I Just Don't Understand It 3

I just don't understand it! This is my 3rd post with this title. And I STILL don't understand it! The Celtics were the best team tonite (without Garnett) when they ran the court.

The Celtics are just not playing 48 minutes of pressure defense and offense. Either they can't or they won't. This has been evident all season. A montage of about 25 of these quarters this season would be an embarrassment indeed.

When they play hard and move players and the ball they are the best team in the league. When they don't, they are no better than 6th to 8th. Nothing has changed, injuries or not.

THE CELTICS ARE NOT SUSTAINING CHAMPIONSHIP BASKETBALL within the same game. I have been pushing for an infusion of talented youth on this team. If nothing else, play the bench more. They went into the half with at least a nice effort.

GO CELTICS111

Ya, I don't understand it as well. As far as the out put by Rasheed, game in and game out, he should be 15th on the roster where Hudson was! If his play continues, it was a very expensive bust for Danny and Wyc.

Being involved in college sports...baseball & hockey, you play a dangerous game of being able to turn your play up when you feel like it. It just does not work that way. An athlete must continue to function on all cylinders to keep sharp and in shape. If Rasheed is holding back for play-off time, it could lead to a big let down come Spring for Celtic Nation.

I hope I am wrong, but I have never seen it work before in College or Pro Sports.

112288

cheer up fellas Blazers up by 18!!!!yeah baby!!!

were a little inconsistant right now to say the least,its a long season,at least Sheed is not injured,Sheed and Ray off with their shot tonite,Crawford lights out second half,Pierce playing his way back into shape,couple little breaks we could have had this game.....we were without 3 key players

Let's be honest. The Celts are playing this season with stretches of little energy or compassion for the game. Even before injuries. It is as simple as that. Pacing has been evident since game 1. Ainge said as much. Doc said they "are not a 48 minute team".

Until the core of this team deciides to play hard and smart for 30 - 35 minutes per game, playing below their potential will continue. The problem with this year's Celtics is as much lack of "want to" as much as their age or injuries.

It hurts me to say this, but my eyes are not deceiving me. The Celtics have got to start putting together a full game's worth of effort so they know they can do it. They can say what they want, I just don't see the compassion to compete with younger, hungrier teams.

This team is simply not doing what it takes to win a championship. Ainge knows it. Rivers knows it. The team doesn't appear to know it, however.

Go Celtics!!

sdcelt

second best record in the nba. Just couldnt shoot straight in 3rd quarter.

Hawks a tough matchup.

Blazers without Oden, Pryzbilla, Outlaw, Batum, Fernandez and Blake beat the Lakers easily tonight. Couple that with Denver (without 'Melo) knocking off the Cavs (Lebron's 8 turnovers helped considerably) and that takes a little bit of the sting (not all) out of tonight's loss to the Hawks.

KG can't come back soon enough.

too many minutes by the starters ... bothers me way more than the loss.

When Rasheed plays almost 39 minutes, shoots 1 for 8 on threes and only grabs 3 rebounds, you're gonna lose. That's too much of a negative to overcome.

true dat

The Celtics did not shoot the ball well. And they also relied on too many 3 point shots. Rasheed never established himself in the post and the Celtics did not go to their 2nd and third options when running a play.

The Celtics did a better job on the glass and they also did a nice job containing Joe Johnson.

Perk had another double double with 15 pts and 14 rebounds.

I thought Rajon was not very aggressive on offense although he did have a quite double double including 2 three point shots.

The Celtics bench was not a factor and really did not play many minutes.

The biggest problem was that Boston did not have anyone to match up with Jamal Crawford (18 points) off the bench. Tony Allen missed the game and that hurt the team because TA is a good wing defender.

I think the starters played too many minutes in this game and simply ran out of steam down the stretch.

This is a game that Boston still could have won if they showed more discipline. But it is not a big deal... They play again on Monday and hopefully the Celtics will bring a more determined attitude to the game.

I see LA lost again to Portland. Even the really good team have a nemesis.

dboss

OF COURSE the Celtics are not doing what it takes to win a championship. This is not the team (not even close) that will be
competing successfully for a championship. It's beginning to look as though the same could be said for the Lakers, and their sick list is
MUCH shorter.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING as "injuries or not." Injuries ARE. They can't be dismissed with the stroke of a few keys. There is NOT ONE GAME of this season at which the Celtics have not had injuries to key personnel. NOT ONE!

When a team is constantly incurring injuries or illness that have been deactivating (on average) three key core members per game; and when the absences have involved a rotating cast of characters; it's difficult-to-impossible to help the ragtag remnants to develop the
rotations and systems that help them play at their most productive. It's tantamount to miraculous—and testimony to some pretty darned good coaching—that they've struggled along with their current record.

Here's one tiny example (there are many) of how it works. What the team misses most about KG's absence is his interior defense, right?
Not necessarily. Okay, his timely 18-footers, right? Not necessarily. Okay, his intensity on the floor, right? Not necessarily.

No, it's entirely possible that what they miss most about KG is the fact that he is their defensive floor general. He must be the most
constantly vocal defensive player in the league, and he understands and anticipates defensive flow much like Cousy was always three or four steps ahead offensively. Sheed can do some of that, but he should be focusing his efforts on shepherding the bench—which, by the way, is in shreds as far as continuity of chemistry-building is concerned.

For better or worse, this is the kind of team that the old advertising slogan (perhaps by General Electric) used to describe: "Better life
through chemistry." It's not a team with dominant individuals who just seek to dominate all the more (shooting 40% of their team's shots) when teammates go missing. It's a team that relies on teamwork more than athleticism...on synergy more than brute force. It's therefore the type of team that takes an inordinate hit when it's constrained from building that chemistry and integrating reinforcements into that
chemistry. On the Celtics, the absence of one player negatively influences other players in a much more pervasive manner than on many
teams.

There will be times when, in depleted condition, they will look old and tired because they are only a portion of what they are meant to be. There have almost certainly been times when they FELT old and tired but persevered and won anyway. That is their character. But, as another tiny example, to expect Sheed to play 35 and 39 minutes at peak performance 48 hours apart is unrealistic. They're doing the best then can with what they can muster.

Here's another little tidbit. For each team in the league, 82games.com displays the 10 player combinations with the most minutes played together. For the Celtics, combinations NOT involving both KG and Daniels comprise only 5% of all 10 Celtics combinations (of which the smallest number of minutes played together is 19). In other words, not one ragtag Celtics combination pressed into action because of all the injuries has played as many as 19 minutes together. That's chemistry? It is to laugh.

Projecting the Celtics' championship chances based on observing a shell of the team they could be by playoff time is not appropriate. Not at all. The present and the future are not synonymous.

GO CELTICS!

Sam

sdceltfan wrote:Let's be honest. The Celts are playing this season with stretches of little energy or compassion for the game. Even before injuries. It is as simple as that. Pacing has been evident since game 1. Ainge said as much. Doc said they "are not a 48 minute team".

Until the core of this team deciides to play hard and smart for 30 - 35 minutes per game, playing below their potential will continue. The problem with this year's Celtics is as much lack of "want to" as much as their age or injuries.

It hurts me to say this, but my eyes are not deceiving me. The Celtics have got to start putting together a full game's worth of effort so they know they can do it. They can say what they want, I just don't see the compassion to compete with younger, hungrier teams.

This team is simply not doing what it takes to win a championship. Ainge knows it. Rivers knows it. The team doesn't appear to know it, however.

Go Celtics!!

sd,

There has never been a "before injuries" for this entire season. Davis and TA were both injured when the season started. Perhaps you meant "before injuries to our starters", but the results are just the same.

IMO, if this team ever gets healthy, with everyone being available, you just might get a full game-in and game-out 48 minute effort. We just ran into a good full-strength athletic team (with the 6th best W-L record) without any kind of backup for Pierce. Plus, as dboss said, Sheed once again shot us out of the game.

I think Doc made a big mistake going into this game trying to win it at all costs. He should have said, "We may lose, but we need to get some minutes for the young guys and get some more pine time for the walking wounded."

I would rather have lost under that scenario than the one that played out.

gyso

Sam,

It is funny, but I was telling Mrs. gyso just this morning that you have been saying for months that the Celtics have not played a single game this season at full strength.

The media (including the local Comcast fellows) have just begun to mention that in the last week or so.

Could it be that they read this forum to get their material?

gyso

Hi,
Yes, that was ugly and it did not feel good. But let's look on the bright side (besides the other contenders lost, too) - I've got an idea how to fix the problem. Simple: cancel the 3rd quarter!
On a serious note: I don't understand Doc. He had exactly the same scenario 2 days ago in Miami and he didn't do any adjustments in Atlanta. WTF?
Also, I noticed some kind of negligence in finishing layups and passing. Hope it's not a trend. And hope they will make statements Sun and Mon in the form of double digit wins.
Thank you very much,
AK

Sorry, I believe the Celtics have a consisitent effort problem. I believe it runs a lot deeper than most of our posters, evidently. I don't agree that you can't project a team's effort or mindset with the season over 1/3 over. Yes, there have been injuries, I have taken that into consideration. Yes, this is not the same team it will be at season's end. I still remain very concerned with what I see on the basketball court.

The Celtics have put a product on the floor that has been capable of more consistent effort and veteran leadership. Injuries and all. I am not alone in this analysis. For gosh sakes our coach and general manager have echoed the same concerns, as well. Time will tell.

Sam, I disagree with you on this one. I would much rather project into the future with what I have seen than assume shortcomings will all be solved when physical ailments improve.. Believe me, I have taken into consideration injuries, progress, etc.

The Celtics problems run deeper than injury status.

That's just the point. Taking injuries into consideration involves recognizing VASTLY more ramifications than I've seen expressed. Maybe the scores of ramifications to which I refer are being considered without being acknowledged. But it seems more likely that they're being discounted unfairly.

Yes, the problems go well beyond simple games lost to injury. One of the main problems has been the inability of the team to capitalize on its potential. At the beginning of the season, I said that, because of the versatility of so many players, this roster represented the equivalent of something like 24 players and gave Doc all sorts of flexibility in matching up with other teams and would better position all players to be successful. Well, he can barely field a competitive team now, which is a LONG LONG way from "all sorts of flexibility" and "positioning all players for optimal success." The genesis of this severe limitation is INJURIES.

Among other things, an entire season's worth of injuries, in addition to keeping a team from reaching anything close to its potential, can inevitably result in a gradual accumulation of debilitation among the "survivors." The onset of fatigue can occur more readily. Mounting the consistent kind of effort (including psychic energy) required to remain competitive against elite opponents (who are difficult matchups under any circumstances) can become extremely difficult.

I feel it's inaccurate to consider any apparent lack of effort (whether real or imagined) to be a cause rather than an effect. This team is not comprised of players with a history of lack of effort. Their hallmark of great defense has been predicated very largely on effort.

In the best of all worlds, everyone would be healthy. The chemistry would mushroom, as players (Sheed in particular) settled into their most productive roles. Games would become easier to play through smoother execution. The depth of the team would mitigate fatigue. Wins would come more easily, as the swagger, inspiration, intensity and effort became more constant.

But this is not the best of all worlds. It's a context of scarcity. Those who simply attribute the problems primarily to lack of effort are downplaying that very real context in favor of assuming it's the best of all worlds and therefore it should automatically be "effort as usual."

Sam

I understand and respect your thoughts, Sam. I do not have a history of unfairly analyzing sports situations either. You have read dozens of my posts, on this board and the previous board. I talked to you at the first Celtic "function. I am not an extremist, nor do I post without a lot of thought and consideration. I have seen a lot of "situations" come and go in the world of sports over the last 50 years. As have you. Situations that make one careful not to over-analyze.

I am just sharing a strong concern that I feel is real.

Time will tell.

Go Celtics!

Well, I am kind of pulled both ways by Sam's post. Yes injuries do have an affect on the team that can limit match up options for Doc and can break rhythm down so as to appear that the players are not putting out the effort.

However, I was privy to be around the New York Islander team and players in the glory days of winning 4 straight Stanley Cups. It was not always a cake walk for them as there were many injuries along the way and incomplete teams fielded. But that did not stop their domination of the league. Their secret was their ability to inject new, raw talent into the lineup from the minors and have them perform at a very high level and therefore minimizing the loss of any key player.

How did they get these minor league guys integrated so as to perform well in their system. Here are the answers:

1) Veteran support and work with the new guys.
2) Veterans out worked themselves so as to open up additional and easier opportunities for the minor league player to perform and achieve.
3) Coach & coaching staff having confidence in the new player and playing the guys in key situations during a game so as to build more confidence in the player. If a mistake or misread in a play cost the Islanders a goal, there would be no benching of the player. Al Arbour would throw the guy out the very next shift and believe you me, he would never make that mistake again and therefore his play and skills would improve.

I am afraid that Doc and staff have failed in #3. He goes to the same old, same old group of guys that quite frankly are getting tired, perhaps a little burnt out and are known by the other teams as to how they play, ie weaknesses and strengths. Why not put a young guy out there that is hungry, young and aggressive and who is a relative unknown to the rest of the league?

I also believe that the Celtic Veterans maybe a little guilty of #2 as well. Have not seen the hustle by the vets when some rookies were inserted.

Well that's my take! Perhaps the Celtic's are not as talented a group of coaches and players as the New York Islanders were back in the early 1980" to over come their adversities and evolve!

112288

I've had an opportunity to gain a few insights into the continuity of quality. What's different now is that, if you're a good team, your opportunities to develop your own players through the draft are more limited; you're reluctant to trade away valuable assets; and so a lot of your retooling is done through free agency.

The Celtics starters consist of two players acquired through trades facilitated by the development of Celtics draftees like Jefferson and Gomes; one drafted by an earlier Celtics regime; and two acquired by the current regime on draft day and developed by Doc. Another Celtics draftee is a bench stalwart developed by Doc. It's difficult for me to see how Doc relies on just the same old players; it seems he has integrated quite a few (including Leon, by the way) into the program, as well as performing amazingly well in adapting to adversity.

There are only two young guys who don't seem to be making any real headway (Walker and Giddens). I have to believe (and so far it has been confirmed by what I have seen in their rare appearances) that they're not showing Doc enough to merit more than "project" status at present.

If Doc were to play those guys just to give them more experience, the short-term likelihood is that they'd dilute the caliber of the team on the floor. That would not necessarily be a productive environment in which to re-introduce the injured players to the team and to jump-start their reintegration heading toward the playoffs.

Unless and until they make a trade or player acquisition (which will probably involve an incoming veteran and possibly an outgoing kid or two), the core of Doc's team is going to be:

KG
Perk (young guy)
Pierce
Ray
Rondo (young guy)
Sheed
Daniels (at or approaching his prime)
Baby (young guy)
Eddie
Tony (relatively young guy)

They're all veterans. When they're injured, Doc's best bet for maintaining continuity is to replace them temporarily with veterans in order to maintain (as much as possible) the veteran atmosphere to which he is committed. If they weren't in serious contention, it would be a different story.

Sam

112288 wrote:Well, I am kind of pulled both ways by Sam's post. Yes injuries do have an affect on the team that can limit match up options for Doc and can break rhythm down so as to appear that the players are not putting out the effort.

However, I was privy to be around the New York Islander team and players in the glory days of winning 4 straight Stanley Cups. It was not always a cake walk for them as there were many injuries along the way and incomplete teams fielded. But that did not stop their domination of the league. Their secret was their ability to inject new, raw talent into the lineup from the minors and have them perform at a very high level and therefore minimizing the loss of any key player.

How did they get these minor league guys integrated so as to perform well in their system. Here are the answers:

1) Veteran support and work with the new guys.
2) Veterans out worked themselves so as to open up additional and easier opportunities for the minor league player to perform and achieve.
3) Coach & coaching staff having confidence in the new player and playing the guys in key situations during a game so as to build more confidence in the player. If a mistake or misread in a play cost the Islanders a goal, there would be no benching of the player. Al Arbour would throw the guy out the very next shift and believe you me, he would never make that mistake again and therefore his play and skills would improve.

I am afraid that Doc and staff have failed in #3. He goes to the same old, same old group of guys that quite frankly are getting tired, perhaps a little burnt out and are known by the other teams as to how they play, ie weaknesses and strengths. Why not put a young guy out there that is hungry, young and aggressive and who is a relative unknown to the rest of the league?

I also believe that the Celtic Veterans maybe a little guilty of #2 as well. Have not seen the hustle by the vets when some rookies were inserted.

Well that's my take! Perhaps the Celtic's are not as talented a group of coaches and players as the New York Islanders were back in the early 1980" to over come their adversities and evolve!

112288

I kind of agree with Sam that besides our injuries we still have the second best record in the league,so how bad could it be?we're still no where near full strength,when we are its gonna be great to watch,however great point on 3,we should be playing Walker more,at least a little by now,I know Scal can play positional defense,but getting so sick of seeing him just pathetically pass or dribble and hand ball off to nearest Celtic on offense,hes 3-28 from field this latest stretch after starting 8-10,cannot hit or buy a shot,not even Walker or Giddens could clank them that bad.....let them go through their trial and error eventually they would have to be giving you more than Scal.

Pete,

If this team wins it all, it will certainly draw that kind of comparison. The current team certainly has a greater distance to travel in terms of gaining cohesiveness. The older team always had that going for them regardless of age, injuries, etc. Although much can change by playoff time, I don't believe the present team (as things stand now) would face such overwhelming competitive odds as the old one.

Sam

Sam with all the parts this team can have with a full healthy squad,I think they're actually deeper than the 69 squad,what do you think?