I feel like we’re going to make a run at this

[Celtics2021]

Team on paper is good enough to win it all. But I worry about the lack of depth.
Unless we pick up someone to help carry the load, starters are going to be playing a ton of minutes down the stretch.
One injury and this thing is over.

that'd only be written on toilet paper. 

team doesn't have the scoring necessary to win a title.  too many times they have shooting droughts and rather than find different ways to score, they continue bricking 3's.  though White has looked like a multi-purpose tool on the court so far, he doesn't cure the shooting woes.  Pritchard's not showing he's out of his season-long funk in the last 2 games either.

C's need to round out the rotation for next year with another couple of guys that are actual shooters that can go off for 20 in a game.

Generally agree, with the caveat that the league is suddenly wide open. We’re talking about Phoenix, GSW, Memphis and Miami as the winningest teams in the league so far this season. Anyone feel like there’s a juggernaut in the bunch? Jury’s out on Brooklyn and Philly, Milwaukee is very good, but I don’t think the C’s are so far off in this current landscape. But they need to play darn near perfect to get there.

I agree there's no juggernaut in the league this year and none of the teams this year scare me.  if the C's are having an "on" night with their shooting, they can beat any other team with the defense they're playing.  having said that, we see far too many nights where the team is shooting so badly, particularly from 3, that if they threw a brick at the ground they'd miss.  Defense will only take a team so far -- they've still got to outscore the other team

While this is ultimately true, that the C’s will need to make some shots sometimes, they have a lot more margin of error than you imply if the defense keeps performing at this level.  They shot under 30% from 3 in consecutive games against the Nuggets and Hawks, teams with the #10 and #3 offenses, and won both.  The Celtics defense has been stifling of late, and is only likely to be even better with the acquisition of White.  Sure, they’re going to lose a game some time, but they’ve been out scoring good offenses when not making shots because their defense is so strong.

[86MaxwellSmart]

Maybe we're shooting so poorly cause we're playing such great defense....worn out on offense.

[gouki88]

It would take a fair bit to go right, but I do like our top 9 of Tatum, Brown, R Williams, Smart, White, Horford, G Williams, Theis and Pritchard come playoff time. That's assuming we don't add any more.

What I really do not like is playing our core guys 37-40 minutes in regular season games time and again. Has got Thibs written all over it.

[Roy H.]

It would take a fair bit to go right, but I do like our top 9 of Tatum, Brown, R Williams, Smart, White, Horford, G Williams, Theis and Pritchard come playoff time. That's assuming we don't add any more.

What I really do not like is playing our core guys 37-40 minutes in regular season games time and again. Has got Thibs written all over it.

I agree with the worries about burnout.

I'm also skeptical that we can win four playoff series with our shooting.  We're seventh worst in the league.  The teams below us:

Indiana (13th in East)
Orlando (14th in East)
New Orleans (11th in West)
Washington (11th in East)
Detroit (15th in East)
OKC (14th in West)

Notice anything about those six teams?  They all suck.  It's a testament to our defense that we've been as good as we have; in today's NBA, teams that shoot a poor percentage from outside are likely to be very bad.  (Conversely, good shooting teams tend to be very good.  The top-six:  Miami, Chicago, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Golden State and Phoenix.  Atlanta is the obvious outlier.)

Asking our team to win 16 playoff games going completely against the grain seems unlikely.

[Celtics2021]

It would take a fair bit to go right, but I do like our top 9 of Tatum, Brown, R Williams, Smart, White, Horford, G Williams, Theis and Pritchard come playoff time. That's assuming we don't add any more.

What I really do not like is playing our core guys 37-40 minutes in regular season games time and again. Has got Thibs written all over it.

I agree with the worries about burnout.

I'm also skeptical that we can win four playoff series with our shooting.  We're seventh worst in the league.  The teams below us:

Indiana (13th in East)
Orlando (14th in East)
New Orleans (11th in West)
Washington (11th in East)
Detroit (15th in East)
OKC (14th in West)

Notice anything about those six teams?  They all suck.  It's a testament to our defense that we've been as good as we have; in today's NBA, teams that shoot a poor percentage from outside are likely to be very bad.  (Conversely, good shooting teams tend to be very good.  The top-six:  Miami, Chicago, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Golden State and Phoenix.  Atlanta is the obvious outlier.)

Asking our team to win 16 playoff games going completely against the grain seems unlikely.

The shooting stats I see have us 8th-worst (eFG%) with Memphis and Toronto behind us, and TS%, where we’re 16th, because we’re a top (if not the top, it changes daily between us, Miami, and Chicago) free-throw shooting team.  I agree it’s still a weakness, but I think it’s a mistake to ignore free throws when talking about our shooting/scoring.  We were 16-17 from the line in the second half yesterday, which helped spur a 20-point turnaround.

[Moranis]

The Big 3 era was never a real thing.  Yes, Boston and then the James Heat had 3 HOF players at the top of their roster (in their prime), but it was never really a thing.  I mean the Lakers with Kobe and Pau won 2 titles.  The Warriors never had 3 close to the same quality.  The James Cavs, were James and then a couple of all stars, and solid role players.  The Raptors were a big 1 with a bunch of very good.  The Lakers last title was 2 guys and a bunch of role players, and calling the Bucks a big 3 is a huge slap in the face to Giannis who was so much better than anyone else on his team.  Championships are won by top tier talent.  Sure the more of it you have, the better, and you need more overall depth if your guy at the very top isn't in the discussion as the best player in the world, but there was never a big 3 era.  It has always been about talent.  And to be fair plenty of other historically great teams have had a big 3 i.e. Bird, McHale, Parish or Magic, Kareem, Worthy or Malone, Erving, Toney (and then Barkley) or Jordan, Pippen, Rodman or Duncan, Manu, Parker, and on and on.  Just because the 2008 Celtics were called a Big 3, doesn't mean those teams didn't exist in the past or created anything differently.  At the end of the day you just need top tier talent.

This is an absurd statement.  Absolutely absurd.  The Warriors had three players win All-NBA over a two season stretch, and then added Kevin Durant to that.  They were a legit big 3, followed by a big 4, when they had four All-NBA members in the same season.

Klay and Dray are no where near Curry.  They have 1 2nd team and 3 3rd team appearances in their entire careers combined.  Curry has 4 1st team, 2 2nd team, and 1 3rd team. He is just a different class of player both at the time and historically.  It was fun to call the Warriors a big 3, but they weren't.  Curry isn't James, but they were a very similar team to the Cavs.

Now historically KG is in a different class than Pierce and Allen, bit given his age he was closer to the other two so you could call them a Big 3 even with the different career arcs.

I have a hard time understanding how a team that had two top-5 players (Durant and Curry) and another top-15-ish player (Klay) wasn't a big three.

same reason no one called Shaq, Kobe, and Rice a big 3.  Or Jordan, Pippen, and Rodman. Because that 3rd guy isn't on the same level despite being very good.

No, it’s not the same reason.  Dennis Rodman neither made an All-Star nor All-NBA team while playing with Jordan and Pippen.  Same with Glen Rice and the Lakers.  Thompson and Green both made All-NBA and All-Star while playing with Steph, and all three were All-NBA in the same season before Durant arrived, and then Green was again the season after Durant, meaning that the Warriors had three of the top 15 players in the league in consecutive seasons, and in one of those seasons had a fourth player who was All-NBA the prior two years.

If having three of the top 15 players isn’t good enough for a Big 3, then you’re just making up a definition to fit your narrative.  The Pierce/KG/Allen Celtics never had three in the same season, nor did the Big 3 Heat.  Ray Allen was clearly the number 3 on the C’s, as Bosh was in Miami, just as Draymond and Klay, despite their individual greatness, behind the pecking order with Steph and then also Durant.  There’s no requirement that all three of a Big 3 be pure equals in terms of excellence.

Glen Rice made 3 consecutive All Star games before playing with Shaq and Kobe and in the 2 prior seasons was 2nd Team and 3rd Team All NBA.  Those seasons he finished 5th and 11th in MVP voting.  He got hurt his 1st year in LA so who knows what might have been, but he probably would not have made the all star team at 17.5 ppg (he was in the mid-20's in Charlotte). Rodman was 3rd Team All NBA in 95 and joined the Bulls the very next season.  He was 1st Team All Defense as well both before and while still on the Bulls. 

Klay and Dray are very similar historical players to Rice and Rodman.  They are absolutely pretty similar.

[Roy H.]

It would take a fair bit to go right, but I do like our top 9 of Tatum, Brown, R Williams, Smart, White, Horford, G Williams, Theis and Pritchard come playoff time. That's assuming we don't add any more.

What I really do not like is playing our core guys 37-40 minutes in regular season games time and again. Has got Thibs written all over it.

I agree with the worries about burnout.

I'm also skeptical that we can win four playoff series with our shooting.  We're seventh worst in the league.  The teams below us:

Indiana (13th in East)
Orlando (14th in East)
New Orleans (11th in West)
Washington (11th in East)
Detroit (15th in East)
OKC (14th in West)

Notice anything about those six teams?  They all suck.  It's a testament to our defense that we've been as good as we have; in today's NBA, teams that shoot a poor percentage from outside are likely to be very bad.  (Conversely, good shooting teams tend to be very good.  The top-six:  Miami, Chicago, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Golden State and Phoenix.  Atlanta is the obvious outlier.)

Asking our team to win 16 playoff games going completely against the grain seems unlikely.

The shooting stats I see have us 8th-worst (eFG%) with Memphis and Toronto behind us, and TS%, where we’re 16th, because we’re a top (if not the top, it changes daily between us, Miami, and Chicago) free-throw shooting team.  I agree it’s still a weakness, but I think it’s a mistake to ignore free throws when talking about our shooting/scoring.  We were 16-17 from the line in the second half yesterday, which helped spur a 20-point turnaround.

Free throws don't correlate to winning nearly as much as 3PT%, though.  The top six teams in FTM per game are Houston (terrible), Utah (good), New Orleans (terrible), Philly (good), Atlanta (bad), Washington (bad).  Our percentage is indeed excellent, but we don't get to the line all that frequently (19th), so it doesn't make up for our outside shooting (11th in 3PA).

[Celtics2021]

It would take a fair bit to go right, but I do like our top 9 of Tatum, Brown, R Williams, Smart, White, Horford, G Williams, Theis and Pritchard come playoff time. That's assuming we don't add any more.

What I really do not like is playing our core guys 37-40 minutes in regular season games time and again. Has got Thibs written all over it.

I agree with the worries about burnout.

I'm also skeptical that we can win four playoff series with our shooting.  We're seventh worst in the league.  The teams below us:

Indiana (13th in East)
Orlando (14th in East)
New Orleans (11th in West)
Washington (11th in East)
Detroit (15th in East)
OKC (14th in West)

Notice anything about those six teams?  They all suck.  It's a testament to our defense that we've been as good as we have; in today's NBA, teams that shoot a poor percentage from outside are likely to be very bad.  (Conversely, good shooting teams tend to be very good.  The top-six:  Miami, Chicago, Atlanta, Milwaukee, Golden State and Phoenix.  Atlanta is the obvious outlier.)

Asking our team to win 16 playoff games going completely against the grain seems unlikely.

The shooting stats I see have us 8th-worst (eFG%) with Memphis and Toronto behind us, and TS%, where we’re 16th, because we’re a top (if not the top, it changes daily between us, Miami, and Chicago) free-throw shooting team.  I agree it’s still a weakness, but I think it’s a mistake to ignore free throws when talking about our shooting/scoring.  We were 16-17 from the line in the second half yesterday, which helped spur a 20-point turnaround.

Free throws don't correlate to winning nearly as much as 3PT%, though.  The top six teams in FTM per game are Houston (terrible), Utah (good), New Orleans (terrible), Philly (good), Atlanta (bad), Washington (bad).  Our percentage is indeed excellent, but we don't get to the line all that frequently (19th), so it doesn't make up for our outside shooting (11th in 3PA).

The point is that of the shooting statistics, the one that correlates most to points scored in a game is TS%.  And I'm not saying we are a good shooting team -- 16th is mediocre at best.  But there are multiple ways to score in a possession, and one reason the C's have been winning of late is that even with their shot not falling they've found other ways to generate offense.  Will they lose a game in the postseason where they shoot 25% from 3 on 40 attempts?  Probably.  Will they win a game in the postseason under similar circumstances?  My guess is yes to that too.

[droopdog7]

So does anyone else want to jump on the bandwagon or what?

[Atzar]

So does anyone else want to jump on the bandwagon or what?

They've certainly developed an identity for themselves over the last month and a half or so. 

Credit to the team, and credit to Udoka.  This has been a hell of a turnaround.  Hope they keep rolling. 

[Neurotic Guy]

WT

[Celtics2021]

So does anyone else want to jump on the bandwagon or what?

I’ve been on it for a bit.  Just wanted to note how ridiculously dominant the C’s have been of late.  In their last 12 games, they have recorded four of the NBA’s 22 biggest routs this year, and that doesn’t include the 30-point romp of the Heat.  The median win has been 29 points.

We’re now the title favorites per 538.