Rebounding

A lot is consistently said of the Celtics' apparent inability to grab offensive rebounds. Here is a legitimately GREAT blog post from the guys over at Reds Army (complete with video analysis) which explains why this might be.

Enjoy, and tell me what you think of this type of game plan?

EDIT: Here's the link:

http://www.redsarmy.com/home/2011/04/the-celtics-a-terrible-rebounding-team-by-design.html#more

A good article, supported by revealing video. Supports what some of us have been saying for some time.

By extension, it might be inferred that those Celtics with the highest number of offensive rebounds per 36 minutes (regular season) have been those who are least able to retreat quickly and, because they're often caught in no man's offensive rebounding land, figure they might as well go for broke on the offensive boards (Kristic, Perk, Luke, Shaq, Murphy, Semih, Jermaine). It also would explain why Krstic was a more prolific offensive rebounder when he first joined the Celtics than he has been more recently (after learning their strategy).

Just another example of how many basketball statistics taken at face value, rather than viewed within proper context, can be misleading. Also another example of how "new blood" is not readily integrated to a team overnight and often takes time to unlearn old habits and learn new ones. Also another example of why even a series against an inferior team can reveal favorable trends that are incurring over time. Also another example of the fact that IT'S APRIL!

Sam

As an avid proponent of offensive rebounding (not that anybody really opposes it, it's just that some, like Doc, see more value in falling back and having a prepared defense) I have accepted the fact that I'm not going to be getting my jollies, in this aspect, of this Celtic team. That's ok, there's still plenty to love.

This makes me wonder a bit, though, about Krstic's value to the team past this year. It is clear to me that he is far more valuable when he is attacking the boards than when he's playing one-on-one, man-to-man defense in the set defense. He has the height, but he lacks the weight to fight the bigger centers and he certainly doesn't have that junkyard dog mentality that might help him overcome that deficiency.

If Krstic's value is using his height on the offensive boards, and that's incompatible with our philosophy, then might be be better off next year with another team? And if so, then what did we get for Perk? A half-year, occasionally-used solution at center, Jeff Green and a draft pick for Perk and Nate.

There's no doubt in my mind that having a system and plugging in players that can work in it is preferable to just having the best athletes money can buy. The Knicks, under Mike Antoni, proved that. So, if Krstic isn't a stalwart in the halfcourt defense, what was Danny and Doc looking at?

I suppose, with the quite satisfying (to me!) production of JON, the question of Krstic's effectiveness is less of an issue than it would have been if he hadn't had such a splendid recovery from surgery. So, this could just be me creating a tempest in a teapot. Nevertheless, it appears that when Krstic plays the most effectively, he's doing it aversely to the Celtic team approach and when he plays within the team's approach he's minimally useful.

Taking a quick look at his playoff production and trying to normalize it to /36mpg, it seems like, statistically, he's still doing well. Better, really, than at OKC. But my eyeballs are telling me otherwise.

Just a thought, as I twiddle my thumbs until Sunday.

bob

.

bobheckler wrote:And if so, then what did we get for Perk? A half-year, occasionally-used solution at center, Jeff Green and a draft pick for Perk and Nate.

Yes....even if that turns out to be the case, what is the problem? In exchange for a guy that they would not have been able to re-sign next year and a guy with ZERO basketball intellect - they got a future All Star, a big body to fill some holes during the playoffs, and draft pick.

Sounds like a good deal to me.

Bob,

I think your assessment of Krstic is accurate, and he may not be a good fit over the long term with this group and with Doc's fall-back-on-D philosophy. Maybe Doc leaves after this year, and maybe the new coach lets Krstic go after the offensive boards, but I think the fall-back-on-D approach is becoming the standard in the league, so Krstic probably has to either adapt, accept a role on the bench, or find a home elsewhere.

As for asking what they got for Perk if Krstic isn't a good fit, I don't want to open that whole can of worms again, but I still think it was a logical move considering:

-- The uncertainty of whether Perk would've re-signed. It's clear to me that Ainge did not want to be in the position of getting nothing for Perk if he signed elsewhere and that he felt that chances were too great that he would sign elsewhere because the Celts couldn't offer anything close to what his agent was looking for.

-- If Perk had signed, Perk and Rondo's combined lack of offensive skills make the other three easier to guard. Rondo and Perk are obviously valuable players, but they are complementary players who need others to carry the offensive load. Their inability to carry that load would become more glaringly apparent as the Big Three fade into the sunset.

-- The value and versatility of Green, which was the main asset they acquired. Krstic was secondary.

Outside

Rebounding is not going to dictate the success of the Celtics.
They were the worst offensive rebounding team this year, but that stat has much to do with:
1) Boston took the least amount of field goal attempts per game then any team in the NBA.
2) Boston had the highest field goal percentage in the NBA.
3) This results in not nearly as many offensive rebound opportunities then other teams have.

Boston doesn't have many aggressive offensive rebounders. I don't believe the theory that they are dictated to get back on defense and that is more important then chasing rebounds. They would pound the offensive boards if that was their strength. Maybe their mindset is getting back on D because their guys won't be getting offensive rebounds anyway.

3 of the 4 worst rebounding teams made the playoffs this year (BOS, ATL, PORT) and 2 of the 4 best rebounding teams were terrible (MINN, SAC)

The play of Rondo and Ray will be the deciding factors for Boston. You know what you will get from KG and PP. The opposition getting 2 or 3 more offensive rebounds then the Celtics equates to very little.

damn good thread. i have been back in the hospital fellas. i am back out and the docs in general think its radiation complications...but thats why ive been absent.

Jeb

sorry to here about that but glad your back out.

keep the chin up. We are all rooting for you!

beat

no sweat beat

back to rebounding!

Jeb,

Always thinking of you.

Sam

jeb wrote:damn good thread. i have been back in the hospital fellas. i am back out and the docs in general think its radiation complications...but thats why ive been absent.

Hope things are improving Jeb. As always our prayers are with you my friend.

jeb wrote:damn good thread. i have been back in the hospital fellas. i am back out and the docs in general think its radiation complications...but thats why ive been absent.

jeb,

I'm really, really happy to hear you are suffering from radiation complications. That's because it's a damn sight better than suffering from cancer complications.

Slow, but steady progress. That's what I'm constantly hoping for with you.

bob

.

Outside wrote:Bob,

I think your assessment of Krstic is accurate, and he may not be a good fit over the long term with this group and with Doc's fall-back-on-D philosophy. Maybe Doc leaves after this year, and maybe the new coach lets Krstic go after the offensive boards, but I think the fall-back-on-D approach is becoming the standard in the league, so Krstic probably has to either adapt, accept a role on the bench, or find a home elsewhere.

As for asking what they got for Perk if Krstic isn't a good fit, I don't want to open that whole can of worms again, but I still think it was a logical move considering:

-- The uncertainty of whether Perk would've re-signed. It's clear to me that Ainge did not want to be in the position of getting nothing for Perk if he signed elsewhere and that he felt that chances were too great that he would sign elsewhere because the Celts couldn't offer anything close to what his agent was looking for.

-- If Perk had signed, Perk and Rondo's combined lack of offensive skills make the other three easier to guard. Rondo and Perk are obviously valuable players, but they are complementary players who need others to carry the offensive load. Their inability to carry that load would become more glaringly apparent as the Big Three fade into the sunset.

-- The value and versatility of Green, which was the main asset they acquired. Krstic was secondary.

Outside

outside,

I absolutely agree with your statement about how the combo of Rondo and Perk would limit our offensive versatility, and yet, we won a championship with them and were a knee away from a second. As Sam always points out, you shouldn't just look at what you lost, but what you gained as well and with Perk and Rondo we gained defense and attitude.

We had Bird rights with Perk. We could have signed him for whatever we wanted regardless of the cap.

Green was the centerpiece of that trade for us and Krstic was a tag-along. Is Green and a draft pick worth a starting center and a backup guard? If Krstic is gone, that's what it boils down to.

bob

.

With the questions about Shaq and JO's availability/health for next year I think Krstic gets re-signed even if it is in a sign and trade.
My impression is that the contract offer made to Perkins was a low-ball first offer that they hoped he woul take. When Perk hit free agency this summer I think he would have signed if Boston increased their offer. Maybe they didn't want to guarantee $27m-$30m for Perk.
Green is a nice complimentary player but he is not looking like a future all-star. He has shown to be a 16 pt 6 reb player when playing more then 35 minutes per game. Nash, Aldridge and Monta Ellis didn't even make the all-star team this year. There is no sign that Jeff Green will ever be in their category of player.
It is still way too early to make any judgments about the Perkins trade.

tjmakz wrote:With the questions about Shaq and JO's availability/health for next year I think Krstic gets re-signed even if it is in a sign and trade.
My impression is that the contract offer made to Perkins was a low-ball first offer that they hoped he woul take. When Perk hit free agency this summer I think he would have signed if Boston increased their offer. Maybe they didn't want to guarantee $27m-$30m for Perk.
Green is a nice complimentary player but he is not looking like a future all-star. He has shown to be a 16 pt 6 reb player when playing more then 35 minutes per game. Nash, Aldridge and Monta Ellis didn't even make the all-star team this year. There is no sign that Jeff Green will ever be in their category of player.
It is still way too early to make any judgments about the Perkins trade.

TJ,

If it's way too early to make any judgments about the Perkins trade, then it's way too early to make judgments about Jeff Green. He's playing with a new team(mates) without the benefit of a training camp, with a new playbook, playing a very different style, expected to do very different things than he was expected to do at OKC AND he's mostly playing a different position than the one he played in OKC. Top that off with the fact that he's only 24 years old and this only his 4th year in the league. Pau Gasol didn't look that good in the latter half of 2008, after he went to the Lakers, either. I don't know anybody who doesn't say he's come a long way since then and is a deserving all-star. Some things need to cook a bit before they're ready. While other things, like the synergy, committment and individual sacrifices of Pierce/KG/Allen that year, came practically instantaneously.

The players who make, or don't make, the all-star team in the west is irrelevant as far as Jeff Green's qualifications for the all-star team in the east. Once Pierce retires, in a few years, who will be Green's competition? LeBron? Ok. Melo? Not my favorite player, but Ok. Deng? Maybe, maybe not. Tayshaun Prince is 31 now, in a few years he'll 33+. My point here is that he's young, he has years to develop himself and his erstwhile competition will be getting thinner (other than Melo and LBJ). Even in the west, who would be beating him out for the SF position out west 3 years from now? Artest? Not in a few years. Shawn Marion? He's 31 now. Same as Richard Jefferson.

bob


.

Jeb,

Your my favorite rebounder anyway so get better quick! We all need you on this board.

Hoop

Marc Gasol violates the nba's 3 second "rule" on every possession in this series and it never ever gets called.

bobheckler wrote:

tjmakz wrote:With the questions about Shaq and JO's availability/health for next year I think Krstic gets re-signed even if it is in a sign and trade.
My impression is that the contract offer made to Perkins was a low-ball first offer that they hoped he woul take. When Perk hit free agency this summer I think he would have signed if Boston increased their offer. Maybe they didn't want to guarantee $27m-$30m for Perk.
Green is a nice complimentary player but he is not looking like a future all-star. He has shown to be a 16 pt 6 reb player when playing more then 35 minutes per game. Nash, Aldridge and Monta Ellis didn't even make the all-star team this year. There is no sign that Jeff Green will ever be in their category of player.
It is still way too early to make any judgments about the Perkins trade.

TJ,

If it's way too early to make any judgments about the Perkins trade, then it's way too early to make judgments about Jeff Green. He's playing with a new team(mates) without the benefit of a training camp, with a new playbook, playing a very different style, expected to do very different things than he was expected to do at OKC AND he's mostly playing a different position than the one he played in OKC. Top that off with the fact that he's only 24 years old and this only his 4th year in the league. Pau Gasol didn't look that good in the latter half of 2008, after he went to the Lakers, either. I don't know anybody who doesn't say he's come a long way since then and is a deserving all-star. Some things need to cook a bit before they're ready. While other things, like the synergy, committment and individual sacrifices of Pierce/KG/Allen that year, came practically instantaneously.

The players who make, or don't make, the all-star team in the west is irrelevant as far as Jeff Green's qualifications for the all-star team in the east. Once Pierce retires, in a few years, who will be Green's competition? LeBron? Ok. Melo? Not my favorite player, but Ok. Deng? Maybe, maybe not. Tayshaun Prince is 31 now, in a few years he'll 33+. My point here is that he's young, he has years to develop himself and his erstwhile competition will be getting thinner (other than Melo and LBJ). Even in the west, who would be beating him out for the SF position out west 3 years from now? Artest? Not in a few years. Shawn Marion? He's 31 now. Same as Richard Jefferson.

bob


.

bob,

Pau Gasol was a very good player from the time he came into the NBA but many people didn't see him often. He averaged more ppg at 21 years old then he did this year. Pau hasn't gotten significantly better over the last few years.
Green was a full time player (more then 35 mpg) with OKC with a pretty open offense and Green showed no glimmers of having all-star talent. Just because some Celtics fans label him a future all-star doesn't mean that he will be. Even if he had the talent, playing behind KG and PP, when will he be an all-star? Coming to Boston dramatically hurts his chance of being an all-star.
All-star teams are mostly decided on players offensive talents. Green's offensive opportunities will probably decrease dramatically under the Celtics system and his lack of playing time compared to when he was a starter for OKC. Green doesn't score or rebound enough to be all-star caliber. In 4 years Green has scored 30 points in a game 3 times. In those 3 games he played 49, 43 and 54 minutes....
For Green to make the all-star team he has to be one of the top 5 forwards chosen. Even if Green was a starter in the east I don't put him any higher then the 12th forward in the east behind Garnett, Pierce, Deng, Iguodala, Josh Smith, LeBron, Amare, Bosh, Boozer, Granger and Carmelo. He could even be lower behind JJ Hickson, Kris Humphries and any other young player that emerges.
If you are looking post Pierce when Green is 27+, there are very young forwards in the East that absolutely have all-star potential such as Ed Davis, Evan Turner, Greg Monroe, Paul George, DeMar DeRozan. I don't know what team Derrick Williams will be drafted to this summer but he clearly has all-star potential.

The Celtics are not about all-stars. Who cares?

Sam

Sam,

Your above comment is a very weak/rude way of trying to end this discussion. Maybe you don't care about Celtics being named to the all-star team but Celtics fans care and the players absolutely want to be named to the all-star team.
While this years voting was going on, Paul Pierce was asking all Celtics fans to vote the Celtics players, hoping they would be named starters.

TJ,

Of course, when it's all-star time, most players would like to be part of the honor and the weekend. However, I don't believe Green's potential for future all-stardom has any bearing on his long-term value to the team because of the ways in which Celtics players have historically bought into the team system—whether they happened to emerge as stars or as role players.

So, especially at this hopefully early point in his Celtics career, who cares about conjecture as to a future label for Jeff Green? It may be relevant (albeit entirely premature) to wonder how valuable Jeff Green will be to the Celtics in the future. But making an issue of whether or not he'll specifically become an all-star as a Celtic is rather beside the point. There's been a load of discussion lately about Perk's significant value to the Celtics. Yet he's never been an all-star. Who cares? (Oops, there I've gone and said it again.)

Believe me, if I had been attempting to end the discussion, you would have known about it. I expressed an opinion. Simple as that.

Sam

Rosalie,

It certainly was not my intention to be rude or to short-cut the conversation. I guess it's easy to interpret a comment like "Who cares?" as being some sort of putdown, but it was intended only as a slang expression meaning "It's not of importance" and expressed in a rushed moment.

Thanks for ordering the book. We hope you and your daughter will like it. We're always up for honest critiques, having developed rather thick skins over the 15+ years we've been giving different versions to people.

Wow, you certainly have had great luck with tickets this season. Here's hoping you personally witness a win. I've never predicted the lengths of series, having learned to take whatever I can get as long as it's hopefully a series win. I expect both teams will be sky high, with different styles, so it ought to be a barn-burner. Here's to no injuries on either side.

Unfortunately, we'll be in Iceland or somewhere when Game One is on, but I'll be with you in spirit.

Go Celtics!

Sam