Celtics 2024 Playoff Run Thread

[Vermont Green]

I may be jumping the gun a bit on this as the playoff seedings are not set yet, but BOS is #1 and will have home court throughout, that much we know.  Our first round opponent could be IND, ORL, PHI, MIA, ATL or CHI, I believe.  And the rest of the bracket could be pretty much anything still at this point.

With the signing of Queta, we now have the playoff roster.  Two-ways are out, so we are down to this:

Guards:    Holiday, White, Pritchard, Mykhailiuk, Springer
Wings:     Tatum, Brown, Hauser, Brissett, Walsh
Bigs:        Porzingis, Horford, Kornet, Tillman, Queta

That is the full 15 man roster, 5 in each category, pretty good balance.  I highlighted the expected "core 8" who will play regularly in the playoffs.  I expect that Kornet, Tillman, and maybe even Queta will all play some, kind of a third big by committee.

The weakness I see is the depth with the bigs.  We can't play both Horford and Porzingis at the same time very much or you will use up their minutes and have to play Kornet/Tillman/Queta (or go really small).  We play small, with an extra guard, and at times, we get victimized on the offensive boards.  One extra possession, due to an opponent's offensive rebound, can be a difference in a playoff game.

But we come out of the regular season as the best team and the favorite to win the title.  We are largely healthy, 1-15.  What more can you ask for.

[Donoghus]

Enjoy the ride.  It's going to be a fun couple of months.

I expect it to be capped with a championship.

[Goldstar88]

Tatum is the starting PF, so I don’t think the C’s are lacking depth at the 4/5.

[Vermont Green]

Tatum is the starting PF, so I don’t think the C’s are lacking depth at the 4/5.

That is where I disagree.  Tatum is not a PF or a C (4 or 5).  He is a wing.  He is a big wing, but still a wing.  Even when we end up with bad match ups, it isn't Tatum that ends up covering the extra big on the other team.  It is usually Holiday and sometimes Brown.  The Celtics play most of the time with only 1 big, 4/5, PF/C, whatever you want to call it.  Most teams play with 2 bigs.  That mismatch has not hurt the Celtics all that much in the regular season, obviously, although we give up too many offensive rebounds.  It may become more of a vulnerability in the playoffs.

MIL in particular has been able to exploit this.  They have 3 solid, full-sized bigs and that has given the Celtics problems.

[Goldstar88]

Tatum is the starting PF, so I don’t think the C’s are lacking depth at the 4/5.

That is where I disagree.  Tatum is not a PF or a C (4 or 5).  He is a wing.  He is a big wing, but still a wing.  Even when we end up with bad match ups, it isn't Tatum that ends up covering the extra big on the other team.  It is usually Holiday and sometimes Brown.  The Celtics play most of the time with only 1 big, 4/5, PF/C, whatever you want to call it.  Most teams play with 2 bigs.  That mismatch has not hurt the Celtics all that much in the regular season, obviously, although we give up too many offensive rebounds.  It may become more of a vulnerability in the playoffs.

MIL in particular has been able to exploit this.  They have 3 solid, full-sized bigs and that has given the Celtics problems.

The PF position has changed. Most teams aren’t going with a traditional double big lineup.

These are the starting PF’s in the East right now: Tatum, Giannis, Anunoby, Tobias Harris, Mobley, Butler, Banchero, Derozan, Hunter, Siakam, Barnes, Bridges, Kuzma, Clowney,  Metu.

The majority are large (S)wings. Tatum matches up fine with those guys, other than Giannis. No one matches up well with Giannis.

[ozgod]

Tatum is the starting PF, so I don’t think the C’s are lacking depth at the 4/5.

That is where I disagree.  Tatum is not a PF or a C (4 or 5).  He is a wing.  He is a big wing, but still a wing.  Even when we end up with bad match ups, it isn't Tatum that ends up covering the extra big on the other team.  It is usually Holiday and sometimes Brown.  The Celtics play most of the time with only 1 big, 4/5, PF/C, whatever you want to call it.  Most teams play with 2 bigs.  That mismatch has not hurt the Celtics all that much in the regular season, obviously, although we give up too many offensive rebounds.  It may become more of a vulnerability in the playoffs.

MIL in particular has been able to exploit this.  They have 3 solid, full-sized bigs and that has given the Celtics problems.

The PF position has changed. Most teams aren’t going with a traditional double big lineup.

These are the starting PF’s in the East right now: Tatum, Giannis, Anunoby, Tobias Harris, Mobley, Butler, Banchero, Derozan, Hunter, Siakam, Barnes, Bridges, Kuzma, Clowney,  Metu.

The majority are large (S)wings. Tatum matches up fine with those guys, other than Giannis. No one matches up well with Giannis.

I think a lot of people still keep to the traditional positions of PG, SG, SF, PF and C when it's really gotten to be ball handers, wings and bigs (as Brad called it back in 2017). It's probably a sign of our ages 

The new era of the NBA requires versatility to win, and the Boston Celtics are adjusting.

"I don’t have the five positions anymore," Celtics coach Brad Stevens said, per Kareem Copeland of the Associated Press. "It may be as simple as three positions now, where you’re either a ball-handler, a wing or a big.

"It's really important. We've become more versatile as the years have gone on."

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2720250-brad-stevens-says-celtics-have-3-not-5-positions-now

Then you have swings, which are basically your KPs - stretch bigs who can spread the floor. At any point, in a switching defense, they all have to defend 1-5 on the other team (or at least 2-5 for some of the slower-footed bigs, where we play drop coverage). Because of all the switching, both offensively and defensively, nobody ends up guarding the same assignment for the whole game, so it becomes all about help defense and rotation.

I feel the reason we give up a lot of offensive rebounds is because the team is set up to run in transition at the expense of crashing the boards - it's a conscious effort they have at least when the top 6 is on the court. If you look at their positioning after misses it's why they tend not to box out, they're ready to run. It's only when we have guys like Luke or Queta or Brissett on the court that this changes somewhat due to the limitations of those players in a transition game.

[BitterJim]

Tatum is the starting PF, so I don’t think the C’s are lacking depth at the 4/5.

That is where I disagree.  Tatum is not a PF or a C (4 or 5).  He is a wing.  He is a big wing, but still a wing.  Even when we end up with bad match ups, it isn't Tatum that ends up covering the extra big on the other team.  It is usually Holiday and sometimes Brown.  The Celtics play most of the time with only 1 big, 4/5, PF/C, whatever you want to call it.  Most teams play with 2 bigs.  That mismatch has not hurt the Celtics all that much in the regular season, obviously, although we give up too many offensive rebounds.  It may become more of a vulnerability in the playoffs.

MIL in particular has been able to exploit this.  They have 3 solid, full-sized bigs and that has given the Celtics problems.

The PF position has changed. Most teams aren’t going with a traditional double big lineup.

These are the starting PF’s in the East right now: Tatum, Giannis, Anunoby, Tobias Harris, Mobley, Butler, Banchero, Derozan, Hunter, Siakam, Barnes, Bridges, Kuzma, Clowney,  Metu.

The majority are large (S)wings. Tatum matches up fine with those guys, other than Giannis. No one matches up well with Giannis.

I think a lot of people still keep to the traditional positions of PG, SG, SF, PF and C when it's really gotten to be ball handers, wings and bigs (as Brad called it back in 2017). It's probably a sign of our ages 

The new era of the NBA requires versatility to win, and the Boston Celtics are adjusting.

"I don’t have the five positions anymore," Celtics coach Brad Stevens said, per Kareem Copeland of the Associated Press. "It may be as simple as three positions now, where you’re either a ball-handler, a wing or a big.

"It's really important. We've become more versatile as the years have gone on."

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2720250-brad-stevens-says-celtics-have-3-not-5-positions-now

Then you have swings, which are basically your KPs - stretch bigs who can spread the floor. At any point, in a switching defense, they all have to defend 1-5 on the other team (or at least 2-5 for some of the slower-footed bigs, where we play drop coverage). Because of all the switching, both offensively and defensively, nobody ends up guarding the same assignment for the whole game, so it becomes all about help defense and rotation.

I feel the reason we give up a lot of offensive rebounds is because the team is set up to run in transition at the expense of crashing the boards - it's a conscious effort they have at least when the top 6 is on the court. If you look at their positioning after misses it's why they tend not to box out, they're ready to run. It's only when we have guys like Luke or Queta or Brissett on the court that this changes somewhat due to the limitations of those players in a transition game.

I don't think KP is a Swing, he's a Big for sure. A Swing would be more of a Brissett/Giannis/PJ Tucker guy who can cover SFs and PFs. KP is really only able to cover Centers and more traditional PFs.

[ozgod]

Tatum is the starting PF, so I don’t think the C’s are lacking depth at the 4/5.

That is where I disagree.  Tatum is not a PF or a C (4 or 5).  He is a wing.  He is a big wing, but still a wing.  Even when we end up with bad match ups, it isn't Tatum that ends up covering the extra big on the other team.  It is usually Holiday and sometimes Brown.  The Celtics play most of the time with only 1 big, 4/5, PF/C, whatever you want to call it.  Most teams play with 2 bigs.  That mismatch has not hurt the Celtics all that much in the regular season, obviously, although we give up too many offensive rebounds.  It may become more of a vulnerability in the playoffs.

MIL in particular has been able to exploit this.  They have 3 solid, full-sized bigs and that has given the Celtics problems.

The PF position has changed. Most teams aren’t going with a traditional double big lineup.

These are the starting PF’s in the East right now: Tatum, Giannis, Anunoby, Tobias Harris, Mobley, Butler, Banchero, Derozan, Hunter, Siakam, Barnes, Bridges, Kuzma, Clowney,  Metu.

The majority are large (S)wings. Tatum matches up fine with those guys, other than Giannis. No one matches up well with Giannis.

I think a lot of people still keep to the traditional positions of PG, SG, SF, PF and C when it's really gotten to be ball handers, wings and bigs (as Brad called it back in 2017). It's probably a sign of our ages 

The new era of the NBA requires versatility to win, and the Boston Celtics are adjusting.

"I don’t have the five positions anymore," Celtics coach Brad Stevens said, per Kareem Copeland of the Associated Press. "It may be as simple as three positions now, where you’re either a ball-handler, a wing or a big.

"It's really important. We've become more versatile as the years have gone on."

https://bleacherreport.com/articles/2720250-brad-stevens-says-celtics-have-3-not-5-positions-now

Then you have swings, which are basically your KPs - stretch bigs who can spread the floor. At any point, in a switching defense, they all have to defend 1-5 on the other team (or at least 2-5 for some of the slower-footed bigs, where we play drop coverage). Because of all the switching, both offensively and defensively, nobody ends up guarding the same assignment for the whole game, so it becomes all about help defense and rotation.

I feel the reason we give up a lot of offensive rebounds is because the team is set up to run in transition at the expense of crashing the boards - it's a conscious effort they have at least when the top 6 is on the court. If you look at their positioning after misses it's why they tend not to box out, they're ready to run. It's only when we have guys like Luke or Queta or Brissett on the court that this changes somewhat due to the limitations of those players in a transition game.

I don't think KP is a Swing, he's a Big for sure. A Swing would be more of a Brissett/Giannis/PJ Tucker guy who can cover SFs and PFs. KP is really only able to cover Centers and more traditional PFs.

I guess I was thinking of him offensively rather than defensively. I agree he’s definitely not a swing defensively.

[Vermont Green]

In looking at the potential match ups in the east, several of the teams have the size that worries me:

MIL:  Giannis, Lopez (Portis)
NYK: Randle*, Robinson (Hartenstein)
CLE:  Mobley, Allen (Wade)
ORL:  Banchero, Carter (Issac)
IND:  Siakam, Turner (Smith)
PHI:  Harris, Embiid (Reed)
MIA:  Jovic, Adebayo (Love)

So "most" of those teams are going to have a size advantage over BOS.   They have an established 3 big rotation (at least) and generally play with 2 bigs on the floor most of the time.  PHI is the clear outlier, Harris is no more of a big than Tatum is.  NYK is down one with Randle hurt, but they have Achiuwa to fill in so they can play the same style, although it appears they will start Anunoby who is not a big.  That is still 5 of the 7 teams that play big, and another one that would if not for injury.  NYK clearly has a size advantage overall and is a very good offensive rebounding team (the thing that worries me the most) even without Randle.  You can quibble that Siakam is not a big, more of a swing, but I don't see that.  He is averaging 2.1 ORebs with IND (Tatum 0.9 ORebs)  He is far more PF than say Harris (1.1 ORebs).  Quantity of ORebs in of itself does not define who is a PF, but I see it as an indicator of style of play or emphasis.

This is how teams with size are going to try to beat the Celtics in the playoffs.  Teams that can out offensive rebound the Celtics will have a chance.  Teams will try to attack Porzingis and whoever ends up on the second big (that has typically been Holiday).  On the other hand, the Celtics will try to use the opponents' size against them by playing with pace, forcing switches, taking a lot of 3s.  The Celtics are still the top team.  Other teams have a size advantage in most cases but the Celtics have more scoring weapons, more athletes, more just about everything else.  But I feel that fans are ignoring something fairly obvious if you don't acknowledge that nearly every team will have a size advantage over the Celtics.

[tazzmaniac]

In looking at the potential match ups in the east, several of the teams have the size that worries me:

MIL:  Giannis, Lopez (Portis)
NYK: Randle*, Robinson (Hartenstein)
CLE:  Mobley, Allen (Wade)
ORL:  Banchero, Carter (Issac)
IND:  Siakam, Turner (Smith)
PHI:  Harris, Embiid (Reed)
MIA:  Jovic, Adebayo (Love)

So "most" of those teams are going to have a size advantage over BOS.   They have an established 3 big rotation (at least) and generally play with 2 bigs on the floor most of the time.  PHI is the clear outlier, Harris is no more of a big than Tatum is.  NYK is down one with Randle hurt, but they have Achiuwa to fill in so they can play the same style, although it appears they will start Anunoby who is not a big.  That is still 5 of the 7 teams that play big, and another one that would if not for injury.  NYK clearly has a size advantage overall and is a very good offensive rebounding team (the thing that worries me the most) even without Randle.  You can quibble that Siakam is not a big, more of a swing, but I don't see that.  He is averaging 2.1 ORebs with IND (Tatum 0.9 ORebs)  He is far more PF than say Harris (1.1 ORebs).  Quantity of ORebs in of itself does not define who is a PF, but I see it as an indicator of style of play or emphasis.

This is how teams with size are going to try to beat the Celtics in the playoffs.  Teams that can out offensive rebound the Celtics will have a chance.  Teams will try to attack Porzingis and whoever ends up on the second big (that has typically been Holiday).  On the other hand, the Celtics will try to use the opponents' size against them by playing with pace, forcing switches, taking a lot of 3s.  The Celtics are still the top team.  Other teams have a size advantage in most cases but the Celtics have more scoring weapons, more athletes, more just about everything else.  But I feel that fans are ignoring something fairly obvious if you don't acknowledge that nearly every team will have a size advantage over the Celtics.

Weren't these "teams with size" trying to use their size to beat the Celts in the regular season?  How'd that go?  The Celts were 9th in DREB% so an above average defense rebounding team.  The Celts might lose a game because of offensive rebounding but they aren't going to lose a series because of it.

[Vermont Green]

In looking at the potential match ups in the east, several of the teams have the size that worries me:

MIL:  Giannis, Lopez (Portis)
NYK: Randle*, Robinson (Hartenstein)
CLE:  Mobley, Allen (Wade)
ORL:  Banchero, Carter (Issac)
IND:  Siakam, Turner (Smith)
PHI:  Harris, Embiid (Reed)
MIA:  Jovic, Adebayo (Love)

So "most" of those teams are going to have a size advantage over BOS.   They have an established 3 big rotation (at least) and generally play with 2 bigs on the floor most of the time.  PHI is the clear outlier, Harris is no more of a big than Tatum is.  NYK is down one with Randle hurt, but they have Achiuwa to fill in so they can play the same style, although it appears they will start Anunoby who is not a big.  That is still 5 of the 7 teams that play big, and another one that would if not for injury.  NYK clearly has a size advantage overall and is a very good offensive rebounding team (the thing that worries me the most) even without Randle.  You can quibble that Siakam is not a big, more of a swing, but I don't see that.  He is averaging 2.1 ORebs with IND (Tatum 0.9 ORebs)  He is far more PF than say Harris (1.1 ORebs).  Quantity of ORebs in of itself does not define who is a PF, but I see it as an indicator of style of play or emphasis.

This is how teams with size are going to try to beat the Celtics in the playoffs.  Teams that can out offensive rebound the Celtics will have a chance.  Teams will try to attack Porzingis and whoever ends up on the second big (that has typically been Holiday).  On the other hand, the Celtics will try to use the opponents' size against them by playing with pace, forcing switches, taking a lot of 3s.  The Celtics are still the top team.  Other teams have a size advantage in most cases but the Celtics have more scoring weapons, more athletes, more just about everything else.  But I feel that fans are ignoring something fairly obvious if you don't acknowledge that nearly every team will have a size advantage over the Celtics.

Weren't these "teams with size" trying to use their size to beat the Celts in the regular season?  How'd that go?  The Celts were 9th in DREB% so an above average defense rebounding team.  The Celts might lose a game because of offensive rebounding but they aren't going to lose a series because of it.

MIL in particular did pretty well vs. BOS in the regular season.  I am not saying that the size disadvantage will necessarily change the outcome of a playoff series, although it very well could if we see MIL along the way.  One of the comments was that BOS does not lack depth at PF/C.  We do.  It is our one weakness.  In the playoffs, games are called differently by the refs and teams are able to focus their game plans better for a specific team.  We have 2 bigs that are playoff caliber.  Most of the teams we will see have 3 or more playoff rotation bigs.  You are going to see Holiday trying to cover centers and other unfavorable match ups.  In spite of that, BOS is favored as the top seed in the East.  I just don't get why people can't acknowledge this and that we are a small team.

[Birdman]

If we are the best team out there & our record shows it, it doesn’t matter who we play, should take care of business & win the title

[Silas]

If we are the best team out there & our record shows it, it doesn’t matter who we play, should take care of business & win the title

I agree!

[Phantom255x]

I ultimately still think Tillman is going to be functioning as our 3rd big in the playoffs. Kornet has had a great season and showed a lot of growth and improvement than even I expected. That said, there are certain matchups like the Heat where he's just not that playable. Against the more physical bigs he can get tossed around at times. Tillman can probably hold up similar to how G-Will did for us in recent years in a similar role.

The reality is, whether injuries or foul trouble, it's not like Horford and Porzingis can play all 48 minutes of every game. I do think Brissett though can function as a "frontcourt energizer bunny", like a guy who can hustle, grab boards and occasionally push the pace. They could use that when they go smaller.

Everything else to me feels straightforward. Pritchard I think might have found a slightly increased role than expected from a few months ago due to his awesome play, but it's primarily White and Holiday and Brown obviously.

[Donoghus]

I ultimately still think Tillman is going to be functioning as our 3rd big in the playoffs. Kornet has had a great season and showed a lot of growth and improvement than even I expected. That said, there are certain matchups like the Heat where he's just not that playable. Against the more physical bigs he can get tossed around at times. Tillman can probably hold up similar to how G-Will did for us in recent years in a similar role.

The reality is, whether injuries or foul trouble, it's not like Horford and Porzingis can play all 48 minutes of every game. I do think Brissett though can function as a "frontcourt energizer bunny", like a guy who can hustle, grab boards and occasionally push the pace. They could use that when they go smaller.

Everything else to me feels straightforward. Pritchard I think might have found a slightly increased role than expected from a few months ago due to his awesome play, but it's primarily White and Holiday and Brown obviously.

Maybe Tillman will have a PJ Brown moment?

(The ultimate "No..No...Yes!" moment.