Now That Is Celtics Basketball
by Jeff Clark on Jan 22, 2010 10:24 PM EST
in Boston Celtics Games
Email
PrintIt doesn't matter how many times Ray Allen misses. The next one is always going in. He hit a clutch shot to give us the lead at the end of overtime. Just like old times. Love it.
In fact, with KG back, it seemed like a lot of great themes that we know and love were back after being missing for the last few weeks. Its amazing what a difference one man can make. Somehow, Garnett's presence seemed to make everything fall into place.
- Obviously the defense kicked it up a notch.
- Spacing and ball movement opened up some lanes for Pierce to attack the basket.
- Sheed was able to play off the bench, taking more advantage of the 2nd unit to get some early points.
- The Rondo - KG connection is really something to watch. They are developing a bond on the court.
- If you thought we had injury problems, the Blazers have had it worse. But they keep on playing excellent basketball. Hats off to them.
110 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Quoting Derek in the chat room....
…..Thanks Be to TA.
Apparently TA is a deity to some. Regardless, quite the hustle on that loose ball Tony.
When Perk was asked what he thought of Howard winning the gold medal this summer, he responded: "What’s his impression of me after I won a ring?"
Refs get paid for this?
Some of the worst officiating we’ve seen in a while. Really unbelievable that one crew could make so many (verified) mistakes.
Nevertheless, KG made all the difference. The answer is definitely in. It’s true, KG’s return, alone, can turn this team around. (Notice – no hint of a 3rd quarter collapse.)
have to agree
the officials were bad. they bought a lot of flops and put most of the celtics starting lineup in serious foul trouble. my guess is that they felt bad that portland only had three guys on their bench… what happened to 10 day contracts? does portland not believe in them?
No roster spots available
We aren’t interested in waiving guys like Oden, Outlaw, Batum, Przybilla, etc, to add a ten day contract. Our end of bench guys are healthy, it’s the good players that you don’t want to cut that are out.
#10 #25 #52 #88 -- #5 is back!
LOL
I thought only Cavs fans complained AFTER a win!
"Memphis then used a pick-and-roll to get Conley free and he drove past Shaquille O'Neal for the go-ahead layup."
two calls in particular were bad
The first foul on ’Sheed was complete vapor.
The offensive foul on Tony Allen (his 2nd?) as he was driving outside the paint and the defender was in constant, back-pedaling motion the whole time.
Beyond that, most of the Celtic fouls were at least technically ‘deserved’ – even if some were ticky-tack.
But the real problem is that the refs seemed to refuse to call any fouls on the Blazers. It was almost comical. Sheed got hammered and checked like it was a hockey game an no call was made. LaMarcus Aldridge was moving on his picks all night and not once got called for it. Miller was constantly running his man into Aldridge on a moving screen and that was getting him free to take wide open shots.
Personal Foul Totals:
Boston – 28
Portland – 18
All that said, it wasn’t the ref calls that kept the Blazer’s in the game. It was the unbelievable number of missed, wide-open shots by the Celtics. I was at the game and could not believe how many shots went in the hoop and right back out. It was worse than my putting in golf!! I was starting to think the hoop was cursed! Fortunately the curse finally wore off in time for Ray’s big 3 point shot at the end.
There were so many, I lose track
Not worth reviewing the game to list them all. One stands out in my memory… the foul on Rondo for tripping what’s-his-name, when he clearly, on replay, tripped over his teammate’s foot. Just one of several ridiculopathies.
Just remembered another bogus call
Webster KICKS HIS LEG OUT on a 3-point attempt, hits Paul whizzing by… and gets the call. The league has SPECIFICALLY instructed refs not to call those fouls. And yet, there it was. 3 FTs.
Oh yeah, i almost forgot about that one.
That was indeed truly bogus. Paul sat on the table in the corner that he crashed into looking perplexed at the ref for a few seconds on that call as if to say, “You gots to be kiddin’ me!??!!”.
Best stat
The best stat line tonite besides the score is 0 flagrants and 0 technicals.
We Needed This...
May not have been the prettiest win, but I think it’s safe to say we’ll all take it! KG’s presence makes all the difference. Actually thought Doc did a good job with the subsitutions tonight, especially due to foul trouble,
by faithfulcelticfan34 on Jan 22, 2010 10:31 PM EST reply actions
Perk on the perimeter
Did you notice how many times Perk found himself guarding a man on the perimeter? Handled it pretty well, I thought. Looks like Doc took the lesson of the Mavs game to heart (where he failed to use Perk on Dirk, as he should have). Good! (This was a point of argument here… settled now, I think.)
Best defensive game by Perk in weeks.
But unfortunately he got in quick foul trouble and only ended up playing 27 minutes (including a chunk of overtime).
But yeah – i’ve complained a lot about Perks terrible perimeter defense lately and he really showed big improvement tonight in that area.
I disagree, though, about the idea that Perk would have been a good one to put on Dirk. As well as Perk played tonight, he is still too slow laterally to keep up with someone like Dirk on the perimeter.
If you watch the game film for tonight, you should see that Perk’s perimeter efforts are largely radial, not lateral. That is, he is responsible for picking up the perimeter shooter who breaks free because of the double. This is a radial step out to contest and possibly smother in a double to try to force a turnover, but then should be followed by a quick return to the post. In many recent games Perk has been late in picking up and stepping out to contest. Tonight he did a great job at this.
But that is NOT the trying to do full perimeter coverage on a laterally moving big like Nowitski. For that you want someone like KG, Sheed or Scal who actually know how to do that. And really, KG is the only guy of those who really stands a chance to stop Nowitski cold. As I said before, the right decision in that game would have been to NOT try to stop Dirk and instead keep Perk and Sheed at home in the paint – because what killed us was not Dirk’s 37 (or whatever it was) points. It was all the points in paint that his teammate’s scored at will. They were running down the middle of the paint at will all night in that game.
We agree
… that one good approach would have been the one in your last paragraph.
As for covering Dirk… I don’t know… you seem to think he’s quick or something. To me, Dirk is a slow clod… with a great shot. I think, though, that Doc took that game to heart, and is prepping Perk for some time in the future when he might be called upon to guard the likes of Dirk. We’ll see…. Of course, it might never come up now that KG and Sheed are both available.
All in all, it was fun to see Perk expand his game like that. Now if he also learns to hold on to that ball….. (not a problem tonight, yay!)
The two Allen came through in OT
Two huge and beautiful plays in a row, beautiful.
Never go away from Ray in the clutch!
It was really hard to get this win but I hope it starts a winning streak and gives us momentum and killer instinct back.
Yeah, the OT was definitely the Allen Brothers Show
Both Tony and Ray also played great defense all night. Both were amazing at man coverage and both created huge transition plays with defensive plays multiple times during the game.
On offense, Ray was killin’ me with the number of shots that went in and out. I can’t blame him for takin’ the shots – he was wide open all night and the shots looked beautiful until they would rim deep in and out again and again! Very frustrating. If just a couple of those had sunk, the game would have been an easy win. It wasn’t just Ray either – Eddie, Sheed and Rondo also had multiple shots (including LAYUPS!!!) sink deep into the hoop and then rim out!
Tony played one of the best games I’ve seen him play all year. There was a point where I said to my buddy – “I really would like to see them send Tony to the hoop a lot right now.” and they proceeded to do just that and it worked every time. Then they stopped doing it for a while – not sure why. Tony was penetrating at will. He was just way too fast for Portland to stop.
But mainly, Tony’s defense was superb.
Overall the team played very good defense – the blazers were taking awkward, ugly shots all night except when they used the moving screens to free Miller – the reason the C’s didn’t win easily was the unbelievable number of shots that just wouldn’t sink in the net.
Great win!
This was a great win for us, hats off to Protland for making it a game though.
Great point but you know what else is beautiful to watch the chemistry between Rondo and Pierce that’s a beautiful connection as well.Congrats Boston
you got lucky and beat a blazer team with more than half of their players out. You guys are goooooooood hahahahahahhahahaha good game!!!!!!
nuff respect due
Blazers played a great game with a lot of guys out
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
Thank you for being the only person to give the Blazers any credit.
Everybody else is bitching about fouls.
by Sabonis4Ever on Jan 23, 2010 1:22 AM EST up reply actions
enjoy having middling playoff team while you can...
before you lose Aldridge and/or Roy to LA, Miami, or New York.
how?
we got them locked up for a lot of years
but good win Cs
by L-TrainFTW! on Jan 22, 2010 10:53 PM EST up reply actions
when the demand to be traded
clearly. maybe roy will demand to go to houston so he can win a title there, like clyde the glide.
Portland is on the way up
they’ll be solid for years if not title contenders
looking forward to when they knock off the Lakers (but not before we beat them one more time in the Finals)
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
and I think we got a pretty good future with our young guys
we just gotta get back healthy and we’ll do fine
of course we still gotta prove ourselves in the playoffs before we talk about any titles
by L-TrainFTW! on Jan 22, 2010 11:02 PM EST up reply actions
i think you’re thinking about the Memphis’ stars?
by cheekmeister on Jan 22, 2010 11:04 PM EST up reply actions
You're right
It was a close game, and your guys are awesome playing with so many people out. Imagine how tough that team will be when at full strength.
seriously though, we know they played just enough to win. props to the blazers! they’ll meet again on the 19th and by then both teams will be different.
by cheekmeister on Jan 22, 2010 11:03 PM EST up reply actions
Hey - no apologize or caveates needed
Portland is 26-18 and a damn good team.
I think that if they were at full strength health-wise they’d be a serious threat to be top 3 in the West, if not in the whole NBA.
Ray was horrible, let's face it
He airballed a 3, missed layups, looked confused, and even missed critical FTs. His line tonight’s: 21% FG%, 50% FT%, 20% 3Pt%. In the past 2 games, he’s 1-9 from 3-pt territory. He’s clearly in a horrible slump.
And why does Ray keep blowing into his hands, like they’re cold? Something’s not right there… weird stuff.
Maybe he needs a break. Doc ran him another 42-43 minutes tonight. Why Doc keeps playing him so much, when he sucks SO badly, is hard to fathom.
KG though…is THE MAN. He makes all the difference, it’s very clear.
I don’t think it’s very fair to say that Ray “sucks SO badly,” Ray hasn’t been playing great lately, but I would never say Ray Allen sucks. He’s a future hall of famer. You can’t expect him to still be the same huge super star every night, he’s not the same player. If he didn’t hit that 3 tonight, probably wouldn’t have won.
by faithfulcelticfan34 on Jan 22, 2010 10:42 PM EST up reply actions
It's not just tonight
It has been about 5 games now. Big, big slump. It’s reasonable to think that it’s because of Doc’s overplaying… he routinely plays 40+. Time for him to get “injured”… or whatever. Is that a hangnail I see???
Ray is the second leading scorer on this team
There is no doubt Ray is in a slump. Aside from his airball 3 (which Pierce had as well), a lot of Ray’s shot could have easily gone in. I don’t think minutes are a huge factor for ray right now. I wouldn’t mind seeing him play less, but with all the injuries lately, it was hard for him not to play so much.
by faithfulcelticfan34 on Jan 22, 2010 10:52 PM EST up reply actions
Much agreed
He didn’t look on his game tonight, but darn it he came through in the clutch like he has many times. He’s not getting any younger and he will never be the same high scoring superstar that he once was again. That being said I’ll still take an aging Ray Allen in the clutch, than no Ray Allen at all.
by NESportsFan on Jan 22, 2010 10:47 PM EST up reply actions
Never say Ray sucks?
I.e., never tell the truth? Don’t understand that one. It is what it is. The man is in a deep dark slump. Ignore it at your peril.
Agree
Just because we love our players, their is nothing wrong with a honest assessment of their play and fair criticism.
I agree Rays shooting this year has been hot and cold and very streaky this year.
Add to the fact House is struggling hitting from outside backing Ray up and I think that the shooting at our shooting guard position is a area of concern.
Hopefully Ray and House will heat it up soon and for the rest of the season into the playoffs , because we are going to need both their outside shooting skills to stretch the floor and open things up for all the other guys on the court.
I totally agree that Ray is in slump, as is Eddie. But, I just didn’t think it was fair to say Ray sucks so bad.
by faithfulcelticfan34 on Jan 22, 2010 11:07 PM EST up reply actions
Ray and Eddie
Combined to be 5-21 from the field tonight — Ray 3-14 and Eddie 2-7. This has been going on for several games. Unless at least one of these guys comes around, this team is going nowhere, KG or no KG. Happy they won, but the fact they had to go to overtime to beat a team with 8 players says a lot to me.
The streaky hot and cold
shooting of Allen and House this year is a big area of concern I think, since both players have been in a shooting funk all season long.
We need better more reliable shooting from both Allen and House, especially heading into the playoffs when the game becomes more of a 1/2 court game.
If House does not snap out of it by the trade deadline I think Danny should try to trade him and his chunky expiring 2.5 million contract for a better more reliable back up shooting guard.
I"m sorry, but you are full of it.
I was at the game.
Yes Ray was cold with his shooting – but practically every one of his misses was a good shot to take and just barely missed. Most were in-and-out rim shots. I want him taking those shots.
But Ray was playing awesome defense. He literally created at least a half-dozen key plays with his defense.
I do wish he had more time off. That will come when Daniels comes back.
Ray’s +/- overall still makes him easily the team MVP this year. You really need to chill out and take a look at the real numbers that matter.
KG is indeed the man. His presence to start the game was a huge boon to the rotations. Its no surprise to me that Sheed had a great game coming off the bench.
Real numbers
Tonight: 21% FG%, 50% FT%, 20% 3Pt% (1-5), 1 TO
Jan 20: 30% FG%, 100% FT% (2-2), 0% 3Pt% (0-4), 5 TOs
Jan 18: a good game
Jan 14: 40% FG%, No FTs, 0% 3Pt% (0-4), 3 TOs
Jan 13: 25 minutes, 11 points
Jan 11: decent game
Jan 10: 46% FG%, 75% FT%, 20% 3Pt% (1-5)
Jan 8: Jan 8: 31% FG%, 2-2 FTs, 3-7 3Pt, 1 TO
You wanna pick and choose the “real numbers”? I know you love Ray, don’t blame you. But he’s a deep funk and you can’t admit it? I hope HE can admit it… ’cause he needs to get out of it.
Btw… “almost” doesn’t count in basketball.
And note: It’s perfectly arguable that Ray Allen, all by himself, cost the Cs the Pistons game on 1/20.
Not saying he’s not a great player. Not saying, of course, that he won’t snap out of it. But truth is truth, and he’s been horrible lately.
He's had 3 bad games in the last 4, true
And even 4 bad games of the last 6.
But for the month of January so far he’s still been overall positive:
1/22 Portland +2
1/20 Detroit -15
1/18 Dallas -7
1/14 Chicago -17
1/12 Nets +13
1/11 Atlanta -2
1/10 Toronto +13
1/6 Miami +13
1/2 Toronto +11
And for the season? Its not even close – he’s been by far and away our most valuable player.
If you want me to say that yeah,he’s slumped recently – sure, big deal – that’s a handful of games. In the context of the rest of the season – its a blip.
But he did NOT “suck horribly” tonight. He was positive for the night despite being wickedly unlucky with his shots. If just a couple of those shots are just fraction of a millimeter different, his +/- would have shot way positive. His defense was a big factor in this game.
And unlike you suggest about him being in a funk – I certainly hope HE doesn’t admit anything of the sort – that’s not how a shooter should ever think. A shooter has to have ice in his veins and always believe the next one will go in. You don’t ‘get out of it’ by thinking you are in it. That’s how folks who are NOT headed for the Hall of Fame for their shooting prowess might think. I don’t expect or want Ray (or Eddie) to ever think that way.
Good point about his attitude
… he does have to believe in himself. And tonight, I saw him ~SCARED to take some shots… clearly lost that confidence for a while there. Got it back for that one game-saver.
Your analytical abilities are primo, m…… it’s just that you seem to rely on that +/- stat an awful lot… more than I think it’s worth. Game by game, it’s not very valuable… sample size is too small, too many variables can affect how a team does in any given stretch. Over longer periods of time… weeks, months, seasons… the longer the better… it gets ever more accurate and meaningful.
But you can’t outweigh a horrid stat line like Ray had tonight, and especially vs. the Pistons, with a +/- stat. Part of this, I think, is your clear love of Ray Allen. Hey, I get that. But let’s not lose games over it. (I also found Doc’s remarkable optimism about Ray’s shooting kinda scary tonight.)
Andre Miller was awesome tonight. Nobody but TA could slow him down. Let’s just switch minutes between TA & RA for a couple of games. I’d like to see what happens.
TA was awesome tonight
but he and RA are not the same type of player. If anything they are far more complementary than interchangeable. TA actually interchanges best with either Paul or Rondo.
Ray brings a bunch of things to the floor that Doc can’t get from most of his other players. This is what examination of the rotation performances tells you.
The +/- stat IS near useless on a single game basis. Not completely useless, but unreliably noisy. It swings wildly based on single events. It can be used to say ‘good game’ v ‘bad game’ but that’s about it. But overall, once you have a sufficient stockpile of minutes, it is practically the only stat you can trust to capture ALL that a player is bringing to the floor, for good or bad.
The only reason I even listed out the per game numbers is because YOU are putting so much weight on the most recent handful of games. If you accept that +/- is subject to wild swings on a per-game basis, how can you put any weight in the per game numbers for individual stats (FG%, etc.) which you listed – which themselves are only components that get sucked up implicitly by +/-? For each of those stats you listed is only PART of the picture of what that player did in that game – there is a ton of missing information. Net +/- is a roll-up that captures all of that. Where it fails is in giving you any details of HOW the number came to be. It doesn’t explain whether the +/- result is because of great shooting or great defense or whatever. It has built in dependency on how other players perform as well – though that works both ways. But despite its lack of detailed resolution, it still implicitly includes all that in its calculus.
On Andre Miller – he’s a great player and did play well tonight. But he benefitted heavily from a lot of blatant moving screens that the refs refused to call.
All good
We can agree that Ray could use a break. At least a respite from these 40+ games Doc keeps slamming at him. That’s where the TA/RA minute-switch thing comes from. Just to get Ray some extra rest. Or better yet – seriously – give him some games off. PP had it, Sheed had it, KG, Baby, Quis… and Ray has worked harder than any of them.
I wouldn’t be surprised if that actually happened. Soon, right before the AS break… so altogether, he would get a nice chunk of off time.
Cya… got Conan on now where I am :)
Ray's defense
Have to disagree, on him playing “awesome” defense. He might not have stopped Miller once all night, and they were matched up quite a bit. It was infuriating when he switched with TA in the overtimes twice when it didn’t seem necessary (given Miller was at the 3-pt line and not a real threat to shoot).
I will say one of my favorite, if not favorite plays, was when Ray rushed down to the block, and basically hip-checked Webster off the court in an effort to box out. Probably could (should :) have been a foul, but it showed he was thinking rebounding, something not exactly prevalent lately.
Ray has gone through slumps each year in Boston
but he always seems to give us more wins than he costs us – I expect that to continue for a couple more years or so
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
How about all that PT?
Perhaps a little less would help? Or a short break?
fine with me
but it sounds like Doc likes to keep him in to keep his rhythm going
"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers" Henry V
Here's an idea
Tony played 23, Ray 43. Switch those around for 2-3 games, see what happens.
He doesn't just 'seem' to give us more wins than he costs us - he DOES.
Ray has simply been not only the player with the most minutes on the floor – but his minutes have been the most valuable. Only KG has a (slightly) better +/- per minute than Ray and KG hasn’t played anywhere near the same minutes.
http://www.82games.com/0910/0910BOS1.HTM
All of our best 5-man rotations in terms of offensive and defensive efficiency include Ray Allen in them.
THAT is why Doc plays him so damn much. Because Doc knows that Ray is the main reason we have such a good winning record.
Yes, I’d like to see Ray get more rest. But that will require more efficient minutes from his teammates (getting KG back helps a ton with that).
That fact that he HAS BEEN good
…doesn’t mean that he IS good now. How obvious is this….? The man’s in a slump. You really wanna argue over that?
Not easy or pretty but at least it was a win
Its still worrying me we are having a hard time beating teams less talented and more injured then us.
It was great to see KG back, lets hope we can start a mini win streak now with him back.
Hopefully we will get Daniels back soon and add some more talent and depth to the roster at the trade deadline and be ready to go come playoff time.
Glad we won
But the TB did have some of their best players missing. We’ll have to get our D back like Doc said in postgame if we’re gonna have a chance against the top teams. Still sooo great to see KG on the court… I love that guy!
Rondo played great. KG energizes the whole team.
by Daveonthecape on Jan 22, 2010 11:03 PM EST via mobile reply actions
KG = energizer bunny
when he and rondo get going it’s an awesome sight.
boy we needed that
not exactly a great display of basketball but no matter how you slice it we got a W which we really needed. there are still plenty of major flaws and issues on this team but at least we can take breather from all the losing and negative stuff
Was that really Celtics basketball?
The Cs choked away a 5 point lead in the last two minutes of regulation.
While Martell Webster was nailing clutch jumpers for Portland, Rondo had a turnover and missed lay-up, Paul Pierce air-mailed a jumper with 19 seconds left and was called for a charge.
Had the Cs not pulled out the win in overtime, this would have gone down as an epic choke.
And
Perk had a T) on a post up and Rondo botched a lob to KG. Isos and hero plays. had they kept runnning the ) and taking what P gave them in rhythm, more likely would have stretched the lead. Odd, the lack of confidence in what works and the need to overreach.
I was at the game with great seats
In my opinion, I actually thought the C’s played very well. I’m betting Doc is very happy with what he saw.
They played great defense overall – with very few breakdowns.
The offense was frustrating – but not because of the way they executed it. They consistently ran the offense perfectly, creating wide open and easy shots. But man, were they cold at times – they had a ton of beautiful shots just rim in & out of the basket. If just a handful of those sink in, then it would not have been a close game.
And most importantly, they had a great intensity – they played with energy for all 53 minutes. NO let down due to just standing around.
The only rotation I didn’t like was when they had Eddie and Ray in at Guard and Paul, KG & BBD as bigs. That rotation kinda sucked.
Doc was thrilled with their D
… and a bit unhappy with the O. Said it was probably good the way the game turned out, because it showed them how they win without great offense… with the D, which is always there if they make it so.
i am glad for the c’s and for ray that he hit the shot because he really played poorly tonite. it’s not just missing shots. he was playing old man d and andre miller is no young stud and he owned ray. kg is something else but, holy smokes, rondo is from outer space. hats off to portland, a real gutsy team. doc keeps saying he doesn’t worry about the offense but we don’t crash the boards. we do play good d but teams beat us because they get 2nd and third shots- rebound after rebound. our shooting percentage is always good- we often don’t get enough second chances and give the other team multiple opportunities. it’s not the players but the scheme that sets it up. tony needed this game real bad and should have been on the floor more.
My excitement about this win is more than tempered
The C’s had to go to overtime to beat a Trailblazers team with 8 players. Our guards simpy can’t shoot anymore from the outside (I know, they are in a slump, etc. etc.). Eddie’s slump has been almost year-long and Ray has been just horrendous lately, despite the clutch shot in OT. So nice to have KG back, but many of the problems — blowing leads in the third and fourth quarters — continued tonight. Happpy about the win, but this team needs to be in much better shape by the All Star break if they are going to make a real run for the title.
why by the all star break?
they need to play their best basketball may-june and even then all they need is a winning percentage of 57% to win it all.
kg is back! turn that frown upside down.
But no 3rd quarter collapse
We give thanks for small favors.
Outhustled and Outrebounded
Is that the new “Celtics basketball”?
Hate to be the glass half empty guy (and I didn’t see the game), but how did we get outrebounded by 10 by a team that starts the calcified remains of Juwan Howard at center?!
Actually
Believe it or not, some of that had to do with unlucky bounces. But there was also a significant lack of hustle on the boards. Overall, a lot to be happy about… and a lot to keep working on.
It was unbelievable how slow reacting the whole team was. Guys were sort of boxing out then the ball would hit the floor. Rondo got a few boards flat-footed. It was like they were waiting for someone else to grab it.
There’s nothing wrong with picking up a rebound off the floor. This is actually good — it means the team was boxing out nicely.
However, when you’re -9 in rebounds and the other team grabs 16 offensive rebounds there is clearly an issue more serious than “unlucky bounces”.
Man, watching the Cs these days is like pulling teeth.
Yeah, I agree definitely. There were a few unlucky bounces/broken plays that got guys out of position, but definitely just getting outworked largely.
And the ball bouncing off the floor in this case was not really good play. It wasn’t the guard coming in to grab it after guys fought off the opponent with box outs. It was more being in good position but reacting so slowly that they almost gave up the ball.
Disagree. And Doc has talked about this before.
Offensive boards come off of missed shots. The missed shots are the product of good defense.
The C’s forced the Blazers to shoot just 38%. That means the created a hell of a lot of offensive rebound opportunities (57 in fact). Yes, they grabbed 16 of them. The C’s grabbed 31 of those (they are called ‘Defensive Rebounds’ when the other team gets them.).
On the other end of the court, the C’s shot just under 49% – despite horrible bad luck on many wide-open perimeter shots. So basically they created fewer offensive rebound opportunities for themselves (only 36), grabbing only 6.
Now – here’s the important point – the latter number is one the C’s basically don’t care about. OFFENSIVE REBOUNDS DO NOT CORRELATE WITH WINNING.
The C’s do NOT stick around to try and fight for offensive rebounds. Instead they hustle back on defense. This is by design.
Huh?
Offensive rebounds do no correlate with winning? How many times have the C’s lost this year as a consequence of giving up 2nd chance points? Maybe, as you say its part of the plan, not just getting back (tho Tommy ragged Sheed last night for releasing too soon) but spreading the floor. But I wouldnt say its a non-factor, ‘specially if shots aren’t falling.
You missed the point
It’s THEIR OWN offensive rebounds they don’t care about… because they have chosen – wisely – to be a “defense first” team, which means you get back on D, and give up some of YOUR OWN offensive rebounds (which are the other team’s defensive rebounds, obviously).
You can’t be everywhere, or have everything.
Did the Celtics
get enough fastbreak baskets to punish Portland for crashing the offensive boards?
If not, this argument doesn’t make a lot of sense.
But just to be clear, there were 47 offensive rebound opportunities, not 57, and Portland grabbed over 1/3 of them. If you make 38% of your shots, but rebound over a third of the misses, then you are scoring on 38% and trying again on about 21%, which puts your offensive effectiveness a lot higher.
Saying that a team can win without offensive rebounds is like saying that a team can win without the three point shot. Both are certainly possible. But both are very valuable weapons that can make the difference between winning and losing in many cases.
Offensive rebounds correlate with winning as much as free throws or three point shots or blocked shots or steals. The team that gets the most is certainly not guaranteed to win, but getting them is better than not getting them.
#10 #25 #52 #88 -- #5 is back!
You can't be everywhere at the same time
A team must determine its identity and find a balance on the court. “Balance” means you have to give up some things to accomplish others. “Identity” helps you identify how various elements are balanced.
The Cs have decided that they are a “defense first” team. To them, that (in part) means that getting back on defense is more important that crashing their offensive glass. You can’t do both. In the opinion of this team, their offensive rebound count is less important than getting back on defense… i.e., they feel that offensive rebounds “correlate less with winning” than optimal defense, especially in transition.
Sounds good to me.
Correction
“The team that gets the most is certainly not guaranteed to win, but getting them is better than not getting them.”
Problem there is that “getting the most” is not the issue. It’s a percentage matter. If team A plays great defense, there will be many more offensive rebounds for team B to try to get (since they’re missing more of their shots). So team B’s raw NUMBER of offensive rebounds will always be higher than that of team A, since they’re starting out with a higher number of opportunities.
The best defensive teams will typically have fewer raw-number offensive rebounds than other teams. For two reasons: 1) the one described above (team B has more rebounds to get in the first place), and 2) strong defense, especially in transition, means you have to give up something on your own offensive glass, in order to get back in time. So team A’s own offensive rebound count will suffer. It’s a double whammy.
I guess the place I disagree
(to which I referred in my earlier post) is that Portland apparently didn’t sacrifice transition defense while crashing the boards, because you guys hardly destroyed us on the fastbreak.
So while there is obviously a balance to be maintained, offensive rebounding and transition defense are not mutually exclusive. The key is each man knowing when to crash the boards and when to get back.
My second disagreement is that “getting the most” is not just a case of raw numbers. Any time you get over 30% on offensive rebounds, you’ve got a potent weapon. In fact, offensive rebounding at that rate effectively becomes not only an offensive weapon but a defensive one as well, because teams can’t get out on the break if they don’t have the ball, can they?
Portland, without a center, pulled down more than 1/3 of their offensive rebound opportunities. You guys are either going to have to drastically improve on that or run a devastating fastbreak to punish teams for crashing the boards on you. You didn’t do either, and it almost cost you a win against a team you should have beaten soundly.
#10 #25 #52 #88 -- #5 is back!
Agree that 1/3 is a little high
… to allow an opponent on his offensive glass. (Now that we’re talking percentages, as opposed to raw numbers, we’re good.) But it’s not horrible. Some of that is luck… the numbers are small… a couple of bad bounces changes the % from acceptable to not-quite. And some of that is insufficient aggression and boxing out.
But the reasons for the game being close were not that, imo. They were: the Cs’ very bad shooting (or bad luck shooting), with lots and lots of rim-outs and Ray seemingly shooting at the moon, the Cs’ ridiculous end-of-game gaffes (multiple TOs and missed open shots), and the refs, who were just horrible (both on fouls they did call and the ones they steadfastly refused to call on Portland’s many moving picks.)
League-wide
the offensive rebounding percentage this year is 0.262. 0.340 is more than a little high, it’s horrible. And it wasn’t bad bounces, you guys weren’t keeping us off the boards.
Agree on the shooting. Apparently Ray has been struggling all year? It figured he would be the one to hit the shot that killed us, though.
Refs? Are we really going to blame the refs? I could mention that Pierce was given an “and 1” on a breakaway where Miller didn’t even touch him, or that Garnett earned all his fouls plus the one that wasn’t called. Sure, there were some questionable calls, at least one of Sheed’s and one of Perk’s looked like gifts to me. But the absence of 3/4 of our rotation really should have negated that, unless you take Tommy H’s word on every call, but he’s an even worse homer than our announcers.
As with any game, there are multiple factors you could identify. The OReb situation hurt you badly in that game.
We can identify things, too. If Webster shoots the 3 against you the way he has against everyone else this month, that game never gets anywhere near overtime. There’s lots of “reasons” we lost. Ultimately, it comes down to the fact that you (barely) made enough plays to get the win.
Thanks for the discussion.
#10 #25 #52 #88 -- #5 is back!
Even if you don’t read this
…it’s worth noting: Luck plays a role in every game, certainly including the rebounding. Over the course of many games, luck will even out. But it usually does NOT even out in a single game: one team will get more lucky bounces than the other. What I am saying is that I specifically noticed an oversupply of bad-luck bounces off the boards for the Cs in that game. You cannot argue that point with general statements… you must do it with specific recollections from that game… which I know you don’t have, because I know what actually happened.
We’re looking at a net of 2-3 offensive rebounds we lost due to net bad luck. That leaves 1-2 offensive rebounds we failed to get due to inadequate aggression/boxing out (in order to get to league average).
As for the refs – we could talk about that forever. EVERY discerning fan in NBA-dom knows the refs suck, for every team. Everybody suffers from their bad calls. But here again, while the bad calls do (theoretically) even out over the course of many games (like a season), they typically do NOT even out in the course of a single game. In this particular game, we got the shaft from the refs more than Portland did. We’re talking verifiably bad calls, proven by the tape. So yeah, I am blaming the refs, because with competent officiating this game does not get to OT.
Overall, I feel good about our prospects. Ray will not keep stinking up arenas like this… he has always pulled himself out of these slumps, and we expect the same this year. Same for Eddie. And Rondo will not throw the ball away in the last few seconds like he did in this game (with that inexplicable TO along the baseline). And the refs won’t always suck as badly for us. And KG is just getting his legs back… his shot will come back soon (it was absent in our game.) Etc.
Good luck to you guys. May one of us have the pleasure of eliminating the Lakers. Of course, we hope it’s us… since we can only do it in the Finals. (Unfortunately, that means you won’t make it… so tell ya what, we’ll agree to have you beat them in the playoffs. :)
Yes, typo'd the 57 - it should have been 47
All my points still stand.
When I say offensive rebounds do not correlate with winning, I mean just that. The team that wins the offensive boards does not correlate at all with the team that wins the game.
The only stats to worry about are points surrendered and points scored. The C’s are second in the former (at a miserly 93.8 ppg) so that part of their game is working. Unfortunately, they have slipped to exactly middle-of-the-pack in offensive points scored (to 99.8 ppg). That’s still a solid +6 point differential. But it’s not where it should be. KG’s presence and effect on the rotations should bump that differential back up a few points over time.
Oddly, despite how it seems like the team is always shooting so poorly, they are tied for first at 48.7% – and as I said above, that shows up in reduced offensive rebound opportunities.
Where they could do better – I’m talking to YOU Ray & Eddie – is 3 pt . They are middle-of-the-pack at 34 and that should be WAY higher, with Ray & Eddie on this team. Just think, if they could sink just TWO of those 3 pt shots each game that have been rimming in and out, that would jump their ppg differential to +12!
Those two are both in the top 20 active career 3-pt % shooters at well over 39%, yet are both shooting well under that this year. That’s actually reason for hope, though. Statistical return-to-mean suggests that both will shoot above their career averages in the second half.
I digress. The real point is – don’t worry so much about the offensive rebound numbers. That is an incidental stat that doesn’t correlate with winning.
Yes and no
You are talking about OR numbers. I am talking about OR%. Big difference. If a team shoots 50%, and you give them an extra possession on a third of their misses, they will then score on 58.7% of their times down the floor. If you hold them to 40%, those extra possessions will still bump them up to scoring on 48% of their trips down court.
That’s non-negligible, and why the typo mattered. 16 offensive rebounds on 57 misses doesn’t hurt a team — it’s a lot, but it’s a lot because they are bricking everything, and obviously a team will get some bounces. It’s a byproduct of either good defense or horrible shooting. But 16 on 47 is a different story. League average percentage would be to give up 12 offensive rebounds, and against a team without a center or a great rebounding PF, a team like Boston with Garnett, Perkins, Davis, and Sheed should do a lot better than league average, rather than worse.
3s. Ray Allen has attempted 193 3s this year, making 67. If he was at 40%, he would have 77 makes. Eddie House has attempted 139, making 51. If he was at 40%, he would have 56 makes. That is an additional 15 makes for an additional 45 points, or approximately 1 ppg, not 6.
The statistical difference between 35 and 40% on 3s is not very significant. The main thing is respect — a defensive team dare not ignore a 40% 3 point shooter, because if you leave him open he can blast you out of the game, so it forces your entire defense to adjust. As long as Ray is dangerous enough that teams dare not leave him, you are fine. I doubt you’ll see people ignoring him at the 3 point line to double other players anytime soon.
Thanks for the discussion, and good look with the rest of your season. If you face the L@kers in the Finals, I hope you crush them.
#10 #25 #52 #88 -- #5 is back!
But 16 on 47 is a different story. League average percentage would be to give up 12 offensive rebounds, and against a team without a center or a great rebounding PF, a team like Boston with Garnett, Perkins, Davis, and Sheed should do a lot better than league average, rather than worse.
As DRJ1 pointed out above, you are looking at one game numbers and holding them to game-over-game averages. Just 4 rebounds difference between that game and the league average? The statistical noise from game to game for that 12% number is probably at least a couple of rebounds.
I agree that on the existing base of 3 pt attempts that it would only net a raw difference of about 1 pt. My statement was specifically that if just two of the misses that have been occuring each game went in, that would be a +6 swing. That is not meant to say that Ray and Eddie shooting their career averages would be a 6 pt swing. I can see how my words could be interpreted that way.
There are other intangibles though, aside from the ‘respect’ factor (opening up the paint for easier 2 pt plays).
Ray has also clearly shied away from taking as many 3 pt shots. He has taken only 4.7 per game this year (compared to a career average of 6.1 and 6.2 in his previous Celtic seasons.). If you add in an additional 1.5 attempts per game that’s 61 more attempts. Now, its not so simple as to say that would be ~24 more 3pt shots – because he probably usually took a 2pt shot instead and he converted those at a slightly higher rate (his overal FG% is slightly higher this year) and with fouls some of those might be 3 pt plays anyway. But it might have netted an additional 18-20 pts or so. Add that plus any ‘respect’ factor that helps the team’s interior game and you may be looking at around a +2 to the point differential.
Brian Scalabrine
Since Scals was out, we have to give the Scalabrine intangibles award to Big Baby Davis. He certainly filled up the stat sheet tonight the way Scals would have. Way to go Glen!
Good pickup
Missed that. Good for the rest of the team. Scary how bad Ray has been lately. I think switching Ray and Tony’s minutes (43/23) might be good to try for a couple of games.
Blazer fan here: HAVE to watch those minutes....ROY (Brandon Roy) was playing many minutes
before he hurt his hamstring….and he is 25.
wonder how long monta ellis lasts…i’ve lost count on how many 48min games he’s played
by cheekmeister on Jan 23, 2010 11:35 PM EST up reply actions
Blazer fan ere'
Entertaining game to say the least, I’m pleased with the play of my Blazers although a win would of been pretty cool. Cya when ever.
I'm not saying, I'm just saying.
A sorely needed win, but ...
This was a Blazers team missing their best player not to mention 4 of their top 8 rotation players. They pushed the C’s to the limit.
There were some good moments but rebounding is still a sore spot along with turnovers.
Tony Allen (my preference) or Daniels when he comes back should start games, allowing Ray Allen to come off the bench. Like Sheed, Ray would be much better against second units.
Ray Allen is not going to come off the bench
Even though at this point of his career it would probably benefit him and the C’s. I say give TA many more minutes now — 25-30 per game. If Ray can’t hit shots, he really is ineffective on the court.
GG...
but yer right, lemon; the C’s should’ve had an easier time, when there’s only 7 healthy blazers in the second half, and the game’s in yer house.
Gettin’ old? Need new (young) blood? I wouldn’t mind seeing Perk in a blazer uni.
And I wouldn't mind Andre Miller in green
Give ya Scal and Baby for Miller. Deal?? lol
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
NBA Playoffs Content Module
Related FanPosts on CelticsBlog
Related FanShots on CelticsBlog
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- NBA Playoffs Fan Fiction: Miami Heat vs. Boston Celtics
- The 10-man rotation, starring the Flaming Lips singin’ about the Oklahoma City Thunder
- The Philadelphia 76ers? Gone till November
- ‘Deep Thoughts’ and Cheap Thoughts: Miami Heat vs. Boston Celtics
- Metta World Peace wishes everyone a happy Labor Day on Memorial Day
