Have the Celtics flipped the switch? (Poll)

[ozgod]

They look like they've flipped the switch defensively at least. Here's their defensive rating in the playoffs, vs pre- and post-All Star break.

Code: [Select]

Boston Def Rating
Playoffs 91.9
Post All Star 110.1
Pre All Star 105.7

Yes, it was against Indiana who everyone says (and knows) sucks balls and are worse than useless so nothing good we do against them should be counted, right? Well here's Indiana's offensive rating in this series as well as pre- and post-All Star break (when they had lost Dipo).

Code: [Select]

Indiana Off Rating
Playoffs 91.9
Post All Star 109.3
Pre All Star 109.3
While I agree performances against a washed up has been team of also rans like Indiana need to be taken with a grain of salt, I don't subscribe to the theory that just because they suck our performances against them are meaningless. The offensive rating of this useless bunch of no hopers (which coincidentally is the same pre-and post-ASB) is around the same as our own post-ASB rating which was 109.7. They haven't broken 100 points in the 3 games they've played us.

Now what remains to be seen is whether we can flip the offensive switch for what remains of this series and what is coming up ahead.

[jambr380]

Y’all are crazy to say yes. Y’all make it seem like the Celtics are beating the snot out of the pacers. Let’s not forget the Pacers are without their best player. Let’s not pretend like the pacers are just losing by not having a go to scorer who can get 30. Overall this dearie is far more bad Pacers than good Celtics.

The Clippers are a scrappy team as well,  but you can easily see the dominance of the warriors show up at certain points. Celtics never show domains at any point in this series. There is no “switch” they are just a “good” team who is getting by. The next series will let us know how “good” they really are.

Dude, you do realIze the Warriors have actually lost a game and the Cs have not, right?

And I would say it is the complete opposite. The Cs have played somewhat mediocre for (long) stretches and then go into total dominance mode when it matters...and win! I am happy to see they actually can reach the highest of highs rather than just play pretty well throughout.

We may not make it as far as we would all like (it really is anybody’s game in the East among the top 4), but this team’s potential is higher than we’ve seen since PP/KG/Allen were on the roster.

[SHAQATTACK]

we will see when they meet Giannis

[RazzelnoDazzel]

Y’all are crazy to say yes. Y’all make it seem like the Celtics are beating the snot out of the pacers. Let’s not forget the Pacers are without their best player. Let’s not pretend like the pacers are just losing by not having a go to scorer who can get 30. Overall this dearie is far more bad Pacers than good Celtics.

The Clippers are a scrappy team as well,  but you can easily see the dominance of the warriors show up at certain points. Celtics never show domains at any point in this series. There is no “switch” they are just a “good” team who is getting by. The next series will let us know how “good” they really are.

Dude, you do realIze the Warriors have actually lost a game and the Cs have not, right?

And I would say it is the complete opposite. The Cs have played somewhat mediocre for (long) stretches and then go into total dominance mode when it matters...and win! I am happy to see they actually can reach the highest of highs rather than just play pretty well throughout.

We may not make it as far as we would all like (it really is anybody’s game in the East among the top 4), but this team’s potential is higher than we’ve seen since PP/KG/Allen were on the roster.

Yes I’m aware GS lost a game they were originally “dominating” in by being up 30 and had just stopped playing. If you saw the game you can see how they just stopped playing because they felt the game was over. I doubt any game after that loss will be anything less than spectacular from GS end.

And again I don’t agree with the “when it matters” statement. I remember losing to a lot of above .500 teams this season. I think our definition of “dominance” is different. But again we will see next series where we actually stand.

[Moranis]

Nope.  Playing a clearly inferior and overmatched opponent, yet are very lucky to be not be down 3 games instead of up 3 games.  They play like this against Milwaukee they will get swept.

[jambr380]

Y’all are crazy to say yes. Y’all make it seem like the Celtics are beating the snot out of the pacers. Let’s not forget the Pacers are without their best player. Let’s not pretend like the pacers are just losing by not having a go to scorer who can get 30. Overall this dearie is far more bad Pacers than good Celtics.

The Clippers are a scrappy team as well,  but you can easily see the dominance of the warriors show up at certain points. Celtics never show domains at any point in this series. There is no “switch” they are just a “good” team who is getting by. The next series will let us know how “good” they really are.

Dude, you do realIze the Warriors have actually lost a game and the Cs have not, right?

And I would say it is the complete opposite. The Cs have played somewhat mediocre for (long) stretches and then go into total dominance mode when it matters...and win! I am happy to see they actually can reach the highest of highs rather than just play pretty well throughout.

We may not make it as far as we would all like (it really is anybody’s game in the East among the top 4), but this team’s potential is higher than we’ve seen since PP/KG/Allen were on the roster.

Yes I’m aware GS lost a game they were originally “dominating” in by being up 30 and had just stopped playing. If you saw the game you can see how they just stopped playing because they felt the game was over. I doubt any game after that loss will be anything less than spectacular from GS end.

And again I don’t agree with the “when it matters” statement. I remember losing to a lot of above .500 teams this season. I think our definition of “dominance” is different. But again we will see next series where we actually stand.

Please note that I do not think we are at the caliber of GSW - they are a historically great team. For better or worse, though, our Cs seem to think that they only need to play hard 'when it matters.' This was seen in the regular season when when we were losing to the worst the NBA has to offer, but always playing the top teams well.

Like I said, I do not know how far we will go. I really do believe the top 4 teams in the East are incredibly even, but I would not look at how much we beat teams by as a barometer for how well we will play against other teams. Frankly, playing a focused, pesky team like Indy first is probably good for the C's offense moving forward and they certainly appear more engaged defensively - even if Indy doesn't have the superstar threat MIL or TOR does.

[footey]

We’ve beaten Pacers 5 consecutive is impressive. We are clearly playing harder and more harmoniously. Will be a good series vs Bucks.

[celticsclay]

Nope.  Playing a clearly inferior and overmatched opponent, yet are very lucky to be not be down 3 games instead of up 3 games.  They play like this against Milwaukee they will get swept.

We really outplayed them game 1. You have to give them credit for that. We won that game going away and were not “lucky”

[nickagneta]

I think defensively they have flipped the switch. The constant defensive intensity in these games has not been see all year.

[GreenEnvy]

Nope.  Playing a clearly inferior and overmatched opponent, yet are very lucky to be not be down 3 games instead of up 3 games.  They play like this against Milwaukee they will get swept.

We really outplayed them game 1. You have to give them credit for that. We won that game going away and were not “lucky”

Considering they didn’t hold a lead in the 4th of games 1 and 3, I find it hard to contemplate how we could be down 0-3, but depends on the narrative trying to be portrayed by some here.

Game 1 was never in doubt in the 4th, and while last night was close, we were always in control (I recall them getting within a bucket midway into the 4th, but I believe we maintained a 5+ point lead the last few minutes). Game 2 was the only one that really was up for grabs, and we know how that went.

I personally like having these close games now, working on execution in clutch, dramatic situations. Winning blowouts doesn’t exactly help in the long run imo. They are finding themselves needing big scores and stops, which is important going forward.


Honestly, such is life around here. Before the series, many predicted it would be a dogfight, long series. Now that we are up 3-0, we haven’t been nearly impressive enough in our 3 wins. If we won by 25 each game, we really should have won by 35 if we want any chance vs a better team.

[celticsclay]

Nope.  Playing a clearly inferior and overmatched opponent, yet are very lucky to be not be down 3 games instead of up 3 games.  They play like this against Milwaukee they will get swept.

We really outplayed them game 1. You have to give them credit for that. We won that game going away and were not “lucky”

Considering they didn’t hold a lead in the 4th of games 1 and 3, I find it hard to contemplate how we could be down 0-3, but depends on the narrative trying to be portrayed by some here.

Game 1 was never in doubt in the 4th, and while last night was close, we were always in control (I recall them getting within a bucket midway into the 4th, but I believe we maintained a 5+ point lead the last few minutes). Game 2 was the only one that really was up for grabs, and we know how that went.

I personally like having these close games now, working on execution in clutch, dramatic situations. Winning blowouts doesn’t exactly help in the long run imo. They are finding themselves needing big scores and stops, which is important going forward.


Honestly, such is life around here. Before the series, many predicted it would be a dogfight, long series. Now that we are up 3-0, we haven’t been nearly impressive enough in our 3 wins. If we won by 25 each game, we really should have won by 35 if we want any chance vs a better team.

Very well said envy. The we could easily be down 3-0 was an objectively bad take.

[Neurotic Guy]

I think defensively they have flipped the switch. The constant defensive intensity in these games has not been see all year.

I’d have to see a replay of the game, but I thought they had a very typical defensive lapse in the stretch when Indy came back from the double-digit deficit to take the lead in the 2nd quarter.  I think the C’s were offensively and defensively exactly like they’ve been all season after going out to a sizable lead. Mental errors, sloppy with the ball, ISO-itis, and I’ll-advised 3-balls — all while providing open lanes, open shots and losing 50-50 balls — giving away the momentum.   Seemed like 2018-19 Celtics basketball to me.   Good news was they retook control of the game eventually but I’ll need more than what I’ve seen this series to convince me they’ve flipped a switch.

BTW:  might just be distorted memory on my part but the defensively dialed-in version of the 2018-19 C’s just doesn’t seem to have the same shutdown capacity of last year’s team.  Could be wrong but seems that even when the C’s are obviously digging in they can’t cause  quite the same level of chaos they were able to last season.

[celticsclay]

I think defensively they have flipped the switch. The constant defensive intensity in these games has not been see all year.

I’d have to see a replay of the game, but I thought they had a very typical defensive lapse in the stretch when Indy came back from the double-digit deficit to take the lead in the 2nd quarter.  I think the C’s were offensively and defensively exactly like they’ve been all season after going out to a sizable lead. Mental errors, sloppy with the ball, ISO-itis, and I’ll-advised 3-balls — all while providing open lanes, open shots and losing 50-50 balls — giving away the momentum.   Seemed like 2018-19 Celtics basketball to me.   Good news was they retook control of the game eventually but I’ll need more than what I’ve seen this series to convince me they’ve flipped a switch.

BTW:  might just be distorted memory on my part but the defensively dialed-in version of the 2018-19 C’s just doesn’t seem to have the same shutdown capacity of last year’s team.  Could be wrong but seems that even when the C’s are obviously digging in they can’t cause  quite the same level of chaos they were able to last season.

Didn’t we hold pacers to one of the lowest second half point totals in game 1 of nba history (27 points). I feel the defense has been good

[IDreamCeltics]

I think defensively they have flipped the switch. The constant defensive intensity in these games has not been see all year.

I’d have to see a replay of the game, but I thought they had a very typical defensive lapse in the stretch when Indy came back from the double-digit deficit to take the lead in the 2nd quarter.  I think the C’s were offensively and defensively exactly like they’ve been all season after going out to a sizable lead. Mental errors, sloppy with the ball, ISO-itis, and I’ll-advised 3-balls — all while providing open lanes, open shots and losing 50-50 balls — giving away the momentum.   Seemed like 2018-19 Celtics basketball to me.   Good news was they retook control of the game eventually but I’ll need more than what I’ve seen this series to convince me they’ve flipped a switch.

BTW:  might just be distorted memory on my part but the defensively dialed-in version of the 2018-19 C’s just doesn’t seem to have the same shutdown capacity of last year’s team.  Could be wrong but seems that even when the C’s are obviously digging in they can’t cause  quite the same level of chaos they were able to last season.

Didn’t we hold pacers to one of the lowest second half point totals in game 1 of nba history (27 points). I feel the defense has been good

I think it was very fortunate that the Celtics got a tune up series against an opponent lacking their best player.  I don't think we'll really know anything definitively until round 2 against Milwaukee. 

[Moranis]

Nope.  Playing a clearly inferior and overmatched opponent, yet are very lucky to be not be down 3 games instead of up 3 games.  They play like this against Milwaukee they will get swept.

We really outplayed them game 1. You have to give them credit for that. We won that game going away and were not “lucky”

Boston shot 36% from the field, lost the turnover battle, and won the game though.  They were downright terrible offensively.  Played very well on defense, but again they are playing a clearly inferior opponent with no one capable of really generating offense.  If they play like they did in game 1 against the Bucks they will get blown out of the stadium.  Indiana gave game 2 away.  And while Boston was awesome in the 1st quarter of game 3, it played pretty mediocre basketball the rest of that game and it was a 2 point game with about 4 minutes left.  Without that incredible hot shooting start, Indiana wins game 3. 

Some times it takes luck to win, especially in the playoffs, and Boston's luck is playing the Pacers as they just aren't very good.  Boston, though except for some very brief stretches has by and large played poor to mediocre basketball.  the Pacers are just worse.  Some of that is Boston's defense, but a very large portion of that is Indiana just isn't a very good team without Oladipo (they were well below .500 in the regular season once he went down). 

I maintain my statement, if Boston plays like they have been, they will get swept by Milwaukee.  I'd like to think Boston will play better, but they haven't really shown the ability to play better for full games.  Maybe they figure some things out for game 4.