I was watching about 100 feet from the court. It was apparent to me that there was a problem that game. Whether it was Kyrie who causes it or not is debatable, but he's supposed to be the team's leader.. The other team had a top PG, and he had no problem leading his teammates, who all seemed to be on the same page with him. I was familiar with Kyrie's stat line when I posted. He did not get his teammates as involved as they needed to be, especially in the last 7 1/2 minutes, when he re-entered the game down four points. Kyrie can score 31 points every night. The Celtics need him to lead, get the offense humming, play at least a little defense, and score, especially in crunch time.
If we used __________ wasn't the problem, because he was 14-24, Andrew Wiggins would be a basketball god. Boston is a lifeless basketball team, and Kyrie is the main reason. He is their best player, and is supposed to be their franchise guy, but he's sowed discord publicly. A 31 point Kyrie who does little else, while freezing out and alienating many of his teammates, is a problem to me.
I voted to keep him, but am heading into "fuck this guy, let him be some other team's problem" territory. I have little faith that he has the leadership tools to right the Celtics' ship, and I have some doubt that he really wants to. I was fine with investing almost $40 million a season in this guy, which was once to me a no brainer, but now I'm questioning it.
(1) Are you referring to the Andrew Wiggins who is a lifetime .331 3P shooter and has a career TS% of .520, including a .482 this year? Kyrie's TS% this year is .599 and was .610 last year. Kyrie has a career high in assists, rebounds, and DBPM. If Andrew Wiggins has a .600 TS% and a DBPM in the positive, he's definitely an All-Star and Thibs would probably still be coaching in MIN.
(2) I think I finally get why this thread exists. I think we all agree that last year's team was one of the most enjoyable teams any sports fan will ever get to watch. I don't have time to re-watch games but I have re-watched the HOU game from last year. And the run to the Eastern Conference finals was unexpected and somewhat magical. But let me ask a question:
How far does last year's team go in this year's new, improved EC?
Yes, we beat MIL by keeping serve at home. In Game 7, MIL's 7 main players included Thon Maker, Jabari Parker, and Jason Terry. #8 was Dellanova. Does anyone think last year's team would even be able to get a Game 7 against this year's MIL team?
Last year's team went 2-2 vs TOR but the games in TOR weren't competitive (91-111; 78-96 - yes we scored 78 at TOR on April 4). Does anyone think we would have beat TOR in a seven game series last year? And I think we all know this year's TOR team is way better than last year's team.
Last year's team went 2-2 vs IND last year but the two wins were in November and December (and included TR's steal) and the two losses (in which BOS scored 91 and 97 points respectively) were in February and March. I think we all agreed that a seven game series vs IND would have been a toss-up at best. I think IND was better this year than last year before Olidipo got hurt.
And finally PHI. I think PHI this year is clearly better than last year but apparently PHI is a good matchup for BOS. And someone might say that the Cs just beat PHI without KI. Yes, but that required GH to have the game of his Celtics career. Would last year's Celtics stand a chance against this year's PHI team? I personally don't think so.
Deadspin has an article entitled,
"Maybe Brad Stevens Isn't Quite Up To This", which asks what has been sometimes posted on this board: since Brad seems to have the most success with limited upside guys who know their role, maybe his system won't work with high upside guys who don't want to be constrained?
While that's a fair question to ask (I guess), I'd put it this way. Brad had a lot of success last year with high-upside guys by putting them into situations where they could use their strengths. Maybe the issue is that these high-upside guys see the success that they have and think they are better than they are and start getting out of their roles? JT thinks he'll be an All-Star and that's probably right but he's not there
yet. JB thinks he can be Jimmy Butler and that may be right but he's certainly not there
yet. Marcus Smart thinks he's an all-around difference maker and he's probably right on the defensive side but not there on the offensive side
yet (and maybe never will be). MM thinks he's a starter on a championship team. TRoz probably thinks he's going to be an All-Star too.
And yes, Kyrie isn't immune to this - I'm sure he thinks he's as good as the top 5 players in the league but I think we all agree he isn't
yet.
This team definitely needs KI to be the best version of itself. Granted there may be issues in the locker room but maybe the biggest issue could be that everyone - including the players - were overly optimistic about this team from the get go.