The Unexplainable Quality that Makes Kyrie Great … Explained

[DefenseWinsChamps]

https://treytalkssports.com/2018/01/06/the-unexplainable-quality-that-makes-kyrie-great-explained/

The Unexplainable Quality that Makes Kyrie Great … Explained
Although eventually the Isaiah Thomas vs. Kyrie Irving debate will go the way of the Eddie Jones vs. Kobe Bryant debate, the trade is fresh enough in my mind to notice differences in players and the Celtic team as a whole.

I loved watching Isaiah Thomas. I was one of the first ones on the Isaiah Thomas All-star bandwagon in 2015. I was one of the first ones on the Isaiah Thomas All-NBA team and MVP ballot bandwagon in 2016.

And yet, even with all of the offensive efficiency, personal accolades, and easy-to-cheer-ness (not a word, but you get my point), in my more honest moments, I knew Thomas was a really good player, but not a great player.

What that meant, I didn’t know, but I did know it was true.

Then Kyrie became a Celtic. His offensive efficiency in 2017-2018 was not up to Thomas’ level in 2016-2017. His offensive rhythm in our offense was off-beat, which was shocking compared to Thomas’ rhythm last year. He wasn’t moving the ball as well. He wasn’t getting to the basket as consistently. He wasn’t drawing fouls.

And yet, I knew Kyrie was more than a really good player … I knew the Celtics had a higher ceiling because it had Kyrie.

Why did I know that?

I think I’ve found the reason. Let me try to explain.

Thomas was not a selfish player, but he was a me-first player. He genuinely believed he could make the Celtics better by being about himself. That doesn’t mean he’s necessarily selfish, but he was so focused on himself, that I think he didn’t make other guys better.

Can you credit any player’s success to Thomas in his time with the Celtics? I know he averaged 6 assists. I know he set up Crowder and Bradley and Horford, but were they better players for having played with Thomas?

I think you could argue that Thomas was better for having played with a heady big like Horford and next to wing defenders like Bradley and Crowder, but I don’t think you could say they were better for having played with Thomas.

And yet, this year, I think you can credit part of the success of Tatum, Brown, Horford, and Rozier to Kyrie, not necessarily because of great open looks are good offensive rhythm or anything else, but because of another ineffable quality.

Confidence.

I know its a cliche word, especially when talking about sports, but I don’t think there is a better term for what Kyrie does.

It’s obvious that Kyrie has taken Rozier under his wing to make him a more confident and efficient scorer. Rozier tries to be a mini-Irving when his number is called. At times that has been frustrating, but other times he is swinging entire games for the Celtics.

It’s obvious that Kyrie inspires Brown to shoot confidently from three whenever he is open. I know Brown was due for a leap in production, but would it be this significant without Kyrie?

It’s obvious that Kyrie provides a blueprint for Tatum to play confidently, even as a 19 year old rookie. I’m sure he’d be pretty good no matter what teammates he played next to, but would he have been this good this soon without Irving?

It’s obvious that Kyrie and Horford have one of the best two-man games in the NBA. The eye test says that Horford is using scoring abilities that he didn’t use last year in the post and mid-range, largely because Irving is setting Horford up in the post.

Or what about the confidence that he shows in Larkin to ignite momentum for the team in key moments.

Kyrie Irving is making his teammates better, more confident, and more productive. His production has been pretty good (not great) this year, but its obvious that he is more than a really good player — he is a great player, entering his prime, that is making a bunch of other high-potential players better.

[Ogaju]

Great observation, TP!!

[RodyTur10]

I was thrilled with the trade from the start, but I think this is biased reasoning.

Crowder definitely played better under the wings of Thomas. Also there's few evidence that Brown and Tatum are playing so well particularly because of Irving. And it's really pushing it to give Irving credit for the play of others when he's not even on the court!

I'm not saying Irving isn't playing good basketball, but to be a real superstar he still has to elevate his game. In comparison to Thomas I primarily see the advantage on the defensive end.

[footey]

Confidence is what sets him apart?

Are you suggesting that Isaiah did not exude confidence?  C'mon.

Look, there are pros and cons to each of their games offensively. The big difference is that Kyrie is better rebounder and defender.  Also several years younger.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Confidence is what sets him apart?

Are you suggesting that Isaiah did not exude confidence?  C'mon.

Look, there are pros and cons to each of their games offensively. The big difference is that Kyrie is better rebounder and defender.  Also several years younger.

Perhaps I should have added something to the post.

Kyrie exudes confidence in his teammates. Thomas exuded it in himself. Both are special, but one makes others better.

If basketball were based on 2K ratings, then you could argue that Thomas and Irving are not that different, but there is a human element to the game. Personality matters. Pride matters. Leadership matters. Relational conflict matters.

My eye test tells me that Irving's personality and leadership promote confidence in his teammantes, which makes them better. Thomas did not have that element to his game, to his personality.

[mgent]

I think he flat out reads situations faster than everyone else, exactly like Rondo did but with more skills to pair with it.

You see it when it's late in the shot clock and he has to make something from nothing.  His first move will get cut off, and then the 2nd, and then the 3rd, but he always knows what he's going to do next even when it's less than a split second to read and react.  He NEVER looks flustered or unsure of where to go.

Isaiah probably had twice the confidence Kyrie does, but when you stop him from doing what he wanted to do (like CLE did in playoffs) he doesn't re-adjust the way Kyrie does.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

I was thrilled with the trade from the start, but I think this is biased reasoning.

Crowder definitely played better under the wings of Thomas. Also there's few evidence that Brown and Tatum are playing so well particularly because of Irving. And it's really pushing it to give Irving credit for the play of others when he's not even on the court!

I'm not saying Irving isn't playing good basketball, but to be a real superstar he still has to elevate his game. In comparison to Thomas I primarily see the advantage on the defensive end.

Crowder succeeded in the rhythm's of CBS's offense, not because of Thomas, but with Thomas.

If Crowder just needed open looks to be a better player, he would be succeeding in Cleveland, and he would have succeeded in Dallas.

[mgent]

Confidence is what sets him apart?

Are you suggesting that Isaiah did not exude confidence?  C'mon.

Look, there are pros and cons to each of their games offensively. The big difference is that Kyrie is better rebounder and defender.  Also several years younger.

Perhaps I should have added something to the post.

Kyrie exudes confidence in his teammates. Thomas exuded it in himself. Both are special, but one makes others better.

If basketball were based on 2K ratings, then you could argue that Thomas and Irving are not that different, but there is a human element to the game. Personality matters. Pride matters. Leadership matters. Relational conflict matters.

My eye test tells me that Irving's personality and leadership promote confidence in his teammantes, which makes them better. Thomas did not have that element to his game, to his personality.

Eh....I would say Isaiah exuded just as much confidence in his teammates.

And between the two of them, IT's probably more likely to pass it at the end of a game, while Kyrie's going to put the game in his own hands and take the gamewinner.

[jambr380]

Confidence is what sets him apart?

Are you suggesting that Isaiah did not exude confidence?  C'mon.

Look, there are pros and cons to each of their games offensively. The big difference is that Kyrie is better rebounder and defender.  Also several years younger.

Perhaps I should have added something to the post.

Kyrie exudes confidence in his teammates. Thomas exuded it in himself. Both are special, but one makes others better.

If basketball were based on 2K ratings, then you could argue that Thomas and Irving are not that different, but there is a human element to the game. Personality matters. Pride matters. Leadership matters. Relational conflict matters.

My eye test tells me that Irving's personality and leadership promote confidence in his teammantes, which makes them better. Thomas did not have that element to his game, to his personality.

Eh....I would say Isaiah exuded just as much confidence in his teammates.

And between the two of them, IT's probably more likely to pass it at the end of a game, while Kyrie's going to put the game in his own hands and take the gamewinner.

Maybe, but I get what he is saying. Part of it might be that Kyrie was the #1 pick, Rookie of the Year, and NBA champion, while IT is still trying to prove the world wrong as a 5'9" 60th draft pick.

IT was also 'King of the 4th' for a reason and it wasn't because he was so unselfish at the end of games. This was certainly not a bad thing for the Cs (who didn't love what IT did last year?), but Kyrie seems more interested in having his teammates do well - especially to open games. This maybe something he took from Lebron. Sometimes when Smart is in, he will just hand the ball off to him, go to the corner, and let the play unfold.

This could all be part of getting acclimated to a new team/situation and it could be that they are just different players with different skills (like Kyrie trying to avoid contact on his shot because he is confident he can make it while IT was always playing for contact since he was such a great FT shooter), but I generally agree that Kyrie has a higher ceiling and I feel better about giving a max to Kyrie than IT - although I hope IT makes tons of money somewhere else and continues to succeed against everybody except the Cs.

[Roy H.]

IT didn’t make those around him better? Nonsense. Crowder was a top-15 SF playing next to IT. IT carried our team into the playoffs without Horford, and into the Conference Finals without another all-star.

[GetLucky]

IT had to be great to be great. Because of his height he needed to fearlessly attack the basket on every drive, score 25+ points every game, and go-all out on defense on every possession to avoid being a net negative. What IT did last season was remarkable because he was great (doing all of the above to the absolute best of his abilities) on a night-to-night basis, and he even did it in two playoff series, where other players were playing great every night, too (he outshined John Wall, who was playing right near as well as he could). This came with downsides, however. Because IT being great was so important (due to team makeup), the entire system revolved around putting him in a position to do well. Most of the Celtics' offense last year were plays designed for IT, either with multiple ball screens as the PnR ballhandler or with him running off the ball as a threat.

Kyrie only has to be good to be great. Kyrie doesn't have to make you go "wow" every night to have the tremendous impact that IT did. He can still be a net neutral or a net positive if he scores 15 points because he is not at such an immediate disadvantage height-wise. As a result, you're now seeing plays called for other guys more often, with Horford being the most noticeable beneficiary. But you're also seeing multiple guys stepping up on different nights, including Brown, Tatum, Theis, Larkin, Baynes, etc. I attribute that to everyone being "in the flow" more, running a more general motion offense instead of a few set plays. It gives the supporting cast every opportunity to step up, and, more often than not this year, at least one person has stepped up every night.

It think that is the difference. That idea of "if our PG does poorly we're screwed" is no longer present; I think that is the "confidence" that you're noticing. There have been many games this year where Kyrie doesn't break 20 but the Celtics still win. I don't think that happened much, if at all, last year.

[Celtics4ever]

I think he draws more doubles and he makes everything look so easy.   He may be the bests I have ever seen at worming his way to the hole and shooting off rhythm, off balance, with the wrong hand, using angles and just improvising when driving.  He does not jump over guys, he just worms his way through them.   I am still amazed night in and night out but then I watch mainly Celtics games.

[mctyson]

IT didn’t make those around him better? Nonsense. Crowder was a top-15 SF playing next to IT. IT carried our team into the playoffs without Horford, and into the Conference Finals without another all-star.

Al Horford?  Please tell me you credit him with some of that?

[Erik]

IT didn’t make those around him better? Nonsense. Crowder was a top-15 SF playing next to IT. IT carried our team into the playoffs without Horford, and into the Conference Finals without another all-star.

I think crowder was more a beneficiary of a motion offense where he could get open looks and drives to the bucket, similar to what Jaylen brown is doing this year. He seems lost in the Cavs isolation offense because he has to rely on catch and shoot and he's not that great of a shooter. Soon when IT becomes the Cavs starting we'll have a better idea of if it was brad or IT.

That said, IT clearly made others around him better. I'm pretty sure most of OPs post is nonsense. The difference between IT and Kyrie is 6 inches, age, and a better contract situation, absolutely not confidence. You don't get to their level in the NBA without a high level of confidence.

[Roy H.]

IT didn’t make those around him better? Nonsense. Crowder was a top-15 SF playing next to IT. IT carried our team into the playoffs without Horford, and into the Conference Finals without another all-star.

Al Horford?  Please tell me you credit him with some of that?

We were a playoff team without Horford. He helped get us farther in the playoffs, but he wasn’t a truly reliable second scorer.

There are lots of star players who put up empty stats without elevating their teams or teammates. That doesn’t apply to IT.