POST GAME ATLANTA - AWAY

Rapid Reaction: Celtics 94, Hawks 87

By Chris Forsberg | ESPNBoston.com

Rapid reaction after the Boston Celtics defeated the Atlanta Hawks 94-87 on Saturday night at Philips Arena:

THE NITTY GRITTY
Despite turning the ball over 19 times (leading to 29 points for Atlanta), the Celtics overcame a 12-point fourth-quarter deficit to clip the Hawks and end a six-game losing streak. Jordan Crawford finished with 12 points, 10 assists and three rebounds. He was a team-best plus-24 in plus/minus and hit a pair of big shots down the stretch to help Boston emerge. Brandon Bass, back in a starter's role after Kelly Olynyk sprained his ankle, led six Boston players in double figures with 17 points to go along with seven rebounds and two blocks. Jared Sullinger (15 points, nine rebounds) and Jeff Green (16 points, five rebounds) had solid nights as well. Al Horford scored a game-high 18 points to pace Atlanta.

TURNING POINT
The Celtics were down 12 after a Shelvin Mack jumper with 11:14 to play in the fourth quarter. But the Hawks went on a five-minute scoreless streak -- missing 10 shots during that stretch -- and Boston whittled its deficit down to one. A pair of Bass free throws with 3:31 to play pushed the Celtics ahead and Crawford made a pair of driving baskets in the final two minutes as the Celtics surged to the finish line.

SULLINGER TAGGED WITH FLAGRANT-1
Sullinger got whistled for a flagrant-1 penalty after a hard, two-handed foul on DeMarre Carroll midway through the third quarter. With Carroll on the break, Sullinger struck down on Carroll's head/shoulders, knocking him to the floor. A flagrant-1 foul is defined as unnecessary contact committed by a player against an opponent. The opposing team is awarded two free throws and possession (Atlanta used that to open a three-point lead in a game that had been tied at 59). Sullinger's flagrant was the team's first of the season. The league reviews all flagrant calls and can reclassify the foul. It can also elect to fine or suspend the player for his actions.

LOB CITY?
The Celtics had been credited with only one alley-oop dunk this season, but had two in this game. Crawford zipped a beautiful pass high above the 3-point arc near the Celtics bench that Brandon Bass threw down in the first quarter. Later in the first half, Green completed a lob from Crawford. OK, so nobody will mistake this for Lob City, but the Celtics showed they can play above the rim (occasionally).

LOOSE BALLS
The Hawks took 21 more shots than Boston, but shot just 38.7 percent overall. Boston connected on 45.8 percent of its shots. ... The Celtics lived at the free throw line, making 24 of 31 attempts (the Hawks shot just 12 freebies). ... Boston finished with a 47-38 advantage on the glass. ... Neither Olynyk nor Keith Bogans (illness) made the trip to Atlanta. ... MarShon Brooks logged a healthy DNP.

WHAT IT MEANS
Threatening to taste its first seven-game losing streak since April 2007, Boston (5-10) got its first win since Nov. 11. The Celtics get a day off Sunday as they come off their fifth back-to-back of the season, but are off to Charlotte where they'll complete a stretch of five games in five cities over seven nights (the second such stretch of an insanely game-heavy November). With the possibility that the Celtics will own Atlanta's 2014 first-round draft pick (if the Hawks execute a swap with the Brooklyn Nets), Boston aided its chances at a better pick with Saturday's win.

112288

I can’t see games during my vacation (which is just great so far, continues with Sam and Gladys Jones tomorrow night or Monday noon, and will not end for another week), so I’m relying totally on the box score in my comments.

One thing I see is the fact that Bass, Green and Crawford collectively took just about twice as many free throws as the entire Hawks’ team. And Atlanta had 12 more points in the paint than the Celts. To me that adds up to the Celts’ interior defense being beaten cleanly, and the Hawks’ interior defense involving more fouling.

I see a nicely distributed scoring pattern for the Celtics, with all five starters plus Faverani scoring more than 10 points. Humphries, Wallace, Pressey and Lee combined to score just 9 points in a collective 57 minutes—pretty puny for four of the five bench players. Brad had to rely on the starters to average 34 minutes apiece.

The bench wasn’t all bad, though. It should be noted that Vitor contributed 11 points and 5 rebounds in just 14 minutes. Humphries had 8 rebounds in 17 minutes. That’s .47 boards per minute. Bass and Sully had 7 and 9 rebounds in 33 minutes respectively. That’s .21 and .27 boards per minute respectively. In other words, Bass and Sully averaged just about half as many (fractional) defensive rebounds per minute as Humphries did. But I assume that Sully must have played a lot of center against taller players, although Horford’s not exactly a giant opponent at that position; and I haven’t yet learned what an Antic is, other than a prank by a court jester.

The Celtics did not play the volume game that has marked a number of their outings, but they made up for it by shooting 45.8% from the floor. They scored only two field goals less than the Hawks despite taking 21 fewer field goal attempts than Atlanta, who shot only 38.7%.

More often than not, when the Celtics don’t shoot in volume, one way they can still eke out a win is by limiting their turnovers. But, in this game, they committed 19 turnovers, which equaled nearly one-quarter of the number of their field goal attempts. Atlanta scored 29 points off those 19 turnovers, and I assume the transition game off turnovers led to most or all of the Hawks’ 12 fast break points.

Since the Hawks committed only 8 turnovers, I’m assuming that virtually all of the Celtics’ mediocre 8 fast break points were initiated by defensive rebounds—a stat in which the Celtics outstripped their opponent by 14. It really helps when a bench player (Humphries) can contribute 7 defensive rebounds while seven teammates can chip in with at least 5 defensive boards apiece.

Perhaps some time before the next decade, people will be able to write nice things about Crawford without qualifying them:

• The guy had 10 assists, or 56% of all the Celtics’ assists! The absence of Kelly Olynyk may have hurt a bit in the assist department. But…..the guy had 10 assists!

• Okay, here comes the obligatory qualifier. Jordan also had 4 turnovers. There have been many games in which Rondo has had 10 assists and at least 4 turnovers, but most fans have seemed comfortable with downplaying Rondo’s turnovers because of the plurality of his assists. Some of Jordan’s turnovers may be products of low-percentage passes. But at least they’re usually aggressive forward passes (football reference unintended), not safe lateral (football reference unintended) passes that accomplish nothing and take precious time off the clock.

• Yes, I hear about poor shot selections. But Jordan Crawford is shooting better than any Celtics’ guard except Courtney Lee. And it doesn't appear his two clutch drives in this game were poor shot selections.

• Yes, I hear about poor defense. There aren’t a lot of defensive stats that are readily available, and I’m not about to bother looking up Synergy points yielded per possession because I think that stat is much like the +/- stat that attributes everything that happens when 5 men are on the floor to just one of those five. But Jordan trails only Gerald Wallace on the team in (fractional) number of steals per minute.

• Yes, I understand that Jordan Crawford is only a stopgap who can’t fill Rondo’s shoes. But, as a stopgap, it seems to me that—more often than not—he’s doing a better job than almost anyone believed he would.

On balance, a good (and very necessary from the confidence point of view) victory for the Celtics. And the fact that it involved a great stretch run to catch, pass, and close out the opponent is really important. Very satisfying defensive rebound stat. Balanced scoring. Continued contributions (more than expected by many) from Vitor and Crawford. A little sign of life from Humphries. (Does it make him more desirable in a trade sooner rather than later?) Reinforcement of reliability on the parts of Sully and Bass. Better scoring consistency by Jeff Green. (Let’s hope it continues.)

Go Celtics.

Sam

Crawford looks like a keeper as a backup to Rondo.

I wasn't able to see the game last night, but good to see they pulled it out.



KJ

KJ

The important thing that mattered last night and moving forward is they are not getting down on themselves and Stevens is keeping them in an up tempo mood.

112288

A very nice, ganas win.  As Forsberg cites, we were down by 10 in the 4th, on the road, without Olynyk (I don't know how much that matters, but being down a key player is rarely good), on the 2nd game of a back-to-back after turning into a team of green pumpkins in the 2nd half of the previous game.  That's a lot of 'Mo going against us and we still overcame.  We didn't freeze up.  We didn't stare at their runs like a bunch of deers caught in headlights.  We're back to being scrappers.

Dave Cowens did the color commentary.  When play was called because Korver had some blood showing Cowens asked "since when have games been stopped because of blood?".  Gorman said "a couple of years now".  Cowens then said "they don't stop prize fights because of blood, nor football games, nor hockey games.  Why should they stop basketball?".  Leave it to Big Red to bemoan the fact that basketball isn't a full-contact blood sport anymore.

1.  I thought Jordan Crawford played a remarkable game.  His previous game had him being an absolutely unconscious shooter in the 1st half and then blowing us up in the 2nd.  Last night, he hardly shot at all in the 1st half (he was 0-2) but had 8 assists at the half.  What was remarkable was that he turned back into the scorer in the final few clutch minutes.  It's one thing to think "I focused too much on scoring last game, this time I'm going to pass, pass, pass".  It's another to recognize that the situation has changed and you need to adjust.  He self-corrected, not just game-to-game but also during the game.  Jordan Crawford has a history of making bad decisions.  Repeatedly making bad decisions is, to me, just another way of saying "not self-correcting".  What we want now, of course, is for the pendulum swings to be a little less dramatic, for Crawford to be more consistent and less "trick or treat", but if this continues I would consider this a glimmer.  For a key rotation player like Crawford, which he will be even when Rondo comes back, to be able to self-correct with increasingly smaller deviations is something that will improve the entire team.  12 points on 3-9, 0-5 from 3.  No, Jordan Crawford did not have a good scoring game, but his 10 assists and very timely last few buckets were very, very impactful.  What might be nicest part of this is that he stepped up and took and made those shots after an entire game of giving the ball to other shooters and missing the shots he did take.  That's some mental toughness, yet with game time flexibility.  Those were precisely the qualities he lacked on Friday vs Indy.

2.  Wallace had a brain fart in the 2nd quarter, when he intentionally fouled a Hawk, thinking we had a foul to give when we didn't.  The Hawk went to the line.  That's becoming Wallace's story.  He's turning the ball over a lot, not scoring and making bad decisions.

3.  Another beautiful Dinosaur Ballet between Sully and Horford.  Sully is playing great positional defense.  He is doing what Cowens used to do with Jabbar and is just trying to push his man one or two feet further out than he'd like to be.  Horford tried to do a little under-and-up on Sully and Sully stuffed the bigger man.  Horford had a few more points than Sully, Sully had a few more rebounds than Horford.  Other than that, it was close.  And Sully's playing out of position.  Just imagine when we get a real center who can take over these duties and he can manhandle PFs.  We got lucky Sully didn't get ejected.  It looked, on the replay, that he did make contact with Carroll's head on that flagrant foul, which is supposed to be an automatic ejection.  Dave Cowens said "maybe he thought Carroll's hair was part of the ball?".  

4.  Vitor had 11 points on 4-6, 1-1 from 3, 5 rebounds, 2 of them offensive and a block.  His offensive rebounds came from him working like a beast under the basket, after being thwarted on the first shot.  You cannot argue with Vitor's effort level, he's a hard worker.  He also had horrible, horrible give-and-go and pick-and-roll defense.  Vitor tries so hard and means so well, but he needs to spend a lot of time in the videography department watching film.  Or a year in Garnett University, but I'm afraid that won't be possible.  His individual defense is, for the most part, pretty good.  It's his team defense that is not.  Just to show I'm not down on Vitor, he played the first 7 minutes of that critical 4th quarter.  The quarter started off with us down 64-74, when Vitor was replaced by Sully with 5:01 left it was 80-81, a 16-7 run by the Celtics.  Vitor had 4 points on 2-2, 2 rebounds and a turnover during those 7 minutes.  That's a solid contribution. Luckily, they weren't able to take advantage of his lack of defensive awareness during that same time period.

5.  Brandon Bass likes starting (who doesn't?).  Last night he started and played like we've seen him play for a while now.  Celtic high scorer with 17.  He did so many little things I liked, including driving Paul Milsap crazy. Milsap had an ok night, but far far less than we've seen him have against us before. He was playing against a real tough guy, a real strong guy and a real good defender last night and it showed.

6.  For the three quarters, they would set a screen elbow extended or so and Teague or Korver would come off the screen to the free throw line and shoot (Korver would move without the ball and Teague would hit him at the free throw line, Teague dribbled to the line).  It worked again and again and again.  They would get to the free throw line (not to take free throw attempts, but as part of the play) or even penetrate into the paint and nobody would step out and contest them.  Our bigs, notably Vitor, would retreat rather than challenge the cutter.  That needs to be addressed.  If you have to close out on the shooters at 21' you sure as hell have to close them out at 15'.

7.  At the half, we had 40fgas and they had 45.  At the end, we had 79fgas (NOT enough!) and they had 93 (WAY too many).  We had 9 TOs at the half, 6 in the 2nd quarter alone.  At the end, we had 17 TOs, which means our 2nd half was about as bad as the 1st, and they only had 8.  We won with better shooting (46% vs 39%), more fts (24-31 vs 10-12) and with a lot more ganas.  We just kept grinding away.  They shot 5-23 in the 4th quarter.  Some of that was just bad shooting but a lot of that was very, very good defense including 3 blocks.  One was by Wallace on the much bigger Antic and 2 were by Bass.  One of Bass' was on a 3pt attempt by Teague with under a minute left and us up by only 5.  Now THAT'S how you close out a shooter!  Bass and Crawford were very, very clutch last night.

8.  Both teams were shooting 44% after 3.  We had 15 TOs vs 5 for them.  We had taken 55fgas while they had taken 70.  They were up by 10.  This should have been their game.  I've been using this word a lot this post, but it was just ganas.  We wanted it more and were willing to do what it took to earn it.

9.  Green had an ok but not particularly nice night.  Not one of his "big splash" games, but not a cameo appearance either.  16 points on 4-10, 5 rebounds.  He had 4 TOs.  He also had, what might be, the game saving play.  With a minute or so left, he contested for an offensive rebound.  He dove to the floor with, I think, Horford and the result was the ball going out of bounds off Horford.  That extra possession, coupled with our lead, changed the final minute Hawk strategy.  He never seems to get angry even though KG told him he needs to be more of an asshole, he always looks so phlegmatic, but that play was pure ganas.  He wanted that ball, he fought for that ball and, even though Horford had the position for it, he stayed on it and Horford couldn't get possession of it without going out of bounds with it.  Big play by Green just when we needed one.  That play, along with Bass' block of Teague's 3pt fga and Crawford's clutch 2 layups were the back breakers.

10.  Nice game by former Butler Bulldog and Maine Red Claw Shelvin Mack.  Nice to see he's getting his chance and making the most of them.  Interestingly, Mack got 12 legit rotation minutes while 1st round pick Dennis Schroder, whom many pundits projected being picked by the Celtics with #16, got a Coaches - DNP.


As pointed out by Forsberg, a victory of the Hawks helps us out on draft day.  They are still at 8-6, though, so I wouldn't make too much of it.  Brooklyn's doing their part, but Atlanta has to hit the skids for a bit to really turn that pick into something.


bob


.

kudos to Bob for gutting this one out (on game thread)

My observations:

Lets' start with Crawford.  The other day he was connected to Dr Jekyll.  Now he is associated with the three faces of Eve.

He began well, then played poorly then played well again.  He made some big plays down the stretch getting into the lane and scoring.  if he has the discipline to pick his spots on offense and distribute the ball and limit his turnovers, he will be a good BU once Rondo returns.

Sully is an absolute beast in the low block.  

Green, Bass, Vitor and even Humphries made contributions to this win.

The Celtics defense on the baseline is horrible considering that each defensive situation involves a double team,  our guy and the baseline.  Our pick  and roll defense sucks.  This is a coaching issue from what I can see.  Our guy continues to get hung up going over the top and they are getting open looks in the lane.  If the guard goes over the top to defend, the big must bum rush the ball handler.  Make him make a difficult pass to the screener and have a second defensive rotation step up.

You cannot be a good defensive team in this league unless you can defend the pick and role.

You cannot be a good offensive team in this league unless you can run the pick and role effectively.

some other observations:

There were a lot of empty seats in the place (in the rich part of town)

Turning the ball over continues to be a problem.  I know that there is a school of thought that multiple players should be able to trigger the fast break.  That is when we see a lot of turnovers. Collectively the Celtics do not pass the ball with a high degree of precision.  Guys wait for passes instead of stepping to the pass.  The old Celtics would have Cousy go to a spot and the ball would go to him to initiate the fast break because he was the best ball handler and passer on the team and understood where the next pass needed to go.  

Unfortunately Crawford is not that guy.  Neither is Avery or any other active player.  A healthy Rondo will change this deficiency.  

The Celtics are still a day late and a dollar short on their defensive rotations.  It is all about anticipation and knowing what happens next.  As this team plays together more and develops more chemistry I would expect to see more timely help defense.

At some point this season Brooks is going to get a chance.  We need a consistent offensive threat coming off the bench in the backcourt.

I really like this team overall and I believe that once they clean up a few issues they will be a tough out for anyone.

Dboss

dboss wrote:kudos to Bob for gutting this one out (on game thread)

My observations:

Lets' start with Crawford.  The other day he was connected to Dr Jekyll.  Now he is associated with the three faces of Eve.

He began well, then played poorly then played well again.  He made some big plays down the stretch getting into the lane and scoring.  if he has the discipline to pick his spots on offense and distribute the ball and limit his turnovers, he will be a good BU once Rondo returns.

Sully is an absolute beast in the low block.  

Green, Bass, Vitor and even Humphries made contributions to this win.

The Celtics defense on the baseline is horrible considering that each defensive situation involves a double team,  our guy and the baseline.  Our pick  and roll defense sucks.  This is a coaching issue from what I can see.  Our guy continues to get hung up going over the top and they are getting open looks in the lane.  If the guard goes over the top to defend, the big must bum rush the ball handler.  Make him make a difficult pass to the screener and have a second defensive rotation step up.

You cannot be a good defensive team in this league unless you can defend the pick and role.

You cannot be a good offensive team in this league unless you can run the pick and role effectively.

some other observations:

There were a lot of empty seats in the place (in the rich part of town)

Turning the ball over continues to be a problem.  I know that there is a school of thought that multiple players should be able to trigger the fast break.  That is when we see a lot of turnovers. Collectively the Celtics do not pass the ball with a high degree of precision.  Guys wait for passes instead of stepping to the pass.  The old Celtics would have Cousy go to a spot and the ball would go to him to initiate the fast break because he was the best ball handler and passer on the team and understood where the next pass needed to go.  

Unfortunately Crawford is not that guy.  Neither is Avery or any other active player.  A healthy Rondo will change this deficiency.  

The Celtics are still a day late and a dollar short on their defensive rotations.  It is all about anticipation and knowing what happens next.  As this team plays together more and develops more chemistry I would expect to see more timely help defense.

At some point this season Brooks is going to get a chance.  We need a consistent offensive threat coming off the bench in the backcourt.

I really like this team overall and I believe that once they clean up a few issues they will be a tough out for anyone.

Dboss

dboss,

You saw many of the same things I saw. We're late on rotations. We don't step up on the ball on picks. If we don't step up on the picks, teams are going to be running shooting drills against us.

To be good at running pick-and-rolls, you need someone to set a good pick. Our one true big, Vitor, would be best for this, but he doesn't set good picks.

Crawford isn't a full court point guard, but he's doing a very credible job as a half court point guard. Pressey could be one, but he needs more minutes, more seasoning.

This is one of the few times mentioning me and the word "gut" in the same sentence makes me feel good. Thanks.


bob


/

Bob

One of the things that I have noticed is that when our big guys set a pick it is not sustained long enough to be effective.  And the timing of when the ball handler makes his move should be based on the pick and not the other way around.

The technique of setting a solid sustained pick without creating an offensive foul is something that must be practiced....it must be learned.

Bob I must say that I so thoroughly enjoy the depths of your insights into this team.

dboss

I have been thoroughly unimpressed with the offensive execution of this team in the set offense and by proxy, the play calling (or lack of) by Coach Stevens during the general flow of the game. On the other hand, his set plays coming out of time outs have been very well done.

Hopefully this means that he is slowly integrating his offense and over time things will get better. Time will tell.

mrkleen09 wrote:I have been thoroughly unimpressed with the offensive execution of this team in the set offense and by proxy, the play calling (or lack of) by Coach Stevens during the general flow of the game.  On the other hand, his set plays coming out of time outs have been very well done.

Hopefully this means that he is slowly integrating his offense and over time things will get better.  Time will tell.

Yeah, I'd have to agree. Their offense has mostly been about grinding out half court possessions when clearly it doesn't play to their strengths.

Brad's gotta get these guys running. Crawford and Pressey are dangerous in transition so I figure they'll benefit greatly from it, and from there it will have a trickle effect to every other position.




KJ

One of the reasons Bass likes to start is that the tone of a game is most usually set when the starters are on the floor. Substitutes tend to be forced to adapt to that tone rather than to be involved in setting it. Subs are more likely to have to vacillate between (1) adapting to that tone and (2) altering it to fit their own strengths. Some players have the kind of dynamic approach that allows them to make a big impact in a substitute role. Bass is at his best when he has been part of setting the tone and carving out a role for himself; he's not so good at dealing with a tone he has inherited.

What you guys are talking about is a constant succession of brush picks. Sully is the only Celt who holds a pick and actually controls the defender with it. The rest (ESPECIALLY Vitor) are much more intent on getting into the roll than on setting a firm pick and then rolling. A faked pick doesn't have much effect on an opponent who's at least an average defender.

Sam