Use Assists and Rebounds As Barometer on Celtic Play

The best way to determine quality Celtic play is to look at Celtic assists and rebounds. Both have been disappointing - especially in 2nd halves. Of course it boils down to lack of ball and player movement.

I did not see the Portland game. Can anyone tell me how many offensive rebounds the Celtics gave up? Also, how many assists did the Celtics have in the 2nd half?

Good to see KG back. Hope he can spark a rededication to basketball!

Go Celtics!!

sd - Portland had 16 offensive rebounds, Boston 6. At halftime, Boston had 14 assists, in the second half PLUS overtime only 11 more for their total of 25.

If one is looking at assists as an indicator of good team play (as reflected, in part, by ball and player movement), it's important to remember that most basketball stats should be considered only within some form of context.

Take assists for example. I'll assume the figures Steve gave are correct (because Steve's meticulous about the stats he presents). Some people might conclude that the Celts played better team ball in the first half because they had 14 assists in those 24 minutes and only 11 assists in the remaining 29 minutes of the game.

But that conclusion would be wrong because it doesn't take into account the number of field goals the Celtics scored: 22 in the first 24 minutes and only 16 in the last 29 minutes.

As a matter of fact, the Celtics assisted on 64% of their made field goals in the first half and elevated that figure to 69% in the second half. So it could be said that, although there was less scoring by both teams in the second half because the pace of the game went down and the defenses on both sides picked up, what scoring the Celtics did was actually based on slightly better team play than in the first half.

Obviously rebounds are important. But they need to be considered within the context of rebound opportunities each team had. The Celtics collected one more defensive rebound than the Blazers—31 to to 30. But it's much more revealing to note that the Celtics collected only 66% of all rebounds that came off the Blazers' offensive boards, while the Blazers collected 83% of all rebounds that came off the Celtics' offensive boards.

My point is only that it's usually not enough to look at the raw stats without considering their context.

Sam

Sam, my point has been the last month and a half that the Celtic offensive pace has slowed way down in 2nd halves - little ball and player movement. Hence, fewer assists. Although the same happened Friday night, assist numbers in 2nd half actually were much better than previous games. Again, though, Celtic offensive numbers dropped in 2nd half.

And, again, the number of offensive rebounds the Celtics allowed were much too high. Giving up that many offensive rebounds results in too many opposition opportunities, and take away your own fast break opportunities.

I will take a win anytime, but the Celtics have a ways to go. Remember, the Blazers were without their best player, Brandon Roy on the Celtics' home court.

Go Celtics!!

SD,

I understand your desire to support the position you've been maintaining for quite a while. But, when you start
talking about stats, you're entering tricky territory. As a general rule (with some exceptions such as the final score of a game), the more basic and readily accessible a stat, the less revealing it probably is.

The fact is that raw stats such as assists and rebounds don't necesarily support conclusions people hope they support because there are related factors that should also be taken into consideration. And I feel some responsibility to the people on this board to point that out.

The fact that the Celtics recorded 14 assists in the first half against Portland and 11 assists thereafter tells us nothing particularly definitive about the vigor of the Celtics attack or their energy level or their ball movement or
their player movement. Within the context of the overall pace of the game, which slowed down as it became more of a defensive battle, I thought the Celtics were pretty consistent in all of these areas throughout the game.

A better indicator of how well they were clicking as a team is to determine what percentage of their field goals came from assists. For the game, it was a very high 66%, and it was slightly better after halftime than before.

Let's look at Portland's offensive rebounds. At face value, a total of 15 for the game might be alarming if one wanted to look at just the raw stat. But I'm interested in being a bit more analytical about it—and I don't mean simply the obvious fact that those rebounds were spread over 53 minutes rather than the usual 48. Consider the
following, when a little context is added:

• Five of the 15 Portland offensive rebounds were recorded in overtime, after KG (5) and Perk (4) had accumulated 9 personals between them. They had to be extra careful in both the rebounding action and their interior defense, especially with Pierce already having fouled out of the game.

• Guess how many offensive rebounds the Blazers got when Perk and KG were in the game together and were not in serious foul trouble. ONE. Odds are those two are normally going to be playing many more minutes
together than they did in that game, given KG's lack of conditioning and their respective foul problems.

• Guess how many offensive rebounds the Blazers got in the entire fourth quarter. ZERO. Is that a sign of deterioration in Celtics energy as the game progressed and became more pressure-packed?

This was an atypical game for a number of reasons: (1) It was KG's first game back and the starters had to get reacquainted without knowing what to expect from him. (2) Perk was in early foul trouble to a degree that was unusual even for him. (3) The plan to reintegrate the bench took a hit because Sheed had to spend so much time filling in for Perk and KG with the starters. (4) Pierce was unavailable for most of crunch time. All things considered, I thought they acted with considerable poise and determination.

Some people may wish to place a lot of continued emphasis on what has happened as this team has struggled against a lot of adversity. I choose to view this as a new beginning and focus on what happens from here on.

Sam

Sam, the assists and offensive rebounds allowed the last weeks HAVE indeed been a good reflection of the way the Celtics have performed. They have been predictable, as has the Celtics' 2nd half performances.

There are a lot of reasons why the statistics are the way they are, that is precisely why the Celtics have got to come up with some answers.

Go Celtics!!

Whatever!

Again assists and offensive rebounds reflect another 2nd half collapse by the Celtics. The Magic had 17 offensive rebounds to the Celtics 6!

The assist number has been worse for the Celtics, but the assist total dropped from 13 in the first half to 9 in the 2nd half. The Celtics were not pushing the ball upcourt the 2nd half again. Rondo had only 2 assists the 2nd half. One reason is the ball is in the hands of Pierce more in most 2nd halves. Another reason is the Celtics veterans do not run the court in 2nd halves.

Defensively, the Celtics were too tired to run the Magic off the 3-point line as they did the 1st half. Stupid Celtic fouls and Magic free throws kept the Magic in the game until the Celtics were too exhausted to play defense. Doc again was quoted as saying this year's team was guilty of pacing itself. Tonite was not so much a problem of pacing itself, but rather a team that again could not keep pace in 4th quarter.

This is a team that has aged considerably this season. They must play an efficient floor game, rebound, and not let the opposition get to the free throw line. Unfortunately they are failing on all 3 counts.

Defense lost this game, as the Magic scored 35 in the fourth quarter. And the fouls on Perk particularly hurt, as Howard had his way in the fourth and the Celtics had to start doubling him, opening up better perimeter shots for Orlando. The last two Magic possessions produced some of the worst Celtics defense of the season.

up three i wodda fouled ol howard and made him shoot 3's but all in all i thought we played good. flashes of brilliance.

Sam wrote:Defense lost this game, as the Magic scored 35 in the fourth quarter. And the fouls on Perk particularly hurt, as Howard had his way in the fourth and the Celtics had to start doubling him, opening up better perimeter shots for Orlando. The last two Magic possessions produced some of the worst Celtics defense of the season.

Completely agree.

There is NO WAY you can let Redick get that shot off to tie the game. Where the hell was Ray Allen. Then later, Rasheed just watches Lewis beat KG and drive to the hoop without a contest of any type. He should have knocked him on his ass and let him beat us at the foul line.

Rasheed is totally lost in the team concept defense – and when Perk is out, it is easy for any team to drive to the hoop.

Tough loss…they had the game under control, but no one stepped up down the stretch. Pierce looks exhausted – KG is dragging his leg around – Rondo asserts himself when he feels like it, but not consistently – Ray is getting beat at will on defense lately.

Refs were horribly one sided (as usual), but still that was our game to lose…and we did just that. Oh well, onto ATL.

Why wasn't Sheed on Howard more in the second half? He was causing all kinds of bad passes/turnovers into the ORL post, yet we went with 4-5 Foul Perk most of the time.

Sam, does this team have any (or many) comparisons to any championship team from the 60's, 70's or 80's that can give us some perspective or are they an island unto themselves? Otherwise, we're going to start slitting our wrists.

Signed,

Restless Native in NC

Damn yall sound negative. We should have won and didnt. Sheed didnt leave Howard cause he would have done the same thing except dunked it.

Letting Reddick shoot at all was a bonehead play.

KG looked like he was dragging his leg around all night. PP imho aint 100% back from that knee crap.

I cant remember the team looking better than they did in that first half and i thought they played with heart and effort throughout. I am breathing easy this morning and filled with hope. We got the whole team on the court except quis and we are going to get better.

I'm just messing with you Jeb. Just tired of the losing that's all. I'm probably the most positive guy out there for the C's, next to you and Sam. Just need some positive mental reinforcement from the troops!!

dbrown

aw hell you got me.

jeb

dbrown

I HEAR you on the losing but if we are gonna lose I prefer it to be goin down swinging in indian country like a wounded viking.

jeb65 wrote:dbrown

I HEAR you on the losing but if we are gonna lose I prefer it to be goin down swinging in indian country like a wounded viking.

Jeb,

I swear you have the best quotes of anyone I've ever seen.

"Going down swinging in indian country like a wounded viking".

I may use that. I'll be sure to give you credit; for the first three times anyway.

Heck, I just came in here to talk about our rebounding problems. This is better.

Regards

sdceltfan wrote:Again assists and offensive rebounds reflect another 2nd half collapse by the Celtics. The Magic had 17 offensive rebounds to the Celtics 6!

The assist number has been worse for the Celtics, but the assist total dropped from 13 in the first half to 9 in the 2nd half. The Celtics were not pushing the ball upcourt the 2nd half again. Rondo had only 2 assists the 2nd half. One reason is the ball is in the hands of Pierce more in most 2nd halves. Another reason is the Celtics veterans do not run the court in 2nd halves.

Defensively, the Celtics were too tired to run the Magic off the 3-point line as they did the 1st half. Stupid Celtic fouls and Magic free throws kept the Magic in the game until the Celtics were too exhausted to play defense. Doc again was quoted as saying this year's team was guilty of pacing itself. Tonite was not so much a problem of pacing itself, but rather a team that again could not keep pace in 4th quarter.

This is a team that has aged considerably this season. They must play an efficient floor game, rebound, and not let the opposition get to the free throw line. Unfortunately they are failing on all 3 counts.

sd,

I originally came in here to say I agree, but I got caught up in Jeb's quote about Vikings in Indian country.

Astute observations on your part. The fact is rebounding, especially on the offensive end, has been problematic for the past several seasons. I think it's our single biggest issue and the root cause of others.

Regards

Dbrown,


Both the Russell teams and the current team were/are precision-dependent teams, relying on execution, rather than brute force or athleticism or hero ball, for success. Both were/are teams that depend on runs to win games; basically a formula of having more runs than the opponent and making sure one of those runs is at the end (either to drive a nail or to come from behind).

Key to both the executional-dependent philosophy and the dependence on runs is chemistry. Many people throw that term around without a full grasp of its implications. It's not just a matter of good passing or setting the right picks at the right time. It also involves things
like being so much on the same wave length as your teammates that the smoothness of your collaboration is energy-efficient even when you're in the middle of the most strenuous run.

That kind of chemistry is something the Russell Celtics routinely enjoyed and solidified even more as their seasons together mounted.
The Collective Bargaining Agreement alone will keep us from ever witnessing that kind of chemistry again. But the current team, relying
so heavily on precision of execution, needs to attain as much chemistry as possible.

I appreciate all the comments on this board so much—even those with which I'm not necessarily in sympathy. But the ones that make me laugh involuntarily (with no disrespect involved) are those that explicitly or implicitly expect that type of chemistry to develop almost overnight. KG's back, so where's the instant chemistry? Sheed's finally been back with the bench for three whole games, so why isn't the bench showing superior chemistry already? As though chemistry were a lollipop that could be purchased at the corner store.

I read diagnostics about how, after two days of relative rest, key players are pooped because they're over age 30 and play 40 minutes on a lot of nights. That one sends me into spasms of mirth. The Russell Celtics, well after key players were in their 30s, used to play big minutes in winning dramatically faster games—occasionally playing five games on five consecutive nights. And cramming themselves into commercial plane seats. (Of course, even though a large number of today's fans assumes they were athletic
zeros, they were smart enough to know that a layup off the backboard didn't exert loads of energy and still counted for two points—just a
wee editorial aside.)

Until the Celtics win every game, there's bound to be lots of conjecture and micro-analysis concerning the reasons. I understand
that. I just wish there were more realization (not just lip service) concerning the importance of chemistry (and the amount of time and continuity it takes to acquire it) for a team relying on precision of execution. Just the fact that they average 17% more turnovers per game than the Lakers is only a tiny indication of the distance they have to go with respect to chemistry.

Anyway, I'm sort of adopting a "Call me in April" philosophy because I expect this team to undergo some bumps in the road as it works toward achieving whatever added chemistry it can by playoff time. When it looks very promising, I'm not getting overly excited; when they make a misstep, I'm not getting overly concerned. I did the same thing when my kids were learning to walk, and it seemed to eventuate in a pretty good outcome.

Sam

Sam

Thats as good as anything you have ever written that i have read. My thoughts are trending towards knowing that this team will not win based on athleticism and will only win it by beating teams with what they have upstairs. As my own hopes and observations for the team evolve i also have begun to to think HOW MUCH SWEETER it is GOING to be to win by playing CENTRAL CASTING, CLASSIC 5 guys CELTIC BALL. I watch how much better we are with kg. I watch the starting fives body language and my heart soars. Even now amidst this crappy run of losses. KG the other night was telling the Boston crowd WE ARE GOING TO WIN THIS. KG himself while two steps slower is five steps smarter in his head and overall grasp of a.) the game b) the very chemistry of which you speak. He is a general, a colonel, a drill sarge and if need be the enemy all in one.

We are dealing with legends here. Hall of fame guys who know each other and also know the strengths and weaknesses of every other player and coach in the nba. I am watching right now for signs. And bubba in the first half we played like the best team in the nba. I feel if our players stay on the flooor and we have a little luck we are going to see something we will all remember the rest of our lives. These guys are a long assed way from being done.

semper fi

Jeb

Jeb,

Thanks.

With a team like this, fans need to be happy with glimmers. The turnaround won't come in huge chunks.

At least the starters' offense seems to be on a positive track since KG returned. The fact that they looked pretty confident and peppy during the first half means they have those abilities; so the challenge is how to sustain them rather than how to accomplish or recapture them. That comes through repetition, and repetition comes with time. And, although it's far to early to note a trend, Ray and Eddie may be showing signs of coming out of their shooting funks and especially shooting more out of the flow of the game.

I don't mean negatives should be ignored. For example, fouls can reduce Perk's effectiveness or take him out of games, and the defense
and defensive rebounding are much better with him in the game. I personally don't see why Williams couldn't be used for a few minutes in the first half to spell Perk like Doc has used Scal to spell KG. They get KG out to rest him. I'd get Perk out to ration his fouls. And I'd
also like to see Sheed spend the majority of histime developing chemistry with the bench.

I assume Williams must be showing something (or failing to show something) in practice that has him in Doc's doghouse; but they clearly
need some other big guy (taller than Davis) to be able to give Perk some time off while saving Sheed for bench play. Do you know which
Celtics five-man combination has by far the best +/- rating per minute of play so far this season? House, Ray, Daniels, Wallace and Williams. Better than the starters (almost two-to-one); better than any other bench combination.

Also, on the negative side, sometimes I think the Celtics carry a "contest everything" mentality too far. If an opponent has beaten you and has a clear layup, why use up a foul and give him a probable "and one? If you're going to jump out on an opponent's three-point attempt because you've left him all alone, jump off to his shooting side rather than into his body. (There's more of his body to foul.)

Sam

Sam

They were flat up in the Magics jersey's in the first half last nite. Stifling. Agressive. I liked seeing it. Doc needs to step up and rest his guys and test his bench.

I dont think things will turn around over night either. I am searching for growth and health and a return to basketball conditioning.

The only chance the Celtics have of getting banner 18 is to improve on the items listed below:

1) more consistent ball and player movement (retaining energy and agression levels more consistently throughout game);

2) better court management (fewer turnovers);

3) better rebounding (especially reducing opponent's offensive rebounds);

4) reducing fouls (keeping opponents off the foul line).


These goals are attainable by this team. Do I think they will be met? No.
Do I think injuries (hence chemistry) are what has solely resulted in Celtics' erratic play? No. We recently played and lost to 2 relatively weak teams who were missing star players. Am I to believe that most of the teams we are playing have better chemistry than the Celtics? Even with the number of veterans we are playing?

Rivers again was quoted as saying the Celtics continue to "pace themselves" and "feel they can turn on a switch". I am not alone in my feeling that Celtic veterans should take a good look in the mirror, and start listening to what Rivers and the coaching staff have to say.

Go Celtics!!

sdcelt

your points are good. and right now hard to argue.

want to see what a couple of weeks brings.