Game Thread – Spurs @ Celtics – 7:00PM, Wed, Feb. 12, 2025

[playa-hater]

Wemby reminds me of Gumby...

Bet a pretty penny Tacko could shut Wemby down.. I want a Tacko!!

[ConstableGeneva]

Oke lets break our coming back home curse and win damn game

Celtics are just 2-5 (and lost 4 straight) in home games coming off a multi-game road trip.

The Double Bigs don't work at home

Sound like Ammo for the Joe must Go crew, inexcusable. - Sam Cassell and I approve this message

Loss to GSW: +1
Loss to PHI: +11
Loss to SAC: +1
Loss to HOU: +4
Loss to DAL: -18

You got 'em one out of five times! Good job, squirt!

[playa-hater]

Celtics are just 2-5 (and lost 4 straight) in home games coming off a multi-game road trip.

The Double Bigs don't work at home

Sound like Ammo for the Joe must Go crew, inexcusable. - Sam Cassell and I approve this message

Loss to GSW: +1
Loss to PHI: +11
Loss to SAC: +1
Loss to HOU: +4
Loss to DAL: -18

You got 'em one out of five times! Good job, squirt!

Got what out of 5?? aren't those 5 straight losses??

[ConstableGeneva]

The Double Bigs don't work at home

Sound like Ammo for the Joe must Go crew, inexcusable. - Sam Cassell and I approve this message

Loss to GSW: +1
Loss to PHI: +11
Loss to SAC: +1
Loss to HOU: +4
Loss to DAL: -18

You got 'em one out of five times! Good job, squirt!

Got what out of 5?? aren't those 5 straight losses??

Those are the numbers when Celtics used double bigs in those games. So if not for the single big lineups, we would've won four of the five.

[ConstableGeneva]

I guess the next fantastical argument would be, if only Joe used single big lineups exclusively, they would've climbed out of the deficit eventually during those games lol.

[playa-hater]

Loss to GSW: +1
Loss to PHI: +11
Loss to SAC: +1
Loss to HOU: +4
Loss to DAL: -18

You got 'em one out of five times! Good job, squirt!

Got what out of 5?? aren't those 5 straight losses??

Those are the numbers when Celtics used double bigs in those games. So if not for the single big lineups, we would've won four of the five.

those numbers lack Context in many ways. What If Boston played zero Bigs? Maybe we win all 5.. just saying.

[ConstableGeneva]

Got what out of 5?? aren't those 5 straight losses??

Those are the numbers when Celtics used double bigs in those games. So if not for the single big lineups, we would've won four of the five.

those numbers lack Context in many ways. What If Boston played zero Bigs? Maybe we win all 5.. just saying.

LOL I knew it. If the data supports your argument, "See! I told you so!". If it goes against what you believe, "it lacks context" and you rely on woulda-coulda-shoulda instead. Gotcha.

[playa-hater]

I guess the next fantastical argument would be, if only Joe used single big lineups exclusively, they would've climbed out of the deficit eventually during those games lol.

I personally think it has to do with the starters sucking (yes its only a single Big) but due to too many mouths to feed and JT taking a back seat.. Then Tatum usually comes in with the 2nd unit and Tatum goes off and often carries the Al-Kornet lineup. Hence giving AL + LK the Net ratings. I personally think Tatum can go off with almost any combination of bench players.

A you stated before, it's the starters who are F ing up, not the bench. and that has far les to do with how many centers we have but rather the way the ball moves and Tatum taking charge.

[playa-hater]

Those are the numbers when Celtics used double bigs in those games. So if not for the single big lineups, we would've won four of the five.

those numbers lack Context in many ways. What If Boston played zero Bigs? Maybe we win all 5.. just saying.

LOL I knew it. If the data supports your argument, "See! I told you so!". If it goes against what you believe, "it lacks context" and you rely on woulda-coulda-shoulda instead. Gotcha.

I rarely use Data.. Just my lying Eyes.. Remember

[ConstableGeneva]

I guess the next fantastical argument would be, if only Joe used single big lineups exclusively, they would've climbed out of the deficit eventually during those games lol.

I personally think it has to do with the starters sucking (yes its only a single Big) but due to too many mouths to feed and JT taking a back seat.. Then Tatum usually comes in with the 2nd unit and Tatum goes off and often carries the Al-Kornet lineup. Hence giving AL + LK the Net ratings. I personally think Tatum can go off with almost any combination of bench players.

A you stated before, it's the starters who are F ing up, not the bench. and that has far les to do with how many centers we have but rather the way the ball moves and Tatum taking charge.

Except it takes five guys to make a lineup work. If double bigs are that bad, Tatum can't carry those lineups by himself. Someone still needs to defend the paint, someone still needs to be stationed at the dunker spot, someone still needs to rebound his misses, someone still needs to space the floor and draw opposing big out of the driving lanes, etc.

The double bigs have worked. It's not something anyone can dispute at this point. Unless you're really that stubborn. Which it seems you are. Those lineups have their uses. I don't believe they can work every time against every opponent/matchup. But our inept coach has in fact made them work to our advantage. Without them and with starters struggling, we would've lost even more games.

[ConstableGeneva]

those numbers lack Context in many ways. What If Boston played zero Bigs? Maybe we win all 5.. just saying.

LOL I knew it. If the data supports your argument, "See! I told you so!". If it goes against what you believe, "it lacks context" and you rely on woulda-coulda-shoulda instead. Gotcha.

I rarely use Data.. Just my lying Eyes.. Remember

So did you happen to close your eyes when we recently beat the Cavs and shellacked the Knicks using the same double big lineups you hate? Those are two of the top teams in the East.

[31to6]

Holiday is missing a few Games, huh?

He has some kind of shoulder injury
It has bothered him since the begining of the season. This long rest is good for him

My internet doctoring skills kinda hit a wall trying to figure out what the heck an impingement is. A week or two ago Sam had a hip impingement and I looked it up and it said the bones in the hip don't fit together right and are rubbing on each other and causing pain. But now I just looked up Jrue's shoulder impingement and it's about tendons and nerves instead of bones. Shrug.

careful, you might find links to thoracic duct outlet syndrome, which robbed Markelle Fultz of his ability to play basketball and/or almost killed him, before he mostly remembered how to play basketball and/or disappeared from the league.

probably just needs to take some zinc

[playa-hater]

LOL I knew it. If the data supports your argument, "See! I told you so!". If it goes against what you believe, "it lacks context" and you rely on woulda-coulda-shoulda instead. Gotcha.

I rarely use Data.. Just my lying Eyes.. Remember

So did you happen to close your eyes when we recently beat the Cavs and shellacked the Knicks using the same double big lineups you hate? Those are two of the top teams in the East.

Yes I See that. But we have also lost some of the most dreadful games with those same lineups..

Problem is those lineups have played all the time? And we have nothing to compare it too.
Just using this as an example. What if it was Queta and Walsh Instead of al and luke the last two months.. There is almost no sample to size, so it would be speculation on my part. But I guess my point is. Do we really know Al and cornet are the best lineups compared to some that have not even been used yet.? Joe very, ratey experiments outside of rhe exception of his few minutes here in therer sample size.

And again using data as you suggest. Does that mean our backups of Al And luke with tatum and whomever alre better than our starting five?? Surely, the numbers indicate That as the case, hence my idea That data needs a lot more context. And can certainly be misleading.

[ConstableGeneva]

I rarely use Data.. Just my lying Eyes.. Remember

So did you happen to close your eyes when we recently beat the Cavs and shellacked the Knicks using the same double big lineups you hate? Those are two of the top teams in the East.

Yes I See that. But we have also lost some of the most dreadful games with those same lineups..

Problem is those lineups have played all the time? And we have nothing to compare it too.
Just using this as an example. What if it was Queta and Walsh Instead of al and luke the last two months.. There is almost no sample to size, so it would be speculation on my part. But I guess my point is. Do we really know Al and cornet are the best lineups compared to some that have not even been used yet.? Joe very, ratey experiments outside of rhe exception of his few minutes here in therer sample size.

And again using data as you suggest. Does that mean our backups of Al And luke with tatum and whomever alre better than our starting five?? Surely, the numbers indicate That as the case, hence my idea That data needs a lot more context. And can certainly be misleading.

No the data says it's worked. I'm not saying anything else other than it's worked and it helped us win. But you kept insisting that it's been bad for whatever reason. And the data is telling us, nope, it's been good for us. I'm not speculating anything else -- whether other single-big configurations would work better, whether double bigs would work against the 1998 Bulls, whether Kornet + Horford would dominate OKC if we meet them in the Finals. It's not predictive. It tells us what happened which you still seem to dispute. For you, double bigs are bad, point blank. They haven't been.

We've won more with those lineups than lost. Like I said, can't win them all. No lineup can.

[Shak_Celts]

Chile, I’m definitely entertained.

[ConstableGeneva]

Just to show I'm not biased lol...

NQ, single, 603 possessions: +12.5
AH, single, 869 possessions: +11.3
KP, single, 934 possessions: -1.6
LK, single, 819 possessions: +12.9

Except I'm not anti-single big lineups. I just know for a fact that double bigs have worked in our favor more often than not. FWIW, Joe's used more single-big than double big lineups. Those four configs above constitute 63.5% of all non-garbage time possessions.

AH + LK, 499 possessions: +15.2

So while our starting lineup w/ KP has struggled much of this season, those hated AH+LK lineups have kept us in games. Celtics best version is still our top 5 players working well together (as they did last season). That single-big lineup would take up at least 18-22 mins per game in the postseason unless Joe makes changes (or someone gets injured). It has to work.

[ConstableGeneva]

Charles Bassey and Spurs two-ways are all OUT.
Holiday is OUT. Craig and Brown are QUESTIONABLE.

EDIT: Maine Sons are also OUT.

Xavier Tillman has been added to the injury report. OUT for left knee inflammation.

[playa-hater]

So did you happen to close your eyes when we recently beat the Cavs and shellacked the Knicks using the same double big lineups you hate? Those are two of the top teams in the East.

Yes I See that. But we have also lost some of the most dreadful games with those same lineups..

Problem is those lineups have played all the time? And we have nothing to compare it too.
Just using this as an example. What if it was Queta and Walsh Instead of al and luke the last two months.. There is almost no sample to size, so it would be speculation on my part. But I guess my point is. Do we really know Al and cornet are the best lineups compared to some that have not even been used yet.? Joe very, ratey experiments outside of rhe exception of his few minutes here in therer sample size.

And again using data as you suggest. Does that mean our backups of Al And luke with tatum and whomever alre better than our starting five?? Surely, the numbers indicate That as the case, hence my idea That data needs a lot more context. And can certainly be misleading.

No the data says it's worked. I'm not saying anything else other than it's worked and it helped us win. But you kept insisting that it's been bad for whatever reason. And the data is telling us, nope, it's been good for us. I'm not speculating anything else -- whether other single-big configurations would work better, whether double bigs would work against the 1998 Bulls, whether Kornet + Horford would dominate OKC if we meet them in the Finals. It's not predictive. It tells us what happened which you still seem to dispute. For you, double bigs are bad, point blank. They haven't been.

We've won more with those lineups than lost. Like I said, can't win them all. No lineup can.

I have a big comeback. Epic big. Bigger than what's ever been seen before. So big, I am afraid real g. M will break down.

But it will have to wait until tonight. Because my kid has a freaking game..

Stay tuned, I promise I will not disappoint

[Parliament10]

Charles Bassey and Spurs two-ways are all OUT.
Holiday is OUT. Craig and Brown are QUESTIONABLE.

EDIT: Maine Sons are also OUT.

Xavier Tillman has been added to the injury report. OUT for left knee inflammation.

Hmmm.
Maine is off tonight. They play tomorrow. Might need to bring some of them up?

[Shak_Celts]

I want JD to get a full game ONCE in his time with us, I fear it’s coming to an end for him. I’ll be hurt if he goes somewhere else and finds his way. If he goes overseas to get paid, good for him, but I still believe he can play in the league. This could be a night where he could play a little. Every one of the main (not Maine) guys are just trying to make it to the break. Let the pups play a little Joe! I know they hyped him up in training camp but JD must be horrible in practice, something has to be up that he never gets a shot. Pritch has missed a game and so have Jrue and White. You could have squeezed him in somewhere, everybody and their mother has gotten a chance.