Postgame Thread Celtics Lose to Knicks 104-101 Tues 4/6/2010

[dboss]

The Celtics did not care about this game. The question is why? I could tell from the beginning that they were not ready to play with a lot of enthusiasm.

Too many turnovers (18) and not enough rebounds (34 for the C's and 44 for the other team)

As this season continues to wind down the Celtics have themselves and their fans riding on a precarious roller coaster.

Where is this team headed.

dboss

[sinus007]

Hi dboss,
Maybe they want Bucks in the first round: no Bogut vs DWade.
Just a thought.

AK

[Hoopdeedoo]

Where is the team headed?

I'm sorry to say that I think an early exit from the playoffs. Last night was another inexcuseable lack of focus and energy. The starters with the exception of RA are not showing the urgency or aggressiveness to make a run. To get outrebounded by a back up big (18 boards, 8 offensive), Perkins and Garnett should pay us their salaries for last night. How many bunnies are Perkins going to shuffle or take a stupid dribble and get blocked at 3 feet from the cup! I love PP but he justs looks old and I now wish RR would take over at the end of games. If you could see a replay of the last few games I bet the misses from PP and KG are all front rim shots. That means fatigue.

Good things are TA's play and Finley is starting to blend in well.

Defensive play will make or break this team from here on. If I were coach I would continue to shorten the big 3 minutes and look for a spark from the bench. Defense and rebounding would be the emphasis. If Sheed can't come in and get 4-5 boards let Williams get some minutes. Forget spreading the floor crap. The game isn't won at the 3 point line.

Doc Rivers is in a tough spot right now. I feel for him and all us fans because it is hard to keep saying the same things and seeing the team just not respond consistently.

I don't post that often and hate to be negative but I watch the games by myself and just had to vent. I enjoy reading this forum and hope you and whoever posts can give us and optomistic point of view on what's needed to turn it around.

Thanks, I feel much better now!

Hoop

[MDCelticsFan]

Where was Ainge looking when Earl Barron was available? That guy plays with heart and intensity. Those are two qualities lacking in the general play of some Celtics in key positions lately! I'm sure Barron could have been had for a song instead of giving away our draft picks from the past two years! Why didn't Ainge get Barron last year instead of Mikki Moore

[bigpygme]

I know Gallinari scored big last night, but i thought the "unknown" (at least to me ! ) Barron was the one who really killed us. Big shots, big reb's, and lots of hustle plays before and while Gallinari got going.

I don't think we would've got a single Tommy point last night as a team, but i think Barron would've gotten, like, three. We sure made him look GOOD. hell, we made the whole Knicks team look good, back-ups and all. them playing without McGrady or Jefferson, the bunch of em looked like freeking all-stars out there against our sadly porous defense.

where do we find life? in our defense, i think. but we need to play with drive and effort and heart (like the knicks, not us, did last night), and those qualities have not been consistently displayed since - well, since at least December, actually. i hope the playoffs bring that sense of urgency that has been missing to date.

sorry for the grousing ...

PS - thinking of other ways to get better - Sams' idea of sitting PP for a little while and giving Quis some time is a very nice, constructive suggestion, and one that the coach is sure not to even consider.

Michael

[bobheckler]

Ganas vs no ganas. That's how I'd describe last night's game. NY really wanted it and we weren't even sure which city we were in much less why we were there. Guess which won? Ganas? Or no ganas?

1. Rondo might not have known why he was there, but he knew who wasn't there. Chris Paul, Deron Williams, Steve Nash weren't, and so he wasn't all that interested. This time, it was Chris Duhon who outplayed him. Rondo showed no evidence of aggressiveness, rarely driving to the hoop. He'd stop 25' out and look for someone to move for him.

2. Another stinky night for the captain. A 14+ppg player, Gallinari, dropped 31 on him and laughed all the way. He's obviously slower, he has no spring in his leaps. I thought KG and Ray's ages were supposed to be our concerns?

3. Earl Barron had a career night. He had 17 points and 18 rebounds and there was at least one rebound that he saved for NY that he didn't get credit for. He was throwing his body everywhere. He had a failed 3-year stint with Miami, went to the D-league, and this was his 2nd game with NY. I see that as evidence that the system you play in will highlight your strengths and weaknesses (something Sam has been saying all along). In Pat Riley's system, he couldn't stay with the team. In D'Antoni's system, he thrives. Since Doc's system is founded on Riley's, I'm not sure we can say that Barron would have been a good pickup for us even if he had been available. Is D'Antoni's system "better" than Riley's? Pat Riley has won championships coaching 2 different teams. D'Antoni hasn't won jack. He showed it all last night, though. Rugged rebounding, hustle, reliable mid-range jumper, baby hooks from 8'. Can he do that consistently? Can he do that after teams start scouting him? Who knows, but he had it going last night, that's for sure. His first game with NY against the Clippers? 6 rebounds and 10 points. Like Gallinari, the Celtics made him look good last night.

4. Every starters +/- was a -. Every bench player's +/- was a +. That should tell you who got the job done and who didn't.

5. NY shot 44% from the field for the game, we shot 55%. How do you lose a game when you outshoot your opponent as badly as that? Well, for one thing, they outrebound you by 10, with those 10 extra rebounds all being offensive rebounds. Barron, himself, had 8 offensive rebounds. As someone who has not been harping on the value of offensive rebounding for a while, I can't tell you how disgusted I am by this. NY took 15 more fga than us. Think getting offensive rebounds facilitated that? We lost by 3 points. You don't need to shoot a very high percentage to score 3 additional points when you have 15 additional attempts to score them. It's less tiring to work hard for an offensive board and score, while all your players are already down at the offensive side of the court, than it is to run back on defense, defend for 24 seconds and then get the ball back and try to score fresh.

6. I think Ray Allen had 14 points at halftime. He ended up with 17. Why would you stop feeding the hot hand?

7. A lot of talk has been made about the Nate for House etal trade. Eddie didn't play last night. Walker and JR played, but were ineffective. Walker had 5 fouls in 28 minutes by repeatedly playing poor defense, just like when he was with Boston. He shot 2-10 and 1-7 from 3. He was the only Knick starter that had a negative +/-. That's why I don't miss him much. JR didn't fare any better. 4 points on 2-5 shooting with 2 turnovers.

We had a golden opportunity to go up on Atlanta, who lost to Charlotte. Unfortunately, our W got lost by the Post Office when we mailed it in.

bob

.

[Guest]

Here's some staggering stats that say a lot about the way Garnett is now playing:
In his last 16 games, 6 times he has failed to get to the FT line. 4 times he has shot only 2 FT's and he has shot 3 or more FT's in 6 games.
With Perkins and Wallace not shooting many free throws either, Boston's big men clearly aren't playing as aggressively as they need to be.

[Sam]

Hoop,

This team can play good defense—at least good enough to win last night’s game. In fact, they outshot the Knicks 55% to 44%. And look at some of the other statistical advantages the Celtics had:

• One more three-pointer (7-6) and better shooting from the arc (39%-24%)
• Three more assists (26-23)
• Six more fast break points (11-5)
• Sixteen more points in the paint (52-36)

Free throws were not that far apart (the Knicks took 25, the Celts took 22), as the Celtics committed only two more fouls than the Knicks (22-20).

Aside from better free throw shooting (hard to do much about that except practice), what won the game for the Knicks was the fact that, despite their 44% shooting, the Knicks took 15 more field goal attempts than the Celtics. And that was a function largely of two things:

• Second-chances (The Knicks grabbed 85% of the shots the Celtics missed, while the Celtics nabbed only 65% of the shots the Knicks missed.

• And the Celtics committed 6 more turnovers than the Knicks 18-12 (The Knicks scored 26% of their points off Celtics turnovers. (Conversely, the Celts scored only 14% of their points off Knicks’ turnovers.)

The Celtics can play defense…at least well enough to have won last night’s game. Holding the opponent to 44% shooting in the face of your own 55% shooting will usually win games. But the Knicks simply gang-rebounded and the Celtics seldom had anyone on their offensive board and only occasionally had more than one guy fighting for the defensive rebounds. They’re seldom going to have a height advantage, and what they need is more of a numbers advantage.

This Celtics team needs to recognize that they execute better when they don’t try to outrun the other team. One thing they need to do (and they have the ability) is to control the pace of every game. They can push the ball into the front court on every possession (in order to get into their offense before the defense is set) without allowing the pace to become helter skelter. They’re not athletic enough for helter skelter; several of them are not good enough ballhandlers for helter skelter; and they tire faster in a helter skelter scenario.

Right now, control of the boards seems to be the single most pivotal factor influencing the Celtics’ immediate future. On the offensive board, Perk’s usually alone and generally rebounds ineffectually with one hand. Maybe another Celtic should be in there to team up with Perk, with one boxing out and the other going for the board. I’d like the offensive rebounding team to be Perk and KG with the starters and Davis and Tony with the bench. Perk and Davis are usually in there anyway, and I believe KG and Tony are fast enough to recover and retreat quickly if the opposition gets the board. I’d be perfectly happy to sacrifice a few fast break points (they generally lead opponents in that category) in favor of crashing the defensive boards with at least two, and hopefully three, players. It may have to be a different two or three on every possession, depending on who winds up nearest the hoop

I believe these goals are achievable without a major retooling of the system. And another doable thing involves better communication out there. Too often, one Celtic is cleanly blocking a shot (KG?) and another one (Perk?) rushes over from the weak side, reaches in desperately, and slams into the shooter. One reason for defensive lapses just has to be lack of effective communication during rotations, which are the key to Thibs’ defensive scheme. Too often, two Celtics are going for a rebound and no one is blocking out.

There’s little time left, but these suggests do not require a lot of practices. The players are all familiar with the concepts. They need to be reminded—emphatically—to be more constantly aware of their importance. Hell, that could be done on an airplane. I hear Doc, in the miked huddles, exhorting the players to do something like protect the ball better. I’m not so much a fan of general rah rah stuff like that as I am in reminding them of some of the principles involved in doing it well. Don’t tell them they have to rebound better. Tell them how. Don’t tell them to push the ball. Tell them to consider it a three-second midcourt rule rather than an eight-second midcourt rule.

Next, it has to be realized that this team will go only as far as the starters take it. Yes, it is helpful to have a bench that can gain ground on the opponent. (The bench was a +7 last night, while the starters were -10. But the starters absolutely cannot leave the bench in a hole. I'm hoping the playoff atmosphere will jack up the starters. But, in the meantime, they need to be reminded that it's they who set the early pace; it's they who determine which team is going to be playing catchup; and it's they who will make or break the results in crunch time.

And finally, I happen to believe that much of the apparent defensive malaise is a function of offensive frustration. Not last night so much, but very often. When a team makes stops and consistently cannot capitalize on them, it takes some of the starch out of their defensive resolve. Yeah, I know it shouldn’t. And we shouldn’t have wars either. Two of my most despised words are should and shouldn’t. “It should be on that shelf over there, sir.” “Yeah, I know it should be, but it isn’t. Now are you really going to help me or not, Mr. slug?” There’s only so much any team can do to shut down the opponent, especially a highly talented, extremely motivated or desperate, opponent. Settling for jumpers and leaving long rebounds can be the kiss of death. I wish Doc would not hesitate to yank out guys who take ill-advised shots in the clutch and say, in effect, “Golly gee, that one should have gone down.”

Sam

[dboss]

Sam

I am really wondering if Doc has somewhat lost the ear of his team. Or are they just plan bored with the regular season.

The team is hard to figure out but there has been a definite slippage in the defense.

They are scoring points and the stats from last night show that they can score.

dboss

[Sam]

dboss,

Since Christmas, I've had the feeling that there's something going on that we don't know about. Rift in the ranks? Tuning Doc out? Wallace's blazé attitude influencing the team? Pierce and Rondo not on the same page stylistically? Veteran resistance to Rondo's taking over the leadership? I have no idea what it might be. But there just appears to be something.

Sam

[bobheckler]

There are two post-game threads.

[gyso]

There are two post-game threads.

Only one per game. This one is for the Knicks game.

[bobheckler]

There are two post-game threads.

Only one per game. This one is for the Knicks game.

gyso,

duh.

bob

.

[Sponsored content]