Kelly Olynyk's cool-down hurt Celtics

Among other things, this article should serve as a reminder of what a true floor general can mean to a team.  Not just an assist-maker who's an opportunist when openings occur.  A tactician who has a viewpoint that stretches farther than the next play.  A guy who senses when certain teammates need the ball more—sometimes because they're not getting it enough and sometimes because they're "hot."

Kelly's not highly skilled in creating his own shot, and he needed more opportunities created for him yesterday.  I've said the same thing about Jae Crowder when he plays with the starters because the natural flow of the starters just doesn't include him.  A capable floor general can realize the need and accomplish the deed.

Frankly, I don't believe Evan Turner or Isaiah Thomas has the kind of floor general knack I'm talking about.  What Isaiah has going for him is that he creates so much havoc that openings occur—sometimes openings for him and sometimes openings for his teammates.  The starters run a more structured offense, and that structure doesn't include Crowder when he's among them.  But neither system is as highly capable in a tactical sense as this team needs.  Especially given its lack of experience and the learning curve it faces as it develop instincts for the game.

So, next time I'm tempted to wonder aloud whether this team can get along very nicely without a true floor general, I'm going to think about the lesson I learned from the first game of this series.

Sam

Isaiah Thomas is a good player, I find it comical that one of the most knowledgeable posters on this board compared his impact interacting with his teammates, getting them going reminiscent of Larry Bird. Perhaps since hes good with stats he can back that up with stats?....anything is possible. I don't see it, but what do I know? didn't know he was that good.

Ah, belaboring as usual.  No stats are required.  Isaiah Thomas is a catalyst for his teammates.  Larry Bird was a catalyst for his teammates.  By "reminiscent," I meant the first definition in the dictionary I consulted: "Tending to remind someone of something."  Note the absence of the word, or any synonym for the word, "compare."  That word is solely your invention; and one thing I truly resent is when people try to put words in my mouth and then attack the words.

At no time did I compare Isaiah's abilities with Larry's—whether as catalysts or anything else.  Any inference to that effect was incorrectly drawn by you in a failed attempt to make a big deal out of something that never existed except in your mind.

To one degree or another, they share(d) a very positive trait.  End of story.

Sam

Good to know we can use our eyes to form our opinions without stats.

As Red would say, 'Stats are for losers'

And so now we travel to the land of the nonsequitor.  When all goes awry, change the subject.

Yes, I've always trusted my eyes more than stats—a habit born in an era when there weren't that many basketball stats to rely on; hence a major reason underlying the observation on Red's part.  Actually, I bet Red would have found ways to use stats better than anyone else if he'd had access to more than a few elementary ones; but one thing he probably wouldn't have done was to call the Celtics' present coach (and avid user of stats) a loser.  I'd say I'm the toughest critic of basketball stats on this board—misused stats, of course.  But it's nice to have a variety of perspectives from which to post rather than relying primarily on tunnel vision.

Sam

Awry? I'm agreeing with you Sam, certain things on the floor we can notice vividly without stats.

On my Red comment that was in reference to an interview Steve did with Red in 87 I believe. Steve was using percentage of rebounds that Moses Malone grabbed for his team, his % of his teams rebounds was greater than Russells %.....after Steve made his point, Red chimed in, Stats are for.....I thought you heard that tape Sam.

sam wrote:Among other things, this article should serve as a reminder of what a true floor general can mean to a team.  Not just an assist-maker who's an opportunist when openings occur.  A tactician who has a viewpoint that stretches farther than the next play.  A guy who senses when certain teammates need the ball more—sometimes because they're not getting it enough and sometimes because they're "hot."

Kelly's not highly skilled in creating his own shot, and he needed more opportunities created for him yesterday.  I've said the same thing about Jae Crowder when he plays with the starters because the natural flow of the starters just doesn't include him.  A capable floor general can realize the need and accomplish the deed.

Frankly, I don't believe Evan Turner or Isaiah Thomas has the kind of floor general knack I'm talking about.  What Isaiah has going for him is that he creates so much havoc that openings occur—sometimes openings for him and sometimes openings for his teammates.  The starters run a more structured offense, and that structure doesn't include Crowder when he's among them.  But neither system is as highly capable in a tactical sense as this team needs.  Especially given its lack of experience and the learning curve it faces as it develop instincts for the game.

So, next time I'm tempted to wonder aloud whether this team can get along very nicely without a true floor general, I'm going to think about the lesson I learned from the first game of this series.

Sam

this has nothing to do with Larry Bird, but I saw that you don't think IT has the floor general knack your looking for, but you say he creates havoc, so going forward is this franchise still looking for a legit PG? At 5'9" I don't think you can play him anywhere else.

As currently constituted, the starters need a lot of structure to be able to get the very most out of their potential.  They're not shot creators, so they need a floor general who can put each of them in a position to succeed.  I don't believe Evan Turner is that person, although I think he's doing the best he can; and I'm getting to like him more and more at the "3" position.  Nor do I feel that the strengths of Isaiah Thomas lend themselves to fostering an atmosphere of strategic structure among the starters.

However, the bench seems to feed much more off energy, opportunism, and even a bit of chaos.  While he's not a classic floor general, Isaiah could be the ideal type of catalyst to create opportunities for his bench mates.  I don't care too much about his height deficiency because (1) on offense he compensates with his energy and unpredictability; (2) on defense, the Celtics seem to be learning to do a decent job of switching and trapping to limit Isaiah's vulnerability; and (3) I'll have more to say about how the shooting guard position could protect Isaiah on the defensive end.

So, as things stand now, I feel a more classic floor general type is needed for the starters but Isaiah could be a sufficient catalyst at that position for the bench.

While Marcus Smart provides many important talents, including the ability to make good passes when openings occur, I don't believe he qualifies as strategically equipped to meet the needs of either unit as a full-time floor general.  And I'd rather have Isaiah than Marcus covering speedy, shifty "1's" of other teams.  

I believe Marcus can improve his shooting and penetration skills sufficiently to play SG, and I could see him doing that on either unit.  Personally, I think that Avery Bradley could be the best human trade asset they have, and I could live with Marcus replacing Avery as the starting SG; or, if the Celtics could draft a pure-shooting SG with a little height, I could see the new guy starting and Marcus joining the bench, thereby offering more height and toughness to cover for Isaiah.

Of course, we do not know what the starting unit and bench unit will look like by next October.  Needs could change.  That's something Danny will have to incorporate into his thinking during his spring, summer and fall transactions.

Sam