Jayson Tatum nearly willed Boston to the NBA Finals. Rozier, Brown, Horford just didn't provide enough offense.
NBA Playoffs Thread
- Thread starter dukiejay
- Start date
Jayson did everything he possibly could, but he really was alone. Missed Kyrie and Gordon horribly last night. In the biggest game of his Life Jayson was a superstar... as a rookie. Proud to call that guy a Duke man.
Its indeed awesome seeing Jayson playing so well. I thought his only real mistake was chest bumping Lebron after the monster dunk. Don't poke the bear in a tight game for the conference title!
OFC
OFC
After watching the series, I think Ainge should find a way to move Rozier and keep Smart. If that proves impossible, he needs to move Rozier, regardless of Smart's decision.
.
Previously, I though Rozier had played too well to move, and that Kyrie should be shopped (NEXT summer). My thinking then was that Rozier's steady play, along with Kyrie's injury history, meant that Rozier was a better long term option than Kyrie.
.
The Cavs series has evolved my thinking on that one. Rozier, rather than looking like a long term quality starting PG (and a cost effective one considering how much will be tied up in Tatum and Brown), now looks like a guy that had a hot shooting streak. He reverted to the mean, somewhat, vs the Cavs. He looks like a top tier backup PG, one that can fill in for a starter, on an elite team. But I'm no longer certain he's going to be a consistent enough shooter/play maker as a starter on a title caliber team. I think a middling team would view him as great option at starting PG, and would give up some valuable pieces.
.
For all the young assets on the Celts, in the next 2-3 years, they have some big decisions to make WRT contracts.
.
Previously, I though Rozier had played too well to move, and that Kyrie should be shopped (NEXT summer). My thinking then was that Rozier's steady play, along with Kyrie's injury history, meant that Rozier was a better long term option than Kyrie.
.
The Cavs series has evolved my thinking on that one. Rozier, rather than looking like a long term quality starting PG (and a cost effective one considering how much will be tied up in Tatum and Brown), now looks like a guy that had a hot shooting streak. He reverted to the mean, somewhat, vs the Cavs. He looks like a top tier backup PG, one that can fill in for a starter, on an elite team. But I'm no longer certain he's going to be a consistent enough shooter/play maker as a starter on a title caliber team. I think a middling team would view him as great option at starting PG, and would give up some valuable pieces.
.
For all the young assets on the Celts, in the next 2-3 years, they have some big decisions to make WRT contracts.
Meh! After that, Tatum hit a huge 3 and his teammates forgot about getting him the ball the rest of the way. Tatum brought them back and instead of going to him, his teammates thought they would finally hit a shot. I liked Tatum's aggression and no fear. He and LeBron embraced after the game.
I get what Hart said about poking the bear. You never want to give the older experienced player more motivation to win. I liked Tatum not backing down, but I'd rather not see him giving Lebron a little more fuel.
For all the reasons you listed, I think Boston needs to keep Rozier. Especially because of Kyrie’s injury history. Their next big move should be to secure point forward type. Keeping Kyrie from having to distribute is his best suit. A point forward along with Tatum, Irving and Hayward night just be the final piece. Correct me if I’m wrong, but don’t the Celtics get the lottery pick next season that they were owed this year? A lot of good things happening for that organization.
Thought he was throwing me a pass there in the second half. Dude just lobbed it to the defense on multiple possessions leading to easy baskets for golden state.
There's been some awful and I mean awful shooting in a lot of these games. Sometimes I just sit on my couch and smh and can't believe these guys get paid millions of dollars.
The Cets get the Kings pick next year, unless it is number 1, which is a very real possibility. If it is number 2 or worse, the Celts get it. And they should use it on a big man. Horford is aging, and they'll need a rim protecting C at some point. So, basically, the Celts will take Bol Bol next year. Unless some other team takes him first, at which point things will get interesting. So the Celts are hoping that Cam, or RJ, or Little blossom into "can't afford to pass on him" wings, and that the Cets pick 2nd or 3rd (after which, Bol might not be available."
The ONLY move the Celts will make this year* is in regards to Marcus Smart. If he can be retained for reasonable money, they would love to do so. That might be a big if. Klay Thompson/Curry, Kawhi, and James Harden would HATE to see Smart defending them in a 7 game series, so I imagine the market for him might be more than the Celts can afford, given the money they'll have to earmark for Jaylen Brown and Tatum.
.
* Obviously, they'll be receptive to a blockbuster trade, but I don't think Kahwi is an option for them, for various reasons. They'd love Anthony Davis and/or KAT, but I'm not sure they'll be willing to part with the necessary pieces to get one of those guys. Tatum and some other assets would probably get it done, but I'm given to understand he is now untouchable. Brown is NEARLY untouchable, but Tatum is effectively off limits for trade purposes.
.
Given their contract situations, they won't make other major moves this year. They can afford Kyrie, Heyward, and all their young pieces, depending on Smart (Ainge might rob some other team in a sign and trade). What they have, with what they are likely to get out of Heyward and Kyrie, could deliver a title next year. They'd have to start making some hard decisions then, especially since Brown and Tatum now look like Max Deal guys, rather than near max guys. But they can stand pat for next year, and make decisions then. If they can win a title, they'll be able to get max return on trades. They can also see if Kyrie can go for the entire year.
Their 3 or layup offense is a lot like GT's option offense in FB. It works because it is such a change of pace compared to what everyone else does. In FB, it works because it is so different from what everyone else does, and individual's responsibilities are so radically different when facing it. Vs every other offense, the defensive front is told to attack the ball, wherever it is. Vs the option, players have individual responsibilities that must be honored, no matter where the ball is. In a week, during the regular season, scout teams barely have time to learn the O, much less get the defenses to adequately prepare to stop it. That is why teams like Duke and WFU have success vs GT, our kids are smart enough remember what to do. GT, and other option schools, don't have much bowl success. Because, with nearly a month to prepare, defenses can learn to stop the option.
.
Houston is the same. In the regular season, when games vs different opponents come every other day, if not sooner, preparing to stop Harden et al is tricky. In a 7 game series, with time off between games, opponents can better plan and execute a D that will slow Harden down. Which is what happened vs the Jazz, and vs the GSW. Houston is a good team, and Harden deserves the MVP he's about to receive. But the Rockets have a razor thin margin of error, as we saw last night.
I agree completely. Marcus Smart thinks he's worth more than 12-14 million.
If Larry Bird played today, he'd average 45 points a game.
The Rockets were 7-44 from 3's, and the Celtics weren't much better in their loss. Live by the 3, die by the 3.
Bird would score 45 a game and give up 50, sounds about right.
In 1984, NBA teams averaged 110.8 ppg. In 2018, NBA teams averaged 108.6 ppg.
I REALLY don't see where Bird is scoring those extra 18 ppg to get to 45 (In a MUCH more athletic league today, definitely a disadvantage to old Larry), but to each his own I guess.
Last edited:
The "I don't really watch the NBA so I'm just gonna complain about certain things" Power Rankings:
1. The guys are a bunch of overpaid babies!
2. All these babies do is complain to the refs!
3. The game was so much more physical back in my day!
4. It's too predictable. Lebron against GS again!
5. They don't play any defense!
Did I miss anything?
1. The guys are a bunch of overpaid babies!
2. All these babies do is complain to the refs!
3. The game was so much more physical back in my day!
4. It's too predictable. Lebron against GS again!
5. They don't play any defense!
Did I miss anything?
If Bird would give up more, offsetting his offense, then that's not much difference than the stars of today.
Plain and simply put, the stars of a certain era would do well in any era.
Guys like Bird, Magic and Jordan would be stars in any era, the same as Lebron or Kobe in any era as well.
Like I told you before, Bird was one of the true winners.
You don't have to look like a basketball player to be one.
Sure. Bird could play in today's era. He would score 25-30 ppg just like he did his whole career. Guy's today also get picked apart for their defensive liabilities MUCH MORE than they did back in Bird's era.
If you have watched these playoffs..the whole game is basically, one of the best players on the team with the ball keeps running a ball screen until he gets matched up with the opposing teams weakest defender, then he plays one-on-one. Simply put...if you are a liability at all on defense, those weaknesses are on FULL DISPLAY in today's league. If Bird was playing the Rockets, it would be ball-screen all-day until Bird got matched up on Harden or CP3. Yikes. Teams are no longer allowing the "weak-link" to hide on defense, and that was not always the case.
I like and respect Bird too, but I'm just saying.....
Like I said, no different than the lockdown D that Harden, or any of the other stars, play. It's cute ball now. The Rockets missed 37 3's. That's atrocious. Still, they lost by 9? Did anyone on that team not have enough IQ to shoot a midrange shot, or something?
I'm not saying the guys from the 80's or 90's were better, but to suggest just because a guy's more athletic equals a better player is asinine.
There's no way Bird would play this lackluster defense like Harden. Switch him and Harden and they beat the Warriors in 5 or 6. Harden seems more interested in the beard he's grown than winning. Some of those passes he made make you wonder if he's colorblind.
Harden, Curry, and Kyrie are considered the only "superstars" to be known as poor defenders. Bird would fall into that category, a superstar who is a poor defender.
Lebron, KD, Kawhi, Anthony Davis, Klay Thompson, Giannis, Paul George, Jimmy Butler (I can keep going if you would like) all are SUPERB defenders. So I really don't get your point?? Your saying stars don't play defense?? Would you consider Anthony Davis a star??
We can go back and forth quite a bit sir, but you may want to stay out of most NBA level conversations and stay in your Duke bubble. You clearly are very knowledgeable and passionate about Duke basketball, but the NBA??????????????
Just a bit of info for you J-will,before his back got bad,Bird was all N.B.A. defensive team in 82,83,and 84
Appreciate the factual information. Maybe others can help out, I’m going off of mostly podcasts and the occasional Classic 1980’s game on NBA TV, was Bird a good defender? Before or after the injuries? I’m guessing he was good before and then terrible after.
I ask because all the books/stories I read about those Celtics teams of the 80’s, really seemed like Bird was the weak link needed to be hidden in D.
Being athletic doesn't make one necessarily a great defender. You act like the guys today are superior to yesteryear's guys. Not true. There's probably 8-10 playing now that would be as good in a different time, and vice versa.Harden, Curry, and Kyrie are considered the only "superstars" to be known as poor defenders. Bird would fall into that category, a superstar who is a poor defender.
Lebron, KD, Kawhi, Anthony Davis, Klay Thompson, Giannis, Paul George, Jimmy Butler (I can keep going if you would like) all are SUPERB defenders. So I really don't get your point?? Your saying stars don't play defense?? Would you consider Anthony Davis a star??
We can go back and forth quite a bit sir, but you may want to stay out of most NBA level conversations and stay in your Duke bubble. You clearly are very knowledgeable and passionate about Duke basketball, but the NBA??????????????
Just because someone doesn't watch the season from start to finish, or follow trades, doesn't mean they don't understand the nba.
You are right about one thing, I really only care about Duke basketball.
After his back went on him,he was definitely a liability on defense,imagine trying to guard an NBA quality player when your back is in spasms,you could see the pain on his face,and he had to lie down whenever he came out of the game.his offence didn't suffer too much,but his defence did for sure
One of the reasons Bird got to be Bird was McHale and Parrish. McHale today would be the model of a face up 4 that could also slide over to play the 5 in small ball. He wasn't a three point threat then, but I have no doubt he'd be one now. He was a top level defender and passer. Parrish was the model of a mobile defensive C. No, he wasn't a unicorn (look how much success team have with those now). But he was an elite rim protector and passer. Basically a Rudy Gobert or Clint Cabella.
.
That Celtics team basically had what would today be the ideal front line. Elite offensive player in Bird, with multi skilled bigs that can move the ball, attack the glass, and defend all over the court.
Bird would be a top 3 player in today's game. Great shooter and passer and one of the best basketball IQ's to play the game. The ultimate competitor!
A healthy Bird. I think he'd take care of his body better today. Back then (which hurts to write) the players didn't take care of them selves, especially in the off season, the way they do now. I think we'd have seen another 2-4 years of "healthy Bird" if he came along today.
I agree 100%. I played college football in the mid 80's and am reminded of it daily. I've had back surgery and I need to have surgery on both shoulders. I wish we had the practice restrictions used today back when I played.
Larry would be AWESOME in today’s game. A guy who can shoot great has a place in every generation of the NBA and Bird was an awesome shooter. Man he was great.
Any player who tells his teammates the day before a game that he's going to score some of his points left handed, and then goes out and scores 22 of his 47 that way, is a freaking stud.
Just think how good the Celtics would have been from 87-92 had Len Bias not tragically died.
I really thought Len Bias was going to be the game's best ever. What a shame we lost him at such a young age.
Bird was a pretty dynamic defender in his time. Players in the 80s, specifically defenders, got by with more, too.
That said, Bird is often characterized as being slow and unathletic. Anyone who had the pleasure to watch him knows neither are true. He was a great player in his era, and would be equally as great today. Time doesn’t truly define ‘great’ players. And Larry Bird was a great player.
That said, Bird is often characterized as being slow and unathletic. Anyone who had the pleasure to watch him knows neither are true. He was a great player in his era, and would be equally as great today. Time doesn’t truly define ‘great’ players. And Larry Bird was a great player.
Guys from that era openly admit that their off season "routine" was mostly golf, drinking beer, and spending a few hours a week half heartedly working on their "skills." Usually in the form of some light pick up games or shooting drills. And these drills look nothing like what Kobe did.
.
I'm fond of saying that Michael Jordan was America's first "professional" athlete. I say that because he was seeming the first guy to realize that being a pro athlete was a year round job. He would take 1-2 weeks "off" after a season, usually in the form of a family vacation. Then it was right back in the gym. And weight routines from the Bird era to the MJ era evolved DRAMATICALLY. Bird would have had a stronger back to start with, and would have had a brutal core routine to further strengthen it today. Bird was very typical of guys that didn't take their offseason seriously. He didn't let himself go in the off season, but neither did he really spend the off months getting ready for the rigors of the upcoming season. No one did. MJ was the first to do that. Now everybody does it. Off seasons are spent working harder than the regular seasons. Bird, coming up in today's world, would be nasty.
Cavs 99 Warriors 98.
Lebron 48, 17, and 12.
When the Cavs win this series, all of the MJ versus Lebron comparisons can be put to rest, Lebron will officially be the GOAT.
Lebron 48, 17, and 12.
When the Cavs win this series, all of the MJ versus Lebron comparisons can be put to rest, Lebron will officially be the GOAT.
You're either still drunk from last night, or you put Whiskey in your Wheaties this morning...which is it? I kid, kind of.
I'm going with Warriors in five, although I wouldn't be surprised if it goes four. Had Houston managed to sneak by GS, then I think we would have had a little better series.
Put it this way....if the Cavs have any chance to make it a series (and I don't mean win, I just mean make it a series), they absolutely must win game one or two.