Those highlights were a thing of beauty. The only thing that would've made them better was someone karate chopping Draymond in the face.
2023-24 Celtics
- Thread starter 128
- Start date
Yea this seems weird. It’s a combo 17 and whoever happens to be in 2nd place at the moment. It’s exactly what we do with baseball every year.
If this week wasn’t peak performance I don’t know what it would look like. I said this about a month ago that my greatest fear besides injuries were this team running off 20 in a row before the playoffs and peaking too soon.
This 5 game road trip should keep them focused, and I doubt they run the table.
I’ll take peaking early and extra rest to decrease injury odds. Injuries have to be the biggest threat. Look at what has happened to the Knicks, who are probably just done after tonight.
So fun. I didn't get to see anything but the late 3rd on, but I do love how hard and well the development squad plays even in a blowout.
Not too soon. They have an 8 game lead with 22 to play. With the injury concerns/age of some players - plus the ability to get rest for guys - who knows how many more peddle-to-the-metal games we get. They're finding their peak now before resting up for the playoffs.
That's my positive spin on it.
Nobody’s really doing a lot of heavy listing as they crush these teams by double digits every game. I would have no problem with them doing this the rest of the season as long as they don’t burn anybody out with extra minutes. The 2008 team closed 20-4 as they tried to put a beatdown on every team.
I really like the way the Celtics are winning. There’s so much on selfishness on this team and so much camaraderie. I don’t think we’re gonna see any peaking at all. They will win 75-80% of their remaining games, and then roll over everybody in the playoffs.
Who are our injury concern guys? Horford has always been super durable but he’ll get B2B off as will KP whose I’ve always felt was overstated. Anyone else would be a fluke that rests aren’t going to help only that fewer minutes will obviously minimize that risk. I expect us to continue what we’ve been doing right to the end of the season except many give an extra day off on a B2B for others. I’m not buying this extended rest period happening as Mazzulla has talked about actually ramping UP same game minutes heading into the playoffs to help prepare.
There's a reason other teams don't do this lol.
Jaylen has some catch-and-shoot issues, so teams sometimes try to not close out to him as hard. But letting him just stand there and take warmup shots is something else entirely.
He's a good shooter who has issues with catch-and-shoots, not a bad shooter.
I get what you mean and share the concern somewhat...............however, this was also the first game in awhile that they even tried hard for the entire competitive portion.
They're just so good that 85% effort + a 3rd or 4th quarter burst wins a ton of games.
They know what they want to do on offense in all personnel groupings, going 10 deep. Missing KP didn't hurt at all. On defense, they know how to flip the switch at a moment's notice and go from respectable to swarming.
I meant injury prevention. Less court time = less injury risk.
I know KPs two major injuries were contact injuries, but no matter how you cut it, hes averaged 52 games a season over the last 5 years. He's 7'3 and had his bouts with plantar fasciitis, back pain, knee pain, etc. Maybe he's just unlucky with his injuries, but the more rest he gets, the happier I'll be.
We’re running the offense Joe talked a lot about last season but couldn’t really run because we had Smart eating minutes (he would be comfortably 9th in 3pt% on this year’s team) and TL providing zero spacing. Not to mention Grant providing almost no offensive value if he wasn’t hitting C&S threes.
They create so many open looks, but the real boost is that they can all shoot the lights out AND attack closeouts to score inside AND pass the ball. There are no breaks, nobody you are happy to see the hot potato stop at.
They create so many open looks, but the real boost is that they can all shoot the lights out AND attack closeouts to score inside AND pass the ball. There are no breaks, nobody you are happy to see the hot potato stop at.
Yep, this. Those moments where the ball just flies around from one guy who can shoot the lights out to the next, while the opposing D scrambles, only to see an open guy drain a three or the last pass hit a cutter who slams down a dunk...it honestly doesn't get any more fun than this.
And this is why I wasn't going to say anything earlier but... Myers was right. This game meant a lot to this team. They wanted to blow the Dubs out and blow them the fuck out they did. It *did* mean a lot more to the Celtics than the Warriors, even if the Warriors are fighting for a play-in spot.
I think it’s right to say that the game meant a lot to the C’s, understandably. What irritated me was Myers saying the C’ “needed” it more. One look at the standings reveals how foolish that is.
Not a bad shooter at all, but there's a pretty good argument that he's the worst shooter in the Celtics 8 man rotation. Which is incredible.
So, there seems to be a lot made of Draymond's sagging defense on Brown in the first quarter. I wasn't in the pregame meetings the Warriors had but here's my take anyways. So, Draymond as a sagging defender, clogging the paint and being a primary/solo helper (solo is usually key here; that is, no one else has help responsibilities bc Draymond has it for all drivers) is a thing the Warriors have done throughout their run. I have taken this model and used it myself in games where we're going up against teams who are either as good as us or better. We even call it "the Draymond." You are playing the Draymond role today. What I really don't get is we employ this strategy when we're facing teams with two or three elite offensive players and we put our "Draymond" on the weakest outside shooter. She sags in the paint, we essentially leave her assignment alone to shoot perimeter shots and "Draymond" is free to double low and help on all drives at will. What I don't get is why A. they thought this tactic could work against an all around great starting five and B. why they chose Brown.
If you're gonna do this, why pick him? Maybe, Al? He could be down low most of the time and screening for perimeter players negating the strategy though.. Ok.. pick Jrue so you're going to allow him to shoot uncontested shots and have space to drive and dish? I mean it's all stupid. Once they made the decision to do it, it was over. In the end, I would have if you told me I HAD to use "the Draymond" I'd put him on Jrue. It wouldn't have worked of course because he can still make threes and operate in space but with no threat to finish at the rim with a sagging defender and the other four defenders tight on their man, I roll the dice with him. And, again, I would not have tried this anyways even with KP out of the game.
If you're gonna do this, why pick him? Maybe, Al? He could be down low most of the time and screening for perimeter players negating the strategy though.. Ok.. pick Jrue so you're going to allow him to shoot uncontested shots and have space to drive and dish? I mean it's all stupid. Once they made the decision to do it, it was over. In the end, I would have if you told me I HAD to use "the Draymond" I'd put him on Jrue. It wouldn't have worked of course because he can still make threes and operate in space but with no threat to finish at the rim with a sagging defender and the other four defenders tight on their man, I roll the dice with him. And, again, I would not have tried this anyways even with KP out of the game.
He's not an elite shooter but he's a great scorer especially in the first half and plays with a chip on his shoulder. You're also taking his weakness away from him by sagging. That's a no no. If I'm gauging JB, I'm forcing him to drive and drive into help.
Yeah it's still a terrible idea, just that I kind of get the justification that if you're plan is to leave someone wide open to have draymond help in the paint, you want it to be the worst shooter on the floor. Three major problems:
-He's a big-time aggressive scorer, and he's not going to pass up open looks if you give them to him.
-He's one of the best 1st quarter scorers in the league, currently 10th in 1st quarter points.
-Even if he's the worst shooter on the floor, he's not a bad shooter.
There are maybe 5 coaches in the league who could implement this game plan in such a haphazard manner and not get ripped apart for it. That's not a compliment to Kerr.
What gets me if it’s true is that draymond claims that the tactic was installed 15 minutes before the tip. I cannot believe that. I can believe however that once they learned KP was out they were like they’re down to four great starters. What do we do? And then they go from there but that still doesn’t add up to leave Brown wide open.
The way to guard Brown is to get right up in his chest and play his right hand strong, make him go left, and just bring a little bit of help from that side - just enough to bother him but not so much that you can’t recover to the shooter.
Easier said than done because he’s become a tremendous scorer, but that’s the right way to play him.
Easier said than done because he’s become a tremendous scorer, but that’s the right way to play him.
JMazz on why he started his starters in the 3Q:
One of the most impressive things of our team is we won the start of the third quarter, 17-10. That's really important... to be in situations when you have a chance to have a letdown and you win by seven and that's why they stayed out there. It was very important that we won that first segment of the third quarter, but it's just that. It's just continuing to stay disciplined, not taking bad shots, not turning the ball over, not quitting on plays, not giving up rebounds, not getting back in transition.
I think when the Warriors looked at the numbers on Jaylen, they saw a guy who shoots 35.2% on threes (8th on the Celtics, 129th in the NBA) and 57.6% on twos (2nd on the Celtics, 38th in the NBA, and KP, who was 1st, was out), so they played him as their biggest inside threat, so they put Draymond on him. Jaylen just made them pay for sagging off him and leaving him wide open for three.
I agree with the Cs players that GSW was trying to get inside JB's head. I think part of the thinking stems from the 2022 incident where Draymond stepped on JB and claimed he knew that GSW was in BOS's heads from the way JB reacted.
I mean I guess it was worth a try.
I think it was during this period that Jefferson made the observation that the Celts were playing defense as if they were down by 15 as opposed to up by 40. He loved that, as did we all.
Regarding laying off Jaylen, IMO that was the strategy because Smart’s been traded. Encouraging Smart to shoot 3’s as opposed to the other, much better options, was a solid strategy. Definitely won’t work on the reg with Jaylen.
This is huge to me. Sure, everything is easier when you're up 40. But it's those games where they are up 10-15 at halftime that are going to be huge come playoff time. If they win the first 6-9 minutes of the 3rd quarter by 7 in those games, it's more or less lights out. But if they get outscored by 5-7 points, it could lead to tight 4th quarters.
Agree that getting inside Jaylen's head is the only reasonable justification here.
"Give Jaylen Brown 10 warmup 3s" is not a game plan. That's just giving up before the game starts.
Jefferson said that in the 2Q but the point still stands.
As for JB, Karalis quipped that GSW found an old game plan and replaced Smart’s name with JB. But the reason I bring it up is because there’s a huge difference between making 36% of 3Ps when defenses concede the shot and making 36% of contested 3Ps. I love Smart but he was one big reason why the Cs were getting bogged down in crunch time - defenders were sagging off of him and allowing him to take barely-contested 3Ps - and he couldn’t make them pay. Having 5 legit 3P shooters on the floor changes everything for the Cs.
Yeah it was the wrinkle that turned the ‘21-‘22 Celtics from a team treading water into a temporary juggernaut. Except as you say it was pretty much always TL helping off the opposing team’s weakest guy who was usually camped in the corner.
If I squint I can see the thought process. Say he misses the first three shots—not unreasonable—and suddenly there is possession #4 and he’s open again but really thinking about it.
Teams are going to have to bring lots of wrinkles in the playoffs because they are just cooking every D right now, so it’s good to have them work through different scenarios. I especially hope all their zone sets are on point.
Hey @Brand Name what's the record for biggest scoring margin gap between the 1st and 2nd teams in NBA history? Celts are somewhere around +210 vs. OKC.
This is it. When the other team is better than you, you are going to have to take risks -- risks that increase your chances to win, but also increase the odds you'll get boat raced. I thought it was fine tactically. It just didn't work. And playing the Celtics straight up also wouldn't have worked. Golden State can't guard them.
This reminds me, one of the issues with the new 65-game award threshold is that playing fewer minutes in a blowout (because it's a blowout) is treated the same as playing zero. 20 minutes counts fully, and between 15-20 minutes can count up to twice all season.
The starters all got to 20 minutes, except for Derrick White who was a few seconds shy, but also is an ironman who is nowhere near having to worry about load management affecting eligibility. White has missed 3 games (all early in the season, for his new baby), and this is only the second game he logged fewer than 20 minutes (the other was our road Milwaukee blowout). I imagine this is why the starters came back out to start the 3rd - Joe Mazzulla probably asked Charles Lee "what are the guys at for minutes?" and then removed them from the game accordingly.
Last edited:
100%. This team has 6 starters, we just can only start 5 of them on a given night.
And aren't we like4-2 in games where two of our big-6 sit? I'm going off total anecdotal memory, if someone can look that up please do. edit: it's actually 8-1, see below
And aren't we like
Last edited:
It doesn’t feel like they’re peaking to me, more like they’re steadily improving as they continue to play together. I'm not saying they're going to win every game by double digits, but their skill level and complete team-wide buy in to the system means they can generate a good shot almost every trip down the floor, and the team is full of smart, great shooters. So if they shoot 50% from 3 there’s a decent chance they win by 50. Everyone has rightfully been high on the Warriors since Draymond came back and the C’s ended that game in the second quarter. The relentlessness of great shooters getting great looks means the other team has to get lucky to keep it close if the C's don't deviate from the script. They're a hydraulic press right now, and I don't see any indications they're going to do anything different going forward.
It's all about health at this point, IMO. They stay healthy, they should win the whole thing. They get injured and they're vulnerable.
I seem to recall someone pointing out on the other thread that there are 3 (?) exception games to the 20 minute rule for someone playing short minutes. (does not apply to a DNP)
OK, we are actually 8-1 (!) with 2 of our 6 starters out. Including the one game where we've had 3 of them out. Horford was one of the absences in 6 of the 9 games.
G 11 @ PHI, missing Brown & Porzingis: W, 117-107
G 14 @ CHO, missing White & Horford: L, 118-121 (OT)
G 17 v ATL*, missing Porzingis & Holiday: W, 113-103
G 24 v ORL, missing Porzingis & Horford: W, 128-111
G 27 @ SAC*, missing Tatum & Horford: W, 144-119
G 31 v TOR, missing Tatum, Porzingis AND Horford (!): W, 120-118
G 41 v SAS, missing Porzingis & White: W, 117-98
G 32 @ HOU*, missing Holiday & Horford: W, 116-107
G 55 v BKN, missing Brown & Horford: W, 136-86
* these 3 games followed a loss, and therefore prevented a losing streak
We should schedule a split-squad pair of games where we divide the crew in half to each play another NBA team, see what happens.
G 11 @ PHI, missing Brown & Porzingis: W, 117-107
G 14 @ CHO, missing White & Horford: L, 118-121 (OT)
G 17 v ATL*, missing Porzingis & Holiday: W, 113-103
G 24 v ORL, missing Porzingis & Horford: W, 128-111
G 27 @ SAC*, missing Tatum & Horford: W, 144-119
G 31 v TOR, missing Tatum, Porzingis AND Horford (!): W, 120-118
G 41 v SAS, missing Porzingis & White: W, 117-98
G 32 @ HOU*, missing Holiday & Horford: W, 116-107
G 55 v BKN, missing Brown & Horford: W, 136-86
* these 3 games followed a loss, and therefore prevented a losing streak
We should schedule a split-squad pair of games where we divide the crew in half to each play another NBA team, see what happens.
Can someone share evidence - even just anecdotal - that NBA teams "peak"? I feel like the NBA is the one professional sport where the best team, barring injury, wins the playoff tournament because it takes hundreds of possessions to win a game, and you have to do that four times to win a series. A team can't get "hot" and beat the 97 Bulls like how Bruins were beat last year or the 2001 Mariners or the 16-0 Pats.
Recent NBA teams that come to mind that have lost in such a fashion are the:
- 2019 Warriors, who lost to the Raptors because of injury
- 2016 Warriors, who lost to a great Cavs team in part because Draymond couldn't keep his cool
- 2011 Heat, who I would argue lost to a superior team
- 2004 Lakers, who I think, again, lost to a superior team
Great, healthy teams only lose to other great, healthy teams (80s Lakers/Celtics series come to mind). If the Celtics lose in the playoffs or finals, it will be because of some fatal flaw in the roster (which we haven't found yet) or injury, not them burning through their mojo in the regular season.
Recent NBA teams that come to mind that have lost in such a fashion are the:
- 2019 Warriors, who lost to the Raptors because of injury
- 2016 Warriors, who lost to a great Cavs team in part because Draymond couldn't keep his cool
- 2011 Heat, who I would argue lost to a superior team
- 2004 Lakers, who I think, again, lost to a superior team
Great, healthy teams only lose to other great, healthy teams (80s Lakers/Celtics series come to mind). If the Celtics lose in the playoffs or finals, it will be because of some fatal flaw in the roster (which we haven't found yet) or injury, not them burning through their mojo in the regular season.
The current implied probability of the Celtics winning a title is a hair over 30%, "should" is shouldering quite a burden here. Feels like no matter how dominant a regular season team is, they are likely going to have to win at least two series that are close to coin flips (albeit still ones they are favored in). Dont get me wrong, they are the prohibitive favorites, and should be. I just think it sets us up for failure as fans when we discount the fact that while they are the clear individual favorites, the field is still favored to win.
I think this is also just my psyche of trying to enjoy the hell out of this journey, before placing all the importance on the destination.
Yeah you’re probably right and since there is nothing else to worry about I’m only concerned about them losing an edge that comes with complacency. Teams with long regular season win streaks have performed very well in winning championships. The two the at stick out, Houston and our ‘09 team, were setback by injuries following their streaks.
The key will be the last couple weeks after clinching home court; how much rest vs. staying sharp.
I think, thankfully, complacency is not something we have to worry about with these guys due to how they've fallen short of a championship the last few years