If the Celts are going to make a blockbuster...

[Tr1boy]

Celts lost to the Pacers.

Sabonis was dominant against the Celts.

If it takes losses to convince Celtic fans that there is a big man problem then here's another loss to a big team.

Robert Williams would have helped tonight

Theis would've helped more if he wasn't plagued with bad foul calls.

disagree

Theis is not a starting calibre center

first he is skinny for a center.  Sabonis, Gasol, Embiid push him around , like its nothing

He provides little on the offensive end (weak passing, shooting, setting picks)

I enjoy the hustle and effort. But only in spurts and off the bench

Robert Williams is an elite rim protector.   Even though rough around the edges, he has more difference making power than Theis and Kanter combined

[ozgod]

Celts lost to the Pacers.

Sabonis was dominant against the Celts.

If it takes losses to convince Celtic fans that there is a big man problem then here's another loss to a big team.

1. Sabonis wasn't dominant.

2. The Celtics didn't lose because they had a big man problem. They lost because they let the Holiday boys go 15-23 for 35 points. The Celtics only gave up 5 offensive rebounds and outrebounded Indy by 8 rebounds. Boston scored two more points in the paint than Indy did.

Not only that, Celtics led by 10 at the start of the 4th but 3 consecutive turnovers by Tatum (trying to do too much with Brown, Hayward and Kemba on the bench) and one by Wanamaker cut that lead to 2 and gave Indy all the momentum. Wanamaker didn't have the greatest game running the offense, it ran better when Hayward was handling the ball (until he got injured again). And defensively as you said they kept losing the Holidays in the corners for wide open 3s. We missed Smart's defense and intangibles tonight. Sabonis had a decent game but was hardly an overwhelming force.

That said, the lack of Timelord affected us more on the defensive end. Theis got into foul trouble early trying to defend their bigs. I don't think there's any doubt that an upgrade at that position would help us - the question would be what we would give up and whether that would end up making it a net loss for the team. Everyone would love a KAT or an AD type player, especially those of us obsessed with having a transcendent big. But is it worth what it's going to cost us? We could have put in Jakob Poeltl or Goga Bitadze or some of the other midlevel names mentioned by various people on this thread, I doubt they would have done a significantly better job than Theis/Timelord/Kanter. None of the ones we could realistically get could move the needle.

Let's see how we go against Philly.

[Sophomore]

For the “we need a big” crowd:

We had more offensive rebounds than the Pacers, more defensive rebounds, more points in the paint.

We lost because Brogdon and both Hollidays torched us, and mostly because freaking Doug McDermott went upside Hayward’s nose at a critical time. We were up four with the ball, establishing rhythm, and probably about to score again. Without Hayward, and then without Brown, everything went sideways. Defensive rotations were a mess - they got open shot after open shot and hit them.

Edit: this would also have been a great night to have Smart available for Brogdon/Holiday, especially down the stretch. Brogdon’s stat line is nuts. 29 points on 10 shot attempts; 15-15 from the line, 8 assists and only one turnover.

[ozgod]

Sure was hoping Kanter was going to be the rebounder.  Apparently not.  They need a guy.  Once the big 5 is together I really think all scoring is taken care of.  I really think those 5 can average 85-90 points.  After that little scoring is needed as they will play at least 2 of those 5 all game.  POst D and rebounding is the biggest weakness.

.

You have been incessant in your view that the Celtics go nowhere in the post season if they don't get a big to deal with Giannis, the Lopez brothers, Embiid, Anthony Davis and other bigs and you think the best solution is getting Jakob Poeltl?

Here's the games before the trade deadline when we play the teams with the aforementioned bigs that our lineup of midgets can't deal with (I threw Detroit and Drummond/Griffin in there for giggles). So far we've only played Philly (away) with Kemba shooting poorly and Milwaukee which we won.

Dec 12 - Philly (Home)
Dec 20 - Det (Home)
Jan 9 - Philly (Away)
Jan 15 - Det (Home)
Jan 16 - Mil (Away)
Jan 20 - Lakers (Home)
Feb 1 - Philly (Home)

I honestly think we should at least see how we play against them before we start giving away assets to pursue Poeltl or Kardashian et al to beef up our frontcourt. We may actually do ok.

Big difference between one game and a long playoff series.

Plus, Kanter does well on the offensive boards, but is ordinary for defensive rebounding.

Agree, which is why I'm not too worried if we get beat by a team with a dominant big in one game. But all those games taken together will give us a better indication of whether we have a problem with big teams than having no data points at all.

[GreenCoffeeBean]

Personally I think the Celtics should stick to playing basketball rather than trying to make high grossing movies.

[SparzWizard]

For the “we need a big” crowd:

We had more offensive rebounds than the Pacers, more defensive rebounds, more points in the paint.

We lost because Brogdon and both Hollidays torched us, and mostly because freaking Doug McDermott went upside Hayward’s nose at a critical time. We were up four with the ball, establishing rhythm, and probably about to score again. Without Hayward, and then without Brown, everything went sideways. Defensive rotations were a mess - they got open shot after open shot and hit them.

Edit: this would also have been a great night to have Smart available for Brogdon/Holiday, especially down the stretch. Brogdon’s stat line is nuts. 29 points on 10 shot attempts; 15-15 from the line, 8 assists and only one turnover.

Malcolm Brogdon has always been a Celtic-killer, since his Milwaukee days.

[gouki88]

For the “we need a big” crowd:

We had more offensive rebounds than the Pacers, more defensive rebounds, more points in the paint.

We lost because Brogdon and both Hollidays torched us, and mostly because freaking Doug McDermott went upside Hayward’s nose at a critical time. We were up four with the ball, establishing rhythm, and probably about to score again. Without Hayward, and then without Brown, everything went sideways. Defensive rotations were a mess - they got open shot after open shot and hit them.

Edit: this would also have been a great night to have Smart available for Brogdon/Holiday, especially down the stretch. Brogdon’s stat line is nuts. 29 points on 10 shot attempts; 15-15 from the line, 8 assists and only one turnover.

Malcolm Brogdon has always been a Celtic-killer, since his Milwaukee days.

He's one of those guys who just feast on us, like Middleton too

[Fierce1]

Celts lost to the Pacers.

Sabonis was dominant against the Celts.

If it takes losses to convince Celtic fans that there is a big man problem then here's another loss to a big team.

1. Sabonis wasn't dominant.

2. The Celtics didn't lose because they had a big man problem. They lost because they let the Holiday boys go 15-23 for 35 points. The Celtics only gave up 5 offensive rebounds and outrebounded Indy by 8 rebounds. Boston scored two more points in the paint than Indy did.

Did you watch the game?

I watched the whole game and we must be watching different games.

1. Sabonis dominated the Celts period!

Not only did Sabonis score and rebound, he also had 8 assists.

When it was 1 on 1, Theis vs. Sabonis inside the paint, it was like a layup drill for Sabonis.
Theis couldn't stop Sabonis 1 on 1.

That led to #2.

2. Reason why the Holidays shot a lot of 3s was because Pacers exploited the weakness of the Celts.

The Pacers used inside-outside basketball.

When Sabonis was being doubled team, he gladly kicked it out to the open shooters.

Would the Celts have doubled inside if the Celtic Center can handle Sabonis 1 on 1?

Of course not!

If you guys have league pass, watch the game again.
Every time Sabonis was 1 on 1 with Theis inside the paint, 3 possibilities would occur.

1. Sabonis scores over Theis.
Theis is just too small.

2. Sabonis draws a foul and goes to the FT line.

3. Sabonis kicks out to the open shooter when doubled.

[gouki88]

Celts lost to the Pacers.

Sabonis was dominant against the Celts.

If it takes losses to convince Celtic fans that there is a big man problem then here's another loss to a big team.

1. Sabonis wasn't dominant.

2. The Celtics didn't lose because they had a big man problem. They lost because they let the Holiday boys go 15-23 for 35 points. The Celtics only gave up 5 offensive rebounds and outrebounded Indy by 8 rebounds. Boston scored two more points in the paint than Indy did.

Did you watch the game?

I watched the whole game and we must be watching different games.

1. Sabonis dominated the Celts period!

Not only did Sabonis score and rebound, he also had 8 assists.

When it was 1 on 1, Theis vs. Sabonis inside the paint, it was like a layup drill for Sabonis.
Theis couldn't stop Sabonis 1 on 1.

That led to #2.

2. Reason why the Holidays shot a lot of 3s was because Pacers exploited the weakness of the Celts.

The Pacers used inside-outside basketball.

When Sabonis was being doubled team, he gladly kicked it out to the open shooters.

Would the Celts have doubled inside if the Celtic Center can handle Sabonis 1 on 1?

Of course not!

If you guys have league pass, watch the game again.
Every time Sabonis was 1 on 1 with Theis inside the paint, 3 possibilities would occur.

1. Sabonis scores over Theis.
Theis is just too small.

2. Sabonis draws a foul and goes to the FT line.

3. Sabonis kicks out to the open shooter when doubled.

Do you realise we held Sabonis to below average scoring and average rebounding? He also only shot one more free throw than usual.

If Smart plays we win this game most likely, as their guards on the perimeter killed us (Holiday and Brogdon). Hell, if Tatum doesn't shoot terribly and turn it over at a few key times and/or Hayward doesn't get hit we probably win too.

[Fierce1]

Also look at the fouls in that Celtics vs. Pacers game.

Celts had 27 total fouls while the Pacers only had 18.

No player from the Pacers had more than 4 fouls.

The Celts had 2 players foul out, Jaylen and Theis.
GWill also had 5 fouls.

Reason why the Celts are fouling too much is the Pacers are big, really big.

Jaylen was on Myles Turner and Theis on Sabonis.

Would Jaylen have committed all those fouls if he wasn't guarding a big man?

It's really not ideal if a 6-8 PF like Theis will be guarding big Centers and a 6-6 wing player will be guarding PFs or Centers.

If Ainge doesn't make a move to address the big man problem, it will be a big mistake.
Celts really have a shot at winning a championship this season.

I think Ainge will make a move on or before the trade deadline.

The problem is too obvious to ignore.

[Fierce1]

Celts lost to the Pacers.

Sabonis was dominant against the Celts.

If it takes losses to convince Celtic fans that there is a big man problem then here's another loss to a big team.

1. Sabonis wasn't dominant.

2. The Celtics didn't lose because they had a big man problem. They lost because they let the Holiday boys go 15-23 for 35 points. The Celtics only gave up 5 offensive rebounds and outrebounded Indy by 8 rebounds. Boston scored two more points in the paint than Indy did.

Did you watch the game?

I watched the whole game and we must be watching different games.

1. Sabonis dominated the Celts period!

Not only did Sabonis score and rebound, he also had 8 assists.

When it was 1 on 1, Theis vs. Sabonis inside the paint, it was like a layup drill for Sabonis.
Theis couldn't stop Sabonis 1 on 1.

That led to #2.

2. Reason why the Holidays shot a lot of 3s was because Pacers exploited the weakness of the Celts.

The Pacers used inside-outside basketball.

When Sabonis was being doubled team, he gladly kicked it out to the open shooters.

Would the Celts have doubled inside if the Celtic Center can handle Sabonis 1 on 1?

Of course not!

If you guys have league pass, watch the game again.
Every time Sabonis was 1 on 1 with Theis inside the paint, 3 possibilities would occur.

1. Sabonis scores over Theis.
Theis is just too small.

2. Sabonis draws a foul and goes to the FT line.

3. Sabonis kicks out to the open shooter when doubled.

Do you realise we held Sabonis to below average scoring and average rebounding? He also only shot one more free throw than usual.

If Smart plays we win this game most likely, as their guards on the perimeter killed us (Holiday and Brogdon). Hell, if Tatum doesn't shoot terribly and turn it over at a few key times and/or Hayward doesn't get hit we probably win too.

You're not getting what I'm saying.
Sabonis didn't dominate the stat sheet, but the effect of Sabonis is what led to the Holidays getting a lot of 3s.

If you have league pass, watch the game again.
When it was Sabonis vs. Theis, it was like a layup drill.
If Sabonis couldn't score because he got doubled, he would kick it out to the open man.
And once Sabonis establishes position inside the paint, the Celtics would end up fouling him.

Also, if we had Smart we would have won this game, absolutely!

But do you realize this is just a Pacers team with really no true superstar.

Pacers are not even a top 4 team in the east and the Celts couldn't beat them.

All of what you said is true, like if Tatum shoots better or Hayward didn't get hurt, etc.

That's the problem, the Celts must always be at their best to win because they're a flawed team.

It's a basic problem.

Celts are lacking size.

If only Kanter is decent on defense then there will be no need for an upgrade at the Center position.

[gouki88]

Celts lost to the Pacers.

Sabonis was dominant against the Celts.

If it takes losses to convince Celtic fans that there is a big man problem then here's another loss to a big team.

1. Sabonis wasn't dominant.

2. The Celtics didn't lose because they had a big man problem. They lost because they let the Holiday boys go 15-23 for 35 points. The Celtics only gave up 5 offensive rebounds and outrebounded Indy by 8 rebounds. Boston scored two more points in the paint than Indy did.

Did you watch the game?

I watched the whole game and we must be watching different games.

1. Sabonis dominated the Celts period!

Not only did Sabonis score and rebound, he also had 8 assists.

When it was 1 on 1, Theis vs. Sabonis inside the paint, it was like a layup drill for Sabonis.
Theis couldn't stop Sabonis 1 on 1.

That led to #2.

2. Reason why the Holidays shot a lot of 3s was because Pacers exploited the weakness of the Celts.

The Pacers used inside-outside basketball.

When Sabonis was being doubled team, he gladly kicked it out to the open shooters.

Would the Celts have doubled inside if the Celtic Center can handle Sabonis 1 on 1?

Of course not!

If you guys have league pass, watch the game again.
Every time Sabonis was 1 on 1 with Theis inside the paint, 3 possibilities would occur.

1. Sabonis scores over Theis.
Theis is just too small.

2. Sabonis draws a foul and goes to the FT line.

3. Sabonis kicks out to the open shooter when doubled.

Do you realise we held Sabonis to below average scoring and average rebounding? He also only shot one more free throw than usual.

If Smart plays we win this game most likely, as their guards on the perimeter killed us (Holiday and Brogdon). Hell, if Tatum doesn't shoot terribly and turn it over at a few key times and/or Hayward doesn't get hit we probably win too.

You're not getting what I'm saying.
Sabonis didn't dominate the stat sheet, but the effect of Sabonis is what led to the Holidays getting a lot of 3s.

If you have league pass, watch the game again.
When it was Sabonis vs. Theis, it was like a layup drill.
If Sabonis couldn't score because he got doubled, he would kick it out to the open man.
And once Sabonis establishes position inside the paint, the Celtics would end up fouling him.

Also, if we had Smart we would have won this game, absolutely!

But do you realize this is just a Pacers team with really no true superstar.

Pacers are not even a top 4 team in the east and the Celts couldn't beat them.

All of what you said is true, like if Tatum shoots better or Hayward didn't get hurt, etc.

That's the problem, the Celts must always be at their best to win because they're a flawed team.

It's a basic problem.

Celts are lacking size.

If only Kanter is decent on defense then there will be no need for an upgrade at the Center position.

You keep banging this drum of the C's needing a big upgrade despite the evidence not actually supporting that. Can't be bothered going back and forth on this yet again

[Fierce1]

Celts lost to the Pacers.

Sabonis was dominant against the Celts.

If it takes losses to convince Celtic fans that there is a big man problem then here's another loss to a big team.

1. Sabonis wasn't dominant.

2. The Celtics didn't lose because they had a big man problem. They lost because they let the Holiday boys go 15-23 for 35 points. The Celtics only gave up 5 offensive rebounds and outrebounded Indy by 8 rebounds. Boston scored two more points in the paint than Indy did.

Did you watch the game?

I watched the whole game and we must be watching different games.

1. Sabonis dominated the Celts period!

Not only did Sabonis score and rebound, he also had 8 assists.

When it was 1 on 1, Theis vs. Sabonis inside the paint, it was like a layup drill for Sabonis.
Theis couldn't stop Sabonis 1 on 1.

That led to #2.

2. Reason why the Holidays shot a lot of 3s was because Pacers exploited the weakness of the Celts.

The Pacers used inside-outside basketball.

When Sabonis was being doubled team, he gladly kicked it out to the open shooters.

Would the Celts have doubled inside if the Celtic Center can handle Sabonis 1 on 1?

Of course not!

If you guys have league pass, watch the game again.
Every time Sabonis was 1 on 1 with Theis inside the paint, 3 possibilities would occur.

1. Sabonis scores over Theis.
Theis is just too small.

2. Sabonis draws a foul and goes to the FT line.

3. Sabonis kicks out to the open shooter when doubled.

Do you realise we held Sabonis to below average scoring and average rebounding? He also only shot one more free throw than usual.

If Smart plays we win this game most likely, as their guards on the perimeter killed us (Holiday and Brogdon). Hell, if Tatum doesn't shoot terribly and turn it over at a few key times and/or Hayward doesn't get hit we probably win too.

You're not getting what I'm saying.
Sabonis didn't dominate the stat sheet, but the effect of Sabonis is what led to the Holidays getting a lot of 3s.

If you have league pass, watch the game again.
When it was Sabonis vs. Theis, it was like a layup drill.
If Sabonis couldn't score because he got doubled, he would kick it out to the open man.
And once Sabonis establishes position inside the paint, the Celtics would end up fouling him.

Also, if we had Smart we would have won this game, absolutely!

But do you realize this is just a Pacers team with really no true superstar.

Pacers are not even a top 4 team in the east and the Celts couldn't beat them.

All of what you said is true, like if Tatum shoots better or Hayward didn't get hurt, etc.

That's the problem, the Celts must always be at their best to win because they're a flawed team.

It's a basic problem.

Celts are lacking size.

If only Kanter is decent on defense then there will be no need for an upgrade at the Center position.

You keep banging this drum of the C's needing a big upgrade despite the evidence not actually supporting that. Can't be bothered going back and forth on this yet again

Bigs like Jarrett Allen and Sabonis playing like All-Stars when they are facing the Celts.

That's not evidence enough?

[Fierce1]

I can understand double teaming the likes of KAT, AD, and Embiid.

But when you have to double team a big like Sabonis...

Also, for the record, Celts don't even have to make a big upgrade, just a slight upgrade.
Guys like Poeltl or Tristan Thompson, Derrick Favors even, are good enough to make the Celts better in the paint.

When was the last time a championship team had 5 starters with the tallest player just 6-8 or shorter?

[Somebody]

Fafnir is using DReb%.  You are using raw defensive rebounds.

Yup, and the GSW played at an above average pace and were good at generating opponent misses. (their defensive eFG% was good) Which means there are a lot of raw defensive boards to be had.

They were decidedly not good at securing defensive rebounds if you look at how many opportunities they had to get them.

Ah alright.