It's Time To Wake Up

Phil Pressey wrote:(I was going to post this on the Butler thread but will leave it here instead. I am not looking to trade Kyrie per se but see no harm in venting some negativity. I believe the Celtics will turn it around very soon. The highs are overrated and the lows get too much focus. George Harrison said, "All things must pass.")

Here's a trade that works. Kyrie and Morris for Butler. That means Rozier and Smart battle to start. Hayward moves to the bench for at least this year to replace the Morris role. Jaylen becomes the small forward. Baynes, a healthy Theis or Tatum should alternate as the big to play with Al based on opponent. Roles become better defined.

The modern NBA is about constant change. I fear Kyrie will get his money and then stop trying hard on defense. Then we are stuck with the ultimate of divas who is apparently also injury prone. I worry K.I. isn't that good as a two-way player and will primarily eat too much into the salary cap. He might be a form of Carmelo Anthony or Kevin Love putting up stats but nothing immortal for pro basketball. He should join the Globetrotters to truly fulfill his potential?

People worried about paying Isaiah and don't realize this is deja vu or very similar. Kyrie is taller but I.T. was better at preventing scoring droughts and maintaining good team atmosphere.

To me, Kyrie is saying look how great I am at humility. It seems forced. Nearly everyone seems afraid to consider he might be overrated or risky the same way no one wants to think about Horford approaching his dinosaur years.

Hayward is potentially a devastating hit to overall team chances if he doesn't recover. I agree the future is now based on Horford's age. The clock is ticking on his stamina as a Big Three component. He is aging like fine wine but even LeBron is starting to fall apart. 32 is the last prime year. 33 tops. Then it's an inevitable quick decline and retirement. I'm hoping Horford is the Bob Cousy of this era around for the first few titles. Tatum can be the Larry Bird/Bill Russell or whatever so be it.

Hayward looks okay, so far, like he might fully recover or close enough?

He's definitely untradeable for right now. He is currently definitely a negative trade asset. The Hayward situation is dogging the team, period. It is the elephant in the room or rain cloud over Charlie Brown.

Speaking of Brown's, I'd give Jaylen Brown this full year before capping his ceiling the way you seem to be doing. He is not far off from true greatness. I think Tatum needs to be separated from the Kobe's and Kyrie's. They are not good role models, imho. Tatum should stick with Horford as his true mentor.

Kylie and Morris for Butler? Are. You. Serious? I didn’t even take the time to read the rest of your post but I will. But 1 thing at a time. You would actually make that trade? P.s. Did u see Butler at Golden state waving a towel with the GS fans with a shit eating grin on his face while his team is getting stomped? You want him?

Phil Pressey wrote:(I was going to post this on the Butler thread but will leave it here instead. I am not looking to trade Kyrie per se but see no harm in venting some negativity. I believe the Celtics will turn it around very soon. The highs are overrated and the lows get too much focus. George Harrison said, "All things must pass.")

Here's a trade that works. Kyrie and Morris for Butler. That means Rozier and Smart battle to start. Hayward moves to the bench for at least this year to replace the Morris role. Jaylen becomes the small forward. Baynes, a healthy Theis or Tatum should alternate as the big to play with Al based on opponent. Roles become better defined.

The modern NBA is about constant change. I fear Kyrie will get his money and then stop trying hard on defense. Then we are stuck with the ultimate of divas who is apparently also injury prone. I worry K.I. isn't that good as a two-way player and will primarily eat too much into the salary cap. He might be a form of Carmelo Anthony or Kevin Love putting up stats but nothing immortal for pro basketball. He should join the Globetrotters to truly fulfill his potential?

People worried about paying Isaiah and don't realize this is deja vu or very similar. Kyrie is taller but I.T. was better at preventing scoring droughts and maintaining good team atmosphere.

To me, Kyrie is saying look how great I am at humility. It seems forced. Nearly everyone seems afraid to consider he might be overrated or risky the same way no one wants to think about Horford approaching his dinosaur years.

Hayward is potentially a devastating hit to overall team chances if he doesn't recover. I agree the future is now based on Horford's age. The clock is ticking on his stamina as a Big Three component. He is aging like fine wine but even LeBron is starting to fall apart. 32 is the last prime year. 33 tops. Then it's an inevitable quick decline and retirement. I'm hoping Horford is the Bob Cousy of this era around for the first few titles. Tatum can be the Larry Bird/Bill Russell or whatever so be it.

Hayward looks okay, so far, like he might fully recover or close enough?

He's definitely untradeable for right now. He is currently definitely a negative trade asset. The Hayward situation is dogging the team, period. It is the elephant in the room or rain cloud over Charlie Brown.

Speaking of Brown's, I'd give Jaylen Brown this full year before capping his ceiling the way you seem to be doing. He is not far off from true greatness. I think Tatum needs to be separated from the Kobe's and Kyrie's. They are not good role models, imho. Tatum should stick with Horford as his true mentor.

With all due respect....?

fierce wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:Are you kidding me, Kyrie and Morris for Butler....???

That’s as inept at any other trade for Butler, the guy is a cancer!!!!

Hope you got that.

And you thought my trade idea of Morris, Brown, Rozier, Ojeleye, and Yabu for Jimmy Butler was crazy.

Seriously, Kyrie and Morris for Jimmy Butler?

Even I wouldn't do that trade.

Kyrie is the Celtics best player period!

Fierce, i agree with your premise that an upgrade for this team may be needed. But I wouldn’t trade a bag of donuts for Butler.

Phil Pressey wrote:It's Fierce's idea to go after Butler, not mine. I simply found a trade for him which doesn't gut the team and then proceeded to a general rant on the current state of the Celtics. It's Fierce who wants to make the C's all shiny and glamorous, not me. I'll stick with the lunch pail mob plus Horford. I'd still roll the long-term dice on not only Brown and Tatum, but also on Rozier and Smart. All four of them look durable, reasonably priced and with open roofs to the sky as in no ceilings. They should remain the core, imho.

I'm hoping Tatum gets tough enough to cover power forward and then the C's are just missing Horford's replacement for a ten year window.

Other guys could be here for a long time too such as Theis, Ojeleye and even the mercurial Marcus Morris. Stranger things have happened. I've articulated the need to identify and sign worthy rotation players to long-term Jae Crowder styled contracts.

The typical Celtics fan of late must be in some pain or is non-human. This sort of roster speculation within a season is a form of inflammation which protects the fragile eggshell sports psyche in other areas of life. Maybe we want Rozier to slump a bit. Then no one will offer him a poison pill contract. Many believe there is a dimensional chess element to Danny's role. That is in play. Terry can flat out shoot and defend. Some people forget how good he is at protecting the ball and are seemingly trying to run him out of town. This is a frame-up and classic double cross on a player bleeding green. This is just meaningless sports related prose as vent and for entertainment value only. Anything is possible. There will be more games! There's always hope.

Terry Rozier has lived here for years and Fierce is saying he shouldn't let the door hit his butt on the way out? This is very sad. Or it's now the one word? Sad. Or pathetic is excellent. Pathetic. Just kidding. It's all good. Ha ha.

If my trade is so bad, then make them cough up some draft picks. Also, we'd be getting the guy not leaving for a while and Minnesota would have two guys maybe with a foot out the door or perhaps they will stay if treated like royalty. Toronto must be on edge. Sure, they are on top of the world right now but maybe Kawhi Leonard would rather live in warmer weather. Toronto doesn't scare me as much as Hayward coming back too slow. But then again, the satisfactory bar becomes the fourth seed for one round of home court. That would be good enough. So why overreact?

That's how little any of this matters. The C's could end up in the fourth slot and as long as they are playing well by April, they could still easily march into the Finals, cupcakes for everyone. Yeah, Leonard is a great player. Toronto is a true threat. They are our daddy. But I'd still bet on my Celtics. These guys are still just slumping. That's all this is. The schedule will get very easy soon and then the wins will reboot piling them up. 2-2 went to 6-2. I predict 6-4 will turn into 20-7.

First things first is to stop the bleeding with a road win.

I'm just trying to give a Kyrie a kick in the pants like Tommy did. I don't want players given so much money when they might be overrated. He is flashy as f ck, but that doesn't win titles or maybe it did once against Golden State. I concede there are worse things than being stuck with Kyrie Irving as a Big Three component. He is spectacular for scoring.

Phil, Terry Roz can flat out defend. Correct. Terry Rozier cannot flat out shoot. 40% is not flat out. Flat maybe...

Look..IF a fan is wanting an upgrade on this team then instead of Butler perhaps one should look at Anthony Davis as a trade option.

AT least one could make a serious argument there.

Just sayin'

I learned once somewhere that making conclusive inferences on the bases of small samples sizes was bad practice.

Of course, it's possible that the Celtics will play just above .500 for 82 games. It's also possible that adding a great talent requires adjustment, and that what we're seeing is an adjustment period.

My money is on the latter.

kdp59 wrote:Look..IF   a fan is wanting an upgrade on this team then         instead of Butler perhaps    one should look at Anthony Davis as a trade option.

AT least one could make a serious argument there.

Just sayin'

Anthony Davis cannot be traded to Boston as long as Kyrie is a Celtic.

There's that Derrick Rose rule that prevents the Celts from having Kyrie and Anthony Davis via trade.

Ktronic1 wrote:

fierce wrote:

cowens/oldschool wrote:Are you kidding me, Kyrie and Morris for Butler....???

That’s as inept at any other trade for Butler, the guy is a cancer!!!!

Hope you got that.

And you thought my trade idea of Morris, Brown, Rozier, Ojeleye, and Yabu for Jimmy Butler was crazy.

Seriously, Kyrie and Morris for Jimmy Butler?

Even I wouldn't do that trade.

Kyrie is the Celtics best player period!

Fierce, i agree with your premise that an upgrade for this team may be needed. But I wouldn’t trade a bag of donuts for Butler.

Agree.

If not Butler then another player that will close the gap between the Celts and GSW.

NESportsfan12 wrote:I learned once somewhere that making conclusive inferences on the bases of small samples sizes was bad practice.

Of course, it's possible that the Celtics will play just above .500 for 82 games. It's also possible that adding a great talent requires adjustment, and that what we're seeing is an adjustment period.

My money is on the latter.

Adjustment period is not an excuse.

This Celtics team is basically the same team as last year.

The only significant new addition is Rob Williams.

It's understandable if this team only played together this season.
But this team already played together last season.
I don't think it's an adjustment problem.
Clearly the Celts don't have the right personnel right now.
Celts have too many good players and not enough great ones.

fierce wrote:

NESportsfan12 wrote:I learned once somewhere that making conclusive inferences on the bases of small samples sizes was bad practice.

Of course, it's possible that the Celtics will play just above .500 for 82 games. It's also possible that adding a great talent requires adjustment, and that what we're seeing is an adjustment period.

My money is on the latter.

Adjustment period is not an excuse.

This Celtics team is basically the same team as last year.

The only significant new addition is Rob Williams.

It's understandable if this team only played together this season.
But this team already played together last season.
I don't think it's an adjustment problem.
Clearly the Celts don't have the right personnel right now.
Celts have too many good players and not enough great ones.

False. 1/5 starters played 1/102 games last season, and 1/5 starters played 60/102 games last season. That is, 20% of the starting 5 missed 99.98% of all games, and another 20% of the starting 5 missed 42% of all games. 40% of the starting five missed significant time last year. Of all the games last season, and the current starting five only played one of them. These aren't just any two players either, but arguably the best two players on the roster.

We see time and again that adding even a single superstar to a team can result in a mediocre start. We've seen it on Lebron superteams and GSW superteams and celtics superteams. Try adding two, one of which is still clearly not right after an injury (Hayward), and the other who is only now reaching his stride (Irving).

NESportsfan12 wrote:

fierce wrote:

NESportsfan12 wrote:I learned once somewhere that making conclusive inferences on the bases of small samples sizes was bad practice.

Of course, it's possible that the Celtics will play just above .500 for 82 games. It's also possible that adding a great talent requires adjustment, and that what we're seeing is an adjustment period.

My money is on the latter.

Adjustment period is not an excuse.

This Celtics team is basically the same team as last year.

The only significant new addition is Rob Williams.

It's understandable if this team only played together this season.
But this team already played together last season.
I don't think it's an adjustment problem.
Clearly the Celts don't have the right personnel right now.
Celts have too many good players and not enough great ones.

False. 1/5 starters played 1/102 games last season, and 1/5 starters played 60/102 games last season. That is, 20% of the starting 5 missed 99.98% of all games, and another 20% of the starting 5 missed 42% of all games. 40% of the starting five missed significant time last year. Of all the games last season, and the current starting five only played one of them. These aren't just any two players either, but arguably the best two players on the roster.

We see time and again that adding even a single superstar to a team can result in a mediocre start. We've seen it on Lebron superteams and GSW superteams and celtics superteams. Try adding two, one of which is still clearly not right after an injury (Hayward), and the other who is only now reaching his stride (Irving).

And they don't practice almost everyday?

The point is the players are already familiar with each other because they were assembled last year, not this year.

Back in 2007-08, Celts assembled a super team that featured KG, Pierce, and Ray.
In year 1 they won a championship.
They also won 66 games that season.

Celts are spending 60m on Hayward and Horford and both are not even averaging 14 points per game.

This year the Celtic offense has been jacking up 3s all game long.
That was not the case last season.

Hard to believe that Hayward is the cause for the Celts jacking up 3s.

This current Celtics team is flawed.

Guys like Rozier, Hayward, and Brown are affected by the lack of touches.

Al Horford gets a pass inside the paint and inches from the rim and he ends up passing the ball outside for a 3.
He did it twice against the Pacers.
That's not smart basketball.

The needing more time excuse would've been valid last season.
Not this season!

fierce,

If I didn't know any better, I would swear you changed you screen name to fierce from tjmakz. Whatever happened to that guy?!

db

fierce wrote:

kdp59 wrote:Look..IF   a fan is wanting an upgrade on this team then         instead of Butler perhaps    one should look at Anthony Davis as a trade option.

AT least one could make a serious argument there.

Just sayin'

Anthony Davis cannot be traded to Boston as long as Kyrie is a Celtic.

There's that Derrick Rose rule that prevents the Celts from having Kyrie and Anthony Davis via trade.

yeah..that's been "quoted" before...but I have yet to see anything in my searches that says it is true, perhaps it is but I wanna see a link that says so from a real source myself.



"Derrick Rose" Rule

In a rule named after Derrick Rose, accomplished players coming off their rookie contract could earn more money in the 2011 CBA.
A Designated Player coming off his rookie contract may be eligible to earn 30% of the salary cap (rather than the standard 25%) if he passes certain criteria. Through the 2017–18 season, in order to be eligible, the player must be voted to start in two All-Star Games, or be named to an All-NBA Team twice (at any level), or be named MVP. Officially titled the "5th Year 30% Max Criteria",[32] it has been dubbed (and is more commonly known as) the "Derrick Rose Rule" after the 2011 MVP,[33] due to the fact that when the criteria were introduced, Rose was the only player in the NBA eligible to sign the maximum extension (due to his MVP award).[34] The reasoning for the rule is to suitably reward players being extended off of their rookie contract who are considered to be of a higher "caliber" than their peers, without restricting them to the lower (25%) salary level.[35] A player may sign a "5th Year, 30% Max" contract before the final year of his rookie contract and before fulfilling the criteria needed to receive the 30% salary grade. Should the player fail to fulfil the criteria before the start of his Designated Player contract, he will receive the standard five-year, 25% Designated Player contract. James Harden of the Houston Rockets and Anthony Davis of the New Orleans Pelicans had such a clause in their contract extensions, but both failed to meet the criteria.[36] The only player in the NBA who was attempting to qualify for a full 30% contract in 2013–14 was Paul George, who signed a provisional 30%/5 year contract in September 2013. George, who had made the All-NBA third team in 2012–13,[37] qualified by again making the All-NBA third team.[38]

The 2017 CBA changed the qualification criteria for "5th Year, 30% Max" contracts. Players who come off rookie contracts at the end of the 2017–18 season, or later, must meet any of the following criteria to qualify:[39]

Selection to an All-NBA team (at any level) in the player's fourth season, or in two of the three seasons between his second and fourth seasons.
Selection as Defensive Player of the Year in the player's fourth season, or in two of the three seasons between his second and fourth seasons.
Selection as MVP in any season from the player's second onward.
These criteria are identical to those for the veteran player extensions introduced in the 2017 CBA. Had these criteria been part of the 2011 CBA, Rose would still have qualified for a 30% contract, as he was in his third NBA season when he was named MVP.

5/30% Contracts
The following players have signed 5 year/30% contracts:[32]

Derrick Rose (signed with the Chicago Bulls; was later traded to the New York Knicks during the last year on that deal) until 2017 (qualified by winning the 2011 MVP award) [40]
Blake Griffin (signed with the L.A. Clippers; was later traded to the Detroit Pistons in 2018) signed through 2018 (qualified by making the All-NBA second team in 2011–12 and 2012–13)
Paul George (signed with Indiana Pacers; since has been traded to the Oklahoma City Thunder) signed until 2019 (qualified by making the All-NBA third team in 2012–13 and 2013–14)[37][38]
Karl-Anthony Towns (signed with Minnesota Timberwolves) through 2024 (qualified by making the All-NBA third team in 2017–18)[41]
5/25% Contracts
In addition the following players are known to have signed 5 year/25% contracts:[32]

Joel Embiid (Philadelphia 76ers) until 2023
Russell Westbrook (Oklahoma City Thunder) until 2017
Anthony Davis (New Orleans Pelicans) until 2021
John Wall (Washington Wizards) until 2019[42]
James Harden (Houston Rockets) until 2018
Kyrie Irving (Boston Celtics) until 2020
Damian Lillard (Portland Trail Blazers) until 2021
Kevin Love was eligible for a designated player contract, but the Minnesota Timberwolves opted[43] for a 4-year contract (with a player option year included, potentially allowing him to become an unrestricted free agent) instead.[44] During Kevin Durant's final five seasons with the Oklahoma City Thunder (2011–2016), he received a Designated Player level salary. His contract was initially drawn up before the lockout—during which the Derrick Rose Rule was implemented—but was officially approved under the provisions of the 2005 CBA[45] by the NBA after the lockout. This led some people[46] to question whether the Thunder had (with NBA approval) effectively signed two players as their Designated Player, as both were contracted for 5 years.

"Supermax" Rule
The provision in the 2017 CBA that allows teams to create Designated Player contracts for their own veteran players, officially known as the "Designated Veteran Player Extension" (DVPE),[9] came to be called the "Kevin Durant Rule" because it was seen as a reaction to a wave of veteran superstars leaving their teams in free agency, capped off by Durant's departure from the Thunder to the Golden State Warriors in the 2016 offseason. The contract is also commonly called "The Supermax". The 2011 CBA allowed all of the teams that were trying to lure Durant to offer him the same initial salary of $26.5 million.[8]

For a veteran player to qualify for such an extension, he must be entering his eighth or ninth season in the NBA, and have either:

made the All-NBA team (at any level) in either the season immediately before signing the extension, or two of the three previous seasons;
been named NBA Defensive Player of the Year in either the season immediately before signing the extension, or two of the three previous seasons; or
been named NBA MVP at least once in the previous three seasons.
Additionally, the team offering the extension must have originally drafted the player, or obtained him in a trade while he was on his rookie contract.[8]

Players who qualify can be offered contracts with a starting salary between 30 and 35% of the salary cap. The extension cannot last more than five years after the expiration of the player's current contract (or five years for a player who is a free agent when signed), but can be negotiated and signed one year before the current contract expires. The extension can be offered to a team's own free agent as well as a player with time left on his contract.[9] Additionally, once a player signs a DVPE, he cannot be traded for one year.[47]

Ironically, while the rule was intended to encourage star players to stay with their current teams, the first major move by an NBA team involving a player eligible for the DVPE was the Sacramento Kings' trade of DeMarcus Cousins to the New Orleans Pelicans during the 2017 All-Star break. Cousins' contract with the Kings was not set to expire until 2018, but he was eligible to sign a DVPE after the 2016–17 season for up to $209 million over five years, a financial commitment that the Kings were apparently unwilling to make.[47]

Players eligible for the supermax
Following the announcement of the 2016–17 All-NBA team, four players were eligible to sign DVPE contracts during the 2017 offseason. All four were named to one of the three All-NBA teams for that season; two were already eligible under the new criteria.[48]

Stephen Curry, Golden State Warriors (met DVPE criteria before the 2016–17 season)
James Harden, Houston Rockets
John Wall, Washington Wizards
Russell Westbrook, Oklahoma City Thunder (met DVPE criteria before the 2016–17 season)
Harden and Westbrook would not have qualified under the standard DVPE criteria because both signed extensions to their contracts in the 2016 offseason, Harden for two years and Westbrook for one. The players' union and owners negotiated a special dispensation allowing them to sign DVPE contracts should they otherwise qualify.[48]

The most recent player to qualify for a supermax contract is Anthony Davis, who has played his entire NBA career to date with the New Orleans Pelicans. He qualified by being named to the All-NBA first team in 2017–18, enabling the Pelicans to offer him a five-year extension worth up to $230 million, effective with the 2019–20 season.[49]

Supermax contracts
The first player to sign a supermax contract was Stephen Curry, who agreed to a new five-year DVPE deal with the Warriors, worth $201 million, that runs through the 2021–22 season. Curry signed the contract once the NBA's free agency moratorium ended on July 6, 2017.[50]

Shortly thereafter, James Harden agreed on a DVPE with the Rockets. At the time of signing, his current contract had two years remaining with total pay of $59 million; the extension will add another $170 million over four seasons, ending in 2022–23.[51]

The next supermax signing was that of John Wall, who agreed later in July to a four-year, $170 million extension that will start in 2019–20.[52] In late September, Russell Westbrook became the fourth and final supermax signing of the 2017 offseason, signing a five-year, $205 million extension that started in 2018–19.[53]

Fierce,

Much of what you say doesn't pass the sniff test.

Teams rarely practice during the season, there's just no time between travel and games.

Preseason has been shortened so much that it has been made almost useless.  That certainly has changed from the 60's when they even played a preseason game in my HS gym.

Hayward didn't play or practice 5 on 5 for almost one year.  Even last season, the short pre-season and 5 minutes of one game didn't help familiarize the rest of the team with his skill set, preferences and tendencies.  Going into this season, not only is he not 100%, it is just like he was added brand new this season.

The 2007-2008 season perfect storm team has nothing to do with the current situation.  Back then, we added two first-ballot hall of famers to our own first-ballot hall of famer.  All three were veteran players who were towards the end of their prime.  All three players fit like a glove with their skill-sets.  The bench players (Posey, House, etc.) were also veteran players close to the end of their careers.  The only similarity between then and now is the color uniform they wore.

The money spent on players has no direct correlation to their production.  It never has and it never will.  If you ever listened to Tommy when he has spoken to what Horford brings to the team you would better understand his role.  Same with Hayward.  Ignore the sage comments from Tommy at your peril.

The Celtics set and broke 3-point shooting records all last season, so it isn't exactly a new trend.  They've ratcheted it up even more this season.  That is where the league is going, I don't necessarily like that style myself, so too bad for me and any other dinosaur who likes the old styles of play more than the current style.  Suggesting that others are blaming Hayward for the increase in 3-point shooting is just a straw man argument of your own making.

I will agree that Horford passing up points in the paint for a 3-point shot doesn't sit well with me.  I have mentioned that in the Game On! thread.  However, to use that as one of the pillars of your argument s cherry picking at best.  It only happens once or twice in a game, if that.

Repeating the same false statements over and over (and over . . .) again doesn't make them true.  If you haven't seen the pattern that practically no one here agrees with you, that is too bad for you.  Most here will agree with me when I say that you are serving up some seriously weak tea on this subject.

gyso

gyso wrote:Fierce,

Much of what you say doesn't pass the sniff test.

Teams rarely practice during the season, there's just no time between travel and games.

Preseason has been shortened so much that it has been made almost useless.  That certainly has changed from the 60's when they even played a preseason game in my HS gym.

Hayward didn't play or practice 5 on 5 for almost one year.  Even last season, the short pre-season and 5 minutes of one game didn't help familiarize the rest of the team with his skill set, preferences and tendencies.  Going into this season, not only is he not 100%, it is just like he was added brand new this season.

The 2007-2008 season perfect storm team has nothing to do with the current situation.  Back then, we added two first-ballot hall of famers to our own first-ballot hall of famer.  All three were veteran players who were towards the end of their prime.  All three players fit like a glove with their skill-sets.  The bench players (Posey, House, etc.) were also veteran players close to the end of their careers.  The only similarity between then and now is the color uniform they wore.

The money spent on players has no direct correlation to their production.  It never has and it never will.  If you ever listened to Tommy when he has spoken to what Horford brings to the team you would better understand his role.  Same with Hayward.  Ignore the sage comments from Tommy at your peril.

The Celtics set and broke 3-point shooting records all last season, so it isn't exactly a new trend.  They've ratcheted it up even more this season.  That is where the league is going, I don't necessarily like that style myself, so too bad for me and any other dinosaur who likes the old styles of play more than the current style.  Suggesting that others are blaming Hayward for the increase in 3-point shooting is just a straw man argument of your own making.

I will agree that Horford passing up points in the paint for a 3-point shot doesn't sit well with me.  I have mentioned that in the Game On! thread.  However, to use that as one of the pillars of your argument s cherry picking at best.  It only happens once or twice in a game, if that.

Repeating the same false statements over and over (and over . . .) again doesn't make them true.  If you haven't seen the pattern that practically no one here agrees with you, that is too bad for you.  Most here will agree with me when I say that you are serving up some seriously weak tea on this subject.

gyso

Couldn't have said it better myself, with the exception of the last bit. Lots of minority views end up being, in the long run, right. Here, the problem is that Fierce's arguments are bad, not that practically no one agrees.

Can we at least wait until Hayward is off his minutes restriction before we start sounding the alarm bells?

It's also worth noting how badly the Lebron James Dwayne Wade Chris Bosh heat started their campaign together.

NE,

I did qualify my post by saying false statements.     I heartedly agree that many minority views end up being right in the long run.

I just take pride in the collective knowledge of this board.  While I do believe that he is a very knowledgeable fan, it is just in this case he fails to adequately support his argument.

By the way, it is good to see you posting again.

gyso

NESportsfan12 wrote:It's also worth noting how badly the Lebron James Dwayne Wade Chris Bosh heat started their campaign together.

I think that they expected the same instant results as our 2007-2008 big three. As I said in another post, our team came together like a perfect storm.

gyso wrote:Fierce,

Much of what you say doesn't pass the sniff test.

Teams rarely practice during the season, there's just no time between travel and games.

Preseason has been shortened so much that it has been made almost useless.  That certainly has changed from the 60's when they even played a preseason game in my HS gym.

Hayward didn't play or practice 5 on 5 for almost one year.  Even last season, the short pre-season and 5 minutes of one game didn't help familiarize the rest of the team with his skill set, preferences and tendencies.  Going into this season, not only is he not 100%, it is just like he was added brand new this season.

The 2007-2008 season perfect storm team has nothing to do with the current situation.  Back then, we added two first-ballot hall of famers to our own first-ballot hall of famer.  All three were veteran players who were towards the end of their prime.  All three players fit like a glove with their skill-sets.  The bench players (Posey, House, etc.) were also veteran players close to the end of their careers.  The only similarity between then and now is the color uniform they wore.

The money spent on players has no direct correlation to their production.  It never has and it never will.  If you ever listened to Tommy when he has spoken to what Horford brings to the team you would better understand his role.  Same with Hayward.  Ignore the sage comments from Tommy at your peril.

The Celtics set and broke 3-point shooting records all last season, so it isn't exactly a new trend.  They've ratcheted it up even more this season.  That is where the league is going, I don't necessarily like that style myself, so too bad for me and any other dinosaur who likes the old styles of play more than the current style.  Suggesting that others are blaming Hayward for the increase in 3-point shooting is just a straw man argument of your own making.

I will agree that Horford passing up points in the paint for a 3-point shot doesn't sit well with me.  I have mentioned that in the Game On! thread.  However, to use that as one of the pillars of your argument s cherry picking at best.  It only happens once or twice in a game, if that.

Repeating the same false statements over and over (and over . . .) again doesn't make them true.  If you haven't seen the pattern that practically no one here agrees with you, that is too bad for you.  Most here will agree with me when I say that you are serving up some seriously weak tea on this subject.

gyso

++1

The bottom line is - that it's way too early in the season to draw any meaningful conclusions - and that includes going overboard on the positive side when things are looking good.

swish

gyso wrote:Fierce,

Much of what you say doesn't pass the sniff test.

Teams rarely practice during the season, there's just no time between travel and games.

Preseason has been shortened so much that it has been made almost useless.  That certainly has changed from the 60's when they even played a preseason game in my HS gym.

Hayward didn't play or practice 5 on 5 for almost one year.  Even last season, the short pre-season and 5 minutes of one game didn't help familiarize the rest of the team with his skill set, preferences and tendencies.  Going into this season, not only is he not 100%, it is just like he was added brand new this season.

The 2007-2008 season perfect storm team has nothing to do with the current situation.  Back then, we added two first-ballot hall of famers to our own first-ballot hall of famer.  All three were veteran players who were towards the end of their prime.  All three players fit like a glove with their skill-sets.  The bench players (Posey, House, etc.) were also veteran players close to the end of their careers.  The only similarity between then and now is the color uniform they wore.

The money spent on players has no direct correlation to their production.  It never has and it never will.  If you ever listened to Tommy when he has spoken to what Horford brings to the team you would better understand his role.  Same with Hayward.  Ignore the sage comments from Tommy at your peril.

The Celtics set and broke 3-point shooting records all last season, so it isn't exactly a new trend.  They've ratcheted it up even more this season.  That is where the league is going, I don't necessarily like that style myself, so too bad for me and any other dinosaur who likes the old styles of play more than the current style.  Suggesting that others are blaming Hayward for the increase in 3-point shooting is just a straw man argument of your own making.

I will agree that Horford passing up points in the paint for a 3-point shot doesn't sit well with me.  I have mentioned that in the Game On! thread.  However, to use that as one of the pillars of your argument s cherry picking at best.  It only happens once or twice in a game, if that.

Repeating the same false statements over and over (and over . . .) again doesn't make them true.  If you haven't seen the pattern that practically no one here agrees with you, that is too bad for you.  Most here will agree with me when I say that you are serving up some seriously weak tea on this subject.

gyso

The 2007-08 team may have been a perfect storm but with that many new players on a roster, 1st ballot or no ballot, they still had to learn each others tendencies and gell. They did and won 66 on there way to a title. To say that they did not have to adjust to each other because of where they were in their careers is suspect at best.

Ktronic1 wrote:

gyso wrote:Fierce,

Much of what you say doesn't pass the sniff test.

Teams rarely practice during the season, there's just no time between travel and games.

Preseason has been shortened so much that it has been made almost useless.  That certainly has changed from the 60's when they even played a preseason game in my HS gym.

Hayward didn't play or practice 5 on 5 for almost one year.  Even last season, the short pre-season and 5 minutes of one game didn't help familiarize the rest of the team with his skill set, preferences and tendencies.  Going into this season, not only is he not 100%, it is just like he was added brand new this season.

The 2007-2008 season perfect storm team has nothing to do with the current situation.  Back then, we added two first-ballot hall of famers to our own first-ballot hall of famer.  All three were veteran players who were towards the end of their prime.  All three players fit like a glove with their skill-sets.  The bench players (Posey, House, etc.) were also veteran players close to the end of their careers.  The only similarity between then and now is the color uniform they wore.

The money spent on players has no direct correlation to their production.  It never has and it never will.  If you ever listened to Tommy when he has spoken to what Horford brings to the team you would better understand his role.  Same with Hayward.  Ignore the sage comments from Tommy at your peril.

The Celtics set and broke 3-point shooting records all last season, so it isn't exactly a new trend.  They've ratcheted it up even more this season.  That is where the league is going, I don't necessarily like that style myself, so too bad for me and any other dinosaur who likes the old styles of play more than the current style.  Suggesting that others are blaming Hayward for the increase in 3-point shooting is just a straw man argument of your own making.

I will agree that Horford passing up points in the paint for a 3-point shot doesn't sit well with me.  I have mentioned that in the Game On! thread.  However, to use that as one of the pillars of your argument s cherry picking at best.  It only happens once or twice in a game, if that.

Repeating the same false statements over and over (and over . . .) again doesn't make them true.  If you haven't seen the pattern that practically no one here agrees with you, that is too bad for you.  Most here will agree with me when I say that you are serving up some seriously weak tea on this subject.

gyso

The 2007-08 team may have been a perfect storm but with that many new players on a roster, 1st ballot or no ballot, they still had to learn each others tendencies and gell. They did and won 66 on there way to a title. To say that they did not have to adjust to each other because of where they were in their careers is suspect at best.

That 2007-08 team was special and they came together right out of the gate.  Everyone was surprised that they were so good so soon.  They began with an 8 game winning streak before losing and they also has streaks of 9, 9,10 and 7 straight wins.  That was 10 years ago.

If you did not look at their win loss totals and just looked at their stats it may really emphasize how the game has changed.

That team average 72.7 FGA.  They only averaged 100 PPG.   They took 19 3PA and shot 38%.  They grabbed 42 boards.  they only had 4 guys in double figures with Rondo making the cut at 10.6 PPG.  The big 3 ate up most of the minutes.  The big 3 average 13.7, 13.9 and  13.5 FGA per game.  No one else average double digits in shot attempts.   The bench came together quickly and provided contributions.  Roles were clearly defined.  

That was a different time and a different style.  I thought it was a rare accomplishment that they won that first year.

I don't agree.  They came out of the chute like they had been playing together for years.  What do you attribute that to?

Edit: Dboss got his post in before mine. He said gate. I said chute. One of us has to be wrong.

They were a lot more seasoned, hungry players. These kids got a good taste last,year but they are young, have heir whole careers in front of them. Paul, Ray, KG, Eddie House, Posey, even PpJ, this was it. They were hungry for the ring before their careers slipped away.

That to me is the difference

Terry Rozier unhappy with playing time?

Bill Simmons: Unexpected early-season Celts subplot: Terry Rozier (restricted FA next summer) has been unhappy w/ his PT all season, word has gotten around the league, and everyone now knows the Celtics need to trade him… which, of course, makes it harder to trade him. 8 hours ago – via Twitter BillSimmons