POST GAME DETROIT

Rapid Reaction: Pistons 87, Celtics 77

By Chris Forsberg | ESPNBoston.com

Rapid reaction after the Detroit Pistons defeated the Boston Celtics 87-77 on Sunday evening at The Palace of Auburn Hills:

THE NITTY GRITTY
The Celtics rallied from a 15-point deficit and actually sneaked ahead briefly in the fourth quarter, but Boston's offense disappeared for a six-minute stretch in the fourth quarter which allowed Detroit to push its lead back to double figures. Unfazed, Boston rallied again to make it a one-possession game, but couldn't get over the hump. Kelly Olynyk scored a team-high 15 points on 6-of-11 shooting with seven rebounds over 26 minutes, while Avery Bradley added 13 points (to go along with eight rebounds and six turnovers). Detroit's frontline of Josh Smith, Greg Monroe, and Andre Drummond each had 15 points apiece (and combined for 29 rebounds).

TURNING POINT
Riding a lineup of Bradley, Courtney Lee, Gerald Wallace, Brandon Bass, and Olynyk, the Celtics rallied from 10 down to make it a two-point game with 2:14 remaining. Coming out of a timeout, the Pistons gave the ball away giving Boston a chance to tie (or pull ahead), but Boston turned it over three straight times (first by Lee, two more by Bradley). The Pistons made their free throws as Boston kicked the ball around and emerged with the win.

GREEN GLUED TO BENCH
Celtics forward Jeff Green, the player that is supposed to be Boston's focal point on offense, didn't play over the final 14:41. Green finished with seven points on 3-of-5 shooting with two rebounds and two assists over 20:06. He was a minus-8 in plus/minus. Likewise, big man Vitor Faverani played only 18 minutes as C's went with smaller lineups after early struggles inside.

LOOSE BALLS
Stevens shuffled up his rotations a bit with MarShon Brooks (0-for-2, 0 points over 6:53) and Keith Bogans (0-for-1, 0 points over 2:51) both made their regular-season debuts... Kris Humphries and Phil Pressey earned DNPs for the second straight game... The Pistons shot 17 more free throws than Boston (29-12)... Boston turned the ball over 21 times leading to 21 points (though the Pistons were actually worse, giving 27 points off 21 turnovers)... Points in the paint: Pistons 54, Celtics 38.

WHAT IT MEANS
The Celtics fall to 0-3 on the young season. They've given themselves a chance to win each game, but lulls continue to hold this team back. Boston plays the second night of a back-to-back on Monday in Memphis. This is a stretch of five games in seven days in seven different cities as Boston has a second road back-to-back looming at the end of the week (in Orlando and Miami).

The lulls are certainly a problem. But I think the turnovers are even more detrimental. No team is going to be firing on all cylinders the entire night, but the key is that when your team isn't, that you don't make the mental mistakes to compound the problem.

At 0-3, I think Pressey deserves a turn at PG for a few games. It certainly can't be any worse than what we're witnessing now.




KJ

http://www.csnne.com/blog/celtics-talk/blakely-plenty-issues-celtics-seasons-start

Blakely: Plenty of issues for Celtics at season's start

November 3, 2013, 11:15 pm

Early struggles with a smidgeon of progress thrown in here and there, followed by a disappointing finish and even more disappointing end result.

This is the Boston Celtics, this season's "Good try, Good effort" team that's setting the pace for NBA lottery-bound clubs.

They have enough talent to compete with most teams in the East, but clearly don't have the players to finish squads off when they are in position to do so.

In each of their three games this season, the Celtics have either led or have been within a possession or two going into the decisive fourth quarter.

In the season opener at Toronto, the game was tied at 71 going into the fourth.

Boston's home opener against Milwaukee saw them squander a 12-point lead after three quarters of play.

And on Sunday, despite Detroit having its way around the basket most of the game, Boston found itself down just 63-58 going into the fourth.

A pair of free throws by Jared Sullinger in the fourth gave the Celtics a one-point, short-lived lead.

"We had our opportunities," Celtics head coach Brad Stevens told reporters after the game.

Sadly, that will be a common refrain for Stevens this season. Because it's clear that opportunities to be successful will be there for the Celtics under Stevens.

The mistakes that they make over and over again, have nothing to do with his play-calling and everything to do with the players called upon to execute the game plan.

Avery Bradley at the point didn't work under Doc Rivers, and it doesn't look any better under Stevens.

In three games, he has nine assists with 14 turnovers.

Ouch!

Bradley's a great defender, evident by him being named to the NBA's All-Defensive second team last season.

He can knock down the corner 3-ball, and his work ethic is as good as you'll find in the NBA.

But he's not a point guard!!

Both Bradley and the Celtics will be better off once this truth is embraced and treated as such.

Then there's Jeff Green who tends to go back and forth between being magnificent one minute, and downright miserable to watch the next.

Arguably Boston's most talented player, his inconsistency has been among the many reasons why the Celtics are 0-for-the-season.

If those were the biggest issues facing the team, Boston would be in pretty good shape.

But sadly, it's not.

There are more; lots more.

More than anything, they have a roster that's simply not functional or put together to win games which truth be told, is not a major priority this year (shocker, I know).

The Celtics didn't have to lose their first three games for folks to realize that this season was going to be challenging in ways Celtics Nation hasn't seen in years.

While victories will be few and far between, Boston has shown the ability to compete every night.

And for a team that's rebuilding, that's the kind of foundation that you want no matter how painful it may be to watch right now.

--

Sunday's 87-77 loss at Detroit kept the Celtics winless at 0-3 this season. It marks just the 10th time in franchise history that Boston struggled so mightily out the gates.

Here's a look at the previous not-so-stellar starts for Boston and how the Celtics how the Celtics' season ended.

Year | Season ended with ...

2012 - Eastern Conference finals

2007 - Did not qualify for the playoffs

1995 - First round

1978 - DNQ for playoffs

1971 - DNQ for playoffs

1970 - DNQ for playoffs

1951 - First round

1950 - DNQ for playoffs

1947 - DNQ for playoffs

----

I don't think playoff aspirations are necessarily important this year. However, the prospective new core's finding ways to develop chemistry and trust while taking up the mantle as leaders is vital.


KJ

Sooner or later Stevens will figure out what we already know.  Bradley is not a point guard and if he is the one to initiate the offense we are in trouble.  Bradley had 6 TO's but the team had a total of 23 so the problem goes beyond Avery.  Bradley is a defender and one of the best in the NBA.  He had 3 steals and 8 rebounds last night and shot 6 for 14 but he only had 3 assists.  We need a set up guy so that the team gets and takes high percentage shots.

This team does not have enough talent to be fundamentally flawed. Rebounding is one thing when you have to matchup against Detroit or other teams with strong frontline but turnovers gets to the very heart of fundamentals and discipline.

The 3 forward lineup with AB and VF was not a good idea considering the length of Detroit frontcourt.  At times I think that lineup can be used but last night was not one of them.

The Positive (just One)

Kelly had a pretty good game with 15 points and 8 rebounds.  He led the team in scoring.  This was the first time that he seemed more aggressive at both ends.  The kid will come along eventually especially after Woo gets him trained up.

Green was 3 for 5 and was buried on the bench in the 2nd half (Played only 20 minutes)  He was basically benched in the second half because....fill in the blanks.  Wallace played 36 minutes, shot 2 for 6, had 4 steals but only 1 rebound, 2 assists and 2 turnovers.  Not exactly a memorable performance.

Crawford was 5 for 10 but he had only 1 assist and 3 turnovers.  I don't know if he is a better answer for us at the point.  Courtney reverted back to who he has been.

One interested thing is that neither Bass, Green or Wallace got a lot of looks  (FGA 8, 5 and 6 respectively)  There is no balance on offense.  

Stevens need to be very, very careful as the team navigates through this rough patch.  The team psyche is very fragile.  I have concerns that he benched Green and that Humphries is not getting any floor time.  I am also concerned that there is riff between Green and Wallace.

The body language indicates that they are at odds.  Take a close look at these guys on the court because  I am not seeing any chemistry between them.

The Celtics need to move Wallace as soon as possible otherwise his strong personality will negatively impact this team.

Stevens needs to understand that you don't bench one of your best players for an extended part of the game.  If he needs to sit down than sit him down but bring him back and give him a chance to redeem himself.  

Green is our best offensive weapon albeit an inconsistent one at this point in the season.

dboss  (rambling early A.M.)

KJ,

I agree Pressey should get a start to see what he can do. Bradley is no point guard and Crawford.................let me not comment!

112288

Couple notes

During the pre season I was concerned that we would not get to the line enough. Last night with only 12 foul shots that concern came to light. At least we made all 12 but we need at least 2x the attempts. Taking it inside and working for inside position for boards would help us draw a few more fouls perhaps.

REBOUNDING gave up 15 offensive boards.....we have to close that down somehow.

TURNOVERS...........23 of course that needs to come down too. Still between this and rebounding and the few FS attempts we were only down 2 with a little over 2 minutes to play. Then we folded up like a cheap suit from the Robert Hall discount sale rack, and went postal. Team could realistically be 2-1 right now but we are a very real 0-3.

Stevens coaching is as green as the road uniforms.....hopefully he reviews his rotations and who is and is not playing as much as he reviews the actual action on the floor. Perhaps he is a little understandingly overwhelmed......
I seem to remember a first year coach that admitted subbing, calling plays, timeouts and things was difficult. He asked players on the bench for help. That first year of his coaching they made the playoffs but lost in the conference finals.
In that coaches second year, the following year.......they won the title. And they did it again a year later.  The Coach, Bill Russell.

Obviously Stevens is NOT Bill Russell but he does have a sharp basketball mind, I would love to jump into a bit of a time machine and glimpse what we look like in March and just who is with us then.....and more importantly who isn't.

We really are not that far away from being a decent team. Have to play each minute and each posession. Turnovers in the first quarter are bad but there is time to overcome them. When you turn it over 3 straight possessions in a 2 point game with 2 minutes to go, there is no time to do anything but loose.

Gonna be a work in progress as if any of us didn't know that already.

beat

We got killed inside, as I suspected we would.  Drummond, Monroe and Smith are a big and strong front line.  Detroit with 34 points in the paint at the half. 34 out of a total of 45. They also had 7 fast break points. That means they either ran or pounded us inside for 41 out of 45 points. 90%.  It's hard to win when you don't stop them from dunking and running on you, but we almost did anyway.

At the end, they had 54 points in the paint.  That's a lot, but it's less than in the 1st half.  Interestingly, we took Vitor out and they got less dunks.  I don't blame Vitor for that, I think that our perimeter defense got better because we went small and quick, so there was less penetration and fewer dump offs for dunks.  Drummond's production dropped off the table when we kept him out of the paint.  Of his 13 fgas, all but two were dunks or at the rim.  Virtually all of Josh Smith's points came in the paint too, with 90% coming in the left block against Wallace and Green.  The word is out, the Celtics are small and soft in the middle, but you are even softer when you don't prevent penetration.

1.  Bradley was 6-14 for the game.  That makes him 14-42 or 34% on the season so far.  He made one of the two killer turnovers in the last minute or two, and both of those TOs were horrific.  They threw the ball directly at the defender.  Point Guard or "Play Initiator"?  Play Iniators, which is the concept Stevens is employing to-date, says someone brings the ball up and then passes it to someone to start the play.  That's what Bradley and Lee did, they got rid of the ball.  Point Guards WANT the ball.  I wish I knew what Stevens and the coaching staff see, or don't see, in Pressey that is earning him these DNPs because Lord Knows Bradley is not and never will be a point guard.  He had 6 TOs in this game alone.  By putting Bradley in this untenable position of being a point guard (which he's not) and a scorer (which he does not initiate well himself, being more of a player who scores off of passes), Stevens is really highlighting Bradley's limitations.  He is looking more and more like a defensive specialist and that's it.

2.  Olynyk finally had a good game.  He still gets bounced around like a pinball, struggles to get traffic rebounds and sometimes gets completely lost on defense (rotating when he shouldn't, which gave up dunks, and not rotating when he should) but offensively he finally looked comfortable.  Let's hope this is a big confidence builder for the rook.  Now THAT would be a glimmer and this game did not provide many, if any.

3.  Vitor and Green sat out most of the second half.  I thought Vitor played well, personally.  I think Green was getting abused by Smith, resulting in defensive breakdowns that got Drummond and Monroe a lot of dunks.  Another disappearing act by Jeff Green.  I don't know what can be said that hasn't already been said.  He's a mystery.

4.  Mr. Herky-Jerky was tied for #2 high scorer with 13 on a very respectable 5-10, but it was all Hero Ball.  He didn't even try to pretend he was a point guard.  Ok, so he provided us with offense that we were desperately searching for, but he is not the solution to our point guard problem either.  That makes him more expendable.

5.  Marshon Brooks came in, instead of Pressey.  This kid is really trying but is really, really confused as to who and what he is.  One time, he had a clear path to the rim and, after driving down the middle of the defenders, was only about 8' out and could have gotten there with one more dribble, and he passed it out to Wallace for a 3 attempt (which didn't go in).  He's a scorer and now he's trying to be Rondo.  Well, I suppose I should be glad someone is.

6.  Keith Bogans got a 3 minute cameo.  Why?  What did that accomplish?  That's not enough time to get any rhythm even if he was the right player for that scenario.  It just makes Stevens look like he's flailing about, looking for answers and hopes one walks up and kisses him on the lips.

7.  Another good, rugged night for Bass.  He had to match up against the taller and equally heavy and strong Greg Monroe.  I love Monroe.  What do I have to do to pry him out of Joe Dumar's cold dead hands?  He's a restricted free agent after this year, since Detroit did not extend him by last week.

8.  This was the worst game for Wallace so far.  He couldn't stop Smith from eating him up inside and didn't score much either.  

9.  Our offense is really incomprehensible.  We had a 3-on-1 fast break last night and screwed it up.  We're doing one-on-one.  We have nobody who can handle the ball and wants the ball (ok, we got one, but he's not getting off the bench).

10.  Sully didn't have a great night either.  I can understand why Stevens wanted him in there against Monroe, I think Hump might have had trouble with the 15 pound difference, but Sully didn't do better.

11. You cannot win with 23 turnovers, yet we almost did. 6 by Bradley, 3 by Crawford (ostensibly our other "point guard") and 3 by Lee. That's 12 TO's by our guards, with the last two truly ugly ones by Bradley and Lee being the untimely back breakers.

This Piston team is really deep.  First round pick Kentavius Caldwell-Pope was a DNP, as was Tony Mitchell and Gigi Datome.

Here's where it really starts to get ugly.  We have a very busy schedule in November, 19 games with 11 on the road, and that means almost no practice days, very little preparation time for Stevens and his staff.  We're starting off 0-3 and we still have 9 road games to go in the 16 left in November.  And, until we know when Rondo's coming back, who's to say December will be any better.


bob


.

In the college game you can pretty much dictate everything as a coach. The pros is all about the players.

Brad is a very smart guy and hopefully will figure this stuff out.

Use a more traditional lineup where players can perform at their natural position even if it means starting Pressey and Vitor.. JG is NOT a SG. AB is not a PG, Sully is not a center.

Dboss

With their existing level of talent and experience, at their current degree of "chemistry," and being as unbalanced as dboss maintains, it appears this team is just good enough to lose games.  Sadly, the last time I recall writing that about the Celtics was 2006-07, when they won only 24 games.  Fortunately, after that season, Danny made a couple of great deals and the Celts pulled what I now call "The Red Sox Polka" and went from worst to first in the Atlantic Division (and, incidentally, also won the Championship).

I'm certainly not implying the same transformation will occur before next season.  But it's interesting to compare the two teams.

• The earlier team had more of what I'd call "retreads in futility" than the current team: immortals named LaFrentz, Banks, Blount, Dickau, Szczeerbiak, Michael Olowakandi, and Ricky Davis (who incredibly averaged 42 MPG that season).  The only current Celtics who could officially included, with finality, in that category are those who don't play (Bogans, Pressey) and one who seems almost invisible when he does play (MarShon Brooks).  So far at least, it would not be at all fair to label Gerald Wallace a "retread in futility," and I'd much rather see him as the Celtics leader in both spirit and MPG (he currently leads the team in this stat) than Ricky Davis.

• Hopefully, the injury plague that haunted the earlier team will be limited mainly to Rondo for a third of this season.  Paul Pierce (who averaged 25 points when he played) missed 26 games; Tony Allen missed 49; Wally Szezrbiak missed 50, Jefferson missed 13, Delonte West missed 13, Gomes missed 9.  That's a total of 160 player games missed among just these six players, although it could be argued that Wally's games missed were a plus rather than a minus.

• There were two future luminaries on that 2006-07 squad.  Big Al had the kind of breakout season (16 PPG, 11 RPG) that made him attractive trade bait for KG.   Rondo was on the team but had not yet come into his own (only 3.3 APG).  It could be argued that Kelly Olynyk, Jared Sullinger, Jeff Green, Vitor Faverani, and Avery Bradley (although I'm souring on him as a possible one trick pony) could be their way up the ladder to stardom, while Brandon Bass is the consistent kind of performer who may be close to the zenith of his potential but who "brings it" every night—unlike, say, Wally Szczerbiak on the earlier team.

As I try to draw some conclusion from these comparisons (I didn't mention the two coaches—far too soon), the most positive thing I note for this season is that—with some obvious exceptions—there is more room for additional improvement than there was in 2006-07.  Hopefully, this season's team will be freer from injuries than the earlier squad, offering a lot more game time and practice time in which to develop improved chemistry.  Finally, the one person who could really jump start that chemistry development (Rondo, for those who just dropped in from Mars) will presumably become available in December.

There's one other way in which I see this team as having an advantage over the 2006-07 iteration—flexibility of trade possibilities.  In 2007, Danny had to wait until after the season and trade away a large portion of the team in a couple of complex trade situations.  The kinds of latent talent and favorable contract situations that exist on the current team could be more conducive to making trades in which only one or two Celtics would be sent away rather than blockbusters.

So, I guess my bottom line is that, while the start of the season is definitely a bummer, I can still maintain my trademark mantra (albeit more tentatively than is usually the case): See me in April.

Sam

Sam

Funny, I forgot who was on that awful team that could not win a game.

I also feel that this team is different because we do have some good young talent.

I still believe that this team will improve a lot.

But I also feel that we will need to add maybe 2 allstar quality players particularly if Green fizzles in his new role as the main guy on offense. Still a lot of unknowns. When Rondo returns we will really get a clearer picture how these players can execute the way coach Stevens envisions.

We are ridiculously unbalanced, ridiculously young and ridiculously new.  What we are seeing now is NOT what we'll be seeing in even 3 months, much less next year.

I've been disappointed in KO's start, but he's a rook and this is the big boy league (to borrow a phrase from Kobe) and his 'settling in' period will take a few more games.  Ok, I can certainly live with that (think Big Picture, Bob, think Big Picture).  What blows my mind is Jeff Green's lack of change.  He says all the right things, but he keeps doing all the old things.

I don't know if this qualifies as a 'glimmer' because it's not a systemic improvement, but Vitor certainly is a pleasant surprise.  His emergence as a legit center has taken one screaming need off the front burner.  Sure, we have no depth behind him, but we didn't think we had any depth with him before the season started.  Before, we needed a legit starting center and a legit backup center.  Now, we only need one of them, and bonafide experienced centers are hard to come by, unheard of at Vitor's price.

I think one of our issues is that we are so heavily dependent upon a pass-first point guard to generate offense.  Don't get me wrong, I prefer pass-first point guards and Rondo is probably the best pass-first point guard in the league, now that Steve Nash has been encased in amber, but what if he's not playing again for any reason (fouls, suspensions, injuries)?  If we are going to be that type of team, with a pass-first point guard driven offense, then we need killer redundancy at that position and we sure don't have that.

I wish to hell I knew what Stevens and his staff were saying and thinking about Pressey, because it is abundantly obvious to me that we need a ballhandler in there to run the offense and none of the guys he has thrown out there so far has gotten the job done.  Sure, Crash has had some good spurts where he's made the offense coherent, but only in spurts and only in the half court.  Crawford has had a few moments too, but passing is an afterthought to him and, if we are going to be this type of team, we need someone with the ball that is NOT that.  Bradley's 3-on-1 fast break disaster might be the final straw that broke this camel's back and, I hope, Brad Stevens' too.  It was one of the most horribly executed fast breaks I've ever seen.  There is no excuse for not getting something out of a 3-on-1.  A turnover, which is what we got, is not what I call 'something'.


bob


.

Finally got to see a game (second half) and wasn't really disappointed. With Rondo out there, I think we would have won. We have speed, some enthusiasm, KO looked pretty good - took a charge on D, shows composure on offense. A year or two in the weight room would turn that boy into a man. I have to agree about Pressey: my grandmother's better than either Bradley or Crawford and that's killing us. Sam, I'm edging toward the same opinion of Bradley - a great ball hounder, maybe not much more, but then again with Rondo to set him up, he might be serviceable.
I see this season purely as a set-up for next season, and from that perspective, there are glimmers. As for JG, I don't know what to think. Perhaps he only gives his all when he think his all is required for something important. Perhaps he's someone who has to play 32-plus minutes to really warm up. Perhaps what we see is all we get, in which case, he's overpaid and we're in trouble. He's another one I want to see out there with Rondo for an extended time before making up my mind, because right now, the offense is clueless, the defense is suspect, and everyone knows the team isn't expected to be very good. Low expectations can play with some people's heads and I think Jeff, for all his talent, is one...Looking forward to tonight. Hawk

The Bradley turnover with 1:07 left and Boston down by just 4 is still as ugly today as it was last night.






bob



.

Bradley is still growing as a player. And I think that he just shouldn't be forced into roles he isn't good at.


KJ

KJ, I agree. I like Bradley, but he's like an ugly girl at a beauty pageant when he's at pg: there's just no way he can succeed. Hawk

BobH,

I think Faverani's work so far represents a legitimate glimmer because (1) His rebounding alone (on his good nights) is forging opportunities for them to run the fast break, which is probably the simplest form of attack for a bunch of newcomers and kids—perhaps excluding those instances when Avery Bradley is involved (at least lately). Besides, the Glimmer Thread desperately needs some fresh material.

Sam

I don't want to be too harsh on Bradley (maybe it's already too late) because I really like the kid and I believe he exerts a lot of effort. But I'm always a little leery of a player whose value emanates primarily from his physicality. That kind of player usually doesn't add a lot, long-term, to a Celtics team. And, also, physicality can diminish over time—sometimes dropping precipitously from one season to the next. Put it this way. Suppose Avery has a nagging injury that slows him down but still allows him to play. Is there anything else about Avery that you'd want to see on the floor if he's slowed down?

Maybe Pressey's messing up in practices, or maybe Brad simply wants to trim the rotation. But I'm afraid he's trimming it by virtually eliminating what I believe is the most important position on a basketball team—point guard. And the reason I believe it's such an important position is that it strongly influences the performances at the other four positions. If there were ever a time when we need to see a wholesale improvement at the other four positions, it's now. Not just to have more chance of winning but also to give the entire roster as much support as possible in the development process—both individually and in terms of team chemistry.

Sam

Sam,

He played Bogans, which is a mystery to me. Is Bogans really that much better to have on the court than Pressey?

As for Bradley, I think he has skills, just not PG skills. But one problem is the fact that there are too many guys that have to be fed the ball and can't create on their own; Bradley is one such player.

I think playing Pressey with Bradley off the ball would help the offense a great deal, it saw some success during preseason.




KJ

k_j_88 wrote:Sam,

He played Bogans, which is a mystery to me. Is Bogans really that much better to have on the court than Pressey?

As for Bradley, I think he has skills, just not PG skills. But one problem is the fact that there are too many guys that have to be fed the ball and can't create on their own; Bradley is one such player.

I think playing Pressey with Bradley off the ball would help the offense a great deal, it saw some success during preseason.




KJ

KJ,

It's not a case of Bogans v Pressey, they play different positions. I can't believe he played Bogans when we have a glut at 2. Period.

bob


.

bobheckler wrote:

k_j_88 wrote:Sam,

He played Bogans, which is a mystery to me. Is Bogans really that much better to have on the court than Pressey?

As for Bradley, I think he has skills, just not PG skills. But one problem is the fact that there are too many guys that have to be fed the ball and can't create on their own; Bradley is one such player.

I think playing Pressey with Bradley off the ball would help the offense a great deal, it saw some success during preseason.




KJ

KJ,

It's not a case of Bogans v Pressey, they play different positions.  I can't believe he played Bogans when we have a glut at 2.  Period.

bob


.

I look at it from the standpoint of a needs basis. You need a PG playing, not a throwaway SG.



KJ