A statistical Look at the Celtics' Current Status and a Look into the Future

Shown below are the statistics I've been tracking throughout the season, broken down into five categories:

Games 1-31, which took the team right up to the first 6-game winning streak
Games 31-37: The first 60game winning streak
Games 38-43: The 6-game losing streak
Games 44-54: The first 11 games after Rondo's loss (including Sully's and Barbosa's losses)
Games 55-58:The most recent 4 games during which "reinforcements" arrived.

The comments beside the stats are my own, and they're in paragraph form. The "....." are there only to help with the formatting, and each line of text is part
of the paragraph and doesn't necessarily relate to the specific stat it's place beside.

If you don't want to wade through the stat, my conclusions are at the end.

Obviously, stats tell only part of the story. But, frankly, I don't see much in
these figures that contradicts what I've been watching throughout the season. I
hope this format will help to concretize some of the impressions.

Sam

Category…………………………………............…....W/L record…......%................................Remarks…………………......…

Assists as % of made field goals:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451):63%...Based on only 4 games, the current iteration
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 63%...of the Celtics is assisting on only50% of the
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 61%....field goals—far below last season’s 67%.
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 65%.....Practices & repetitions may help. Otherwise
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 50%...team may live/die on ability to create shots.

Offensive rebounds as % of available offensive rebounds:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451): 20%...Between them, Rondo and Sully accounted for
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 27%...about 1/3 of the Celtics’ offensive rebounds.
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 22%....Sully ranks #1 on team in ORB/36 minutes.
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 15%....Team % is improving as Wilcox, Bass solidify
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 22%...their #2 and #3 team rankings in OR/36 min.

Defensive rebounds as % of available defensive rebounds:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451): 74% …Last year the Celts ranked #13 in DRB
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 70%....by capturing 73% of available def. boards.
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 76%.....Sully exited, def. board % dipped. Now
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 72%......recovering on the strength of gang-boarding and
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 74%....more contributions from Pierce and the guards.

Fast break points as % of total Celtics points.:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl. 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451) : 13%...Highest FB % (19%) came during 6-game
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 12%...losing streak. Likely linked to 4^th quarter
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 19%....fatigue. Now, they’re trending nearly back to
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 13%.... highest % of season as everyone is contributing
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 18%...and minutes allocation spread better.

Points. in the paint as % of total Celtics points:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451): 39%...Points in paint currently lowest % of season.
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 42%...Sully’s loss was obviously a factor. Balance has
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 42%....Need more penetration from Green, Lee, Bass,
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 37%....and all three seem to have gotten the word.

Points from three-point shots as % of total Celtics points:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451): 18%...No clear trend in terms of the impact of threes.
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 17%...Fine with me, as I hope the team will continue
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 16%....not to depend a lot on threes but to depend
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 20%....more on transition and going to the hole.
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 18%

Turnovers as % of opponent turnovers:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451): 94%...98% figure for games 55-58 misleading: 79% for first 3 games
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 86%... and 155% for Warriors game, which was a track meet. Shows
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 100%.. that, while Celts can fast break effectively, it's easy to
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 85%...…get out of control if it’s carried to the extreme., especially if you
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 98%...don't have an experienced PG ball distributor in transition.

Field goals attempted as % of opponent FGA:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451): 98%...100% figure during losing s treak shows that volume shooting
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 86%...is not a panacea. But it may be becoming more of a factor on
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 100%..this team. The problem is that volume shooting is mainly
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 85%... effective if combined with lack of turnovers, strong offensive
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 98%...rebounding and a reasonable shooting %.

Bench points as % of opponent bench points:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451):33%...Following strong bench contribution after loss
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 37%...of Rondo/Sully/Blur, the rotation has tightened with
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 34%....Lee joining the starters. Recent bench scoring has been
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 39%....the lowest of the season. Need much stronger contributions
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 32%...from Terry and Crawford (at the very least).

Steals + blocks as % of opponent steals + blocks:

Games 1-31 (up to, not incl., 1^st win streak—14-17 (.451):95%....The strongest indications of defensive energy
Games 31-37 (first 6-game winning streak)—6-0, (1.000): 125%..have occurred during the first winning streak
Games 38-43 (losing streak b4 Rondo loss)—0-6,, (.000): 107%..and the most recent 4 games (combined total of 9-1
Games 44-54 (Rondo then Sul & Blur out)—8-3,,, (.727): 111%.. record). I hope the upward trend will be sustained because
Games 55-58 (four new players with team)—3-1,,, (.750): 129%..defense is this team's trump card.

Most of the period-to-period differences are not huge, as time has a tendency to smooth out trends. But that’s what makes noteworthy differences most
revealing, even if they’re based on relatively few games.

Of particular interest to me are the patterns formed since the departures of Rondo, Sully and Barbosa. In the first 11 games, offensive rebounds plummeted;
defensive rebounds dipped; fast break points dropped measurably; points in the paint declined; there was increased dependence on three-point shots; and the
number of attempted field goals decreased. And yet the Celtics went 8-3 (a very healthy .727 record). How could this happen?

Simple.

• For one thing, the team took better care of the ball—the best rate of the season, but only one percentage point better than during the earlier six-game
winning streak. It’s no coincidence that, during what were arguably the two most impressive stretches of the season, the Celtics turnover ratio was far
better than during any period of time.

• Second, the bench contributed more scoring punch than at any other time of the season, despite the fact that they lost Sullinger, Barbosa, and Lee (who
was “lost” to the bench). Does anyone with a brain seriously doubt what Jeff Green brings to this team?

• Third, their defensive energy, which had barely outstripped the opposition’s during the losing streak leading up to Rondo’s loss, turned the corner. It
began an ascent that has continued throughout the most recent four games, when it has surpassed all other time periods of the season.

• Fourth, the impact of assists actually increased—to its highest level of the season. But, instead of being concentrated largely in one catalyst, the assists
were spread out among the team.

Now the adrenalin from that 11-game stretch has at least partially abated, and we’re four games into the rest of the season. Four reinforcements have arrived, and it appears
that at least one of them (Crawford) might become of the regular rotation. Based on very early indications (based on only four games, and pending what eventuates from this
week’s practice sessions), some plausible portents follow:

• The defensive energy of this team (obviously headed by Avery Bradley) is the real deal and will probably continue to be their trump card.

• Hopefully, the Warriors’ game was an aberration, and the Celtics will continue to take better care of the ball than their opponents.

• Jeff Green will continue his hard forays to the hoop and will help loosen things up for Terry and Crawford to get more open shots from the outside.

• Like it or not, the Celtics seem to be trending increasingly in the direction of being a transition and jump shooting team. It would be ideal if they had
more inside strength. But Green, Wilcox, Bass (to an increasing extent, I hope), and Pierce (probably to a decreasing extent as fatigue sets in) are not
nearly as formidable inside as a lot of key opponents.

• In addition to the arrival of four new players, the most recent four games coincide with the wakeup call given to Wilcox by Doc. Bass also seems to be
more aggressive in the offensive end. The Celtics play better when they rebound on the offensive boards; and their recent trend is an upward one. However, one
factor supporting a volume shooting strategy (which they seem to have been employing recently) is a strong offensive rebounding capability. The less
effective they are on the offensive boards, the more pressure there will be not to allow a volume shooting mentality to lower their shooting percentage appreciably.

• Through additions and subtractions, the Celtics seem to have evolved into more of a free-lancing team, as many of them seem more comfortable creating
their own shots than creating shots for others. This, along with the chemistry factor, could easily change over the next six weeks. As the ultimate picture
crystallizes, we’ll have a better idea what analytical emphasis to place on assists.

• Most, if not all, of these factors will be influenced by the team's resiliency and endurance. If Doc does shorten the rotation, I hope he does it much closer to
playoff time. Doing so will help to spread out the minutes more judiciously over the next six weeks as well as to evaluate the potential of the newer guys and possibly (depending on how Shavlik and White work out) to make another move or two.

Go Celtics!

Sam

Sam, Very interesting compilation of stats. What jumped out at me was the following. During our six game losing streak we had the most
....points in the paint
...fast break points and
...defensive rebounds

Does this mean we shouldn't score points in the paint, score fast break points, and get defensive rebounds? Going by stats only would imply that, but NO!
The most revealing stat during our losing streak was that our turnovers were 100% of the opponents, the highest percentage in all the groups of games played. I take from your accumulated stats that turnovers lead to defeats, and good ball control leads to wins. This key stat is DEFINITELY true in football, and now I'm beginning to think the same holds true for basketball too.

W,

What I've heard called "empty possessions" (turnovers) are a curse for more than one reason. (1) One turnover can mean as much as a 6-point swing in the score—a three you might have scored plus a three the other team now has a chance of scoring. (2) It can negate the value of a hard-earned stat such as a defensive rebound. (3) It can be a real momentum buster and/or psychological downer among the team.

Also, what should not be overlooked in the way I elected to compile this stat is that forcing an opposition turnover counts as heavily as preventing your own turnover. So this is one stat that contains both offensive and defensive implications.

Also noteworthy is the fact that scoring points in the paint, scoring fast break points, and grabbing defensive rebounds all require relatively high levels of energy expenditure. Any of the three can exact a physical toll. And in how many of those six losing games did the Celtics have early advantages only to fold later in the game?

I'm hoping that spreading not only the minutes but also the heavy duty work among a broader spectrum of Celtics players will produce a fresher close-out group down the stretch.

Sam

Astute observations bout both empty possessions and the effects of high energy expenditure plays.

Sam I really like the new additions, Danny made great under the radar moves, we have 5 pieces in the backcourt and thats without Rondo. The 2 pitbulls together are better defensively than any combination with Rondo, thats just a fact. Now we have Jet, Crawford and T Will all pining for time, lets use em all and uptempo and run teams off the floor!!

Don't know much of the 2 new bigs, I assume neither is a Perk type enforcer....lets keep limiting KG's minutes as we need him fresh for the playoff run.

It all sounds good to me, Cow. It'll be interesting to see whether and how Doc uses the new guys after all the practice time they're having. It's kind of interesting to see Randolph talking about his role with the Celtics being rebounding and defense after averaging 31-32 points in the Chinese league. That is reminiscent of Perk, who was a major offensive star at his high school. I hope that, at 6' 10", 240 lbs, Shavlik can at least take care of himself.

Sam

Thanks Sam for a very nice post, and a lot of work. Couple of things, I asked earlier which you would rather have, 1 guy getting twelve assists or 3 guys getting 4 assists. Kind of like pts, I would rather not depend on a 24 pt scorer game in and out since PP would be that guy and he can't consistantly do it anymore.
I agree that defense is the key as it appears to be getting better. One thing about Rondo getting so many offensive rebounds was when he wasn't successful then we were vulnerable to the other team getting fast break pts.
Again, nice post and thanks.

Thanks, Tardust. Ironically, I don't think anyone on this board is as tough on the use of basketball statistics as I am because I believe it's possible to poke holes in the way many basketball stats are used.

One of my pet peeves is the lack of context in the use of many stats, and that's why I so frequently allude to the "per 36 minutes" qualifier when talking about stats. I hope that, in presenting these stats (which are basically combinations of readily available figures and various forms of contexts), I'm practicing what I preach.

You pose an interesting question about which is preferable on this team—one guy getting 12 assists or three guys getting four assists apiece. I'd have to wimp out and say, "Neither of the above."

I prefer a "model" that involves having one primary floor general. But being a floor general involves a lot more than just assists. A good floor general controls pace; creates and maintains an attack mentality; ensures that the ball is distributed equitably enough to keep everyone happy; anticipates so well that he often makes the pass before the assist pass; cultivates team-wide trust in teammates; and many more subtle and not-so-subtle factors.

One of Cousy's little secrets involved Satch Sanders' eyesight. Satch wore contacts in games; and some of the dependably hilarious moments involved players on both teams, as well as refs, lying on the floor trying to locate one of Satch's lenses when it popped out.

Cousy was ever mindful of the fact that Satch had difficulty picking out the ball from a distance of more than 30 feet. But Cooz was equally mindful of the need to motivate Satch to run the floor. So, on selected occasions, Cousy would throw a long baseball pass to a breaking Satch, knowing that Satch had very little chance of catching the pass—just to reward him for filling the lane. In other words, Cooz judiciously "expended" an almost certain turnover in the quest for motivation.

Now that is the kind of thing I think of when talking about a floor general. Mentality and judgment are at least as important as physicality; and the epitome of the floor general mentality involves energizing and enabling the entire team while exerting enough control to keep everyone in synch.

Sorry for the long discourse, but it happens that Bob Cousy represented (and still does) to me the essence of what professional basketball should be all about. To this day, he was so far ahead of anyone else who ever qualified for the title of floor general. In my opinion, Russell was the heart of those teams and Cousy was the soul.

Under the current circumstances I believe it's wise to divvy up Rondo's assists among remaining players; and the fact that assists can come from any direction can even be an advantage, at least in the short term. The other team can't depend on any one Celtic to pass first routinely. But what is most missing from the equation in Rondo's absence is the floor general mentality. Rajon is far from the perfect floor general, but he does it better than anyone else on the team—definitely including Paul Pierce.

The very unusual twists and turns of this season have pretty much convinced me that, as far as assists are concerned, the ideal balance would have the team collecting at least 25 assists per game, with Rondo accounting for 35%-40% of them. This year's experience has convinced me that the team has become too "Rondo-centric," with Rondo controlling too much of the offensive flow. That pattern creates predictability, which can be the kiss of death—especially on offense.

I'm not sure I answered your question, but perhaps you can find something relevant in this rant.

Sam

Sam

I totally agree with your call on the Rondo situation, have loved him over the years, but agree that he had too much dominance of the ball and we got much too predictable on offense. Now another Rondo weakness has been exposed as I just love the way Avery Bradley hounds and defends the opposing points, I know Rondo always had good steals stats, but there are so many talented points and we are blessed with the best defensive point in the league, as no one disrupts opposing points and their whole offense like AB.

Going forward next year, if you start Rondo and Bradley and Rondos innate vision and passing will still be there offensively, I still want AB on that point defensively wearing him out. Rondo would have to cover the 2's, but he would take a beating and is too slight, I see Lee and even T Will defending the 2's better. I don't know what the best solution is, I know AB can defend both guard spots, against the Heat I would still want him harassing Wade. Against the Russell Westbrooks, Pauls, Tony Parkers, etc all the points that their teams rely on them to score and create with the ball in their hands for the majority on offense I want AB sticking to them....thats just what he does.

I see flaws in our offense without Rondo and even though he overcontrolled the ball, still easy to see stretches where our offense could use his handle, quickness and penetration. But the reason we are winning is on defense and that starts with AB on that point and nobody defends that position better. By him stopping those points, just messes up everything for that team, they think more survival, just get the ball up than creating.

cow

Cow,

For sure, figuring out the Rondo situation is the biggest puzzle confronting the Celtics—well maybe tied with getting a big league center. That's center, Danny. Not just a big. Not a stretch 4 or skinny 5. A bona fide center. That's C-E-N-T-E-R.

It's difficult to envision anything happening with Rondo this summer for at least two reasons. (1) He's considered damaged goods until proven otherwise in league play. (2) He deserves time to establish whether or not he can adapt to a little backtracking from Doc's assurance that this is Rondo's team.

One thing we shouldn't lose sight of is the fact that Rondo's defensive reputation was honed when he had a younger KG backing him up and ensuring that Rondo's defensive gambles didn't backfire too often. Cousy had Russell and became a very competent risk-taker in the passing lanes. Rondo can no longer count on that degree of backup. Maybe you're right, and it's simply a matter of having Bradley cover quick opposing point guards. Will Rondo be up to guarding quick and taller shooting guards on a regular basis? Who knows?

There's also a factor that I haven't heard or seen associated with Rondo. At age 27 next season, he'll be in his 8th year in the league. His 19,182 minutes don't begin to compare with those of Nash (41.502) and Kidd (55,287) or even Cousy (34, 285). But a typical minute for Rondo involves vastly more wear-and-tear than the case with the other three. Rondo's style of play (I wonder if the Celts keep stats on tumbles to the floor) is a magnet for physical deterioration. And he's also had two very serious injuries in his seven seasons.

Even if we assume that Rondo can alter his approach to controlling the game so as to fit the optimal model for the Celtics (definitely not a sure thing), much longer can he maintain his semi-reckless attack style? If he moderates that style, how much effectiveness could he lose? If he winds up guarding taller, more pphysical opponents while Bradley covers the less physical guys, how might will his resilience be affected? Guys like Doofus Wade are waiting in the bullrushes. Rondo's game depends to a high degree on his athleticism. How much longer will he maintain roughly the same level of athleticism?

I don't have the solutions to these issues, but I do believe they're highly relevant issues.

Sam

Sam

Great points, with a younger KG and the fearsome Perk backing him up, we could afford more of Rondos gambling without hurting the defense so much as those 2 enforcers also made Pierce and Ray Allen better defenders. I loved watching that defense and used to call KG and Perk the best 4-5 defensive twosome in the league. KG made Perk a better defender and Perks punishing presence did the same for Garnett.

I know Rondo is still very much an above average defender, but hes not physically strong and gifted like AB, who might be the best defensive package I've ever seen at 6'3". And if you have such a disruptive force at point, you've got to play to your strengths and use him there. Its actually better for AB in the long run too, as with his punishing style, rather see him go at the smaller guys who are closer to his size, even though he can obviously make life difficult for the 2's.

Next year will certainly be interesting and still feel as is, we are primed for a deep playoff run. Go Celtics!!!

cow

We may surprise folks with this year's playoff run as well.