Game 2 thoughts

kdp59 wrote:I think this was the first game this season where the whole team gave up.

I think most of us felt were about the 5-6th best team in the NBA this year.
Cleveland already showed us how far behind the elite teams we were when they came in here at the end of the season and blew us out.  so most of us are not surprised by them beating us soundly.

But the giving up...that's hard to see for me.

hard to see how we move from where we are now up to the next level. Horford is not going to get better, IT has been exposed as an average player in the playoffs, Bradley and Crowder cannot be counted on as secondary scorers in any game of consequence.

Like Atlanta two years ago, perhaps this group has gone as far as they can.  I think this series should turn us all away from trading the top pick now. we need the possible talent upgrade and are not close anyway (sorry Horford).

Build around Jaylen, Smart and Fultz, I say. Everyone else is expendable. if no trades Danny should NOT spend big money on any of the vets coming up for FA's in the next two years ( IT, Bradley, Kelly, etc).

swedeinestonia wrote:The players that could be traded are bradley, smart, thomas. They are the ones that could bring something major back and replacing them is possible with rest of roster as long as you dont trade all of them. Trading lets say Thomas + Crowder could get a really good player back if you find the right match and balance roster some. Thomas will not be worth a max contract, not that he cant get it somewhere or even on the Celtics but at max contract level you sort of pay the same for a player like lebron and a player like thomas.

Rmbone wrote:

swedeinestonia wrote:The players that could be traded are bradley, smart, thomas. They are the ones that could bring something major back and replacing them is possible with rest of roster as long as you dont trade all of them. Trading lets say Thomas + Crowder could get a really good player back if you find the right match and balance roster some. Thomas will not be worth a max contract, not that he cant get it somewhere or even on the Celtics but at max contract level you sort of pay the same for a player like lebron and a player like thomas.

Bradley, Smart, and Thomas will all be on their last year under contract. Can't get anything major for guys in their last year.

swedeinestonia wrote:The players that could be traded are bradley, smart, thomas. They are the ones that could bring something major back and replacing them is possible with rest of roster as long as you dont trade all of them. Trading lets say Thomas + Crowder could get a really good player back if you find the right match and balance roster some. Thomas will not be worth a max contract, not that he cant get it somewhere or even on the Celtics but at max contract level you sort of pay the same for a player like lebron and a player like thomas.

Rmbone wrote:Jae Crowder is locked up to a dirt cheap contract for the next 3 seasons. He's a better version of Smart who shoots the 3.

People always propose trading him just to get him off the team, it's crazy. As if you can't bring Crowder off the bench, or make Hayward earn the starting job with both guys on the team. As if you can't start Crowder at PF next to Hayward.

fierce wrote:

Rmbone wrote:Jae Crowder is locked up to a dirt cheap contract for the next 3 seasons. He's a better version of Smart who shoots the 3.

People always propose trading him just to get him off the team, it's crazy. As if you can't bring Crowder off the bench, or make Hayward earn the starting job with both guys on the team. As if you can't start Crowder at PF next to Hayward.

If the Celts are going after Hayward or Paul George then Crowder is redundant because the Celts still have Jaylen Brown.

Jae Crowder's trade value is very high because he's a good player and his contract is dirt cheap, like you said.
That's why he's the most tradable player on the roster.

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I have been an AB supporter for the last couple of years, thinking that what he brings defensively is so important to this team. However, my thinking is fast changing.  First of all, it is so hard to consider that he is the "second" choice in the scoring department. Those couple of games where he just went off for 28 and 27 points respectively were a joy to watch. I kept thinking "yest there is the Avery I have been waiting for"  Then he disappeared. I know he uses alot of his energy guarding the best players in the backcourt But that excuse is wearing thin.
We need someone who can put the ball in the hole time after time, someone to really rely on and Avery is not it.  His contract is going to be up next year and there is no way he is going to be worth the money he will be looking for, at least on this team.  He would be fortunate to go to a team who does not need his offense, and he can totally concentrate on his defense, aka, Tony Allen.  That is what I see for him.  To keep him if we were to get a big shooter would be hard to do financially.  
I never thought alot about the Celtics giving Bradley the kind of money he wants, but now, even a person like me with minimal understanding of the cap, can see that it would be almost impossible to keep him.  Expecially if we are keeping IT. (and that is another story for another post)

Rosalie

Rmbone wrote:

fierce wrote:

Rmbone wrote:Jae Crowder is locked up to a dirt cheap contract for the next 3 seasons. He's a better version of Smart who shoots the 3.

People always propose trading him just to get him off the team, it's crazy. As if you can't bring Crowder off the bench, or make Hayward earn the starting job with both guys on the team. As if you can't start Crowder at PF next to Hayward.

If the Celts are going after Hayward or Paul George then Crowder is redundant because the Celts still have Jaylen Brown.

Jae Crowder's trade value is very high because he's a good player and his contract is dirt cheap, like you said.
That's why he's the most tradable player on the roster.

If Crowder can play minutes at SF and PF, and Hayward can only play 35 minutes anyway, Crowder isn't redundant. And your grass-is-greener view of Hayward ignores the fact that Hayward would get absolutely destroyed by LeBron, much worse than Crowder. The East goes through LeBron, and you want to make a massive defensive downgrade at SF and trade Crowder even though there's plenty of minutes for both Hayward and Crowder.

What do you want to trade Crowder for, anyway? Another ball dominant guy in addition to IT, Hayward, and Fultz? How many ball dominant guys do you want?

bobheckler wrote:Awful.

Two players showed heart, Marcus Smart and Jaylen Brown.  That is not to say Smart played well, he didn't, but at least he played hard.  He was 0-6 because he wanted to make something happen and tried to create points on his own and that's not his strength (talk about understatement!).  

Jaylen Brown showed something.  In fact, he was the only player out there who seemed oblivious to the pressure and the score.  7-11 shooting?  Against that defense?  Gimme more!  A coming out party for Jaylen Brown.

It wasn't just the players who had mental meltdowns, Brad did too.  He starts Gerald Green to get some offense but only plays him 14 minutes?  Despite him being 2-4 and hitting two 3s in a row to move the score from 9-2 to 11-8?  7 1/2 minutes in the first quarter for Green and then only 2 1/2 in the 2nd quarter?  4 minutes in the entire 2nd half, with 3 of those minutes in the "what's the point?" 4th quarter?  Why bother starting him if you're going to play him those kind of minutes?  We're shooting 30% after 1 and 27.5% at the half and he doesn't play our designated bench scoring machine?  SERIOUS learning curve for Brad.

Kelly takes two shots, missed both (thought he was fouled on one) and gets sat and only plays 8 minutes.  Is he your first big off the bench, or not?  If he isn't, who is?  Jerebko got 16 minutes.  That's not a lot either, even though he was 2-4.


Crowder 3-9
Bradley 6-17
Smart 0-6

That's 9-32 from 3 of our most used players.  28%.  We took 86 fgas, so they represent 37% of our entire offensive shots.  Can't win shooting like that, against anybody.

We gave up a 32 points first quarter and a 40 point 2nd quarter.  We gave up 40 point quarters against Washington too.  That is pathetically poor defense, and it isn't just this game or just the World Champion Cleveland Cavaliers.  We are neither an exceptional offensive team like GSW, Cleveland and even Washington nor are we an exceptional defensive team.  We are a one-legged stool on offense and too small on defense.

Cavaliers shot 48.7% from 3.  Can't win when a team is shooting like that either.  It doesn't matter if it's the Cavs or GSW or the Brooklyn Nyets.  Any team that shoots 48.7% from 3 is probably going to win especially when they take 39 of them and their fga is 85.  That's 45.9% of their fgas.  45.9% of their fgas were 3s and they hit 48.7% of them.  Could we have defended the 3pt shot better?  I'm sure we could have, but even if we knocked them down to 40% that's still good enough to win if 45.9% of their fgas are 3s.

In my opinion, we need offensive players.  Killers.  More players like Gerald Green.  Is he a liability on defense?  Yeah, but today's defenses are swarming defenses more so than man-to-man.  Would a rim protector have helped?  Sure, but how much?  If you're hitting 48% of your 3s and 45% of your shots are 3s, what's a rim protector defending against?

Mickey with 5 rebounds in 10 minutes.  Against their scrubs, true, but 5 rebounds.

I've talked about the difference between regular season experience and playoff experience.  That's what we saw last night.  They have playoff experience up to two Finals and are the World Champions. We, including Brad, got schooled by pros.  There's only one way to get that experience, I just wish it wasn't quite so painful.

Gotta love the fans, though, cheering "Let's Go Celtics" despite getting blow-torched.


bob


.

fierce wrote:

Rmbone wrote:

fierce wrote:

Rmbone wrote:Jae Crowder is locked up to a dirt cheap contract for the next 3 seasons. He's a better version of Smart who shoots the 3.

People always propose trading him just to get him off the team, it's crazy. As if you can't bring Crowder off the bench, or make Hayward earn the starting job with both guys on the team. As if you can't start Crowder at PF next to Hayward.

If the Celts are going after Hayward or Paul George then Crowder is redundant because the Celts still have Jaylen Brown.

Jae Crowder's trade value is very high because he's a good player and his contract is dirt cheap, like you said.
That's why he's the most tradable player on the roster.

If Crowder can play minutes at SF and PF, and Hayward can only play 35 minutes anyway, Crowder isn't redundant. And your grass-is-greener view of Hayward ignores the fact that Hayward would get absolutely destroyed by LeBron, much worse than Crowder. The East goes through LeBron, and you want to make a massive defensive downgrade at SF and trade Crowder even though there's plenty of minutes for both Hayward and Crowder.

What do you want to trade Crowder for, anyway? Another ball dominant guy in addition to IT, Hayward, and Fultz? How many ball dominant guys do you want?

First, I'm not really a die-hard fan of Hayward.
I'm only saying Hayward because according to reports, Celts are all in for Hayward.

Second, you keep forgetting that we have a future star in Jaylen Brown and his natural position is SF.

And third, for the Celts to keep Olynyk and sign Hayward, the Celts must shed some salary.
Right now Crowder has the most trade value.

fierce wrote:Rmbone

I agree that Bradley has to go.
Fultz will replace Bradley.

But Celtics need Thomas.
Celts are just a lottery team without IT.

Rmbone wrote:

fierce wrote:Rmbone

I agree that Bradley has to go.
Fultz will replace Bradley.

But Celtics need Thomas.
Celts are just a lottery team without IT.

Fultz isn't even necessarily an upgrade over Bradley, because he's a defensive downgrade, and his good scoring with the ball in his hands can't be fully utilized with IT on the court.

Jaylen Brown though is a clear upgrade at SG over Bradley. 35 lbs stronger, 5 inches taller, more athletic, and not much of a drop off as a shooter. Better rebounder, and much better help defender against SFs, PFs, and Cs than little Avery.

fierce wrote:Rmbone

Jaylen Brown is not a SG.
His ball-handling is not that good.
In college, he was a slasher, someone who can overpower weaker defenders.

Nobody can beat Lebron now.
He's just too good right now.
All the Celts have to do is wait 2 more years.
By that time, Lebron will be on the decline.

I want Jae Crowder, Bradley, and the 2018 Nets picks, with protection, traded for Paul George.
That way the Celts will not need to go after Hayward.

fierce wrote:

Rmbone wrote:

fierce wrote:Rmbone

I agree that Bradley has to go.
Fultz will replace Bradley.

But Celtics need Thomas.
Celts are just a lottery team without IT.

Fultz isn't even necessarily an upgrade over Bradley, because he's a defensive downgrade, and his good scoring with the ball in his hands can't be fully utilized with IT on the court.

Jaylen Brown though is a clear upgrade at SG over Bradley. 35 lbs stronger, 5 inches taller, more athletic, and not much of a drop off as a shooter. Better rebounder, and much better help defender against SFs, PFs, and Cs than little Avery.

You're putting too much emphasis on defense.
In the old NBA, you would be correct.
But the new NBA is more on schemes and help defense.

Just look at the Cavs.
Love and Kyrie are really not good defenders.
Only Shumpert is a good defender on the Cavs roster.

Let's just put it this way, a team of 5 Jae Crowders will not beat a team composed of 5 Gordon Haywards.

Jae Crowder is just a role player.
Celtics need stars.

Last night's Game 2 was an example of how stars dominate the NBA.
Lebron, Love, and Kyrie all scored 20 or more points.

Rmbone wrote:

fierce wrote:

Rmbone wrote:

fierce wrote:Rmbone

I agree that Bradley has to go.
Fultz will replace Bradley.

But Celtics need Thomas.
Celts are just a lottery team without IT.

Fultz isn't even necessarily an upgrade over Bradley, because he's a defensive downgrade, and his good scoring with the ball in his hands can't be fully utilized with IT on the court.

Jaylen Brown though is a clear upgrade at SG over Bradley. 35 lbs stronger, 5 inches taller, more athletic, and not much of a drop off as a shooter. Better rebounder, and much better help defender against SFs, PFs, and Cs than little Avery.

You're putting too much emphasis on defense.
In the old NBA, you would be correct.
But the new NBA is more on schemes and help defense.

Just look at the Cavs.
Love and Kyrie are really not good defenders.
Only Shumpert is a good defender on the Cavs roster.

Let's just put it this way, a team of 5 Jae Crowders will not beat a team composed of 5 Gordon Haywards.

Jae Crowder is just a role player.
Celtics need stars.

Last night's Game 2 was an example of how stars dominate the NBA.
Lebron, Love, and Kyrie all scored 20 or more points.

Did you just pretend that LeBron isn't a good defender? And Kyrie isn't a good defender in the regular season, but he's a talented defender who steps it up in the playoffs.