Brad Stevens: President of Basketball Ops

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,923
I’m not offended. I do think we can and need to be better as a community and that doesn’t happen unless attention is called to conduct we have historically treated as acceptable and shouldn’t. I’m also not blaming you or calling out individuals (although this response indicates maybe I should have). I get it. I’ve told or laughed at plenty of jokes in my life that I shouldn’t have considered funny and have since learned should never have been something I perceived to be an acceptable source of humor, this topic included.

SoSH has dealt with similar issues in other contexts, generally successfully, after a prolonged stretch of backlash by people who refuse to accept that things they’ve always done are things they never should have done and that doesn’t make them a bad person—although a refusal to engage in appropriate retrospection once the issue is brought to your attention is more troubling.

It literally shouldn’t matter if people think this is funny either. Because there’s a ton of evidence that body image shaming and body image focused humor does tremendous harm to many many people. That doesn’t get better unless we work to be better and to stop doing the thing that is harmful. We need to do that.
You literally called me and a few others out. Sorry, I don’t agree with your conclusion here and clearly others don’t as well based on the responses that have come in.

Just because you think something is “harmful” doesn’t make it so. There is a clear sports-specific context here.

You need to stop playing mod and let the real mods do their job. They actively monitor this board and if they think comments cross the line, they address it.

Go ahead and pass more judgment on posters through. It’s a real good look for you.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
50,717
We shouldn't be body shaming even athletes in 2022. I have no data to back this up but my sense is that our community has many members who struggle with weight or other conditions and practice habits which contribute to the problem. They often know better and also have significant incentives to change but still struggle. I don't know much about Kyle Lowry but is it possible he falls into this category?

More to the point, there are plenty of other legitimate criticisms of Lowry's game, such as his masterclass in grifting, that we can discuss. If he actually has trouble staying at his playing weight, it actually makes him more relatable.

As a side note, I am not overweight but have people around me who are. In my experience, weight jokes directed anywhere make them feel crappy. Why do people want to defend behavior that make others, especially unintended targets, feel bad?
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
because they are being paid millions specifically to be in good shape.

Whether you think that's a good defense or not is another matter. I'd guess the vast majority of posters on here who struggle with weight are probably at jobs that don't require them to be physically fit.

Where do you draw the line between "fat shaming" and using someone's weight as a legit excuse for poor performance? If a player was out partying all night before a game and it was causing him to suck, we would crap all over him.

Why is eating yourself into poor performance any different than going to strip clubs every night? They both lead to the same result on the court.

I get the posts that were quoted don't actually offer any value other than dunking on fat people for being fat, though. They don't mention how Lowry's weight impacts his play or anything. Just dunking on Lowry for being fat.
 

EddieYost

is not associated in any way with GHoff
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
10,945
NH
I think Brad did a great job filling out the roster around the core. Who’s with me?
 

Smokey Joe

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,243
Replying to all of these to note that fat shaming is a serious societal problem that both is a significant causal factor in obesity, a major source of depression, and a contributor to suicide risk. It’s not something that should be the source of jokes.

Note: I am not a mod, but I sincerely hope the powers that be on SoSH support this because we, as a community, have made significant strides over the years to address a lot of toxic cultural elements that we had previously embraced and/or perpetuated. I’d like to think that is largely a result of many/most of us needing to first learn to be better before we could become better. We should do that on this issue too.
So a riff on popular culture, where a reluctant extraterrestrial free agent is lured to sign with a team by the use of a popular candy, when neither E.T. Nor Kyle Lowry are actually overweight, gets turned into fat shaming?
I am sorry Jake Rae, I think you are reading way too much into this.
 

BlackJack

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 11, 2007
3,516
What I really want to know, for those who have started referring to him as POBOBS, are you saying all the words when you see that? Or are you pronouncing it? And if the latter, PO-BOBS or POB-OBS?
 

Justthetippett

New Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,867
Cosign. Are the cs at the point to attract vet ring chasers? Or do they use the deeper part of the bench on lottery tickets next year?
Can’t they do both? The ring chasing vet thing really comes down to a chemistry fit for me. They have the great situation now with Al. They don’t need someone coming in thinking they’re there to “teach” the Jays and Marcus. I would love some old three point sniper to take Neismith under his wing and see if they could settle him down a bit. He could be a big part of next regular season.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
1 through 9, absolutely. The rest is an off season project.
It's kind of funny that the C's are competing for a Championship while their #11-17 have never been more anonymous. No ex-stars that are washed, no veteran locker room leaders, no young draft picks to dream on, not even NBA JAGs, literally flotsam.

The reality is Brad has them because they are super cheap & don't create salary cap/tax issues

For fun, I'm going to try to rank these guys in case the team came down with COVID and needed to play.
11. Hauser (I actually like Sam and think he'll return next season)
12. Stauskas (he's as close to being a NBA vet presence as they have here)
13. Kornet (tall & the most expensive one of the bunch)
14. Morgan (312 career NBA minutes)
15. Fitts (74 career NBA minutes)
16. Thomas 2 way (someone liked him as a PG of the future for 10 secs)
17. Ryan 2-way (1yr removed from pruning trees in a cemetery)
 

bluefenderstrat

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2002
2,610
Tralfamadore
Can’t they do both? The ring chasing vet thing really comes down to a chemistry fit for me. They have the great situation now with Al. They don’t need someone coming in thinking they’re there to “teach” the Jays and Marcus. I would love some old three point sniper to take Neismith under his wing and see if they could settle him down a bit. He could be a big part of next regular season.
I would love for them to sign Connaughton (not that he’s “old”) for the local connection and fit, but I expect he stays in MIL.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
For fun, I'm going to try to rank these guys in case the team came down with COVID and needed to play.
11. Hauser (I actually like Sam and think he'll return next season)
12. Stauskas (he's as close to being a NBA vet presence as they have here)
13. Kornet (tall & the most expensive one of the bunch)
14. Morgan (312 career NBA minutes)
15. Fitts (74 career NBA minutes)
16. Thomas 2 way (someone liked him as a PG of the future for 10 secs)
17. Ryan 2-way (1yr removed from pruning trees in a cemetery)
Let me abbreviate for you.
11. really good hooter
12. good shooter who can handle ball (hopefully funny story I was listening to the Locked on Ws podcast before the series as my 11 YO wanted to hear "what the enemy was saying" and he mentioned Stauskas as a guy who might give the Cs some shooting. That's when I knew the guy had spent 0 minutes watching the Cs, even though that might literally be his job.)
13. Tall shooter.
14. versatile wing who actually has playoff experience.
15. Versatile wing.
16. Small shooter (.467% in G-League!) who can handle the ball and play some D. I think he could be a rotation guy somewhere in NBA. He also has 459 NBA minutes.
17. shooter
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
Can’t they do both? The ring chasing vet thing really comes down to a chemistry fit for me. They have the great situation now with Al. They don’t need someone coming in thinking they’re there to “teach” the Jays and Marcus. I would love some old three point sniper to take Neismith under his wing and see if they could settle him down a bit. He could be a big part of next regular season.
Have any of the teams we've played had ring-chasing vets doing anything meaningful? I guess Dragic, kinda, although that was a buyout.

Everyone else is playing tight rotations, and had to compete for their vets on the open market (PJ Tucker comes to mind).

So many of those offense-first old dudes are unplayable in the postseason, particularly in the modern NBA. The ones who can still play D are getting real contracts.
 

bankshot1

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 12, 2003
25,295
where I was last at
Let me abbreviate for you.
11. really good hooter
12. good shooter who can handle ball (hopefully funny story I was listening to the Locked on Ws podcast before the series as my 11 YO wanted to hear "what the enemy was saying" and he mentioned Stauskas as a guy who might give the Cs some shooting. That's when I knew the guy had spent 0 minutes watching the Cs, even though that might literally be his job.)
13. Tall shooter.
14. versatile wing who actually has playoff experience.
15. Versatile wing.
16. Small shooter (.467% in G-League!) who can handle the ball and play some D. I think he could be a rotation guy somewhere in NBA. He also has 459 NBA minutes.
17. shooter
re #10 on the 11-17 list
WBCD thanks for the thumbnails on 11-17
I'm pretty sure I can list 1-9 (maybe not in perfect order).

But it leaves the #10 in limbo.

I think that's Nesmith.

He seems to rank ~10 seems to be in Celtic limbo, and who seems to have his work cut out this off-season to crack 1-9, find some meaningful PT (probably at PP's expense), or pack his bag for Sacramento, Barcelona, or Tel Aviv.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
So many of those offense-first old dudes are unplayable in the postseason, particularly in the modern NBA. The ones who can still play D are getting real contracts.
The guys who are really getting contracts are guys who can play D and shoot. Of course those guys are super expensive, which brings up an interesting question:

Is it more efficient to stack the bench with guys who can shoot and hope that they can learn to play passable defense (which is why Strus passed Robinson - evidently he played some passable defense, particularly in the PHI series on Harden)?

Or should a team stack the bench with guys who can guard multiple positions with hopes that they can learn to shoot (someone like Romeo)?

Probably not an either/or question. I have to think it's easier to learn to shoot than learn to play defense, but what do I know?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
Let me abbreviate for you.
11. really good hooter
12. good shooter who can handle ball (hopefully funny story I was listening to the Locked on Ws podcast before the series as my 11 YO wanted to hear "what the enemy was saying" and he mentioned Stauskas as a guy who might give the Cs some shooting. That's when I knew the guy had spent 0 minutes watching the Cs, even though that might literally be his job.)
13. Tall shooter.
14. versatile wing who actually has playoff experience.
15. Versatile wing.
16. Small shooter (.467% in G-League!) who can handle the ball and play some D. I think he could be a rotation guy somewhere in NBA. He also has 459 NBA minutes.
17. shooter
Ha. I also listened to that Warriors Locked on pod with the Stauskas comment and thought the same. He spent no time studying Boston. That dude had the Warriors in 5, his post-game whine is classic.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
So many of those offense-first old dudes are unplayable in the postseason, particularly in the modern NBA. The ones who can still play D are getting real contracts.
The guys who are really getting contracts are guys who can play D and shoot. Of course those guys are super expensive, which brings up an interesting question:

Is it more efficient to stack the bench with guys who can shoot and hope that they can learn to play passable defense (which is why Strus passed Robinson - evidently he played some passable defense, particularly in the PHI series on Harden)?

Or should a team stack the bench with guys who can guard multiple positions with hopes that they can learn to shoot (someone like Romeo)?

Probably not an either/or question. I have to think it's easier to learn to shoot than learn to play defense, but what do I know?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
Ha. I also listened to that Warriors Locked on pod with the Stauskas comment and thought the same. He spent no time studying Boston. That dude had the Warriors in 5, his post-game whine is classic.
The really stupid thing is that he not mentioned mentioned Stauskas in his Final preview, but when Karalis was doing the cross-over podcast, he threw out Stauskas. I'm sure Karalis was like, "WTF is this guy talking about?" but to his credit, he didn't bat an eyelash, at least not on the radio.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
The guys who are really getting contracts are guys who can play D and shoot. Of course those guys are super expensive, which brings up an interesting question:

Is it more efficient to stack the bench with guys who can shoot and hope that they can learn to play passable defense (which is why Strus passed Robinson - evidently he played some passable defense, particularly in the PHI series on Harden)?

Or should a team stack the bench with guys who can guard multiple positions with hopes that they can learn to shoot (someone like Romeo)?

Probably not an either/or question. I have to think it's easier to learn to shoot than learn to play defense, but what do I know?
I'd stack the deep bench (11-15) with the best defensive players from the G-league (if you need cheap).

When #11-15 enter a game they would never be a top 3 offensive option. So if you ever have to break glass and pull one of those guys I want plus D (which doesn't get paid).

BUT 11-15 really doesn't matter, like at all, in the playoffs and a little bit during the regular season
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
The guys who are really getting contracts are guys who can play D and shoot. Of course those guys are super expensive, which brings up an interesting question:

Is it more efficient to stack the bench with guys who can shoot and hope that they can learn to play passable defense (which is why Strus passed Robinson - evidently he played some passable defense, particularly in the PHI series on Harden)?

Or should a team stack the bench with guys who can guard multiple positions with hopes that they can learn to shoot (someone like Romeo)?

Probably not an either/or question. I have to think it's easier to learn to shoot than learn to play defense, but what do I know?
At the place in the cycle the Celtics are at, I'd rather hope a shooter can get to passable on defense. For another team, it might be different.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,901
Hingham, MA
Bruce Bowen is probably the best example of a guy who learned to shoot. Obviously an outlier but he became super valuable.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,922
Melrose, MA
The guys who are really getting contracts are guys who can play D and shoot. Of course those guys are super expensive, which brings up an interesting question:

Is it more efficient to stack the bench with guys who can shoot and hope that they can learn to play passable defense (which is why Strus passed Robinson - evidently he played some passable defense, particularly in the PHI series on Harden)?

Or should a team stack the bench with guys who can guard multiple positions with hopes that they can learn to shoot (someone like Romeo)?

Probably not an either/or question. I have to think it's easier to learn to shoot than learn to play defense, but what do I know?
Is this an apples to apples comparison? A guy who can shoot but is poor a poor defender may or may not have the potential to develop ito a passable one, and that is probably known from the outset. That might be dfferent from defenders trying to learn to shoot.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
Ha. I also listened to that Warriors Locked on pod with the Stauskas comment and thought the same. He spent no time studying Boston. That dude had the Warriors in 5, his post-game whine is classic.
- we just have that championship experience
- best defense the celtics have faced
- best offense the celtics have faced
- can't bet against a dynasty
- memphis was better than boston anyway
- did you know Jimmy Butler almost hit a 3??

Did I miss anything in Warriors Bingo?
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
Is this an apples to apples comparison? A guy who can shoot but is poor a poor defender may or may not have the potential to develop ito a passable one, and that is probably known from the outset. That might be dfferent from defenders trying to learn to shoot.
Not really apples to apples and not really either/or. Brad decided to have intentionally stacked his bench with as many shooters as he could find, preferably in the 6'6" (+/-) category, and I'm just wondering out loud why he's doing this. (This isn't even including Garrison Matthews).

If we agree that #11-#17 should generally be for developmental players (minus the one or two spots for veteran cheerleaders/break-glass-in-case-of-emergency guy), I personally would sign all of the best potential defenders I could and try to teach them to shoot but I don't think NBA teams do this. Maybe it's because it's hard to teach a guy to shoot when that guy doesn't play?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
- we just have that championship experience
- best defense the celtics have faced
- best offense the celtics have faced
- can't bet against a dynasty
- memphis was better than boston anyway
- did you know Jimmy Butler almost hit a 3??

Did I miss anything in Warriors Bingo?
These are the latest nuggets:
-a healthy GP2 is the difference between a 5-game and 7-game series win
-26 straight series where the Dubs have won a road game
-Smart can't guard Steph
-Kerr has the Tatum cheat code and Dubs will continue to shut JT down
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,922
Melrose, MA
Not really apples to apples and not really either/or. Brad decided to have intentionally stacked his bench with as many shooters as he could find, preferably in the 6'6" (+/-) category, and I'm just wondering out loud why he's doing this. (This isn't even including Garrison Matthews).

If we agree that #11-#17 should generally be for developmental players (minus the one or two spots for veteran cheerleaders/break-glass-in-case-of-emergency guy), I personally would sign all of the best potential defenders I could and try to teach them to shoot but I don't think NBA teams do this. Maybe it's because it's hard to teach a guy to shoot when that guy doesn't play?
A guy who can defend but not shoot might be a #9 or #10 guy instead of #11 to #17. Look at the way Romeo played on the Celtics while he was here - especially last season, his offensive role was to hang out in the corner not really expecting to ever receive a pass. But he was a playable defender.
 

Senator Donut

post-Domer
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2010
5,703
Have any of the teams we've played had ring-chasing vets doing anything meaningful? I guess Dragic, kinda, although that was a buyout.

Everyone else is playing tight rotations, and had to compete for their vets on the open market (PJ Tucker comes to mind).

So many of those offense-first old dudes are unplayable in the postseason, particularly in the modern NBA. The ones who can still play D are getting real contracts.
The series of events that led to the Bucks swapping out PJ Tucker for Semi Ojeleye could be playing out similarly in Boston. Winning the title triggered a bonus for Jhrue Holiday putting the Bucks slightly over the luxury tax and triggering the repeater penalty for 21-22, one year earlier than the franchise had planned.

If the Celtics win the title, Brown’s incentive will kick in putting the Celtics in the tax and making them a likely repeater team next year. Obviously, winning a championship is worth the cost, but it’s something to keep an eye on.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
The series of events that led to the Bucks swapping out PJ Tucker for Semi Ojeleye could be playing out similarly in Boston. Winning the title triggered a bonus for Jhrue Holiday putting the Bucks slightly over the luxury tax and triggering the repeater penalty for 21-22, one year earlier than the franchise had planned.

If the Celtics win the title, Brown’s incentive will kick in putting the Celtics in the tax and making them a likely repeater team next year. Obviously, winning a championship is worth the cost, but it’s something to keep an eye on.
If they go cheap, ala Bucks, then they run the real risk of Brown/Tatum questioning the ownerships commitment
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
The guys who are really getting contracts are guys who can play D and shoot. Of course those guys are super expensive, which brings up an interesting question:

Is it more efficient to stack the bench with guys who can shoot and hope that they can learn to play passable defense (which is why Strus passed Robinson - evidently he played some passable defense, particularly in the PHI series on Harden)?

Or should a team stack the bench with guys who can guard multiple positions with hopes that they can learn to shoot (someone like Romeo)?

Probably not an either/or question. I have to think it's easier to learn to shoot than learn to play defense, but what do I know?
Jason Timpf is good for you and your son. He had the Warriors and I believe he's a Dub's fan but is extremely fair. Nice recap of adjustments he see's happening

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkOoqF2m_xA
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,883
Imaginationland
Let me abbreviate for you.
11. really good hooter
12. good shooter who can handle ball (hopefully funny story I was listening to the Locked on Ws podcast before the series as my 11 YO wanted to hear "what the enemy was saying" and he mentioned Stauskas as a guy who might give the Cs some shooting. That's when I knew the guy had spent 0 minutes watching the Cs, even though that might literally be his job.)
13. Tall shooter.
14. versatile wing who actually has playoff experience.
15. Versatile wing.
16. Small shooter (.467% in G-League!) who can handle the ball and play some D. I think he could be a rotation guy somewhere in NBA. He also has 459 NBA minutes.
17. shooter
That's beyond embarrassing. You don't need to have watched a minute of the Celtics to know Stauskas is an end of the bench JAG, just look at basketball reference and see that he's played 31 total minutes for Boston, regular season and playoffs. Were one so inclined, you could take 60 seconds looking at his game log and see that the average margin in games he played was over 18 points (Celtics are 13-2 when Stauskas plays! He's the secret!). Lazy is an understatement.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
8,198
I think Brad did a great job filling out the roster around the core. Who’s with me?
I filled out around my core once I turned 40 and stopped playing basketball every day, and I’m not offended by someone posting that a professional basketball player is fat.

However, I didn’t grow up heavy, and certainly understand how someone who has struggled with their weight could be hurt by such comments, so I will be more sensitive to their feelings in the future.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
These are the latest nuggets:
-a healthy GP2 is the difference between a 5-game and 7-game series win
-26 straight series where the Dubs have won a road game
-Smart can't guard Steph
-Kerr has the Tatum cheat code and Dubs will continue to shut JT down
Thanks for posting. Just started listening to it. One fix suggested by host and expert is that GSW should start using their "deep bench" as an advantage. I.e., Kerr should start playing 11-12 guys tonight.

Like any playoff coach has an 11- or 12-man rotation in a playoff game.

LOL.
 

teddykgb

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 16, 2005
11,425
Chelmsford, MA
Jason Timpf is good for you and your son. He had the Warriors and I believe he's a Dub's fan but is extremely fair. Nice recap of adjustments he see's happening

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkOoqF2m_xA
This was a good video although a little tough with out video clips. One thing he mentions that I wish he had spent more time on is that teams no longer hedge screens. Why is that? Our KG teams were devastating hedging the screens and you could almost argue there’s little difference between a high drop coverage and a hedge. What drive that out of the game because you definitely don’t see it much anymore
 

JCizzle

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 11, 2006
21,827
If they go cheap, ala Bucks, then they run the real risk of Brown/Tatum questioning the ownerships commitment
This ownership group has always said they'll pay it for teams that are in serious competition for the title. They have no excuse for the next few years or they deserve all the criticism they'll get from fans and media.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
Thanks for posting. Just started listening to it. One fix suggested by host and expert is that GSW should start using their "deep bench" as an advantage. I.e., Kerr should start playing 11-12 guys tonight.

Like any playoff coach has an 11- or 12-man rotation in a playoff game.

LOL.
Cyrus (GSW Locked-On dude) went completely off the rails with his GP2 saving the day takes. He's convinced GP2 alters this from a 5-game to a 7-game series o_O

11-12 man rotation on 7 days rest, yikes! Steph/Wiggins playing fewer minutes isn't the solution they are looking for...maybe GSW can find their groove by Game3 by going into their deep bench? more Toscano-Andersen please

No one in Dubs Nation is acknowledging their 13pt 4th Quarter (Bjelicia last 3 withstanding). The Celtics going 5 wide/switch everything instead of TL/Al drop coverage was hellish for GS's offense. Steph going into full sprints to lose White in the halfcourt only to find Tatum on him, then another sprint to find Brown on him on the perimeter just sucked the life out of Steph.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,607
A guy who can defend but not shoot might be a #9 or #10 guy instead of #11 to #17. Look at the way Romeo played on the Celtics while he was here - especially last season, his offensive role was to hang out in the corner not really expecting to ever receive a pass. But he was a playable defender.
The reverse is also true though. A guy who can shoot, but not defend, might be a #9 or #10 guy on this team.

Their top seven are all plus defenders.

Another guy who can shoot, specifically a guy with some size, can play as a fifth guy with any of your top 7.

Basically, another Pritchard that gives up speed/quickness on defense rather than size.

I'd guess a guy like that would be their top target for next season, when they are (hopefully) defending their title.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,345
- we just have that championship experience
- best defense the celtics have faced
- best offense the celtics have faced
- can't bet against a dynasty
- memphis was better than boston anyway
- did you know Jimmy Butler almost hit a 3??

Did I miss anything in Warriors Bingo?
to be fair to Warriors fans (and that’s excluding this goofball who thinks Stauskas ever plays), this seems to be the National media as well.

I listened to both The Lowe Post and The Mismatch after Game 1 and was kind of stunned to hear all of them still talking about the Butler Miami 3 and still picking the Warriors in 7.

Before the series, I had Celtics in 6 (and I thought the media was exhibiting some pretty crazy recency bias with the end of that game 7). After watching Game 1, I am sticking with my pick but I’m very very tempted to change it to 5…
The Warriors have only 1 guy that create anything off of the dribble consistently (Curry). One of their supposed closing 5 is such an awful defender he’s getting played off of the floor (Poole). Klay looks like he’s playing in cement shoes. On offense, Draymond is about as useful as I am. Wiggins could be that secondary creator but I need to see it 4 times from him this series to believe it
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,825
The series of events that led to the Bucks swapping out PJ Tucker for Semi Ojeleye could be playing out similarly in Boston. Winning the title triggered a bonus for Jhrue Holiday putting the Bucks slightly over the luxury tax and triggering the repeater penalty for 21-22, one year earlier than the franchise had planned.

If the Celtics win the title, Brown’s incentive will kick in putting the Celtics in the tax and making them a likely repeater team next year. Obviously, winning a championship is worth the cost, but it’s something to keep an eye on.
The repeater tax comes when you spend four years in five over the line. Boston will be a taxpayer this year and next, but their payroll will go down when Al comes off the books. And in Begarin they have low cost talent coming in to balance the scales.
 

DGreenwood

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 2, 2003
2,527
Seattle
The repeater tax comes when you spend four years in five over the line. Boston will be a taxpayer this year and next, but their payroll will go down when Al comes off the books. And in Begarin they have low cost talent coming in to balance the scales.
They only pay this year if they win the title, correct? I think they are currently under but Brown's bonus if they win the championship would put them over?

Edit to add a source:
View: https://twitter.com/BobbyMarks42/status/1531113996463525888?s=20&t=kvXN-urSeChaJn6qgNoglA
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
The repeater tax comes when you spend four years in five over the line. Boston will be a taxpayer this year and next, but their payroll will go down when Al comes off the books. And in Begarin they have low cost talent coming in to balance the scales.
Yeah, they could taxmaxx next year, re-sign Grant, and still have a path to dip under in 2023-2024 and reset the repeater. Or they could find some extra talent and Wyc could take a loan against high equity and go over; point is, they have options.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
to be fair to Warriors fans (and that’s excluding this goofball who thinks Stauskas ever plays), this seems to be the National media as well.

I listened to both The Lowe Post and The Mismatch after Game 1 and was kind of stunned to hear all of them still talking about the Butler Miami 3 and still picking the Warriors in 7.

Before the series, I had Celtics in 6 (and I thought the media was exhibiting some pretty crazy recency bias with the end of that game 7). After watching Game 1, I am sticking with my pick but I’m very very tempted to change it to 5…
The Warriors have only 1 guy that create anything off of the dribble consistently (Curry). One of their supposed closing 5 is such an awful defender he’s getting played off of the floor (Poole). Klay looks like he’s playing in cement shoes. On offense, Draymond is about as useful as I am. Wiggins could be that secondary creator but I need to see it 4 times from him this series to believe it
I'm with you, although I've seen soooo many NBA series where the game 1 loser comes out and just plays their asses off that I'm going to hold off on triumphalism for a game.

I do think that Klay and Dray not being KLAY and DRAY is not yet priced in.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
This was a good video although a little tough with out video clips. One thing he mentions that I wish he had spent more time on is that teams no longer hedge screens. Why is that? Our KG teams were devastating hedging the screens and you could almost argue there’s little difference between a high drop coverage and a hedge. What drive that out of the game because you definitely don’t see it much anymore
Haven't listened but did he say that teams don't hedge at all or that BOs / GSW didn't hedge in G1? Because if it's the former, that's super weird to me as it's my understanding that GSW was most effective guarding Luka when Curry hedged him and then scrambled back to his defender.