POST GAME UTAH - HOME

Celtics Wrap: Boston Concludes Homestand With 98-86 Loss To Jazz

NESN by Adam London on Sat, Nov 17, 2018 at 9:56PM

For the second time in eight days, the Utah Jazz rolled through the Boston Celtics.

The Celtics couldn’t pick up their third straight win Saturday night at TD Garden, as the Jazz swept the regular-season series between the two teams with a convincing 98-86 win.

Donovan Mitchell put on a show, scoring a game-high 28 points, while Ricky Rubio impressed with 20 of his own. Kyrie Irving notched 20 points in 30 minutes, but he only was one of two Celtics to score in double figures.

With the loss, the Celtics fall to 9-7, while the Jazz improve to 8-8.

Here’s how it all went down:

STARTING FIVE
PG: Kyrie Irving
SG: Jaylen Brown
SF: Jayson Tatum
PF: Gordon Hayward
C: Al Horford

SLOW START
The Celtics didn’t carry much momentum coming off Friday’s thrilling overtime win over the Toronto Raptors, as the Jazz grabbed a 29-20 lead after the first 12 minutes of play. Within a 38 percent field goal percentage in the first, Boston struggled mightily from distance, posting a 1-for-9 mark on 3-pointers. Mitchell was feeling it from the get-go, notching seven first-quarter points, while Irving was the high man for the C’s with five.

CHIP AWAY
The Jazz stretched their lead to as large as 12 in the second quarter, but the Celtics made sure things didn’t get out of hand in the early goings. Thanks in large part to a quick 9-0 run near the midway point of the frame, Boston trimmed Utah’s advantage to 50-45 at the break.

The Celtics’ offense wasn’t overly impressive in the second, but their defense was sharp, holding the Jazz without a field goal for a stretch of four minutes and 48 seconds as they nipped on the visitors’ heels. Utah shot at a 36 percent clip in the second to help Boston get back in the game. Irving led the way with seven points in the quarter to boost his first-half mark to 12, while Aron Baynes provided a boost off the bench with five.

KNOCKED BACK DOWN
After rallying in the second quarter, the Celtics couldn’t ride the wave into the third, which concluded with the Jazz holding a 77-62 advantage. Mitchell was a force to be reckoned with in the frame with nine points, six of which via 3-pointers. Utah also received strong efforts from Rudy Gobert and Rubio, both of whom chipped in five third-quarter points.

The Celtics’ offense lacked rhythm in the third, and things only got worse when Irving picked up his fifth foul of the game with 5:21 left in the stanza, forcing the point guard to the bench. Hayward paced the Celtics with five points in the quarter.

Utah could have delivered the dagger earlier had it not been for another lengthy field goal drought. After Rubio hit a jumper with 5:02 left in the quarter, the Jazz didn’t score another basket until Dante Exum buried a triple with 26 seconds to go.

TOO LITTLE, TOO LATE
The Jazz kept their foot on the gas and quickly swelled their lead to 19 early in the fourth quarter. The Celtics’ lifelessness prompted head coach Brad Stevens to make an unexpected move, sending Guerschon Yabusele and Brad Wanamaker into action at the 8:58 mark.

The surprising tactical change created some energy for the Celtics, who went on a 6-0 run in less than a minute. That served as the last moment of hope for Boston, however, as Utah didn’t blink and cruised to victory.

UP NEXT
The Celtics hit the road for a Monday evening clash with the Charlotte Hornets. Tip-off from Spectrum Center is set for 7 p.m. ET.

112288

DISAPPOINTING & NOT ACCEPTABLE!

112288

If the exhilarating OT win against the Raptors gave us all sorts of glimmers, it is fair to say that tonight the Celtics slipped back into a black hole.

I know it is only one game but this loss revealed some disturbing issues with our offense.  This is not about the horrid 3 point shooting, the turnovers or even the inability to make a free throw.

I believe what has been revealed is a serious issue with the structure of our offense.  The Celtics offense is reliably boring and reflects a singular purpose.  Just keep shooting the 3 ball is the main focus of this team.

And when that is not working just keep shooting them.  As much as I like Brad Stevens there is no genius in his offense.  Sure he can call up a well designed play but that has little to do with how the offense flows throughout the game.

The Celtics inability to get other than 3 point looks is a real problem.

A screen here or there up top and passes side to side is not an offense.  That is not good basketball.   The predictability of the offensive sets is obnoxious to watch.

Get a hard earned offensive rebound near the basket kick it out to an open shooter, screw the 14 second shot clock.  Yep this offense is designed to get everybody and their grandmother an ooen look from behind the arc.  It does not matter who's open or if they are 1-7.  The offense finds its lowest common denominator.  The offense lacks any semblance of sophistication.   Few back cuts, few screens that free up a pathway to the rim, just a collection of too many bad shots.  

When those 3's are missing they have nothing else.  Wasted possessions and wasted talent.  They still have no fastbreak.  None of our bigs post up.  Everything is jumpshots.  

The Celtics will not be able to win just on their defense.  The league made sure of that.  

The unthinkable must happen.  Brad needs to make major changes to the offense.

dboss wrote:If the exhilarating OT win against the Raptors gave us all sorts of glimmers, it is fair to say that tonight the Celtics slipped back into a black hole.

I know it is only one game but this loss revealed some disturbing issues with our offense.  This is not about the horrid 3 point shooting, the turnovers or even the inability to make a free throw.

I believe what has been revealed is a serious issue with the structure of our offense.  The Celtics offense is reliably boring and reflects a singular purpose.  Just keep shooting the 3 ball is the main focus of this team.

And when that is not working just keep shooting them.  As much as I like Brad Stevens there is no genius in his offense.  Sure he can call up a well designed play but that has little to do with how the offense flows throughout the game.

The Celtics inability to get other than 3 point looks is a real problem.

A screen here or there up top and passes side to side is not an offense.  That is not good basketball.   The predictability of the offensive sets is obnoxious to watch.

Get a hard earned offensive rebound near the basket kick it out to an open shooter, screw the 14 second shot clock.  Yep this offense is designed to get everybody and their grandmother an ooen look from behind the arc.  It does not matter who's open or if they are 1-7.  The offense finds its lowest common denominator.  The offense lacks any semblance of sophistication.   Few back cuts, few screens that free up a pathway to the rim, just a collection of too many bad shots.  

When those 3's are missing they have nothing else.  Wasted possessions and wasted talent.  They still have no fastbreak.  None of our bigs post up.  Everything is jumpshots.  

The Celtics will not be able to win just on their defense.  The league made sure of that.  

The unthinkable must happen.  Brad needs to make major changes to the offense.

Excellent synopsis. Especially the part about them not even being fun to watch. Someone posted that despite horrific shooting, the Celtics are getting more open looks than any other team. I would like to understand how this was determined because it doesn't seem match what my eyes see. Even if true, the shots aren't coming from good ball/player movement. Some of this rests on Brad's shoulders. Their current offensive philosophy isn't working.

The team chemistry seems really off this year. Maybe a line up change is in order. Also seems that there is no real leader, no one to whip them up or get them back in line during those painful offensive droughts.

All that being said, it is still only tbe beginning of a long season. Plenty of time to figure things out. If they are still playing this way in a month, the I will really worry.

dBoss,

I agree with 100% of what you stated. I have been saying this for 2 years, it is very predictable offense..............dribble to the arc and shot......get a rebound and pass it to a guy beyond the arc. I think the NBA has figured this out by now and are just sitting back and allow the Celtics to take low percentage shots.

Now you know why the Celtics are last in the NBA in scoring in the paint.

I guess it starts by not having a true center who is a beast and can score down low. We are forced to score away from the paint/basket because cause Horford is not a center, he is a true power forward and does not like the inside game of battling bigger centers. He gets pushed around like a doll and is most of the time over matched.

This is not a healthy offense and Brad has to start changing his approach or this will be a down year for the team. I would like them to start running and gunning fast breaks like the old Celtics..........no one can beat us if we execute this style of basketball.

Like to see what Williams can do. Cannot hurt, play the kid.

112288

Rock I really think it is a structural issue with the offense. The Celtics play offense on the perimeter. It does not really matter who is in their. Only Kyrie and Tatum look to get to the rim. There are certain types of screens that are designed specifically for attacking the basket, not just the pick and role.

112288 wrote:dBoss,

I agree with 100% of what you stated.  I have been saying this for 2 years, it is very predictable offense..............dribble to the arc and shot......get a rebound and pass it to a guy beyond the arc. I think the NBA has figured this out by now and are just sitting back and allow the Celtics to take low percentage shots.  

Now you know why the Celtics are last in the NBA in scoring in the paint.

I guess it starts by not having a true center who is a beast and can score down low.   We are forced to score away from the paint/basket because cause Horford is not a center, he is a true power forward and does not like the inside game of battling bigger centers.  He gets pushed around like a doll and is most of the time over matched.

This is not a healthy offense and Brad has to start changing his approach or this will be a down year for the team.  I would like them to start running and gunning fast breaks like the old Celtics..........no one can beat us if we execute this style of basketball.

Like to see what Williams can do.  Cannot hurt, play the kid.

112288

112288

Yes this has been an issue for a while but now that just about every team is putting up big points it is obvious what the problem is.

Yes I would love to see Williams get some minutes.

I still think they'll get it figured out and get on track.

Unfortunately, the lack of offense is really a lack of balanced offense.

Too much going through Kyrie.

Hayward is doing OK, but still needs time to get back to his past form.

Rebounding needs to improve, but that's been the case since 1988.

Just awful.  I could wax more lyrical but "just awful" is the most accurate.

38.5% shooting.  5-33, 15.2%, from 3.  11-20, 55%, from the line.  High school teams can do better than that.

Rozier wants to start?!  Not shooting 2-9, 0-6 from 3 and 0-3 from the line.  His season-to-date shooting numbers are 36.6% fg%, 33.9% from 3 and 72.7% from the line.  Not only are those not starter's numbers, they aren't even rotation player numbers.  All 3 of those numbers are down from his career averages.  Did the spotlight from starting in last year's playoffs actually damage him, mentally and/or emotionally, by setting his expectations too high and now he can't help but feel disappointed and it's showing up on the court?

They pnr'd us to death.  Gobert had 12 points and he doesn't score except from the line and off of pnr dunks.  He had 4 points off of fts, the rest were alley-oops because of our poor defense.

The winner of the "Who is doing a better job of overcoming the sophomore jinx" contest is Donovan Mitchell.  VERY smooth.  Tatum is off.

Jaylen Brown was 1-9, 1-6 from 3.  He also didn't do a great job defending Mitchell, his primary assignment.  36.2% fg%, 27.3% from 3, 64.5% from the line.  The first two numbers are WAY lower than his career averages.  Another player, like Rozier, who has fallen off the table and whose numbers aren't even rotation player numbers.

http://www.espn.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=401070910

In a nutshell, we just wasted that magnificent victory over Toronto with this abomination.


bob



.

NYCelt wrote:I still think they'll get it figured out and get on track.

Unfortunately, the lack of offense is really a lack of balanced offense.

Too much going through Kyrie.

Hayward is doing OK, but still needs time to get back to his past form.

Rebounding needs to improve, but that's been the case since 1988.

NYCelt

At last we have something to disagree about, lol

I have removed my green tinted glasses and made a new pitcher of Kool-Aid with a lot less sugar.

We do have the same take on one thing for sure.  "the lack of offense is really a lack of a balanced offense"

I disagree however that the Celtics run too much of their offense through Kyrie.  Perhaps they have an over dependence on Kyrie for scoring.  That I can agree with but with the realization that you could say that about any team other than GSW that has a top scorer.   Kyrie actually gets a lot less touches than many guards in the league given his level of scoring proficiency.

Here is Exhibit A  on touches per game by guards

https://stats.nba.com/players/touches/?sort=TOUCHES&dir=1&Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular%20Season&PlayerPosition=G

You will note that a lot of high profile guards get more touches per game than Kyrie.  The reason is clear.  Stevens has an emphasis on positionless basketball and as such anybody may have the ball.  The ball moves form the top to one side and back to the top and over to the other side.  If an open 3 point shot opens up that shot is taken no matter the time on the shot clock or who is taking the shot.  

The lack of balance in their offense may be more closely related to the structure of their offense.   The Celtics take too many 3 point shots.  40% of their offense (FGA) comes from behind the line.  We have no reliable post up game from our bigs.  With a roster full of many athletes we do not look to fast break enough.  Other than Kyrie, we have no one that can consistently take his man off the dribble, get to the rim and finish.  Gordon may help in this area as he becomes more aggressive and Tatum has shown some skill in this area but the problem is reflected in the offensive sets, ball movement, positioning, screens and priorities.  

Positionless basketball sounds real good on paper but it is nothing but a Utopian dream.  No team has 4 or 5 6' 8" clones that are interchangeable.  This team is filled with a lot of guys that are very good at very specific things and average to below average at other things.  There seems to be no clearly defined roles on this team.  The only role that everybody has bought into is taking a three point shot.  Don't get me wrong, I am not sounding the alarm against positionless basketball.  If the structure of the offensive lacks diversity everything becomes so painfully predictable.

Stevens needs to go back to the drawing board.

dboss wrote:

NYCelt wrote:I still think they'll get it figured out and get on track.

Unfortunately, the lack of offense is really a lack of balanced offense.

Too much going through Kyrie.

Hayward is doing OK, but still needs time to get back to his past form.

Rebounding needs to improve, but that's been the case since 1988.

NYCelt

At last we have something to disagree about, lol

Positionless basketball sounds real good on paper but it is nothing but a Utopian dream.  No team has 4 or 5 6' 8" clones that are interchangeable.  This team is filled with a lot of guys that are very good at very specific things and average to below average at other things.  There seems to be no clearly defined roles on this team.  The only role that everybody has bought into is taking a three point shot.  Don't get me wrong, I am not sounding the alarm against positionless basketball.  If the structure of the offensive lacks diversity everything becomes so painfully predictable.

Stevens needs to go back to the drawing board.

dboss,

Hmm. Still only a partial disagreement here.

I 100% agree with your comment about position-less basketball. I've seen it played once consistently at the NCAA level, and once briefly in the NBA by Phoenix when D'Antoni was the coach. I've seen position-less players, notably Jabari Parker at Duke, but that's one out of five. The Celtics, despite the constant talk, have never played position-less basketball. Not that I've ever seen. I also think you're right on lack of clearly defined roles. That's not from having no pre-set position, however. I think that's from lack of a clear-cut game plan, on offense especially. Or, at least, lack of players focused on executing the plan.

I think part of my assertion on the problem with Kyrie (where we finally do get to disagree!) can be seen with last night's FG attempts. 16 for Kyrie, 11 for Tatum, and then no one else in double figures. I think Boston has too many scorers for that wide a separation in shots.

I think that except for having no strong bigs outside of Horford, Tatum being more of a hybrid 3-type, this team has enough horses to compete for the division title. I'll also agree it's time for a new game plan.

One out of three. I promise to try and be be more disagreeable in the future!

Back to football...

Regards

NYCelt

Trust me...you may find even more agreement with me on this.  

You pointed out that last night there was not a good distribution of shots with Kyrie taking 16 and Jason getting 11.

That game may not be a good example since there was a bench clearing.  If you look at the season averages Boston has 5 players that average at least 10 FGA per game.  Hayward is at 9.2 and should actually be right up there with Irving.  That will make 6 guys with at least 10 FGA per game.

The real problem is that they have too many guys taking too many shots.  That may sound odd but before your head explodes please consider this.

If you look at the top 10 teams in the NBA none of them have more than 4 players taking 10 or more shots per game.  I never thought to look at this but here is what I found.

GS 3
Bucks 3
Raptors 3
Pacers 2
Denver 4
Memphis 2
OKC 4
LAC 3
Portland 3
Philly 4 (Butler trade and no Saric)

The top teams are structured to get their best offensive players the most shots.    With that in mind, the problem is not with the number of FG taken by Kyrie.  The problem is with the structure of this offense that has a green light on all day and all night for any Tom, Dick or Barry that has an open 3 point shot.  If you want to fix this offense you must change the focus on 3 point shooting and you must rely on your best scorers to score.  That means that Kyrie, Tatum and Hayward are the guys that you want to get the most shots.   The Celtics offense is structured to prevent that from happening.  

I think the pecking order needs to be established.  There will be a few bruised egos.  

Stevens would have to come to a realization about his offense and any notion that an equitable distribution of shots is NOT a formula for winning in the NBA today and the stats prove that.

The tough part will be to communicate this to his players.

Jaylen Brown is not as good as Tatum
Rozier is not as good as Kyrie
Morris is not as good as Hayward

Only Al is likely to embrace this reality.

Is it okay to blame Steven's yet for the teams lack of offense?

KJ

Kj

Sure as long as it is not mean spirited and as long as acknowledgement of his immense coaching skills is not overlooked.

I have been trying to figure out what the issue is. You have chemistry issues still but if the chemistry issues were eliminated how much better would this team be?

If guys start making those uncontested 3 point shots will that fix the problem? They will win more games but I do not think it is a complete solution.

I have an issue with the overall style of play particularly on offense.

So yes coach Stevens has earned his share of criticism. He will get his share of praise as well as criticsm. I just hope he can figure out how to make this team great.

Like I pointed out just recently in another thread - It's the star power at the top and not a deep bench that leads to championships in most years.

swish

Star power and bad basketball is not always mutually exclusive.

I think it is really a combination of both. Case in point, 2008 championship 3 stars and a deep bench.

bobheckler wrote:Just awful.  I could wax more lyrical but "just awful" is the most accurate.

38.5% shooting.  5-33, 15.2%, from 3.  11-20, 55%, from the line.  High school teams can do better than that.

Rozier wants to start?!  Not shooting 2-9, 0-6 from 3 and 0-3 from the line.  His season-to-date shooting numbers are 36.6% fg%, 33.9% from 3 and 72.7% from the line.  Not only are those not starter's numbers, they aren't even rotation player numbers.  All 3 of those numbers are down from his career averages.  Did the spotlight from starting in last year's playoffs actually damage him, mentally and/or emotionally, by setting his expectations too high and now he can't help but feel disappointed and it's showing up on the court?

They pnr'd us to death.  Gobert had 12 points and he doesn't score except from the line and off of pnr dunks.  He had 4 points off of fts, the rest were alley-oops because of our poor defense.

The winner of the "Who is doing a better job of overcoming the sophomore jinx" contest is Donovan Mitchell.  VERY smooth.  Tatum is off.

Jaylen Brown was 1-9, 1-6 from 3.  He also didn't do a great job defending Mitchell, his primary assignment.  36.2% fg%, 27.3% from 3, 64.5% from the line.  The first two numbers are WAY lower than his career averages.  Another player, like Rozier, who has fallen off the table and whose numbers aren't even rotation player numbers.

http://www.espn.com/nba/boxscore?gameId=401070910

In a nutshell, we just wasted that magnificent victory over Toronto with this abomination.


bob



.

Most of Tatums numbers are better this year with the exception of FG percentage. He 3pt % is not has high but last nite it was over 40 %. Rebounds and points are up.
We have too many guys shooting VERY BAD percentages. Its like they don't know their roles. Example, Smart should never shoot a 3 pter unless the clock is running down. Baynes although his percentage is probably alright I don't want my centers living on the 3 pt line. As I have stated earlier they need better ball movement and take it to the hole hole and get points or foul shots. The better players need more minutes IMO like most teams do. When you are 1-6 in threes it is time to quit shooting it. When you need to score a 3 pointer is not a better option than a 2 pointer. You should shoot a higher average from inside the line. We just keep firing. Frustrated. I agree Toronto was a wasted victory.

Do we think we are better than we are? Lets look back to the playoffs. Indiana took Lebron to 7 games without the home court advantage. Milwaukee took us to 7 games. We very easily could have got knocked out in first round. We have on scorer. Kyrie. We have got to get at least one more that is averaging 20. I think it is Tatum. He needs more minutes and more shots. Hayward now without the minute restriction needs more minutes as well. He is the best all round player we have. He will prove it when he gets in tune. We have to develop some CHEMISTRY. Hard to do running 11 players out there. As you can tell I am a Tatum fan. I have noticed when he comes out in the first quarter sometimes he is out for nearly 12 game minutes (probably 30 real minutes) I am sure some other rotations are similar. Definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Hope Brad does something soon.

All good comments, I think they are thinking too much, leading to a lot of overpassing at times and not playing on instinct and are not attacking aggressively enough. The player passing up the most shots has been Hayward. Another problem I’m more worried about is rebounding, Al like a lot of bigs, don’t rebound as well into their 30’s to mid 30’s. That’s a bigger problem than post up bigs IMHO, the Rockets and GS don’t post with their bigs, they just roll. Bigs rolling to the hoop has replaced post up play for the most part. If Williams can help us on the boards, how many times have we played great/good defense and get killed on offensive boards???,,,that would be great. We need a dynamic dirty work type player IMHO.

I do not think the pick in roll has replaced post up plays. Afterall the pick and role is one of the oldest plays in basketball but with bigs able to stretch the floor we probably see more pick and pops. The Celtics get very little scoring out of the post from the Pick and roll.

I think once Hayward starts looking to shoot more things should improve. He is just trying to fit in and always looks to pass the ball. I would prefer to see him shoot.

dboss wrote:I do not think the pick in roll has replaced post up plays.  Afterall the pick and role is one of the oldest plays in basketball but with bigs able to stretch the floor we probably see more pick and pops.  The Celtics get very little scoring out of the post from the Pick and roll.  

I think once Hayward starts looking to shoot more things should improve.  He is just trying to fit in and always looks to pass the ball.  I would prefer to see him shoot.

Really check out Willie Cauley Stein or Capella, both no post moves, almost all their scores are on rolls or offensive boards. In the old days bigs posted, I see less and less.

Ya ,

And now we see forwards and guards posting and shooting low percentage shots.

112288

FYI

Through 16 games, the Boston Celtics’ offense hasn’t lived up to its enormous potential.

Boston ranks 27th in the NBA in offensive rating, 24th in points per game and 29th in free throws attempted per game so far this season. The Celtics have been hoisting up 3-pointers at an alarming rate as well, averaging 36.4 triples per game, which is good for third in the NBA. But the C’s only connect on 34.9 percent of their 3-point attempts, which ranks 18th in the NBA.

112288

dboss wrote:Star power and bad basketball is not always mutually exclusive.  

I think it is really a combination of both.  Case in point, 2008 championship 3 stars and a deep bench.

Three super stars and a productive bench equaled .800 ball for the year - so there's nothing wrong about having a good bench - but the bottom line success was mainly due to Garnett, Pierce and Allen who collectively took 53.6 percent of the shots.

swish

It's still just a matter of getting GH more touches then we can replicate a Big 3 that get 53.6% of the shots. AH just doesn't shoot that much. JB can then be free to D-up on the other end and go for slams on our end. Right now, we have a Big 2.5, maybe 2.25 with JT and GH not quite up to speed. Fix it, Brad!

db

dBrown

Lofty amounts when comparing what we have now to the past Big 3.

I think we are at 1.5. 1 = Irving, .5 = Horford. That is it!

Brown and Tatem cannot be included in the conversation. Haywood is still finding his sea legs and until then cannot be factored into the equation. If at top performance he is best a .75.

112288