Fire Joe! ... or critique Joe ... or defend Joe... or worry about Joe's coaching

[JSD]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

We've also been mediocre to bad in extremely close games:

Bobby Manning @RealBobManning
yesterday
#Celtics: 12-11 in one possession games under 2 min. -93 net rating tonight in the final 2. They're 4-7 now in games played within 1 point in the final minute.

I was in early on this concern…

All the negativity that’s in this town sucks, I get that, but hear me out:

The Celtics are just 3-2 in games decided by 3 or fewer points. They are also now 0-3 in overtime games. The Celtics have now fallen out of the top 5 in PPG.

Do any of these things concern you?

I wouldn't go quite that far. I think this Celtics team could be great if they cleaned up their finishing down the stretch of games. They're right on the doorstep of greatness.

This Celtics team is 4-4 in games decided by 3 points or less and 2-3 in overtime. So they're essentially 6-7 in close games. That's not great.

This team just simply lacks something in close games

[SparzWizard]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

We've also been mediocre to bad in extremely close games:

Bobby Manning @RealBobManning
yesterday
#Celtics: 12-11 in one possession games under 2 min. -93 net rating tonight in the final 2. They're 4-7 now in games played within 1 point in the final minute.

I was in early on this concern…

All the negativity that’s in this town sucks, I get that, but hear me out:

The Celtics are just 3-2 in games decided by 3 or fewer points. They are also now 0-3 in overtime games. The Celtics have now fallen out of the top 5 in PPG.

Do any of these things concern you?

I wouldn't go quite that far. I think this Celtics team could be great if they cleaned up their finishing down the stretch of games. They're right on the doorstep of greatness.

This Celtics team is 4-4 in games decided by 3 points or less and 2-3 in overtime. So they're essentially 6-7 in close games. That's not great.

This team just simply lacks something in close games

Nice to see you tracking your assessments. Sadly, this team hasn't learned a thing. I'll say it starts with the coach. Next are the Jays and esp Tatum's bad ISOs.

[Kernewek]

Close games tend to trend towards .500 over time. You get spikes here and there but over time they go towards .500. Close games like that often come down to chance (make or miss league). It is not solely chance but chance is a huge part of it.

Let them have their moment Who, it's been a very dry season for the Fire Joe thread.

[Kernewek]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

We've also been mediocre to bad in extremely close games:

Bobby Manning @RealBobManning
yesterday
#Celtics: 12-11 in one possession games under 2 min. -93 net rating tonight in the final 2. They're 4-7 now in games played within 1 point in the final minute.

I was in early on this concern…

All the negativity that’s in this town sucks, I get that, but hear me out:

The Celtics are just 3-2 in games decided by 3 or fewer points. They are also now 0-3 in overtime games. The Celtics have now fallen out of the top 5 in PPG.

Do any of these things concern you?

I wouldn't go quite that far. I think this Celtics team could be great if they cleaned up their finishing down the stretch of games. They're right on the doorstep of greatness.

This Celtics team is 4-4 in games decided by 3 points or less and 2-3 in overtime. So they're essentially 6-7 in close games. That's not great.

This team just simply lacks something in close games

Nice to see you tracking your assessments. Sadly, this team hasn't learned a thing. I'll say it starts with the coach. Next are the Jays and esp Tatum's bad ISOs.

This is a great example of how looking at different stats can colour the narrative you choose to present, though.

Ex: If we look at 'clutch minutes' that the Celtics have played this season (Clutch = the final five minutes of the fourth quarter or overtime when the score is within five points), the Celtics are 21-11, top 5 in the league, and the other teams in that zone have largely interchangeable numbers:
https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/clutch-advanced

Both of these things, of course, are true - that the Celtics are 4-7 if the game was within 1 point in the final minute and 21-11 when the game was within 5 with 5 minutes to go.

That's not to say that the team doesn't have an issue with closing out games and blowing leads, but it's important to understand how people are chopping the numbers to arrive at those conclusions, particularly in light of a game at the end of March with the first seed all but sown up.

[Redz]

Presumably Joe would have opted for Jeue or White or both down the stretch if they were available.  As it was, getting Soringer some crunch time minutes might be important down the road than a non-weight bearing loss. 

It’s still annoying to lose in two bad ways in one game (blowing a huge lead, then getting outplayed in a tight game).

[Roy H.]

Presumably Joe would have opted for Jeue or White or both down the stretch if they were available.  As it was, getting Soringer some crunch time minutes might be important down the road than a non-weight bearing loss. 

It’s still annoying to lose in two bad ways in one game (blowing a huge lead, then getting outplayed in a tight game).

It was a bizarrely coached game.  The big lineup to start the game was really interesting -- and effective -- but then Joe negated that by subbing in Pritchard at halftime.  Then, he went to some truly strange lineups in the second half that even a casual observer would know couldn't work.  Kornet + Svi + Springer + Hauser + Tatum.  That lineup was a -10.

From a "risk versus reward" standpoint, I don't like the experimentation.  Yes, it gets our scrubs / end of benchers playing time.  But, it disrupts our rhythm and our chemistry.  Obviously when a team is short-handed the coach is going to have to mix in some non-rotation players, but it's important to put those guys in a position to succeed.  You don't run Svi and Springer and Kornet out there at the same time, but rather mix one in with the starters.  It reminds me of the Doc era.  He had a propensity early to make "line change" substitutions, putting 4 or 5 bench players on the floor together.  It never worked out.  He later learned that a guy like Scal could be quite effective filling in for KG, because he was surrounded by excellent talent that can carry him.

[SparzWizard]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

We've also been mediocre to bad in extremely close games:

Bobby Manning @RealBobManning
yesterday
#Celtics: 12-11 in one possession games under 2 min. -93 net rating tonight in the final 2. They're 4-7 now in games played within 1 point in the final minute.

I was in early on this concern…

All the negativity that’s in this town sucks, I get that, but hear me out:

The Celtics are just 3-2 in games decided by 3 or fewer points. They are also now 0-3 in overtime games. The Celtics have now fallen out of the top 5 in PPG.

Do any of these things concern you?

I wouldn't go quite that far. I think this Celtics team could be great if they cleaned up their finishing down the stretch of games. They're right on the doorstep of greatness.

This Celtics team is 4-4 in games decided by 3 points or less and 2-3 in overtime. So they're essentially 6-7 in close games. That's not great.

This team just simply lacks something in close games

Nice to see you tracking your assessments. Sadly, this team hasn't learned a thing. I'll say it starts with the coach. Next are the Jays and esp Tatum's bad ISOs.

This is a great example of how looking at different stats can colour the narrative you choose to present, though.

Ex: If we look at 'clutch minutes' that the Celtics have played this season (Clutch = the final five minutes of the fourth quarter or overtime when the score is within five points), the Celtics are 21-11, top 5 in the league, and the other teams in that zone have largely interchangeable numbers:
https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/clutch-advanced

Both of these things, of course, are true - that the Celtics are 4-7 if the game was within 1 point in the final minute and 21-11 when the game was within 5 with 5 minutes to go.

That's not to say that the team doesn't have an issue with closing out games and blowing leads, but it's important to understand how people are chopping the numbers to arrive at those conclusions, particularly in light of a game at the end of March with the first seed all but sown up.

But if it was locked up, then why bother giving heavy minutes to the Jays? Or even experimenting with them on the floor. If Joe were to experiment, then he should just rest them. Now they're scrambling with their lead and end up putting back in the core to risk injuries, fatigue, etc.

[Kernewek]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

We've also been mediocre to bad in extremely close games:

Bobby Manning @RealBobManning
yesterday
#Celtics: 12-11 in one possession games under 2 min. -93 net rating tonight in the final 2. They're 4-7 now in games played within 1 point in the final minute.

I was in early on this concern…

All the negativity that’s in this town sucks, I get that, but hear me out:

The Celtics are just 3-2 in games decided by 3 or fewer points. They are also now 0-3 in overtime games. The Celtics have now fallen out of the top 5 in PPG.

Do any of these things concern you?

I wouldn't go quite that far. I think this Celtics team could be great if they cleaned up their finishing down the stretch of games. They're right on the doorstep of greatness.

This Celtics team is 4-4 in games decided by 3 points or less and 2-3 in overtime. So they're essentially 6-7 in close games. That's not great.

This team just simply lacks something in close games

Nice to see you tracking your assessments. Sadly, this team hasn't learned a thing. I'll say it starts with the coach. Next are the Jays and esp Tatum's bad ISOs.

This is a great example of how looking at different stats can colour the narrative you choose to present, though.

Ex: If we look at 'clutch minutes' that the Celtics have played this season (Clutch = the final five minutes of the fourth quarter or overtime when the score is within five points), the Celtics are 21-11, top 5 in the league, and the other teams in that zone have largely interchangeable numbers:
https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/clutch-advanced

Both of these things, of course, are true - that the Celtics are 4-7 if the game was within 1 point in the final minute and 21-11 when the game was within 5 with 5 minutes to go.

That's not to say that the team doesn't have an issue with closing out games and blowing leads, but it's important to understand how people are chopping the numbers to arrive at those conclusions, particularly in light of a game at the end of March with the first seed all but sown up.

But if it was locked up, then why bother giving heavy minutes to the Jays? Or even experimenting with them on the floor. If Joe were to experiment, then he should just rest them. Now they're scrambling with their lead and end up putting back in the core to risk injuries, fatigue, etc.

No disagreement from me on that front - I wasn't able to watch the game last night, so I can't comment on the specific coaching decisions, just offering some more context to the tweets and record discussion.

[bdm860]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

On the optimistic side, these comebacks seems to happen against lesser competition.  My only playoff concern (regarding blown leads) is maybe a first round opponent steals 1-2 games with the C's not taking them seriously (like vs Hawks last year), or maybe if a later opponent is down a superstar (like last year when Embiid or Dejounte Murray missed a game in their respective series).

The Hawks were 31-39 and missing Trae Young.

Last year the 28 point blown lead against the Nets, that was a team who had traded away their 2 superstars (Durant, Irving) and were 7-15 since Durant last played a game for them.

Earlier this month, the 22 point blown lead against the Cavs, Mitchell was out and Mobley went out with an injury before the Cavs made their comeback.

Earlier in the season, the 18 point blown lead against the Hornets, they were 3-9 and missing Rozier.

This is partly why I want to get Miami in the first round, I think the C's are more likely to take them seriously throughout and not give away any games.

[Neurotic Guy]

It doesn’t make sense to ignore the struggles to win close games and it also doesn’t make sense to ignore thee see they are 57-15 and coasting to HCA throughout the playoffs. I also believe that are 20-3 in their last 23 games.  This team may not have what it takes to win the championship or maybe they do.  I’m looking forward to the playoffs and the prospect of another gear. We’ll see soon enough.

[tenn_smoothie]

Interesting comments by Brian Windhorst on the NBA page of the ESPN website today ......

He talks about every point the fans here discuss in frustration on a daily basis, including the awful lack of execution on important, late-game possessions, Mazzulla's refusal to call a timeout to set up something other than an iso-dribble fall-back jumper from Tatum or Brown, the constant habit of playing fast and aggressive in the first half of games only to slow the offense to a walk in the 4th quarter. He talks about the overwhelming talent this team has and how it is not utilized to win games. Very interesting clip he shows of the ridiculous possession we had at the end of the Atlanta game when Brown stands on the right wing at the 3-point line dribbling the clock away with zero movement from the other players, all while Joe stands clueless on the sideline with two timeouts in his pocket.

Seems that certain members of Celtics Strong are not the only ones who have serious concerns about the ability of this team and coach to succeed in the playoffs. I just keep thinking about the great things a quality coach could do with this talented team.

Note: Also submitted on the "Blown Leads" thread when I couldn't decide where to post it. Hope I'm not out of line, but it was really interesting to hear the opinion of someone outside of the Celtics fan base pointing out the exact concerns some of us have.

[SparzWizard]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

On the optimistic side, these comebacks seems to happen against lesser competition.  My only playoff concern (regarding blown leads) is maybe a first round opponent steals 1-2 games with the C's not taking them seriously (like vs Hawks last year), or maybe if a later opponent is down a superstar (like last year when Embiid or Dejounte Murray missed a game in their respective series).

The Hawks were 31-39 and missing Trae Young.

Last year the 28 point blown lead against the Nets, that was a team who had traded away their 2 superstars (Durant, Irving) and were 7-15 since Durant last played a game for them.

Earlier this month, the 22 point blown lead against the Cavs, Mitchell was out and Mobley went out with an injury before the Cavs made their comeback.

Earlier in the season, the 18 point blown lead against the Hornets, they were 3-9 and missing Rozier.

This is partly why I want to get Miami in the first round, I think the C's are more likely to take them seriously throughout and not give away any games.

Careful what we wish for because Miami is licking their chops to upset us again. These stooges won't go away as long as Jimmy Butler, Bam Adebayo and Eric Spoelstra are there.

[makaveli]

Two main concerns going into the PO:

1. Team basketball and ball sharing and movement STOPS at close late game situations. No reason for setteling for contested stepbacks as our primary solution

2. Switching everything, not hidding Al or Zinger. I mean we managed to hide IT so why are we PLEASED with Al or Zinger defending Kyrie, Butler, Harden, Dame etc at the end game situations?

All of this is pure coaching. Sort that out ASAP!

[Redz]

One nice recent development has been seeing Svi come in under just about any circumstance and be a steady shooter.  That impressed the heck out of me.

[ozgod]

Fun fact:  the Celtics have given up the biggest comeback in the NBA this year (Hawks) and last year (Nets).

It's definitely not a coincidence, but I'm also not sure how predictive it will be regarding our playoff chances.

On the optimistic side, these comebacks seems to happen against lesser competition.  My only playoff concern (regarding blown leads) is maybe a first round opponent steals 1-2 games with the C's not taking them seriously (like vs Hawks last year), or maybe if a later opponent is down a superstar (like last year when Embiid or Dejounte Murray missed a game in their respective series).

The Hawks were 31-39 and missing Trae Young.

Last year the 28 point blown lead against the Nets, that was a team who had traded away their 2 superstars (Durant, Irving) and were 7-15 since Durant last played a game for them.

Earlier this month, the 22 point blown lead against the Cavs, Mitchell was out and Mobley went out with an injury before the Cavs made their comeback.

Earlier in the season, the 18 point blown lead against the Hornets, they were 3-9 and missing Rozier.

This is partly why I want to get Miami in the first round, I think the C's are more likely to take them seriously throughout and not give away any games.

It's a 100% mental issue. They switch off and then they let the other team get a head of steam and gain confidence. When even a lesser team gains confidence and starts hitting 3s anything can happen. Like Dean Wade with Cleveland, then with Portis with Milwaukee, and then Krecji and Bodganovic with Atlanta.

To me the bigger concern is not that the other team came back, any team can come back these days when they start hitting 3s. The sun shines on a dog's backside every now and then...the issue is that when it happens, it somehow throws us off the style of play that has caused us to build the lead to begin with. It forces us into uncharacteristic mistakes and turnovers, like Tatum's backcourt violation or the turnovers they gave up going iso.

That's what needs to be addressed. It shows a lack of trust in what had gotten them to that point, if they abandon it because they are put under pressure. It's also why I don't mind seeing them put under pressure during these last 10 or so games...because I'd much rather see them put under pressure now when a loss is more an embarrassment than something that really matters in the playoffs, where we can only afford to lose 3 games out of 7.

Sure it sucks for us who are following them on the game thread, it's not a fun experience...but it happening in the playoffs will be much, much less so. They've not been put under pressure all that often in this season where we've blown teams out for the most part, and that to me is their biggest weakness...they might not be as battle hardened in dealing with pressure as some of these other teams that have had to scrape and fight for wins. And pressure is only something you can learn to deal with experientially.