Selected Celtics Stat Calculations: Updated Cumulative Season-to-date Games 1-25

Selected Celtics Stat Calculations: Updated Cumulative season-to-date Games 1-25

Post by sam on Sun 18 Nov 2012 - 14:54
I decided to wait until after the first 25 games to post an update of the 10 cumulative year-to-date stats I’ve been following. When one is dealing with cumulative data, things seldom change very quickly. But I believe there are some interesting trends, and one of the tests of the validity of a trend is whether there’s a plausible explanation for it. In this case, I believe such explanations exist based on observation of games. Anyway, see what you think, and I’ll be interested in any comments people might have.

Sam

Assists as a percentage of made field goals

Year 2007-08: 61%
Year 2011-12: 67%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 71%
After 10 gms.: 68%
After 15 gms.: 64%
After 20 gms.: 64%
After 25 gms.: 63%

The Celtics are assisting on fewer of their made field goes as the season progresses. This comes despite the fact that this is the sixth consecutive year in which Rondo has increased his average assists per game (he’s now at 12.3 APG). The fact is that KG and Paul Pierce are assisting less these days. They averaged a combined 7.4 assists last season but are accounting for only 5.6 assists this season. (The rest of the team is collectively averaging slightly more assists this year—5.4 APG—than last year—4.4 APG.) This raises some interesting questions. Is there a point at which it’s NOT a good thing to have such a large proportion of the ball distribution concentrated in one source? Could it be making the Celtics’ offensive game too predictable? Is having to shoulder so much of the scoring load detracting from KG’s and Paul’s ability to contribute to a diversification of the ball distribution responsibilities? (They’re currently averaging a combined 1.7 more points per 36 minutes than last year.

Offensive rebounds as a percentage of available offensive rebounds

Year 2007-08: 27%
Year 2011-12: 20%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 16%
After 10 gms.: 18%
After 15 gms.: 18%
After 20 gms.: 19%
After 25 gms.: 19%

It would be nice to see the Celtics collecting more offensive rebounds despite Doc’s feeling that it’s not particularly important compared to what’s gained by falling back quickly on defense. But, in the championship season, the Celtics had seven players contributing at least 1.0 offensive rebound per game compared with only three this season (Bass, Sully and, in very limited minutes, Collins). At least the trend is in a positive direction, but so is a snail crawling up an aquarium wall. I do believe I’ve noticed more Celtics effort on the offensive boards as of late, so it will be interesting to see if this stat continues its steady, albeit very slow, growth.

Defensive rebounds as a percentage of available defensive rebounds

Year 2007-08: 74%
Year 2011-12: 72%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 79%
After 10 gms.: 75%
After 15 gms.: 75%
After 20 gms.: 75%
After 25 gms.: 74%

I don’t really believe that defensive rebounding is a major problem with this team. They’re pretty consistently grabbing three-quarters of the available defensive rebounds and have limited opponents to 10.8 offensive rebounds per game as compared with 11.8 last season. Moreover, the corresponding figures for selected other teams so far this season are: Knicks 74.5%, Lakers 74.0%, Spurs 73.7%, Heat 73.2%.

Fast Break Points as a Percentage of Total Points

Year 2007-08: 10%
Year 2011-12: 13%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 17%
After 10 gms.: 15%
After 15 gms.: 14%
After 20 gms.: 13%
After 25 gms.: 13%

The low absolute numbers in this stat don’t bother me as much as the downward trend. By this time, it should be creeping upward. I’m seeing them misfire on numerous fast break opportunities, and I’m hoping they will reverse this trend starting very soon. The return of Avery Bradley should help.

Points in the Paint as a Percentage of Total Points

Year 2007-08: 37%
Year 2011-12: 38%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 36%
After 10 gms.: 38%
After 15 gms.: 39%
After 20 gms.: 39%
After 25 gms.: 39%

It’s hard to believe, but points in the paint are actually accounting for a slightly higher percentage of total points scored than in the championship season. I realize we all feel that they should be doing a better job in this area, and the team’s tendency to default too quickly to jumpers when the chips are down is a legitimate concern. But I think a lot of the angst has less to do with lack of Celtics points in the paint than with the comparatively elevated number of opponent’s points in the lane. The interior defense has been a season-long problem, and most of us (perhaps all) are awaiting the stud center savior that Danny will unquestionably produce in trade for Lucky the Mascot and a baker’s dozen of the Celtics Dancing Girls.

Points on Three-point Shots as a Percentage of Total Points Scored

Year 2007-08: 22%
Year 2011-12: 18%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 17%
After 10 gms.: 16%
After 15 gms.: 15%
After 20 gms.: 16%
After 25 gms.: 17%

I’ve never been a fan of the three-pointer, but I threw this stat into the mix because I know others really savor bombs. (Heck, I’m such a maverick that I believe dunks should count for only one point.) Anyway, after some early slippage, the share of total points represented by three-pointers is on the rise again. I’ll leave it to you to decide whether this is good or bad. One could argue that the importance of long-distance shots in the championship season was undeniable. Others might argue that it’s too easy to shoot bailout threes when the focus should be on taking it to the hoop. I can now confess that I slipped a note containing this stat to Paul Pierce before the Cavs game.

Turnovers as a Percentage of Opponents’ Turnovers

Year 2007-08: 95%
Year 2011-12: 95%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 95%
After 10 gms.: 93%
After 15 gms.: 92%
After 20 gms.: 100%
After 25 gms.: 97%

If opponents’ turnovers are used as a benchmark, the Celtics have looked comparatively good (by a slim margin) this season, although the Celtic figure has trended upward during the last 10 games. Their average turnover number to date is 14.6, which is right about where Doc wants it. If they can mount a more effective transition game without increasing their turnovers, it would be a major step in the right direction.

Field Goals Attempted as a Percentage of Opponents’ Field Goals Attempted

Year 2007-08: 99%
Year 2011-12: 97%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 93%
After 10 gms.: 92%
After 15 gms.: 96%
After 20 gms.: 96%
After 25 gms.: 97%

This is one stat in which the Celtics have demonstrated noteworthy improvement over the last 15 games. Lately, they seem to be shooting a little earlier in the clock (on average), which could help explain the recent upward trend. Considering that they’re a generally good shooting team (..472 so far this season versus 45.0 for opponents), a little below opponents on this measure is just about where I’d expect them to be.

Bench Points as a Percentage of Total Points Scored

Year 2007-08: Not available
Year 2011-12: Not available

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 33%
After 10 gms.: 33%
After 15 gms.: 32%
After 20 gms.: 31%
After 25 gms.: 30%

Considering the early prognostications for the Celtics bench and depth in general, this has to be a disappointing downward trend. I’m sure that some of it can be accounted for by the fact that there has been quite a bit of shuffling between the bench and the starters, making it more difficult for the bench players to get in synch. In general, it appears that the degree of bench production will depend largely on whether or not Jason Terry comes off the pine. The X factor here, as he has been all season long, is Jeff Green.

Celtics Steals plus Blocks as a Percentage of Opponents Steals plus Blocks

Year 2007-08: 109%
Year 2011-12: 105%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 61%
After 10 gms.: 80%
After 15 gms.: 85%
After 20 gms.: 93%
After 25 gms.: 97%

I like to call this my “energy stat.” While it’s obviously not nearly a total indicator of energy output, these are two commonly available stats that I believe are strongly correlated with the exertion of energy on the defensive end. Compared with last season and the championship season, this edition of the Celtics started off dismally, and their early record showed it. But gradually, as team members slowly became more comfortable on their roles and were able to focus on playing more instinctively rather than having to think so much, the energy indicator has crept up and now represents one of the most positive trends in these stats. The energy output is not yet where it needs to be, but it’s certainly headed in the right direction.

Summary

These statistics underscore the importance of realizing that improvement can take time—never more so than when the majority of the rotation is new to the team. But, in my opinion (for whatever it’s worth), the best news from these stats is that most of them are trending in a positive direction. The team is really putting out at both ends of the floor, and it’s only when they do that and still come up short against the good teams that areas of vulnerability are exposed. Number one, of course, is lack of a big who can team with KG to intimidate in the defensive interior and who can be a pretty good enforcer even without KG by his side. The early returns on the Collins-at-center experimet, while not a long-term fix, give some indication of the huge dividends such a player could pay.

Number two involves the inconsistent play of the bench. It may be unreasonable to expect more consistency until Bradley is back, the center position is (hopefully) bolstered, and there’s some predictability in the bench configuration.

I like the fact that the Celtics are gradually playing more volume basketball, pushing the rock consistently, shooting earlier in the shot clock, allowing time to run second and third options in the halfcourt. I believe the newer players have learned the Celtics defensive system as well as could be expected at this point, but they’re having difficulty spreading themselves thin without another big guy to anchor the middle.

Although I’d definitely like to see the Celtics depend so much on jump shots, I’m not nearly as concerned about scoring more points in the paint as I am in limiting other teams’ points in the paint.

I believe that the person who is currently searching hardest to clarify his identity on this team may be—wait for it—Rajon Rondo. What’s the right balance between being a facilitator and being a scorer? If he scores a little more, can KG and Paul Pierce distribute a little more?

As far as rebounds are concerned, more are always better, but I don’t believe rebounding is turning out to be a massive problem. More effectiveness in what they do with the ball after they grab a rebound is what’s needed, especially in capitalizing consistently on pushing the ball.

Back to top Go down

Reply with quote
Edit/Delete this post
Delete this post
View IP address of poster

Selected Celtics Stat Calculations: Updated Cumulative season-to-date Games 1-25

Post by sam on Sun 18 Nov 2012 - 14:54
I decided to wait until after the first 25 games to post an update of the 10 cumulative year-to-date stats I’ve been following. When one is dealing with cumulative data, things seldom change very quickly. But I believe there are some interesting trends, and one of the tests of the validity of a trend is whether there’s a plausible explanation for it. In this case, I believe such explanations exist based on observation of games. Anyway, see what you think, and I’ll be interested in any comments people might have.

Sam

Assists as a percentage of made field goals

Year 2007-08: 61%
Year 2011-12: 67%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 71%
After 10 gms.: 68%
After 15 gms.: 64%
After 20 gms.: 64%
After 25 gms.: 63%

The Celtics are assisting on fewer of their made field goes as the season progresses. This comes despite the fact that this is the sixth consecutive year in which Rondo has increased his average assists per game (he’s now at 12.3 APG). The fact is that KG and Paul Pierce are assisting less these days. They averaged a combined 7.4 assists last season but are accounting for only 5.6 assists this season. (The rest of the team is collectively averaging slightly more assists this year—5.4 APG—than last year—4.4 APG.) This raises some interesting questions. Is there a point at which it’s NOT a good thing to have such a large proportion of the ball distribution concentrated in one source? Could it be making the Celtics’ offensive game too predictable? Is having to shoulder so much of the scoring load detracting from KG’s and Paul’s ability to contribute to a diversification of the ball distribution responsibilities? (They’re currently averaging a combined 1.7 more points per 36 minutes than last year.

Offensive rebounds as a percentage of available offensive rebounds

Year 2007-08: 27%
Year 2011-12: 20%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 16%
After 10 gms.: 18%
After 15 gms.: 18%
After 20 gms.: 19%
After 25 gms.: 19%

It would be nice to see the Celtics collecting more offensive rebounds despite Doc’s feeling that it’s not particularly important compared to what’s gained by falling back quickly on defense. But, in the championship season, the Celtics had seven players contributing at least 1.0 offensive rebound per game compared with only three this season (Bass, Sully and, in very limited minutes, Collins). At least the trend is in a positive direction, but so is a snail crawling up an aquarium wall. I do believe I’ve noticed more Celtics effort on the offensive boards as of late, so it will be interesting to see if this stat continues its steady, albeit very slow, growth.

Defensive rebounds as a percentage of available defensive rebounds

Year 2007-08: 74%
Year 2011-12: 72%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 79%
After 10 gms.: 75%
After 15 gms.: 75%
After 20 gms.: 75%
After 25 gms.: 74%

I don’t really believe that defensive rebounding is a major problem with this team. They’re pretty consistently grabbing three-quarters of the available defensive rebounds and have limited opponents to 10.8 offensive rebounds per game as compared with 11.8 last season. Moreover, the corresponding figures for selected other teams so far this season are: Knicks 74.5%, Lakers 74.0%, Spurs 73.7%, Heat 73.2%.

Fast Break Points as a Percentage of Total Points

Year 2007-08: 10%
Year 2011-12: 13%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 17%
After 10 gms.: 15%
After 15 gms.: 14%
After 20 gms.: 13%
After 25 gms.: 13%

The low absolute numbers in this stat don’t bother me as much as the downward trend. By this time, it should be creeping upward. I’m seeing them misfire on numerous fast break opportunities, and I’m hoping they will reverse this trend starting very soon. The return of Avery Bradley should help.

Points in the Paint as a Percentage of Total Points

Year 2007-08: 37%
Year 2011-12: 38%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 36%
After 10 gms.: 38%
After 15 gms.: 39%
After 20 gms.: 39%
After 25 gms.: 39%

It’s hard to believe, but points in the paint are actually accounting for a slightly higher percentage of total points scored than in the championship season. I realize we all feel that they should be doing a better job in this area, and the team’s tendency to default too quickly to jumpers when the chips are down is a legitimate concern. But I think a lot of the angst has less to do with lack of Celtics points in the paint than with the comparatively elevated number of opponent’s points in the lane. The interior defense has been a season-long problem, and most of us (perhaps all) are awaiting the stud center savior that Danny will unquestionably produce in trade for Lucky the Mascot and a baker’s dozen of the Celtics Dancing Girls.

Points on Three-point Shots as a Percentage of Total Points Scored

Year 2007-08: 22%
Year 2011-12: 18%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 17%
After 10 gms.: 16%
After 15 gms.: 15%
After 20 gms.: 16%
After 25 gms.: 17%

I’ve never been a fan of the three-pointer, but I threw this stat into the mix because I know others really savor bombs. (Heck, I’m such a maverick that I believe dunks should count for only one point.) Anyway, after some early slippage, the share of total points represented by three-pointers is on the rise again. I’ll leave it to you to decide whether this is good or bad. One could argue that the importance of long-distance shots in the championship season was undeniable. Others might argue that it’s too easy to shoot bailout threes when the focus should be on taking it to the hoop. I can now confess that I slipped a note containing this stat to Paul Pierce before the Cavs game.

Turnovers as a Percentage of Opponents’ Turnovers

Year 2007-08: 95%
Year 2011-12: 95%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 95%
After 10 gms.: 93%
After 15 gms.: 92%
After 20 gms.: 100%
After 25 gms.: 97%

If opponents’ turnovers are used as a benchmark, the Celtics have looked comparatively good (by a slim margin) this season, although the Celtic figure has trended upward during the last 10 games. Their average turnover number to date is 14.6, which is right about where Doc wants it. If they can mount a more effective transition game without increasing their turnovers, it would be a major step in the right direction.

Field Goals Attempted as a Percentage of Opponents’ Field Goals Attempted

Year 2007-08: 99%
Year 2011-12: 97%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 93%
After 10 gms.: 92%
After 15 gms.: 96%
After 20 gms.: 96%
After 25 gms.: 97%

This is one stat in which the Celtics have demonstrated noteworthy improvement over the last 15 games. Lately, they seem to be shooting a little earlier in the clock (on average), which could help explain the recent upward trend. Considering that they’re a generally good shooting team (..472 so far this season versus 45.0 for opponents), a little below opponents on this measure is just about where I’d expect them to be.

Bench Points as a Percentage of Total Points Scored

Year 2007-08: Not available
Year 2011-12: Not available

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 33%
After 10 gms.: 33%
After 15 gms.: 32%
After 20 gms.: 31%
After 25 gms.: 30%

Considering the early prognostications for the Celtics bench and depth in general, this has to be a disappointing downward trend. I’m sure that some of it can be accounted for by the fact that there has been quite a bit of shuffling between the bench and the starters, making it more difficult for the bench players to get in synch. In general, it appears that the degree of bench production will depend largely on whether or not Jason Terry comes off the pine. The X factor here, as he has been all season long, is Jeff Green.

Celtics Steals plus Blocks as a Percentage of Opponents Steals plus Blocks

Year 2007-08: 109%
Year 2011-12: 105%

Year 2012-13:
After 5 games: 61%
After 10 gms.: 80%
After 15 gms.: 85%
After 20 gms.: 93%
After 25 gms.: 97%

I like to call this my “energy stat.” While it’s obviously not nearly a total indicator of energy output, these are two commonly available stats that I believe are strongly correlated with the exertion of energy on the defensive end. Compared with last season and the championship season, this edition of the Celtics started off dismally, and their early record showed it. But gradually, as team members slowly became more comfortable on their roles and were able to focus on playing more instinctively rather than having to think so much, the energy indicator has crept up and now represents one of the most positive trends in these stats. The energy output is not yet where it needs to be, but it’s certainly headed in the right direction.

Summary

These statistics underscore the importance of realizing that improvement can take time—never more so than when the majority of the rotation is new to the team. But, in my opinion (for whatever it’s worth), the best news from these stats is that most of them are trending in a positive direction. The team is really putting out at both ends of the floor, and it’s only when they do that and still come up short against the good teams that areas of vulnerability are exposed. Number one, of course, is lack of a big who can team with KG to intimidate in the defensive interior and who can be a pretty good enforcer even without KG by his side. The early returns on the Collins-at-center experimet, while not a long-term fix, give some indication of the huge dividends such a player could pay.

Number two involves the inconsistent play of the bench. It may be unreasonable to expect more consistency until Bradley is back, the center position is (hopefully) bolstered, and there’s some predictability in the bench configuration.

I like the fact that the Celtics are gradually playing more volume basketball, pushing the rock consistently, shooting earlier in the shot clock, allowing time to run second and third options in the halfcourt. I believe the newer players have learned the Celtics defensive system as well as could be expected at this point, but they’re having difficulty spreading themselves thin without another big guy to anchor the middle.

Although I’d definitely like to see the Celtics depend so much on jump shots, I’m not nearly as concerned about scoring more points in the paint as I am in limiting other teams’ points in the paint.

I believe that the person who is currently searching hardest to clarify his identity on this team may be—wait for it—Rajon Rondo. What’s the right balance between being a facilitator and being a scorer? If he scores a little more, can KG and Paul Pierce distribute a little more?

As far as rebounds are concerned, more are always better, but I don’t believe rebounding is turning out to be a massive problem. More effectiveness in what they do with the ball after they grab a rebound is what’s needed, especially in capitalizing consistently on pushing the ball.