Celts Can't Dip The Nuggets! Loss vs DEN 1/19

[Parasite]

I hoped Jrue would fix the crunch time issues. That obviously hasn't happened and isn't going to happen.

The only hope at this point is Joe telling the team (Tatum) that White will now be initiating the crunch time offense. Absent that happening (and I'm not confident it will), this team is not making it out of the East, never mind the Finals.

The silver lining is I think ownership forces Brad to fire Joe if there is no Finals appearance. An average NBA coach will improve this team immediately.

If we don’t make the Finals and Joe isn’t fired, we aren’t a serious organization anymore. This whole situation just blows my mind tbh. Joe is LEARNING to coach. The fact that he was given the keys to a team that should be contending and winning NBA titles is lunacy.

[tfmiii]

I'm not going to start screaming the Celtics are a terrible team, they still have the best record in the league. HOWEVER, it is way past time to throwing off the blame for let downs on being a young team, or Joe being a new coach. Celtics need to do a few simple things to be an elite team.

1) If the three ball is not falling, then drive the hoop and see a few baskets go in before trying anymore threes. The Jays are two of the best at getting downhill, use it to get going. Jays going 2-17 is unacceptable when you have White and Porzingis going 8-17 on the same night. This is totality on the Jays.

2) JT does not need to be the only one to take the end of game shots. Try using him as a decoy and use his size and passing ability to hit the open player. This is on Joe.

3) Stop thinking JB is the best defender on the team. JB constantly gets burned by smaller, quicker guards, like he did with Murry last night. If he gets switched on them, so be it, but we have two great defensive guards to put on these type of players. Use them. There should have been NO reason to have JB on Murry and White on a 6'10 Porter Jr. JB should have been primary on Porter or Gorden. with White or Holliday on Murry. This is on Joe.

4) Can someone please get an assistant coach to work with JB on his left hand and his free throw shooting. JB is fifth worse on the team in FT shooting ahead only Brissett, Svi, Walsh and Petterson. and Walsh and Petterson have yet to take a FT for the club. 72% for someone making what JB makes is unacceptable. All four of our big men, including Queta, are better than JB at FT shooting. This is on JB.

I endorse all of this and would add:
- Why Kornet???
-Why no Brissette?
-Why not guard Murray with one of our elite defensive guards (or both taking turns?
-It has to be said, DWhite needs to initiate late game offense (Cs had 2 pts last 4:50 of game)
-Don't forget your most efficient scorer, Cs let Denver to take KP away on offense

Please let DWhite run pick and roll action at end of games, please? With KP would be nice too

[BK_2020]

The difference between Denver's offense and ours in the last 4 minutes was 1 bucket (not counting the intentional foul). Denver went 2 for 8. Jokic was 1-4 and Murray was 0-1. It's nonsense to think that Jokic and Murray are clutch masters while Tatum and Brown should just not shoot and let Derrick White handle it.
In a 4 minute game it comes down to luck more than anything.

[Jaqua92]

The difference between Denver's offense and ours in the last 4 minutes was 1 bucket (not counting the intentional foul). Denver went 2 for 8. Jokic was 1-4 and Murray was 0-1. It's nonsense to think that Jokic and Murray are clutch masters while Tatum and Brown should just not shoot and let Derrick White handle it.
In a 4 minute game it comes down to luck more than anything.

2 of Jokic's 3 misses were late shot clock heaves during that time span. Jokic and Murray are a superior duo. The rest of our squad has to be the difference makers.

[BK_2020]

The difference between Denver's offense and ours in the last 4 minutes was 1 bucket (not counting the intentional foul). Denver went 2 for 8. Jokic was 1-4 and Murray was 0-1. It's nonsense to think that Jokic and Murray are clutch masters while Tatum and Brown should just not shoot and let Derrick White handle it.
In a 4 minute game it comes down to luck more than anything.

2 of Jokic's 3 misses were late shot clock heaves during that time span. Jokic and Murray are a superior duo. The rest of our squad has to be the difference makers.

One of them was a sidestep three lol.

[fallguy]

The difference between Denver's offense and ours in the last 4 minutes was 1 bucket (not counting the intentional foul). Denver went 2 for 8. Jokic was 1-4 and Murray was 0-1. It's nonsense to think that Jokic and Murray are clutch masters while Tatum and Brown should just not shoot and let Derrick White handle it.
In a 4 minute game it comes down to luck more than anything.

Prove it. You keep saying this. I don't think anyone believes it's true and I think the data doesn't show it either.

[zoyathedestroya]

Last night was the lowest paced game of all the NBA games played this season, per nba.com. Just 86.0 possessions. Celtics now have two of the lowest paced games this season (W vs. NYK in 11/2023).

Less possessions, less margin for error. In a way, it's surprising we only lost by 2 pts when our top two guys shot really poorly while taking almost half the team's shot attempts (combined 2/17 from 3).

[BK_2020]

The difference between Denver's offense and ours in the last 4 minutes was 1 bucket (not counting the intentional foul). Denver went 2 for 8. Jokic was 1-4 and Murray was 0-1. It's nonsense to think that Jokic and Murray are clutch masters while Tatum and Brown should just not shoot and let Derrick White handle it.
In a 4 minute game it comes down to luck more than anything.

Prove it. You keep saying this. I don't think anyone believes it's true and I think the data doesn't show it either.

We attempted 89 field goals and 14 free throws. Do you think it's possible that one more of those 89 coin flips could've gone our way instead? Games that come down to one team getting one extra good bounce don't really tell you very much about the strengths and weaknesses of those teams. The Nuggets won the close game last night. Does that prove that they are good at close games, that they just figured out how to win close games and their stars are good at close games? They are 8-7 in games decided by 6 or less. The Celtics, meanwhile, are 7-8. If one extra open three goes in, it's the Celtics that are 8-7 and the Nuggets 7-8.

As for data, I can't find the studies but overtime games have been analyzed in both basketball and football and basically the one factor that most strongly influences who wins OT games is who gets possession first.

[Ben-N1ce]

They lost to a team that shot 26% from 3 took 8 fewer shots and got outscored by 18 from the 3. Same crap. One style of play and they can't pivot. Coach and star players peeing down their leg in the clutch. Jaylen 13 points on 16 shots. KP 21 on 11. Joe Mazzula ball. Doesn't read the game and adjust. Just the same as the donkey NFL coaches using a calculator to determine 4th downs despite seeing what is happening on the field cuz math...

[fallguy]

The difference between Denver's offense and ours in the last 4 minutes was 1 bucket (not counting the intentional foul). Denver went 2 for 8. Jokic was 1-4 and Murray was 0-1. It's nonsense to think that Jokic and Murray are clutch masters while Tatum and Brown should just not shoot and let Derrick White handle it.
In a 4 minute game it comes down to luck more than anything.

Prove it. You keep saying this. I don't think anyone believes it's true and I think the data doesn't show it either.

We attempted 89 field goals and 14 free throws. Do you think it's possible that one more of those 89 coin flips could've gone our way instead? Games that come down to one team getting one extra good bounce don't really tell you very much about the strengths and weaknesses of those teams. The Nuggets won the close game last night. Does that prove that they are good at close games, that they just figured out how to win close games and their stars are good at close games? They are 8-7 in games decided by 6 or less. The Celtics, meanwhile, are 7-8. If one extra open three goes in, it's the Celtics that are 8-7 and the Nuggets 7-8.

As for data, I can't find the studies but overtime games have been analyzed in both basketball and football and basically the one factor that most strongly influences who wins OT games is who gets possession first.

To your first paragraph -

1) Why are you bringing up the entirety of the game to talk about how crunch time is about luck?
2) No I don't think last night proves anything in particular about Denver because it's *one* game.
3) Games that come down to crunch time tell you - with enough of a sample size - about how well a team plays in crunch time. Games that come down to crunch time against good teams - with enough of a sample size - will tell you even more. Crunch time games that come down to offensive execution against good teams will tell you more still about how that team executes in those situations. Again, sample size.
4) Crunch time is about on-the-floor decision-making, shot selection, shot making, defensive focus, coach play calling and clock management, refereeing and some luck. But luck is only one factor. It's silly to say it's about 'luck more than anything'. Which is exactly what you said.

To your second paragraph -

No data. Okay. Compelling argument.

[BK_2020]

We are actually 7-7 in close games (6 points or less). The Nuggets meanwhile 8-7. That's not a big disparity when the Nuggets have the following advantages:
1. They just know how to win.
2. They want it more.
3. They can adapt and score in multiple different ways.
4. Their stars are not afraid of the big moment.
5. Their stars can create bucketz.
6. Their coach calls timeouts.
7. They are just clutch.

[JR Hawks]

Only fair to give Joe 2 seasons, this season and next season.

If the Cs still have not hung Banner 18 by 2025, I also want Joe out.

Remember, this is not the same team from last season.

If this were the same team then the result would most likely be the same.

But this is an upgraded Celtics team.

April is 3 months away.

This is season #2 for Joe. There won't be a #3 without a Finals appearance. Wyc isn't nearly as infatuated with Joe as Brad is.

[BK_2020]

Prove it. You keep saying this. I don't think anyone believes it's true and I think the data doesn't show it either.

We attempted 89 field goals and 14 free throws. Do you think it's possible that one more of those 89 coin flips could've gone our way instead? Games that come down to one team getting one extra good bounce don't really tell you very much about the strengths and weaknesses of those teams. The Nuggets won the close game last night. Does that prove that they are good at close games, that they just figured out how to win close games and their stars are good at close games? They are 8-7 in games decided by 6 or less. The Celtics, meanwhile, are 7-8. If one extra open three goes in, it's the Celtics that are 8-7 and the Nuggets 7-8.

As for data, I can't find the studies but overtime games have been analyzed in both basketball and football and basically the one factor that most strongly influences who wins OT games is who gets possession first.

To your first paragraph -

1) Why are you bringing up the entirety of the game to talk about how crunch time is about luck?
2) No I don't think last night proves anything in particular about Denver because it's *one* game.
3) Games that come down to crunch time tell you - with enough of a sample size - about how well a team plays in crunch time. Games that come down to crunch time against good teams - with enough of a sample size - will tell you even more. Crunch time games that come down to offensive execution against good teams will tell you more still about how that team executes in those situations. Again, sample size.
4) Crunch time is about on-the-floor decision-making, shot selection, shot making, defensive focus, coach play calling and clock management, refereeing and some luck. But luck is only one factor. It's silly to say it's about 'luck more than anything'. Which is exactly what you said.

To your second paragraph -

No data. Okay. Compelling argument.

Crunch time sample size of 20 games is 80 minutes if we take the last 4 minutes to be crunch time, which seems reasonable. Most NBA teams won't play 20 close games that come down to the last 4 minutes. 80 minutes is less than 2 games' worth of minutes. The record and stats from 80 minutes don't tell you very much.
In the playoffs you might see 6 or 7 close games if a team makes a run to the finals. Last season the Nuggets played 5 games decided by 6 or less, the Heat played 8. The season before, Boston and GSW both had only 5 close games in the entire playoffs.

[fallguy]

We attempted 89 field goals and 14 free throws. Do you think it's possible that one more of those 89 coin flips could've gone our way instead? Games that come down to one team getting one extra good bounce don't really tell you very much about the strengths and weaknesses of those teams. The Nuggets won the close game last night. Does that prove that they are good at close games, that they just figured out how to win close games and their stars are good at close games? They are 8-7 in games decided by 6 or less. The Celtics, meanwhile, are 7-8. If one extra open three goes in, it's the Celtics that are 8-7 and the Nuggets 7-8.

As for data, I can't find the studies but overtime games have been analyzed in both basketball and football and basically the one factor that most strongly influences who wins OT games is who gets possession first.

To your first paragraph -

1) Why are you bringing up the entirety of the game to talk about how crunch time is about luck?
2) No I don't think last night proves anything in particular about Denver because it's *one* game.
3) Games that come down to crunch time tell you - with enough of a sample size - about how well a team plays in crunch time. Games that come down to crunch time against good teams - with enough of a sample size - will tell you even more. Crunch time games that come down to offensive execution against good teams will tell you more still about how that team executes in those situations. Again, sample size.
4) Crunch time is about on-the-floor decision-making, shot selection, shot making, defensive focus, coach play calling and clock management, refereeing and some luck. But luck is only one factor. It's silly to say it's about 'luck more than anything'. Which is exactly what you said.

To your second paragraph -

No data. Okay. Compelling argument.

Crunch time sample size of 20 games is 80 minutes if we take the last 4 minutes to be crunch time, which seems reasonable. Most NBA teams won't play 20 close games that come down to the last 4 minutes. 80 minutes is less than 2 games' worth of minutes. The record and stats from 80 minutes don't tell you very much.
In the playoffs you might see 6 or 7 close games if a team makes a run to the finals. Last season the Nuggets played 5 games decided by 6 or less, the Heat played 8. The season before, Boston and GSW both had only 5 close games in the entire playoffs.

This is all beside your original attempted point.

Crunch time is NOT primarily about luck. Regardless of how frequently it happens.

Re: sample size. You don't like 80 minutes? Grab the last two playoffs and last season as well. There's plenty to understand about this team in certain situations.

And then that's a weird point about playoff crunch time. Assume we play six games a series for four rounds. 24 games. If just 6 of those are tight down the stretch, that's 25%. You can easily win or lose a title in those games.

[zoyathedestroya]

They lost to a team that shot 26% from 3 took 8 fewer shots and got outscored by 18 from the 3. Same crap. One style of play and they can't pivot. Coach and star players peeing down their leg in the clutch. Jaylen 13 points on 16 shots. KP 21 on 11. Joe Mazzula ball. Doesn't read the game and adjust. Just the same as the donkey NFL coaches using a calculator to determine 4th downs despite seeing what is happening on the field cuz math...

The math actually doesn't compute for this team. They might need to look at the math more...

Celtics are one of the most efficient teams within 0-3 of the rim. But they're among the teams that take the least amount of shots from there. Celtics are one of the most efficient shooters from corner threes. And yet they don't take many corner threes.

They should also probably allocate more shot attempts to their more efficient scorers/shooters (KP, White, Hauser) if they're into math esp on nights when their stars aren't making theirs.

[TheMartian]

They lost to a team that shot 26% from 3 took 8 fewer shots and got outscored by 18 from the 3. Same crap. One style of play and they can't pivot. Coach and star players peeing down their leg in the clutch. Jaylen 13 points on 16 shots. KP 21 on 11. Joe Mazzula ball. Doesn't read the game and adjust. Just the same as the donkey NFL coaches using a calculator to determine 4th downs despite seeing what is happening on the field cuz math...

The math actually doesn't compute for this team. They might need to look at the math more...

Celtics are one of the most efficient teams within 0-3 of the rim. But they're among the teams that take the least amount of shots from there. Celtics are one of the most efficient shooters from corner threes. And yet they don't take many corner threes.

They should also probably allocate more shot attempts to their more efficient scorers/shooters (KP, White, Hauser) if they're into math esp on nights when their stars aren't making theirs.

I really don't understand when it's pretty obvious even to us fans, and the data is out there, why the coaching staff seems to be ignoring these things. Are they just oblivious, or simply choose to ignore them? Either way, that's so incompetent of them seeing as it's part of their job to look into these things.

[BK_2020]

Why doesn't Joe shake things up with the offense? It's only the 2nd best in the league and also the history of the NBA. It's so obvious to us fans that serious, foundational changes with the offense needs to happen. We even lost our 10th game already.

[fallguy]

Why doesn't Joe shake things up with the offense? It's only the 2nd best in the league and also the history of the NBA. It's so obvious to us fans that serious, foundational changes with the offense needs to happen. We even lost our 10th game already.

Offense is mostly luck anyway.

[165bows]

Last night was the lowest paced game of all the NBA games played this season, per nba.com. Just 86.0 possessions. Celtics now have two of the lowest paced games this season (W vs. NYK in 11/2023).

Less possessions, less margin for error. In a way, it's surprising we only lost by 2 pts when our top two guys shot really poorly while taking almost half the team's shot attempts (combined 2/17 from 3).

It was pretty common in the college bball analytics discussion that slower pace title things slightly towards underdogs for precisely the luck/variance reasons described above. Ie, fewer possessions leads to more luck based outcomes.

[fallguy]

They lost to a team that shot 26% from 3 took 8 fewer shots and got outscored by 18 from the 3. Same crap. One style of play and they can't pivot. Coach and star players peeing down their leg in the clutch. Jaylen 13 points on 16 shots. KP 21 on 11. Joe Mazzula ball. Doesn't read the game and adjust. Just the same as the donkey NFL coaches using a calculator to determine 4th downs despite seeing what is happening on the field cuz math...

The math actually doesn't compute for this team. They might need to look at the math more...

Celtics are one of the most efficient teams within 0-3 of the rim. But they're among the teams that take the least amount of shots from there. Celtics are one of the most efficient shooters from corner threes. And yet they don't take many corner threes.

They should also probably allocate more shot attempts to their more efficient scorers/shooters (KP, White, Hauser) if they're into math esp on nights when their stars aren't making theirs.

I really don't understand when it's pretty obvious even to us fans, and the data is out there, why the coaching staff seems to be ignoring these things. Are they just oblivious, or simply choose to ignore them? Either way, that's so incompetent of them seeing as it's part of their job to look into these things.

Corner threes are the most prized shots in the game, other than shots at the rim. Part of it is that teams will aggressively move to take away the corner three from Boston knowing that the C's can be baited into less efficient threes from above the arc.

But honestly, I think part of it is just philosophical. Joe rarely believes the Celtics take bad shots (I'm not sure Joe believes there is such a thing as a bad three). Almost every serious observer of the team around the league knows that shot selection is going to determine a big part of this team's fate.

A poster who is definitely not the The Comedian expects Tatum to attack more in the playoffs and that seems reasonable. But teams will force the ball out of his hands a lot. What shots are we willing to accept in that scenario? Let's hope DW is the guy getting the pass out of the double.