Hot and Not Hot Cs Takes...Will They Age Well?
- Thread starter Shaky Walton
- Start date
I think there's something to this, but I'm trying to figure out what.
They consistently win a lot of games and go deep in the playoffs, all at fairly young ages. I'm not sure about the toughness thing with Ime: they had one big regular season stretch, but then had multiple bed-shitting performances against Milwaukee and Miami, that they then salvaged in a way that was similar to last year.
I don't see a huge difference with or without Ime. It feels like the same Brown/Tatum core to me, with all its plusses and minusses.
The other confounding factor is that the league is insanely deep right now. The old players aren't aging out, and the stars are very evenly distributed across teams.
Is it the case that everyone outside of Denver (and even there maybe) feels like their core just doesn't have enough, or can't get over the hump?
Maybe the real answer here is that Brown and Tatum just aren't *quite* as good as we wish they were, and so they're down in the almost-contender moshpit, and don't have enough oomph to go to a Jokic+Murray level. What we call "soft" might be "not good enough".
The only way through that is to accumulate so much talent that it doesn't matter, which is clearly Brad's GM philosophy.
Last edited:
Shorter version: if they replaced Tatum and KP with Jokic and KCP, everyone would be expecting the Cs to romp to a title, right? Regular season ups and downs aside.
To me, that suggests that the issue is less softness, or Jaylen Brown's mental state, and more that Tatum is not THAT GUY, and still has a big gap to that level.
To me, that suggests that the issue is less softness, or Jaylen Brown's mental state, and more that Tatum is not THAT GUY, and still has a big gap to that level.
Part of what I see is that teams that attack the Celtics weaknesses have success. Orlando dominated them physically and the Celtics folded like a cheap suit. In last year's playoffs, Miami put a lot of pressure on the Celtics where they were weakest - ballhandling and playmaking - and beat them that way. I don't know if that is a "star not good enough" thing or a "team is fatally flawed for all of the talent" thing or just that they aren't prepared to fight back in those situations. But I think the 2007-08 Celtics would have chunks of this team in its stool.
Yesterday seemed like some of the worst shooting I’ve ever seen from them. I hate to keep saying “if those shots went in, they’d have won” because that’s true of every basketball game, but the shooting was amazingly atrocious in the second half.
Imagine this board if we DIDN'T have the best record in the league but instead have lost 5 of 7 like say the Nuggets have?
I'll share a tip that fans of every contender really should take the time to do. It's something I've done for years in handicapping all sports. There are 82 games...go down the schedule and identify where, let's say 25 losses will come from. The majority will be on the road, both on short rest and long trips. Once you have these 25 games circled it will help fans deal with regular season losses to help avoid "game thread-like panic" or even concerns. Do this several times over the course of the season. It will help...trust me on this.
Last edited:
I get your point, but the 2007-2008 Celtics also came within a heroic Paul Pierce performance from choking out in the 2nd round to a far, far inferior Cleveland team. How is that really different from the problems you're observing with this team?
It feels like your standard is 2017 Warriors, or 2023 Nuggets, and I think you need a historically great offensive Star, plus a supporting cast, to hit that level of certain winning.
Well, they have shot less than 33% from the field 5 times and lost four of those games, while they have won every game when they shot at least 33%.
Some correlates with losing:
- Shooting percentage below 33%: 5 times, 4 losses
- 3-point shooting percentage below 33%: 5 times, 4 losses
- 20 or fewer assists: 6 times, 3 losses
- 8 or more steals: 4 times, 3 losses
- Opponent FG makes, 42 or more: 8 times, 4 losses
- Opponent offensive rebounds, 12 or more: 7 times, 3 losses
- Opponent total rebounds, 48 or more: 3 times, all losses
- Opponent turnovers, 12 or more: 7 games, 4 losses
- Opponent defensive rebounds, 35 or more: 6 games, 4 losses
Nikola Jokic was soft, unplayable on defense in the playoffs, total liability. Everyone knew it, most obvious thing in the world. Simply couldn’t win with the guy.
Acting like anything about this team is set in stone in **checks notes** November with a team that **checks notes** is the number one seed in the NBA right now is absurd. Things change all the time in this league.
I can’t imagine watching every minute of every game for 82 games with the standard that if they do anything but win decisively or lose with dignity and grit then they have shamed their families. The perverse joy in the post-loss effigy-burning is so freaking weird to me.
Acting like anything about this team is set in stone in **checks notes** November with a team that **checks notes** is the number one seed in the NBA right now is absurd. Things change all the time in this league.
I can’t imagine watching every minute of every game for 82 games with the standard that if they do anything but win decisively or lose with dignity and grit then they have shamed their families. The perverse joy in the post-loss effigy-burning is so freaking weird to me.
Also, the 2008 Celtics struggled in a 7 game series against the 37-45 Atlanta Hawks.
Celtics still have the fewest losses, 4, tied with the Wolves and the Thunder. The Magic have beaten the Lakers, Bucks, and Nuggets at home this season. They executed well a strategy (grab offensive rebounds while defending the 3 point line) that worked.
If not for Sam Cassell there is a decent chance the Celtics also go down 0-2 to Cleveland when a young Rondo was having his postseason meltdown. These land mines aren't easy to navigate even when you are the best team in the league.
Well, the Cleveland team had prime LeBron who had taken a similarly flawed team to the finals the year before, but I take your point.
But last year Miami went up 3-0 on them behind Caleb Martin, Gabe Vincent, and Duncan Robinson among others, while their best player not named Jimmy or Bam was out injured. The same Caleb Martin who turned back into a pumpkin in the next series. Jimmy Butler is very good, but he's not prime Lebron. I don't think Butler and Bam and the Heat roster were more talented than when the Celtics had last year. They were better, because they get more out of what they have.
I agree that nothing is set in stone. I would just say that this team has a long way to go. Longer than the 12-4 record and offseason additions might lead one to think. Heck, last year after 16 games they were 13 and 3 with 2 OT losses and we know how that ultimately went.
Unclear if this take will belong in this thread or not; I'm just speculating.
We have had some spirited debates in other threads about where Jaylen Brown sits among the league's top players. Last year, he was good enough to be named to be one of the NBA's top 15, but that is probably not a consensus assessment among posters here, which have him anywhere from borderline all-NBA to outside the top 50 (the latter is nonsense, but whatever). There have also been some debates as to who is the better player, Brown or Porzingis.
What the debate tells me is that there are a lot of players that could be considered, say, Top 30 (splitting the difference between all-NBA and Top 50). There are probably 50-60 players vying for that top 30 slot, and those 50-60 players are spread around the league. And the gap between the top 1 or 2 players in the league and the others in the clear top 10 also seems to be narrowing. There are a lot of really good players in the Association this year, and every year there seem to be more coming in than there are retiring. That 2020 draft had some real players that are now just starting to come into their prime in Edwards, Maxey, Halliburton, LaMelo Ball (assuming he's healthy) and (cry) Bane. From 2022, we're seeing Banchero and Holmgren turn into possible stars. Going back earlier, we are seeing a healthy Zion turn the Pelicans into a tough out (they've beaten Denver, Clippers, Thunder). And of course there's Wemby, currently surrounded by a bad team but probably not for too long. There seem be far fewer gimme games than there were in 2008, never mind 1986.
There's going to be some surprising omissions when it comes to this season's All Star game. And this thread will be bumped at least another 20 times this season if not more.
We have had some spirited debates in other threads about where Jaylen Brown sits among the league's top players. Last year, he was good enough to be named to be one of the NBA's top 15, but that is probably not a consensus assessment among posters here, which have him anywhere from borderline all-NBA to outside the top 50 (the latter is nonsense, but whatever). There have also been some debates as to who is the better player, Brown or Porzingis.
What the debate tells me is that there are a lot of players that could be considered, say, Top 30 (splitting the difference between all-NBA and Top 50). There are probably 50-60 players vying for that top 30 slot, and those 50-60 players are spread around the league. And the gap between the top 1 or 2 players in the league and the others in the clear top 10 also seems to be narrowing. There are a lot of really good players in the Association this year, and every year there seem to be more coming in than there are retiring. That 2020 draft had some real players that are now just starting to come into their prime in Edwards, Maxey, Halliburton, LaMelo Ball (assuming he's healthy) and (cry) Bane. From 2022, we're seeing Banchero and Holmgren turn into possible stars. Going back earlier, we are seeing a healthy Zion turn the Pelicans into a tough out (they've beaten Denver, Clippers, Thunder). And of course there's Wemby, currently surrounded by a bad team but probably not for too long. There seem be far fewer gimme games than there were in 2008, never mind 1986.
There's going to be some surprising omissions when it comes to this season's All Star game. And this thread will be bumped at least another 20 times this season if not more.
They were 13-3 last year on the back of unsustainably hot three point shooting. Comparing last year’s start to this year’s is apples to oranges. This team is obviously better.
Second. This is an incredibly fun team (overall) to watch - homegrown stars, some great recent arrivals from other teams that seem to fit well, easy to dream on.
In the spirit of Thanksgiving, I'm giving thanks for having these guys wearing the Green.
They went up 2-0 so this isn’t entirely true. Rondo’s game 1 box looks good. His game 2 looks bad but the Celts won by 16. So, I’m not sure if any of this is true.
Cassell had 13 points in Game 1, and made a key rebound of a LeBron miss then sunk 2 free throws to put the Celtics up by 2 late in the 4th. In Game 2, Cassell first entered the game after the Cavs jumped out to a 21-9 lead and played the rest of the first half, after which the Celtics led by 8.
I wouldn't take too much form yesterdays loss in isolation. No Holiday, half-portion of unicorn against a good team on the road.
But the loss continues the string of games over the past two years where large leads have been lost.
Simply the Celts should be good enough to not lose so many double digit late lead games.
They are a championship team.
And they were last year too.
The wilting is a problem and early last year I thought that CJM lacked the experience or gravitas to manage an experienced super-star packed team.
And I was an early, harsh but maybe an unfair critic, CJM had a lot thrown into his bowl. But CJM lived down to my expectations.
But he was a puppy and I knew he was going to piss on the rug some times, but he was pissing on a fucking real Oriental in June.
That loss to Miami was brutal and going down 0-3 was intolerable.
Its time for CJM to prove he's an alpha that can really lead an at times undisciplined pack.
But the loss continues the string of games over the past two years where large leads have been lost.
Simply the Celts should be good enough to not lose so many double digit late lead games.
They are a championship team.
And they were last year too.
The wilting is a problem and early last year I thought that CJM lacked the experience or gravitas to manage an experienced super-star packed team.
And I was an early, harsh but maybe an unfair critic, CJM had a lot thrown into his bowl. But CJM lived down to my expectations.
But he was a puppy and I knew he was going to piss on the rug some times, but he was pissing on a fucking real Oriental in June.
That loss to Miami was brutal and going down 0-3 was intolerable.
Its time for CJM to prove he's an alpha that can really lead an at times undisciplined pack.
This is what I come back to. It reminds me of the 2007 team that was nearly unstoppable when everyone was available.
The #1 issue for this team is health and that is unlikely to change.
This team, when healthy, is built much better for playoff basketball than any other team Brad has constructed.
Box score doesn't show the impact Cassell had when he took over for Rondo in G1 and in the first rotation of G2.
its a strange thing, because talking about this specific team in the regular season is kind of a waste of time. They’re going to, if healthy, win 55-60 games and be a top 2 seed. We’ve just seen this movie before like a half-dozen times (which is both an impressive string of success and disappointment), so it’s all going to come down to what they do in the playoffs. I personally feel less reactive to anything that happens between now and April because it doesn’t really tell us anything. A loss to a good Orlando team is as informative as a win over Milwaukee, meaning not very informative at all. So I’m just enjoying the dunks and threes and I hope Tatum plays well enough to win an MVP and then we’ll see if they can get lucky/get over the hump. This is all just a fun preamble to the real test.
I was one of the people who thought a team couldn't win s championship with Jokic, MPJ, and Murray on defense. Boy was I wrong.
I don't think it's a hot take to say that JT is not as good as Jokic right now. But he's also trying to figure out exactly how much to assert himself versus how much to defer I think. This team (and JT) still has room to grow.
JT situation kind of reminds me of Dirk, who many didn’t think had the “it” factor for several years. All it takes is one title run to change the narrative forever.
Amen to that.
Also it’s pretty clear we’re going to see a ton of lineup and roster experimentation for the first half of the season, maybe even all of it. This is going to lead to a fair share of bad possessions. And yes, losses.
Last edited:
The Miami heat basically showed that the regular season basically doesn’t matter. Get to the post season healthy and see how it plays out
Yeah, and the Heat weren't that healthy for the whole postseason. Herro was banged up.
My hot take for today is that we’re not seeing nearly enough experimentation. Joe has settled on an 8-man rotation, for example, and will rarely budge from that outside of injuries-foul trouble.
My hot take is that unless you show the data, you cannot make a credible claim that the C's experiment less than other contending teams. There is probably a fair bit of work involved in that project but its just not a supportable position without numbers around it. Its an opinion of someone seeking problems where there isn't one.
He did say it was a hot take.. and usually those don’t require actual data.
That's fair. However If you just glance at most contending teams minutes played - and I understand that entails going on your phone and taking the seconds required to look up the info - you'd see its a silly complaint. The Celtics are doing everything wrong!
To be clear.. I don’t disagree. I’d guess the C’s have probably experimented more than most nba teams with the number of days off they’ve given for injuries/personal reasons. My hot take is that they’re experimenting too much.
I think the advice given upthread is incredibly sound. Build in some realistic number of losses for this team this season - and I think that a good faith approach would be to assume that team doesn't intend to go undefeated or set the regular season W/L record - and accept that as a given. Back end of B2Bs on the road, road trips later in the season, various injuries and, even experimentation will all play into these.
Maybe this isn't correct but my assumption is that the Celtics have no intentions of winning every regular season game or even executing perfectly during any games. They are a work in progress like every other NBA team at this point in the season.
Maybe this isn't correct but my assumption is that the Celtics have no intentions of winning every regular season game or even executing perfectly during any games. They are a work in progress like every other NBA team at this point in the season.
I think the Celtics are burning through those X number of losses with miminal experimentation. And I've seen nothing from Joe in his year plus here that says regular season wins is not his top priority. (Last year people defended that.)
I'd argue that the players are the ones who settled the rotation. Those who are on the outside looking in are so due to either poor performances and/or not fitting into the role they are being asked to fill. It's not difficult to see who our Top-9 are right now.
In other words, this entire season rests on the hope that we can bring in a couple of low cost plug and play vets.
I don’t think that’s true at all.. if the top six or seven are healthy they’ll beat anyone and play almost all of the minutes.
When wa the last team that one a chamionship with a 7 man rotation? Do we aim to be the first?
Attachments
I think Hauser or PP can play similar-ish minutes to Christian Braun or 50 year old Jeff Green?
Maybe it's reactionary. I can agree that what I said was. But they also have created that situation where they're are in position to be eliminated (phila and mia say hello; hell they fucked around with Atlanta too). Much like how they don't routinely close games out like we want them to. That costs you wins and championships too.
I've always worried about the Brown closing offense. I'm just out on Brown and Tatum as a duo. And when this team isn't complete, lack of depth and all, I definitely don't see Brown elevating them. Tatum was bad yesterday, but he can defend at a high level. Brown is not a high level two-way player imo.
There's a good chance that Im wrong. I'm just really not a fan of this fit roster-wise.
Let me see if I can get this straight:
1. We're so good we don't need to try to win every game - there are a good 25 games or so that we don't need to complete in and we don't need to worry about losing. The loss in Orlando is a good example of that kind of unimportant, almost planned loss.
2. But we're not good enough to win without Tatum leading the league in minutes or coming close to that. Even in these "planned loss" type of games he needs to be going 39 minutes - otherwise, we might... lose?
3. We have a bench of 2 guys who are playable in the postseason: well, one we know who is (Horford), and one we hope is but who is showing all the progress towards that (Hauser). After that we are relying on guys who can be OK in the regular season, but who can't be counted on in the post-season (Pritchard, Kornet).
4. Speaking of Stevens, as good as he is in most of his job, I guess the dumpster diving to fill out the bottom of the roster isn't a strength. Unlike his higher profile moves, Stevens went 0-for-6 (Svi, Stevens, Brissett, Banton, Queta, Knight) in his attempts to add a low cost bench piece that is usable. Meanwhile our starters just got manhandled by a guy Stevens had no use for.
1. We're so good we don't need to try to win every game - there are a good 25 games or so that we don't need to complete in and we don't need to worry about losing. The loss in Orlando is a good example of that kind of unimportant, almost planned loss.
2. But we're not good enough to win without Tatum leading the league in minutes or coming close to that. Even in these "planned loss" type of games he needs to be going 39 minutes - otherwise, we might... lose?
3. We have a bench of 2 guys who are playable in the postseason: well, one we know who is (Horford), and one we hope is but who is showing all the progress towards that (Hauser). After that we are relying on guys who can be OK in the regular season, but who can't be counted on in the post-season (Pritchard, Kornet).
4. Speaking of Stevens, as good as he is in most of his job, I guess the dumpster diving to fill out the bottom of the roster isn't a strength. Unlike his higher profile moves, Stevens went 0-for-6 (Svi, Stevens, Brissett, Banton, Queta, Knight) in his attempts to add a low cost bench piece that is usable. Meanwhile our starters just got manhandled by a guy Stevens had no use for.
1/5th into the season and the Celtics are dead last in Q3 scoring 
I'm not sure what the hot take is other than that I don't like it!
Also, Point Jaylen made a heavy reappearance yesterday and I don't like that either!
I'm not sure what the hot take is other than that I don't like it!
Also, Point Jaylen made a heavy reappearance yesterday and I don't like that either!
Points to coaching yes?1/5th into the season and the Celtics are dead last in Q3 scoring
I'm not sure what the hot take is other than that I don't like it!
Also, Point Jaylen made a heavy reappearance yesterday and I don't like that either!
Obviously no Jrue, but I’m also wondering if CJM has been doing that to try and help JB grow as a player.
I hope not.
It’s been long enough that we very clearly know it’s not going to work. It’s like his fifth season of being a top 2/3 option, and a heavy usage guy. This team is trying to win a title, please just put everyone in the best position to succeed.