Offseason Mailbag Part 2
Better late than never!
It’s mailbag time!
On Sunday, I put out a quick call for questions to help kick off this week in the best way possible.
I always look forward to doing this type of post, as I never know what questions are going to get thrown my way, and it also gives me a feel for where people’s heads are at as we slowly edge towards the official end of the NBA season.
So, let’s jump in!
📬 Kenneth Paul asks: After the all-NBA teams were announced, I was surprised not to see more grumbling from Brown and others about the “waivers” that allowed Doncic and Cunningham to qualify. Was that lawyerly exception always a part of the 65-game rule, and were there any applicants last year?
📢 I’m not 100% on this, but I’m fairly confident that Luka Doncic and Cade Cunningham were the first players to receive an exemption since the 65-game rule was implemented. My bigger gripe is what good is the 65-game rule if a precedent has now been set for subverting ineligibility?
Granted, both Doncic and Cunningham had fair arguments as to why they should be included on people’s ballots, yet the door has now been opened for the rules to be “bent” in the coming years. We’re probably going to see one or two names receive an exemption moving forward.
Either you want the 65-game rule, or you don’t. I think it’s a flawed system, and there need to be some tweaks that potentially take context into account, or are built around multiple qualifiers.
📬 Chris Figee asks: I understood from one of your videos that it’s actually attractive for the Celtics to stay under the luxury tax next year as that gives them a lot more room the year after that. Given that free agency group is not overwhelming..shouldn’t we all expect Brad to keep the core intact and make changes around the edges, pursue organic development and use the trade exceptions and not much more ?
📢 I would assume this is from the interview I did with Yossi Gozlan of Third Apron.
“ So what I'm keeping an eye on is, I think they're gonna have to try to make these moves now. And I think, I recall Brad Stevens kinda alluding, ‘We need to get better.’ I don't think he said anything that ‘we're trying to be in a holding pattern.’
They wouldn't be able to actually go that deep into the tax next year if they wait to do these moves next year,” Yossi said. “So that's the challenge. And so you might be thinking, 'Oh, they're mostly running back.' I think they're probably going to be very motivated during this offseason at the trade deadline to make some moves, to make their moves now to get them ready for the following season.”
The attractiveness comes from resetting the repeater tax. Boston would remove the higher-price penalties that come with being subject to the repeater tax, effectively making it cheaper to go into the first or second apron from 2027-28 onward.
In order to do that, Brad Stevens would need to keep the Celtics out of the luxury tax next season — or at least have the team under it by the time that season comes to an end.
However, that doesn’t mean the Celtics won’t seek out upgrades. In fact, using the NTMLE (non-taxpayer mid-level exception) and/or the Anfernee Simons TPE would hard cap the Celtics at the first apron, thus making it somewhat easier to stay under the luxury tax threshold.
In terms of keeping the core intact, I don’t think it’s a necessity to avoid the repeater, but I do think that’s the most likely outcome. It’s going to be very difficult finding an upgrade over Jaylen Brown or Derrick White (I see Jayson Tatum as untouchable). Does that mean there’s no chance of a big swing happening? I don’t think so.
Stevens has proven he’s not afraid to make the tough calls when an opportunity to get better arises — see Marcus Smart being packaged as part of the Kristaps Porzingis trade.
Still, the most likely outcome, from where I’m sitting, would be to add a guard in free agency (it’s a decent FA class at the top end) and then either trade for, or draft, a big man, depending on the level of internal confidence surrounding Neemias Queta as the starting five.
📬 Michael Ouyang asks: One of the things we were missing this season for the first time in a while was a guard that could reasonably match up 1-5, this was a staple of our teams since Smart, then Jrue, and I think that aspect of the defense was a big part of why the Cs were so tough. This season without that element, it seems like it became one of the many flaws in the roster when the playoffs came. Do you think that’s a necessary component to a guard for this Celtics revamp?
📢 There are very few NBA players that are genuinely switchable 1-through-5 on defense. Even fewer of those guys are guards. Having one of those guards on your roster immediately provides versatility and optionality within a defensive system, which of course can be advantageous.
However, if you have multiple defensively versatile wings, along with above league-average defenders at the guard position, you can get by. Look at the New York Knicks this season. Their defense is primarily coming from OG Anunoby and Mikal Bridges, with Josh Hart splitting his time between the two and three. They’ve leaned on their size at the wing positions to help cover what they’re giving up when Jalen Brunson is on the floor.
There are multiple ways to build a championship-level defense. I view a switchable, defensive-specialist type guard as more of a ceiling raiser than the floor for what constitutes a championship team.
Take Jrue Holiday for example. He raised the ceiling of the Milwaukee Bucks and the Celtics, getting them over the hump to win a championship. Without him, both teams were still contenders; with him, their ceiling rose high enough that there was a larger margin of error.
If we’re talking about potentially locating another Holiday or Smart, then Dyson Daniels should be the priority. The problem is, I don’t see a world where the Atlanta Hawks are parting with him, especially after the impact he had for them last season.
We’re probably undervaluing Derrick White here, too. While he’s not a truly switchable guard, he’s still one of the better defenders at his position. The key to resurfacing that defensive intensity will be repositioning his offensive role closer to the 2023-24 and 2024-25 seasons than the increased role he had this past one.
So, to answer your question, I wouldn’t say its necessary to have a Jrue-type guard, primarily because they’re so rare — but it sure does help.
📬 Mo asks: What’s your take on why Joe Mazzulla‘s coaching seems to be so much more effective in the regular season than the playoffs, we’ve seen it happen now for a couple years running where the team kind of, I don’t know how to save this without sounding more critical about it than I really am, but doesn’t perform like it should under pressure. We can also see that he’s changing his coaching style somewhat when the playoffs start, is that the problem? Like, we all knew that this team wasn’t a true championship contender this year, but they should’ve been able to put away the 76ers, just like last year they should’ve been able to be more competitive against the Knicks.
📢 It’s a good question, and a hard one to answer.
In both the New York Knicks series last season and the Philadelphia 76ers series this past season, the Celtics had multiple ice-cold shooting nights from deep. For a team that’s built around winning the math game, those shot variance games can be brutal, especially when there’s a handful of them in quick succession.
However…
Even with shot variance, the Celtics attack and score at a high enough clip to keep the numbers steady over a multi-game sample size.
Even in terms of conversion rate, the Celtics hold up once the playoffs begin. There’s a slight dip in 3-point success, but nothing big enough to be a cause for concern. Across the board, they’re a picture of consistency.
The same can be said for their defensive field goal percentage (the opposing teams’ shot conversion rate).
So, I don’t think this is a numbers problem. To me, everything starts with an inability to win on their home court. Dropping three home games in a series is borderline criminal.
Against the Knicks, Boston dropped both of its home games to start the series.
Expecting a team to win a championship when they can’t defend home court is akin to banking on winning the lottery without buying a ticket. You need one to stand a chance of the other.
Then we get to Joe Mazzulla. I think he’s been outcoached in his last two playoff series. Nick Nurse certainly had his number. It’s not that the Celtics didn’t make adjustments; it’s that Nurse was ready for them and had answers. The same can be said about Thibodeau — although when your best player goes down with a torn Achilles, winning playoff games does inevitably get harder.
There are plenty of valid excuses as to why the Celtics have fallen short these past two seasons. Porzingis not being fully healthy, Tatum’s injury, a re-tooling year, the list goes on.
We can also point to Mazzulla’s system and only having one clear-cut approach. There has to be an alternative when the threes aren’t falling. Furthermore, that alternative has to be more than just going away from perimeter-based actions into drive and kick that ultimately result in a three or attacking a closeout.
Brad said it best: “We’d all like to see more dunks.”
Ultimately, I think there’s been an amalgamation of minor issues that have led to the past two playoff exits (with Tatum’s injury being a major one, of course). Boston needs to add more optionality to its rotation on both sides of the floor. Some of that will naturally come via internal development; the rest has to come via free agency and the trade market.
Even then, unless Mazzulla is willing to make some adjustments, that optionality won’t matter. At some point, you have to evolve, and that is the crossroads I envision the Celtics facing this summer.