2012-13: A Season Defined by Scarcity and Compromise

In all the hurly burly of seasonal post-mortems, finger-pointing, and conjecture, I’d like tocoffer a perspective dealing with a common thread that pervaded the Celtics’
situation all season long. Somecmight view it as a list of excuses for the team, but it’s not. I’m simply trying to get to the heartcof why things went as they did, much as a physician would attempt to diagnose acmedical problem by looking for common threads in the symptoms. I’m not interested in playing the blame game either. I’ll leave that to the Monday morning quarterbacks.

The 2012-13 Boston Celtics were many things this season. But, at the top of the list—and influencing virtually everything that went wrong—was the fact that they were a team of scarcity and compromise:

• They were forced to back up the center position with marginal and/or undersized backup centers because they compromised this position in favor of shoring up the shooting guard position.

• They played with undersized or under-bulked power forwards, although the jury is out in terms of how much of a compromise this may be down the road, as one PF (Sully) displayed
the ability to be a consistent difference maker before he went down; Green could easily become a go-to guy of the future; and Bass expanded his game as the season and playoffs progressed (showing more versatility on offense and newfound defensive tenacity on dominant opposing PFs such as Carmello Anthony).

• Except for Jeff Green, there was an acute scarcity of consistent penetration skills combined with the ability to get to the line often. They used to depend on Paul Pierce in this area, but his current performance level resulted in a concession to age and erosion of skills.

• Red used to prize players for their one major dominant trait. But that didn’t mean it was the only trait each of his players had. They were all more well-rounded than players who were one-trick ponies on this year’s team—people like Wilcox (jams in the paint); Terry (threes); Bass (mid-range jumpers, although he did display some impressive defensive skills late); and Bradley (defensive intensity which—possibly for physical reasons—seemed to become less imposing as the season progressed, at least until the last quarter of the last game). The scarcities created by Rondo’s unavailability and the widespread lack of half-decent ball-handling abilities among his teammates was arguably the most noticeable compromise in
the skills department.

• None of the backup ball-distribution candidates ever developed the type of dependable aptitude for the job that is needed to facilitate scorers to the max. (Yes, I know Williams showed promise, but I’m talking about a ready-made floor general backup this past season.) They were forced to turn to Paul Pierce, who was already overburdened (see above) and became a turnover machine.

• They operated from a position of scarcity in needing to raid the Chinese League and the Wizards for an unwanted loose cannon into service because they were available cheaply. Actually, in the cases of Shavlik and Williams, this case may not be closed as they have some skills to build upon.

• Their team help defense system is supposed to minimize the impact of defensive warts of individual defenders. But the unsatisfied demands of that scheme for split-second anticipation and timing seriously compromised the team’s defense.

• They had a scarcity of true bigs (actually one) who could defend effectively in the paint and the pick-and-roll—and the one was a limited-minutes 37-year-old guy with immense pride and intensity but with skills compromised by the mileage on his tires. And a resulting compromise involved the need to play an inordinate amount of small ball.

• When opponents trapped the Celtics, the Green often lapsed into playground/iso ball, inconsistency in pushing the ball, defaulting to jumpers, sporadic (at best) drives to the hoop and points in the paint. This meant they never really developed an offensive identity. And this problem surfaced long before Rondo was lost to injury.

• They too frequently compromised their offensive rebounding because they had to “cheat” in order to get back in time on defense. Even when there was a Celtic on the offensive board, he was frequently outnumbered and/or muscled out of the way and wound up flailing with one hand for the offensive board. (Shades of Perk.)

• Even before Sully left, the team had a scarcity of defensive board toughness and height, as well as the ability to block out, making them vulnerable in the defensive rebounding area—especially against opponents who gang-banged energetically.

• As throughout his career, Rondo was dependent on a helter-skelter style that put him in harm’s way in many trips down the floor. This has compromised his ability to play full tilt for a full season—at least in the last three years.

I’m not trying to spread gloom and doom. That’s never my thing. I try to deal with facts. And, despite these many downers, there were some very promising developments:

• The team certainly didn’t compromise in the heart department, which they proved by the 20-0 run at the end.

• Green represents huge potential to be a very effective go-to guy.

• Sully looks solid in the rebounding department, assuming his health holds out.

• Perhaps Williams and Shavlik represent potential to unknown degrees once they’ve been through a training camp.

• Bass (if he is here next season) may prove to become more of a two-way player than in the past, and he doesn’t mind getting into it under both boards.

• The mandate to swing the ball and play more of a motion offense was a valuable learning experience.

Aside fromspecificquestions such as where they will get a good big man or two, a backup PG, and a lights-out shooter, key questions of a general nature revolve around all of these scarcities and compromises. I’m sure people will be able to add to the list of my favorites:

• How many of this season’s Celtics players are seriously likely to improve next year—especially in directions that will accommodate whatever systems may be adopted by next year’s team?

• How likely is it that continuation of the same Celtics’ offensive and defensive systems would maximize the play of the team? Alternatively, in what directions should the offensive and defensive systems evolve to take maximum advantage of the team’s strengths and minimize the impact of the team’s weaknesses?

• How can next season’s team be molded to fit a targeted identity, supported by fluid chemistry, rather than identity-by-default?

• As seasoned leaders depart and leave the team In the hands of a younger, presumably more thletic squad, how will the leadership structure of the team evolve?

• Will it be possible to gravitate toward players who, while specialists, are sufficiently well-rounded to be able to fill other roles and positions reasonably well?

Sam

Very well thought out, Sam. You raise some very interesting points out of genuine concern for not only the immediate future of the Celtics but also the long term future of the team we all love for many reasons, tangible and intangible.

Clearly, the injuries killed us, Rondo being the main one. And we were led down a strange deceptive path for many weeks with a better winning percentage while Rondo was out. It proved to be a mirage. But we have injuries every year. They are part of the game and season. Old age didn't help either as we saw the dismantling of PP toward the end. But KG definitely held up his end of the bargain by refusing to go down.

I could never figure out why we would always cheat, as you put it, on getting back and not crashing the boards to get an offensive rebound or two. They never really made any effort to get an offensive rebound that I could tell. What were they afraid of? They would have 2-3 people back on defense most of the time after a miss. You will never get a rebound that way...and they didn't. It appeared they were overreacting to something in the stats because it was so extreme. Even if they moved one guy up that would make a huge difference. I think the math proves out an offensive rebound is worth about 1 point, so it's a free throw. I'm guessing they felt giving up two points on a miss was clearly more detrimental than trying to get a rebound on the offensive end. Actually, giving up a layup on the other end after a miss is worth about 1 point on average as well.

I've said before it's time for Danny to go to work. You have expressed many concerns with bigs, back-up's, etc. and there's no reason to even speculate until Danny completes his assignments to address questions like identity, improvements and synergy.

We can't even focus on a core yet, although AB, BB, RR, JG and JS look like a good, odds-on starting place. But DA has always toyed with the spectacular blockbuster ideas that brought the Big 3 to Boston 6 years ago. So no one is safe.

I honestly have no idea until the results are in. So many things just broke badly against us this past season, much to the enjoyment of the rest of the league who thinks we have enough titles and it's time for someone else to win.

I think the 20 point comeback was significant in that it reminded us no matter how ugly the season that this teams has an undying spirit to win at all costs as all the banners hanging in the Garden. It gave us hope for the future even though we came up short.

BTW, when does summer league start?

Dbrown,

It's possible that the Celtics had as bad a scarcity/compromise season some time between 1986-87 and 2007-08, but all those years sort of blend into one big black hole in my mind so I can't single out any one season. I know that, until 1987, the annual totals of scarcity and compromise never approximated this season.

Moreover, this past season was like a perfect storm in futility because two factors that could have mitigated a lot of the frustration (steady PG play and versatility among the players) were actually part of the problem.

I used a variety of sources to establish that there will be at least three summer leagues:

Orlando: July 9-13

Las Vegas: June 12-22 (including a windup tournament and championship

Los Angeles:July 20-31 (incl. a windup tournament & championship)

I have no idea which league(s) the Celtics might enter; but, if an entry has to be available to play every game, the overlap between the leagues would limit them to not more than two.

Sam

Yeah, I definitely don't want another 22 year drought although we are 6 years into the current one. The double deaths of Len Bias and Reggie Lewis brought on and continued the Dark Ages (1988-2006) for the Celtics and Celtic fans alike. And the effects of those two events combined with the original Big 3 decline stretched out for 22 years. I admittedly was part of the exodus myself during that time period. When I finished college in 1986 and then grad school in 1987, I inadvertently finished with the Celtics until you and the Boston Globe pulled me up from the muck.

I was a huge fan during my college years, obviously. That's where all this started. The basketball was clearly exciting but I think I liked the Celtics more for what they represented. The games were just the icing on the cake.

There was even a group of us college kids that traveled from Charlotte to Atlanta to see the Celtics play Dominique and company. I think Doc may have even been on the court that night. But he wasn't the person or team we were there to see! Larry burned them late in the 4th with a dagger to the heart 3!

Well, DA's had about a week and nothing to report. We should be hearing something soon, though. Until then, we're just speculating. I don't know. Teammate deaths are very rare but they have to be absolutely devastating. And to have 2 within 7 years you start to think you are cursed. And the last time a Boston team had a curse on it, it went on for 80+ years, if you believe in that sort of thing. While this season was clearly a disappointment, things can be corrected marginally or drastically without sending us off into the event horizon for light years.

Thanks for the schedule as well. I hope can pick it up.

db