2023-24 Celtics

[RorschachsMask]

You can pretty much hunt whoever you want in the playoffs, forcing switches is a majority of playoff offense.

Last night felt more to me like the defense than the offense, though both were bad in the second half lol. In crunch time last night, Tatum went 3-4, though he had 1 ugly turnover. Jaylen went 2-3, with one ugly forced three. Al went 0-1, KP went 0-2, and Springer went 0-1.

Speaking of Tatum’s passing, since people mentioned it above. Celtics only cashed in on 5 of his 15 potential assists, multiple of which were down the stretch . Considering they were primarily wide open threes, that was costly. The most glaring was the Springer one with 4 minutes left, as that would usually be White or Holiday, who drill those shots. Would have given them a 5 point lead. Celtics then went and got a stop on the next possession, Tatum passed the ball ahead to KP on the break, who got his layup blocked by Capela.

Also, I’m never the “ref” guy, but it was annoying watching the Hawks draw touch fouls down the stretch, while Tatum was getting tackled off-ball on the other end lol.

 

[lars10]

Everybody hates the end-of-game isos, but it’s weird that literally last week the way they ended up beating the Bucks was to say, “fuck the offense, just iso Tatum.” Where were all the “RUN THE OFFENSE” people then?

And the intensity ramps up at the end. The other team doesn’t just let you pass the ball around. Why don’t they give it to KP? Well, did you see the play late where he just threw the ball away because he was stuck at the arc with no plan?

The Cs should have won, clearly, but it’s way more about Sam Hauser going 2-10 from 3 and Bogdonavich finishing at the rim at will than it is about late-game isos.

Losses are the only times it matters obviously.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

The 8 second violation was embarrassing. I was curious why they didn’t start PP with White and Holiday out. Didn’t seem to matter as they built that huge lead. But then they started PP in the second half. I didn’t like Jaylen’s 3P from like 5 feet beyond the arc in the first half. Kind of gave the game a “it’s the all star game we’re just going to good 95.38).around feel” to it.

Karalis made this point so h/t to him but as we all know, the Cs have a historic offense, based primarily on a TS% that is #1 in the league (61%). We also know that the Cs lead everyone in 1Q offensive statistics.

The Cs are 9th in the league in 1Q pace 102.03 (they have a TS% of 62.6%).

However, in terms of pace overall, the Cs are 18th in the league at 98.22. Why?

In 4Q, BOS is dead last in pace at 93.92. They also have a TS% of 58.5%, which is 13th. Ironically, their pace is slightly better than that in losses - pace of 94, which is 25th (TS% of 54.7%, which is 16th). Just taking team wins, they are dead last with a pace of 93.89 (TS% of 59.5%, which is 22nd).

(As a side note, it's interesting that in terms of 4Q pace in losses, the bottom 2132 teams are (in order): CLE (93.07), CHI, ORL, MIN, MIA, BOS, PHO, LAC, SAC, BRK, NYK, and LAL (95.38). DEN is 12th at 97.33. In terms of 4Q pace in wins, the bottom 5 teams after BOS are DEN at 93.96, CLE, NYK, and MIA (95.23). And the #1 team in 4Q pace in wins is DET, which has a pace of 101.00 over its 12 wins. MIL is second at 100.04.)

(As a second side note, in the 2Q, BOS has a pace of 98.47 (22nd) and a TS% of 63.1% (1st) and in the 3Q, BOS has a pace of 98.42 (20th) and a TS% of 59.6% (7th).

I presume JMazz and his staff knows all of this. I can't help but thinking that BOS needs to play faster in the 4Q. Seems to me that BOS plays better when they play faster. Maybe it's hard playing that fast for 48 minutes. But according to Karalis, the drop from 102 (1Q pace) to 94 (4Q pace) is the largest in the league by a wide margin.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

Good post WBCD and I think consistent with what many of us see and worry about, all against the "this is a great team" acknoweldgement.

HRB and others note that in true end of game situations there's reasons to focus on ISO (likely enables best shooters to have the shot; controls clock; can pick matchup; limits risk of turnovers). Fair; the stats you posted show the larger issue, which is they seem to move towards that mindset too early. I do think 4th quarter defense changes too, so it is not all about the Cs...but it is to a fair degree, imo.

Mo Dakhil posted clips that someone linked here as well, showing same---4th quarter possessions that had little no motion and few actions, just depending on ISO. That certainly can work - Cs have two great ISO players-- but it's not often the optimal approach. And they have a long track record of slowing and getting more conservative as game goes on and defense tightens; they just need to be aware of it and proactive in reducing that.

 

[RorschachsMask]

You can pretty much hunt whoever you want in the playoffs, forcing switches is a majority of playoff offense.

Last night felt more to me like the defense than the offense, though both were bad in the second half lol. In crunch time last night, Tatum went 3-4, though he had 1 ugly turnover. Jaylen went 2-3, with one ugly forced three. Al went 0-1, KP went 0-2, and Springer went 0-1.

Speaking of Tatum’s passing, since people mentioned it above. Celtics only cashed in on 5 of his 15 potential assists, multiple of which were down the stretch . Considering they were primarily wide open threes, that was costly. The most glaring was the Springer one with 4 minutes left, as that would usually be White or Holiday, who drill those shots. Would have given them a 5 point lead. Celtics then went and got a stop on the next possession, Tatum passed the ball ahead to KP on the break, who got his layup blocked by Capela.

Also, I’m never the “ref” guy, but it was annoying watching the Hawks draw touch fouls down the stretch, while Tatum was getting tackled off-ball on the other end lol.

Just want to add to this. I completely understand why certain fans may worry, and that’s fine. I’m just explaining why it’s not really an issue for me.

 

[benhogan]

Losses are the only times it matters obviously.

Pace & ISO-centric offense has been mentioned around here in wins and losses during the regular season and past playoff games.

For some odd reason discussing it on a discussion board seems to hurt some fans' feelings.

 

[slamminsammya]

The thing is, they obviously cared for a half during which they built a 30-point lead. This loss would be easier to explain if they'd come out flat from the jump.

i mean, did they care when they were playing well? to me it looked like they were kinda going through the motions even then, and they are capable of stomping teams without trying too hard, especially when they hit their threes. which they were.

 

[Auger34]

Also, I’m never the “ref” guy, but it was annoying watching the Hawks draw touch fouls down the stretch, while Tatum was getting tackled off-ball on the other end lol.

So this is the ultimate “do as I say, not as I do” post but…Tatum has to do a better job of not letting the refs get to him.

I 100% believe that he gets screwed over by the refs and doesn’t get the type of calls that he should. It would absolutely infuriate me if I were in his shoes.

But, he’s a pro and he has to try and not let it get to him too much. Yesterday he seemed completely preoccupied with the refs and yelling at them

 

[RorschachsMask]

View: https://twitter.com/StoolGreenie/status/1772627397780631768

 

[Ed Hillel]

I think it's fair to question aspects of their late-game offense. Generally they've been better about running their core stuff late this season, but there have been some noteable lapses.

The issue is that so many games have been blowouts it’s tough to tell which Celtics are the “real” Celtics close and late. I’d say it’s been a mixed bag that tilts positive in these circumstances, but the Jays Iso show has also reared its head a handful of times.

 

[PedroKsBambino]

View: https://twitter.com/StoolGreenie/status/1772627397780631768

Good post. And, of course, an essential element of blowing leads is that you had a lead in the first place so Celtics hvae more chances to lose a lead than anyone, and all the teams with the most win a lot of games.

 

[koufax32]

View: https://twitter.com/StoolGreenie/status/1772627397780631768

I feel like using this stat is a little bit if a straw man. Going into the 4th with a 2 point lead and eventually losing does not imply some systemic problem. Doing so with a double digit lead is potentially indicative of one.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

View: https://twitter.com/StoolGreenie/status/1772627397780631768

It would be interesting to know how many leads that DEN has blown at full strength. I know the DAL game is one.

Upon further reflection, I think the issue to me is that BOS doesn't seem to know how it should play when it comes down to crunch time. Contrast that to DEN, which knows exactly what it's going to do - get the ball to Jokic either on a two-man game with Murray or have him back his defender down and react to the defense.

As Karalis said on his pod, maybe the best way to deal with this is hopefully BOS will not play many close games in the playoffs.

 

[Gene Conleys Plane Ticket]

View: https://twitter.com/StoolGreenie/status/1772627397780631768

Worth keeping those numbers in mind.

Also, worth remembering that while the Celtics are middle-of-the-pack (tied for 11th) in fewest blown 10-point leads, that's only because they have generally blown teams away. Their 36-4 record in games decided by 10 points or more is far and away the best in the NBA. Their record in games decided by 3 points or fewer is 5-6. (https://www.espn.com/nba/standings/_/view/expanded)

I'm reminded of a Bill James article from one of his original Abstracts back in the '80s (can't find it online) in which he debunked the cliché, "great teams win the close games." James was obviously writing about baseball but the logic applies to any sport. His idea was that truly great teams are the ones that obliterate opponents, not the ones that just squeak by. A great team's record in close games — which are generally decided, or heavily affected, by luck — won't be any better or worse than any other team's. After all, he said, you wouldn't say "great teams win the close pennant races."

No, great teams are the ones that leave the competition in the dust. Which is exactly what the Celtics have done this season.

The reason the Celtics blow big leads is that they build big leads more than anyone. Of the 14 leads they've blown this season — fewer than any other team in the NBA (OKC and Denver are tied for second with 18 https://champsorchumps.us/records/most-nba-blown-leads-in-2024) — only 6 (43%) have been leads of fewer than 10 points.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

I feel like using this stat is a little bit if a straw man. Going into the 4th with a 2 point lead and eventually losing does not imply some systemic problem. Doing so with a double digit lead is potentially indicative of one.

I would love to see the winning percentage of teams who build and lose large leads versus those who play tighter games - over a large dataset. I'm very curious what that actually looks like.

 

[NomarsFool]

It seemed to me like KP was getting bullied a lot off-ball last night.

 

[Gene Conleys Plane Ticket]

I would love to see the winning percentage of teams who build and lose large leads versus those who play tighter games - over a large dataset. I'm very curious what that actually looks like.

Without doing that research, I would predict that teams that build and lose large leads will have a higher winning percentage than those that play more close games. Probably significantly higher.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

Without doing that research, I would predict that teams that build and lose large leads will have a higher winning percentage than those that play more close games. Probably significantly higher.

I would guess that as well but actual data can surprise.

Maybe building and losing a large lead really is indicative of a problem.

Make with the info people!!!

 

[jimmyjam]

I would guess that as well but actual data can surprise.

Maybe building and losing a large lead really is indicative of a problem.

Make with the info people!!!

This isn’t exactly what you’re looking for, but somewhat related. I’m not really sure what to do with the findings (besides the cliche of “play the team not the score”).

View: https://youtu.be/aqk9MPfjKSw?si=vRYuUoHMxRK9UVJF

 

[benhogan]

It seemed to me like KP was getting bullied a lot off-ball last night.

I'm not a REF activist myself but there was an "inconsistent" whistle down the stretch (then again ATL thought Boston had a favorable whistle in the 1st Half)

It's going to get very physical on the perimeter for the Celtics because
1. letting them shoot open 3s is a bad idea
2. letting the JAYs get downhill is an even worse idea
3. finally letting KP easily post up at the nail is the absolute worst outcome for opponents

Just expect a Miami Heat hack-a-thon going forward.

 

[lovegtm]

The issue is that so many games have been blowouts it’s tough to tell which Celtics are the “real” Celtics close and late. I’d say it’s been a mixed bag that tilts positive in these circumstances, but the Jays Iso show has also reared its head a handful of times.

We do tend to forget the many games in which they've executed the shit out of their offense with 6 mins to go and turned close games into late blowouts. The stats about their good 4Q net rating reflect this.

 

[ifmanis5]

I haven't seen the stat and I very much understand that the game has changed due to the 3 point variance, but did the 2008 Celtics ever blow a 20 or 30 point lead? I don't recall it but did it happen?

 

[RorschachsMask]

I haven't seen the stat and I very much understand that the game has changed due to the 3 point variance, but did the 2008 Celtics ever blow a 20 or 30 point lead? I don't recall it but did it happen?

So the 2008 equivalent of 20-30 is probably 10-20, I’d say. Those Celtics teams were notorious for blowing leads. I’ll never forget Phil Jackson being mic’d up during the 2010 finals and saying as much to his team.

 

[ifmanis5]

So the 2008 equivalent of 20-30 is probably 10-20, I’d say. Those Celtics teams were notorious for blowing leads. I’ll never forget Phil Jackson being mic’d up during the 2010 finals and saying as much to his team.

'They know how to lose in the 4th qtr.'
View: https://youtu.be/Q4hJxKpY4-Y?si=H1i52mOPxRsAw9EP

 

[RorschachsMask]

'They know how to lose in the 4th qtr.'
View: https://youtu.be/Q4hJxKpY4-Y?si=H1i52mOPxRsAw9EP

Edit: Fuck Phil lol.

 

[Euclis20]

I haven't seen the stat and I very much understand that the game has changed due to the 3 point variance, but did the 2008 Celtics ever blow a 20 or 30 point lead? I don't recall it but did it happen?

Quickly skimming through the play by play of their regular season losses (didn't take long considering they only lost 16 games), it looks like they lost maybe 5-6 games in which they at one point led by double digits, but never by more than 15. The worst was a loss to Washington in which they led by 14 with under 6 minutes left, and were outscored 25-6 the rest of the way (honorable mention to a loss to the Sixers where they led by 11 in the 4th quarter and went scoreless for more than 6.5 minutes).

As mentioned above, it's a totally different game now. In their 16 losses, Boston averaged 96.8 points. In their 15 losses, this year, the 2024 Celtics have averaged 110.1 points. What is and is not a significant margin is just completely different than it was 16 years ago.

 

[lovegtm]

'They know how to lose in the 4th qtr.'
View: https://youtu.be/Q4hJxKpY4-Y?si=H1i52mOPxRsAw9EP

That is such good framing; I had never seen that clip. Too bad the Lakers ended up losing the actual game.

 

[Euclis20]

'They know how to lose in the 4th qtr.'
View: https://youtu.be/Q4hJxKpY4-Y?si=H1i52mOPxRsAw9EP

To put some numbers behind this:

-The 2008 Celtics were 8th in 4th quarter net rating, and 14th in clutch net rating.
-The 2024 Celtics are 1st in 4th quarter net rating, and 7th in clutch net rating.

 

[InstaFace]

I haven't seen the stat and I very much understand that the game has changed due to the 3 point variance, but did the 2008 Celtics ever blow a 20 or 30 point lead? I don't recall it but did it happen?

Not 20+, but:

This game vs DET, blew a 10-point lead (from late in the 2Q), just went absolutely cold in the 4Q.

This game vs CHA, blew an 11-point lead in the 2Q, they went on an immediate run to take the lead, we fell apart 2nd half

This one vs WAS, tight game and small leads in the 1st half, but we built a 14-point lead midway through the 4Q, and then scored 2 points between that point and the closing seconds.

This one vs TOR, had an 11-point lead in the 2Q and an 8-point lead early in the 4th, then Scalabrine started screwing around, Toronto got somewhat hot from 3, and we missed a few chances to steal it at the end.

This one at ORL, we were down as much as 16 in the 3rd, but then Posey and Pierce got hot and we briefly took the lead midway through the 4th, fought back a few extra times, Ray Allen tied it with a 3 with 14 seconds left... and then Hedo Turkoglu hit a buzzer-beating 3 pointer to win it.

This one at GSW, we ran out to a 9-0 lead, blew it, had a 12-point lead early in the 3rd, blew it by the end of the 3rd, were up by 6 midway through the 4th, frittered it away, drew level on 2 FTs by Pierce with 6 seconds left... and then Baron Davis hit a buzzer-beating jumper to win it.

This one at New Orleans, we took a 15-point lead late in the 2nd, by 10 at half, by 13 at various points in the 3rd, but had a long cold spell during the 4th, so it turned into a 6-8 points deficit in the final minutes. David West put up 37 on us.

This one vs Philly, we had a good lead in the 1st, lost it in the 2nd, turned on the D in the 4th and built it to +11 with 8 minutes left... and then gave up a 19-0 run to turn it into an 8-point deficit with 90 seconds left.

Game 4 at ATL, we blitzed them early and were up 16-3, but Joe Johnson and Josh Smith shot them back to a 5-point lead by the end of the 1st. We took the lead again late in the 3rd and were up by 10 at the end of 3, before scoring all of 5 points between then and 2 minutes remaining, at which point we were somehow down only 4, had several shots to tie it, but fell short.

Game 6 at ATL, we blitzed them early and were up 10 at the end of the 1st, but coughed it up over the 2nd and only were up 1 at half, turned it on again and were up by 9 midway through the 3rd, but got sloppy in the last minute, some guy named Al Horford took over in the 4th and got some dunks and layups, and we didn't score from 8:47 remaining (+3) until 3:46 remaining (-7). We rallied again but Joe Johnson hit a few jumpers to put it to bed.

Game 6 at CLE, we were up 31-25 midway through the 2nd, but then scored only 2 FTs between then and 9:00 remaining in the 3rd, at which point we were down 33-49. It was a VERY defensive game, final score 69-74, talk about a different era.

They also had a 3-game losing streak, during which I'm sure the likes of Rocco here needed oxygen. Clearly, the team was prone to long cold spells on offense, made up for by their defense. Our team this year is kinda built different.

 

[ifmanis5]

Thanks for doing the research, appreciated. Sorry for the clip, still a bit triggering.

 

[Eddie Jurak]

Christmas Day, 1985, Madison Square Garden, Celtics blow a 25-point third-quarter lead and wind up losing in doubt OT to the Knicks.

https://www.espn.com/boston/nba/story/_/id/7386155/boston-celtics-new-york-knicks-1985-christmas-flashback

 

[Deathofthebambino]

The 8 second violation was embarrassing. I was curious why they didn’t start PP with White and Holiday out. Didn’t seem to matter as they built that huge lead. But then they started PP in the second half. I didn’t like Jaylen’s 3P from like 5 feet beyond the arc in the first half. Kind of gave the game a “it’s the all star game we’re just going to good around feel” to it.

Just want to point out, because it's been mentioned a few times now, that Jaylen's long 3 in that situation was clearly a heat check moment, combined with an extremely pissed off Jaylen coming together.

Jaylen made a 3 from the corner to give the C's a 30-14 lead. He then picked Hunter in the open court, and while going in for a dunk, his feet were clearly clipped from behind on what should have been deemed a flagrant 1. He was livid about it and was jawing at the ref. He made the layup to give the C's a 32-14 lead.

Atlanta made a 3, and then the ball found Jaylen who stepped into a very, very deep 3. He was clearly pissed off and had just made a couple of baskets and was looking for a kill shot in front of the crowd. I couldn't have cared less about it.

 

[Deathofthebambino]

Karalis made this point so h/t to him but as we all know, the Cs have a historic offense, based primarily on a TS% that is #1 in the league (61%). We also know that the Cs lead everyone in 1Q offensive statistics.

The Cs are 9th in the league in 1Q pace 102.03 (they have a TS% of 62.6%).

However, in terms of pace overall, the Cs are 18th in the league at 98.22. Why?

In 4Q, BOS is dead last in pace at 93.92. They also have a TS% of 58.5%, which is 13th. Ironically, their pace is slightly better than that in losses - pace of 94, which is 25th (TS% of 54.7%, which is 16th). Just taking team wins, they are dead last with a pace of 93.89 (TS% of 59.5%, which is 22nd).

(As a side note, it's interesting that in terms of 4Q pace in losses, the bottom 2132 teams are (in order): CLE (93.07), CHI, ORL, MIN, MIA, BOS, PHO, LAC, SAC, BRK, NYK, and LAL (95.38). DEN is 12th at 97.33. In terms of 4Q pace in wins, the bottom 5 teams after BOS are DEN at 93.96, CLE, NYK, and MIA (95.23). And the #1 team in 4Q pace in wins is DET, which has a pace of 101.00 over its 12 wins. MIL is second at 100.04.)

(As a second side note, in the 2Q, BOS has a pace of 98.47 (22nd) and a TS% of 63.1% (1st) and in the 3Q, BOS has a pace of 98.42 (20th) and a TS% of 59.6% (7th).

I presume JMazz and his staff knows all of this. I can't help but thinking that BOS needs to play faster in the 4Q. Seems to me that BOS plays better when they play faster. Maybe it's hard playing that fast for 48 minutes. But according to Karalis, the drop from 102 (1Q pace) to 94 (4Q pace) is the largest in the league by a wide margin.

I'm the first guy to lose my shit when the team slows it down. I've pointed it out repeatedly in the game threads, including from the arena against the Bucks last week. The minute this team stops pushing the pace, the offense stagnates. They're so talented and so good at hitting shots that it usually doesn't matter. Last night, they made zero 3 pointers in the 2nd half. That was really the entire story, from my perspective.

I'm not sure how much we can really take from the pace numbers in the 4Q with this year's Celtics team, to be honest. They have blown out so many opponents that they've had like a half dozen or more games where the starters haven't played, they've been up by so much that it makes no sense to keep pushing the pace in the last 4-5 minutes. It doesn't surprise me at all that teams like Detroit and the Bucks need more pace in the 4th Quarter in their wins, because their games are tighter and they give up more on the defensive end.

I would love to see them just run over teams from start to finish, like everyone else. But I think the 4Q numbers are pretty heavily skewed by having big leads too.

 

[nighthob]

So the 2008 equivalent of 20-30 is probably 10-20, I’d say. Those Celtics teams were notorious for blowing leads. I’ll never forget Phil Jackson being mic’d up during the 2010 finals and saying as much to his team.

That was more a FO thing. They just didn't have enough players over 6'6". Once Fat Andy Bynum rode Perkins into the ground Boston was toast. LA's entire gameplan was "Let Kobe shoot jumpers and then play volleyball with the miss".

 

[ObstructedView]

View: https://twitter.com/StoolGreenie/status/1772627397780631768

So in other words, all of the top teams in the league have blown a bunch of leads. This stat reminds me of LOB in baseball; it looks bad and feels bad, but you're going to squander some chances when you're good enough to generate a ton of them to start with.

 

[lars10]

Pace & ISO-centric offense has been mentioned around here in wins and losses during the regular season and past playoff games.

For some odd reason discussing it on a discussion board seems to hurt some fans' feelings.

And some point to it being the only reason they lose. But your condescension is noted.

Edit: I mean.. some posters melt down every time Tatum or Brown miss an iso shot.

I’d prefer the offense move more but it’s not like other teams don’t do something similar.. and nobody says anything when it works.

 

[lovegtm]

So in other words, all of the top teams in the league have blown a bunch of leads. This stat reminds me of LOB in baseball; it looks bad and feels bad, but you're going to squander some chances when you're good enough to generate a ton of them to start with.

It's also pretty revealing that the bad/collapse losses have come when the other team went bonkers from 3 and the Cs couldn't buy a shot.

If you zoom out, it looks a lot like the random variance that happens on occasion when you have lots of big leads.

I think there's plenty to fix in these bad losses, but it's important to also have the memento mori of "sometimes you run bad."

 

[benhogan]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w9SQ9fhV1nY


Ryan Bernardoni speculates on Jrue Holiday contract & Celtics roster construction over the next couple of years

 

[benhogan]

And some point to it being the only reason they lose. But your condescension is noted.

Edit: I mean.. some posters melt down every time Tatum or Brown miss an iso shot.

I’d prefer the offense move more but it’s not like other teams don’t do something similar.. and nobody says anything when it works.

Nobody is melting down around here about anything. The team is in first by a country mile. Everyone around here recognizes that.

Even on game threads posters have been OK. If anything close/tight games are good for playoff preparation. They probably need to pick up the pace in Q4, instead of slowly bringing the ball up, letting defenses dig in, burning clock, & limiting their shot options. YMMV

Optimism has been high from Day 1 in the Cellar. I had the Celtics as a 60+ win team in preseason and they've only exceeded my expectations (& every other regular poster around here). Many of us have been posting Net Rtg #s for the last month. A 2024 Celtic Championship probably puts them in the discussion as one of the greatest NBA teams ever (TOP10 at least). Last night's loss doesn't change that. 63-64 wins looks about right which means 3-4 more losses. There will be comments & criticism win or lose after every game.

My condescension comes from the fact that posters question the Tatum ISOs at the end of Q1, Q2, Q3 every night when they are winning by 50-points. It's not only when they lose.

 

[InstaFace]

My condensation comes from the fact that posters question the Tatum ISOs at the end...

You might be posting a little too hard, then.

 

[SteveF]

There probably is something metaphorically apt. Posting on a message board (for anyone -- this is not a personal dig at any poster) is somewhat akin to hot air meeting a cold surface.

 

[DeJesus Built My Hotrod]

People can discuss whatever they want on these pages. It just feels like nobody wants to be challenged when the topic is a function of small sample sizes. If we are concerned about something that happens 21% of the time how are we contrasting it with the other 79%?

More to the point if a team has a fatal flaw that folks are compelled to point out because it could doom the Cs chances, having it not happen about in >75% of outcomes seems good. I understand that the concern is that the playoffs will all look like the bad outcomes but that starts to fall apart when you see all of the data that supports their winning percentage.

In short, if the Cs run Jay ISOs all playoffs or whatever other bad stuff they do in losses shows up, they may well fall short. Their roster and entire body of work (not just loss 15 in 72 games) suggests they know this from Stevens on down. They have earned the trust this season - by winning 79% of their contests. That may mean nothing in the end, especially if they get bounced early. But its far more concrete than people rage/anxiety posting about how many dribbles Tatum takes during a possession on March 25th.

 

[benhogan]

You might be posting a little too hard, then.

Clearly those ISOs are making us sweat it out

 

[slamminsammya]

FYI this is the same cast of Milwaukee Bucks who had won a championship blowing a 14 point lead in the final minute last year.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XIfC2tbr_A

 

[m0ckduck]

From ESPN:

the Celtics are a staggering 49-3 when hitting more than one-third of their 3-pointers this season

This is kinda crazy because:
1. It's not hard for a team to hit 33.3% of their threes. In fact, all NBA teams average better than this mark.
2. The odds of Boston not being able to reach this threshold consistently in the playoffs look slim, given that they've hit it in 72% of regular season games, are now tied for the team lead league in 3PT% (39%) and are shooting even better (40.6%) at home, where they will enjoy HCA.
3. Even in the 20 games where the C's haven't hit a third of their threes, they are still 8-12.

All things are possible in the postseason, but some of these trends will have to give significantly for someone to beat this team 4 games out of 7.

Edit: not to mention the simple fact of them being 91.4% at home (75 win pace over an 82 game season.)

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

From ESPN:


This is kinda crazy because:
1. It's not hard for a team to hit 33.3% of their threes. In fact, all NBA teams average better than this mark.
2. The odds of Boston not being able to reach this threshold consistently in the playoffs look slim, given that they've hit it in 72% of regular season games, are now tied for the team lead league in 3PT% (39%) and are shooting even better (40.6%) at home, where they will enjoy HCA.
3. Even in the 20 games where the C's haven't hit a third of their threes, they are still 8-12.

All things are possible in the postseason, but some of these trends will have to give significantly for someone to beat this team 4 games out of 7.

Edit: not to mention the simple fact of them being 91.4% at home (75 win pace over an 82 game season.)

was it that long ago when BOS shot 30.3% over a seven-game series, with each game being: 34.5%, 28.6%, 26.2%, 40%, 41%, 20%, and 21.4%?

 

[InstaFace]

was it that long ago when BOS shot 30.3% over a seven-game series, with each game being: 34.5%, 28.6%, 26.2%, 40%, 41%, 20%, and 21.4%?

Attempts, cumulative for series:

White: 23 / 47 (48.9%)
Tatum: 11 / 47 (23.4%)
Brown: 7 / 43 (16.3%)
Smart: 15 / 42 (35.7%)
Horford: 8 / 29 (27.6%)
Grant: 9 / 21 (42.9%)
Brogdon: 3 / 18 (16.7%)
Hauser: 2 / 8 (25.0%) (in 22')
Pritchard: 1 / 7 (14.3%) (in 33')

Yes, there's variance, in any given 7 game stretch some guys will be hot and others will be cold. But I think you'd have to bet that some of those numbers will go way up - particularly Hauser replacing Grant's volume, Pritchard replacing Brogdon's volume, and Brown and Tatum almost certainly not going to both shit the bed simultaneously. I would not have any problem taking Over 33% on our 3P% in any given series, for even money, and I doubt you'd take my action on that.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

I would not have any problem taking Over 33% on our 3P% in any given series, for even money, and I doubt you'd take my action on that.

Of course. It is certainly unlikely that BOS will shoot under 33% in any series, particularly given how much better of a shooting team this team is. I think we all agree that if BOS shoots over (for example) 38% for any playoff series, they are winning that series.

Which is how I am hoping they play on their way to the title.

But what worries all of us is if they don't shoot over 33%.

At any rate, I am going to try to enjoy the rest of the season and worry about that if it comes to that.

 

[Ed Hillel]

Knicks about to pass the Cavs, and I know we can find things scary about the Cavs, but to me the Knicks and Bucks are on another level. I find the Knicks to be the scariest opponent in the EC, and I think, if healthy, they will beat the Bucks. I am very much hoping the Knicks remain the 3 seed.

 

[InstaFace]

They're the East team with the highest floor, other than the Celtics of course. But I think they also have the lowest ceiling, relative to the Bucks, Cavs and even arguably the Pacers. There's a reason the Cs are 4-0 against the Knicks this year, and it's because NYK don't really have another level to go to if they're not getting a bottom-20% performance out of the Celtics that night.

Maybe it'll be different if / when they have their battlestation fully armed and operational again. Maybe we'll see on 4/11. But the Knicks' greatest asset - their depth and lack of weak links in the lineup on either end - doesn't get them much of an edge against the Celtics, whereas in most regular season games, against most teams, they'll find things they can exploit, and their defensive intensity can pressure bad decisions out of teams.