Shrewsberry: Stevens Really Beat Himself up Over Last Season

[greg683x]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Excellent post

[Csfan1984]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Sorry but you can't go by defense alone. And being in so many games but such a tight margin and seeing how many of those came down to a lot of luck I can't give them much credit for the start. Even BS the coach said the start wasn't accurate to the team. You arguing with me and the actual coach of the team. It's utter ridiculous.

[greg683x]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Sorry but you can't go by defense alone. And being in so many games but such a tight margin and seeing how many of those came down to a lot of luck I can't give them much credit for the start. Even BS the coach said the start wasn't accurate to the team. You arguing with me and the actual coach of the team. It's utter ridiculous.

Do you have a link to an article where Brad Stevens was saying these things?

[jambr380]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Sorry but you can't go by defense alone. And being in so many games but such a tight margin and seeing how many of those came down to a lot of luck I can't give them much credit for the start. Even BS the coach said the start wasn't accurate to the team. You arguing with me and the actual coach of the team. It's utter ridiculous.

Do you have a link to an article where Brad Stevens was saying these things?

Does it even matter if he did? We all know Stevens' personality - would it really surprise you if he didn't get super-pumped after such a phenomenal start? That's just not in his demeanor.

I am not sure why this has even become an argument. That team just lost it's new max All-Star to a gruesome injury and rather than fold, they went on an incredible streak. The team should be commended, regardless of how close the games were.

[greg683x]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Sorry but you can't go by defense alone. And being in so many games but such a tight margin and seeing how many of those came down to a lot of luck I can't give them much credit for the start. Even BS the coach said the start wasn't accurate to the team. You arguing with me and the actual coach of the team. It's utter ridiculous.

Do you have a link to an article where Brad Stevens was saying these things?

Does it even matter if he did? We all know Stevens' personality - would it really surprise you if he didn't get super-pumped after such a phenomenal start? That's just not in his demeanor.

I am not sure why this has even become an argument. That team just lost it's new max All-Star to a gruesome injury and rather than fold, they went on an incredible streak. The team should be commended, regardless of how close the games were.

It really doesn’t matter, I’d just love to see it, because you’re right Stevens does keep low key demeanor and he loves to give credit to the players, that’s why I have a hard time believing that he threw a bunch of shade on the team after they went on a great run.


But yes, this argument is completely ridiculous.  Apparently the rotations caused a chemistry problem on a 30-10 team BUT only on one side of the ball because you can’t just look at defense

[nickagneta]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Sorry but you can't go by defense alone. And being in so many games but such a tight margin and seeing how many of those came down to a lot of luck I can't give them much credit for the start. Even BS the coach said the start wasn't accurate to the team. You arguing with me and the actual coach of the team. It's utter ridiculous.

During their 16 game winning streak they averaged winning by 9.7 points a game. During their 34-8 streak they averaged winning by 5.5 points a game. That's not barely winning games.

Also, Stevens is always a Negative Nancy regarding how the team plays. He is like Belichick. Always talking about how the team needs to be better, even when the team is playing great.

[Csfan1984]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Sorry but you can't go by defense alone. And being in so many games but such a tight margin and seeing how many of those came down to a lot of luck I can't give them much credit for the start. Even BS the coach said the start wasn't accurate to the team. You arguing with me and the actual coach of the team. It's utter ridiculous.

During their 16 game winning streak they averaged winning by 9.7 points a game. During their 34-8 streak they averaged winning by 5.5 points a game. That's not barely winning games.

Also, Stevens is always a Negative Nancy regarding how the team plays. He is like Belichick. Always talking about how the team needs to be better, even when the team is playing great.

Lol you are all silly, now what the coach says doesn't matter. Okay

[Csfan1984]

Hope he finally stops tinkering with substitutions and rotations for half the season to "build data". Its a big chemistry killer that he does every year repeatedly.

this coming year will be his 6th season, chemistry has been an issue for 1 season.  ALL of the other seasons the team overachieved.

hes proven he can do a lot with his 'data' when he gets it, so you should be very optimistic about him being able to fix the problem from this season instead of harping on him to change everything

1st half's of seasons they have struggled due to his tinkering each year. Just because they pulled it out a few second halfs doesn't mean it's not a problem. You are starting in the hole.

Yeah, that 30-10 start in 2017-2018 (including 16 in a row early) was a huge problem, especially without Hayward.

Are you kidding you remember how they barely won most of those games and BS called the streak fools gold. They struggled.

You are what your record says you are. - Bill Parcells

Unless you are not and you get beat by a lower seed.

LOL at saying 30-10 is struggling. That's priceless.

Winning games with a ton of luck doesn't count as playing well. The record isnt the sign of struggles I am talking about. Its the play not the standings. Do you even remember how crazy some of those games went? Teams can play bad or poorly and still win especially if you had some luck. How many games has this team consistently played poorly for whole quarters especially 1st and 3rds but still won, are we going to say they had a great game? The answer is no. The rotations and subsitions haven't been good is my issue. How many times has this team been dominated on the boards and BS has three guards line ups, you forget that blunder he repeats over and over? This is basketball coaching choices that he is messing up often. Not utilizing length, cutters, or simply controlling the playing time of guys that aren't following the game prlan.

If this was just you going through some serious mental gymnastics to create some kind of revisionist history, that's one thing. But this is just a fairy tale that has no place in reality. That team was rolling and feeding off the "we vs the world" mentality. Their defense was off the hook, outstanding. They never gave up and came back on many occasions to win games. They were playing likes champions.

Not sure what team you were watching but it wasn't the Celtics post Hayward's injury.

What do you mean revisionist you just wrote it yourself. They had to come back to win on many occasions.

Coming back from being down in games are what the best teams do. If you think championship teams go out and win every game going away, never falling behind, then I now understand your fairy tale view of that team.

Hate to break it to you but every team falls behind by good amounts in just about every game. The really good to great teams, they come back and win those games. If that team was playing poorly, they would have lost those games.

Instead, after the first 2 losses, the team held 25 of their next 42 opponents to less than 100 points scored, had the best defense in the league by a wide margin, all while going 34-8. That team was playing the best basketball a Celtic team had been playing while being coached by Stevens.

Sorry, but you are just completely wrong about how that team was playing

Sorry but you can't go by defense alone. And being in so many games but such a tight margin and seeing how many of those came down to a lot of luck I can't give them much credit for the start. Even BS the coach said the start wasn't accurate to the team. You arguing with me and the actual coach of the team. It's utter ridiculous.

Do you have a link to an article where Brad Stevens was saying these things?

If you watch the post games and pre games that year BS said it a few times. And don't be fool by the total win difference during the stretch they played a lot of bad teams that helps it. They had a ridiculous stat that was being covered by a few sports media sources of games being very close with the last 3 mins. Don't remember the exact number but they also said the win % in that scenario was like double the league average. There were a few teams that really gave the C's the win in that stretch as well with unforced turn overs in under 2 mins. It was very much a lot of luck.

[Never Nervous Pervis]

If you watch the post games and pre games that year BS said it a few times. And don't be fool by the total win difference during the stretch they played a lot of bad teams that helps it. They had a ridiculous stat that was being covered by a few sports media sources of games being very close with the last 3 mins. Don't remember the exact number but they also said the win % in that scenario was like double the league average. There were a few teams that really gave the C's the win in that stretch as well with unforced turn overs in under 2 mins. It was very much a lot of luck.

The Celtics could go 82-0 and Stevens would still find things to be critical of. That's his humble Indiana roots, not proof that the team struggled despite going 30-10 without Hayward. Why are you still clinging to this invalidated claim 4 pages later?

[makaveli]

This is exactly what kyrie should be doing, instead of considering other options

[playdream]

CBS needs to grow a pair

Just move on and dont try to satisfy every player

This, he should tell Rozier and Brown "you better play your role or you play none" the second they complain about their bench role

[Csfan1984]

If you watch the post games and pre games that year BS said it a few times. And don't be fool by the total win difference during the stretch they played a lot of bad teams that helps it. They had a ridiculous stat that was being covered by a few sports media sources of games being very close with the last 3 mins. Don't remember the exact number but they also said the win % in that scenario was like double the league average. There were a few teams that really gave the C's the win in that stretch as well with unforced turn overs in under 2 mins. It was very much a lot of luck.

The Celtics could go 82-0 and Stevens would still find things to be critical of. That's his humble Indiana roots, not proof that the team struggled despite going 30-10 without Hayward. Why are you still clinging to this invalidated claim 4 pages later?

Invalidated? Please, the evidence is there that there are issues. A few posters have stated them over the last few years. I am stating it now. The thread is about a report BS is beating himself up about the season. I am pointing out something he is doing wrong and the BS fan club want's to come at me with one half of a season. I broke down the errors in their rebutle. The facts are he has struggled, some teams over achieved but he has made mistakes. Mistakes I point out that need correction. I'm critical because that's what a non-homer is.

[RazzelnoDazzel]

CBS needs to grow a pair

Just move on and dont try to satisfy every player

This, he should tell Rozier and Brown "you better play your role or you play none" the second they complain about their bench role

This is not the correct approach to manage people.

[Bobshot]

I'll just throw this out in the middle of this conversation about Stevens and why the Celtics team "quit."

Well, maybe they quit just like the current Red Sox team has "quit."

Because they felt the management was not supporting their efforts to win.

The Celtics got that immediately at the start of the season with Hayward coming out of the blue into the starting lineup. Especially after the Celtics had almost gotten into the finals last season without Hayward and Irving. To say nothing of Hayward, even Irving wasn't 100% ready to start the season with a heavy load. But both were in the starting lineup as if nothing had happened down the stretch. And Stevens spent much of the pre-season, not on the starting lineup, but on who was going to be the last players to make the team.

The Red Sox players maybe got that in spring training, when the team  was "resting" players , which they had done successfully last September before the October playoffs. But that was September, not March, and they had already clinched the division and best record, for all intents. And then they stonewalled Kimbrel, instead bringing in a slew of AAA releivers and castoffs to fill the bullpen (they are still doing that).  Granted they were up against a cap wall, but Henry made a fortune on the Red Sox last year, and they deserved better than his going cheap on them. There's a pic on Twitter today of Henry flying first class holding some soccer champion cup up with his hands.  It's no wonder the team is flat.

The similarities with the Celtics are there.  If the players (even some of them) think the management is not putting out its best effort to win, they won't either.

[SHAQATTACK]

thinking next year Celtics will be way closer to lottery team than competing for anything significant.  If Hayward doesn't seriously pan out ,  i see see Boston sliding back .