Re: POST GAME TORONTO - HOME

by **cowens/oldschool** Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:58 am

worcester wrote:And what a splendid team it is.

no one thought we would be this good after opening night injury to Hayward, amazing that we are winning with defense and rebounding.

So glad Danny got rid of the wusses, was hoping he would have done it sooner, but the transformation is remarkable!!

by **worcester** Tue Nov 14, 2017 11:23 am

Wusses gone. Wins increased.

by **RosalieTCeltics** Tue Nov 14, 2017 1:55 pm

We cannot comment on Hayward as he has not played any time in the games we have played. However, if he had, maybe Tatum would not be receiving the rave reviews he is getting. The cream would rise to the top as they say, and eventually he would have gotten his accolades. But having Hayward? He would have been the missing piece, the second or third go to guy. Some of those struggles we have seen with the offense would not be there.

This is all supposition, of course. Until he returns, we will not know how good this team REALLY is??? I cannot wait for that day

by **sinus007** Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:25 pm

Rosalie,
I agree with you.
As I've mentioned in some past threads, Danny put his bets on those 2 pieces to complete the "championship team" puzzle. I'm talking about Tatum and Brown.
The horrible injury to Hayward hasn't changed the master plan, it just corrected it. The year without GH will dramatically speed up JB's and especially JT's development.
I believe that the Celtics core of KI, GH, JB, JT, AH, MS, AB (if they stick around) and MM can challenge GSW in June 2019.
All this, of course, is just my opinion.

AK

by **Sandpd** Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:27 pm

mrkleen09 wrote:
beat wrote:
sure he makes mistakes tries too much (agree) BUT I didn't see consecutive screw ups and I rewatched the game multiple times solely focusing on him.
and some of those so called mistakes are when he ends up with the ball in his hands with just a couple seconds on the shot clock ( and some of those he held it too long) ...but that said making the right play can't be hurried either, case in point the lob pass into Horford late for an easy deuce. Patience was needed for Horford to get into the position.

Sort of an enigma for sure but i'd wager there are a LOT of teams would love to have him as a starter......or the first man off the bench for a backcourt position. Perhaps as many as 29 of them !!

And to add I'll always look for the best in someone over the mistakes they made (make) Smart adds a lot more than he takes away from us IMHO. He was tops on our team in that +- thingy too at +11 !! Big ll and Tatum were only a +2 and +4 in comparison. (Seems Smarts errors are blown up a lot more on here than others ) to me If he isn't looking to score (at least some of the time) he is not gonna be much of a factor.

I'll take the Smart we have, hope he gets a bit better but he is what he is.

beat

+1

+2
As you say Beat, with Smart we have to take the bad with the good and from my perspective, the good far outweighs the bad. Shooting is Smart's Achilles Heal but that is only one weakness versus the many other facets of his game that are better than average. Besides, the C's aren't looking to him to be their primary scorer, so his shooting woes aren't as magnified if he was one of their primary scorers.

by **RosalieTCeltics** Tue Nov 14, 2017 3:59 pm

Beat, I can't see Danny trading away this piece of the puzzle. I have to say that each year he has improved his game at some level. AND, the big thing is Stevens loves him. I am sure there are times he would like to scream at him, but those times are fewer and fewer. He runs the team well when he is in there, distributes the ball, and gives up his body for those crazy plays he pulls off.

The only thing that will take him away from the Celtics is an Evan Turner like deal, where some team offers crazy money and DA won't match. This is why I wish they had made a deal in the off season.

by **beat** Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:26 pm

Question.....???

Is there any guard in the league that hates being guarded by anyone else more than being guarded by Smart?

Plays like a pit bull.

If he's gone next season. We'll move on. Thought the same about Bradley too. Hate to loose him but not gonna worry about it just continue to enjoy this season and being at the game on Thursday with Marcus.

beat

by **Sandpd** Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:32 pm

RosalieTCeltics wrote:Beat, I can't see Danny trading away this piece of the puzzle. I have to say that each year he has improved his game at some level. AND, the big thing is Stevens loves him. I am sure there are times he would like to scream at him, but those times are fewer and fewer. He runs the team well when he is in there, distributes the ball, and gives up his body for those crazy plays he pulls off.

The only thing that will take him away from the Celtics is an Evan Turner like deal, where some team offers crazy money and DA won't match. This is why I wish they had made a deal in the off season.

Rosalie, I too was disappointed that the C's didn't re-sign Smart. Maybe it's a harbinger of things to come as we can never be sure what "Wheeler-Dealer" Danny Ainge might do. Later into the season, when playoff teams are more more clearly identified, there might be some desirable players that teams who are out of the mix want to move. A sign and trade scenario with Smart, combined with their many other chips (e.g., LA pick, whether 2-5, will still be valuable) is not out of the realm for the right player. That said, up to now, I would rather keep Smart . . . but someone like Porzingis would change my mind.

by **Sandpd** Tue Nov 14, 2017 4:41 pm

beat wrote:Question.....???

Is there any guard in the league that hates being guarded by anyone else more than being guarded by Smart?

Plays like a pit bull.

If he's gone next season. We'll move on. Thought the same about Bradley too. Hate to loose him but not gonna worry about it just continue to enjoy this season and being at the game on Thursday with Marcus.

beat

What a game to be at Basketball

Please say hi to Marcus for me and have a great time.

by **worcester** Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:20 pm

If Terry had adequate play making skills as a PG he'd replace Marcus Smart, but he doesn't even come close in that department, so I think we'll be keeping Smart.

by **RosalieTCeltics** Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:26 pm

Me too Beat!! Both kids at the game?? Would drive me nuts!!

My son just bought tickets for us to go to a game, I do not know which one, but I think it is soon. NOOO. Not Golden State. The prices for those tickets were crazy.
One of the Celtic coaches comes into the coffee shop where we go every morning. During the summer I saw him a lot. Now, he comes in early. Has given at least two sets of tickets to the guys who work there. One was the manager who told me this summer he HATES basketball. That drives me nuts. Someone who goes just to say he was ther! Should have given them to the kids who work their buns off for him and love basketball.

Oh well, the way of the world.

by **worcester** Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:29 pm

I'll be going to the Utah game 12-15-17 with my son.

by **jrleftfoot** Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:16 pm

worcester wrote:If Terry had adequate play making skills as a PG he'd replace Marcus Smart, but he doesn't even come close in that department, so I think we'll be keeping Smart.

Agree. I was shocked, frankly , when Smart developed those skills. Terry might be like the roadrunner, honk, honk. Moving too fast.

by **jrleftfoot** Tue Nov 14, 2017 9:26 pm

swish wrote:If they were ever to consider a missed shot,not rebounded by the offense, as a turn over - an entirely different offensive picture might develop for some players.

swish

They already have a statistic for that . It`s called field goal percentage.

by **Sandpd** Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:24 pm

jrleftfoot wrote:
swish wrote:If they were ever to consider a missed shot,not rebounded by the offense, as a turn over - an entirely different offensive picture might develop for some players.

swish
They already have a statistic for that . It`s called field goal percentage.

Not really. I think swish is looking (thinking out loud?) to have missed shots not rebounded by the offense to be counted as TO's, but they are not TO's.

A shot is a shot. Likewise, a missed shot is a missed shot, not a TO, and if the offensive team gets the rebound after a missed shot, it's counted in the box-score as an offensive rebound. So, it's inconceivable to make that missed shot a TO . . . the premise makes no sense to me.

by **jrleftfoot** Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:44 pm

Yes a missed shot is a missed shot and , as I stated, it counts against field goal percentage . I see no reason to doubly penalize the shooter

by **Sandpd** Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:31 pm

jrleftfoot wrote:Yes a missed shot is a missed shot and , as I stated, it counts against field goal percentage . I see no reason to doubly penalize the shooter

+1 We are in agreement.

by **jrleftfoot** Wed Nov 15, 2017 9:42 pm

I thought so, Sandpd

by Sponsored content