If can only choose one to keep after this season - Stevens or Irving (poll)

[PhoSita]

Irving with no hesitation. This team is going nowhere under Stevens' leadership. I would do anything to not have to watch another second of this small ball offense. His offensive philosophy is terrible and honestly so is his defensive philosophy. Any team that runs pick and roll over and over again will defeat the Celtics. Not even sure what Stevens does well at this point.

I'm curious, which coaches in the league do you like?  Which teams run a system that you appreciate?

Try not to mention teams that have a clear MVP caliber centerpiece, e.g. the Bucks, Warriors, etc.


This isn't meant as a flippant retort to your comment, I'm actually interested to hear from strong Stevens critics which teams they'd like to see the Celtics emulate, instead.

[NKY fan]

I wonder if kyrie would be willing to do a sign and trade.
If he is the only possibilities I see are :
Houston for Gordon or Paul
Detroit for Jackson plus picks or Drummond

1.) He's not going to either of those teams. I'll eat my shirt if he does.
2.) Why should he do a sign and trade? He'd get nothing out of it.

Yup. No more 5th year on sign and trades. Soooo, there is no reason for for a max level paid player to agree to a sign and trade because he gets to keep that extra guaranteed year of pay on their next max contract if they are moving on from their team.

Kyrie will not be doing the Celtics any favors by agreeing to a sign and trade. Boston won't be doing Kyrie any favor by sign and trading him so he can go play for a team he wants to go to but doesn't have the cap space to sign him.

It comes down to Kyrie will either sign here for a five year deal, or he will sign elsewhere for 4 years somewhere else. That is really the only options with Kyrie this off season.

Eh, if he wanted to I'm sure he could get some team to do a Durant-style 1-and-1 or 2-and-1.

He seems to like to follow in LeBron's footsteps, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if that's the way he decides to go.  Complain a ton about free agency questions but make it so he's always on the verge of free agency so he never has to be fully committed to a team long term.

Only Lebron and Durant can afford to do that.. I think Leonard May pull the same with Toronto. Raptors would only tolerate this because they are centered around Leonard and didn’t give up much for him... if kyrie says he would only do one plus one ... chances are Danny will show him the door...

[nickagneta]

I wonder if kyrie would be willing to do a sign and trade.
If he is the only possibilities I see are :
Houston for Gordon or Paul
Detroit for Jackson plus picks or Drummond

1.) He's not going to either of those teams. I'll eat my shirt if he does.
2.) Why should he do a sign and trade? He'd get nothing out of it.

Yup. No more 5th year on sign and trades. Soooo, there is no reason for for a max level paid player to agree to a sign and trade because he gets to keep that extra guaranteed year of pay on their next max contract if they are moving on from their team.

Kyrie will not be doing the Celtics any favors by agreeing to a sign and trade. Boston won't be doing Kyrie any favor by sign and trading him so he can go play for a team he wants to go to but doesn't have the cap space to sign him.

It comes down to Kyrie will either sign here for a five year deal, or he will sign elsewhere for 4 years somewhere else. That is really the only options with Kyrie this off season.

Eh, if he wanted to I'm sure he could get some team to do a Durant-style 1-and-1 or 2-and-1.

He seems to like to follow in LeBron's footsteps, so I wouldn't be at all surprised if that's the way he decides to go.  Complain a ton about free agency questions but make it so he's always on the verge of free agency so he never has to be fully committed to a team long term.

Only Lebron and Durant can afford to do that.. I think Leonard May pull the same with Toronto. Raptors would only tolerate this because they are centered around Leonard and didn’t give up much for him... if kyrie says he would only do one plus one ... chances are Danny will show him the door...

I think Toronto would put up with it for Kawhi because without Kawhi, they are no longer an Eastern Conference Finals threat. It's not like they will be able to replace the third best player in the league in free agency even if they had cap space, which they do not.

Also, DeRozan is one hell of a player. Not sure he qualifies as not giving up much for Toronto.

[Spicoli]

Irving with no hesitation. This team is going nowhere under Stevens' leadership. I would do anything to not have to watch another second of this small ball offense. His offensive philosophy is terrible and honestly so is his defensive philosophy. Any team that runs pick and roll over and over again will defeat the Celtics. Not even sure what Stevens does well at this point.

I'm curious, which coaches in the league do you like?  Which teams run a system that you appreciate?

Try not to mention teams that have a clear MVP caliber centerpiece, e.g. the Bucks, Warriors, etc.


This isn't meant as a flippant retort to your comment, I'm actually interested to hear from strong Stevens critics which teams they'd like to see the Celtics emulate, instead.

The Spurs don't have a clear MVP candidate, and their point guard went down before the season even started. Popovich allows his players to play to their strengths. Aldridge and Derozan are better in the midrange and he allows them free range in that area. If Aldridge and Derozan played for Stevens they would be forced into being 3 point shooters. We all know how great Pop is though. Mike Malone in Denver plays a trapping style defense and on offense he plays everything through his big (inside out). He also doesn't reward minutes to players who don't deserve it (Isaiah Thomas). I love the system that Kenny Atkinson runs in Brooklyn. Their offense is free flowing and dynamic even without an MVP caliber player. Dave Joerger on the Kings is doing a fantastic job with the offense he's built there. The only gripe i have with him is he's keeping Bagley and Bogdanovich on the bench. Both of those players are starters in this league. And finally, Nate McMillan in Indiana. That team plays HARD on both ends no matter who is out there. They are sitting in the 4th seed and have some impressive wins even though Oladipo has missed most of this season. To me that's clearly a team that's a product of their coach.

Brad Stevens is trying to force a small ball, 3 point shooting philosophy onto a team with no real 3 point shooters. He is not playing the best players (Brown and Williams) and he's defensive philosophy routinely gets shredded by any team that can execute a pick and roll effectively. Not to mention his timeout management. I honestly don't see any redeeming qualities about him as a coach.

[PhoSita]

I can see a lot of the flaws you're pointing out.  Yet, I don't think there's room to argue with the notion that the Celts exceeded expectations every season under Brad until this year.  So I think the key question here is what changed?  Is it simply the burden of expectations?  Is it that Brad is coaching a team with an excess of talent for the first time?


I will say that in watching the game against the Cavs last night, I felt that the Cavs were actually running a better offense than the Celts for much of the game.  The Cavs simply didn't have guys who could hit shots.  But in the 1st quarter especially it felt like the Celts had a lead only because they were hitting tough shots and the Cavs missed a number of quality open shots that their ball movement generated.  I liked the way the Cavs swung the ball around the perimeter and had good floor balance with a big man diving to the basket while other guys fanned out on the wings.


The Celts have to lead the league in drives that go nowhere.  The Celts don't exactly drive the ball very often, but I feel that when they do, it seems that a lot of the time the guy driving doesn't have an apparent plan, just barrels toward the paint, apparently hoping that something will open up when he gets there.  Part of that, I feel, is that the Celts tend to play 5-out sets instead of playing 4-out sets with a big man rolling or in the dunker spot.  That can tend to leave the guy driving into the paint without an obvious, large target to pass to if the defense collapses on him.

I don't mind 5 out sets, to be clear, but I think they work best if you have a really great driver (e.g. Giannis) and you surround that guy with very good shooters.  The Celts don't really have a great driver on the roster unless / until Jaylen, Jayson, or Hayward becomes more consistent, and most of the shooters that they put out there are just okay.


I agree that the hallmark of a Popovich team is allowing players to play to their strengths.  Before this year, I thought Stevens followed the same philosophy.


Perhaps the issue is that he does.  Could it be that the team that Ainge has constructed for Brad is comprised primarily of players who want to get their offense out of isolation sets?  Kyrie, Jaylen, Tatum, Rozier, Morris, and even Hayward fall into this category.  Even Al Horford likes to break down mismatches with a one on one fairly regularly, though I think he mostly does that when he has a major mismatch.

Maybe Brad has been trying to let this team play to its strengths, the problem is that the natural tendency of more than half of the rotation is to go hunt for shots 1-on-1.

[Spicoli]

I can see a lot of the flaws you're pointing out.  Yet, I don't think there's room to argue with the notion that the Celts exceeded expectations every season under Brad until this year.  So I think the key question here is what changed?  Is it simply the burden of expectations?  Is it that Brad is coaching a team with an excess of talent for the first time?

I can be objective and agree that in previous iterations of Stevens' teams they have exceeded expectations and advanced further than what i thought possible. Honestly i'm not sure what to attribute that to. The makeup of those teams usually consisted of grit/effort players like Crowder, Bradley, Larkin etc. Winning regular season NBA games is about 80 % effort and 20 % talent IMO. The playoffs are more about talent. His offensive and defensive philosophies were the same for those teams (bad offense and a defense that can be shredded against certain opponents) but the record itself did exceed expectations. In the Isaiah Thomas years specifically, weren't there a high number of 4th quarter comebacks due to his usage and heroics? I can also recall Stevens being very good at out of timeout plays but this year i have not noticed this at all.

I will say that in watching the game against the Cavs last night, I felt that the Cavs were actually running a better offense than the Celts for much of the game.  The Cavs simply didn't have guys who could hit shots.  But in the 1st quarter especially it felt like the Celts had a lead only because they were hitting tough shots and the Cavs missed a number of quality open shots that their ball movement generated.  I liked the way the Cavs swung the ball around the perimeter and had good floor balance with a big man diving to the basket while other guys fanned out on the wings.

I feel this way as well. For every game i've watched this season (i've only missed a couple) i feel as though the opponent is running a far more cohesive offense. I feel that there's a method to what they're trying to accomplish on the offensive end of the floor. When i watch the Celtics, it seems that outside of dribble handoffs and isolation sets, no real offensive is being ran. I have not seen a double screen or a curl to a shooter (similar to how they use to run curls for Ray). Granted this team has a lot of finesse players on it, but if you're using Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown as spot up shooters you are doing something wrong.

The Celts have to lead the league in drives that go nowhere.  The Celts don't exactly drive the ball very often, but I feel that when they do, it seems that a lot of the time the guy driving doesn't have an apparent plan, just barrels toward the paint, apparently hoping that something will open up when he gets there.  Part of that, I feel, is that the Celts tend to play 5-out sets instead of playing 4-out sets with a big man rolling or in the dunker spot.  That can tend to leave the guy driving into the paint without an obvious, large target to pass to if the defense collapses on him.

This is spot on.

I agree that the hallmark of a Popovich team is allowing players to play to their strengths.  Before this year, I thought Stevens followed the same philosophy.

Perhaps the issue is that he does.  Could it be that the team that Ainge has constructed for Brad is comprised primarily of players who want to get their offense out of isolation sets?  Kyrie, Jaylen, Tatum, Rozier, Morris, and even Hayward fall into this category.  Even Al Horford likes to break down mismatches with a one on one fairly regularly, though I think he mostly does that when he has a major mismatch.

Maybe Brad has been trying to let this team play to its strengths, the problem is that the natural tendency of more than half of the rotation is to go hunt for shots 1-on-1.

Brown is a slasher. Why is he camped out at the 3 point line. Baynes is a giant 7 footer. Why is he waiting to shoot corner 3's? Kyrie can beat anyone off the dribble one on one. Why are you sending screens for him over and over? Tatum is pretty good when he gets a handoff with a head of steam. Why does he only receive a few of these a game? Hayward is a big, physical player. Why is he never in the post? If Stevens' has a team full of iso players he can't do anything about that, but what is his excuse for how he's been using these players in their isolation sets?

[Tr1boy]

WE WILL SEE what happens

still not optimistic

but this subject question will be answered

1. If the Celtics don't make it to the ECF,  it maybe Irving's fault
2.  If the Celtics make it to the finals,  it is likely because Irving is the X-factor

Unfortunately this would mean, it is a much steeper hill to climb for Irving to "prove" than CBS

[nickagneta]

WE WILL SEE what happens

still not optimistic

but this subject question will be answered

1. If the Celtics don't make it to the ECF,  it maybe Irving's fault
2.  If the Celtics make it to the finals,  it is likely because Irving is the X-factor

Unfortunately this would mean, it is a much steeper hill to climb for Irving to "prove" than CBS

So #3 isn't a possibility

3. The Celtics don't make it to the ECF but it's not Irving's fault?

I actually think this might be the most likely scenario.

[Tr1boy]

WE WILL SEE what happens

still not optimistic

but this subject question will be answered

1. If the Celtics don't make it to the ECF,  it maybe Irving's fault
2.  If the Celtics make it to the finals,  it is likely because Irving is the X-factor

Unfortunately this would mean, it is a much steeper hill to climb for Irving to "prove" than CBS

So #3 isn't a possibility

3. The Celtics don't make it to the ECF but it's not Irving's fault?

I actually think this might be the most likely scenario.

This is why I stated maybe

But guess who(by media etc) will be blamed anything short of reaching the ECF..

[Donoghus]

WE WILL SEE what happens

still not optimistic

but this subject question will be answered

1. If the Celtics don't make it to the ECF,  it maybe Irving's fault
2.  If the Celtics make it to the finals,  it is likely because Irving is the X-factor

Unfortunately this would mean, it is a much steeper hill to climb for Irving to "prove" than CBS

So #3 isn't a possibility

3. The Celtics don't make it to the ECF but it's not Irving's fault?

I actually think this might be the most likely scenario.

This is why I stated maybe

But guess who(by media etc) will be blamed anything short of reaching the ECF..

Do you just want to preemptively include yourself in that "etc." now or wait to see what actually plays out?

[Csfan1984]

I picked Tatum

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

WE WILL SEE what happens

still not optimistic

but this subject question will be answered

1. If the Celtics don't make it to the ECF,  it maybe Irving's fault
2.  If the Celtics make it to the finals,  it is likely because Irving is the X-factor

Unfortunately this would mean, it is a much steeper hill to climb for Irving to "prove" than CBS

So #3 isn't a possibility

3. The Celtics don't make it to the ECF but it's not Irving's fault?

I actually think this might be the most likely scenario.

This is why I stated maybe

But guess who(by media etc) will be blamed anything short of reaching the ECF..

Do you just want to preemptively include yourself in that "etc." now or wait to see what actually plays out?

ISWYDT

[Tr1boy]

WE WILL SEE what happens

still not optimistic

but this subject question will be answered

1. If the Celtics don't make it to the ECF,  it maybe Irving's fault
2.  If the Celtics make it to the finals,  it is likely because Irving is the X-factor

Unfortunately this would mean, it is a much steeper hill to climb for Irving to "prove" than CBS

So #3 isn't a possibility

3. The Celtics don't make it to the ECF but it's not Irving's fault?

I actually think this might be the most likely scenario.

This is why I stated maybe

But guess who(by media etc) will be blamed anything short of reaching the ECF..

Do you just want to preemptively include yourself in that "etc." now or wait to see what actually plays out?

front of the line

Kyrie talks a big game

Now its time to show the "young guys" what he means

[Tr1boy]

When this poll 1st went up and after some time passed...

it was CBS with 44 votes and Irving with 19 votes .... If can only choose one, who to keep

I have reset the poll to zero, to see if the results would be any different after the way the season ended

Also

I still don't think these two can co exist moving forward.....if someone thinks otherwise, I would like to hear ... how possibly

[SparzWizard]

When this poll 1st went up and after some time passed...

it was CBS with 44 votes and Irving with 19 votes .... If can only choose one, who to keep

I have reset the poll to zero, to see if the results would be any different after the way the season ended

Also

I still don't think these two can co exist moving forward.....some if someone thinks otherwise, I would like to hear ... how possibly

To replace? Easily Brad Stevens. Appreciate his work back when this team was in its developing/rebuilding stage. He's a perfect coach for teams in those process. But this season has signified that he can't work his way around with multiple star players.

You need a new voice in the team. Just look at Toronto and Milwaukee.

To keep? Kyrie Irving. A top 5 point guard, and is needed to contend with in the East. Pair him up with the right star player like Anthony Davis and things will be smooth. Get rid of malcontents like Terry Rozier and pick up some role players.