Round 2: Celtics vs Cavs

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,630
Maine
I love Horford he does LOTS of good things. And His 3pt shooting has been a godsend this year.....and I expect it to come back despite this cold streak.

That said.....he is about the worst 6'10+ post player I have seen in a long time. He constantly (even before playoffs for at least the last few years) tries that quick flip hook thing which seems like an incredibly low percentage shot. Its like he thinks he is 6'6 and needs to "quick shoot" on everyone. Its annoying. And Its striking how much Zinger who turned and kept the ball high then just took a little jumper over shorter players was an improvement.
I am not saying Horford should try to rain Zinger or Embiid jumpers over everyone.....but on a switch against a guard yes!

Why does he do this? Its like he never developed a post game and I know thats not true.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
6,357
Cultural hub of the universe
Like, it wasn’t completely unreasonable to think the Cs would easily dispatch the Cavs last night. Personally, there wasn’t a moment when I thought the Cs might lose. But there were clearly some less-than-ideal things occurring during the game. We should discuss those things, I think.
It's amazing that this needs to be pointed out.

The corollary of it's okay to see positive outcomes in losses is also true.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,773
I love Horford he does LOTS of good things. And His 3pt shooting has been a godsend this year.....and I expect it to come back despite this cold streak.

That said.....he is about the worst 6'10+ post player I have seen in a long time.
It’s because he’s not 6’10”. He’s actually 6’8”.
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
27,522
Newton
On the substantative side, what people called "iso ball" or "stagnant" late was actually the Cs having trouble attacking Cleveland's "no switch" policy. They started to figure it out more late, and either drive against the no-switch or hit a roller at a better angle, but it definitely made them uncomfortable.

It's funny to say, and he has better personnel, but I've thought JBB has done a better job at underdog coaching than Spo did. Spo got completely destroyed with his Tatum coverages, because Tatum is too used to them, and gluing Bam to Tatum got rekt.

JBB has found ways to use limited guys like Strus to make Tatum uncomfortable at times, while also not having rules like "don't leave Tatum ever off-ball" that you see from some teams.

The not-switching stuff has been a creative way to gum up the Cs favorite initiating actions while keeping the Cavs' limited smaller guys on the floor more.
This is a helpful post -- I hadn't noticed the "no switch" policy you mention and it explains a lot.

I'm generally very positive about this team. But even I'm still trying to figure out why they were bringing the ball up so slowly during long stretches of the 4th, with the ball just finding Tatum and Brown (and often only one of them). I get that they were trying to milk some clock but what is the argument for "Tatum brings the ball up, dribbles a bit 32' out, maybe dishes to another guy to get the ball back a second or two later, and then takes a contested three or deep two with less than two seconds remaining on the shot clock"?

I know the Cavs were pressuring and it didn't seem like hero ball to me. But I still don't understand why there weren't more screens being set and why they weren't playing with more pace.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,660
Imaginationland
I love Horford he does LOTS of good things. And His 3pt shooting has been a godsend this year.....and I expect it to come back despite this cold streak.

That said.....he is about the worst 6'10+ post player I have seen in a long time. He constantly (even before playoffs for at least the last few years) tries that quick flip hook thing which seems like an incredibly low percentage shot. Its like he thinks he is 6'6 and needs to "quick shoot" on everyone. Its annoying. And Its striking how much Zinger who turned and kept the ball high then just took a little jumper over shorter players was an improvement.
I am not saying Horford should try to rain Zinger or Embiid jumpers over everyone.....but on a switch against a guard yes!

Why does he do this? Its like he never developed a post game and I know thats not true.
I'm not sure 6'9 Al Horford who is too old to get any lift at all is comparable to 7'2 Porzingis. Even against guards, he's liable to get his shot bothered if he does the slow turnaround jumper that KP can use comfortably on 75% of the league. Plus even in his prime, Horford didn't have anywhere near the scoring touch that KP has right now.

Horford is just way off right now, from everywhere. I don't know if we'd prefer a slump (which he could break out of at any time) or a result of overuse (which might correct if and when KP returns).
 

reggiecleveland

sublime
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Mar 5, 2004
28,164
Saskatoon Canada
Why does he do this? Its like he never developed a post game and I know thats not true.
For the same reason lots of fast baseball players can't bunt. He wasn't asked to or taught to post up. When I see a forward with the ball 8 feet from the hoop with a guard behind them pass it out I feel the same way Ty Cobb must when fast baseball player swung and missed at 1st pitch with the infield back.

But, when there are bad switches Tatum, Brown, White just punish them, even if Al doesn't.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,341
This is a helpful post -- I hadn't noticed the "no switch" policy you mention and it explains a lot.

I'm generally very positive about this team. But even I'm still trying to figure out why they were bringing the ball up so slowly during long stretches of the 4th, with the ball just finding Tatum and Brown (and often only one of them). I get that they were trying to milk some clock but what is the argument for "Tatum brings the ball up, dribbles a bit 32' out, maybe dishes to another guy to get the ball back a second or two later, and then takes a contested three or deep two with less than two seconds remaining on the shot clock"?

I know the Cavs were pressuring and it didn't seem like hero ball to me. But I still don't understand why there weren't more screens being set and why they weren't playing with more pace.
A lot of it is that they were setting screens, but they weren't getting the expected result from them, so then it looks like a slow iso, because the same guy has the ball. It took some time to adjust to how Cleveland was defending those screens.

The Celtics use a lot of slip screens and forced switches to initiate their good late-game offense and open up holes, find passes, and force rotations. Credit to Cleveland for disrupting that, and it's not the last time we'll see it.

Denver does a different thing to similar effect, where they put 2 on the ball, but rotate to take away the easy outlet pass, which gummed up the Cs a lot in their 2nd meeting.

It's all fun stuff to watch for. The Celtics do a much better job this year of running real offense late game, but the other team gets a say in that too!
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,341
Side note: it's pretty funny how the goal posts have moved from "they play too many elimination games" to "yeah, they're up 3-1 for the 2nd time in a row, but they let the other team get within 5 points!"

Whenever Denver plays like crap and lets the other team be ahead for most of the game, people jizz over how they barely squeak it out with their "unstoppable 2-man game" (that somehow gets down/close for lots of the game). When the Celtics let a team within 5, and then curbstomp them in the last couple minutes, people worry that....something?
 

Gene Conleys Plane Ticket

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
3,380
On the substantative side, what people called "iso ball" or "stagnant" late was actually the Cs having trouble attacking Cleveland's "no switch" policy. They started to figure it out more late, and either drive against the no-switch or hit a roller at a better angle, but it definitely made them uncomfortable.

It's funny to say, and he has better personnel, but I've thought JBB has done a better job at underdog coaching than Spo did. Spo got completely destroyed with his Tatum coverages, because Tatum is too used to them, and gluing Bam to Tatum got rekt.

JBB has found ways to use limited guys like Strus to make Tatum uncomfortable at times, while also not having rules like "don't leave Tatum ever off-ball" that you see from some teams.

The not-switching stuff has been a creative way to gum up the Cs favorite initiating actions while keeping the Cavs' limited smaller guys on the floor more.
This is a really helpful analysis, and I agree that JBB has done better job than Spo (though in fairness, he also has better personnel).

I think the key to the series so far, however, is that JBB said going in to this series that his defensive game plan was to hold the Celtics to fewer than 40 3PA per game. And they have done exactly that. After the first game when Cs put up 46, hit 18 and won by 25 points, the Cavs have held them to 35, 34 and 32 3PA, respectively. The results for the Celtics: a 24-point loss, a 13-point win and 7-point win. Whatever he has his team doing to limit the C's 3-point attempts, it's working and producing results. His team has one win to show for it and they have been highly competitive in the other two games against a significantly better team.

The Celtics need to decode his scheme. If they can get back over 40 3PA, they should win Game 5 going away. In yesterday's game they shot 37.5% from 3, in their 32 attempts. Good but not great. Still, if they had put up 48, which is what the Cavs did, and shot the exact same percent, that's 18 successful shots instead of 12 — 18 additional points. Or, (assuming all other things being equal), a 25-point win.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,783
Hingham, MA
Side note: it's pretty funny how the goal posts have moved from "they play too many elimination games" to "yeah, they're up 3-1 for the 2nd time in a row, but they let the other team get within 5 points!"

Whenever Denver plays like crap and lets the other team be ahead for most of the game, people jizz over how they barely squeak it out with their "unstoppable 2-man game" (that somehow gets down/close for lots of the game). When the Celtics let a team within 5, and then curbstomp them in the last couple minutes, people worry that....something?
The Celts aren't playing real teams. So all we are doing (myself included) is projecting.
 

RorschachsMask

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2011
5,925
Lynn
The Celts aren't playing real teams. So all we are doing (myself included) is projecting.
The Cavs are a real team, even without Allen. They have two all stars still, and Mobley was second in DPOY last year? Plus Strus, Dean Wade, and others are legitimate rotation players.

They aren’t amazing or anything, but for instance, I think they’d give Dallas a pretty competitive series.
 

ObstructedView

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2001
3,529
Maine
Side note: it's pretty funny how the goal posts have moved from "they play too many elimination games" to "yeah, they're up 3-1 for the 2nd time in a row, but they let the other team get within 5 points!"

Whenever Denver plays like crap and lets the other team be ahead for most of the game, people jizz over how they barely squeak it out with their "unstoppable 2-man game" (that somehow gets down/close for lots of the game). When the Celtics let a team within 5, and then curbstomp them in the last couple minutes, people worry that....something?
Part of what's at play here is that Denver won the title last year and therefore has The Heart of a Champion. So every time they eke out a game or series they're lauded for their clutchness and poise. The other thing that seems to be happening is that the Celtics' "easy" path to the Finals is being preemptively held against them.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,783
Hingham, MA
The Cavs are a real team, even without Allen. They have two all stars still, and Mobley was second in DPOY last year? Plus Strus, Dean Wade, and others are legitimate rotation players.

They aren’t amazing or anything, but for instance, I think they’d give Dallas a pretty competitive series.
Are they a real team without Allen and Mitchell? Because that's who dressed last night.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,783
Hingham, MA
But that’s 1 out of 4 games.
RIght, and no one really expressed any concerns with games 1 or 3.

And I'd argue that there wouldn't be too many concerns with game 2 had they beaten Miami in game 2. But they've now lost 4 consecutive game 2s at home.

They've also shown a pattern of playing down to their opponent when the star is out. Lakers in February, and twice against Cleveland.

It's all under the umbrella of "lacks killer instinct".

I hope that we are all worrying for nothing.
 

jezza1918

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
2,906
South Dartmouth, MA
RIght, and no one really expressed any concerns with games 1 or 3.

And I'd argue that there wouldn't be too many concerns with game 2 had they beaten Miami in game 2. But they've now lost 4 consecutive game 2s at home.

They've also shown a pattern of playing down to their opponent when the star is out. Lakers in February, and twice against Cleveland.

It's all under the umbrella of "lacks killer instinct".

I hope that we are all worrying for nothing.
The defending champs lost out on homecourt because they blew a 21 point lead with 20 minutes to go against the Spurs. Then promptly lost two games at home to the wolves...who then in turn had a chance to show their own killer instinct but promptly lost two of their own at home. OKC is in a battle with a Mavs team that features a banged up superstar.
I dont point these things out to tell you the things you are worried about arent worth worrying about...BUT (not trying to speak for others, though I think others would agree) my point is by now every fanbase is worried if their team has enough killer instinct to get them through the finish line. So if every fanbase is worried about the same thing, Id argue it's actually NOT worth worrying about at all. Im not trying to fan police, just explaining my perspective. Id only argue watching/following from this POV allows one to probably 'enjoy the ride' a little bit more.
On the flipside though, my guess is should they win it all...you'll likely bask in the title a bit more than myself. So all some risk/reward type stuff.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
35,504
Are they a real team without Allen and Mitchell? Because that's who dressed last night.
Yes?

The Cavs are a good team, even without Mitchell and Allen.

They have Mobley who is a top pick a DPOY contender recently and a 15+ PPG 3rd option, they have Garland who was an AS and 20ppg guy a year ago, they have a bunch of legit NBA top 7 guys in Strus, LeVert and Okoro. That team is still a legit NBA team, honestly replace Mitchell and Allen with MLE type guys and that team still easily makes the playoffs this year. They're better than the Heat or Hawks or even the Embiidless 76ers, you could make a case they're as good as IND was.
 

Mystic Merlin

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 21, 2007
47,700
Hartford, CT
How can you lack ‘killer instinct’ if you’re routinely closing out series year after year, including - likely - two consecutive series in five games apiece? Feels like a pretty amorphous label of collective psychology to me that, anecdotally, seems to get thrown at good teams who haven’t won a title and are perceived to not beat lesser teams easily enough. Is this just a proxy label for essentially assessing talent/skill, scheme, and experience, and perhaps attempting to ascribe collective psychological causes to variance (somebody has to win if two closely matched teams play)?

All I found myself thinking when I hear that label is: well what does THAT mean in the context of this team for the relevant games?
 

jmcc5400

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
5,526
How can you lack ‘killer instinct’ if you’re routinely closing out series year after year, including - likely - two consecutive series in five games apiece? Feels like a pretty amorphous label of collective psychology to me that, anecdotally, seems to get thrown at good teams who haven’t won a title and are perceived to not beat lesser teams easily enough. Is this just a proxy label for essentially assessing talent/skill, scheme, and experience, and perhaps attempting to ascribe collective psychological causes to variance (somebody has to win if two closely matched teams play)?

All I found myself thinking when I hear that label is: well what does THAT mean in the context of this team for the relevant games?
It means that Jimmy Butler heroically missed a three late in Game 7 of the ECF in 2022, probably the greatest missed three of all time so the Celtics de facto did not close out that series. Oh and those other series they closed out? Milwaukee in 2022 doesn't count because they didn't have Middleton and the Celtics gave away Game 5. The Hawks in 2023? Should never have taken 6 games. The Sixers in 2023? Wouldn't have taken 7 if they hadn't messed around in Game 1 with Embiid out. Surely you're not going to count Miami this year with Butler and Rozier out and those terrible close-outs in Game 2, are you?

(Still working on how to discount Brooklyn in 2022. Give me time).

The important thing to remember is that during this time, the Celtics have not had a single injury or had to display the slightest bit of resilience.
 

Deathofthebambino

Drive Carefully
SoSH Member
Apr 12, 2005
42,334
Part of what's at play here is that Denver won the title last year and therefore has The Heart of a Champion. So every time they eke out a game or series they're lauded for their clutchness and poise. The other thing that seems to be happening is that the Celtics' "easy" path to the Finals is being preemptively held against them.
And yet, Denver has not beaten a playoff team in a series over the last 2 years that had as many wins as, checks notes, this year's Cleveland Cavaliers.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
38,783
Hingham, MA
Lot of good responses here. Their late game execution is probably far more of a concern than "killer instinct", which probably isn't even the right term. To me it's more that they don't seem as fully engaged as they should given their history.

But as @jezza1918 points out, if all fanbases are having the same worries, then perhaps it's not worth worrying about.
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
52,096
Side note: it's pretty funny how the goal posts have moved from "they play too many elimination games" to "yeah, they're up 3-1 for the 2nd time in a row, but they let the other team get within 5 points!"

Whenever Denver plays like crap and lets the other team be ahead for most of the game, people jizz over how they barely squeak it out with their "unstoppable 2-man game" (that somehow gets down/close for lots of the game). When the Celtics let a team within 5, and then curbstomp them in the last couple minutes, people worry that....something?
Part of what's at play here is that Denver won the title last year and therefore has The Heart of a Champion. So every time they eke out a game or series they're lauded for their clutchness and poise. The other thing that seems to be happening is that the Celtics' "easy" path to the Finals is being preemptively held against them.
And yet, Denver has not beaten a playoff team in a series over the last 2 years that had as many wins as, checks notes, this year's Cleveland Cavaliers.
YUP. Until last season, everybody talked about Denver and particularly Jokic as a guy you cannot win a title with because he will be exposed on D. "Great player, but what happens in the playoffs?" Getting the big one, even if it comes in a generally easy path, does a lot to a narrative, and people forget the easy path part.

And speaking of 2008, I think it people are a little championship-hazed to think that there was relatively little rending of garments and gnashing of teeth during that first series against ATL. Maybe it has been forgotten but KG was seen as a playoff pretender, choker, not a go-to guy, however you want to phrase it and the Atlanta series raised all of those questions especially given the dominance of the regular season.

We are so close to being post-narrative with this group of players I can almost taste it.
 

BrotherMouzone

New Member
Aug 2, 2010
146
It means that Jimmy Butler heroically missed a three late in Game 7 of the ECF in 2022, probably the greatest missed three of all time so the Celtics de facto did not close out that series. Oh and those other series they closed out? Milwaukee in 2022 doesn't count because they didn't have Middleton and the Celtics gave away Game 5. The Hawks in 2023? Should never have taken 6 games. The Sixers in 2023? Wouldn't have taken 7 if they hadn't messed around in Game 1 with Embiid out. Surely you're not going to count Miami this year with Butler and Rozier out and those terrible close-outs in Game 2, are you?

(Still working on how to discount Brooklyn in 2022. Give me time).

The important thing to remember is that during this time, the Celtics have not had a single injury or had to display the slightest bit of resilience.
I remember one of the more prominent "sky is falling always" posters here being "very disappointed" with the Celtics effort in at least one of those wins. So that one can probably be discounted too.
 

scottyno

late Bloomer
SoSH Member
Dec 7, 2008
11,431
I remember one of the more prominent "sky is falling always" posters here being "very disappointed" with the Celtics effort in at least one of those wins. So that one can probably be discounted too.
They "barely" won all 4 games of that series, should have won each game by 20 as the 2 seed so it doesn't count. Guarantee if we looked back we'd find that take somewhere
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,341
Kind of reminds me of when the Raptors had that weird streak of losing every game 1
YUP. Until last season, everybody talked about Denver and particularly Jokic as a guy you cannot win a title with because he will be exposed on D. "Great player, but what happens in the playoffs?" Getting the big one, even if it comes in a generally easy path, does a lot to a narrative, and people forget the easy path part.

And speaking of 2008, I think it people are a little championship-hazed to think that there was relatively little rending of garments and gnashing of teeth during that first series against ATL. Maybe it has been forgotten but KG was seen as a playoff pretender, choker, not a go-to guy, however you want to phrase it and the Atlanta series raised all of those questions especially given the dominance of the regular season.

We are so close to being post-narrative with this group of players I can almost taste it.
Forget about Atlanta in 2008: why do people rarely talk about the fact that it took 7 games to beat a LeBron team that had a negative net rating? If Pierce doesn't go off in Game 7, they probably lose that one. I get it's LeBron, but the Cs had peak KG and PP.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,899
Santa Monica
Side note: it's pretty funny how the goal posts have moved from "they play too many elimination games" to "yeah, they're up 3-1 for the 2nd time in a row, but they let the other team get within 5 points!"

Whenever Denver plays like crap and lets the other team be ahead for most of the game, people jizz over how they barely squeak it out with their "unstoppable 2-man game" (that somehow gets down/close for lots of the game). When the Celtics let a team within 5, and then curbstomp them in the last couple minutes, people worry that....something?
The NBA Media's most popular Anti-Celtic narrative is the EC sucks & is completely injured. Anything less than a 25-point win is considered a poor performance due to a lack of focus/effort.... Yawn

I'll gladly sip pina coladas as KP heals and the WC beats the crap out of each other. Showtime Lakers spent a decade being fed Finals while Boston battled Nique, Jordan, Detroit Bad Boys, Dr. J/Andrew Toney, Moncrief's Bucks, etc
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
52,096
Kind of reminds me of when the Raptors had that weird streak of losing every game 1

Forget about Atlanta in 2008: why do people rarely talk about the fact that it took 7 games to beat a LeBron team that had a negative net rating? If Pierce doesn't go off in Game 7, they probably lose that one. I get it's LeBron, but the Cs had peak KG and PP.
And it required 800 year old PJ Brown hitting the greatest midrange J of my lifetime.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,660
Imaginationland
I almost always ignore what the media says about the Celtics, but it is so over the top negative that I’m kind of blown away. National media, local media, doesn’t matter.
It really is something. They're 7-2 and have the best net rating in the playoffs, and 90% of the discussion involving the team and this series ranges from dismissive to extremely negative. The actual play or games are talked about like they're weeknight January games on NBA TV.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
12,018
around the way
I almost always ignore what the media says about the Celtics, but it is so over the top negative that I’m kind of blown away. National media, local media, doesn’t matter.
Part of it is fatigue of another Boston area team having success. Part is a Lakers-centric worldview. Some of it is just hard to understand. I'd sign up right now for a waterfall of hoop twitterverse posts slagging of the 2024 Championship Celtics. Won't dent my happiness in the slightest.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
32,364
I get that it is very frustrating they come out flat and/or less focused sometimes - they do. And most, nearly all, teams do that sometimes as well.

However, they had enough fight in them to come back from 0-3 vs Miami last year---that took a real depth of fortitude. They won game 6 on the road vs Bucks, and then vs Sixers, in separate years...and then closed out game 7 each time. I'd argue these are all likely better/tougher wins than anything Denver has done figuring in context and competition. Denver won a ring last year---no knock on that---just noting that the filter people have is perhaps not fair.

So, yeah, I too hate that they play flat and/or uneven sometimes. But the overall track record, to me, is pretty encouraging about their ability to fight when they have to as well, and fewer teams can say that.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,459
It really is something. They're 7-2 and have the best net rating in the playoffs, and 90% of the discussion involving the team and this series ranges from dismissive to extremely negative. The actual play or games are talked about like they're weeknight January games on NBA TV.
It’s funny that the Heat are Schrodinger’s Team - simultaneously threatening because they have The Best Coach in The NBA and retrospectively a cream puff. OKC can get all the credit in the world for beating NOLA without Zion, but the Celtics get no credit for beating the opponents in front of them.
 

jmcc5400

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 29, 2000
5,526
It really is something. They're 7-2 and have the best net rating in the playoffs, and 90% of the discussion involving the team and this series ranges from dismissive to extremely negative. The actual play or games are talked about like they're weeknight January games on NBA TV.
As a thought experiment, imagine what would happen if the Thunder break through and lose in the finals to the Celtics in 6. Shai has a good, not great series.

Wouldn't this all be seen as a great positive for Shai, leading his team to the finals at such a young age before losing a reasonably close series to a more seasoned team?

Tatum did this in '22 when he was two years younger than Shai is now and, well, you know.
 

RorschachsMask

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2011
5,925
Lynn
Part of it is fatigue of another Boston area team having success. Part is a Lakers-centric worldview. Some of it is just hard to understand. I'd sign up right now for a waterfall of hoop twitterverse posts slagging of the 2024 Championship Celtics. Won't dent my happiness in the slightest.
Oh I think it’s hilarious, but it really has been just insanely over the top.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,065
Some of the commentary re: Cleveland is people forgetting that they were a 48-win team that runs about 9-deep

Yes they've been missing Jarrett Allen but they are still a very good defensive team without him
Without Allen AND Mitchell however they are a horrific offensive team and a borderline lottery team. They got the Strus game with the help from Merrill in the 1H before Garland got it going in the 2H…at home in their first game without Mitchell which is almost always their big step up game. I think Cleveland could lose by 40+ in Boston with a 63-35 halftime score not out of the question. I expect a bloodbath.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
10,226
San Francisco
Without Allen AND Mitchell however they are a horrific offensive team and a borderline lottery team. They got the Strus game with the help from Merrill in the 1H before Garland got it going in the 2H…at home in their first game without Mitchell which is almost always their big step up game. I think Cleveland could lose by 40+ in Boston with a 63-35 halftime score not out of the question. I expect a bloodbath.
To add some beef behind this take, which I agree with: Here from pbp stats we see they had a 111 offensive rating without those two which is putrid.

Edit: I have no idea how to make a table render in a post here so just take my word that they had ~1000 minutes without those two this season and the offensive rating was 111.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
6,357
Cultural hub of the universe
Without Allen AND Mitchell however they are a horrific offensive team and a borderline lottery team. They got the Strus game with the help from Merrill in the 1H before Garland got it going in the 2H…at home in their first game without Mitchell which is almost always their big step up game. I think Cleveland could lose by 40+ in Boston with a 63-35 halftime score not out of the question. I expect a bloodbath.
I like this vision of the future.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
13,341
If Mitchell doesn't play it will be surprising but also raises interesting questions about the off-season given today's Klutch press rel...er, trial balloon.
Mitchell clearly wants to give it his all and compete, but I bet he errs on the side of caution with anything actually serious, given his upcoming move to A Team That Isn't Cleveland.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,065
Mitchell clearly wants to give it his all and compete, but I bet he errs on the side of caution with anything actually serious, given his upcoming move to A Team That Isn't Cleveland.
Only speculating of course but I’d be very surprised if Mitchell would go being down 3-1 on the road when he was unable to go 48 hours earlier in the teams biggest game of the year at home when they had a realistic shot to compete for a win with him. Even more than surprised, I don’t see it happening.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
11,062
Without Allen AND Mitchell however they are a horrific offensive team and a borderline lottery team. They got the Strus game with the help from Merrill in the 1H before Garland got it going in the 2H…at home in their first game without Mitchell which is almost always their big step up game. I think Cleveland could lose by 40+ in Boston with a 63-35 halftime score not out of the question. I expect a bloodbath.
Yeah…I believe there was a post on here earlier that said that the Cavs minus Mitchell and Allen are roughly at the Pacers level. That’s fucking insane. That team is barely play-in level
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
31,065
Yeah…I believe there was a post on here earlier that said that the Cavs minus Mitchell and Allen are roughly at the Pacers level. That’s fucking insane. That team is barely play-in level
I didn’t see that post, I don’t read all the threads, but that’s laughable. I said the other day either here or Discord, I forget, that Cleveland without those two are a lottery team fighting to grab a play-in spot. I stand by that.