Celtics (0-0) at Sixers (0-0) Game #1 10/23/19

[johnnygreen]

Gordon Hayward was one of the lone bright spots last night. He was basically the only guy that was not afraid to constantly attack the paint.

I did like Tatum’s aggressiveness and hope it continues. Jaylen was basically never given an opportunity to play due to the quick nit picky fouls.

I had to look up the stat sheet, and was amazed Kemba had taken 18 shots. It seemed like he hardly shot the ball at all. During the first half, he seemed to easily blow by his defender whenever he wanted, but didn’t do it nearly enough. He also did not help matters by not creating and making easier shots for his teammates. I don’t want to make much out of one game, but was Kemba part of the problem in Charlotte by not being able to create shots for his teammates?

The poor free throw shooting was extremely disappointing. Quick aside, when shooting flagrant fouls, why can’t the free throw shooter request his teammates to line up on the side of the box? Being alone at the free throw line feels totally different.

Two questions I would have for Brad Stevens. Why did we seem to allow Ben Simmons to consistently take layups and not just foul him? The guy can’t make free throws, but we were OK with letting him dunk? In the fourth quarter, Theis was clearly pushed in the back on a defensive boxout, but was called for a foul when fighting back for position. At the time, Philly was up 9. Could Brad have called for a review? I thought it was a pivotal point in the game, where a review was clearly warranted and needed. Instead of possibly cutting into the lead, Philly got an and 1 to go up by 12.

[Tr1boy]

I really liked what I saw from Grant Williams last night

He caused problems for the 76ers.  His weight loss/slimmer body from summer league to now,  is impressive

I hope he will be given more mins in the future and some reps as a point forward

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Is it time for the panic button? This team got dismantled by the 76ers. Right where they left off from last year's ECSF against Milwaukee.

Seriously, one game in... Give me a break 

So, us negative nellies heard the same thing last season—"Give it more than a game," then it was "Give it at least 20 games," then it was "give it til the All-Star break," then it was "As long as they're clicking going into the playoffs"—and we all know how that ended.

I'm not trying to start, or otherwise promote, a war between the optimists and the pessimists, but it does bug me that, in the minds of optimists, everything that comes out of the mouths of pessimists is a "hot take." Really? Because all of those "hot takes" from last season proved to be well-founded.

And it's not like optimists don't have their own "hot takes"—if the Cs win a couple in a row against decent teams, some people around here start talking about making the Finals.

[seancally]

Is it time for the panic button? This team got dismantled by the 76ers. Right where they left off from last year's ECSF against Milwaukee.

Seriously, one game in... Give me a break 

So, us negative nellies heard the same thing last season—"Give it more than a game," then it was "Give it at least 20 games," then it was "give it til the All-Star break," then it was "As long as they're clicking going into the playoffs"—and we all know how that ended.

I'm not trying to start, or otherwise promote, a war between the optimists and the pessimists, but it does bug me that, in the minds of optimists, everything that comes out of the mouths of pessimists is a "hot take." Really? Because all of those "hot takes" from last season proved to be well-founded.

And it's not like optimists don't have their own "hot takes"—if the Cs win a couple in a row against decent teams, some people around here start talking about making the Finals.

If they make a normal FT percentage it's a different game. If Kemba has a normal performance it's a different game. Now, if in these first 10 games we average ~66% from the FT line and Kemba proves to be no improvement over Terry Rozier, then yes, we'll have good reason to be concerned.

But not after 1 game. Unfortunately we'll have to be patient.

[jambr380]

Is it time for the panic button? This team got dismantled by the 76ers. Right where they left off from last year's ECSF against Milwaukee.

Seriously, one game in... Give me a break 

So, us negative nellies heard the same thing last season—"Give it more than a game," then it was "Give it at least 20 games," then it was "give it til the All-Star break," then it was "As long as they're clicking going into the playoffs"—and we all know how that ended.

I'm not trying to start, or otherwise promote, a war between the optimists and the pessimists, but it does bug me that, in the minds of optimists, everything that comes out of the mouths of pessimists is a "hot take." Really? Because all of those "hot takes" from last season proved to be well-founded.

And it's not like optimists don't have their own "hot takes"—if the Cs win a couple in a row against decent teams, some people around here start talking about making the Finals.

Giving it more than one game is different than giving it until after the All-Star break. Let's just step back from the ledge for now and see what we have.

Even with all of the missed FTs and Kemba's horrible performance, we were only down 4 in the 4th. Then Korkmaz and Harris hit back to back 3s and the lead ballooned up to 10 in like the span of 30 seconds. The opposite could have happened and we might be talking about a big Cs win today - even with all of the issues.

I get that we lost the game and it was a less than impressive effort - especially for much of the 2nd half, but it's not like the Sixers destroyed us. I like our chances against them with a more cohesive and experienced unit moving forward...and frankly, they are our biggest challengers in the EC (okay, MIL, too).

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Is it time for the panic button? This team got dismantled by the 76ers. Right where they left off from last year's ECSF against Milwaukee.

Seriously, one game in... Give me a break 

So, us negative nellies heard the same thing last season—"Give it more than a game," then it was "Give it at least 20 games," then it was "give it til the All-Star break," then it was "As long as they're clicking going into the playoffs"—and we all know how that ended.

I'm not trying to start, or otherwise promote, a war between the optimists and the pessimists, but it does bug me that, in the minds of optimists, everything that comes out of the mouths of pessimists is a "hot take." Really? Because all of those "hot takes" from last season proved to be well-founded.

And it's not like optimists don't have their own "hot takes"—if the Cs win a couple in a row against decent teams, some people around here start talking about making the Finals.

Giving it more than one game is different than giving it until after the All-Star break. Let's just step back from the ledge for now and see what we have.

Even with all of the missed FTs and Kemba's horrible performance, we were only down 4 in the 4th. Then Korkmaz and Harris hit back to back 3s and the lead ballooned up to 10 in like the span of 30 seconds. The opposite could have happened and we might be talking about a big Cs win today - even with all of the issues.

I get that we lost the game and it was a less than impressive effort - especially for much of the 2nd half, but it's not like the Sixers destroyed us. I like our chances against them with a more cohesive and experienced unit moving forward...and frankly, they are our biggest challengers in the EC (okay, MIL, too).

I get your point, but what I'm saying, if you boil it down, is that the pessimists always get lectured for their pessimism, and even if the net product of an entire season (like last season) proves the pessimists right, there's never any acknowledgement that we were right; we're always told to be quiet and move along, no matter what happens.

I mean, here's basically how last season's conversation between the optimists and pessimists went:

• After a 2-2 start that included a home loss to the lowly Magic:
Pessimists: Wow, that was terrible. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, it's early, you've gotta give them at least 20 games.

• After 20 games, when the Cs were 10-10 and had lost to the Hornets, the Knicks, and the Mavs:
Pessimists: Dang, this is a horrible first 20 games for a team with title aspirations. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, guys, we're only a quarter of the way through the season. You've gotta give them until the all-star break.

• The all-star break arrives, and things are indeed better record-wise—the Cs were 37-21, including a recent win in Philly—but there was plenty of discord within the team (and not all of it Irving's fault), and the Cs came out of the break with four straight losses, then had another four-game losing streak in late March.
Pessimists: This is bad.
Optimists: Doesn't matter. They're gonna make the playoffs, and they'll be fine when the playoffs roll around.

• So then they ended up winning only 49 games after virtually everyone had them pegged for upper-50s to low-60s, and they barely got homecourt in the first round (and ONLY for the first round).
Pessimists: Man, this team has a lot of problems. We can't see them going far in the postseason.
Optimists: Come on, it's the playoffs—they'll flip the switch!

• After a first-round sweep of Indy and a good Game 1 vs. the Bucks, the Celtics got their butts handed to them in four straight and looked downright awful.
Pessimists: We TOLD you that this team had major issues that were gonna come back to bite them.
Optimists: Oh well, they gave it their best!
Pessimists: Did they really?!?
Optimists:



And the optimists wonder why the pessimists are a little salty?

[gpap]

I really liked what I saw from Grant Williams last night

He caused problems for the 76ers.  His weight loss/slimmer body from summer league to now,  is impressive

I hope he will be given more mins in the future and some reps as a point forward

I'm assuming you mean Robert, as Grant barely played last night. And yes, I would agree. I think Robert could end up being HUGE for the Celts if he continues to develop his game and stays healthy.

[Tr1boy]

I really liked what I saw from Grant Williams last night

He caused problems for the 76ers.  His weight loss/slimmer body from summer league to now,  is impressive

I hope he will be given more mins in the future and some reps as a point forward

I'm assuming you mean Robert, as Grant barely played last night. And yes, I would agree. I think Robert could end up being HUGE for the Celts if he continues to develop his game and stays healthy.

nope Grant

Robert played well also

[bdm860]

I really liked what I saw from Grant Williams last night

He caused problems for the 76ers.  His weight loss/slimmer body from summer league to now,  is impressive

I hope he will be given more mins in the future and some reps as a point forward

I'm assuming you mean Robert, as Grant barely played last night. And yes, I would agree. I think Robert could end up being HUGE for the Celts if he continues to develop his game and stays healthy.

nope Grant

Robert played well also

Personally, I remember a few things about Grant Williams that stood out in that 6 minute run he got in the 2nd quarter.

First off, he got physical with Embiid right away defensively.

In this clip, he gets called for a foul, but went right after Embiid after getting bump fighting for position.

This clip was the next possession, here he hip checks Embiid while Embiid was crashing the boards.

So with these, I like the aggression, liked he didn't back down.  Not scared or intimidated to go right at Embiid physically. Those both stuck out to me.

Now this is probably really minor, but one other thing I noticed was how hard he ran down the court on offense.  Maybe this is normal and I never noticed before, but it just stood out to me as I'm not used to seeing players turn on the jets in the half court to get to their spot. 

Example 1, watch he hard he cuts once he gets to the 3 point line

Example 2, similar situation here.

Nothing special, just a little thing that caught me eye, though many might think it's nothing.

[Rondo9]

Is it time for the panic button? This team got dismantled by the 76ers. Right where they left off from last year's ECSF against Milwaukee.

Seriously, one game in... Give me a break 

So, us negative nellies heard the same thing last season—"Give it more than a game," then it was "Give it at least 20 games," then it was "give it til the All-Star break," then it was "As long as they're clicking going into the playoffs"—and we all know how that ended.

I'm not trying to start, or otherwise promote, a war between the optimists and the pessimists, but it does bug me that, in the minds of optimists, everything that comes out of the mouths of pessimists is a "hot take." Really? Because all of those "hot takes" from last season proved to be well-founded.

And it's not like optimists don't have their own "hot takes"—if the Cs win a couple in a row against decent teams, some people around here start talking about making the Finals.

Giving it more than one game is different than giving it until after the All-Star break. Let's just step back from the ledge for now and see what we have.

Even with all of the missed FTs and Kemba's horrible performance, we were only down 4 in the 4th. Then Korkmaz and Harris hit back to back 3s and the lead ballooned up to 10 in like the span of 30 seconds. The opposite could have happened and we might be talking about a big Cs win today - even with all of the issues.

I get that we lost the game and it was a less than impressive effort - especially for much of the 2nd half, but it's not like the Sixers destroyed us. I like our chances against them with a more cohesive and experienced unit moving forward...and frankly, they are our biggest challengers in the EC (okay, MIL, too).

I get your point, but what I'm saying, if you boil it down, is that the pessimists always get lectured for their pessimism, and even if the net product of an entire season (like last season) proves the pessimists right, there's never any acknowledgement that we were right; we're always told to be quiet and move along, no matter what happens.

I mean, here's basically how last season's conversation between the optimists and pessimists went:

• After a 2-2 start that included a home loss to the lowly Magic:
Pessimists: Wow, that was terrible. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, it's early, you've gotta give them at least 20 games.

• After 20 games, when the Cs were 10-10 and had lost to the Hornets, the Knicks, and the Mavs:
Pessimists: Dang, this is a horrible first 20 games for a team with title aspirations. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, guys, we're only a quarter of the way through the season. You've gotta give them until the all-star break.

• The all-star break arrives, and things are indeed better record-wise—the Cs were 37-21, including a recent win in Philly—but there was plenty of discord within the team (and not all of it Irving's fault), and the Cs came out of the break with four straight losses, then had another four-game losing streak in late March.
Pessimists: This is bad.
Optimists: Doesn't matter. They're gonna make the playoffs, and they'll be fine when the playoffs roll around.

• So then they ended up winning only 49 games after virtually everyone had them pegged for upper-50s to low-60s, and they barely got homecourt in the first round (and ONLY for the first round).
Pessimists: Man, this team has a lot of problems. We can't see them going far in the postseason.
Optimists: Come on, it's the playoffs—they'll flip the switch!

• After a first-round sweep of Indy and a good Game 1 vs. the Bucks, the Celtics got their butts handed to them in four straight and looked downright awful.
Pessimists: We TOLD you that this team had major issues that were gonna come back to bite them.
Optimists: Oh well, they gave it their best!
Pessimists: Did they really?!?
Optimists:



And the optimists wonder why the pessimists are a little salty?

How many players are back from last year? The Celtics once are a different team that needs time to gel, if you're so sure that they'll be the same as last year then there's no point in being this angry.

[jambr380]

Is it time for the panic button? This team got dismantled by the 76ers. Right where they left off from last year's ECSF against Milwaukee.

Seriously, one game in... Give me a break 

So, us negative nellies heard the same thing last season—"Give it more than a game," then it was "Give it at least 20 games," then it was "give it til the All-Star break," then it was "As long as they're clicking going into the playoffs"—and we all know how that ended.

I'm not trying to start, or otherwise promote, a war between the optimists and the pessimists, but it does bug me that, in the minds of optimists, everything that comes out of the mouths of pessimists is a "hot take." Really? Because all of those "hot takes" from last season proved to be well-founded.

And it's not like optimists don't have their own "hot takes"—if the Cs win a couple in a row against decent teams, some people around here start talking about making the Finals.

Giving it more than one game is different than giving it until after the All-Star break. Let's just step back from the ledge for now and see what we have.

Even with all of the missed FTs and Kemba's horrible performance, we were only down 4 in the 4th. Then Korkmaz and Harris hit back to back 3s and the lead ballooned up to 10 in like the span of 30 seconds. The opposite could have happened and we might be talking about a big Cs win today - even with all of the issues.

I get that we lost the game and it was a less than impressive effort - especially for much of the 2nd half, but it's not like the Sixers destroyed us. I like our chances against them with a more cohesive and experienced unit moving forward...and frankly, they are our biggest challengers in the EC (okay, MIL, too).

I get your point, but what I'm saying, if you boil it down, is that the pessimists always get lectured for their pessimism, and even if the net product of an entire season (like last season) proves the pessimists right, there's never any acknowledgement that we were right; we're always told to be quiet and move along, no matter what happens.

I mean, here's basically how last season's conversation between the optimists and pessimists went:

• After a 2-2 start that included a home loss to the lowly Magic:
Pessimists: Wow, that was terrible. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, it's early, you've gotta give them at least 20 games.

• After 20 games, when the Cs were 10-10 and had lost to the Hornets, the Knicks, and the Mavs:
Pessimists: Dang, this is a horrible first 20 games for a team with title aspirations. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, guys, we're only a quarter of the way through the season. You've gotta give them until the all-star break.

• The all-star break arrives, and things are indeed better record-wise—the Cs were 37-21, including a recent win in Philly—but there was plenty of discord within the team (and not all of it Irving's fault), and the Cs came out of the break with four straight losses, then had another four-game losing streak in late March.
Pessimists: This is bad.
Optimists: Doesn't matter. They're gonna make the playoffs, and they'll be fine when the playoffs roll around.

• So then they ended up winning only 49 games after virtually everyone had them pegged for upper-50s to low-60s, and they barely got homecourt in the first round (and ONLY for the first round).
Pessimists: Man, this team has a lot of problems. We can't see them going far in the postseason.
Optimists: Come on, it's the playoffs—they'll flip the switch!

• After a first-round sweep of Indy and a good Game 1 vs. the Bucks, the Celtics got their butts handed to them in four straight and looked downright awful.
Pessimists: We TOLD you that this team had major issues that were gonna come back to bite them.
Optimists: Oh well, they gave it their best!
Pessimists: Did they really?!?
Optimists:



And the optimists wonder why the pessimists are a little salty?

I'm not sure why you would want to be a fan of a sports team if you are strictly a pessimist. Only one out of 30 teams in the NBA win each year - it is extremely difficult to be the champion. Part of being a fan is rationalizing why your team has a chance to win it all or seeing that they are putting together the pieces to win it all soon. Last year's team was supposed to be better - that is true - but when they came out slowly, we still had to support them and hope for the best. Otherwise, what's the point of following them.

Thinking this current iteration of the Cs sucks and are going to suck all year based off of one game just seems a bit premature. They may very well not win the title, but there's no reason to think they are just going to be horrible.

I should clarify that I am not contesting your fandom - you have clearly followed the Cs for years and obviously get enjoyment out of them - I would just recommend at least taking more of a 'wait and see' approach before we sell them down the river for good. I think you may be surprised just how competitive they actually are. And, if not, well then I guess that's a bummer for another day.

[hpantazo]

Brad Stevens' Celtics teams have started out mediocre basically every single season, and then hit their stride about 30 games in.

I think it reflects his approach at mixing and matching lineups to generate enough data to use to decide on a set rotation. Considering all the new players this season and the loss of Al and Kyrie, I fully expect a lot of tinkering from Brad before he settles on a rotation.

[rocknrollforyoursoul]

Is it time for the panic button? This team got dismantled by the 76ers. Right where they left off from last year's ECSF against Milwaukee.

Seriously, one game in... Give me a break 

So, us negative nellies heard the same thing last season—"Give it more than a game," then it was "Give it at least 20 games," then it was "give it til the All-Star break," then it was "As long as they're clicking going into the playoffs"—and we all know how that ended.

I'm not trying to start, or otherwise promote, a war between the optimists and the pessimists, but it does bug me that, in the minds of optimists, everything that comes out of the mouths of pessimists is a "hot take." Really? Because all of those "hot takes" from last season proved to be well-founded.

And it's not like optimists don't have their own "hot takes"—if the Cs win a couple in a row against decent teams, some people around here start talking about making the Finals.

Giving it more than one game is different than giving it until after the All-Star break. Let's just step back from the ledge for now and see what we have.

Even with all of the missed FTs and Kemba's horrible performance, we were only down 4 in the 4th. Then Korkmaz and Harris hit back to back 3s and the lead ballooned up to 10 in like the span of 30 seconds. The opposite could have happened and we might be talking about a big Cs win today - even with all of the issues.

I get that we lost the game and it was a less than impressive effort - especially for much of the 2nd half, but it's not like the Sixers destroyed us. I like our chances against them with a more cohesive and experienced unit moving forward...and frankly, they are our biggest challengers in the EC (okay, MIL, too).

I get your point, but what I'm saying, if you boil it down, is that the pessimists always get lectured for their pessimism, and even if the net product of an entire season (like last season) proves the pessimists right, there's never any acknowledgement that we were right; we're always told to be quiet and move along, no matter what happens.

I mean, here's basically how last season's conversation between the optimists and pessimists went:

• After a 2-2 start that included a home loss to the lowly Magic:
Pessimists: Wow, that was terrible. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, it's early, you've gotta give them at least 20 games.

• After 20 games, when the Cs were 10-10 and had lost to the Hornets, the Knicks, and the Mavs:
Pessimists: Dang, this is a horrible first 20 games for a team with title aspirations. We don't like what we're seeing.
Optimists: Come on, guys, we're only a quarter of the way through the season. You've gotta give them until the all-star break.

• The all-star break arrives, and things are indeed better record-wise—the Cs were 37-21, including a recent win in Philly—but there was plenty of discord within the team (and not all of it Irving's fault), and the Cs came out of the break with four straight losses, then had another four-game losing streak in late March.
Pessimists: This is bad.
Optimists: Doesn't matter. They're gonna make the playoffs, and they'll be fine when the playoffs roll around.

• So then they ended up winning only 49 games after virtually everyone had them pegged for upper-50s to low-60s, and they barely got homecourt in the first round (and ONLY for the first round).
Pessimists: Man, this team has a lot of problems. We can't see them going far in the postseason.
Optimists: Come on, it's the playoffs—they'll flip the switch!

• After a first-round sweep of Indy and a good Game 1 vs. the Bucks, the Celtics got their butts handed to them in four straight and looked downright awful.
Pessimists: We TOLD you that this team had major issues that were gonna come back to bite them.
Optimists: Oh well, they gave it their best!
Pessimists: Did they really?!?
Optimists:



And the optimists wonder why the pessimists are a little salty?

I'm not sure why you would want to be a fan of a sports team if you are strictly a pessimist. Only one out of 30 teams in the NBA win each year - it is extremely difficult to be the champion. Part of being a fan is rationalizing why your team has a chance to win it all or seeing that they are putting together the pieces to win it all soon. Last year's team was supposed to be better - that is true - but when they came out slowly, we still had to support them and hope for the best. Otherwise, what's the point of following them.

Thinking this current iteration of the Cs sucks and are going to suck all year based off of one game just seems a bit premature. They may very well not win the title, but there's no reason to think they are just going to be horrible.

I should clarify that I am not contesting your fandom - you have clearly followed the Cs for years and obviously get enjoyment out of them - I would just recommend at least taking more of a 'wait and see' approach before we sell them down the river for good. I think you may be surprised just how competitive they actually are. And, if not, well then I guess that's a bummer for another day.

I know you're not contesting my fandom. And I admit that when it comes to sports, I'm a knee-jerk kind of guy—I probably shouldn't be, but I am. For some reason, I take the losses personally.

And you're right: It wouldn't make sense to be a sports fan and be an outright pessimist—that would lead to depression 99% of the time (or 75% of the time if you're a Boston sports fan  ). So when I say I'm a pessimist, I'm not saying that I believe that the team is going to be horrible; I'm saying that I see the problems more readily than I see the positives, and—particularly in light of last season, when a lot of concerns were validated by the team's subpar play—it sticks in my craw that any negativity is so quickly and derisively brushed aside by some (not saying you in particular) as mere "hot takes," as though they're not worthy of consideration.

I honestly don't think this team is going to suck, but I also honestly don't think this team will be great. And I know that one game is one game, but we heard "it's only one game" a LOT last season, and look how that ended. That's what I'm saying—I could be overreacting to "just one game," but there's also plenty of recent evidence (the season just before this one, with several of the same key players) to suggest that things such as bad third quarters and bad shooting nights will not simply be rare occurrences this season, anomalies that can be brushed aside.

So, I'll do my best to take your advice and be patient, wait and see, etc., but I also hope that the ardent optimists here can understand how some of us others are suffering shell shock from last season, when we were constantly told that "everything will be okay" and it wasn't (not even close). And how when the Cs came out last night and showed every single flaw that last year's team possessed, that can be alarming.

[Celtics4ever]

What adjustments were made that changed things?

I got home from work at that time and it jinxed us.  JK

[Csfan1984]

Disappointed in the whole group but after last year and this summer I'm not surprised. They still don't know what they want to do out there. They get cold too often. There is stagnation and poor substitutions. Only thing I liked was how they managed Kanter vs Embid. Rest they can throw away.