Author Topic: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22  (Read 19368 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #135 on: February 27, 2022, 11:16:26 PM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6986
  • Tommy Points: 411
I suspected the recent Celtics run was fools gold. Actually, in their win streak, they didn't beat anyone good. They have had an incredibly lucky streak of playing good teams who were decimated by injuries and also played weak teams. The Celtics are 22nd in FG %, 24th in 3 pt. % and 18th in assists. That isn't gonna get it done. And to compound matters, the bench is wildly erratic and clearly lacks depth.

The Philly win was a good one, and we were beating the teams we were supposed to.  Then, with the Detroit loss we completely reverted to bad habits.

Our offense is too bad and our rotation too thin to advance deep into the playoffs, now matter how good the defense is.

This is how I feel about this team too. It isn’t a fraud team, but it is flawed. The offense is built around tough shots or transition offense. If the defense is clicking, then it opens up more opportunities for transition/semi transition buckets.


- LilRip

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #136 on: February 27, 2022, 11:30:33 PM »

Offline pokeKingCurtis

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3733
  • Tommy Points: 280
I suspected the recent Celtics run was fools gold. Actually, in their win streak, they didn't beat anyone good. They have had an incredibly lucky streak of playing good teams who were decimated by injuries and also played weak teams. The Celtics are 22nd in FG %, 24th in 3 pt. % and 18th in assists. That isn't gonna get it done. And to compound matters, the bench is wildly erratic and clearly lacks depth.

The Philly win was a good one, and we were beating the teams we were supposed to.  Then, with the Detroit loss we completely reverted to bad habits.

Our offense is too bad and our rotation too thin to advance deep into the playoffs, now matter how good the defense is.

This is how I feel about this team too. It isn’t a fraud team, but it is flawed. The offense is built around tough shots or transition offense. If the defense is clicking, then it opens up more opportunities for transition/semi transition buckets.

Kind of like the Isaiah Thomas Celtics.

Record/standings might end up better than they actually are.

Though in this case due to early season woes might even out for this 2021/22 Celtics team.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #137 on: February 27, 2022, 11:54:07 PM »

Offline footey

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16038
  • Tommy Points: 1837
I suspected the recent Celtics run was fools gold. Actually, in their win streak, they didn't beat anyone good. They have had an incredibly lucky streak of playing good teams who were decimated by injuries and also played weak teams. The Celtics are 22nd in FG %, 24th in 3 pt. % and 18th in assists. That isn't gonna get it done. And to compound matters, the bench is wildly erratic and clearly lacks depth.

The Philly win was a good one, and we were beating the teams we were supposed to.  Then, with the Detroit loss we completely reverted to bad habits.

Our offense is too bad and our rotation too thin to advance deep into the playoffs, now matter how good the defense is.

This is how I feel about this team too. It isn’t a fraud team, but it is flawed. The offense is built around tough shots or transition offense. If the defense is clicking, then it opens up more opportunities for transition/semi transition buckets.

Kind of like the Isaiah Thomas Celtics.

Record/standings might end up better than they actually are.

Though in this case due to early season woes might even out for this 2021/22 Celtics team.

I’d be less worried if the Sixers with Harden didn’t look so good. But I fear we won’t be able to compete at that level, which is weird since we just blew them out. Just shows how much having two super stars is a tough formula to beat.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #138 on: February 28, 2022, 01:03:57 AM »

Offline SparzWizard

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18750
  • Tommy Points: 1118
I suspected the recent Celtics run was fools gold. Actually, in their win streak, they didn't beat anyone good. They have had an incredibly lucky streak of playing good teams who were decimated by injuries and also played weak teams. The Celtics are 22nd in FG %, 24th in 3 pt. % and 18th in assists. That isn't gonna get it done. And to compound matters, the bench is wildly erratic and clearly lacks depth.

I'm afraid this team's about to get exposed when they start facing a very good team in a 7-game series.


#FireJoe
#JTJB (Just Trade Jaylen Brown) 2022 - 2025
I am the Master of Panic.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #139 on: February 28, 2022, 07:44:56 AM »

Offline boscel33

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2802
  • Tommy Points: 172
I suspected the recent Celtics run was fools gold. Actually, in their win streak, they didn't beat anyone good. They have had an incredibly lucky streak of playing good teams who were decimated by injuries and also played weak teams. The Celtics are 22nd in FG %, 24th in 3 pt. % and 18th in assists. That isn't gonna get it done. And to compound matters, the bench is wildly erratic and clearly lacks depth.

I'm afraid this team's about to get exposed when they start facing a very good team in a 7-game series.

Or, they just played three games in four nights including back to back on the road.  They were spent!
"There's sharks and minnows in this world. If you don't know which you are, you ain't a shark."

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #140 on: February 28, 2022, 08:11:26 AM »

Offline jambr380

  • K.C. Jones
  • *************
  • Posts: 13654
  • Tommy Points: 2056
  • Everybody knows what's best for you
One other thing that drives me nuts - while I’m glad that Ime finally seems concerned about managing Al’s minutes, if he would do better at stop playing him unnecessary minutes during blowouts perhaps we wouldn’t have to sit him for entire games at a time. We clearly missed Al tonight.

That said, we look tired all around, and doubtful Al would’ve been the complete defining difference.
Disagree.  The difference was in the 2nd quarter when Theis got abused and Pacers built their lead.

Eh, Horford would have been just as abused. I don't know why we were going double big when IND was absolutely destroying us from deep. That isn't Theis' fault. I mean, he was only a -5, while our lord and savior was a -24. I love Tatum to death, but he is the one that needed the night off - dude totally didn't want to be there.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #141 on: February 28, 2022, 09:04:21 AM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45901
  • Tommy Points: 3339
One other thing that drives me nuts - while I’m glad that Ime finally seems concerned about managing Al’s minutes, if he would do better at stop playing him unnecessary minutes during blowouts perhaps we wouldn’t have to sit him for entire games at a time. We clearly missed Al tonight.

That said, we look tired all around, and doubtful Al would’ve been the complete defining difference.
Disagree.  The difference was in the 2nd quarter when Theis got abused and Pacers built their lead.

Eh, Horford would have been just as abused. I don't know why we were going double big when IND was absolutely destroying us from deep. That isn't Theis' fault. I mean, he was only a -5, while our lord and savior was a -24. I love Tatum to death, but he is the one that needed the night off - dude totally didn't want to be there.

I really feel that Ime has a hard time adjusting his game plan in real time.  Pritchard was still hot from the last game but didn't play in the second half until the 4th. The starters looked beat and we needed our young bench guys to bring some energy but they didn't play. This game looked over in the first half. Only one turnover for the bench and 9 for the starters.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #142 on: February 28, 2022, 09:14:20 AM »

Offline slamtheking

  • NCE
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32230
  • Tommy Points: 10094
One other thing that drives me nuts - while I’m glad that Ime finally seems concerned about managing Al’s minutes, if he would do better at stop playing him unnecessary minutes during blowouts perhaps we wouldn’t have to sit him for entire games at a time. We clearly missed Al tonight.

That said, we look tired all around, and doubtful Al would’ve been the complete defining difference.
Disagree.  The difference was in the 2nd quarter when Theis got abused and Pacers built their lead.

Eh, Horford would have been just as abused. I don't know why we were going double big when IND was absolutely destroying us from deep. That isn't Theis' fault. I mean, he was only a -5, while our lord and savior was a -24. I love Tatum to death, but he is the one that needed the night off - dude totally didn't want to be there.

I really feel that Ime has a hard time adjusting his game plan in real time.  Pritchard was still hot from the last game but didn't play in the second half until the 4th. The starters looked beat and we needed our young bench guys to bring some energy but they didn't play. This game looked over in the first half. Only one turnover for the bench and 9 for the starters.
agree that it seemed foolish to hold Pritchard out until the fourth.  should have gotten some burn in the third.

does seem that Ime's defensive schemes are predicated on the 2-big approach and doesn't have the flexibility to function well when one big would seem to be the way to go. 

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #143 on: February 28, 2022, 09:21:06 AM »

Offline Celtics2021

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7858
  • Tommy Points: 1027
I suspected the recent Celtics run was fools gold. Actually, in their win streak, they didn't beat anyone good. They have had an incredibly lucky streak of playing good teams who were decimated by injuries and also played weak teams. The Celtics are 22nd in FG %, 24th in 3 pt. % and 18th in assists. That isn't gonna get it done. And to compound matters, the bench is wildly erratic and clearly lacks depth.

The Philly win was a good one, and we were beating the teams we were supposed to.  Then, with the Detroit loss we completely reverted to bad habits.

Our offense is too bad and our rotation too thin to advance deep into the playoffs, now matter how good the defense is.

This is how I feel about this team too. It isn’t a fraud team, but it is flawed. The offense is built around tough shots or transition offense. If the defense is clicking, then it opens up more opportunities for transition/semi transition buckets.

Kind of like the Isaiah Thomas Celtics.

Record/standings might end up better than they actually are.

Though in this case due to early season woes might even out for this 2021/22 Celtics team.

You mean the Isaiah Thomas team that went to the conference finals before losing while IT was injured?

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #144 on: February 28, 2022, 09:21:55 AM »

Offline #1P4P

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 993
  • Tommy Points: 143
Ime’s inexperience showed in this one. These are the games that Brad would’ve gone deeper into the bench for a spark.

Endurance matters; the Pistons are a big, strong, tough group and it was a hard fought road win the night before.  There’s a website that analyzes the schedule and travel and factors it in to predict the impact on games.

Down Horford on the 2nd night of a back to back and 3rd game in 4 nights, Ime has to go deeper into the bench when these games are showing their hand. Nesmith’s hustle is built for these games.

With the main rotation being mostly in the right place on defense and the Pacers still hitting +60% from 3 during the 1st half, it’s a red flag! On those nights, it’s not about playing the better players, it’s about the better conditioned players for a particular game, and this was one of them.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #145 on: February 28, 2022, 09:39:06 AM »

Offline liam

  • NCE
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 45901
  • Tommy Points: 3339
Ime’s inexperience showed in this one. These are the games that Brad would’ve gone deeper into the bench for a spark.

Endurance matters; the Pistons are a big, strong, tough group and it was a hard fought road win the night before.  There’s a website that analyzes the schedule and travel and factors it in to predict the impact on games.

Down Horford on the 2nd night of a back to back and 3rd game in 4 nights, Ime has to go deeper into the bench when these games are showing their hand. Nesmith’s hustle is built for these games.

With the main rotation being mostly in the right place on defense and the Pacers still hitting +60% from 3 during the 1st half, it’s a red flag! On those nights, it’s not about playing the better players, it’s about the better conditioned players for a particular game, and this was one of them.

Well said.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #146 on: February 28, 2022, 09:59:55 AM »

Offline todd_days_41

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1462
  • Tommy Points: 1074
  • B2B 2022 and 2023 Trade Deadline Guru
Ime’s inexperience showed in this one. These are the games that Brad would’ve gone deeper into the bench for a spark.

So it's Ime's fault the Celtics have a non-existent bench? Who other than Pritchard is he supposed to go to? Luke Kornet? We traded the tiniest shred of a bench spark we had (Richardson) at the deadline. And when Ime only plays White a combined total of 42 minutes in back-to-backs when he's starters are front-rimming everything.... it tells you how confident he is in the guy, despite having coached him in SAS.

Nesmith’s hustle is built for these games.

Nesmith is one of the most unnatural basketball players taken in the NBA first round (especially under 6'10") i've seen in my life. He fumbles and stumbles around on the court, like a lost dog. He can't shoot. He's mentally weak. That he does his best Rodman impersonation to try to make up for it doesn't mean he impacts the game in some plus way.

It is not Ime's fault that the Celtics whiffed BADLY in Nesmith.



Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #147 on: February 28, 2022, 10:27:36 AM »

Offline Rosco917

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6108
  • Tommy Points: 559
Ime’s inexperience showed in this one. These are the games that Brad would’ve gone deeper into the bench for a spark.

So it's Ime's fault the Celtics have a non-existent bench? Who other than Pritchard is he supposed to go to? Luke Kornet? We traded the tiniest shred of a bench spark we had (Richardson) at the deadline. And when Ime only plays White a combined total of 42 minutes in back-to-backs when he's starters are front-rimming everything.... it tells you how confident he is in the guy, despite having coached him in SAS.

Nesmith’s hustle is built for these games.

Nesmith is one of the most unnatural basketball players taken in the NBA first round (especially under 6'10") i've seen in my life. He fumbles and stumbles around on the court, like a lost dog. He can't shoot. He's mentally weak. That he does his best Rodman impersonation to try to make up for it doesn't mean he impacts the game in some plus way.

It is not Ime's fault that the Celtics whiffed BADLY in Nesmith.



Fully agree on the analysis of Nesmith. Where is the shooting that was touted coming out of college? He seems so uncomfortable out there at times.

2 for 12 from the 3 point line from the sometimes lazy Tatum didn't help in this game. Jayson Tatum walking the ball down the court looking for his predictable step-back 3 is ugly, boring basketball. It's deflating to teammates and easy to defend for the opposition. It gives the opposing defense a nice little rest knowing Chuck-em-up Tatum is at it again.

He's been playing some decent ball on this little streak the Celtics have been on, but this wasn't a good one.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #148 on: February 28, 2022, 10:43:58 AM »

Offline Sophomore

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6227
  • Tommy Points: 823
Ime’s inexperience showed in this one. These are the games that Brad would’ve gone deeper into the bench for a spark.

So it's Ime's fault the Celtics have a non-existent bench? Who other than Pritchard is he supposed to go to? Luke Kornet? We traded the tiniest shred of a bench spark we had (Richardson) at the deadline. And when Ime only plays White a combined total of 42 minutes in back-to-backs when he's starters are front-rimming everything.... it tells you how confident he is in the guy, despite having coached him in SAS.

Nesmith’s hustle is built for these games.

Nesmith is one of the most unnatural basketball players taken in the NBA first round (especially under 6'10") i've seen in my life. He fumbles and stumbles around on the court, like a lost dog. He can't shoot. He's mentally weak. That he does his best Rodman impersonation to try to make up for it doesn't mean he impacts the game in some plus way.

It is not Ime's fault that the Celtics whiffed BADLY in Nesmith.

This reminds me of the analyses of Grant we were seeing last year. Nesmith has flaws, no question, and I don’t know if he’ll grow out of them. But I’m not ready to give up. I’ve seen Grant and Rob figure it out. Nesmith has an NBA body, even to be a plus athlete in some respects, and he’s flashed NBA skills. There’s a player in there somewhere if we can pull him out.

Re: Celtics (36-26) at Pacers (20-41) Game #63 2/27/22
« Reply #149 on: February 28, 2022, 11:39:08 AM »

Offline boscel33

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2802
  • Tommy Points: 172
Their two latest losses have been on the back end of back-to-back games.  I'm not worried.
"There's sharks and minnows in this world. If you don't know which you are, you ain't a shark."