I approve of this pedantry.

How about anticompetitive?

Firstly, the Wizards were seconds away from losing in 6, so one could arguably say they were even fortunate just to be in a game 7, much less winning in the third quarter. But secondly, and more importantly, the Celtics have only 4 players left on their roster who even played in that series, and who collectively accounted for only 38% of the minutes played. Saying "last year the Wizards almost won" isn't very relevant when you consider how strikingly different the Celtics will be this year compared to last. What is relevant is: are the Celtics better this year than last year, and, should they meet head-to-head in the playoffs, how do the Celtics compare with the Wizards? I think the answer to that first question is a resounding "yes." Despite all their tremendous ball-movement, the Celtics only had one player who could reliably create a shot off the dribble/get to the rim. And the one guy they had was 5'10" and was occasionally subject to being overwhelmed by aggressive, defensive-oriented wings. Now they have two players who can get their shot, who are normal-sized for their position (or large, even, if Hayward plays more at the 2). Their offense was putrid was Thomas was off the court -- now they can stagger minutes to always have at least one guy who can create his own shot on the court at all times (when healthy). They also had a very undersized backcourt with Thomas and Bradley out there together, which teams, including the Wizards, were able to exploit at times. Now their primary backcourt will have Irving and Hayward or Irving and Brown -- that's about five extra inches in height at each position. That weakness is gone. And to compare with the Wizards, the NBA is about stars first. I'd say you could make a case for either side of preferring Kyrie+Hayward to Wall+Beal. I'd choose the former, because I think Kyrie and Wall are a wash and Hayward is unquestionably superior to Beal, but I'll allow that some people think Wall is a different level from Kyrie, and might give that tandem the edge. But there is no third top-level player on the Wizards to compare to Al Horford. Porter is paid like one, but he's not yet, and won't be as long as he's such a low-usage player. Depth can sometimes overcome lack of top talent, as you could very much argue it did for the Celtics last year to get past Washington. But depth was the Wizards' weakness last year, and it is no less the case this year. It may take a bit for the Celtics to gel, but I think the distance between the Boston and Washington has increased. I question the trade for the Celtics, because I think it hurts their ability to get past the Cavs (Crowder was an important defender against LeBron, that draft pick could be used to make a major move, and even Zizic might have proved situationally useful if Thompson was dominating the boards), but I think the upgrade from Thomas to Irving puts more distance between the Celtics and Washington.

We know that Kyrie was a budding star before Lebron came back to Cleveland. He won ROY and all star MVP before Lebron joined his team. He won the Championship for the Cavs. I think he's motivated and is gonna be really good for Boston.