2019-2020 Celtics Regular Season Thread

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
I don't get the Wanamaker hate that some folks have. He is what he is: a reserve player who makes mistakes, isn't a very good player (by NBA standards) but who does give you something. He gives you a 2.7:1.1 assist to turnover ratio (Kemba's is 2.5:1.1, LeBron's is 2.9:1.1, Harden's is 1.8:1.1). He gives you good catch-and-shoot ability. He makes his free throws (92.5%). He's an above-average defender. And he only shoots 5.1 times a game so it's not like his 42.8% overall shooting percentage is really problematic. At 5.1 shots a game, if the team plays 5 times over two weeks, that's about 25 shots over two weeks. The difference between poor shooting at 42.8% and great shooting at 48.2% is one and a half made baskets over the course of two weeks. Hardly anything to get worked up over.
Hmmm a couple points here.

1. Offenses are ecosystems, so one guy's role and percentages ripple through all the lineups he's in.

2. The point I'm making isn't so much about Wanamaker himself, but how I think teams like Milwaukee are using guys with his skillset better than the Celtics are. Part of that is the team needing to adjust to the roster-building and role-setting implications of having a 6-8 defensive wrecking ball who is rapidly becoming a primary offensive engine.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,934
Cultural hub of the universe
I don't get the Wanamaker hate that some folks have. He is what he is: a reserve player who makes mistakes, isn't a very good player (by NBA standards) but who does give you something. He gives you a 2.7:1.1 assist to turnover ratio (Kemba's is 2.5:1.1, LeBron's is 2.9:1.1, Harden's is 1.8:1.1). He gives you good catch-and-shoot ability. He makes his free throws (92.5%). He's an above-average defender. And he only shoots 5.1 times a game so it's not like his 42.8% overall shooting percentage is really problematic. At 5.1 shots a game, if the team plays 5 times over two weeks, that's about 25 shots over two weeks. The difference between poor shooting at 42.8% and great shooting at 48.2% is one and a half made baskets over the course of two weeks. Hardly anything to get worked up over.
I don't get the hate either, but he does turn the ball over a lot. His TO% is 15.5%, Kemba's is 10.1% and Smart's is 11.6%, both on significantly higher usage. Good shooter, solid defender. I like the poor man's George Hill comp, that seems like a good role for him.
 

Cesar Crespo

79
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
21,588
If Wanamaker shot as many 3s as Hill, would he still be as effective? Hill's at 5.0 attempted/36. Wanamaker is at roughly half that. 2.7/36.

Isn't the problem he doesn't shoot the 3 enough? Only 27.7% of his shots are 3s, 46% of Hill's are.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
If Wanamaker shot as many 3s as Hill, would he still be as effective? Hill's at 5.0 attempted/36. Wanamaker is at roughly half that. 2.7/36.

Isn't the problem he doesn't shoot the 3 enough? Only 27.7% of his shots are 3s, 46% of Hill's are.
Yeah, this gets at my issues with his role. He can't shoot the 3 enough because he's being used as an on-ball initiator rather than a spot-up spacer. This drastically lowers the amount of the time he'll find himself with available 3s to take.

For me this isn't really a "get Brad Wanamaker more shots" thing as much as it is "fucking use the 5 good on-ball initiators you have, Brad" thing.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,100
Yeah, this gets at my issues with his role. He can't shoot the 3 enough because he's being used as an on-ball initiator rather than a spot-up spacer. This drastically lowers the amount of the time he'll find himself with available 3s to take.

For me this isn't really a "get Brad Wanamaker more shots" thing as much as it is "fucking use the 5 good on-ball initiators you have, Brad" thing.
It the above this season's "play Al at the 4 and Aaron at the 5" mantra? Couldn't resist.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
It the above this season's "play Al at the 4 and Aaron at the 5" mantra? Couldn't resist.
I mean...they're both things that someone wants the coach to do, I guess?

And Hamlet and Harry Potter are basically the same book about a guy's dad getting killed by a villain.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
8,021
Imaginationland
Yeah, more than fine with him. He's an excellent spot up 3 point shooter, the best in the league from the line, and is a solid defender who won't kill you on switches. It's not his fault that the team's 3 primary ball handlers (Kemba, Smart, Hayward) have missed a combined 40 games, which has him bringing the ball up more often than you'd like. If anything it highlights his durability (leading the team in games played), which is very welcome in a year in which the team seems to flow from one injury to the next.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Rewatching the 2nd half...it's hilarious how bad the Celtics gameplan was. They started by getting Jaylen iso'd on House, who can't guard him. You can get matchups like that every time down against Houston if you want, because they switch everything by default. Instead, the Cs just went back to their base offense and had a lot of Smart, Hayward, and Tatum driving into thickets of arms, since you can't play PnR against the Rockets.

I guess the positive is that there's low-hanging fruit and options for playoff matching up, but the 2nd half was bizarre, particularly because they attacked matchups pretty well in the 1st half.

Playoff Brad always seems a lot more aggressive than Regular Season Brad about exploiting mismatches as the base of a gameplan.

I'm fine chalking some of this up to fatigue after the roadtrip, but it's going to be hard to avoid going on the road in round 2 against Toronto.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Through the 4th quarter now: wow. What a total team fail in terms of rebounding effort. It's especially weird because the defensive effort was strong all game.

And the offensive gameplan continued to be utter crap after the 1st quarter. This was early January vs the Pistons and Wizards level stuff. Probably better that they lost rather than pulled out a miracle win, since it will force some self-evaluation like they had to do 2 months ago.

Edit: when they did the Brad mic'd up towards the end of the 4th quarter, he talked about keeping it simple and spread out on offense. They also repeatedly went to post isos after timeouts This leads me to think that the gameplan was solid, but for whatever reason the players weren't up to executing.
 

lars10

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
11,620
Through the 4th quarter now: wow. What a total team fail in terms of rebounding effort. It's especially weird because the defensive effort was strong all game.

And the offensive gameplan continued to be utter crap after the 1st quarter. This was early January vs the Pistons and Wizards level stuff. Probably better that they lost rather than pulled out a miracle win, since it will force some self-evaluation like they had to do 2 months ago.

Edit: when they did the Brad mic'd up towards the end of the 4th quarter, he talked about keeping it simple and spread out on offense. They also repeatedly went to post isos after timeouts This leads me to think that the gameplan was solid, but for whatever reason the players weren't up to executing.
I wonder how much that has to do with Smart going off script as the primary ball handler. If that’s Kemba perhaps we’re seeing different?
When Smart has the majority of the ball handling duties I feel like Tatum has to come out further a lot more often to demand the ball which then leads to him dribbling extra to get back inside. obviously that’s also on him, but I’d be interested to see if there’s a difference where he starts with the ball between him with Kemba or Smart.
Smart’s threes in transition and also ill-timed ones also feel like they’d be frustrating for an offense.
They’re so much better when the ball is moving.. I think Kemba will alleviate a lot of this.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
I wonder how much that has to do with Smart going off script as the primary ball handler. If that’s Kemba perhaps we’re seeing different?
When Smart has the majority of the ball handling duties I feel like Tatum has to come out further a lot more often to demand the ball which then leads to him dribbling extra to get back inside. obviously that’s also on him, but I’d be interested to see if there’s a difference where he starts with the ball between him with Kemba or Smart.
Smart’s threes in transition and also ill-timed ones also feel like they’d be frustrating for an offense.
They’re so much better when the ball is moving.. I think Kemba will alleviate a lot of this.
I'd have to watch more closely: I think Smart probably does go off script in that regard too often, rather than just getting Tatum and Brown the ball in advantage matchups. Houston is a weird matchup for him: there's little value in what he does as a ballhandler against them, and a lot more value in his keeping the floor spaced, which he didn't do often.

The thing is, there are a lot of advantages to playing the Smart lineups, since the defense was awesome at times. They really need to stick to the offensive gameplan better than they did, and, you know, try to rebound occasionally.
 

bigq

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,088
Rewatching the 2nd half...it's hilarious how bad the Celtics gameplan was. They started by getting Jaylen iso'd on House, who can't guard him. You can get matchups like that every time down against Houston if you want, because they switch everything by default. Instead, the Cs just went back to their base offense and had a lot of Smart, Hayward, and Tatum driving into thickets of arms, since you can't play PnR against the Rockets.

I guess the positive is that there's low-hanging fruit and options for playoff matching up, but the 2nd half was bizarre, particularly because they attacked matchups pretty well in the 1st half.

Playoff Brad always seems a lot more aggressive than Regular Season Brad about exploiting mismatches as the base of a gameplan.

I'm fine chalking some of this up to fatigue after the roadtrip, but it's going to be hard to avoid going on the road in round 2 against Toronto.
The 3rd quarter in particular sucked and was where the game was lost in my mind. The Celtics underperformed on offense and defense getting out scored 36-22 while shooting 33% compared to Houston at 59%.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,025
The 3rd quarter in particular sucked and was where the game was lost in my mind. The Celtics underperformed on offense and defense getting out scored 36-22 while shooting 33% compared to Houston at 59%.
This, I know, is beating a horse that's long been dead, but I still can't believe Danny didn't add a proven shooter at the trade deadline.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
This, I know, is beating a horse that's long been dead, but I still can't believe that Danny didn't add a proven shooter at the trade deadline.
Whom? Washington apparently wanted more than 2 firsts for Bertans (a rental who would take them way into the luxury tax) and Bjelica was really the only other option out there.

A shooter wouldn’t have helped them care about rebounding or run the offensive gameplan.

Overpaying for immediate fit without regard to asset management is called Elton Brand’ing, and it’s avoided by competent franchises.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Gonna post frustration videos: here's something that Houston themselves on offense do consistently, like nearly every play, and the Celtics sort of did and sort of didn't, depending on whether they felt like it.

Grant has Jeff Green on him, and so he sets an early screen for Tatum. Houston switches, because they SWITCH EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE KNOWS IT, and you have Tatum iso'd on Jeff Green. At that point, you've won the play. Tatum ends up with a pretty clean stepback for 3 and hits it.

https://videos.nba.com/nba/pbp/media/2020/02/29/0021900892/188/c2d3ffc2-7724-e4d7-a5fe-240c864a1d71_1280x720.mp4
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,025
Whom? Washington apparently wanted more than 2 firsts for Bertans (a rental who would take them way into the luxury tax) and Bjelica was really the only other option out there.

A shooter wouldn’t have helped them care about rebounding or run the offensive gameplan.

Overpaying for immediate fit without regard to asset management is called Elton Brand’ing, and it’s avoided by competent franchises.
How about Alec Burks? He's shooting 37 percent from 3-point range this season (and averaging 15.4 points per game). I doubt very much that spending a second-rounder or two--or, God forbid, the Bucks' first-round pick---would have tied Danny's hands going forward.

This is shaping up, perhaps unexpectedly, as a season when the C's have a legitimate shot at making the Eastern Conference finals, and they're banking on having all the key pieces healthy for the playoffs. If that happens, the bench will be fine. But there's been little during the regular season to suggest that'll be the case.

Elton Brand has basically blown up the Sixers' roster with a couple of his deals and contracts. This is apples and oranges. I'm talking about tweaking the bench, not disrupting the core.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
How about Alec Burks? He's shooting 37 percent from 3-point range this season (and averaging 15.4 points per game). I doubt very much that spending a second-rounder or two--or, God forbid, the Bucks' first-round pick---would have tied Danny's hands going forward.

This is shaping up, perhaps unexpectedly, as a season when the C's have a legitimate shot at making the Eastern Conference finals, and they're banking on having all the key pieces healthy for the playoffs. If that happens, the bench will be fine. But there's been little during the regular season to suggest that'll be the case.
We have a pretty good spot-up 3pt shooter on the bench that is being masqueraded as a playmaker.

But you know Team Giannis was more important than the Laker and Rocket games
 

Jed Zeppelin

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 23, 2008
51,333
How about Alec Burks? He's shooting 37 percent from 3-point range this season (and averaging 15.4 points per game). I doubt very much that spending a second-rounder or two--or, God forbid, the Bucks' first-round pick---would have tied Danny's hands going forward.

This is shaping up, perhaps unexpectedly, as a season when the C's have a legitimate shot at making the Eastern Conference finals, and they're banking on having all the key pieces healthy for the playoffs. If that happens, the bench will be fine. But there's been little during the regular season to suggest that'll be the case.

Elton Brand has basically blown up the Sixers' roster with a couple of his deals and contracts. This is apples and oranges. I'm talking about tweaking the bench, not disrupting the core.
If the key pieces aren’t healthy, it doesn’t matter if they have a Burks-level player or not.
 

Rustjive

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2009
1,048
How about Alec Burks? He's shooting 37 percent from 3-point range this season (and averaging 15.4 points per game). I doubt very much that spending a second-rounder or two--or, God forbid, the Bucks' first-round pick---would have tied Danny's hands going forward.
I don't think it was a pick issue, but this:

View: https://twitter.com/KeithSmithNBA/status/1225417826795696130


There were probably more creative trade scenarios that could've been made to make it happen, but it's like other people said, Kemba is a pretty great shooter...
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
How about Alec Burks? He's shooting 37 percent from 3-point range this season (and averaging 15.4 points per game). I doubt very much that spending a second-rounder or two--or, God forbid, the Bucks' first-round pick---would have tied Danny's hands going forward.

This is shaping up, perhaps unexpectedly, as a season when the C's have a legitimate shot at making the Eastern Conference finals, and they're banking on having all the key pieces healthy for the playoffs. If that happens, the bench will be fine. But there's been little during the regular season to suggest that'll be the case.

Elton Brand has basically blown up the Sixers' roster with a couple of his deals and contracts. This is apples and oranges. I'm talking about tweaking the bench, not disrupting the core.
I don't think Burks would help on the court even in place of the current bench guys. You're just substituting him for a couple guys who shoot about 35-37% from 3 (Wanamaker is better, Semi, you can make an argument that Grant is there--DARKO estimates him as about a 33-34% guy going forward).

All 3 of those guys are better defenders than Burks. So you're not really upgrading shooting, and you're hurting your defense, and you're out some assets.

Yes, Burks has some shot creation ability, but the Celtics don't particularly need that, even when not healthy. They have 5 guys who are better options than Burks to initiate action, and usually at least 4 of them are healthy, which means you can have 2 on the floor at all times.

I think the Celtics bench issues are different than people think: Wanamaker, Grant, and Semi can all space around primary actions about as well as a Burks type. The problem is more that the team's offense hasn't really optimized its bench+starter units to lean on the big horses, and so you end up in a lot of situations where guys like Wanamaker are trying to create, instead of just starting with a Tatum iso, or a Brown mismatch against a switch, or letting Hayward drive the lane. This has the ripple effect that you're not then finding those bench guys for shots around that, and I think it would be much the same with mediocre JAGs like Burks and GRIII.

Now, on the flip side: I lusted after Bertans. If the Celtics had someone with elite gravity like that, they could really kill it offensively just by pairing him with Tatum. I really, really hope they prioritize that kind of player this offseason over keeping Hayward, and I would have been fine if they had dealt for Bertans with the intent of re-signing him in that way. By all accounts Washington wasn't really open to a reasonable price, however.
 

128

Member
SoSH Member
May 4, 2019
10,025
I don't think Burks would help on the court even in place of the current bench guys. You're just substituting him for a couple guys who shoot about 35-37% from 3 (Wanamaker is better, Semi, you can make an argument that Grant is there--DARKO estimates him as about a 33-34% guy going forward).

All 3 of those guys are better defenders than Burks. So you're not really upgrading shooting, and you're hurting your defense, and you're out some assets.

Yes, Burks has some shot creation ability, but the Celtics don't particularly need that, even when not healthy. They have 5 guys who are better options than Burks to initiate action, and usually at least 4 of them are healthy, which means you can have 2 on the floor at all times.

I think the Celtics bench issues are different than people think: Wanamaker, Grant, and Semi can all space around primary actions about as well as a Burks type. The problem is more that the team's offense hasn't really optimized its bench+starter units to lean on the big horses, and so you end up in a lot of situations where guys like Wanamaker are trying to create, instead of just starting with a Tatum iso, or a Brown mismatch against a switch, or letting Hayward drive the lane. This has the ripple effect that you're not then finding those bench guys for shots around that, and I think it would be much the same with mediocre JAGs like Burks and GRIII.

Now, on the flip side: I lusted after Bertans. If the Celtics had someone with elite gravity like that, they could really kill it offensively just by pairing him with Tatum. I really, really hope they prioritize that kind of player this offseason over keeping Hayward, and I would have been fine if they had dealt for Bertans with the intent of re-signing him in that way. By all accounts Washington wasn't really open to a reasonable price, however.
I've winced at a ton of bricks by Boston reserves in recent years, and I'll admit to having a fondness, perhaps irrational, for players who can hit outside shots, which is one reason I was excited about what Carsen Edwards might add. Maybe he still will, but he's not ready this season, and neither is Romeo. Grant will get there eventually, but I'm not sure Boston can count on him too heavily for scoring this season.

Let's hope the core is healthy. If those guys are all available for the playoffs, my concerns about the bench will vanish.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
I've winced at a ton of bricks by Boston reserves in recent years, and I'll admit to having a fondness, perhaps irrational, for players who can hit outside shots, which is one reason I was excited about what Carsen Edwards might add. Maybe he still will, but he's not ready this season, and neither is Romero. Grant will get there eventually, but I'm not sure Boston can count on him too heavily for scoring this season.

Let's hope the core is healthy. If those guys are all available for the playoffs, my concerns about the bench will vanish.
Yeah, I feel your pain. I really want elite shooting for this team. And I would have been totally fine cutting bait on Edwards to open a roster slot for the right guy. The problem is that all the names available at the deadline were either overpriced, unavailable, or didn't solve the problem.

I think we forget how far this team has come: a lot of this problem happened because they didn't know what they had in the summer, and then a lot of development happened fast with Tatum and Brown. The shooting problem is just one that didn't lend itself to in-season fixing, which often happens.

I'll be really disappointed if they run it back with Hayward rather than allocating those resources more towards shooting. I know his percentages are good, but he doesn't get up a lot of attempts and lacks gravity. (Actually, this is an easy way to sum up my objection to Burks: imagine adding a worse-shooting Hayward with worse on-ball creation and worse defense.)
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
Last night was really frustrating, but I'm optimistic because I think the difference can be chalked up to experience. More frustrating than the early in the clock transition threes was the way that all of our ballhandlers (most often JB and JT) would drive and then not have a plan or out once they met the wall of the Houston D in floater range.

So many turnovers, blocked shots, and bad decisions resulted from them being laser focused on getting the shot instead of kicking the ball out. A lot of that comes from recognizing that the defense is collapsing earlier and finding an open man. They waited a half second too long on those opportunities last night and it resulted in Westbrook getting the steal from behind or Covington and Tucker tying the driver up.

Passing is not a strength of Brown or Tatum, but they've obviously proven to be coachable and I think it will come over time.

Side note re: Houston: I'm amazed at how their bigs (Tucker and Covington) are almost as disruptive at the rim (or more in some cases) than teams with real bigs. If Capela was still playing for them, I think the Celtics would've had an easier time driving because he'd be slower to react. We'll see if it continues, but it's incredible how their energy completely makes up for their lack of size. Celtics can definitely learn from that as well.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
20,124
Santa Monica
Side note re: Houston: I'm amazed at how their bigs (Tucker and Covington) are almost as disruptive at the rim (or more in some cases) than teams with real bigs. If Capela was still playing for them, I think the Celtics would've had an easier time driving because he'd be slower to react. We'll see if it continues, but it's incredible how their energy completely makes up for their lack of size. Celtics can definitely learn from that as well.
The Celtics are pretty much there at Center w/Theis (6'8" w/longish arms) and Granite (6'6"). Theis has been very disruptive at the rim (8th block %). If GW can consistently hit spot-up 3s, as he has over the last 3mths, he'll see plenty of playoff minutes. I really don't classify them as classic real bigs (like Kanter)

Hopefully, we'll get to see if TL can help defensively at the rim, especially on weakside help.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
The Celtics are pretty much there at Center w/Theis (6'8" w/longish arms) and Granite (6'6"). Theis has been very disruptive at the rim (8th block %). If GW can consistently hit spot-up 3s, as he has over the last 3mths, he'll see plenty of playoff minutes. I really don't classify them as classic real bigs (like Kanter)

Hopefully, we'll get to see if TL can help defensively at the rim, especially on weakside help.
I know you probably agree with this...but does anyone even want "real" bigs anymore? Like if the entire marginal value a guy provides is his ability to bang in the post, aren't you maybe better off using help and speed instead of having that guy out there?

Obviously having long guys with big wingspan and standing reach is a different story--you want as much of that as possible. I'm starting to think that pure height is probably a negative indicator: you're less mobile and have to carry more weight than a guy with the same standing reach who is shorter. I.e. it's much better defensively to be Daniel Theis than Kelly Olynyk.
 

ManicCompression

Member
SoSH Member
May 14, 2015
1,352
I know you probably agree with this...but does anyone even want "real" bigs anymore? Like if the entire marginal value a guy provides is his ability to bang in the post, aren't you maybe better off using help and speed instead of having that guy out there?

Obviously having long guys with big wingspan and standing reach is a different story--you want as much of that as possible. I'm starting to think that pure height is probably a negative indicator: you're less mobile and have to carry more weight than a guy with the same standing reach who is shorter. I.e. it's much better defensively to be Daniel Theis than Kelly Olynyk.
It's becoming more and more apparent, isn't it? Now "Real Bigs" have to be hyper-skilled to be valuable, like Giannis/Davis/Embiid level, guys who are elite in multiple ways offensively and defensively. If they just rim run and defend the rim, the elite version of that is Gobert and that only takes you so far because he can be schemed out of games on both sides of the floor.

On the other hand, the 6'7" guy with strength, energy and athleticism doesn't need to be all that skilled. I mean, look at how Robert Covington has changed Houston. He's big for a wing, but he can't dribble or pass, yet he adds all this value by being able to hit threes and help in the paint.

It's early days yet with the Houston thing and who knows if other teams can replicate it, but I'll be interested to see how they hold up against the truly elite teams with length, like Milwaukee and the Lakers (and the Clippers for that matter). I just hope Granite can reach "PJ Tucker Level Shooter" because these strong, mobile, active, average shooting big wings are worth a zillion times more than a guy like Time Lord reaching his peak.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
I mean isn’t Houston basically replicating Boston here? They just had Harden and Westbrook to start with, which made the switch easier. Tatum’s in-season level-upping, however, puts the squads on pretty equal footing.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,818
Honolulu HI

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Can someone explain this call last night? Wasn't able to hear the explanation during the game (girlfriend was sleeping, so the volume was off).
I mean, did they actually think Tatum intentionally threw off his own shot so he could kick Tucker in the balls? Is this a correct interpretation of a horrible rule or just a horrific call by the officials?
https://clutchpoints.com/celtics-video-jayson-tatum-surprisingly-gets-called-flagrant-over-fadeaway-shot/
Probably they’re saying that he kicked his leg out unnaturally, which is a dangerous play they’re trying to de-incentivize.

They got tricked by Harden early when he flung his legs forward on a 3 (that he made) to draw a foul. Then later he tried the same thing and they correctly didn’t give him the call. Fairly sure the officials were locking in on this, especially since it was a Harden game.

I’m pretty fine if they make it illegal to kick your legs out on shots, and also give flagrants when you hit a guy in the nuts doing so.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
It's becoming more and more apparent, isn't it? Now "Real Bigs" have to be hyper-skilled to be valuable, like Giannis/Davis/Embiid level, guys who are elite in multiple ways offensively and defensively. If they just rim run and defend the rim, the elite version of that is Gobert and that only takes you so far because he can be schemed out of games on both sides of the floor.

On the other hand, the 6'7" guy with strength, energy and athleticism doesn't need to be all that skilled. I mean, look at how Robert Covington has changed Houston. He's big for a wing, but he can't dribble or pass, yet he adds all this value by being able to hit threes and help in the paint.

It's early days yet with the Houston thing and who knows if other teams can replicate it, but I'll be interested to see how they hold up against the truly elite teams with length, like Milwaukee and the Lakers (and the Clippers for that matter). I just hope Granite can reach "PJ Tucker Level Shooter" because these strong, mobile, active, average shooting big wings are worth a zillion times more than a guy like Time Lord reaching his peak.
As to the last sentence: TimeLord reaching his peak (very unlikely, but play along) would be way more valuable than having PJ Tucker. You put him in lineups with Tatum, and the other team simply wouldn’t score points. People really underestimate vertical spacing also—someone like Tatum would just adjust his PnR game to be more about engaging the big for lobs rather than going for the seal.

TL at his peak would be cocaine Theis without shooting (Theis doesn’t shoot much, so this wouldn’t be a big change).

I think the new style of play doesn’t obsolete TL types nearly as much as Kanter types. There’s a lot less reason now to put a non-athletic, non-shooting guy out there just because he’s a big body.

All these trends make me very bullish on Grant’s future, but TL will get the most slack to succeed of any of the remaining true centers on the Cs, because his upside scenario is perfect for the modern NBA.
 

Eddie Jurak

canderson-lite
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
44,478
Melrose, MA
Can someone explain this call last night? Wasn't able to hear the explanation during the game (girlfriend was sleeping, so the volume was off).
I mean, did they actually think Tatum intentionally threw off his own shot so he could kick Tucker in the balls? Is this a correct interpretation of a horrible rule or just a horrific call by the officials?
Earlier in the game, Smart took a three, and his defender got into his landing area, causing Smart to land on him and a flagrant 1 to be called on the defender. I think these types of calls are based on recklessness rather than specific intent to harm.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Earlier in the game, Smart took a three, and his defender got into his landing area, causing Smart to land on him and a flagrant 1 to be called on the defender. I think these types of calls are based on recklessness rather than specific intent to harm.
The Westbrook one was clearly worse—he pulled a Zaza and specifically inched in after the shot. It’s dirty af and warrants ejection imo.

I think Tatum’s fell more in the recklessness category, and I’m fine with them calling it.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
11,406
around the way
The Westbrook one was clearly worse—he pulled a Zaza and specifically inched in after the shot. It’s dirty af and warrants ejection imo.

I think Tatum’s fell more in the recklessness category, and I’m fine with them calling it.
This is a good take. I'm fine with Tatum's being called, assuming that Westbrook's is called harder. They're sure as fuck not the same thing.
 

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,758
Tatum kicks his legs out a lot on short fallaways. It's a shot Kobe has taken hundreds of times the same way. Unfortunate that Gordon got nut-kicked.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
Tatum kicks his legs out a lot on short fallaways. It's a shot Kobe has taken hundreds of times the same way. Unfortunate that Gordon got nut-kicked.
Yeah, lots of guys have done it over the years, just as Bruce Bowen used to constantly and dirtily take out Kobe's landing spot. The league is trying to cut down on all of it.
 

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
This, I know, is beating a horse that's long been dead, but I still can't believe Danny didn't add a proven shooter at the trade deadline.
They had shooters on the floor. They just missed.

They also had one on the bench, injured.
 
Last edited:

DJnVa

Dorito Dawg
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
53,850
Tatum kicks his legs out a lot on short fallaways. It's a shot Kobe has taken hundreds of times the same way. Unfortunate that Gordon got nut-kicked.
I saw a tweet which I can't find now, but it said on that kind of shot, a turnaround, the leg has to be out because it's helping maintain balance (similar to putting your arms out wide). It's a tough call because Gordon does get kicked, but it's actually part of a natural shooting motion on that type of shot.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
12,680
They had shooters on the floor. They just missed.
Basically the only rotation members that aren’t average or better three point shooters are the bigs (Kanter, Theis, and Grant Williams), and even the latter has been decent since his terrible start. If they could find Theis with a three point shot, they’d have their ideal C.
 

Saints Rest

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
I saw a tweet which I can't find now, but it said on that kind of shot, a turnaround, the leg has to be out because it's helping maintain balance (similar to putting your arms out wide). It's a tough call because Gordon does get kicked, but it's actually part of a natural shooting motion on that type of shot.
I read that too, but it seems a simple thing post-hoc to confirm or not by reviewing clips of Tatum's other fade-aways.

Here's a clip with a whole bunch of Tatum fade-aways. It seems that he pretty regularly gets a bit of a right leg kick on his shot.
View: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1116185658581421
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
Looks like it is always his right leg that kicks out further as well - just like the play he got called for.

Someone should send that to the league to show that it most certainly is a natural basketball motion for him. Not because of the prior game, but for educational purposes for future games.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
12,001
I read that too, but it seems a simple thing post-hoc to confirm or not by reviewing clips of Tatum's other fade-aways.

Here's a clip with a whole bunch of Tatum fade-aways. It seems that he pretty regularly gets a bit of a right leg kick on his shot.
View: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1116185658581421
Thanks for that, helpful. After watching, most of them are a lot lower and less exaggerated on the kick (only the Hawks one early in the real got high).

They also don't hit a guy in the nutsack. Guys flail their arms on defense all the time, but connecting with a dude's head on the flail is frowned on.

(It's also funny watching how much worse Tatum was in iso just a year ago.)
 

NomarsFool

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 21, 2001
8,160
The ruling was that it was not a natural basketball motion, that is why it was a flagrant 1. That is exactly what the ref said. You can hit anyone anywhere you want as long as it is a "natural basketball motion". Based on those videos, I'd say that Tatum kicks his legs out naturally quite frequently.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,818
Honolulu HI
The ruling was that it was not a natural basketball motion, that is why it was a flagrant 1. That is exactly what the ref said. You can hit anyone anywhere you want as long as it is a "natural basketball motion". Based on those videos, I'd say that Tatum kicks his legs out naturally quite frequently.
It also seems like that if the refs really thought it "wasn't a natural basketball motion" that would suggest that must mean they think he did it intentionally - which in this case makes no sense. Tatum has a pretty good look at that shot and I think he probably hits it if he doesn't accidentally kick the defender (which throws off his motion). He also rises up far above the defender as he takes the shot making it unlikely he was even aware that he had come up under him (his eyes are focused on the rim). And it's not as if the defender isn't also partially responsible for the contact. He rushes in on Tatum as he goes up for the shot which at least contributes to the contact. It seems like at the very least the refs could have called it a regular offensive foul if the goal is to get players to better focus on leg kicks. Sure the guy got kicked in the balls but that's literally a daily occurance in the NBA and it's very rarely done intentionally.
 

Koufax

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
5,936
Calling it a flagrant foul seems like a good way to keep it from continuing to be a daily occurrence. Players will learn that it's not OK to kick your leg out, even if it help on an off-balance shot.
 

kazuneko

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2006
2,818
Honolulu HI
Calling it a flagrant foul seems like a good way to keep it from continuing to be a daily occurrence. Players will learn that it's not OK to kick your leg out, even if it help on an off-balance shot.
I guess it's a question of whether or not this is an involuntary motion. It looks like Tatum's leg shot out as a reflex to prevent himself from losing his balance. I don't think that's something you can train yourself to stop. Obviously the real issue is when players like Harden kick out their legs intentionally in order to draw a foul call, and while that's an issue, to go from Harden getting extra free throws for a more intentional motion to Tatum getting a flagrant for something that looks involuntary is a big switch.
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
21,770
Pittsburgh, PA
it's also a question of when the legs go out. With Harden it's usually after the release, so after the shot's fate is sealed but before the opportunity to draw a call is past.

With Tatum, it's part of his release motion, the leg appears connected to the arm as he releases in the air. This is probably a function of how his weight shifts when he releases on the ground - he must push off a lot more with his right leg.