2021-2022 NBA Game Thread!

kfoss99

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2009
637
Lol. Fair enough.
Okay, I made a bad point. But, I've watched a few Warriors games and the bench, appears to me, to run good ball movement sets. The starters especially, so. You may all watch more of their games.

In general, they're a fun team to watch.

If I can't make a bad point on an anonymous Celtics forum, where can I? LOL

This is my favorite spot on the internet. Let's put this behind us.

Go C's!
 

ColonelMustard

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 23, 2006
192
Okay, I made a bad point. But, I've watched a few Warriors games and the bench, appears to me, to run good ball movement sets. The starters especially, so. You may all watch more of their games.

In general, they're a fun team to watch.

If I can't make a bad point on an anonymous Celtics forum, where can I? LOL

This is my favorite spot on the internet. Let's put this behind us.

Go C's!
Pshhtt. Here's a dirty secret. Everyone is talking out of their ass here.

I personally enjoyed your commentary.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,459
Santa Monica
The Warriors/Grizz play with dizzying pace (hello Curry/Ja), energy & movement. This is what dynamic All-NBA PGs can do for you. It contrasts sharply with what we see from the Celtics on a nightly basis. It's really been a problem for the C's since Jan'20 when Kemba's knee gave out. Brad is probably going to have to overpay with draft picks, young players, etc to get that dynamic ballhandler. The JAYs playing the role of lead initiators/distributors instead of attackers isn't getting the most out of them.

Also of note, while talking about bench play from that W/Grizz game. Look at how many minutes and # of players each team rolled out. 10-12 men on each side played. Two players on each side went over 30minutes. That also helps with a team's ability to play with energy & pace. IME needs to take notes, he's already worn Horford down to dust. 40mins+++ from TL/Brown/Tatum against a bunch of 2nd stringers on the Pacers is nutz. The meat of the game was the perfect time to roll out more bench. IME's I'm playing the men I can trust, is a load of crap.
AND before anyone cries CELTIC BENCH WOES, Boston has Schroder, JRich, Grant, Romeo, Enes coming off the bench. They are more than capable.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
26,752
Okay, I made a bad point. But, I've watched a few Warriors games and the bench, appears to me, to run good ball movement sets. The starters especially, so. You may all watch more of their games.

In general, they're a fun team to watch.

If I can't make a bad point on an anonymous Celtics forum, where can I? LOL

This is my favorite spot on the internet. Let's put this behind us.

Go C's!
That the Warriors run a clear and consistent offensive scheme is not a bad point—-it’s inarguably true. That is true of both the starters and the bench.

whats tricky—and some here conflate these two things—is that scheme is usually necessary to have a great offense but not sufficient. You can’t win in the nba without top tier talent—it’s not the NCAA and Princeton’s offense even with perfect execution won’t score without individual talent. So, sure, if Steph goes 4-20 Warriors struggle….and sure, even a good scheme won’t score a lot of points with mediocre players. But that is different than scheme not mattering.

The reverse of that—-talent without a scheme—occasionally is enough if you have Nets level offensive talent. I gave other examples in a different thread. But usually, as with Warriors, great offenses have both scheme and talent to make it work optionally. And the critique many of us have made of Celtics is they don’t yet show and execute a scheme and their talent is less than you’d need to get away with that.

I get some folks here focus just on the individual talent part of that, and I think there’s more to it.
 

the moops

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 19, 2016
3,259
Saint Paul, MN
Ben Taylor has done some great work on how Golden State runs their offense and what makes it work. He went into how and why their backups can run it too. The system has been in place and even when they were struggling and missing Curry and/or Klay and/or Green, they still ran the same stuf with Poole and Wiggins and whoever else.

This is a good video.

https://www.reddit.com/r/nba/comments/rpzaxb/thinking_basketballben_taylor_the_warriors/
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Okay, I made a bad point. But, I've watched a few Warriors games and the bench, appears to me, to run good ball movement sets. The starters especially, so. You may all watch more of their games.

In general, they're a fun team to watch.

If I can't make a bad point on an anonymous Celtics forum, where can I? LOL

This is my favorite spot on the internet. Let's put this behind us.

Go C's!
What PKB said. Aside from that, it is a tight balance between what is serious, playful and a combination when communicating in a forum such as this. Sometimes we get in “heated” discussions but many times it’s with posters who have been here or on other Celtics boards for 20 years so we “know”’ each other and recognize when comments are made in fun/jest (which again doesn’t always translate well) and keeping things light. Sorry for the mixup.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,459
Santa Monica
That the Warriors run a clear and consistent offensive scheme is not a bad point—-it’s inarguably true. That is true of both the starters and the bench.

whats tricky—and some here conflate these two things—is that scheme is usually necessary to have a great offense but not sufficient. You can’t win in the nba without top tier talent—it’s not the NCAA and Princeton’s offense even with perfect execution won’t score without individual talent. So, sure, if Steph goes 4-20 Warriors struggle….and sure, even a good scheme won’t score a lot of points with mediocre players. But that is different than scheme not mattering.

The reverse of that—-talent without a scheme—occasionally is enough if you have Nets level offensive talent. I gave other examples in a different thread. But usually, as with Warriors, great offenses have both scheme and talent to make it work optionally. And the critique many of us have made of Celtics is they don’t yet show and execute a scheme and their talent is less than you’d need to get away with that.

I get some folks here focus just on the individual talent part of that, and I think there’s more to it.
If the question is does Steve Kerr have a better scheme/approach than Ime Udoka, I think we all know the answer to that.

The Celtics offensive scheme is definitely a combination of rookie HC with no floor general. The "other" pieces are more than fine.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
If the question is does Steve Kerr have a better scheme than Ime Udoka, I think we all know the answer to that.
Oh of course nobody is doubting that and it is much easier for backups to fit in WITH Curry and Draymond as they move the ball so well. I don’t agree that it works very well without Curry in the lineup as the league-high TO/rate isn’t offset by what Curry brings offensively. What does some of the non-Curry data look like?

Would Celtics fans prefer Kerr/Tatum or Ime/Curry? Unless the latter is outrageously stubborn I’m guessing our offense would look quite different with Curry opposed to Smart.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
3,396
Cultural hub of the universe
The Warriors/Grizz play with dizzying pace (hello Curry/Ja), energy & movement. This is what dynamic All-NBA PGs can do for you. It contrasts sharply with what we see from the Celtics on a nightly basis. It's really been a problem for the C's since Jan'20 when Kemba's knee gave out. Brad is probably going to have to overpay with draft picks, young players, etc to get that dynamic ballhandler. The JAYs playing the role of lead initiators/distributors instead of attackers isn't getting the most out of them.

Also of note, while talking about bench play from that W/Grizz game. Look at how many minutes and # of players each team rolled out. 10-12 men on each side played. Two players on each side went over 30minutes. That also helps with a team's ability to play with energy & pace. IME needs to take notes, he's already worn Horford down to dust. 40mins+++ from TL/Brown/Tatum against a bunch of 2nd stringers on the Pacers is nutz. The meat of the game was the perfect time to roll out more bench. IME's I'm playing the men I can trust, is a load of crap.
AND before anyone cries CELTIC BENCH WOES, Boston has Schroder, JRich, Grant, Romeo, Enes coming off the bench. They are more than capable.
I get that this is one of your daily talking points, but 33 year old Curry played 39 minutes last night. J's played less than that last game before OT. Jaylen is averaging .4 minutes a game more than last year, Tatum .9. Horford's minutes are down significantly lately. Really only RWIII is playing significantly more minutes.

I'd agree that distributing the minutes a little better would probably help, but it's just not that extreme.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
The Warriors/Grizz play with dizzying pace (hello Curry/Ja), energy & movement. This is what dynamic All-NBA PGs can do for you. It contrasts sharply with what we see from the Celtics on a nightly basis. It's really been a problem for the C's since Jan'20 when Kemba's knee gave out. Brad is probably going to have to overpay with draft picks, young players, etc to get that dynamic ballhandler. The JAYs playing the role of lead initiators/distributors instead of attackers isn't getting the most out of them.

Also of note, while talking about bench play from that W/Grizz game. Look at how many minutes and # of players each team rolled out. 10-12 men on each side played. Two players on each side went over 30minutes. That also helps with a team's ability to play with energy & pace. IME needs to take notes, he's already worn Horford down to dust. 40mins+++ from TL/Brown/Tatum against a bunch of 2nd stringers on the Pacers is nutz. The meat of the game was the perfect time to roll out more bench. IME's I'm playing the men I can trust, is a load of crap.
AND before anyone cries CELTIC BENCH WOES, Boston has Schroder, JRich, Grant, Romeo, Enes coming off the bench. They are more than capable.
It works both ways though. In general, if you’re employing a faster pace you are going to be using more of your bench. All minutes are not created equally. 32 min can be more exertful/stressful than 40 min depending on other factors…..not too dissimilar than a baseball pitcher who throws 90 pitches than can be more stressful than when he throws 115 depending on compensating factors (pace, scheduling, etc). It isn’t about the minutes it is about how the minutes are used just as it is with a pitcher.

Edit: This was Curry’s second game in a week with a day off the day prior and a day off today. Usage hasn’t been a factor with him lately as he was plenty fresh to go heavy minutes yesterday.
 
Last edited:

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
26,752
Oh of course nobody is doubting that and it is much easier for backups to fit in WITH Curry and Draymond as they move the ball so well. I don’t agree that it works very well without Curry in the lineup as the league-high TO/rate isn’t offset by what Curry brings offensively. What does some of the non-Curry data look like?

Would Celtics fans prefer Kerr/Tatum or Ime/Curry? Unless the latter is outrageously stubborn I’m guessing our offense would look quite different with Curry opposed to Smart.
I hope no one was arguing that it works as well without Curry---that is definitely not true. What I think several of us have been noting is related to your first point---part of the benefit of a system all the players understand and execute is it simplifies things for the non-stars, and also a well-designed system helps emphasize the strenghts and benefits brought by the stars.

I would rather have Ime/Curry---at least assuming out age as a variable. I believe like you, I'm of the view that the NBA is primarily about your alpha and a top-3 to 5 star is almost always worth the tradeoffs to get them. Coaching matters, but not as much as an alpha star does.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,459
Santa Monica
I get that this is one of your daily talking points, but 33 year old Curry played 39 minutes last night. J's played less than that last game before OT. Jaylen is averaging .4 minutes a game more than last year, Tatum .9. Horford's minutes are down significantly lately. Really only RWIII is playing significantly more minutes.

I'd agree that distributing the minutes a little better would probably help, but it's just not that extreme.
Horford playing more minutes than he did 3 seasons ago under Brad (when this team was relevant) is malpractice.
Rumor has it that TimeLord can be fragile and the extreme minutes' increase probably isn't a good idea. IME could solve both those problems easily, it isn't a roster issue, that's a 100% coaching problem.

The JAYs spend all their minutes/all game playing through double and triple teams (same w/Curry - but he is some supernatural freak). Carlisle threw a BOX & 1 at Tatum most of the game. Expect more of that. The JAYs legs are shot by Q4, when they go into ISO ball and have been failing.

This team is middling, playing some fresh/younger legs wouldn't hurt.

IME is finally adding Grant/JRich to the minutes' mix which he should have been doing from the first week.

If you don't think IME has been pressing and overplaying guys too much in a long NBA season then I have no idea what you've been watching over the first 41 games.

It works both ways though. If you’re employing a faster pace you are going to be using more of your bench. All minutes are not created equally. 32 min can be more exertful/stressful than 40 min depending on other factors…..not too dissimilar than a baseball pitcher who throws 90 pitches than can be more stressful than when he throws 115 depending on compensating factors. It isn’t about the minutes it is about how the minutes are used just as it is with a pitcher.
Yea IME should play more bench. That would help with energy/pace.

He's taken THIBZing players to a new level.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
26,752
I agree Ime should be playing more guys. That acknowledged, I also think his shrinking the bench over the last 4-6 weeks has been driven a bit by COVID, and a bit by a not-unreasonable choice to try to focus on winning and on execution from the core group. I wouldn't make that same choice, but I can easily imagine why he'd feel he needs to get that group focused on consistency and execution first, and then start layering in more players. The team (players and he) are failing at that goal, but I get why you'd seek to achieve it.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Yea IME should play more bench. That would help with energy/pace.

He's taken THIBZing players to a new level.
Does Ime really want to play with more pace though? His lineups don’t suggest that he does which wouldn’t require as deep a rotation. Over the last 10 games only the Knicks have played at a slower pace than Boston.

I feel this is his philosophy and he isn’t changing anytime soon. You don’t start Smart at the 1 and 2BIGZ if you want Pace……we are dead last in 1Q pace over the entire season. This is by design.
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,459
Santa Monica
Does Ime really want to play with more pace though? His lineups don’t suggest that he does which wouldn’t require as deep a rotation. Over the last 10 games only the Knicks have played at a slower pace than Boston. I feel this is his philosophy and he isn’t changing anytime soon.
Good point

I'm forming an opinion on IME's approach to lineups and offense after half a season ;)
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,565
Looking at Minutes for what has been basically the 8 man rotation:
Tatum- Career high
Brown- Career high
Smart- Career High
TL- career high
Grant- Career high
Schroder- 2nd highest (despite not starting almost half his games)
Horford- Not at career high levels
Richardson- not career highs (but first year since rookie year he wasn't a starter)

What I'd really like to see, but can't find is 2nd half breakdowns, feels like Ime tightens his already tight rotation even more in the 2nd half, and rides really long stretches with guys.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Good point

I'm forming an opinion on IME's approach to lineups and offense after half a season ;)
I began forming mine after one of his first pressers when he said Smart was his PG and Horford is looking at a starting spot. How do you tell your fanbase that you are going to plod without explicitly saying you are going to plod? The forming continued when he played TL 45 min in the opener (even without OT it was a career high for him). You don’t need a sample size when he literally tells you what he’s going to do. This is who he wants to be.

Edit:
Pace by Month-

Oct 99.7
Nov 98.5
Dec 98.2
Jan 94.8
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
37,272
Nets @ Bulls on ESPN is the antithesis of a rock fight with both clubs around 50% at the half. Eversley and Karnisovas deserve a lot of credit for all of their moves in digging out of the mess that GarPax left all over.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
13,459
Santa Monica
Nets at full strength. Yet we see them start/play two rookies Kessler Edwards (29mins) & Day'Ron Sharpe (22mins) in what some would describe as an impt regular season match-up. Take notes IME
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Nets at full strength. Yet we see them start/play two rookies Kessler Edwards (29mins) & Day'Ron Sharpe (22mins) in what some would describe as an impt regular season match-up. Take notes IME
You can fit young players around 3 or the best players in the game. See: Perk, Rondo, Powe, Baby. We don’t have that luxury.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
24,565
You can fit young players around 3 or the best players in the game. See: Perk, Rondo, Powe, Baby. We don’t have that luxury.
Which is also one of the reasons that much as I like them, if Smart and/or TL can be part of a package to get you an elite player you don't think twice. The highest probability way for this team to contend is to add a 3rd star to Tatum and Brown (and of course for them to improve). Depth is overrated in the NBA, you can always find depth if you have stars, but depth won't win consistently against stars.
 

jon abbey

Shanghai Warrior
Dope
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
58,245
First half of MIL/GS making a case for Draymond Green as league MVP, 77-38 MIL at halftime without him.
 

RoDaddy

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jun 19, 2002
2,802
Albany area, NY
Very hard to believe but the Bucks are up 39 at the half over GS, and the great Steph Curry has +/- of -34!

Edit: Sorry jon, missed your post on the same
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Warriors about to lose 4 of their last 5. Next up trips to Chicago and a dangerous Minnesota team before coming home for 3 cupcakes.
 

AMS25

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 29, 2008
2,628
Holland on the Plains
Enjoying watching the Thunder dismantle the Nets. Yes, the Nets are resting Durant and Mills, but if they were planning to throw in the towel, I'm not sure why Harden is out there.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
23,057
Enjoying watching the Thunder dismantle the Nets. Yes, the Nets are resting Durant and Mills, but if they were planning to throw in the towel, I'm not sure why Harden is out there.
Nets have won many games without Durant and Kyrie. It isn’t THAT difficult to envision Harden and Co. beating OKC tonight is it?
 

AMS25

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 29, 2008
2,628
Holland on the Plains
Nets have won many games without Durant and Kyrie. It isn’t THAT difficult to envision Harden and Co. beating OKC tonight is it?
Maybe, but Brooklyn had played four games in five nights. Plus, the Thunder are feisty and excel in playing close games that they lose, which is good for entertainment value and tanking.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,047
NYC
Top ten draft picks scoring volume / efficiency (pts per 36 and true shooting %)

C Cunningham 17.2 on .493 ts
J Green 17.9 on .519
E Mobley 15.6 on .553
S Barnes 14.7 on .536
J Suggs 16.1 on .451
J Giddey 13.5 on .467
J Kuminga 20.3 on .556
F Wagner 17.5 on .547
D Mitchell 13.0 on .452
Z Williams 11.4 on .497

Kuminga: #1 in scoring volume and #1 in scoring efficiency, at age 19 and three months. That’ll do, Joku, that’ll do.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
4,668
Imaginationland
Not exactly fair to compare him to the rest with a rate state considering the total minutes played (315 minutes for Kuminga which is the fewest by far of anyone on that list, the other 9 are averaging 982 minutes with Williams the second fewest at 502), but he is off to a nice start.
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,047
NYC
Not exactly fair to compare him to the rest with a rate state considering the total minutes played (315 minutes for Kuminga which is the fewest by far of anyone on that list, the other 9 are averaging 982 minutes with Williams the second fewest at 502), but he is off to a nice start.
Yeah, a looooooong ways to go for all these guys. All have shown flashes of intriguing skills. The only two on the list who I would be mildly concerned about this early on (were I a fan of their teams) are Mitchell and Suggs. Basically, “overrated by March Madness” strikes again. And look how Baylor and Gonzaga have tanked in their absences!
 

Sam Ray Not

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
8,047
NYC
Hawks waxed at home by the crummy Knicks, 117-108. They're now 17-25. Their suckage this season is far more shocking to me than that of the Lakers (which I pretty much expected). Thought they had all the hallmarks of an up and coming monster at the end of last season. Go figure the NBA.
 

terrynever

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2005
20,906
pawtucket
76ers 109-98 over Miami. Embiid with 32 and 12. Harris with 22 and 8. Curry hits 21. Niang off bench with 12 on 4 killer 3s.

Thybulle out with sore right shoulder. Korkmaz started in his place. Maxey converted a 4-point play over a tiring Jimmy Butler, who made 1 of his 11 shots in 35 minutes.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
3,396
Cultural hub of the universe
Man Jokic is having an amazing season. Not only are his offensive numbers great but by most advanced stats his defense has been as well, a pretty surprising development. It'd be a shame if he doesn't get MVP because his supporting cast has been decimated.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
4,668
Imaginationland
I know it's easy to say that everyone saw the Lakers' struggles coming, but this is still somewhat remarkable. Lebron looks a bit slower but statistically he's as strong as ever - his assists and rebounds are down, but his steals/blocks/turnovers/TS% are the best they've been since Miami, his points are the highest they've been since his first stint in Cleveland. How is he this good (still) and how does that line up with the Lakers being this bad?