Physically he looks quite far off. He wasn't exactly a quick twitch athlete before, but right now he is struggling with quick twitch movements, stopping and starting, changing direction, etc. Interior shots are easy to block because he needs to load up more than he would, and he ends up taking fadeaway or pull-up type shots instead of being able to attack hard off one foot. Combined with the timing issues stemming from not playing for a year, and it's a recipe for a guy who looks like this so far.I did not watch a ton of hayward while he was in Utah. How far off is he now, frome where he was? Because when I watch him now, I think to myslef, meh - this guy shows some stuff, but he is nowhere near a max player or good enough to be the 2nd best player on a contender
He isn't the same player physically nor is he playing the same role. I saw in another thread someone mentioning how they expect him to "dominate" later this year. If those are the expectations he will surely disappoint even if/when he returns to his old physical self as that simply is not his game.....nor is that the role he'll have in this offense.I did not watch a ton of hayward while he was in Utah. How far off is he now, frome where he was? Because when I watch him now, I think to myslef, meh - this guy shows some stuff, but he is nowhere near a max player or good enough to be the 2nd best player on a contender
That was me, in this thread (post #1100). If Gordon gets back to himself in 4-5 months it's not a stretch to imagine him dominating 2nd units in an efficient manner.He isn't the same player physically nor is he playing the same role. I saw in another thread someone mentioning how they expect him to "dominate" later this year. If those are the expectations he will surely disappoint even if/when he returns to his old physical self as that simply is not his game.....nor is that the role he'll have in this offense.
What he was at the time of his signing was another Top-30 player who is efficient and savvy similar to a Horford in that manner.
This is fantastic.He's loved by many,15-seconds at a time.
I think I'd start Smart and maybe try Hayward off the bench and running the second unit.I agree that a shakeup is needed with so much redundancy in this lineup. My issue is that I don't see the shakeup being within this roster due TO the redundancy. I don't want to play Horford at the 4 and I don't see Morris bringing much of a different skillset than Hayward as they both handle and score the ball. Maybe Smart with the starters? Rozier? To me this seems like shuffling the deck with the same personnel. I do expect a couple changes to the lineup as this is what Brad has access to at this time...….assuming little changes I then expect Ainge to try and do what is necessary to improve the team by the deadline.
That's where I would begin as well as Smart is the only perimeter option with that group who isn't actively looking for their shot now that he has gotten paid. For those who don't believe the contract implications toward a rookie contract players motivations, Smart's FG/36 have gone from over 11 per game each of the last 3 seasons to 7.3 this year.I think I'd start Smart and maybe try Hayward off the bench and running the second unit.
Clearly, at least some of this sounds off balance (I find it hard to believe that Durant is quaking over playing "Lebron when he's full throttle"), but if you just take the idea of Durant joining Boston, it's interesting. First, a big assumption: KD decides to leave Golden State. But if he did, what makes the most sense as his next move? Boston was on his short list during his first free agency, and he was apparently impressed by the organization. I read somewhere that's he's friendly with Kyrie. I know it would be a major headache figuring out how to pay him, and Kyrie both, but ... the salary cap has never stopped an NBA exec from acquiring a premier talent before; there's always a way to make it work.“Guys think about it,” Davis wrote, as pointed out by WBZ’s Adam Kaufman. “For real listen to what kd said earlier about Boston and (their) team and how they are a tough match for the warriors. Plus who talks about money at this time during the season. Then also uncle drew (Kyrie Irving) said 2 weeks ago saying I need a 15 year vet. It’s coming together for sure now. Especially seeing this fallout in the second half of that clippers game. The warriors will handle business this year but kd leaving. Cause believe it or not the lakers are coming and kd doesn’t want no part of Lebron when he’s full throttle.”
Interesting, I think it's the opposite.Long term, Hayward coming off the bench is not best for the Celtics. It may be while he finds his rhythm and works his way through the minutes restriction. But his playmaking on the floor with Kyrie for as many minutes as possible is how this team achieves its ceiling.
The way he's playing right now, the best candidate to come off the bench is Tatum. He's the worst offender in terms of taking shots outside the flow of the offense. If he wants to hone his Carmelo impression, he should do it with the second unit.
Yep, Smart or Baynes starting (depending on the matchup) instead of Hayward would make the most sense. Celtics would end up with a better offensive/defensive balance with both the starting unit and bench.I think I'd start Smart and maybe try Hayward off the bench and running the second unit.
Unless KD is willing to play for minimum/MLE or whatever its impossible unless its a tradeAnyone talking about this? (Sorry mods if wrong thread; I wasn't sure where to put it). Glen Davis predicts Durant to become a free agent, then go to Boston.
Clearly, at least some of this sounds off balance (I find it hard to believe that Durant is quaking over playing "Lebron when he's full throttle"), but if you just take the idea of Durant joining Boston, it's interesting. First, a big assumption: KD decides to leave Golden State. But if he did, what makes the most sense as his next move? Boston was on his short list during his first free agency, and he was apparently impressed by the organization. I read somewhere that's he's friendly with Kyrie. I know it would be a major headache figuring out how to pay him, and Kyrie both, but ... the salary cap has never stopped an NBA exec from acquiring a premier talent before; there's always a way to make it work.
If nothing else, a fun thing to dream about.
Technically it's not impossible. They'd have to renounce their free agents (including Irving, Horford and Rozier), which is not at all likely, but they could carve out the money if Durant was determined to sign with Boston.Unless KD is willing to play for minimum/MLE or whatever its impossible unless its a trade
Or make it a sign & trade with Hayward and Brown going the other way.Technically it's not impossible. They'd have to renounce their free agents (including Irving, Horford and Rozier), which is not at all likely, but they could carve out the money if Durant was determined to sign with Boston.
Huh, I didn't realize that renouncing them would allow the team enough money to sign him, my bad. But which lineup do we like better? KD, Tatum, Brown, Hayward and Baynes(or maybe RW) or KI, Brown, Tatum, Hayward and Al? I started this with an argument for the current 5 but I cant get over the length of the KD version. Also, Hayward and AD are basically making the same...Technically it's not impossible. They'd have to renounce their free agents (including Irving, Horford and Rozier), which is not at all likely, but they could carve out the money if Durant was determined to sign with Boston.
I was not impressed since there was no discussion of the open shot % - plus I wanted more numbers on there shot % in the paint as we seem to miss 50 layups a game.ESPN’s Kirk Goldsberry writing about the Celtics’ terrible offense this year.
http://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/25283082/why-boston-celtics-offense-broken-nba
Short answer: This isn’t bad luck, it is terrible shot selection. The Celtics, as a team, are allergic to the paint and in love with low efficiency pull-up jumpers.
Nothing too surprising, really.
One thing that is noticeably different from last year is that we aren't getting the "easy" shots in transition because we don't have personnel on the floor to run with Kyrie and Hayward replacing Rozier and player-x's minutes. It reminds me a lot of the Doc years when we were "running our stuff" to get good looks but they weren't "easy" looks in transition. This isn't; a luck thing this is a personnel thing. Now, granted we have missed more open looks than we should however my point remains in that slugfest defensively focused teams generally do not play good offense as that is not where the focus lies.I was not impressed since there was no discussion of the open shot % - plus I wanted more numbers on there shot % in the paint as we seem to miss 50 layups a game.
If I had a life that would allow it, I'd love to go back to last year's winning streak versus this year's games and see if there really are marked differences between the shots being took (breaking out half-court versus transition).I was not impressed since there was no discussion of the open shot % - plus I wanted more numbers on there shot % in the paint as we seem to miss 50 layups a game.
If I had a life that would allow it, I'd love to go back to last year's winning streak versus this year's games and see if there really are marked differences between the shots being took (breaking out half-court versus transition).
My guess would be that the only player from last year really taking a substantial number of different shots is Tatum, and the rest of difference would be made up by adding Gordon.
Other than those two guys (and Baynes shooting from 3P to that, but that's a small number of shots), my guess would be that the rest of the guys are basically taking the same shots they did last year. But they aren't making them.
Are they really better shots though? I'll go back to my "open" shots not being the same as "easy" shots that come in rhythm. Shooting is about rhythm and there is a marked difference in how players are getting the shots they are taking this year compared to last. Maybe in-house teams have ways of quantifying these things but to the trained eye we are not getting these "easy" shots in rhythm at lease early on. I'm skeptical on whether much changes as I've stated from the get go. Are we playing as if we are entitled? Are we playing down to our competition? Tonight is going to tell us a lot about this team imo.It's all SSS but outside of Rozier, all of those trends suggest they are taking better shots.
We really won't know anything until after Christmas anyway. A good or bad stretch of games can make a team appear better or worse than they are in the early going.Are they really better shots though? I'll go back to my "open" shots not being the same as "easy" shots that come in rhythm. Shooting is about rhythm and there is a marked difference in how players are getting the shots they are taking this year compared to last. Maybe in-house teams have ways of quantifying these things but to the trained eye we are not getting these "easy" shots in rhythm at lease early on. I'm skeptical on whether much changes as I've stated from the get go. Are we playing as if we are entitled? Are we playing down to our competition? Tonight is going to tell us a lot about this team imo.
As far as big units go, that's an insanely stretchy/quick one. Tatum was guarding Lowry down the stretch, and doing a damn good job of it.This is the first time the Celtics have beaten Kawhi Leonard, they are 1-9 against him.
Gordon Hayward went 39 minutes, so I guess the minutes restriction real is done. He also led the team with a +18. (While Marcus Smart was somehow a -17).
They went with an interesting look down the stretch: Horford, Morris, Tatum, Hayward, and Kyrie played the whole overtime and almost all of the last 5 minutes of the game. At one point, Toronto went smaller (put in VanVleet with Lowry) but Stevens stuck with the bigger unit and it paid off. Haven’t seen much of Hayward at the 2 this year, but it was magic tonight.
And then attacking Lowry on the offensive end.As far as big units go, that's an insanely stretchy/quick one. Tatum was guarding Lowry down the stretch, and doing a damn good job of it.
He's a great player and all, but that 0 for 9 prior to tonight is a Spurs thing more than Kawhi. The Spurs have had the Cs number for 20 years. They dominated the Celtics in the Robinson-Duncan era (18 in a row!), then it evened out with Pierce/KG. The Spurs were still one of the best teams in the league when Kawhi came into the league, and the Celtics were declining at the end of the Pierce/KG era followed by the full rebuild. So most of those 9 games were a mismatch. Then he was injured last year when the Cs finally had the guns to compete with them.This is the first time the Celtics have beaten Kawhi Leonard, they are 1-9 against him
So your argument is that the reason the Celtics couldn’t beat Kawhi Leonard, is not because of Kawhi, but because they can’t beat teams with the letters SPURS on the uniform going back 20 years. And your evidence is that the Celtics finally beat the spurs last year when KL was injured.He's a great player and all, but that 0 for 9 prior to tonight is a Spurs thing more than Kawhi. The Spurs have had the Cs number for 20 years. They dominated the Celtics in the Robinson-Duncan era (18 in a row!), then it evened out with Pierce/KG. The Spurs were still one of the best teams in the league when Kawhi came into the league, and the Celtics were declining at the end of the Pierce/KG era followed by the full rebuild. So most of those 9 games were a mismatch. Then he was injured last year when the Cs finally had the guns to compete with them.
Except that he’s right, Boston went 6-2 against the Spurs during the height of the Pierce/Garnett/Allen era. Leonard arrived in the NBA during the strike-shortened year, which was the last gasp of that squad.So your argument is that the reason the Celtics couldn’t beat Kawhi Leonard, is not because of Kawhi, but because they can’t beat teams with the letters SPURS on the uniform going back 20 years. And your evidence is that the Celtics finally beat the spurs last year when KL was injured.
Im not the model poster but can we please think before we post.
No. The Celtics didn’t lose to Kawhi because David Robinson was tough back in the day. And they didn’t lose because the Celtics were on a downswing when the spurs were on an upswing *totally independent of Kawhi leonard*. They lost to Kawhi’s teams because, with Kawhi on them, Kawhi’s teams were better than the Celtics.Except that he’s right, Boston went 6-2 against the Spurs during the height of the Pierce/Garnett/Allen era. Leonard arrived in the NBA during the strike-shortened year, which was the last gasp of that squad.
The 2013 Celtics were an oooold team, and then the rebuilding started. So, yes, the Spurs star-studded team handily beat a rebuilding Celtics squad. And last year, when the rebuild was complete, Leonard was on vacation.
What the hell does David Robinson have to do with Leonard? Aside from nothing. (And, no, the other poster never made that claim, he just pointed out that the Duncan/Robinson squads beat up on the rebuilding Celtics as well. He could have gone back even further, because the Robinson/Elliot teams beat up on Boston’s Rebuilding Error™ teams as well.)No. The Celtics didn’t lose to Kawhi because David Robinson was tough back in the day.
You mean a title contender is better than a rebuilding team? Truly your basketball analytical skills are first rate.And they didn’t lose because the Celtics were on a downswing when the spurs were on an upswing *totally independent of Kawhi leonard*. They lost to Kawhi’s teams because, with Kawhi on them, Kawhi’s teams were better than the Celtics.
As far as big units go, that's an insanely stretchy/quick one. Tatum was guarding Lowry down the stretch, and doing a damn good job of it.
It makes me think that the odd guy out in this group, the one who just doesn't fit despite his talent, is Rozier.I think that lineup was about getting Morris onto Kawhi instead of Brown.
In terms of Hayward vs Brown they were sort of running Hayward at point forward tonight. It was the best he’s looked to me. He really helped the offense getting into the paint and moving the ball.
Far and away the best game of the year. Still far from perfect but they got into the paint and it made a lot of difference.
Frankly, and I say this as a huge JB fan, I think they did this because JB is not playing well on offense.I think that lineup was about getting Morris onto Kawhi instead of Brown.
In terms of Hayward vs Brown they were sort of running Hayward at point forward tonight. It was the best he’s looked to me. He really helped the offense getting into the paint and moving the ball.
Far and away the best game of the year. Still far from perfect but they got into the paint and it made a lot of difference.
Bingo. Thanks nighthob, you caught my drift exactly. It's way more a timing thing between the organizations than it being attributed to a single player. The Cs did well against the Duncan era Spurs when they had the Big 3 at their peak, but before and after that the Spurs have dominated them during rebuilds. So the 2 long winning streaks aren't specifically attributable to Duncan or Kawhi individually. The Spurs organization as a whole has destroyed every mediocre Celtics team for the last 20 years.What the hell does David Robinson have to do with Leonard? Aside from nothing. (And, no, the other poster never made that claim, he just pointed out that the Duncan/Robinson squads beat up on the rebuilding Celtics as well. He could have gone back even further, because the Robinson/Elliot teams beat up on Boston’s Rebuilding Error™ teams as well.)
You mean a title contender is better than a rebuilding team? Truly your basketball analytical skills are first rate.
Well, Jaylen Brown was having a bad night and so was Rozier. Meanwhile, Hayward was making game-changing defensive plays. It's the first time I've seen that from him as a Celtic.They went with an interesting look down the stretch: Horford, Morris, Tatum, Hayward, and Kyrie played the whole overtime and almost all of the last 5 minutes of the game. At one point, Toronto went smaller (put in VanVleet with Lowry) but Stevens stuck with the bigger unit and it paid off. Haven’t seen much of Hayward at the 2 this year, but it was magic tonight.
He literally did. Right here.What the hell does David Robinson have to do with Leonard? Aside from nothing. (And, no, the other poster never made that claim, he just pointed out that the Duncan/Robinson squads beat up on the rebuilding Celtics as well.
You can keep arguing loudly, but you’re still aggressively wrong. There’s even a logical poster taking your side, sort of, but PKB does so by acknowledging the very thing you just said never happened.He's a great player and all, but that 0 for 9 prior to tonight is a Spurs thing more than Kawhi. The Spurs have had the Cs number for 20 years. They dominated the Celtics in the Robinson-Duncan era (18 in a row!), then it evened out with Pierce/KG.
If you had to weigh all the factors in why Kawhi Leonard’s teams have beaten the Celtics, I don’t think continuity of system dating back to David Robinson has even “some” relevance. We’re talking two decades. Too much changed over time. The actual players on the court are what mattered.The reason older spurs teams have some relevance (and only some) is that the coach and overall philosophy—both on court and roster construction—is fairly similar for a long time. The Celts have been all over the map in that timeframe, and the relevance of the above is limited. But saying it’s about the name “spurs” on the roster misses the part which is salient here
I assumed I didn’t need to spell out my logic for you but clearly I was wrong as you’re having difficulty here.You mean a title contender is better than a rebuilding team? Truly your basketball analytical skills are first rate.
I think it was about the defense. The had Smart on Kawhi for a while and I don’t think there’s a good argument that Smart was out there over Jaylen for offense. The Smart on Kawhi experiment went poorly, he scored at will. Brad switched to Morris and it went very well.Frankly, and I say this as a huge JB fan, I think they did this because JB is not playing well on offense.
Funny that JB's usage % is down only marginally from last year (21.4% to 21..1%) but it seems he's getting a lot fewer touches. I hope they figure things out with him because he's still their best perimeter defensive player.
That's funny, I literally just logged on to post something asking about re-signing Morris. His attitude change is for real, as is his improved shot selection. I'd FAR rather have him for 3-4 years at $10-14M than Rozier for really any price. Being able to play big while staying skilled gives so many advantages that I have to imagine they're looking at ways to bring him back.Any chance that Marcus Morris resigns here next year? I would think not, but he offers at this time what everyone hopes Jaylen Brown will offer some day. He has got to be one of the most underpaid player in the league right now?
and the next 15 games are relatively soft. We only play 2 teams with winning records over the next month (Pels 2X, Pistons). With Hayward healing/improving and Brad willing to juggle lineups, we should close the gap with the Raptors.Well it has been almost 16 whole games...