Sure the Celtics are the type of underachieving team that could turn it on in the second half…but they were also that type of team last year…..and didn’t. So it’s hard to see things suddenly changing without some kind of impetus.
First, last year's team had serious issues with depth that this year's team doesn't. The idea that the talent from last year is equivalent to this year's talent is wrong. Kemba, TT, Pritchard, and Grant Williams were 4-5-6 in total minutes last year. This year you have Schroder-Horford-Rob Williams-Richardson-Grant Williams. Schroder is about the same or even a little better than Kemba (who has been out of the rotation at times in New York), Horford is an upgrade from TT (who is barely in the rotation in Sacramento), Richardson is more useful than PP, and Grant Williams is an upgrade on last year's version of Grant Williams.
As I see it, there are three main issues: (1) is just performance. Tatum, Horford and Smart all posting worst or near-worst career seasons from three-point-land is not just a fit issue. There have been problems with finding each other open shots, but the bottom line is that our star is not hitting shots he hit last year. As @
slamminsammya pointed out upthread, they've been unbelievably bad on wide-open threes. I haven't checked, but if I had to guess, Tatum, Horford, and Smart have all been major culprits here. I hope all three of those players find their stroke on open shots. If they don't, nothing will help.
(2) is fit, and it's a real one. As others have documented, neither Tatum nor Brown nor Schroder nor Smart is a good enough playmaker to complement the others strengths. Tatum has been a very good isolation scorer in the past, though he's been miserable this year, Brown is a great slasher and great scorer, but a turnover machine when asked to be a lead ballhandler, Schroder is a good slasher and sixth man but mediocre shooter and passer, and Smart is a bad shooter and average passer for his position. The team is 23rd in assists, 15th in turnovers, and 23rd on three pointers. Easy buckets have been extremely hard to come by. Brown is one of the only guys who can get you one, but he gives back so much when he's lead ballhandler that you don't want him with the ball in his hands.
The third issue is talent. If Tatum were playing like himself, this team would be in Cavaliers territory: 22-17 or thereabouts. That team would be more fun to watch, but it still wouldn't be a contender. The Celtics either need Tatum to take a leap or they need more talent to contend. Chris Paul, for example, would make the offense elite. Even Lonzo would have been a huge help.
Obviously all three of these issues interlock and interact, to a degree. But talent is the biggest issue even if (1) they were playing more to their talent level and (2) the team had better fits (Lonzo instead of Smart or Schroder, for example).
The question is if PBS can draw a third star who complements Tatum and Brown without having to give either of them up. Look at the heat: getting Kyle Lowry without really giving anything up has made a huge difference for their offense. Or Phoenix adding Chris Paul while keeping Ayton, Bridges and Booker.
I see a few targets: Lillard and Beal are the best options possibilities: volume shooters struggling from 3-pt land this year. I think if you have to send Brown back for either of them, though, it's pretty much a marginal move. The fit would be better, but the overall talent level still might not be good enough. Brogdon is another -- I think he moves them in the right direction, but maybe isn't enough to make this an elite team. He probably doesn't command Jaylen Brown as a return, on the other hand. De'Aaron Fox also interests me. Fox replicates some of the Celtics issues: he's had good seasons as a passer, but he's another miserable shooter. His salary is also massive, so I think he's a no-go.