FOR CELTICS, SUCCESS MAY BE AS EASY AS 1, 2, 3

http://www.weei.com/sports/boston/basketball/celtics/john-tomase/2015/09/29/celtics-success-may-be-easy-one-two-three?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter




FOR CELTICS, SUCCESS MAY BE AS EASY AS 1, 2, 3

Tue, 09/29/2015 - 11:35pm



Isaiah Thomas and the Celtics hope to celebrate a higher percentage of 3's this year. (Maddie Meyer/Getty Images)




Sometimes basketball is very simple, as Celtics coach Brad Stevens illustrated during a recent staff meeting.

Putting aside advanced evaluative tools like defensive efficiency, true shooting percentage or player tracking, Stevens grabbed a marker and reduced the game to its essence.

"We were talking about what's really important and I drew a basket and a ball and a net," Stevens said on Tuesday. "If the ball doesn't go through the net, it stinks. If the ball does, then you feel pretty good about life, and you act like you know what you're talking about."

The Celtics already were a legit defensive team before adding noted interior defender Amir Johnson in free agency and aggressive guard Terry Rozier in the draft. But their ability to put the ball in the basket remains very much in question, particularly from what might be the most important spot on the floor -- the 3-point line.

The Celtics defended the 3 at a borderline elite level last year, placing fourth by holding opponents to an impressive .336 shooting percentage (.350 is league average). The only problem is, they ranked 27th from beyond the arc themselves, shooting just .327.

The correlation between 3-point shooting and success is well-established and seemingly more crucial than ever. The top 12 teams in 3-point field goal percentage all made the playoffs last year, including the eventual champion Warriors, who were historically good (.398). Only three of the bottom 16 teams qualified, including the Celtics.

In other seasons the ratio hasn't been that pronounced -- just nine of the top 15 3-point shooting teams reached the playoffs in 2013, for instance -- but it doesn't take an MIT statistician to recognize that the better a team shoots the most valuable shot, the better off it will be.

The Celtics, though, field a lineup full of inconsistent shooters, with Jonas Jerebko (.406) and Avery Bradley (.352) the only two returning players who shot better than league average from deep last year, and even Bradley was down 40 points from 2014. Otherwise, players like Kelly Olynyk (.349), Isaiah Thomas (.345), Marcus Smart (.335) and Jared Sullinger (.283) have plenty of room to improve.

"They need to become better shooters, and those are things they do every day," Celtics boss Danny Ainge said recently. "If they're just stuck in the low-to-mid-30s right now, and that's who they're going to be their whole careers, then yeah, that's an issue, because we need to become a better shooting team."

Improving from the outside isn't as simple as combing the free agent ranks for the best gunner available. Luigi Datome, for example, shot nearly 50 percent from 3 last season (17-for-36) yet was such a defensive liability the Celtics couldn't keep him on the floor. Maintaining their perimeter defense remains a priority, and great shooters often aren't great defenders.

"We sometimes think of the game in terms of football or baseball, like we need a cornerback, but in basketball you need a player that can do everything on the court," Ainge said. "You need five quarterbacks to some extent. You can get away with having a rim protector if all he has to do is play defense and rebound, but until you put four stars around him, he can be a liability.

"I remember when I was with the Celtics, we went to the Finals four years in a row, and every year all anybody said was the Celtics will never win a championship if they don't get a true point guard. DJ and I were both combo guards, and we won two championships. It wasn't until maybe the third or fourth year that that stopped being an issue."

New Celtics big man David Lee has an interesting perspective on the value of the 3, because he saw up close and personal what kind of a weapon it could be last season en route to a title. Golden State's Steph Curry and Klay Thompson made over 500 between them, and the Warriors shot an unconscious .398 as a team, far and away the best in the league and the 13th best of all time.

"A lot of what we did last year when a play would fail was we could just throw it to one of those two guys and they could throw the ball up from 30 feet away and a lot of times it would go in," Lee said. "It puts a lot of pressure on the defense to extend and get out to shooters. Once you do that, it opens up lanes. A lot of it is a spacing thing, and something a defense has to be aware of. This team creates a lot of problems slashing to the basket. We have a lot of wings who can put the ball on the floor and have a good mid-range game, so that creates other problems."

So how do the Celtics improve with largely the same cast? That's where offseason works comes in, the fruits of which will be evident in short order. For every Thompson, Curry or Eric Gordon -- shooters who enter the NBA polished -- there's a Mike Dunleavy, Khris Middleton or Danny Green who must hone their craft.

Each ranked among the top 11 in 3-point shooting last year, but it wasn't always that way. Dunleavy shot just .285 in 2006. Middleton went 14-for-45 (.311) as a Pistons rookie in 2013 before being traded to the Bucks. Green bounced around the D-League and was waived twice before setting a Finals record for 3-pointers with the Spurs in 2013.

Heck, different era and all that, but even the legendary Larry Bird only shot .308 from beyond the arc in his first five seasons (in 1981-82, incidentally, he only made 11 3's the entire season en route to his first title).

The point is, it helps to be born a shooter, but to some extent they can be made, too.

"We shot a reasonable amount of them last year. We didn't shoot it very well," said Stevens, whose club launched 2,021 3's last year, 13th most in the NBA. "We have to make sure we're continuing to improve individually in our work, in taking the right ones, in studying the game to take the right ones, spacing the game to take the right ones, and getting a little bit more accurate just by the work we put in in the offseason and when we're out before practice and after practice.

"I think that's really important. We're spending a lot of time talking about being in the right spots. After that, you have to step up and make shots, and I think we're capable of that. Certainly we need to."



bob
MY NOTE:  This is what grabbed me about this piece ""We sometimes think of the game in terms of football or baseball, like we need a cornerback, but in basketball you need a player that can do everything on the court," Ainge said. "You need five quarterbacks to some extent. You can get away with having a rim protector if all he has to do is play defense and rebound, but until you put four stars around him, he can be a liability."  That gives me some insight into what kind of players Danny and Brad are trying to bring in.

Another bit that grabbed me was the part about how Dunleavy, Middleton and Green weren't good shooters early on.  Another reminder to me that last year is last year and players don't just screw off during the off-season and every single one of the returning 10 players were given off-season assignments by Brad and his staff.  They work, they're just not in games where the scores are being kept track of.  Kelly did well in international competition this summer.  Those players were the best those countries could field.  Smart showed in summer league, that he is taking driving the ball to the rim more seriously.  In other words, the past is not always prologue.  In English that means "ya neva know".  

Even small improvements in each of the returning players will produce better team basketball overall.  10 returning players, each with marginal improvements, will produce better team basketball overall too.  A gear turning slightly faster inside of another connected gear that is also turning slightly faster.

If you bring in players, by trade say, but you don't have the culture then you might have an excellent basketball team but it might not be a winning basketball team.  The 2004 Lakers would be an example of that.  On paper, they should have been shoo-ins for the title.  If you have the culture, you can then bring in players that fit the culture and then you can have a dynasty (or, at least, a nice long run).  That's what Pop did and that's what Brad and Danny are doing.  It takes a little longer but it's worth it in the long run.


.

Building the right culture wins, everywhere. it's as important in the everyday workplace as much as on sports teams. we've all seen that - the impact of the negative blowhard, or someone who's always undercutting management at the water cooler, or what the gossips can do ... what happens when people slack and don't pull their weight.

all that really shows up in an organization (again, work or sports) where team-building is part of the culture. some businesses emphasize that in their model too; they're organized around workgroups or working teams that have their own set of goals, and when all aren't pulling in that direction it gets obvious pretty fast ... and the whole group's performance goes downhill.

when developing a new culture, getting "buy-in" from everyone is Key ! that's what seems to be going on, now and lately. top down and DA to Coach to players, players are on board with the new culture Brad's putting in. that's why so many Wanted to stay, and Want to be here !

BTW, the evolving new culture looks to me a lot like the old culture from the long C's tradition of teamwork and excellence - team D, play together and cover and trust each other, think pass n pick until you get to the best open shot, on and on. ... all easy to talk about, but hard to do.

just ask Pop !
or ask the Warrior players about S Kerr, for that matter. in a very short time Kerr got buy-in from the players (it starts with 'players' before it gets to become a team) on a new way of thinking and playing together.
M Jackson was no slouch as a coach, but the way mostly the same guys played for Kerr was pretty different from what Jackson had been able to produce. Kerr changed the culture and 'sold' his vision so well that everyone was on the bus. the results are self-evident. Kerr guided them to a place Jackson can only dream of.

so building the right culture Does pay off. you need players who can get it done, obviously, but just as obviously that alone is not enough. once it's in place, it can keep feeding on itself and paying off year after year.

After shooting .406% on an average of 1.7   3 point shots per game in his  rookie year, I wonder why his 3 point attempts dropped off so dramatically in his next 4 years?

swish

A little research shows that both Parish and McHale Joined the club in 1980-81. This probably resulted in a greater focus on the post-up game and less on the 3 point shooting of Bird and Ford.

swish

If Kelly boosts his 3 point accuracy by 10% this year he'll go from .349 to .384. That would make him a very valuable asset. However, last year he dropped from his rookie 3 point average of .351%, so who knows? He did rip it up playing on the Canadian national team this summer, so maybe this will be his breakout year. Here's hopin'.