RealGM

This compares the celtics 3 pt shooting percentage to the opponents 3 pt shooting percentage.

We are not defending as well as 2 years ago and not shooting as well as last year.

2009-10 - Celtics 3 point shooting percentage margin - [minus 1%] - ranked 18th
Celtics 3 pt shooting FG% 34.2% ranked ranked 16th in NBA.
opposing team 3 pt FG% 35.2% ranked 15th in NBA

2008-09 - Celtics 3 point shooting percentage margin - 4.8% - ranked 2nd
Celtics 3 pt shooting FG% 39.7% ranked 1st in NBA.
opposing team 3pt FG% 34.9% ranked 5th in NBA

2007-08 - Celtics 3 point shooting percentage margin 6.5% - ranked 1st
Celtics 3 pt shooting FG% 38.2% ranked 5th in NBA.
opposing team 3pt FG% 31.6% ranked 1st in NBA

0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

just showing volume 3 pt shooters.

2009-2010

PP 43.7%
EH 38.6%
RA 30.1%
RW 28.1%

00000000000000000000000000000


2008-09

EH 44.4%
RA 40.9%
BS 39.3%
PP 39.1%
RR 31.3%
GP 29.2%

00000000000000000000000000000

2007-2008

RA 39.8%
EH 39.3%
PP 39.2%
JP 38.0
BS 32.6%
TA 31.6%

so you're trying to make a comparison between two entire seasons two years ago and this one where we've only played a total of seventeen games? a little too early for this thread and many others like it. we might not end up being better percentage wise in both categories when compared to the previous years, but im sure we'll get our act together and average out.

Like I said in your other thread, too small of a sample size. More importantly, stats don't even begin to tell the whole story

SonicYouth34 wrote:Like I said in your other thread, too small of a sample size. More importantly, stats don't even begin to tell the whole story

We'll see if the trends hold, but we have played 21% of the season. Thats NOT a small sample.

My eyes also tell me that this team is not nearly as good as 2 years ago or the first half of last year. The stats and my eyes are both saying the same thing. We are a very good team. But not a dominant team, at least since game 5, thats 12 games, again not a small sample.

In the last few games the Celtics have modified their offense for the good. They are driving inside and finding cutters much more than in the past.

The Celtics have all the symptoms of an older team. Not chasing down rebounds, which is mostly hustle and energy. Not getting the lift on long jumpers - 3 pointers. Not closing out as well on 3 pointers and defense in general. Teams are driving into the middle much easier than in the past 2 seasons - pre-KG injury.

Some will complain about Rondo and others letting their man by them into the middle. But on pick and roll defense, the "big" is suppose to "turn" the driver giving the "small" like Rondo, Ray & Pierce time to get back to pick up the man. The Celtics are not "turning" the driver nearly as well as in the past.

I don't know how to find the stat, but if someone knows a good site which shows trends for opposing team scoring in the paint, I'd be curious to see those numbers. My eyes are telling me opponents are getting inside easier than in the past. I'd be curious if the stats validate this.

Someone has never taken stats. 21% is way too small. Make this same thread after the all-star break and I'll take it seriously.

Wasn't this guy banned? Can we have one designated Wolves thread at least..

Hey Wolves--do us a favor and go look up last year's stats up until December 1st. See what you see. THAT might be an interesting exercise.

ryaningf wrote:Hey Wolves--do us a favor and go look up last year's stats up until December 1st. See what you see. THAT might be an interesting exercise.

I can tell you that 3 point shooting and rebounding were not problems.

The 3 highest volume 3 point shooters were Ray, EH and PP.

Ray - 49% 3 point shooting in Nov.
EH - 40% 3 point shooting in Nov.
PP - 38% 3 point shooting in Nov.

As for team rebounding, we averaged 43 rebounds a game through the first 17 games, 5 higher than the 38 we are averaging this season.

Our offense was scoring 99 points per game through 17 games last season vs 100 points per game this season. So we are scoring more.

Through the first 17 games last season our defense was giving up 85 points per game vs 91 points per game this year. So our defense is MUCH more porous.

Our margin of victory last year was 14 per game. This year it is 9 per game. A big part of that is the reduction in rebounding. [each rebounds gives you 1 point per game so 5 additional rebounds is the differential.]

I have no means to calculate things like adjusted plus minus and win share for a partial season from last year.

Last year we also started with a weak schedule but we only had 2 losses in the first 17 games, and had a higher margin of victory. We were the dominant team in the NBA not one of the top 6.

Wolves2011 wrote:

ryaningf wrote:Hey Wolves--do us a favor and go look up last year's stats up until December 1st. See what you see. THAT might be an interesting exercise.

I can tell you that 3 point shooting and rebounding were not problems.

The 3 highest volume 3 point shooters were Ray, EH and PP.

Ray - 49% 3 point shooting in Nov.
EH - 40% 3 point shooting in Nov.
PP - 38% 3 point shooting in Nov.

And I can tell you these stats are WRONG.

The real stats follow as such:

For 2008:

Ray -- 35.9% 3-point shooting in Nov.
EH -- 31.3% 3-point shooting in Nov.
PP -- 37.3% 3-point shooting in Nov.

For 2009:

Ray -- 25% 3-point shooting in Nov.
EH -- 37.2% 3-point shooting in Nov.
PP -- 38.9% 3-point shooting in Nov.

The difference is not as staggering when the real #s are involved.

When we play with the ball movement and chemistry demonstrated by the starting unit in the last 3 games, we're a DOMINANT team in this league. It's not about old legs, it's about getting the most out of what we have, passing the ball to the open man, and hitting open shots. For a stretch we weren't doing that--but we be back now. And it makes no diff that we're a year older.

ryaningf wrote:

Wolves2011 wrote:

ryaningf wrote:Hey Wolves--do us a favor and go look up last year's stats up until December 1st. See what you see. THAT might be an interesting exercise.

I can tell you that 3 point shooting and rebounding were not problems.

The 3 highest volume 3 point shooters were Ray, EH and PP.

Ray - 49% 3 point shooting in Nov.
EH - 40% 3 point shooting in Nov.
PP - 38% 3 point shooting in Nov.

And I can tell you these stats are WRONG.

The real stats follow as such:

For 2008:

Ray -- 35.9% 3-point shooting in Nov.
EH -- 31.3% 3-point shooting in Nov.
PP -- 37.3% 3-point shooting in Nov.

For 2009:

Ray -- 25% 3-point shooting in Nov.
EH -- 37.2% 3-point shooting in Nov.
PP -- 38.9% 3-point shooting in Nov.

The difference is not as staggering when the real #s are involved.

When we play with the ball movement and chemistry demonstrated by the starting unit in the last 3 games, we're a DOMINANT team in this league. It's not about old legs, it's about getting the most out of what we have, passing the ball to the open man, and hitting open shots. For a stretch we weren't doing that--but we be back now. And it makes no diff that we're a year older.

your stats are right, mine are wrong. I was looking at total shooting, not 3 point shooting.

The rebounding stats are right though. 43/gm last year in the first 17 games vs 38/gm this year.

Wallace is only shooting 28% on 3 pointers as well, he's a high volume 3 point shooter.

Wolves2011 wrote:

ryaningf wrote:
And I can tell you these stats are WRONG.

The real stats follow as such:

For 2008:

Ray -- 35.9% 3-point shooting in Nov.
EH -- 31.3% 3-point shooting in Nov.
PP -- 37.3% 3-point shooting in Nov.

For 2009:

Ray -- 25% 3-point shooting in Nov.
EH -- 37.2% 3-point shooting in Nov.
PP -- 38.9% 3-point shooting in Nov.

The difference is not as staggering when the real #s are involved.

When we play with the ball movement and chemistry demonstrated by the starting unit in the last 3 games, we're a DOMINANT team in this league. It's not about old legs, it's about getting the most out of what we have, passing the ball to the open man, and hitting open shots. For a stretch we weren't doing that--but we be back now. And it makes no diff that we're a year older.

your stats are right, mine are wrong. I was looking at total shooting, not 3 point shooting.

The rebounding stats are right though. 43/gm last year in the first 17 games vs 38/gm this year.

Wallace is only shooting 28% on 3 pointers as well, he's a high volume 3 point shooter.

So, our 'raw' rebound #s are down relative last year's start. Have you looked at our available rebound %, relative the league average and our start last season? I'd be interested to see how our current % of available rebounds stacks up against the league and our start last season (through the same amount of games).

Go to: http://celticshub.com/2009/11/23/a-quic ... ebounding/ for more info on available rebound %.

To me, our rebounding situation isn't as bad as it seems when you look at the raw #s. I would agree, to an extent, that we're not rebounding at as good a rate as last season, given the same # of games (just off the top of my head). I think that can be explained without concluding that we're old. That's too easy.

If anything, we may have an OFFENSIVE rebounding problem, which I'd explain away by pointing to the way KG and 'Sheed play offense (away from the basket, for the most part). Baby, who's actually a good offensive rebounder (but a poor defensive one) might help that stat when he comes back. Regardless, our high shooting % also serves to lower our offensive rebounding #s as well.

When you get inside the #s, and try to come up with actual solutions to why #s are higher or lower than last season, it becomes harder to justify conclusions that we're 'old'. What does that mean, anyway? We're talking about 1 year after all. Couldn't the rebounding situation be summed up by the major difference between this year's team and last year's? That is, the diff between Baby and 'Sheed? And since Baby's on his way back, I just don't think it the right time to start making 'we're old' arguments. We won't know if we're old until we see how we perform when the playoffs start. The season is too young to say we're old.

through the first 17 games of 2008-9 Celtics season:

last Celtics season: 732 rebounds or 43/gm

last Celtics opponents season 682 rebounds or 40/gm

so there is still a margin of 3 rebounds/gm even early in the season for the Celtics.

[Not sure what a 3 rebound per game margin would have ranked us last year after the first 17 games, but we would have been among the leaders.

below please find the rounding margin this year along with the full year rebounding margins for the previous 2 years.

000000000000000000000

2009-2010 - 18th in the NBA in Rebounding Margin: 0.0 per game
[38.2/gm]

2008-2009 - 2nd in the NBA in Rebounding Margin: 4.5 per game
[42.1/gm]

2007-2008 - tied for 3rd in NBA in Rebounding Margin: 3.1 per game
[42.0/gm]

Ryan with Ray shooting 30% and wallace shooting 28% through 17 games from the 3 point line, its still a problem.

Wolves2011 wrote:through the first 17 games of 2008-9 Celtics season:

last Celtics season: 732 rebounds or 43/gm

last Celtics opponents season 682 rebounds or 40/gm

so there is still a margin of 3 rebounds/gm even early in the season for the Celtics.

[Not sure what a 3 rebound per game margin would have ranked us last year after the first 17 games, but we would have been among the leaders.

below please find the rounding margin this year along with the full year rebounding margins for the previous 2 years.

000000000000000000000

2009-2010 - 18th in the NBA in Rebounding Margin: 0.0 per game
[38.2/gm]

2008-2009 - 2nd in the NBA in Rebounding Margin: 4.5 per game
[42.1/gm]

2007-2008 - tied for 3rd in NBA in Rebounding Margin: 3.1 per game
[42.0/gm]

Wolves, I said it might be interesting to research the available rebounding percentage and compare last year's rate (though 18 games) with this years rate, but you just reposted the same stats with more detail. Not what I was asking for. At all.

Available rebounding percentage gives a better picture of the rebounding situation because it measures the amount of rebounds secured versus the amount of rebounds available. Therefore, it gets around the things that could skew the 'raw' rebounding #s, like playing against high or low possession teams (possession equal shots which are sometimes missed and lead to rebound opportunities), or shooting a high percentage yourself, or turning the ball over, etc.

I think both our shooting percentage and our defensive percentage numbers will improve. Sheed, eddie and ray have all been in a slump and if they get going our numbers will jump. I still would like to see another shooter on the bench along with a veteran pg so I hope that as the season goes on Danny can add someone. I'm in favor of giving lester some minutes