2016-17 Celtics

[Rd11490]

People are starting to catch on to your ideas Crow.

http://www.celticshub.com/2016/12/13/se ... on-issues/

[Crow]

Thanks for the link. Yeah I see a number of points in agreement.

[Crow]

Currently 5 of top 6 most used Celtics lineups are negative. Two by a lot.

I have criticized use of huge quantities lineups for scant time. Another way to look at it: On average Stevens has used his 296 different lineups an average of 1.96 times for the season. Only 5% of his lineups have been used more than 5 times in 26 games. 174 of the 296 have been used only once.

[Crow]

I see moderate use of the biggest minute - good lineup. I'd bump that up 50% given the poor performance of the main alternatives and the hit n miss nature of dink lineups. Stevens has not closed with this best lineup recently (did not check before). Not sure the coach logic for that. High burden to overcome on this.

[Rd11490]

Can't close with your best lineup if one or more of the players in that lineup are out of the game with injuries.

[Crow]

That could be reason for some times past. But not recently to my knowledge. No major injuries right now.

I was looking at games where the best lineup was used at start of 1st and 3rd quarters but not at end of 4th. This not using your biggest minute, presumably best and often proved best performing lineup to date is pretty common for NBA coaches. It might make sense sometimes but probably doesn't make sense a lot of times.

[Rd11490]

Ahhh, I assumed you were talking about the overall best lineup, with IT at the point. When you had posted this, IT had missed the previous 4 games with a groin injury.

[Crow]

The Celtics guard rotation appears to have major issues. Bradley's on / off is -12 per 100 possessions. All-Star Thomas is -2. Smart is slightly negative. A common issue is using the 3 together- it is -7 and Stevens has given that small lineup 17% of total minutes. Fix it or drop it. Rozier is positive on / off. I'd might give him more run when things are not going well. Strongly consider a major trade involving one or more of these main 3. And try Jackson beforehand.

P.S. Thanks for the note about Thomas' recent absence. I hadn't noticed that brief out. In last 4 games though Stevens has hardly used all 5 starters in last half of 4th quarter despite their availability. Wins overcome this critique right now, mostly; but the fact remains he stayed nearly completely away from the full starters lineup despite their having the most proven and large advantage. Instead he gambled with way less tested / good on average lineups- and won 3 of 4 seemingly the harder way. But a review of the tape would be appropriate next step.

[Crow]

It appears Celtics / Stevens lost the last 6 minutes of last 4 games combined by a few points. So they more "held on" than won because of the late lineup choices.

[Crow]

Ainge looking for trade opportunities but "focused on long-term" and not that interested in "renting a player".

Words sound alright; but, Celtics cap situation will never be this good again with this core. In 2 years it will be dramatically worse. I'd rent a player or two while I could. And win that first Stevens series. Conference finals? Now seems like a good time to try. Hard.

[Crow]

I. Thomas 4th on ORPM estimate. Dead last, 448th, on DRPM. How is that going to work in playoffs? A Coaching challenge each way.

[Crow]

No trades. Tick tock on the salary cap and contention clock...

[Rd11490]

What would have been a reasonable target for them? Of the players they were linked to:
1. Paul George - you're opinions on him are well documented
2. Nerlens Noel - RFA, will get paid in the 20Mil/year range, results in real cap issues
3. Okafor - Destined to be a 1 dimensional bench big - doesn't help the team
4. Butler - according to reports the bulls didn't want assets, but core players so that they "expedite a rebuild" - takes celtics out of contention
5. Carmelo - reports suggest he would not have waived NTC to go to boston.

Why tick toc on salary cap? There is no way they resign Bradley and Thomas. By not making a move, they have signaled that they do not think this core can actually contend and content letting it run its course while developing a younger core of '17 & '18 nets picks, brown, zizic, and smart.

[Crow]

"There is no way they re-sign Bradley and Thomas"

Really? I assumed they would try hard to do that, as much as they trumpet them. More so Thomas.

Shift to a younger core of that? That sounds like an insane 5-7 year fantasy plan to me. But I just occasionally look at them.

if you don't believe in now and this core, Horford sounds like a dumb move, a move that over expected Durant, a deceptive move to placate fans or some high concept "culture" move. which ones?

Who would I targeted? None of those. I'll get back to you after I get into idea of running the Celtics my way.

[Crow]

If I ran the Celtics starting last summer I wouldn't have signed Horford to that massive contract. He is a very good player but just an ok plus value. I might have gone for Dedmon or Pachulia in ensemble roles with Johnson, Olynyk, etc. If I took over after July 2016 I'd be looking for best deal to trade Horford.

Celtics greatest needs are getting to foul line, rebounding both ways and fouling less. A different center would help with the first 3.

I would have been open to trading any Celtic asset beyond Thomas, Crowder and Johnson and I could be talked into trading them too for right price.

I would have spent my long shot chase time on Milsap. My more realistic work on players like T. Chandler, G. Dieng, Mason Plumlee, Lou Williams, maybe Bledsoe, maybe Galinari, maybe Hernangomez...

Fouling rate is on Stevens, rest of staff and players.

If I spent more than this brief time on it I'd add other suggestions. Maybe later.