Moderators: Domejandro, ken6199, Dirk, infinite11285, Clav, bwgood77, bisme37, zimpy27, KingDavid, cupcakesnake
CelticsLV wrote:64%, 19%, 53%, 23%, 25% and now again 19% against Celtics. Those are Sixers 3p% so far in each playoff game. Seems like they have tendency to shoot like **** from 3 and they are streaky at best. They are one of the worst 3p shooting teams so far in the playoffs. So much for "Sixers will not shoot like this ever again".
Wilfried wrote:CelticsLV wrote:64%, 19%, 53%, 23%, 25% and now again 19% against Celtics. Those are Sixers 3p% so far in each playoff game. Seems like they have tendency to shoot like **** from 3 and they are streaky at best. They are one of the worst 3p shooting teams so far in the playoffs. So much for "Sixers will not shoot like this ever again".
Well, pretty sure Rozier won't be shooting 7/7 either
They are streaky for sure, but they also won that 2 games against Miami where they shot 23% and 25%
Pumpkin17 wrote:76ciology wrote:Pumpkin17 wrote:
Well, my point is not only about the impact of the trade, is about Phila's reasoning. Why going for a PG if you already know to have a superstar prospect at the same position? After the trade they were chosing 1st, so they could have very well take Tatum instead of Fultz. Obviously Ainge would have not traded the pick if he was convinced that Phila was going for Tatum, but that's Boston perspective and it's more than understandable. Phila, on the other hand, was wrong on the whole process (no pun intended). They were wrong in trading up and they were wrong in chosing a PG. Even Jackson would have been better for them considering Simmons is going to be their PG for years to come, not to speak about the asset they gave up.
I'll put it this way. If Fultz was shooting just as good as he did in SL, Sixers won't lose G1. Fultz can switch better than JJ or Beli. Fultz can run the PnR with Ben or Jojo for the entire game and force Rozier, Larkin or Smart to switch unto a 6'10 or taller generational player in either Ben or Jojo.
If you look at every contender. Rockets, Warriors, Raps or Cavs. All have a lead scoring guard. LeBron plays that role. Ben doesnt have that 25+ppg scorer in his DNA.
Fultz wasn't an ordinary PG. He was close to being the perfect PG. He's got the tools to play positionless well on both ends. He can switch unto bigger defenders and even provide rim protection on D. Offensively he can run the PnR for 48 mins (Tatum or Jackson cant), space the floor and also score on ISO.
And overall, star PGs are valued highly and generally possess higher RPMs in the league over guys like Paul George or Hayward, who are more of beta than alpha on offense.
Why did the Sixers overpaid for the number 1 overall pick? Because Sixers believes top tier assets gets you top tier talent. And top tier talent gets you into a top tier team. And you can't get top tier assets without going the extra mile, that is whether to tank or sacrifice a young promising player.
Fultz was not just a top tier talent. He was even the perfect fit for the team. That is given he can shoot like he did in UW or SL.
The trade looks bad now because Fultz cant shoot. We didnt trade for that. But once he gets his jumper back, you're talking about a flawless PG with elite size for his position.
As I said in my first post, I agree that Fultz could end up being a superstar, so nothing to say about this, only time will tell.
Still, I am not sold on him as a PG being the best choice (assuming we don't know about his troubles in the season). In a vacuum, I can agree with your reasoning, but you are assuming that everything clicks. It can very well be that case, and then you are unstoppable. But, if Fultz ends up being "just" more of what you already have in Simmons, I.e. a generational prospect capable of being a great floor general? Wouldn't be better to have a great floor general in Simmons, a great big in Embiid and a great wing in Tatum/Jackson? I am convinced that's a more balanced combo going forward. You can always slot Ben at point forward but you will mitigate some of the mismatch advantages he has in playing PG.
Obviously, my point can be moot cause Sixers could have just thought that Fultz was a so far better prospect wrt Tatum that the impact was going to be extremely different and I am speaking with hindsight. Anyone can miss a pick and Philly has years of success guaranteed with Ben and Joel, so not a shot at them. It is just straightforward to think about that trade in this context and think about "what if?"...
76ciology wrote:Pumpkin17 wrote:76ciology wrote:
I'll put it this way. If Fultz was shooting just as good as he did in SL, Sixers won't lose G1. Fultz can switch better than JJ or Beli. Fultz can run the PnR with Ben or Jojo for the entire game and force Rozier, Larkin or Smart to switch unto a 6'10 or taller generational player in either Ben or Jojo.
If you look at every contender. Rockets, Warriors, Raps or Cavs. All have a lead scoring guard. LeBron plays that role. Ben doesnt have that 25+ppg scorer in his DNA.
Fultz wasn't an ordinary PG. He was close to being the perfect PG. He's got the tools to play positionless well on both ends. He can switch unto bigger defenders and even provide rim protection on D. Offensively he can run the PnR for 48 mins (Tatum or Jackson cant), space the floor and also score on ISO.
And overall, star PGs are valued highly and generally possess higher RPMs in the league over guys like Paul George or Hayward, who are more of beta than alpha on offense.
Why did the Sixers overpaid for the number 1 overall pick? Because Sixers believes top tier assets gets you top tier talent. And top tier talent gets you into a top tier team. And you can't get top tier assets without going the extra mile, that is whether to tank or sacrifice a young promising player.
Fultz was not just a top tier talent. He was even the perfect fit for the team. That is given he can shoot like he did in UW or SL.
The trade looks bad now because Fultz cant shoot. We didnt trade for that. But once he gets his jumper back, you're talking about a flawless PG with elite size for his position.
As I said in my first post, I agree that Fultz could end up being a superstar, so nothing to say about this, only time will tell.
Still, I am not sold on him as a PG being the best choice (assuming we don't know about his troubles in the season). In a vacuum, I can agree with your reasoning, but you are assuming that everything clicks. It can very well be that case, and then you are unstoppable. But, if Fultz ends up being "just" more of what you already have in Simmons, I.e. a generational prospect capable of being a great floor general? Wouldn't be better to have a great floor general in Simmons, a great big in Embiid and a great wing in Tatum/Jackson? I am convinced that's a more balanced combo going forward. You can always slot Ben at point forward but you will mitigate some of the mismatch advantages he has in playing PG.
Obviously, my point can be moot cause Sixers could have just thought that Fultz was a so far better prospect wrt Tatum that the impact was going to be extremely different and I am speaking with hindsight. Anyone can miss a pick and Philly has years of success guaranteed with Ben and Joel, so not a shot at them. It is just straightforward to think about that trade in this context and think about "what if?"...
It depends on how you view Tatum/Jackson, Ben and Fultz. My point of view is Fultz is a guard, Ben is a forward and Biid is a C. And I do see better impact with Ben,Jojo and Fultz. Specially if you look around and realize that the era of a ball dominant playmaker is dead and is trending towards 2-3 perimeter playmaker. If you get 2 star perimeter playmaker, then you're in great position
Wont argue that trade looks bad now. But I also feel its unfair to judge Fultz now for its like he'll regain his shot back. Why wouldn't he? He has a history of being a good shooter, he's coming from a non chronic injury and he's just 19.
CelticsLV wrote:Wilfried wrote:CelticsLV wrote:64%, 19%, 53%, 23%, 25% and now again 19% against Celtics. Those are Sixers 3p% so far in each playoff game. Seems like they have tendency to shoot like **** from 3 and they are streaky at best. They are one of the worst 3p shooting teams so far in the playoffs. So much for "Sixers will not shoot like this ever again".
Well, pretty sure Rozier won't be shooting 7/7 either
They are streaky for sure, but they also won that 2 games against Miami where they shot 23% and 25%
Miami was much worse FT shooting team than Boston. It basically cost them game 4.
ballup wrote:The strategy of trying to foul out Baynes to force Horford to play center more is kinda flawed when you consider the circumstances of the Celtics rotation. Baynes only averages 18 mpg and a minute more for the playoffs. He‘s not really an undisciplined defender so it‘s not like you are going to foul him out so quickly that he plays less than 18 minutes. Horford plays a lot of center these days, probably more than half his minutes go there so it‘s not as if he would be swimming in uncharted territory
More gameplanning has to come out of the defensive end as in how to limit the Horford PnP and attacking the Celtic‘s weak playmaking.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
Pumpkin17 wrote:76ciology wrote:Pumpkin17 wrote:
As I said in my first post, I agree that Fultz could end up being a superstar, so nothing to say about this, only time will tell.
Still, I am not sold on him as a PG being the best choice (assuming we don't know about his troubles in the season). In a vacuum, I can agree with your reasoning, but you are assuming that everything clicks. It can very well be that case, and then you are unstoppable. But, if Fultz ends up being "just" more of what you already have in Simmons, I.e. a generational prospect capable of being a great floor general? Wouldn't be better to have a great floor general in Simmons, a great big in Embiid and a great wing in Tatum/Jackson? I am convinced that's a more balanced combo going forward. You can always slot Ben at point forward but you will mitigate some of the mismatch advantages he has in playing PG.
Obviously, my point can be moot cause Sixers could have just thought that Fultz was a so far better prospect wrt Tatum that the impact was going to be extremely different and I am speaking with hindsight. Anyone can miss a pick and Philly has years of success guaranteed with Ben and Joel, so not a shot at them. It is just straightforward to think about that trade in this context and think about "what if?"...
It depends on how you view Tatum/Jackson, Ben and Fultz. My point of view is Fultz is a guard, Ben is a forward and Biid is a C. And I do see better impact with Ben,Jojo and Fultz. Specially if you look around and realize that the era of a ball dominant playmaker is dead and is trending towards 2-3 perimeter playmaker. If you get 2 star perimeter playmaker, then you're in great position
Wont argue that trade looks bad now. But I also feel its unfair to judge Fultz now for its like he'll regain his shot back. Why wouldn't he? He has a history of being a good shooter, he's coming from a non chronic injury and he's just 19.
Agreed that Fultz is going to regain his form, an entire life of shooting doesn't disappear almost overnight, it is beyond stupid to label him as a bust. On the other hand, you already know Tatum is going to be at least very very good, so that's what hit people at the moment.
Also, if you slot Simmons as forward I have no issue with that. It's just that he played PG all the season (and exceptionally well), it's not an experiment kind of what Antetokounmpo was for a stretch, so I tend to believe that Phila has seen him as that since last year. In which case I would have preferred a forward. Also have to note that Tatum is obviously not a great passer/distributor, but he moves the ball and doesn't strike me as an egomaniac black hole type. Can play small ball 4 also.
In a sense, Sixers are building a team the "old" way with a dominant big and a PG while the celtics seems to me more incline to positionless basketball based on the forwards, can see a lineup with Hayward/Brown/Tatum together switching 2-4 and I am either not sold on Kyrie being the main creator there in that case.
Anyway, I think we are set for a lot of years of great Celtics/Sixers matchups in the playoffs and cannot be more excited about that. I am euro and had the luck to see the game between them in London this year so I feel like I'm going to enjoy every bit of it
CelticsLV wrote:64%, 19%, 53%, 23%, 25% and now again 19% against Celtics. Those are Sixers 3p% so far in each playoff game. Seems like they have tendency to shoot like **** from 3 and they are streaky at best. They are one of the worst 3p shooting teams so far in the playoffs. So much for "Sixers will not shoot like this ever again".
76ciology wrote:Pumpkin17 wrote:76ciology wrote:
It depends on how you view Tatum/Jackson, Ben and Fultz. My point of view is Fultz is a guard, Ben is a forward and Biid is a C. And I do see better impact with Ben,Jojo and Fultz. Specially if you look around and realize that the era of a ball dominant playmaker is dead and is trending towards 2-3 perimeter playmaker. If you get 2 star perimeter playmaker, then you're in great position
Wont argue that trade looks bad now. But I also feel its unfair to judge Fultz now for its like he'll regain his shot back. Why wouldn't he? He has a history of being a good shooter, he's coming from a non chronic injury and he's just 19.
Agreed that Fultz is going to regain his form, an entire life of shooting doesn't disappear almost overnight, it is beyond stupid to label him as a bust. On the other hand, you already know Tatum is going to be at least very very good, so that's what hit people at the moment.
Also, if you slot Simmons as forward I have no issue with that. It's just that he played PG all the season (and exceptionally well), it's not an experiment kind of what Antetokounmpo was for a stretch, so I tend to believe that Phila has seen him as that since last year. In which case I would have preferred a forward. Also have to note that Tatum is obviously not a great passer/distributor, but he moves the ball and doesn't strike me as an egomaniac black hole type. Can play small ball 4 also.
In a sense, Sixers are building a team the "old" way with a dominant big and a PG while the celtics seems to me more incline to positionless basketball based on the forwards, can see a lineup with Hayward/Brown/Tatum together switching 2-4 and I am either not sold on Kyrie being the main creator there in that case.
Anyway, I think we are set for a lot of years of great Celtics/Sixers matchups in the playoffs and cannot be more excited about that. I am euro and had the luck to see the game between them in London this year so I feel like I'm going to enjoy every bit of it
Agree with most of what you said.
But I just want to clear things up that Sixers didnt intend to draft a PG and a C.
Sixers were trying to get as many top tier talent as possible. It's what Sixers ownership, Hinkie and Morey belief in roster construction for a contender.
And Sixers just view that Ben, Biid and Fultz are possibly top tier talent. Just as Andrew Bynum, Nerlens Noel and Jahlil Okafor.
I'd also go a but further to say that most of our guys plays multiple position, specially Ben and Jojo. Jojo plays like a wing on offense, is the best elite rim protector and one of the best C in defending guards based on advanced stats. Ben needs no explanation with his versatility. I see some upside with Fultz physical tools to defend 1-3 And that what's make them special.
76ciology wrote:ballup wrote:The strategy of trying to foul out Baynes to force Horford to play center more is kinda flawed when you consider the circumstances of the Celtics rotation. Baynes only averages 18 mpg and a minute more for the playoffs. He‘s not really an undisciplined defender so it‘s not like you are going to foul him out so quickly that he plays less than 18 minutes. Horford plays a lot of center these days, probably more than half his minutes go there so it‘s not as if he would be swimming in uncharted territory
More gameplanning has to come out of the defensive end as in how to limit the Horford PnP and attacking the Celtic‘s weak playmaking.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
Guard need to switch. Then you have a lot of time for either Ben, Roco, or Saric to switch to that guard while Horford tries to position himself to the post from the 3pt arc. Force Al to be a roll man.
You kinda saw it in the fourth when Sixers are trying to makw a comeback
kuclas wrote:Judging from what Brett brown said on espn yesterday he's not ruling out Fultz but McConnell has "earned" the right to back up Ben. It doesn't sound like Fultz is going to sniff minutes this series or the playoffs. Heck, even Bayless made a cameo appearance in the last 90 seconds of the game after being DNP-CD or not even dressed for almost 2 months.
Play Fultz. McConnell gives you basically zero. He's not negative. But he's not positive either. He's zero impact. So if sixers want to thread water for 10 minutes McConell is in the game so be it. But Fultz at least can take the player off the dribble.
PLO wrote:Tatum played OK - took advantage of a few mismatches - decent on the defensive end. He is what we thought he was going into the season - a technically very proficient player operating close to his career ceiling as a rookie.
SuperDario wrote:supremacy wrote:commentatorer wrote:Philly's rustiness won't exist in Game 2....
And will Boston hit 17-35 treys in Game 2....?
They won’t need to, bud. They’re getting back one of their best defenders and scorers. That mis-match on the wings will only get worse.
There's mismatches on both sides of the ball. I suspect we'll take better advantage of ours Game 2.
supremacy wrote:commentatorer wrote:supremacy wrote:
They won’t need to, bud. They’re getting back one of their best defenders and scorers. That mis-match on the wings will only get worse.
You Celtics fans are giving me no shortage of things to quote post-Game2
You serious? Try the first 40 pages of the initial thread and compare what I’m saying to what you guys were. Do I really need to remind you?
titlebound1 wrote:SuperDario wrote:supremacy wrote:
They won’t need to, bud. They’re getting back one of their best defenders and scorers. That mis-match on the wings will only get worse.
There's mismatches on both sides of the ball. I suspect we'll take better advantage of ours Game 2.
I mean you guys have Embiid. That's about it though for mismatches. And it looks like Stevens was already content with just giving them that one and not double teaming
titlebound1 wrote:SuperDario wrote:supremacy wrote:
They won’t need to, bud. They’re getting back one of their best defenders and scorers. That mis-match on the wings will only get worse.
There's mismatches on both sides of the ball. I suspect we'll take better advantage of ours Game 2.
I mean you guys have Embiid. That's about it though for mismatches. And it looks like Stevens was already content with just giving them that one and not double teaming
commentatorer wrote:titlebound1 wrote:SuperDario wrote:
There's mismatches on both sides of the ball. I suspect we'll take better advantage of ours Game 2.
I mean you guys have Embiid. That's about it though for mismatches. And it looks like Stevens was already content with just giving them that one and not double teaming
Well nobody can stop Simmons from scoring 18 points (and 7 rebounds, 6 assists, 2 steals, 1 block) in his worst game of the playoffs, so that's an obvious mismatch.
Not really. The Celtics have multiple guys to throw onto Simmons and none of them have physical mismatch woes like JJ or Bellineli do. Looking through the tracking data, Simmons is the only player with 10+ points who took more contested shots than uncontested shots.commentatorer wrote:titlebound1 wrote:SuperDario wrote:
There's mismatches on both sides of the ball. I suspect we'll take better advantage of ours Game 2.
I mean you guys have Embiid. That's about it though for mismatches. And it looks like Stevens was already content with just giving them that one and not double teaming
Well nobody can stop Simmons from scoring 18 points (and 7 rebounds, 6 assists, 2 steals, 1 block) in his worst game of the playoffs, so that's an obvious mismatch.
