Analysis of Celtics Games (2020-2021)

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
As I said in the Coach Brad thread, when I checked in the pre-season, the Cs were the youngest team in the NBA with championship aspirations. They are super young, particularly if KW isn't playing.

I don't think it's a question of can't or won't right now. It's a question of how much further they have to grow. We should all note that we're pretty spoiled - that JB and JT have exceeded every reasonable projection we had when they were drafted. They are also 24 and 22 and as many people have noted, they are doing more this year in terms of assists than they've done before.

So to me, it's not a question of "CAN'T" or "WON'T". It's a question of whether they will learn what it takes to win big games in the NBA - on both sides of the floor.

For both players, their growth (well except for JB's bump his second year) has been pretty steady. At this point, their growth will be more incremental. I think they are still growing so I'm not particularly worried about their record this year. Frankly, it's probably better than they lose games like this than pull out a victory at the last moment.
Yes, and when I want to teach a young person anything to help them succeed, I force them to practice the skill, even in games. You force the double AA pitcher to work on his 2-3 best pitches, but you make them take them into the game. You keep calling for the change, the slider. You practice the skill, you take the skill to the court. If they are going to lose, lose trying to improve the skills necessary to win. I understand it's not sexy stuff, and every kid wants to work on the off balance fade away with 2 seconds left on the clock... and in terms of being gym rats, both of these guys seem to have it to spare.

Here's the thing though - we are spoiled, and (most) all of us recognize it. We all see these guys (kids) working on all of their individual skills - and see the vast improvement. We are frustrated though, because we all recognize that it isn't enough. They need to (also) be working on winning skills - which in this case we see as team oriented basketball. And we are seeing that regress (and for me, I see it now, and I saw it last year when Tatum returned from the All Star game as well). I don't know it if is a conscious effort to 'be the man', or if it is an overwhelming desire to carry the team forward (which I respect). But for this team and its future prospects - individual progress by the Js is not enough.

So how do you help them? Put them in a hard structure that mandates team play, and rewards it. I agree, they are probably better off losing via the last minute heroics so it doesn't reinforce the negatives... but I'd rather them losing while trying to make the right play, as part of their development.

The overarching point for me is that a rigid motion offense might restrict them in some ways, but it also takes the burden off them a percentage of the time. Kemba, Smart, TL, etc. are able to contribute more and then when the occasion arises for the last minute heroics - one of the Js can still be the man.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
Same with this video of the Jazz from this season, but count how many highlights involve Rudy Gobert setting a pick at the top of the key?
I don't have time to break it down but below are the highlights from the UT-BOS game.

Just a quick perusal:
  • PNR with Conley that lead to a lobP
  • PnR Favors and Ingles that lead to Ingles 3
  • transition
  • fake PnR that lead to Gorbet dunk
  • Early shot clock 3
  • Conley PnR that morphs into BB side PnR
  • what might be horns set leading to Conley Gorbet PnR with Gorbet passing out of short roll
  • (note next play was the same pindown that was in the previous video I posted only JT instead of GH on the side)
  • Clarkson Gorbet PnR that lead to Clarkson 3
  • Clarkson Gorbet PnR that lead to Clarkson 3 (I imagine there's a number of these).
I stopped at 2:40 of these highlights. I know the last Mitchell 3 was off PnR and I think the one before that was too. BOS couldn't stop the PnR all game so the Jazz kept going to it.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce0qJYJ2JhM
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
Tatums Ast% has gone from 8.3 to 10.0 to 14.5 to 20.4 during his first four seasons. The optics show him in iso once the clock is under 10 which happens with all first options across the league. It may happen more this season to Tatum with his teammates struggling to create their own shots. When he’s sharing the floor with any combination of Pritchard, Semi, Grant, Javonte/Nesmith, and Teague’s corpse along with none of our 3 centers being shot creators......he’s gong to end up bailing out the offense frequently which is what we’ve been seeing. This is on Ainge and the personnel. We are fortunate to have two guys so good at creating out of iso or this offense would look like the C’s in the year Pierce left.
His assists have increased, saw that. [Edit: I saw a really nicely timed pass/assist to Theis during the Utah game. He does seem to look for the pass in the two man game when the seal/snake is being run.] And still the offense is motionless. Excusing him because "all first options across the league" get the ball when less than 10 seconds exist. Yeah except HE is the reason they are under 10 seconds a lot of the time. Pritchard has 3 times the ball handling skills as Tatum, and when on the court against the Cavs, Tatum was Sunday strolling the ball up the court - even late in the game when possessions were a premium. Compound with a pass to someone who immediately passes it back. That leaves roughly 10 seconds left on the clock... so um.. yay, another Tatum ISO which is OK, because <10 seconds on the clock. Yeah, no.

Give the ball to PP (in your player set), have the players run some damn motion and if nothing is produced in the 15 seconds or so, let your hero take his shot. But we want the first 15 seconds of possession to be productive, maybe gas the defense a bit so that it's easier for Tatum than if everyone on the other team is resting for those 15 second cycles. Why is that blasphemy to you guys? Do you know how many coverage mistakes a team makes when the opposition is standing still waiting for the hero to walk the ball up? Or how many they make when Tatum is dribbling down the clock into <10 seconds? How many rotations get missed when 3 guys are standing still while a PnR is being set with your only rim runner? It does not compute.

Edit: OK, so if you want to blame Ainge on the skills of the other guys, fine. I happen to think their is decent quality support if used well, and in a motion offense. In the interim, if your view is that the best way to win is for 3 guys to stand still while a PnR is run for one of the Js, and dribble the clock down so the Js can pretend to be/grow into LeBron or Harden iso stars... knock yourself out. It's sucky basketball, it's defeatist basketball, boring to watch. I'll shut the game off, and go throw the neighborhood kids off my lawn.
 
Last edited:

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
Yes, and when I want to teach a young person anything to help them succeed, I force them to practice the skill, even in games. You force the double AA pitcher to work on his 2-3 best pitches, but you make them take them into the game. You keep calling for the change, the slider. You practice the skill, you take the skill to the court. If they are going to lose, lose trying to improve the skills necessary to win. I understand it's not sexy stuff, and every kid wants to work on the off balance fade away with 2 seconds left on the clock... and in terms of being gym rats, both of these guys seem to have it to spare.

Here's the thing though - we are spoiled, and (most) all of us recognize it. We all see these guys (kids) working on all of their individual skills - and see the vast improvement. We are frustrated though, because we all recognize that it isn't enough. They need to (also) be working on winning skills - which in this case we see as team oriented basketball. And we are seeing that regress (and for me, I see it now, and I saw it last year when Tatum returned from the All Star game as well). I don't know it if is a conscious effort to 'be the man', or if it is an overwhelming desire to carry the team forward (which I respect). But for this team and its future prospects - individual progress by the Js is not enough.

So how do you help them? Put them in a hard structure that mandates team play, and rewards it. I agree, they are probably better off losing via the last minute heroics so it doesn't reinforce the negatives... but I'd rather them losing while trying to make the right play, as part of their development.

The overarching point for me is that a rigid motion offense might restrict them in some ways, but it also takes the burden off them a percentage of the time. Kemba, Smart, TL, etc. are able to contribute more and then when the occasion arises for the last minute heroics - one of the Js can still be the man.
As noted above, JT's assist ratios have gone up every year.

Plus, there's one big difference between the NBA and the minor leagues. In the minor leagues, you can force kids to do what you tell them. In the NBA, if your star isn't happy, he's leaving, and the franchise is stuck for the next 10 years.

Maybe DA should have given up JB for Kawhi or JT/JB for AD (although note that AD didn't go anywhere without LBJ). But DA made his bet and I don't know if adding an above-average player to the roster is going to help this team. It's really going to come down to whether JT or JB become a MVP candidate, which we all agree they are not right now.

I mean leaving out Magic, who's the youngest guy that was the best player on a championship winning team?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
As noted above, JT's assist ratios have gone up every year.

Plus, there's one big difference between the NBA and the minor leagues. In the minor leagues, you can force kids to do what you tell them. In the NBA, if your star isn't happy, he's leaving, and the franchise is stuck for the next 10 years.

Maybe DA should have given up JB for Kawhi or JT/JB for AD (although note that AD didn't go anywhere without LBJ). But DA made his bet and I don't know if adding an above-average player to the roster is going to help this team. It's really going to come down to whether JT or JB become a MVP candidate, which we all agree they are not right now.

I mean leaving out Magic, who's the youngest guy that was the best player on a championship winning team?
Tim Duncan.
 

RorschachsMask

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2011
5,205
Lynn
It's really going to come down to whether JT or JB become a MVP candidate
I think Tatum gets there by 25ish (crazy that it’s two or three seasons away), I’d be very surprised if Jaylen ever gets there. I think he will be more all star than all nba, but with his work ethic, I’d love for him to prove me wrong.

Your other point is spot on about guys winning titles when young, for the most part, nobody wins titles as the guy before 26/27. Duncan did it, Kawhi was close but I don’t think it was his team yet, same with Kobe and the Lakers.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
As noted above, JT's assist ratios have gone up every year.

Plus, there's one big difference between the NBA and the minor leagues. In the minor leagues, you can force kids to do what you tell them. In the NBA, if your star isn't happy, he's leaving, and the franchise is stuck for the next 10 years.

Maybe DA should have given up JB for Kawhi or JT/JB for AD (although note that AD didn't go anywhere without LBJ). But DA made his bet and I don't know if adding an above-average player to the roster is going to help this team. It's really going to come down to whether JT or JB become a MVP candidate, which we all agree they are not right now.

I mean leaving out Magic, who's the youngest guy that was the best player on a championship winning team?
You are either progressing to a winning position or you aren't. If you are saying that they have to cater to the 'heroic Js' and hope one becomes a top 5ish player in order to win because you can't force them to play team ball - then I think you have the wrong players. I also believe the NBA plays king maker with the stars, and based on my read of how the Js are officiated, they've decided that they won't become kings/MVPs.

In the absence of a movement offense, adding an above average player doesn't help, because then it's still 3 individual efforts. Hayward was the right piece, wrong injury. The only way to combat the absence of an NBA accepted king is to get/mandate a motion offense.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
I'm not going to argue that Duncan wasn't the best player on that team but he's not winning anything about David Robinson.

Plus, as much as we would like, JT is not Tim Duncan. Yet.
And Magic isn't winning anything without Kareem.

There's Magic and Duncan. That's a list.

The only player I can think of recently who didn't have a sidekick was Dirk.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
And Magic isn't winning anything without Kareem.

There's Magic and Duncan. That's a list.

The only player I can think of recently who didn't have a sidekick was Dirk.
Technically, because of the stacked rivalries... Magic wasn't winning anything without Kareem, Worthy, Cooper, et al. Larry wasn't walking through that door alone, ya know?

But your point is correct.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
And Magic isn't winning anything without Kareem.

There's Magic and Duncan. That's a list.

The only player I can think of recently who didn't have a sidekick was Dirk.
I'm fine with Kawhi for TOR being the example of a top 5-7 player in the NBA getting a really lucky run and sneaking out a title without a true sidekick.
That shows something though, those Raps teams were good regular season teams that never sniffed being a real title contender, struggling to make the ECF even. They got a super-star, got a bunch of lucky bounces and won a title. He left and they had a year like before him (2 seed, don't make the ECF) and now they are a mess.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,504
If you are saying that they have to cater to the 'heroic Js' and hope one becomes a top 5ish player in order to win because you can't force them to play team ball - then I think you have the wrong players.
If the Cs have the wrong players, oh well, because it's super-unlikely that the Cs are going to be able to replace either one of them for a player that makes them more likely to win a championship. I suppose its possible - and I'm sure DA listens to everything - but it's hard to see how the Cs can reconfigure this team for the better.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
If the Cs have the wrong players, oh well, because it's super-unlikely that the Cs are going to be able to replace either one of them for a player that makes them more likely to win a championship. I suppose its possible - and I'm sure DA listens to everything - but it's hard to see how the Cs can reconfigure this team for the better.
Then what do they have to lose by forcing a motion offense that increases their chance to win? Alienating the players they can't win with now?
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
Brad know how motion offenses work. Let's stipulate that Brad knows how this shit works and isn't just punching a clock for his check, shall we.

The only options are: 1. he is running the actions that suit his personnel and opponents, or 2. he has completely lost the team.

The latter seems unlikely, as we would have heard some of this by now. Smart alone would explode publicly if guys started doing whatever the fuck they wanted.

I think that it's just that simple as the former. Given Tatum's strengths, iso 3s is good offense right now. And Jaylen putting his head down and getting to the rim is as well. The problem lies when opponents can take shit away and force those guys into midrange. And when you see lineups with Teague, Semi, and Grant and nobody's worred about helping onto the Jays, you can see why things aren't working.

Getting good Kemba back would solve a lot, but so would upgrading some of the rotation pieces.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,464
One note... it's very very hard to change much this year, especially for young teams because nobody is getting regular practice sessions.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
One note... it's very very hard to change much this year, especially for young teams because nobody is getting regular practice sessions.
Yeah this weird schedule and covid side effects are affecting different teams in different ways, just like bubble ball did. Lack of practice is one of those ways.

Unfortunately it seems that predictions of a buyers market at this deadline were way off, so help probably isn't coming that way either.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
You are either progressing to a winning position or you aren't. If you are saying that they have to cater to the 'heroic Js' and hope one becomes a top 5ish player in order to win because you can't force them to play team ball - then I think you have the wrong players. I also believe the NBA plays king maker with the stars, and based on my read of how the Js are officiated, they've decided that they won't become kings/MVPs.

In the absence of a movement offense, adding an above average player doesn't help, because then it's still 3 individual efforts. Hayward was the right piece, wrong injury. The only way to combat the absence of an NBA accepted king is to get/mandate a motion offense.
The problem with this particular team is that for a motion offense to be successful you need to have personnel on the floor who are threats to shoot or beat their man off the dribble throughout your lineup or else you are running around without a purpose. You can’t simply say “Hey let’s run motion” against NBA caliber defenses while neglecting the skills of your own personnel.

We have players all over the floor who struggle getting off their shot against length (PP, Semi, Grant), struggle beating their man off the dribble (the above 3, all our 5’s, and this version of Teague), and those we don’t want making decisions with the ball (most of the list above). This isn’t a lineup designed to run motion.....it’s PNR and iso-centric based on the current personnel.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
Lets put it this way. You could install and drill to perfection the most efficient offensive sets in the history of basketball and this club, as currently constituted, still isn't likely to change their ceiling this year. Fire your coach, change your scheme, its not likely to make a meaningful difference. You need talent. Why is this so hard to get? Its pretty clear cut.
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I'm fine with Kawhi for TOR being the example of a top 5-7 player in the NBA getting a really lucky run and sneaking out a title without a true sidekick.
That shows something though, those Raps teams were good regular season teams that never sniffed being a real title contender, struggling to make the ECF even. They got a super-star, got a bunch of lucky bounces and won a title. He left and they had a year like before him (2 seed, don't make the ECF) and now they are a mess.
Lowry was a top 15 player in the league at that time.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
The problem with this particular team is that for a motion offense to be successful you need to have personnel on the floor who are threats to shoot or beat their man off the dribble throughout your lineup or else you are running around without a purpose. You can’t simply say “Hey let’s run motion” against NBA caliber defenses while neglecting the skills of your own personnel.

We have players all over the floor who struggle getting off their shot against length (PP, Semi, Grant), struggle beating their man off the dribble (the above 3, all our 5’s, and this version of Teague), and those we don’t want making decisions with the ball (most of the list above). This isn’t a lineup designed to run motion.....it’s PNR and iso-centric based on the current personnel.
I'm still not buying this. GWill is shooting 40.9% this year, Semis is at 38.8%, PP is at 40.5%. We're 11th in the NBA in 3p%, even with a massive drop off from Kemba and Smart. Those guys aren't beating anyone off the dribble, but neither are Bogdanovich and Royce O'Neal. The difference is Bodanovich and O'Neale are getting way more wide open looks than those guys are.

And this isn't just about role players. As I've said repeatedly, Steph Curry isn't getting open strictly on PnR's. The guy runs the baseline, uses off ball screens and is constantly moving. Obviously, he's got a ludicrously fast release, and he's a special player, but we're doing none of that. They just fucking stand there. I honestly have trouble understanding why folks are defending this lack of movement. And let's forget our "role" players for a minute. Jaylen Brown stands in the corner and twiddles his thumbs on a ton of possessions when it's not his turn to shoot. Kemba does the same when Tatum brings the ball up. Marcus is pretty much the only guy that ever flashes through the lane on some nights. And the baseline appears to be fucking kryptonite to the C's, as they can't get near it. Move around, get your hands up, etc. I mean, those were the mantras of every coach I ever had from kindergarten to high school....
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
I'm still not buying this. GWill is shooting 40.9% this year, Semis is at 38.8%, PP is at 40.5%. We're 11th in the NBA in 3p%, even with a massive drop off from Kemba and Smart. Those guys aren't beating anyone off the dribble, but neither are Bogdanovich and Royce O'Neal. The difference is Bodanovich and O'Neale are getting way more wide open looks than those guys are.

And this isn't just about role players. As I've said repeatedly, Steph Curry isn't getting open strictly on PnR's. The guy runs the baseline, uses off ball screens and is constantly moving. Obviously, he's got a ludicrously fast release, and he's a special player, but we're doing none of that. They just fucking stand there. I honestly have trouble understanding why folks are defending this lack of movement. And let's forget our "role" players for a minute. Jaylen Brown stands in the corner and twiddles his thumbs on a ton of possessions when it's not his turn to shoot. Kemba does the same when Tatum brings the ball up. Marcus is pretty much the only guy that ever flashes through the lane on some nights. And the baseline appears to be fucking kryptonite to the C's, as they can't get near it. Move around, get your hands up, etc. I mean, those were the mantras of every coach I ever had from kindergarten to high school....
I can hear you... in case you are wondering, your mic IS on... lol Keep preaching! lol

What the Cs are currently doing is failing. At this execution path, they are one and done. Acting like everyone that doesn't have a J in their name is excrement, so there is no point in moving is just a lame perspective. Get the people moving, and defensive coverages break - even if it is just 1 or 2 layups a game, that is easy points that the Js don't have to score. The defenses get a bit tired from you know defending... then maybe a higher percentage of the Js heroics are successful. I don't see the resistance.

That said, I have way more faith in the supporting cast than "they all suck and can't hit a 3, and can't get open off the dribble". I also call bullshit on Kemba, PP not being able to create off the dribble and create a wide open shot for a teammate, in flow.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I'm still not buying this. GWill is shooting 40.9% this year, Semis is at 38.8%, PP is at 40.5%. We're 11th in the NBA in 3p%, even with a massive drop off from Kemba and Smart. Those guys aren't beating anyone off the dribble, but neither are Bogdanovich and Royce O'Neal. The difference is Bodanovich and O'Neale are getting way more wide open looks than those guys are.
Bog is a 20 ppg scorer on a normal team and is a threat off the dribble, in the paint and has a quick release. He’s a legit 2nd/3rd option on many teams in this league. How is he even in the conversation with players we are hoping to replace in the rotation at the deadline?

Royce has a quick release. We’ve seen numerous times, and they are noted in the game threads, about Grant and PP not being able to comfortably get their shots off due to their slow releases. We know Semi can’t put the ball on the floor at all. Our offense would look markedly different with Bog and Royce in the lineup and we certainty wouldn’t be looking to upgrade them.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,214
If the C's had rotation players like Bojan and O'Neal, the tone of discussion around this place would likely be much different and more positive. You can look this stuff up in less than 30 seconds on your phone. Its all there - in multiple places on the internet. And yet despite an obvious and absolutely demonstrable talent disparity, people are suggesting that the difference between this season's Utah Jazz and the Celtics is simply coaching and scheme?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
I get the frustration with the offense... but the defense is rotten to the core.

When I say core, I'm looking directly at Tatum, Brown, Smart. They waxed poetic about being all defensive players pre-season. What a joke. Watching them get beat to the rim and then raising their hand afterward has become comical...Add in Grant's belly, Semi's standing reach, Teague? & Kemba picking up his guy at the 3pt line, floating around, while lost in rotation defense.

How many transition points, off their defense, did they get in the Jazz game?
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
9,193
San Francisco
I get the frustration with the offense... but the defense is rotten to the core.

When I say core, I'm looking directly at Tatum, Brown, Smart. They waxed poetic about being all defensive players pre-season. What a joke. Watching them get beat to the rim and then raising their hand afterward has become comical...Add in Grant's belly, Semi's standing reach, Teague? & Kemba picking up his guy at the 3pt line, floating around, while lost in rotation defense.

How many transition points, off their defense, did they get in the Jazz game?
I was just about to post something similar. The offense is ugly to watch at times and obviously has problems but they are also 11th in the NBA and +2 points above the median (using adjusted Ortg). Its the defense that is really letting them down.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
One note... it's very very hard to change much this year, especially for young teams because nobody is getting regular practice sessions.
Yeah, this year is Covid v.2.0. People need to chill out about how Boston's playing with their roster churn after a near non-existent offseason, no training camp (to speak of) and no practice time in season. It's going to be an ugly year. Accept it. Embrace it. But know better times are ahead.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
Yeah, this year is Covid v.2.0. People need to chill out about how Boston's playing with their roster churn after a near non-existent offseason, no training camp (to speak of) and no practice time in season. It's going to be an ugly year. Accept it. Embrace it. But know better times are ahead.
Great, we're happy to do that if you are calling it a wasted year. But since we don't have to care anymore about Ws or Ls, then I want to see AN and PP a whole bunch, and I want to see a solid motion offense installed so that next year we hit the ground running.

K thanx bye
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
I mean the entire Stevens Era has been about trying to win. It’s just that this year the results have been ugly because of more roster churn and limited time to build chemistry. The year won’t be pretty. Next year will be better.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Great, we're happy to do that if you are calling it a wasted year. But since we don't have to care anymore about Ws or Ls, then I want to see AN and PP a whole bunch, and I want to see a solid motion offense installed so that next year we hit the ground running.

K thanx bye
There are benefits for Stevens trying his best to win each regular season game. After all, he's both privately and publicly telling the team that they need to do their best on every play, it's only natural that they hold the coach to the same standard.

Trying to win now helps the long term. But the roster is what it is for this season. And forcing a motion offense would look less appealing when those passes end up in the 3rd row.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
There are benefits for Stevens trying his best to win each regular season game. After all, he's both privately and publicly telling the team that they need to do their best on every play, it's only natural that they hold the coach to the same standard.

Trying to win now helps the long term. But the roster is what it is for this season. And forcing a motion offense would look less appealing when those passes end up in the 3rd row.
You guys are killing me. You keep saying it is what it is, this season is toast, we don't have enough, adding another above average player won't make a difference. OK< we get it, the season is toast. If that is the case, dismissing a building step for next season because it would be "less appealing when those passes end up in the 3rd row" is insane. If your belief is that passes would end up in the 3rd row, I'd rather it happen this year while learning, than next year while learning.

If you don't believe a motion offense will help the team going forward, fine just say that. If you believe forcing/mandating a motion offense could cause them to disenfranchise the Js (as has been posited *could* occur), then say that. But to say the season is a loss, and simultaneous say that there is no point in trying to develop team oriented skills that will pay off in future years during this lost season is beyond logic.

No personal attack intended, if it feels as if I have, that's a failure on my part.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
No, we’re saying that the future is in the JayCrew, not the 6-10 guys in the rotation. Those guys are ultimately fungible. Tatum and Brown need to grow if Boston is to become a contender, these are the growing pains.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,303
There are benefits for Stevens trying his best to win each regular season game. After all, he's both privately and publicly telling the team that they need to do their best on every play, it's only natural that they hold the coach to the same standard.

Trying to win now helps the long term. But the roster is what it is for this season. And forcing a motion offense would look less appealing when those passes end up in the 3rd row.
I get this line of thinking and agree with it...if anyone was asking for Nesmith and PP to play 30 minutes and I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that. Giving Nesmith 15 mins a game and PP~22 MPG is not going to make anyone think Brad’s waiving the white flag. The people they are replacing are terrible too.
I’m sorry but if we all accept that this is a “bridge year” then there is literally no argument against giving those two rotation minutes
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
You guys are killing me. You keep saying it is what it is, this season is toast, we don't have enough, adding another above average player won't make a difference. OK< we get it, the season is toast. If that is the case, dismissing a building step for next season because it would be "less appealing when those passes end up in the 3rd row" is insane. If your belief is that passes would end up in the 3rd row, I'd rather it happen this year while learning, than next year while learning.

If you don't believe a motion offense will help the team going forward, fine just say that. If you believe forcing/mandating a motion offense could cause them to disenfranchise the Js (as has been posited *could* occur), then say that. But to say the season is a loss, and simultaneous say that there is no point in trying to develop team oriented skills that will pay off in future years during this lost season is beyond logic.

No personal attack intended, if it feels as if I have, that's a failure on my part.
The season can be toast for the fan base in regards to competing for a Championship but this is still a multi-billion dollar business with a lot at stake for the ownership group and those who report to the owners.

We are 1 game in the loss column from the 4-seed and 1 game in the loss column from the lottery. Last year the playoff teams shared over $23m and if fans are allowed back for the playoffs a normal home game is worth $1.5-2m to the team (obv this year won’t be normal in MA this year so a much lesser figure).

So yeah, Brad is going to continue coaching to win games with the roster he’s been given and Ainge has a responsibility to his bosses to get Brad as much help he can with the little he has to offer. He isn’t going to play guys jus to “give them minutes” if they haven’t been productive when given opportunities. He isn’t going to try to build some type of future cohesion among players who aren’t likely to be a part of our future. The talk about the Celtics tanking the season when 1 game from a 4-seed doesn’t lead to any type of productive discussions.
 
Last edited:

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
The season can be toast for the fan base in regards to competing for a Championship but this is still a multi-billion dollar business with a lot at stake for the ownership group and those who report to the owners.

We are 1 game in the loss column from the 4-seed and 1 game in the loss column from the lottery. Last year the playoff teams shared over $23m and if fans are allowed back for the playoffs a normal home game is worth $1.5-2m to the team (obv this year won’t be normal in MA this year so a much lesser figure).

So yeah, Brad is going to continue coaching to win games with the roster he’s been given and Ainge has a responsibility to his bosses to get Brad as much help he can with the little he has to offer. He isn’t going to play guys jus to “give them minutes” if they haven’t been productive when given opportunities. He isn’t going to try to build some type of future cohesion among players who aren’t likely to be a part of our future. The talk about the Celtics tanking the season when 1 game from a 4-seed doesn’t lead to any type of productive discussions.
Well, in fairness, those of us asking for more motion in the offense aren't saying the season is over - that's coming from others opposing implementation of some sort of attempt to involve the entire on court personnel. We are saying, that it's frustrating watching the team continue to fail, i.e. the stupid iso hero ball fail, with the PnR 2 man game being the only other involvement of teammates for the most part. 3 guys doing nothing on most possessions. Others are saying their is no point to trying to add motion this season - it's a lost season. Well if it's lost, then start working on next year.

So now you are saying that they are only 1 game out of the 4 seed... and basketball is a business... so talking about them tanking doesn't lead to productive discussions. Great - if you think we are still in it (no opposition from me) or still competitive - then I'll say it again. Force/demand some movement in the offense to try to improve their chance of success. If there is simply a need to keep the fan base involved, and earn some post season cash - then I'll say as fans we are being forced to watch the same failing garbage over and over again and it's not fun -- let's try to add something that will give them a fighting chance... because the current on court offensive execution is not working. That will please me as a fan and make me not want to shut the games off - because business.

All kinds of circular garbage going on here... I'll say that.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Well, in fairness, those of us asking for more motion in the offense aren't saying the season is over - that's coming from others opposing implementation of some sort of attempt to involve the entire on court personnel. We are saying, that it's frustrating watching the team continue to fail, i.e. the stupid iso hero ball fail, with the PnR 2 man game being the only other involvement of teammates for the most part. 3 guys doing nothing on most possessions. Others are saying their is no point to trying to add motion this season - it's a lost season. Well if it's lost, then start working on next year.

So now you are saying that they are only 1 game out of the 4 seed... and basketball is a business... so talking about them tanking doesn't lead to productive discussions. Great - if you think we are still in it (no opposition from me) or still competitive - then I'll say it again. Force/demand some movement in the offense to try to improve their chance of success. If there is simply a need to keep the fan base involved, and earn some post season cash - then I'll say as fans we are being forced to watch the same failing garbage over and over again and it's not fun -- let's try to add something that will give them a fighting chance... because the current on court offensive execution is not working. That will please me as a fan and make me not want to shut the games off - because business.

All kinds of circular garbage going on here... I'll say that.
It isn’t that there is no point adding motion it is that our two best players are iso and PNR players while the cast on the floor with them are not motion type players as they don’t possess the skill sets to be effective in that style offense. I mean if you feel what this team is missing is the ball in the hands of Semi, TT, Grant and our 5’s making decisions off the dribble I am going to go ahead and disagree with that.
 
Last edited:

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,581
NOVA
HRB is onto something here. Movement inherently is at odds with spacing (just read up on Harden, Morey, and the Rockets), especially when there aren't enough highly skilled players on the floor. I'm all for move the ball, move yourself. Yet, that takes not only ball skill and off-ball skill, but also a high basketball IQ. Because players who move also need to possess great court awareness (it's one thing to develop court awareness when you have the ball but much more challenging without the ball, IMO) and know when moving is needed and when to space. May sound simple but it's a hard skill to learn and takes great experience - or movement can easily collapse space - think.. basket cutting for example and bringing yourself and your defender and maybe a help defender (tagger) into the paint with you. This is where GH made a huge difference last year. He was high basketball IQ and could play with the ball, especially as a facilitator, and without the ball and not get in anyone's space especially in a driver's space. His man also had to respect his shooting ability and couldn't play far off him or free range so GH inherently spaced the floor for others. I suspect Brad knows he has two very good (not yet great, maybe) ball dominant players who can score in space. But, without great shooters/spacers on the floor, their ability to "iso" play is limited... in addition to the fact that they're still young and not yet (if ever?) all world. If Brad instead emphasizes movement/motion well then he'll have to rely heavily on players, 3-8, being highly skilled with the ball and moving without. Yikes!

It's late. Hope that made some sense. I struggle with this tension between spacing and movement all the time myself as a coach and so I may tend to overly empathize with Brad's dilemma this year.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
It isn’t that there is no point adding motion it is that our two beat players are iso and PNR players while the cast on the floor with them are not motion type players as they don’t possess the skill sets to be effective in that style offense. I mean if you feel what this team is missing is the ball in the hands of Semi, TT, Grant and our 5’s making decisions off the dribble I going to go ahead and disagree with that.
I mean if you feel that Kemba, PP, and Smart shouldn't have the ball in their hands and making decisions off the dribble, then I'm going to go ahead and disagree with that. I think they would excel in a motion approach. In addition, TL would likely benefit, Theis would be fine - he's euro trained, Grant I think has the BB IQ to do it as well - I think you might be wrong about him. So there's 4 players who might contribute more than the current approach, 1 in Theis who would at least be even, and one we disagree with in Grant. That's an 8 deep set of players, without including the possibility of any other players actually respond to it and flourish - Green/AN/RL (if he ever gets a sherpa to help him find the court). If you tell me that it means that Semi/TT don't see the court again if we go to a motion offense, I'm not going to be saddened. I won't insult your knowledge here, but we both know that motion can be run without asking the 5s to make decisions off the dribble. Stevens is much better than that, and so are you. And laugh all you want, but for one example, the triangle uses a lot of motion from the off the ball 3, and iso/PnR or Pinch/Post for the other 2 - which still lines up to maximize the strength of the Js.

Ignoring the benefits of a motion offense also fails to consider that it might lead to some easy buckets on blown defensive assignments. It might cost them some turnovers as well - but they already turn the ball over too much - it might be a wash. It definitely makes the defense exert more, which would potentially increase the odds of success when the iso stuff happens.

We can disagree here, but many of us are of the opinion there is no reason to not attempt to engage a motion offense. The reasons not to being offered are circular and/or dismissive (like your strawman re: wanting the 5s to be making decisions off the dribble).
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
HRB is onto something here. Movement inherently is at odds with spacing (just read up on Harden, Morey, and the Rockets), especially when there aren't enough highly skilled players on the floor. I'm all for move the ball, move yourself. Yet, that takes not only ball skill and off-ball skill, but also a high basketball IQ. Because players who move also need to possess great court awareness (it's one thing to develop court awareness when you have the ball but much more challenging without the ball, IMO) and know when moving is needed and when to space. May sound simple but it's a hard skill to learn and takes great experience - or movement can easily collapse space - think.. basket cutting for example and bringing yourself and your defender and maybe a help defender (tagger) into the paint with you. This is where GH made a huge difference last year. He was high basketball IQ and could play with the ball, especially as a facilitator, and without the ball and not get in anyone's space especially in a driver's space. His man also had to respect his shooting ability and couldn't play far off him or free range so GH inherently spaced the floor for others. I suspect Brad knows he has two very good (not yet great, maybe) ball dominant players who can score in space. But, without great shooters/spacers on the floor, their ability to "iso" play is limited... in addition to the fact that they're still young and not yet (if ever?) all world. If Brad instead emphasizes movement/motion well then he'll have to rely heavily on players, 3-8, being highly skilled with the ball and moving without. Yikes!

It's late. Hope that made some sense. I struggle with this tension between spacing and movement all the time myself as a coach and so I may tend to overly empathize with Brad's dilemma this year.
No, this makes a ton of sense and expands on my points. The key takeaway here is for people to understand the uniqueness of settling into a complementary role at NBA game speed (length and athleticism). Young players who have mostly been “the man” their entire lives aren’t equipped to succeed in these roles. Basketball is a game of instinctual movements. If a player is on the floor having to “think” of what to do and where to be they have little chance to succeed......doing so against the best athletes in the world ensures failure. This is why GM’s of contenders like Miami and Milwaukee are still trading for guys like Trevor Arica and PJ Tucker. It’s why Ainge brought in Rasheed in ‘08 while adding PJ Brown and Cassell. They understand what to do in these roles.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,836
Quincy, MA
HRB is onto something here. Movement inherently is at odds with spacing (just read up on Harden, Morey, and the Rockets), especially when there aren't enough highly skilled players on the floor. I'm all for move the ball, move yourself. Yet, that takes not only ball skill and off-ball skill, but also a high basketball IQ. Because players who move also need to possess great court awareness (it's one thing to develop court awareness when you have the ball but much more challenging without the ball, IMO) and know when moving is needed and when to space. May sound simple but it's a hard skill to learn and takes great experience - or movement can easily collapse space - think.. basket cutting for example and bringing yourself and your defender and maybe a help defender (tagger) into the paint with you. This is where GH made a huge difference last year. He was high basketball IQ and could play with the ball, especially as a facilitator, and without the ball and not get in anyone's space especially in a driver's space. His man also had to respect his shooting ability and couldn't play far off him or free range so GH inherently spaced the floor for others. I suspect Brad knows he has two very good (not yet great, maybe) ball dominant players who can score in space. But, without great shooters/spacers on the floor, their ability to "iso" play is limited... in addition to the fact that they're still young and not yet (if ever?) all world. If Brad instead emphasizes movement/motion well then he'll have to rely heavily on players, 3-8, being highly skilled with the ball and moving without. Yikes!

It's late. Hope that made some sense. I struggle with this tension between spacing and movement all the time myself as a coach and so I may tend to overly empathize with Brad's dilemma this year.
I disagree to some degree with your premise. Motion doesn't preclude spacing, in fact it can open it up. You are saying move around but don't get in the Js way. That isn't a good example or usage of motion. I'm talking about motion so that iso/PnR isn't necessary every play. Effective motion generates high percentage offense.

Next, you are dismissing 3-8 as not being able to participate in a motion offense. Wow, talk about dismissive. Are you really saying that Kemba couldn't contribute in a motion offense given his skills? Damn. I'm pretty sure Marcus could as well, his passing would be very effective in such an offense finding cutters, etc. He isn't Rondo, but he'd get it done. I'd bet my shirt that PP would excel in that context, especially given his handle. A motion offense would also lead to more lobs for TL, and his passing would be an asset. I'm not saying he wouldn't break down at times - but hey isn't that why we have the ISO guys to pick up the slack? Theis can work within any offensive structure that involves movement, most of the guys coming here from Europe are fundamentally sound. Grant probably moves the best in terms of finding open space of the big bodies (he has a solid BB IQ), and if the defense is moving around he has a better chance to finish without being stuffed. So I disagree with your 3-8 comment, I think those 8 could get it done. We also have no idea how AN/RL would respond (other than assume as young players they'd be likely lost). If Green/Semi/TT can't get on the court because of the motion - well those are the players that we've got some of the highest complaints on offensive contributions anyway - not much of a loss.

I agree Haywire was the player we needed and want... as I stated in another post - I just don't believe he wanted to wait around watching the Js evolve (or not) into superstars while he just sat around making the right pass when he finally got the ball. I would counter that there were many complaints here about him not shooting well enough from the outside even though you give him credit for being that threat. But here's the thing... you say "yikes" to these 3-8 moving without the ball - and I've answered why I think you'd be wrong. I say "yikes" to putting 3 guys per possession sitting in chairs behind the 3 point line getting cold, and then when they finally get the ball complaining they can't shoot well enough to justify being on the court. Get them moving around, working up a sweat, building a rhythm and maybe they hit those 3's at a higher clip. And maybe they take advantage of a breakdown or two and pick up and extra couple of easy buckets a game.

I get your point, and perspective. From that coaching perspective, I think if you've got a properly executed motion offense, there isn't a space issue. Please don't take that as a poke about your coaching, I'm certainly not doing that. And while you've coached basketball, and I haven't - I've seen youth teams running a motion offense. Implemented in stages, and added to over time - but it's doable. If youth can do it with their lack of skills/experience, I'm thinking that professionals can do it successfully.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,581
NOVA
No, this makes a ton of sense and expands on my points. The key takeaway here is for people to understand the uniqueness of settling into a complementary role at NBA game speed (length and athleticism). Young players who have mostly been “the man” their entire lives aren’t equipped to succeed in these roles. Basketball is a game of instinctual movements. If a player is on the floor having to “think” of what to do and where to be they have little chance to succeed......doing so against the best athletes in the world ensures failure. This is why GM’s of contenders like Miami and Milwaukee are still trading for guys like Trevor Arica and PJ Tucker. It’s why Ainge brought in Rasheed in ‘08 while adding PJ Brown and Cassell. They understand what to do in these roles.
You bring up a great point. Thinking stalls the ball. Whether you have the ball or you don't. Role ID (like having one and knowing/understanding your role and feeling confident in your role) is very important especially when we're talking about players who are very good at one or two things but limited at doing other things. I suspect much to the chagrin of some of us that Ainge is very aware of the problem this year and so is Brad.(As an aside, when I hear each of them talk, they seem so on the page about everything that I think they both really get it this year and understand the team's strengths and limitations and I don't think Ainge has even thought for a moment about firing Brad). And, yeah, it takes young players like you said a great deal of time to figure out what they can and cannot do at the next level, whatever level. I only coach HS varsity and every year if lucky, I will have an outstanding Freshman who will take a season or more to get it... yeah you can't do that or get away with that here. For me, we will often start such a Freshman in a very defined role and then expand gradually over time. But, I'm high school. The NBA is less forgiving especially when you have a team with many younger players but high expectations and two very good players.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
9,581
NOVA
I disagree to some degree with your premise. Motion doesn't preclude spacing, in fact it can open it up. You are saying move around but don't get in the Js way. That isn't a good example or usage of motion. I'm talking about motion so that iso/PnR isn't necessary every play. Effective motion generates high percentage offense.

Next, you are dismissing 3-8 as not being able to participate in a motion offense. Wow, talk about dismissive. Are you really saying that Kemba couldn't contribute in a motion offense given his skills? Damn. I'm pretty sure Marcus could as well, his passing would be very effective in such an offense finding cutters, etc. He isn't Rondo, but he'd get it done. I'd bet my shirt that PP would excel in that context, especially given his handle. A motion offense would also lead to more lobs for TL, and his passing would be an asset. I'm not saying he wouldn't break down at times - but hey isn't that why we have the ISO guys to pick up the slack? Theis can work within any offensive structure that involves movement, most of the guys coming here from Europe are fundamentally sound. Grant probably moves the best in terms of finding open space of the big bodies (he has a solid BB IQ), and if the defense is moving around he has a better chance to finish without being stuffed. So I disagree with your 3-8 comment, I think those 8 could get it done. We also have no idea how AN/RL would respond (other than assume as young players they'd be likely lost). If Green/Semi/TT can't get on the court because of the motion - well those are the players that we've got some of the highest complaints on offensive contributions anyway - not much of a loss.

I agree Haywire was the player we needed and want... as I stated in another post - I just don't believe he wanted to wait around watching the Js evolve (or not) into superstars while he just sat around making the right pass when he finally got the ball. I would counter that there were many complaints here about him not shooting well enough from the outside even though you give him credit for being that threat. But here's the thing... you say "yikes" to these 3-8 moving without the ball - and I've answered why I think you'd be wrong. I say "yikes" to putting 3 guys per possession sitting in chairs behind the 3 point line getting cold, and then when they finally get the ball complaining they can't shoot well enough to justify being on the court. Get them moving around, working up a sweat, building a rhythm and maybe they hit those 3's at a higher clip. And maybe they take advantage of a breakdown or two and pick up and extra couple of easy buckets a game.

I get your point, and perspective. From that coaching perspective, I think if you've got a properly executed motion offense, there isn't a space issue. Please don't take that as a poke about your coaching, I'm certainly not doing that. And while you've coached basketball, and I haven't - I've seen youth teams running a motion offense. Implemented in stages, and added to over time - but it's doable. If youth can do it with their lack of skills/experience, I'm thinking that professionals can do it successfully.
I take no offense and I welcome the pushback because I like the opportunity to think and rethink the game as much as possible. Annnnnd I'm very confident in my coaching ability :) but that said, I can't address all your points because of life (haha I should go to sleep) but I'll say this.

I agree that motion doesn't necessarily have to impede spacing thus my comments on what it takes to have both (spacers, court awareness, high IQ both with the ball and without, etc.). That said, there is always a tension there (I mean NBA coaches discuss this at Sloan and elsewhere), but if you watch the GSW you know that both can co-exist without too much difficulty (helps to have two all-world players be awesome without the ball). If only, we all had the GSW. But, having virtually no offseason and a limited training camp, it greatly hinders a coach's ability to install a good motion offense especially with new and/or young players. You mentioned watching youth teams get good at motion... over time... against other youth teams. I'm not sure that's comparable to the NBA and to the lack of time this team has had together and who they're competing against. I've seen enough youth teams to know they can't defend a paper bag. Also, Kemba missed significant time early and then Smart missed significant time. Also, I believe their practice time once games began has been severely limited. I think you're dismissing too easily how much time is needed to gel in a motion type offense. For example, learning each other's habits at the NBA level is significantly more important than learning to play by rules or principles as a motion offense is typically taught at the youth level.

That's all I got for now :)
 

Imbricus

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 26, 2017
4,813
I've enjoyed watching this debate unfold, and I think it's perfectly timely. I am a little surprised that some posters seem (in my view) a bit too accepting of the ISO instincts of our alpha dogs and a bit too denigrating (in my view) of what even an inferior bench can do with some ball movement/open shot opportunities.

I'll just throw out this case in point, because I watched the beginning of the recent Utah game:

Tatum came out to start the game in typical Tatum ISO mode, forced up some hard shots, didn't play well, wound up on the bench.

Tatum returned and I know not why (someone said something to him? a light went on?), all of a sudden, he was passing more than shooting. Starkly noticeable. And he showed that he can be a very good passer. The Celtics got some easy buckets (even with their inferior bench players). They looked good. Yes, it didn't last, but it was a revelation of sorts, I thought.

Yes, the bench isn't that good, agreed. It needs upgrading at some point. But the Celtics too often aren't playing team ball. That's why Gorman got flat-out disgusted with them. It's a problem.
 
Last edited:

Bernie Carbohydrate

writes the Semi-Fin
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2001
4,047
South Carolina via Dorchestah
I don't think an NBA team can implement new offense in midseason. Successful offenses (the 2014 Spurs motion, the Phil Jackson Triangle, Mike D'Antoni Phoenix system) take a few years to gel. It has to be installed in training camp, refined in practices, and may take a few seasons (and personnel shifts) until you get the pieces in place.

Besides, it isn't the motion itself that creates points in a motion offense -- it is having players who can take advantage of the space created by that motion. When Brad last ran the motion he had IT, who could create with just a sliver of space, and who could beat his man if the defender was just a little off balance. He also had bigs (like Olynyk) who could shoot better than our current bigs. He had Avery Bradley, who was a good cutter. Run the motion all you want with the 2021 Celts, and if the ball ends up in Semi's hands, even wide open, he's gonna do Semi things.
 
Last edited:

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
You guys are killing me. You keep saying it is what it is, this season is toast, we don't have enough, adding another above average player won't make a difference. OK< we get it, the season is toast. If that is the case, dismissing a building step for next season because it would be "less appealing when those passes end up in the 3rd row" is insane. If your belief is that passes would end up in the 3rd row, I'd rather it happen this year while learning, than next year while learning.

If you don't believe a motion offense will help the team going forward, fine just say that. If you believe forcing/mandating a motion offense could cause them to disenfranchise the Js (as has been posited *could* occur), then say that. But to say the season is a loss, and simultaneous say that there is no point in trying to develop team oriented skills that will pay off in future years during this lost season is beyond logic.

No personal attack intended, if it feels as if I have, that's a failure on my part.
My 3rd row comment was perhaps a bit snarky. I'm a big fan of watching real ball movement and the extra pass to the open player. The point I was attempting to get across is that we should not underestimate the difficulty of trying to install a Utah Jazz motion offense (intentional exaggeration alert) at this point of a season for which there will be zero practice time from now until the playoffs (and that assumes the C's avoid the play-in round) (no exaggeration intended). I do believe there is an optimal point for this team that exists in that chasm between Jazz/Warriors ball movement and having the team's best players pound the ball into the ice rink below the TD garden floor waiting for a shot that never comes. I would be hugely disappointed if we see the same problems exist next season.

Also should note that some of those problems involve defense as well. If Stevens decides to spend precious prep time focusing on improvements on the defensive side of the ball, I cannot really blame him.

I get this line of thinking and agree with it...if anyone was asking for Nesmith and PP to play 30 minutes and I don’t think anyone’s suggesting that. Giving Nesmith 15 mins a game and PP~22 MPG is not going to make anyone think Brad’s waiving the white flag. The people they are replacing are terrible too.
I’m sorry but if we all accept that this is a “bridge year” then there is literally no argument against giving those two rotation minutes
I think all of the following can indeed be correct:

1.) When it comes to handling the trade deadline, the team as it stands is not close enough to competing for a championship to justify emptying the cupboard of the few assets remaining to overpay for a player and missing out on a chance to reset the tax.

2.) The team should go all out to try to win each and every game as if they're hunting for their playoff lives, because that is indeed the situation. There is value both to the owners and to the players for the Celtics to make the playoffs. The J's need every ounce of playoff experience they can get, even if it does not always end up with a good result.

3.) Part of development is getting the young players into roles where they can taste some success. Pritchard did get 19 minutes against the Cavs, second only to starter Marcus Smart among point guards. He only get 12 against the Jazz, but that's partly due to Stevens giving Kemba 34 in an attempt to steal a win against Tier 1 opponent. I honestly don't think we can expect more. As for Nesmith, if he's not ready, it could very well be better for his long term development to keep him out of situations where he will get exposed and lose all his confidence. There is still a next year for him.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
So yeah, Brad is going to continue coaching to win games with the roster he’s been given and Ainge has a responsibility to his bosses to get Brad as much help he can with the little he has to offer. He isn’t going to play guys jus to “give them minutes” if they haven’t been productive when given opportunities. He isn’t going to try to build some type of future cohesion among players who aren’t likely to be a part of our future. The talk about the Celtics tanking the season when 1 game from a 4-seed doesn’t lead to any type of productive discussions.
Just to be clear, you believe Semi and Grant have been productive with their opportunities? Teague had a decent week last week IMO, but aside from that, what kind of production are we getting from him? Javonte Green?

The lack of playing time for Nesmith with those guys in front of him is mind-boggling. Or to a lesser extent, PP, who at least finds his way onto the floor on occasion. I have no idea what Nesmith can or will be, but I know in the 7 games where he played 22 minutes a night, he wasn't out there hurting the team. These guys are actively hurting the team regularly, and we're just going to keep sending them out there, while he hangs around on the bench. I want to know what Brad saw in those 7 games that completely turned him off to Nesmith, because I sure as hell didn't see it.

Reggie was in here blasting away over and over again about the 1 game where Nesmith played 22 minutes and didn't take a shot (which is kind of hard to do when you're relegated to standing in a corner sucking your thumb on offense), but nobody seems concerned that in 10 games this season where he played 14+ minutes, Semi has taken either 0,1 or 2 shots. The other night, he played 19 minutes, zero shots. In his last 11 games, Grant Williams is averaging 16mpg, and averaging 3.1fga. In those 11 games, he's shooting .412/.313/.625.

If these guys were playing some sort of Dennis Rodman level defense, I'd have no problem plugging them in there over anyone, but we all know they aren't even playing decent defense, so what are we waiting for? When do we change something?

Sacramento tonight, we'll see what happens...
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
41,948
He also had bigs (like Olynyk) who could shoot better than our current bigs.
That's just not true, in his 4 seasons here, Olynyk shot 35.1%, 34.9%, 40.5% and 35.4% from deep, for an average of 36.8%.

Semi shot 37.8% and is at 38.8% this year, and he's averaging more 3PA per game this year than Olynyk did in any season in Boston, so it's on higher volume. Grant is shooting 40.9% this year. PP is shooting 40.5%.

Semi and Grant suck. Don't get me wrong, but for the most part, they can hit wide open 3's. You just have get them wide open 3's. And this offense isn't generating those looks.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
That's just not true, in his 4 seasons here, Olynyk shot 35.1%, 34.9%, 40.5% and 35.4% from deep, for an average of 36.8%.

Semi shot 37.8% and is at 38.8% this year, and he's averaging more 3PA per game this year than Olynyk did in any season in Boston, so it's on higher volume. Grant is shooting 40.9% this year. PP is shooting 40.5%.

Semi and Grant suck. Don't get me wrong, but for the most part, they can hit wide open 3's. You just have get them wide open 3's. And this offense isn't generating those looks.
KO is 6'11. Semi and Grant are 6'6. Semi and Grant are pretend bigs and that's a huge part of the problem.