2023-24 Celtics

astrozombie

New Member
Sep 12, 2022
367
There are all sorts of good reasons why this team should play hard most of the time in the regular season (the biggest reasons being securing home court and integrating the two major new pieces to their rotation), but I absolutely agree that it's really not worth getting bent out of shape over the random goofy loss or appearance (I posted just yesterday that the only really dopey loss on our schedule so far this year was @Charlotte, I guess this would be #2). Even a bad week or two is hardly out of character for championship teams.



This exactly. Until they win a title it's impossible to be fully satisfied with regular season wins, and regular season losses for a team that hasn't won it all just yet will always feel symptomatic of a larger problem.
Good points and this is where I am at. When they start putting together consecutive games where they get blown out by 20, the Jays cant hit the ocean and they have 19 turnovers at the end of the half... I'll get worried. For now though this is a team that has been playing at a high level that lost a game to a bunch of hungry reserves finally getting a chance to shine without LeBron and AD. That's fine. The only thing that they should have changed is that at one point there was a layup line on the Cs and the Lakers were abusing Hauser. I like Hauser, he has improved a lot, but at one point you have a bad night or just cant stop better players consistently. Maybe they could have switched schemes, but it is what it is.
 

Gene Conleys Plane Ticket

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
3,317
If you cut the playoffs down to 6 there will be a dozen teams eliminated from playoff possibility half way through the season. That is a good way to make so many games meaningless for one of the teams playing.
Sure, but all sports deal with this every year, and always will. A lot of teams drop out of contention early. Many never have a chance from Day One. The only way to make every team a playoff competitor is to expand the playoffs to include every team.

The point of the shorter NBA schedule and more compact playoff structure would be to increase the overall quality and intensity of play throughout the season. That way you avoid situations like last night, when the top team in the league, the team that is widely favored to win the championship, for some reason decided that this game wasn't worth the effort it would take to win it.

All NBA teams do that multiple times per season and it produces way too many games like that one. I don't blame teams for doing it. I don't even really blame the Celtics for doing it last night. Basketball is an incredibly demanding and exhausting sport to play. Across 82 games plus playoffs, throwing in the often insane scheduling and travel, it's simply not possible to survive a season if you're giving 100% effort 82 times.

Again, I have zero illusions that the NBA would ever make those format changes. It would be throwing away hundreds of millions of dollars, even if it makes that money by selling a quality-comprised product. But in a "perfect world" sense, those are changes it should definitely make.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,732
Are we really even prone to “high variance streaks?” We are 9-1 coming off a loss, haven’t lost 3 in a row all year and our only B2B loss came in Minnesota and in Philadelphia with both being one-possession games.
Yeah we're not particularly prone to it. People clearly just don't follow the rest of the league at all. You do, so this all feels normal.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
7,793
Imaginationland
Yeah we're not particularly prone to it. People clearly just don't follow the rest of the league at all. You do, so this all feels normal.
Just in the last week alone, the top 2 seeds in each conference (Boston, Milwaukee, Minnesota, OKC) have lost to the Lakers, Blazers, Spurs and Pistons, respectively. Shit fucking happens, especially at this time of year.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,732
Just in the last week alone, the top 2 seeds in each conference (Boston, Milwaukee, Minnesota, OKC) have lost to the Lakers, Blazers, Spurs and Pistons, respectively. Shit fucking happens, especially at this time of year.
Yes, but you don't understand: OKC and Minnesota are proven winners. They can safely handle lapses, confident that they'll turn it on in April. The Celtics, on the other hand, are soft front-runners.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
10,981
Chelmsford, MA
Just in the last week alone, the top 2 seeds in each conference (Boston, Milwaukee, Minnesota, OKC) have lost to the Lakers, Blazers, Spurs and Pistons, respectively. Shit fucking happens, especially at this time of year.
In response to all of this: I mean that their dependence on the 3 leaves them vulnerable in game. I don’t know why you guys have this incredible desire for every post in here to state that the Celtics are an upper echelon team with very few flaws. They are, undoubtedly, a top 6 team in the league and probably top 2. That doesn’t mean they don’t have ways they can be attacked and that they don’t have to work on things. It’s so exhausting to post on this forum right now because nobody wants to actually talk about the team it’s just a giant “who can post the next thing that says the Celtics are incredible” competition. They’re super good, guys, I get it.

When faced with a situation where they didn’t have their best they had an opportunity to maybe learn a lesson or two. Try a few things. I can assure you that they will play playoff games against teams where they aren’t making shots and some scrub on the other team is going off. For a team which will just out talent and out shoot their way into the playoffs I think they’re missing out if they don’t use the few learning opportunities they have to get better at some of the situational stuff necessary to grind out wins when they really aren’t at their best. This particular game, of course, is irrelevant because they will win far far far more than they will lose. But I’m glad to see Mazzulla benching players and wish I’d see them responding and showing a little more of an ability to bring the game under control and not execute a really poor lakers B squad. Even if they lost in the end it never felt like they had enough of playing with their good and just put together a good solid 15 minutes of basketball. Sometimes those shots aren’t going to be falling for you in a game 7 and you’re gonna have to k ow what you’ll do next. As long as their answer is “keep shooting and play piss poor defense” then I think we will be having yet another box score / shot luck discussion at the end of a playoff run that falls just short
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,980
San Francisco
In response to all of this: I mean that their dependence on the 3 leaves them vulnerable in game. I don’t know why you guys have this incredible desire for every post in here to state that the Celtics are an upper echelon team with very few flaws. They are, undoubtedly, a top 6 team in the league and probably top 2. That doesn’t mean they don’t have ways they can be attacked and that they don’t have to work on things. It’s so exhausting to post on this forum right now because nobody wants to actually talk about the team it’s just a giant “who can post the next thing that says the Celtics are incredible” competition. They’re super good, guys, I get it.

When faced with a situation where they didn’t have their best they had an opportunity to maybe learn a lesson or two. Try a few things. I can assure you that they will play playoff games against teams where they aren’t making shots and some scrub on the other team is going off. For a team which will just out talent and out shoot their way into the playoffs I think they’re missing out if they don’t use the few learning opportunities they have to get better at some of the situational stuff necessary to grind out wins when they really aren’t at their best. This particular game, of course, is irrelevant because they will win far far far more than they will lose. But I’m glad to see Mazzulla benching players and wish I’d see them responding and showing a little more of an ability to bring the game under control and not execute a really poor lakers B squad. Even if they lost in the end it never felt like they had enough of playing with their good and just put together a good solid 15 minutes of basketball. Sometimes those shots aren’t going to be falling for you in a game 7 and you’re gonna have to k ow what you’ll do next. As long as their answer is “keep shooting and play piss poor defense” then I think we will be having yet another box score / shot luck discussion at the end of a playoff run that falls just short
Im curious what the "try something else" take has to say about games like (2?) a few games ago when D White looked ice cold and then hit 4 threes in the 4th to lead a comeback. Like, how do you know when youre actually cold and not just hitting some bad luck?
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
47,717
In response to all of this: I mean that their dependence on the 3 leaves them vulnerable in game. I don’t know why you guys have this incredible desire for every post in here to state that the Celtics are an upper echelon team with very few flaws. They are, undoubtedly, a top 6 team in the league and probably top 2. That doesn’t mean they don’t have ways they can be attacked and that they don’t have to work on things. It’s so exhausting to post on this forum right now because nobody wants to actually talk about the team it’s just a giant “who can post the next thing that says the Celtics are incredible” competition. They’re super good, guys, I get it.

When faced with a situation where they didn’t have their best they had an opportunity to maybe learn a lesson or two. Try a few things. I can assure you that they will play playoff games against teams where they aren’t making shots and some scrub on the other team is going off. For a team which will just out talent and out shoot their way into the playoffs I think they’re missing out if they don’t use the few learning opportunities they have to get better at some of the situational stuff necessary to grind out wins when they really aren’t at their best. This particular game, of course, is irrelevant because they will win far far far more than they will lose. But I’m glad to see Mazzulla benching players and wish I’d see them responding and showing a little more of an ability to bring the game under control and not execute a really poor lakers B squad. Even if they lost in the end it never felt like they had enough of playing with their good and just put together a good solid 15 minutes of basketball. Sometimes those shots aren’t going to be falling for you in a game 7 and you’re gonna have to k ow what you’ll do next. As long as their answer is “keep shooting and play piss poor defense” then I think we will be having yet another box score / shot luck discussion at the end of a playoff run that falls just short
What leads you to believe that the Celtics aren't aware of their flaws and tendencies? Do you believe they don't want to do well in the playoffs? Maybe they are as complacent as you fear but it doesn't feel that way from all the comments from the players & Mazzulla.

Also, I take the other side of anyone saying that the Lakers game was anything other than a weaker team (given the injuries) benefitting from a freak shooting night. 53% from deep on 36 shots is tough to beat from any NBA team. Should the Cs react to that and change the approach that has had a ~70% success rate this year? I don't think so but maybe they should scrap everything in response to what is typically the crappiest stretch of any NBA season.

People can and certainly do point out the Cs many flaws here each and every day. What gets pushback is the "mental toughness"/coach is sub replacement level/questions about the Jays fits posts that are essentially talk radio level takes.

Perhaps you are right that the Celtics tendencies will get them an early exit from the playoffs. The thing about that concern is that if we don't react to individual game results (and it has to be acknowledged that they have only lost 12 times all year), the Cs as an organization appear to be pretty well run from the top down. It doesn't make sense that they ignore issues before heading into the dance.

But yeah, maybe they do think they have another banner already.
 
Last edited:

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
19,786
Santa Monica
In response to all of this: I mean that their dependence on the 3 leaves them vulnerable in game. I don’t know why you guys have this incredible desire for every post in here to state that the Celtics are an upper echelon team with very few flaws. They are, undoubtedly, a top 6 team in the league and probably top 2. That doesn’t mean they don’t have ways they can be attacked and that they don’t have to work on things. It’s so exhausting to post on this forum right now because nobody wants to actually talk about the team it’s just a giant “who can post the next thing that says the Celtics are incredible” competition. They’re super good, guys, I get it.

When faced with a situation where they didn’t have their best they had an opportunity to maybe learn a lesson or two. Try a few things. I can assure you that they will play playoff games against teams where they aren’t making shots and some scrub on the other team is going off. For a team which will just out talent and out shoot their way into the playoffs I think they’re missing out if they don’t use the few learning opportunities they have to get better at some of the situational stuff necessary to grind out wins when they really aren’t at their best. This particular game, of course, is irrelevant because they will win far far far more than they will lose. But I’m glad to see Mazzulla benching players and wish I’d see them responding and showing a little more of an ability to bring the game under control and not execute a really poor lakers B squad. Even if they lost in the end it never felt like they had enough of playing with their good and just put together a good solid 15 minutes of basketball. Sometimes those shots aren’t going to be falling for you in a game 7 and you’re gonna have to k ow what you’ll do next. As long as their answer is “keep shooting and play piss poor defense” then I think we will be having yet another box score / shot luck discussion at the end of a playoff run that falls just short
I'll preface this by saying the Celtics are the best team in the NBA but

5 things this team could look to improve upon:
1. Players jogging back on D due to complaining to refs, missed shots, turnovers, or laziness.
2. Shot selection. ~4 less Pull-Up jumpers/game relative to Catch & Shoot jumpers. The eFG% difference is staggering.
3. Hunt mismatches for KP in the post
4. Make KP an offensive hub at the nail more often
5. Get Hauser & Holiday a total of ~2 more Corner3s a game

Very small, on-the-edge things that would create more offensive balance, rather than being so JAY dependent.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
29,846
In response to all of this: I mean that their dependence on the 3 leaves them vulnerable in game. I don’t know why you guys have this incredible desire for every post in here to state that the Celtics are an upper echelon team with very few flaws. They are, undoubtedly, a top 6 team in the league and probably top 2. That doesn’t mean they don’t have ways they can be attacked and that they don’t have to work on things. It’s so exhausting to post on this forum right now because nobody wants to actually talk about the team it’s just a giant “who can post the next thing that says the Celtics are incredible” competition. They’re super good, guys, I get it.

When faced with a situation where they didn’t have their best they had an opportunity to maybe learn a lesson or two. Try a few things. I can assure you that they will play playoff games against teams where they aren’t making shots and some scrub on the other team is going off. For a team which will just out talent and out shoot their way into the playoffs I think they’re missing out if they don’t use the few learning opportunities they have to get better at some of the situational stuff necessary to grind out wins when they really aren’t at their best. This particular game, of course, is irrelevant because they will win far far far more than they will lose. But I’m glad to see Mazzulla benching players and wish I’d see them responding and showing a little more of an ability to bring the game under control and not execute a really poor lakers B squad. Even if they lost in the end it never felt like they had enough of playing with their good and just put together a good solid 15 minutes of basketball. Sometimes those shots aren’t going to be falling for you in a game 7 and you’re gonna have to k ow what you’ll do next. As long as their answer is “keep shooting and play piss poor defense” then I think we will be having yet another box score / shot luck discussion at the end of a playoff run that falls just short
Aren’t we somewhere in the Top-5 in Post-Up frequency and 4th overall in Team Defense as well as #1 in Offensive Efficiency, Net Rating and Overall record? We are on pace for 62 wins and frankly have not come close to peaking yet. You make it sound like we are Doug Moe’s Nuggets when you say “keep shooting and play piss poor defense.” We are shooting 38% from 3 and you want to “try something else?”

At least we agree that we’re a Top-6 team so we do share that common ground. ;)
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,732
Gonna just use ignore and make the forum good again. I enjoy critiquing the Celtics, but life is too short for WEEI.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,281
Pittsburgh, PA
Gonna just use ignore and make the forum good again. I enjoy critiquing the Celtics, but life is too short for WEEI.
Looking at the last page, I see like 10-15x multi-paragraph 300+ word posts that have subtlety to them and aren't knee jerk overreactions. nobody disagreed with you, Euclis gave you a yes-and point, etc.

Sometimes I get it with someone deciding to take their ball and go home, but calling this WEEI just doesn't seem to match reality, from what I've seen.
 
Last edited:

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,732
Looking at the last page, I see like 10-15x multi-paragraph 300+ word posts that have subtlety to them and aren't knee jerk overreactions. nobody disagreed with you, Euclis gave you a yes-and point, etc.

Sometimes I get it with someone deciding to take their ball and go home, but calling this WEEI just doesn't seem to match reality, from what I've seen. Maybe you want some posters to stretch it out into full 5-paragraph essays? Do a better job of data visualizations? Actually maybe WEEI calls are like TED talks now, and we just need to step up our game. I wouldn't know. But that would make more sense than the comparison I think you're making.
Literally was just talking about one poster clogging things up with dumb takes. I assumed that was obvious.

Hence "ignore", which allows me to then continue discussion with everyone else.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
29,846
Gonna just use ignore and make the forum good again. I enjoy critiquing the Celtics, but life is too short for WEEI.
It’s almost like we really are an upper echelon team with few flaws….as our record and every metric across the board shows.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,276
Somewhere
It’s almost like we really are an upper echelon team with few flaws….as our record and every metric across the board shows.
The flip side is that the league is as deep as it has ever been which means that the odds of winning a championship are long compared to similarly talented teams in the past (I don’t see this as a bad thing).
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,732
The flip side is that the league is as deep as it has ever been which means that the odds of winning a championship are long compared to similarly talented teams in the past (I don’t see this as a bad thing).
This is true, and it's why critique is warranted, and why the team really needs to find its identity, hone its problem-solving ability, stay healthy, and stay mentally fresh. "Try to optimize winning every single game" doesn't always align with that goal.
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
8,993
You know the Celtics are really good when everytime they have a loss someone leaves or gets placed on ignore. Imagine what’ll happen when there is actually playoff stress!
 

Montana Fan

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 18, 2000
8,829
Twin Bridges, Mt.
The flip side is that the league is as deep as it has ever been which means that the odds of winning a championship are long compared to similarly talented teams in the past (I don’t see this as a bad thing).
Man, this topic could have its own thread. After the 88/89 expansions the NBA was so diluted (especially guard play). Now every team has a couple of studs and every Isaiah, Sam or Carson can nail threes at a rate that no one could 30 years ago. The athleticism and talent level is so high right now. Which is why I liked the IST, as well as the idea of shortening the season to 66 games. Give these talented players more important games, even if it results in less games played overall. IMO the 66 game shortened season in 2012 was the most exciting regular season I can recall. Go to 66 games and expand the play in games to a series.
 

kfoss99

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2009
1,149
Man, this topic could have its own thread. After the 88/89 expansions the NBA was so diluted (especially guard play). Now every team has a couple of studs and every Isaiah, Sam or Carson can nail threes at a rate that no one could 30 years ago. The athleticism and talent level is so high right now. Which is why I liked the IST, as well as the idea of shortening the season to 66 games. Give these talented players more important games, even if it results in less games played overall. IMO the 66 game shortened season in 2012 was the most exciting regular season I can recall. Go to 66 games and expand the play in games to a series.
People say the owners don't want a shorten season because it will drop revenue. But, is that the case?

Doesn't the advertising and ticket revenue become more valuable, assuming interest is higher? (pretty basic supply & demand)

That's more than possible if the stars don't feel they have to sit games. Then, like you say, make up some of those games with a different structure for the first round of the playoffs.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
10,981
Chelmsford, MA
Aren’t we somewhere in the Top-5 in Post-Up frequency and 4th overall in Team Defense as well as #1 in Offensive Efficiency, Net Rating and Overall record? We are on pace for 62 wins and frankly have not come close to peaking yet. You make it sound like we are Doug Moe’s Nuggets when you say “keep shooting and play piss poor defense.” We are shooting 38% from 3 and you want to “try something else?”

At least we agree that we’re a Top-6 team so we do share that common ground. ;)
You keep coming back to season long metrics. We have a very talented team which will win a ton of games by playing this our like a simulator. I have 0% fear that we somehow won’t make the playoffs as a top seed. Their overall approach will pile up regular season wins without a doubt. They are simply better than the teams they face, generally, and treating basketball as a math problem will see them win a fantastic amount of games.

I didn’t say they play piss poor defense every night. I was talking about the situation they were in in that Lakers game. They were playing piss poor defense both on and off ball while barely moving the Lakers at the other end. Everything I’m trying to discuss about this group is about their ability to adjust and play to individual game situations. This is literally the only thing this group can learn in the regular season. As we saw in the playoffs just last year, 7 game series are small sample size mini seasons where you can’t just play the percentages for the shooting to even out. They’re going to play good teams with good players and sometimes those players are going to get hot. It’s all well and good to play the box score matchup game and say that if the other team shoots their normal percentages and we shoot ours then we win. I don’t see how that’s particularly interesting analysis because in the real world you’re going to run into Caleb Martin turning into Steph Curry for a week or the other team is going to have a really good defender that can really hamper Tatum (or Tatum is going to turn an ankle) and you need as a team to develop enough ways to win that you can still compete and try to take back the momentum of a basketball game even when things aren’t going your way. I can’t reference statistics because I’m talking about becoming a more resilient, multiple ways to win a game basketball team. I’d be ecstatic for them to lose more but play games where they really feature Porzingis at the nail or focus on developing weak side actions for Brown. I think this 82 game schedule should be way more focused on development and situational basketball and see the Lakers going off the other night as an opportunity to see who can step up. How does the group look to turn that situation around? There was a brief period where they created a few turnovers and Tatum dive to tie up a jump ball and it looked like they were developing it but they just reverted to the three and no D strategy shortly after and they continued to try to claw back a 10 point deficit while not doing enough on the defensive end to put together their own run.

I think it’s absolute garbage to call my posts WEEI stuff because you don’t agree with them but ignore away for those who would like. You all ran off one poster for not agreeing and were getting on reggie earlier in the week for having some negative thoughts. I don’t understand the point of a discussion forum if all we are going to do is point to their statistical outcomes and win totals. This group of Celtics is basically built to play a 7 game conference finals and a 7 game finals series and they need to be finding a way to be a team that can get over the hump of winning those 2. That takes an attention to detail and an adaptability that I think they’ve been lacking for a few years. Ime was on them about this and few people disagreed at the time. Of course every team has bad weeks and if they choose as a group to really knuckle down and work on some of this stuff in March instead of late Jan then I guess I don’t really care but I don’t want them to find themselves having to try to figure out answers to common problems in playoff games.

The last thing I’d say is that while I can already feel the mocking coming about “mental toughness” and “wanting it more” I think this group could stand to develop killer instinct. People like to point out that they’ve won a bunch of game 7s in the playoffs as a testament to their ability to do what I’m saying they might lack. I think they have had such consistently good teams that they shouldn’t be in game 7s all that often and that they have consistently played with fire by playing long series against inferior opponents. You play enough game 7s and you’re going to occasionally run into an injury or a bad shooting night and end up golfing when you should be playing. Yes, the Garnett Celtics struggled with this same issue at times but that was a weakness of that group also. You can win a title with these weaknesses but you start to rely more on outliers not happening and I think this group should be focused on burying teams as often as possible because they can and because it takes luck and variance out of the equation
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
19,786
Santa Monica
Man, this topic could have its own thread. After the 88/89 expansions the NBA was so diluted (especially guard play). Now every team has a couple of studs and every Isaiah, Sam or Carson can nail threes at a rate that no one could 30 years ago. The athleticism and talent level is so high right now. Which is why I liked the IST, as well as the idea of shortening the season to 66 games. Give these talented players more important games, even if it results in less games played overall. IMO the 66 game shortened season in 2012 was the most exciting regular season I can recall. Go to 66 games and expand the play in games to a series.
I like watching the Celtics play 82 games & watch other NBA teams on their nights off (obv a sports nerd). The season is a 4000-piece Ravensburger puzzle, every trade, game result, and development of team + players are pieces hopefully to a Championship season.

As mentioned above, I enjoy watching Luke, PP, Hauser, Brisset, etc play when the superstars need a break. The game doesn't get materially worse IMO, just slightly changes.

With broadcasting rights always being measured and gambling fully embedded in the league revenue stream, the # of teams + Games Played is only going in one direction. More games = increased action = larger rake.

What would the NBAPA say if the NBA upped it to 90 games with wages up 10% across the board, but kept Awards qualification at 65??? (not proposing this, but this thing is one big $$$ grab)
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
29,846
You keep coming back to season long metrics. We have a very talented team which will win a ton of games by playing this our like a simulator. I have 0% fear that we somehow won’t make the playoffs as a top seed. Their overall approach will pile up regular season wins without a doubt. They are simply better than the teams they face, generally, and treating basketball as a math problem will see them win a fantastic amount of games.

I didn’t say they play piss poor defense every night. I was talking about the situation they were in in that Lakers game. They were playing piss poor defense both on and off ball while barely moving the Lakers at the other end. Everything I’m trying to discuss about this group is about their ability to adjust and play to individual game situations. This is literally the only thing this group can learn in the regular season. As we saw in the playoffs just last year, 7 game series are small sample size mini seasons where you can’t just play the percentages for the shooting to even out. They’re going to play good teams with good players and sometimes those players are going to get hot. It’s all well and good to play the box score matchup game and say that if the other team shoots their normal percentages and we shoot ours then we win. I don’t see how that’s particularly interesting analysis because in the real world you’re going to run into Caleb Martin turning into Steph Curry for a week or the other team is going to have a really good defender that can really hamper Tatum (or Tatum is going to turn an ankle) and you need as a team to develop enough ways to win that you can still compete and try to take back the momentum of a basketball game even when things aren’t going your way. I can’t reference statistics because I’m talking about becoming a more resilient, multiple ways to win a game basketball team. I’d be ecstatic for them to lose more but play games where they really feature Porzingis at the nail or focus on developing weak side actions for Brown. I think this 82 game schedule should be way more focused on development and situational basketball and see the Lakers going off the other night as an opportunity to see who can step up. How does the group look to turn that situation around? There was a brief period where they created a few turnovers and Tatum dive to tie up a jump ball and it looked like they were developing it but they just reverted to the three and no D strategy shortly after and they continued to try to claw back a 10 point deficit while not doing enough on the defensive end to put together their own run.

I think it’s absolute garbage to call my posts WEEI stuff because you don’t agree with them but ignore away for those who would like. You all ran off one poster for not agreeing and were getting on reggie earlier in the week for having some negative thoughts. I don’t understand the point of a discussion forum if all we are going to do is point to their statistical outcomes and win totals. This group of Celtics is basically built to play a 7 game conference finals and a 7 game finals series and they need to be finding a way to be a team that can get over the hump of winning those 2. That takes an attention to detail and an adaptability that I think they’ve been lacking for a few years. Ime was on them about this and few people disagreed at the time. Of course every team has bad weeks and if they choose as a group to really knuckle down and work on some of this stuff in March instead of late Jan then I guess I don’t really care but I don’t want them to find themselves having to try to figure out answers to common problems in playoff games.

The last thing I’d say is that while I can already feel the mocking coming about “mental toughness” and “wanting it more” I think this group could stand to develop killer instinct. People like to point out that they’ve won a bunch of game 7s in the playoffs as a testament to their ability to do what I’m saying they might lack. I think they have had such consistently good teams that they shouldn’t be in game 7s all that often and that they have consistently played with fire by playing long series against inferior opponents. You play enough game 7s and you’re going to occasionally run into an injury or a bad shooting night and end up golfing when you should be playing. Yes, the Garnett Celtics struggled with this same issue at times but that was a weakness of that group also. You can win a title with these weaknesses but you start to rely more on outliers not happening and I think this group should be focused on burying teams as often as possible because they can and because it takes luck and variance out of the equation
Couple things and I’ll keep it brief.

1. The Laker game is completely irrelevant as we will never face a scheduling/exhale spot like that in the playoffs. Discussed some in Silver Dollar but that is what often occurs in these spots.

2. I’ve only had nice respectful conversations with Reggie in the past and hadn’t conversed with him recently. I just drove 24 hours and didn’t read all the threads but this wasn’t me nor, do I beleive, I ran anyone off from this board except maybe to deposit monies into their now fat bank accounts. ;)

EDIT: 3. I def did not refer to EEI so you must have me confused w someone else.
 
Last edited:

GeorgeCostanza

tiger king
SoSH Member
May 16, 2009
7,284
Found in central mass
Couple things and I’ll keep it brief.

1. The Laker game is completely irrelevant as we will never face a scheduling/exhale spot like that in the playoffs. Discussed some in Silver Dollar but that is what often occurs in these spots.

2. I’ve only had nice respectful conversations with Reggie in the past and hadn’t conversed with him recently. I just drove 24 hours and didn’t read all the threads but this wasn’t me nor, do I beleive, I ran anyone off from this board except maybe to deposit monies into their now fat bank accounts. ;)
Where to? That’s a hell of a haul.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
29,846
Where to? That’s a hell of a haul.
17 day trip. NJ, CT, RI, PA then back down to FL last night. I was able to utilize my HardRockBet in NJ and VA, then kiosks everywhere else at retails. I’ve spent nearly half my time on the road since last spring. I’m going to slow this down a bit…..except for a PA trip in two weeks and Vegas in March.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
19,786
Santa Monica
nor, do I beleive, I ran anyone off from this board except maybe to deposit monies into their now fat bank accounts. ;)
Your March Madness underdogs to keep an eye on have always played well in the Office Pool.

Bob in Accounting has no idea I have the wizardry of HRB in my back pocket :cool:
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
47,717
You keep coming back to season long metrics. We have a very talented team which will win a ton of games by playing this our like a simulator. I have 0% fear that we somehow won’t make the playoffs as a top seed. Their overall approach will pile up regular season wins without a doubt. They are simply better than the teams they face, generally, and treating basketball as a math problem will see them win a fantastic amount of games.

I didn’t say they play piss poor defense every night. I was talking about the situation they were in in that Lakers game. They were playing piss poor defense both on and off ball while barely moving the Lakers at the other end. Everything I’m trying to discuss about this group is about their ability to adjust and play to individual game situations. This is literally the only thing this group can learn in the regular season. As we saw in the playoffs just last year, 7 game series are small sample size mini seasons where you can’t just play the percentages for the shooting to even out. They’re going to play good teams with good players and sometimes those players are going to get hot. It’s all well and good to play the box score matchup game and say that if the other team shoots their normal percentages and we shoot ours then we win. I don’t see how that’s particularly interesting analysis because in the real world you’re going to run into Caleb Martin turning into Steph Curry for a week or the other team is going to have a really good defender that can really hamper Tatum (or Tatum is going to turn an ankle) and you need as a team to develop enough ways to win that you can still compete and try to take back the momentum of a basketball game even when things aren’t going your way. I can’t reference statistics because I’m talking about becoming a more resilient, multiple ways to win a game basketball team. I’d be ecstatic for them to lose more but play games where they really feature Porzingis at the nail or focus on developing weak side actions for Brown. I think this 82 game schedule should be way more focused on development and situational basketball and see the Lakers going off the other night as an opportunity to see who can step up. How does the group look to turn that situation around? There was a brief period where they created a few turnovers and Tatum dive to tie up a jump ball and it looked like they were developing it but they just reverted to the three and no D strategy shortly after and they continued to try to claw back a 10 point deficit while not doing enough on the defensive end to put together their own run.

I think it’s absolute garbage to call my posts WEEI stuff because you don’t agree with them but ignore away for those who would like. You all ran off one poster for not agreeing and were getting on reggie earlier in the week for having some negative thoughts. I don’t understand the point of a discussion forum if all we are going to do is point to their statistical outcomes and win totals. This group of Celtics is basically built to play a 7 game conference finals and a 7 game finals series and they need to be finding a way to be a team that can get over the hump of winning those 2. That takes an attention to detail and an adaptability that I think they’ve been lacking for a few years. Ime was on them about this and few people disagreed at the time. Of course every team has bad weeks and if they choose as a group to really knuckle down and work on some of this stuff in March instead of late Jan then I guess I don’t really care but I don’t want them to find themselves having to try to figure out answers to common problems in playoff games.

The last thing I’d say is that while I can already feel the mocking coming about “mental toughness” and “wanting it more” I think this group could stand to develop killer instinct. People like to point out that they’ve won a bunch of game 7s in the playoffs as a testament to their ability to do what I’m saying they might lack. I think they have had such consistently good teams that they shouldn’t be in game 7s all that often and that they have consistently played with fire by playing long series against inferior opponents. You play enough game 7s and you’re going to occasionally run into an injury or a bad shooting night and end up golfing when you should be playing. Yes, the Garnett Celtics struggled with this same issue at times but that was a weakness of that group also. You can win a title with these weaknesses but you start to rely more on outliers not happening and I think this group should be focused on burying teams as often as possible because they can and because it takes luck and variance out of the equation
I think some of us are talking past one another here. Part of your frustration is that you believe that this particular game has larger meaning for the team whereas some of us don't ascribe much value to individual contest results and tend to look at their body of work as a whole.

So yes, they didn't play their best during the Laker game - you can have that statement. Where some of us part ways is weighing that result versus their overall season. Speaking only for myself, I see very little reason to share your concerns given their overall record and all of the metrics around how they got there.
 

Devizier

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 3, 2000
19,276
Somewhere
Wait, is @reggiecleveland being pushed out? He’s one of the longest tenured posters here and the one with (to my knowledge) the most extensive coaching experience. We can all have differences of opinion, right?
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,300
I think it’s absolute garbage to call my posts WEEI stuff because you don’t agree with them but ignore away for those who would like. You all ran off one poster for not agreeing and were getting on reggie earlier in the week for having some negative thoughts. I don’t understand the point of a discussion forum if all we are going to do is point to their statistical outcomes and win totals.
I agree the WEEI thing is a tired insult on this board (overused to the point that it doesn’t hold meaning), but no one was run off. Discussion is great, but if you have the minority position on the subject, you should expect the majority to overwhelm your responses - it’s just how this works, especially if you repeat the same one over and over again. There’ll be snark in it too, because it’s the internet and it makes us shittier than we are IRL.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,300
Wait, is @reggiecleveland being pushed out? He’s one of the longest tenured posters here and the one with (to my knowledge) the most extensive coaching experience. We can all have differences of opinion, right?
I think he’s referring to Eddie Jurak leaving as getting “run off”
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,300
Eddie's game summaries were always great. Why is he leaving the Port Cellar?
I don’t know if he officially left, but a lot of posters called him out for being unreasonably negative after 10 point wins and he’s not really posted his opinions since. That’s what I believe @teddykgb is referring to.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
30,194
More annoying for me is that whether it’s Caleb Martin or Bryant Reeves or whatever random role player is going off they don’t have a guy who can just go lock him up for a while to cool things off. For all the words I read about how White is this incredible defender and Jrue is this incredible defender and Tatum has all this value because of how good a defender he is then why the hell can’t one of them step up and shut down the nonsense. Sometimes you need to knuckle down and get stops and these games where the other team gets hot and stays hot but they just try to shoot their way through it. I really thought Jrue could be that guy at the guard level but I wonder whether Brad needs to be looking into someone who can just put the clamps on someone in a short stint so they don’t bury themselves while the shots aren’t falling. Of course those guys aren’t really available as much anymore but I’m not talking about someone who can shut down a Kawhi or Halliburton just someone to stay connected to these other types and get them out of rhythm
Curious - can you name any guards who Brad should be looking at and are better than Jrue snd DW? By your criteria, Smart would be off the list because he couldn't shut down Martin last year. Who would you have in mind and what metrics are you using to think they might be better defensively.

I happen to think Jrue/DW is the best defensive guard combo in the NBA (don't have time to look up metrics) but given what you wrote, I'm curious as to what you think.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
19,786
Santa Monica
Curious - can you name any guards who Brad should be looking at and are better than Jrue snd DW? By your criteria, Smart would be off the list because he couldn't shut down Martin last year. Who would you have in mind and what metrics are you using to think they might be better defensively.

I happen to think Jrue/DW is the best defensive guard combo in the NBA (don't have time to look up metrics) but given what you wrote, I'm curious as to what you think.
One of the few guards in their zip code is Alex Caruso, first Team All-Defense last year. Get it done Brad!

BUT nobody was stopping Hillbilly Kobe from 30' or Caleb Martin last year in the playoffs.
 

Bob Montgomerys Helmet Hat

has big, douchey shoulders
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
More annoying for me is that whether it’s Caleb Martin or Bryant Reeves or whatever random role player is going off they don’t have a guy who can just go lock him up for a while to cool things off. For all the words I read about how White is this incredible defender and Jrue is this incredible defender and Tatum has all this value because of how good a defender he is then why the hell can’t one of them step up and shut down the nonsense. Sometimes you need to knuckle down and get stops and these games where the other team gets hot and stays hot but they just try to shoot their way through it. I really thought Jrue could be that guy at the guard level but I wonder whether Brad needs to be looking into someone who can just put the clamps on someone in a short stint so they don’t bury themselves while the shots aren’t falling. Of course those guys aren’t really available as much anymore but I’m not talking about someone who can shut down a Kawhi or Halliburton just someone to stay connected to these other types and get them out of rhythm
Hey, when Big Country goes off, there is no stopping him
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
27,925
Saskatoon Canada
I watched Grizzlies camp once. Big Country was ok probably first player with his own coach. Whenever they ran sprints a guy ran beside him begging him to keep going. This was right after he signed the franchise killing extrnsion. He reminded me of the kid whose parents signed up for basketball and he goddam do guitar next year because they won't let him quit.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,375
In response to all of this: I mean that their dependence on the 3 leaves them vulnerable in game. I don’t know why you guys have this incredible desire for every post in here to state that the Celtics are an upper echelon team with very few flaws. They are, undoubtedly, a top 6 team in the league and probably top 2.
They have the best record in the league after playing one of the toughest schedules in the league (they have the second best offensive rating and fourth best defensive rating with the best net rating by a point over OKC and 2.6 points over Philly).. but they're probably top two? Not saying everyone has to be a cheerleader, but what record would they have to have to definitely be top two? Or let's even say definitely top three? What five teams are in front of them to say they're definitely at least top six (and why aren't their larger number of losses more concerning)? I get that SOSH can be positive about the Celtics..but the dissenting opinions are basically the same but just almost the polar opposite in negativity. I get that they haven't won a championship, but every loss is also not an indictment that nothing has changed with the team from last year. People keep saying that they live and die by the three.. or that they need to shoot less threes... but haven't they been doing that? They've been posting KP, Tatum and Brown have definitely been taking it to the hoop more and both DW and Drue have been taking their man to the hoop as well.

Not trying to pile on, but posters come in and say that everyone is too positive and this or that loss should be viewed as the canary in the coal mine or what to expect in the playoffs.. it’s like the equivalent of betting the entire rest of the nba to win vs the Celtics .. until the Celts win it’s always a winning bet.
 
Last edited:

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,577
where I was last at
Last year, I was questioning of CJM's in-game stuff early, (his insistence of ignoring TOs and his burying certain players) and was mocked, until other people understood the concern, and it became a thing.

Last year, I was concerned in Dec, Jan February about the Celts intensity, focus toughness in the face of adversity and almost inexplicable series of losses in which they lost games in which they had late double-digit leads. I was called "reactionary" "chicken little" and told to remember the NBA is a make or miss league and it was just a game in January/Feb etc. Really good teams lose games like that from time to time, but not 5-6 in a season. Good teams learn how to win games like that in Jan and Feb by learning and making adjustments (both sides of the ball and bench) so they don't crumble in May and June.

Last year, I warned about the Celts inexplicable poor record in OT games, and late and close game. Games in which coaching adjustments were more important than they are in 20 pt wins. It made no sense to me why an elite team that was capable of playing .750+ ball, was . 300 team in OT. See the above comments for responses.

Last year, when the Celts after losing some games dropped from the 2nd seed to the 3rd seed,(Mar or April, don't remember) I joked the bright side was at least we would avoid Spo and the Heat in the 1st round, as I feared Spo would steal CJM's lunch. Good thing they didn't meet in the 1st round.

The Celts are a juggernaut, and a better more talented team than last year's team which IMO was good enough and had sufficient on-court talent to win a championship. But they have issues.

CJM has improved but my fear about his ability to coach this team to its potential remains a real concern to me.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,980
San Francisco
You could probably make a lot of money if you could accurately divine how the playoffs will shake out from watching every team's losses in January and February.

Every team but one will have the "we should have seen it coming! The signs were all there" narrative at the end of the season but I think when the margins get really close like in the playoffs some things are just random.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
24,577
where I was last at
I don't bet basketball.

Last year you could see it coming.

But some chose not to.

I still think the Celts are the most talented team in the NBA. And I hope that CJM continues to mature and improve as a coach.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,980
San Francisco
I don't bet basketball.

Last year you could see it coming.

But some chose not to.

I still think the Celts are the most talented team in the NBA. And I hope that CJM continues to mature and improve as a coach.
My point is just "you could see it coming" is almost always going to be a good bet. Most teams don't win the championship. Most title contenders don't win the championship. Maybe they lost because of all the issues you pointed out, maybe they lost because Caleb Martin morphed into Kobe Bryant for a series before turning into a pumpkin and Malcolm Brogdon broke his arm.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,012
Last year, I was questioning of CJM's in-game stuff early, (his insistence of ignoring TOs and his burying certain players) and was mocked, until other people understood the concern, and it became a thing.

Last year, I was concerned in Dec, Jan February about the Celts intensity, focus toughness in the face of adversity and almost inexplicable series of losses in which they lost games in which they had late double-digit leads. I was called "reactionary" "chicken little" and told to remember the NBA is a make or miss league and it was just a game in January/Feb etc. Really good teams lose games like that from time to time, but not 5-6 in a season. Good teams learn how to win games like that in Jan and Feb by learning and making adjustments (both sides of the ball and bench) so they don't crumble in May and June.

Last year, I warned about the Celts inexplicable poor record in OT games, and late and close game. Games in which coaching adjustments were more important than they are in 20 pt wins. It made no sense to me why an elite team that was capable of playing .750+ ball, was . 300 team in OT. See the above comments for responses.

Last year, when the Celts after losing some games dropped from the 2nd seed to the 3rd seed,(Mar or April, don't remember) I joked the bright side was at least we would avoid Spo and the Heat in the 1st round, as I feared Spo would steal CJM's lunch. Good thing they didn't meet in the 1st round.

The Celts are a juggernaut, and a better more talented team than last year's team which IMO was good enough and had sufficient on-court talent to win a championship. But they have issues.

CJM has improved but my fear about his ability to coach this team to its potential remains a real concern to me.
Denver went 5-5 in a 10-game stretch in late January to early February.