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

[MDCelticFan]

Beat: MY BAD! It is Charlotte, I was peeking a week ahead! SO SORRY!-I'll take forty lashes with a wet noodle (from Campbell's Soup)-or just hit me with a technical foul, and you can go to the line to shoot the technical!-MD.

[MDCelticFan]

Sam: It's amazing how you can combine both facts of a game with a feature flavor showcasing your analysis and point of view. I have read professional sportswriters that do not possess a flair for either. If I remember correctly you my be in Public Relations or Advertising, not sure. However, your writing style is very unique, and the ability to intertwine feature & fact is a pleasurable experience to intellectually digest! My sincere congrats!-MD.

[bobheckler]

As Sam pointed out, the Celtics have been bedeviled by high screen offenses lately and, fortunately, the Pistons didn't run many. The question then becomes "how vulnerable are the Celtics against a team that doesn't use their kryptonite against them?". In all, I'd say we fared pretty well. Let's not overlook the loss of Perk. No way Detroit takes it to the hole as much as they did if he was in there.

1. Game ball to Nate for his energy and microwave points. This why we got him. He's scoring like Eddie, he's ballhandling better than Eddie and he got a HUGE offensive rebound, skying over everyone. He only played 15 minutes, but his impact felt bigger.

2. Second game ball to Shelden for his hustle on the offensive boards. I'm concerned he might have manos de piedras (hands of stone; very different inference than when Roberto Duran proudly accepted that nickname), but one thing at a time. He got offensive rebounds and/or prevented Detroit from running on us by fighting for the offensive board. He's given credit for 2 offensive rebounds, I give him credit for more. He's also given credit for 2 defensive rebounds, I give him credit for less because he didn't always box out. Oh well, that's why he was always a mid-end bencher and hasn't played much. Still, when we needed a body to replace Perk, he came through.

3. Pierce looked slow out there. He's not getting calls like he used to either.

4. Rondo was only 4-10 from the field but I don't care (not something I see as happening all the time). He had 6 turnovers and dribbled way way too much and I don't care (see above). On the good side, he also had 11 assists, and I still don't care. All my eyes can see is that he was 7-8 from the free throw line, hitting his last 4 straight in absolute crunch time with none of them so much as nicking the iron. Please Lord let that be a switch in his head that just flipped. Then let him tell Perk how he did it.

5. I've been beating on Sheed lately, justifiably in my opinion, but he played well before his old-town homies. Moved his feet on defense. Lead the team with blocks with 2. Pumpsie said he showed up in time to see Sheed miss a 3. Well, overall he shot 2-5 from three for 40%. I will definitely take 40% from 3 from anybody on this team except Pierce who is shooting better than that already. One shot does not an evening make. Sheed had a good evening; shooting, defending, stealing. Good solid all-round game, Sheed. Gimme more like this one and I'll happily get off your case.

6. A Trick-or-Treat night from Tony Allen. Shot well, but committed some really, really dumb fouls. Tony has struggled to find his game with the return of Marquis and now with the addition of Nate. That's because his game is heavily predicated upon athleticism and not upon smarts. Unfortunately for Tony, at the pro level, the game is more mental than physical.

7. Speaking of smarts, though, I'm really enjoying watching Marquis Daniels play. He's new to the team, out most of the season with a thumb and he still comes in and he plays a very coherent game. You can just tell he knows where he's supposed to go, where his teammates are supposed to be. He's only on a one-year, I sure hope Danny re-signs him after this season. Feel the love, Quis, feel the love.

8. Part of me wants to applaud Davis for not curling up into fetal position because he wasn't having a good shooting night (5-14). Another part of me wants to hand him the KoME Selfish Player of the Game Award. He played 18 minutes and had more fga than anybody else on the team. I guess, since we won and winning soothes the savage breast, I'll give him credit for ganas. He WANTED the ball badly because he WANTED to make a difference and turn our funk around. In his defense, two of his shots were baby hooks from 8-10' in the paint. He'll make them more times than not and that would have made him 7-14 and that's quite good.

I felt good about our chances of winning this game on the first possession of the second half. Full court pressure by the Celts didn't get the ball into Stuckey's hands until just 14-15 seconds were left on the shot clock. Thib must have been in heaven. The difference between getting into your halfcourt set with 14 seconds left and 18 seconds left is 1-2 extra passes producing a GOOD shot. Take those options away and every defense looks better.

On to Charlotte to break Air Jordan's heart with a positive spring in our step.

bob

[Sam]

MD,

Thanks for the compliments. I've had numerous advertising agencies and public relations firms as clients, but I've never been an advertising person per se. Actually, writing something like 1,200 business reports has created and reinforced a stilted writing style I personally dislike and am always trying to improve. But I'm happy if someone gets value out of whatever I produce. Thanks again.

Sam

[Sam]

BobH,

Nice to read comments involving the shot clock, which I believe is an underrated elements of the flow of basketball games. I wish there were more stats available on each team's shot patterns and incidence of success in relation to the shot clock.

And relating the shot clock to the possible number of passes in a possession is particularly astute because it has a major bearing on how many options a team can run through. My own rule of thumb is that, in a halfcourt set, the first entry pass should occur in time for the team to run at least two options if necessary (however much time a specific requires). If the first option works, fine; but, if it doesn't work out, there should ideally be time for a second and possibly a third to materialize. I'd really like to sound out Doc on why this isn't a "given."

Thanks for all of your insights.

Sam

[dboss]

Always enjoy seeing Boston beat the Pistons.

The Celtics are still trying to snap out of their funk and the addition of Nate and having Daniels healthy really sets the stage for a strong run down the stretch.

How the Celtics play is all between the ears. funny that we always talk about their defense yet it is still ranked #1 (along with the Bobcats) in PA. Yet you just have the feeling that they have several notches above this that they can go. And good offense will flow from good defense.

Come playoff time I would not want to have to face a heathy Celtics team. And that is really the key. The team needs all of their key players to be heathly.

They may not finish at the top of the division and will need to win on the road to move along but this team plays well on the road and can play much better at home.

Many of the pundits have written Boston off becasue of some recent struggles but if you consider the depth on this team you have to have a high level of optimism even when they put up a stinker or two on the board. i really think that this team is probably significantly better than they have shown.

dboss

[bobheckler]

BobH,

Nice to read comments involving the shot clock, which I believe is an underrated elements of the flow of basketball games. I wish there were more stats available on each team's shot patterns and incidence of success in relation to the shot clock.

And relating the shot clock to the possible number of passes in a possession is particularly astute because it has a major bearing on how many options a team can run through. My own rule of thumb is that, in a halfcourt set, the first entry pass should occur in time for the team to run at least two options if necessary (however much time a specific requires). If the first option works, fine; but, if it doesn't work out, there should ideally be time for a second and possibly a third to materialize. I'd really like to sound out Doc on why this isn't a "given."

Thanks for all of your insights.

Sam

sam,

82games.com might help you some.

If you go to a team (homepage) and then click on a player (e.g. Paul Pierce) and scroll 2/3-3/4 down the page, there's a section called 'shooting details'. In that section it shows his shooting proclivity (i.e. % jumpers, % dunks, etc) and it shows his shots within the context of the shot clock.

http://www.82games.com/0910/09BOS9.HTM

I haven't found yet, where they'll do that for entire 5-man units, as opposed to the individual players. Now THAT would be interesting info! Perhaps you can discern a pattern by looking at the individual players that comprise the 5-man units...

bob

[jeb]

bobheck and sam

Continued excellence and insight breaking dow the game. Much enjoyed by this Celtics fan.

Jeb

[Sam]

Bob,

Thanks. I've seen those stats for players. i'd prefer to see them for full teams, as that would be more reflective of the general philosophy of the coach. There were stats for one year published (something like 2004), but I've never seen it replicated more recently. Maybe if I look at the stats for all the players, they'll reflect general team patterns.

Take care,

Sam

[Sam]

Here's the post-game thread for tonight. I still have to watch the game (looking forward to it) and will post later.

Sam

[Pumpsie Green]

Its going to take a lot more games to make me believe that this team has turned it around. We are only two games separated from a very embarassing loss to the Nets. If they can rip of 8-9 wins in a row, I will believe again.

[Pumpsie Green]

Sam, any idea why my previous game thread posts didn't come through on that thread??

[Pumpsie Green]

I think that something is wrong with the logistics of the forum. If I am having this problem, perhaps others are too.
No matter...its that much less often you guys have t read my crap

[Sam]

I have no idea. There's really no way to track something like that
unless others are also having the same problem. We don't control what
you call "the logistics." That's in Forumotion's domain. But, if others
would report the same difficulty, we could cite it to Forumotion as a
widespread problem.

How many of your posts were involved?

[Pumpsie Green]

I tried rebooting the computer...lets see if this works.

[Pumpsie Green]

I tried it again.....no luck. I think you can see this, but the only way I can see your replies is if I am notified that you posted while I was posting, making me hit the "save" button.
I would guess that at this point there are about 10 posts that are not appearing. Also, I cannot see anyone elses new post on this forum.

-------

https://samcelt.forumotion.net/viewtopic.forum?t=1042

-------

https://samcelt.forumotion.net/viewtopic.forum?t=1108

-------

https://samcelt.forumotion.net/viewtopic.forum?t=1109

-------

https://samcelt.forumotion.net/viewtopic.forum?t=1110

[Sponsored content]