Joe Mazzulla officially named head coach

Senator Donut

post-Domer
SoSH Member
Apr 21, 2010
5,703
I understand it’s an expression and I understand why, but “prison rules basketball”’as an expression always amuses me. Like… prison has a lot of fucking rules. And if you think there are a lot of “unwritten rules” in basketball, well, about prison…

Rule One: Thou shalt not do anything that causes basketball to be suspended for everyone.

Some of the other issues around contact are… not interesting.

Anyway, moving along, that’s an interesting thought of the different % on oreb in that situation. Seems like something numbers can be run on, but would still need to consider matchups… What might the tipping point be!
I’ve never seen figures for NBA, but KenPom estimates that a team that misses a free throw while trailing by 2 in the final minute gets an offensive rebound 25% of the time, well above the normal OR% on missed free throws, which is between 10 and 15% depending on the season.

Obviously there is a lot of difference between NBA and college, for instance NCAA rebounders are both further away from the sidelines and baseline when lining up.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,922
Melrose, MA
The one advantage Joe has had is plenty of talent on hand - he hasn't yet been asked to build with smoke and mirrors the way Spoelstra has done at times. On the other hand, he did coach the Celtics to 9-1 in the playoffs without KP.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
The one advantage Joe has had is plenty of talent on hand - he hasn't yet been asked to build with smoke and mirrors the way Spoelstra has done at times. On the other hand, he did coach the Celtics to 9-1 in the playoffs without KP.
Yes, it's easy to forget that Boston without KP isn't remotely a "superteam". Talent-wise, it might not even be as good as Denver, Minnesota, OKC, maybe Dallas. It's a really well-coached team that executes its ass off, with well-fitting pieces.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Yes, it's easy to forget that Boston without KP isn't remotely a "superteam". Talent-wise, it might not even be as good as Denver, Minnesota, OKC, maybe Dallas. It's a really well-coached team that executes its ass off, with well-fitting pieces.
What!?!
It has one top-5 player; one top 20 player; and two all defensive players.
That’s a ton of talent
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
32,048
Yes, it's easy to forget that Boston without KP isn't remotely a "superteam". Talent-wise, it might not even be as good as Denver, Minnesota, OKC, maybe Dallas. It's a really well-coached team that executes its ass off, with well-fitting pieces.
Don't know if I agree with this. JT, JB, DW, and Jrue are still 4 all-NBA caliber talents.

Obviously, KP makes them a historically great team (assuming they win the chip) but the Cs were 21-4 without KP this year (granted some of those games they rested KP because of quality of opposition).
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,345
Don't know if I agree with this. JT, JB, DW, and Jrue are still 4 all-NBA caliber talents.

Obviously, KP makes them a historically great team (assuming they win the chip) but the Cs were 21-4 without KP this year (granted some of those games they rested KP because of quality of opposition).
yeah, that’s a ridiculous statement. Mazzulla has been good but let’s not make it seem like he’s coaching high school team or something
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
yeah, that’s a ridiculous statement. Mazzulla has been good but let’s not make it seem like he’s coaching high school team or something
I explicitly said "not a superteam", not "not a very good team."

If you look at the talent level of other top teams, Boston without KP is really good but not way above them, and possibly below some.

People were talking about Denver being favored over a healthy Boston team. Not sure how what I'm saying is crazy at all.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,345
I explicitly said "not a superteam", not "not a very good team."
the “it might not be as good as” and then listing a bunch of teams is what people are responding to.

We all have posts that are kind of ridiculous. This one was yours
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
the “it might not be as good as” and then listing a bunch of teams is what people are responding to.

We all have posts that are kind of ridiculous. This one was yours
It's not ridiculous in the slightest.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,883
Imaginationland
I explicitly said "not a superteam", not "not a very good team."
Yeah minus KP, it's essentially a more top heavy version of last year's team (solidly improved backcourt, same frontcourt, much weaker bench). That team is likely still favored in this series, but absolutely would not have looked like far and away the best team in the league all year, nor would they [statistically at least] have looked like one of the best single teams ever.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
Yeah minus KP, it's essentially a more top heavy version of last year's team (solidly improved backcourt, same frontcourt, much weaker bench). That team is likely still favored in this series, but absolutely would not have looked like far and away the best team in the league all year, nor would they [statistically at least] have looked like one of the best single teams ever.
No, you did it wrong, you're supposed to post "what?!?!"
 

Red Averages

owes you $50
SoSH Member
Apr 20, 2003
9,353
Very good team = could win a title
Super team = a near lock for a title, and makes it look easy.
I see nothing wrong with @lovegtm ‘s statement
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,345
saying missing Porzingis would make them the 5th most talented team in the West is something I just don’t agree with at all.

the classification of “very good” is fine. Its the drilling down and saying they are was talented than 5 teams is what I am responding to
 

TomRicardo

rusty cohlebone
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 6, 2006
21,318
Row 14
The Mavs made adjustments but well they did shit.

1) They got Tatum out of the Post with some great off ball movement in the first... so Mazzulla adjusted and let Tatum get to Luka and Kyrie. Luka did not like that. Mavs decided to let Tatum sit in the post again, and that ended that.

2) Luka got absolutely roasted and he was forced to start trying to stay in front in the 4th, he just got tired and was abused by Jrue cutting behind.

3) Mavs did better to stay on the perimeter. They got smoked on cutters.

4) Kyrie took the ball up more, and did his best Marcus Smart impression.

5) Dante Exum changed the pace... causing Luka to always be 30 feet behind several possessions.

I liked the time PJ Washington initiated the offense because it caused a little confusion on the Celtics for the Mavs but I mean if you can't beat the Celtics when they are missing open 3s....

Mazz has been the better coach this series.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,566
saying missing Porzingis would make them the 5th most talented team in the West is something I just don’t agree with at all.

the classification of “very good” is fine. Its the drilling down and saying they are was talented than 5 teams is what I am responding to
Well, you'll notice that I said "maybe" for Dallas, and now I'd upgrade that to "definitely better than Dallas, even without KP" ;)

I think they'd be clearly worse than Denver without KP, OKC is probably a toss-up, and Minnesota is a bad matchup for Boston in general (too much ability to contain penetration).
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,330
Well, you'll notice that I said "maybe" for Dallas, and now I'd upgrade that to "definitely better than Dallas, even without KP" ;)

I think they'd be clearly worse than Denver without KP, OKC is probably a toss-up, and Minnesota is a bad matchup for Boston in general (too much ability to contain penetration).
I think you guys are drastically underrating how good this team is even without Porzingis. Would the ‘86 Celtics still have been a great team without Bill Walton, the 6th man of the year that season? Of course they would have as others were more than capable of stepping up in his absence….just as we have this season in the non-Porzingis games. Sure, “on paper” it’s great having him out there but it isn’t like he’s missed when he’s in slacks and shoes.
 

RSN Diaspora

molests goats for comedy
SoSH Member
Jul 29, 2005
11,922
Washington, DC
Sure, “on paper” it’s great having him out there but it isn’t like he’s missed when he’s in slacks and shoes.
I'd argue that there is a wide gulf of difference between "this team is good even without Porzingis" (true) and "he isn't missed" when he's out. Tatum forces a Kyrie turnover with about 2:25 remaining in the game. He proceeds to miss a short-range jumper with space that he hits on an "on" night, allowing Dallas to pull from down 10 to down 5 in the midst of an 9-0 run, and but for DWhite's block on the other end, it's a 3-point game. I have to believe that a healthy KP would have at least been the best option to mitigate this, especially in light of Al's dreadful 2-of-4 shooting night.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
50,717
The Celtics Needed a Killer Instinct. Their Coach Made Them Watch Killer Whales.

"It could be anything," said Celtics guard Derrick White after a Game 2 win over the Dallas Mavericks in the NBA Finals on Sunday night. "A lot of ocean, a lot of nature. He loves that predator-prey lifestyle."
As for the clip that Mazzulla showed the Celtics earlier this year, of hyenas working in tandem to take down a wildebeest? "Man, was it hard to watch," Kornet said. "I'll tell you what, Mother Nature..." He mulled over the lesson the video imparted. "It was really about working together and trying to bring the enemy to a standstill."
Mazzulla's autobiography will have no shortage of titles but I am working with "Hyenas Before Sage" though I am 110% convinced that if burning sage shows some sort of edge Joe is going to set the world on fire.
 

Cornboy14

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 26, 2001
1,010
Huge credit for going with Tillman. I think almost every other coach just defaults to playing Kornet.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
21,160
Santa Monica
credit for playing Tillman (exp. in playoffs & against MAVs)
demerits for not playing Hauser at the start of Q4 over PP

otherwise, he's been solid throughout
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
66,571
So what kind of fucked up videos does CJM show the team this weekend?

Dark horse guess: Ants.
 

Light-Tower-Power

ask me about My Pillow
SoSH Member
Jun 14, 2013
16,446
Nashua, NH
I think Joe’s 100% right that the process was great for the first 6 or so minutes of the game but they missed some open shots. Everything went to shit after a few no calls on drives to the basket early, and they were visibly really frustrated. Then it snowballed from there. Not saying they decided to mail it in once they realized they weren’t going to get to the line tonight but it clearly affected them. Have to hope they get the calls at home.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
10,320
NOVA
I think Joe’s 100% right that the process was great for the first 6 or so minutes of the game but they missed some open shots. Everything went to shit after a few no calls on drives to the basket early, and they were visibly really frustrated. Then it snowballed from there. Not saying they decided to mail it in once they realized they weren’t going to get to the line tonight but it clearly affected them. Have to hope they get the calls at home.
Everything went to Hell when they subbed Al out and Dallas ignored Tillman which ironically led to his and-1 drive. But, their defense suffered many miscommunications and their offense was stagnate without Al's spacing threat on offense and his quarterbacking on defense.

And don't give me this oh even when Al got back in they weren't much better. Of course not. But things unraveled when he left and then got the second foul later, it really snowballed. They have a big problem right now against a team that is well, big.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
66,571
I think Joe’s 100% right that the process was great for the first 6 or so minutes of the game but they missed some open shots.
Was that true, though? Maybe it was because they had good shots so they took them, which is what CJM preaches, but even in those first minutes I found myself thinking, “This doesn’t look like the Celtics offense.”

I’m not saying that Joe’s cold corpse wouldn’t know more basketball than I do. I’m just wondering if what he said is really true.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
10,320
NOVA
Was that true, though? Maybe it was because they had good shots so they took them, which is what CJM preaches, but even in those first minutes I found myself thinking, “This doesn’t look like the Celtics offense.”

I’m not saying that Joe’s cold corpse wouldn’t know more basketball than I do. I’m just wondering if what he said is really true.
I think if you’re Joe that is exactly what you say. You don’t give an inch. You tell them we good in our process while changing some things for game 5.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
10,320
NOVA
At the varsity level I’d love to have a platform to tell the opposing coach meh we will just double down on the process.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
66,571
I think if you’re Joe that is exactly what you say. You don’t give an inch. You tell them we good in our process while changing some things for game 5.
Yeah, I buy that. “Stick with our offense, it will work. It does work.” And that’s why I agree that it makes sense to say that in his remarks.

I’m just questioning if they were actually running the offense in the first half of Q1. I can see the coaching example you raise: You don’t want them to think differently, but to execute.

There were a couple of times in the game that it seemed like CJM called time outs close to one another. It’s been reported that the thing that bugs him most it, like, he accepts shooting variance, but not executing the offense is what gets to him. Would love to know if some of that was about that.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
10,320
NOVA
Yeah, I buy that. “Stick with our offense, it will work. It does work.” And that’s why I agree that it makes sense to say that in his remarks.

I’m just questioning if they were actually running the offense in the first half of Q1. I can see the coaching example you raise: You don’t want them to think differently, but to execute.

There were a couple of times in the game that it seemed like CJM called time outs close to one another. It’s been reported that the thing that bugs him most it, like, he accepts shooting variance, but not executing the offense is what gets to him. Would love to know if some of that was about that.
I think on the surface from the outside it’s not easy to tell. Did Joe anticipate the changes and coached them through this process pregame? Maybe. Did the changes occur and he was disappointed that the Celtics couldn’t adjust? Maybe. Were they gotten completely flat footed ? Maybe. From the outside we are all guessing.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
10,320
NOVA
One thing I can say is that yeah in the first half of the first quarter they were trying to run offense based on everything they had seen. Doesn’t mean it was good or effective.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
10,320
NOVA
You all hate his therapy coaching perspective when he loses one of every seven or eight games. Never quit. Some day you and Ron borges can toast to the one time you were right.
 

riboflav

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2006
10,320
NOVA
Can you imagine being EJ or whomever his respondent is and being put in a film room with Joe and trying to keep pace and understand anything he’s dissecting and trying to get across to his team? I cannot imagine the arrogance of knowing next to nothing about basketball and coming to a SoSH thread to lay it all bare that I in fact know nothing.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
45,922
Melrose, MA
Got the lotion whipped out?

We know how they need to play the Mavs, they fucked the execution.
This morning I read the quote as more insightful and substantive than I did last night.

Joe Mazzulla: “Preparation doesn’t guarantee automatic success.” Said the Celtics process was good and the Mavs just beat them.

My "Ha!" was because I thought it was absolutely hilarious that Joe said the process was good. I didn't mean it as an attack on Joe. I just thought it was funny that he claimed with a straight face that the team did what it was supposed to do, what he wanted them to do.

This morning I focused more on the first part. Preparation doesn’t guarantee automatic success.” That could be read in a couple of different ways. One, this is the NBA, sometimes this shit happens, even to good, prepared teams. Two, focusing on the "automatic success" part, that could be a veiled criticism of the team, along the lines of "you [players] just expected to show up and win this ["automatic"], didn't you? Well, this is what happens when you do that. Nothing's automatic in this league."

I don't pretend to know what Joe meant.

I think if you’re Joe that is exactly what you say. You don’t give an inch. You tell them we good in our process while changing some things for game 5.
Honestly, I think "the process was good" could be read as the Joe Mazzulla version of "We're on to Cincinnati." It hits differently (funny rather than gruff/angry) because the personalities are different, but I think it is basically a similar comment.

Can you imagine being EJ or whomever his respondent is and being put in a film room with Joe and trying to keep pace and understand anything he’s dissecting and trying to get across to his team? I cannot imagine the arrogance of knowing next to nothing about basketball and coming to a SoSH thread to lay it all bare that I in fact know nothing.
I'd like you to point me to any particular post of mine from my whole history where I singled you (not a point you made that I disagreed with) out for personal attack and insult, not done in response to same. Please show me, and I will apologize. Otherwise, is it really too much to ask that, no matter how stupid you think my comment, you criticize that, however harshly, and not me personally? I think that's a reasonable ask (and I thought it was a longstanding SoSH rule).