RealGM

Continued from here.

6 for Irving

Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

Nets went small last game for defensive purposes.

If they played Drummond more they wouldn't have rebounding issues.

Claxton for all his defensive prowess is not a very good rebounder.

Another solution is play Blake or LMA.

Still I think Nets gave up a ton of offensive rebounds which just showed a lack of awareness as well. Wasn't all the size issue.

Hello Brooklyn wrote:

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

Nets went small last game for defensive purposes.

If they played Drummond more they wouldn't have rebounding issues.

Claxton for all his defensive prowess is not a very good rebounder.

Another solution is play Blake or LMA.

Still I think Nets gave up a ton of offensive rebounds which just showed a lack of awareness as well. Wasn't all the size issue.

Yeah I'm not saying that the Nets did something wrong by not going big, but rather that they don't really have the personnel to make a successful adjustment here and close the rebounding gap with the Celtics unless they create huge holes on offense and/or defense. It's not going to continue being that crazy 60-40 split or anything, I agree some of that was just bad luck or lack of awareness, but it's probably going to persistently favor the Celtics this series no matter what the Nets do.

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

you realise that Horford played (maybe) the best game of his career?

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

It will be interesting how Simmons fits into this if he ever plays. Having guys who can't shoot seems to allow Boston to send hard doubles at Durant and Kyrie and just live with trying to rotate their way through it and counting on less talented offensive players being unable to take advantage.

Hello Brooklyn wrote:

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

Nets went small last game for defensive purposes.

If they played Drummond more they wouldn't have rebounding issues.

Claxton for all his defensive prowess is not a very good rebounder.

Another solution is play Blake or LMA.

Still I think the Nets gave up a ton of offensive rebounds which just showed a lack of awareness as well. Wasn't all the size issue.

Drummond gets rebounds and he is a great screener

The Comedian wrote:

This might be the best argument yet for the play-in game tournament, which I have been critical of. Those games may serve as a kind of primer that gets people ready for the full Saturday/Sunday slate of games we always get. In the past, it's just gone from season-end Wednesday, to full slate Saturday.

Perseus1966 wrote:

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

you realise that Horford played (maybe) the best game of his career?

The Nets were a trash defensive rebounding team in the regular season too. This isn't some brand new problem that only just came up because Horford had a great game. Like I said, it's not going to be this sort of dominant 60-40 split every game, that was an aberration, but the size gap will persist for the duration of the series.

Patches Perry wrote:

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

It will be interesting how Simmons fits into this if he ever plays. Having guys who can't shoot seems to allow Boston to send hard doubles at Durant and Kyrie and just live with trying to rotate their way through it and counting on less talented offensive players being unable to take advantage.

I don't think they're going to play Simmons at all, and if he does, it will be a miracle if he is a huge difference-maker. They only just cleared him to run a couple days ago because they were worried he would re-injure his back. He is supposed to start one-on-one contact drills some time this week. If they rush him in for game 4 or 5, he will maybe get like one or two five-on-five practices for the first time in close to a year before playing for a brand new team for the first time in the middle of a playoff series. If he plays, I figure it will be more to get him minutes in preparation for possible later rounds than because they think he will help win the series.

Perseus1966 wrote:

Hello Brooklyn wrote:

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

Nets went small last game for defensive purposes.

If they played Drummond more they wouldn't have rebounding issues.

Claxton for all his defensive prowess is not a very good rebounder.

Another solution is play Blake or LMA.

Still I think the Nets gave up a ton of offensive rebounds which just showed a lack of awareness as well. Wasn't all the size issue.

Drummond gets rebounds and he is a great screener

Neither Drummond nor Claxton is individually a problem imo. The problem is that Drummond and Claxton can't function together and Blake and Aldridge are both cooked so they are forced to frequently play three guard-sized players and Kevin Durant next to a center. The Celtics have a huge size advantage at every position except center.

I'm always afraid of "the game after" the big game. After the way the Celtics won game 1, I think the Nets are going to come out with stronger emotional intensity in game 2 and earn the split.

At the same time, one thing I haven't seen mentioned a lot is that Boston clearly suffered from the long layoff leading up to this series. Their offense looked disjointed and out of sorts for most of the game, definitely a sign of rust.

The negativity clearly bothers Kyrie; he's a guy who wants to be liked, but being bothered ironically doesn't hurt his game. Some guys wilt under the heat, some guys are good at embracing it, and he's one of the latter. The one time it might've hurt Brooklyn was on the last possession: he was so desperate to hit the game winning shot to stick it to the fans that he dribbled around for too long before finally passing to Durant.

The way things ended between the Celtics and Kyrie was probably best for everyone: Brooklyn gets a window to contend for a title as long as their stars are healthy, the Celtics avoid the mistake of investing in a point guard who is on a different timeline from Jaylen and Jayson, and us fans on both sides get some extra drama to make a great series even more interesting.

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

The best rebounder per minute (Drummond) played 17 minutes and got 4 fouls in the second quarter. Size as in match ups at center is not a problem. Wing size is another case until Simmons is injured we have no answers

I was surprised the Nets got rid of James Johnson. I think he would have helped them in this series.

DeRoma wrote:

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

The best rebounder per minute (Drummond) played 17 minutes and got 4 fouls in the second quarter. Size as in match ups at center is not a problem. Wing size is another case until Simmons is injured we have answers

Yeah like I said the problem isn't Drummond or Claxton individually, they were both fine. It's that the two can't play together because they lack range and defensive versatility, so everything shifts up. I actually do think Simmons could be really helpful for addressing some of the Nets' biggest weaknesses next year because of that.

Slax wrote:SWithout weighing in on the previous discussion, I think the answer to this particular question is threefold. First, Kyrie didn't really want to be in Boston in the first place, he just preferred Boston as an alternative to Cleveland because he couldn't force a trade to New York or LA. Second, he was resentful when the Celtics continued winning when he was injured. Third, he got into a bunch of personality clashes with multiple teammates and the coach. The 2019 Celtics season was super toxic and resulted in at least three veteran free agents choosing to leave (Kyrie, Horford, Marcus Morris), so he was really just the highest profile casualty of a REALLY bad locker room, only some of which was his fault.

Perhaps he also hated the fans while he was here, who knows. But based on everything we know, those three reasons make the most sense for him leaving.

jfs1000d wrote:Kyrie is moody. I am sure he didn’t like Boston, which makes no sense, but I think biggest reason is he did t like getting traded and told where to be.

Durant and Kyrie would be in Boston now with Tatum if kyrie stayed. But, you also have to realize the BS that Kyrie pulls doesn’t fly in boston.

They demand you play games here. I always feel like kyrie doesn’t want to play a full 82 game season because he feels it isn’t necessary. This year was perfect kyrie. Part time player, physically healthy for the only thing that matters - playoffs.

I don't think these are true at all... I think you need to put yourself in Kyrie's shoes in order for you to see it in his perspective. Why would he leave an established contender like the Cavs with Lebron leading the squad just to go to an unproven commodity like the Celtics? He didn't hate Boston whatsoever. He was actually enamored by the potential of this team given the logistics are practically perfect at that time.

The reason why Kyrie left the Cavs was because he already experienced getting a ring with Lebron's mindset in place. Now in order for him to keep himself motivated it was time for him to lead his own team with his style of play as the leading philosophy of the team. Thus wanting to go to Boston given that you guys are already a fringe playoffs squad with a decently clean cap space for flexibility and a substantial amount of talent given that the Nets gave you guys so many picks (as well as Philly). Point is Kyrie had the creative control for you squad and that's all he literally all he wants.

The unfortunate event that had happen was the fact that he got injured by the end of that season. And the Celtics young guys carried and overachieved in the playoffs that gave them the confidence that they can do more in a short amount of time. That's an anomaly given that rookies/sophomores (i.e. Brown/Tatum) should only be trying to prove to themselves that they belong in the league at the normal rate of sports developmental stage.

This is where the clash of perspective happened and why he left Boston in the first place. Kyrie had to share the creative control with Tatum/Brown while Kyrie has yet to establish himself as the alpha of the squad given that he was injured at the time there was meaningful games being played. Tatum/Brown felt they should have say and respectfully so, they should. Issue is, developmental stage is different for both parties. While Boston had to pick between the two. And if I were Boston I'd also pick Tatum/Brown 1000%.

It's the same thing with KD. He left OKC cause he wants to play with shooters (since he thought Westbrook was trash) and not realizing the backlash he'll get from joining a 70 win team. Now he joined a squad with a bunch of shooters where he has a secondary star that shares the same philosophy as him.

The point is the only thing that these superstars cares about is to leave a mark on history and be remembered. It's easy to see it that way given that they make millions and get an overwhelming amount of attention that a normal human needs. These are there priorities in order for them to keep going forward and give meaning to their lives.

Cricket23 wrote:I was surprised the Nets got rid of James Johnson. I think he would have helped them in this series.

I think they just want to keep Kessler Edwards cause he has all the prototype to be a great 3/D player. While at the same time given that they'll make the playoffs he'll get the extra bonus since he is not getting paid that much. That bonus is not coming from the Nets finance but from the NBA's finance.

Kyrie Irving fined $50K by NBA for giving middle finger to Celtics fans

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/33767384/kyrie-irving-fined-50000-flipping-celtics-fans-game-1

Slax wrote:Something under-discussed in the last thread: the Nets' lack of size is REALLY hurting them on the glass. Celtics dominated the boards, and I'm not really sure how the Nets can fix that without playing Drummond and Claxton together, which would create all sorts of other problems for them. Anything is a difference-maker in such a close game, and clearly the Celtics having actual big men - and especially Horford - who can both crash the boards and play versatile defense and mesh together on offense gave the Nets a lot of trouble. And that Celtics advantage will only widen if Rob Williams can come back healthy enough to provide quality minutes later in the series.

The funny part is that Horford is 6'9", shorter than the likes of Drummond and Claxton

Horford won't be putting up 20/15 every game, but the fact that no one on the floor for the Nets can consistently match his physicality gives the Celtics more control.

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk