INDICATOR

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

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]It's good to look at trends - it gives an idea of how valueable ball movement is and playing your game and controlling pace.  Watching games it seems to me their ball movement is fast and effective while other times it seems like they over pass, but that's the style of play they seem to be winning with so - even though it looks like too much passing at times, it forces the other team to think alot about defense and use nrg to play defense, and that takes the opponent off their game.  Just like they never seem to crash 3 guys to the offensive board, that's not their style.  They wear down the other teams defense with ball movement and shoot a high percentage, so the odds are getting back and playing tough defense is the best percentage.  Seems to be working for them.  I think Tom and Mike talked about this stat during the last game.  It will be interesting to see over the rest of the season how Perkins changes the team rebounding numbers.  Personally, I like the statistics, if you win every time you score more than 30 points in the paint, not that they do, just as an example, then calling plays and having a strategy to play your game and score points in the paint makes sense.
    Posted by jeezem[/QUOTE]

    Great thought! Points in the paint are another stat that is critical. It means your interior defense is weak, your bigs are suseptible to fouls and you give up second chance points.

    As a coach you have to look at tendencies that are helping your team and hurting your team. You can't just roll the balls out and play. These teams know your sets and plays even as the play is called. Do you know how frustrating it must be to call a play and the defense already know what to do. LOL! Any edge teams can get they will milk it until you stop it.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from basketbert. Show basketbert's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : I told you my indicator is for Celtic losses and not Celtic wins. Why are you so hardheaded?
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    Well, the only possibilities are wins and losses, no?

    RA struggles, we loose.
     
    So you're saying that if Ray Allen does NOT struggle we win ? ;-)
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from jeezem. Show jeezem's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    The interior defense just reminds me of the Orlando game.  Howard had like 35 point and 13 rebounds and everyone talked about how great a player he is, but he had 1 ONE foul and 0 ZERO blocked shots, and the Cs scored a ton of points in the paint.  If I was Howards coach or team mate - I would ask him if he was trying to throw the game by not playing any defense.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : Your indicator makes sense because Doc is the coach. Ray's role is to share the scorer role with Paul. Doc needs to get rid of his doghouse and running those two into the ground strategies. Wafer and Nate should become the scorers when Paul and/or Ray are having off-nights. Marquis can pile up points on occasion, but he doesn't have the outside shot like Nate and Wafer do. Eddie used to do that. Eddie hasn't been fully replaced even though the team has players to fill that part.
    Posted by NickFaldo[/QUOTE]

    Wafer and Nate?  Your kidding right?  If Paul and Ray are having a off night more than likely this team is going to lose.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : Well, the only possibilities are wins and losses, no? RA struggles, we loose.   So you're saying that if Ray Allen does NOT struggle we win ? ;-)
    Posted by basketbert[/QUOTE]

    http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nba/columns/story?columnist=may_peter&id=6051477

    Another Allen factoid: When he scores big, the Celtics win. Boston is 12-0 when Allen scores 20 or more. (Curiously, when he scores 19, the Celtics are 2-3.) But here's another number that is even more critical: 43. That's the number of games the Celtics have played and that's the number of games Allen has played. Neither he nor Paul Pierce has missed a game this season. Think Doc Rivers would like to see that trend continue over the second half?
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]Here is another stat based on rebounding. From CNNSI: Occasionally you'll hear an announcer or commentator declare that the Celtics are last or near the bottom of the NBA in rebounding. And yes, they grab just 38.2 per game, fewest in the league. But that number is extremely deceptive. The Celtics play deliberately (they are 21st in place), making for fewer possessions, fewer shots and fewer rebounds overall. They also don't contest on the offensive glass nearly as much as other teams, partly because they are far and away the most accurate shooting team in the NBA and thus know they have fewer potential misses to grab, and partly because they'll forfeit the chance at some put-backs in order to get back and set their half-court defense. But in terms of defensive rebounding percentage, Boston is tied for 10th. Put simply, the Celtics are smart about when and how they rebound. That's why, on the numbers that matter -- points scored per 100 possessions and points allowed per 100 possessions -- they are 10th on offense and second on defense. 
    Posted by BiasLewis[/QUOTE]

    This is spot on.  When you shoot a higher percentage and get back on D, then there are fewer offensive Boards to get.   They are a little too relaxed on getting defensive rebounds in the 1st 3 quarters.  Same is true for drawing fouls.  Ever notice how far behind we are in free throws vs the opposition in the 1st 3 qtrs and then how we get to the foul line a lot in the 4th quarter?   We play a different game in the 4th quarter.



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

    Re: INDICATOR

    Yes but let's not fool ourselves Rondo is a crummy point guard because he doesn't shoot jump shots and if he shot jump shots they would have been 21 -0 even if they didnt' have the 25 assists. Acie and Pud and DudDud have convinced me.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    Yea, right.  Its amazing how bad our point guard is for us to have the 2nd best record in the league and for our starters to have such good shots that he sets them up for.  He's not perfect, but then again, neither is any other player.   I hate to see you go there about Rondo.   


     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    If we are up by more than 1 point at the end of the fourth im pretty sure we win!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]If we are up by more than 1 point at the end of the fourth im pretty sure we win!
    Posted by KGLove[/QUOTE]


    We could even go all the way to saying if we are up by ONLY one point, we still win!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : There is nothing in depth about any of this. You can't base winning on a specific indicator. There is a multitude of things that go into winning and losing game. You can't put a stat in a vaccum and say that is why the team won or lost a game
    Posted by tompenny[/QUOTE]

    Well you may not be able to base the stat on anything but the fact is when they get that many assists they win. Pure and simple.  I would take 25 assists tonight and take my chances.  Odds are we will win.  How can you argue with that.  Its all within the framework of the game.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]Here is another stat based on rebounding. From CNNSI: Occasionally you'll hear an announcer or commentator declare that the Celtics are last or near the bottom of the NBA in rebounding. And yes, they grab just 38.2 per game, fewest in the league. But that number is extremely deceptive. The Celtics play deliberately (they are 21st in place), making for fewer possessions, fewer shots and fewer rebounds overall. They also don't contest on the offensive glass nearly as much as other teams, partly because they are far and away the most accurate shooting team in the NBA and thus know they have fewer potential misses to grab, and partly because they'll forfeit the chance at some put-backs in order to get back and set their half-court defense. But in terms of defensive rebounding percentage, Boston is tied for 10th. Put simply, the Celtics are smart about when and how they rebound. That's why, on the numbers that matter -- points scored per 100 possessions and points allowed per 100 possessions -- they are 10th on offense and second on defense. 
    Posted by BiasLewis[/QUOTE]

    Good post. Stats can be deceptive. Like the football team that is a league leader in rushing defense...but you look deeper and they are near the bottom in pass defense.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : Good post. Stats can be deceptive. Like the football team that is a league leader in rushing defense...but you look deeper and they are near the bottom in pass defense.
    Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    22-0  I guess it is a pretty good indicator.  Like I said I will take 25 assists and take my chances every game.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : 22-0  I guess it is a pretty good indicator.  Like I said I will take 25 assists and take my chances every game.
    Posted by OneOnOne[/QUOTE]

    34 assists today and 60% FG...you aren't beating a team with those two stats...forget it.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    Against the Kings the Celtics only had 23 assists but the Celtics still won. Why? Ray Allen had 22 points and 4 3-pointers. Every time Ray plays well the Celtics usually win.




     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from bilalkazmi. Show bilalkazmi's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]When Celtics gets 25 assists they are 21 and 0
    Posted by OneOnOne[/QUOTE]

    I have figured out an indicator that will always always work. 

    <<<drum roll />>>>

    when, at the end of the game (regulation or overtime) the Celtics have outscored the other team, the Celtics win the game.

    Man, I did thousands and thousands of iterations of neural models to figure this one out.  What do you say?
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]Against the Kings the Celtics only had 23 assists but the Celtics still won. Why? Ray Allen had 22 points and 4 3-pointers. Every time Ray plays well the Celtics usually win.
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    I read somewhere yesterday that the C's had lost one game when he hit 3 threes in a game.  They were something like 23-1
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to INDICATOR : I have figured out an indicator that will always always work.  <<<drum roll /> />>> when, at the end of the game (regulation or overtime) the Celtics have outscored the other team, the Celtics win the game. Man, I did thousands and thousands of iterations of neural models to figure this one out.  What do you say?
    Posted by bilalkazmi[/QUOTE]

     I would say your right between 90 and 100% of the time.lol
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : I read somewhere yesterday that the C's had lost one game when he hit 3 threes in a game.  They were something like 23-1
    Posted by OneOnOne[/QUOTE]

    It was at Chicago where Ray went 3-5 from 3pt land and the Celtics lost. But so far the Celtics are perfect when Ray scores 20 or more.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : It was at Chicago where Ray went 3-5 from 3pt land and the Celtics lost. But so far the Celtics are perfect when Ray scores 20 or more.
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    So we are undefeated if Ray scores 20 and the Celtic pass out 25 assists? 

    I think were undefeated in games Shaq has 10 plus rebounds too.  LOL
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: INDICATOR

    In Response to Re: INDICATOR:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: INDICATOR : So we are undefeated if Ray scores 20 and the Celtic pass out 25 assists?  I think were undefeated in games Shaq has 10 plus rebounds too.  LOL
    Posted by OneOnOne[/QUOTE]

    That's why my "indicator" only shows up when the Celtics lose. There are so many reasons why the Celtics win. But there is not a single game, this season, where the Celtics lost and Ray had 20 points or more.

    I'm more than happy if your "indicator" shows up more often than mine. I hate it when my "indicator" shows up, because it means the Celtics lost.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share