Celtics suddenly overflowing with questions after ugly end to season

It's important for the Boston Celtics not to overreact to the final game of the season. But in assessing a 119-81 blowout loss to the Knicks that eliminated them from the playoffs, they should realize that it only reinforced major questions that already existed.

Many of those questions will soar above the surface this summer, as the C's are expected to make notable roster changes with the goal of getting under the luxury tax aprons. The days of simply spending every dollar it took to put a championship squad on the court are about to give way to hunting for value. President of basketball ops Brad Stevens should inspire confidence that he can find it, but he does have to find it.

There are questions about the top of the roster. Jayson Tatum is likely to miss most or all of the 2025-26 season after rupturing his Achilles tendon in Game 4 of the Knicks series. When he returns, he could come back to a completely different roster.

There are questions about Jaylen Brown, what he is, and how he fits into the equation going forward. He's an NBA champion, Finals MVP, and three-time All-Star, which can't be taken away from him. But the end of this series illustrated why he isn't quite a headliner on a championship team. He'd continue to be an elite No. 2 behind Tatum, but he lacks the consistency and pure skills to elevate to that top spot when called upon. Of all the Celtics' trade candidates, Brown would return by far the best value.

There are questions about the Celtics' other high-priced stars. Jrue Holiday (signed for the next three years at an average of $34.8 million) and Kristaps Porzingis ($30.7 million cap hit next season) are the most obvious trade candidates to cut payroll, while they'd be better off without Sam Hauser's superfluous four-year, $45 million extension on the books. Al Horford turns 39 years old next month. Stevens' biggest challenge this offseason could be to find pieces that deliver similar on-court value to Holiday and Porzingis, at a fraction of the price.

There are questions about the Celtics' play style. They attempted easily the most 3-pointers per game (48.2) in the regular season, but ranked only ninth in team 3-point percentage (36.8%), and in the playoffs it bordered on an unhealthy obsession. The approach failed them in Game 6, as they shot only 29.3% as a team from beyond the arc. They showed a profound inability to adjust or get back in a rhythm when the triples stopped going in, falling only deeper into the 3-point hole with increasingly ill-advised shot selection.

There are questions about head coach Joe Mazzulla's ability to execute this approach, or get the most out of it. Mazzulla rarely had answers when the 3-point barrage wasn't working. He displays an alarming lack of situational savvy when it's needed the most, an almost-pathological aversion to moving away from the 3-pointers for even a possession or two, as if it's out of an irrational fear of abandoning them altogether.

And finally, there are questions of what this Celtics team is going to be in the big picture for the foreseeable future. They rode the thrilling high of their 2024 championship by running it back with the same starters and key role players, most of which either regressed or deteriorated. What originally promised to be another breezy run to the NBA Finals instead floundered in two rounds, and no it's not because they lost Tatum. They'd rolled over against the inferior-on-paper Knicks before Tatum's Achilles popped.

And thus, the problem with this iteration of the Celtics came roaring back to the forefront at the worst possible time. It's great that they raised that long-awaited 18th banner, but they never faced real adversity on their journey. The Knicks made it actually hard on them for the first time since the Heat did it two years ago, and for the second time in three seasons -- the third time in four seasons, if you count the 2022 Finals against the Warriors -- the Celtics cracked under the pressure.

The C's shouldn't be in the business of moving on from true star players in the primes of their careers. So, the general expectation should be that in two years, Tatum and Brown remain in the fold, with a retooled roster around them. But what if another team comes calling and offers a similar haul that the Oklahoma City Thunder got for Paul George, which landed them Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and a fat stockpile of ongoing draft picks?

Stevens would be wise to at least take that call. But jettisoning a known commodity in Brown, while banking on landing the Celtics' version of Gilgeous-Alexander, would come with considerable risk.

The C's may have to take a number of risks this offseason, either way. They won't be getting Tatum back for a while, and they have significant roster decisions to make as it is. They have to figure out how to win at a high level while playing tough, smart basketball along the way, with or without Tatum or Brown.

Whether any of that happens with the roster and coaching staff as currently constituted -- any of them -- is the source of more question marks than anyone in Boston wants to admit.