2019-2020 Celtics Regular Season Thread
- Thread starter Devizier
- Start date
Yet they still won missing three starters and Sacramento is a decent team. This game reminded me of a game against Charlotte early in the schedule two seasons ago when Kyrie and Hayward were both out. They won like 90-87 or something like that. Couldn’t put the ball in the basket but played tough defense and somehow pulled out a win. These guys just grind it out. The Jays becoming consistent 20 PPG scorers helps too.
Yeah, with some of the lineups out there last night you just look around the floor and think "Who is going to put the ball in the basket?" Smart hit some big shots (and had some great defensive plays, as per usual) but there were some cringeworthy airballs as well. That Tatum contested 3 in the corner late seemed incredibly forced.
I'm confused by how awful GW has been on offense this season. SSS, but 26% on the season? A lot of those have been 3s - which he definitely needs to work on (and I'm sure he has been).
I'm confused by how awful GW has been on offense this season. SSS, but 26% on the season? A lot of those have been 3s - which he definitely needs to work on (and I'm sure he has been).
It's amazing they cracked 100 pts. Also, it's unfair to lump Jaylen in with Tatum who was simply terrible in the final three minutes. His final shot was ass, the two twos he took before that were shit, and Stevens had to call a TO with 13 seconds left because he backed himself up to the half court line where it looked like his plan was to try to take his man off the dribble forty feet from the basket.
The shot Tatum missed at the end was nearly identical to the shot that everyone loved a couple weeks ago when he buried it for the win.
It’s a quality look with 2 seconds left; a worse one with 6 seconds or whatever they had. Context matters a ton when assessing shot quality.
Word. The worst matchup on the floor at that time was Tatum trying to take Barnes off the dribble, and that's what he was fixing to do before the timeout.
I get that Tatum KNOWS that he has the alpha scorer gene. But he's just not that guy yet. He's still not aware enough of his limitations. This is an area where he's behind Brown.
Maybe I misheard Stevens postgame, but he didn't call the TO because Tatum did that on his own, he called the TO because the play was set to get an immediate drive for a layup and if that didn't happen because of the look the defense showed, then to back out, call another TO and reset. In other words, Tatum was given the option to drive if it was there, or back out and they'd call another TO. If that's the case, then Tatum made the smart decision.
Honestly in late clock situations like that, they should be looking for the Jaylen drive+fadeaway a lot more. It has a chance of generating a layup or a foul, and if that fails is a better shot than most of what Tatum has in his bag. Plus he can get it off against almost anyone.
Jaylen had a great game. He had quite a few big buckets when it mattered. I really like his 3 point shot, too. I'd like to see more drive and dish outs to JB. When Jaylen drives to the basket, my impression is that if the shot isn't there, he'll pass it back out. Not everyone on the team is comfortable doing that, unfortunately.
Jaylen is making better decisions at the moment and certainly is way more likely both to get by his guy and to get fouled.
What Jayson has going to him is that he's a lot less likely to get blocked. He's way longer and a bit shiftier in place. And at the end of the day, he has a little more of the secret sauce.
If there are 18 seconds left, it's an interesting debate. I'd rather have JB taking his guy off the dribble. But if it's 3 seconds left, JT is the better option.
What bothered me was the though of JT taking Barnes off the dribble. Whether that was his idea, Brad's, or the ball just ended up there, it was the worst possible option.
What Jayson has going to him is that he's a lot less likely to get blocked. He's way longer and a bit shiftier in place. And at the end of the day, he has a little more of the secret sauce.
If there are 18 seconds left, it's an interesting debate. I'd rather have JB taking his guy off the dribble. But if it's 3 seconds left, JT is the better option.
What bothered me was the though of JT taking Barnes off the dribble. Whether that was his idea, Brad's, or the ball just ended up there, it was the worst possible option.
1. Rookie. 2. Cold off the bench. 3. Minutes 4. Patience. 5. Eventual payoff
We have all watched our starters open up every game shooting COLD.
Now times that by ten for a rookie coming off the bench. These guys (Grant, Carsen) are learning how to be bench spark plugs. They were high usage All-American starters that had free reign on offense over the last few seasons. Brad is still trying to figure out how to get them efficient shots, who to play them with and when to play them. It's going to be rotation experimentation and rookie inconsistency for a while. By investing the minutes now into Carsen, Grant, Tre the Celtics will get the payoff by seasons end and big-time the next few seasons when Championship reality will be even greater.
Have fun this season (and Tre was FUN last night) and play the long game.
I'll take the glass half full approach: the final sequence was a teachable moment for Brad and the team's young studs. No Kemba limited their options, but the execution was poor nonetheless. They made it up on the other end with clutch team defense to force the airball.
Ah ok, that makes sense. The idea of Tatum trying to make something happen that far from the basket made me queasy at the time.
I wonder if there is a cut off point where they decide to just have him ditch the 3 point shot. I'm sure we aren't even close to it but if he's like 0/100 from deep the discussion has to come up. He's someone who could have value without a 3 but he obviously has way more with it.
There’s just so much reason to think he can do it that I don’t know whether they will. It’s probably like Smart, where they treat it as a multi-year project and let him work on it in game for a few attempts a game.
I also think more regular PT would help in this regard.
Agreed.
I just watched a replay of the last minute.
The initial play was for Jaylen, when Wanamaker was trying to inbound the balls. BUT Joseph effectively fronted Jaylen. Wanamaker had to call TO.
Smart inbounded the next ball to Tatum, who posted up Barnes. Tatum went into his solo ball act and took an off-balance 3 with
5 SECONDS LEFT ON THE SHOT CLOCK, 9.1 SECONDS ON REGULATION Airball.
Battle for the ball underneath. King's ball with 5.7 seconds timeout.
So IMO not great shot selection, and terrible use of the clock. That ball has to be let go w/1 second on the shot clock by JB, JT or Smart, on the block/closer to the rim, trying to draw a foul (as makeup on the Smart drive non-call).
If the Celtics get the ball up on the rim, get no call, or doesn't go in - at worse the ball is tipped around and the Kings would have had no more than 1-2 seconds or maybe the clock expires.
While I'm being critical of the end of the game strategy.
Brad, who usually loves to play small at the 5, for some reason doesn't go to that last night? 48 mins of Kanter/TL? The Kings have no offensive threat at the 5. The Kings' screened our 5 so Barnes/Bog/Hield could get open looks at the 3 all night (47 3PA- 38%). Having a more active wing on the floor would have helped slow down the King's perimeter assault.
While down 3 starters, happy with a win against a hot Sacramento team. BUT Celts need to clean up their perimeter rotation defense and situational play at the end.
Last edited:
Tommy is quite high on Grant's ability to hit the three. If Tommy is on board, I'm on board. He's got a nice looking stroke.
Wanamaker has been pretty awful at the end of close basketball games, at least the last 3. I'm sure I'm not the only one who wanted Waters to stay in the game over him last night but I get why that didn't happen.
Also, do other people think this team is deep? I just don't see it. It has potential to be in a year or two but I think it's lacking a player. The top 5 of Smart, Kemba, Tatum, Brown and Hayward is awesome. Kanter and Theis are decent rotational players. After that, we are relying on Brad Wanamaker, Semi and a lot of potential.
I don't think the bench is shallow either, just not particularly deep and lacking offensive fire power. If the team is fully healthy, I don't think that matters much.
Semi and Edwards lead the team in 3 point % off the bench at .333 if you exclude Marcus Smart. Smart is only at .342 himself. Is there a way to get Starter/Bench splits for 3 point %? The Celtics bench is probably hovering at 30%. If that continues, that will be a huge problem.
Also, do other people think this team is deep? I just don't see it. It has potential to be in a year or two but I think it's lacking a player. The top 5 of Smart, Kemba, Tatum, Brown and Hayward is awesome. Kanter and Theis are decent rotational players. After that, we are relying on Brad Wanamaker, Semi and a lot of potential.
I don't think the bench is shallow either, just not particularly deep and lacking offensive fire power. If the team is fully healthy, I don't think that matters much.
Semi and Edwards lead the team in 3 point % off the bench at .333 if you exclude Marcus Smart. Smart is only at .342 himself. Is there a way to get Starter/Bench splits for 3 point %? The Celtics bench is probably hovering at 30%. If that continues, that will be a huge problem.
they did win a game with 3 starters out.
and take a top WC team, the Nuggets, down to the wire, on the road, while missing 2 starters
BUT that's exactly why you have to give Wana, Grant, Arsen minutes at critical times. Brad is building a bench. 7 rookies on the 17-man Celtic roster
I don't know--when you win a game with 3 starters not playing, with no player on your team going off for 50+, a G League call-up helping steady the ship, it points to some depth.
I don't know how to justify it, but to my GAZE, Brown last night just seemed more in control. He was willing to hesitate/change speeds on his drive to create an overreaction, the little up and under move. The weirdest thing was late in the game his shots seemed softer on the rim - maybe more loft? How would that even be possible?
I think the depth is adequate, but uneven. The Celtics have been able to continue playing well despite Hayward's injury, because of their depth in wings, but Walker's injury has strained the back court depth of the team. Wanamaker is a competent NBA backup guard, but his limitations really get exposed when he's on the court for extended minutes against starters, especially last night in crunch time. They really miss Terry Rozier for those minutes, but in fairness to Ainge's roster construction, Walker historically has been at a far lower risk of injury than Irving.
In playoff games, depth is less important as the schedule expands and the benches are shortened. I'm curious how comfortable Stevens will be with lineups, such as last night's starters, that have Smart as the main ball-handler when Kemba is off the floor.
I agree with all of this except that I'm not sure that he needs to shelve the floater permanently. I think that he could turn it into a weapon long-term with reps.
The game has slowed down for Brown on offense in a way that it hasn't quite yet for Tatum. He's really not far behind IMO and could theoretically "add" more control to his drives during the season. The up fake that drew the foul call is exactly the type of changeup that might keep people a bit more honest.
Jaylen was max maxing the rim like that a lot last year and getting similar results. He was able to add that element of control in this past offseason. I think that Tatum can do it during.
Not an exact comparison, but look what happened to Golden State with some top players out/left. A total garbage team. The fact that missing 2 All-Star caliber players and another starter they are still competitive with a team like Sacramento, I think shows they have some decent depth.
The Celtics remind (although not as good) of the 2011-2014 Spurs run, when they seemingly could throw out any random group of guys and be competitive with anyone. The league started to price that in mentally, and treat their starters as maybe less important than they were.
The 2018 playoff run probably factors in as well.
At the end of the day though, you need your stars to dominate, and losing 1, let alone 2, of them generally makes things a lot worse.
The 2018 playoff run probably factors in as well.
At the end of the day though, you need your stars to dominate, and losing 1, let alone 2, of them generally makes things a lot worse.
I'd say we have the potential to have a deep team, but we're not there yet. Need the a couple of the Williams, Edwards and Waters to step up. GW and Edwards hitting shots would certainly help. Semi and Wanamaker are good depth against the right matchups, but aren't really impact players. Smart on the bench gives them one, but need one or two others to step up.
A gentle reminder that the Celtics have 7 rookies on the 17man roster.
With 3 starters out last game, their top draft pick injured, and Brad's penchant for experimenting with rotations they are playing a lot of guys that are getting thrown into the deep end. I like Brad's strategy for development/creating depth while still being competitive and winning. By the All-Star game, I'd expect Brad to have a handle on rotations and matchups.
There will be times where Enis, Semi, Wanamaker and the rookies will frustrate us but the season is long and playoffs are many months away.
PLUS this team is really built to make a championship run in 2021 and beyond.
Can we mention here that a noon game the day after Thanksgiving is stupid. Put the game at 7 or 730, what is the problem. If it’s hockey play another day.
Yes, agree, and mini rant:
I feel like everyone is rapidly catching on to what a joke the NBA regular season is. There are no stakes.
I'm as avid a fan as they come, and while I totally agree with your point that it's stupid, I can't bring myself to care. Half the time it feels like I'm watching, passionately, for the same reason I watch Summer League: to see how individual players develop so that I know what parts of whose game will be relevant when the actual games start in April.
It's a player driven sport. Watching players develop falls under that. It's funny because the games don't mean much but I'll watch 2 horrible teams play every day of the week. I can't say that about any other sport.
Yeah, I like this way of thinking about it. Makes me care even less about results, but makes the process more fun than waiting for scores to spit out.
Celtics sure don't seem to play like there's no stakes. Maybe you should walk up to Smart and tell him the games don't matter.
The noon start is very unfair to women fans who also like to shop on Black Friday.
There is a lot of work to do in the regular season in terms of finding identity, especially for the Celtics. For that reason, I love watching, and have watched every minute of this year's games. But the actual W-L result from Friday's game really doesn't matter in the scheme of things. I like the NBA approximately 100x more than the NFL, but NFL games are way higher stakes, and it's obvious.
Re Smart: he also thinks kids' dodgeball games are life-or-death tests of valor.
Non-Kyrie observations:
Doris Burke is way, way better than most national commentators. She seems to know little Celtics things that aren't part of the national media hive mind yet, like Tatum’s defensive leap. Honestly, national people like Duncan/LeRoux could learn a lot from how she actually "watches" "games".
This team does such a better job handling the variance of basketball. They kept playing D when all the 3s were falling, made some minor adjustments to switch more, and weathered the storm. Runs happen in the NBA, and they just play through them for the most part. Last year's team looked like they had never seen a run in the NBA before, and couldn't handle not front-running.
Doris Burke is way, way better than most national commentators. She seems to know little Celtics things that aren't part of the national media hive mind yet, like Tatum’s defensive leap. Honestly, national people like Duncan/LeRoux could learn a lot from how she actually "watches" "games".
This team does such a better job handling the variance of basketball. They kept playing D when all the 3s were falling, made some minor adjustments to switch more, and weathered the storm. Runs happen in the NBA, and they just play through them for the most part. Last year's team looked like they had never seen a run in the NBA before, and couldn't handle not front-running.
On the 11/22 Real Gm Radio podcast, Danny LeRoux and his guest, Ethan Sherwood Strauss, actually spent 10-15 mins discussing Tatum and appreciating his defensive growth. It was like they had read the Tatum thread right before the podcast. This is unlike the Hollinger/Duncan podcast, where Hollinger thinks Tatums defense is “nothing special” and Duncan just nods his head and agrees.
I find the lack of true analysis in the podverse pretty shocking. it makes me appreciate lurking at the Port Cellar.
I'm honestly a bit shocked whenever I read or listen to Hollinger that he got hired by an NBA team. It's like he's unable to do analysis that doesn't involve munging box-score stats.
To your point, I've basically stopped listening to NBA podcasts; they're mostly empty calories from midwits fishing for money.
The Lowe Post is a very good NBA podcast. Zach and his guests just love hoops, they use analytics and their takes are fairly well informed. They have also been very bullish on the Celtics and a certain defensive minded stretch six in particular.
Yeah, I should have added that the Lowe Post is one of my must listens. His recent Smart interview was just fantastic journalism.
Doris gets it. I love when she does our games.
Stupid example, but she was all over the crowd acting silly when Marcus got down the trapped ball (again) and audibly chucked when the crowd started chanting MVP.