his life in a place where he can be in the nba---lasted 5 games with Cleveland and cut for showing up late, etc.

Just to take discussion back up a level, for me the biggest gap they have actually isn't rebounding or rim protection, it's lack of a second creator--this remains a matchup league and they only have one guy who can reliably win his matchup against credible defenses. Maybe 1.5 guys, as Horford helps there but is ideally your third scorer not second. If they had that, I'd take my chances on filling in the other gaps

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Hopefully that's a role Jaylen fills in 2 years. Or whoever they draft this year.

Cousins would have been that 2nd scorer too. Someone mentioned Lou Williams somewhere on this board. He wouldn't have been a long term answer but he would have helped this year.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Gerald Green was brought in to be a scorer off the bench. I presume he stopped getting run during the season because (i) didn't want to take minutes away from JB, and (ii) the Cs were winning a lot without him.

But I do wonder why he's not getting more run during the playoffs when a lack of a scorer other than IT4 seems to be really acute.

 

[JCizzle]

Gerald Green was brought in to be a scorer off the bench. I presume he stopped getting run during the season because (i) didn't want to take minutes away from JB, and (ii) the Cs were winning a lot without him.

But I do wonder why he's not getting more run during the playoffs when a lack of a scorer other than IT4 seems to be really acute.

It's not like they didn't know this in advance, but he's such a ball stopper. In my opinion, there's basically no offensive flow when he's in the game- he's either hot and hitting ridiculous shots and single handedly carrying the unit, or putting up tons of ill advised bullshit instead of keeping the ball moving. He'd be much better if he just played within the system and took good shots.

 

[RetractableRoof]

It's not like they didn't know this in advance, but he's such a ball stopper. In my opinion, there's basically no offensive flow when he's in the game- he's either hot and hitting ridiculous shots and single handedly carrying the unit, or putting up tons of ill advised bullshit instead of keeping the ball moving. He'd be much better if he just played within the system and took good shots.

If he would do that he wouldn't have been let go the first time. I kid, I kid.

 

[moly99]

I do also think it's ridiculous to think the team *needs* a star center and a star wing, unless we are really diluting what star means. (I know the Horford haters will say I've already done that in this very post).

Obviously it is a question of semantics, but I think it is clear we need a second shot creator who can be a two way player on the wing as well as a big man who can give us what we need on offense as well as improving our rebounding and interior defense. How you want to classify those guys is up to you. "Star" is the easiest label, though I admit it isn't the most accurate.

- - -

As for whether the C's are looking for a center, it's almost impossible to tell. Boogie was the only player available who provides everything we need, and he has clearly been blacklisted by most of the NBA. The other guys available have issues too: IE Nerlens Noel is not viable because he doesn't fit on offense.

Players who have the skills to fill the traditional role of a big man (protect the paint and clean up the glass) as good shooting and passing are really, really rare. There are only a handful of guys in the NBA who would be a clear upgrade on Al Horford.

 

[smastroyin]

We agree in principal. I was more interpreting your need as saying they'd need to get a Gobert and a Butler to truly contend, which would be hard even if you get ping pong luck.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

For all the Al Horford talk, he's had one hell of a series so far. 16.0 points, 9.0 rebounds, 6.4 assists, 1.4 steals, 1.4 TO on .561/.500/.900 shooting.

One could argue he's been the best player this series.

 

[DJnVa]

Al seems very animated as well.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

What do they do going forward to Round 2? Does Gerald Green continue to start?

 

[Eddie Jurak]

The big problem for the Celtics will be who does IT guard?

 

[Big John]

The big problem for Washington is who guards IT. He's too quick for Wall or Beal.

 

[JakeRae]

I'm glad to see the NBA decided not to count our first round loss so we get to play in the second round despite being an abject playoff failure.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

For all the Al Horford talk, he's had one hell of a series so far. 16.0 points, 9.0 rebounds, 6.4 assists, 1.4 steals, 1.4 TO on .561/.500/.900 shooting.

One could argue he's been the best player this series.

I'm not sure who would argue against it. The green teamers complaints of Horford throughout the season are those who must never have seen him play in Atlanta and had different expectations of his game.

 

[BaseballJones]

I'm glad to see the NBA decided not to count our first round loss so we get to play in the second round despite being an abject playoff failure.

Well I don't think there's any question that the Celtics benefitted greatly from Rondo's injury. And also probably from Morris' injury yesterday (Washington was up 45-42 until he had to leave the game, and FWIW, Morris was +7, the highest number on the Wizards yesterday).

The C's have played really well, but these injuries no doubt have been significant.

 

[Red Averages]

Well I don't think there's any question that the Celtics benefitted greatly from Rondo's injury. And also probably from Morris' injury yesterday (Washington was up 45-42 until he had to leave the game, and FWIW, Morris was +7, the highest number on the Wizards yesterday).

The C's have played really well, but these injuries no doubt have been significant.

Washington was up by 3, but they were also shooting about 60% at the time. The Celtics were winning the game regardless of Morris.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Washington was up by 3, but they were also shooting about 60% at the time. The Celtics were winning the game regardless of Morris.

Do we really think they beat the Bulls down 0-2 going back to Chicago with a healthy Rondo? Their best case would have been a Game 7 win.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Do we really think they beat the Bulls down 0-2 going back to Chicago with a healthy Rondo? Their best case would have been a Game 7 win.

Game 7? That looked like a potential sweep with Rondo. You could hear the air coming out of the Bulls with each game.....the final one they wanted to be anywhere else but playing a Game 7. They played that games with their bags packed and no point guard on their active roster once Rondo went down.

I'm obviously not the biggest Rondo fan but openminded enough to see the impact he made in these first two games getting open looks for everyone.......looks that no longer existed in Game 3 or really when he was on the bench in the first two games.

 

[Saints Rest]

The big problem for Washington is who guards IT. He's too quick for Wall or Beal.

The bigger issue is that IT4 can rest on defense if he only has to guard Oubre, but if Wall or Beal have to cover him, they will get worn out.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Game 7? That looked like a potential sweep with Rondo. You could hear the air coming out of the Bulls with each game.....the final one they wanted to be anywhere else but playing a Game 7. They played that games with their bags packed and no point guard on their active roster once Rondo went down.

I'm obviously not the biggest Rondo fan but openminded enough to see the impact he made in these first two games getting open looks for everyone.......looks that no longer existed in Game 3 or really when he was on the bench in the first two games.

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote (and I probably wasn't clear enough). I was saying that the Celtics' best case scenario with a healthy Rondo was a game 7 win but it probably would have been over sooner based on what we saw. Thus, crowing about this thread is a bit misguided imo, at least based on the Bulls series.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote (and I probably wasn't clear enough). I was saying that the Celtics' best case scenario with a healthy Rondo was a game 7 win but it probably would have been over sooner based on what we saw. Thus, crowing about this thread is a bit misguided imo, at least based on the Bulls series.

Yes, I understood. I was only taking it to another level in that even getting to a Game 7 with Rondo healthy would have been an uphill battle at best.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

The bigger issue is that IT4 can rest on defense if he only has to guard Oubre, but if Wall or Beal have to cover him, they will get worn out.

Oubre isn't as likely to hurt you with a barrage of 3's as Bogdanovich can. The problem with Isaiah on the latter is that he'll never face a contested 3 with length. It could be dangerous although in NBA defensive schemes you can't simply say this guy is on that guy......offenses are designed to force defensive rotations and switches so matchups as the shot clock is winding down is very fluid.

 

[smastroyin]

There is a whole thread to discuss the actual playoffs.

I'm not sure how a dick measuring contest is of much use. But hey, the best thing about the Rondo injury is that you guys can always say you were right about the Celtics chance and enjoy them winning instead of having to make the difficult choice of admitting you were wrong for once. So enjoy it.

I mean no offense, but getting pissed off because someone crowed about you being wrong about the team you are supposedly a fan of being doomed is pretty lame.

 

[#classicsquander]

Do we really think they beat the Bulls down 0-2 going back to Chicago with a healthy Rondo? Their best case would have been a Game 7 win.

This feels like a bit of a cynical reading, and ignores the possibility that Brad's adjustments (starting Green, benching Amir, etc) would have had no difference on games 3-6. I also feel like their poor performance early in the series can be partially attributed to Isaiah's personal tragedy, and the way the Bulls were stacking the paint/sagging off of Marucs Smart to prevent Isaiah from driving. I suppose one could argue that Rondo, a pretty mediocre NBA player at this point, would have single-handedly prevented the Celtics from making those adjustments, but it seems like a stretch.

 

[luckiestman]

This feels like a bit of a cynical reading, and ignores the possibility that Brad's adjustments (starting Green, benching Amir, etc) would have had no difference on games 3-6. I also feel like their poor performance early in the series can be partially attributed to Isaiah's personal tragedy, and the way the Bulls were stacking the paint/sagging off of Marucs Smart to prevent Isaiah from driving. I suppose one could argue that Rondo, a pretty mediocre NBA player at this point, would have single-handedly prevented the Celtics from making those adjustments, but it seems like a stretch.

I agree. It's not knowable. There are way too many moving parts.

 

[BigSoxFan]

This feels like a bit of a cynical reading, and ignores the possibility that Brad's adjustments (starting Green, benching Amir, etc) would have had no difference on games 3-6. I also feel like their poor performance early in the series can be partially attributed to Isaiah's personal tragedy, and the way the Bulls were stacking the paint/sagging off of Marucs Smart to prevent Isaiah from driving. I suppose one could argue that Rondo, a pretty mediocre NBA player at this point, would have single-handedly prevented the Celtics from making those adjustments, but it seems like a stretch.

Not really unless you think it was likely that the Celtics win 4 straight with Rondo in there. Obviously, that would have been the literal best case and possible (although unlikely imo). I didn't say the Celtics would have definitely lost but it would have been a very tall climb, especially given IT's travel.

 

[Montana Fan]

I agree. It's not knowable. There are way too many moving parts.

Correct. The only thing that is knowable is that with a competent ball distributor, the Bulls kicked the crap out of the Celtics on their home court in Games 1 & 2. Without a skilled point guard, there was no way that the Bulls were going to beat the Celts and that was born out.

 

[TheDeuce222]

One important point being obscured in all of the Rondo hagiography is that he was really quite bad in Game 1. 12 points and 6 assists on 6/15 shooting and a -7 in his 26 minutes on the floor. Bobby Portis and Jimmy Butler won that game for the Bulls. They won it in spite of Rondo. He was also mediocre-bad all year. Yes, Rondo was spectacular in Game 2. But the Celtics were also very out of sorts in that game, with Isaiah in particular looking incredibly drained (missing six free throws that Rondo had nothing to do with). Would have been interesting to see it play out with a healthy Rondo, but to assume that the Celtics couldn't have improved, played better, and won the series even with Rondo in there is incorrect.

 

[#classicsquander]

Not really unless you think it was likely that the Celtics win 4 straight with Rondo in there. Obviously, that would have been the literal best case and possible (although unlikely imo). I didn't say the Celtics would have definitely lost but it would have been a very tall climb, especially given IT's travel.

Sure, I see where you're coming from and I certainly understand why people make that argument. That said, part of the point I was trying to inarticulately make in that last post is that it's equally possible to entirely blame the Celtics poor performance in Game 1 and 2 on Isaiah's personal life, and say that they only lost because Isaiah and team were struggling with that. To me, that's just as disingenuous, but I don't see why it's less legitimate. Ultimately, I think one's reading of that series goes back to one's larger opinion of the team and I think the "Rondo was the difference" people are largely the same people who think this team is soft and bad.

I suppose I can't get behind this kind of argument because it's just too far reaching, did the Cavs not really win the title last year because of Green's suspension? Did the Warriors not really win the title the year before due to Love's injury? We can go back into Celtic's recent history with the Perkins injury as well and pull many examples. At a certain point, we can narrativize these injuries or suspensions in whatever way we want, and it ultimately goes back to whether you believe a certain team is legit or not. And perhaps there is some legitimacy to some of these arguments, I'm certainly not denying it. I just find the argument that a fairly bad Rondo on a bad Bulls team was necessarily going to beat the Celtics this season, especially given the arguments that you can make about the C's adjustments on offense and on defense to protect Isaiah.

 

[Sam Ray Not]

Five straight wins in the playoffs, regardless of opponent, is hard to do. And they've been fairly solid beatings (+14.2 average margin).

If the season ended right now, the Cs would be NBA champs.

 

[BigSoxFan]

Five straight wins in the playoffs, regardless of opponent, is hard to do. And they've been fairly solid beatings (+14.2 average margin).

If the season ended right now, the Cs would be NBA champs.

Yup. End of the day is that Rondo's injury certainly helped but they're also playing much better. Would love to see the team we saw for a good chunk yesterday get a crack at LeBron.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

This feels like a bit of a cynical reading, and ignores the possibility that Brad's adjustments (starting Green, benching Amir, etc) would have had no difference on games 3-6. I also feel like their poor performance early in the series can be partially attributed to Isaiah's personal tragedy, and the way the Bulls were stacking the paint/sagging off of Marucs Smart to prevent Isaiah from driving. I suppose one could argue that Rondo, a pretty mediocre NBA player at this point, would have single-handedly prevented the Celtics from making those adjustments, but it seems like a stretch.

Rondo was far from a mediocre PG in the first two games......he created open looks for teammates that we did not have an answer while getting into the paint whenever he wanted. Portis and Zipser had wide open 3's the first two games and killed us, they were created by Rondo. Butler was able to receive the ball in his sweet spots without having to initiate and put up huge numbers in those two games. The other factor was that Chicago did not have another reliable NBA PG on their roster to replicate Rondo in any fashion.....it changed everyones role on the floor.

Nothing changed in the Celtics offense. The Bulls offense was now restricted to Butler and Wade alternating iso's looking to work switches to force Isaiah to defend the ball. Green was able to play because he wasn't a liability defensively defending the stretch-4 in Mirotic. Had the Bulls ran their same offense as they did in the first two games it results in switches and rotations.....where Green never would have been able to be on the floor. It was an ideal matchup for Green (and Brad) post-Rondo.

Breaking a series down by total points is vanilla but in this case it truly captures the difference in each teams offense with and without Rondo. It's not like this is coming from a Rondo fan......it's one of the few times I've defended him. It was that noticeable of a difference.

Celtics Points per game: 102-97-104-104-108-105

Bulls Points per game: 106-111-87-95-97-83

 

[The Needler]

Rondo had a very good game 2 in the Bulls' blowout win. It's hard to give him too much credit for the game 1 win when he had a +/- of -7.

 

[Light-Tower-Power]

I think we need to take a moment to appreciate how great Al Horford has been in the playoffs so far...averaging 16.1/8.6/7. He has been the C's best all-around player so far and I don't think it's actually that close. To see that line from a center is crazy. I wasn't as hard on him as a lot of folks were during the regular season, but still probably didn't appreciate him as much as I should have. Playoff Al is real and he's spectacular.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

I don't think that everything that changed for the Celtics after the first 2 games could be attributed solely to Rondo. Yes, he was damned good until his injury. No, it's not reasonable to attribute the Celtics success in games 3-6 solely to his absence.

 

[Cesar Crespo]

Overlooked in all of this is Terry Rozier. He didn't play at all in game 1 vs the Bulls and while he played in game 2, it was when they were behind. They made runs with him in the game but didn't go back to him for whatever reason. He played 13 minutes and was a +11. Since then, he's made a big impact off the bench. I guess you could say the Celtics were able to use Rozier more with Rondo injured, but Rondo was in game 2.

Having this version of Rozier is a huge lift and it helped us beat the Bulls.

 

[the moops]

Yea, Rozier has been a treat to watch. He misses some D assignments, and is out of control on offense at times, but to see him soar back into the paint to grab defensive boards is slick. He is a sick athlete with what appears to be a huge wingspan (cue HRB and some exciting wingspan chat).

 

[Sam Ray Not]

Rozier's wingspan measured 6'-8.3" at the 2015 draft combine, per DraftExpress.

 

[#classicsquander]

Nothing changed in the Celtics offense. The Bulls offense was now restricted to Butler and Wade alternating iso's looking to work switches to force Isaiah to defend the ball. Green was able to play because he wasn't a liability defensively defending the stretch-4 in Mirotic. Had the Bulls ran their same offense as they did in the first two games it results in switches and rotations.....where Green never would have been able to be on the floor. It was an ideal matchup for Green (and Brad) post-Rondo.

You know more about the game than I, dude. But, we may have to agree to disagree here. While I think you're right that Green wouldn't have started against the Bulls if Rondo had played, Marcus Smart likely would have, as Brad clearly thought Amir was a bad matchup for the Bulls quicker bigs. And, Brad did make some defensive adjustments, as detailed in Zach Lowe's recent piece, here: http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/19243080/zach-lowe-boston-celtics-hiding-isaiah-thomas-vs-chicago-bulls-nba

I guess I just don't buy the argument that the Celtics couldn't have adjusted for Rajon Rondo.