The Kyrie Irving free agency thread(to sign 4yr/$141M w/Nets page 105)

[celticsclay]

Maybe he was sick, but this is not the lowest percentage he has shot in a game this season.  He had 2 separate regular season games with a worse shooting percentage and one of those he took 14 shots making just 2 (so it wasn't a small sample size).  He had 5 separate regular season games this year where he was 30% or worse from the field and in 2 of those games he had 21 shots (making 6) and 17 shots (making 5). 

This also isn't the first time he has been terrible in the playoffs.  His last year in Cleveland he was 4 of 17, 6 of 19, and 7 of 21.  Even one of the finals games he was just 8 of 23.  The year before that when Cleveland won the title he had a lovely 3 of 19 game against the Raptors in the ECF.  He also had 3 separate finals games against the Warriors where he was 7 of 22, 5 of 14, and 7 of 18.  Even that first season where he ended up missing a lot of games, he was pretty bad in 3 games going 2 of 10, 3 of 13, and 3 of 11.  In other words, Kyrie has pretty consistently throughout his playoff runs put up some pretty awful shooting performances.

So yeah there is amazing playoff Kyrie, which we see at times (like game 1), but there is also the playoff Kyrie that is downright terrible (like game 2).  And again maybe he really was sick, or maybe it was just Kyrie being Kyrie and the writers are trying to make excuses for his otherwise poor play.

Why would the writers do this? It certainly doesn't seem like Kyrie is a media darling. Also Brad implied he was too right?

[celticsclay]

Maybe he was sick, but this is not the lowest percentage he has shot in a game this season.  He had 2 separate regular season games with a worse shooting percentage and one of those he took 14 shots making just 2 (so it wasn't a small sample size).  He had 5 separate regular season games this year where he was 30% or worse from the field and in 2 of those games he had 21 shots (making 6) and 17 shots (making 5). 

This also isn't the first time he has been terrible in the playoffs.  His last year in Cleveland he was 4 of 17, 6 of 19, and 7 of 21.  Even one of the finals games he was just 8 of 23.  The year before that when Cleveland won the title he had a lovely 3 of 19 game against the Raptors in the ECF.  He also had 3 separate finals games against the Warriors where he was 7 of 22, 5 of 14, and 7 of 18.  Even that first season where he ended up missing a lot of games, he was pretty bad in 3 games going 2 of 10, 3 of 13, and 3 of 11.  In other words, Kyrie has pretty consistently throughout his playoff runs put up some pretty awful shooting performances.

So yeah there is amazing playoff Kyrie, which we see at times (like game 1), but there is also the playoff Kyrie that is downright terrible (like game 2).  And again maybe he really was sick, or maybe it was just Kyrie being Kyrie and the writers are trying to make excuses for his otherwise poor play.

Do you log a diary entry every time he has a bad shooting night?

The fact is, most players - even elite ones - have bad shooting nights. Kyrie is not immune from that, but he is still one of the most efficient shot makers in the game (his playoff averages are .461 FG/.412 3PTFG /.876 FT with a true shooting percentage of 57%). We can cherry pick stats from an assortment of players.

This is the same argument I made time and time again on here about Rondo.  This board has pretty consistently only examined the great things our players do and pretty widely disregarded the poor things and the inconsistency.  The reason though that that sort of inconsistency matters more for Kyrie, then many other great players, is quite simply because Kyrie doesn't do much else.  He isn't making up for a poor shooting night by playing lights out defense.  He isn't cleaning up the glass and by and large isn't getting others involved with his passing.  If Kyrie doesn't shoot well it is a bad sign for the W/L department, especially against the better teams the C's face in the playoffs.

Seems pretty strange to me to have a moderator on a board making sweeping criticisms about the board as a whole? We are all idiots that only look at the great things our players and disregard poor play and inconsistency?

[RJ87]

Maybe he was sick, but this is not the lowest percentage he has shot in a game this season.  He had 2 separate regular season games with a worse shooting percentage and one of those he took 14 shots making just 2 (so it wasn't a small sample size).  He had 5 separate regular season games this year where he was 30% or worse from the field and in 2 of those games he had 21 shots (making 6) and 17 shots (making 5). 

This also isn't the first time he has been terrible in the playoffs.  His last year in Cleveland he was 4 of 17, 6 of 19, and 7 of 21.  Even one of the finals games he was just 8 of 23.  The year before that when Cleveland won the title he had a lovely 3 of 19 game against the Raptors in the ECF.  He also had 3 separate finals games against the Warriors where he was 7 of 22, 5 of 14, and 7 of 18.  Even that first season where he ended up missing a lot of games, he was pretty bad in 3 games going 2 of 10, 3 of 13, and 3 of 11.  In other words, Kyrie has pretty consistently throughout his playoff runs put up some pretty awful shooting performances.

So yeah there is amazing playoff Kyrie, which we see at times (like game 1), but there is also the playoff Kyrie that is downright terrible (like game 2).  And again maybe he really was sick, or maybe it was just Kyrie being Kyrie and the writers are trying to make excuses for his otherwise poor play.

Do you log a diary entry every time he has a bad shooting night?

The fact is, most players - even elite ones - have bad shooting nights. Kyrie is not immune from that, but he is still one of the most efficient shot makers in the game (his playoff averages are .461 FG/.412 3PTFG /.876 FT with a true shooting percentage of 57%). We can cherry pick stats from an assortment of players.

This is the same argument I made time and time again on here about Rondo.  This board has pretty consistently only examined the great things our players do and pretty widely disregarded the poor things and the inconsistency.  The reason though that that sort of inconsistency matters more for Kyrie, then many other great players, is quite simply because Kyrie doesn't do much else.  He isn't making up for a poor shooting night by playing lights out defense.  He isn't cleaning up the glass and by and large isn't getting others involved with his passing.  If Kyrie doesn't shoot well it is a bad sign for the W/L department, especially against the better teams the C's face in the playoffs.

Seems pretty strange to me to have a moderator on a board making sweeping criticisms about the board as a whole? We are all idiots that only look at the great things our players and disregard poor play and inconsistency?

Yup. Moranis is the only poster capable of "seeing beyond" stats to the real truth.

[Ogaju]

Maybe he was sick, but this is not the lowest percentage he has shot in a game this season.  He had 2 separate regular season games with a worse shooting percentage and one of those he took 14 shots making just 2 (so it wasn't a small sample size).  He had 5 separate regular season games this year where he was 30% or worse from the field and in 2 of those games he had 21 shots (making 6) and 17 shots (making 5). 

This also isn't the first time he has been terrible in the playoffs.  His last year in Cleveland he was 4 of 17, 6 of 19, and 7 of 21.  Even one of the finals games he was just 8 of 23.  The year before that when Cleveland won the title he had a lovely 3 of 19 game against the Raptors in the ECF.  He also had 3 separate finals games against the Warriors where he was 7 of 22, 5 of 14, and 7 of 18.  Even that first season where he ended up missing a lot of games, he was pretty bad in 3 games going 2 of 10, 3 of 13, and 3 of 11.  In other words, Kyrie has pretty consistently throughout his playoff runs put up some pretty awful shooting performances.

So yeah there is amazing playoff Kyrie, which we see at times (like game 1), but there is also the playoff Kyrie that is downright terrible (like game 2).  And again maybe he really was sick, or maybe it was just Kyrie being Kyrie and the writers are trying to make excuses for his otherwise poor play.

Do you log a diary entry every time he has a bad shooting night?

The fact is, most players - even elite ones - have bad shooting nights. Kyrie is not immune from that, but he is still one of the most efficient shot makers in the game (his playoff averages are .461 FG/.412 3PTFG /.876 FT with a true shooting percentage of 57%). We can cherry pick stats from an assortment of players.

This is the same argument I made time and time again on here about Rondo.  This board has pretty consistently only examined the great things our players do and pretty widely disregarded the poor things and the inconsistency.  The reason though that that sort of inconsistency matters more for Kyrie, then many other great players, is quite simply because Kyrie doesn't do much else.  He isn't making up for a poor shooting night by playing lights out defense.  He isn't cleaning up the glass and by and large isn't getting others involved with his passing.  If Kyrie doesn't shoot well it is a bad sign for the W/L department, especially against the better teams the C's face in the playoffs.

The bolded part is a partially valid point because Kyrie can make up for a bad shooting night by being a facilitator if he wants,

[Big333223]

So you have a sick Kyrie and Hayward only has a 9.8% usage rate?  That is the problem right there.  Stevens should have run the offense through Hayward a lot more than he did last night.  Pace would have slowed, better shot selection, more team ball.  He did it for a couple possessions in the fourth and right away two assists and wide open looks for his teammates. 

Also, Middleton was guarding Hayward for 34 possessions and was able to sit in a corner with him and rest. 

One example of many poor decisions, but important nonetheless.

Agree completely, TP. A below 10% usage rate for the player who is in my mind our second best offensive decision maker is completely inexcusable

I couldn't watch the game last night so I'm curious about Hayward.

Isn't his low USG% on him? He was on the floor for 30 minutes last night, a night where apparently no one else had it (except Morris) and he only took 5 shots. I agree its inexcusable and it strikes me that Hayward would be chiefly to blame for being ineffectual in his minutes.

But I didn't get to see how it went down.

Hayward was not involved in the offense at all most of the game.  The few times he brought the ball up it was to initiate the horns set for Kyrie and Al.  Very few PnR with Al etc. that worked the last month or so.  The one time they ran PnR early it was with Baynes and he missed the wide open three. 

Outside of the set plays there isn't much opportunity to play freely on offense because I believe the philosophy is to get back on D and stop the transition.  Brown crashed the boards late, but figure if it was a close game Stevens wouldn't like that if he didn't get the rebound and there was a break.

Just not sure why we didn't let Hayward come in and run point during his first run just like Game 1.  It gets him going and Kyrie to the off guard.  Too often Hayward goes an hour (real time) without being involved. 

That said, I think everyone sucked, but Morris, and a lot of players stopped competing.

How much responsibility does Hayward need to take for that?

As I said, I didn't watch the game so maybe I shouldn't be saying this but it does seem to me that there's a trend where guys like Morris, Rozier, and Kyrie are often chastised for taking too many shots but when Hayward has a game where he barely shows up he's "not being used right." Stevens' system leaves a lot of room for guys to improvise. If Hayward isn't doing anything (forget not doing things well, just not doing anything) he has to carry a big percentage of the blame.

Tommy Heinsohn said the reason was he was sharing a lot of game time with Kyrie and Terry who were both the primary ball handlers who would initiate offense at the top of the key. Hayward was used the way Jaylen Brown was, to mainly stand in the corner as a spacer.

The other thing is, Gordon isn't the type of player to jack up shots for the sake of increasing his shot count, unlike some of the others who are a little more trigger happy.

Also keep in mind that they didn't move the ball around much last night as they have been in the past. Kyrie was trying to shoot his way out of his shooting slump.

It wouldn't be for the sake of his shot count, it would be for the sake of helping his team which was struggling to score points.

If he was in more of a Jaylen role last night, ok, but Jaylen put up about 11 shots a game this season and 12 shots last night. To me, if Hayward isn't being aggressive he needs to take responsibility for that. It's on him to make his presence known and I've, too often (even in the last 2 months) not felt his presence when he was on the court.

[Big333223]

Maybe he was sick, but this is not the lowest percentage he has shot in a game this season.  He had 2 separate regular season games with a worse shooting percentage and one of those he took 14 shots making just 2 (so it wasn't a small sample size).  He had 5 separate regular season games this year where he was 30% or worse from the field and in 2 of those games he had 21 shots (making 6) and 17 shots (making 5). 

This also isn't the first time he has been terrible in the playoffs.  His last year in Cleveland he was 4 of 17, 6 of 19, and 7 of 21.  Even one of the finals games he was just 8 of 23.  The year before that when Cleveland won the title he had a lovely 3 of 19 game against the Raptors in the ECF.  He also had 3 separate finals games against the Warriors where he was 7 of 22, 5 of 14, and 7 of 18.  Even that first season where he ended up missing a lot of games, he was pretty bad in 3 games going 2 of 10, 3 of 13, and 3 of 11.  In other words, Kyrie has pretty consistently throughout his playoff runs put up some pretty awful shooting performances.

So yeah there is amazing playoff Kyrie, which we see at times (like game 1), but there is also the playoff Kyrie that is downright terrible (like game 2).  And again maybe he really was sick, or maybe it was just Kyrie being Kyrie and the writers are trying to make excuses for his otherwise poor play.

Do you log a diary entry every time he has a bad shooting night?

The fact is, most players - even elite ones - have bad shooting nights. Kyrie is not immune from that, but he is still one of the most efficient shot makers in the game (his playoff averages are .461 FG/.412 3PTFG /.876 FT with a true shooting percentage of 57%). We can cherry pick stats from an assortment of players.

This is the same argument I made time and time again on here about Rondo.  This board has pretty consistently only examined the great things our players do and pretty widely disregarded the poor things and the inconsistency.  The reason though that that sort of inconsistency matters more for Kyrie, then many other great players, is quite simply because Kyrie doesn't do much else.  He isn't making up for a poor shooting night by playing lights out defense.  He isn't cleaning up the glass and by and large isn't getting others involved with his passing.  If Kyrie doesn't shoot well it is a bad sign for the W/L department, especially against the better teams the C's face in the playoffs.

The bolded part is a partially valid point because Kyrie can make up for a bad shooting night by being a facilitator if he wants,

He's also played very good defense this year, averaged the 4th most rebounds on the team, and - because of his consistent scoring ability - will bend defenses to the Celtics' advantage even on night's when he's scoring well.

[RJ87]

Maybe he was sick, but this is not the lowest percentage he has shot in a game this season.  He had 2 separate regular season games with a worse shooting percentage and one of those he took 14 shots making just 2 (so it wasn't a small sample size).  He had 5 separate regular season games this year where he was 30% or worse from the field and in 2 of those games he had 21 shots (making 6) and 17 shots (making 5). 

This also isn't the first time he has been terrible in the playoffs.  His last year in Cleveland he was 4 of 17, 6 of 19, and 7 of 21.  Even one of the finals games he was just 8 of 23.  The year before that when Cleveland won the title he had a lovely 3 of 19 game against the Raptors in the ECF.  He also had 3 separate finals games against the Warriors where he was 7 of 22, 5 of 14, and 7 of 18.  Even that first season where he ended up missing a lot of games, he was pretty bad in 3 games going 2 of 10, 3 of 13, and 3 of 11.  In other words, Kyrie has pretty consistently throughout his playoff runs put up some pretty awful shooting performances.

So yeah there is amazing playoff Kyrie, which we see at times (like game 1), but there is also the playoff Kyrie that is downright terrible (like game 2).  And again maybe he really was sick, or maybe it was just Kyrie being Kyrie and the writers are trying to make excuses for his otherwise poor play.

Do you log a diary entry every time he has a bad shooting night?

The fact is, most players - even elite ones - have bad shooting nights. Kyrie is not immune from that, but he is still one of the most efficient shot makers in the game (his playoff averages are .461 FG/.412 3PTFG /.876 FT with a true shooting percentage of 57%). We can cherry pick stats from an assortment of players.

This is the same argument I made time and time again on here about Rondo.  This board has pretty consistently only examined the great things our players do and pretty widely disregarded the poor things and the inconsistency.  The reason though that that sort of inconsistency matters more for Kyrie, then many other great players, is quite simply because Kyrie doesn't do much else.  He isn't making up for a poor shooting night by playing lights out defense.  He isn't cleaning up the glass and by and large isn't getting others involved with his passing.  If Kyrie doesn't shoot well it is a bad sign for the W/L department, especially against the better teams the C's face in the playoffs.

The bolded part is a partially valid point because Kyrie can make up for a bad shooting night by being a facilitator if he wants,

And he's been a facilitator in these playoffs, he's also giving more effort defensively and has carried over his uptick in rebounding from the regular season - some posters just refuse to admit that. But the thing with being a facilitator is that you can make all the passes you want, guys still need to make shots for it to count, right? Last night was a rough shooting night for everyone (except Morris & Al).

[Triplenickle]

Tatum is the one that needs to be taking 17 shots now, and it's why our offense is good and not great.

Problem is we don't know if it's Brads design or not...and if he does try to assert himself, then fans knock him for being iso-happy.

What makes other teams a handful to guard is players that can get their shot off the dribble, and to me that's how I tell the difference from a role-player to a star.

The Celts have Kyrie, Tatum, JB and Gordon to an extent, in that order, who can disrupt a defense.  Smart...but not really for himself, and Al only in the paint. Gordon is not quick enough to dominate from start to finish.

Now judging from what I see in these games, Brad has either not identified that aspect of the league, or he feels the 3 is much more important.

And it's why i'm dead set against trading any of those guys...even Rozier.

With players that can't score off the dribble...you will not have a contending team.

So my point is if you have guys that can iso...LET THEM ISO.

The IT team only had one, which was him. I have no idea why people want that again.

[SHAQATTACK]

all the major outlets today crucified the Celtics .   

Celtics are cooked ,  Irving hates Celtics ,  its a major media hate fest on Celtics and Love for Kyrie heading to NYC .

Every channel its the same thing .   Its about how all the best stars must play in a big market ....its just the way things need to be .   

i hate the major news outlets

[gpap]

all the major outlets today crucified the Celtics .   

Celtics are cooked ,  Irving hates Celtics ,  its a major media hate fest on Celtics and Love for Kyrie heading to NYC .

Every channel its the same thing .   Its about how all the best stars must play in a big market ....its just the way things need to be .   

i hate the major news outlets

I take it all with a major grain of salt.

[ozgod]

all the major outlets today crucified the Celtics .   

Celtics are cooked ,  Irving hates Celtics ,  its a major media hate fest on Celtics and Love for Kyrie heading to NYC .

Every channel its the same thing .   Its about how all the best stars must play in a big market ....its just the way things need to be .   

i hate the major news outlets

I take it all with a major grain of salt.

I was expecting it...the Bucks had to deal with it after Game 1, as did the Warriors after they gave up a 30 point lead. Haters are gonna hate 

[Moranis]

all the major outlets today crucified the Celtics .   

Celtics are cooked ,  Irving hates Celtics ,  its a major media hate fest on Celtics and Love for Kyrie heading to NYC .

Every channel its the same thing .   Its about how all the best stars must play in a big market ....its just the way things need to be .   

i hate the major news outlets

I take it all with a major grain of salt.

I was expecting it...the Bucks had to deal with it after Game 1, as did the Warriors after they gave up a 30 point lead. Haters are gonna hate 

Plus, game 2 was confirmation bias for those that thought the Bucks were going to win the series or that Irving was going to leave in the off-season.  Bucks have a game like that, it makes you think you were right. 

I'm really curious to see how game 3 goes as I do think it is a must win for Boston.  If they let Milwaukee take back home court in game 3, I think the series might just be over (I know not literally but I don't think Boston comes back from that either). 

[footey]

all the major outlets today crucified the Celtics .   

Celtics are cooked ,  Irving hates Celtics ,  its a major media hate fest on Celtics and Love for Kyrie heading to NYC .

Every channel its the same thing .   Its about how all the best stars must play in a big market ....its just the way things need to be .   

i hate the major news outlets

I take it all with a major grain of salt.

I was expecting it...the Bucks had to deal with it after Game 1, as did the Warriors after they gave up a 30 point lead. Haters are gonna hate 

Plus, game 2 was confirmation bias for those that thought the Bucks were going to win the series or that Irving was going to leave in the off-season.  Bucks have a game like that, it makes you think you were right. 

I'm really curious to see how game 3 goes as I do think it is a must win for Boston.  If they let Milwaukee take back home court in game 3, I think the series might just be over (I know not literally but I don't think Boston comes back from that either).

I agree.  I think if the game is close, our home court advantage will help. 

The Bucks defense is what concerns me the most. They played extremely long the last game, and really frustrated our ability to attack the paint and kick out.  That has become the motor of our offense, and we just never got it to work.  I'm less concerned about their offense, I think that we can tighten up the defense to contest better  the 3 point shooting.

[droopdog7]

Maybe he was sick, but this is not the lowest percentage he has shot in a game this season.  He had 2 separate regular season games with a worse shooting percentage and one of those he took 14 shots making just 2 (so it wasn't a small sample size).  He had 5 separate regular season games this year where he was 30% or worse from the field and in 2 of those games he had 21 shots (making 6) and 17 shots (making 5). 

This also isn't the first time he has been terrible in the playoffs.  His last year in Cleveland he was 4 of 17, 6 of 19, and 7 of 21.  Even one of the finals games he was just 8 of 23.  The year before that when Cleveland won the title he had a lovely 3 of 19 game against the Raptors in the ECF.  He also had 3 separate finals games against the Warriors where he was 7 of 22, 5 of 14, and 7 of 18.  Even that first season where he ended up missing a lot of games, he was pretty bad in 3 games going 2 of 10, 3 of 13, and 3 of 11.  In other words, Kyrie has pretty consistently throughout his playoff runs put up some pretty awful shooting performances.

So yeah there is amazing playoff Kyrie, which we see at times (like game 1), but there is also the playoff Kyrie that is downright terrible (like game 2).  And again maybe he really was sick, or maybe it was just Kyrie being Kyrie and the writers are trying to make excuses for his otherwise poor play.

Do you log a diary entry every time he has a bad shooting night?

The fact is, most players - even elite ones - have bad shooting nights. Kyrie is not immune from that, but he is still one of the most efficient shot makers in the game (his playoff averages are .461 FG/.412 3PTFG /.876 FT with a true shooting percentage of 57%). We can cherry pick stats from an assortment of players.

This is the same argument I made time and time again on here about Rondo.  This board has pretty consistently only examined the great things our players do and pretty widely disregarded the poor things and the inconsistency.  The reason though that that sort of inconsistency matters more for Kyrie, then many other great players, is quite simply because Kyrie doesn't do much else.  He isn't making up for a poor shooting night by playing lights out defense.  He isn't cleaning up the glass and by and large isn't getting others involved with his passing.  If Kyrie doesn't shoot well it is a bad sign for the W/L department, especially against the better teams the C's face in the playoffs.

The bolded part is a partially valid point because Kyrie can make up for a bad shooting night by being a facilitator if he wants,

And he's been a facilitator in these playoffs, he's also giving more effort defensively and has carried over his uptick in rebounding from the regular season - some posters just refuse to admit that. But the thing with being a facilitator is that you can make all the passes you want, guys still need to make shots for it to count, right? Last night was a rough shooting night for everyone (except Morris & Al).

I'm sorry but since when did Kyrie being inconsistent become a thing?  People seem to be disregarding the fact that the poster's entire premise is wrong.

[tenn_smoothie]

So you have a sick Kyrie and Hayward only has a 9.8% usage rate?  That is the problem right there.  Stevens should have run the offense through Hayward a lot more than he did last night.  Pace would have slowed, better shot selection, more team ball.  He did it for a couple possessions in the fourth and right away two assists and wide open looks for his teammates. 

Also, Middleton was guarding Hayward for 34 possessions and was able to sit in a corner with him and rest. 

One example of many poor decisions, but important nonetheless.

Agree completely, TP. A below 10% usage rate for the player who is in my mind our second best offensive decision maker is completely inexcusable

I couldn't watch the game last night so I'm curious about Hayward.

Isn't his low USG% on him? He was on the floor for 30 minutes last night, a night where apparently no one else had it (except Morris) and he only took 5 shots. I agree its inexcusable and it strikes me that Hayward would be chiefly to blame for being ineffectual in his minutes.

Good Gawd - No, it was not Hayward's fault - he is a playmaking forward and the ball has to be moving for him to be involved. He can't run to the free throw area and jump up and down asking for the ball. The point I have been futilely trying to make all year is that we have a bunch of players like Hayward who need movement to be effective and we have a point guard who needs spot-up shooters surrounding him to be effective. Kyrie's style and his teammates styles clash in the worst way. Irving would do better in Houston's system.