Celtics Learning How Far They Still Need To Go

Celtics learning how far they still need to go
April 24, 2015, 10:30 am







BOSTON – On to the next one.

It’s more than just a catchy hit by rap mogul/entrepenaur/Beyonce’s husband, a.k.a. Jay-Z.

It symbolizes the approach Brad Stevens has taken to this season, one that is on the brink of ending following a 103-95 Game 3 loss to the Cleveland Cavaliers on Thursday night in their first-round series.

Game 4 will be Sunday as the Celtics, down 3-0 in the series, try to stave off elimination.

As disappointed as Boston may be in being down 3-0, a closer examination of this roster tells us that this group should have never been in the postseason if you’re talking sheer talent and experience – two areas they are lacking relative to other teams in the playoffs.

And as the Cavaliers and several other playoff Goliaths are proving, you have to have at least one of those two traits if you are to have a legit shot of being anything more than just a postseason speed bump for teams with visions of speeding ahead towards an NBA title – a team like Cleveland.

The Celtics have shown improvement in each game of this series, one of the many positives they can take away from this playoff spurt – I can’t call it a run if it’s over in four games, which looks like that will be the case.

And while we can sit here and argue the value of getting swept in the playoffs versus not making the playoffs and getting a lottery pick, here’s what you have to remember.

When you look at the teams that are bulldozing their way through the playoffs this year, the one trait they all have in common is heartache.

Golden State won 51 games last season and saw its season end in the first round following a grueling seven-game series loss to the Los Angeles Clippers. Memphis emerged as a legit Western Conference power and saw its season go up in flames in the first round courtesy of the Oklahoma City Thunder after having advanced to the Western Conference finals the previous year.

And this season, defending NBA champion San Antonio Spurs lost their regular season finale which dropped them from the No. 2 seed to No. 6.

So what did they do?

They go out and steal Game 2 against the Los Angeles Clippers and now have home-court advantage by relying on many qualities to get the Game 2 win in Los Angeles – experience certainly being one of them.

The Celtics players are in the heat of battle right now, so they can’t possibly comprehend the importance of this playoff run for both their individual growth and the franchise.

The big concern for Celtics fans – and it’s a legit thing to worry about – is whether they can parlay this success into adding a high-impact player which this team desperately needs going forward.

Short of that, the Celtics need to adopt the Atlanta Hawks philosophy.

The Hawks don’t have a single player that one would consider a bona fide superstar. But what they do have is a bunch of guys who if you were to rank them at their respective positions, most likely would rank among the league’s top 10.

Paul Millsap. Al Horford. Jeff Teague.

All three rank among the top 10 players at their respective positions.

And for the others, they need to provide a skillset that sets them apart and meshes with the core guys.

The Celtics have all those pieces in place right now.

But what they lack more than anything else, is experience which is exactly what they are getting right now.

To get it against Cleveland gives them a much clearer reading on how far they must continue to grow if they are to join the game’s elite.

And while Boston will have boatloads of cash and draft picks at their disposal this summer to attract free agents, their best shot at bolstering this roster sooner rather than later is by trade.

This playoff run can only help because it provides a better idea of what these Boston players can do in intense, high-pressure situations to not only Celtics management, but to potential trade partners, too.

Of the guys who will be free agents this summer, Jae Crowder and Jonas Jerebko have probably done the most to up their value in the eyes of other NBA teams, as well as the Celtics.

Boston will try and keep both, but understand that some teams might be willing to pay them above-market value – something Boston isn’t likely to do.

But let’s not get too ahead of ourselves.

The Celtics still have at least one game to play, another opportunity for this group to grow together, find themselves and give the TD Garden fans one last feel-good moment this season.

After that?

On to the next one.



bob
MY NOTE:  One of the more appealing products of A. Sherrod Blank-stare.  Talent is important, but so is experience.  What he said about GSW is absolutely correct.  They had Curry and Thompson last year too.  They had Bogut last year too.  Same with Draymond Green and Harrison Barnes.  They have just taken a step up this year.  They have matured, have learned what the difference is between regular season basketball and playoff basketball and are absolute killers now.  You either have to buy that experience, like Andre Iguadola (who, btw, prefers to be called "Dre", short for Andre, and hates "Iggy".  Who knew?), or you build it up, year by year.  I like Steve Kerr, I think he's doing a good job, maybe better than Mark Jackson, but his roster only has marginal improvements over Jackson.  The core is the same, they're just better and they are better because of the beatdown they took last year in the playoffs.

I touched on his point about how the playoffs also show who is ready for prime time and who isn't. If Trader Danny wants to make a deal, and he always does, and selling high is where he wants to be then putting his players in the crucible will either up their trade value or lower it. If we put on a scrappy effort, even if we lose, that will draw trading partners to Danny. It's hard to trade for talent if you don't have a willing trading partner, we've seen that in the past. You have to convince other GMs we have some talent to offer as well.



.

A kind of rare good one by A.

Whatever happens in game 4, I will always remember these playoffs as a crucible that put a very hard-working group of guys through some very important tests at this stage of their careers.  If I had to guess, I'd bet that, on average, the bench players could wind up being better at being bench players than the starters will be at being starters.  But, regardless of their roles, I'd be surprised if there's one player who got any minutes who didn't learn one or more very important lessons in the process.  Some may have sharpened important skills; some may have learned what it takes to aspire to the next level; some may have received tips on self-evaluations and expectations.  Whatever the nature of the lessons, they had to be learned at some point; and I'm glad that point has now come to pass.  Whether the learning benefits the Celtics or other teams as the players pursue their careers in the future, it has been a distinct pleasure to watch them grow and, more important, to watch them grow together.

Go Celtics!

Sam

I have been saying since the trade deadline that I thought danny changed course from the star acquisitions to the atlanta model.

I believe he will continue that this off season, bringing in additional pieces over a super star.

Bob on another note you may want to check out the most recent mock over at cbs sports, you lol happy with who parish has falling to our pick!

bob

FYI Bogut was injured last year and did not suit up for any playoff games.

Experience helps, but if you don't have talent experience isn't gonna get you far. The 02 Celtics had no playoff experience and went to ECF, if Pierce hits some key free throws they could have went to Finals. This playoff series so far has confirmed how bad we need a load in the paint that rebounds and defends, but we all already knew that. In the backcourt some have ripped AB's shooting, but IT has been a turnover machine and has little impact that made a certain poster compare his impact to a certain legend.

cow

kdp59 wrote:I have been saying since the trade deadline that I thought danny changed course from the star acquisitions to the atlanta model.

I believe he will continue that this off season, bringing in additional pieces over a super star.

Bob on another note you may want to check out the most recent mock over at cbs sports, you lol happy with who parish has falling to our pick!

kdp,

Woohoo!!


Sam Vecenie has Porzingis going at #12 to Utah. We can move from 16-11, if need be (16-7 would be hard).

Personally, I'm thinking he's going top 10.


bob



.

cowens/oldschool wrote:bob

FYI Bogut was injured last year and did not suit up for any playoff games.

Experience helps, but if you don't have talent experience isn't gonna get you far. The 02 Celtics had no playoff experience and went to ECF, if Pierce hits some key free throws they could have went to Finals. This playoff series so far has confirmed how bad we need a load in the paint that rebounds and defends, but we all already knew that. In the backcourt some have ripped AB's shooting, but IT has been a turnover machine and has little impact that made a certain poster compare his impact to a certain legend.

cow

cow,

We're not getting beaten by center beef, we're getting beaten by the top talent in the league (LeBron and Irving) and Tristan Thompson.  Sully and/or Bass should be able to handle Thompson.  Mozgov, despite being bigger than anybody we have, has not dominated us in general nor Zeller in particular.  Where we have a problem, in my opinion, is length.  We don't have someone who can block/intimidate shots.  Sully is bodying up Mozgov.  Zeller is trying.  Bass has done a decent job on him too, it's Thompson that's killing us on the offensive boards.

We need a California Condor.  We need someone with a wingspan thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiis biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig.

As far as the 2001-2002 and 2002-2003 teams goes, they fell to Jason Kidd's Nets both times, who had made the finals both years before too. Experience. Sure, you need talent, but Miami had talent in 2011 too.


bob



.

bob

I guess you missed the game Mosgov had 5 blocked shots, centers can make key plays altering shots or stopping penetration that don't show up on the boxscore. They're whole frontline Love, Mosgov, Thompson and ofcourse James has been beating us inside repeatedly. Thankfully Stevens only gave KO a few minutes last game or their dominance could have been worse. Sully is a better shot maker than Thompson, but as bangers, Thompson might have the edge right now as we have nobody that can stop him from getting key rebounds and I don't think Sully is all the way back.

cow

cowens/oldschool wrote:bob

I guess you missed the game Mosgov had 5 blocked shots, centers can make key plays altering shots or stopping penetration that don't show up on the boxscore. They're whole frontline Love, Mosgov, Thompson and ofcourse James has been beating us inside repeatedly. Thankfully Stevens only gave KO a few minutes last game or their dominance could have been worse. Sully is a better shot maker than Thompson, but as bangers, Thompson might have the edge right now as we have nobody that can stop him from getting key rebounds and I don't think Sully is all the way back.

cow

cow,

I still say we need length more than weight.  We might just have to agree to disagree here.  5 blocked shots doesn't require 270#.  Neither Russell who played against Wilt and Thurmond, nor Walton who played against Gilmore and Kareem, nor Parish who played against Hakeem and Moses were bulky players, but they were very effective shot blockers/deflectors.  Effective shot blocking/intimidation requires length (especially deceptive length from extraordinary wingspans), quick hops and timing (and the BBIQ to be in the right place at the right time).

I just looked at some shot charts for games 1-3.  

Kevin Love is 6-14,  43%, in the paint against us (Game 1, 3-7; Game 2, 2-3; Game 3, 1-4) and 9-21,  43%, from outside the paint (Game 1, 2-77; Game 2, 0-3; Game 3, 7-11).  43% from outside the paint, especially from 3, is pretty good.  43% from inside the dotted circle isn't.

Timofey Mozgov is 6-13, 46%, in the paint against us (Game 1, 1-4; Game 2, 3-5; Game 3, 2-4) and 1-3 from outside the paint.  46% from 6' and in, by a guy who is bigger, heavier and stronger than anybody else on either team, is quite underwhelming.  He had 3 blocks in Game 1, 5 blocks in Game 2 but only 1 block (and only 19 minutes) in Game 3.  Pretty impressive, but his 19 minutes in Game 3 makes me think that we had Blatt responding to us, going small, rather than trying to dominate us in the post.  LeBron or Irving or Love would shoot and Tristan Thompson, NOT Mozgov would suck up the offensive board.  I didn't look to compare Mozgov vs Thompson's offensive reboard counts, but I know Thompson is FAR ahead of everybody on that stat.

LeBron has been killing us inside, with his penetrations, but he does that to everybody.  That's why he's the best player on the planet, but anybody penetrating will create opportunities in the paint, not just LeBron.  If Bradley, who is not a good finisher at the rim, penetrated more and took a shot that hits the rim, Sully or Bass or Zeller or even Kelly, could go get it off the carom.  That doesn't require beef, it requires defenders being forced to leave their man to pick up someone else's, allowing his man to rove free and get position underneath and we're not making them do that.  They are doing it to us.

We only have two consistent penetrators, Turner and Thomas and our PFs aren't attacking the boards because we're afraid of their transition offense with Irving and James.

Thompson has been tearing us a new one but there's no reason why Bass and Sully shouldn't be able to put a body on him.  They have the weight and strength needed.


bob



.

Many of the Celtics' problems in penetrating have involved poor decision-making.  Several players (probably headed by Avery and Pressey) have a penchant for driving into sure-fire block situations, and Sully did a some of that when he returned (although I have no idea how healed he really was).

Sam

bobheckler wrote:

kdp59 wrote:I have been saying since the trade deadline that I thought danny changed course from the star acquisitions to the atlanta model.

I believe he will continue that this off season, bringing in additional pieces over a super star.

Bob on another note you may want to check out the most recent mock over at cbs sports, you lol happy with who parish has falling to our pick!

kdp,

Woohoo!!


Sam Vecenie has Porzingis going at #12 to Utah.  We can move from 16-11, if need be (16-7 would be hard).

Personally, I'm thinking he's going top 10.


bob

.

I thought you'd like that,

I was just reading all the shuttlebut about Love today......so maybe that Atlanta model is out the window.
A lot of smoke out there about Love it seems

Bob, you certainly know a heck of a lot more about Porzingis than I do.  But 7' 1" an 220 pounds with very good offensive skills sounds a lot like a skinnier Kelly Olynyk to me.  I guess Porzingis has shown more defensive potential (in terms of steals and blocks) than Kelly, but his defensive prowess seems built more on agility than on strength, as he may be susceptible to being pushed around.  In short, the term "intimidator" doesn't immediately spring to mind when I read about Porzingis, and I assume you may be thinking of him more as a PF (which is what the "experts" say) than a center.

I've read reports that he's not the quickest thinker and often seems half a step slow, which is not really in the "read and react" mold.

It seems he lacks a back-to-the-basket game but has a strong perimeter game, which suggests to me that he'll be another big floor-spacer who's better working the perimeter or the high post than adding strength down low.  And yet, he doesn't seem to have the passing ability that helps some big men (including Kelly) offset other deficiencies.  (Last season overseas, he averaged one assist every 26 minutes.)

I'm not trying to contradict your enthusiasm for him, but I'm wondering what value added you feel he (and his future potential) he represents for the Celtics and what role you would see him playing down the road for the Green.

Sam

sam wrote:Bob, you certainly know a heck of a lot more about Porzingis than I do.  But 7' 1" an 220 pounds with very good offensive skills sounds a lot like a skinnier Kelly Olynyk to me.  I guess Porzingis has shown more defensive potential (in terms of steals and blocks) than Kelly, but his defensive prowess seems built more on agility than on strength, as he may be susceptible to being pushed around.  In short, the term "intimidator" doesn't immediately spring to mind when I read about Porzingis, and I assume you may be thinking of him more as a PF (which is what the "experts" say) than a center.

I've read reports that he's not the quickest thinker and often seems half a step slow, which is not really in the "read and react" mold.

It seems he lacks a back-to-the-basket game but has a strong perimeter game, which suggests to me that he'll be another big floor-spacer who's better working the perimeter or the high post than adding strength down low.  And yet, he doesn't seem to have the passing ability that helps some big men (including Kelly) offset other deficiencies.  (Last season overseas, he averaged one assist every 26 minutes.)

I'm not trying to contradict your enthusiasm for him, but I'm wondering what value added you feel he (and his future potential) he represents for the Celtics and what role you would see him playing down the road for the Green.

Sam

sam,

I'm in love with his length and mobility.  I am concerned about his weight, but I was concerned about Gobert's weight too and see how wrong I was about that.  He is looooong.  He's more of a 4 than a 5, because of his weight and strength issues, but unlike Kelly he will be able to fly in from the weak side or step in front of a penetrator and block/intimidate shots.  Will he get punished in the low blocks?  Absolutely, if he's playing 5, but he has the length to make up for that at 4.  The big difference between Kelly and Kristaps is his length and think of how good Kelly could be, even a little underweight, if he didn't have alligator arms.

I love physical players, like Cowens does, but between Bass, Zeller and Sully we have some beef but it's not translating into good interior defense.  We need length, IMO, and I'm willing to give up beef to get it (since we won't be giving up ALL of those 3 players to get it).  Cowens has talked a lot about Gobert and, to be honest, I wanted Gobert on the Celtics too (weight issues and all) and that's because with Brad's uptempo game a big hulking brute like Pekovic or Howard wouldn't fit in.  So, if I can't have a 280# 7'0" gazelle with a wingspan like a California Condor, I'll surrender the weight to get the rest.  I'd rather have a 250# or 260# 7'0" gazelle with a condor's wingspan than a 220# one too, but there aren't many of those available either.

Frank Kaminsky of Wisconsin is 7'0", 242 pounds, but he is a PF.  So, would he be better than Porzingis, since they're both effectively offensively-oriented, defensively-challenged 4s but Kaminski has 22# on Porzingis?  Maybe.  Draftexpress has him projected to go #10 and Porzingis at #8, so Kaminsky might be more within our reach.

Miles Turner, a 6'11", 242# freshman out of Texas is listed at #11, after Kaminsky.  He has a 7'4" wingspan, so he could fit my requirements.

Here are his defensive stats:



Offensively, though, there is no comparison between Turner and either Porzingis or Kaminsky.  Turner's jump shot is said to be "inconsistent".  I saw no mention of his inside game.

In short, I like Porzingis for his length and mobility (his experience playing pro ball against bigger, older veterans in Europe doesn't hurt either).  Defensively, Turner might be the better fit for us because of our need for a baseline defender.  As we get closer to draft time I'll watch their scouting videos and think on them more.  



bob



.

bob sam

This is exactly why I wanted to skip the playoffs this year, to have a shot at a better player be it Turner, Cauley-Stein or Porzingis....I agree with Sam on Porzingis I don't know if he can defend at the next level, he reminds me of that Chinese player everyone was high on in 08 draft that was thicker than Porzingis and had a stroke and was supposed to be athletic and did nothing in league. I don't see the mobility or defensive intensity that I saw in clips of Gobert....but who knows maybe Dakari Johnson or Robert Upshaw, who will be there at 16 might be the load/defensive presence that we need next to an in shape ready to rumble Sully.

cow

seems to me that although we lack a rim protector, our defense was not that bad - our offense kind of sucked though. Don't get me wrong, I am a huge fan of a real center, but we can't ignore that our offense sucks. At the nba level, defense can be taught since many guys never learned/bothered to play it, but offensive potentials are closer to being reached. Imagine what Brad could do with high character guys who have q little more offensive talent.

One telling point was made by some commentator today (I forget who) when he said the Celtics don't have one player who would start at any position on any of the Western Conference playoff teams.

I'm in favor of the Celtics number 1 priority being to land at least 2 all league type scorers over the next 2 years. If they happen to double as very good rebounders that's a real plus. Utilize all current assets to land these all league players and worry about the other pieces to the puzzle later.

swish

Cow, yeah, if the Celtics had a higher draft pick, they might have been lucky enough to get another perennial all-star and MVP, Joe Barry Carroll, instead of trading for the equivalent of that bum, Kevin McHale.

Sam