Gant wrote:So far so good for Boston's summer moves, especially considering the loss of Hayward, Morris not playing yet, and Smart playing hobbled. Smart is lighter and quicker though, and Rozier has improved noticeably.
The Kyrie trade looks better and better. His defense has been shockingly good.
The Tatum trade and selection looks to be outstanding. He and Brown are both contributing and looking like the right picks in their respective years.
So far, the predictions of a drop in the Celtics' team defense due to the departures of Bradley and Crowder, have not at all come true. Their defense is dramatically improved, going from 12th in DefRtg last year to first at this early moment.
Similarly, predictions of poor rebounding have fallen flat. Their DefReb% has gone from 27th last season to 4th this season. Their overall increase in size at the smaller spots has been a huge benefit as they've switched IT, Bradley and Crowder, for Kyrie, Brown and Tatum.
They've gotten good defensive contributions from two other (and older) rookies, Ojeleye and Theis.
The team's overall defense has been great and is ahead of their offense to this point.
Baynes has been fantastic. His muscle has changed the team and brought out the best in Horford who is now freed from battling behemoths to do what he does best. Baynes has been a tremendous upgrade over the aging Amir Johnson.
Great offseason for Boston.
Reviewing past threads should be mandatory, IMO.
It's usually clear as day in retrospect who the posters are that really understand basketball. Let's bump this one again after Hayward gets back.
Hey, lets plan the Magic's eastern conference finals trip first.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Gant wrote:So far so good for Boston's summer moves, especially considering the loss of Hayward, Morris not playing yet, and Smart playing hobbled. Smart is lighter and quicker though, and Rozier has improved noticeably.
The Kyrie trade looks better and better. His defense has been shockingly good.
The Tatum trade and selection looks to be outstanding. He and Brown are both contributing and looking like the right picks in their respective years.
So far, the predictions of a drop in the Celtics' team defense due to the departures of Bradley and Crowder, have not at all come true. Their defense is dramatically improved, going from 12th in DefRtg last year to first at this early moment.
Similarly, predictions of poor rebounding have fallen flat. Their DefReb% has gone from 27th last season to 4th this season. Their overall increase in size at the smaller spots has been a huge benefit as they've switched IT, Bradley and Crowder, for Kyrie, Brown and Tatum.
They've gotten good defensive contributions from two other (and older) rookies, Ojeleye and Theis.
The team's overall defense has been great and is ahead of their offense to this point.
Baynes has been fantastic. His muscle has changed the team and brought out the best in Horford who is now freed from battling behemoths to do what he does best. Baynes has been a tremendous upgrade over the aging Amir Johnson.
Great offseason for Boston.
Reviewing past threads should be mandatory, IMO.
It's usually clear as day in retrospect who the posters are that really understand basketball. Let's bump this one again after Hayward gets back.
Hey, lets plan the Magic's eastern conference finals trip first.
You downgraded us to a C after the Kyrie trade, after we added him, Hayward and Tatum this summer.
But I'm not changing wasting assets now because of a 5 game win streak. That seems like a fool's errand. It seems the point of the thread just was entirely missed. But again no comment really is needed. Nobody thought they'd be a bad team and the persecution complex is tired.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Captain_Caveman wrote: Reviewing past threads should be mandatory, IMO.
It's usually clear as day in retrospect who the posters are that really understand basketball. Let's bump this one again after Hayward gets back.
Hey, lets plan the Magic's eastern conference finals trip first.
You downgraded us to a C after the Kyrie trade, after we added him, Hayward and Tatum this summer.
Others lamented the loss of Amir Johnson.
How am I supposed to respond to that?
We're something like 10% of the way through the season. If you want to go to war, can we wait until we have some bigger sample sizes to work with?
Last year the Clippers looked practically unbeatable till halfway through the year. At the start of the Process the Sixers were killing good teams left and right for a couple of weeks behind Michael Carter Williams.
Now, before I get dogpiled by an angry tide of green, I AM BY NO MEANS SUGGESTING THAT THE CELTICS ARE BAD. They're quite good.
But maybe wait on doing your victory laps until we have a little bigger sample size to work with.
Captain_Caveman wrote: Reviewing past threads should be mandatory, IMO.
It's usually clear as day in retrospect who the posters are that really understand basketball. Let's bump this one again after Hayward gets back.
Hey, lets plan the Magic's eastern conference finals trip first.
You downgraded us to a C after the Kyrie trade, after we added him, Hayward and Tatum this summer.
Others lamented the loss of Amir Johnson.
How am I supposed to respond to that?
Some people hate admitting they’re wrong.
I’ve had to read that Amir was a huge loss. Losing AB and Jae will tank their defense. Kyrie wasn’t a top 10 PG. Dragan Bender was better than Jaylen Brown. I understand the urge to laugh when you’re on the right side of history.
But, I get the impression that some of those who were wrong won’t admit it. So I wouldn’t waste the effort.
bondom34 wrote:Hey, lets plan the Magic's eastern conference finals trip first.
You downgraded us to a C after the Kyrie trade, after we added him, Hayward and Tatum this summer.
Others lamented the loss of Amir Johnson.
How am I supposed to respond to that?
Some people hate admitting they’re wrong.
I’ve had to read that Amir was a huge loss. Losing AB and Jae will tank their defense. Kyrie wasn’t a top 10 PG. Dragan Bender was better than Jaylen Brown. I understand the urge to laugh when you’re on the right side of history.
But, I get the impression that some of those who were wrong won’t admit it. So I wouldn’t waste the effort.
Its almost like nobody said they would be bad. Almost. Reading is fundamental.
MyUniBroDavis wrote: he was like YALL PEOPLE WHO DOUBT ME WILL SEE YALLS STATS ARE WRONG I HAVE THE BIG BRAIN PLAYS MUCHO NASTY BIG BRAIN BIG CHUNGUS BRAIN YOU BOYS ON UR BBALL REFERENCE NO UNDERSTANDO
Just sent a round of PMs. Hopefully we're all good for now.
We will definitely be revisiting this at the end of the season, as we always do. And I think there'll be a lot of crow to go around (and I expect those who are wrong to own up to it—as we're always supposed to do on T&T.)
In the meantime, let's let this one sit and bring it back for posterity once we're a little further along. Please? Thanks?
bondom34 wrote:Hey, lets plan the Magic's eastern conference finals trip first.
You downgraded us to a C after the Kyrie trade, after we added him, Hayward and Tatum this summer.
Others lamented the loss of Amir Johnson.
How am I supposed to respond to that?
We're something like 10% of the way through the season. If you want to go to war, can we wait until we have some bigger sample sizes to work with?
Last year the Clippers looked practically unbeatable till halfway through the year. At the start of the Process the Sixers were killing good teams left and right for a couple of weeks behind Michael Carter Williams.
Now, before I get dogpiled by an angry tide of green, I AM BY NO MEANS SUGGESTING THAT THE CELTICS ARE BAD. They're quite good.
But maybe wait on doing your victory laps until we have a little bigger sample size to work with.
All good, homie. Not interested in early November victory parades, unless it is baseball.
I think giving Boston a C for their offseason is preposterous (similar to someone doing the same for the Thunder), but the truth will come out in the wash, one way or another. I am stoked to have added Kyrie, Hayward, Tatum, and a likely future top 5 pick this offseason, and think that any team would be really happy to have that kind of summer.
Just sent a round of PMs. Hopefully we're all good for now.
We will definitely be revisiting this at the end of the season, as we always do. And I think there'll be a lot of crow to go around (and I expect those who are wrong to own up to it—as we're always supposed to do on T&T.)
In the meantime, let's let this one sit and bring it back for posterity once we're a little further along. Please? Thanks?
We were already all good IMO, but we can let it go if you're asking.
I had Boston (pre-Kyrie trade) at 56 wins. Right now they are on pace for 58.6 and before the last win they were on pace for 54.7. Seems the right range but it should be bouncy with the small sample obviously. If they lose the next game it drops to a 51.25 win pace, these small samples do funny things if you take them too literally (they won't it is versus the Kings who are a disaster.)
But small samples can be really tricky.
Right now Boson has teams against it shooting the 5th best in 3 point percentage, and the 4th best in free throw percentage. Their defense was great against the 3 last year, and every year under Stevens. But this year's numbers would have led the league by a bit for last year, and its not clear that free throw
And anyone wondering about Orlando's hot start might want to note that Orlando's opponents are shooting 27.8% from 3 against them. Either Orlando has figured out some radically amazing three point defense or its a bit flukey and then some.
In terms of concrete areas I identified that dragged them down to an A- instead of an A: "A legit rim protector. Another defensive glass rebounder at the 4 or 5."
Boston's interior defense has still shown signs of weakness, ranking 26th in the league in points in the paint allowed. So that seems true still even with the 5 game win streak.
In contrast, the defensive rebounding has been amazing, jumping from 27th last year to 4th this year.
Part of that is playing the two big lineups of Baynes Horford, this lineup has been a big part of Boston's success: In the 92 minutes they played together Boston has a 77.9 defensive rating and grabs 88% of the defensive rebounds.
Now, ignoring that those numbers are not sustainable and just taking them being that unsustainably good as a good sign, what does it say?
Horford's Net rating with Baynes: +18.1 Horford's Net rating without Baynes: +6.6
Boston's Def rating without Baynes: 100.3
It sure seems evidence for a two big lineup is so key in the success so far.
Which comes back to this:
Spoiler:
Golabki wrote:
HartfordWhalers wrote:
Golabki wrote:4. They mentioned that the celtics don't have enough versatility at center... which strikes me as just dumb. They have a tradition physical big in Baynes, a classic modern stretch 5 in Horford, and they have so many good wings with size
I'm with you on a bunch of the criticism of before this -- after all I did give an A- --but not here.
The Celtics big rotation is a career backup, Horford, and wings. That seems pretty clearly flawed. They need a second big better than Baynes, so the options aren't: Horford and a backup level player Horford and a wing A backup level player and a wing
I've never been a believer that the celtics need a starting center. Horford has been primarily a center for his whole career. Hayward/Crowder/Morris is a REALLY interesting front court that I think the celtics should and will use in the playoffs. I think that is a lot more dangerous than Hayward/Cowder/Dedmon.
Also... what exactly was their path to adding a starting caliber center? why should we believe they could have added a much better center than Baynes?
As a said, Baynes is a good fit as a 15-20 mpg player in the regular season who's going to get a lot of DNP coaches decisions in the playoffs.
Has Baynes developed from a '5-20 mpg player in the regular season who's going to get a lot of DNP coaches decisions in the playoffs' into a guy who pulls a middle of the pack defense into league best?
And if so, imagine what a better than Baynes player could have done at center.
I saw a certain mod talking about how some people never admit when they are wrong. I would love to see some of the people who have banged the drum that Stevens cannot use a big that doesn't spread the floor to revisit their stance.
Tatum's definitely looked good though. Will be interesting to see when his numbers get a little bit of a sample to them, I'm more thna willing to wager he doesn't finish the season a 50% 3 point shooter. And even with his 50% three point shooting, he has one of the worse on offs of Boston. Course Smart is defensively the worst rotation Celtic right now... small samples sometimes are just that.
HartfordWhalers wrote:I had Boston (pre-Kyrie trade) at 56 wins. Right now they are on pace for 58.6 and before the last win they were on pace for 54.7. Seems the right range but it should be bouncy with the small sample obviously. If they lose the next game it drops to a 51.25 win pace, these small samples do funny things if you take them too literally (they won't it is versus the Kings who are a disaster.)
But small samples can be really tricky.
Right now Boson has teams against it shooting the 5th best in 3 point percentage, and the 4th best in free throw percentage. Their defense was great against the 3 last year, and every year under Stevens. But this year's numbers would have led the league by a bit for last year, and its not clear that free throw
And anyone wondering about Orlando's hot start might want to note that Orlando's opponents are shooting 27.8% from 3 against them. Either Orlando has figured out some radically amazing three point defense or its a bit flukey and then some.
In terms of concrete areas I identified that dragged them down to an A- instead of an A: "A legit rim protector. Another defensive glass rebounder at the 4 or 5."
Boston's interior defense has still shown signs of weakness, ranking 26th in the league in points in the paint allowed. So that seems true still even with the 5 game win streak.
In contrast, the defensive rebounding has been amazing, jumping from 27th last year to 4th this year.
Part of that is playing the two big lineups of Baynes Horford, this lineup has been a big part of Boston's success: In the 92 minutes they played together Boston has a 77.9 defensive rating and grabs 88% of the defensive rebounds.
Now, ignoring that those numbers are not sustainable and just taking them being that unsustainably good as a good sign, what does it say?
Horford's Net rating with Baynes: +18.1 Horford's Net rating without Baynes: +6.6
Boston's Def rating without Baynes: 100.3
It sure seems evidence for a two big lineup is so key in the success so far.
Which comes back to this:
Spoiler:
Golabki wrote:
HartfordWhalers wrote: I'm with you on a bunch of the criticism of before this -- after all I did give an A- --but not here.
The Celtics big rotation is a career backup, Horford, and wings. That seems pretty clearly flawed. They need a second big better than Baynes, so the options aren't: Horford and a backup level player Horford and a wing A backup level player and a wing
I've never been a believer that the celtics need a starting center. Horford has been primarily a center for his whole career. Hayward/Crowder/Morris is a REALLY interesting front court that I think the celtics should and will use in the playoffs. I think that is a lot more dangerous than Hayward/Cowder/Dedmon.
Also... what exactly was their path to adding a starting caliber center? why should we believe they could have added a much better center than Baynes?
As a said, Baynes is a good fit as a 15-20 mpg player in the regular season who's going to get a lot of DNP coaches decisions in the playoffs.
Has Baynes developed from a '5-20 mpg player in the regular season who's going to get a lot of DNP coaches decisions in the playoffs' into a guy who pulls a middle of the pack defense into league best?
And if so, imagine what a better than Baynes player could have done at center.
I saw a certain mod talking about how some people never admit when they are wrong. I would love to see some of the people who have banged the drum that Stevens cannot use a big that doesn't spread the floor to revisit their stance.
Tatum's definitely looked good though. Will be interesting to see when his numbers get a little bit of a sample to them, I'm more thna willing to wager he doesn't finish the season a 50% 3 point shooter. And even with his 50% three point shooting, he has one of the worse on offs of Boston. Course Smart is defensively the worst rotation Celtic right now... small samples sometimes are just that.
Thing with Tatums off/on numbers is that he had/has to play with the bench lineups for the scoring punch. This ofc deflated his on offs especially when Smart was out because the bench was pretty bad.
Bet with Stillwater Celtics will finish 6th or higher in ECF Standings Regular Season(17-18). [WON]
HartfordWhalers wrote:I had Boston (pre-Kyrie trade) at 56 wins. Right now they are on pace for 58.6 and before the last win they were on pace for 54.7. Seems the right range but it should be bouncy with the small sample obviously. If they lose the next game it drops to a 51.25 win pace, these small samples do funny things if you take them too literally (they won't it is versus the Kings who are a disaster.)
But small samples can be really tricky.
Right now Boson has teams against it shooting the 5th best in 3 point percentage, and the 4th best in free throw percentage. Their defense was great against the 3 last year, and every year under Stevens. But this year's numbers would have led the league by a bit for last year, and its not clear that free throw
And anyone wondering about Orlando's hot start might want to note that Orlando's opponents are shooting 27.8% from 3 against them. Either Orlando has figured out some radically amazing three point defense or its a bit flukey and then some.
In terms of concrete areas I identified that dragged them down to an A- instead of an A: "A legit rim protector. Another defensive glass rebounder at the 4 or 5."
Boston's interior defense has still shown signs of weakness, ranking 26th in the league in points in the paint allowed. So that seems true still even with the 5 game win streak.
In contrast, the defensive rebounding has been amazing, jumping from 27th last year to 4th this year.
Part of that is playing the two big lineups of Baynes Horford, this lineup has been a big part of Boston's success: In the 92 minutes they played together Boston has a 77.9 defensive rating and grabs 88% of the defensive rebounds.
Now, ignoring that those numbers are not sustainable and just taking them being that unsustainably good as a good sign, what does it say?
Horford's Net rating with Baynes: +18.1 Horford's Net rating without Baynes: +6.6
Boston's Def rating without Baynes: 100.3
It sure seems evidence for a two big lineup is so key in the success so far.
Which comes back to this:
Spoiler:
Golabki wrote:
HartfordWhalers wrote: I'm with you on a bunch of the criticism of before this -- after all I did give an A- --but not here.
The Celtics big rotation is a career backup, Horford, and wings. That seems pretty clearly flawed. They need a second big better than Baynes, so the options aren't: Horford and a backup level player Horford and a wing A backup level player and a wing
I've never been a believer that the celtics need a starting center. Horford has been primarily a center for his whole career. Hayward/Crowder/Morris is a REALLY interesting front court that I think the celtics should and will use in the playoffs. I think that is a lot more dangerous than Hayward/Cowder/Dedmon.
Also... what exactly was their path to adding a starting caliber center? why should we believe they could have added a much better center than Baynes?
As a said, Baynes is a good fit as a 15-20 mpg player in the regular season who's going to get a lot of DNP coaches decisions in the playoffs.
Has Baynes developed from a '5-20 mpg player in the regular season who's going to get a lot of DNP coaches decisions in the playoffs' into a guy who pulls a middle of the pack defense into league best?
And if so, imagine what a better than Baynes player could have done at center.
I saw a certain mod talking about how some people never admit when they are wrong. I would love to see some of the people who have banged the drum that Stevens cannot use a big that doesn't spread the floor to revisit their stance.
Tatum's definitely looked good though. Will be interesting to see when his numbers get a little bit of a sample to them, I'm more thna willing to wager he doesn't finish the season a 50% 3 point shooter. And even with his 50% three point shooting, he has one of the worse on offs of Boston. Course Smart is defensively the worst rotation Celtic right now... small samples sometimes are just that.
A) The argument that post centers don’t space the floor is a big pet peave of mine—they clearly drag defenders away from the perimeter and open the floor for shooters. It sounds like you’re insinuating my arguing elsewise, which I don’t believe I did [i believe I even posted as much saying so in that Gobert thread in the offseason], but if I did I was wrong.
B) I think you’re underrating Baynes a bit. I get that Amir produced decent numbers over the course of the past season, but it was quite clear he was kicked come the playoffs. Baynes has been an upgrade over what Amir would have provided (and has provided in Philly).
C) The rebounding has been a very pleasant surprise and is likely the culmination of playing multiple solid rebounders at a time— Brown, Tatum, Baynes, Horford, Theis and Rozier all have TReb%’s above 10. This wasn’t reasonably predictable.
D) Their defensive improvement has been understandable. I think you agreed with me that Bradley was overrated— I thought Crowder was too. Kyrie actually trying (and playing solidly) defensively was also a huge reason for their current performance. Replacing the worst defender in the league with a good one is a world of a difference. To be fair, there is literally no way anyone could have reasonably predicted Kyrie would finally start to try.
I know that it was requested that we pump the breaks on this thread, so please feel free to continue with me via PM if you’d like—I, too, would like to keep this thread from getting overly hostile. Additionally, in case it’s not obvious through text, I’m trying to be as cordial as I can and am by no means attempting to be confrontational here.
So far I've been really really impressed. If the trends continue my predictions will be completely wrong. And if Boston wins first in the East Brad deserves serious COTY consideration.
Gant wrote:So far so good for Boston's summer moves, especially considering the loss of Hayward, Morris not playing yet, and Smart playing hobbled. Smart is lighter and quicker though, and Rozier has improved noticeably.
The Kyrie trade looks better and better. His defense has been shockingly good.
The Tatum trade and selection looks to be outstanding. He and Brown are both contributing and looking like the right picks in their respective years.
So far, the predictions of a drop in the Celtics' team defense due to the departures of Bradley and Crowder, have not at all come true. Their defense is dramatically improved, going from 12th in DefRtg last year to first at this early moment.
Similarly, predictions of poor rebounding have fallen flat. Their DefReb% has gone from 27th last season to 4th this season. Their overall increase in size at the smaller spots has been a huge benefit as they've switched IT, Bradley and Crowder, for Kyrie, Brown and Tatum.
They've gotten good defensive contributions from two other (and older) rookies, Ojeleye and Theis.
The team's overall defense has been great and is ahead of their offense to this point.
Baynes has been fantastic. His muscle has changed the team and brought out the best in Horford who is now freed from battling behemoths to do what he does best. Baynes has been a tremendous upgrade over the aging Amir Johnson.
Great offseason for Boston.
Classic bump. I would love for people to admit they were wrong on this thread if these early season trends hold but we all know that won't happen. That's why the 5 or so pages discussing last years review were stripped out of this thread because nobody would admit they were wrong and that a ballboy was right. Great fun to read that thread in hindsight. I come out pretty well for the most part
