(1) Celtics vs. (4) Cavs Second Round Playoff Series Thread

[beasted]

Jrue Holiday helped Milwaukee win a ring just 2 or 3 years ago. It's not that rare.

How often does a team win a championship with a pg-size two as their main scorer? It's pretty close to never. Championship is a tough standard and it's not relevant when we're talking about two players that would never be the best player on a contender.

I would not call Jrue a game manager type PG. He plays too much time off the ball and as SG. He barely initiates the pick and roll.

In recent times scoring PGs have had much more success.

[Airupthere]

Credit to Tatum, he's been playing with more intensity and consistency, not settling for the step back 3s, using his size more and being more dynamic on offense.

[Real Men Wear Green]

I would not call Jrue a game manager type PG. He plays too much time off the ball and as SG. He barely initiates the pick and roll.

In recent times scoring PGs have had much more success.

How is Garland a game manager of Holiday is not? Garland scores more points, takes more shots.

[beasted]

How is Garland a game manager of Holiday is not? Garland scores more points, takes more shots.

To be honest I don't think he actually is. I think Garland is a low- scoring scoring PG, but you seemed to be alluding to him being closer to a traditional game manager PG because you say he's easier is easier to build around since he's not as trigger happy as Mitchell. That's why I classified him as that type for the sake of the debate around fitting a team around a game manager.

Long and short of it is, whatever you classify Mitchell or Garland as, Mitchell is the easier of the two to build around, and fit is irrelevant in my book. Finding elite scorers is hard and expensive. Finding guys who can pass a little and have enough size to defend either guard positions is relatively easy. Finding a back-court partner for a combo guard 6'3" Mitchell isn't as difficult as you've alluded to.

Once you actually account for Garland earning the max, it just becomes a no-brainer.

[Real Men Wear Green]

To be honest I don't think he actually is. I think Garland is a low- scoring scoring PG, but you seemed to be alluding to him being closer to a traditional game manager PG because you say he's easier is easier to build around since he's not as trigger happy as Mitchell. That's why I classified him as that type for the sake of the debate around fitting a team around a game manager.

Long and short of it is, whatever you classify Mitchell or Garland as, Mitchell is the easier of the two to build around, and fit is irrelevant in my book. Finding elite scorers is hard and expensive. Finding guys who can pass a little and have enough size to defend either guard positions is relatively easy. Finding a back-court partner for a combo guard 6'3" Mitchell isn't as difficult as you've alluded to.

Once you actually account for Garland earning the max, it just becomes a no-brainer.

Again I said "fit in" not"build around." Because Garland has typical size for his position you don't have to make adjustments to cover up for him being undersized most of the time. Imagine if the Celtics were making adjustments and decided to go big, sliding Jaylen Brown over to SG. One of Brown's favorite sites is to rise up over the defender from just inside the paint for an easy (for him) jumper. Can Mitchell deal with his size? No. Any team that builds around Mitchell is accepting a flaw in their defense for the sake of what he does as a scorer. No I have said that O would rather have Mitchell, he's worth it and I think a he gets older he may play point guard a lurks more. But if you have a big scoring two you can have a field day at his expense.

[90sgoat]

These Cavs are playing much better this series than against Orlando right?

[beasted]

Again I said "fit in" not"build around." Because Garland has typical size for his position you don't have to make adjustments to cover up for him being undersized most of the time. Imagine if the Celtics were making adjustments and decided to go big, sliding Jaylen Brown over to SG. One of Brown's favorite sites is to rise up over the defender from just inside the paint for an easy (for him) jumper. Can Mitchell deal with his size? No. Any team that builds around Mitchell is accepting a flaw in their defense for the sake of what he does as a scorer. No I have said that O would rather have Mitchell, he's worth it and I think a he gets older he may play point guard a lurks more. But if you have a big scoring two you can have a field day at his expense.

I think the disconnect here for me is that I don't understand your argument from the perspective that I see Mitchell as much more capable as a PG if his back court mate' height is an issue. You're speaking of Mitchell as though he's a Cam Thomas type player that is 6'3" and has no play making skills.

For me, the best position is Mitchell at PG and a ball handling combo SG with sufficient height to defend either guard position.

Through that lens it makes Mitchell the better fit everywhere, because it's fairly easy to find SGs of the type I'm describing.

[Real Men Wear Green]

Mitchell night be able to play point guard but he's always started alongside a point guard, a history that includes two different franchises. It's his coaches that have decided he's a 2.

[Wally450]

Mitchell not expected to play tonight in G5. Celtics need to close this out and not mess around having to go back to Cleveland.

[beasted]

Mitchell night be able to play point guard but he's always started alongside a point guard, a history that includes two different franchises. It's his coaches that have decided he's a 2.

But again, if I need a tall "PG", those are relatively easy to find. I'd rather a 6'3" SG and 6'4"+ PG than a 6'1" PG AND A 6'4" SG. Fitting is no more difficult because having a PG as small as 6'1" without much bulk brings its own challenges on switches.

[FultzNationRISE]

Niang is legitimately obese

[SATAN]

That wasn't worth a tech call.

[Wally450]

That wasn't worth a tech call.

Most emotion Tatum has shown all postseason lol

[Real Men Wear Green]

But again, if I need a tall "PG", those are relatively easy to find. I'd rather a 6'3" SG and 6'4"+ PG than a 6'1" PG AND A 6'4" SG. Fitting is no more difficult because having a PG as small as 6'1" without much bulk brings its own challenges on switches.

There aren't many 6'5+ good point guards, actually. Guys that big are far more likely to develop as 2s.

[Axe]

Without mitchell, this series has become unwatchable imo. But i do hope the Cs will be more dominant in the coming rounds than their 60-win season would suggest.