He has to be #3 in the MVP race behind Harden and Westbrook. He is the essence of a most valuable player. Without him this is a 42 win 7 seed.
21st Century Tiny Archibald?
- Thread starter Sprowl
- Start date
Agreed and he will get votes. In fact, I would argue that he should be number two right now behind Harden. It may be the year of the Rooster for the Chinese but its the year of the left-handed shooter for NBA MVP candidates.
It seems like he has raised his game to the next level. Hopefully he has figured out something that will translate to the playoffs. Wouldn't it be something if he could be scoring 15+ in the fourth quarter of playoff games?
It would but you know full well it will be much tougher.
Toronto was on the back-end of a back to back and these are the dog days of winter in the NBA when guys are banged up, tired, hung over and not as locked in as they will be come April and beyond. That said, when Bradley comes back, opponents wont be able to collapse in on or blitz him as much because he'll have another decent shooter to make them pay.
Either way, he is an elite level scorer who can get buckets any number of ways and that will be nice to have come the playoffs.
Last year in the playoffs, IT has basically none of that kind of support. No Bradley, no Olynyk, Crowder playing on a bad ankle and not shooting well, no Horford obviously.
As long as the shooters are there in the playoffs, IT will fare better than he did last year.
That is a crazy stat. Usually you get a 2 point per shot game from a finisher big with 12 points. 44 from 22 for a small guard? Unbelievable.
Posted this in the game thread the other day, but IT4 has scored 15 or more points in the 4th quarter 10 times this season. The 2nd most is Westbrook with 5. He has scored 15 or more points in the 4th in 22% of his games.
IT4 has scored 20 or more points in the 4th quarter 4 times this season. No other player has done it more than once.
Update to beat Havlicek: He has to average 30 1/3 ppg in the final 33 games. To beat Birds 29.9, he needs to average 31.1ppg. In December, he average 30.3, in January it was 32.9. 34.8 over his last 16. If you take out that game where he only played 24 minutes because Orlando sucks, he has averaged 37.5 over the last 8.
IT4 has scored 20 or more points in the 4th quarter 4 times this season. No other player has done it more than once.
Update to beat Havlicek: He has to average 30 1/3 ppg in the final 33 games. To beat Birds 29.9, he needs to average 31.1ppg. In December, he average 30.3, in January it was 32.9. 34.8 over his last 16. If you take out that game where he only played 24 minutes because Orlando sucks, he has averaged 37.5 over the last 8.
I know the metrics say IT is bad on defense. Like, worst defender in the league bad. But is he that bad? I know he's at a disadvantage due to his size, but the C's seem to do a good job of hiding him, putting him on the team's worst offensive guard (even SF at times) while letting Bradley or Smart take the primary ball handler. His offense is great, but I'm starting to hear more and more national reporters talk about how bad IT is on defense and how he's actually a net minus when he's on the court (I believe that was 4th quarter numbers). But my eyes tell me the C's are better with him on the court. Any thoughts from those who have watched him all season?
He's really bad on D 1 on 1 but the Cs as a team are playing like shit on D and that isn't all on him.
Cs also cannot stay healthy and I think that is hurting them from a talent(obvious) perspective but also from a reps perspective
Watching him guard Demar Derozen one on one makes me cringe. Brad has done a good job at trying to put him on the player they can most afford to let have the freedom to roam around, that is for sure though.
If we had more of a rim protecting big in the middle it would help a great deal.
If we had more of a rim protecting big in the middle it would help a great deal.
It is, and IT's efficiency given his usage is what's making this run so incredible. Gobert, DeAndre Jordan and Tyson Chandler are the only three guys with points per shot > 1.7 right now. Isaiah's right behind Harden, Durant and Lowry and ahead of Jimmy Butler. Those guys are the only non-bigs in the top 20.
Fun tangential fact- on Saturday, John Gillon dropped 43 point on 13 shots for Syracuse. 10/13 overall, including 9/10 from three with 14/14 from the line.
Edit to add- Gillon was guarded primarily by potential future IT replacement Dennis Smith Jr., who at least had the decency to put up a triple double on the other end.
Last edited:
Fun tangential fact #2 - Tim Hardaway Jr. has now joined the 20 pts in the 4Q club. That Jr. not the original.
Here's an article that does a pretty deep dive into the numbers: http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/celtics-isaiah-thomas-is-a-fourth-quarter-killer-but-which-team-is-he-killing/.
One thing he does mention about the +/- numbers: a lot of times they are presented as per 100 possessions, but that adjustment could skew things. Or as the author states: ". . . using per-100-possession data accounts for pace and gives you a more accurate view of what's going on. But it also means that you're not accounting for small changes in flow. By that I mean that while the Celtics are a minus-1.27 per 100 possessions in net points with Thomas on the floor in the 4th, they're a raw plus-12 over 356 minutes and 42 games in the 4th with Thomas on the floor. . . . Why are the two numbers different? Offense-defense substitutions. Thomas is on the floor for more offensive possessions than defensive ones." (emphasis added)
Observationally, the Cs have an extremely hard time playing defense when IT4 is on the floor - put him in a PnR situation and the Cs don't have a ton of answers. Toronto (the previous one), WAS, and NY were all recent games I remember that this happened. Still, if IT4 can continue lighting it up as efficiently as he does; the Cs stop giving up corner 3s; and Brad using offense-defense situations judiciously, I am cautiously optimistic that IT4 is still a net positive.
It will be different in the playoffs though I think.
Well honestly I'd be shocked if the original joined that club at this stage of his career.
Sarcasm? At the same age, Hardaway was averaging 22.9ppg 9.7apg. Unless you mean he accomplished it in his rookie season. Although 20 points in a quarter is hard to score, if Hardaway did it, it was probably in his 2nd-4th seasons.
Woosh, you are correct. I thought he meant relative to Tim Hardaway Jr's career. Not 50 year old Tim Hardaway.
The object of the game is to put the ball through the basket, and IT4 is one of the 5-10 best players in the league at doing that. His defense isn't bad enough to erase that -- but it's pretty damn bad. As in "I'm not sure he can play 30 minutes a night for a contender under any circumstances" bad.
Somehow the Celtics have made it to the season's midpoint 2nd in the Eastern Conference. Yes, Isaiah's defense is bad, but they don't make it to the 2nd seed without his offense.
No question about it. Advanced stats love players like Jae Crowder who shoot the ball sparingly and make the most of their shots, but you can't have a team full of those guys -- in addition to the numbers not adding up (someone has to shoot the ball), you need dynamic players who disrupt the defense and generate the quality shots that those high-efficiency guys are so good at converting. IT4 is not just one of the league's best at doing that; he's pretty much the only guy on the C's roster who does it reasonably well.
The downside is that you can't win a title without above-average defense, and I don't think you can have an above-average defense with IT4 as one of your core guys -- he's just too big a liability. The C's are the 9th-worst team in the NBA in terms of points allowed per possession, and they're the only team in the bottom 10 with more than a snowball's chance of advancing past the first round of the playoffs. So while IT4 is incredibly valuable to this year's team and is a helluva lot of fun to watch, I'm afraid the moves that take this club from a second-tier team to a bona fide contender will include trading IT4 away.
Or you surround him with good athletic three and D wings and a rim protector.
Steph Curry is taller and a much better defender but earlier in his career he was a big liability on defense. The Warriors responded by getting Andrew Bogut and Andre Iguodala to go along with plus defenders in Green and Thompson. The result was they became a contender.
IT4, Bradley, Crowder, Horford plus an elite rim protecting big works.
I get that the Cs would get that guy if he was out there. I am just pointing out that there is a path to the next level that doesn't involve trading Thomas.
Yes. I don't think think the Celtics current roster is well constructed to protect Thomas on D. No rim protector and a reliance on short wings. There is opportunity for improvement through roster upgrades.
Yes he gets hurt on D, but I have to give him all the respect in the world to go to work like he has a a small guy in the league. How good does may little guy have to be to get a chance? Under 6-2 in the league?
As a C's fan it is a dilemma to deciude what to do, to go to the next level. But I just want to enjoy the show.
As a C's fan it is a dilemma to deciude what to do, to go to the next level. But I just want to enjoy the show.
I'm with you, Reggie. At this point I'm just enjoying the show and letting Danny worry about roster construction. He's done a hell of a job so far, and I'm confident that he understands the situation quite well, so let him sweat it out and let us enjoy one of the most spectacular offensive talents we've had in a long time.
They were one of the best defensive teams in the nba last year with IT as a core guy, unless you want to argue his increased usage on offense this year tanked his defense
I think it's pretty simple. The Celtics are highly likely to be drafting a point guard this year. As soon as the coaching staff thinks that player is ready to start, IT will be traded. All us fans will be sad to see him go, but they should get a very nice return foe him.
+3 tonight and yet nobody can tell me that the Celtics beat the Lakers without him. +/- is flawed for sure.
Last edited:
2 points away from being the first Celtic in franchise history with 3 straight 40 point games. He can get a mini-run going so quick. It's amazing how quick he gets the shot off on the perimeter but even more so in the paint against the bigs. So fun to watch.
I am of the opinion that basketball is harder to quantify. Football, baseball are broken into closed plays, with specialists. IT forces teams to play their best defenders more, and takes pressure off of other guys. To make a comparison to another open, continuous sport. Do you think the Bruins would be okay with an elite offensive talent that was weak defensively? Is Ovi the NHL equivalent of IT?
This is my thinking as well. Hope it works out.
One thing I noticed Wed against Toronto was that Thomas was trying to go over the top of picks, 28 feet from the basket. It didn't work and the guards would build up downstream momentum. Has anybody else noticed this or am I imagining?
I don't understand why he doesn't go underneath that far from the hoop. I realize it is probably a team mandate, but IT isn't Bradley or Smart. I don't see the problem with having him go underneath that far from the hoop, but having the more capable guards go over the top. I guess it makes the schemes more challenging for the man guarding the picker, he would have to be aware of the teammates intent to go over or under (to properly hedge or stick). But I think they could get that.
I don't understand why he doesn't go underneath that far from the hoop. I realize it is probably a team mandate, but IT isn't Bradley or Smart. I don't see the problem with having him go underneath that far from the hoop, but having the more capable guards go over the top. I guess it makes the schemes more challenging for the man guarding the picker, he would have to be aware of the teammates intent to go over or under (to properly hedge or stick). But I think they could get that.
Observationally, the C's have an extremely hard time rebounding the basketball when IT4 is on the floor as well.
Going under the screen is going to give the ball handler a good look at the 3-point shot, especially if his defender plays that way consistently. Probably better to fight over it and make the ball handler drive; the help defense should at least be able to force the O to settle for something worse than an open 3-point look for the PG.
This is one of those problems that the Celtics' lack of rim protection exacerbates.
I get that - but 28 feet from the basket, it isn't quite the threat it is at 25 feet. I guess I could have articulated that better. It wasn't that he was attempting to go over, but where he was attempting to go over. It was too far from the basket to make any sense, and was put at an immediate disadvantage.
At least part of this is due to the bigs having to rotate over to help, leaving them out of position to rebound.
Long form SI article on IT4Q here: http://www.si.com/nba/2017/02/07/isaiah-thomas-celtics-the-little-ticket-brad-stevens
I agree, he has problems on the ball, but maybe worse is how lkate, or poorly he rotates away from the ball. Of course when he does get there, he is still tiny.
There is actually an IT4 Part II in college: Marcus Keene.
LINK: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/02/07/marcus-keene-central-michigan-chippewas-division-i-scoring-leader
He's 5'9" and leading the NCAA in scoring at a ridiculous 30.7 ppg. The next closest is at 23.8 ppg.
LINK: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2017/02/07/marcus-keene-central-michigan-chippewas-division-i-scoring-leader
He's 5'9" and leading the NCAA in scoring at a ridiculous 30.7 ppg. The next closest is at 23.8 ppg.
We're way past that point on Thomas. He's averaging a reasonably efficient 30 points per game. He's in the MVP discussion. Isaiah Thomas, shaky defense and all, is a starting point guard in this league. It doesn't mean the Celtics should re-sign him, but the ship has sailed on whether he should be a sixth man or not.
Agreed... But where the Celtics utilize Thomas isn't necessary where a winning team would.
The Celtics are a winning team. They are one of the 5 best teams in the NBA right now. Is this post an exercise in absurdism?
I know you stated above that you are biased against Thomas but I hate this "analysis." IT is the best player on a team that is 36-19. The team is a winning team and he is their #1 star. You want to change that to Championship team and we can have a discussion but otherwise your bias is far too strong.
Or what Jake Rae said so much more succinctly...
Many here think that basketball is the exact opposite of the other sports, in that the regular season results are meaningless other than seeding, and talent is only shown in playoff series. I'm not sure I would go as far as some do with that line of thought, but until this core actually wins a playoff series or two, it's a valid criticism of them.
That doesn't make them any less fun, enjoyable, or "winning" right now. But I assume that's where RR is coming from.
That's great, but empirically, NBA regular season results predict playoff outcomes better than in any other professional sport. So, I'm inclined to pretty much entirely discount this thought pattern. I do think there is a real phenomenon where aging teams can coast through the regular season and then play at a different level in the playoffs. So, if you want to argue that the fact that the Celtics are making a run at the 1 seed overstates their chances of beating the Cavs in the playoffs, I'd tend to agree. But, that doesn't really cut against the point I was making or support the absurd assertion that the Celtics are anything other than a very good NBA team.
I'm only trying to parse what RR is saying, because it is nonsensical on its face unless you limit it strictly to "in the playoffs" - and I've seen many posts here saying the C's can win in the regular season with IT starting, but won't win in the playoffs, so he's certainly not alone.
Last edited:
I know. I was responding to the substance underlying the perspective you were explaining. I hope it didn't come across as critical of you. That was not my intention.