Celtics Bounce Back with Blowout Win Over Pacers
Two days ago the Celtics ran off the court at halftime to a rain of boos from the fans. Tonight, as the buzzer sounded, the scene was quite different. The Celtics, up 67-47, left to a standing ovation.
"It really left a bad taste in my mouth the way we played last game," said Paul Pierce who finished with 20 points. "I mean, nobody wants to be booed at home by our home crowd, and seeing everybody leave early. And that really sat with me that night to be honest, you know I think it sat with everybody. Today we just came in, talked to each other, and you know, just played like a team that was on a mission tonight and hopefully it can carry over for the rest of the season."
Tonight at the TD Garden they shot 63% in the first half, scoring more than double what they scored in last game's first half. A Marquis Daniels jump shot, followed by a Nate Robinson inbounds steal that he turned into a three-pointer, gave the Celtics a six point cushion going into the second quarter. The bench built on that lead early on in the second, and the starters came in midway through to put the Celtics ahead by 20 at the half.
"The second unity, they've been redesigned a couple of times so they're all out there just going off of feel and just trying to get to know one another," said Kevin Garnett. "But as far as energy and effort, you always have to praise them for that and like Paul said we have to get off to better starts and let them feed off of that energy."
They would not relinquish that lead for the remainder of the game, as Gino made an appearance at the Garden with just over two minutes to go and the Celtics cruised to a 122-103 victory.
Let's forget for a second that this was the Indiana Pacers. After such a poor effort against the Grizzlies, it is at least encouraging to know that this team can bounce back the next game in the fashion that they did, and beat up on a poor team. One way to limit the Big Three's minutes is to build up a big enough lead in the first three quarters so they don't have to touch the floor in the fourth.
"We're supposed to be able to bounce back; that's the type of team we are," said Paul Pierce. "The important thing for us is to just play better. We want to start building these habits going into the playoffs and it's not too late. We're going to use these last 18 games to start to gather some momentum and start playing better basketball. We're going to try to win all of them. If we don't, regardless, the key is even if we lose some games to feel good about the way we play and what we left out there on the court."
Once again, it was Nate Robinson who provided that spark off the bench for the Celtics. He got the crowd going throughout the game, draining five three pointers on his way to 15 points, five assists, and four steals. He has more than fit into his role on this team as the backup point guard and offensive force off the bench.
"You know, listen, when Nate and the second unit, when they play like that, the tone of the game changes," said Coach Doc Rivers. "We've just got to keep him aggressive."
The other guard didn't have such a bad game himself. Rajon Rondo had another double-double tonight, scoring 16 points and dishing out 11 assists. Rondo and Robinson make a pretty good 1-2 punch at the PG position, and while their style of play is different, Robinson is learning a lot from Rondo playing with him in games and practices.
"He's a smart player, he's feisty, he knows how to play the game," said Robinson. "Just being along side of him, watching him play, watching the areas where I can pick up different traits off of him. When we're in there together it's kind of hard to guard. You just got to pick your poison when you're in there against us. With him in practice, me pushing him, him pushing me, it's definitely going to make our game better."
Celtics fans can sleep a little easier tonight, but Sunday's game in Cleveland will say a lot more about this team than tonight's game can.
38 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Washington????
Do we have a PG named Washington?
He’s the new d league guy. But shoosh don’t let doc find out.
by Blackberry33 on Mar 13, 2010 12:21 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Washington is code for Robinson
…haven’t you heard? George Washington, Frank Robinson…c’mon, they’re practically brothers.
Pearl Washington?
Leave it to the Celtics to sign a 46 year old point guard…who hasn`t played in the NBA for over 20 years!
Nice move, Danny!
It's Doc's Bizarro World
…young players die in the rookie graveyard, old players get maximum PT.
Got that right
Another solid 20+ point game by Bill Walker last night.
by lemonade sky on Mar 13, 2010 7:28 AM EST up reply actions
Yep: 33 minutes, 8-13 FGs, 2-4 3pts, 4 assists, 2 steals
The kid’s got game, apparently. We never knew.
how bout the game before when he scored 1 point? or the game before that when he scored 4? or the game before that when he scored 8? or the game before that when he scored 6?
those games dont count.. just on the occassion when he played garbage time the entire second half and again was playing no defense? bill walker hasnt even been playing in close games for the knicks
And in his very next game, he's hi-scorer again
23 points (leading all scorers) in 25 minutes – last night vs. the Mavericks (!) no less.
9-12 shooting overall, 5-8 from 3pt.
I’m prepared to conclude that this kid has game. How much game is as yet unknown… could be standard NBA fare, could be Joe Johnson level. Time will tell. But that he has game is quite clear right now.
Of course, he could fade out too… or get injured… anything is possible. But he has already proven that he can rise to a high level. Highest on his current team. Kid’s got game.
Too bad Doc never recognized that. For all we know, they might have just given away Paul’s heir. (Before you jump on that, note the word “might”.)
And only 1 PF in his 33 minutes.
Almost makes me think Doc’s plan is to coach just as long as he can get anything out of the Ancient 3—and no longer: He sure doesn’t appear willing to help Danny develop assets out of any young guys or picks.
crying wolf
sorry, not buying this as a bounce-back game. so they whooped up on one of the worst teams in the league – who cares?
in the playoffs, we’re gonna have to beat a quality team 4 out of 7 games, and the celtics haven’t shown that level of consistency or execution in friggin months.
sorry to be such a downer on a night where we actually play well, but it’s gonna take more than a win over the pacers to convince me that the ship has been in any way righted.
The point is, it was a blowout
All NBA teams are close in talent level. That’s why most games are decided by single digit margins. When you blow out any NBA team, you’re done something noteworthy. And the WAY they blew them out was particularly satisfying… with excellent defense (before the blowout was apparent and they throttled it back a bit), and lots of ball movement on offense.
It’s not meaningless. It’s a very good sign.
I disagree
The Pacers played defense like the Celtics did against Memphis. It was pretty apparent they were mailing this one in before halftime. Doesn’t take away from the effort by the C’s for a change, though.
by lemonade sky on Mar 13, 2010 7:26 AM EST up reply actions
and my point is, it's just one game
they have to play at that level night in night out to be successful. so when we see this kind of effort sustained for some period of time, then i’ll be inclined to agree with you.
they blew out the bobcats a week or so ago. and then they turned around and turned in a couple of stinkers. it’s about consistency.
and by the way
the idea that all nba teams are close on talent level is insane.
talent has a normal distribution across the league
think of it like a bell curve – a few teams have very little, a few teams have a ton and most teams have somewhere in the middle. most games are decided by single digit margins because most teams fall into that middle category.
but when you have a high talent level team like the C’s playing a low talent level team like the pacers, it’s probably to be expected to some extent. take a look at some of the scores from games between top teams and bad teams and you’ll notice a pattern…
26 years ago, that was true
Today, it’s not. Up until 25 years ago (1985), there was no NBA lottery, and no cap. In 1985, the lottery system began (and was refined in subsequent years). At about that same time, the cap system began. These changes revolutionized the NBA. Prior to that time, a few teams dominated the league in terms of talent. If you made your comment then, you’d be completely correct. But after 25 years of lottery and cap restrictions, talent has evened out across the league. Rich teams can no longer spend their way to the top without restriction. And the lottery assures that the worst teams never stay that way. There’s much more to the story, but that’s the heart of it.
All NBA teams now are close in talent level. If, for example, you compare the Nets to Cleveland, or Boston, or the Lakers… player by player, the comparison is not as one-sided as you might think looking at W/L records. A few teams have true superstars, who are better than almost everybody else. But there’s at most only one such player per team, and only a handful of true superstars exist altogether. The rest of each roster compares reasonably well with all other rosters.
Now we can discuss and argue roster talent forever, and never convince anybody of anything, because “talent” is so subjective. Here are some numbers:
Offensive Efficiency (pts scored per 100 possessions): Cleveland is #2 at 109.1 (I’m excluding the #1 Suns because that’s an outlier). Dead last are the Nets, at 96.6. Number 4 (CHI) = 100.2.
Defensive Efficiency (pts allowed per opponent 100 possessions): Boston is #1 or #2 (depending on the week) at 99.5. Toronto = 109.5. Number 4 from the bottom (OKC) = 100.1.
The standard deviation in the NBA for Off Eff is currently 3.58 points.
The standard deviation in the NBA for Def Eff is currently 3.12 points.
That means that ~68% of all teams have an offensive or defensive efficiency that is within 3.12 / 3.58 points of the average. 95% of all teams fall within 6-7 points of the average, in both categories.
I think those numbers qualify for the adjective “close”.
good analysis, but doesn't apply
you’re looking at aggregate statistics over a period of time, when the context of our discussion requires consideration at a single point in time. This is because great teams like the celtics and cavs rarely play the terrible teams because there are so few of each. therefore, the stats you presented don’t reflect the gap between the good teams and bad teams. look at the games played between top 5 teams and bottom 5 teams and you will get a much better sense of the disparity that does exist. yes, the lottery and the salary cap counteract this, but only over the course of several seasons.
this is exactly what happened last night – the celtics played the pacers. it was a reflection of the disparity between the two teams rather than an indication that the celtics are back on track. obviously i’d rather see them win in a blowout than lose under any circumstances. it was nice to see them win big, and to that extent i agree with you.
But looking at single games gets meaningless
…real quick. Because we could look at the Nets beating the Celtics not so long ago. Or the Bulls and Wizards (!) beating the Cavs, or the Clippers beating the Lakers, or even the Raptors (barely a .500 team) beating both the Lakers AND the Cavs, etc., etc.
You MUST look at the larger picture in order to see any pattern at all. Otherwise, you get immediately lost in the details.
Now we can do an analysis of just the best teams vs. the worst…. but (a) I don’t have time for that, and (b) it’s incorporated into the bigger picture I presented earlier anyway. 95% (2 std devs) covers just about all teams.
This isn’t such a big deal. All I’m saying is that a blowout of ANY NBA team is notable, and a job well done. And the bottommost of the bottom lines is: the Cs played a great game, and correctly… it would not have mattered WHO they were playing, they would have done well. And that’s what we need them to do… play their game. When they do that, there is no team that can be at all certain of beating them.
I agree with hooray (big surprise)
The Pacers sure played like a team with just 7 road wins – and it’s no coincidence that the last “big” win came hosting a team with just 8 (Bobcats).
As I said after the 4 straight wins over bottom-feeders, it’s how the team plays against winning teams that matters, and we all saw the results at the Bucks and vs the Griz…
by nba is the worst on Mar 13, 2010 9:33 AM EST up reply actions
oops... washington
Wow… Long day. Changing that right now…
by Jimmy Toscano on Mar 13, 2010 3:10 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Great, now everybody'll think
…we’re all nuts in here. :)
4th seed it is
no matter,with this brutal schedule,we’re finishing 4th…and the Cavs 1st..these next weeks,games & practice,are a tuneup…and BADLY needed..now Doc can rationalize 4th by saying he’s “resting” guys,which he should..we get our house in order,be efficient in round one,then go to Cleveland and roll the dice
Bucks beat another good team last night
How is the schedule “brutal”?
The Jazz have been hot – and to look ahead to the Cavs without mentioning that it will be challenging (to say the least) for the Celts to beat the Bucks in the 1st round doesn’t make sense.
by nba is the worst on Mar 13, 2010 9:40 AM EST reply actions
Jazz????
Jazz?…what are you talking about??brutal meaning lots of games,road trip to Tx and little practice time this month…and yes,every game or series is losable,nothing is a sure thing
Bucks beat the Jazz last night
Schedule is typical for Western conference teams…
by nba is the worst on Mar 13, 2010 10:36 AM EST up reply actions
It's interesting
From the beginning of the season through Christmas, we we’re consistently very good, then from Christmas through the All-Star break, we were consistently very bad. Since the ASB, we’ve been consistently inconsistent. Blowout wins immediately followed by headscratching losses. Through all of this, the 2-8 record against the elites is the most troubling stat. Really would be nice to win in Cleveland on Sunday, or at least take them down to the wire.
by joebianca on Mar 13, 2010 10:20 AM EST via mobile reply actions
Booing!
If the booing and early exit doesn’t sit well with the team, they can multiply that by the number of fans and see what the lack of Celtic Pride has meant to the fans. I am glad this has caught their attention, and hope they don’t have a “short” attention span!
by thirstyboots18 on Mar 13, 2010 11:28 AM EST reply actions
Ways to improve
1 boo the celtics before the game starts, maybe they’ll put it in second gear earlier in the game
2 teach sheed that he’s past his 3 point shooting prime. Keep the attempts down
3. Rest rondo in the first, and in the third play our fastest and most mobile lineup, I’m gonna guess rondo, Nate, Marquis, Big baby (I went crazy after his block last night), and Perkins.
4. Don’t settle for dumb shots, I.e sheed… Last night he did a great job a d has looked more mobile on defense
I believe teams know were slow and think they can play with us and just beat us, which they do. But I don’t see many teams faster then those guys, and I think thata a great defensive team. Overall I just love seeing rondo and Nate in together.
by Pmartin60 on Mar 13, 2010 12:40 PM EST via mobile reply actions
it could be ugly no matter
bucks,raps,bobcats etc..it’s a trainwreck unless we get it together..we had trouble with the Hawks a couple years ago and still won…hope for best matchup and advance if you can but don’t go nuts trying to move up a seed or two
Positive Effect
Well, the booing certainly had a positive effect on Pierce, who played his best game in at least a month. He hustled and got out ahead of the ball. The second unit also shot well. Robinson hit a bunch of threes and Finley was 4-5. They still got outrebounded, but only by one.
But last night was just a scrimmage. Tomorrow is the big test.
Yes, the booing was very important
It was unforgettable to the players. That, and even more dramatic, more affecting… was the walking out by thousands of their fans before the game was over. Boos can be dismissed, maybe, as due to a few bad apples. But when thousands of your regular fans WALK OUT ON YOU… .that has to be devastating. You could hear the effect in the players’ words and voices in their interviews. Nothing the fans could have done could have been more effective in turning this team around than what they did.
I think this is one of the few times in history that fans were able to directly influence events like this. It’s a beautiful thing, really. Great story.
===
But last night was not a scrimmage. As pointed out above (“26 years ago, that was true”), every team in the NBA is good, every team is dangerous. When you blow out an NBA team, you’ve done something real and laudable. They played great defense last night (while they needed to), and great offense as well (after a slow start). They won in a blowout because they played correctly, and persevered through the tough first quarter. That was no scrimmage.
But yeah, Sunday will be harder. If they play their game though, there’s no reason they can’t come out of there with another W.

by 

























