I was posting off memory, they were actually 46-20 when they announced he was out for the year.
I guess he missed a 6 games earlier in the season before the major injury
"In Irving’s two seasons with the Celtics (2017-18 and 2018-19), he played a total of 127 regular-season games in all, missing 37 due to injury. With Irving in the lineup, the Celtics went 78-49, good for a 61.4 percent winning percentage. That’s not too bad, until you consider how Boston did without the All-Star guard.
Over the last two seasons, the Celtics have gone 26-15 without Irving during the regular season, a 63.4 percent winning percentage. This season in particular, the team was markedly better without Irving and went 12-3 when he was on the bench or away from the team.
And, while the sample size isn’t huge, the Celtics were also better in the playoffs without Irving. With him this postseason, the team went 5-4 and lost in the second round. Without him last postseason while the All-Star point guard was out with an injury, Boston went 11-8 and made it to Game 7 of the Eastern Conference Finals.
While those numbers give an indication about how having Irving on the floor negatively impacted the Celtics, they don’t paint the full picture about just how much his presence, which should have been a boon for Boston, ultimately has hurt the team."
Never seen a "Superstar" with so little impact in the Outcome of games. He gives you all the fancy stats, Fantasy league points and Bleacher Report instagram Highlights but takes away from ALL his teammates. Ineffective ass Terry Rozier shooting 30% took his spot and the team didn't even feel Kyries absence, BTW Cavs didn't miss a beat without him either, Made it Right back to the Finals the year he Left. When LeBron left the Cavs went 19-63 with the same roster.
The Celtics Really Are Better Off Without Kyrie Irving. Yes, Really. - InsideHook