FanPost

I'm Really Excited For a No Kyrie No AD Team

Last summer I couldn't wait for the upcoming NBA season. I thought the Celtics were going to be a new kind of team that we had never seen before. A team with almost an entire rotation of guys who could, to varying degrees, shoot, pass, defend, and create. At the time Smart was still a poor 3 point shooter, Kyrie was a minus defender (still is), and Jaylen could get a little out of control with the ball (still does, but less often) They were something new- a team with high level talent all over the court ranging from age 20 to 33. There hadn't been a team like that before...

And now we know why. This team was filled with redundant skill sets that cannibalized each other, undermined the coach, and destroyed team chemistry. The young guys had tasted success and knew they were too good to stand in the corner and wait for a Kyrie pass. All of that added up to a team that was significantly less than the sum of its parts, and the least likable Boston sports team since the 2011-2012 Red Sox (who got better after dumping "stars").

Aside from the maddening inconsistency on the court the worst was the gossip and the drama. That nonsense may keep the league on the front page, but as a fan of actual basketball; I can live without it. Not every NBA player is a "what's best for my brand" team hopper, and I like my Celtics to want to be Celtics, and to value being a Celtic. Kyrie pretended to care. AD doesn't care. Thanks to Ray Allen for the good years and helping to get KG, but he never really got it either. I'm looking forward to the coming season because I want to support a team I actually like with players that are Celtics, not mercenaries.

Not only could next year's team be significantly more likable, but they could be better, a lot better. Here's why I think Kyrie leaving and AD not coming could be good-

-Think of Kyrie as a sunk cost. The assets used to acquire him are spent, and the situation didn't work. A lot of fans are falling victim to a Kyrie sunk cost fallacy. (Sunk cost fallacy- "Individuals commit the sunk cost fallacy when they continue a behavior or endeavor as a result of previously invested resources (time, money or effort)") Because we "invested" in him we are having a harder time thinking of him as a sunk cost, and are likely to continue digging a deeper hole by investing even more assets in and around him. Investing in something that doesn't work gets you broke. It's hard to let go of something you've already invested in that doesn't work out, but it's usually the smart thing to do.

- Context is important when looking at player performance. Oladipo with and without Westbrook is an obvious example, or with KD on the Warriors. The Warriors were better with KD, but they weren't 1 KD better. It seems to me that guys who were more complimentary players like Smart, Brown, and Horford did fine playing with Kyrie. Guys like Tatum, Hayward, and Rozier struggled. I think it hurt Stevens as well. Tatum, Hayward, and Rozier all played like guys who rarely got into rhythm and often forced things because they don't do well waiting in the corner. I think a lot of the Hayward disappointment was due to his fit. He was usually really good when Kyrie sat. It's possible that those guys all have much better seasons playing in more suitable roles. It seems unlikely that a bunch of guys, and Stevens, all just happened to have bad seasons. It seems a lot more likely that Kyrie was the common factor in their underperformance.

You need the right mix of players. In every "big three" one player ends up being the primary star, one the secondary, and the third becomes a super role player. Paul Pierce (lead scorer), KG (scorer/ defensive leader), and Ray Allen (focused perpetual off ball motion machine/ super shooter third wheel) fell neatly into those roles. They worked because they made sense together and they were at a point in their careers where they were willing to sacrifice. Bosh was the third man in Miami. KD and Steph are primary scorers. They work with Klay and Dray in their big 4 because those guys are best as an off ball shooter/ defender and a defender/ playmaker respectively. Smart, Brown, and Horford all feel like super role players to me. Hayward was as good and productive as Kyrie before they joined the Celtics, and he fits the Brad Stevens system better. Tatum has the potential to be an A level scorer in the near future. That could be a very good team filled with players who have been undervalued after a disappointing season.

- AD and Kyrie don't come close to "guaranteeing" a title. NBA players are reliant on their supporting cast, so it's almost impossible to judge them based entirely on playoff results, but any player with little to no playoff success (without LeBron) makes me nervous. If you subtract Kyrie's 3 LeBron years those two guys have played in a combined total of 5 playoff series and 22 playoffs games, while winning 2 series over a combined 12 seasons. (Reminder- these are as the team's primary star, so Kyrie's three LeBron season aren't being counted). For reference Al Horford has missed the playoffs once in 12 years, which was due to injury. He has played in 120 playoff games and has been to the ECF 3 of the last 5 years. He was the best player on most of those teams.

There are a million variables at work that make it impossible to draw meaningful conclusions from those numbers, but NBA history is littered with players who put up great numbers and never led their teams to any playoff success. These "Carmelo All Star" types are always over valued. Melo, Boogie, Love... they put up stats on bad teams and we treat them like they're stars. Kyrie could absolutely be one of those guys. Those guys are usually poor defenders, so AD probably doesn't belong in their company, but we don't KNOW for sure. I compared Kevin Love's 6th season (final year in Minny) stats with AD's 6th season (most recent full season) stats over at Basketball-Reference. They aren't identical (Love was a better shooter, playmaker, and rebounder and AD the much better defender), but the catch all performance stats (PER, Win Share, VORP) are really similar. I don't think AD is Kevin Love, but you can't assume a player's stats from one situation will transfer over to another situation. You also can't assume that great regular season stats on a bad team means they can lead you to a title.

- People frequently bring up that you need at least one "superstar" to win a title, but they rarely bring up what kind of superstar. Superstar wings win titles. AD has some perimeter skill, but he's a big. Kyrie is a small guard. The last big to win a finals MVP award was Duncan in 2005. He's an all time top 10 player. The last small guard to win was Tony Parker in 2007. Duncan was the best player on that 2006-07 team. Small guard Steph was the best player on his team in 2015. Pau Gasol was as important as Kobe in 2010. For the most part wings (big guards and perimeter forwards- Kawhi, LeBron, KD, Dirk) have dominated the last decade. It goes even further back that that. Over the last 40 years Kareem (with Magic), Hakeem (when Jordan was out of the league), Shaq, and Duncan are the only big man finals MVPs. I don't know that AD is on that level. Embiid and Jokic are the only big men who made any noise in these playoffs as primary stars. Jokic's best skill is playmaking, and Butler was the 76ers closer. Big men are often reliant on other players to get them the ball, and small guards (who aren't the greatest shooter of all time like Steph) can have their offensive value be undermined by defensive deficiencies. I think it's a bad idea to build around a small guard and/or big man, or to trade wings and big guards for a big man. The value of an excellent wing is just higher. In a perimeter focused pace and space league guys like Luka and Donovan Mitchell were able to change their teams in ways that KAT just couldn't.

Tatum might be the best 2 way wing prospect since Kawhi. He might not ever become the star we would like him to be, but he had one of the greatest playoff runs of a young rookie in league history last year. The potential is there. 10 plus years of Tatum sounds a lot better than 1, or maybe more, years of AD.

Anyway... assuming Kyrie leaves and AD goes elsewhere I'm excited to see what the guys can do next year. I think we might be pleasantly surprised.

FanPosts are fan-created content and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of CelticsBlog. Be respectful and keep it clean. Thanks.