Post-game Thread: Celtics-Bulls in Boston 11/27/14

[Sam]

One of the things that has always fascinated me about pro basketball is how simple it looks from afar.  If something’s working in the first half, just continue it in the second half.  Whenever there’s an offensive problem, just take it to the hoop.  Always stay in front of your man defensively.  Don’t make turnovers.  Block out under those boards.  And, for god’s sake, make 100% of your free throws.  The game is such a snap, wouldn’t you say?
 
Unfortunately, a little thing called “reality” invariably seems to intrude on this idyllic scenario.  And it encroaches more consistently on some teams (we call them “strugglers”) than others (whom we call “contenders”).  And seldom more persistently than on the 2014-15 version of the Boston Celtics.
 
This team regularly offers a theatrical production in three acts: (1) The Opening Flurry, (2) The Gradual Erosion, and (3) The Inglorious Finale.  I’ve seen this show so many times this season that I practically know the script by heart…..maybe even better than some of the actors Brad puts on the floor.
 
Brad alluded to the key to this phenomenon before the game.  He said something to the effect that, when the team learns something, they have to learn it for the long term.  They can’t just put it into action for a little while and then forget about it when another piece of learning pushes it into the background.
 
This game followed the all-too-usual pattern.  The team came out, spaced the floor, moved the ball and their bodies, and set a blistering pace that eventually earned them a lead as high as 16 points.  On defense, they were trapping selectively, ganging up on Bulls in the paint, and closing out on three point shooters.  The starters grabbed a slim lead, which the bench expanded.  Sully, Bradley and Bass accounted for 22 points between them as the Celts led 35-24 at the quarter mark.
 
Then, halfway through the second quarter (as the starters filtered back in), it seemed as though the gas started escaping from the balloon.  Paul Gasol was particularly effective in the lane, getting both Kelly and Zeller in foul trouble.  Nikola Mirotic (who?) and Brooks started getting it into gear.  The Celtics made a couple of horrible passes, each leading to successful Chicago fast breaks, and suddenly the Celtics lead had dwindled to six at the half.  The starters were a collective +1, and the bench was a combined +5 as the Celtics led by 6 at the half.  The Bulls had not taken over the lead, but they definitely seized the momentum and the pace.  Chicago had 10 fast break points in that second quarter, and the Celtics had none.
 
Statistically, the third quarter was a standoff, as the Celts led by 6 going into the fourth.  But, in reality, the quarter consisted of the Bulls’ frequently taking three point or five point leads and the Celtics scrambling to catch up and finally to edge ahead.  The Bulls’ starting backcourt had 20 points in the quarter (12 for Rose and 8 for Butler, who seized the opportunity to become a regular when he subbed for Rose).
 
The fourth quarter actually made me proud of the Celtics.  The Bulls were obviously on a roll.  Rose and Brooks did their Superman imitations, and Noah went semi-wild with 7 points and 8 boards in the quarter.  But the Celtics hung very close throughout the quarter, despite resorting to an all-too-familiar attempted fix by launching a bunch of three-pointers (they were ZERO for 8 on threes in that quarter alone).  I find that unconscionable.  Finally, when they were theoretically still in the game, Brad posted up Jeff Green, who I’m sure had fewer touched than I’ve ever witnessed in a Celtics game.  Sure enough, Jeff whirled around and scored.  Then, Brad inserted Marcus Thornton to take the ball to the hoop.  It surprised no one, and Turner got blocked.   A couple more Chicago fast breaks, and game over: 109-102 Chicago.
 
Some player thumbnails:
 
Sully: 23 and 10 with a block and a steal in 33 minutes; what’s not to like?
Kelly: Awful once again: 1-8, 3 rebounds, 5 personal fouls in 19 minutes; no defense
Green: Very few touches (9 shots), but somehow scored 10 with 4 boards in 26 minutes
Bradley: Very hot at times; played good defense on Rose but faded toward the end
Rondo: Good stats as usual (8-7-9); maintained pace until the 4^th; missed two freebies in clutch

Bass: Steady Eddie: 16-9 but, more important, very aggressive at both ends
Zeller: Changed a lot of Bull shots (no pun intended) but otherwise nondescript
Thornton: Even fewer touches than Green (on a per minute basis); only 3 shots
Turner: Helped keep them in the game during second quarter.  Then disappeared.
 
I continue to be concerned that the concept of cumulative learning doesn’t seem to apply with this team.  They seem to have something mastered in one game or one quarter, only to lose it in the next game or quarter.  They go on a roll and fail to continue doing what was successful.  They default to three point barrages when the going gets tough.  They play hard, but only in spurts do they play smart.
 
I just have to take my own advice and realize that development takes time and patience.  It’s frustrating to have this feeling that they’re only one hump from respectability and they just can’t seem to get over that hump.  It required a lot of patience.  But that patience is much of what separates a fan from a spectator.  And, believe me, it’s eminently worth being a fan.
 
Go Celtics.
 
Sam

[112288]

They shot 27% from 3 pt area, again a poor showing.........If you continue to fail in this area and you do not want to give a natural shooter like Young a shot at giving you some scoring from 3 pts land............Danny will you please trade for a real shooter please!

112288

[kdp59]

didn't SEE this game, but was tracking it from the yahoo link, while at my office.

unless I read wrong, our Captain missed two FG's and two FT's near the end of the game. maybe that should be noted in his "stat" line.

[112288]

kdp59

0-2 could have put the Celtics up by 2 at the end as I read the game summary.

112288

[Sam]

kdp,


You're absolutely right.  I made a big deal on the Game-on Thread about Rondo' two missed freebies and neglected to put it in my summary (which I have amended).  I can forgive the two missed drives because at least he was going to the hoop and wasn't hoisting a jumper.  But the alleged team catalyst can't be depended upon to miss free throws down the stretch in game after game, which is sort of what's happening.

Sam

[wide clyde]

Sam,

What do you think Rondo's future is with the Celtics?

[k_j_88]

The primary problem is the excessive 3-point shooting. Once a player hits a few, or several players hit a few, then everyone keeps taking them, even after consecutive misses. It's also a shot that encourages laziness and allows the opposing defense to just lock in on the shooters since they have no desire to go in.

That's just bad offense and I blame Brad for that particular philosophy. Logically speaking, a 3-pointer is a low percentage shot and should only be taken by those most adept at making them. Out of the 22 attempts, the Celtics only made 6 (27%). That's abysmal by any standards.


KJ

[steve3344]

The primary problem is the excessive 3-point shooting. Once a player hits a few, or several players hit a few, then everyone keeps taking them, even after consecutive misses. It's also a shot that encourages laziness and allows the opposing defense to just lock in on the shooters since they have no desire to go in.

That's just bad offense and I blame Brad for that particular philosophy. Logically speaking, a 3-pointer is a low percentage shot and should only be taken by those most adept at making them. Out of the 22 attempts, the Celtics only made 6 (27%). That's abysmal by any standards.


KJ

And 27% (actually 27.48%) is Sullinger's career number for 262 attempts. If he doesn't get better in his next couple hundred attempts I would encourage him to shoot them less often if I were the coach. But i don't think Brad will because he likes to stretch the defense and draw the man guarding Sullinger's further outside because of the perceived threat of a three. And right now, at 27%, it's only a perceived threat.

[k_j_88]

Steve,

But unfortunately, that strategy hasn't afforded the Celtics many wins. Sullinger should not, in my opinion, be the one stretching the floor. I'd give that responsibility to Kelly, as he is both a better shooter and better at running the floor.

Sully shooting threes is a problem. He needs to be in and around the paint, using his physicality.


KJ

[Sam]

Clyde,

I don't want you to think I ignored your question about Rondo's future with the Celtics.  In fact, I was prompted to start an entire thread on the subject.  When I really thought about it, I realized that I'm conflicted.  What I didn't say in the other thread was to reiterate that he's been my favorite Celtic of this era ever since I saw him throw the same half-court bounce pass (right on target) that Heinsohn rhapsodizes over frequently.  BUT It seems there's every possibility that perhaps a lot of the credit that has gone to him was facilitated by the future hall of famers with whom he played.  So I'm totally up in the air about him, and I hope I fairly presented both sides of the coin in that other thread.

Sam

[dbrown4]

I just find it hard to believe Rondo hasn't upped his free throw numbers over the years, especially down the stretch.

I can understand the ol' Wilt and Shaq arguments that my hands are too damn big and I just don't care about free throws, but Rondo's a guard. You're going to be fouled because the plays originate and are facilitated through you. Now Rondo can assist his way around going to the line, but late in the game, it's going to Hack-a-Rondo every game when it's close and he's only going to make 50% at best. With the current Celtics there is little margin for error late in games, they will be winning only about 30%-33% of them over the season. Hello draft.

I know he's been working with specialists over time (Mark Price, correct?) but it's not working. If it has been, its' been sporadic at best. Both Wilt and Shaq are HOFers with championships. They were both horrific free throw shooters. This may raise the question whether will Rondo be a HOFer. He has a championship, he's a great player. Is there consensus and is that enough, though?

db

[112288]

KJ

Thank you for pointing out the errors of Brads ways on 3 pters. I could not have said it any better!!!!!

112288

[Sponsored content]