Ok I actually like the scrappy guard like a Pritchard crashing as they tend to have a better instinct of the carom as shooters. I thought you were referring to when Pritchard himself was shooting the 3 that is when we need to have at least two others retreating as he's vulnerable defending numbers in space like this.
Fair point on the negative effects of overcrashing, especially if PP is the guy back on a 2 on 1. But I've noticed that love is correct about PP being used as a dedicated ball chaser on that end because why not, and as you note he has a nose for it too.
It seems like Joe is encouraging crashing from the Corners, whether it's PP, Hauser, or Brissett.
That is definitely where you want to crash from as you are beginning inside and running out to best engage in transition defense while also getting the better trajectory read of the shot.
Exactly. Joe has done a good job of maximizing this while trying to minimize the many and obvious transition downsides of overpursuing O-boards.
I'm sure there are numbers for it, and someone here will probably respond in like 12 minutes lol, but the offensive team would seem to have a greater advantage in rebounding 3's as opposed to other shots. When a shot goes up the crashers are watching the ball, trajectory, and open space on the floor to attack while the defender is most likely not watching any of these with their focus being on their own man with their back to the basket.
Here are the best players from the last dozen champions:
None of those players had 2 through 6's like Tatum does. Is anyone even close? It's pretty nuts when you think about how great our depth is behind JT.
Peak Spurs were loaded. last year's Nuggets were regarded as having exceptional depth and the size of their starters overwhelmed the Lakers in the WCF. The Hamptons Five? I think it's more common than we think, even if our "6 starters" lineup could prove to be legendary on that same level.
I've been thinking about this for a while now.
There is depth and there is depth. Which teams had 5 All-Star level players? The Hampton Five were the only one I think is comparable. The Spurs started Bruce Bowen and Rasho Nesterovic, neither of whom would even sniff an ASG. Other years they had guys like Avery Johnson and Malik Rose starting or David Robinson when he was at the tail end of his career. We are just figuring out how to get the best out of each individual as part of the collective group and as @SteveF said above we could really be a lethal unit. These B2B 140-pt games aren't a fluke.
Denver was not regarded as having exceptional depth. They had terrible depth. They just were fortunate enough that their top 6, which was incredible, did not get hurt.
Last year’s Nuggets also had two all-star caliber guys (whether Murray has made it or not)
While the Celtics are advocating Holiday and White for all-defense, Tatum and Brown for all-NBA, etc, they should make a bit of an effort to advocate Horford for 6th man. No, he'll never get it given what the people who vote on that award are typically looking for. And he's actually only come off the bench in 14 of 28 games this year (he's started 10 and rested 4). But I think his contributions this year should not be overlooked.
Talent depth, sure, but total talent id say that Jokic is so damn talented that I’m not sure I agree. Everyone in the stadium knows what Jokic wants to do and are essentially powerless to stop it. That’s worth an awful lot compared to having more guys who could theoretically score themselves but are mostly watching in crunch time. I know I’m maybe belaboring this point a bit but in a close and late situation our 5 all stars become maximum 2 just like most teams because you’re going to want to control the clock and shot clock and park most of the guys away from Tatum and whomever else they bring into the action. We basically have to blow teams out over 3.5 quarters to truly take advantage of our star depth
We've been explicitly comparing the 2-6 quality of teams. Everyone knows Jokic is way better than Tatum.
Bontemps overall point is that title winners normally have the best player on the floor in almost every series.
5 all star level players and one of the best 6th men in the game. 7 looks damn good and 8 looks good too.
As the lead player on the Celtics, Tatum is 5-2 against Embiid and Giannis in the playoffs. Even if both guys are better and play better than Tatum, it's not something worth worrying about.
I mean, Bontemps was making a point that is the general line of thinking with everyone involved in the NBA.
It‘s kind of like the Sox board where posters propose trading five $1 prospects for a $5 starting pitcher and call it an even deal in terms of value. There is something to be said for talent density. The Warriors won two years ago because at some point Steph asserted himself as the best player on the floor. Tatum has done the same in several key moments of huge playoff series, but if you were to ask me the key to this team winning a championship (outside of general health), it’s Tatum leveling up on that biggest of stages.
The title team and 73 win team had Harrison Barnes as their 5th guy, not Zaza or Livingston.
The path to getting Olynyk seems too difficult given his salary and the C's cap constraints - unless they want to completely change their rotation to get him. Does it really make sense for them to deal picks plus a bunch of rotational bodies for the *upgrade* Kelly brings?
The top 4 of curry/klay/iggy/draymond is miles ahead of that Celtics group that it doesn't matter who the 5th guy is. Curry is a top 20 player ever, and he was in his back to back MVP winning prime. Outside of Tatum, this Celtics group might not even have a guy in the top 20 of active players. Then you've got Klay and Draymond, both of whom made all NBA in 2015 AND 2016 (and Draymond was the DPOY in 2017)....it's not close, even if the Celtics 4th and 5th guys (after Tatum) are solidly better than the 4th and 5th guys after Durant in those GS lineups.
Agreed. Plus with Boston as a 2nd apron team, it's really hard to make the numbers work: https://celticswire.usatoday.com/lists/nba-boston-celtics-no-ko-trade-but-maybe-buyout/?taid=6589f90a1b6d74000194d803&utm_campaign=trueanthem&utm_medium=trueanthem&utm_source=twitter
He would represent a significant upgrade over Queta both offensively and defensively.
Yes this is what I was just thinking but as was said above replacing Kornet would likely be his role as Queta is matchup specific unique in an ideal deep bench role.
The runs in the first when they blew it open initially and the fourth when they effectively ended the game was amazing basketball, but repeatable if the team wants to. It wasn't hot 3P shooting, or someone going off, it was just really, really high end team basketball. It's crazy that JT's early shot clock/end of quarter ISO 3's are our biggest complaint at this point
IN: KP, Derrick White, Jrue
The only name from the list who will be blocking the Celtics is Giannis, and maybe Jokic. Which is to say, you can win without that guy if the other team doesn’t have “him” either. Tbd
The inside play from KP should boost his top of the league scoring rate from the post. Going to KP inside is exactly what the Cs should do when the threes aren‘t falling. Once the defense sags in on KP, the three ball will be more of the wide open variety.
Hauser was gonna be here regardless of Grant. This team would certainly be deeper and better with Grant still here.
