Post by Admin on Apr 11, 2019 18:54:00 GMT -5
Boston Celtics playoff preview 2019: Kyrie Irving’s future, Marcus Smart’s injury, five questions about playoffs By Tom Westerholm
(AP Photo/Darren Abate)
The Boston Celtics start their postseason run this weekend against the Indiana Pacers at the TD Garden. What are the biggest storylines? How will the postseason affect the offseason? MassLive’s Celtics beat writers Tom Westerholm and John Karalis break it down with five big questions.
1. Can the Celtics overcome Marcus Smart’s injury?
Tom Westerholm: As bad as 4-6 weeks without Smart sounds for the Celtics, they might be able to get away with it in their next two matchups. The Pacers are without Victor Oladipo. The Bucks are without Malcolm Brogdon. Missing Smart is never good for the Celtics, but if there’s an acceptable time, it’s prior to somewhere between eight and 14 games against the short-handed Pacers and Bucks.
Bojan Bogdanovic might do some damage without Smart there to check him, but if the Celtics -- even the Celtics without Smart -- are going to lose to Bojan Bogdanovic, they were never going very far anyway.
John Karalis: They can, but it’s going to take everyone pitching in. Smart is able to do things that other single defenders can’t. They’re losing a guy who usually doesn’t need help defensively, which allows other defenders to worry more about their guy than helping and rotating.
If they can play connected defense with everyone on the same page, then they can beat Indiana. If they face Milwaukee without Smart, they’ll have to do all that and get some heroic efforts from Kyrie Irving, Al Horford, and Gordon Hayward.
I’m still comfortable with them getting past Indiana. It’ll take a level of play we’ve barely seen to beat Milwaukee. The Celtics are not beating the Toronto Raptors without Smart.
1. Can the Celtics overcome Marcus Smart’s injury?
Tom Westerholm: As bad as 4-6 weeks without Smart sounds for the Celtics, they might be able to get away with it in their next two matchups. The Pacers are without Victor Oladipo. The Bucks are without Malcolm Brogdon. Missing Smart is never good for the Celtics, but if there’s an acceptable time, it’s prior to somewhere between eight and 14 games against the short-handed Pacers and Bucks.
Bojan Bogdanovic might do some damage without Smart there to check him, but if the Celtics -- even the Celtics without Smart -- are going to lose to Bojan Bogdanovic, they were never going very far anyway.
John Karalis: They can, but it’s going to take everyone pitching in. Smart is able to do things that other single defenders can’t. They’re losing a guy who usually doesn’t need help defensively, which allows other defenders to worry more about their guy than helping and rotating.
If they can play connected defense with everyone on the same page, then they can beat Indiana. If they face Milwaukee without Smart, they’ll have to do all that and get some heroic efforts from Kyrie Irving, Al Horford, and Gordon Hayward.
I’m still comfortable with them getting past Indiana. It’ll take a level of play we’ve barely seen to beat Milwaukee. The Celtics are not beating the Toronto Raptors without Smart.
2. How deep do the Celtics need to get to keep Kyrie Irving?
TW: I’ve long been of the opinion that Irving’s decision is going to come down to some factor that absolutely none of us saw coming, like the underrated vegan options in San Antonio. On paper, getting to the conference finals should be a pivotal goal. That’s far enough to make the future look bright with the promise of reinforcements from New Orleans on the horizon.
That’s unless, of course, Irving decides he wants to sign with the Sioux Falls SkyForce to get away from the rat race and hoop unimpeded for a while.
JK: They could lose in the first round, deal for Anthony Davis, and he could come back. However, if Boston misses out on Davis, I think a good conference finals run could be enough to keep Irving around.
It might take some selling from Danny Ainge, though. I’d say a pitch starting with “we’re not keeping Terry Rozier” is a good start. Maybe a promise to trade some of Boston’s assets for good bench help that’s very happy and willing to come off the bench.
Or maybe Boston puts together a magical run, they win a title, and Irving decides his life’s journey is calling him home anyway. It’s impossible to tell sometimes, but if I had to put $5 down one one of these boxes, it’s that he returns to finish what he started.
3. Is Gordon Hayward completely back?
TW: No. But he’s so, so much closer, to the point that he’s an unequivocal positive essentially every time he steps on the floor. He’s defending and distributing at a high level, and he’s getting to his comfort zones and finishing as a scorer. The 3-pointer is still yet to resurface fully, but as everything else returns, he buys time to rediscover his stroke. Even without it, he’s turned the Celtics back into a force offensively.
JK: Hayward isn’t completely back, but I think the version we’ve seen lately is the consistent version we’ll see throughout the playoffs. He’s found a confidence level and enough explosiveness that he’s fixed a major flaw in his early season game. Instead of driving with hopes of passing, he’s now driving in an effort to score. Now his drives have gravity, and pulling those defenders in opens up lanes to find teammates.
Also, his ability to draw fouls will be huge in the playoffs. There are few secrets in these long series. Everyone knows everyone’s plays and tendencies, but the ability to draw fouls, score from the line, and get teams into the penalty is a great way to build leads.
He still needs a summer of inconsequential five-on-five to fine tune some of his game and really find that next level, but what Boston has now is good enough to make a big difference.
4. How much like the 2010 squad is this year’s group?
TW: I think there are some 2010-ish vibes around this year’s team -- a disappointing regular-season squad that got a favorable playoff path led by a point guard who pines for big moments. Whether they respond to their favorable playoff matchups the same way as Rajon Rondo and the Paul Pierce/Ray Allen/Kevin Garnett trio remains to be seen.
JK: In zero-point-zero ways. The 2010 Celtics coasted because they were old and saving themselves for a playoff run. The 2019 Celtics underachieved not for lack of effort, necessarily, but a lack of effort in the right places.
This season was marred with too much “my turn” play from guys chasing numbers. The 2010 season was a recent championship team saying “we know what we need to do,” then going out and (mostly) doing it when it mattered. Sure, each had “disappointing” seasons, but there may not be a single reason for that disappointment that was the same in those two seasons.
5. Prediction time: How far are the Celtics going?
TW: I still think this team can get to the conference finals, so I’ll make that my prediction. Hayward’s sudden resurgence and Jaylen Brown’s hot stretch for the last few months make me wonder if this team can survive a Smart-less stretch. Boston matches up well against both Indiana and Milwaukee, largely thanks to Al Horford, and I’ll take the Toronto Raptors -- with their defensive versatility and star power -- to go to the Finals.
Is it ridiculous to pick the Celtics sans Smart over Milwaukee? Maybe. Could the Celtics beat the Raptors if they do? Also maybe. This is a strange, strange basketball team.
JK: I’m going to play my optimism card and say Smart returns in time to save Boston against Milwaukee. I feel pretty good about Boston’s ability to get to the conference finals, so I too will make that my prediction.
I can’t, in good faith, go beyond that. Toronto is too good and the home court advantage is too much to overcome. Maybe if I’d seen just a little bit more out the Celtics to prove they could win in Toronto, I could be pushed over the edge here, but I just haven’t.