MacMullan and Windhorst Podcast: Discussing Celtics

[CelticSooner]

Listening to Ainge’s weekly interview things definitely aren’t great chemistry wise. Players like each other but just don’t particularly fit on the court. I’d chalk that up to guys just being at a different point of their careers. Ainge said he was hopeful they can toughen up and come together for a playoff run. This is so similar to the last few years of the Cavs it’s not even funny. We’ll all just have to wait and see.

[ozgod]

Ainge is indicating the team lacks resolve, Brad is acknowledging season long chemistry problems.  I heard an interview on a local radio show today indicating that Kyrie and Tatum are laughing on the bench when we're down 20 to Toronto.

It's going to be extremely difficult for this team to flip a switch.

The whole concept of flipping the switch makes no sense with this team anyway ... they are a YOUNG team that has not really won anything of significance.


I'm sure Kyrie's attitude about this comes from playing with LeBron, who has certainly adopted a "flip the switch" attitude the last few years. 

What's most troubling about that is apparently Kyrie thinks he's earned the right to flip the switch like that, even though he's never really won anything on his own.  You would hope he'd be driven to prove what he can do as the lead guy.  Doesn't seem like he feels he has anything to prove.

I agree but what else can he say? I think he's adopted it because there's no other way forward...the team has underachieved, he mentioned a month or two ago when he called out the young guys that he wasn't happy just settling for the fifth seed, but look where they are 2 months later. The only way he can try and instill confidence in his team is to tell them don't worry about all our screw ups during the regular season just make sure we're ready for the playoffs. He's been talking about playing well every single day, which he personally has done for the most part. But what else can you say? Oh we're in deep **** now, we had all season to try to get in position and now it's too late. He can't really say that, then everyone crucifies him for being negative. Or he can go into I-told-you-so mode which everyone hates. I'm sure in private they're all very aware of what they have to do, it's not like it's only message board folks that can see there are issues.

Everyone here is slitting wrists and understandably so, results haven't been to expectation. I'm still positive. It became apparent to me at the start of Feb that they were going to have to do it the hard way. I reset my expectations accordingly. The season isn't over yet, I'm not prepared to call it a failure until it is over, then I will call it what it is. It's definitely not as bad as the early 90s, the Pitino years, or the pre-Big Three years. This is nothing compared to that 

[SparzWizard]

An ESPN analyst nailed it during the off-season when he said the Celtics are going to have a chemistry problem when Hayward and Irving returns after they overachieved with Tatum, Brown, and Rozier. But it'll be a good problem to have.

Little did we know it was a bad problem to have, and something they're facing 4 months in to the season.

[PhoSita]

It's definitely not as bad as the early 90s, the Pitino years, or the pre-Big Three years. This is nothing compared to that 

I get that in many respects it isn't as bad as those years.

With that said, when was the last time the Celts were expected to win on the order of 55-60 games (e.g. Vegas predicted it), and they fell 10+ games short of that?

There have been years with dysfunction and years when the talent on the roster was crappy.  When else has the team massively underachieved?

This is a genuine question and I don't know the answer.


Looks like in 2012-2013, Vegas the Celts winning 50-51 games and they ended up winning 41.

In 2009-2010, the Celts' over under was 56.5, and they won only 50.

In 06-07, the over under was 35, and they ended up winning 24.  I guess that was mostly due to tanking though.

[ozgod]

It's definitely not as bad as the early 90s, the Pitino years, or the pre-Big Three years. This is nothing compared to that 

I get that in many respects it isn't as bad as those years.

With that said, when was the last time the Celts were expected to win on the order of 55-60 games (e.g. Vegas predicted it), and they fell 10+ games short of that?

There have been years with dysfunction and years when the talent on the roster was crappy.  When else has the team massively underachieved?

This is a genuine question and I don't know the answer.


Looks like in 2012-2013, Vegas the Celts winning 50-51 games and they ended up winning 41.

In 2009-2010, the Celts' over under was 56.5, and they won only 50.

In 06-07, the over under was 35, and they ended up winning 24.  I guess that was mostly due to tanking though.

Definitely in terms of underachieving this team is right up there. I guess for a lot of people failing to meet high expectations is cause for greater disappointment than failing to meet low ones. Kind of like having a smart kid who wastes his future by being lazy versus a stupid one who never had a future anyway.

[Rosco917]

"It's all fun, fun, fun until daddy takes he T-Bird away."

When they're forced to watch a teammate...a friend clean out his locker and say goodbye to the team, maybe the laughing after a loss will stop. Because that is exactly what this team needs, a harsh reaction to their lackluster play.

[PhoSita]

It's definitely not as bad as the early 90s, the Pitino years, or the pre-Big Three years. This is nothing compared to that 

I get that in many respects it isn't as bad as those years.

With that said, when was the last time the Celts were expected to win on the order of 55-60 games (e.g. Vegas predicted it), and they fell 10+ games short of that?

There have been years with dysfunction and years when the talent on the roster was crappy.  When else has the team massively underachieved?

This is a genuine question and I don't know the answer.


Looks like in 2012-2013, Vegas the Celts winning 50-51 games and they ended up winning 41.

In 2009-2010, the Celts' over under was 56.5, and they won only 50.

In 06-07, the over under was 35, and they ended up winning 24.  I guess that was mostly due to tanking though.

Definitely in terms of underachieving this team is right up there. I guess for a lot of people failing to meet high expectations is cause for greater disappointment than failing to meet low ones. Kind of like having a smart kid who wastes his future by being lazy versus a stupid one who never had a future anyway.

Well I mean, usually if you expect that team to be bad, you're spending most of the year focused on the good things that might come in the draft.

If you went in expecting a really good team and they're just decent, and to boot they're a trainwreck in terms of chemistry, then what do you have to feel good about?  What gives you hope?

[nickagneta]

TP, Jiri, for benefitting us with your procrastinating!

I think Kyrie is a problem, but I think he's no worse than half this team's troubles—the other half being the poor attitude of some of the young guys.

"Bad Kobe" seems to have rubbed off on Tatum, then there were the predictions of multiple titles from Brown, and I think last year's postseason success really hurt these guys for this season—they seem to think that they earned the right to play more minutes than Kyrie and Gordon, which was never gonna happen.

I don't think this team will win the title, or even the conference, maybe not even come close to that.

Given what Jackie said about Morris being unhappy because Brown earned the right to be on the floor late, I wouldn't put all the attitude problems on the young guys. I can definitely see where Morris could be a problem with attitude.

Also, Smart didn't exactly create a lot of love with players both old and young with his late three against Portland. Once that shot missed you could see people both young and old, both on and off the court had problems with it.

Tatum appears tight with several vets and Hayward seems tight with many of the young guys. Horford seems good with everyone.

I don't think this is just a young vs old thing with those dastardly young guys not knowing their place. There could just be a personality divide in the locker room and have nothing to do with old or young or vets and youth. Maybe it's people with superstar personalities vs people without superstar personalities or something like that, not necessarily exactly that.

Funnily enough, Stevens is looking like a good person to blame, but as the layers of what this locker room was actually like get unwrapped, I wonder if in retrospect we might look at the job Stevens is doing as amazing given the train wreck the personality of this team was like and how toxic the locker room was?

[gpap]

TP, Jiri, for benefitting us with your procrastinating!

I think Kyrie is a problem, but I think he's no worse than half this team's troubles—the other half being the poor attitude of some of the young guys.

"Bad Kobe" seems to have rubbed off on Tatum, then there were the predictions of multiple titles from Brown, and I think last year's postseason success really hurt these guys for this season—they seem to think that they earned the right to play more minutes than Kyrie and Gordon, which was never gonna happen.

I don't think this team will win the title, or even the conference, maybe not even come close to that.

Given what Jackie said about Morris being unhappy because Brown earned the right to be on the floor late, I wouldn't put all the attitude problems on the young guys. I can definitely see where Morris could be a problem with attitude.

Also, Smart didn't exactly create a lot of love with players both old and young with his late three against Portland. Once that shot missed you could see people both young and old, both on and off the court had problems with it.

Tatum appears tight with several vets and Hayward seems tight with many of the young guys. Horford seems good with everyone.

I don't think this is just a young vs old thing with those dastardly young guys not knowing their place. There could just be a personality divide in the locker room and have nothing to do with old or young or vets and youth. Maybe it's people with superstar personalities vs people without superstar personalities or something like that, not necessarily exactly that.

Funnily enough, Stevens is looking like a good person to blame, but as the layers of what this locker room was actually like get unwrapped, I wonder if in retrospect we might look at the job Stevens is doing as amazing given the train wreck the personality of this team was like and how toxic the locker room was?

And what's strange is it seemed like last year and even into this year, Morris looked like a very good fit for this team. He may have some issues with his teammates/coach or he may not, but his body language yesterday sucked. I noticed it right away in the 1st quarter. Safe to say he won't be back.

As for Smart, he does need to cut back on those [dang] 3s. I know he was hot there for a while, but that's not his job. His job should be remaining a tough defender, setting screens on offense and deferring to his teammates.

[gpap]

Jackie Mac is all over the place.

First she says that something doesn't appear to be right with Kyrie yet she mentions that he was joking with Tatum during the Raptors game and that the whole team was joking around after the Bulls game on Saturday.

Which one is it?

[nickagneta]

Jackie Mac is all over the place.

First she says that something doesn't appear to be right with Kyrie yet she mentions that he was joking with Tatum during the Raptors game and that the whole team was joking around after the Bulls game on Saturday.

Which one is it?

Maybe she thinks something isn't right about Kyrie because he has become nonchalant about defeats and is joking around at times when some think it not appropriate.

[alt]

I believe all this personality based stuff is wildly overrated. Good teams keep winning regardless of this stuff; likewise, bad teams keep losing even when all players get along and nobody sulks.

The problems are on the court. Too many players are anxious - desperate for their next shot. So they drift toward playing selfishly.

Notice how often players stay back after putting shots up, or even after made baskets, hunting for opponent's outlets and even inbounds passes after made baskets. Awful for the team, but a chance for glory for each individual player.

Then Kyrie isn't the type of PG that is capable of, say, rewarding a guy who's hustled or defended well or is anxious for a shot. Get a guy who's struggling going. Find a way of creating a good mismatch for that player. Letting someone initiate the offense and just play off-the-ball for a few possessions. He's good at making baskets, and even at creating baskets for others when he focus on that, but not at managing this kind of stuff. And his defensive effort is super uneven. Just a complicated player to have leading a team. To me, this is far, far more important than anything about his personality, if he laughs or sulks or whatever.

[Jiri Welsch]

Jackie Mac is all over the place.

First she says that something doesn't appear to be right with Kyrie yet she mentions that he was joking with Tatum during the Raptors game and that the whole team was joking around after the Bulls game on Saturday.

Which one is it?

Maybe she thinks something isn't right about Kyrie because he has become nonchalant about defeats and is joking around at times when some think it not appropriate.

Just to add to this: when listening it seemed she was implying that their reactions were inappropriate considering the circumstances. The fact that no one was bothered by a horrible performance led her to believe that something it “off” about the team’s culture.

No one can react authentically because they aren’t truly at ease—something to that effect.

[gpap]

Jackie Mac is all over the place.

First she says that something doesn't appear to be right with Kyrie yet she mentions that he was joking with Tatum during the Raptors game and that the whole team was joking around after the Bulls game on Saturday.

Which one is it?

Maybe she thinks something isn't right about Kyrie because he has become nonchalant about defeats and is joking around at times when some think it not appropriate.

Just to add to this: when listening it seemed she was implying that their reactions were inappropriate considering the circumstances. The fact that no one was bothered by a horrible performance led her to believe that something it “off” about the team’s culture.

No one can react authentically because they aren’t truly at ease—something to that effect.

Okay, I get it.

Well, it sounds like Kyrie already has one foot out the door.

I also read what Ainge said on the Sports Hub and how highly he thinks of Brad and his accountability and it sounds like Brad has full support from DA and likely Wyc (otherwise, they wouldn't have extended his contract.)

If you take Jackie's comments about Kyrie not seeming happy, coupled with all his controversial comments he's made throughout the season and it sounds like he might be the squeaky wheel. I am sure everyone bears some blame, but it seems like Kyrie has been at the center of all the drama (and Morris to a lesser extent.)

So, I think Tatum/Brown/Hayward/Horford are here to stay (unless one of them gets dealt, which is possible.)

Kyrie and Morris are both gone.

I still think Ainge makes some type of splash in the offseason, it just won't involve Anthony Davis.

[cltc5]

ONLY thing windhorst is good at dissecting is a thanksgiving turkey