MacMullan and Windhorst Podcast: Discussing Celtics

[Who]

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.

Lots of great stuff in this comment. Agreed on Kyrie's style of play issues + that the problems are generally on the court rather than personality based. Not enough teamwork in general.

Outside of Horford, nobody else has really tried to create a team environment here this season.

[LarBrd33]

Btw, this team DOES have chemistry problems on the court, but that's because we're trying to incorporate too many guys. 

This team would have struggled this season no matter what star was in Kyrie's role this season, because you're asking 7 other guys to flourish in minimized roles. I don't care if it was Steph Curry in there this season... Steph (like Kyrie) would be individually spectacular, but the rest of the team would still suck, because you have Horford and Tatum out there while also Brown, Morris, Smart, Rozier and Hayward are all gunning for big offensive roles.

Disagree completely. They wouldn't have these issues with Steph Curry instead of Kyrie. Curry is a much better leader, better passer and floor general (and always has been) & overall much easier to play alongside. Curry doesn't break plays the way Kyrie does and has throughout his career. Curry doesn't over-dribble and stagnate the offense. He is easy to play with. Fun to play with.

Really isn't about being fun to play with.  Kyrie averages less shots and more assists than Steph does.  Kyrie's usage rate is 24th in the league - behind both Steph and Durant despite the fact Kyrie is the lone star on this team.   At the end of the day, you're still going to have all the same issues I mentioned...

- Hayward is still injured

- Brown still starts this season like garbage

- Brad is still trying to balance sharing the wealth amongst 8 players

- Morris and Smart are still going to rip into Jaylen for his immaturity and lack of focus

- Terry Rozier is still going to get angry that he's backing up Steph and not starting over him

- Morris is still going to gun for shots in a contract year

- Guys are still going to struggle to get a rhythm when their shots fluctuate so frequently

- Players previously accustomed to starring roles are still going to be unhappy coming off the bench as role players

- Young players are still going to hang their head after botched plays or give inconsistent defensive effort


Steph's a better shooter, but this team still has the same chemistry issues, because these issues aren't related to Kyrie.  If anything, the issue is that Kyrie hasn't been selfish enough.  There's no precedent for a team where 8 guys share the wealth.  As I pointed out in the other thread, essentially every prior champion has 3 guys getting 10+ shots.  Often it's only 2.  Very very rarely it's 4.   If we set into this season with everyone healthy and gave Kyrie his 20+ shots, Tatum his 16-19 shots, Hayward his 14-16 shots, and Horford his 9 shots...  with everyone in significantly limited roles getting 5 or less shots per night, there would have been a real hierarchy and an opportunity for players to build some real chemistry.  But good luck doing that and telling Brown, Morris, Rozier and Smart they are no longer important to the offense.

Doesn't matter what superstar you put in Kyrie's place you're still dealing with a messy roster where the 2nd best player is a 20 year old kid.  Jayson Tatum is literally younger than Robert Williams... and he's our 2nd best player.  Barely winning 50 makes sense.

[gouki88]

Btw, this team DOES have chemistry problems on the court, but that's because we're trying to incorporate too many guys. 

This team would have struggled this season no matter what star was in Kyrie's role this season, because you're asking 7 other guys to flourish in minimized roles. I don't care if it was Steph Curry in there this season... Steph (like Kyrie) would be individually spectacular, but the rest of the team would still suck, because you have Horford and Tatum out there while also Brown, Morris, Smart, Rozier and Hayward are all gunning for big offensive roles.

Disagree completely. They wouldn't have these issues with Steph Curry instead of Kyrie. Curry is a much better leader, better passer and floor general (and always has been) & overall much easier to play alongside. Curry doesn't break plays the way Kyrie does and has throughout his career. Curry doesn't over-dribble and stagnate the offense. He is easy to play with. Fun to play with.

Rofl. Not true at all. Maybe back when Curry was younger, but the Curry who turns 31 in two weeks isn't that exceptional a passer. He generates less assists than Kyrie and per-minute turns it over more.

The criticism that Kyrie isn't a good passer is so boringly dated at this stage.

[Androslav]

When Windhorst talks about the state of the Celtics it feels as if Kim JU is publicly making his "honest" and objective USA's state of the union take. Without any existing connotations, of course, just naked truth.

[Who]

Btw, this team DOES have chemistry problems on the court, but that's because we're trying to incorporate too many guys. 

This team would have struggled this season no matter what star was in Kyrie's role this season, because you're asking 7 other guys to flourish in minimized roles. I don't care if it was Steph Curry in there this season... Steph (like Kyrie) would be individually spectacular, but the rest of the team would still suck, because you have Horford and Tatum out there while also Brown, Morris, Smart, Rozier and Hayward are all gunning for big offensive roles.

Disagree completely. They wouldn't have these issues with Steph Curry instead of Kyrie. Curry is a much better leader, better passer and floor general (and always has been) & overall much easier to play alongside. Curry doesn't break plays the way Kyrie does and has throughout his career. Curry doesn't over-dribble and stagnate the offense. He is easy to play with. Fun to play with.

Rofl. Not true at all. Maybe back when Curry was younger, but the Curry who turns 31 in two weeks isn't that exceptional a passer. He generates less assists than Kyrie and per-minute turns it over more.

The criticism that Kyrie isn't a good passer is so boringly dated at this stage.

Assists are not the only measure of one's passing ability. Look at the creativity. Look at the decision making. The understanding of where and when to pass. Curry has that in spades. He always has. He didn't get credit for it early in his career but he had it.

Curry plays the right way for his team. He shares the ball. He knows he has Draymond Green who is one of the best ball-handling and passing forwards in the league. He knows he has Kevin Durant who has gradually grown and turned himself into a very good passer and ball-handler in his own right. It is not in the team's interest for Curry to try and rack up big assist numbers. It is in their interest to play with balance and Curry does that.

[gouki88]

Btw, this team DOES have chemistry problems on the court, but that's because we're trying to incorporate too many guys. 

This team would have struggled this season no matter what star was in Kyrie's role this season, because you're asking 7 other guys to flourish in minimized roles. I don't care if it was Steph Curry in there this season... Steph (like Kyrie) would be individually spectacular, but the rest of the team would still suck, because you have Horford and Tatum out there while also Brown, Morris, Smart, Rozier and Hayward are all gunning for big offensive roles.

Disagree completely. They wouldn't have these issues with Steph Curry instead of Kyrie. Curry is a much better leader, better passer and floor general (and always has been) & overall much easier to play alongside. Curry doesn't break plays the way Kyrie does and has throughout his career. Curry doesn't over-dribble and stagnate the offense. He is easy to play with. Fun to play with.

Rofl. Not true at all. Maybe back when Curry was younger, but the Curry who turns 31 in two weeks isn't that exceptional a passer. He generates less assists than Kyrie and per-minute turns it over more.

The criticism that Kyrie isn't a good passer is so boringly dated at this stage.

Assists are not the only measure of one's passing ability. Look at the creativity. Look at the decision making. The understanding of where and when to pass. Curry has that in spades. He always has. He didn't get credit for it early in his career but he had it.

Curry plays the right way for his team. He shares the ball. He knows he has Draymond Green who is one of the best ball-handling and passing forwards in the league. He knows he has Kevin Durant who has gradually grown and turned himself into a very good passer and ball-handler in his own right. It is not in the team's interest for Curry to try and rack up big assist numbers. It is in their interest to play with balance and Curry does that.

How can you watch Kyrie play and not say he is a creative passer?? That is a simply mind-boggling take for me to understand. I know you dislike him, but jeesh that is biased.

How about secondary assists? A stat where Kyrie is 2nd in the whole league, whereas Curry is 10th. Kyrie also averages only 0.6 less passes made per game, while receiving 1.3 passes less than Curry.

Or assists points created? A stat that Kyrie blows Curry out of the water in (16.5 vs 12.8 ).

Or assists adjusted? A stat which incorporates secondary assists, free throw assists and regular assists, and is another one in which Kyrie blows Curry out of the water (8.0 vs 6.5).

Kyrie also trumps Curry in potential assists, assist to pass % and adjusted assist to pass %. In almost every single measurable statistic, Kyrie is a better passer.

Granted, Curry has historically been better. But to keep saying Curry is a much better passer and floor general is to dismiss the considerable improvements Kyrie has made.

But you want him gone, so I guess that kind of dishonesty is expected.

https://stats.nba.com/players/passing/ for stats reference

[Who]

I was thinking earlier while I was out what Kyrie would be like on that Golden State team instead of Steph (after imagining Steph here in Boston earlier) ... and what that might look like.

I think that Golden State team would have chemistry issues (on the court) too. I think Kyrie would have difficulty sharing the ball with Draymond Green. With Kevin Durant. With avoiding over-dribbling and calling his own number too often. Breaking plays. With making sure Klay Thompson gets enough shots and feels involved. I don't think Kyrie could handle that many mouths to feed.

Do people agree or disagree with that?

[Who]

I was thinking earlier while I was out what Kyrie would be like on that Golden State team instead of Steph (after imagining Steph here in Boston earlier) ... and what that might look like.

I think that Golden State team would have chemistry issues (on the court) too. I think Kyrie would have difficulty sharing the ball with Draymond Green. With Kevin Durant. With avoiding over-dribbling and calling his own number too often. Breaking plays. With making sure Klay Thompson gets enough shots and feels involved. I don't think Kyrie could handle that many mouths to feed.

Which then led me to a second thought - would Kyrie be a problem regardless of where he is?

I don't think so.  I mean, I feel quite good about the idea of a healthy Hayward, Kyrie and Anthony Davis. I think those 3 could figure out how to play together very well and have huge success. Get the right role players around. More low usage guys. Allow Kyrie and AD to dominate the show and Hayward to be the glue guy / 3rd scorer type supporting star player.

I do wonder if Hayward is switched with a more selfish 3rd star (who wants more of the ball & more shots) - say Jimmy Butler -- how does that team's chemistry do then? Do Kyrie and Jimmy clash? Can Kyrie (the point guard) keep control of the offense and team spirit? How much of that is Jimmy's fault and how much is Kyrie's fault (shared blame to me)?

What if there are higher usage role players like Marcus Morris on that 3 star team? That take shots away from Kyrie? How does Kyrie handle that?

And how should that effect how Ainge builds the team going forward once that AD drama is over with (if AD arrives or not).

[Who]

Btw, this team DOES have chemistry problems on the court, but that's because we're trying to incorporate too many guys. 

This team would have struggled this season no matter what star was in Kyrie's role this season, because you're asking 7 other guys to flourish in minimized roles. I don't care if it was Steph Curry in there this season... Steph (like Kyrie) would be individually spectacular, but the rest of the team would still suck, because you have Horford and Tatum out there while also Brown, Morris, Smart, Rozier and Hayward are all gunning for big offensive roles.

Disagree completely. They wouldn't have these issues with Steph Curry instead of Kyrie. Curry is a much better leader, better passer and floor general (and always has been) & overall much easier to play alongside. Curry doesn't break plays the way Kyrie does and has throughout his career. Curry doesn't over-dribble and stagnate the offense. He is easy to play with. Fun to play with.

Rofl. Not true at all. Maybe back when Curry was younger, but the Curry who turns 31 in two weeks isn't that exceptional a passer. He generates less assists than Kyrie and per-minute turns it over more.

The criticism that Kyrie isn't a good passer is so boringly dated at this stage.

Assists are not the only measure of one's passing ability. Look at the creativity. Look at the decision making. The understanding of where and when to pass. Curry has that in spades. He always has. He didn't get credit for it early in his career but he had it.

Curry plays the right way for his team. He shares the ball. He knows he has Draymond Green who is one of the best ball-handling and passing forwards in the league. He knows he has Kevin Durant who has gradually grown and turned himself into a very good passer and ball-handler in his own right. It is not in the team's interest for Curry to try and rack up big assist numbers. It is in their interest to play with balance and Curry does that.

How can you watch Kyrie play and not say he is a creative passer?? That is a simply mind-boggling take for me to understand. I know you dislike him, but jeesh that is biased.

How about secondary assists? A stat where Kyrie is 2nd in the whole league, whereas Curry is 10th. Kyrie also averages only 0.6 less passes made per game, while receiving 1.3 passes less than Curry.

Or assists points created? A stat that Kyrie blows Curry out of the water in (16.5 vs 12.8 ).

Or assists adjusted? A stat which incorporates secondary assists, free throw assists and regular assists, and is another one in which Kyrie blows Curry out of the water (8.0 vs 6.5).

Kyrie also trumps Curry in potential assists, assist to pass % and adjusted assist to pass %. In almost every single measurable statistic, Kyrie is a better passer.

Granted, Curry has historically been better. But to keep saying Curry is a much better passer and floor general is to dismiss the considerable improvements Kyrie has made.

But you want him gone, so I guess that kind of dishonesty is expected.

https://stats.nba.com/players/passing/ for stats reference

I view Kyrie more like Iverson as a passer. He can create well but he disrupts the flow of the game with his decision making, over-dribbling and selfishness.

I believe assists per game type statistics do not always tell the full story. I would much rather have a Mike Conley type run my team's offense than an Allen Iverson. Sound decision making and team orientated focus. Tries to get others involved rather than (not all the time, but too often) only involving others when he cannot get his own shot off.

It is extremely hard to be a high scoring PG and keep balance with the rest of the team. Most fail at it. I admire Curry because he is one of the few I have seen to have scored 25+ppg while maintaining great teamwork. It is extremely difficult.

It is one of the reason's why Iverson was moved over to shooting guard. To give him more freedom to express himself as a scorer without having to worry about keeping everyone else involved. It worked wonderfully well for him individually and for everyone else on team who had more stability in their involvement / roles.

All scorers have to balance scoring with involving their teammates but there is even more pressure when that scorer is a PG because they have more responsibility as initiator of the offense. That is why I generally speaking dislike building around a scoring PG. Because it is so much harder than for a scorer at another position.

[Big333223]

I'm not necessarily predicting this, but if this is truly a chemistry problem but guys still, ultimately, all want to win a championship, what are the odds the playoff atmosphere focuses them into maximizing their talent and becoming the team we thought they would be?

As much as I hate the idea that this locker room resembles Cleveland's from the past bunch of seasons, for 4 straight years, Cleveland underachieved in the regular season and made it to the Finals. This Celtic team has drastically underachieved but would it be the strangest thing we've seen in the NBA if they make the Finals?

[GreenCoffeeBean]

I'm not necessarily predicting this, but if this is truly a chemistry problem but guys still, ultimately, all want to win a championship, what are the odds the playoff atmosphere focuses them into maximizing their talent and becoming the team we thought they would be?

As much as I hate the idea that this locker room resembles Cleveland's from the past bunch of seasons, for 4 straight years, Cleveland underachieved in the regular season and made it to the Finals. If this Celtic team has drastically underachieved but would it be the strangest thing we've seen in the NBA if they make the Finals?

Regarding the 2014-2018 Cleveland teams:

1. They still won 50 games every year. We might not break 45.
2. Their bench was super old
3. The East sucked. Like, really, really sucked.

[Green-18]

I'm not necessarily predicting this, but if this is truly a chemistry problem but guys still, ultimately, all want to win a championship, what are the odds the playoff atmosphere focuses them into maximizing their talent and becoming the team we thought they would be?

As much as I hate the idea that this locker room resembles Cleveland's from the past bunch of seasons, for 4 straight years, Cleveland underachieved in the regular season and made it to the Finals. If this Celtic team has drastically underachieved but would it be the strangest thing we've seen in the NBA if they make the Finals?

I wont rule out the potential for the Celtics to refocus themselves in the playoffs.  Some of this will need to be the result of good luck and fortune.  A dramatic road victory as an underdog could do the trick.  I've always been a believer that a single game or event can change the mindset of a team.  People are emotional and irrational.

For example, imagine if Hayward gets hot and wins us a game with some clutch shot making.  I could totally envision it as a rallying point that refocuses the team.     

[PhoSita]

I was thinking earlier while I was out what Kyrie would be like on that Golden State team instead of Steph (after imagining Steph here in Boston earlier) ... and what that might look like.

I think that Golden State team would have chemistry issues (on the court) too. I think Kyrie would have difficulty sharing the ball with Draymond Green. With Kevin Durant. With avoiding over-dribbling and calling his own number too often. Breaking plays. With making sure Klay Thompson gets enough shots and feels involved. I don't think Kyrie could handle that many mouths to feed.

Do people agree or disagree with that?

Oh definitely. Curry deserves credit for how long that team has been able to stick together.  I seriously doubt it would have been as calm and positive there all this time if Kyrie were in his place. Curry is exceptional in terms of how he handles himself off the court.

[PhoSita]

I'm not necessarily predicting this, but if this is truly a chemistry problem but guys still, ultimately, all want to win a championship, what are the odds the playoff atmosphere focuses them into maximizing their talent and becoming the team we thought they would be?

As much as I hate the idea that this locker room resembles Cleveland's from the past bunch of seasons, for 4 straight years, Cleveland underachieved in the regular season and made it to the Finals. This Celtic team has drastically underachieved but would it be the strangest thing we've seen in the NBA if they make the Finals?

Is LeBron on our team?

[Big333223]

I'm not necessarily predicting this, but if this is truly a chemistry problem but guys still, ultimately, all want to win a championship, what are the odds the playoff atmosphere focuses them into maximizing their talent and becoming the team we thought they would be?

As much as I hate the idea that this locker room resembles Cleveland's from the past bunch of seasons, for 4 straight years, Cleveland underachieved in the regular season and made it to the Finals. If this Celtic team has drastically underachieved but would it be the strangest thing we've seen in the NBA if they make the Finals?

Regarding the 2014-2018 Cleveland teams:

1. They still won 50 games every year. We might not break 45.
2. Their bench was super old
3. The East sucked. Like, really, really sucked.

Exactly. The East sucked and they still barely won 50 games 3 of those 4 seasons.

They had one season where they won as much as they should've (57 wins in '16) and that was the year Lebron got David Blatt fired mid season even though the team was 30-11.

But I'm not saying the situations are the same in every way, I'm saying if the comparison for the locker room dysfunction is Cleveland, well, those teams figured things out enough to make the Finals every year. And I don't want to hear "well they had Lebron" because they had Lebron in the regular season too and almost always underachieved.

Again, I'm not predicting this, I just think it's a possibility.