Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
1
Celtics Talk / Re: Praise for Joe
« Last post by tenn_smoothie on Today at 04:19:14 AM »
Agree with Roy, Mazzula deserves strong credit for our play so far.  I say that as someone who has been very critical of him at times.  Last season was a major failure, especially the playoffs. 3rd quarter of game 1 against the Knicks was straight up coaching malpractice after a successful, balanced first half.  It was the most ineffective and idiotic quarter of basketball I've ever seen, employing Joe's rigid 3-point happy philosophy and moving away from what was working. I'll never forget it, and quite frankly I think Joe helped us squander another title run.  But I digress.  If I'm going to criticize him, I should also praise him when things are going well.

The fact that we're still one of the top defensive teams despite the roster turnover and missing one of our best defenders in Tatum says a lot.  4th in defensive rating as a few games ago IIRC.  Always important to be a good defensive team, so I'm glad that's the emphasis.  The youngsters are developing well.  And the offense has been functioning better than expected while missing Tatum.  So props to Joe, for now.

Defense has not been the problem, for the most part, with Mazzulla.

It is his extreme 3-point heavy offensive scheme that is the main problem. Aggravating that is his stubborn, almost immature and insecure persona in regard to trying to justify that offense. SCeltic, you are right on target about last season's Knick series. Both Games 1 & 2 were coaching malpractice. Blowing two 20-point second half leads by recklessly continuing to shoot and miss 3-point shots without stopping play and adjusting the offense to create higher percentage shots was horrible coaching and cost us the series. I continue to be at a loss as to why there has never been alternative offensive strategies added to our schemes.
2
Celtics Talk / Re: Should Joe consider playing Amari Williams?
« Last post by No Nickname on Yesterday at 11:49:51 PM »
I don't know.  He's a long way away.

Should have taken Kalkbrenner or Raynaud. ;)

Should have taken Kyle Filipowski!  I don't mind the Williams pick, it was in the second.  Kyle and Hugo would have been some good young blood on this team.

Interestingly, Filipowski was taken 32nd overall in 2024.  We had #30 that year, and #32 in 2025, when both Kalkbrenner and Raynaud were on the board.

Stats this season:

Filipowski: 9.5 points, 6.4 rebounds, 0.5 blocks
Kalkbrenner: 8.7 points, 6.4 rebounds, 1.8 blocks
Raynaud: 10.0 points, 5.8 rebounds, 0.5 blocks

Every draft is different, but I think generally Stevens does not want to use draft picks on unathletic, low-ceiling big men. If you can get guys like Queta or Kornet off the scrap heap, why would you bother using a pick and roster spot on a guy who probably won't even be as good as they are? And if these guys were such big missed opportunities, why are there similar types of players available seemingly every year in the late first round or second? Nobody wants to expend resources on these guys because they all project as backups on good teams and you can find similar types every year.

If choosing between a solid backup and somebody likely to never be a rotation player, I'd take the backup.

While it's a small sample size, if you look at Raynaud in December (9 games) he's averaging starter minutes with these stats:

30.1 mpg
15.4 ppg
9.2 rpg
54.7 fg%
40.0 3pfg%








3
Celtics Talk / Re: Should Joe consider playing Amari Williams?
« Last post by Roy H. on Yesterday at 08:38:53 PM »
I don't know.  He's a long way away.

Should have taken Kalkbrenner or Raynaud. ;)

Should have taken Kyle Filipowski!  I don't mind the Williams pick, it was in the second.  Kyle and Hugo would have been some good young blood on this team.

Interestingly, Filipowski was taken 32nd overall in 2024.  We had #30 that year, and #32 in 2025, when both Kalkbrenner and Raynaud were on the board.

Stats this season:

Filipowski: 9.5 points, 6.4 rebounds, 0.5 blocks
Kalkbrenner: 8.7 points, 6.4 rebounds, 1.8 blocks
Raynaud: 10.0 points, 5.8 rebounds, 0.5 blocks

Every draft is different, but I think generally Stevens does not want to use draft picks on unathletic, low-ceiling big men. If you can get guys like Queta or Kornet off the scrap heap, why would you bother using a pick and roster spot on a guy who probably won't even be as good as they are? And if these guys were such big missed opportunities, why are there similar types of players available seemingly every year in the late first round or second? Nobody wants to expend resources on these guys because they all project as backups on good teams and you can find similar types every year.

If choosing between a solid backup and somebody likely to never be a rotation player, I'd take the backup.

4
Celtics Talk / Re: Should Joe consider playing Amari Williams?
« Last post by obnoxiousmime on Yesterday at 06:47:36 PM »
I don't know.  He's a long way away.

Should have taken Kalkbrenner or Raynaud. ;)

Should have taken Kyle Filipowski!  I don't mind the Williams pick, it was in the second.  Kyle and Hugo would have been some good young blood on this team.

Interestingly, Filipowski was taken 32nd overall in 2024.  We had #30 that year, and #32 in 2025, when both Kalkbrenner and Raynaud were on the board.

Stats this season:

Filipowski: 9.5 points, 6.4 rebounds, 0.5 blocks
Kalkbrenner: 8.7 points, 6.4 rebounds, 1.8 blocks
Raynaud: 10.0 points, 5.8 rebounds, 0.5 blocks

Every draft is different, but I think generally Stevens does not want to use draft picks on unathletic, low-ceiling big men. If you can get guys like Queta or Kornet off the scrap heap, why would you bother using a pick and roster spot on a guy who probably won't even be as good as they are? And if these guys were such big missed opportunities, why are there similar types of players available seemingly every year in the late first round or second? Nobody wants to expend resources on these guys because they all project as backups on good teams and you can find similar types every year.

5
Around the NBA / Re: NBA Season 2025-26
« Last post by Phantom255x on Yesterday at 06:38:17 PM »
Wait, so SAS-OKC played last night. And now they play again tomorrow against each other on Christmas?  ???
6
Celtics Talk / Re: Celtics News
« Last post by Phantom255x on Yesterday at 06:37:17 PM »
What we simply need is another big man, it could be someone better than Queta, or even just a viable backup behind him who can eat 20-25 minutes a night regularly. Because when Queta struggles, is in foul trouble or simply doesn't play due to injury that's when the issues arise. Because clearly Tillman/Boucher aren't trusted and are unplayable, and Garza I guess can have a few decent games here or there but that's not an ideal option still.
7
Around the NBA / Re: NBA Season 2025-26
« Last post by Who on Yesterday at 06:09:03 PM »
Quote
Jorge Sierra: FYI: Nikola Jokic has passed Larry Bird in assists.

Bird - 13 years 897 games 5,695 assists
Jokic - 11 years 774 games 5,699 assists

That is cool (and a little sad!). I always say Jokic is a 6-11 280lb version of Larry Bird.

Got me curious where how close / far apart they are in other stats:

Rebounds: Bird 8,974 > Jokic 8,488
Points: Bird 21,791 > Jokic 17,047

Jokic might catch Bird in rebounds by the end of the season. Still, impressive for Bird. Jokic is a big time rebounder at center and Bird is still ahead of him. Looks like Jokic will need another 2 full seasons to catch up to Bird in points. Jokic more of a slow starter scoring wise. Barely broke 20ppg his 1st 5 years in the league.

Steals: Bird 1,556 > Jokic 992
Blocks: Bird 755 > Jokic 559

Fair dues to Larry. Won both steals and blocks. Convincingly too.
8
Celtics Talk / Re: Celtics News
« Last post by Who on Yesterday at 04:52:04 PM »
https://x.com/CrumpledJumper/status/2003290505418080591/photo/1
Sooo... you're telling me that right now Neemy is a better rim protector (by 0.1!) than Ivaca Zubac that everyone thinks we should trade for and start ahead of Neemy?

I feel like people are underrating Q. Advanced metrics should always be taken with a grain of salt, but his are really impressive, particularly with a quarter of the season gone. Even more so when you consider how much he's getting paid.

Sometimes it's a snob thing, he was a nobody last season, he's getting paid peanuts, he's unspectacular, it's hard to change that paradigm of how we viewed him. I feel he impacts winning a lot more than people give him credit for. He's a perfect Moneyball type player to me.

Most of the names that people have brought up as supposed upgrades actually have worse advanced metrics than him, and cost ten times as much. Look at his percentiles for on-off. He's improved in pretty much every facet other than his free throw rate and his pts/possession and eFG. He's in the 90th %ile among all bigs in terms of his on-off differential, and his defensive metrics are all in the top 10-20% of bigs.



Queta only plays half the game. 25mpg. We need a 2nd starting caliber for the other half of the game.

It is not a question that Queta isn't solid. It is that we have 48 minutes at center and he is filling only half of them. Queta is not enough.
9
Celtics Talk / Re: Celtics News
« Last post by Birdman on Yesterday at 04:50:47 PM »
I alway will have a special place in my heart for Horford, Holiday & Porzingis but look like it was a great thing in not keeping all 3? Porzingus still fighting that virus & hopefully he be okay while Jru & Al been hurt most of the year
10
Around the NBA / Re: NBA Season 2025-26
« Last post by Phantom255x on Yesterday at 03:40:29 PM »
A Spurs-Thunder playoff series would be awesome
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10