If it were Jaylen Brown they'd listen. But that would put Boston firmly in the Cade Cunningham sweepstakes themselves. I guess there's always the chance that they landed 1 and 4 and went Cade/Jalen Green to keep their Jalen ratio up. You'd also get the Warriors #1. But that would have the impact of making the team even younger. And making the proper use of the TPE bringing in someone like Al Horford to stabilize the clubhouse.
C'mon, I keep hearing the same things. We've seen them run *some* motion stuff. We've seen them go games without any. As a coach, you can't tell me that adding bits and pieces to what they already have in the sets isn't possible - even at this point in the season. That's all I'm asking for. A commitment to run what they already possess, and add a bit more as you go. If that means parking some fannies that aren't willing to make the effort to work within that framework - then do it. I'd rather watch PP, Kemba, Theis, TL, Smart, Grant, AN, and RL (when he gets released from witness protection) get lit up every flipping night than watch the hero, iso, 4 potted plants, 2 man PnR game that is currently taking place. That might be acceptable basketball to some, and it might work for some teams, but if it's not working for the current Celtics, then I want to watch actual basketball - as they progress to something better next year.
Well, they should probably try playing with everyone freely available before going more radical. The four man combo of Smart, Brown, Walker and Tatum have played a grand total of 65+ minutes together thus far this season. So roughly a game and a half all in for the season. This lineup, which got the Cs to the ECF, represents just over 3% (!!!) of the teams total minutes thus far.
Stevens post game quotes were pretty telling, he absorbed (without being overly prompted) a lot of ownership of the situation/results. That's his character. But he's acknowledging that something is off. Jaylen indicated there was off court stuff, but said they were pros and should be able to produce because in the end they are being paid to play a kids game (paraphrasing). So, I'm inferring the lack of a crowd, the isolation, the rigorous covid protocols, etc. is wiping the energy from the team. Some teams are playing with a few fans, that's got to be a gut punch for those that aren't. These are humans, I accept all that, and feel for them. I've not slammed them for the lack of energy. I'd offer not a single complaint if any of the players raised their hand and opted out - short or long term. Like most everyone, I've made life changes/choices for family - sacrificing professionally and financially to be at home and coach the team. I've taken one too many calls to sooth a kid who struck out, and daddy wasn't going to be home to talk about it before bedtime. That feeling sucks. This team (like others) lasted a long time in the bubble, and have been dealing with who knows what in order to even be on the court. I wouldn't be surprised to find out later that half the league was suffering depression over the last year. If nothing else I think Eric V has a study out, their sleep patterns have probably been destroyed around all the changes, and protocols, etc.
The problem with this is that you cannot have one without the other. If you aren’t playing for a purpose you aren’t going to be focused or getting better. This is why you see coaches of bad teams lose their team and you don’t see the coaches of contenders lose their team. I’ve been sensing for a little while now that the players realize a deep playoff run isn’t in the cards......and they go out and lose B2B against Cleveland and Sacramento. This is when coaches lose their teams and a players bad habits are more visible.
Even in college if you are doing as well as you hooped guys are thinking about transferring, trying to do what matters for them.
What's your favorite book/link/resource for coaching (not XOs per se), the fundamentals of leading, building the personalities of teams, etc.?
It’s even worse in college. Nearly all of the bench or especially deep bench guys who aren’t playing are unhappy and looking to get out......regardless of W/L record. I’ve seen this firsthand and both of my schools.
I imagine this holds true for most NBA games.
LOL
It does, as much as anything I will look at the Hubie Brown stuff, (I'm already in on anything Russell related!), I'd love to ask Stevens about this part of your answer. I know he believes in service oriented leadership. Would be a fun conversation until my eyes glassed over not being able to absorb any more! lol
The best part of that story is that I can just picture the head nod in mutual acknowledgement. Good stuff.
Ah, you jinxed us.
That’s a pretty strong jinx for sure!
One quick comment. I think the scouting report is out on PP, which is if he drives, don't leave your feet before he does. If you recall early in the season, he was able to finish at the rim because he would use pump fakes or pivots to create space. Well, people aren't going for his pump fakes anymore and the pivots aren't working either.
It's fascinating to watch PP now because you can read the uncertainty of the entire Celtics team just through his play. Is he the backup PG? Spot up 3 point shooter? Should he be deferring to the star players when they are in the game or taking his opportunities as they come? Should he be deferring to Teague since Teague was signed as a backup but he kind of sucks most of the time? You can see all of this in how he plays. You can see even when he's bringing the ball up the floor which role he'll decide to go with on a particular possession (hand off to other player and hide in corner, or try and playmake).
Teague has been better than PP for a good month or so I think. PP is a 3rd PG, he isn't very good, and nobody should expect him to be more than a deep bench option. The problem is Teague is also really a 3rd PG, but one or both have to play a decent amount because Kemba can't play B2B, and Smart is playing more wing because our bench wings haven't been good.
Continuing this thought, we've seen a bit of "freeze out" culture on the Cs previously. Times where someone who is a rookie or a lesser light was wide open, and the ball possessor just blatantly ignored them. Jaylen experienced it a bit, I've seen it with PP a bit, others as well. Essentially, a negative reward feed back loop - if you don't get us the ball back you won't get it to begin with. I think that is a certain amount of Tatum bringing the ball up when PP is right there waiting for it (non-crunch time examples) as the best ball handler on the floor. All these things make it as you say 'fascinating' with regard to the team development.
I'm not saying you are wrong, but damn that is a negative view of PP. I think we've been watching different games. With his handle alone, he doesn't need to be explosive to score - he is quite adept at creating angles for himself to be successful without the need for explosiveness out of the gate. Everyone was comparing him to VanVleet, possibly because he isn't an explosive player either. *IF* he is able to adjust/adapt in the way that WBCD mentions he'll need to, he'll be fine. I see no issues with him being able to distribute/find the open man - his play early in the season demonstrated that quite adequately.
I think he may get better, but I think he does need to be explosive to score long term. He can't get to the rim or draw fouls so far, and he struggles to get off 3pt shots in traffic. Maybe he becomes super-crafty, but I don't know long term if it works.
I think it's fascinating from the perspective of somebody who loves the in's and out's of basketball, but kind of horrifying from the perspective of a fan. You don't want to see this in your team. You want everybody to be on the same page.
He has no issue getting to the rim, if anything he has an issue with being able to finish (WBCD assessment) amongst the sequoias. His early play this season showed he doesn't have an issue getting penetration given his handle. Few rookies draws fouls, and very few short players draw fouls. IT4 didn't get them until the King of the 4th or whatever that marketing blitz was called. Hell, the Js barely get fouls called. Being explosive is not his game, it wasn't his game, and Ainge didn't draft him expecting it to be his game. He (like all rookies) needs to adjust to the speed/length of those contesting 3s in the NBA versus college. I'm not swaying your opinion, but all over the league players were mentioning him in a positive light. He's going to need to adapt, but he doesn't need to *become* super-crafty, that is already in his game. I don't think I've got green glasses on, but again... seeing different games I guess.
Those FVV were pretty generous. I'd guess PP develops into a decent bench player and someone you can start in a pinch. I'd love to be wrong.
That's not always horrifying, I think people who enjoy basketball do look for, see those kinds of things. People that enjoy more of the athletic performance that basketball is often presented as, maybe don't enjoy that lack of synchronicity. One of the things that use to be a hallmark of BB football teams was that the team we saw in the first 4-5 games of the season was not the team that was saw at the end of the season, and into the playoffs. As they built familiarity with the expectations, and each other, the disguised stuff on defense was possible. Those kinds of growth patterns (which lots of folks in the football area can describe far better than I) are fun to see and watch.
IT4's rookie year: 4.0 FTA/36. PP: 1.0 FTA/36.
I took them as: "height challenged, high BB IQ player who survives with crafty play versus explosion" comparisons. Doesn't for a minute suggest that he will have the same success as FVV. But as far as those comparisons go, I see the same characteristics.
OK, I never said those two were comparable players- only that I didn't think that IT4 got his share of fouls. If I'm wrong, mea culpa. Most short players have a problem getting fouls, damning PP for being in that group doesn't seem particularly enlightening.
He has issues getting to the rim cleanly, he has a terrible FTr for anyone of any size, and he only takes 15% of his shots at the rim. He might get a bit of separation at the point of attack but he's not getting past the next level.
Not really. FVV was getting to the line at more than twice the rate PP is (.198 vs .091) and FVV was getting to the rim, (around 35% of his shots at the rim first two years combined, vs. 15% for PP). FVV's underlying profile showed a guy getting to the rim, PP's doesn't
OK, you do you. I'm not the PP champion here. I think he's damn good for a late round pick (though Ainge might have done better keeping Bane et al), has rookie issues to adapt to, and will struggle to get on the floor due to defensive liabilities, but could run a motion offense if such a thing existed on the Cs. I think you've made your mind up, and that's fine. You're probably even going to be right (it doesn't take Nostradamus to predict a late round pick will likely fail) - but if you can't see some of the skills he does possess, then so be it.
2.7/36, 2.4/36 and 2.4/36 are still quite better than 1.0/36. I think the league average is 3.3.
He can be a damn good pick and a heavily flawed player. He went in the late first round for a reason. He's already exceeded everyone's expectations. I just don't see him improving much from what he is now. He'll get more comfortable running the offense and probably score a few more points and pick up a few more assists. PP is a nice guy to have on a rookie contract.
I see him as having some skills. Getting to the rim isn't one of them. You can look at past years and see that the players with FTr and 0-3 shot % where he is are a certain type of player. Some of them are good (Seth Curry, Tony Snell, Ducan Robinson) one of them is great (Klay Thompson)
And while he may not have turned the earth on its axis, he didn't spit the bit like other more highly touted/drafted rookies who couldn't get on the floor, or who when they did get on the floor resembled the deer on the highway. He's already provided more value to the Cs than a lot of folks thought possible. So far, it's a win. Being fair in an assessment and saying he might not get much better given his limitations is reasonable. Saying he's not very good and is just deep bench material simply seems overly negative given he's a rookie that has already surpassed any reasonable expectations. YMMV.
Then we don't have any worries, because the way this team is performing, they aren't a showing as a good team to begin with. In that context, maybe they should give him more run, eh? I'd rather have him learning to overcome those multitude of deficits you are listing now, while they are working on a viable offensive approach for next year. lol
Yeah, the luster has certainly worn off PP from where I’m sitting. Defenses now recognize how to close out on him without allowing themselves to be best off the dribble. Early in the year he was able to get off wide open shots then the defenders would overcompensate by closing out hard. Now, they know they don’t need to close out hard to prevent him from getting a shot off. Much of the problem comes when PP is in the game with Grant and/or Semi who also struggle getting off shots against close outs.
