What's the point? Celtics guard gap and offseason options.

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
1,314
I’m not advocating a “pure” or “throwback” PG and someone like Augustin would be a worse option than White as he isn’t capable of playing at a Finals level. I’ve advocated for one who can function in that capacity since last summer and it finally bit us when the heat was turned up. Are we still not going to address it? There is a reason why Schroder was our crunch time PG for much of the time he was here……even Ime knew Smart/Tatum’s limitations/best role. Of course he showed that he wasn’t the right person for other reasons but Ime knows.

Backcourt play and ball handling/passing is more crucial than ever in this league and we simply don’t have the personnel to execute as well as we should do this glaring weakness. I don’t want to advocate for iso-ball constantly but with our lineup I’ve had to as the alternative risk was played out for us the last 6 games.
I'm not really disagreeing with you as much as I'm wondering who and how they acquire this proposed player. Between salary and picks, they already paid a premium to get White. In order to upgrade White, it will be at the expense of something else. Robbing Peter to pay Paul.

I also don't see it as a fatal flaw. Game 6 was an abomination, but outside that, this was a close series. They can tinker around the edges versus having to find this premium missing piece facilitator, which is both hard and expensive to acquire. If this guy is readily available at a reasonable cost, then by all means. Sign me up.
 

ragnarok725

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2003
6,363
Somerville MA
I’m not advocating a “pure” or “throwback” PG and someone like Augustin would be a worse option than White as he isn’t capable of playing at a Finals level. I’ve advocated for one who can function in that capacity since last summer and it finally bit us when the heat was turned up. Are we still not going to address it? There is a reason why Schroder was our crunch time PG for much of the time he was here……even Ime knew Smart/Tatum’s limitations/best role. Of course he showed that he wasn’t the right person for other reasons but Ime knows.

Backcourt play and ball handling/passing is more crucial than ever in this league and we simply don’t have the personnel to execute as well as we should do this glaring weakness. I don’t want to advocate for iso-ball constantly but with our lineup I’ve had to as the alternative risk was played out for us the last 6 games.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing that the player you're advocating for would improve the team. The problem is that the PG who fits into the switch everything defense and is an upgrade over Marcus in ability to run an offense and distribute is a max contact player. Every team wants that unicorn. Are there names you have in mind that fit the profile that are realistic at all?
 

JakeRae

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 21, 2005
8,125
New York, NY
I don't think anyone is disagreeing that the player you're advocating for would improve the team. The problem is that the PG who fits into the switch everything defense and is an upgrade over Marcus in ability to run an offense and distribute is a max contact player. Every team wants that unicorn. Are there names you have in mind that fit the profile that are realistic at all?
Ben Simmons is the only player like that I can think of who might be available (but doubtful). There’s obviously lots of issues there, and I’m not advocating for acquiring him, but he’s the guy that does all the things HRB wants without negatively impacting our defensive scheme.

Separately, I find it somewhat remarkable that we are still debating whether the shift in roster construction to oversized PG with defensive versatility but some offensive shortcomings has worked given that we just went to the NBA finals for the first time in a decade based largely on a defensive transformation brought about by that change. There’s a point where evidence that an approach has worked should trump our priors, and I would suggest that the Smart as PG experiment has well surpassed that point. The team needs to improve still, and a lot of that is in playmaking, and Smart is likely not a huge part of that solution as I don’t think we can realistically expect big changes from him as a distributor beyond the step forward he took this year.

That said, I continue to believe Tatum will keep developing as a playmaker in ways that will obviate much of this over the next couple years. What this team needs is less than a full time distributor. I think there are 3-4 “significant” needs that aren’t terribly hard to address:
  • Tatum and Brown to continue to improve (also our other young players, but mostly these two). Tatum needs to keep incrementally improving his handle, vision, and passing and needs to continue to work on playing with strength at the rim and in traffic along with building that strength. Brown needs to improve his handle and also train himself not to plow into traffic unless he’s in control. He could maybe get away with just one of those fixes.
  • We need a secondary playmaker for when Tatum sits. I don’t think this is a role we need a major player for. Someone like Dragic would be a good fit here as a 10 mpg bench option that can run the offense when Tatum sits and let Jaylen continue to thrive as a secondary scorer instead of needing to press to be a player he’s not for 1/4 to 1/3 of his minutes.
  • White needs to get back to being White. He’s historically been a much better player on both ends than he showed this year. He flashed that in the playoffs, but only for a few games late against Miami and then G1 of the finals. Hopefully a stable offseason with a clear role will help him get back to being that player, as he should be our 6th man next year and definitely has the talent to be great in that role, fits perfectly in Boston, but it never quite clicked this year.
  • It would be nice, but is less necessary, to add a versatile bench wing with the Fournier TPE. There aren’t a ton of great options though, and most of them probably aren’t available. Batum, for example, would be a great fit but hard to see that trade happening. Covington isn’t exactly the mold of player we most need, but I wouldn’t hesitate to add him if available as he would fit great on defense and is passable on offense. Barton would be awesome to add but can’t see him being available. Duncan Robinson would probably be available but hard to see wanting to add a guy Spo basically gave up on. Powell would give us a lot of offense but gives it all back on the other end. Anyway, there’s a lot of flexibility on this as we obviously don’t need to use all $17 million and can add assets to the TPE, and what Stevens manages to get this way, if anything, is probably how pundits will judge our offseason.
  • A silver lining would be meaningful improvement from any of Grant, Nesmith, and Pritchard. I’m not a big believer in Grant (aside from his tremendous utility on defense in the EC), but I do think the steps he needs to take to go from a negative offensive player to average aren’t huge. A faster release, which he continues to trend toward, and a functional close out attack, which he’s clearly working on adding, should get him there. He also needs to get better at moving to the right spots after screening to get open shots on pick and pop actions. He’s too good a shooter not to know how to set that up, and Smart and Horford should be able to help him there.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
I’m not advocating a “pure” or “throwback” PG and someone like Augustin would be a worse option than White as he isn’t capable of playing at a Finals level. I’ve advocated for one who can function in that capacity since last summer and it finally bit us when the heat was turned up. Are we still not going to address it? There is a reason why Schroder was our crunch time PG for much of the time he was here……even Ime knew Smart/Tatum’s limitations/best role. Of course he showed that he wasn’t the right person for other reasons but Ime knows.

Backcourt play and ball handling/passing is more crucial than ever in this league and we simply don’t have the personnel to execute as well as we should do this glaring weakness. I don’t want to advocate for iso-ball constantly but with our lineup I’ve had to as the alternative risk was played out for us the last 6 games.
Didn't the team play much better after they traded Schroder? Wasn't their 4th quarter finishing terrible the first half of the season? Seems like a weak argument that they need a playmaking finisher. Not that I'm disagreeing that they do.

My guess on Ime's thinking ( and like you I have no idea what he really thought) is that he finally realized they'd be better with the reins firmly in Tatum and Smart's hands. And they were. Not good enough to win a championship, but good enough to take a flailing team and turn it into a Finals team.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,678
Didn't the team play much better after they traded Schroder? Wasn't their 4th quarter finishing terrible the first half of the season? Seems like a weak argument that they need a playmaking finisher. Not that I'm disagreeing that they do.

My guess on Ime's thinking ( and like you I have no idea what he really thought) is that he finally realized they'd be better with the reins firmly in Tatum and Smart's hands. And they were. Not good enough to win a championship, but good enough to take a flailing team and turn it into a Finals team.
Right, before running out of gas/getting injured Tatum was a two way monster. But his play after getting injured during the Heat series makes it optimal that he not have to carry the team on both ends of the floor. But this team's offense opened up and exploded after they shipped out the ball dominant guard. Why would anyone want to sacrifice Tatum's offense to return to the days of Schroeder? I agree that they need to reduce Tatum's workload to keep him fresh for the playoffs, and I think that that needs to start with reducing the defensive workload.
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,156
They need to somehow work on White's confidence, as observed through the television screen. I could completely be reading into things that aren't there, of course, but the body language from White when faced with the prospect of taking a 3 - or many other shots, frankly, just seems like someone who is hesitating and doesn't have confidence that he can make the shot. He could, and has shown to be, a much better offensive player than he was after Game 1.

That said, it would be great to see them with one more option at guard. It's just quite odd how last season the Celtics had a bunch of mediocre players from 10-15 that were all about the same but could at least be playable in certain situations, and this year they have a bunch of truly putrid players from 9-15 who can't play outside of garbage time.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Right, before running out of gas/getting injured Tatum was a two way monster. But his play after getting injured during the Heat series makes it optimal that he not have to carry the team on both ends of the floor. But this team's offense opened up and exploded after they shipped out the ball dominant guard. Why would anyone want to sacrifice Tatum's offense to return to the days of Schroeder? I agree that they need to reduce Tatum's workload to keep him fresh for the playoffs, and I think that that needs to start with reducing the defensive workload.
Yeah fuck being back Schroder.

I also love people saying "yeah but Tatum sucked in the finals" and discounting "excuses" like being worn to a nub or injured. Seriously, did you people watch the first three series?

Recency bias uber alles. Sweet Jesus.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
I don't think PG is a particular area of need. I think they need more bench guys who can play in real games, particularly ones who can shoot, and Tatum and Brown need to continue to grow as ball handlers and passers.

The offense should run through Tatum and Brown a lot, to me the biggest problem with Smart/White was that they struggled shooting. Tatum and Brown need to improve with the ball, the answer is not taking the ball out of their hands. PP could be upgraded, and they need a big guard or wing... Nesmith was supposed to be that guy, but he's not.
 

GB5

New Member
Aug 26, 2013
675
Let me throw out a crazy idea that has been on my mind, because I am a whacko and think of these things.
Is there a chance one of the Jays, more specifically Jaylen walks in to see Brad and says “I have had enough of Marcus, it’s time for him to go elsewhere?”

Now they have had 2 public blowup’s in the last few years, Miami in the bubble, and Marcus’s going to the press hammering the Jay’s for not passing.
We, as a fan base just accepted it, but I can’t think of many other franchises where the 3rd(?) best player is allowed without repercussions to go to the press and attack one or two of the clear superstars on the team and then everyone just moves on and accepts it.

Is it fair to say if they had these two public quarrels that they must have had many more that didn’t get out publicly?
I think the turning point was when he agreed to defer to the two Jay’s and played a secondary role.

To me, we saw a glimpse of that structure collapsing when he launched two threes on the same possession on what I considered the biggest possession of the series down a couple in the midst of the Game 4 collapse.

I have my doubts that he will agree long term to play nice and be deferential to the two Jays. The best part of him is that he thinks he is Michael Jordan. The worst part of him is that he thinks he is Michael Jordan.

The reason this thought came to me is I was listening to the press conferences after Game 4, and I think it went unreported but there was some subtle fingerprinting amongst the three of them.
The Jays: “We did a poor job of getting set up in our offense” i,e, the point guard sucked.
Marcus: We stopped moving and looking for the ball” I,e, the two Jays let us down by not be willing to come get the ball.

the team never played well or with the same fight after this game.

Am I reading too much into this and on my own island here?
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Mark Blount's Port Cellar: "Where every discussion leads to a new Marcus Smart trade idea!"

You people will get him gone eventually. Then his replacement will have a rough stretch and they will have their turn being the "get this player gone at any cost, I don't like their flaws either .."
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
They need to somehow work on White's confidence, as observed through the television screen. I could completely be reading into things that aren't there, of course, but the body language from White when faced with the prospect of taking a 3 - or many other shots, frankly, just seems like someone who is hesitating and doesn't have confidence that he can make the shot. He could, and has shown to be, a much better offensive player than he was after Game 1.
I think it would be wrong to say (and you didn't) that White's confidence was an issue for the whole postseason. Rather it was up and down. His postseason was erratice with some very good and very bad moments.

I think that if he's back next year (and I assume he will be back), getting to be with the team for the full season will help some.
I don't think PG is a particular area of need. I think they need more bench guys who can play in real games, particularly ones who can shoot, and Tatum and Brown need to continue to grow as ball handlers and passers.
Agreed.
Let me throw out a crazy idea that has been on my mind, because I am a whacko and think of these things.

Is there a chance one of the Jays, more specifically Jaylen walks in to see Brad and says “I have had enough of Marcus, it’s time for him to go elsewhere?”

Now they have had 2 public blowup’s in the last few years, Miami in the bubble, and Marcus’s going to the press hammering the Jay’s for not passing.
We, as a fan base just accepted it, but I can’t think of many other franchises where the 3rd(?) best player is allowed without repercussions to go to the press and attack one or two of the clear superstars on the team and then everyone just moves on and accepts it.
I don't think there's anything to this. If there was simmering animosity between Marcus and anyone else, on the team I don't think you get one public outburst in October and then nothing for 7-8 months.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
I don't think PG is a particular area of need. I think they need more bench guys who can play in real games, particularly ones who can shoot, and Tatum and Brown need to continue to grow as ball handlers and passers.

The offense should run through Tatum and Brown a lot, to me the biggest problem with Smart/White was that they struggled shooting. Tatum and Brown need to improve with the ball, the answer is not taking the ball out of their hands. PP could be upgraded, and they need a big guard or wing... Nesmith was supposed to be that guy, but he's not.
I’m not holding my breath on any major Jaylen ball handing improvement. Maybe around the margins. This is largely who he is. Tatum is a guy who probably has more meaningful improvement to be had in that department.

White getting back to 34-36% 3pt shooting like he was in SA a couple years ago would make a lot of difference. For whatever reason, be shot like shit for us. But we saw how good we are when he makes shots. Problem with Smart and White combo is that neither is a good shooter so you’ll have games where both are off. And all that does is compound the problem with Tatum/Brown.

We really need more playable shooters on this team. Zero confidence in Nesmith being that guy.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,371
Nesmith is the fascinating piece, right? They had concerns about his defense, but saw him as a lights-out shooter. It's been just the opposite - he's been a good defender and hustles and rebounds, but can't shoot a lick. If he EVER could find his shot, he'd be a terrific guy to have coming off the bench. He'd solve so many problems they have. But alas...he can't seem to shoot at all.
 

Jakarta

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 18, 2020
241
I think the team needs someone like a Malik Beasley-type wing. Someone who can play similar minutes as White, start occasionally, but gives them more of an offensive look. Except for PP (who we just saw be unplayable in the last 2 series) the the rest of the normal bench guys are defense-first guys. Having a bit of variety would give Ime more flexibility and might allow Tatum and JB to be able to get a bit more rest without the offense grinding to a halt. This also allows Grant and PP to slide down to be the 8th and 9th guys in the rotation. Nesmith is in theory that guy but nothing he has done so far lead me to believe he is going to be that guy.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I don't think anyone is disagreeing that the player you're advocating for would improve the team. The problem is that the PG who fits into the switch everything defense and is an upgrade over Marcus in ability to run an offense and distribute is a max contact player. Every team wants that unicorn. Are there names you have in mind that fit the profile that are realistic at all?
It doesn’t necessarily have to be a PG and certainty not a “traditional PG” like Tyus Jones although someone like Sexton (on a 1-yr cheap make good deal) could function in that role.

My most ideal fit, my dream fit, would be Kyle Anderson who can advance the ball against pressure initiate the offense to free up Tatum to get the ball in his sweet spots. Another idea, probably my second choice, would be Rubio who is entering the ring chasing portion of his career and coming off an ACL his suitors will be limited to contenders/upper tier playoff teams.
 

EL Jeffe

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 30, 2006
1,314
Kyle Anderson makes a ton of sense as they need a veteran wing. I think he and Ime overlapped in SA. I could 100% see that for from both sides.
 

Fishy1

Head Mason
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
5,867
Right, before running out of gas/getting injured Tatum was a two way monster. But his play after getting injured during the Heat series makes it optimal that he not have to carry the team on both ends of the floor. But this team's offense opened up and exploded after they shipped out the ball dominant guard. Why would anyone want to sacrifice Tatum's offense to return to the days of Schroeder? I agree that they need to reduce Tatum's workload to keep him fresh for the playoffs, and I think that that needs to start with reducing the defensive workload.
I find this pretty persuasive. Another big wing would do this team wonders. I love Grant Williams but the guy's inability to create his own shot really limits his upside.

It doesn’t necessarily have to be a PG and certainty not a “traditional PG” like Tyus Jones although someone like Sexton (on a 1-yr cheap make good deal) could function in that role.

My most ideal fit, my dream fit, would be Kyle Anderson who can advance the ball against pressure initiate the offense to free up Tatum to get the ball in his sweet spots. Another idea, probably my second choice, would be Rubio who is entering the ring chasing portion of his career and coming off an ACL his suitors will be limited to contenders/upper tier playoff teams.
What a great idea. Anderson would be a tremendous fit. In addition to the above, he's long and a good team defender, should fit in really well next to the rest of the length on the Celtics, gets a ton of deflections, steals and blocks, and would really extend the rotation. He could soak up a lot of the Grant Williams minutes/Daniel Theis minutes and be much more effective in that role. I don't really have a problem with Grant or Theis, but their limitations were pretty glaring as the playoffs went on and as Tatum got more and more exhausted.

Sign me up.
 

mcpickl

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 23, 2007
4,546
Mark Blount's Port Cellar: "Where every discussion leads to a new Marcus Smart trade idea!"

You people will get him gone eventually. Then his replacement will have a rough stretch and they will have their turn being the "get this player gone at any cost, I don't like their flaws either .."
Agreed.

We went a decade with Jeff Green isn't aggressive enough, Kelly Olynyk isn't aggressive enough, Al Horford isn't aggressive enough, to oh Marcus Smart is too aggressive, I don't like that either.

The porridge is unlikely to be just right for your support players,

I keep seeing people saying the last half of the season that the Celtics improved when Marcus Smart returned from covid, changed his game and deferred to Tatum/Brown.

But, did this actually happen? Before Smart went out, he averaged 10.8 FGA per 36 minutes. After he returned, he averaged 11.8 FGA per 36 minutes. Brown and Tatums FGA remained almost exactly the same, while all three of them had their assist rate go up significantly.

I don't think Smart changed at all. I think Tatum/Brown did. The first half of the season, the offense was littered with Smart bringing the ball up, Brown to his left calling for the ball, Tatum to his right doing the same. Then whoever got it dicking around with the ball for ten seconds before driving or shooting while the other 4 guys watched.

The two weeks those guys got to have the Dennis Schroder experience of also dicking around with the ball while Tatum/Brown were now watching more may have made them realize, hey this offense sucks. Maybe we should trust Smart to run the offense, we'll move the ball and still get our shots. And it worked!

As long as they cut it out with the iso ball stuff, which crept back in during the Finals, they will be just fine with the guards they have. It's not like if they bring in a distributor, Brown/Tatum are just going to defer to that guy to run the offense while they wait for him to get them the ball.

They want the ball. They don't need a different guy to dribble the ball before throwing it to them.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
I find this pretty persuasive. Another big wing would do this team wonders. I love Grant Williams but the guy's inability to create his own shot really limits his upside.



What a great idea. Anderson would be a tremendous fit. In addition to the above, he's long and a good team defender, should fit in really well next to the rest of the length on the Celtics, gets a ton of deflections, steals and blocks, and would really extend the rotation. He could soak up a lot of the Grant Williams minutes/Daniel Theis minutes and be much more effective in that role. I don't really have a problem with Grant or Theis, but their limitations were pretty glaring as the playoffs went on and as Tatum got more and more exhausted.

Sign me up.
Convincingly him to sign up for the full MLE would be the challenge. Hopefully his lack of upside/athleticism will dissuade below the cap lottery teams from pursuing. I’ll take him just as he is.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
31,187
We’ve been talking about Slo Mo since the 21 trade deadline and he remains a very interesting fit.

for me the gap they are trying to fill is “bench creator/scorer” and could be filled by a passer (Rubio), a shooter (a version of last years Monk) , or a scorer (Slo Mo ish) profile. Or (less likely but not impossible) through Nesmith improvement.

also curious to see the development plan for Grant—at times he showed a little off the bounce game which would go a long way if he could do it with any consistency.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
We are all forgetting the most talked about addition from last year who would also fill the initiator (and finisher) role. It would take some creativity but Jayson Tatum and Bradley Beal are still best of friends.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
We are all forgetting the most talked about addition from last year who would also fill the initiator (and finisher) role. It would take some creativity but Jayson Tatum and Bradley Beal are still best of friends.
Brad Beal still can't and won't play any defense. That ship has rightly sailed, same with Dame.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,016
We are all forgetting the most talked about addition from last year who would also fill the initiator (and finisher) role. It would take some creativity but Jayson Tatum and Bradley Beal are still best of friends.
Never say never. If Beal were determined to get to Boston, the teams would find a way to get it done.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
Brad Beal still can't and won't play any defense. That ship has rightly sailed, same with Dame.
Man, is this not the case with 90% of primary scorers on mediocre teams? Over the last 3 years, the only other legit scoring option on the Wizards was a monstrously inefficient Russell Westbrook in 2021 (Kuzma and Bertans were the only other Wizards to average 15 ppg at any point since 2019). Over that time, Beal averaged 29 ppg (he was 2nd in ppg in 2020 and 2021) and a usage rate of 33.4% (5th in 2020 and 4th in 2021). He'll never be a lockdown sort of defender, but he's got more physical tools than Kembra and is several years younger than Dame. Put him on a legit title contender with two other guys capable of averaging 25 per game and it's a reasonable bet that both his defensive effort and offensive efficiency will take a solid leap forward.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Man, is this not the case with 90% of primary scorers on mediocre teams? Over the last 3 years, the only other legit scoring option on the Wizards was a monstrously inefficient Russell Westbrook in 2021 (Kuzma and Bertans were the only other Wizards to average 15 ppg at any point since 2019). Over that time, Beal averaged 29 ppg (he was 2nd in ppg in 2020 and 2021) and a usage rate of 33.4% (5th in 2020 and 4th in 2021). He'll never be a lockdown sort of defender, but he's got more physical tools than Kembra and is several years younger than Dame. Put him on a legit title contender with two other guys capable of averaging 25 per game and it's a reasonable bet that both his defensive effort and offensive efficiency will take a solid leap forward.
Is it? A lot of people say this, but what are the examples of it working where you take a veteran All-Star player (but not in last chance range) and ask him to completely rebuild his game on both ends, AND defer to at least 1 likely 2 teammates and it works?
I also kind of hate the fit unless Jaylen is being traded, that means Jaylen has to play 3 where he is worse, Tatum has to play 4, and you can't play 2 bigs as much, which makes TL much worse.

And Beal was a bad defender his entire career, even when he was playing 2nd fiddle to John Wall (who played good D), now he's atrocious on D. Any move for Beal that is predicated on him being anything but the worst defender on the team is just pure wishcasting. He's going to be bad on D wherever he goes next.
And the efficiency... it could be a case of workload, but that's not always the case, a lot of guys who become "The guy" on bad teams develop terrible habits and never recover.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
Is it? A lot of people say this, but what are the examples of it working where you take a veteran All-Star player (but not in last chance range) and ask him to completely rebuild his game on both ends, AND defer to at least 1 likely 2 teammates and it works?
I also kind of hate the fit unless Jaylen is being traded, that means Jaylen has to play 3 where he is worse, Tatum has to play 4, and you can't play 2 bigs as much, which makes TL much worse.

And Beal was a bad defender his entire career, even when he was playing 2nd fiddle to John Wall (who played good D), now he's atrocious on D. Any move for Beal that is predicated on him being anything but the worst defender on the team is just pure wishcasting. He's going to be bad on D wherever he goes next.
And the efficiency... it could be a case of workload, but that's not always the case, a lot of guys who become "The guy" on bad teams develop terrible habits and never recover.
Beal could both improve defensively and still be the worst defender on the team (which says just as much about the Celtics as it does about Beal). I don't disagree with you that he's not a perfect fit, on both ends, there are too many what ifs (I think adding him to the roster is closer to keeping Tatum happy than it is improving their chances at a title, at least directly), I just don't think we've seen the best version of Beal yet, given the trash he's played with since Wall was last healthy.

*edit - and I think he'd be a much better fit than Kemba (2 years ago) or Dame (now), and that's before you get to the part about his relationship with Tatum.
 
Last edited:

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Beal could both improve defensively and still be the worst defender on the team (which says just as much about the Celtics as it does about Beal). I don't disagree with you that he's not a perfect fit, on both ends, there are too many what ifs (I think adding him to the roster is closer to keeping Tatum happy than it is improving their chances at a title, at least directly), I just don't think we've seen the best version of Beal yet, given the trash he's played with since Wall was last healthy.

*edit - and I think he'd be a much better fit than Kemba (2 years ago) or Dame (now), and that's before you get to the part about his relationship with Tatum.
Dame and Kemba shouldn't be the comps though, it should be guys like John Collins, Brogdon and/or Turner, Huerter or Hunter, Jerami Grant, guys you can add who aren't making 35M a year.

As a side note... I'd rather have Dame, yes he's paid even more, yes he's older... he's also a much better player than Beal and he's sustained at that high level even as the younger Beal appears to have started his decline.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,014
Imaginationland
Dame and Kemba shouldn't be the comps though, it should be guys like John Collins, Brogdon and/or Turner, Huerter or Hunter, Jerami Grant, guys you can add who aren't making 35M a year.

As a side note... I'd rather have Dame, yes he's paid even more, yes he's older... he's also a much better player than Beal and he's sustained at that high level even as the younger Beal appears to have started his decline.
You can say that you value Beal at the same level as guys like Collins/Brogdon/Turner/Huerter/Grant, but the league (and the GMs who make the decisions) likely don't.

I want nothing to do with Dame. 3 years older and smaller than Beal (and if paying $35M for Beal makes you uncomfortable, you can't feel great about paying Dame $45M). Beal this year scored 23 ppg on .451/.300/.833 shooting in 40 games, Dame scored 24 ppg on .402/.324/.878 shooting in 29 games. I'll admit I didn't watch much of either guy this year, but why is one in decline and the other is still performing at a high level? Both guys had pretty rough years, decent volume but with big dips in efficiency, cut short by injury.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
You can say that you value Beal at the same level as guys like Collins/Brogdon/Turner/Huerter/Grant, but the league (and the GMs who make the decisions) likely don't.

I want nothing to do with Dame. 3 years older and smaller than Beal (and if paying $35M for Beal makes you uncomfortable, you can't feel great about paying Dame $45M). Beal this year scored 23 ppg on .451/.300/.833 shooting in 40 games, Dame scored 24 ppg on .402/.324/.878 shooting in 29 games. I'll admit I didn't watch much of either guy this year, but why is one in decline and the other is still performing at a high level? Both guys had pretty rough years, decent volume but with big dips in efficiency, cut short by injury.
I mean sure, but the Celtics aren't "the league" they are a team that has to balance production with salary (and match, trading for Beal means you need to trade at least 1 starter, probably more) and cost, and fit. My point was that Beal will cost similar to those guys maybe more, and I think some of them (Collins notably) are better short AND long term fits and let you be more flexible.

We shouldn't think "Well Beal is getting maxed, so he's a better player to trade for" especially since one of the reasons Beal gets paid what he does is teams without scorers always overpay for a guy who can score 20+ and hope they can build around it, we have 2 guys who can score 20+ already, that isn't our problem.

I wouldn't want Dame at all either, but he's a better player, he's been a better player for a long long time. Last 3 years they've played essentially the same number of games (Dame has 5 more games, and 300 more minutes), Dame shoots better from 3 on higher volume, better from the line on the same volume, much better EFG% accordingly. They rebound at the same rate (Dame better on D, Beal a few more ORb), assists at a significantly higher rate and turns it over less, they also grade out about the same defensively by most metrics.

And while Lillard is older, he'd have to have a precipitous decline to make it back to Beal's level, and Beal is the one whose production has trailed the last few years.

I don't want either, but if you're going to pay big money and break up the starting lineup, I want to do it for a no doubt All-NBA talent, not a "probably an All-Star" it's like 5-6 years ago trading for Chris Paul or Mike Conley... similar players on the surface in terms of style, but one is a top 10 in the league type player, and one is nowhere near that.

My point with the Dame thing is, Dame is a bad fit, he makes a lot of money, he's hard to get... there is a small chance it's worth it because he's a top 5 offensive player in the league when healthy. Beal is not that guy, Beal isn't even close to that guy, he's more Kemba in CHA, a solid offensive player who scores a ton because his team lets him take all the shots.
 

Smokey Joe

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 9, 2001
1,155
Man, is this not the case with 90% of primary scorers on mediocre teams? Over the last 3 years, the only other legit scoring option on the Wizards was a monstrously inefficient Russell Westbrook in 2021 (Kuzma and Bertans were the only other Wizards to average 15 ppg at any point since 2019). Over that time, Beal averaged 29 ppg (he was 2nd in ppg in 2020 and 2021) and a usage rate of 33.4% (5th in 2020 and 4th in 2021). He'll never be a lockdown sort of defender, but he's got more physical tools than Kembra and is several years younger than Dame. Put him on a legit title contender with two other guys capable of averaging 25 per game and it's a reasonable bet that both his defensive effort and offensive efficiency will take a solid leap forward.
Get thee behind me Satan! This is how I persuaded myself that Kemba was a good idea!
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Brad Beal still can't and won't play any defense. That ship has rightly sailed, same with Dame.
Oh please stop with this. Beal, nor anyone else, can’t and won’t play defense on hopeless lottery teams. Hasn’t Wiggins amongst others taught us this many time over?
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Oh please stop with this. Beal, nor anyone else, can’t and won’t play defense on hopeless lottery teams. Hasn’t Wiggins amongst others taught us this many time over?
He's been on 5 different playoff teams... he played zero defense on them, and he was one the worst defenders among rotation guys for WAS basically every year of his career... he's a bad defender, he's always been a bad defender, and it has nothing to do with lottery teams. People are acting like Beal played his whole career with bums on the Kings or something. He played on good teams, a lot of them.

Maybe he'll be a Wiggins, but there are a LOT more guys who were bad at defense forever and continued to be bad at defense everywhere they went even contenders. Wiggins is more exception than he is a usual case. I'd also say Wiggins has a lot better tools than Beal.

Listen is it hypothetically possible that Beal goes somewhere and becomes a much better defender... sure, it's possible.
Is there any reason at all in his 10 year career to think it's likely? No, and basing analysis of a trade on "well maybe we get lucky?" isn't a good idea. It's very much the "but maybe it could work for us" meme.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
He's been on 5 different playoff teams... he played zero defense on them, and he was one the worst defenders among rotation guys for WAS basically every year of his career... he's a bad defender, he's always been a bad defender, and it has nothing to do with lottery teams. People are acting like Beal played his whole career with bums on the Kings or something. He played on good teams, a lot of them.

Maybe he'll be a Wiggins, but there are a LOT more guys who were bad at defense forever and continued to be bad at defense everywhere they went even contenders. Wiggins is more exception than he is a usual case. I'd also say Wiggins has a lot better tools than Beal.

Listen is it hypothetically possible that Beal goes somewhere and becomes a much better defender... sure, it's possible.
Is there any reason at all in his 10 year career to think it's likely? No, and basing analysis of a trade on "well maybe we get lucky?" isn't a good idea. It's very much the "but maybe it could work for us" meme.
Beal is certainly no Smart on the defensive end but the idea that he’s awful or has been awful isn’t based on any evaluation I’ve made on him when he’s been carrying the offensive load on mostly crappy teams.

He was in his young 20’s when he was on marginal playoff teams so yeah he wasn’t a great defender in his young 20’s as most aren’t at that age especially when asked to carry an offensive load. Teammates matter and winning culture matters if one has the physical skills to be a solid defender……he’s never had either of the former while always possessing the latter. If anyone watched Ray Allen play defense in Seattle on a 25-win team his final year there they never would have wanted him in Boston…..Ridnour and him were turnstiles on that end of the floor.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
34,457
Beal is certainly no Smart on the defensive end but the idea that he’s awful or has been awful isn’t based on any evaluation I’ve made on him when he’s been carrying the offensive load on mostly crappy teams.

He was in his young 20’s when he was on marginal playoff teams so yeah he wasn’t a great defender in his young 20’s as most aren’t at that age especially when asked to carry an offensive load. Teammates matter and winning culture matters if one has the physical skills to be a solid defender……he’s never had either of the former while always possessing the latter. If anyone watched Ray Allen play defense in Seattle on a 25-win team his final year there they never would have wanted him in Boston…..Ridnour and him were turnstiles on that end of the floor.
But Allen played better on the Bucks. (also a sneaky thing... he was not that good on D in Boston, it's just that we erased everything at the rim with an all-time great in KG, and other defensive bigs, and 2008 was early enough that teams didn't hunt 3s against him.

Listen you can argue that you think Beal's an exception and he'll find it, feel free as long as you acknowledge that it's just a gut feel/hope and body typing.

My point is there is zero evidence to support it. He's 10 years in, not many guys substantially change their play for the better years 11-15, if anything they tend to decline. When assessing the most likely outcome for Beal it's that he will defend poorly, because we have a massive sample of him doing just that. We have it when he carried a heavy load, when he was the 2nd option, when he had bad defenders as teammates and when he had a number of good ones, we have it in his early 20s, his mid 20s and his late 20s. There is nothing in Bradley Beal's entire history as a basketball player to suggest he's ever been even an average defender, and in general across the league it's very rare for guys that old and that deep into their career to suddenly change.

Though, it's also just a small part of the issues with Beal, since he makes Brown a 3 where he's not as strong a defender, and Tatum a 4 (where he's actually fine against most teams) and TL has to actually play C instead of roaming off the worst other player (a pretty big downgrade, that adjustment turned his season around). And then there are contract and offensive end issues. I think he'd be a terrible acquisition in the lines of Kemba, (though he has more left and is a better defender than Kemba was).

Edit- I don't think Beal destroys the defense, he's not that bad, but he lowers the defensive ceiling and floor, and I think he makes the players around him worse on that end by dint of moving them out of position. And on offense I don't think his skillset and mindset fit with what we need. It's very much a rumor based on his friendship with Tatum rather than his fit with the roster.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
Beal is currently a -1.2 DARKO on defense, which is equivalent to Tyler Herro, one tenth worse than Dame, and one tenth better than DeRozan. In the same class of guys as Morant and SGA, Monk, Oubre. The numbers match the eye test.

At his peak he was around Devin Booker/Payton Pritchard bad. He has slid considerably from there. Maybe part of that is being on hopeless teams the last couple of years, but also maybe not. Either way he's shitty bad and doesn't have Wiggins' length and bulk to dream on.

Please no more 200# matadors. If it's peak Dame you live with it. Dame isn't even peak Dame. Brad never was.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
If the Stevens/Udoka led Celtics acquire Bradley Beal, I trust that they have a good idea that his defense plus their scheming will make it work. They may well be wrong but they aren't likely blowing up the foundation of this team just to placate Tatum.

Also, given that we collectively suck at takes in this here forum - and that includes me - maybe we should be less certain with our statements. Beal has been bad. Its not impossible that he can be good enough that his net overall game is additive to this team. Boston needs more talent and they have to be creative.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,403
around the way
If the Stevens/Udoka led Celtics acquire Bradley Beal, I trust that they have a good idea that his defense plus their scheming will make it work. They may well be wrong but they aren't likely blowing up the foundation of this team just to placate Tatum.

Also, given that we collectively suck at takes in this here forum - and that includes me - maybe we should be less certain with our statements. Beal has been bad. Its not impossible that he can be good enough that his net overall game is additive to this team. Boston needs more talent and they have to be creative.
Yeah, that's fair.

More talent would be good. We had an abundance of defense and a shortage of offense in that last series. No question. And PBS will need to get creative.

Just feels like we've seen the little guy traffic cone thing play out with three little guy traffic cones. I trust the management team though. It's been doubles off the monster since they started making moves, and I can't take issue with any of them. Some have and do, but seems like the team is in way better shape now than a year ago. That has earned them some trust.
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
48,204
Yeah, that's fair.

More talent would be good. We had an abundance of defense and a shortage of offense in that last series. No question. And PBS will need to get creative.

Just feels like we've seen the little guy traffic cone thing play out with three little guy traffic cones. I trust the management team though. It's been doubles off the monster since they started making moves, and I can't take issue with any of them. Some have and do, but seems like the team is in way better shape now than a year ago. That has earned them some trust.
To be clear, I wrote this post before reading yours and I think you have a reasonable take on Beal. If Boston somehow acquires him, we should all probably mentally be prepared for him to be targeted. There will almost certainly be painful stretches.

My only point is if the Cs share the assessment that has no upside on D individually as well as being part of the rotation, this conversation is likely moot. Brad Beal will not be coming to the Celtics.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
Beal is currently a -1.2 DARKO on defense, which is equivalent to Tyler Herro, one tenth worse than Dame, and one tenth better than DeRozan. In the same class of guys as Morant and SGA, Monk, Oubre. The numbers match the eye test.
Beal’s “current” numbers don’t reflect what his role would be in Boston. Aside from the culture and motivation which any reasonable person would agree bumps up his defense you must favor in how a reduced offensive load would allow him to play a more complete game similar to Allen when he was here. Insinuating that Beal’s defense here would be similar in any way to Herro’s in a Miami is failing to look at the entire picture. He isn’t as bad as those numbers suggest and would be fine defensively here.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
I mean sure, but the Celtics aren't "the league" they are a team that has to balance production with salary (and match, trading for Beal means you need to trade at least 1 starter, probably more) and cost, and fit. My point was that Beal will cost similar to those guys maybe more, and I think some of them (Collins notably) are better short AND long term fits and let you be more flexible.

We shouldn't think "Well Beal is getting maxed, so he's a better player to trade for" especially since one of the reasons Beal gets paid what he does is teams without scorers always overpay for a guy who can score 20+ and hope they can build around it, we have 2 guys who can score 20+ already, that isn't our problem.

I wouldn't want Dame at all either, but he's a better player, he's been a better player for a long long time. Last 3 years they've played essentially the same number of games (Dame has 5 more games, and 300 more minutes), Dame shoots better from 3 on higher volume, better from the line on the same volume, much better EFG% accordingly. They rebound at the same rate (Dame better on D, Beal a few more ORb), assists at a significantly higher rate and turns it over less, they also grade out about the same defensively by most metrics.

And while Lillard is older, he'd have to have a precipitous decline to make it back to Beal's level, and Beal is the one whose production has trailed the last few years.

I don't want either, but if you're going to pay big money and break up the starting lineup, I want to do it for a no doubt All-NBA talent, not a "probably an All-Star" it's like 5-6 years ago trading for Chris Paul or Mike Conley... similar players on the surface in terms of style, but one is a top 10 in the league type player, and one is nowhere near that.

My point with the Dame thing is, Dame is a bad fit, he makes a lot of money, he's hard to get... there is a small chance it's worth it because he's a top 5 offensive player in the league when healthy. Beal is not that guy, Beal isn't even close to that guy, he's more Kemba in CHA, a solid offensive player who scores a ton because his team lets him take all the shots.
You keep talking about how Beal has been in decline for the last couple years. Now go look at his 2020-2021 stats, normal and advanced. Dude was putting up 59% TS on 34 usage *one year ago*. He's not an inefficient volume scorer.

On offense, there simply isn't a multiyear decline. There is an injury-plagued 2021-22.

Now, it's reasonable to ask whether those injuries will continue, and also to question Beal's fit and D, but your multiyear decline narrative is factually incorrect.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
The Celtics adding Beal would mean the Celtics sending out Brown (Washington isn't going to trade him for Hoford and scraps) and fundamentally changing the team from a defensive to offensive focus.

This isn't about "Can Beal play defense?" or "Will Beal play defense?"

It is about replacing a big wing who can defend 4 positions with an undersized wing who can't.

Of course, that shift brings with it a big offensive upgrade, so it may be worth doing. But it absolutely changes the character of the team.

Beal's salary is $34.5 for the current league year (ending July 1?) and a player option for $37.2 for 2022-23. So the Celtics would need Beal to opt in to next year's deal, presumably with the promise of maxing him out after next year.

Jaylen Brown's salary is $24.8 for the current league year, $26.7 for next season, and $28.5 the year after that. I guess if the Celtics have any reservations about maxing Brown after his deal expires then they should go ahead and trade him. (Leage rules preclude them from offering Brown an extension that he would be willing to accept.)

If Beal agrees to opt in, the Celtics could do Brown plus Theis for Beal either this year or next year.

They could also replace Brown in the deal with Smart or White and add Nesmith and some other salary pieces. But those type of offers are obviously less attractive to Washington.

If they do a Brown for Beal, that makes them both undersized with Beal, Smart, White, and thin at forward, so look for one of the latter two to be dealt. (The alternative is to run a lot of lineups with Beal at the 3/Tatum at the 4). That, too, likely changes the character of the team from a defensive team to an offensive one.

Anyway, none of this is to say that the Celtics shouldn't do Brown for Beal.
 

Auger34

used to be tbb
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
9,271
The Celtics adding Beal would mean the Celtics sending out Brown (Washington isn't going to trade him for Hoford and scraps) and fundamentally changing the team from a defensive to offensive focus.

This isn't about "Can Beal play defense?" or "Will Beal play defense?"

It is about replacing a big wing who can defend 4 positions with an undersized wing who can't.

Of course, that shift brings with it a big offensive upgrade, so it may be worth doing. But it absolutely changes the character of the team.

Beal's salary is $34.5 for the current league year (ending July 1?) and a player option for $37.2 for 2022-23. So the Celtics would need Beal to opt in to next year's deal, presumably with the promise of maxing him out after next year.

Jaylen Brown's salary is $24.8 for the current league year, $26.7 for next season, and $28.5 the year after that. I guess if the Celtics have any reservations about maxing Brown after his deal expires then they should go ahead and trade him. (Leage rules preclude them from offering Brown an extension that he would be willing to accept.)

If Beal agrees to opt in, the Celtics could do Brown plus Theis for Beal either this year or next year.

They could also replace Brown in the deal with Smart or White and add Nesmith and some other salary pieces. But those type of offers are obviously less attractive to Washington.

If they do a Brown for Beal, that makes them both undersized with Beal, Smart, White, and thin at forward, so look for one of the latter two to be dealt. (The alternative is to run a lot of lineups with Beal at the 3/Tatum at the 4). That, too, likely changes the character of the team from a defensive team to an offensive one.

Anyway, none of this is to say that the Celtics shouldn't do Brown for Beal.
The assumption is that Beal tells the Wizards he would only accept a trade to a very small list of teams which includes Boston. Then the Celtics would be able to make a trade centered around Smart, Horford or White.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting a Brown for Beal trade
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
The assumption is that Beal tells the Wizards he would only accept a trade to a very small list of teams which includes Boston. Then the Celtics would be able to make a trade centered around Smart, Horford or White.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting a Brown for Beal trade
Correct. It won’t be easy or maybe not even possible but some of the key future assets that I’d imagine would go to Washington would be Begarin and a future 1st(s). The problem is that Leonsis has never been a fan of the full blow it up rebuild but more of a throw on a band-aid and let’s be somewhat competitive so people keep showing up type of owner over the years.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,475
Melrose, MA
The assumption is that Beal tells the Wizards he would only accept a trade to a very small list of teams which includes Boston. Then the Celtics would be able to make a trade centered around Smart, Horford or White.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting a Brown for Beal trade
Well, Beal does hold as many of the cards as a player can, since he can always just go to free agency if he wants. So, if he demanded this Washington would almost have to go along and take cents on the dollar. They could play hardball by sending him to free agency (thereby removing Boston as a possible designation) but that doesn't seem like the way the league works.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,996
Well, Beal does hold as many of the cards as a player can, since he can always just go to free agency if he wants. So, if he demanded this Washington would almost have to go along and take cents on the dollar. They could play hardball by sending him to free agency (thereby removing Boston as a possible designation) but that doesn't seem like the way the league works.
Correct--there's a reason teams rarely extract huge value in S&Ts. It's a very player-friendly process. In the very, very worst case for the player, he signs a wink-wink deal with a bad under-the-cap team that agrees to trade him to his first choice team in Jan.

Of course, everyone knows the player has that option and others, so the game theory plays out such that the player ends up where he wants, with some light assets changing hands (up to a low 1st or two).