[East Finals] #1 Boston Celtics vs. #2 Cleveland Cavaliers

[kingsboi]

Not saying they're better off without the guy (as currently constructed, they probably aren't) but the Celtics are far harder to game plan for when there isn't a 5'8" defensive sieve taking up over 30 percent of their offensive possessions.

if the Celtics are truly serious about contending, then they need to ship IT out while his value is at an all-time high. Considering what they had to give up for him and what they can garner in return is quite the move for Ainge.

 

[miltonap]

if the Celtics are truly serious about contending, then they need to ship IT out while his value is at an all-time high. Considering what they had to give up for him and what they can garner in return is quite the move for Ainge.

If they could get IT to come off the bench they could compete.

Sign Hayward, develop Fultz, they'll have a top pick next year

 

[kingsboi]

If they could get IT to come off the bench they could compete.

Sign Hayward, develop Fultz, they'll have a top pick next year

IT will be looking for big money when he is a free agent next offseason. I have no reason to believe he won't book it if he feels Boston wants to use him as a 6th man.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

That's where Boston is a bit fortunate because they may get to decide on IT before Fultz is ready to start.

IT's value was sky high headed into the playoffs but he's been exposed in every series.

 

[miltonap]

Honestly, they gotta trade him if he won't come off the bench.

 

[jpsls]

Not saying they're better off without the guy (as currently constructed, they probably aren't) but the Celtics are far harder to game plan for when there isn't a 5'8" defensive sieve taking up over 30 percent of their offensive possessions.

IT is terrible on defense, but on offense he needs to take up 30% of their offensive possessions because who else on that team is going to create shots?

 

[kingsboi]

That's where Boston is a bit fortunate because they may get to decide on IT before Fultz is ready to start.

IT's value was sky high headed into the playoffs but he's been exposed in every series.

Don't forget, he was exposed last season too when the Celts were first round exit fodder.

 

[Tetsujin]

IT is terrible on defense, but on offense he needs to take up 30% of their offensive possessions because who else on that team is going to create shots?

No, I completely agree there. Without IT, Boston lacks a 1st, 2nd, or even 3rd option on offense and it's a credit to Brad Stevens that they look like a competent team on that end without him out there.

 

[KingsFanGER]

IT is terrible on defense, but on offense he needs to take up 30% of their offensive possessions because who else on that team is going to create shots?

Avery Bradley has improved tremendously as a shot creator and overall offensive player.
Marcus Smart despite his inconsistent shooting is a capable PG and a missmatch at the PG position for many teams due to his size and bulk.
Al Horford is one of the best passing big man in the league. I agree, that he isn't the best at creating offense for himself, but in my mind that's mainly because he is so damn timid.
Gerald Green is not a smart basketball player, but due to his athleticism he can create offense for himself, when he is on (he will shoot you out of games, when he is not though ).

If they could get IT to come off the bench they could compete.
Sign Hayward, develop Fultz, they'll have a top pick next year

if the Celtics are truly serious about contending, then they need to ship IT out while his value is at an all-time high. Considering what they had to give up for him and what they can garner in return is quite the move for Ainge.

The Celtics clearly are a better team with IT. IT is also not a sixth man. He is a bad defender, but so are many starting PG's and the whole Celtics team is built to cover him on that end. Of course missmatches happen and being 5'9 isn't ideal, but there aren't many teams, that have the luxury of an ideal roster.
I mean the Celtics are playing the Cavaliers. A team with 2 superstars and the best player in basketball leading the charge. Before that they beat a strong Washington team in 7 and the experienced but flawed Bulls in 6. Part of that while their best offensive player faced a devastating personal loss.
Really nothing but respect for the run the Celtics made so far.

Ship out IT for whom? A top big man would make sense. Paul George would make sense. Who is gonna play PG for the Celtics in that case?
Smart? I'm a big fan of Smart, because he is a great defensive player, but a starting PG for a contending team? You would need a playmaking big of the caliber of DMC or a SF like George to make that work, so that trades would make sense for the Celtics, but would they make sense for the Pacers or Pelicans?

Fultz? I really don't get the hype every year, before those draftees have played their first NBA game. Every year there are plenty of guys people label as the next "insert current superstar here" with even some added attributes on top of that (Like the next John Wall with a better jumper or something like that). Every year there are of course great players coming out of the draft, but every year they need time to develop and most of those guys fail to reach superstar level. I mean with all due respect for D'Angelo Russel for example, but he is not the next Steph Curry (yet).....
Maybe Fultz will have the same kind of offensive impact IT has currently in a few years (maybe even faster). But as a team already able to reach the conference finals I'm not betting all my money on that and I'm not going to bench or trade my best offensive player for some unproven rookie, just because some analysts believe he is the next NBA superstar in the making. IT is easily a Top-10 PG in this league. Even at 5'9 those are some really big footprints to fill for any rookie. The complimentary players like Bradley, Crowder and Horford are already in their prime. The Celtics only have a limited amount of time to wait for a rookie to develop, when this rookie is given an important role. Billy King gifted them the opportunity to contend, while developing top draft picks in limited minutes. If you aren't able or willing to ship out the picks for another superstar in his prime to really be serious about a championship, why not continue on this path? Develop the rookies in a competetive environment, able to make deep playoff runs and set up your franchise for the time after Lebron and Curry that way, with a small outsider chance in mind (due to some bad injury luck for the Cavs or something like that) to maybe even reach the finals.
From the outside looking in - sounds like a solid strategy.

 

[kingsboi]

Avery Bradley has improved tremendously as a shot creator and overall offensive player.
Marcus Smart despite his inconsistent shooting is a capable PG and a missmatch at the PG position for many teams due to his size and bulk.
Al Horford is one of the best passing big man in the league. I agree, that he isn't the best at creating offense for himself, but in my mind that's mainly because he is so damn timid.
Gerald Green is not a smart basketball player, but due to his athleticism he can create offense for himself, when he is on (he will shoot you out of games, when he is not though ).





The Celtics clearly are a better team with IT. IT is also not a sixth man. He is a bad defender, but so are many starting PG's and the whole Celtics team is built to cover him on that end. Of course missmatches happen and being 5'9 isn't ideal, but there aren't many teams, that have the luxury of an ideal roster.
I mean the Celtics are playing the Cavaliers. A team with 2 superstars and the best player in basketball leading the charge. Before that they beat a strong Washington team in 7 and the experienced but flawed Bulls in 6. Part of that while their best offensive player faced a devastating personal loss.
Really nothing but respect for the run the Celtics made so far.

Ship out IT for whom? A top big man would make sense. Paul George would make sense. Who is gonna play PG for the Celtics in that case?
Smart? I'm a big fan of Smart, because he is a great defensive player, but a starting PG for a contending team? You would need a playmaking big of the caliber of DMC or a SF like George to make that work, so that trades would make sense for the Celtics, but would they make sense for the Pacers or Pelicans?

Fultz? I really don't get the hype every year, before those draftees have played their first NBA game. Every year there are plenty of guys people label as the next "insert current superstar here" with even some added attributes on top of that (Like the next John Wall with a better jumper or something like that). Every year there are of course great players coming out of the draft, but every year they need time to develop and most of those guys fail to reach superstar level. I mean with all due respect for D'Angelo Russel for example, but he is not the next Steph Curry (yet).....
Maybe Fultz will have the same kind of offensive impact IT has currently in a few years (maybe even faster). But as a team already able to reach the conference finals I'm not betting all my money on that and I'm not going to bench or trade my best offensive player for some unproven rookie, just because some analysts believe he is the next NBA superstar in the making. IT is easily a Top-10 PG in this league.Loo Even at 5'9 those are some really big footprints to fill for any rookie. The complimentary players like Bradley, Crowder and Horford are already in their prime. The Celtics only have a limited amount of time to wait for a rookie to develop, when this rookie is given an important role. Billy King gifted them the opportunity to contend, while developing top draft picks in limited minutes. If you aren't able or willing to ship out the picks for another superstar in his prime to really be serious about a championship, why not continue on this path? Develop the rookies in a competetive environment, able to make deep playoff runs and set up your franchise for the time after Lebron and Curry that way, with a small outsider chance in mind (due to some bad injury luck for the Cavs or something like that) to maybe even reach the finals.
From the outside looking in - sounds like a solid strategy.

I get what you are saying I really do. However, if a team is serious about contending then IT as your primary player is not going to net you the end goal..a championship. I see Boston drafting Fultz, seeing how he plays in his rookie season with IT and if it doesn't work out then maybe try to work a trade package together whether it's to win now or whether it's to win in a few seasons. Boston can also bring Fultz off the bench for his rookie season and then try to bring in another all-star caliber player such as PG or Butler or Blake or Hayward...whoever it may be. Even with all that, you take away IT and you take away the head of the snake and smart teams know how to take IT out of the game. Wiz weren't able to because they are dumb as a box of rocks.

 

[KingsFanGER]

I get what you are saying I really do. However, if a team is serious about contending then IT as your primary player is not going to net you the end goal..a championship. I see Boston drafting Fultz, seeing how he plays in his rookie season with IT and if it doesn't work out then maybe try to work a trade package together whether it's to win now or whether it's to win in a few seasons. Boston can also bring Fultz off the bench for his rookie season and then try to bring in another all-star caliber player such as PG or Butler or Blake or Hayward...whoever it may be. Even with all that, you take away IT and you take away the head of the snake and smart teams know how to take IT out of the game. Wiz weren't able to because they are dumb as a box of rocks.

I agree. There are only two championship teams currently in the NBA. Everybody else is basically battling for the second spot in their conferences.
Drafting Fultz, if no superstar trade is available to put this team over the top this offseason, is perfectly reasonable. At the deadline in 2017-18 you make a decision regarding IT. He won't go anywhere when Boston decides to make a reasonable offer, because he knows Boston is pretty much the perfect fit for him. There is no other team in this league, able to give IT the kind of role he has under Stevens.
Having one guy for the opposing team to focus on, will always be a problem, although I personally think that IT is pretty difficult to take out of games on offense under this current ruleset and allowed level of contact. Nonetheless that's why I was pretty shocked, that Ainge decided to sign Horford, who has all the tools, but somehow views himself more like a complimentary player and didn't force another major move so far. I was and still am pretty convinced, that trying to trade for Cousins, especially with our asking price being that low, would have been better for the Celtics overall, even though I don't think the combination of IT+Cousins would have been ideal.
But same was said about Kyrie, Love and Lebron or Durant and Curry and certainly the offensive firepower paired with defensive tough dudes like Crowder, Smart and Bradley would have been pretty damn impressive.
Enough to take out the Cavs? I don't know about that, but Cousins would have given them a nice edge versus Thompson or Love.

 

[kingsboi]

I agree. There are only two championship teams currently in the NBA. Everybody else is basically battling for the second spot in their conferences.
Drafting Fultz, if no superstar trade is available to put this team over the top this offseason, is perfectly reasonable. At the deadline in 2017-18 you make a decision regarding IT. He won't go anywhere when Boston decides to make a reasonable offer, because he knows Boston is pretty much the perfect fit for him. There is no other team in this league, able to give IT the kind of role he has under Stevens.
Having one guy for the opposing team to focus on, will always be a problem, although I personally think that IT is pretty difficult to take out of games on offense under this current ruleset and allowed level of contact. Nonetheless that's why I was pretty shocked, that Ainge decided to sign Horford, who has all the tools, but somehow views himself more like a complimentary player and didn't force another major move so far. I was and still am pretty convinced, that trying to trade for Cousins, especially with our asking price being that low, would have been better for the Celtics overall, even though I don't think the combination of IT+Cousins would have been ideal.
But same was said about Kyrie, Love and Lebron or Durant and Curry and certainly the offensive firepower paired with defensive tough dudes like Crowder, Smart and Bradley would have been pretty damn impressive.
Enough to take out the Cavs? I don't know about that, but Cousins would have given them a nice edge versus Thompson or Love.

Honestly, I see Cousins having more success alongside Davis rather than IT. The Pelicans need to surround the two with shooters and defenders and see how they mesh together for a offseason, training camp & preseason. I also feel they can give the Warriors trouble if they mesh together, or at the very least....attempt to break this small ball trend and introduce the NBA to the twin tower duo, hopefully it conduces to winning.

 

[KingsFanGER]

Honestly, I see Cousins having more success alongside Davis rather than IT. The Pelicans need to surround the two with shooters and defenders and see how they mesh together for a offseason, training camp & preseason. I also feel they can give the Warriors trouble if they mesh together, or at the very least....attempt to break this small ball trend and introduce the NBA to the twin tower duo, hopefully it conduces to winning.

Don't know about that. I'm hoping for a resurgence of physical big man basketball, but I don't really believe it. And aquiring those defenders and shooters is gonna be a huge problem, because above average defenders, that can shoot have great value in todays league. Solo's shot is inconsistent. Moore is pretty decent. Holiday is ok, but looks kinda slow and did make some really questionable decisions during the short DMC tenure. Cunningham is a good corner 3 shooter, but that's pretty much it. Diallo looked promising. Well and that's pretty much all the Pel's have on their roster right now, unless Quincy Pondexter makes a wondrous comeback or DMO finally shows his tremendous talent on the court.

The wing and guard positions are simply too weak. Of course you can always try to sign FA's and guys like DC or Jonathan Simmons would fit in really nicely with the Pels, but the Asik desaster is limiting their wiggle room quite a bit and they will potentially throw a max at Holiday.

Frankly speaking - while AD and Cousins might be the better fit, when you still believe in big man basketball, the Celtics simply are the much better run franchise than the Pels.
DMC got from one bad situation right into another.

 

[Kingz19]

Yikes

IT may be out as soon as this offseason if this keeps up.

This may be one of those true addition via subtraction things and not just talking about a hot take whenever a team does well without their marquee player...the change we're seeing is a result of defense and ball movement..

and boy, does that not reflect well on the teams biggest ball hog and matador defender who isn't playing.

 

[miltonap]

Been saying that IT needs to come off the bench to be most effective for a team

 

[Kingz19]

Been saying that IT needs to come off the bench to be most effective for a team

I agree. He's virtually the same player with the same production off the bench. Obviously not 29 points(which means his usage rate is far higher than it should be) but he's a 18-20 a game guy off the bench anyway. Only he'll do it huge spurts more off the bench like he did here before being a starter. He's more effective as a back breaker type who drops a quick 14 points in a few minutes and devastates inferior second units.

nobody wants to hear it now because we're just counting out the little guy again because his size..but it's true.

it is a big deal and it's why I comfortably predict IT won't truly stick anywhere until he fully embraces a 6th man role...in which case he becomes invaluable.

 

[Tetsujin]

I agree. He's virtually the same player with the same production off the bench. Obviously not 29 points(which means his usage rate is far higher than it should be) but he's a 18-20 a game guy off the bench anyway. Only he'll do it huge spurts more off the bench like he did here before being a starter. He's more effective as a back breaker type who drops a quick 14 points in a few minutes and devastates inferior second units.

nobody wants to hear it now because we're just counting out the little guy again because his size..but it's true.

it is a big deal and it's why I comfortably predict IT won't truly stick anywhere until he fully embraces a 6th man role...in which case he becomes invaluable.

I've thought since the Kings drafted him that IT's idea role was a supercharged Jamal Crawford role.

 

[KingsFanGER]

I agree. He's virtually the same player with the same production off the bench. Obviously not 29 points(which means his usage rate is far higher than it should be) but he's a 18-20 a game guy off the bench anyway. Only he'll do it huge spurts more off the bench like he did here before being a starter. He's more effective as a back breaker type who drops a quick 14 points in a few minutes and devastates inferior second units.

nobody wants to hear it now because we're just counting out the little guy again because his size..but it's true.

it is a big deal and it's why I comfortably predict IT won't truly stick anywhere until he fully embraces a 6th man role...in which case he becomes invaluable.

I've thought since the Kings drafted him that IT's idea role was a supercharged Jamal Crawford role.

Been saying that IT needs to come off the bench to be most effective for a team

Just curious - why is IT a sixth man and guys like Lillard, Irving or Parker are important starters?
Lillard is horrible on the defensive end, but nobody doubts, that he is a starting PG. Irving got called out for his lack of defense multiple times in his career, even though from my point of view he had a few playoff games, where he stepped up really nicely on that end ( after Lebron got to Cleveland to teach him the correct NBA ways). Parker not only is a bad defender, he also is not a good offensive player nowadays. Just saying, that there are quite a few starting PG's, some even are considered superstars, who are pretty bad defenders.

Now of course IT's physical limitations will be under a microscope in the Playoffs. Smart coaches will attack him with bigger guards or try to force switches. But where excactly is the difference to let's say Pau Gasol (or insert any slow big here), who smart coaches force into switches on wings or guards as much as possible, or simply take him out of the game by going small and playing uptempo, because he is so slow? How many teams are out there, that don't have at least one guy, who is at a severe physical disadvantage, when put into certain matchups?
And btw. how about the physical disadvantage of the guy trying to stay in front of IT on the other end of the floor?
In the end it all comes down to the question, if IT is a good enough offensive player to overcome his defensive shortcomings. I personally would say, that's not really a question. But even if you are not high on IT the fact, that he is one of the best 4th quarter scorers of the league, indicates, that he is pretty good against the best guys on the floor and not someone, who feasts on inferior second units.

 

[Tetsujin]

The thing is that it's not just Kings fans saying this now. Parts of the media are starting to hop on the IT has limitations bandwagon. IT is a super good scorer but he also holds the ball a lot and is decidedly never going to be better than a negative on the defensive end. He's still 28 years old but, as we've seen in other small players that've come through the league, small guards suffer a big drop off in production right around their age 30 season (Nate Robinson, as a comparison, had a really really good age 28 season then proceeded to bounce out of the league by age 31 and is now wandering the d-league), and if there is ever an injury that spells doom for short dudes in sports, it's leg injuries (like IT's hip injury, for one). Now, obviously IT is better than most of the other dudes who played in the NBA at his size and he is really strong for (a generously listed) 5'9", but his defense isn't going to get better and his offense is going to decline with age and as other guys on the Celtics start demanding touches (you aren't going to draft Fultz just to have him stand around and watch IT iso-score every other possession).

http://www.foxsports.com/nba/galler...leveland-cavaliers-nba-playoffs-injury-052317

 

[KingsFanGER]

The thing is that it's not just Kings fans saying this now. Parts of the media are starting to hop on the IT has limitations bandwagon. IT is a super good scorer but he also holds the ball a lot and is decidedly never going to be better than a negative on the defensive end. He's still 28 years old but, as we've seen in other small players that've come through the league, small guards suffer a big drop off in production right around their age 30 season (Nate Robinson, as a comparison, had a really really good age 28 season then proceeded to bounce out of the league by age 31 and is now wandering the d-league), and if there is ever an injury that spells doom for short dudes in sports, it's leg injuries (like IT's hip injury, for one). Now, obviously IT is better than most of the other dudes who played in the NBA at his size and he is really strong for (a generously listed) 5'9", but his defense isn't going to get better and his offense is going to decline with age and as other guys on the Celtics start demanding touches (you aren't going to draft Fultz just to have him stand around and watch IT iso-score every other possession).

http://www.foxsports.com/nba/galler...leveland-cavaliers-nba-playoffs-injury-052317

I agree with your take on his defense and the concerns about how his game will age. We have to take into account, that IT is not Allen Iverson though. AI played in the era of isolation basketball and needed unreal quickness to dominate his matchup. IT often isn't beating his man 1vs1. I even don't think he is a particularly good 1vs1 player. But what he absolutely excels in is using screens to his advantage and breaking open the defense out of the high screen&roll. Nate Robinson never was on IT's level in that regard, but also more of a shothappy undersized isolation player. When age will eventually start to slow him down, it will affect him quite a bit, but not in the way AI was affected. But overall I agree - he relies on his athleticism quite a bit and obviously more than a player with superior size.

Regarding the time he holds the ball, I personally think his number is pretty much on par with most above average PG's in the Playoffs (#13) and it was actually lower in the regular season (#36). Comparing his number with Curry and Lebron is meant to be a joke right? I mean Lebron is playing alongside Irving, who handles the ball quite a lot. Curry took a step back to make room for Durant and plays alongside Iggy, Thompson and Green. Of course this is totally comparable to IT's situation...

To me it's just weird. The Celtics won 53 games this year and got the #1 seed in the east. That's the best regular season record for them since 2010-11, when Garnett, Allen, Pierce and Rondo were still on the roster. That is btw. a better record than the last two seasons, even with IT holding the ball for a bit longer......
IT was one of the main reasons for this. He had an exceptional season. He had an extraordinary playoff run, when you take his personal situation into account. But the Celtics won one game against the Cavs without Thomas and led by 16 in a second, before giving the game out of the hand, due to the heroics of a PG, who is also not known for his defense.

But somehow this means they are a better team without IT or with IT as a bench player and it means PG's with questionable defense are a weak spot for their respective teams?

Like I said - concerns about how his game will age? Ok I get that. Complaints about his D? I understand that, even though he tries way harder than in his early days in SAC or PHX adn to me looks like a huge positive for his team despite his bad D.
But everything beyond those points, feels a little bit like hyperbole to me.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I don't understand how 6th man ever became an insult. He's really good. But he has limitations which means they could get more out of him by working the matchups.

 

[Mr. S£im Citrus]

I don't understand how 6th man ever became an insult. He's really good. But he has limitations which means they could get more out of him by working the matchups.

Kevin McHale pretty much rode the sixth man role to the Hall of Fame. Manu Ginobili is about to do the same thing.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

Kevin McHale pretty much rode the sixth man role to the Hall of Fame. Manu Ginobili is about to do the same thing.

Right? For those who think he is a HOF caliber player, wouldn't playing a role that highlights his strengths and masks his weaknesses help him get there? It could also prolong his career. It's not an indictment on his ability any more than suggesting he'd be a lousy center is.

 

[Tetsujin]

Kevin McHale pretty much rode the sixth man role to the Hall of Fame. Manu Ginobili is about to do the same thing.

Andre Iguodala is pretty much doing the supersub thing for the Warriors.

Yes, IT led the league in crunch time scoring but as far as I can remember, there's no rule stating that you have to play your starting lineup to close out a game.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

there's no rule stating that you have to play your starting lineup to close out a game.

There's not even a rule stating you can't start him 40 games a year if those matchup favor small guards.

 

[jpsls]

If it suits the team, I don't see IT having a problem coming off the bench.

 

[VF21]

If it suits the team, I don't see IT having a problem coming off the bench.

I do. I don't think it's in his DNA to accept anything less than a starting role. And I don't mean that to belittle him. I mean that he's fought the odds his entire career and I truly believe in his mind he views anything except being part of the starting five as less than the best. IF he can find a team/coach who can convince him otherwise, he could easily end up in the HoF - which is what a lot of us were trying to say back in the day.

 

[jpsls]

I do. I don't think it's in his DNA to accept anything less than a starting role. And I don't mean that to belittle him. I mean that he's fought the odds his entire career and I truly believe in his mind he views anything except being part of the starting five as less than the best. IF he can find a team/coach who can convince him otherwise, he could easily end up in the HoF - which is what a lot of us were trying to say back in the day.

He never complained about being a 6th man when he was with the Kings. When he left FA, he signed with the Suns to be their 6th man also.

 

[pdxKingsFan]

I don't really remember it that way but it is water under the bridge. Celts are my second favorite team and I hope that he can be a part of it in a productive fashion and that's that.

 

[VF21]

He never complained about being a 6th man when he was with the Kings. When he left FA, he signed with the Suns to be their 6th man also.

I'm not gonna take the time to dig up the rebuttal, but he did in fact comment about being in the starting lineup. As pdx has said, however it's water under the bridge. I stand by my feeling that he will not be happy in a 6th man role. I get the feeling you totally missed the point I was trying to make.