People need to cool the Kyrie hype

[Ilikesports17]

Let me ask you guys a real question...

If you switch Isaiah Thomas with Kyrie Irving, in the same situation, who does better, and who do you think would lead to a (longer) if better winning streak, Uncle Drew or King of the 4th? You have to take into account the increased defensive potential the Celtics have mustered out there. We're infinitely an superior team. Does the few inches really mean that much of a difference, or is Kyrie benefiting more from Horford, than Isaiah did?

We'll see. The season is still young.

Hard to tell. I think a big reason the offense has been so mediocre is because they are all adjusting to eachother. Not sure how much smoother the transition would have been with Isaiah still here.

[wayupnorth]

LOL at anyone who compares Kyries short time here to IT last season.

He had played in this offense for almost two years, and with mostly the same core, and yet you compare him to Kyrie, who is new to both the team and the system, as are most of the other players.

Seriously, you don't think Kyrie will look better after 2 and a half years with similar players and the same system?

[green_bballers13]

LOL at anyone who compares Kyries short time here to IT last season.

He had played in this offense for almost two years, and with mostly the same core, and yet you compare him to Kyrie, who is new to both the team and the system, as are most of the other players.

Seriously, you don't think Kyrie will look better after 2 and a half years with similar players and the same system?

I think few disagree that Kyrie is a better fit for the Celtics long term.

The points of contention seem to be:

-Is Kyrie Irving a cupcake?
-Should we dampen our expectations of Kyrie?

I think Kyrie might have nursed some injuries and missed a couple games in the past. I also think he's on the "fragile" side of the NBA spectrum. I'm not ready to call him a cupcake, yet. I'm going to see what he does in a full year with the Celtics before I judge that.

I also see no reason why we can't be optimistic about his future. His handle might be the best in the league.

[Roy H.]

His handle might be the best in the league.

I think it’s the best, hands down.

[GetLucky]

LOL at anyone who compares Kyries short time here to IT last season.

He had played in this offense for almost two years, and with mostly the same core, and yet you compare him to Kyrie, who is new to both the team and the system, as are most of the other players.

Seriously, you don't think Kyrie will look better after 2 and a half years with similar players and the same system?

I think few disagree that Kyrie is a better fit for the Celtics long term.

The points of contention seem to be:

-Is Kyrie Irving a cupcake?
-Should we dampen our expectations of Kyrie?

I think Kyrie might have nursed some injuries and missed a couple games in the past. I also think he's on the "fragile" side of the NBA spectrum. I'm not ready to call him a cupcake, yet. I'm going to see what he does in a full year with the Celtics before I judge that.

I also see no reason why we can't be optimistic about his future. His handle might be the best in the league.

Well, he went to Duke, soooooooooo

[wayupnorth]

LOL at anyone who compares Kyries short time here to IT last season.

He had played in this offense for almost two years, and with mostly the same core, and yet you compare him to Kyrie, who is new to both the team and the system, as are most of the other players.

Seriously, you don't think Kyrie will look better after 2 and a half years with similar players and the same system?

I think few disagree that Kyrie is a better fit for the Celtics long term.

The points of contention seem to be:

-Is Kyrie Irving a cupcake?
-Should we dampen our expectations of Kyrie?

I think Kyrie might have nursed some injuries and missed a couple games in the past. I also think he's on the "fragile" side of the NBA spectrum. I'm not ready to call him a cupcake, yet. I'm going to see what he does in a full year with the Celtics before I judge that.

I also see no reason why we can't be optimistic about his future. His handle might be the best in the league.

Well, he went to Duke, soooooooooo

As did Jaysen.

God help us.

lol

[Celtics4ever]

Celtics fast break points per game the last 3 years.  15-16 season 16.3 6th in the league, 16-17 12.4 17th in the league, this year 8.1 22nd in the league.  Celtics pace has gone from 15-16 101.15 3rd, to 16-17 99.32 12th, to this year 98.68 24th.

The C's are playing slower and slower as the league is playing faster and faster.  The fast break points that the C's are scoring have been cut in half.

Great points, TP   Our eyes often fail us when it comes to measuring empirical data such as basketball stats.  It is part of being human.

The only reason I was aware of this is that I had looked it prior to posting in thread, like 3-4 days before.

[Vermont Green]

LOL at anyone who compares Kyries short time here to IT last season.

He had played in this offense for almost two years, and with mostly the same core, and yet you compare him to Kyrie, who is new to both the team and the system, as are most of the other players.

Seriously, you don't think Kyrie will look better after 2 and a half years with similar players and the same system?

It had a generationally good single season for the Celtics last season but I agree that that is not the baseline to which to measure Irving, at least as it relates to assessing the trade.  The way to compare in terms of the trade is who is the player that we should be building around for the next 5 years.

I think that Kyrie can play the next 5 seasons at a level that is in the range of what IT did in 2016-17, maybe better.  I don't think IT will match that season ever again.  Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT, but if you consider their  statistical mean to date and projected for the future, Kyrie in my mind projects better and more than a little better.

Even without injury, IT would likely "revert to his mean" to some degree.  That "mean" is still really good, just not quite as good as Kyrie's mean.  Then you throw in the injury and the difference in age, and I feel it is clear that Kyrie is a much better investment.  I am very excited that he is a Celtic for at least two seasons and probably more and I don't intend to "cool" my excitement in any way.

[Androslav]

If anyone is curious, here are ITs stats for his first 15 Celtic games:
https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/t/thomais02/gamelog/2015#263-277-sum:pgl_basic
I was delighted by them, even though they don't look like much, as I knew he can only be better after some time.
I am applying the same logic to Kyrie's numbers.
Both are so "pointy" for the defenses to not get pierced.

[Roy H.]

LOL at anyone who compares Kyries short time here to IT last season.

He had played in this offense for almost two years, and with mostly the same core, and yet you compare him to Kyrie, who is new to both the team and the system, as are most of the other players.

Seriously, you don't think Kyrie will look better after 2 and a half years with similar players and the same system?

It had a generationally good single season for the Celtics last season but I agree that that is not the baseline to which to measure Irving, at least as it relates to assessing the trade.  The way to compare in terms of the trade is who is the player that we should be building around for the next 5 years.

I think that Kyrie can play the next 5 seasons at a level that is in the range of what IT did in 2016-17, maybe better.  I don't think IT will match that season ever again.  Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT, but if you consider their  statistical mean to date and projected for the future, Kyrie in my mind projects better and more than a little better.

Even without injury, IT would likely "revert to his mean" to some degree.  That "mean" is still really good, just not quite as good as Kyrie's mean.  Then you throw in the injury and the difference in age, and I feel it is clear that Kyrie is a much better investment.  I am very excited that he is a Celtic for at least two seasons and probably more and I don't intend to "cool" my excitement in any way.

I agree with a lot of that, and understand almost all of it.  The only thing I don’t get at all:

Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT

Based on what we’ve seen of both players in green, what elevates current Kyrie over 2017 IT? 

[chilidawg]

LOL at anyone who compares Kyries short time here to IT last season.

He had played in this offense for almost two years, and with mostly the same core, and yet you compare him to Kyrie, who is new to both the team and the system, as are most of the other players.

Seriously, you don't think Kyrie will look better after 2 and a half years with similar players and the same system?

It had a generationally good single season for the Celtics last season but I agree that that is not the baseline to which to measure Irving, at least as it relates to assessing the trade.  The way to compare in terms of the trade is who is the player that we should be building around for the next 5 years.

I think that Kyrie can play the next 5 seasons at a level that is in the range of what IT did in 2016-17, maybe better.  I don't think IT will match that season ever again.  Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT, but if you consider their  statistical mean to date and projected for the future, Kyrie in my mind projects better and more than a little better.

Even without injury, IT would likely "revert to his mean" to some degree.  That "mean" is still really good, just not quite as good as Kyrie's mean.  Then you throw in the injury and the difference in age, and I feel it is clear that Kyrie is a much better investment.  I am very excited that he is a Celtic for at least two seasons and probably more and I don't intend to "cool" my excitement in any way.

I agree with a lot of that, and understand almost all of it.  The only thing I don’t get at all:

Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT

Based on what we’ve seen of both players in green, what elevates current Kyrie over 2017 IT?

Defense.  Half the game.

[kozlodoev]

Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT

Based on what we’ve seen of both players in green, what elevates current Kyrie over 2017 IT?

The fact that even though you won't confuse Kyrie for a defensive stopper, you actually do not have to devise an entire defensive system to hide him away from the action. Or are we just looking at the offensive side of the ball now?

[Androslav]

Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT

Based on what we’ve seen of both players in green, what elevates current Kyrie over 2017 IT?

The fact that even though you won't confuse Kyrie for a defensive stopper, you actually do not have to devise an entire defensive system to hide him away from the action. Or are we just looking at the offensive side of the ball now?

That was it. Got me decided longterm too.
Those were some ugly compromises for the D, running him ASAP to (any) corner, just to get away further from the PNR action. And also Smart (and others too) switching one more time before the "real switch" to postpone/negate the switch where IT gets to be involved in the main action. I am glad that is a part of Celtic history now, as it never smelled like a win-big type of basketball.

[Vermont Green]

I agree with a lot of that, and understand almost all of it.  The only thing I don’t get at all:

Based on the short sample size we have with Kyrie as a Celtic, I think Kyrie is better than IT, maybe only slightly better than the 2016-17 IT

Based on what we’ve seen of both players in green, what elevates current Kyrie over 2017 IT?

Kyrie is making as many big shots so far (although not quite as many overall shots); is showing more ability to get other involved, maybe not based on assist stats but he seems to open up more things for other player but at time after multiple passes (so doesn't count as an assist); is playing better defense and enabling better overall team defense; and is just getting started on a team that suffered a major loss in the first game.

Yes, I think Kyrie is right there with 2016-17 IT, and maybe a little better (hard to be all that much better than what IT did last season).