Have you heard Bill Simmons' Ewing theory? That teams actually can be better when their best player leaves? Especially because it gives talented players a chance to step up as they don't depend on that player anymore.
I think the Celtics are a sneaky Ewing theory candidate, but not because of Kyrie Irving. Our best and most important player last year was Al Horford.
Irving caused the drama, and just on that front, the team should be more comfortable and enjoyable.
But so much of our offense revolved around Al Horford. He's a fantastic player -- one of the top guys in the league as far as a fun teammate to play with. But let's be honest, he's a high level role player. To build so much of our system around his skillset on offense and defense, but to have so little production -- that says a lot about Horford. Both that he is a really good and smart player, but that he is also not an all-star.
Without him touching the ball several times a possession, and taking minutes (without producing rebounds) on the defensive side of the court, I wonder if it opens an opportunity for guys to take more of a role in decision-making -- guys who can score more effectively, more like superstars (ahem, Jayson Tatum, Jaylen Brown, ahem).
Just a thought. Sometimes teams are better without good players. That can be for a variety of reasons. Sometimes it's because they are locker room cancer. Sometimes it's because they are depended on too much and deliver too little.
Ewing theory for the Boston Celtics and Al Horford has now been hypothesized. Let's see how the experiment comes back.