Tyler Zeller finding his groove

From CelticsBlog, copied from an ESPN article...

http://www.celticsblog.com/2014/11/10/7184647/tyler-zeller-is-finding-his-groove-with-the-boston-celtics

...something we've all noticed.



Tyler Zeller is finding his groove with the Boston Celtics

By Jeff Clark@celticsblog on Nov 10 2014, 6:00a 37


He's seeing his opportunity and productivity grow with the Celtics.

Tyler Zeller really impressed me on Saturday night.  He must have impressed Brad Stevens as well, since he got to play a season high 21 minutes and was on the court for much of the final few minutes.

His 10 points, 7 rebounds, and 4 assists helped the Celtics best a team that featured star centers Pau Gasol and Joakim Noah.  He did much of his offensive damage in the pick and roll.  We've seen him execute that play very effectively with Rajon Rondo, but he's also working well with Evan Turner and Phil Pressey.

He's doing it very efficiently too. Like, really, really efficiently (thus far).

Sure, it’s a small sample size, but Zeller seemingly has created points every time he has touched the ball this season. In fact, Synergy Sports has a metric called score percentage that measures the percent of possessions finished that result in at least one point, and Zeller is at a ridiculous 86.4 percent -- nearly 10 percentage points better than the nearest competitor. That's what happens when you're shooting 85.7 percent from the field (12-of-14), limiting turnovers and getting to the line with regularity.

Some of that efficiency has to do with running the floor. That doesn't always mean a traditional fast break either. He hustles down the court and sets up transition plays very well.  Sometimes that simply means being a "rim-runner" as Brad Stevens called him. But other times it means setting up a high screen-and-roll play before the defense has a chance to set up their rotations.  That worked beautifully against the Bulls - which explains how a team with no star player on the court was able to run up such a score on what is often considered the best defense in all the land.

I'm not sure if Zeller is worth a spot on your fantasy roster at this point, but he's worth keeping an eye on at least.  And he's a perfect cheap center option for single-game fantasy games like FanDuel.

So if a guy is that efficient, maybe shouldn't he be playing more minutes?  But of course there's a bit of a big man rotation log-jam.

Sullinger is one of the best players on the team at this point, and deserves minutes.  Kelly Olynyk is quietly having a great season as well.  Then there's old reliable Brandon Bass, who Stevens was subbing in for defensive possessions in the final moments of the Bulls game - so he clearly trusts his defense more than the other bigs.

Complicating things has been the small-ball lineup that features Jeff Green playing at the power forward spot (with Rondo, Bradley, and Smart giving backcourts fits).  That squeezes out some more playing time from the big man rotations.  However, with Smart missing a few weeks, we may see Stevens shift more to bigger lineups.

In fact, if he plays like he did against the Bulls, Zeller is going to force his way into the rotation on a more permanent basis.  Or at least when there is a matchup that requires a more traditional center instead of the stretch 4's on the roster.

Regardless, every time I see Zeller do something positive, it reminds me that we got him (and a 1st rounder) for virtually nothing (or if you want to look at it another way, he was tacked onto the Pierce/KG trade a year after the fact). He's kind of found-money at this point and I'm happy to have him on the roster.


Here's the ESPN original; http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/celtics/post/_/id/4715612/zeller-scoring-with-surprising-efficiency

Talk about a lack of originality; I'm posting a copy of something, copied from an article posted somewhere else.  May as well set the bar low for today!

Ironically, this article relates to something we've been discussing on the "Dieng Thread."  What is the likelihood that a player who seems productive in few minutes can maintain that degree of productivity in more minutes?  In Tyler's case, so far so good.

The Celtics have been doing a much better job of setting picks so far this season.  Solid picks, and often several of them during one possession.  Tyler knows how to set a pick, and his decisions on whether and when to roll to the hoop are excellent.

Sam

On alot of teams Zeller might play as he did on Cavs the last 2 years, but Stevens has way of really putting his players in positions to use their strengths and players are just learning and finding their roles....I don't know if Doc Rivers or other coaches could have figured out how to use him like this, but I really hope he keeps this going. Love the way this team is growing and fighting and it can get better and better.....fock the Triangle!!!

Cow,

After some of the Celtics' "performances" after Game 1, there was every reason to believe that this was going to be a really long and frustrating season.  Credit for the little resurgence should probably go to a lot of people, but Brad has to lead the list.  It seems as though, regardless of whether or not they have intervening practice days, the Celtics instantly correct most problems they display.  That's utterly amazing, especially with Rondo and Smart out.  (A few people—not I—would probably say they've improved BECAUSE Rondo is out.)

None of this means anything with respect to the eventual fate of the team this season.  But it's certainly better than a sharp stick in the eye, and it cannot be denied that they have become a fun team to watch.

Go Celtics!

Sam

Cow, regarding the triangle.

My favorite Celtics video is of a full game 5 (in the best of 5 division final) from 1965 against the Cincinnati Royals.  It was filmed as a documentary, so there are many interesting devices of which several came into common usage later : replays; slow motion; stop action; etc.  Red was miked for sound.

Anyway, I mention this because, at one point, they talk about the Celtics "triangle," even graphing a triangle on the floor.  Not as complex as that of the Lakers or Knicks, but based on similar principles.  I believe the triangle was hatched at some college years before the Celtics used a diluted (read and react) version of it; but it might possibly be that the Celtics were the first NBA team to use some version of the triangle.

The video is worth watching for dozens of reasons.  But one of my favorites is a stop- action replay of Russ—six feet out of the play—soar from out of nowhere to block an Oscar Robertson point blank shot and redirect it to a teammate.

Given my age, I am determined to play this video a.s.a.p. for as many as will come and see it.  Portions are currently available on Youtube, but you need to see the whole game to get the real effect.  I'm going to try (for the umpteenth time) to work it into our spring, 2015, spring get-together.

Sam

The triangle is just another read-and-react motion offense that relies on spacing, ball movement, and player movement to create opportunities. I took Cow's insult to be directed at the Lakers and Phil Jackson. The triangle offense itself is blameless.

The triangle was originally developed by USC coach Sam Barry in the 1940s. Tex Winter was one of his players, and Winter refined the offense during his years as a coach and eventually became the triangle guru for Phil Jackson.

Sam

I saw that game, didn't you show some of that game at the first Celtic party at that sports bar downstairs before the playoff game? That was the game they lost vs Hawks in first round of 08 at Atlanta, beat and his son, NY Celt, bobc33, worse were all there.

Outside

Hope you didn't take that as an insult, wasn't meant to insult anyone. I just really like this offense and the players are just learning it on the fly and there is some brisk movements and sharing of the ball that are done in a way I've never seen before, as far as I know its just coach Stevens offense and as far as I know, it has no name. Maybe I did take a shot at Phil and the Lakers without thinking?

Cow,

That was at the Allston Depot for what was really our first get-together (at BDC).  I showed a couple of minutes from that game and a bunch of unrelated videos illustrating the five different styles Cousy used on his outside shots.

Sam

Cow,

I wasn't insulted at all. You hate the Lakers. You hate Phil Jackson. It just seemed like the triangle was a proxy for that. I was just pointing that out, like looking out the window and saying, "Oh look, there goes an ice cream truck." Simply an observation.

outside

Well now that were talking about Phil, one of my all time favorite moments was during that blow out win over the Lakers in game 6 in 08.....absolutely loved whenever they would show Phil Jackson sitting meekly on that bench, powerless to impart any useful knowledge, taking his beating like a man!!!

cow

Outside wrote:The triangle is just another read-and-react motion offense that relies on spacing, ball movement, and player movement to create opportunities. I took Cow's insult to be directed at the Lakers and Phil Jackson. The triangle offense itself is blameless.

The triangle was originally developed by USC coach Sam Barry in the 1940s. Tex Winter was one of his players, and Winter refined the offense during his years as a coach and eventually became the triangle guru for Phil Jackson.

outside I really enjoy your posts, you have vast knowledge of the game, I'm curious do you remember when Gary Peyton played for the Lakers he complained that he wasn't cut out for the Triangle, that it didn't play to his strengths, do you remember that era? what was Peytons problem?

Cow,

I do remember that. I saw them play in the preseason, and Payton dribbled down on the fast break through the defenders like they were pylons, and my thought was, wow, this is a dimension they haven't had, and I thought Payton would add a lot. But these motion offenses are so different from what most NBA players are used to, and some guys have a hard time adjusting to it. I think that's where Payton was, at the end of his career and too set in his ways to learn new tricks. Payton was a hard-nosed, supremely self-confident player, but the down side of that is that he could be stubborn, and my guess is that his stubbornness worked against him in that situation.

That was also the year they had Karl Malone (who fit in well but hurt his knee) and they lost to Detroit in the finals. The Shaq-Kobe pairing had run its course, and they had a lot of internal issues. It was a mess at that point, and that certainly didn't help Payton's fortunes there.

Outside,

What a curse it must be for a team to have a stubborn floor general.  I'm glad the Celtics don't have to deal with that.  (LOL)

Sam

Outside

Shaq would go on to win a championship with Wade, even though that team failed, how could you not keep Shaq and retool the rest of that team? oh right Kome was a petulant spoiled child!!! On the Triangle, do you think it takes away from a points ability to penetrate, because of the structure and strategy? Seems the point just passes and waits on the perimeter for the rest of the ball to move, similar to what Derek Fisher did.

cow

sam wrote:Outside,

What a curse it must be for a team to have a stubborn floor general.  I'm glad the Celtics don't have to deal with that.  (LOL)

I assume with a wink wink, nudge nudge that you're referring to Rondo's stubbornness leading to resistance on his part to totally buy into Stevens' motion offense. Rondo and Payton may share a stubbornness gene that makes them both resistant to fully adopting a motion, read-and-react offense, but Payton's situation with the Lakers was different from Rondo's current situation with the Celtics in one key aspect -- for the 2003-04 Lakers, Phil Jackson had the option to bench Payton, but that's not an option for Stevens with Rondo. Stevens HAS to get Rondo to change his stripes and jump with both feet into the motion offense pool.

Edit: in looking at that 2003-04 Laker team, Payton played all 82 games and played 34.7 minutes per game, which means Phil didn't bench him. When I think about that team, Payton seems like an afterthought, so I just assumed that Phil had benched him when he hadn't. A more accurate description would be that Phil had the luxury of relying on Shaq, Kobe, and Malone for the offensive emphasis without worrying about Payton. It's still true that Stevens doesn't have that option with Rondo. He HAS to get Rondo to buy in to this offense.

cowens/oldschool wrote:Shaq would go on to win a championship with Wade, even though that team failed, how could you not keep Shaq and retool the rest of that team? oh right Kome was a petulant spoiled child!!!

There's no doubt that Kobe wanted to be the number one guy, but Shaq was also at his most petulant at that point. There's actually a Wikipedia entry for "Shaq-Kobe feud," and if you want to see how bad each of them were and how other factors played into everything falling apart, read the "Final years as teammates" section.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shaq%E2%80%93Kobe_feud#Final_years_as_teammates

Forced to choose between Kobe and Shaq, history has proven that Jerry Buss made the right choice with Kobe. He was younger and was able to lead the Lakers to two more championships. Shaq did win another title in Miami with Wade (and Payton), but his time after leaving the Lakers is marked by physical decline. By 2007-08, his averages were down to 13.6 points and 9.1 rebounds, and his total minutes dropped a lot.

Say what you will about "KoMe," but:

• In the 12 seasons from 1999-00 through 2010-11, he led the Lakers in assists 10 times (sometimes by a wide margin) and was second the other two times (once to Payton that 2003-04 season, the other time to Lamar Odom).

• His average of 4.75 assists per game for his career puts him no. 116 on the all-time NBA record list.

• His total of 5,949 career assists puts him at no. 32 on the all-time NBA record list.

cowens/oldschool wrote:On the Triangle, do you think it takes away from a points ability to penetrate, because of the structure and strategy? Seems the point just passes and waits on the perimeter for the rest of the ball to move, similar to what Derek Fisher did.

In the triangle, the point guard brings the ball up the court and makes the first pass in what is normally a multi-pass possession, but the the players (including the point guard) and the ball should be in motion throughout the possession. The offense can cater to each player's strengths, so in Fisher's case, that was often as a perimeter shooter who could space the floor. But he could do that from multiple spots (corner, wing, above the top of the key), and he would move from one spot and cut through the lane on his way to another spot. It wasn't as simple as just staying the whole possession at the three-point line.

Any motion offense, including the triangle and Stevens' offense, are designed to create opportunities as the ball and players move throughout the possession, and theoretically, it can be an equal-opportunity offense. In reality, a couple of things happen to change that:

• The ball winds up in the better players' hands more often, leading to more chances for those players, whatever position they play.

• They don't run the motion offense exclusively and throw in varying doses of pick-and-roll and isolation.

That sets the stage to answer your question about whether the triangle (or any motion, read-and-react offense) takes away from a point guard's ability to penetrate. In the case of a dominant point guard (a guy like Payton or Rondo as opposed to Fisher), it forces him to become part of a system that relies more on passing and movement by all players as opposed to a traditional offense, which would use a dominant point guard's individual ability to penetrate and kick, penetrate and score, play a two-man pick-and-roll, or deliver the ball to a player coming off screens (think Rondo delivering the ball to Ray Allen or Pierce). All of that is predicated on that point guard having the ball in his hands and controlling the action.

In a read-and-react offense like the triangle, the offense itself controls the action. The objective is to take what the defense gives you by design or seize on defensive lapses and then either deliver the ball to your best offensive players in good position to score or deliver the ball to lesser offensive players for an open shot. All this relies on ball movement and player movement that takes the ball out of a dominant point guard's hands more than a traditional offense.

Theoretically, a dominant point guard could still be the dominant offensive player, but he would do it more often after receiving a pass back rather than having the ball continuously from the start. But that requires that point guard, whether it be Payton with the triangle or Rondo with Stevens' offense, to adapt to the system and recognize the new opportunities that system offers rather than force his traditional offense mindset, which undermines the system.

This gets at the core Rondo question -- can he adapt and take advantage of the opportunities in Stevens' system, or will he revert to walking the ball up and pounding the ball into the floor for much of the possession? It's apparently a difficult thing for a strong-willed guy like Rondo to do, but he's so smart that he has to see what this offense offers him. If he can just start the offense quickly, pass the ball, and trust that it will come back to him often, he'll receive the ball in good position to do what he does -- drive and score, drive and dish, or otherwise use his skills to find open teammates or get himself good shots. But at that point, the whole idea of the motion offense is that the defense will be on its heels or out of position instead of set and waiting as Rondo arrives in the frontcourt.

outside thanks you are like a professor of basketball.

Cow,

Well, I don't know about that, but thank you. I do love this game, and I especially appreciate motion offenses. When run well, as San Antonio displayed in the finals, they show how teamwork and unselfish play is far superior to individual-centric play.

I know the idea of the Lakers and Phil Jackson make you want to hack up a hairball, but I like the triangle offense. It will take the Celtics a while to gain confidence and expertise with Brad Stevens' offense, but once they do, I think it can take them to another level. I was really glad to see Stevens go all in with the motion offense.

The San Antonio Spurs, since 2013 finals, have played great as a team. They pass and move. They never stay put. You'll see Spurs members running in circles around the court trying to get open. Even though I am a Lebron fan, I did like how the Spurs were playing in 2013, and with even better execution this year, that is how they won the 2014 finals. I was a little upset but all in all, the Spurs definitely deserved it.

Hi Ramdaman. Welcome. As a LeBron fan, the 2014 finals had to hurt, but San Antonio played absolutely wonderful, beautiful basketball, the best I've seen in a long time.

Ramdaman, welcome to the forum.  We hope you'll enjoy it and will post early and often.  You may not encounter as much fondness for LeBron as you'd like, but we guarantee convivial discussion; so, for the most part, even our disagreements tend to be friendly ones.  Our number one rule is not to let it get personal.

Sam