2022-2023 POST GAME PORTLAND TRAIL BLAZERS - HOME

Celtics Wrap: Boston Ends Losing Streak, Cruises Past Trail Blazers
The C's are back in the win column


NESN by Gio Rivera

BOSTON — The Boston Celtics put their three-game losing streak behind them with a 115-93 victory over the Portland Trail Blazers at TD Garden on Wednesday night.

The Celtics improved their record to 46-21 while the Trail Blazers fell to 31-35 on their season.

ONE BIG TAKEAWAY
The Celtics were in dire need of putting together a complete four-quarter effort and that’s exactly what they did. This time, Boston countered one of the league’s best 3-point shooters, Damian Lillard, with a solid showing from beyond the arc that the Trail Blazers had no counter for. Jayson Tatum, Al Horford and Sam Hauser led that charge, each combing for 12 of 18 outside shots knocked down by the Celtics.

Entering the fourth quarter with a 22-point lead, the Celtics didn’t buckle but instead preserved their lead over the Trail Blazers. The C’s grabbed 15 rebounds in the game-deciding minutes while scoring 21 points.

Taking care of business, the Celtics allowed head coach Joe Mazzulla to play rookie J.D. Davidson, who last played for Boston on Feb. 14 against the Detroit Pistons.

STARS OF THE GAME
— Tatum provided the Celtics with one of his strongest outputs since the All-Star break, scoring 30 points with six rebounds and seven assists.

— Derrick White followed Tatum’s lead, contributing 21 points while shooting 8-of-12 from the field with five rebounds and seven assists.

— All-Star Damian Lillard pulled his weight on Portland’s side, scoring a team-leading 27 points with five rebounds and eight assists.

WAGER WATCH
FanDuel Sportsbook set the over/under on Derrick White’s assists total at 3.5 with -130 odds on the Over prior to the start of the contest. At the end of the first half, White had cleared those odds, racking up five of his total seven assists. A $100 wager placed on the 28-year-old veteran would’ve resulted in a $176.92 total payout.

UP NEXT
The Celtics are off the next two days before hitting the road to play the Atlanta Hawks on Saturday night. Tip off from State Farm Arean is scheduled for 7:30 p.m. ET.

112288

I lost electricity in my apartment in the 3rd quarter, so I wasn't able to watch the game shortly after going up 21.  I think it came down to 18, and then gone (NOTE:  the boxscore froze when the electricity and WiFi went, so the last score I saw was 70-49 with 8:47 left in the 3rd).

Every starter in double-digits.  They shot a combined 33-54, 61%.  Not bad.  12-25 from 3.  

Sam started off hot, 3-3 from 3, but ended up 3-9 from 3.  

Brogdon was 2-13, 1-7 from 3.  That is SO unusual from him I'm giving him a pass.  When I got locked out of the game he had missed at least 3 bunnies.  In the 2nd quarter he was 1-8, the 3 blown bunnies and 1-5 from 3.  

Jay King @ByJayKing
yesterday
Joe Mazzulla: "I always had a question about, like, when we shoot a lot of 3s and miss, everybody asks me questions. But when we shoot a lot of layups and miss nobody says anything. ... Just because you’re closer to the basket doesn’t mean it’s easier to score."

Well, we've been talking about all those blown bunnies here, Joe, both on the Game On! thread and in the forum.  Joe's point was "just because a shot is close doesn't mean it's easy".  I disagree, Joe.  A layup is easier if you focus.  The fact that we missed layups doesn't mean they're hard, it means we're not finishing at the rim.  Getting the same result, missing the shot, doesn't mean it's because of the same reason.  Post hoc ergo propter hoc is an informal logical fallacy.  It means "Event Y followed Event X, therefore Event Y must have been caused by Event X".  That isn't logically true, is it?  Just because you miss a 3pt fga because it's hard doesn't mean that you missed your layups because they were hard.  It's the difference between causation and correlation and Joe doesn't get that.

49 out of 88 fgas were 3s.  I suppose that's the good news, we're back to doing what we were doing.  The bad news is that we shot 36.7% on them and that's league average, nothing particularly stellar.  We won, in part, because they shot 28.2% from 3.  7 more 3pt fgm for us = 21 points.  We won by 22.

Only 10 turnovers.  Very nice.  Tatum with 3 of them and only 2 assists.  Not so nice.

Grant sighting!! Will he return to his burrow for 6 more weeks of basketball winter or will we get more sightings on this long road trip?

DWhite with 21 points on 8-12 and 7 assists.  He had his hands full with Dame today.

They shot 36.6%.  That's why I'm not all excited here, other than getting a W for a change.  If their offense hadn't been horrendous this would have been a lot closer.

https://www.espn.com/nba/boxscore/_/gameId/401469141




Bob


.

Dame Time my ass! Yeah, I'm not worried. Hate to say this but this is the starting line up that works. RWIII might need to come off the bench from here on out. His backdoor dunks aren't going to work in the playoffs.

26 assists out of 42 makes. That's in the wheelhouse. Doesn't necessarily imply the ball is moving but it does mean you are consciously putting players in the best position to make an easier attempt at the basket. To to that, you are probably moving the ball better. I wasn't counting passes this time, but I will when I re-watch.

If 36.7% is indeed the 3-ball league average, it's time to go back inside for 2-pointers with And 1's.

Brogden back. He didn't shoot well but it's his first game back. He'll be ah-ight. Not worried.

Tatum, Horford and Smart all above 50% for 3's.

The popping ball movement in the playoffs will be what wins us Banner 18.

The Great and Powerful Oz has spoken!

OK, it's just me.

db

dbrown4 wrote:Dame Time my ass!  Yeah, I'm not worried.  Hate to say this but this is the starting line up that works.  RWIII might need to come off the bench from here on out.  His backdoor dunks aren't going to work in the playoffs.    

26 assists out of 42 makes.  That's in the wheelhouse.  Doesn't necessarily imply the ball is moving but it does mean you are consciously putting players in the best position to make an easier attempt at the basket.  To to that, you are probably moving the ball better.  I wasn't counting passes this time, but I will when I re-watch.

If 36.7% is indeed the 3-ball league average, it's time to go back inside for 2-pointers with And 1's.

Brogden back.  He didn't shoot well but it's his first game back.  He'll be ah-ight.  Not worried.  

Tatum, Horford and Smart all above 50% for 3's.  

The popping ball movement in the playoffs will be what wins us Banner 18.

The Great and Powerful Oz has spoken!  

OK, it's just me.  

db      

dbrown,

Through Games 66-67 the league average for 3pt fg% is 36.1%, so 36.7% is pretty close.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_stats_per_game.html


Bob


.

BobH,

My bad.  My conclusion is wrong as I misread the number!  As long as the league average for 3's is above 33.33%, we're going to continue to see more 3's shot/made than 2's.  (I was assuming the league average for 2-point FG's is 50%, but as I look it up it's a bit less at 47.4%.  Also, if you move the line out, that increases the area of the 2-point FG's which, on average, would drop the 2-point FG average slightly.  Dog chasing its tail, Catch 22, etc.)    

I'm one for parity as far as shooting goes.  But the league likes the line where it is for now and that's where it's going to stay.  Move the line back and that average will drop.  I'm sure there's an ambitious math grad student that can tell us exactly how far that line needs to be from the rim for parity with 2-point FG%, but you're probably going to have to widen the court by a couple of feet to make it happen.  Shortening the court so the area stays the same might not be a bad idea.  

The league widened the free throw lane many years ago, why not the whole court?  

db

P.S. The only other thing, and it's the simplest, is to change the value of the 3-point shot. Make it a 2.75-point shot, 2.5-point shot, etc. to hit the target. Definitely an adjustment, though. Now, the scoreboards aren't going to like it but there's only 30 to change. but as it stands, the 3-point shot is more valuable than the 2-point shot until something changes.

When the Celtics play consistent and the right way on each possession they are hard to beat. I know Portland is not a great team, but when you get back on defense, play tough half court D, minimize turnovers, and move the ball on each possession good things usually happen.

This road trip is crucial. Can we eliminate the mental lapses, empty possessions, bad turnovers? Can we play consistent basketball for 48 minutes? I think we can. When your on the road its always possible you are going to run into a hot shooter. (Look at what McCollum did to Dallas in the fourth quarter last night.). However, I don't think its unreasonable we can go 5-1 on this road trip. We are better than every team we are playing. Its all about consistent play for 48 minutes, staying focused.

What's the boards prediction for the road trip?????????

6-0

It’s a bunch of tomato cans thankfully

The Celtics needed this win like a Junkie rooming the street looking to get well.

Portland is nobody but they are just one game back in the loss column to make the 7-10 playin round.  In my mind, every win is a good win and every loss is a bad loss.  No time to split hairs with qualifiers. The Bucks are up 3 games in the loss column and the Sixers are breathing down our necks like some sick sociopath.

Our 2nd 6 game road trip is next and I hope we will sweep the lot.  They may resemble cans of Tomato Sauce but the Celtics have had problems opening similar cans.

@Hawks - They will be playing their 2nd game of a B2B
@Rockets - If they beat us something is really wrong.
@Minny - KAT may or not be playing but this will be a hard game.
@Portland -  revenge will be on their minds
@Jazz - both teams will be playing second game of B2B ...Beat danny ainge
@Kings - They will be playing the 2nd game of a B2B.  Kings may be our toughest game/  2nd in the West and putting up a league high 121.1 PPG.  

Great win. Looked pretty routine and thats how I like em.

There is one thing that concerns me and thats the Grant and Joe scenario.

At the post game presser after the Cav’s loss and the missed 2 free throws by Grant.
Joe says “I Love him” then proceeds to bench him almost the entire game last night. Maybe Joe “forgot” again?
Either way it’s not a good look and sends the wrong message to a struggling player who we need if we are to go a long way.

Grant himself has talked about the ligament strain that has affected his shooting. Who knows? Mazzulla may have noticed it too, qnd adjusted his minutes accordingly.

I’m not convinced that Grant’s reduced playing time is due to injury.

Why is Grant not listed on an injury list? If he is injured the team HAS to report that or the league will have something to say about it.

Ktron wrote:I’m not convinced that Grant’s reduced playing time is due to injury.

Why is Grant not listed on an injury list?  If he is injured the team HAS to report that or the league will have something to say about it.

I'll just take Grant's word for it, having heard him say it was bothering him in a You Tube interview.If he couldn't play, because of injury, he'd be on an injured list. Why in the world would a team that is capable of suiting up on the injured list? To show the other team who to attack?

jrleftfoot wrote:

Ktron wrote:I’m not convinced that Grant’s reduced playing time is due to injury.

Why is Grant not listed on an injury list?  If he is injured the team HAS to report that or the league will have something to say about it.

     I'll just take Grant's word for it, having heard him say it was bothering him in a You Tube interview.If he couldn't play, because of injury, he'd be on an injured list. Why in the world would a team that is capable of suiting up on the injured list? To show the other team who to attack?

Thats partly what I’m saying. He’s not hurt enough to be placed on the injured list so why is he not playing? I’ll
Ask sorta of the same question. Why in the world would we not play a player not on the injured list that was key to our run last year?
I’m not sure if a team can hide anything from another team regarding players. They have scouts. They know whats going on.
Again, I'm not saying that Grant is not having issues with his elbow. I just don't think that is the only thing thats keeping him on the bench.