Fire Joe! ... or critique Joe ... or defend Joe... or worry about Joe's coaching

[Kernewek]

https://twitter.com/GwashburnGlobe/status/1722442745170526428

Probably one of the more bizarre Mazzulla post-game sessions since he's been head coach, and that's saying something. #Celtics #76ers

This is the other thing about Joe that drives me nuts. He's so bad with the media and comes off as so arrogant and insecure any time someone questions him.

Thought he had did some media training or something this summer, as he started off better and was fairly good in the JJ podcast. But since the season has started he's back to his awkward, defensive self.

Not that I completely disagree, but I feel like Gary Washburn also hates Mazzulla lol and so I wouldn't be surprised if those two just hate each other. Washburn has asked some ridiculous questions and posted some pretty exaggerated pieces on the C's and Mazzulla as well even last year when it didn't feel warranted.

Listen to Mazzulla on Zolak&Bertrand for example, I feel like he provides good insight with them even on hard questions and Zo+Beetle actually treat him normally. Washburn though always seems to be in attack-mode with him and not in a constructive way

There's a difference between a person-to-person interview and the pressers. It's easy to come off better in a conversational interview and the tone is always going to be warmer since technically you are a "guest" and there is an implicit courteousness to the proceedings. Joe has to be better at the pressers and not come off so thin-skinned and defensive. It makes it seem like he's insecure and falls into fight-or-flight mode whenever he feels attacked. He also sometimes thinks he's being playful and insightful with a joke but he doesn't realize people are seeing through his obvious passive aggression.

I've said this before, but you're the coach of a big sports franchise in the Northeast. If he thinks the Celtics press core is tough or unfair now, imagine how he would have felt in the 80s or 90s when sports radio was dominant, the tone much more negative, and the press core was dominated by older veterans who had more power, influence, and security in their jobs. I watch a lot of the pressers on YT and a lot of the questions are softballs. If you're a diehard, you start to recognize most of the voices asking questions and a lot of the younger ones ask safe and boring stuff because they're afraid of losing access. I mean, Abby Chin is almost always asking multiple questions at these things and she works for the local affiliate! I love her seriousness in not just being a "sideline reporter," but obviously she's not going to be a tough interrogator.

Washburn asking about 3s is definitely a relevant question, because last season their record was horrible when they dropped below a certain percentage/number made. Smart, Brown, and Tatum were starters and they were all 35% and below. Sure, when we're hot the team looks like gangbusters, but you could say that about a lot of teams that are even worse at 3s than we are. Besides, Joe himself is the one who brought up 3s as an essential part of his offensive philosophy. Washburn repetitively asking about 3s wouldn't even matter if Joe simply responded with confidence instead of crazy "I've read your book. I know all your tricks. I will defeat you" kung-fu movie staredowns.

Good post, just wanted to highlight that every team has a bad record when they're missing a lot of shots - one of the Celtics Twitterati put up one of these easily misconstrued stats about this last season (The Celtics were 0-20 when shooting 15% from deep or whatever) when we dove into it on the forum was ultimately not particularly telling or surprising.

[Kernewek]

Moving this over here as to avoid bumping the Timberwolves thread entirely, because I think this is part of the conversation for the general coaching thread (which this is):

agree with last two posts.

See problem = address problem

That's how it works for most of us in our daily lives...and elsewhere all around us.  Regarding this issue the C's seem to exist in a vacuum where the basic laws don't reach.

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't address the issue, but I do think it's easier to overreact to one game than to realise it likely won't mean very much in February, or March, or June.

That's the problem exactly. By not addressing and correcting the problems now, they mean everything in February, March all the way thru June because the team is still making the same mistakes vs better competition in the playoffs and then it costs them the ability to win titles.
Of course, the flawed stars in this current group have been doing the same dumb things their entire careers, which is why they keep falling short.

I think Tenn has hit on the heart of The Winged Jay Paradox:

Part 1) We can very safely assume that the coaching staff is trying to address and correct the recurring problems that appear time and time again for the C's, because they have a very vested professional interest in winning basketball games. The idea that the Celtics coaching staff aren't trying to correct these problems is quite simply not worth considering - no matter how much fun it is to gripe like this is the case.

Part 2) We can see on the court that the Jays have been "doing the same dumb things their entire careers", and while we can also assume that Mazza, Udoka, and Stevens have all tried to address and correct these recurring problems, these efforst are being met with limited success*, basically.


*limited success is a bit of a misnomer here, because the Celtics have been a very successful team since drafting Jaylen. They just haven't won a title.

So what do we do? Personally, I don't stress about one game or another (as we know), because to my mind it's ultimately a tiny mote in a sea of hoops, but I understand the impulse of the Bobby Knight fetishists who want to see Discipline ala Throbbing Gristle. I think the question is: if we've seen many coaching staffs try (and fail?) to curb these tendencies, why do we presume another coaching staff would be any different?

[Moranis]

Moving this over here as to avoid bumping the Timberwolves thread entirely, because I think this is part of the conversation for the general coaching thread (which this is):

agree with last two posts.

See problem = address problem

That's how it works for most of us in our daily lives...and elsewhere all around us.  Regarding this issue the C's seem to exist in a vacuum where the basic laws don't reach.

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't address the issue, but I do think it's easier to overreact to one game than to realise it likely won't mean very much in February, or March, or June.

That's the problem exactly. By not addressing and correcting the problems now, they mean everything in February, March all the way thru June because the team is still making the same mistakes vs better competition in the playoffs and then it costs them the ability to win titles.
Of course, the flawed stars in this current group have been doing the same dumb things their entire careers, which is why they keep falling short.

I think Tenn has hit on the heart of The Winged Jay Paradox:

Part 1) We can very safely assume that the coaching staff is trying to address and correct the recurring problems that appear time and time again for the C's, because they have a very vested professional interest in winning basketball games. The idea that the Celtics coaching staff aren't trying to correct these problems is quite simply not worth considering - no matter how much fun it is to gripe like this is the case.

Part 2) We can see on the court that the Jays have been "doing the same dumb things their entire careers", and while we can also assume that Mazza, Udoka, and Stevens have all tried to address and correct these recurring problems, these efforst are being met with limited success*, basically.


*limited success is a bit of a misnomer here, because the Celtics have been a very successful team since drafting Jaylen. They just haven't won a title.

So what do we do? Personally, I don't stress about one game or another (as we know), because to my mind it's ultimately a tiny mote in a sea of hoops, but I understand the impulse of the Bobby Knight fetishists who want to see Discipline ala Throbbing Gristle. I think the question is: if we've seen many coaching staffs try (and fail?) to curb these tendencies, why do we presume another coaching staff would be any different?

This just comes down to the same thing I've seen (and said on here) for years, Brown does not compliment Tatum very well.  He has no elite skills and the things he does the best, Tatum just does better.  Brown is a good, but not great shooter. He is an average passer. He is poor ball handler. He doesn't make great decisions.  He just doesn't work as a secondary piece when the primary piece is also is a wing. The reason that year after year, the team is better when Jaylen is on the bench, is because Tatum plays better when he has lesser overall players, but ones with an elite skill, playing next to him. 

Again this year, Tatum's on/off differential per 100 possessions is +20.9 while Brown's is -1.6.  They have both started every game and Tatum is at 36.4 mpg while Brown is at 34.1.  This discrepancy happens every year (it is larger now in the small sample size, but there is always a big gap) and it is just weird for 2 players on the same team that both start and play roughly the same minutes to consistently over years have that sort of discrepancy.  It is why I've been advocating to trade Brown for awhile.  It isn't because I don't think Brown is a good player (though this board has pretty consistently overrated him as they do all players), it is because Brown's effect on Boston winning is limited.  He just doesn't move the metric for this team on the scoreboard and he never really has.

[green_bballers13]

Moving this over here as to avoid bumping the Timberwolves thread entirely, because I think this is part of the conversation for the general coaching thread (which this is):

agree with last two posts.

See problem = address problem

That's how it works for most of us in our daily lives...and elsewhere all around us.  Regarding this issue the C's seem to exist in a vacuum where the basic laws don't reach.

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't address the issue, but I do think it's easier to overreact to one game than to realise it likely won't mean very much in February, or March, or June.

That's the problem exactly. By not addressing and correcting the problems now, they mean everything in February, March all the way thru June because the team is still making the same mistakes vs better competition in the playoffs and then it costs them the ability to win titles.
Of course, the flawed stars in this current group have been doing the same dumb things their entire careers, which is why they keep falling short.

I think Tenn has hit on the heart of The Winged Jay Paradox:

Part 1) We can very safely assume that the coaching staff is trying to address and correct the recurring problems that appear time and time again for the C's, because they have a very vested professional interest in winning basketball games. The idea that the Celtics coaching staff aren't trying to correct these problems is quite simply not worth considering - no matter how much fun it is to gripe like this is the case.

Part 2) We can see on the court that the Jays have been "doing the same dumb things their entire careers", and while we can also assume that Mazza, Udoka, and Stevens have all tried to address and correct these recurring problems, these efforst are being met with limited success*, basically.


*limited success is a bit of a misnomer here, because the Celtics have been a very successful team since drafting Jaylen. They just haven't won a title.

So what do we do? Personally, I don't stress about one game or another (as we know), because to my mind it's ultimately a tiny mote in a sea of hoops, but I understand the impulse of the Bobby Knight fetishists who want to see Discipline ala Throbbing Gristle. I think the question is: if we've seen many coaching staffs try (and fail?) to curb these tendencies, why do we presume another coaching staff would be any different?

This just comes down to the same thing I've seen (and said on here) for years, Brown does not compliment Tatum very well.  He has no elite skills and the things he does the best, Tatum just does better.  Brown is a good, but not great shooter. He is an average passer. He is poor ball handler. He doesn't make great decisions.  He just doesn't work as a secondary piece when the primary piece is also is a wing. The reason that year after year, the team is better when Jaylen is on the bench, is because Tatum plays better when he has lesser overall players, but ones with an elite skill, playing next to him. 

Again this year, Tatum's on/off differential per 100 possessions is +20.9 while Brown's is -1.6.  They have both started every game and Tatum is at 36.4 mpg while Brown is at 34.1.  This discrepancy happens every year (it is larger now in the small sample size, but there is always a big gap) and it is just weird for 2 players on the same team that both start and play roughly the same minutes to consistently over years have that sort of discrepancy.  It is why I've been advocating to trade Brown for awhile.  It isn't because I don't think Brown is a good player (though this board has pretty consistently overrated him as they do all players), it is because Brown's effect on Boston winning is limited.  He just doesn't move the metric for this team on the scoreboard and he never really has.

You make this point ad nauseum after losses, then are quiet about him after wins. We get it- you have an agenda here.

I just want the Celtics to win. I'm rooting for Jaylen to do well.

[Moranis]

Moving this over here as to avoid bumping the Timberwolves thread entirely, because I think this is part of the conversation for the general coaching thread (which this is):

agree with last two posts.

See problem = address problem

That's how it works for most of us in our daily lives...and elsewhere all around us.  Regarding this issue the C's seem to exist in a vacuum where the basic laws don't reach.

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't address the issue, but I do think it's easier to overreact to one game than to realise it likely won't mean very much in February, or March, or June.

That's the problem exactly. By not addressing and correcting the problems now, they mean everything in February, March all the way thru June because the team is still making the same mistakes vs better competition in the playoffs and then it costs them the ability to win titles.
Of course, the flawed stars in this current group have been doing the same dumb things their entire careers, which is why they keep falling short.

I think Tenn has hit on the heart of The Winged Jay Paradox:

Part 1) We can very safely assume that the coaching staff is trying to address and correct the recurring problems that appear time and time again for the C's, because they have a very vested professional interest in winning basketball games. The idea that the Celtics coaching staff aren't trying to correct these problems is quite simply not worth considering - no matter how much fun it is to gripe like this is the case.

Part 2) We can see on the court that the Jays have been "doing the same dumb things their entire careers", and while we can also assume that Mazza, Udoka, and Stevens have all tried to address and correct these recurring problems, these efforst are being met with limited success*, basically.


*limited success is a bit of a misnomer here, because the Celtics have been a very successful team since drafting Jaylen. They just haven't won a title.

So what do we do? Personally, I don't stress about one game or another (as we know), because to my mind it's ultimately a tiny mote in a sea of hoops, but I understand the impulse of the Bobby Knight fetishists who want to see Discipline ala Throbbing Gristle. I think the question is: if we've seen many coaching staffs try (and fail?) to curb these tendencies, why do we presume another coaching staff would be any different?

This just comes down to the same thing I've seen (and said on here) for years, Brown does not compliment Tatum very well.  He has no elite skills and the things he does the best, Tatum just does better.  Brown is a good, but not great shooter. He is an average passer. He is poor ball handler. He doesn't make great decisions.  He just doesn't work as a secondary piece when the primary piece is also is a wing. The reason that year after year, the team is better when Jaylen is on the bench, is because Tatum plays better when he has lesser overall players, but ones with an elite skill, playing next to him. 

Again this year, Tatum's on/off differential per 100 possessions is +20.9 while Brown's is -1.6.  They have both started every game and Tatum is at 36.4 mpg while Brown is at 34.1.  This discrepancy happens every year (it is larger now in the small sample size, but there is always a big gap) and it is just weird for 2 players on the same team that both start and play roughly the same minutes to consistently over years have that sort of discrepancy.  It is why I've been advocating to trade Brown for awhile.  It isn't because I don't think Brown is a good player (though this board has pretty consistently overrated him as they do all players), it is because Brown's effect on Boston winning is limited.  He just doesn't move the metric for this team on the scoreboard and he never really has.

You make this point ad nauseum after losses, then are quiet about him after wins. We get it- you have an agenda here.

I just want the Celtics to win. I'm rooting for Jaylen to do well.

I make this point when it is relevant to the discussion others are having.  It is the same after wins as well.  The team is better when Brown is on the bench. Year after year.

I have no agenda other than wanting the team to do well.

[Kernewek]

Ok - I guess the question is, is on/off per 100 the most reliable indicator of the issue, which is (apparently) a lack of good decision-making on offense? It seems to me we would want to slice the data involving close games, in the final 5 minutes, say, and the net result of a given play with those two guys in the same lineup on the floor.

In other words, following your logic, we would expect to see something around the fact that Brown being in the game in the above scenario ties in with going to cause Tatum to go cold, or make the bad passes, or vice versa. I don't think we've looked at enough data properly to presume that.

[Moranis]

Ok - I guess the question is, is on/off per 100 the most reliable indicator of the issue, which is (apparently) a lack of good decision-making on offense? It seems to me we would want to slice the data involving close games, in the final 5 minutes, say, and the net result of a given play with those two guys in the same lineup on the floor.

In other words, following your logic, we would expect to see something around the fact that Brown being in the game in the above scenario ties in with going to cause Tatum to go cold, or make the bad passes, or vice versa. I don't think we've looked at enough data properly to presume that.

At one point last year I went through the games when Brown sat vs. Brown played.  I looked at multiple season, but below I put the first part of the 21-22 season when the team as a whole was getting used to Udoka, but the dramatic difference in Tatum's shooting is pretty amazing.  Tatum scored more on a better shooting efficiency in the games Brown didn't play at all.  His other stats were in the same general range.  It was easier to do it that way since Brown didn't play at all.  I don't know if it holds in games in which both play when Tatum is on the floor and Brown isn't.

21-22 season

Games 4-9 (Brown played) - Tatum Stats

22.5 p, 7.8 r, 3.5 a, 1.0 s, 0.7 b, 2.0 t - 36.1% FG (27.5% - 3)

Games 10-17 (no Brown) - Tatum Stats

28.6 p, 9.1 r, 3.6 a, 1.0 s, 1.0 b, 2.9 t - 45% FG (41.6% - 3)

Games 18-22 (Brown) - Tatum Stats

20.6 p, 9.8 r, 4.0 a, 1.0 s, 0.2 b, 2.8 t - 35.1% FG (21.1% - 3)

Games 23-27 (no Brown) - Tatum Stats

31.0 p, 8.2 r, 3.4 a, 0.6 s, 0.8 b, 3.4 t - 48.6% FG (36.8% - 3)

Games 28-33 (Brown) - Tatum Stats

25.7 p, 8.2 r, 4.5 a, 1.7 s, 0.8 b, 3.2 r - 43% FG (33.3% - 3)

Now obviously that is less than a 1/2 season sample size, but because of when Brown missed time (in chunks), it is also easy to illustrate and doesn't just capture a hot or cold stretch for Tatum.  When Brown played, Tatum shot poorly, when Brown didn't play, Tatum shot very well. 

Brown also missed the 3rd game (which is why I started at game 4) and Tatum missed games 34-47 (why I stopped at game 33), but during the first 33 games that season, Boston was 7-7 without Brown and 9-10 with Brown (which is also a pretty consistent pattern year after year).

[Yuckabuck33]

Moving this over here as to avoid bumping the Timberwolves thread entirely, because I think this is part of the conversation for the general coaching thread (which this is):

agree with last two posts.

See problem = address problem

That's how it works for most of us in our daily lives...and elsewhere all around us.  Regarding this issue the C's seem to exist in a vacuum where the basic laws don't reach.

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't address the issue, but I do think it's easier to overreact to one game than to realise it likely won't mean very much in February, or March, or June.

That's the problem exactly. By not addressing and correcting the problems now, they mean everything in February, March all the way thru June because the team is still making the same mistakes vs better competition in the playoffs and then it costs them the ability to win titles.
Of course, the flawed stars in this current group have been doing the same dumb things their entire careers, which is why they keep falling short.

I think Tenn has hit on the heart of The Winged Jay Paradox:

Part 1) We can very safely assume that the coaching staff is trying to address and correct the recurring problems that appear time and time again for the C's, because they have a very vested professional interest in winning basketball games. The idea that the Celtics coaching staff aren't trying to correct these problems is quite simply not worth considering - no matter how much fun it is to gripe like this is the case.

Part 2) We can see on the court that the Jays have been "doing the same dumb things their entire careers", and while we can also assume that Mazza, Udoka, and Stevens have all tried to address and correct these recurring problems, these efforst are being met with limited success*, basically.


*limited success is a bit of a misnomer here, because the Celtics have been a very successful team since drafting Jaylen. They just haven't won a title.

So what do we do? Personally, I don't stress about one game or another (as we know), because to my mind it's ultimately a tiny mote in a sea of hoops, but I understand the impulse of the Bobby Knight fetishists who want to see Discipline ala Throbbing Gristle. I think the question is: if we've seen many coaching staffs try (and fail?) to curb these tendencies, why do we presume another coaching staff would be any different?

This just comes down to the same thing I've seen (and said on here) for years, Brown does not compliment Tatum very well.  He has no elite skills and the things he does the best, Tatum just does better.  Brown is a good, but not great shooter. He is an average passer. He is poor ball handler. He doesn't make great decisions.  He just doesn't work as a secondary piece when the primary piece is also is a wing. The reason that year after year, the team is better when Jaylen is on the bench, is because Tatum plays better when he has lesser overall players, but ones with an elite skill, playing next to him. 

Again this year, Tatum's on/off differential per 100 possessions is +20.9 while Brown's is -1.6.  They have both started every game and Tatum is at 36.4 mpg while Brown is at 34.1.  This discrepancy happens every year (it is larger now in the small sample size, but there is always a big gap) and it is just weird for 2 players on the same team that both start and play roughly the same minutes to consistently over years have that sort of discrepancy.  It is why I've been advocating to trade Brown for awhile.  It isn't because I don't think Brown is a good player (though this board has pretty consistently overrated him as they do all players), it is because Brown's effect on Boston winning is limited.  He just doesn't move the metric for this team on the scoreboard and he never really has.

I question how the discrepancy in on/off ratings prove that the Jays don't compliment each other. I don't have time to learn how to run individual line ups, but mathematically, couldn't that mean that Jaylen's time in the floor WITHOUT Tatum is what drags his on/off ratings down. (Watching the last 2 games, it has been brutal when Jalen has been on the floor with a bench unit but no Tatum.) I don't see how on/off differential by itself determines how effective or complimentary they are together on the floor.

[Moranis]

Moving this over here as to avoid bumping the Timberwolves thread entirely, because I think this is part of the conversation for the general coaching thread (which this is):

agree with last two posts.

See problem = address problem

That's how it works for most of us in our daily lives...and elsewhere all around us.  Regarding this issue the C's seem to exist in a vacuum where the basic laws don't reach.

I don't think anyone is saying they shouldn't address the issue, but I do think it's easier to overreact to one game than to realise it likely won't mean very much in February, or March, or June.

That's the problem exactly. By not addressing and correcting the problems now, they mean everything in February, March all the way thru June because the team is still making the same mistakes vs better competition in the playoffs and then it costs them the ability to win titles.
Of course, the flawed stars in this current group have been doing the same dumb things their entire careers, which is why they keep falling short.

I think Tenn has hit on the heart of The Winged Jay Paradox:

Part 1) We can very safely assume that the coaching staff is trying to address and correct the recurring problems that appear time and time again for the C's, because they have a very vested professional interest in winning basketball games. The idea that the Celtics coaching staff aren't trying to correct these problems is quite simply not worth considering - no matter how much fun it is to gripe like this is the case.

Part 2) We can see on the court that the Jays have been "doing the same dumb things their entire careers", and while we can also assume that Mazza, Udoka, and Stevens have all tried to address and correct these recurring problems, these efforst are being met with limited success*, basically.


*limited success is a bit of a misnomer here, because the Celtics have been a very successful team since drafting Jaylen. They just haven't won a title.

So what do we do? Personally, I don't stress about one game or another (as we know), because to my mind it's ultimately a tiny mote in a sea of hoops, but I understand the impulse of the Bobby Knight fetishists who want to see Discipline ala Throbbing Gristle. I think the question is: if we've seen many coaching staffs try (and fail?) to curb these tendencies, why do we presume another coaching staff would be any different?

This just comes down to the same thing I've seen (and said on here) for years, Brown does not compliment Tatum very well.  He has no elite skills and the things he does the best, Tatum just does better.  Brown is a good, but not great shooter. He is an average passer. He is poor ball handler. He doesn't make great decisions.  He just doesn't work as a secondary piece when the primary piece is also is a wing. The reason that year after year, the team is better when Jaylen is on the bench, is because Tatum plays better when he has lesser overall players, but ones with an elite skill, playing next to him. 

Again this year, Tatum's on/off differential per 100 possessions is +20.9 while Brown's is -1.6.  They have both started every game and Tatum is at 36.4 mpg while Brown is at 34.1.  This discrepancy happens every year (it is larger now in the small sample size, but there is always a big gap) and it is just weird for 2 players on the same team that both start and play roughly the same minutes to consistently over years have that sort of discrepancy.  It is why I've been advocating to trade Brown for awhile.  It isn't because I don't think Brown is a good player (though this board has pretty consistently overrated him as they do all players), it is because Brown's effect on Boston winning is limited.  He just doesn't move the metric for this team on the scoreboard and he never really has.

I question how the discrepancy in on/off ratings prove that the Jays don't compliment each other. I don't have time to learn how to run individual line ups, but mathematically, couldn't that mean that Jaylen's time in the floor WITHOUT Tatum is what drags his on/off ratings down. (Watching the last 2 games, it has been brutal when Jalen has been on the floor with a bench unit but no Tatum.) I don't see how on/off differential by itself determines how effective or complimentary they are together on the floor.

well when they are on the floor together they have the same number and when they are both off the floor they have the same number.  So the difference is entirely  when one is on and one is off.  It is probably some combination of Tatum being better or slightly worse and Brown being significantly worse without the other.  The thing that leads me to the conclusion they don't fit well is the teams overall record when Brown doesnt play at all verse when Tatum doesn't play at all.  The stats I posted above are also very interesting in my view to this discussion.

[Moranis]

Boston up 15 with 2 minutes left, Brown and Tatum are both out. Brown played well statistically he was just +6, while Tatum was +28 in a game he shot terribly in.  That is a fairly consistent result +- result for those two.  Brown simply doesn't matter to the overall success of the team on a night in and night out basis.  Sure games here or there he will be very impactful, but for the most part, it just doesn't matter how he plays or if he even plays at all.

[Goldstar88]

Joe must have emphasized shooting better before the game. Excellent job.

[SCeltic34]

Boston up 15 with 2 minutes left, Brown and Tatum are both out. Brown played well statistically he was just +6, while Tatum was +28 in a game he shot terribly in.  That is a fairly consistent result +- result for those two.  Brown simply doesn't matter to the overall success of the team on a night in and night out basis.  Sure games here or there he will be very impactful, but for the most part, it just doesn't matter how he plays or if he even plays at all.

A lot of that was a big dropoff defensively in the first quarter after Tatum subbed out and the bench was subbed in.  We struggled a lot with Kornet on the floor in the 1st. 

The trend of Brown's +/- obviously doesn't lie over the years, but context does matter.  Joe favors subbing Tatum out first as the bench starts to come in.

[jpotter33]

Boston up 15 with 2 minutes left, Brown and Tatum are both out. Brown played well statistically he was just +6, while Tatum was +28 in a game he shot terribly in.  That is a fairly consistent result +- result for those two.  Brown simply doesn't matter to the overall success of the team on a night in and night out basis.  Sure games here or there he will be very impactful, but for the most part, it just doesn't matter how he plays or if he even plays at all.

A lot of that was a big dropoff defensively in the first quarter after Tatum subbed out and the bench was subbed in.  We struggled a lot with Kornet on the floor in the 1st. 

The trend of Brown's +/- obviously doesn't lie over the years, but context does matter.  Joe favors subbing Tatum out first as the bench starts to come in.

True, but Tatum also plays much more with the bench than JB does. In fact, alot of times Tatum gets thrown out there with full bench lineups and fares just fine.

Some of the problem tonight is depth-related, as Al's absence forced JB to play more minutes with heavier bench lineups, which were a disaster.

[Moranis]

+19 for Tatum at half -4 for Brown.

[Moranis]

Brown with a solid game his last game, but doesn't play tonight and the Celtics beat the Sixers.  Once again the team keeps right on winning when Brown doesn't play at all.