POST GAME - ATLANTA - AWAY

NEXT GAME - DETROIT - WEDNESDAY - HOME - 7:30PM 

Hawks 109, C's 105: Another 2nd-half collapse for Boston

By Chris Forsberg | ESPNBoston.com

The way the Boston Celtics fell apart in the second half of Tuesday's game against the Atlanta Hawks might have been shocking if it hadn't stuck with the script for the 2014-15 season.

The Celtics shot a blistering 61.4 percent in the first half and built as much as a 23-point lead, then stumbled their way through another disastrous second half that allowed Atlanta to emerge with a 109-105 triumph at Philips Arena.

Boston let Kyle Korver (team-high 24 points) get hot while the Celtics, in standard fashion, went ice cold in the fourth quarter (outscored 29-20 in the frame).

Despite falling behind by 9 with 3:35 to go -- a head-shaking 32-point swing from a late first-half lead -- Boston rallied within 2 with the ball with 23 seconds to play. Jeff Green had a chance to draw a foul after getting his defender in the air, but instead drove and missed a runner in the lane.

Green and Jared Sullinger finished with 25 points apiece to pace the Celtics.

• Everything went right in 1st half: Rajon Rondo handed out 14 in 15 minutes of floor time, an aggressive Jeff Green connected on 7-of-8 attempts for 16 points, and Boston shot 63.6 percent beyond the 3-point arc while opening a 66-50 lead at halftime. During an on-camera interview, Celtics coach Brad Stevens cautioned that the Hawks would make a second-half run. He didn't know how right he was.

• Rondo Report: Rondo dazzled with his playmaking in the first half, but finished with 2 points (on 1-of-8 shooting) with 19 assists and 12 rebounds over 34:25. He also turned the ball over seven times. His defense eroded in the second half and negated some of his first-half offensive wizardry.

• Loose balls: Tyler Zeller (8 points, 3 rebounds, 2 assists) started his second straight game at center. ... Kelly Olynyk chipped in nine points over 21 minutes off the bench. ... Dwight Powell, Phil Pressey, and James Young were healthy DNPs. ... Boston turned the ball over 23 times for 28 points.

• What it means: The Celtics, desperate for a win having not beaten a team with a win since Nov. 8, endured a real stomach punch in Atlanta. Boston falls to 4-11. You'll hear someone in the locker room say, "The good news is we have another game tomorrow." The Detroit Pistons visit TD Garden on Wednesday. 

112288
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Celtics blow 23-point lead in 109-105 loss to Hawks

CSNE

A.SHERROD BLAKLEY

The calendar may have flipped, but the Boston Celtics' late-game woes are still alive and well.

After leading by as many as 23 points against the Atlanta Hawks, the Celtics once again melted down the stretch as the Hawks escaped with a 109-105 win.

Boston (4-11) has now lost five straight and eight of their last nine games.

The Celtics had a chance to tie the game in the closing seconds, but Jeff Green had a wide open mid-range jumper rim in and out. The loose ball eventually led to a lay-up by Kent Bazemore for the game's final points.

The Celtics officially lost the lead down the stretch when a Paul Millsap basket put the Hawks ahead 90-88 in the fourth. Boston soon tied the game back up, but there was no denying the Celtics were in trouble.

It was as if the Celtics completely forgot what they did to build up their lead. Boston took control early on because they kept feeding the post.

Guess what?

It worked, as Jeff Green scored 14 of his 25 points in the first quarter primarily on the block or in transition. And the pace that Celtics are so focused on creating was there throughout the first half, make or missed shot. From there, Boston was a shell of the team that played so brilliantly in the first half.

It wouldn't be so upsetting if it happened from time to time.

But it was the latest in what has become this team's identity - they can't keep big leads.

You have to give the Hawks credit. They're one of the best teams in their (relatively empty) building and the Celtics are well, the Celtics.

WHAT WORKED

First half execution

It was as flawless a brand of basketball that we have seen from the Celtics this season. They were making shots around the rim. They were hitting open shots. Defensively they were solid. It all added up to a commanding 66-50 lead at the half.

WHAT DIDN'T WORK

Second half offense

Boston went completely away from the things that worked so well earlier. They didn't look for Jeff Green on the post, and Green wasn't exactly working to get position. They did what they always do when they have a big lead, and that's fall in love with the jumper. And when it stops falling, they continue shooting it rather than try and work the ball inside for an easier score.

KEY PLAY/STRETCH

Trailing 107-105, Jeff Green pulled up for a wide open mid-range jumper that rattled in and out. The Hawks grabbed the rebound and after a mad scramble, Atlanta came up with the ball and got the ball up court to Kent Bazemore who closed out the game with a lay-up.

WHAT'S NEXT: The Celtics have a quick turn-around as they host the Detroit Pistons Wednesday night at the TD Garden.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
CELTICS FOLD IN SECOND HALF, FALL TO HAWKS IN ATLANTA

WEEI  
 
Rajon Rondo delivered 19 assists but turned the ball over seven times in the Celtics‘ loss on Tuesday. (Getty Images)

Evidently, there is no lead too big for the Celtics to bungle.

After the Celtics raced out to a 42-point first quarter and 16-point lead at the half, the Celtics were outscored by a staggering 20 points in the second half in suffering 109-105 loss. The Celtics have now lost five straight and eight of nine, falling to 4-11 on the year.

The team’s game-ending woes are becoming an ongoing theme. The team entered the night being outscored by 4.6 points a night in the second half (third worst in the NBA) and 5.4 points per game in the fourth quarter (worst in the NBA). In this case, the team was outscored by 20 in the second half and nine in the fourth quarter.

Boston once again offered little defensive resistance in the 59-point second-half eruption. The Celtics’ average yield of 107.7 points per game remains the worst total in the Eastern League.

The Hawks shot 52 percent from the floor, with Kyle Korver (8-of-9, 6-of-7 on 3-pointers) leading the way en route to 24 points and Paul Millsap filling the box score with 19 points, six boards, seven assists, three blocks and three steals. The Celtics received 25-point nights from both Jared Sullinger and Jeff Green.

Rajon Rondo had a game that was alternately brilliant and sloppy, scoring just two points (1-for-8 from the floor) and committing seven turnovers (two shy of his career worst), but he grabbed 12 rebounds and dished out 19 assists, his career high for a road game.

DANNY.....IT'S TIME TO RESHUFFLE THE DECK.......YOU JUST DON'T HAVE THE FINISHING HORSES TO WIN!

21 POPOVERS!

112288

I like Zeller, but hes not really a starting 5 in this league that can consistently man the position and do enough to put his team in position to win, don't get me started on Kelly, who hustles and tries, but is less equipped to play either big position than Raef Lafrentz, who was terrible... Danny goofed on this pick, hate saying it cause he seems like a really good kid. Painful to see him on floor as we blew another lead. This is how a team looks with no center, the rest of the pieces just can't cover/compensate for that position. We have no anchor, we are a rudderless ship. Henry Sims would be an upgrade defensively. The NBA is a copycat league, in other words teams know where to attack us.

To call this team soft is a compliment.

Well this is rebuilding....at least theres alot of 7 footers in the draft.

This team couldn't be trusted with a 100 point lead.

By the way, I was wondering how this kid Schröder  got his name - I mean with the Umlaut - the two dots over the vowel. Turns out he's German. Too bad he's the one celebrating with some "Käsekuchen" after the game.

Evan Turner played exactly like his very first game in Boston, absolutely atrociously.

Cow you're right, we're not going to get very far without a real center.

This team not only seems to be too soft, they also seem to be too dumb. Is the coach the problem, the players, or both? How can they play so well and so terribly within four quarters?

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/celtics_nba/boston_celtics/2014/12/celtics_burn_in_atlanta

Wednesday, December 3, 2014 PrintEmailBe the first to comment
By:
Mark Murphy

ATLANTA — A big lead is like whipped cream on this team. The first lick comes, and they melt.

Last night’s big number was 23, representing a lead in the second quarter. The Celtics were shooting the ball like the Golden State Warriors and defending like the Chicago Bulls.

Then came the second-half realization that they’re the Celtics, a 4-11 team that consistently breaks down at the first sign of resistance.

The result was a 109-105 loss to Atlanta that never seemed to have the Hawks worried in what was their largest comeback of the season.

Opponents now are developing a book on the Celtics: Don’t worry if you fall behind early.

“It definitely hurts being up 23. Everyone highlights our fourth-quarter woes, and this was a double highlight,” Evan Turner said.

The problem, according to Marcus Thornton, is that word is spreading across the league about the C’s.

“It’s written,” Thornton said of the second-half reputation. “(Opponents) watch film and we watch film, too. They know right now we’re a first-half team. They don’t get down in the (halftime) locker room. They know we’re going to let them back in. We’ll find a way to do it.

“On the road we know the other team is going to make a run in their own building, but it’s on us to stick to the game plan. Sometimes we deviate from it and go on our own, start to try and make hero plays. We should stay to the offense and stay true to ourselves.”

Instead, the Celtics lost all memory of the work behind their 66-50 halftime lead, which included such gaudy items as 61.4 percent shooting — 63.6 percent on 3-pointers at 7-for-11 — and Rajon Rondo’s 14 assists.

Rondo went on to a season-high 19, but he also had seven turnovers.

“It starts with me,” Rondo said.

Rondo witnessed a career game from Dennis Schroder, the Hawks’ 21-year-old German who grew up idolizing the C’s point guard.

Last night, while driving his team back in the fourth quarter, Schroder scored 10 of his 15 points. Nine of those points came in the 23-9 run the Hawks used to steamroll the Celtics during the first 6:16 of the quarter, erasing an 85-80 advantage and replacing it with a 103-94 Hawks edge. Schroder’s three-point play early in the burst gave Atlanta its first lead of the second half.

From Kyle Korver’s six-trey performance, his third of the season, to the interior damage wreaked by Paul Millsap and Al Horford, the Celtics got the worst of every physical encounter.

Under pressure, the Celtics threw the ball away eight times down the fourth-quarter stretch, and they generally lost every chance at a contested rebound or loose ball.

“When it comes easy we’ve been good — when it gets tough we haven’t,” C’s coach Brad Stevens said. “The game honors the more physical team, and it does night in and night out. We just have to improve in that area. I’m not crazy enough to think that if it doesn’t change, we’re going to be sitting here a lot like this. (The second-half disappointment is) something we have to change. There’s a lot of things that entails, some of which I’ll speak of and some of which I won’t. I’m disappointed, but we’re going to move forward.

“The game can sometimes be summarized in a play or two, and I have a couple vividly in my mind where we were not quick enough to the ball. It was a symbol of our struggles. That’s part of this recurring theme, and until that changes you’re hoping instead of knowing. If you start hoping, you probably get exposed.”

The Celtics’ only consolation is a quick turnaround. Tonight at the Garden, the C’s have a shot at instant redemption when they host the Detroit Pistons.

But this team is also riding a season-long five-game losing streak.

“It’s just tough. We’re a great first-half team and sometimes in the s,econd half we can’t put it together,” Thornton said. “It’s frustrating. We’ve lost a lot of games like that, so it’s on us to go back and try to find a reason. We have to find a way to change this. We can’t be a 24-minute team.”

The Mendoza Line of basketball seems to be right around the 23-24 point lead line. Beyond that, very few teams have comeback to win. Below that line, comebacks and wins are almost a dime a dozen, at least pretty regular.

Center, Center, Center seems to be the battle cry. And completing 48 minutes of play. If they put two halves together like their first 24, we'd be 15-0.

For now it's second verse, same as the first.

db

Hi,
I guess Brad has to figure out what to do to keep the lead to the final buzzer.
Otherwise it's extremely frustrating to watch...

AK

a couple notes:

no Zeller is not a starting NBA center, you don't get them for nothing in a trade in the NBA sorry.

Kelly is a better overall player than Zeller (nothing against Zeller), he is the BEST outside shooting big man (something Stevens seems to want) and the BEST passing big we have. he also has high BB IQ.

He is a lousy defender (but so was Bird folks) , so COACHING is what's needed to hide the lack of defense on his part.

Sully needs to stick down low, its where he does his most damage and having him outside is counter productive.


Sully and Zeller are out low post players on offense and Kelly and Bass are good high post guys. Stick with what players strengths are instead of trying to make them what they are not.

Atlanta's coaches said they want to make rondo shot the ball to get back into the game. It worked and always will. No one respects Rondos outside shot and if he drives you just foul him. Call it hack a Rondo if you want. Rondo cannot be on the court with the game on the line. oh yeah.......any idea that Rondo plays good defense has been totally destroyed this season.....watch the tapes.


we have NO ONE who wants the ball with the game on the line...Green wanted to be that guy last night, but only got a few chances (and frankly he'll never really be that guy).

so we started this off-season, needing a Center and a go-to scorer ( or team leader). We still need both things.

there was not only no fireworks this past off-season, there wasn't even a match lit.

Finally, Stevens needs a REAL NBA veteran coach on his bench with him. he stills seems bewildered at times by the NBA game, IMO.

Couple of things.

KDP - I agree with your post except the difference between Bird and KO...Bird dropped game in and game out 30+ from the outside and was a better defender then you think as his position required him to cover more of the floor space then KO at center, and he had the moves and the quick release! KO would never be able to do so with his slow release. 

I agree get a real ass't coach who as real NBA experience as a head coach or head ass't coach.  I'll give Brad the benefit of the doubt because Danny is still not done getting real players for him, but next year will tell the tale if Brad is over his head or if he is done with the NBA and wants to go back to coaching college where he would get equal pay as he is getting now, nice life style, and his ability to get high school players to play for him verses hoping and NBA free agent is going to sign with the Celtics.

112288

kdp

You say Bird was lousy on defense?? gotta disagree with that completely............ he played angles, anticipated better than almost anyone, boxed out as good as anyone and rarely just waived at his man as he went by. IMHO he certainly was the best (non-jumping, unathletic) defender of his era.

Lousy doesn't get you this.

1981-82 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)

1982-83 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)

1983-84 NBA All-Defensive (2nd)

top 10 in steals 3X

1980-81 NBA 161 (9th)
1983-84 NBA 144 (10th)
1985-86 NBA 166 (8th)
Career NBA 1556 (31)


KO may develop into a good player. Right now he is a bit lost out there and it is only his second year.

Patience is needed.

beat

I don't know why anybody would mention KO and Larry Bird in the same sentence, KO couldn't hold Larry Bird's cousins jockstrap.

Couple of comments.

-A "culture of losing" is what is on full display in Philly, nothing about what is happening in Boston speaks to that phenomenon.  They are playing hard, the effort is there, it is a combination of lack of talent and lack of experience (both players and coach) that is causing this current state.  They are not giving up, not tanking, and not showing a lack of fight.  Nothing about this team shows a culture of losing. Culture of hard work and effort and taking your lumps maybe.

-How could the "honeymoon" be over when discussing the 3rd youngest team in the NBA?  It is just beginning - and a little more patience is going to go a long way to paying dividends in 2 or 3 years.

There are a whole list of teams in much worse shape than the Celtics - seriously, slow your roll people.

Some of the veteran forum members will recall this from the "good old days" of the past decade. And, by "veteran," I mean former members of the BDC Forum.

Based on a comment made by Mike Gorman, I posted that, when the Celtics reached a 17 point lead, they almost always won the game. Year after year, that proved to be true. Many's the night when, on the Game-on Thread, Berlin would post, "That's 17, Sam." And, sure enough, another win was in the bag. There was one game when they lost a game after reaching a 17 point margin, and we were all thunderstruck! But it turned out to be an anomaly—the exception to prove the rule—and the 17 point rule of thumb held up for a long time.

Now it's just a joke! Just like a 42 point first quarter is meaningless. The formula for beating the Celtics is well-known to every single opposing team. (Yes, I know the 6ers were an exception, but I was careful to use the word "team.") (1) File your nails, floss your teeth, and send a mass text to all your girlfriends around the league while the Celtics build a big lead. (2) Then, either extend your defense or collapse your defense in the lane. (It doesn't seem to matter which; either is sufficient to confuse the Celtics.) (3) Drive to the hoop until the flailing of Celtics' arms looks like a scene from the movie "Exodus." (4) Then play the old inside-out game and toss in a few daggers known as threes.

What's all too predictable is that the Celtics will do a takeoff on an old Carol Burnett sketch called "Went with the Wind" in which Vicki Lawrence plays the Butterfly McQueen role when "Melody" is about to give birth. Vicki starts running around the stage yelling, "What I do? What I do? What I do?) Then she stops short, gives herself a resounding slap in the face and says, "I think of sumptin'.")

Except that, in Celtics game, the slap is missing and they think of nothin'. Sure, they make a few plays. They routinely come close. But I'm convinced that, in the very last timeout huddle, they vote on who's going to screw up the pivotal play. We all know about Rondo's freebies. Last night, Jeff Green made a great move to get by a Hawks perimeter defender but missfired on a long but makeable jumper. That play came so close to tying the game near the buzzer that I bet Jeff won't win the huddle vote in the next few games. He came too close.

Enough for the sarcasm, although it really did feel good. In the first quarter, the Celtics showed how they're supposed to play at both ends. The starters were a collective +11 in the quarter, and the bench (in about 3 minutes) more than held their own at +1. Jeff Green went wild, scoring 14, while Jared Sullinger scored 7, Avery Bradley was 2 for 2 with 5 points, and Kelly Olynyk (in three minutes as a sub) scored 4 points with 3 assists. By halftime, Kelly had 5 assists. Up 42-30 after one. Those of us on the Game-on Thread would have been giddy, but our happiness was tempered by concerns about the inevitable. It's hard to get all that enthusiastic (with good reason) when your opponent scores 30 in a quarter.

The Celts added to the lead in the second quarter. The lead was up to 16, and Rondo had 14 assists by halftime. A pretty good showing. Nice pace. Nice spacing of the floor. Dare we hope? Did the team meeting on Monday really have a dramatic effect?

Sure enough, the bottom began to fall out in the third quarter, as Korver, Milsap and Horford plied their respective specialties and the Hawks outscored the Celts by 11. The Celtics' shooting percentage had regressed from 77% in the first to 61% after the second and 51% by the third, and at least the Celts still held the lead by five entering the fateful last quarter.

The Celts' shooting actually wasn't that bad in the 4th, and they ended the game shooting 49%. But their defense was woeful. In addition to the the three previously cited Hawks, Dennis Shroder came up big, scoring 10 of his 15 points in the quarter, mostly on uncontested drives to the hoop. As the lead evaporated and expanded in the other direction, the Celts trailed by 9 at one juncture. But they responded with some heroic threes by Turner and Sully and a driving layup and one by Jeff Green to bring the Green to within 2 points with the ball and 23 seconds left to play.

Brad obviously drew up a great play in the huddle (down, sarcasm, down boy), resulting in the aforementioned long, abortive jumper by Jeff. There was still time for another Hawks breakaway, making the final score 109-105. The starters were a combined +3 for the night, but the bench was -7.

The big news of the night was that gyso won the contest we revived on the Game-on Thread. So gyso, Jeff Green (25 and 4) and Sully (22 and 9) share the game ball, although Rondo has an admirable 19 assists and 12 rebounds, which were at least partially offset by 1-8 shooting and 7 turnovers.

And they live to fight another day.

Sam

one thing to clarify.

I was in no way trying to compare Kelly to Bird EXCEPT for his defense. I personally always felt Bird was the weak link among Celtic defenders (much like Kelly is now).

and yes we could only HOPE that Kelly can one day be the help defender that Bird was.

I still say its time to look at our coaching staff and time to lay some of the blame there for not being able to change up the second half fails.

one thing for sure, IF this team can't beat Detroit tonight we are in serious trouble.

dboss wrote:  My reference to a culture of losing has nothing to do with the effort that we see on the court.  It has more to do with the impact that losses have on the pysche of the team.  The team has not figured out how to win games.  The youth and inexperience in some instances and the lack of talent in others not withstanding, this team does not have a culture of winning.  They don't know how to win.

How could those two issues be "not withstanding"?  That is like saying, well aside from the fact that he had an inferior car and it was his first race - he should have won the Indy 500.  LOL

Those two issues are at the CORE of winning - so how could they be immaterial to losing? They are facing teams every night with more talent, more height, more experience - but not withstanding those thigns, they should be winning. Really?

dboss wrote:  The honeymoon is over becasue last year Stevens came in as a young pup of a coach but he is no longer a rookie.  The players had to adjust to playing under him.  The players repeatedly make the same errors over and over and over again.   Last year stevens was slow to recognize that Avery cannot run the point or that Kris Humphreys was their best big.  This year it took him way to many games to put Zeller in the lineup.  And he insists on using Evan Turnover at the point despite his mindless quality of play.  The team is shooting .315% from behind the arc but there appears to be a green light on for them to keep shooting.  The regression at the defensive end is startling.   I see no reason to suspect that Stevens can coach them up.  So the honeymoon is over for the coach and the players and Danny Ainge for assembling this collection of misfits.

Could not disagree more.  This is not a zero sum game....where if you are learning and improving as a coach you are also winning.  When you dont have the horses to win the race, you can be the best trainer and have the best jockey - you still will not compete.  The fact that Brad Stevens can even make lemonade for half a game with the bowl of fruit he has inherited, is a testament to his basketball acumen and more so - his leadership skills.  He is one of the most respected basketball minds in the world and if the Celtics were to let him go, it would not take him a week to find a job.

Here in your own words is a perfect example of you missing the point of what is needed to succeed in the long run.  Kris Humphries was never going to be part of the long term plans for the Celtics, so any small improvement in performance that was gained by him playing more than say Sullinger or KO was not worth the long term damage to the development of those two players.  Yet, to Brad's credit - he bucked the conventional trend and didnt go all young guys, he actually played Kris Humphries more than many people expected and what did it net the team?  25 wins.

PPG are up 8%. Assists per game are up 22%.  FG attempts, FG%, Steals are all up - turnovers are down.

They are doing just fine - learning and growing and lucky for us, DA and the Celtics ownership has voiced their support of Brad over the long haul.  Greg Popovich was 17-47 in his first season.  By your rationale, the Spurs would have given up on the greatest coach in the last decade since clearly the honeymoon only lasts 1 season.  SMH

Wow...yeah, I have to wonder if we are even watching the same games.

-No veteran will come play here because they dont want to play for Coach Stevens?  
-Coach Stevens isnt a respected basketball mind?

As for your final paragraph, you are clearly not looking at the same numbers as me.

By nearly every offensive measure the team is doing better this year vs last.  Right across the board



FGA up - FG% up -2P% - up - Rebounds up - steals up - assists up - points per game up.  What "score trending" are you talking about?

The stats are not trending in the wrong direction....+ is + not matter how you want to parse it.  

As for the Brad Stevens part - if you need a refresher, here is what you said

dboss wrote:No one is knocking on the door because they want to play for coach Stevens.

How do you know that?  Are you in meetings and on calls with DA?

Stevens is one of the most respected young basketball minds “in the world”.  The NBA is the pinnacle of basketball talent, for players and coaches – and Brad is recognized as one of the brightest young minds.  So yes, in the whole world.

If you didn’t know who Brad Stevens was before he came to Boston, then you don’t keep up with college basketball much.

"The best young coach I have seen in my time" - Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim.

"Brad is one of the great college coaches. He's an outstanding coach. He's at a time -- he's young -- I can see him wanting to do something different. He's terrific. It's a great hire for the Celtics." – Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/blog/_/name/katz_andy/id/9449176/mike-krzyzewski-jim-boeheim-others-react-brad-stevens-move-butler-boston-celtics

mrkleen09 wrote:
"Brad is one of the great college coaches. He's an outstanding coach. He's at a time -- he's young -- I can see him wanting to do something different. He's terrific. It's a great hire for the Celtics." – Duke Coach Mike Krzyzewski

College success doesn't necessarily translate to the NBA. Case in point, Rick Pitino. We all get that he's a smart guy, and could one day be revered as a great NBA coach, but I'm not going to anoint him anything as long as I continue to see failed substitution patterns, starting lineups ill-prepared to match up with the opponent, and timeouts called too late. These are relatively basic things that he's still missing.

Let's look at things on a larger scale. Is this team better than last year's? Yes. Is it much better? Not really. This team is still losing games in almost the same fashion as last year; the only difference is that the losses aren't by as many points. This fact alone constitutes either a structural deficiency within the team, or a coaching deficiency (or both) still persists. Interestingly enough, despite the fact that the Celtics are the 3rd highest scoring team in the East, it has only translated to a 5-11 start because the Celtics are dead last in the East in giving up points. Whatever defensive "schemes" he's currently employing are not working.


KJ