2023-24 Celtics

[Jimbodandy]

You responded to my stand alone post by questioning it - I didn't direct it to you or respond to you so don't tell me you are taking it easy on me. Go as hard at me as you feel is necessary here - I am not afraid.

To me, Forsberg is clearly playing into a the clutch, hero-ball and Cs late game execution woes narrative. You don't see it that way and I am sure Chris appreciates your air cover.

I stand by my post. This team has lost 13 times all season and each one feels like it exposes the fatal flaw that will upend the Cs season. This time we ticked all the boxes because Tatum, Mazzulla and the C's inability to win close and late all came up. Its a good thing too because after the last few weeks the C's astronomical net rating was getting a bit tired to discuss.

Words.

Somewhere the hoop twitterati was holding back their complaints for a month while this doomed Celtics team kept winning and got to let out a little steam today. I'm happy for them.

I maintain that if this game were important to Joe Mazzula, he wouldn't have played Al Horford 20min and Luke Kornet 16. And I'm pleased that he didn't use it as some "test" of whether they can close games. It's not. It's a March game in the midst of a badass winning streak, and he stuck to his rotations and didn't fret stuff. If people want to make something more of it then that, go bonkers.

 

[lovegtm]

Words.

Somewhere the hoop twitterati was holding back their complaints for a month while this doomed Celtics team kept winning and got to let out a little steam today. I'm happy for them.

I maintain that if this game were important to Joe Mazzula, he wouldn't have played Al Horford 20min and Luke Kornet 16. And I'm pleased that he didn't use it as some "test" of whether they can close games. It's not. It's a March game in the midst of a badass winning streak, and he stuck to his rotations and didn't fret stuff. If people want to make something more of it then that, go bonkers.

I'm resigned at this point. Twitterati will hate unless and until they win a title.

If they don't, I'll still enjoy my life and the team, and they'll still be on Twitter.

 

[HomeRunBaker]

Yeah, I don't really get this. In a typical end-of-half scenario, taking a shot with time on the clock could result in a scenario where you miss + give up an opponent's basket and grade out at -2 or -3. But in the Celtics situation last night, anything between 0 and -3 results in the same outcome: they lose the game, so the scenario above doesn't matter. You need to score more than manage the clock. If the shot goes up with 2 seconds left, I have to think the likelihood of an offensive rebound and put back is nearly as high as the likelihood of scoring + opponent hitting a buzzer beater.

I disagree. Scoring and managing the clock are not mutually exclusive. We know that the best way to score is to get off a quality FGA, we know the best most effective way to get off a quality FGA in an end of game scenario defense is via iso when you have an elite iso shot creator on the floor. If Tatum scores w :05 or :02 the opponent has a TO and the ball in the frontcourt. :02 gives them a catch & shoot and a dribble/shoot, :05 gives them all kind of options…..:00 gives them none. Tatum got a good look under those circumstances and even tried to go a little early to give the tip-in opportunity but Garland (and arguably the ref) prevented it.

 

[Auger34]

You responded to my stand alone post by questioning it - I didn't direct it to you or respond to you so don't tell me you are taking it easy on me. Go as hard at me as you feel is necessary here - I am not afraid.

To me, Forsberg is clearly playing into a the clutch, hero-ball and Cs late game execution woes narrative. You don't see it that way and I am sure Chris appreciates your air cover.

I stand by my post. This team has lost 13 times all season and each one feels like it exposes the fatal flaw that will upend the Cs season. This time we ticked all the boxes because Tatum, Mazzulla and the C's inability to win close and late all came up. Its a good thing too because after the last few weeks the C's astronomical net rating was getting a bit tired to discuss.

Bullshit.

Don’t stand on your soapbox and then get off it and act like it never happened. You took a shot at me with the Tatum comment. Own it. Playing the victim when you took the first shot is lame as hell. Just own what you post.

I responded ro your comment because you tried to portray Forsbergs comments as if it was something that Forsbetg was saying would be a season long problem. That’s not what he said or was communicating. He was writing a game review. He reviewed what happened in the Cavs game. It is literally what happened. Forsberg doesn’t need my “air cover”. You brought your own bias to what Forsberg wrote and tried to play it off as a media bias. I think Alanis Morrissette would call that “ironic”

 

[HomeRunBaker]

tie game/end of the Quarter/half... of course, you want the last shot & ISO is fine there.

Down 1pt, you don't want to BURN clock, you want to GO.

I just watched Joe's video, pretty much what he said

Go, Go, Go reckless is another option to extend the game for sure. I was referring to the choice of creating the best FGA to win the game on that final possession. Those are two completely different sets.

 

[joe dokes]

I'm resigned at this point. Twitterati will hate unless and until they win a title.

And even then, only until training camp. Or the draft. Or the parade.
Not unique to Celtics coverage either. Just the way of the world, which has moved beyond "what have you done for me (or to me) lately?," to "what will you do for me in 2026?".

 

[benhogan]

Bullshit.

Don’t stand on your soapbox and then get off it and act like it never happened. You took a shot at me with the Tatum comment. Own it. Playing the victim when you took the first shot is lame as hell. Just own what you post.

I responded ro your comment because you tried to portray Forsbergs comments as if it was something that Forsbetg was saying would be a season long problem. That’s not what he said or was communicating. He was writing a game review. He reviewed what happened in the Cavs game. It is literally what happened. Forsberg doesn’t need my “air cover”. You brought your own bias to what Forsberg wrote and tried to play it off as a media bias. I think Alanis Morrissette would call that “ironic”

Probably the nicest guy in Boston Sports media history, but I need to know before clicking:
is Chris Forsberg part of the evil Celtic Twitterverse?

 

[tims4wins]

The Celtics, on pace for 66 wins, would become the 18th team in league history to reach that mark. Of the 17 previous 66-win teams, 12 went on to win the championship that season.

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/39660074/jayson-tatum-celtics-cruising-nba-best-record-postseason-questions

 

[BringBackMo]

It is possible both that Forsberg is a very nice human being and that his attempt to frame the collapse against Cleveland as some kind of teachable moment is ridiculous and reflective of an overall media tendency to dig for drama and “all is not quite as well under the hood as it seems!” storylines while covering juggernaut teams and athletes. (This is not a Celtics-specific phenomenon, in other words.)

It’s boring to cover runaway successes after a while—AND it’s hard to present savvy, insider takes when everyone can see how talented a team or player is. Identifying weak spots and “potential dangers” that the average schmoe is oblivious to proves you are a sharpie and, especially when covering a home town team, not a homer.

Keep in mind, the piece doesn’t just open ominously with the single word “nineteen” to highlight Tatum’s folly…it frames the entire sequence as a crucial area where the Celtics must improve or risk not winning it all. Because, you know, danger is lurking. Even Forsberg likely doesn’t believe this. He’s the nicest guy in sports media. He almost certainly suspects what others do here: that Joe was experimenting with lineups, that the C’s may have been playing to win or lose with that shot, that Tatum was probably fouled at some point during those nineteen dribbles, that the Celtics are the best team in the NBA, that there is pretty much no lesson to be taken away from that game, and that nineteen dribbles doesn’t actually highlight an area where the Celtics must improve in order to win a championship.

He’s a nice guy. He’s not out to get the Celtics. It was still a silly framing and a silly article. All of these things can be true.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

How many playoff games, close as they may be, even come down to a final shot? Just did a quick glance at last year's Nuggets run for example and at a quick count it looks like there was only one in which the Nuggets had the ball needing to hit a shot at the buzzer down 3 against Miami. Murray missed and they lost. In a couple other games their opponent missed a final look at the buzzer.

Given the quality of the team, the reality is that if they are in position where the apparent last-shot weakness is relevant enough to actually tank their title hopes, it means a bunch of other far more important stuff has gone wrong. Sure, if suddenly we are closing the last 3 minutes of every game with Tatum taking 23.5 seconds to find a contested fadeaway it will be A Thing, but there's not really evidence to suggest this team behaves that way. Shit even on Tuesday they had 3 straight super clutch possessions (would've been 4 if not for the unfortunate bounce on Garland's wild layup heave) to score 5 straight and take the lead.

 

[tims4wins]

How many playoff games, close as they may be, even come down to a final shot? Just did a quick glance at last year's Nuggets run for example and at a quick count it looks like there was only one in which the Nuggets had the ball needing to hit a shot at the buzzer down 3 against Miami. Murray missed and they lost. In a couple other games their opponent missed a final look at the buzzer.

Given the quality of the team, the reality is that if they are in position where the apparent last-shot weakness is relevant enough to actually tank their title hopes, it means a bunch of other far more important stuff has gone wrong. Sure, if suddenly we are closing the last 3 minutes of every game with Tatum taking 23.5 seconds to find a contested fadeaway it will be A Thing, but there's not really evidence to suggest this team behaves that way. Shit even on Tuesday they had 3 straight super clutch possessions (would've been 4 if not for the unfortunate bounce on Garland's wild layup heave) to score 5 straight and take the lead.

This is a good point.

That said, their numbers when in very close games aren't awesome. They're not horrible, but they're not awesome. Basically .500. Roughly 1/3 of their games have been within 3 points with 3 minutes to play, and they're 11-9 in those games. There are likely to be more of those games in the playoffs.

 

[joe dokes]

This story is worth it. Just for the picture of the sad and disheveled-looking unidentified man (in the caption anyway) at left.
A night of high school basketball with Brad Stevens (bostonglobe.com)

 

[Jimbodandy]

It is possible both that Forsberg is a very nice human being and that his attempt to frame the collapse against Cleveland as some kind of teachable moment is ridiculous and reflective of an overall media tendency to dig for drama and “all is not quite as well under the hood as it seems!” storylines while covering juggernaut teams and athletes. (This is not a Celtics-specific phenomenon, in other words.)

It’s boring to cover runaway successes after a while—AND it’s hard to present savvy, insider takes when everyone can see how talented a team or player is. Identifying weak spots and “potential dangers” that the average schmoe is oblivious to proves you are a sharpie and, especially when covering a home town team, not a homer.

Keep in mind, the piece doesn’t just open ominously with the single word “nineteen” to highlight Tatum’s folly…it frames the entire sequence as a crucial area where the Celtics must improve or risk not winning it all. Because, you know, danger is lurking. Even Forsberg likely doesn’t believe this. He’s the nicest guy in sports media. He almost certainly suspects what others do here: that Joe was experimenting with lineups, that the C’s may have been playing to win or lose with that shot, that Tatum was probably fouled at some point during those nineteen dribbles, that the Celtics are the best team in the NBA, that there is pretty much no lesson to be taken away from that game, and that nineteen dribbles doesn’t actually highlight an area where the Celtics must improve in order to win a championship.

He’s a nice guy. He’s not out to get the Celtics. It was still a silly framing and a silly article. All of these things can be true.

This is a beautiful post.

Of course Forsberg is not one of those hoping to tapdance on the grave of the Boston Celtics later in the year. But yeah, you can't write 25 "And this is why the Celtics are awesome" pieces, and you can't be credible writing "And yet there are bigtime flaws" pieces while riding a season-long win streak. So after a loss, it's a filler piece with a side of Chicken Little, at worst, glib.

Sometimes stuff like this gets lumped in with the LA morons because it seems disingenuous. But it is very different in kind.

 

[Jed Zeppelin]

This is a good point.

That said, their numbers when in very close games aren't awesome. They're not horrible, but they're not awesome. Basically .500. Roughly 1/3 of their games have been within 3 points with 3 minutes to play, and they're 11-9 in those games. There are likely to be more of those games in the playoffs.

That's fair, I guess I'm just not moved much by such a small sample. For example how do the rankings look had they not gotten the wrong end of the call on Tuesday and the even bigger screw job against Indy earlier in the year?

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

tie game/end of the Quarter/half... of course, you want the last shot & ISO is fine there.

Down 1pt, you don't want to BURN clock, you want to GO.

I just watched Joe's video, pretty much what he said

BTW, I agree with you and Karalis - down one, the Cs should not be walking the ball up the court and playing for the last shot. The Cs should be playing fast and try to get as many good shots as possible and use their TOs if they have to.

Hopefully, JMazz agrees and will let JT know that.

But as Rorschach’s Mask says, the Cs looked mildly disinterested in the game all night and didn’t seem like they wanted to go to OT.

 

[tims4wins]

That's fair, I guess I'm just not moved much by such a small sample. For example how do the rankings look had they not gotten the wrong end of the call on Tuesday and the even bigger screw job against Indy earlier in the year?

Right, 13-7 looks a lot better, 65% or the equivalent of a 53 win team. But - they did lose those two games.

 

[Ed Hillel]

KAT just went down and probably effed the Timberwolves’ season. Let’s just clinch and make up a bunch of fake injuries. Wins be damned.

 

[tims4wins]

KAT just went down and probably effed the Timberwolves’ season. Let’s just clinch and make up a bunch of fake injuries. Wins be damned.

Do they have to have a reason to sit guys? Will they get fined otherwise?

 

[benhogan]

nm

 

[benhogan]

But as Rorschach’s Mask says, the Cs looked mildly disinterested in the game all night and didn’t seem like they wanted to go to OT.

That's fair, they did look disinterested. Up double digits throughout they were experimenting with lineups, probably looking past the CAVs (without Dono), and had Denver on their minds.

Trap games are a thing.

 

[benhogan]

This is a good point.

That said, their numbers when in very close games aren't awesome. They're not horrible, but they're not awesome. Basically .500. Roughly 1/3 of their games have been within 3 points with 3 minutes to play, and they're 11-9 in those games. There are likely to be more of those games in the playoffs.

+1 thanks for posting

The closing lineup talent level has significantly changed (for the better) from previous seasons.

Expecting improvement as CJM makes adjustments.

 

[lovegtm]

Do they have to have a reason to sit guys? Will they get fined otherwise?

Depends on the game, and whether it's national TV. Cs have a lot of games against crap teams the NBA doesn't care about to finish the season.

Also, everyone is banged up this time of year, so you can always find something. Main thing JT and JB will probably care about is keeping All-NBA eligibility (not that JB will get it, but he'll be on the edge of the convo).

 

[MyDaughterLovesTomGordon]

This story is worth it. Just for the picture of the sad and disheveled-looking unidentified man (in the caption anyway) at left.
A night of high school basketball with Brad Stevens (bostonglobe.com)

The idea of Van Gundy tagging along to Brad's kid's high school game in Wellesley cuz he has nothing better to do brings me joy. So great.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Bullshit.

Don’t stand on your soapbox and then get off it and act like it never happened. You took a shot at me with the Tatum comment. Own it. Playing the victim when you took the first shot is lame as hell. Just own what you post.

I responded ro your comment because you tried to portray Forsbergs comments as if it was something that Forsbetg was saying would be a season long problem. That’s not what he said or was communicating. He was writing a game review. He reviewed what happened in the Cavs game. It is literally what happened. Forsberg doesn’t need my “air cover”. You brought your own bias to what Forsberg wrote and tried to play it off as a media bias. I think Alanis Morrissette would call that “ironic”

This post and discussion has zero to do with Celtics basketball and nobody was taking a shot at you. You have some beef with me - its not mutual, like at all.

That said if Forsberg wants to play to the mouth breather crowd, he deserves to be called out for it. That's actually a form of praise because I agree he should know better.

Back to the main point, we can discuss anything here but if we are going to launch into talk radio narratives that are being pushed by beat writers and NBA pundits who need to feed the machine every day - they need to get the people going or else they lose mindshare - you best expect a lot of pushback. Its all small sample sized reactions that mean nothing in the big picture.

There really should be no place for that First Take level garbage here. People can get plenty of that elsewhere.

 

[bakahump]

Hopefully Joe is sitting on the Plane or meeting up with certain players at the hotel and saying "Yea...see.....its tough to hit those last second shots. Now if we had run....".

There is nothing wrong with Tatum, as awesome as he is, or Jaylen, as great as he is, to be reminded that the success this year has been because of a Team approach. Hunting the mismatch yadda yadda. Sometimes negative reinforcement is a good thing.

Also as some have said (about experimenting) Joe may have very well said at some point "Ok....if this comes down to a final shot I want a Jayson ISO" . A good coach then turns that into a teachable moment either in this instance ("OK thats why we need to stick to our gameplan for all 48 Mins") ..... or even had he made it. "Awesome Shot JT....Now teams will be looking for that in the closing seconds and sending doubles and triple teams at you even more. You swing the ball next time and KP/JB/DW has an easy shot"

 

[kazuneko]

This is my concern, dude...
View attachment 79089



The late and close numbers back the eye test- the offense is terrible in those situations. Mostly Tatum doing hero ball fadeaways.*

Aside from the coach reverting to innocent bystander, the 3 numbers in losses are worst in the league: 32% (40% in wins). Those are patterns we've seen for a while.

*
View attachment 79088

Saw this on Facebook:
“The Celtics scored 7 points in crunch-time last night and they all stemmed from Kristaps Porzingis touches. In the clutch, he has a 22% usage rate and 87% TS, while Jayson Tatum has a 32% usage rate and 50% TS. Running more offense through KP late would benefit the Celtics.”

 

[InstaFace]

Do they have to have a reason to sit guys? Will they get fined otherwise?

Only for national TV games, and only if the sitting doesn't fall under an existing exemption like Horford's "over age 35 on back to backs" one. Here are the rules:

• Only one star player is permitted to rest for one game
• Star players must be available for national TV and in-season tournament games
• Teams must balance between the number of one-game absences for a star player in home games and road games, with a preference for the former
• Teams must abstain from long-term shutdowns or a possibility of one when a star player stops playing or plays in a markedly reduced role in situations that could affect the game's integrity
• Healthy players resting for a game must be present and visible to fans

("star player" definition is complex but encompasses Brown, Tatum and Holiday - and notably not the other 3 of our big 6)

Given the focus on one-game absences, I think concerns would also be mitigated by giving our 3 "stars" a week or more off, each. But also, our team is so awesome that a great many of our games have been chosen as national-TV games, I believe the most in the league.

We literally have more national games (11, with a bullet) remaining, than we do non-national games (10, in parens):

- 3/7 @ DEN
- 3/9 @ PHX
- 3/11 @ POR
(3/12 @ UTA, B2B)
- 3/14 vs PHX
(3/17 @ WAS)
(3/18 vs DET, B2B)
- 3/20 vs MIL
(3/22 @ DET)
(3/23 @ CHI, B2B)
- 3/25 @ ATL
(3/28 @ ATL)
- 3/30 @ NOP
- 4/1 @ CHO
(4/3 vs OKC)
- 4/5 vs SAC
(4/7 vs POR)
- 4/9 @ MIL
- 4/11 vs NYK
(4/12 vs CHO, B2B)
(4/14 vs WAS)

So that's really not much room for us to give Tatum, Brown and Jrue a break. One each on those 3 back-to-backs, perhaps. Meanwhile, it seems we can rest Porzingis, White and Horford basically without risk of penalty. So if we gave Porzingis and Horford each a week or so off entirely, I think it would probably do them a lot of good. One day or game is fine if you're explicitly banged-up, but only longer periods of rest are really going to refill the tank at all for the playoff run.

And then there's the option of the Hellenic Flu. I think I'd only do that if we were going to do a longer rest for one of the guys, so like if we can say Brown "cut his hand during practice" so he's out for a national game or two, and then it's followed by a non-national game or two so we just choose to rest him ("ensure his recovery"). Could do that from 3/12-3/19, giving him 4 games off, only needing to excuse his absence on 3/14 vs PHX.

Resting our guys can also affect eligibility for postseason awards, this year, but the starting 5 are well ahead of pace on that and can cool off without much worry.

 

[SteveF]

With the score being -2, -1, 0 in the last 30 seconds of a game * , the Celtics have had 10 possessions and scored 2 points. Tatum (in 9 possessions) is 1-7. Rest of team is 0-1 from 2 (Brown -- the Indiana reversed call marginal contact to head game), and 0-2 from 3 (Brown, Hauser).

Here are the shots, links to video provided where possible (some aren't included in the NBA.com video archive):
16' fadeaway miss (down 1), 17' turnaround fadeaway miss (down 2), 5' running layup miss (down 1), 20' pullup jumpshot miss (tied), Tatum 8' Pullup Jump Shot miss (tied), Tatum 3' Driving Layup make (tied), Tatum 23' Pullup Jump Shot miss (tied).

*Initially I was looking at -2 to +2 and comparing the Celtics to other contenders (where they compare poorly -- sample size caveats apply) but other teams had way more take fouls in there because most of the Celtics situations are tied or down with the ball -- as opposed to being ahead with the ball. The difference between being ahead 1 and down 1 in the final 23-24 seconds with the ball is night and day, obviously.

Here are some comparisons with other teams in the same situation:
Denver 3 possessions, 3 points. LAC 4 possessions, 7 points. Milwaukee 3 possessions, 3 points. OKC 6 possesions, 8 points. Minnesota 5 possessions, 4 points.

Not exactly large sample sizes here. I'm not sure this was worth posting, but eh. I did the work so here it is.

Edit: There's a lot of context here, obviously. The kind of shot you take in a tied game is going to be different from a shot down 1 or 2 for reasons clear to everyone.

 

[benhogan]

Saw this on Facebook:
“The Celtics scored 7 points in crunch-time last night and they all stemmed from Kristaps Porzingis touches. In the clutch, he has a 22% usage rate and 87% TS, while Jayson Tatum has a 32% usage rate and 50% TS. Running more offense through KP late would benefit the Celtics.”

I agree with you, but you'll get pushback (ie SSS, Superstar must ISO, you're being reactionary!, Social Media Clickbait, etc)

I'd much rather see KP in the PnR with Tatum (instead of JAY's ISO Pull-Ups against double teams)

OR

Horns 3-man set of with JT/KP/DW with JB/Jrue in the Corners looking for a kick, cut, or crash

(from the DW thread)
Derrick White is shooting 68.8 EFG% (!) on pull-up jumpers over the last 15 games, best in the NBA during that span… White’s shooting is devastating for opponents. Especially in the clutch where he has an 81.6 EFG% + a bunch of clutch defensive plays. Zero weakness player.

If you are wondering why Boston has been so good in the "Clutch" it's mostly due to the addition of White/KP to the closing lineup.

I'm looking forward to more late/tight in the regular season so our closing unit can work on multiple actions and have a more varied approach than ISO-ball

 

[RedOctober3829]

This is a good point.

That said, their numbers when in very close games aren't awesome. They're not horrible, but they're not awesome. Basically .500. Roughly 1/3 of their games have been within 3 points with 3 minutes to play, and they're 11-9 in those games. There are likely to be more of those games in the playoffs.

The raw numbers are great and all, but there's no context. Regular season games have so many variables to it. Who is hurt? Was a team playing on a back to back or 3 in 4 situation? Home or road?

 

[RorschachsMask]

I have no issue with wanting some more variety, but there’s a reason teams very rarely pass the ball around in those scenarios. Teams aren’t going to risk turning the ball over on a last possession.

Tatum’s efficiency in those situation hasn’t been good this year, but the process has been, for the most part. The team has been pretty balanced in crunch time. That’s more important to me than a few extra missed shots. And I trust him to make big shots in the playoffs. Obviously this is super SSS, but since small samples are being used here anyways.

 

[InstaFace]

Let the Bontemps roll!

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/39660074/jayson-tatum-celtics-cruising-nba-best-record-postseason-questions

Original headline for Tim Bontemps' article:

"The Celtics blew a 22-point lead and are still having the fifth-best regular season of all time"

Which was then updated to add some Eeyore:

"The Celtics are cruising to the NBA's best record -- and toward a postseason of questions"

Despite that - which is probably just an editor's doing - the article covers the season and some trends in a fairly balanced way, although I think they overplay the Tatum-clutch-time thing.

 

[Euclis20]

I was convinced that Denver couldn't win the title last year, in part because I didn't think a team whose two best players were at best average defensively could pull it off, and in part because I didn't think a team that was thoroughly average defensively could make it through 4 rounds against top competition. They did, less so because their defense improved but because their offense was so great that it pressured other teams to keep up, and their defensive weaknesses ended up not really mattering.

This could actually be a Tatum/Celtics problem, AND it might not be fixable given the current personnel and timing, AND it may end up not mattering at all. The Celtics are 1st in 4th quarter net rating, and 5th in crunch time net rating. There were exactly 3 games (out of 20) in last year's playoff run where the ability to make or miss a shot in the closing seconds could've won or extended the game for Boston:

-Game 5 against Atlanta, when Young hit a 3 to go up by 2 with 2 seconds left. Boston didn't get a shot off.
-Game 4 against Philly, when Harden hit a 2 to tie the game with 16 seconds left and Smart missed a 3 at the buzzer, and again when Harden hit a 3 with 19 seconds left in OT to go up 1, and Smart made a 3 just after the buzzer.
-Game 6 against Miami, when Butler hit his free throws with 3 seconds left and White had the magic tip in.

I see two games in which it would've taken a miracle for Boston to score (one of which they got), and one game in which they did indeed blow it (once on execution, once on design). Even if this is a problem, it may end up not mattering.

 

[m0ckduck]

I disagree. Scoring and managing the clock are not mutually exclusive. We know that the best way to score is to get off a quality FGA, we know the best most effective way to get off a quality FGA in an end of game scenario defense is via iso when you have an elite iso shot creator on the floor. If Tatum scores w :05 or :02 the opponent has a TO and the ball in the frontcourt. :02 gives them a catch & shoot and a dribble/shoot, :05 gives them all kind of options…..:00 gives them none. Tatum got a good look under those circumstances and even tried to go a little early to give the tip-in opportunity but Garland (and arguably the ref) prevented it.

If we're going to run ISO, then I agree that timing it to leave nothing on the clock is the best approach. And, agree that one of the benefit of ISO is that it's easy to control exactly when the shot goes up.

But my issue is with the bolded. Generally, yes, for teams with an elite scorer, running ISO at the end is the best option. However, the Celtics happen to be sitting on the most efficient play in the NBA this season, Porzingis in the post. So, again I ask, why aren't they running that at the end of games? I'm sure there IS a reason, somewhere— I don't think for a moment that the coaching staff simply hasn't thought of it.

But, if the purported reason to run Tatum ISO instead of KP is only to avoid leaving time on the clock, then I'd say that's a poor reason (delta between KP post efficiency and Tatum ISO efficiency outweighs whatever hazard exists from potentially scoring too early).

 

[benhogan]

If we're going to run ISO, then I agree that timing it to leave nothing on the clock is the best approach. And, agree that one of the benefit of ISO is that it's easy to control exactly when the shot goes up.

But my issue is with the bolded. Generally, yes, for teams with an elite scorer, running ISO at the end is the best option. However, the Celtics happen to be sitting on the most efficient play in the NBA this season, Porzingis in the post. So, again I ask, why aren't they running that at the end of games? I'm sure there IS a reason, somewhere— I don't think for a moment that the coaching staff simply hasn't thought of it.

But, if the purported reason to run Tatum ISO instead of KP is only to avoid leaving time on the clock, then I'd say that's a poor reason (delta between KP post efficiency and Tatum ISO efficiency outweighs whatever hazard exists from potentially scoring too early).

According to JJ Redick, the Celtics have
1. the 4th best clutch offense
2. the 7th best offense in Q4 overall
3. run the 4th most ISO/100 possessions in Q4, unfortunately, their ISO is ranked 27th in PPP

Mazzulla-ball is setting NBA offensive records even with Q4 ISO ball dragging it down

(Warning: avoid clicking if any negative Celtic commentary triggers)
View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMLLbDgdo8o

 

[lovegtm]

I find it funny that the Celtics lose so infrequently that every loss becomes a referendum on whether they can ever win when it counts most.

During the win streak it was even worse: every win that got under double-digits became that referendum (see the 4-point win against Miami).

It's getting ridiculous at this point. No other team faces remotely this level of scrutiny.

 

[Euclis20]

I find it funny that the Celtics lose so infrequently that every loss becomes a referendum on whether they can ever win when it counts most.

During the win streak it was even worse: every win that got under double-digits became that referendum (see the 4-point win against Miami).

It's getting ridiculous at this point. No other team faces remotely this level of scrutiny.

It'd save a lot of time and if everyone just repeated their two weaknesses over and over again:

-They don't have a consensus top 3 player
-They haven't won before

Unless the expectation is that this team should be nearly perfect and winning 75+ games, there isn't much else.

 

[lovegtm]

It'd save a lot of time and if everyone just repeated their two weaknesses over and over again:

-They don't have a consensus top 3 player
-They haven't won before

Unless the expectation is that this team should be nearly perfect and winning 75+ games, there isn't much else.

Even if they won 75 games, the exact same concerns you mention would persist. We'd hear over and over how the 73-win Warriors lost in the Finals.

I'm going to just start cutting and pasting your two points after every loss (or sub-15-point win).

 

[Ed Hillel]

I find it funny that the Celtics lose so infrequently that every loss becomes a referendum on whether they can ever win when it counts most.

During the win streak it was even worse: every win that got under double-digits became that referendum (see the 4-point win against Miami).

It's getting ridiculous at this point. No other team faces remotely this level of scrutiny.

It would be nice to win a title just to stop this shit.

Meanwhile, Jimmy No-Rings is a hero.

 

[benhogan]

It'd save a lot of time and if everyone just repeated their two weaknesses over and over again:

-They don't have a consensus top 3 player
-They haven't won before

Unless the expectation is that this team should be nearly perfect and winning 75+ games, there isn't much else.

the consensus TOP3 is ridiculous when you have 5 players in the TOP40.

It's like having a lineup that's relentless 1-9.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

This could actually be a Tatum/Celtics problem, AND it might not be fixable given the current personnel and timing, AND it may end up not mattering at all. The Celtics are 1st in 4th quarter net rating, and 5th in crunch time net rating. There were exactly 3 games (out of 20) in last year's playoff run where the ability to make or miss a shot in the closing seconds could've won or extended the game for Boston:

-Game 5 against Atlanta, when Young hit a 3 to go up by 2 with 2 seconds left. Boston didn't get a shot off.
-Game 4 against Philly, when Harden hit a 2 to tie the game with 16 seconds left and Smart missed a 3 at the buzzer, and again when Harden hit a 3 with 19 seconds left in OT to go up 1, and Smart made a 3 just after the buzzer.
-Game 6 against Miami, when Butler hit his free throws with 3 seconds left and White had the magic tip in.

I see two games in which it would've taken a miracle for Boston to score (one of which they got), and one game in which they did indeed blow it (once on execution, once on design). Even if this is a problem, it may end up not mattering.

Don't forget G1 of the PHI series. Cs went down 1 after Brogdon threw the pass that everyone thought was a shot-clock violation (Maxey went in for a layup) with 28 seconds left. JT draws a shooting foul with 26 seconds left. Harden hit a 3P with 8 seconds left to get PHI up 2 and then Smart threw the ball away.

Amazing DWhite wasn't on the floor at the end of that game.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiPv0MPRfcw

 

[bigq]

Don't forget G1 of the PHI series. Cs went down 1 after Brogdon threw the pass that everyone thought was a shot-clock violation (Maxey went in for a layup) with 28 seconds left. JT draws a shooting foul with 26 seconds left. Harden hit a 3P with 8 seconds left to get PHI up 2 and then Smart threw the ball away.

Amazing DWhite wasn't on the floor at the end of that game.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiPv0MPRfcw

Yikes I had blocked out that Brogdon turnover. I like the DW JH back court approximately 200X more than the MS MB version.

 

[ifmanis5]

Pressure is on I guess.
View: https://twitter.com/awfulannouncing/status/1765909067707637868

"If they don't win a championship this year, it would be a total gag job... I will be shocked if the Celtics don't win." - Charles Barkley

 

[chilidawg]

Pressure is on I guess.
View: https://twitter.com/awfulannouncing/status/1765909067707637868

"If they don't win a championship this year, it would be a total gag job... I will be shocked if the Celtics don't win." - Charles Barkley

High expectations are what comes with having a great team.

 

[reggiecleveland]

It would be great if Tatum made just one buzzer beater before the playoffs started. I think it may be in the back of his mind a bit. Once he makes one then he will be himslef in that situation, which is good enough to win it. I think he makes one game winner, and the floodgates open.

 

[128]

It would be great if Tatum made just one buzzer beater before the playoffs started. I think it may be in the back of his mind a bit. Once he makes one then he will be himslef in that situation, which is good enough to win it. I think he makes one game winner, and the floodgates open.

He's definitely not the second coming of Bird in that area.

 

[DGreenwood]

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GbmxZ93vsyA

 

[lovegtm]

At least @HomeRunBaker doesn't have to worry about them peaking early now.

Not even joking: I think they'll have some humility and have to figure some things out. If they lose to Milwaukee, the noise will get pretty loud.

 

[bigq]

At least @HomeRunBaker doesn't have to worry about them peaking early now.

Not even joking: I think they'll have some humility and have to figure some things out. If they lose to Milwaukee, the noise will get pretty loud.

2 consecutive close losses in playoff like games may be a helpful mid March wake up call for this team.

 

[lovegtm]

2 consecutive close losses in playoff like games may be a helpful mid March wake up call for this team.

There was definitely some risk of own-fart-smelling after the GSW game.