Indicator

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Indicator

    LOL! Right, good question
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from NickFaldo. Show NickFaldo's posts

    Re: Indicator

    P34 is correct. There is something to his analysis. If Pierce has to try to be the Celtics' version of Kobe Bryant or LeBron James, i.e. be a ball hog, it usually indicates the team is desperate for offense. Ray's job is to hit his outside jumpers and not turn the ball over. If he can't hit his shots, he isn't of much value. Doc needs to limit his minutes so he can keep his legs fresh and continue to be one of the greatest shooters in NBA history. Any problems with Ray Allen might be Doc Rivers' fault.

    Pierce is the only Celtic able to try to take over games when necessary. Ray no longer has the ability to do that on his own. He needs crisp passes to his spots. He can drive to the hoop once in a while but now is too old to do it very often or on call.

    Pierce will be in the same boat as Ray in a year or two. Like Ray he will no longer be able to take over games. Rondo is the most important Celtic because he epitomizes the Celtic tradition of selfless play. He lifts up the other players.

    The Rondo and Perk haters are the worst. But they aren't the only wastes of time. There is probably one or two persons with multiple accounts who have turned this forum into a zoo. So-called Celtics fans have hurt this forum worse than any of the so-called Laker trolls.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from bilalkazmi. Show bilalkazmi's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Indicator : Im pretty sure I recall from a couple years ago that this is Docs strategy.. After our shot goes up, everyone heads downcourt to play defense.  Docs analyzed the reward of crashing the offensive boards to the risk of letting teams get a break on us. If you notice (as its pointed out many times during games) opposing teams try to get down court and get a shot up quick against us before our defense settles in.  Doc wants to limit any 3on2's or 4on3's etc and feels sacrificing offensive boards pays off. Its not like we dont get any offensive boards but I think in general, the strategy is to not get caught upcourt,,
    Posted by Karllost[/QUOTE]

    Yes, this is exactly what it is.  We DO NOT hustle as much as other teams in trying to get offensive boards.  We would rather get back and protect our own basket.  Over the past 3 years, I would say this startegy has paid off because:
    1.  We have won an overwhelming number of games where we got outrebounded on the offensive board
    2.  We have restricted our competition to one of the league's worst FG% shooting while being outrebounded on the offensive board

    However, last year we also struggled with defensive rebounds.  Case in point, game 7 of the Laker vs Celtics final series.  I don't think not focusing on defensive rebounds is in our game plan.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from bilalkazmi. Show bilalkazmi's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Indicator : THAT'S WHERE YOU ARE WRONG! Against the Pistons Pierce scored 33 points but the Celtics still lost. That's not an indicator because it's not consistent, Pierce scoring 30 or more doesn't guarantee a Celtic win.
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    P34:  No indicator in basketball (or in other areas in general) will ever have a 100% correlation with your desired outcome.  I am sure I can find examples of many games in the past where Ray Allen scored 30+ but the Celtics still lost.  In fact, do you remember the 50 point game that Ray had against Chicago (I think) that we lost in the playoffs?  There are probably more examples of this.

    What you are saying makes sense.  When Ray is feeling it, the coaches of the opposing teams ask their players to pay extra attention to Ray.  This gives other scorers on our team more room to do what they do.  It probably also causes the opposing teams to expend energy trying to deny Ray open looks, again helping us.  But this argument also works for Pierce. 

    Keep in mind that in statistics you have to be careful.  The Celtics have won a large number of games and lost only a few.  So if you come up with a list of indicators, you will find that most indicators have a strong correlation with winning because in general we win most of our games.  And no indicator should have a 100% correlation, given a truly large sample size.  If some indicators are exhibiting that, then most likely the sample size isn't large enough. 
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Indicator

    Now this is a good topic...offensive rebounds. I think bilalkazmi and Karllost are right. Doc doesn't mind giving up offensive rebounds to make sure w'ere back on defense. Getting an offensive rebound is good but making them a priority opens you up to fastbreak points, guys out of position and fouls. Yes if one comes right to you then it's a good thing but climbing someone's back or reaching are just stupid fouls that aren't needed.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from CHEisCHE. Show CHEisCHE's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Indicator : The Celtics never lost a game this season when Ray scores 20 or more or he makes 3 or more 3s in one game.  Pierce scored 33 points against Detroit the Celtics lost. Last night Pierce got 30 points against the Raptors and the Celtics win. Facts are facts.
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    Your statement is not all about the game of basketball but rather a Jai Alai.

    There are 5 players to win a game & vice versa (for lost). Just because Ray scored 20 for a win and Pierce scored more than 30 for a loss does not mean an absolute win/loss result or statistic. It's a team effort.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from gtown07. Show gtown07's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]Ok what's your point?? So now RA is the most important player? That's not an indicator it's a coincidence.
    Posted by BiasLewis[/QUOTE]

    Generally, Ray gets much better shots when Rondo is playing. So there is a connection with Rondo and Ray that can't be denied. No Rondo...no Ray.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Indicator

    Um thank you gtown07.

    Some think that the tail wags the dog around here. LOL!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]Um thank you gtown07. Some think that the tail wags the dog around here. LOL!
    Posted by BiasLewis[/QUOTE]

    You don't really believe your the only one that realizes that Rondo helps get Ray involved in the game do you?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Indicator

    According to the person who started this post, it's hard to tell. Some think KG is the X factor, some PP, some BBD, some Luke. (LOL just joking) and some Rondo.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from jdm894g. Show jdm894g's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]There is probably one or two persons with multiple accounts who have turned this forum into a zoo. So-called Celtics fans have hurt this forum worse than any of the so-called Laker trolls.
    Posted by NickFaldo[/QUOTE]

    You hit the nail on the head!!!!  Folks holding convos and arguing with themselves....HAHAHAHA!!!! Sometimes I even wonder if this is a Celtics board at times......
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    Re: Indicator

    umm How about Rondo played!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from jeezem. Show jeezem's posts

    Re: Indicator

    Red used to say BBall is a simple game.  If you put the ball in the bucket more times than the other guy, you win.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: Indicator


    While I agree with P34 about Ray being a key indicator (when Ray shoots and scores well, we win), I also see other indicators.....like the assist total and the opponent's shooting percentage.   But, one can't deny - when Ray is playing well, its almost a guaranteed win as he spreads the floor for Paul and KG and his points come in bunches as a high percentage.  Ray's shooting makes the game so much easier.

    Of course, Ray does score better when Rondo is in the game to set him up and when he gets enough rest during the game to be fresh 4th qtr.

    However, I'm the one that made that first rebounding comment and obviously I wasn't clear.  I am worried about the OTHER TEAM getting offensive rebounds, not the Celts.  The Celts don't do a lot of offensive rebounding as they want to get back on d.  That's not a big issue because our shooting percentage (#1 in the league) is so good (there are fewer rebounds to get, we feel confident we'll score the next time, and its more important for us to get back and prevent their fast break).  

    The problem is that we let teams stay in the game by getting on THEIR offensive boards!  If we rebounded better on our defensive end, many teams wouldn't even be in the game (read, more blowouts) because Celts force a lot of misses and if opponents then get few offensive boards, they would be scoring even less!  More blowouts, more wins, and more rest for the starters.

    Lakers series was a good example - we let them get WAY too many offensive boards.  We need to fix this.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from jeezem. Show jeezem's posts

    Re: Indicator

    I think Rondo has an effect on that also.  If he's in the game our fast break is better and the other team has to consider that when they send guys to the offensive boards.  I'd be curious to see statistics on offensive rebounds for the opponent when Rondo plays vs. DNP.  I'll bet there is a correlation there.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Indicator

    Celtsfan4life,

    I like your comments on rebounding. I think all good or great teams are going to give up something. What are you willing to sacrifice as a team is probably a better question?

    The Heat have said we will require everyone to rebound if we want to run and that's how we will win for the lack of size.

    Orlando is riding on guys that can score, not just shoot and have Howard there to cover a lot of mistakes.

    SA isn't realying on size but court savvy and great defense.

    The C's rely on team defense and not allowing you to reverse the ball for easy and open looks. We're going to give up one aspect of rebounding either off or def. The C's want you to shoot a low pct, cut off passing lanes and make shots difficult, have you take shots late in the shot clock and hope you make mistakes in your offensive execution. However a team that moves the ball, has size and good passers can exploit the Cs (see Lakers). Rebounding is more important to a team like the Heat because if they don't rebound they can't run.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: Indicator

    Absolutely right about the Heat and why they need to rebound well.  Good point.  In fact, a lot of their rebounds come from Lebron or DWade being near the basket, getting the ball, and running all the way.

    If Paul and Ray are hitting from the outside or at least making Lebron and Wade chase them, then they won't get clean rebounds to run.  


     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Indicator

    RAY ALLEN 20 POINTS, 4-5 3PT FGS, RESULTS IN ANOTHER CELTIC WIN.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: Indicator

    P34, did Rondo play?? How many assts did he get??

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]P34, did Rondo play?? How many assts did he get??
    Posted by BiasLewis[/QUOTE]

    Rondo had 15 assists against Dallas but the Celtics end up losing. 

    Again, Bias, stop being a jerk! Call a spade a spade. Tonight Ray scored 20 points and made 4 out of 5 3-pointers which resulted in a Celtics win.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    Re: Indicator

    Also Rondo played.... Ray wont get 20 + when Rondo is out
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from jeezem. Show jeezem's posts

    Re: Indicator

    Anyone have any stats on how often the Cs outrebound their opponent?  I wonder if they ever lose when they win at rebounding as an indicator.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]Also Rondo played.... Ray wont get 20 + when Rondo is out
    Posted by KGLove[/QUOTE]
    http://www.nba.com/celtics/stats/boxscore_reader.html?gameid=20101222/PHIBOS

    Ray scored 22 points and Rondo did not play in that game. The Celtics won that game, 84-80, by the way. 
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]Anyone have any stats on how often the Cs outrebound their opponent?  I wonder if they ever lose when they win at rebounding as an indicator.
    Posted by jeezem[/QUOTE]


    Celtics lost that game to the Cavs 95-87. But the Celtics outrebounded the Cavs 38-37.


    Once again the Celtics won the battle of the boards, 40-35, but ended up losing the game.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from jeezem. Show jeezem's posts

    Re: Indicator

    In Response to Re: Indicator:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Indicator : http://www.nba.com/celtics/stats/boxscore_reader.html?gameid=20101027/BOSCLE Celtics lost that game to the Cavs 95-87. But the Celtics outrebounded the Cavs 38-37. http://www.nba.com/celtics/stats/boxscore_reader.html?gameid=20101231/NOHBOS Once again the Celtics won the battle of the boards, 40-35, but ended up losing the game.
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]
     never would have guessed
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share