Official Game Thread: Hawks at Celtics

[REHawksFan]

56 minutes ago, Peoriabird said:

8 turnovers by your starting point guard will do that

Boston scored 6 points off of Trae's 8 TOs and 4 of those points were at the free throw line.  We all know 8 TOs is too many.  There's no need to embellish and act like the TOs kept Boston in the game.  The truth is the Hawks got lucky that Boston didn't capitalize on the points off turnovers.  

Overall, the Hawks scored 21 pts off 16 Boston TOs.  The celtics scored 15 pts off 14 Hawks TOs.  And 6 of those 15 pts were directly off of Trae's TOs.  The TOs just didn't hurt them this game and is 100% NOT why the game was as close as it was. 

Edited February 18, 2021 by REHawksFan

[TheNorthCydeRises]

14 hours ago, REHawksFan said:

Not gonna win many games with your star logging 8 TOs. Got a little lucky that Boston never really capitalized too much on them. Also don't win if Trae isn't 30+ tonight. So its a mixed bag.

My thing is he needs to limit the dumb ones but I understand he's always going to be near the league lead because of his usage and aggressiveness. 

When he becomes a facilitator and really focuses on taking care of the ball the Hawks aren't very good. They built the team around Trae being elite and he has to play fast and aggressive to be elite. That leads to TOs.

Take the bad with the good. 

The Hawks are 3 - 3 when Trae commits 7 turnovers or more.

The Hawks are 7 - 0 when Trae scores 36 points or more.

 

 

Superstar Trae w/high volume of points = win . .  even if he turns the ball over

 

[kg01]

11 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

The Hawks are 3 - 3 when Trae commits 7 turnovers or more.

The Hawks are 7 - 0 when Trae scores 36 points or more.

 

 

Superstar Trae w/high volume of points = win . .  even if he turns the ball over

 

This is interesting.  I think we all assumed his numbers would have to take a dip in the name of winning.  But I'm not sure if I want to watch Trae force-feeding Gallinari only to watch him bum-fumblin' his way to off-balance shots.

Give me vintage Trae (minus the obvious foul-baiting, which isn't as necessary as he seems to think) all day over that.

[JayBirdHawk]

Mavs, Spurs, Pacers, Knicks trapped Trae off the PnR aggressively forcing him to give up the ball, and in some cases picked him up full court, they also played lots of ball denial defense (even on the inbounds) which forced other players into having to make plays - Boston didn't do many of those things vs Trae, it will be interesting to see if they change strategy on Friday. Kemba is also expected to play.

[TheNorthCydeRises]

14 hours ago, Peoriabird said:

Y'all keep saying the key to winning is Trae putting up a bunch of shots.  Certainly if he makes them it helps but Trae was only +2 in this game even though he was efficient whereas Mays was +6 and he barely scored which tells you Mays was a lot better in other areas.  I sincerely hope the fate of the hawks doesn't depend on Trae being an efficient scorer because he isn't that type of player yet.

The numbers don't lie.

When Trae puts up 20 or more shots ( regardless if he's making them or not ), the Hawks are 6 - 4.  

 

Aggressive Trae . . . turnovers and all = A Hawks team that is at least .500 or better.

 

His teammates aren't solid enough for Trae to play like John Stockton.  Trae has to be Allen Iverson.

Trey Iverson.

[macdaddy]

4 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Mavs, Spurs, Pacers, Knicks trapped Trae off the PnR aggressively forcing him to give up the ball, and in some cases picked him up full court, they also played lots of ball denial defense (even on the inbounds) which forced other players into having to make plays - Boston didn't do many of those things vs Trae, it will be interesting to see if they change strategy on Friday. Kemba is also expected to play.

Seems like they were more concerned with getting crushed inside by JC and Cap.  Which they should be.   

[TheNorthCydeRises]

2 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

The numbers don't lie.

When Trae puts up 20 or more shots ( regardless if he's making them or not ), the Hawks are 6 - 4.  

 

Aggressive Trae . . . turnovers and all = A Hawks team that is at least .500 or better.

 

His teammates aren't solid enough for Trae to play like John Stockton.  Trae has to be Allen Iverson.

Trey Iverson.

Or Trae Iverson . . that shoots a lot of treys

[JayBirdHawk]

2 minutes ago, macdaddy said:

Seems like they were more concerned with getting crushed inside by JC and Cap.  Which they should be.   

Yes. Boston failed to address their Center position in the offseason, so they had to pick their poison.  

[bleachkit]

2 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

The numbers don't lie.

When Trae puts up 20 or more shots ( regardless if he's making them or not ), the Hawks are 6 - 4.  

 

Aggressive Trae . . . turnovers and all = A Hawks team that is at least .500 or better.

 

His teammates aren't solid enough for Trae to play like John Stockton.  Trae has to be Allen Iverson.

Trey Iverson.

Trae's turnovers are often on passes, I doubt there is much of a correlation between number of shots and turnovers.

[JayBirdHawk]

2 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Trae's turnovers are often on passes, I doubt there is much of a correlation between number of shots and turnovers.

Aren't most TOs, lol...you do have the dribble off the foot, stepping on the sidelines, getting blocked driving into 3 people to try and score, getting blocked type TOs.  But for most primary ball handlers, I would assume most TOs come from the pass.  I haven't looked into it though.

[terrell]

Rewatching the game in the 4th qtr..Why is Huerter always the guy who takes the ball out? He never makes a good inbounds pass..smh

[bleachkit]

1 minute ago, JayBirdHawk said:

Aren't most TOs, lol...you do have the dribble off the foot, stepping on the sidelines, getting blocked driving into 3 people to try and score, getting blocked type TOs.  But for most primary ball handlers, I would assume most TOs come from the pass.  I haven't looked into it though.

Yes all true. But I think the argument some are making that turnovers are good because that means Trae is being aggressive is a fallacious one. 

[TheNorthCydeRises]

8 minutes ago, kg01 said:

This is interesting.  I think we all assumed his numbers would have to take a dip in the name of winning.  But I'm not sure if I want to watch Trae force-feeding Gallinari only to watch him bum-fumblin' his way to off-balance shots.

Give me vintage Trae (minus the obvious foul-baiting, which isn't as necessary as he seems to think) all day over that.

See . . once again, just look at the numbers.

Foul baiting = Free throw attempts = points

 

When Trae attempts 13 FTs or more, the Hawks are 7 - 2.  The trips to the FT line are critical in getting the Hawks in the bonus a lot earlier than they normally would.  The FTs are also critical in Trae putting up a huge number of points.

The foul baiting, I believe, has a hand in lowering his FG% a tad bit, because when the foul isn't called, he's liable to miss the shot.   But the foul baiting is a very smart tactic by Trae, regardless if people like it or not.

I heard Eddie Johnson on Sirius NBA Radio yesterday, talking about Trae not being an All-Star this year because of the foul baiting and his lower FG%.  Instead of seeing that as a smart tactic being used by Trae to help his team, many people believe that it's a cheap way to get points.   This was Steve Nash's argument earlier this season.

Trae never gets credit for taking all of those bumps in order to get to the line.

[JayBirdHawk]

1 hour ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

His teammates aren't solid enough for Trae to play like John Stockton. 

This^^^.  Most are dependent on Trae setting the table for them.  They do not have the level of consistency and comfort, not yet anyway - there is a hope that those guys can hit the open shot or drive the ball and score or make a play but not the requisite confidence that they definitely will.  Hunter was becoming that reliable 2nd option that could create for himself or teammates, the rest - Na!

[JayBirdHawk]

4 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

Yes all true. But I think the argument some are making that turnovers are good because that means Trae is being aggressive is a fallacious one. 

I don't think ANYONE is saying TO's are good.  

That's different from saying you can 'live with some of them' based on him being aggressive.

[macdaddy]

17 minutes ago, terrell said:

Rewatching the game in the 4th qtr..Why is Huerter always the guy who takes the ball out? He never makes a good inbounds pass..smh

I don't know.  Make you wonder  how bad everyone else is at it.   Heurter definitely seems like he is one of LP's favorites.   

[bleachkit]

11 minutes ago, JayBirdHawk said:

I don't think ANYONE is saying TO's are good.  

That's different from saying you can 'live with some of them' based on him being aggressive.

What exactly is meant by the term "aggressive"?  That he's taking a lot shots? Again, I don't think there is statistically significant correlation between turnovers and number of shots. 

[REHawksFan]

36 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

The numbers don't lie.

When Trae puts up 20 or more shots ( regardless if he's making them or not ), the Hawks are 6 - 4.  

 

Aggressive Trae . . . turnovers and all = A Hawks team that is at least .500 or better.

 

His teammates aren't solid enough for Trae to play like John Stockton.  Trae has to be Allen Iverson.

Trey Iverson.

I obviously agree very much with this sentiment.  The numbers bear it out and have for some time now.  I'll just add that aggressive Trae - turnovers and all - is enough of a net positive that it carries the team to a win more often than not.  But that's not the same thing as saying the turnovers - in general - don't hurt the team.  They obviously do, just not enough to effect the wins/losses because he is so supremely talented and effective when playing that style.  

With that said........IF IF IF IF IF he could cut down on the dumb turnovers and keep the aggressiveness, then we'd be maximizing his effectiveness for the Hawks, imo.  He's always going to have - relatively  speaking - a lot of turnovers, but if he can keep his average in the 3.5 to 4.0 range, we'll see a really good version of Trae.  If he can get that number even a little below 3.5, he'd be really really doing well.  

 

[REHawksFan]

23 minutes ago, bleachkit said:

What exactly is meant by the term "aggressive"?  That he's taking a lot shots? Again, I don't think there is statistically significant correlation between turnovers and number of shots. 

I can't speak for everyone else, but when I talk about Trae being aggressive, I'm talking about playing with pace, pushing the issue at the defense, not deferring to other players, and taking control / being the leader late in the game.  

In regards to pace, last night Trae pushed the tempo and had a pace of 104.5 poss / 48.  No one else on the team even sniffs that over a long stretch of time. Most can't do it even for a short time. Trae did that over 35+ minutes. By comparison, Mays played 12.5 min and had pace less than 90 poss.  Trae is at his best when he's running fast (but that also leads to more TOs).

In regards pushing the issue at the defense, I'm talking about getting into the lane.  Putting the defense in a compromised position where they are worried about the floater, the lob, AND the kickout.  That doesn't happen when he slows down and dribble around the key and then defers to Huerter or cam.  No one on this team (and not many in the NBA) make the quick decisions and precise passes that Trae can make.  When he isn't aggressive, he loses that advantage.

In regards to not deferring, taking the ball out of his hands in key moments - even to make the "right play" - is just a bad idea.  I'd rather Trae take a contested shot or drive to the lane than Cam take a wide open shot.  And frankly, that goes for Huerter too.  That's not all game, but in crunch time, with the game on the line, Trae needs to be the guy with the ball in his hands.  

In regards to taking control / being a leader, Nate mentioned after the game last night that Trae did a good job of getting the team in a play even when their first look wasn't there. Aggressive (or assertive) Trae does that really well.  He gets the team organized and runs the team instead of becoming a spectator as we have seen in some other games where they blow a late lead. 

 

Edited February 18, 2021 by REHawksFan

[kg01]

39 minutes ago, TheNorthCydeRises said:

See . . once again, just look at the numbers.

Foul baiting = Free throw attempts = points

 

When Trae attempts 13 FTs or more, the Hawks are 7 - 2.  The trips to the FT line are critical in getting the Hawks in the bonus a lot earlier than they normally would.  The FTs are also critical in Trae putting up a huge number of points.

The foul baiting, I believe, has a hand in lowering his FG% a tad bit, because when the foul isn't called, he's liable to miss the shot.   But the foul baiting is a very smart tactic by Trae, regardless if people like it or not.

I heard Eddie Johnson on Sirius NBA Radio yesterday, talking about Trae not being an All-Star this year because of the foul baiting and his lower FG%.  Instead of seeing that as a smart tactic being used by Trae to help his team, many people believe that it's a cheap way to get points.   This was Steve Nash's argument earlier this season.

Trae never gets credit for taking all of those bumps in order to get to the line.

Well, I draw a distinction between "drawing fouls" and "foul-baiting".  I have no issue with trying to draw fouls but foul-baiting is something refs will stop rewarding.  We've already seen it start to go uncalled.  It has a shelf-life.