The game tonight proves how flawed this roster is

[Rondo9]

I remember a playoff game last year where the Spurs were taking an absolute bludgeoning at the hands of the Thunder in the second half; Pop pulled Parker, Duncan, Ginobili, and Leonard, while the likes of Aaron Baynes, Jeff Ayres, Patty Mills, and Marco Belinelli led the Spurs on a furious come back just to fall short in the end.

It's hard to tell whether you mean G3 or G4 from the series. The Spurs were down in both by ~20 pts. In G3, their "comeback" never had them into single digits (they lost by 12 or something). In G4, they were down 20 with 3 minutes to go and lost by 9 after OKC's reserves gave some of the lead up. Neither game was close to being an upset.

In both cases, though, there were just 2 players off the bench that played 20+ minutes (and in both games, one of them was Diaw).  What I want to point out here is that while the bench can and should give you boost in spurts, no team worth their salt will rely on 4 (four) backups for the better part of a one quarter and two overtimes. If you need to do this, you certainly need better starters, because yours really, really suck.

So one game where the bench played to historic levels and now the starters really, really suck? Never mind the fact that it was the starters (and some of the bench.) led the team to victory on Sunday.

It's not that the starters suck, its that there isn't much of a discernible talent difference between the starting unit & the bench.  That's not really a good thing to have.   To me, it illustrates a team filled with average to slightly above average talent. 

Last night was obviously an aberration with the 82 points but there is that underlying notion to me that this team doesn't have a high ceiling as currently constituted.

The bench went crazy for the first time this year. I think the starters are very good since they always build big leads (only for the bench to squander it.) which was a common cricticism this year and now the bench does crazy good and now all of sudden the talent between the starters and the bench is not that big?

What do you honestly think is this current roster's ceiling? Late lottery?  1st round playoff exit?  Farther?

As it currently stands they'll most likely fall short of the playoffs.

And what do you think the reason for that is?

The lack of a go to guy and a rim protector are the main reasons.

[hwangjini_1]

I remember a playoff game last year where the Spurs were taking an absolute bludgeoning at the hands of the Thunder in the second half; Pop pulled Parker, Duncan, Ginobili, and Leonard, while the likes of Aaron Baynes, Jeff Ayres, Patty Mills, and Marco Belinelli led the Spurs on a furious come back just to fall short in the end.

It's hard to tell whether you mean G3 or G4 from the series. The Spurs were down in both by ~20 pts. In G3, their "comeback" never had them into single digits (they lost by 12 or something). In G4, they were down 20 with 3 minutes to go and lost by 9 after OKC's reserves gave some of the lead up. Neither game was close to being an upset.

In both cases, though, there were just 2 players off the bench that played 20+ minutes (and in both games, one of them was Diaw).  What I want to point out here is that while the bench can and should give you boost in spurts, no team worth their salt will rely on 4 (four) backups for the better part of a one quarter and two overtimes. If you need to do this, you certainly need better starters, because yours really, really suck.

So one game where the bench played to historic levels and now the starters really, really suck? Never mind the fact that it was the starters (and some of the bench.) led the team to victory on Sunday.

It's not that the starters suck, its that there isn't much of a discernible talent difference between the starting unit & the bench.  That's not really a good thing to have.   To me, it illustrates a team filled with average to slightly above average talent. 

Last night was obviously an aberration with the 82 points but there is that underlying notion to me that this team doesn't have a high ceiling as currently constituted.

The bench went crazy for the first time this year. I think the starters are very good since they always build big leads (only for the bench to squander it.) which was a common cricticism this year and now the bench does crazy good and now all of sudden the talent between the starters and the bench is not that big?

What do you honestly think is this current roster's ceiling? Late lottery?  1st round playoff exit?  Farther?

As it currently stands they'll most likely fall short of the playoffs.

And what do you think the reason for that is?

The lack of a go to guy and a rim protector are the main reasons.

youthful inexperience and inconsistency won't build up the win total either.

[Donoghus]

And both those comments kinda sum up what I've been getting at in this thread and I think the OP was getting at; the idea that this current roster is kind of a mis-mosh of parts and contains redundancies.  There isn't a huge talent gap between the top of the roster and the back end of the rotation. Starters versus bench doesn't demonstrate a whole lot of talent disparities.  IMO, to head in the right direction, they're going to have to add a top heavy talent or two.  Get that starting lineup to have more talent.

[PickNRoll]

Went back and watched the game with the Wizards broadcast from the 2nd half on.  A few things stood out.

• So many chances to win the game.  We really deserved to win.
• 3 blown calls and about 5 questionable calls favoring the wiz.  Wall definitely didn't get fouled.  Smart got jobbed after playing perfect defense.  etc.  The charging foul on Wall vs. Olynyk was really close.  Could see that one going either way.  Of course, on the Wizards blog they think the refs treated them unfairly.  I guess this is how bias works.
• Wizards announcers.  They've been around a long time and while they aren't offensive, they basically take a nap when the Wizards don't have the ball.  They could barely be troubled to mention a Celtic except when we scored they'd give us the obligatory "Green for 2" in the most monotone PA voice they could muster.  Really detracts from the game experience.  Every crew has a slant, but these guys seemed lazy.  They knew that Jeff Green went to Georgetown.  They mentioned Smart once when he got tangled up with Gortat.  And that was it.  Just weak stuff.
• Turner mishandles that rebound in OT with a bit over a minute left.  We go from up 7, game over, to a 3 point play for Gortat.  That was truly painful.
• I still don't know what the refs were doing during that replay.  A charge call cannot be overturned to my knowledge.  Is there an exception for the restricted area rule?

[2short]

I feel Ainge is a few trades away (redundant players mixed with draft picks) into making this a strong roster.  I've stated before with our cache of power forwards; sully is top but not that head and shoulders above kelly or bass.  SG is the spot now that has me shaking my head, bradley is starting but I am not seeing him be that much above, smart, thornton or turner.

[oldtype]

Here's the thing. Rebuilding takes time. If it was easy no team would spend more than 2~3 years out of contention ever.

We all want a "quick" rebuild, but in realistic terms 5 years probably qualifies as quick. It could be as long as a decade before we're title contenders again. Hell, for a lot of teams it just never happens. Accelerating it any further than that takes a lot of luck (which we've already had once).

I understand there's a lot of frustration because there doesn't seem to be any combination of moves that could shift us back into contention in a short timeframe, but that's natural. The Finals MVP for banner 18 probably isn't even on anybody's radar yet. (Unless it happens to be Marcus Smart)

[KeepRondo]

Went back and watched the game with the Wizards broadcast from the 2nd half on.  A few things stood out.

• So many chances to win the game.  We really deserved to win.
• 3 blown calls and about 5 questionable calls favoring the wiz.  Wall definitely didn't get fouled.  Smart got jobbed after playing perfect defense.  etc.  The charging foul on Wall vs. Olynyk was really close.  Could see that one going either way.  Of course, on the Wizards blog they think the refs treated them unfairly.  I guess this is how bias works.
• Wizards announcers.  They've been around a long time and while they aren't offensive, they basically take a nap when the Wizards don't have the ball.  They could barely be troubled to mention a Celtic except when we scored they'd give us the obligatory "Green for 2" in the most monotone PA voice they could muster.  Really detracts from the game experience.  Every crew has a slant, but these guys seemed lazy.  They knew that Jeff Green went to Georgetown.  They mentioned Smart once when he got tangled up with Gortat.  And that was it.  Just weak stuff.
• Turner mishandles that rebound in OT with a bit over a minute left.  We go from up 7, game over, to a 3 point play for Gortat.  That was truly painful.
• I still don't know what the refs were doing during that replay.  A charge call cannot be overturned to my knowledge.  Is there an exception for the restricted area rule?

I was ready to quit watching NBA games if the refs over turned that charge call.

[Capricious]

One good game by the bench and we get this thread?   

[fairweatherfan]

• I still don't know what the refs were doing during that replay.  A charge call cannot be overturned to my knowledge.  Is there an exception for the restricted area rule?

Yes, and as of last year they can review if the defender was set too.  http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/NBA-Instant-Replay-Situations.pdf

It's under #12, part 4.  So they really can reverse a call like that.  But it looks like they're only supposed to begin a review if there's uncertainty about being in/out of the circle, which didn't seem to be the case on that play.[/list]

[PickNRoll]

• I still don't know what the refs were doing during that replay.  A charge call cannot be overturned to my knowledge.  Is there an exception for the restricted area rule?

Yes, and as of last year they can review if the defender was set too.  http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/NBA-Instant-Replay-Situations.pdf

It's under #12, part 4.  So they really can reverse a call like that.  But it looks like they're only supposed to begin a review if there's uncertainty about being in/out of the circle, which didn't seem to be the case on that play.[/list]

That's just BS.  Charging calls, apart from the restricted line rule, are actually harder to evaluate in slow mo replay than in real time.  This is a terrible idea.  You can watch that John Wall charge 1000 times and be no better off.  The real-time context of the game is too important to those calls to watch it frame by frame.  I would have been p---ed if they'd overturned that.

I find it interesting that they snuck that into the rules.  None of Gorman, Scal, the Wiz announcers or myself had any clue what they were doing.  This one smells bad.  This will be the end of Tommy Heinsohn if they ever invoke this rule.

[kozlodoev]

• I still don't know what the refs were doing during that replay.  A charge call cannot be overturned to my knowledge.  Is there an exception for the restricted area rule?

Yes, and as of last year they can review if the defender was set too.  http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/NBA-Instant-Replay-Situations.pdf

It's under #12, part 4.  So they really can reverse a call like that.  But it looks like they're only supposed to begin a review if there's uncertainty about being in/out of the circle, which didn't seem to be the case on that play.[/list]

It's also last 2 minutes or OT only. Was this the case there?

[Celtics4ever]

I feel Ainge is a few trades away (redundant players mixed with draft picks) into making this a strong roster.  I've stated before with our cache of power forwards; sully is top but not that head and shoulders above kelly or bass.  SG is the spot now that has me shaking my head, bradley is starting but I am not seeing him be that much above, smart, thornton or turner.

I concur all is not gloom and doom.

[fairweatherfan]

• I still don't know what the refs were doing during that replay.  A charge call cannot be overturned to my knowledge.  Is there an exception for the restricted area rule?

Yes, and as of last year they can review if the defender was set too.  http://mediacentral.nba.com/media/mediacentral/NBA-Instant-Replay-Situations.pdf

It's under #12, part 4.  So they really can reverse a call like that.  But it looks like they're only supposed to begin a review if there's uncertainty about being in/out of the circle, which didn't seem to be the case on that play.[/list]

It's also last 2 minutes or OT only. Was this the case there?

Looked it up - it was with 24 seconds left in regulation.  So yes, it appears it was legit to review.  Still annoying though.

http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/playbyplay?gameId=400578594&period=4

[satch]

Have no opinion on Rondo. I do believe that Rondo or Coach Stevens should go. Do not believe there is a personality conflict but a philosophical one.