WHAT’S WRONG WITH THE CELTICS?

WEEI

BEN ROHRBACH

Celtics coach Brad Stevens needs to rein in his team. (Bob DeChiara/USA TODAY Sports)

In the span of 11 days, the Celtics went from stating their case as quite possibly the Eastern Conference’s second-best team behind the Cavaliers to raising legitimate questions about whether or not they’re even worthy of a playoff spot come April.

During that stretch, Isaiah Thomas questioned Celtics coach Brad Stevens’ rotations -- or lack thereof -- David Lee voiced his frustration following another DNP-coach’s decision and Marcus Smart got into an on-court argument with Jae Crowder.

Meanwhile, the Celtics suffered embarrassing back-to-back losses to the Lakers and Nets before blowing late leads to the Pistons and Grizzlies. Instead of building on an impressive four-game win streak sandwiched around Christmas during what should have been their easiest stretch of the season, the C’s dropped from 18-13 to 19-18.

Goodbye, No. 2 seed. So long, home-court advantage. Adios, playoffs?

On Tuesday, the Celtics play the first of four games in five nights, during which they’ll pass the season’s midway point, and things only get tougher from there.

Considering the Celtics trail the second-seeded Raptors by just three losses, there’s time for Stevens to right the ship. Avery Bradley and Marcus Smart’s healthy returns should solidify a unit that still ranks second in defensive rating (97.9), despite a three-point dip in points allowed per 100 possessions since the loss to the Lakers.

Likewise, the C’s strange home woes should correct themselves. No team with a winning record has finished with a sub-.500 mark at home in the past 35 years, and I doubt it happened before then, when home-court advantage was more significant. The Celtics are currently 9-10 at TD Garden, so either that record improves or they’re simply a sub-.500 team, which isn’t out of the realm of possibility, either.

Harder to correct are their more deep-seeded issues, because the answers aren’t necessarily on the current Celtics roster. Let’s examine the C’s three Achilles heels.

3-POINT TURN

It’s a sore subject after every loss, since the Celtics currently rank fourth from the bottom in 3-point shooting (32.0 percent), and yet still attempt more 3’s per game (27.2) than all but six teams. It’s a sign of the times, as teams are somehow only now recognizing the added value of a 3-pointer. You don’t have to be Ramanujan to figure out 33 percent of a 3 is the equivalent of 50 percent of a 2.

Stevens would like to take advantage, but he simply doesn’t have the arsenal. The only C’s shooting better than 33 percent from 3 are Jonas Jerebko (39.4 percent), Kelly Olynyk (38.9), Avery Bradley (37.6) and Jae Crowder (34., which is probably a case for playing Jerebko and Olynyk more than a combined 33.4 minutes a night.

The Celtics also feature some of the NBA’s most prolifically poor 3-point shooters. Jared Sullinger, Smart and Evan Turner are shooting a combined 21.9 percent on 7.1 attempts per game, so somebody should probably tell them to dial it back a bit.

The Celtics might also have the sharpshooting wing they so desperately need already on the roster. R.J. Hunter is currently shooting a substandard 25.5 percent on 2.2 attempts per game, but at least his sample size is too small to write him off just yet. No doubt the kid’s going to be a shooter, so why not let him find his stroke?

FAMOUS PAINTING

While the C’s have been solid in the paint -- ranking sixth in opponents’ field goal percentage inside of 8 feet (52. -- skilled bigs have killed them. In the past three weeks alone, Zach Randolph (25 points, 13 rebounds), Pau Gasol (17, 18), Thaddeus Young (23, 15), Brook Lopez (39, 13), Julius Randle (15, 12), Kristaps Porzingis (16, 12), Andre Drummond (22, 22) and Karl-Anthony Towns (25, 16) have all posted monster double-doubles against the Celtics.

Amir Johnson has helped shore up some of the rim protection problems that plagued the Celtics last season, but they’re still getting abused on the glass. The C’s are one of eight teams that grab fewer than three-quarters of available defensive boards. Compound that with a shallow list of paint-protecting options beyond Johnson, and opponents are averaging an extra 14 second-chance points a night.

CAPTAIN CRUNCH

The Celtics rank 10th in net rating, outscoring opponents by 2.7 points per 100 possessions, a respectable number that drops to a putrid minus-13.6 per 100 possessions in the clutch (within 5 points in the final 5 minutes), which requires the Celtics to blow teams out for victories. The only teams worse – the Lakers, Jazz, Nuggets, Kings, Suns and 76ers -- are a combined 88 games under .500.

The Celtics are 4-8 in games decided by two possessions or less, and the only player with a positive net rating in crunch time is David Lee, who’s played all of six clutch minutes this season. Isaiah Thomas and Turner are the C’s sole creators, and neither is efficient enough to consistently create when defenses and whistles both get tight.

***
It’s easy enough to say they need a deadly 3-point shooter, a high-quality big man and a crunch-time scorer, but Celtics president of basketball operations DannyAinge has had a difficult time finding one of those options, let alone all three of them.

In the end, the C’s margin of error is small, accentuating the importance of chemistry and execution. These aren’t the Doc Rivers Celtics. They can’t take teams lightly, coast through easy stretches of the schedule and flip a switch whenever they want. These Celtics need to be on at all times, and that means the players should be less concerned about rotations and more focused on making the most of their minutes.

Maybe Stevens does need to strike a balance, perhaps by self-restricting his lineup by sitting certain guys some nights a la Gregg Popovich, but the players also have to realize he’s sifting through his bench to find anyone who’ll produce in a given game. Nobody on the roster has proven that much better than the next guy to warrant automatic playing time.

The only other answer is to simply execute better, or else it’ll be more of the same from these C’s, who may ultimately have to accept the fact they’re a .500 team. In which case, nobody should be surprised to find themselves on the trading block come February.

112288

Too many players about the same level of talent.

I heard or read somewhere that the Celtics have a lot of players who are the 6th thru 9th players on a good playoff team.


that is looking spot on more and more.

either Ainge needs to make some trades for quality over quantity, or Brad needs to come up with a regular 10 player rotation and stick with it the rest of the year.

but what the hell do I know.......

kdp59 wrote:Too many players about the same level of talent.

I heard or read somewhere that the Celtics have a lot of players who are the 6th thru 9th players on a good playoff team.


that is looking spot on more and more.

either Ainge needs to make some trades for quality over quantity, or Brad needs to come up with a regular 10 player rotation and stick with it the rest of the year.

but what the hell do I know.......

You know quite a lot kdp!

Problem is fellas, we made the playoffs and Danny and Brad over estimated what they had on the court and bench.

Play the rookies see what you have or do not have, clean up the current roster and get ready for the draft and free agency.

Making the playoffs was a big mistake....right now we are in no-mans land....not good......not bad ....the NBA Purgatory !!!!

112288

It's one thing to have a defensive mindset, that's a very good thing, but you have to be able to hit your fgs too.  Other than Thomas and Jae, and sometimes Bradley, who do we have that can do that?  We send in Jerebko and we get defense.  We send in Sully and we get rebounding.  We send in Turner and we get a myriad of stuff, good and bad, but do we get shooting?  I'm talking ice-cold shooting.  No.

We need a knockdown shooter.  RJ was supposed to be that, (and maybe he still will be, he's only in his rookie year and his head is no doubt exploding with all the newness of it all) but he isn't.

Rozier looks pretty good in D-league, as does Mickey, but that's D-league.  Watch a game sometime.  Mickey looks BIG compared to everybody else on the court, and he's only 6'8".

Thomas is a better passing point guard than I thought he'd be, I'll give him that based upon low expectations, but he's just one guy.  Turner is trick-or-treat and he is an awful shooter from beyond 16' and 16' doesn't cut it anymore in the NBA.  In fact, he's an awful shooter if he isn't IN the paint.  Having a penetrator besides Thomas is good, we need one since Bradley and Smart aren't good at that, but his decision making is questionable.  Especially shot decision making.

Brad says he wants to put every player into a position where they can succeed by playing to their strengths.  How is letting Evan Turner shoot 3s playing to his strength?  How is having Smart hang out at the arc waiting for the ball, when he is an awful shooter, playing to his strength?    He's putting awful outside shooters on the outside and then we all wonder why our offense sucks, why we have so many empty possessions?  I know we don't have a lot of length, so going inside is easier said than done, but thinking you can open the floor for slashers by having non-shooters taking the shots to open it makes no sense to me.

Finding a high percentage knockdown shooter is easier said than done.  If it was easy everybody's roster would be stocked with them, but that's what we need.  It's a hit-or-miss league and we're missing because we're putting TOO much emphasis on defense at the expense of offense.

Oh yeah, a paint protector would be nice too, not to mention another ball handler.

Ok, so here's what I see coming.  Either we are going to pull our heads out of our asses over the next 4-5 weeks or Danny will be shipping people out.  He'll probably do that anyway, but I'm talking about some serious blood-letting.  Depending upon those changes, are they upgrades or just salary dump/roster spot clearing type stuff, we'll start to see different boxscores.  Players who weren't playing much before, or who weren't with the team before, will start getting some minutes.  If we're not making the playoffs, and in the more competitive EC you cannot afford 4-game losing streaks if you are on the bubble like us, then goals change.

Will Danny take a chance that Lee will leave and he'll get nothing for him?  Will he count on a sign-and-trade, or will he move him for less before the deadline?  Clearly, Lee is the most likely to be gone first, if Danny has his way.  If there's a nibble, how much will Danny want for him?  Lee wants to leave, although he's being a good trouper about it.  Trading Lee is easier said than done too because of his salary.  Even the fraction of what is left the numbers still have to match up more or less.  Even if Danny was willing to take just a 2nd rounder for him, that won't work because of the lack of salary coming in.  Could he give a TPE?  Sure, but that is one big mofo TPE for Lee.

I think the question of Sully or Kelly will be decided upon the incoming players.  If Danny snags a bull, like Cousins, Sully's gone in exchange.  If Danny snags a high quality shooter who can spread the floor, at almost any position, Kelly's gone.

Then again, maybe Danny plays the pat hand until the summer.  Then he'll know whether he needs to renew Amir's contract because he couldn't snag someone better, whether he's doing a sign-and-trade with Sully (a higher base salary for Sully allows for more salary and, presumably, a better player to come in), etc.

About the only thing I believe I can count on is that Danny will pull the trigger if he gets a reasonably good deal.  He has spent the last few years getting all the contractual ducks in a row for this summer.  He can take on a big contract if he needs/wants to by just not renewing some contracts this summer. He won't need a trading partner to bail him out, it's all within his control.  Furthermore, he knows he doesn't want to be stuck in the middle.  He moved Pierce and KG precisely because, at their ages and with their contracts, we weren't going to be any better than middlin' until they retired and he wanted to avoid that.  So he gutted us, sucked up Billy King's job future and started re-positioning us.  I can't see him being happy in the middle after going out of his way to do that.


bob


.

Being in the middle of the pack is for losers unless your loaded with young and very talented players whose only short comings is their youthful inexperience.  Being patient when rooting for a team mired in mediocracy is not the easiest thing to do. Its one giant rollercoaster ride. But there is a light at the end of the tunnel coming as early as this summer for the Celtics.  But caution: If Danny cannot do the makeover by trade or free agency and is forced to rebuilt via the draft it ain't going to happen overnight. No matter how talented these 19 and 20 year olds are they have a long way to go before they can be relied on for veteran leadership. Milwaukee, Orlando, and Detroit amongst others, can attest to the growing pains of talented but youthful rosters.

 swish

swish

I agree 100% with your assessment.

I guesss making the run as we did and creating the hype was fools gold!

112288

I disagree that making the playoffs last year was a mistake.

First, seeing the Cs competitive once again in just about every game they played after getting rid of Rondo was absolutely great for me. Knowing that your team has a serious shot to win every time they lace up the sneakers is much more fun than sitting around dreaming about lottery picks that have never seemed to work for our team (Tim Duncan, anyone?).

Second, the run to the playoffs last year and even losing once getting there, to a superior team I may add, showed that the Cs are still shorthanded at some positions. Solving the talent level issues is sometimes very easy to talk about but not always so easy to do in reality.

This year, we are still a couple of players short of what we need, but we are much closer to being where we want to be than I thought that we would be when Garnett and Pierce were traded.

I see this team being only one player away from solidifying a similar run up the standings as last year's team did to get to the playoffs. Yes, this player needs to be the "right" guy, but I am sure that our GM is searching for him as we speak.

Ainge has plenty of assets to get this one guy at or before the trading deadline, and getting this guy before the season ends will make getting the "second" right guy easier either before this trade deadline or next summer in the free agency period.

wideclyde wrote:I disagree that making the playoffs last year was a mistake.

First, seeing the Cs competitive once again in just about every game they played after getting rid of Rondo was absolutely great for me.  Knowing that your team has a serious shot to win every time they lace up the sneakers is much more fun than sitting around dreaming about lottery picks that have never seemed to work for our team (Tim Duncan, anyone?).

Second, the run to the playoffs last year and even losing once getting there, to a superior team I may add, showed that the Cs are still shorthanded at some positions.  Solving the talent level issues is sometimes very easy to talk about but not always so easy to do in reality.

This year, we are still a couple of players short of what we need, but we are much closer to being where we want to be than I thought that we would be when Garnett and Pierce were traded.

I see this team being only one player away from solidifying a similar run up the standings as last year's team did to get to the playoffs.  Yes, this player needs to be the "right" guy, but I am sure that our GM is searching for him as we speak.

Ainge has plenty of assets to get this one guy at or before the trading deadline, and getting this guy before the season ends will make getting the "second" right guy easier either before this trade  deadline or next summer in the free agency period.

clyde,

+1. Excellent post, my sentiments exactly.


bob



.

For a team that is in a rebuilt mode I would much prefer a big time loosing record and a shot at a top 5 draft pick. At this point in their rebuild I don't see any advantage of finishing in the middle of the pack. I'm with you on this one 112288.

swish

Last years draft had some intriguing big men, 2 franchises might have found that key big to build around. If any year was worth the tank, last year would have been it, once you get that key piece and his game grows, teams can be rebuilt to contend for years, with FA's the contending run is usually less long if there is a run, because those players are usually close to or on the wrong side of 30.

Cow

Like drafting a stud.

Dboss

Celts have tons of draft picks.

Acquired without tanking.

dboss

When the General Manager breaks up a team I call it Down Sizing which is a common business practice. Mucho draft picks is certainly a plus in the rebuilt but the success will hinge on having highly desired draft picks to trade or develop. Yes its reasonable to count on The Nets pick to be a high pick this year but for the following years - who knows for sure ? Its not in the Celtics hand to determine how well the Nets do next year. Low draft picks can be the sweetener in a trade involving other players but standing alone will only return a player of corresponding value unless a team is looking to dump salary.

swish

dboss wrote:Celts have tons of draft picks.

Acquired without tanking.  

dboss

Yes, exactly. The Celtics don't have to tank since the Nets are doing it for them. Rorbach's article is an hysterical overreaction to a mid season slump. The Celtics have the luxury of accumulating a winning culture and acquiring the right complimentary players while 1) the Nets trades guarantee an influx of talent via the draft; 2) the large number accumulated assets provides trade flexibility; and 3) the cap situation allows us to be players in free agency. Had we taken the tanking route, the roster would have been filled with draft picks. Even if they were high picks, it wouldn't be a great situation. Just look at the history of the NBA, teams consistently in the lottery are, by definition, consistently in the lottery.

Shamrock1000 wrote:

dboss wrote:Celts have tons of draft picks.

Acquired without tanking.  

dboss

Yes, exactly.  The Celtics don't have to tank since the Nets are doing it for them. Rorbach's article is an hysterical overreaction to a mid season slump. The Celtics have the luxury of accumulating a winning culture and acquiring the right complimentary players while 1) the Nets trades guarantee an influx of talent via the draft; 2) the large number accumulated assets provides trade flexibility; and 3) the cap situation allows us to be players in free agency. Had we taken the tanking route, the roster would have been filled with draft picks. Even if they were high picks, it wouldn't be a great situation.  Just look at the history of the NBA,  teams consistently in the lottery are, by definition,  consistently in the lottery.

The only effect that our won-loss record of last year and this year will have on Danny's rebuilding program is where the Celtics pick in the draft. Any success or lack of success by this current TEAM will be irrelevant, because if over the next 2 years Danny repeats his house cleaning of the summer of 2007, we can look forward to at least half of the present roster to be gone. And by the way, what was the Winning culture that the Championship team of 2007-08 inherited from the 2006-07 team ?

swish

Shamrock

The only effect that our won- lost record of last year and this year will have on Danny's rebuilding program is where the Celtics pick in the draft. Any success or lack of success by this current TEAM will be irrelevant, because if over the next 2 years Danny repeats his house cleaning of the summer of 2007, we can look forward to at least half of the present roster to be gone. And by the way, what was the winning culture that the Championship team of 2007-08 inherited from the 2006-07 ?

swish

Swish,

Fair points, especially if 2007 is the blueprint for the current rebuild.  Personally,  I think 2007-2008 is a unique situation,  and more the exception than the rule. There are multiple paths to a rebuild, and I think Danny is trying to keep all of them open. One path is creating a team that is attractive to impacful free agents. I could easily see a big name looking at this team and thinking they are one star away from contending. They have a great coach and a number of players who could be contributors on a good team. So I'm not sure Danny will be "cleaning house". I'm sure trades will happen,  but I think they have some players they like. Plus, we already have Brooklyn tanking for us.

The big problem is the Celtics/Danny is building the team from the outside in which is a little off the norm when building a team. Coupled with the fact we have not had any Irish Luck with the ping pong balls at draft time.

Our only key to breaking this log jam of irrelevant success is Brooklyn's #1 pick. We better get a top 4 or 5 at worst.

112288

112288 wrote:The big problem is the Celtics/Danny is building the team from the outside in which is a little off the norm when building a team.  Coupled with the fact we have not had any Irish Luck with the ping pong balls at draft time.

Our only key to breaking this log jam of irrelevant success is Brooklyn's #1 pick.  We better get a top 4 or 5 at worst.  

112288

 Building from the inside out may have been the way to go way back when, but the 3 ball has drastically changed offensive strategy for many teams. Check out the below link for some figures on the shooting trends for current centers vs the mid 1980's.

 Here are some numbers to show how the inside game has changed since the Bird - Magic years.
In 1985-86 there were 20 centers on only 23 teams that took 8 or more 2pt field goal attempts per game.
In 2015 that number is down to 10 on 30 teams. I only charted players with at least 1800 minutes played in 1985-85 and for 2015-16 I used 900 minutes (half the season). Those minutes will for the most part single out the starters. The focus on the low post game has sure diminished greatly over the years.

 swish