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

[slamtheking]

The team kept its composure and played hard to the end.  Joe didn't make any adjustments, but he didn't have to.

So, that makes 1/3 games that he's been a net positive.

has he though?  what I saw was a team that's yet to figure out how to deal with a Knicks team that's pushing them around and getting very handsy when the C's drive.  C's need to figure out how to get into their half court offense with at least 18 seconds on the shot clock and not with less than 10 because the Knicks are keeping them pushed out to almost the half court line unable to make any entry passes down low. 

Offense still looks poor but being able to hit open 3's today made all the difference.  they still had issues hitting layups and shots in the paint.  Still having issues securing the ball after making a good defensive stand. 

Some of that's on the players, some of that's on Joe for not coming up with a strategy to improve the teams handling of those issues.

[ozgod]

Joe avoided getting pink slipped till next game?

[ozgod]

I'll give Mazzulla credit. Yes, the 3s were falling today which helped, but there was definitely some urgency such as those timeouts he called today, which usually he'd let the lead dip to below 10 to call. He also had some nice ATOs and definitely made some adjustments with PP and Kornet. Thought he managed the rotations well.

Hope it continues. If the 3 doesn't fall though, I hope they have also learned to adjust and settle for the easy twos in the second half. The C's actually did that this time around, kept the lead around 19-23 for most of it.

Make-miss league 

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

I'll give Mazzulla credit. Yes, the 3s were falling today which helped, but there was definitely some urgency such as those timeouts he called today, which usually he'd let the lead dip to below 10 to call. He also had some nice ATOs and definitely made some adjustments with PP and Kornet. Thought he managed the rotations well.

Hope it continues. If the 3 doesn't fall though, I hope they have also learned to adjust and settle for the easy twos in the second half. The C's actually did that this time around, kept the lead around 19-23 for most of it.

Make-miss league 

thanks doc rivers 

[ozgod]

I updated my table with the stats for G3, to see if there was evidence that a) Joe and the team changed their strategy and b) whether their execution improved:



The data doesn't suggest any definitive change in strategy - they still took nearly 50% of their total shots in 3s, though in Game 1 that was 61% and in Game 2 that was 43%. Over the course of the season they averaged 48 3s a game on 90 total shots which is 53%, so if anything their volumes of 3s they've taken have dropped in G2 and G3, which suggests that G1 was the outlier. In Game 2 we scored more PITP and pts off turnovers than in Game 3, which can be explained by them hitting more 3s.

What the data doesn't show is some of the things that Joe did to avoid his immediate termination for the Cs' abysmal performances in G1 and G2: 1) he played PP 34 mins in G3, vs 21min in G1 and 24min in G3; b) they utilized KP better - knowing he wasn't at his best they used him mainly as a rim protector and to draw fouls under the basket and as a decoy within the flow of the game, rather than trying to go out of their way to work him into the game. I know we all love the timeout as one of the main metrics for determining a coach's effectiveness in managing the game and he did a better job of that too.

But the biggest difference was the players' execution. They shot 50% from 3, and they showed better judgment in the 3s they shot. They took care of the ball better, other than in the first quarter, and they didn't show panic when NY went on that 8-0 run in the 4th. They made plays and took care of business even when they were leading by 20.

Obviously Joe did some things right this time, but from looking at the data this series will be won and lost not necessarily by Joe - he will influence it, for sure - but by the players. If they make shots and don't turn the ball over, they will win and we will be happy. If they miss shots and turn the ball over, they will lose and we will be mad. As Doc said via BGL above, make miss league 

BTW, because we take more 3s than other teams, and 3s tend to miss more, other teams' fans will happier at least 50% of time during the game, while we will be madder about 65% of the time. But it's who is happier at the end of the game that counts 

[Goldstar88]

I updated my table with the stats for G3, to see if there was evidence that a) Joe and the team changed their strategy and b) whether their execution improved:



The data doesn't suggest any definitive change in strategy - they still took nearly 50% of their total shots in 3s, though in Game 1 that was 61% and in Game 2 that was 43%. Over the course of the season they averaged 48 3s a game on 90 total shots which is 53%, so if anything their volumes of 3s they've taken have dropped in G2 and G3, which suggests that G1 was the outlier. In Game 2 we scored more PITP and pts off turnovers than in Game 3, which can be explained by them hitting more 3s.

What the data doesn't show is some of the things that Joe did to avoid his immediate termination for the Cs' abysmal performances in G1 and G2: 1) he played PP 34 mins in G3, vs 21min in G1 and 24min in G3; b) they utilized KP better - knowing he wasn't at his best they used him mainly as a rim protector and to draw fouls under the basket and as a decoy within the flow of the game, rather than trying to go out of their way to work him into the game. I know we all love the timeout as one of the main metrics for determining a coach's effectiveness in managing the game and he did a better job of that too.

But the biggest difference was the players' execution. They shot 50% from 3, and they showed better judgment in the 3s they shot. They took care of the ball better, other than in the first quarter, and they didn't show panic when NY went on that 8-0 run in the 4th. They made plays and took care of business even when they were leading by 20.

Obviously Joe did some things right this time, but from looking at the data this series will be won and lost not necessarily by Joe - he will influence it, for sure - but by the players. If they make shots and don't turn the ball over, they will win and we will be happy. If they miss shots and turn the ball over, they will lose and we will be mad. As Doc said via BGL above, make miss league 

BTW, because we take more 3s than other teams, and 3s tend to miss more, other teams' fans will happier at least 50% of time during the game, while we will be madder about 65% of the time. But it's who is happier at the end of the game that counts 

This. Great post, Oz. 

[jpotter33]

I updated my table with the stats for G3, to see if there was evidence that a) Joe and the team changed their strategy and b) whether their execution improved:



The data doesn't suggest any definitive change in strategy - they still took nearly 50% of their total shots in 3s, though in Game 1 that was 61% and in Game 2 that was 43%. Over the course of the season they averaged 48 3s a game on 90 total shots which is 53%, so if anything their volumes of 3s they've taken have dropped in G2 and G3, which suggests that G1 was the outlier. In Game 2 we scored more PITP and pts off turnovers than in Game 3, which can be explained by them hitting more 3s.

What the data doesn't show is some of the things that Joe did to avoid his immediate termination for the Cs' abysmal performances in G1 and G2: 1) he played PP 34 mins in G3, vs 21min in G1 and 24min in G3; b) they utilized KP better - knowing he wasn't at his best they used him mainly as a rim protector and to draw fouls under the basket and as a decoy within the flow of the game, rather than trying to go out of their way to work him into the game. I know we all love the timeout as one of the main metrics for determining a coach's effectiveness in managing the game and he did a better job of that too.

But the biggest difference was the players' execution. They shot 50% from 3, and they showed better judgment in the 3s they shot. They took care of the ball better, other than in the first quarter, and they didn't show panic when NY went on that 8-0 run in the 4th. They made plays and took care of business even when they were leading by 20.

Obviously Joe did some things right this time, but from looking at the data this series will be won and lost not necessarily by Joe - he will influence it, for sure - but by the players. If they make shots and don't turn the ball over, they will win and we will be happy. If they miss shots and turn the ball over, they will lose and we will be mad. As Doc said via BGL above, make miss league 

BTW, because we take more 3s than other teams, and 3s tend to miss more, other teams' fans will happier at least 50% of time during the game, while we will be madder about 65% of the time. But it's who is happier at the end of the game that counts 

I only got to watch the second half, so my perspective is a little limited.

I do think Joe was much better with his rotations and timeout management, and he was instrumental in helping the team curb any momentum and runs by calling strategic timeouts and not just expecting the guys to figure it out themselves. It also seemed like he went away from using the overly used double big lineup more and towards a smaller lineup with PP that was effective. These were issues he was getting hammered for in the media the last several days. So kudos to him for these adjustments, but it?s frustrating that it takes two historic collapses for him to get out of his dogmatic way and make the obvious adjustments.

As for the shooting, I do think alot of it boils down to us finally making them. The shot profile looks largely the same, but we did do a higher percentage of makes off the pass and assisted as opposed to pull ups, as well as we seemed to be implementing more of the inside out offense. So I do think the quality of threes was a bit better due to an adjustment to gameplan.

[wdleehi]

I did like the adjustment of setting up the defense in the 4th quarter after the Celtics made a shot instead of just allowing the Knicks just push the ball after misses.   

[ozgod]

From Washburn's reporting, Sensei Joe came up with his usual inscrutable answers at the presser when asked if the previous 72 hours before the pressure-relieving win had been tough (like it was tough for the fans who thought it was all over after two terrible games):

When asked if the past 72 hours have been difficult, Joe Mazzulla smiled after spending the first few minutes of his postgame press conference giving textbook answers and repeating the phrase ?live-ball turnovers? because the Celtics committed few.

The narrative that the Celtics? mental weakness was exposed in blowing those late leads caused him to shake his head in denial. They fully believed they were capable of a resounding comeback.

?No,? he said about whether the last games have been difficult, followed by a wry smile. ?I?ve said it 1,000 times. There?s no one way of how it?s supposed to go. You get caught up when your expectations aren?t met. There?s no expectations there. We?re on the path of trying to go after greatness and you don?t get to dictate the test that?s in front of you. All you get to dictate is how you approach it and how you respond to it.

?If you plan on doing this for a long time, trust me, it can be a lot worse and that?s the perspective you have to have. We?ve got a test in front of us and I?ve got a group of guys I wouldn?t want anyone else to be able to go through that. This is the fun part. You don?t get into the journey to be easy.?

Of course, Mazzulla wouldn?t end his soliloquy without a confounding quip.

?It?s been dark, but in a good way,? he said. ?You have tap into your darkness and that?s it. So, we have do it.?

The Celtics were their authentic selves the past three games. Mazzulla didn?t make significant adjustments but enough to put his team in the position to take another large lead. And his players stuck to their convictions to build that 31-point advantage but made enough modifications to hold the lead this time and regain their swagger after a humbling stretch.

The situation wasn?t dark because the Celtics refused to view it that way, and that was the right approach.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/05/10/sports/celtics-blow-out-knicks/

[Donoghus]

From Washburn's reporting, Sensei Joe came up with his usual inscrutable answers at the presser when asked if the previous 72 hours before the pressure-relieving win had been tough (like it was tough for the fans who thought it was all over after two terrible games):

When asked if the past 72 hours have been difficult, Joe Mazzulla smiled after spending the first few minutes of his postgame press conference giving textbook answers and repeating the phrase ?live-ball turnovers? because the Celtics committed few.

The narrative that the Celtics? mental weakness was exposed in blowing those late leads caused him to shake his head in denial. They fully believed they were capable of a resounding comeback.

?No,? he said about whether the last games have been difficult, followed by a wry smile. ?I?ve said it 1,000 times. There?s no one way of how it?s supposed to go. You get caught up when your expectations aren?t met. There?s no expectations there. We?re on the path of trying to go after greatness and you don?t get to dictate the test that?s in front of you. All you get to dictate is how you approach it and how you respond to it.

?If you plan on doing this for a long time, trust me, it can be a lot worse and that?s the perspective you have to have. We?ve got a test in front of us and I?ve got a group of guys I wouldn?t want anyone else to be able to go through that. This is the fun part. You don?t get into the journey to be easy.?

Of course, Mazzulla wouldn?t end his soliloquy without a confounding quip.

?It?s been dark, but in a good way,? he said. ?You have tap into your darkness and that?s it. So, we have do it.?

The Celtics were their authentic selves the past three games. Mazzulla didn?t make significant adjustments but enough to put his team in the position to take another large lead. And his players stuck to their convictions to build that 31-point advantage but made enough modifications to hold the lead this time and regain their swagger after a humbling stretch.

The situation wasn?t dark because the Celtics refused to view it that way, and that was the right approach.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2025/05/10/sports/celtics-blow-out-knicks/

He's got some Kyrie speak to him.  Definitely an oddball.

[SparzWizard]

I sure hope fans in Boston are waiting at the airport in Logan, getting ready with their pitchforks on Joe, Jaylen, Kristaps, and guys who failed to contribute this series

[goCeltics]

Add not fouling a brick machine (robinson) in the 4th to the list of crappy choices.

[Goldstar88]

And while we are at it, fire JB, Jrue, White, Horford and KP. 

[Roy H.]

The team lost its composure, went through long scoring droughts, and blew large leads in 3 out of 4 games to a significantly inferior team.

I'm not sure how to divide up the pie chart of blame, but Joe gets a chunk of it.

[Larry for 3]

The team lost its composure, went through long scoring droughts, and blew large leads in 3 out of 4 games to a significantly inferior team.

I'm not sure how to divide up the pie chart of blame, but Joe gets a chunk of it.

A huge chunk Roy, he has to go