MacMullan and Windhorst Podcast: Discussing Celtics

[Moranis]

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.

Kyrie, while super talented, is an awkward player to play alongside. He has been his whole career. It is why he struggled for team success early in his career. It is why he struggled whenever LeBron was on the bench or injured.

Swap out Kyrie for prime Michael Jordan... doesn't change the fact that we're trying to spread out 70 shots amongst Tatum/Morris/Brown/Horford/Hayward/Rozier/Smart. Doesn't change the fact that a guy like Gordon Hayward will have some nights when he takes 3 shots off the bench. Doesn't change the fact that a guy like Morris will be gunning for his touches in a contract year. Doesn't change that a guy like Brown is going to get into multiple public scuffles with veteran role players like Smart and Morris who have taken his "starring" role and relegated him to the bench. Doesn't change that Terry Rozier is going to publicly admit that he sees his own teammates as competition when he's on the court, because "they have what he wants". Meanwhile Prime Michael Jordan is going to be like, "why the hell am I only taking 18 shots per game on this team and only playing 32 minutes per game?" ... He probably would start murdering his young teammates - which subsequently would solve the problem of there being too many guys

Michael Jordan is an interesting one. I think you are right here. I think Jordan would struggle on this team too (cause chemistry problems). He never created a team atmosphere / environment for his teammates to succeed. Scottie Pippen did that.

Now a prime Scottie Pippen, I think he would be absolutely awesome and a huge success on this Celtics team.

The thing is, Curry and obviously Jordan are much better players than Irving.  They are not only better defenders (and significantly in the case of Jordan) but also are both better offensive players.  When you are a clear alpha everyone else finds it easier to get in line.  Irving is a very good player and is Boston's best player, but Irving is not anywhere close to the level of player where he demands that everyone get in line behind him on the court.  In the scenario where you aren't that level of player you have to be a great leader to get the team to fall inline, and Irving is certainly not a great leader and probably isn't even a good one.

This echoes what I've been saying since the trade was made (and increased a great deal over the summer to much negativity on this board) i.e. Boston lacks the true top end talent needed to consistently realistically contend for a title.  Boston, in its best case, is probably a slightly better version of what the Raptors have been (before adding Kawhi this year) i.e. a very deep team that has a lot of good players, but not one that is realistically going to win a championship (there are fluke years, but consistent contention just doesn't happen without the Gold Medal Superstar level of players).  The only way Boston becomes a consistent contender with basically the current roster is if Tatum elevates his game into that Gold Medal Superstar level of player that we all hope he can be. 

[Moranis]

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.

when the best player in the world suits up it becomes a realistic possibility. 

[Chief Macho]

Why the hell would anyone still want to pay Kyrie money.  Ill take the mistake and look forward to the flexibility.

The C’s are capped out regardless. You resign Kyrie and trade him later if need be.

Lol, so many people just ignore this. We have no cap flexibility.

People keep saying "just sign some other PG like Kemba or D'Angelo Russell", which absolutely makes no sense. We have no money.

if kyrie leaves,  and horford opts out, how do we have no money the next few seasons?

[bdm860]

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.

It's not a Kyrie problem. It's a too many guys problem.

I think a big piece of the chemistry problem is too many guys with uncertain futures.

Not just the young guys, but seemingly everybody's status is uncertain:

* Kyrie is a free agent who might decide to leave
* Tatum, Brown, Smart, Ojeleye, Yabusele, Williams - some combination of these guys will be moved in an Anthony Davis trade, and everybody knows it.
* Morris, Rozier, Theis - all free agents, and Morris and Rozier aren't expected to return, and the team might not be able to afford Theis either.
* Hayward, while he has a huge contract that nobody would trade for, I bet in the back of his mind he's worried he's going to get traded. "I haven't produced in 2 years, the teams going to try to unload me."
* Horford and Baynes have player options.  You think it's in the back of their mind that they're going to opt in in June only for Danny to trade them in July?

I think when you look around that locker room, 90% of the guys have serious doubts that they will be back next year, and 100% of the guys have no idea who their teammates will be next year.  I think this is part of what's leading to chemistry problems.

Compare that to a team like Toronto, Kawhi's status is up in the air, but most of the rest of the team probably thinks they'll be back.  MIL, IND, and PHI all have a ton soon-to-be free agents, but their superstars are all in place, and most of the guys with expiring contracts know their teams will be trying to retain them.  I think there's a lot less uncertainty in those locker rooms.

[PhoSita]

when the best player in the world suits up it becomes a realistic possibility.

Agreed.

Those Cleveland teams were a mess and approached everything the wrong way.  But they had LeBron, and that was enough in the East.

[PhoSita]

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.

It's not a Kyrie problem. It's a too many guys problem.

I think a big piece of the chemistry problem is too many guys with uncertain futures.

Not just the young guys, but seemingly everybody's status is uncertain:

* Kyrie is a free agent who might decide to leave
* Tatum, Brown, Smart, Ojeleye, Yabusele, Williams - some combination of these guys will be moved in an Anthony Davis trade, and everybody knows it.
* Morris, Rozier, Theis - all free agents, and Morris and Rozier aren't expected to return, and the team might not be able to afford Theis either.
* Hayward, while he has a huge contract that nobody would trade for, I bet in the back of his mind he's worried he's going to get traded. "I haven't produced in 2 years, the teams going to try to unload me."
* Horford and Baynes have player options.  You think it's in the back of their mind that they're going to opt in in June only for Danny to trade them in July?

I think when you look around that locker room, 90% of the guys have serious doubts that they will be back next year, and 100% of the guys have no idea who their teammates will be next year.  I think this is part of what's leading to chemistry problems.

I agree, but it's not just the uncertainty of where they will be next year.

It's the uncertainty of what role they will have in the league in the future, and related to that, how much $$ they will earn in the future.


Plenty of contending teams succeed despite having a supporting cast constructed from guys on one year deals.  But usually the guys on short term deals are veterans who have already shown what they can do in the league.  They know their strengths and weaknesses and they've tried and failed to secure larger roles elsewhere, or they've had larger roles and achieved as much as they could in those roles, and now want to win.


This Celtics team is not built out of players like that.  It's a bunch of guys who have not proven exactly what their peak role can be in the NBA, except for Al Horford and, I would argue, Marcus Smart.  Maybe you could add Baynes in there as well.  Those guys know who they are.  In the case of Smart and Horford, they're also paid already and on long term deals.

Even Kyrie hasn't yet proven what he can ultimately achieve in the league on an individual basis. 


Being hungry and driven to prove yourself is nice, but when that's the whole team I think it prevents cohesion.  It sabotages the effort to develop a team identity.  Especially when you've got a bunch of guys who are naturally a bit odd and mercurial.  That's what we've seen with this Celtics team.

[NKY fan]

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.

It's not a Kyrie problem. It's a too many guys problem.

I think a big piece of the chemistry problem is too many guys with uncertain futures.

Not just the young guys, but seemingly everybody's status is uncertain:

* Kyrie is a free agent who might decide to leave
* Tatum, Brown, Smart, Ojeleye, Yabusele, Williams - some combination of these guys will be moved in an Anthony Davis trade, and everybody knows it.
* Morris, Rozier, Theis - all free agents, and Morris and Rozier aren't expected to return, and the team might not be able to afford Theis either.
* Hayward, while he has a huge contract that nobody would trade for, I bet in the back of his mind he's worried he's going to get traded. "I haven't produced in 2 years, the teams going to try to unload me."
* Horford and Baynes have player options.  You think it's in the back of their mind that they're going to opt in in June only for Danny to trade them in July?

I think when you look around that locker room, 90% of the guys have serious doubts that they will be back next year, and 100% of the guys have no idea who their teammates will be next year.  I think this is part of what's leading to chemistry problems.

I agree, but it's not just the uncertainty of where they will be next year.

It's the uncertainty of what role they will have in the league in the future, and related to that, how much $$ they will earn in the future.


Plenty of contending teams succeed despite having a supporting cast constructed from guys on one year deals.  But usually the guys on short term deals are veterans who have already shown what they can do in the league.  They know their strengths and weaknesses and they've tried and failed to secure larger roles elsewhere, or they've had larger roles and achieved as much as they could in those roles, and now want to win.


This Celtics team is not built out of players like that.  It's a bunch of guys who have not proven exactly what their peak role can be in the NBA, except for Al Horford and, I would argue, Marcus Smart.  Maybe you could add Baynes in there as well.  Those guys know who they are.  In the case of Smart and Horford, they're also paid already and on long term deals.

Even Kyrie hasn't yet proven what he can ultimately achieve in the league on an individual basis. 


Being hungry and driven to prove yourself is nice, but when that's the whole team I think it prevents cohesion.  It sabotages the effort to develop a team identity.  Especially when you've got a bunch of guys who are naturally a bit odd and mercurial.  That's what we've seen with this Celtics team.

I couldn’t agree more! I can also see where Rozier and Morris are coming from and how they think their reduced roles can affect their earnings in the coming years but in the end of the day they have contracts that they are under. Especially Rozier situation is very unique - being an insurance policy to Kyrie...

[gpap]

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.

Hayward is no longer injured. He's getting up and down the court just fine. The injury is an invalid excuse.
And who's Steph?

[gpap]

Why the hell would anyone still want to pay Kyrie money.  Ill take the mistake and look forward to the flexibility.

The C’s are capped out regardless. You resign Kyrie and trade him later if need be.

Lol, so many people just ignore this. We have no cap flexibility.

People keep saying "just sign some other PG like Kemba or D'Angelo Russell", which absolutely makes no sense. We have no money.

if kyrie leaves,  and horford opts out, how do we have no money the next few seasons?

If Kyrie leaves and both Horford and Baynes opt out, that should free up a considerable amount of money. If Ainge lets Theis, Wannamaker and Rozier walk, that opens up even more money which means we should have enough for a max contract and then some.

It seems every year we hear the same excuse about how the Celtics "have no money."

Maybe Ainge either shoots for Durant or tries to go after a free agent in a sign and trade offering draft picks (like Kemba, Middleton, etc.)

The Celts supposedly have no money, yet season ticket holders on this site are seeing a spike in their renewals. Hmmmm.....how does that happen?

[keevsnick]

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.

I think your point about shot distribution is very, very wrong. Coming  out and giving guys like Tatum who isn't ready to be getting that many shots and Hayward who wasn't good enough early season (and still isnt) that many shots doesn't create chemistry, it creates bad offense. Tatum's shots 14-19 are not as efficient as his first 13 shots, not for a guy who has had a hard enough time cutting mid rangers out of his game. Forcing Hayward who was gun shy and couldn't beat most power forwards off the dribble to take 16 shots would have been disastrous. Because those guys wouldn't deserve those shot. Now if you wnat to say "But we can't have this equal opportunity offense, its hurting our chemistry!" then your problem isnt shot distribution, its not having enough top end talent to earn those shots. We need A) Guys like Tatum and Brown to make a leap B) Fewer like talented players C) Trade 2 or 3 for 1 superstar. 


I agree with you that Kyrie should take more shots, but he's the only guy on this team really worthy of funneling shots t right now.

I think the point about Kyrie is a lot of other superstars wouldn't have some out and put their foot in their mouths as firmly as Kyrie did this season. That hurt this team.

[wiley]

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.

I think your point about shot distribution is very, very wrong. Coming  out and giving guys like Tatum who isn't ready to be getting that many shots and Hayward who wasn't good enough early season (and still isnt) that many shots doesn't create chemistry, it creates bad offense. Tatum's shots 14-19 are not as efficient as his first 13 shots, not for a guy who has had a hard enough time cutting mid rangers out of his game. Forcing Hayward who was gun shy and couldn't beat most power forwards off the dribble to take 16 shots would have been disastrous. Because those guys wouldn't deserve those shot. Now if you wnat to say "But we can't have this equal opportunity offense, its hurting our chemistry!" then your problem isnt shot distribution, its not having enough top end talent to earn those shots. We need A) Guys like Tatum and Brown to make a leap B) Fewer like talented players C) Trade 2 or 3 for 1 superstar. 


I agree with you that Kyrie should take more shots, but he's the only guy on this team really worthy of funneling shots t right now.

I think the point about Kyrie is a lot of other superstars wouldn't have some out and put their foot in their mouths as firmly as Kyrie did this season. That hurt this team.

Agreee completely with the bolded and your overall point.  It should be Kyrie way at the top of the shot chart and equal opportunity for the rest, as long as each plays to their strength and within their limits. I'd be happy to see Gordon shoot more and keep his body language up even when he misses a bunch in a row.  The team needs to consider basketball mainly a defensive endeavor, and be looser on offense. 

[Big333223]

when the best player in the world suits up it becomes a realistic possibility.

Agreed.

Those Cleveland teams were a mess and approached everything the wrong way.  But they had LeBron, and that was enough in the East.

I don't understand this logic.

Obvious James was the biggest part of their success and having the best player in the world makes winning a lot easier. But the Celtics are winning 60% of their games despite all the nonsense. If James, and everyone else on Cleveland, was able to put their own drama aside and work together in the playoffs, why can't this team?

Again, I'm not saying anyone is going to raise their level of play to James'. It's about the ability to put the petty stuff aside come playoff time, which those Cleveland teams did do.

[PhoSita]

If James, and everyone else on Cleveland, was able to put their own drama aside and work together in the playoffs, why can't this team?

The thing is I don't really agree with the premise.

They shortened their rotation and played their main guys a lot of minutes, plus LeBron started playing defense again.

They were still a dysfunctional team with serious roster construction and personality issues. 

The biggest difference for those Cleveland teams is they were atrocious on defense in the regular season and then come playoff time they started trying on that end.  In the case of the 2015 team, they turned into a grind it out defensive team by necessity.


I believe this Celtics team will increase their intensity on the defensive end, but it's not like they're currently winning 60% of their games despite putting forth zero effort on defense.  They've been a top 5 defense unit pretty much all year.  The issues have been more about lapses in focus, poor shot selection, inability to get to the free throw line, getting beasted on the boards in certain matchups, etc.


I just don't think it's a useful comparison, unfortunately.

[Big333223]

If James, and everyone else on Cleveland, was able to put their own drama aside and work together in the playoffs, why can't this team?

The thing is I don't really agree with the premise.

They shortened their rotation and played their main guys a lot of minutes, plus LeBron started playing defense again.

They were still a dysfunctional team with serious roster construction and personality issues. 

The biggest difference for those Cleveland teams is they were atrocious on defense in the regular season and then come playoff time they started trying on that end.  In the case of the 2015 team, they turned into a grind it out defensive team by necessity.


I believe this Celtics team will increase their intensity on the defensive end, but it's not like they're currently winning 60% of their games despite putting forth zero effort on defense.  They've been a top 5 defense unit pretty much all year.  The issues have been more about lapses in focus, poor shot selection, inability to get to the free throw line, getting beasted on the boards in certain matchups, etc.


I just don't think it's a useful comparison, unfortunately.

Lapses in focus, not rebounding... those sound like effort problems to me. Even shot selection is often a result of settling rather than working for something better. This is my point: the problem isn't talent, the problems are things like focus and chemistry.

If these guys' heads are really in the right place (wanting to win a championship), maybe the intensity of the playoffs will help them push some of the petty stuff aside and get them to focus better. The pressure might also expose how deep these issues are. Either way, I think we're going to learn everything we need to know in the playoffs, not now.

[Green-18]

If James, and everyone else on Cleveland, was able to put their own drama aside and work together in the playoffs, why can't this team?

The thing is I don't really agree with the premise.

They shortened their rotation and played their main guys a lot of minutes, plus LeBron started playing defense again.

They were still a dysfunctional team with serious roster construction and personality issues. 

The biggest difference for those Cleveland teams is they were atrocious on defense in the regular season and then come playoff time they started trying on that end.  In the case of the 2015 team, they turned into a grind it out defensive team by necessity.


I believe this Celtics team will increase their intensity on the defensive end, but it's not like they're currently winning 60% of their games despite putting forth zero effort on defense.  They've been a top 5 defense unit pretty much all year.  The issues have been more about lapses in focus, poor shot selection, inability to get to the free throw line, getting beasted on the boards in certain matchups, etc.


I just don't think it's a useful comparison, unfortunately.

If these guys' heads are really in the right place (wanting to win a championship), maybe the intensity of the playoffs will help them push some of the petty stuff aside and get them to focus better. The pressure might also expose how deep these issues are. Either way, I think we're going to learn everything we need to know in the playoffs, not now.

This team needs something to ease the tension in the locker room.  I genuinely believe that the guys want to make this work but there's still a ton of baggage behind the surface.  I'm sure many of us have been in a work environment that is awkward and uncomfortable, even in situations where we like most of our coworkers.  It can be very debilitating in any sort of team environment. 

Brad doesn't appear to be the type of coach who can loosen the mood, at least not with this group.  Any attempt on Kyrie's end would come off as forced an unnatural.  Who knows, maybe they will stumble upon something by accident.