In games Celtics shoot above 43.5%, they are 13-0. In games they shoot under that percentage, they are 0-4.
If the Celtics take on average 89 shots per game, that would equate to needing 39 shots made to pass this threshold.
If they take 43 3’s per game and make about 15 (34.8%)
Then as long as they shoot 24/46 (52.1%) from 2, that would get them to 39/89
This equates to 93 points, and if you add their average of 17 FTM per game, the Celtics should win the vast majority of their games when scoring 110+ points.
They have won all 9 games they have scored at least 110 points in regulation this season.
I wonder if busting your ass and moving without the ball might impact such a stat? I wonder if moving the ball might help?
The Celtics are one of the most visually apparent momentum teams I’ve ever seen: when they’re all moving around, they win, and win comfortably. The moment you see them standing around (esp. on the offensive end, but defense too), they start getting in trouble.
It’s been like this across multiple seasons. I do not understand how it perpetuates.
To be fair, we have excellent isolation players.
Tatum scores 1.12 points per possession in isolation. He’s in the same ballpark as SGA is this season. He also put up 1.11 PPP in the playoffs. Even Brown and White put up good isolation numbers in last year’s playoffs.
I think the idea is to make the game simpler. Tatum is a 6’10” wing who can handle the ball and almost always draws a double when he’s on an island, and the thing about isolation is spacing is more important. Celtics would rather drive and kick and play to their strengths of making it easier to read defensive motions. It’s not that cutting and a motion offense can’t be effective, I think it just plays to the Celtics strengths to go 1-on-1 because they have a lot of really good 1-on-1 players.
They’ve won 50+ games the last 2 seasons and made deep playoff runs and will likely do so again this year.
I agree they can get into trouble when not giving effort, but some of that can be attributed to the schedule. Their worst offensive games so far this season were all 3+ games into a road trip (Philadelphia, Memphis, Charlotte) and then against the best 2 defenses in the league (Minnesota and Orlando). A lot of teams struggle in those spots. Almost every other game they’ve played has been good offensively.
So overall, I think they have some things to work out against teams with length (Orlando, Minnesota, Toronto) but in the playoffs when both teams have the same schedule, they won’t be at that disadvantage.
A good test is if they fall flat with their home schedule coming up in December against Cleveland and Orlando twice each. That should be a week where they figure some of their problems out.
I agree with what you posted, but will simply say: in no universe do you ever, ever abandon off-ball work because you have good iso players.
Those aren’t in opposition - it’s combining the two that enables you to win more than the other guy.
The issue is neither temporary, and has nothing to do with schedule. The Celtics have had this problem for at least 2+ years, and I’d claim more.
Many fans are very, very focused on the ball and that’s how they watch the game. “Did he score?” The amount of attention given her to on-ball plays and stats is incredibly disproportionate.