Celtics (22-4) at Spurs (17-8) Game #27 12/8/17

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Once again, practice proves that when Brad's preconceived gameplan falls apart, he really has no idea how to actually coach during the game. It's extremely frustrating to watch.

jesus christ koz, do you ever shut up on this single point? "no idea how to actually coach?" this is the sort of statement that undermines so much of what you say about stevens. you really do let your personal agenda interfere with you otherwise good basketball analyses.

just give it a rest.

So you think that when your big man is getting killed in isolation, and your star PG is jacking long contested threes, the correct coaching approach is to do nothing and keep your fingers crossed that they'll snap out of it? Well, congratulations, it didn't really work.

I'd be happy to give it a rest, but unfortunately he just keeps doing it.

Hate to agree with the super negative version of Koz here, but he's spot on with this. This has been one of Stevens' few flaws during his entire tenure in Boston. He simply struggles to make certain in-game adjustments with his rotation, gameplan, and play-calling.

Tonight was just yet another example of this unfolding. It certainly wasn't the only reason we lost, but it definitely played a part.

That's just the negative version. The super negative will come when I start complaining about leaving Rozier in too long at the start of the 4th.

Stevens has been doing a lot of things right (you just have to when you're winning so many games), but sometimes he just doesn't look like he has an idea how to adjust in-game.

Or perhaps panic-coaching isn't good coaching. Perhaps it takes more fortitude and wisdom to stay with something even when the results are unexpectedly working against you?

Its his commitment to his philosophy that is the thing that makes him so special. its his commitment to leaving players in the game who are struggling that helps develop them. its his commitment to hard-nosed defense and a specific offense that gets open looks that keeps us in most every game.

[86MaxwellSmart]

Spurs FLOPPED their way back into the game in the first half...Then FLOPPED their way to the win in the 4th...Refs bit on it---Swear, it looks like another Zapruder film with all the heads snapping back.

[BlastFromThePast]

We didn't make open shots, and we didn't rebound the basketball, therefore we didnt deserve to win this one.

Simple as that. Onto the next.

They have to be ready to box their man out if a shooting big man is dragging our center out of the key, or Brad needs to be ready to play another big.

That manu 3 doesn't exist if we just grab the rebound.

True.  So who off the bench had the length and toughness needed to grab that rebound?  Having seen the probs Al (and others) guarding LA AND Rudy Gay were having why put in Rozier who was nothing more than a decoy down the stretch instead of Theis?

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

Aldridge made Horford look like a chump all night long, and then Al didn't do jack squat on offense.

Ginobili hits two (essentially halfcourt) heaves.

Celtics got killed on the glass like Game 7 of the 2010 Finals (complete with Pau Gasol still sticking it to us).

Great work.

Nice melt. We're 22-5.

Relax.

There's always someone who has to say something like this. Like, it's wrong for me to be upset? I don't care if they'd been 26-0 coming into this game; they had a really good chance to beat a very good team on the road, and they screwed it up.

But I guess I can't be upset about a loss unless it's an elimination game in the playoffs, according to some people.

take away our 17 game win streak and we are 5-5!

we need to be winning 3 outta every 4 moving forward and stay out losing streaks. now we did win what? 4 straight before this one? ok time for another streak.

yeah, but if you take out the losses the celtics are undefeated!!!!!!!!!!! 

[jdz101]

Spurs FLOPPED their way back into the game in the first half...Then FLOPPED their way to the win in the 4th...Refs bit on it---Swear, it looks like another Zapruder film with all the heads snapping back.

That is manu's MO.

[trickybilly]

It's almost like Brad has a no-trap/no-double, switch everything every time, team policy - in every situation.

The advanced stats probably bear it out..

[SCeltic34]

Once again, practice proves that when Brad's preconceived gameplan falls apart, he really has no idea how to actually coach during the game. It's extremely frustrating to watch.

jesus christ koz, do you ever shut up on this single point? "no idea how to actually coach?" this is the sort of statement that undermines so much of what you say about stevens. you really do let your personal agenda interfere with you otherwise good basketball analyses.

just give it a rest.

So you think that when your big man is getting killed in isolation, and your star PG is jacking long contested threes, the correct coaching approach is to do nothing and keep your fingers crossed that they'll snap out of it? Well, congratulations, it didn't really work.

I'd be happy to give it a rest, but unfortunately he just keeps doing it.

Hate to agree with the super negative version of Koz here, but he's spot on with this. This has been one of Stevens' few flaws during his entire tenure in Boston. He simply struggles to make certain in-game adjustments with his rotation, gameplan, and play-calling.

Tonight was just yet another example of this unfolding. It certainly wasn't the only reason we lost, but it definitely played a part.

That's just the negative version. The super negative will come when I start complaining about leaving Rozier in too long at the start of the 4th.

Stevens has been doing a lot of things right (you just have to when you're winning so many games), but sometimes he just doesn't look like he has an idea how to adjust in-game.

Or perhaps panic-coaching isn't good coaching. Perhaps it takes more fortitude and wisdom to stay with something even when the results are unexpectedly working against you?

Its his commitment to his philosophy that is the thing that makes him so special. its his commitment to leaving players in the game who are struggling that helps develop them. its his commitment to hard-nosed defense and a specific offense that gets open looks that keeps us in most every game.

Agreed to a certain extent.  But he needs to make adjustments when things clearly are not working - like forcing the ball out of LMA's hands by doubling in the post after he had scored numerous times over Horford.

The most egregious example was last year in the playoffs versus Cleveland where he refused to adjust pick and roll coverage, continuing to switch everything.  Oh how I loved to watch Olynyk try to guard LeBron on the perimeter.

Stevens is a top notch coach, but he can still get better.

[jdz101]

We didn't make open shots, and we didn't rebound the basketball, therefore we didnt deserve to win this one.

Simple as that. Onto the next.

They have to be ready to box their man out if a shooting big man is dragging our center out of the key, or Brad needs to be ready to play another big.

That manu 3 doesn't exist if we just grab the rebound.

True.  So who off the bench had the length and toughness needed to grab that rebound?  Having seen the probs Al (and others) guarding LA AND Rudy Gay were having why put in Rozier who was nothing more than a decoy down the stretch instead of Theis?

Its why I dont like Marcus Morris in there with Al Horford either. There are certain lineups we run that just dont box out and rebound the basketball. Popovich took full advantage with two legit 7 footers out there and drummond always has a field day with us playing that lineup.

If Baynes can't play the next one I dearly hope they slot Theis in his place instead of going back to morris starting.

[kozlodoev]

Or perhaps panic-coaching isn't good coaching. Perhaps it takes more fortitude and wisdom to stay with something even when the results are unexpectedly working against you?

Its his commitment to his philosophy that is the thing that makes him so special. its his commitment to leaving players in the game who are struggling that helps develop them. its his commitment to hard-nosed defense and a specific offense that gets open looks that keeps us in most every game.

But see, that's not panic coaching. San Antonio showed you this game that they can beat you with Aldridge in the post. It worked, the entire game, almost every time. Take that away and make them beat you some other way.

I don't think anything brilliant in a philosophy which says, "Hey, Aldridge scored at will every time he posted up, so we're just going to let them do that three time in a row in crunch time because... that will develop 32-year-old Horford?"

I can maybe understand not overreacting to a bad shot or two from Kyrie (Pierce did that as much as anyone in his time), and trusting that he's too good to keep doing that. But keeling over defensively and just taking it is inexcusable. Do something. Make someone else beat you with a jumpshot.

[kozlodoev]

We didn't make open shots, and we didn't rebound the basketball, therefore we didnt deserve to win this one.

Simple as that. Onto the next.

They have to be ready to box their man out if a shooting big man is dragging our center out of the key, or Brad needs to be ready to play another big.

That manu 3 doesn't exist if we just grab the rebound.

True.  So who off the bench had the length and toughness needed to grab that rebound?  Having seen the probs Al (and others) guarding LA AND Rudy Gay were having why put in Rozier who was nothing more than a decoy down the stretch instead of Theis?

Its why I dont like Marcus Morris in there with Al Horford either. There are certain lineups we run that just dont box out and rebound the basketball. Popovich took full advantage with two legit 7 footers out there and drummond always has a field day with us playing that lineup.

If Baynes can't play the next one I dearly hope they slot Theis in his place instead of going back to morris starting.

SA was small, Baynes got whacked in the groin, and he wasn't doing much other than hacking people anyhow...

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Once again, practice proves that when Brad's preconceived gameplan falls apart, he really has no idea how to actually coach during the game. It's extremely frustrating to watch.

jesus christ koz, do you ever shut up on this single point? "no idea how to actually coach?" this is the sort of statement that undermines so much of what you say about stevens. you really do let your personal agenda interfere with you otherwise good basketball analyses.

just give it a rest.

So you think that when your big man is getting killed in isolation, and your star PG is jacking long contested threes, the correct coaching approach is to do nothing and keep your fingers crossed that they'll snap out of it? Well, congratulations, it didn't really work.

I'd be happy to give it a rest, but unfortunately he just keeps doing it.

Hate to agree with the super negative version of Koz here, but he's spot on with this. This has been one of Stevens' few flaws during his entire tenure in Boston. He simply struggles to make certain in-game adjustments with his rotation, gameplan, and play-calling.

Tonight was just yet another example of this unfolding. It certainly wasn't the only reason we lost, but it definitely played a part.

That's just the negative version. The super negative will come when I start complaining about leaving Rozier in too long at the start of the 4th.

Stevens has been doing a lot of things right (you just have to when you're winning so many games), but sometimes he just doesn't look like he has an idea how to adjust in-game.

Or perhaps panic-coaching isn't good coaching. Perhaps it takes more fortitude and wisdom to stay with something even when the results are unexpectedly working against you?

Its his commitment to his philosophy that is the thing that makes him so special. its his commitment to leaving players in the game who are struggling that helps develop them. its his commitment to hard-nosed defense and a specific offense that gets open looks that keeps us in most every game.

Agreed to a certain extent.  But he needs to make adjustments when things clearly are not working - like forcing the ball out of LMA's hands by doubling in the post after he had scored numerous times over Horford.

The most egregious example was last year in the playoffs versus Cleveland where he refused to adjust pick and roll coverage, continuing to switch everything.  Oh how I loved to watch Olynyk try to guard LeBron on the perimeter.

Stevens is a top notch coach, but he can still get better.

I disagree. He played it perfectly, but we missed key shots at the end. If we double, they get 3s. Its as simple as that. Instead of wide open 3s, he allowed Horford to force Aldridge into bad shots. This worked multiple times at the end. One ended in a TO and another in a miss. We just missed the shots at the other end that would have started to seal the game.

Again, the game looks a lot different when we miss shots.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

We didn't make open shots, and we didn't rebound the basketball, therefore we didnt deserve to win this one.

Simple as that. Onto the next.

They have to be ready to box their man out if a shooting big man is dragging our center out of the key, or Brad needs to be ready to play another big.

That manu 3 doesn't exist if we just grab the rebound.

True.  So who off the bench had the length and toughness needed to grab that rebound?  Having seen the probs Al (and others) guarding LA AND Rudy Gay were having why put in Rozier who was nothing more than a decoy down the stretch instead of Theis?

Its why I dont like Marcus Morris in there with Al Horford either. There are certain lineups we run that just dont box out and rebound the basketball. Popovich took full advantage with two legit 7 footers out there and drummond always has a field day with us playing that lineup.

If Baynes can't play the next one I dearly hope they slot Theis in his place instead of going back to morris starting.

SA was small, Baynes got whacked in the groin, and he wasn't doing much other than hacking people anyhow...

He wanted Morris in to guard Gay.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Or perhaps panic-coaching isn't good coaching. Perhaps it takes more fortitude and wisdom to stay with something even when the results are unexpectedly working against you?

Its his commitment to his philosophy that is the thing that makes him so special. its his commitment to leaving players in the game who are struggling that helps develop them. its his commitment to hard-nosed defense and a specific offense that gets open looks that keeps us in most every game.

But see, that's not panic coaching. San Antonio showed you this game that they can beat you with Aldridge in the post. It worked, the entire game, almost every time. Take that away and make them beat you some other way.

I don't think anything brilliant in a philosophy which says, "Hey, Aldridge scored at will every time he posted up, so we're just going to let them do that three time in a row in crunch time because... that will develop 32-year-old Horford?"

I can maybe understand not overreacting to a bad shot or two from Kyrie (Pierce did that as much as anyone in his time), and trusting that he's too good to keep doing that. But keeling over defensively and just taking it is inexcusable. Do something. Make someone else beat you with a jumpshot.

First of all, Aldridge was 11 for 20. Lets not act like he scored "every time."

Yes, SA showed they can beat you if you have a back-to-the basket big with quick moves and mid-range fade-aways, but only if you shoot sub30% from 3. If we make more 3s, we don't care if Aldridge is scoring in the post, because we are trading 3s for 2s. We would win handily.

The point wasn't to "develop" Horford. You know I wasn't saying that phrase about Horford. The point was that it gave us the best opportunity to win the game. Guess what ... if we made more shots, we would have!

[SCeltic34]

Once again, practice proves that when Brad's preconceived gameplan falls apart, he really has no idea how to actually coach during the game. It's extremely frustrating to watch.

jesus christ koz, do you ever shut up on this single point? "no idea how to actually coach?" this is the sort of statement that undermines so much of what you say about stevens. you really do let your personal agenda interfere with you otherwise good basketball analyses.

just give it a rest.

So you think that when your big man is getting killed in isolation, and your star PG is jacking long contested threes, the correct coaching approach is to do nothing and keep your fingers crossed that they'll snap out of it? Well, congratulations, it didn't really work.

I'd be happy to give it a rest, but unfortunately he just keeps doing it.

Hate to agree with the super negative version of Koz here, but he's spot on with this. This has been one of Stevens' few flaws during his entire tenure in Boston. He simply struggles to make certain in-game adjustments with his rotation, gameplan, and play-calling.

Tonight was just yet another example of this unfolding. It certainly wasn't the only reason we lost, but it definitely played a part.

That's just the negative version. The super negative will come when I start complaining about leaving Rozier in too long at the start of the 4th.

Stevens has been doing a lot of things right (you just have to when you're winning so many games), but sometimes he just doesn't look like he has an idea how to adjust in-game.

Or perhaps panic-coaching isn't good coaching. Perhaps it takes more fortitude and wisdom to stay with something even when the results are unexpectedly working against you?

Its his commitment to his philosophy that is the thing that makes him so special. its his commitment to leaving players in the game who are struggling that helps develop them. its his commitment to hard-nosed defense and a specific offense that gets open looks that keeps us in most every game.

Agreed to a certain extent.  But he needs to make adjustments when things clearly are not working - like forcing the ball out of LMA's hands by doubling in the post after he had scored numerous times over Horford.

The most egregious example was last year in the playoffs versus Cleveland where he refused to adjust pick and roll coverage, continuing to switch everything.  Oh how I loved to watch Olynyk try to guard LeBron on the perimeter.

Stevens is a top notch coach, but he can still get better.

I disagree. He played it perfectly, but we missed key shots at the end. If we double, they get 3s. Its as simple as that. Instead of wide open 3s, he allowed Horford to force Aldridge into bad shots. This worked multiple times at the end. One ended in a TO and another in a miss. We just missed the shots at the other end that would have started to seal the game.

Again, the game looks a lot different when we miss shots.

Every team misses shots down the stretch.  On the other side of the floor, we didn't get enough stops.  And a lot of that was Aldridge going 11-20 from the floor.  We gave up 28 points in the 4th. 

It doesn't hurt to switch coverages a few times, teams practice doubling and rotating in practice.  If they're not ready for that in game time, that's the coaching staff's fault.

[SCeltic34]

Or perhaps panic-coaching isn't good coaching. Perhaps it takes more fortitude and wisdom to stay with something even when the results are unexpectedly working against you?

Its his commitment to his philosophy that is the thing that makes him so special. its his commitment to leaving players in the game who are struggling that helps develop them. its his commitment to hard-nosed defense and a specific offense that gets open looks that keeps us in most every game.

But see, that's not panic coaching. San Antonio showed you this game that they can beat you with Aldridge in the post. It worked, the entire game, almost every time. Take that away and make them beat you some other way.

I don't think anything brilliant in a philosophy which says, "Hey, Aldridge scored at will every time he posted up, so we're just going to let them do that three time in a row in crunch time because... that will develop 32-year-old Horford?"

I can maybe understand not overreacting to a bad shot or two from Kyrie (Pierce did that as much as anyone in his time), and trusting that he's too good to keep doing that. But keeling over defensively and just taking it is inexcusable. Do something. Make someone else beat you with a jumpshot.

First of all, Aldridge was 11 for 20. Lets not act like he scored "every time."

Yes, SA showed they can beat you if you have a back-to-the basket big with quick moves and mid-range fade-aways, but only if you shoot sub30% from 3. If we make more 3s, we don't care if Aldridge is scoring in the post, because we are trading 3s for 2s. We would win handily.

The point wasn't to "develop" Horford. You know I wasn't saying that phrase about Horford. The point was that it gave us the best opportunity to win the game. Guess what ... if we made more shots, we would have!

Surely you also saw how deep Aldridge got the ball on some of those plays too, some off the pass, some off the dribble.  If you're going to let him dribble 3 to 4 times and still not send help, don't be surprised if he scores on you.