Rozier, Brown and Hayward were the three best players on the court tonight. Given all the grief these guys have taken on this site....it's good to see.
But dang, why can't Rozier be like this when coming off the bench? It's like he is a completely different player. If Rozier played off the bench the way he started, he would be one of the more sought after free agents this summer. What a moron for not making sure he was the same player coming off the bench as he is starting. He is costing himself tens of millions of dollars.
I'm curious to know what you make of Brown/Rozier/Hayward having excellent games with Kyrie out, and Rozier's issues coming off the bench. To be transparent, I'm asking in the context of your staunch support for Kyrie - no set-up here.
Well, Rozier has been like this since his first year. When he started in Maine he was great, got a chance here off the bench and wasn't good. I don't think IT or Kyrie limiting his minutes affects or affected Rozier. I think it's something internal with him. He just plays better knowing he is starting.
As for Hayward and Brown, they have both played well when Kyrie plays. Hayward's problems are due to not being 100% physically or 100% mentally to have the confidence to do what he used to do. If he was 100% to start the season, I think Hayward and Kyrie would have a wicked 2 man game going on right now. Hayward at 100% is that good.
Brown was Brown's problem early. He went from a number one option last year in the playoffs to being the 5th option to start the season as a starter. That would effect any 21-22 year old in the league.
I think Brown and Hayward will continue to get better and better, regardless of who is starting at PG. By the playoffs I can see Hayward being close to 100% and Brown just taking his game to a level equal to or better than last year's playoffs.
Certainly both Hayward and Brown are trending in that direction.
I didn't know that was a trend for Rozier going back to Maine. That's a fair point. Through interviews and his play when he starts, I do get the impression that it's somewhat ego-driven, which seems somewhat fair - he does play like a starter when he starts, and he entered the league as a "fair" prospect with a chip on his shoulder.
Hayward has certainly been limited by his injury and recovery, which is completely understandable, and I agree that they'd play well; I think Hayward could play well with anyone, though.
Brown is a different case. While he's trending upward, he has regressed. I agree with you regarding Brown and Rozier - both went from top options on a successful playoff run during their prime developmental years, and they haven't responded well to being downgraded to lesser roles. And that's understandable and expected for 22-24 year olds.
This is also related to my primary concern - we have excellent prospects that have played poorly since Kyrie's return. Realizing that concern this season sucks because these guys are our ticket to long-term contention, and they've proven to be very good players. Kyrie's stats are trending upward, but I don't see him making any one better. Again, I believe he has the ability, but until he does, we're failing to support our best prospects in their prime developmental years. I don't know about you, but I care more about that than an off-shot of contending with GS this season.
I also think Brown and Hayward will also continue to trend upward.
I disagree with Kyrie making players better.
First off, take a look at the way Tatum, Rozier, Smart and Rozier finish and handle the ball. Every single one of them have learned moves from Kyrie's encyclopedia of moves. Every one has learned a crossover or finish that Kyrie does naturally but that by learning those things from Kyrie have made them more dangerous and better as an offensive player.
Second, Kyrie is having a career year in assisting his team mates and it's a correlation that the more assists the Celtics have in a game, the better they are. Assists and ball movement have gone through the roof since the start of December. The vast majority of those games with Kyrie. It also is when Boston has played their best ball as they are now 20-9 since very late November. So that tells me Kyrie has been making his team mates better since Kyrie has been playing his best ball when Boston has been passing the ball the best which has caused them to win over 70%of their games in that time.
There's no doubt that playing with Kyrie every day has improved their individual abilities. That doesn't necessarily improve the team, though, or player development from a broader perspective. Do you care more about their developing footwork and finishing abilities this season, or developing as a young core? Getting reps in big games? Learning how to win together?
Kyrie's assist numbers are trending upward, same with his scoring. But that also doesn't necessarily indicate that he's making his teammates better; his assist numbers definitely aren't an indicator of player or team development.
I think what you are trying to do is take the quantitative out of this and make it completely subjective.
If players learn new moves and new finishers and new passes from a player that makes them individually better as a player but also your team better since you will use those new moves in games to your team's success. So, yeah, learning new moves does make your team better as a whole because you are more dangerous as a player.
I just do not see if you are scoring about what you used to score in other years but giving out more assists than you used to while leading the league in secondary assists, how you are not making your team and team mates better.
The core of this team is coming together. The team has been a roller coaster and yet still one of the best in the league. Stevens is an amazing coach, some poor substitution patterns not withstanding, and while you may not see this team gelling and Kyrie being an overwhelming positive factor, I do. But I have stats and strong logical arguments to at least, help explain my opinion and support it. So subjective with qualitative support. But you want to set those things aside and talk about what you see versus what I see, hence subjective and wanting to take the qualitative part out.
Did you provide quantitative support for your position? If I missed it, I apologize for glossing over it. So far, I have only seen your subjective take, which I actually think is undervalued on this forum. Our most advanced stats are very flawed, and I do believe that a well-informed eye test goes a long way.
Quantitatively, the Celtics' most used lineup last year was fantastic, but better after swapping out Kyrie for either Smart or Rozier. That's meaningful, and a larger sample size than any that I've seen presented on this season. I've shared that in other threads, but it may have gone unnoticed.
Players can learn new moves and not necessarily develop on a broader scope. I'd argue there are many factors more important to their growth (Rozier, Brown, Tatum) than learning new moves, including those I listed above.
Increased scoring and assists are an indicator of individual achievement, but definitely not team development. It means he has a higher and/or more efficient usage, and again, this is seen in the context of regression by nearly every one on the team not named Mook.