Re: Celtics Post-Game Thread (Collection of past threads)

[bobc33]

Well I'd still like to see his minutes reduced to keep him fresh for the playoffs. Why?

I can not think of another good player in the history of this franchise who has had, even half as many, really bad playoff games as Ray has in the past 2 years. It may be injuries, it may be minutes, it may even be he doesn't like the big stage. (though he has hit game winning shots for us in playoff games)

All players have off or mediocre nights, even HOF players which I think Ray is, but I think either at times he can't handle the pressure, or he is too old to play big minutes.

[dbrown4]

Thoroughly enjoyed the Celtic display that was put on in the second game of back-to-back on the road. Loved the smooth passing and KG dunking, Ray as well! I was way wrong on this one. Thought the C's would blow this one with all the hype about OKC. Overall, just a great game.

As an aside, I may be shot for this but you had to somewhat enjoy the end of the Lakers/Heat game. Great game all the way around. I remember flipping Phil off with 9 seconds left and Miami up by 4 and calling him something derogatory starting with an "f" as they showed his smug, no timeout callin' face. Great shot by Kobe and great D by Wade. There was a split second where the guy guarding Fisher should have switched to double Kobe, I thought, but who knows. We all want the Lakers at their best. That was pretty good. But there is an obscure point. So far, (OK just two games to date) But each team that pulls games out of their behinds with last second victories don't wind up winning the title...Glen Davis (unfortunately for us) vs. Orlando, LeBron vs. whoever it was he threw that prayer up on...was that Orlando too? Now the Lakers?....I know, I know. It's a stretch and this was a regular season game, but so far it's 2 for 2!! I had to give the Lakers credit for that one though, much to my chagrin.

[babyskyhook]

But there is an obscure point. So far, (OK just two games to date) But each team that pulls games out of their behinds with last second victories don't wind up winning the title...Glen Davis (unfortunately for us) vs. Orlando, LeBron vs. whoever it was he threw that prayer up on...was that Orlando too? Now the Lakers?....I know, I know. It's a stretch and this was a regular season game, but so far it's 2 for 2!! I had to give the Lakers credit for that one though, much to my chagrin.

db4- IMO the Cs and Cavs losing to the Magic didn't have anything to do with those shots. They made those series (esp vs the Cavs) closer than they otherwise would have been. The Magic were just a better team last year (barely) than the KG-less Celts, and were a far superior team to the Cavs- they (and the Lakers) were a matchup nightmare for the Cavs.


The LAkers didn't deserve to win the other night, but that was a case of a superior team being flat against a well-coached, hard-working team that defends well to stay close, then let's their superstar (one of the 3 best players in the NBA) win games for them in the 4th quarter. Kind of the opposite dynamic of the other two cases you mentioned. So I'm not losing any sleep over that theory.

Lakers-HEat was an incredible game to be at, and both of Wade's sick dunks at the end of the first half, (YOU TUBE them if you haven't seen them- they were INCREDIBLE!) and Fisher and KObe's 3's at the end were right in front of me at the basket that I sit behind, so we all got our money's worth. The last two shots both elicited playoff-like electricity. Pretty rare in December unless the Cs are in town.


Really good win for the Cs vs OKC. More impressive to me than vs the SPurs actually, who have looked really bad in every game I've seen them this year.

Considering the age of the Big 3, 2nd night of a back 2 back after a close game the night before, end of a road trip, and the talent and athleticism that OKC has, that was an impressive and dominant win by the Cs.

[MDCelticsFan]

I'm not convinced Tyronne Liu is the quality level player the C's need to back up Rondo. We need someone who is starter material and could take on additional minutes if needed. The C's need someone who commands much more respect than Liu. I like the name Rafer Alston that was suggested in a 3 for 2 or a 2 for 1 trade by a previous poster!-MD.

[Sam]

The Celtics raised their winning streak to 8 by beating the Bucks at the Garden 98-89. This was not one of the Celtics' more energized games but for the most part, the Bucks were even more out to lunch. For example:

• The teams combined for only 12 fast break points (but at least the Celts had 9 of them)

• The teams combined for 35 turnovers (but at least the Bucks had 20 of them)

• The teams combined for only 4 blocked shots (with the Bucks garnering 3)

Some credit should be given to the Celtics defense. On a night when Bogut bucked (pun intended) the sleepy trend and shredded the Celtics interior defense repeatedly, the Celts tightened up the "D" in the second half. Rondo deserves particular praise for limiting Jennings ("Mr. youngest 50-point man") to 17 points on 7-19 shooting primarily by overplaying Jennings to his left (shooting) hand and sticking close to him.

The Celtics won based on what is becoming a familiar pattern:

• The entire starting team scored in double figures and was joined by Sheed in that respect.

• The ratio of assists to made field goals exceeded my 67% "comfort zone" by reaching 69%.

• They managed to close out a tight game in which the final margin of nine was the largest for either team in the game.

KG again looked like the Garnett of old, going for 25 points and 9 boards and shooting lights-out. Rondo missed a triple-double by only one rebound (11/9/13). Sheed and Ray shot a collective 5-8 from the arc, although Eddie went 1-4 from downtown and 1-7 overall.

But, if I had to name one single factor that probably won the game for the Celtics, it was their superiority in making steals (17-4). It seemed that each time the Bucks closed the gap, the Celts would make a steal or two, although some of the steals were partially the results of sloppy Bucks play.

If pressed to pick the single most disturbing stat (from several candidates), I'd once again point to the Celtics' deficit in offensive rebounding (5-14). They did tie the Bucks, 20-20 in rebounding on the defensive end. For a short time, Doc appeared so frustrated by their rebounding disadvantage that he played Pierce at the "2" and Scal at the "3." Moreover, in the absence of Marquis Daniels (thumb), Ray played some time at SF, with Eddie and Rondo at the guards.

Lately, Scal seems to be getting much more time than Sheldon Williams in general (15 minutes to 4 last night). While Sheldon is certainly a better rebounder than Scal, and the Celtics need rebounding help, I believe the reason for giving Scal more minutes is the stagnant nature of the bench offense. Once again, last night, the starters outscored their opposition and the bench lost ground to theirs. Scal doesn't necessarily score a lot, but he smoothes offensive flow by measures such as spacing and swinging the ball; and, on offense, Sheldon sometimes seems to be playing pretty much of an individual game out there. My guess (only a guess) is that Doc's becoming underwhelmed by Sheldon's inability to pick up the offensive system better in practice. The writing could be on the wall for Sheldon (and Scal) when Glen Davis returns.

One final comment about Rondo. Doc mentioned, after the game, noticing something that had occurred to me in the fourth quarter—the very first instance of a "hack-a-Rondo" approach on an intentional Bucks foul. But Doc also gave Rondo deserved credit for hitting the two freebies (nothing but net) and foiling the tactic. Rondo was 5-7 from the line, and I guess many of us would be happy with 71% free throw shooting on his part. He also hit a nice midrange jumper. Nothing fantastic (and there will be nothing conclusive on his free throw shooting for a long time), but certainly signs that were more positive than negative.

Another good one to win. And I have to admire the sporadic outbursts of the crowd as they tried to move the Celtics into gear.

Sam

[cowens/oldschool]

Spot on analysis Sam,can't win every game by blowouts and all out energy,but we were good enough when we had to be.Bogut played the game of his life,hadn't seen anyone do that to Perk in a long time.Rondo took it to Jennings both ends,seems Pierce and Ray are defering to KG since hes been so on fire shooting and they want the big man to get going and get his confidence.I'd say thats going well,if KG's offense is going like this come playoff time we'll all be happy.I agree Scal can do some perimeter things like ball handling and spacing that SW does not,but does that warrant losing SW's defense and rebounding?with Quis out maybe it does.I would still love having SW in the mix,to me having two shotblockers on the floor at all times is a luxury and advantage that makes the team what it is and thats the identity I prefer.

[dbrown4]

Oh, make no mistake, BSH, there is no relation in my analysis. Strictly coincidental. Was just trying to be like some of the crazy baseball stats the media/fans comes up with, football as well (Washington Redskins last home game and subsequent election results, etc) It has absolutely no basis in fact. But if the Lakers do indeed come up short this year, I'm taking my theory to ESPN and let them run with it!!

Great games though. More to come. Great season so far.

[Sam]

Cow,

I hadn't thought about Paul and Ray deferring to KG to help build his confidence, but maybe it's a factor.

The Sherman Williams thing is just perfect for debate on this board because everyone's guess is as good as everyone else's. I'm guessing it's no coincidence that the Celtics have had luxury of more practice time yesterday and (1) it's paying off in wins and (2) Doc has changed playing times somewhat.

Sam

[dbrown4]

All well said. Once again, in a close game in the 4th, I'm not sweating a loss. Clearly, the Celtics aren't either. That's a very good feeling. Very good indeed. They are doing this now with regularity in the close games. Sam, must remind you of the Russell teams' swagger when there was a loss. I forgot how you quoted those teams but it was like an error or a mistake. "Did we just lose? Huh, that was weird. Never experienced that before. Oh well. Who's next?" Something to that effect. They expect to win EVERY time out.

Also, they have been in every game to the end with chances to win all of them. No blowouts against us to date.

[bigpygme]

Agree with cowens/o.s. that i'd love to see shelden in more - like his D and rebounding. Sam's point that he's not picking up team offensive plays or flow may indeed be at the root of his recent reduction in playing time. but how unfortunate that is - a loss to the team, it seems to me. i feel he's been a boost to the 2nd unit, and does manage to contribute some offensively, inside to Scal's outside.

i commented during the game that Bogut was simply shredding us. i haven't seen him play a lot since going pro, but i have some, and i haven't seen him look this good since college. (i really liked him coming out of college, thought he'd make a mark in the NBA, though you can [almost] never tell, really). any thought about why he was so effective last night? what does that say about our interior defense?

i also said in game-on thread that Rondo was making an impact via assists and reb's. though he eventually scored a few points, they pretty much came late - his assists got his seemingly half-asleep teammates involved in the offense.

a good one to win indeed. pulling away from (i think) an 84-84 tie to score the next 7 was enough to put it away - watching that game was much better than watching the nuggets lose a really awful game to charlotte at the same time the C's were playing.

regards
Michael in Denver

[dbrown4]

Boxer, Dwight "Buzzsaw" Braxton, after one of his fights was being interviewed by a reporter. He asked, "Buzzsaw, that was a great fight. You knocked him out in the first round. Amazing!! At what point, Buzzsaw, when did you know you had him whopped?!!" Without batting an eye he stared down the reported and said, "Before I ever got to the arena."

That's what the Celtics are thinking for every game.

[Sam]

Michael, I hope you noticed that I corrected my error and declared you the winner of last night's contest.





My guess is that Doc feels the bench is currently in need of both
rebounding help and offensive smoothness. He may be reasoning that,
since not bodying opponents off the boards is a big problem, Scal can
do that pretty well (while not getting many boards himself) and that
Scal can also enable offensive fluidity better than Sheldon.



The five Celtics starters are collectively averaging 0.16 rebound every minute each spends on the floor. The corresponding number for the bench is 0.14 Not that much of a difference.

The five Celtics starters are collectively averaging 0.12 assist every minute each spends on the floor. The corresponding number for the bench is 0.06. Only half as much.

While I could point out fallacies to these or virtually any stats, I'm concluding that—of two sputtering elements—the bench's offensive flow is sputtering more than the bench's rebounding.

And I do NOT assume they could throw a more "pure" PG in there with the bench and make everything all right in the assist area—not until there is a better offensive system operating among the other four players.

Sam

[mrkleen09]

Tony Allen has got to have the lowest “basketball IQ” I have ever seen in a pro player. I know he hasn’t played and I don’t expect him to have his offensive timing down, but defense is something you either have or you don’t. After being on this team for years, he still looks CLUELESS out there.

It was a very strange game, with no real flow for either team. The refs were not necessarily bad, but they were very inconsistent – and you could see by the end of the game that it was getting very chippy – especially between Perk and Bogut and KG and Ilyiasova (sp)

This falls under the category of “a win is a win” – I will take it.

[Sam]

If they have a promotional DVD to send to prospective season's ticket purchasers, this would probably be a good game to skip.

A team can either win or lose those games, and at least they won this. But, for the first time in a while, I didn't see much of anything that represented real progress. I guess it can't happen in every game.

Sam

[bigpygme]

Michael, I hope you noticed that I corrected my error and declared you the winner of last night's contest.

My guess is that Doc feels the bench is currently in need of both rebounding help and offensive smoothness. He may be reasoning that,
since not bodying opponents off the boards is a big problem, Scal can do that pretty well (while not getting many boards himself) and that Scal can also enable offensive fluidity better than Sheldon.

The five Celtics starters are collectively averaging 0.16 rebound every minute each spends on the floor. The corresponding number for the bench is 0.14 Not that much of a difference.

The five Celtics starters are collectively averaging 0.12 assist every minute each spends on the floor. The corresponding number for the bench is 0.06. Only half as much.

While I could point out fallacies to these or virtually any stats, I'm concluding that—of two sputtering elements—the bench's offensive flow is sputtering more than the bench's rebounding.

And I do NOT assume they could throw a more "pure" PG in there with the bench and make everything all right in the assist area—not until there is a better offensive system operating among the other four players.

Sam

nope, i didn't know i won, thx for the mention. i lost the game when the computer tv feeed went south in the 4th quarter and didn't know how the final score ended up - then i didn't put 2 and 2 togather when i checked the box scores today ...

very reasonable idea as to where the sputtering is coming from, and based on numbers that don't lie (though i know you aren't fond of them, in and of themselves) - i hope Doc is looking at it with as much statistical precision as you name, instead of just "gut". while certainly there are times to just go with your gut, i'd hope that at least some analysis goes into determining who plays and why.

i also think that in last night's game Rondo was showing that different "stroke" from the FT line that you've brought up before ... all to the good ! last, i've liked Quis' ball handling thus far, when he's been asked to do it, though it seems that Doc prefers House take over those duties when he's on the floor. i have to wonder why, since freeing Eddie up to launch the rock would seem to be a preferred way to go.

Michael in Denver - it FREEZING here !! LOL

[dboss]

Sam

Thanks for your post game analysis.

I cannot recall KG shooting the ball this well even in 08. PG Rajon Rondo has a real connection with KG. Seems to know where is will be all the time. Great chemistry there.

Speaking of Rondo, it was really interesting to watch him knock down free throws and an outside jumper with the game in the balance. I am hoping this will turn into a trend.

Shelden Williams has been buried on the bench lately.

Rasheed is trying to find more balance between his post game and his outside shooting. I hope he spends more time in the post punishing smaller defenders. His 3 point shooting has picked up a bit.

With the pecking order at work I am expecting to see more of Tony Allen over the next 6-8 weeks while Daniels recovers from surgery. Tony did not look bad considering how long he has been idle.

I hate to beat a dead horse but I am still under the strong impression that the 2nd unit without a quarterback is a team that will struggle on offense. The 2nd unit seems incapable of holding any lead or building on it as it did during the beginning of the season. Every single possession looks like an adventure. They just cannot seem to run effective offensive sets.

dboss

[Sam]

The Celtics lost three of the four quarters, but they won the game by two points largely on the strength of a strong second quarter and some great play by Rondo at the end.

The Celts started fast but trailed by one at the end of one. Their major spurt of the game followed; and, by halftime, it looked as though the game would end in extended garbage time, as the Celtics led by 14. The Celtics were repeatedly driving to the hoop while forcing the Wiz to take a disproportionate percentage of outside shots. However, the teams looked as though they had changed uniforms in the third quarter, as Washington wiped out the lead and led by as many as three themselves.

All five Celtics starters scored in double figures, and Ray Allen scored his 20,000th NBA point. But the starters were outscored by roughly four points by their Wizards counterparts, and the Celtics bench (especially when playing with Ray and with the OTHER Allen looking not bad as the bench's high scorer at eight points) pulled their fat out of the fire by gaining approximately seven points on the Wizards bench.

Rondo scored 21 with 11 assists, but these stats are hardly reflective of the two-headed catalyst he was. In the first half, he dominated with his ball distribution, including two beautiful alley-oops to a driving KG. In the last quarter, he became Rondo the scorer, repeatedly slashing to the hoop and even hitting a jumper (which he had also done early in the game). In the end, Ray hit a couple of freebies and Perk hit one to ice the contest. Pierce struggled in the clutch, missing two of four from the line.

One good piece of news was that the Celtics appeared to find their rebounding touch, dominating a good rebounding team 40-34 on the boards.

Doc continued with a nine-man rotation, as Scal received a DNP in favor of Williams. Prior to this game, ten five-man combinations had accounted for 72% of the Celtics' minutes. It's a little shocking to note that only three of those ten combinations had outscored their competition:

• The starters had a figure of +0.34 points per minute played.

• The "augmented bench" of Eddie, Ray, Daniels, Williams and Sheed had a figure of +0.49 points per minute played (obviously fattened up in the earlier part of the season before the bench went into a collective slump that hopefully ended last night).

• An infrequently used five of Eddie, Ray, Pierce, Garnett and Wallace had a figure of +0.22 points per minute played.

In contrast with the "augmented bench involving Ray, the quintet of Eddie, Pierce, Daniels, Williams and Sheed had a figure of -0.33 points per minute. So, it appears that playing Ray with the bench is generally more productive than playing Pierce with the bench, although last night Pierce was valuable in playing the point with the bench while Rondo was resting.

Another example of finishing games well to continue being the league's best road team and running the win streak to eight games.

Sam

[gacracker]

If I am reading the shot chart correctly, Rondo took 9 mid range shots (beyond the paint) and converted 3. While that % is not impressive, it is encouraging to see him take the shot irregardless of the outcome.

He did become a bit tentative in the waining minutes but the driving baseline dunk made up for that to put the game pretty much in the W coulmn.

Hopes are that he can continue enlarging his offensive game as a run up to playing truly "elite" (dont' ask me to define, please! You know who they are) opponents.

GC

[dbrown4]

Allright Sam, you're throwing me back into the briar patch again with this new stat!! Truly fascinating!! How do you calculate those stats? Can you derive them from the box score or is it more deliberate by just marking time during the game vs. whose on the floor once subs start coming in.

I like the Celtics dunking. It's almost like you don't expect us to do that. Larry never really dunked. Rarely at best. Parish would always do those soft secure dunks. McHale mostly went for those pretzel twisting layups. DJ was a lay-up guy. Especially the one we all remember with the feed from Bird. My boys and I jumped out of our seats with Rondo's dunk, though. That had to rip the Wizard's heart out.

[bigpygme]

love the stats you'[re laying out there, Sam (though i too don't know how you do it ! ) they make a clear case for certain combinations being on the floor.

i was glad to see Shelden get some minutes last night - it's been more infrequent lately, but the time he got earlier in the season shows he has something to bring to the table for us. i haven't looked at the box to see if he was part of the reason for the welcome shift in rebounding dominance, but that was something that needed to turn around, and last night was a good start.

we'll be needing that to go against GC's "elite" teams ! [smile]

M in Denver

[Sam]

Dbrown and Michael,

I have a love/hate relationship with the +/- stat. I love it for evaluating combinations and hate it for evaluating individuals because the stat is a function of the interactions of individuals, not by individuals alone.

I don't calculate the stats I mentioned. They're available from the website sponsored by 82games.com. They provide +/- figures for individuals (which I totally ignore) and for the several five-man combinations playing the most minutes on a given team. The sample of minutes is now large enough so that they list 10 combinations for the Celtics. By the end of the season, they'll be listing 20.

The URL for the Celtics stats I mentioned is:
http://www.82games.com/0910/0910BOS2.HTM

I simply took the +/- figure for each combination and divided it by the number of minutes they've played together.

I always should issue a disclaimer that stats aren't everything and should be utilized only with careful analysis and consideration of all possible contexts. For example, there could be some combinations that play together mainly during garbage time, which could easily result in a misreading of their performance potential under pressure. And the better +/- for the Celtics bench than for the starters (in the stats I presented) is a great example of the fact that the relative quality of the competition should be considered.

But, in this case, I think it's a fairly straightforward set of conclusions.

When I talk about how the Celtics starters performed versus the bench in terms of +/- in a given game, I'm less comfortable with my approach. Basically, I take the shortcut of totaling (from the box score) my "hated" +/- figures for the starters and dividing the total by 5. And I total the +/- figures for the bench players and divide by the number of bench players.

Neither of these results is a completely accurate reading for either the starting unit or the bench because of the intermingling of certain starters and certain bench players in the course of a game. But, in general, I believe these data can give a rough indication of which unit performed competitively better than the other, especially (for example) if all the starters have consistently positive or negative figures and all the bench players consistently have the opposite.

Note that, in last night's game, the individual starter with the least bad +/- was Ray. This would be consistent with the possibility that his minutes with the better-performing bench helped offset the negative scores he compiled with the starters. That likelihood gives me a little more confidence in the conclusions I drew about the superior +/- performance of the bench.

Sam

[dboss]

Sam

Last night's win was difficult as expected. it was a fascinating game. Last year during the playoffs, Perk Rondo and Baby came of age.

This year as everyone speculated about the return of KG and the additions of Wallace and Daniels. Perk and Rondo and baby were determined to make this year a year where their contributions could not be overlooked or understated. While Baby has yet to show what he can do both Rondo and Perkins are having their best years individually and collectively.

Last night's game was a perfect example.

16pts and 11 boards for Perk was outstanding and now we are seeing a definite pattern here as he is over 14 ppg over the past 5 contest. Once he settles down a bit at the line Perk will be a very important scoring opton for Boston. He has a very good looking free throw shot. Now he just need to discipline himself to knock more of them down when the opportunity presents itself.

I do not know what to say about Rondo. He certainly looks more confident at the line AND also he is taking open jump shots. As he continues to work on those things and improves, he will become virtually unstoppable. Last night was just a glimmer of what we can expect to see from him this year. His 11 assists were outstanding considering only 1 turnover. He played a super game and was probably the one that put the W on the board.

I was very happy to see TA in the game. I have always liked TA despite his tendency to turn the ball over. TA is still a very gifted athlete that plays very well around the basket. He has a noise for the ball and is still a very good on the ball defender. While we may miss some of the ball handling skills that Daniels has, TA adds another dimension off the bench that could actually make the 2nd unit more productive. If he gets the consistent minutes I think he will be a big plus for the team.

Looking forward to Baby's return.

Overall a good tough win puts this team at 10-1 on the road.

dboss

[Sam]

This is more of an invitation than an analysis. The reason is that I didn't see the game and will have to wait until I return home after a five-day trip to watch it. However, I'll piece together what I can from the box score and will ask a few questions that will hopefully invite others to chime in.

The Celts soundly beat the Bulls, 106-80. In doing so, they achieved a rarity in winning all four quarters in an obvious case of total domination. (Maybe someone can tell me whether they got out to a quick advantage or gradually pulled away after trading baskets for a while.) I'd be delighted to learn more about their defense. The spectacular part of it seemed to go well, as eight different Celtics blocked at least one shot and they totaled 13 blocks.

Seven Celts were in double figures (I love it when that happens), with Sheed and Eddie joining the five starters. The balanced scoring among the starters has been a consistent "given" lately." Their shooting percentage was nothing to write home about, as Eddie (5-15 and 3-10 from the arc) and Paul (4-12) struggled. Did I read that Paul has some sort of nagging injury, or did I imagine it?

As is no longer news, Rondo flirted with a triple double, with 16 points, 7 rebounds, and 14 assists. Those assists are really becoming a huge force and were the main factor in the Celts reaching my "litmus test" level of two-thirds (66%) of their made field goals being the results of assists.

Their so-so field goal percentage gave them lots of opportunities for offensive rebounds, but they got only 10 (compared with 16 for Chicago). The Celts gathered in only 20.4% of the offensive rebounds available to them. The Bulls grabbed 29.1% of the available rebounds on their offensive end. We've been having an interesting discussion on the reasons for the offensive field goal deficiency, and I know that some of the problem is the following trio of factors:

1. Perk's usually the only Boston player contesting for offensive rebounds.

2. In the offensive rebound action, Perk tends to plant himself directly below the front rim, regardless of the flight of the shot.

3. It's pretty easy for the usual phalanx of opponents to keep Perk from backing into range of anything but the tiniest bounces, so he winds up flailing ineffectually with one hand.

That sequence means that the Celtics either need to reeducate Perk or get another rebounder in there to complement him or limit the long bounces. Last night, 36% of the Celtics' missed field goal attempts were from three-point land—an open invitation to long bounces. I'd view anything more than 20% as being a red flag, although they obviously got away with it in this one.

KG chipped in with a nice double-double (12 points, 10 boards). And Sheldon Williams had 8 rebounds (all defensive). In my "stat of the day," I'm going to be presenting interesting figures on the number of rebounds per minute among the Celtics big men.

Tony Allen was once again his active trick-or-treat self. He was 2-for-6 from the field, and every one of his four misses was blocked. He also had a turnover to go along with his six points. But, on the positive side of the ledger, two of his three rebounds were offensive ones. So far, he's had noteworthy contributions, but the question is always going to be at what price? At the moment, it really doesn't seem to matter because of a lack of alternatives. So we just have to keep rooting for the Tony Treats and timing our kitchen and bathroom breaks for those moments when he's about due to commit a Tony Trick.

My final question is whether the Celts seemed to be having fun out there. It's an under-scrutinized part of the game, but I believe it's vitally important to the chemistry process.

I'll appreciate any feedback on this game. (I may be looking for the same after Monday's game too.)

Sam

[dboss]

Sam

Th final score does not really measure the difficulty of the game.

The Bulls came out fast and it was nip and tuck throughout the first quarter.

But the Celtics have become a vice like team...squeezing their opponents a little tighter and then a little tighter as the game progressed.

The Celtics imposed their will on the Bulls. The game started off ugly after Miller slammed Rondo to the floor on a driving layup. Rondo stepped to the line and knocked down both free throws and when he got the ball on the next possession he blew by the defense for another layup. This kid is tough as nails.

Rondo also knocked down some outside shots. There was exactly 3.9 seconds remaining to halftime and the Celtics took the ball out of bounds and passed it to Rondo and as is his custom with few seconds left, he allowed the ball to roll just about to halfcourt and then drove the ball to the left elbow with his man along with it and then stepped back for a jumper to end the half. Great shot!

PP had a poor shooting night and was repeatedly beaten by Deng. Later in the game the Celtics adjusted and brought some help defenders to Paul's aid. I talked about this in my pre game thread but it took too long for the Celtics to adjust.

The Celtics got beat on the glass again. The Celtics miss Glen Davis and his girth. Teams are bullying the Celtics on the glass. We need another thug out there.

Overall the Celtics shot the ball poorly (PP, Ray Allen and Eddie House all missed a ton of shots) but the Bulls only shot 30% from the field. As I mentioned in the pregame, the Bulls cannot score and they cannot defend. The result was another blowout and a reinforcement message to the Bulls and the rest of the league that this year the championship may be going through Boston.

At 11-1 on the road the Celtics have regained their mental toughness. They have stayed right on point and continue to execute their opponents night after night.

I did not see a lot of celebration from Boston. This was a very business like display where they came in to do their job.

dboss

[cowens/oldschool]

Overall I thought it was just a methodical beatdown against a tired team that faded in 2nd half,we didn't play great,but Rondo gave us enough spark to win easily.Its good to see Rondo keep growing as he is light years better than our championship season,nobody can stay in front of him and his stroke is getting better and better,has a unique way of gliding,darting into paint,so easily past his man,then your at his mercy......once he starts hitting the FT's he'll be to me best point in the league.

[Sponsored content]