Celtics (0-1) at Knicks (1-0) Game #2 10/24/25

[Moranis]

Did people really believe Brown was a #1?  I thought it was fairly obvious he is a #2.  He isn't a good enough ball handler, creator, or passer to be a #1.  And because he is serving that role, everyone else has to move up roles for which they aren't suited i.e. White is trying be a #2 when he is really more like a #4, PP is a 3 when he should be a 6th man, etc.

I think they may need to start Simons and let him serve as the #1 scorer.  He can at least create good looks for himself.  That moves everyone else down to roles they are better suited for. 

[ozgod]

Missed the game again, [dang] Friday nighters...well on the plus side we're tied with the Rockets and Mavs, so if we're slitting wrists those fans will be slitting wrists worse than us at least 

[ozgod]

Did people really believe Brown was a #1?  I thought it was fairly obvious he is a #2.  He isn't a good enough ball handler, creator, or passer to be a #1.  And because he is serving that role, everyone else has to move up roles for which they aren't suited i.e. White is trying be a #2 when he is really more like a #4, PP is a 3 when he should be a 6th man, etc.

I think they may need to start Simons and let him serve as the #1 scorer.  He can at least create good looks for himself.  That moves everyone else down to roles they are better suited for.

Agree with starting Simons. I think PP is better suited to coming off the bench as well. As for the role switches, unfortunately it's an adjustment for everyone, they're all being asked to fill roles they either have never played, or may not be capable of doing. This is the year we find out about them, who's going to be part of the next iteration of the team for the long term, who's ready to "graduate", and what people's ceilings are.

[Muzzy66]

Did people really believe Brown was a #1?  I thought it was fairly obvious he is a #2.  He isn't a good enough ball handler, creator, or passer to be a #1.  And because he is serving that role, everyone else has to move up roles for which they aren't suited i.e. White is trying be a #2 when he is really more like a #4, PP is a 3 when he should be a 6th man, etc.

I think they may need to start Simons and let him serve as the #1 scorer.  He can at least create good looks for himself.  That moves everyone else down to roles they are better suited for.

I've been saying this for years every time people push this "Brown is better than Tatum" nonsense.  Brown is a really good player.  He's very much capable of carrying a team in scoring once every couple of games when he's got a favourable matchup or is feeling hot.  Carrying a team consistently over the course of a full season is a VERY different thing. 

When you are the clear #1 scorer on a team, it completely changes the way opposing teams play you.  Teams throw double and triple teams at you.  They trap you.  They study your game and build their entire defensive gameplan around taking away the things you do best.  To maintain that same high level of production for years on end guys like Tatum need to constantly work on their games - they need to regularly find new ways to counter what the defence is throwing at them.  If the defence is hitting them with doubles/triple teams then they need to work on their vision and passing so that they can effectively break those.  if opponents try to take away their outside shot then they need to improve their driving game and try to find ways to beat the defence and get in to the paint.  Guys like Paul Pierce and Melo in their prime were masters of this - no matter what a defence threw at them, they always had a counter.  Tatum isn't quite at the level of those guys yet, but he's getting very close.

People criticise Tatum and talk as if he just scores because he shots a lot, and that Brown (if put in his position) could do the same thing.  At this point in Brown's career that's just not true.

[Muzzy66]

Did people really believe Brown was a #1?  I thought it was fairly obvious he is a #2.  He isn't a good enough ball handler, creator, or passer to be a #1.  And because he is serving that role, everyone else has to move up roles for which they aren't suited i.e. White is trying be a #2 when he is really more like a #4, PP is a 3 when he should be a 6th man, etc.

I think they may need to start Simons and let him serve as the #1 scorer.  He can at least create good looks for himself.  That moves everyone else down to roles they are better suited for.

Agree with starting Simons. I think PP is better suited to coming off the bench as well. As for the role switches, unfortunately it's an adjustment for everyone, they're all being asked to fill roles they either have never played, or may not be capable of doing. This is the year we find out about them, who's going to be part of the next iteration of the team for the long term, who's ready to "graduate", and what people's ceilings are.

I feel the opposite. 

Pritchard is a pretty steady guy - he commits very few turnovers, is a solid passer, a good ball handler, puts in effort on defence, and offensively he can be extremely effient.  I think you want that type of stability leading your unit at the PG spot.

Simon's only real strength is his scoring, and outside of scoring he's largely a liability in other aspecs of the game.  Guys like this to me are perfectly suited for coming off the bench because they can come in cold and put up a bundle of points while your usual main scorer(s) are resting.  They can fullfil that "spark off the bench" role.  I see Simons as a high risk / high reward player.  He's volatile.  He'll come in and make big positive splash offensively, or he'll come in, chuck a bunch of bad shots, get exploited on defence, and need to be pulled out. Too unstable / inconsistent to depend on as a starter.

Pritchard has had a couple of bad shooting games to start, but I have no doubts he will find his shot and he'll be fine.  I wouldn't be the least bit shocked if he ends up averaging close to 20 PPG by the time the season is over.

[Who]

SVG and Ian Eagle are actually a pretty good team. Much better than the Reggie Miller/Jamal Crawford atrocity that NBC subjected us to.

I was shocked at how bad Jamal Crawford was. He is very good in interviews. Did not translate.

[Who]

When Brad was the coach, he rewarded the guys who cared with minutes, which is why they were lovable underdog teams. Joe is clueless. Minott, Hugo, Boucher actually care and should be in more.

Not sure why Minott isn?t playing, but Hugo and Boucher are getting plenty of minutes.

Harder to play all 3 of them when Hauser is starting at PF. Leaves you either too small (Boucer at C, Minott at PF) or without enough shooting on the wing (Hugo at SF, Minott at SG).

Better to start Boucher and bring Hauser off the bench. Team will have better balance. They need Hauser's shooting on the bench to balance out the non-shooters on the wing (Hugo, Minott, Walsh). They need more rebounding and physical activity at PF in the starting lineup. Boucher (or Minott) can supply that better than Hauser.

[Who]

That lineup Mazzula used early Q2 when the team was struggling offensively is exactly the type of lineup I would like to see when the team is struggling to score. This is the best offensive unit they have:

G: Pritchard
G: A Simons
G: D White
F: Jaylen
C: Queta

But then Mazzula subs Jaylen for Hauser. It was already a small group with 3 guards one wing one big. Now you are swapping out a physical wing for a non-physical finnese wing in Hauser. Putting even more pressure on Queta. I think you are asking too much of Queta at that point. He needs some more help.

That lineup with Hauser at PF alongside those 3 guards and Queta is probably their best non-Jaylen offensive lineup. For a team struggling to score early in the 2nd period. You can understand why Joe went to it. Still, I'd rather have some more size / physicality at PF alongside that 3 guard alignment. Like they had initially with Jaylen. Boucher would have been a good option. Maybe Minott.

[A Future of Stevens]

That lineup Mazzula used early Q2 when the team was struggling offensively is exactly the type of lineup I would like to see when the team is struggling to score. This is the best offensive unit they have:

G: Pritchard
G: A Simons
G: D White
F: Jaylen
C: Queta

But then Mazzula subs Jaylen for Hauser. It was already a small group with 3 guards one wing one big. Now you are swapping out a physical wing for a non-physical finnese wing in Hauser. Putting even more pressure on Queta. I think you are asking too much of Queta at that point. He needs some more help.

That lineup with Hauser at PF alongside those 3 guards and Queta is probably their best non-Jaylen offensive lineup. For a team struggling to score early in the 2nd period. You can understand why Joe went to it. Still, I'd rather have some more size / physicality at PF alongside that 3 guard alignment. Like they had initially with Jaylen. Boucher would have been a good option. Maybe Minott.

I agree. If you NEED Hausers spacing, sub a guard for him. With our current roster makeup, Jaylens rest minutes need to come at the expense of the wing rotation, not the small ball 4.

[A Future of Stevens]

Did people really believe Brown was a #1?  I thought it was fairly obvious he is a #2.  He isn't a good enough ball handler, creator, or passer to be a #1.  And because he is serving that role, everyone else has to move up roles for which they aren't suited i.e. White is trying be a #2 when he is really more like a #4, PP is a 3 when he should be a 6th man, etc.

I think they may need to start Simons and let him serve as the #1 scorer.  He can at least create good looks for himself.  That moves everyone else down to roles they are better suited for.

I think Brown could be the #1 in super specific scenarios/teams. Like a Kawhi/PG13 primary scorer. The modern NBA has shifted to require #1s to have the traits you listed. Jaylen is a great #2 on the vast majority of teams. I think that role is tailored for his skillset.

 Huge, athletic 2/3 that can score on anyone? Lockdown defender when that's his assignment when games matter. Asking him to be a primary passer is a misuse of his skill set.

[Who]

NY was going even smaller in Q2. Shocking how small NY is playing. They were bailing out BOS small ball lineups.

G: T Kolek ... later Brunson
G: McBride
G: J Clarkson
F: Mikal Bridges
F: Yabusele

No true big man. Queta vs Yabu. Then Tillman vs Yabu. Mikal Bridges is a finesse SF like Hauser is. Bailed them out there. Played 3 small guards. Clarkson has height but he is skinny and doesn't have much of an engine as a defender or rebounder. The other guards are all small guards. No big guard like D White who does deliver defense & rebounding.

BOS' small ball lineups actually had more defensive & rebounding integrity than NY's small ball lineups. Especially when Queta was on the floor. Close to neutral when Tillman came in.

[Who]

In that Q2, Hauser had 9pts of BOS 14pts total. Tillman got a layup created by Jaylen Brown. The other bucket was a nice drive and kick by A Simons to D White for a 3.

Hauser keeping them close. BOS only down 10pts with 2min to go in Q2 despite their abject offense. Then NY go on a 10-0 run to end the quarter and push the lead to 20 at halftime.

10 turnovers at halftime. You cannot afford so many turnovers when you play small. The whole idea of small ball is "more ball-handlers + more passers = less turnovers". If you are turning the ball over, it just doubles down the rebounding deficit small ball creates (large possession deficits).

[Who]

Love me some Hugo! Great development today. Changed the game with his defense and energy. Just could not buy a bucket late.

I loved the way Simons was competing too.

Our offense needs work. Looked a bit better today, but the flow still isn't there. Weirdly I think Garza is going to help that.

Anything that results in less Tillman ... I am a fan of.

Agree on Garza being a miss on offense. He is the only big who has any skills on offense we have.