POST GAME - NEW YORK - AWAY

Rapid Reaction: Celtics 114, Knicks 73

By Chris Forsberg | ESPNBoston.com

NEW YORK -- Rapid Reaction after the Boston Celtics defeated destroyed the New York Knicks 114-73 on Sunday afternoon at Madison Square Garden:

THE NITTY GRITTY
Jordan Crawford scored a team-high 23 points on 8-of-14 shooting (connecting on six 3-pointers), while Jared Sullinger added 21 points on efficient 9-of-13 shooting and was a team-best plus-43 in plus/minus. Avery Bradley added his first career double-double (13 points, 10 rebounds), while Jeff Green and Brandon Bass kicked in 16 points apiece as the first-place Celtics cruised. Carmelo Anthony scored a team-high 19 points for the Knicks, but was a team-worst minus-40 in plus/minus. Just check out the final box score for the full carnage.

TURNING POINT
The Celtics scored the game's first 12 points and 18 of the first 19 before New York generated its first field goal (an Anthony dunk with 5:45 to play in the frame). Boston pushed its lead as high as 25 before the end of the quarter and led 34-11 after 12 minutes. Boston shot 54.5 percent in the frame, including 71.4 percent beyond the 3-point arc (5 of 7 overall). The Knicks didn't even score five first-quarter field goals, finishing 4-of-18 shooting (22.2 percent) with four turnovers. Things only got worse from there for the hosts.

TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES
Typically mild-mannered Bass got tagged with a rare technical foul late in the third quarter after barking at an official for no whistle as he muscled in a putback in traffic. The Boston bench couldn't help but chuckle. The Celtics were up 37 at that point.

LOOSE BALLS
Courtney Lee had an excellent game off the bench, scoring 10 points over 19:36. ... MarShon Brooks played the final six minutes, scoring six points. ... Keith Bogans was a healthy DNP. ... On the first possession after checking in for the first time, Amare Stoudemire got whistled for a technical for poking Brandon Bass in the face on a shot attempt.

WHAT IT MEANS
The Celtics (10-13) have now won three straight and now own a two-game lead in the Atlantic Division (pending how the Raptors fare against a returning Kobe Bryant and the Los Angeles Lakers). This one was never close. Boston now heads across the city to dance with old friend Kevin Garnett and the Brooklyn Nets on Tuesday night.

112288

GOTTA GIVE THE KNICKS CREDIT....THEY DO NOT KNOW THE MEANING OF QUIT!

112288

The Knicks never had a chance. They were beaten by a superior team.



KJ

This game had so many things to be happy about that this thread ought to be loaded.  We'll read about the three-pointers, the almost-ferocious defense, the sustained effort, the chemistry, the 54% shooting, the nearly 2-to-1 advantage in points in the paint, the nearly 2-to-1 advantage in rebounding, the nearly 2-t0-1 advantage in assists, the nearly 4-to-1 advantage in fast break points, and probably a few things I've overlooked.

But there's one facet of this game that will never show up in any box score and which I feel was the "hidden catalyst" in this one.  Simply put, the Celtics laid an incredible hand job on the Knicks.  (That sentence probably won't win me a Pulitzer, but I couldn't resist.)  On offense, I witnessed the best exhibition of strong, sure hands the Celtics have exhibited all season.  Bass, in particular, rebuffed several Knicks' attempts to wrest the ball from him under the offensive basket.  Jeff Green and Sully also showed very sure hands, and so did Humphries in his more limited time.  And, on defense, it seemed that the majority of Knicks' passes were contested by Celtics hands.  As I said on the game-on thread, the Celtics must have had 100 deflections.  In addition to causing a number of Jets turnovers, the forest of Celtics' hands disrupted the Knicks' offensive timing again and again.

In general, my post-game comments often deal with the team as an organic whole than with individuals.  But,in terms of being an inspiration in this one, Brandon Bass deserves to be singled out for his grittiness.  In addition to his sure hands, he was super-aggressive on offense (I'm really getting to love the dual offensive threats he and Sully present down low) and also played great defense against the suddenly Mellow Yellow.  Bass wins my game ball.

Good win Celtics.  Let's celebrate.  Okay, enough of that.  On to the next game.

Go Celtics!

Sam

I didn't want to single out any particular player for this game. I thought that the overall team effort was the most impressive aspect of the outing.


Now then, a few observations from the game...


1. The scorching Celtics must have a kerosene soaked wick

They started off blazing (yet another incendiary pun), putting the Knicks into an early hole, ending the first quarter up 34-11. The only thing that was ever extinguished happened to be the Knicks' chances of winning this game.

The start of the third quarter only served to increase the lead. Boston scored 34 points in the third quarter.

2. Bass banged up CarMarshmellow Anthony and the hapless Knicks

Bass was looking rather dominant all game long, taking Melo to the rim in the paint and keeping Melo out of the paint and forcing him to take ill-advised jumpers.

3. Crawford, the Marskman

He was really putting the heat on the Knicks with his 6-11 shooting from 3. I liked the fact that he had 7 assists, more than his season average.

4. Suffocating defense

The Knicks weren't able to find a 3 point rhythm, going 6-16 when they average around 22 attempts per game. Overall, they finished 25-73 (34 % FG).

Perhaps what was most telling was the fact that 2 of their starters were held scoreless, Shumpert and Felton. Bargniani had 2 points and Anthony had 19 on 5-15 shooting.

5. It's all about the team

This team is playing with such fluidity that it's hard to believe it was put together only recently. I said before that I felt like they'd make a run in December.

Boston won pretty much every statistical category. You name it, Boston did it better. Well, except for losing.


Other notables...

-The Knicks will need to file a restraining order against Avery because he victimized their back court the entire game.

-Actually, make that two restraining orders. One for Avery and one for Brandon.

-On second thought, make that three. Sullinger needs one as well.

-Boston's starters outscored NY's starters 89-29. That isn't a typo.

-The refs suck. A lot. They called so many nonsense fouls on the Celtics and were even letting the Knicks get away with extra contact while Boston struggled to get any whistles and were called for ticky-tack fouls. It was utterly ridiculous and overall disrespectful of the game. But it still wasn't enough to help that  other team out.

-The Knicks stumbled out of the gates with an inebriated stupor, being down 18-1 at one point in the first quarter.

-Go home, Knicks. You're drunk.

-The Knicks must have been sipping the victory Kool-Aid too strong, coming off of two consecutive big wins to losing by 41. They must be trying to set a precedence here.



KJ

This game was over in the first QTR.

Perhaps over the next 60 games or so the Knicks will manage to drag themselves out of the depths of despair and reach some level of respectability.  But at present, they are a horrible basketball team.

Jordan Crawford has turned into an assassin.  Every time the Knicks displayed some small measure of competitive play, he drilled another three pointer in their collective faces.

The beat down was complete on every level imaginable.  

The Celtics have found a style of play that works and all of the players are now on the same page.  We may not have that ultimate go to guy to lean on but I think we can all agree that this is the way basketball should be played.  Everyone making a contribution, winning the 50/50 plays, sharing the basketball, helping out on defense, controlling the defensive glass and doing it with a sense of integrity and respect.

This team is starting to do a lot of things well.  Yet you get the feeling that they know they can play better.  This stretch of games with the Nets, Clippers and another one against the Knicks could easily propelled this team into a contending position for a playoff spot.  

With both the Knicks and Nets playing like they are lost in the Wilderness a surreal opportunity has presented itself.  The Nets are the team that is the big surprise.  They could conceivably miss the playoffs and be rewarded by watching the Celtics select a lottery pick come June.  There is a lot of basketball yet to be played and who knows how the Hawks will end up but there is some degree of intrigue that will only increase if losses continue to pile up for them.

We just need both the Hawks and the Nets to go belly up.

dboss

Stevens is doing one heck of a job for a first year coach. He is giving these guys just what they
need, a steady hand. He never shows his emotions on the court, but he has to be thrilled with the play of his team these last couple of weeks. I know I cannot wait for the next game.

Rosalie

I'll take these thoughts from the game

We played the whole 46 minutes (last 2 were sort of a bit garbageish)

Bass fighting for a put back of his miss with a bazillion point lead THEN PICKING UP A TEE after he made it. He did a good job on melo to boot.

Brooks can shoot, put can he do it with a lead less than 40?

I had to turn the sound of after hearing Frazier for about 5 minutes. ( had to watch the game on the knicks channel)

believe I counted 5 "This is a nightmare" quotes from the Knick's pair of announcers (before the sound went)

Late in the game (sound back on) camera showed about 5 young knick fans, all had big frowns on their little faces........ Frazier goes " Perhaps the little ones need to go to Clyde's whine and dine." OK I changed the spelling to be more fitting.

With the cascade of BOOOO's at the end how long before the Knicks make a major move any move?

Grahpic showed the knicks were the first team in NBA history to come off a 9 game loosing streak to win the next 2 by 30+

They are now the first team in NBA history to come of a 9 game loosing streak with 2 30 point wins followed by a 40 + point loss.

2 game lead in the division........ who would have thunk it. Tank what tank. NEVER not in our blood.

We are not this good........... are we?

Finally in watching the times the camera is on him....... will games like this make Rondo come back perhaps sooner (providing he can play 95%) Playing with an unselfish bunch must be making him chomping at the bit !

Are the Knicks really that bad? Marv Albert would say "YES !"

beat

It is thrilling watching this team grow, we have so many young guns just starting to find their games and learning how to play to their strengths and to play together as a team. If we can continue these hot starts in first quarter we can be a load as we really have great depth and our second unit is pretty good. Most surprising to me is our defense with no true shotblocker and our perimeter defense being tops in the league without Rondo. Never in my wildest dreams did I think Sully and Bass would be so effective, but they are with Sullys post defense on 7 footers being a revelation and they sure seem to have plenty of fight in them. Credit has to go to Stevens as he has all these guys playing to their strengths with confidence, we are in first place, who saw that coming? our young guys are playing better and better every game it seems.

These guys are Celtics, filled with Celtic pride and work ethic.

Boston fans this year are getting the same extremely important lesson from all four major sports teams. The lesson? Teams don't have to be loaded with stars in order to succeed. The secret?. The collective strengths of the non-stars must combine in complementary fashion to fill all the needed roles on the team.

The Red Sox had so many journeymen this season that many picked them to finish last in their division. It seemed as though most of the journeymen overachieved simultaneously, with a different guy coming up big every game; and the team had as much chemistry as a team can have in a sport that is inherently individual in nature.

The Bruins have continued the pattern they established when they won the Stanley Cup a couple of years ago, with a variety of guys (including minor leaguers) stepping up when key injuries occurred.

The Patriots are stopping hearts with every comeback victory, but they're winning despite a succession of injuries to virtually every star except Tom Brady because everyone is focused on doing his job to the maximum of his ability.

Now who's that fourth team? Oh yeah, the Celtics are carrying on the tradition of numerous earlier Celtics teams by not worrying about being stars and focusing instead on developing chemistry by individually doing what each one does best.

Wouldn't it be amazing if a team were absolutely loaded with star-caliber players who played together with the "religion" of the egalitarian gods. I suppose that will never happen. Oh wait...... Sorry, couldn't resist. Perhaps I'm a little giddy as I sit here watching a 2:00 a.m. replay of today's game.

Twice in the first half I saw Jordan Crawford loop long passes (from at least half-court), right on the money, underneath for Celtics buckets. Someone (Dboss?) recently commented on the lack of long passes among the Celtics. Maybe Jordan heard you, Dboss.

I also just saw Bradley slip and fall as his defensive assignment went right by him. So Avery just got up, caught up, and plucked the ball away. Amazing.

So much to like in this one!

Sam

worcester wrote:These guys are Celtics, filled with Celtic pride and work ethic.

This is the key point that Tommy keeps making over and over....when asked about the media echo chamber calling for the Celtics to tank.

You dont build a winning team be asking players to lose, as it is clearly much harder to build a winning attitude than it is to assemble a team full of individually talented players. The Cavs / Wizards / Bucks / Bobcats are great examples of teams with lots of good players on paper - who dont mesh well and dont have any clue what a winning environment feels like.

Hi,
I just wanted to add an item to this discussion. Actually, expand on what Rosalie's already mentioned. It looks like BrSt is a better NBA coach than Woodson. I venture even farther - he looks better than many other coaches.

AK

sinus007 wrote:Hi,
I just wanted to add an item to this discussion. Actually, expand on what Rosalie's already mentioned. It looks like BrSt is a better NBA coach than Woodson. I venture even farther - he looks better than many other coaches.

AK

When looking at him standing on the sideline (does he ever sit down) all I can see are the wheels turning not only with the present action on the court but putting players in the best possition possible for success. Yesterday we had 9 players with at least 17 minutes each. Plus a few extended minutes for 2 others. Management is paying him HALF of what we paid Doc.

As it appears Rondo and him are on the same page LOOK OUT.

During yesterdays game when the volume was on Clyde Frazier mentioned how he was surprised that BrSt is letting Crawford play so "out of control" obviously Clyde has not watched many of our games. It appears to me for perhaps the first time in his young career Crawford has a COACH who trusts him. And that trust is being rewarded, and it appears that way with every player.

.500 record is just down the rooad !!

I think this has already proved to be Boston's best move in the offseason

beat

beat wrote:During yesterdays game when the volume was on Clyde Frazier mentioned how he was surprised that BrSt is letting Crawford play so "out of control" obviously Clyde has not watched many of our games. It appears to me for perhaps the first time in his young career Crawford has a COACH who trusts him. And that trust is being rewarded, and it appears that way with every player.

What's unexpected about that is that, for all appearances, Stevens is a "control" guy. He relies on preparation and metrics, and as someone else pointed out, he is controlled on the sideline and his players don't get many technicals. It seems like letting Crawford do his "out of control" thing would drive Stevens nuts, but that's not the case.

Because those herky jerky shots are NOT Crawford being out of control, that is just his unorthodox game....hence why only a commentator who doesnt watch many Celtics games would consider those moves out of control.

Show up for a playoff game all dressed in black like you're going to a funeral, will you? Well, New York Knicks, ask not for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee. And it couldn't happen to nicer bunch of assholes. How do you like dem apples, JR and K-Mart?! If you're looking for your heads, they're rolling on the floor over there.

There wasn't much about this game NOT to gush about.  It was a demolition in every way.  One reminder, in the interest of fairness and full disclosure, the Knicks are playing with center Tyson Chandler and Andrea Bargnani is their starting center.  That makes Sully look like the 2nd coming of Moses Malone, Bargnani is as soft as tiramisu.

Stevens is cool, dispassionate, focused.  You can almost see the wheels turning even if his face doesn't contort or move.  Mike Woodson, yesterday, looked like he had looked at the Medusa.  He was turned to stone, with dead eyes.  Understandable, he was distracted by the sight of his job passing before those eyes.

I got the MSG feed, like beat, but I listened to Walt "Clyde" Frazier the whole time.  I've listened to him when the game wasn't so lop-sided and didn't like it so much but, considering what was going on, I couldn't help but LMAO at him and enjoy him yesterday.  Stuck in the '70s.  I will say one thing for Clyde, though, I didn't hear him jump on the refs once the whole game.  You can't make it through a quarter without Tommy slicing up some fresh referee meat.  After all these years, Clyde still hates Celtic green and still gets up to play against them.  One recurring note of frustration coming from Clyde was that none of the Knicks showed up to play the Boston Celtics. Heheheh.

One of the things I wanted to see was for us to come out of halftime and really bear down on the Knicks.  If Woodson rallied his troops and got it down to 15 or so by the end of the 3rd, it's a different game but even more significantly, it would show me that we were not as strong mentally as we need to be and, at this level, the 4" muscle between the ears is the difference between a team that can compete for a championship and a team of players that are just happy to be in the NBA.  Happily, the Celtics came out for the 3rd and really poured it on.  At one point we were up by 45.  THAT, to me, was the biggest takeaway from this game.  They came out of halftime with the game in hand with a 27 point lead.  It was a 34 point lead after 3.  There aren't enough players on the roster from last year to do this just out of payback for last year's playoffs. We had two 34-point quarters.  That's unbelievable.  One 34 point quarter is notable, but two in one game?  Offense fixed?  Check.  That the two 34 point quarters were the 1st and 3rd suggests Brad Stevens prepared them well for when the game resumed.

1.  Bass did about as good a job on Melo as I've seen.  Melo, ostensibly, has speed on Bass, but he wasn't able to employ it often due to Bass' outstanding position defense.  A PF defending one of the games best SFs?  Yep, and doing a phenomenal job at it too.  Melo ended with 19 points on 5-15, 5 rebs, 1 assist and 2 TOs.  Bass had 16 points on 4-8, 8 rebs, 1 assist and only 1 TO, 3 steals and a block of Melo early in the game.  Bass won the tip off against the bigger Bargnani and then proceeded to attack Melo offensively in the first few possessions.  Crawford shot lights out, but shutting down Melo is key for stopping the Knicks and Bass did that without any double-teams.  When you can handle Melo without a double-team, that leaves you in a better position to close out their shooters and that's what happened.  JR Smith, Shumpert, Hardaway and Felton didn't get many wide-open looks at the basket because we closed on them and that was because Bass' man-a-mano with Melo.  That's why I'm giving him my game ball.

2.  Crawford was 8-14 and 6-12 from 3.  That means that he only took two shots that weren't threes.  Live by the 3, die by the 3.  Yesterday, we lived by them, but I'm just not comfortable with it.  Yeah, I know we have to generate points somehow and we're not a big team, but yesterday we took 72fgas and 25 of them were 3s.  Yeah, we hit a ridiculous 56% of them, most of them courtesy of Mr. Crawford, but jumpshooters wear down over the season.  Were even the 3-happy Knicks of the past few years taking that many 3s?  Crawford also had 7 assists.  Helluva game by Crawford.  Clyde kept asking why the Knicks weren't getting up on him.  He repeatedly said "as soon as Crawford gets out of the locker room, he's in range, you have to pick him up as soon as he goes over half court".  Beat mentioned how Clyde didn't understand why BrSt lets Crawford be so out of control.  Clyde was saying that college coaches don't usually allow that much freedom to shooters.  Clyde hasn't watched enough Celtic games to know that Brad Stevens is NOT your typical college coach being given a shot at the big time but is caught like a deer in headlights.  

3.   A generally excellent job by our back court over their back court.  While Crawford was going off like a fireworks factory on fire, Bradley was hitting 3s, getting 10 rebounds in his first career double-double and sticking it to Raymond Felton.  Iman Shumpert, who was being dangled as part of that ridiculous trade rumor, was virtually invisible all night.  And yet, somehow, Clyde said that "Shumpert is always effervescent".  I don't know which is worse, that Clyde thought highly of Shumpert's game or that he used the word "effervescent".  Prigioni came in and harrassed the hell out of people and Udrih hit a few, but much too little and much, much, much too late.  Lee, with another solid effort.  Marshon Brooks is clueless.  Yeah, he hit a 3 and some 2s, but he also had 2 TOs in 6 minutes due to just generally stinkin' thinkin'.  Poor Keith Bogans couldn't even get in on this tsunami of a win.  This wasn't just Gino Time, it was the entire American Bandstand time and Bogans was sentenced to waving towels.  It has to be a "showcasing" thing.  We must be showcasing Brooks and assuming nobody will take Bogans at $5M.

4.  Amar'e had a good game.  He shot from outside, he picked up fouls, he put the ball on the floor and dribbled past Vitor (oh, the shame!  Amar'e is playing on one leg and he still blew past Vitor).  Vitor played 7 minutes and is the only Celtic with a negative +/-.  That's because Amar'e saw him and his eyes got as big as tea saucers.  In the 7 minutes Vitor played, Amar'e was 1-2, 3-4 from the line on two Vitor fouls.  Not one of Vitor's better games.  If there's some solace here, this IS one of Amare's better games.  He actually looked good out there.  A s--tload better than Shumpert.

5.  Pressey is struggling.  Sam has suggested that a stint in the D-league might be good for Kelly.  I'm thinking that might not be a bad idea for Pressey too.  He's struggling.  He's lost his aggressiveness.

6.  Hump with another solid game.  I don't know who's going, I don't know if it'll be mid-season or at the end of the year, but one of our PFs are gone.  I'm going to miss whichever one it is because they're all good players and are all working their fannies off and not complaining about minutes or roles or anything.

7.  We shot 54% for the game.  We shot 51% against Denver, 49% against Milwaukee.  Result?  A 3-game winning streak.  It didn't take long for Stevens to straighten out the offense, did it?  

8.  Sully is completely confounding opposing coaches.  He's a beast underneath but is hitting 3s too now.  They don't know what to make of him.  That tip in, with .2 seconds left before the half, shows just how clueless the Knicks are, and how much they miss Chandler.  The only thing you can do with .2 left is a dunk or a tip and they couldn't keep Sully away from the rim.  21 points on 9-13 for Sully and, with Crawford throwing them in from the other side of the East River, you hardly noticed Sully's points.  I had no idea he had that many until I looked at the box score this morning.  I'm going on record right now as saying Sully is not going to be one of the PFs gone.  What a keeper.  When he was drafted his agent said "he might not have some of the spectacular upside of some draftees, but Sully's a blue chip.  He'll be solid and predictable for years".  I don't think even he predicted this.  I love Sully.  I love his inside game, his rebounding, his shots and most of all his "all y'all tankers can kiss my butt" attitude.  Speaking of butts, Clyde's view on the tip in was "Sullinger using his derriere".  He meant it as a compliment and wasn't so complimentary about the Knicks' failure to prevent the only possible shot attempt.

9.  Statistically, as you might expect, it was Nagasaki and Hiroshima combined.  42 points in the paint for the Celtics vs 22 for the Knicks.  22 fast break points for the Celtics vs 6 for the Knicks.  46 rebounds for the Celtics vs 26 for the Knicks (hard to rebound when the other team is hitting everything.  There's also a lot of rebounds available when the other team is only shooting 34%).  22 assists for the Celtics on 39fgm (56%) vs 13 assists on 25fgm for the Knicks.  Percentage-wise the Knicks look good, the problem, of course, was that they only hit 25 shots.  One area we did not dominate them was in turnovers.  We had 16 vs 14 for them.  16 isn't awful but it's a bit more than we've seen the past few games.  

10.  Our bench scored 25 points on 8-17, 3-6 from 3, 16 rebounds, 7 assists and 11 TOs (this should tell you just how good our starters were.  If our bench had 11 TOs and we had 16 total, then our starters only had 5).  Their bench scored 44 points on 16-32 (Amar'e and TAFKARA doing most of the damage with a combined 29 points on 10-17, Amar'e with 7-10 from the line), 14 rebounds, 9 assists (of NY's total 13), 8 TOs.  Their bench outscored ours but we held our own against them in other ways.  Prigioni was a real pest on defense and TAFKARA was pretty disruptive too.  Well, somebody had to show up for the Knicks, Lord knows none of the starters did.

 
Ok, so we're starting to see a lot of good stuff now.  They coaching schemes are starting to sink in past the conscious level.  Our offense is looking better, we're not taking as many buzzerbeaters, our defense is less porous and is doing a better job on pick-and-rolls.

Atlanta still needs to lose, damn it.  They play OKC next and then Washington.  I don't like to wish injuries on players, that's just being cruel, but how about a pebble in their sneakers?


bob


.

Bob

I'll only add I'm not even sure with .2 seconds left you can even dunk.

beat

beat wrote:Bob

I'll only add I'm not even sure with .2 seconds left you can even dunk.

beat

You can if you have Bill Russell receive a great pass at the rim and dunk it, which I saw once.

Outside wrote:

beat wrote:Bob

I'll only add I'm not even sure with .2 seconds left you can even dunk.

beat

You can if you have Bill Russell receive a great pass at the rim and dunk it, which I saw once.

unfortunately they didn't have the tenths on the clock when he played. Heck many of the clocks HAD HANDS for crying out loud !
I really don't think it's possible to catch a ball and dunk it even if it's a great pass at the rim in.02 seconds.

And just thinking the about that, the "rule" is you can't catch and shoot with .3 tenths or less left so isn't dunking a ball a "form" of catching the ball first?

beat

Bob,

I've been assuming right along that Pressey was D-League-bound as soon as Rondo comes back and is established in the lineup. Probably the closest I've ever come to a prediction, but I invoke the technicality that an assumption is not a prediction.

I'm no fan of the three-pointer in general, but I am a fan of Celtics players shooting from where they're most comfortable and can be most accurate. If a "make" counts for three points rather than two, so much the better. I'm just not comfortable with a team strategy centered around longball.

If Crawford should wear down or they just stop falling for whatever reason, it would be time to curtain his bombs away policy. Although I'm not sure he'll wear down after Rondo comes back. In the meantime, I'd normally say the key is to get him as comfortably open as possible to maximize his three-point shooting percentage; but yesterday, he hit a couple with a Knick practically checking Jordan's prostate.

In his career, Ray Allen has taken just about three times as many threes per game as Jordan has with the Celtics (4.6 per game). Of course, Ray has hit at 45.2% from the arc during his career, compared with Jordan's 40.2% this season.

There are certainly both positives and negatives within Jordan Crawford. But, at this juncture, I can live with 4.6 threes a game, and I don't see enough negatives to make me moderate my happiness over having a professional, confident "Daggerman" on board.

Sam

sam wrote:Bob,

I've been assuming right along that Pressey was D-League-bound as soon as Rondo comes back and is established in the lineup.  Probably the closest I've ever come to a prediction, but I invoke the technicality that an assumption is not a prediction.

I'm no fan of the three-pointer in general, but I am a fan of Celtics players shooting from where they're most comfortable and can be most accurate.  If a "make" counts for three points rather than two, so much the better.  I'm just not comfortable with a team strategy centered around longball.

If Crawford should wear down or they just stop falling for whatever reason, it would be time to curtain his bombs away policy.  Although I'm not sure he'll wear down after Rondo comes back.  In the meantime, I'd normally say the key is to get him as comfortably open as possible to maximize his three-point shooting percentage; but yesterday, he hit a couple with a Knick practically checking Jordan's prostate.

In his career, Ray Allen has taken just about three times as many threes per game as Jordan has with the Celtics (4.6 per game).  Of course, Ray has hit at 45.2% from the arc during his career, compared with Jordan's 40.2% this season.

There are certainly both positives and negatives within Jordan Crawford.  But, at this juncture, I can live with 4.6 threes a game, and I don't see enough negatives to make me moderate my happiness over having a professional, confident "Daggerman" on board.

Sam

sam,

Nice try, but assumptions are the foundation of predictions, not of analyses.  

Oh, what the hell, Merry Christmas and Happy Assumptions!


bob


.

beat wrote:unfortunately they didn't have the tenths on the clock when he played. Heck many of the clocks HAD HANDS for crying out loud !
I really don't think it's possible to catch a ball and dunk it even if it's a great pass at the rim in.02 seconds.

And just thinking the about that, the "rule" is you can't catch and shoot with .3 tenths or less left so isn't dunking a ball  a "form" of catching the ball first?

I wish I could find video of that Russell play. What he did -- catch the pass at the rim and throw it down -- was much faster than a catch and shoot. With catch and shoot, you have to go through a shooting motion, but Russell didn't waste time with that. I would be surprised if he took longer than 0.2 seconds. (Doing it in .02 seconds, that would be pretty tough, but 0.2 seconds I'd believe.)

Outside

I remember the so called Hospital game. Russ had missed a few games and this was his first one back. Hondo threw an Alley opp to Russ with just a couple seconds left, who came off a back pick. Throw was right on the money and Russ grabbed it and threw it in even then the mere act of catching the ball takes a bit of time that is why "they" say .3 and under it has to be a tip.

beat

Outside wrote:

beat wrote:unfortunately they didn't have the tenths on the clock when he played. Heck many of the clocks HAD HANDS for crying out loud !
I really don't think it's possible to catch a ball and dunk it even if it's a great pass at the rim in.02 seconds.

And just thinking the about that, the "rule" is you can't catch and shoot with .3 tenths or less left so isn't dunking a ball  a "form" of catching the ball first?

I wish I could find video of that Russell play. What he did -- catch the pass at the rim and throw it down -- was much faster than a catch and shoot. With catch and shoot, you have to go through a shooting motion, but Russell didn't waste time with that.  I would be surprised if he took longer than 0.2 seconds. (Doing it in .02 seconds, that would be pretty tough, but 0.2 seconds I'd believe.)

I remember my father screaming and jumping up and down, I think I was 5 or 6 and then he told me about the play and described it to me in enough detail that I still remember it.