GLIMMER THREAD

[Sam]

Time to start the Glimmer Game again.  The board definition of a "glimmer" is a factor in a given game that's not just a temporary good performance.  It's a display of ability that could be leveraged into something more permanent for the future.  It may be combined with results of other games to indicate a trend that is a glimmer.

For instance, the sheer fact that Turner got 19 points in last night's game would not necessarily be a "glimmer" by the board's definition because it could have been a one-time thing.  The fact that Turner ran the team well, even down the stretch, qualifies as a glimmer because he displayed an ability that could hopefully bode for well for the future.  The fact that he displayed this ability means he has the ability, and that fact can't be denied.

Jeff Green scored only 14 points—not a glimmer in and of itself.  But the fact that he has scored in double figures in every game this season is a glimmer because it suggests that his current role on this team, and the lack of pressure that role conveys, could potentially lead to greater consistency on Jeff's part.

Zeller's 10 points were nice; but they, alone, weren't necessarily a glimmer.  However, his continuing facility with the pick-and-roll and his increasing rebound totals suggest that he can be an impact player offensively and on the boards.  It remains to be seen as to what level of impact he can rise.  An he'll have to demonstrate tougher and more consistent defense to elevate his defense to "glimmer" stature.

Obviously, all of these, as well as the definition of a glimmer itself, are very subjective.  Feel free to debunk or alter any of these or add some of your own.  I claim that looking for glimmers goes beyond just enjoying a game because glimmers are intended to be a positive force leading to good things in the future rather than just present pleasures.  Glimmers to hand-on-hand with continuing assessment of a team's development.

I've learned not to try to force "glimmers" just for the sake of being optimistic.  Last season, there were many games in which there was no genuine glimmer.  But maybe, if we keep this Glimmer Thread alive, we'll find out later in the season that we were able to identify some very important trends that have held up over time.

Anyway, perhaps it's worth a try.

Go Celtics (always a "glimmer")!

Sam

[kdp59]

I'm too new here to know what this glimmer thing is, but if it has something to do with trends.....I'd say we can all agree that Stevens like to use 10 players EVERY game.

that should continue to bode well for fast break basketball AND full court defense.

like I've said before, I may not have the deep insight many here do but  I do see the obvious..........

[Outside]

Is a glimmer thread needed if they have a winning record at the end of December?

November's schedule is filled with half the games against the West and most of those against powerhouse teams. December's games include only three against the West, and those are bottom-feeders (Lakers, Timberwolves, and Sacramento, the toughest of the bunch).

[beat]

Every morning I find I have a pulse is a glimmer !!

[Sam]

Outside,

Some of the best glimmers emerge through adversity.

Sam

[Outside]

Outside,

Some of the best glimmers emerge through adversity.

Exactly. There is adversity in any season, but you've promoted "glimmers" in the past because the team was struggling. I think this team will do better than most expected, which is the opposite situation.

There's nothing wrong with recognizing glimmers, regardless of their record or how well they're playing. I just wanted to toss the idea out there that this team could have a very nice record by the end of December. Call that a glimmer, if you like.

[Sam]

kdp,

Actually, that's a great glimmer.  Easily passes the glimmer test.  If Brad had used 10 players in a game, ho hum.  But, when something develops a trend or pattern and it has the potential do benefit the team over time, it's a sure glimmer.

What I try to do is to differentiate glimmers from comments such as, "Rondo had a great triple-double last night."  That's nice, but it's not a glimmer the sense suggested above unless it instroduces a new perspective on the future.

The glimmer notion began a couple of years ago as a means of encouraging recognition of positive developments within a period of general frustration.  That first year, I counted the entries, and there were something like 80 or 90 bona fide glimmers.  They wneren't all unique.  In a number of cases, different member would recognize the same glimmer at different points in time or reinforce a glimmer with fresh evidence.  That's fine because the main objective of encouraging recognition of positive when they occur was maintained.

As with any venture soliciting ideas, the sheer number of glimmers sometimes dwindles over time because a lot of the "good glimmers" are taken early in the process.  After a while, if I can generate one good glimmer a week, I consider myself lucky.  But events such as trades during the season sometimes offer new material.

Anyway, some may scoff at the idea, and others may like it.  At least the intent is a positive one.

Go Celtics!

Sam

[Sam]

Outside,

To continue my rationale for developing this thread, a glimmer thread is intended as a safeguard against discouragement and frustration.  The very fact that this month could be a difficult one for the Celtics could lead to some discouragement and frustration.  Ergo, why not get people used to a device intended to combat frustration and frustration in case it might occur?

Yes, as I've stated, I've used glimmers to help alleviate frustration in the past.  But I try not to be locked into the past.  As far as I'm concerned, glimmers may also be used to heighten positive experiences by crystallizing the components and sharing them with others.  Do you disagree?

Sam

[bobheckler]

Thanks for the Glimmer thread, Sam.  I think this will be a great aid to string together the games I don't get to actually see by connecting the dots to a positive destination. In fact, the glimmer thread is the trend line that connects all the individual dots created by individual games by individual players against the panoply of opponents and makes it easier to understand this team and where it's going (or not going).


Hopeful in Hue



.

[wide clyde]

There can be many things that could be discussed on the 'glimmer' thread that are individual type things such as points, assists and rebounds.

I would like to add in a team thing that I believe is very much a big part of the Celtics improvement this year to date and definitely will be as the year continues. And, that is their play in the end-of-game situations.

Last year the worth of the entire season could have been dramatically altered if they had been able to play well in the last 3 minutes of the so, so many games that were close at that three minute mark.

So far, in a small sample, they seem to be much better in just about every phase of the game when the clock gets short in the fourth quarter. Even in their three losses they have not fallen off the cliff in the last few minutes like they seemed to do last year in about four of every five such situations.

Better coaching all around, better understanding by players or whatever it is, it sure looks better.

[Sam]

A very pertinent observation, Clyde.  It's interesting to try to conjecture how much of a difference there really is between last year's and this year's team at the end of games.  It's almost as the two years have been on opposite sides of a hump.  Do you think there's anything strategically different about how they're approaching crunch time this season, or are players just handling the situation better, or is greater player diversity giving Brad more options substitution-wise, or what?

Sam

[Sam]

Bobh, thanks for checking in whenever you can.  Your location must seem like a world away from NBA basketball.  Maybe that's because it literally IS a world away.  Anyway, as usual, keep yourself safe.

Sam

[cowens/oldschool]

Two individual glimmers are Evan Turner and Tyler Zeller, two players that their previous franchises gave up on them and while theres certain things they can't do, theres also things they can do in Stevens system and right now they are suddenly finding ways to play to their strengths. Zeller should be starting, hes a legit 7 footer, he showed great hands around the basket, had 7 rebounds in 20 minutes and many key baskets off beautiful feeds inside. Turner showed great skill cutting, moving without the ball and hit some key mid range shots. Both players also had some ineffective moments/games earlier, if we can get this kind of production out of these two when Rondo and Smart come back, along with Sully, KO and AB'S continued growth, thats a huge thing.

[Outside]

Yes, as I've stated, I've used glimmers to help alleviate frustration in the past.  But I try not to be locked into the past.  As far as I'm concerned, glimmers may also be used to heighten positive experiences by crystallizing the components and sharing them with others.  Do you disagree?

I agree. Nothing wrong with that.

I certainly don't have anything against having the thread. I was merely saying that I'm optimistic about the team's direction and think they will be above .500 at the end of December. Rather than looking for glimmers of hope in an otherwise dismal season, I was merely voicing my opinion that it won't be a dismal season at all. I would hope that a positive opinion like that wouldn't ultimately be a negative for the thread.

[beat]

Depth.. depth and more depth

Although it is a limited sample....
in checking the per 36 minutes stat line....

We have 10 players averaging over 10 points per game,
and 2 more that are over 9 points per game

that is virtually 12 of the suited up 13 players averaging double figures per 36 minutes
Odd man out is Gerald Wallace.

Without looking at the rest of the league I doubt any other team can hold a candle to that stat.

beat

[sinus007]

Hi,
The only time when we don't need "Glimmer Thread", IMO, is when Celtics are ahead by 39 points with less than a minute away winning their 4th game in the Finals.
For now there are so many glimmers it's hard to list them all.
The brightest one is Brad Stevens. In other glimmers I'd include multitude of draft picks.
Also, I'd say that based on the first 6 games there's a slight improvement on defense (I hope they keep the trend).

AK

[rickdavisakaspike]

Teamwork.

Most of these guys never played together before this season, didn't know each other's moves or what everyone likes to do, and yet they're already coalescing as a team. Examples: after that long dinner in Houston, they played as a team - unfortunately, they all stunk - but they stunk together as a team: and in Chicago, with Rondo and Smart out, they complemented each other very neatly. Kudos to the coach.

Free throws.

For the most part, they're drawing fouls and making free throws when they have to, late in games. It's a little thing but a big thing.

Offensive rebounds.

Two games in a row they've solidified the win with an offensive rebound in the final minute, Green against the Pacers and Oly against the Bulls. Is this the result of coaching, too? Ya gotta wonder if Coach Stevens didn't see something and tell his players to look for it.

[Sam]

Great glimmers, guys!  Really great!  Much more prolific than I expected.  After reading this thread, I'm almost ready to buy season tickets even though I seldom attend games due to a disability.

Outside, the one term I've most associated with this season is "development."  Rather than asking people to post indicators of positive development—a concept that seems somewhat elusive to me)—I put it in terms of glimmers.  They're easier, more fun, and less abstract to talk about than aspects of development.  I've never once implied that the glimmer thread emanates from a belief that this will be a dismal season.  That's not in my makeup.  Good things can happen without a negative backdrop.

Sam

[dboss]

I vote for a sticky.

The Celtics get a checkmark for playing at a different pace thus far.  As the season progresses I expect to see fewer lapses in keeping that pace characterized by an increase in fast break points.

The last time we had a team this quick was during the Cowens/white/Havlicek, etc years.  A glimmer.

dboss

[tjmakz]

I vote for a sticky.

The Celtics get a checkmark for playing at a different pace thus far.  As the season progresses I expect to see fewer lapses in keeping that pace characterized by an increase in fast break points.

The last time we had a team this quick was during the Cowens/white/Havlicek, etc years.  A glimmer.

dboss

dboss,

I think Boston needs to try to keep the pace fast against Memphis tonight, but do you really think the fast pace has helped the Celtics?
Boston is scoring quite a bit, but they are giving up the 3rd most points in the NBA.
What happened to the Celtics mentality of defense first?
People mock Mike D'Antoni for his Suns teams who pushed the ball and gave up 102-103 points per game.
What's the difference between what D'Antoni tried to do (and made it to the Western Conf. Finals two times) and what Stevens is trying to do?
Boston is currently giving up 107.5 ppg.

[dboss]

Well of course the defense needs to get better  but I thought the glimmer thread is used to reflect a significant and positive trend.  The fact is that they are 10+ over last year in scoring.

The defense is behind and was not their primary focus going into the year but I do think they have enought talent and depth  to play much better defense.  When that missing center is added there should be further improvement.  In the interim we have discovered that Zeller is at the very least a high end backup but also a lower level starter.

"Opie" Zeller is a definite glimmer.  He is really fast.  When your center is getting dunks off the fast break it really supports what we heard before they got Zeller.  Namely that he can run the floor.

dboss

[cowens/oldschool]

I vote for a sticky.

The Celtics get a checkmark for playing at a different pace thus far.  As the season progresses I expect to see fewer lapses in keeping that pace characterized by an increase in fast break points.

The last time we had a team this quick was during the Cowens/white/Havlicek, etc years.  A glimmer.

dboss

please don't mention that team, that great hardnosed running 70's team with this current squad.

[dboss]

Cow

That was a fun team to watch. Undersized over achievers.

Dboss

[Sam]

TJ,

The offense has to qualify as a glimmer.  Not just because they're scoring a lot of points but because they are doing so via a specific vehicle—namely uptempo basketball.

In each of the past two games, while on the Game-on Thread, I've kept track of a given period of time (most of one quarter) in how many possessions the Celtics have gotten the ball up to the arc within 6 or fewer seconds and how many possessions they got the ball up to the arc within 7 or more seconds.  (Just an arbitrary split that I selected.)  I believe Rondo was in there for most, if not all, of the 27 possessions involved.  Among the 27 possessions, there was only one in which they brought the ball up within 4 seconds; so they weren't fast-breaking at the time and were relying almost exclusively on half court offense.  And, no, I didn't count plays when they were already in the offensive end when the possession started (e.g. after an offensive rebound or an out-of-bounds play).

In the portions of two games (combined), there were 7 possessions on which they took 6 seconds or less tofv get the ball to the three point line where they usually start their half court offense.  They averaged 1.8 points per possession in those cases.

There were 18 possessions in which they took 7 seconds or longer to bring the ball up.  They averaged 0.1 points per possession in those cases.

I know, small sample, yada yada.  But you or anyone else can do the same tabulation I did as long as one doesn't mind going blind watching the tiny seconds clock and the action simultaneously.  The resulting details will invariably be different from mine; but, if done the same way I did it, I bet the pattern will be the same.  Pushing the ball creates more points than not pushing the ball.  Period!

What this means to me is that the Celtics absolutely must play uptempo ball most, if not all, of the time—including bringing the ball up quickly whatever the circumstance of the possession.

You have a legitimate question about the defense IF there's reason to believe the Celtics' uptempo offense somehow affects the Celtics' defense adversely.  It could be that an uptempo offense, by creating more possessions (and possibly encouraging greater pace) for both teams just increases the scoring by both teams without changing the net result.  The kind of switching, man-to-man defense the Celtics have been using isn't necessarily effective against an opponent who is moving the ball around, creating spacing, and catching the Celtics before they're set on defense (just as we hope the Celtics' push of the ball catches opponents before they're set on defense).

However, I can't conceive of a way that slowing down the Celtics' attack would have a beneficial effect on their defense.  What will have a beneficial effect on their defense will be a greater proportion of players who are good individual defenders who are not totally dependent on the crutch of team defense.  I'd hate to count the number of "dying quail" leaps Kelly et al. have taken this year.  They get just close enough to miss.  In essence, they're desperately hoping their arms (including the shorts arms of Kelly) will compensate for their poor footwork and positioning on defense.  Axiom: footwork = defense; arms = fouls.  (Source: myself)

Sam

[Sloopjohnb]

Boston is scoring more but it seems that scoring across the league is up by a lot so far this year. Last night there were nine games in which the winning team scored between 101 and 140 points.

A statistical bump or a sign that something is going on?

[Sponsored content]