therealbig3 wrote:DarkXaero wrote:I've noticed you over the years having these type of takes and there tends to be a lot of PG blame/overreaction.therealbig3 wrote:I liked Kenny a lot, I think he's one of the better coaches in the league.
I'll be honest, my patience with Kyrie is at an all-time low. This has been a bust of a season on his part (yeah, he's been hurt, but he wasn't exactly lighting the world on fire when he played...a consistent theme of a team playing better without you across multiple seasons in a large sample size is very daming, IDC what anyone says), and I mean, nobody is firing a head coach without the star player being aware of what's going on. At minimum, he didn't exactly go to bat for Kenny and fight for him to stay.
He better put up or shut up next season. For all the trash talk we've gone back and forth with regarding Kemba vs Kyrie...anyone that still takes Kyrie is insane at this point.
In the 20 games Kyrie played this season, he averaged 27.4 PPG, 6.4 APG, 5.2 RPG, 1.4 SPG, with only 2.6 TOV, on efficiency of 59.5% TS%, and 26.3 PER. That puts him among the elite tier of PGs in the league this season. Stats indicate that we're a top 5 offense with him, and a below average offense without him. Metrics also indicate that he has elite offensive impact in the league. This is despite a super frustrating season, where he was injured a lot, and team chemistry issues were apparent, we didn't get to gel as a team with Kyrie. So let's not go there with the "he wasn't exactly lighting the world on fire when he played", because on an individual basis, the impact was there. Teams haven't been consistently better without him, let's not play into idiotic narratives generated by Celtics fans, and the media.
Secondly, Kyrie IS a better player than Kemba, this is fact. This doesn't mean that Kemba isn't a better fit for the Celtics. Celtics are for now better off with Kemba instead of Kyrie, because Kemba is more willing to take a backseat to Tatum & Brown, who have IMPROVED a lot from last season. But you can compare statistics, raw or advanced, and you can compare team success, Kyrie is FACTUALLY better than Kemba. Third, you're placing blame on Kyrie for Kenny getting fired, when all we really have is a **** reporter saying so. If Kyrie got Kenny fired, why would it be now when he's not even playing for the rest of the season?
Meh, I just try to hold the stars accountable. Kyrie put up nice stats, and he made a strong offensive impact...but we essentially gave everything back on defense when he was on the court as well. Can we say for sure that we can maintain a strong offense with Kyrie without sacrificing the defense? IDK if I can.
Celtics were better without him last year. We've been better without him this year. It's kind of a huge sample size at this point, hand waving it away doesn't really make much sense at this point.
Like I said in a later post, Kemba is like 90% of Kyrie but is actually available. That's what I mean, it's crazy to take Kyrie at this point since he's a guarantee to miss a ton of games, while Kemba has pretty much been an iron man outside of this year and 2015. And he's NEVER involved in off the court drama the way Kyrie is.
I'm also saying that if Kyrie didn't actively ask for Kenny to be fired, he damn sure didn't jump to his defense, and there's no way Kyrie didn't know that it was going down. Kenny wasn't perfect, but he was a really good coach who blatantly overachieved with the talent he's had the last 2 years. Not really sure that having Kyrie is worth losing Kenny.
So what you saying is that teams better without Kyrie and has higher ceiling? I'm really excited to hear how Cavs and Saltics became better team with higher ceiling factually and how their championship expectations grew up.