Celtics vs Heat ECF Redux Discussion Thread

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
8,494
San Francisco
Celtics averaged 1.4 points per possession against 30 ish possessions in the zone game 5. Y'all shouldn't complain about how they're handling the zone. They are absolutely wrecking it.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,102
Celtics averaged 1.4 points per possession against 30 ish possessions in the zone game 5. Y'all shouldn't complain about how they're handling the zone. They are absolutely wrecking it.
People get mad when the Celtics don't follow their very special plans for how to break the zone, even though the Heat have seen it all and adjust quickly to basic zone-breakers.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
8,237
I’m going to be interested to see if Caleb Martin is hobbled at all going into the next game. It looked like he hyperextended his knee fairly badly early in the game
 

Van Everyman

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2009
26,200
Newton
I’m going to be interested to see if Caleb Martin is hobbled at all going into the next game. It looked like he hyperextended his knee fairly badly early in the game
Martin has had such a good series. It’s hard not to be impressed. Other than maybe a stretch during the second half of game 4, he has pretty much knocked down every shot you’ve hoped he would.
 

Leon Trotsky

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
2,670
Boston, MA
Despite handwringing about Highsmith making some shots, that video highlights that he was horrific on the defensive end, as was Duncan Robinson and Zeller. We definitely have more depth at this point, and just need to keep trying to run them off the floor - the more they have to play those guys, the better our chances.

(I love that guy too!)
 

GreenMonster49

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
630
Hockey also has the goaltender issue. Basically 1 string of 4 straight excellent performances by one player can flip the series in a way that it can't in any other. You could have an amazing pitcher throw 2 great games in 4 games, but not 4. In basketball a single player can't just prevent the opponent from scoring at all. The impact of a goalie is just going to be larger.
Wikipedia says that there have been 204 teams in the Stanley Cup playoffs who could have come back from a 0-3 deficit. So it may be a larger sample size, but the low-scoring nature of hockey games makes for more variance in outcomes (and that benefits the underdog).
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
20,584
Pittsburgh, PA
Not directly related, but a question:

0-3 comebacks by sport:

1 time in Baseball (as we know)
4 times in Hockey (Bs being one such team)
0 times in NBA

Do you suppose there is something unique in hockey that has enabled it to happen much more often? The best I can come up with is there is a lot more variability in hockey where the better team often doesn't win (more 'puck-luck') that causes more variance and allows anomolies like that to happen
...we can even reverse engineer an estimate of the odds that a team in each sport who's up 3-0 on an opponent will win a given next game against that opponent.

NBA: Since 1984, in a 7-game 2-2-1-1-1 series, teams that go up 3-0 are 111-0.
- Of those 111 series, 71 were sweeps, 40 went to 5 games, 9 went to 6 games, and 0 went to 7 games. So the leading teams were 71-40 in Game 4, 31-9 in Game 5, and 9-0 in Game 6.
- Therefore, the team that went up 3-0 had a game W-L of 111-49 from that point forward, a 69.4% winning percentage.
- With that Win %, you'd expect a 4-game comeback by the underdog once every 114 series.
- (if you include 2-3-2 format series, 5 series got to 3-0, of those 4 were sweeps and 1 went 6 games, the 1996 Finals)

NHL: all-time in any 7-game series, teams that are up 3-0 are 201-4 in the eventual result.
- Of those 205 series, 128 (62.4%) were won by the leading team in 4, 55 (26.8%) ended in 5 games, 13 ended in 6 games, 5 were won by the initially leading team in 7, and 4 were comeback wins by the trailing team.
- Therefore the team that went up 3-0 had a game W-L of 128-77 in game 4, 55-22 in game 5, 13-9 in game 6, and 5-4 in game 7, for a total W-L of 201-112, a 64.2% W%.
- With that Win %, you'd expect a 4-game comeback by the underdog once every 61 series, or about 3.4 times in NHL history (vs actual 4).

MLB: all-time in any 7-game series, teams that are up 3-0 in a series are 38-1 in the eventual result.
- Of those 39 series, 31 were won in 4 games, 4 were won in 5 games, 2 were won in 6 games, and the 2 that went to a 7th game were split 1-1 (the other was the 2020 ALCS, Rays over Astros)
- Therefore the team that went up 3-0 was 31-8 in game 4, 4-4 in game 5, 2-2 in game 6, and 1-1 in game 7, for a total W-L of 38-15, a 71.7% W%.
- But after the 4th game, those series were sure even! This goes against what I was saying about the spread of the teams' quality. But MLB is more selective about the teams making the postseason, they should be more evenly matched, not less!
- Looking more closely, 23 of these series were in the World Series, and the results were even more skewed there: of the 23 series, and excluding 2 tied games early in baseball history, 20 were sweeps, 3 went to a 5th game, none beyond that. That's a 23-3 W-L, 88.5% W-L. Maybe a lot of these series in the pre-free-agency era were just very lopsided, maybe the teams just wanted to go home and kinda gave up once they were down 3-0. They only get paid a share of gate for the first 4 games, after all.
- By contrast, in the LCS, best-of-7 in 1988-present, you have the 11 series in that article, plus the 2016 ALCS (4-1), 2017 NLCS (4-1), 2019 NLCS (4-0), 2020 ALCS (4-3) and the 2022 ALCS (4-0).
- In those 16 series, 10 were sweeps, 2 ended in 5, 2 ended in 6, and 2 ended in 7 (initially-leading teams 1-1). Teams up 3-0 went 15-11 from there, a mere 57.7% W%.
- If the first number including all those WS sweeps is correct, you'd expect a comeback only once every 136 series. But if it's the second number, you'd expect it once every 31 series - and wouldn't be surprised that it had happened once and only once.
 

wilked

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
3,868
...we can even reverse engineer an estimate of the odds that a team in each sport who's up 3-0 on an opponent will win a given next game against that opponent.

NBA: Since 1984, in a 7-game 2-2-1-1-1 series, teams that go up 3-0 are 111-0.
- Of those 111 series, 71 were sweeps, 40 went to 5 games, 9 went to 6 games, and 0 went to 7 games. So the leading teams were 71-40 in Game 4, 31-9 in Game 5, and 9-0 in Game 6.
- Therefore, the team that went up 3-0 had a game W-L of 111-49 from that point forward, a 69.4% winning percentage.
- With that Win %, you'd expect a 4-game comeback by the underdog once every 114 series.
- (if you include 2-3-2 format series, 5 series got to 3-0, of those 4 were sweeps and 1 went 6 games, the 1996 Finals)

NHL: all-time in any 7-game series, teams that are up 3-0 are 201-4 in the eventual result.
- Of those 205 series, 128 (62.4%) were won by the leading team in 4, 55 (26.8%) ended in 5 games, 13 ended in 6 games, 5 were won by the initially leading team in 7, and 4 were comeback wins by the trailing team.
- Therefore the team that went up 3-0 had a game W-L of 128-77 in game 4, 55-22 in game 5, 13-9 in game 6, and 5-4 in game 7, for a total W-L of 201-112, a 64.2% W%.
- With that Win %, you'd expect a 4-game comeback by the underdog once every 61 series, or about 3.4 times in NHL history (vs actual 4).

MLB: all-time in any 7-game series, teams that are up 3-0 in a series are 38-1 in the eventual result.
- Of those 39 series, 31 were won in 4 games, 4 were won in 5 games, 2 were won in 6 games, and the 2 that went to a 7th game were split 1-1 (the other was the 2020 ALCS, Rays over Astros)
- Therefore the team that went up 3-0 was 31-8 in game 4, 4-4 in game 5, 2-2 in game 6, and 1-1 in game 7, for a total W-L of 38-15, a 71.7% W%.
- But after the 4th game, those series were sure even! This goes against what I was saying about the spread of the teams' quality. But MLB is more selective about the teams making the postseason, they should be more evenly matched, not less!
- Looking more closely, 23 of these series were in the World Series, and the results were even more skewed there: of the 23 series, and excluding 2 tied games early in baseball history, 20 were sweeps, 3 went to a 5th game, none beyond that. That's a 23-3 W-L, 88.5% W-L. Maybe a lot of these series in the pre-free-agency era were just very lopsided, maybe the teams just wanted to go home and kinda gave up once they were down 3-0. They only get paid a share of gate for the first 4 games, after all.
- By contrast, in the LCS, best-of-7 in 1988-present, you have the 11 series in that article, plus the 2016 ALCS (4-1), 2017 NLCS (4-1), 2019 NLCS (4-0), 2020 ALCS (4-3) and the 2022 ALCS (4-0).
- In those 16 series, 10 were sweeps, 2 ended in 5, 2 ended in 6, and 2 ended in 7 (initially-leading teams 1-1). Teams up 3-0 went 15-11 from there, a mere 57.7% W%.
- If the first number including all those WS sweeps is correct, you'd expect a comeback only once every 136 series. But if it's the second number, you'd expect it once every 31 series - and wouldn't be surprised that it had happened once and only once.
Nicely done...
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
20,584
Pittsburgh, PA
Yes, they are trashing the ZONE.
I enjoy this way too much, clearly a character flaw of mine

Cody Zeller, what are you doing!!!!
I'm right there with you. At this point I don't even care if he's doing a bit or not, I don't care if he's wrong half the time and an asshole with unrealistic expectations 100% of the time, it's enjoyable after every win. In fact I think it's funnier if it's not a bit.

Like, it's barely English sometimes. "Highsmith's presence in this game is that of disaster!"
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,102
I'm right there with you. At this point I don't even care if he's doing a bit or not, I don't care if he's wrong half the time and an asshole with unrealistic expectations 100% of the time, it's enjoyable after every win. In fact I think it's funnier if it's not a bit.

Like, it's barely English sometimes. "Highsmith's presence in this game is that of disaster!"
That's extremely poetic and beautiful English in this context; love it.
 

DennyDoyle'sBoil

Found no thrill on Blueberry Hill
SoSH Member
Sep 9, 2008
40,694
AZ
As between NHL and NBA sample sizes are too small to say, I think. One of the hockey ones was over 80 years ago.

To me, the NBA thing is an anomaly. It should have happened once or twice.

Here's a way to think about it. Imagine a series where the teams are roughly even. Home court matters. And the psychology of being up or down in a series will matter too but let's just say that by and large the teams are roughly comparable and a good match up and maybe the spread goes from -3 to +3 depending on venue.

Question 1: How often will it happen in a series where teams are roughly even that one team will get out to a 3-0 lead? About 25 percent of the time. Why? Well the team that wins game 1 will have about a 50 percent chance of winning game 2 and a 50 percent chance of winning game 3. So, 25 percent.

Question 2: How often will the other team win the next four? It should be about 6.25 percent. (.5x.5x.5x.5)

So, for every 100 series where the teams are evenly matched you would expect that a team would come back from 3-0 down about 1.6 times.

How often are series evenly matched? I don't know. Has to be at least 3 or 4 per year. So it feels like it should have happened once or twice in the last 25 years or so. And even where the teams are not evenly matched -- if you assume the matchup is 65/35, then the team down 3-0 should still have a comeback about 1.5 percent of the time.

Clearly the majority of the time that a team goes up 3-0 it is because the team is better and that means that it's very to very very unlikely the other team will win 4. But it seems as though there should be enough series where a team would get up 3-0 just because, which should make conditions favorable to a comeback occasionally the number of 3-0 series is 150.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
8,237
Despite handwringing about Highsmith making some shots, that video highlights that he was horrific on the defensive end, as was Duncan Robinson and Zeller. We definitely have more depth at this point, and just need to keep trying to run them off the floor - the more they have to play those guys, the better our chances.

(I love that guy too!)
Robinson can’t defend anyone. He might be one of the worst defensive players I have ever seen. Grant Williams went around him like a traffic cone a few times. If Grant Williams is driving by you, that’s a really bad sign.
Love also can’t defend anyone.
If Martin and Vincent are at all hobbled that means that both of them are going to have to be out on the floor a lot and that’s a weak link the Celtics can always pick at
 

InstaFace

The Ultimate One
SoSH Member
Sep 27, 2016
20,584
Pittsburgh, PA
As between NHL and NBA sample sizes are too small to say, I think. One of the hockey ones was over 80 years ago.

To me, the NBA thing is an anomaly. It should have happened once or twice.

Here's a way to think about it. Imagine a series where the teams are roughly even. Home court matters. And the psychology of being up or down in a series will matter too but let's just say that by and large the teams are roughly comparable and a good match up and maybe the spread goes from -3 to +3 depending on venue.

Question 1: How often will it happen in a series where teams are roughly even that one team will get out to a 3-0 lead? About 25 percent of the time. Why? Well the team that wins game 1 will have about a 50 percent chance of winning game 2 and a 50 percent chance of winning game 3. So, 25 percent.

Question 2: How often will the other team win the next four? It should be about 6.25 percent. (.5x.5x.5x.5)

So, for every 100 series where the teams are evenly matched you would expect that a team would come back from 3-0 down about 1.6 times.

How often are series evenly matched? I don't know. Has to be at least 3 or 4 per year. So it feels like it should have happened once or twice in the last 25 years or so. And even where the teams are not evenly matched -- if you assume the matchup is 65/35, then the team down 3-0 should still have a comeback about 1.5 percent of the time.

Clearly the majority of the time that a team goes up 3-0 it is because the team is better and that means that it's very to very very unlikely the other team will win 4. But it seems as though there should be enough series where a team would get up 3-0 just because, which should make conditions favorable to a comeback occasionally the number of 3-0 series is 150.
I think it's a mistake to assume a 50-50 win odds for a team that ends up winning 3 in a row, at least one of those an Away game. And then to assume 50-50 odds by the trailing team. Especially since the NBA teams who go up 3-0 have a ~69% winning percentage in the subsequent games of the series. The odds and frequency of an 0-3 comeback change dramatically if the trailing team's chances to win any given game are 30% vs 40% vs 50%, because you're compounding those odds 4 times.

To get around this, you begin with "in a series where teams are roughly even". But that's a faulty premise. The stratification of NBA teams is much stronger than in NHL or MLB - see my notes on the yearly standings earlier. Teams in a playoff series will be "roughly even" less often than in NHL/MLB, and if we're already starting from the point of a 3-0 series lead, the likelihood that they were evenly matched to begin with is already suspect, from a Bayesian perspective.

I went with an approach of "estimate the W-L % of the leading team", precisely because the # of comebacks is far too small to get any sort of series-level estimate. But in terms of the number of games played, we do have a decent sample overall.

If you were to instead take your 65/35 estimate of a game result for a series that's 3-0, then yes, the trailing team would come back once every 1 / (.35^4) = 67 times and have a ~1.5% chance each time, just as you said. And then over 149 series, a little binomial math would lead you to expect 2.2 comebacks, and there would be a 10.5% chance of having seen 0 of them in that time.

But modify those odds to a 69.4% win probability of the game, and then you're down to a 0.88% chance of a comeback, i.e. once in 114 tries, and suddenly your expected # of comebacks in 149 series is 1.3, and the chance of seeing 0 is up to 27%.

So yeah, maybe it's a little odd that we haven't had one in the NBA. But if you think the odds of an 0-3 trailing team winning a game are closer to that 30.6% estimate, then statistically speaking, it's merely very mildly surprising that we haven't seen any to-date.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,102

TripleOT

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 4, 2007
7,482
Yes, they are trashing the ZONE.
I enjoy this way too much, clearly a character flaw of mine

Cody Zeller, what are you doing!!!!

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAn0gleYyQg
I enjoy Exasperated Ex-Coach’s act. I wonder how NBA superstars would reach if a coach actually went at them like this in a video session. Probably somewhere between sprewelling the coach’s neck and lobbying ownership for a coaching change.
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
18,652
Santa Monica
I enjoy Exasperated Ex-Coach’s act. I wonder how NBA superstars would reach if a coach actually went at them like this in a video session. Probably somewhere between sprewelling the coach’s neck and lobbying ownership for a coaching change.
A Jim Boylen video session
 

jablo1312

lurker
Sep 20, 2005
830
Brogdon questionable, Vincent questionable for tomorrow night.

Brogdon obviously hasn't been good this series, but I still think he can give them something for stretches. I like him on Jimmy instead of D-White but I doubt he'll play enough for that to really matter in g6. He still provides some level of gravity when he's out there and his handle helps vs the Heat's half court defense. Could use him not jacking up contested pull-up 28 footers when hes out there, though.

Vincent being questionable in theory means that, even if he's out there, he'll be a little less explosive and a bit more vulnerable on defense. Could provide another spot for the J's to poke at on defense. Would imagine he'll still be better then Lowry was in g5 (I wouldn't write off Lowry playing better, g5 was the worst he's looked all playoffs). Will be interesting to see how Spo manages the guard rotation if he plays. Rewatching g5 I thought the half court offense better at challenging weaker defenders (Robinson obviously, but also Strus) consistently in the half court. I think thats where excising Lowry (if he's actually benched for most of g6) could hurt Mia,. They played Bam-Butler-Martin-Highsmith all together in the 3q of g6, which is pretty solid on D and relatively light on dribbling. Is Spo really gonna go to Highsmith early tomorrow night if Vincent suits up though?
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,190
Brogdon questionable, Vincent questionable for tomorrow night.

Brogdon obviously hasn't been good this series, but I still think he can give them something for stretches. I like him on Jimmy instead of D-White but I doubt he'll play enough for that to really matter in g6.
Brogdon on Jimmy? Yikes, I want no part of that.

A healthy Brogdon is by far the worst defender in the rotation, only rivaled by the disinterested version of Jaylen.

If his elbow is that bad, should be an DNP and only used in case of emergency.

7 man rotation with potential spot minutes for PP or Houser.

My biggest concern there is actually Al Horford (sometimes looking totally washed) counted on for 25-30 min on the road with 1 day of rest.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,327
Cultural hub of the universe
Anyone watching Al Horford and thinking he's washed is watching a different game than I am. Not to mention a +7.0 net rating in the playoffs, best of any of the starters. And owning MVP Joel Embiid. WTF does the man have to do to get some respect?
 

benhogan

Granite Truther
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
18,652
Santa Monica
Brogdon questionable, Vincent questionable for tomorrow night.

Brogdon obviously hasn't been good this series, but I still think he can give them something for stretches. I like him on Jimmy instead of D-White but I doubt he'll play enough for that to really matter in g6. He still provides some level of gravity when he's out there and his handle helps vs the Heat's half court defense. Could use him not jacking up contested pull-up 28 footers when hes out there, though.

Vincent being questionable in theory means that, even if he's out there, he'll be a little less explosive and a bit more vulnerable on defense. Could provide another spot for the J's to poke at on defense. Would imagine he'll still be better then Lowry was in g5 (I wouldn't write off Lowry playing better, g5 was the worst he's looked all playoffs). Will be interesting to see how Spo manages the guard rotation if he plays. Rewatching g5 I thought the half court offense better at challenging weaker defenders (Robinson obviously, but also Strus) consistently in the half court. I think thats where excising Lowry (if he's actually benched for most of g6) could hurt Mia,. They played Bam-Butler-Martin-Highsmith all together in the 3q of g6, which is pretty solid on D and relatively light on dribbling. Is Spo really gonna go to Highsmith early tomorrow night if Vincent suits up though?
White is a much better defender than Brogdon when Malcolm is healthy. Injured Malcolm struggles to hold his position, which makes him especially bad.

Highsmith looks more active than a completely washed Love, so I could see Kevin playing very little tomorrow night.

Anyone watching Al Horford and thinking he's washed is watching a different game than I am. Not to mention a +7.0 net rating in the playoffs, best of any of the starters. And owning MVP Joel Embiid. WTF does the man have to do to get some respect?
Horford's defense is more than fine on Bam. When Al hits 3s this team really hums since it usually removes the opponent's BIG from the paint.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
17,416
This neglects the facts that:

- they could have shot worse in game 5 and won
- Miami shot well from 3 in the competitive part of game 5, but the Cs just completely turned off the water in terms of attempts allowed

Shooting variance is a big part of NBA life, and it may well come back to bite the Celtics. But it's not the story of games 4 and 5.
Or games 1 or 3, for that matter. It was a factor in Game 2.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,190
Anyone watching Al Horford and thinking he's washed is watching a different game than I am. Not to mention a +7.0 net rating in the playoffs, best of any of the starters. And owning MVP Joel Embiid. WTF does the man have to do to get some respect?
I said sometimes for a reason.

You don't think he has had some brutal games?

Can happen to anyone of course, but frequent enough at his age to be a bit concerned this his floor in any given game (especially with limited rest, big minutes, on the road) could be pretty low.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
5,327
Cultural hub of the universe
I said sometimes for a reason.

You don't think he has had some brutal games?

Can happen to anyone of course, but frequent enough at his age to be a bit concerned this his floor in any given game (especially with limited rest, big minutes, on the road) could be pretty low.
As have Tatum, Brown and Smart. No one's calling them washed.

Al's my fave, I'm gonna stick up for him.
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
13,190
As have Tatum, Brown and Smart. No one's calling them washed.

Al's my fave, I'm gonna stick up for him.
LOL. Al is 36, 2 years older than another former All-Star forward on the roster who definitely is washed.

I like Al too, he's a valuable piece on the team, but he sometimes looks pretty washed. It's OK to admit, but let's just hope we don't see that version in the next game.
 

tbb345

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 23, 2010
8,237
Brogdon on Jimmy? Yikes, I want no part of that.

A healthy Brogdon is by far the worst defender in the rotation, only rivaled by the disinterested version of Jaylen.

If his elbow is that bad, should be an DNP and only used in case of emergency.

7 man rotation with potential spot minutes for PP or Houser.

My biggest concern there is actually Al Horford (sometimes looking totally washed) counted on for 25-30 min on the road with 1 day of rest.
At least in these playoffs, if Brogdon’s not scoring with good efficiency, he’s just not a good player. He’s a bad defender and is rarely interested in even looking to pass let alone actually passing.
If the elbow is bad enough that he can’t shoot then he should be stapled to the bench. If CJM wants to go 8 deep, I hope he goes with Hauser next game instead of PP
 

Spelunker

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
11,463
Brogdon on Jimmy? Yikes, I want no part of that.

If his elbow is that bad, should be an DNP and only used in case of emergency.

7 man rotation with potential spot minutes for PP or Houser.
Sooo.....you're saying he's gonna have a Schilling game?
 

joe dokes

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 18, 2005
29,094
LOL. Al is 36, 2 years older than another former All-Star forward on the roster who definitely is washed.

I like Al too, he's a valuable piece on the team, but he sometimes looks pretty washed. It's OK to admit, but let's just hope we don't see that version in the next game.
Al has not look washed playing defense. When he's tired, it shows up in the 3s and rebounding, but rarely, if ever, in his defense.
 

Euclis20

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 3, 2004
7,188
Imaginationland
As have Tatum, Brown and Smart. No one's calling them washed.

Al's my fave, I'm gonna stick up for him.
There was a quote from a baseball player (I want to say it was Bernie Williams, but can't verify) awhile back, something like: "When you're young and in a slump, they call it a slump. When you're old and in a slump, they say you're washed up."

Al's defense has looked fine (and Bam with his athleticism has always been kind of a hard matchup for him) and his rebounding has been mediocre for awhile now, but how washed he looks tends to just depend on whether or not he's making his 3's. His shot profile is radically different now than what it was even a year ago. In last year's playoffs, 51% of his shots were 3 pointers. This postseason, it's up to 73% of his shots are from 3. More than ever, his offense is about making his outside shots. If he's missing (and he's just under 30% for the playoffs), it really stands out because he's not doing much else offensively.
 

lovegtm

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 30, 2013
11,102
There was a quote from a baseball player (I want to say it was Bernie Williams, but can't verify) awhile back, something like: "When you're young and in a slump, they call it a slump. When you're old and in a slump, they say you're washed up."

Al's defense has looked fine (and Bam with his athleticism has always been kind of a hard matchup for him) and his rebounding has been mediocre for awhile now, but how washed he looks tends to just depend on whether or not he's making his 3's. His shot profile is radically different now than what it was even a year ago. In last year's playoffs, 51% of his shots were 3 pointers. This postseason, it's up to 73% of his shots are from 3. More than ever, his offense is about making his outside shots. If he's missing (and he's just under 30% for the playoffs), it really stands out because he's not doing much else offensively.
Yeah, it's not washed if it varies from game to game, all with the same rest. It's just inconsistency.

It's weird to me that at a time when so many guys are playing well into their mid/late 30s, Al is the one people constantly expect to be washed. His game, body and lifestyle were engineered in a lab to age well, and he had an elite physical profile to begin with.

I really want the Celtics to add some regular season depth so that he can play less, but I expect him to have a couple more good years.
 

sezwho

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2005
1,555
Isle of Plum
Yeah, it's not washed if it varies from game to game, all with the same rest. It's just inconsistency.

It's weird to me that at a time when so many guys are playing well into their mid/late 30s, Al is the one people constantly expect to be washed. His game, body and lifestyle were engineered in a lab to age well, and he had an elite physical profile to begin with.

I really want the Celtics to add some regular season depth so that he can play less, but I expect him to have a couple more good years.
He’s certainly not washed but he’s not peak youth either. I expect him to be good for a couple more years as well, but I would expect the hangover from an Embiid series to impact the next games even more moving forward.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
54,767
deep inside Guido territory
This neglects the facts that:

- they could have shot worse in game 5 and won
- Miami shot well from 3 in the competitive part of game 5, but the Cs just completely turned off the water in terms of attempts allowed

Shooting variance is a big part of NBA life, and it may well come back to bite the Celtics. But it's not the story of games 4 and 5.
This shows that the Celtics have been getting open looks all series long. Nothing more, nothing less. Knock them down and they have a very good chance to win.
 

PedroKsBambino

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 17, 2003
30,257
Zach Lowe said on his podcast that the Celtics have been watching "Four Days in October" video clips before each game.

So it's very much not just us making the comparison...
 

koufax32

He'll cry if he wants to...
SoSH Member
Dec 8, 2006
8,983
Duval
As soon as game 4 ended, I felt like tonight is where the series is decided. I think this is the game they have to survive Playoff Jimmy. If the C’s somehow pull this one out, I think the dam breaks, MIA’s confidence gets shot, and we win fairly comfortably in a home game 7.

It was kinda nice to go into the last two games with no expectations or nervousness. That’s over.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
29,515
Celtics averaged 1.4 points per possession against 30 ish possessions in the zone game 5. Y'all shouldn't complain about how they're handling the zone. They are absolutely wrecking it.
Broadcast said that the 3P by JB in G5 was the first 3P the Cs hit against the zone all series - do you know if that's correct?

Cs running high PnR against the zone really throws the MIA zone out of shape..
 

Pmoose82

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 28, 2003
125
I don't know that I would ever count on Miami folding in a game. Game 7 is likely to be the let down/trap game for the C's.
I don’t understand how anyone thinks they would let down in a game 7 after seeing what happened against Milwaukee last year and Philly this year.