Quantcast

I hope the Celtics’ revamping of their support staff last summer included hiring a good detective or two. It appears that, somewhere between Atlanta and Dallas, Brad Stevens’s parcel of “Halftime Houdini Harangues” got itself misplaced. It took Boston seven Q3 possessions to score at all, and another five before they could register a successful field goal attempt.

The C’s committed six turnovers in that third session alone, as many as they’d forced in the game’s first 36 minutes.

Summative Equation:
Bos – 49 Conversions + [8 “Stripes”] {13 treys “minus” 5 missed FT’s “equals” 8 stripes}
Dal – 47 Conversions + [4 “Stripes”] {7 treys “minus” 3 missed FT’s “equals” 4 stripes}
Expected Outcome -- +2 Conversions + [4 Stripes] = C’s win by 8 points
Actual Score: Boston 110, Dallas 102


There was an odd symmetry to Boston’s first half shooting last night. They shot a very-easy-to-compute even 50% -- 20 for 40 – conveniently separating the attempts into two neat piles of 20 per quarter.

On top of that, they had 13 makes and seven misses in Q1 (eight-for-nine on “twos”) – but then they flipped those overall numbers (7-20) in the second session. That’s kinda weird.

Summative Equation (Season-to-date):
Bos – 843 Conversions + [+102 Stripes] {197 treys minus 95 missed FT’s equals 102 stripes}
Opp – 791 Conversions + [+59 Stripes] {152 treys minus 93 missed FT’s equals 59 stripes}
Expected Outcome -- +52 Conversions + [+43 Stripes] = C’s win by (104 + 43) 147 points
Actual Score: Boston 1852, Opponents 1707

Including the final ten Q4 possessions, and kicked off with their first “follow-up” points of the game, the Celtics converted 14 of their last 21 opportunities – while Dallas was posting 11 one-and-done’s and just 5 conversions.

Game, set and match.

The Algebra of the Game

1st Quarter
FG: C’s – 13-20, .650 / Dal – 10-24, .417
3FG: C’s – 5-11, .455 / Dal – 1-5, .200
FT: C’s – 3-3, 1.000 [1] / Dal – 1-2, .500 [1]
TO: C’s – 4 / Dal – 1
OR: C’s – 0 + 0 (team) / Dal – 1 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 25 / Dal – 25
CV%: C’s – 14 / 25, .560 / Dal – 11 / 25, .440

2nd Quarter
FG: C’s – 7-20, .350 / Dal – 10-22, .455
3FG: C’s – 3-9, .333 / Dal – 4-10, .400
FT: C’s – 2-6, .333 [3] / Dal – 3-4, .750 [2]
TO: C’s – 4 / Dal – 2
OR: C’s – 2 + 0 (team) / Dal – 1 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 25 / Dal – 25
CV%: C’s – 10 / 25, .400 / Dal – 12 / 25, .480

Our Dirk-to-be?
3rd Quarter
FG: C’s – 3-14, .214 / Dal – 10-22, .455
3FG: C’s – 1-5, .200 / Dal – 2-6, .333
FT: C’s – 9-9, 1.000 [4] / Dal – 6-6, 1.000 [2]
TO: C’s – 6 / Dal – 3
OR: C’s – 0 + 0 (team) / Dal – 3 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 24 / Dal – 24
CV%: C’s – 7 / 24, .292 / Dal – 12 / 24, .500

4th Quarter
FG: C’s – 10-21, .476 / Dal – 7-17, .412
3FG: C’s – 4-10, .400 / Dal – 0-7, .000
FT: C’s – 3-3, 1.000 [1] / Dal – 5-6, .833 [2]
TO: C’s – 3 / Dal – 5
OR: C’s – 3 + 0 (team) / Dal – 2 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 22 / Dal – 22
CV%: C’s – 11 / 22, .500 / Dal – 9 / 22, .409

Overtime
FG: C’s – 5-9, .555 / Dal – 2-11, .182
3FG: C’s – 0-1, .000 / Dal – 0-5, .000
FT: C’s – 4-5, .800 [2] / Dal – 2-2, 1.000 [1]
TO: C’s – 0 / Dal – 0
OR: C’s – 0 + 0 (team) / Dal – 1 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 11 / Dal – 11
CV%: C’s – 7 / 11, .636 / Dal – 3 / 11, .273

Full Game
FG: C’s – 38-84, .452 / Dal – 37-78, .474
3FG: C’s – 13-36, .361 / Dal – 9-24, .375
FT: C’s – 21-26, .808 [11] / Dal – 16-20, .800 [8]
TO: C’s – 17 / Dal – 14
OR: C’s – 5 + 0 (team) / Dal – 6 + 3 (team)
Poss: C’s – 107 / Dal – 107
CV%: C’s – 49 / 107, .458 / Dal – 47 / 107, .439


Note re Calculations:
The number of “possessions” is an accurate count, not a formula-based estimated value.

For purposes of clarity, the bracketed digit following the FT% is the exact count of “conversions” represented by those FTA’s.

“Possessions” calculation: FGA’s + FT conversions + TO’s – OR’s (including Team OR’s)
“Conversions” calculation: FG’s + FT conversions


Abacus Revelation for the Road

Algebraically, Boston should have won this game by one point in regulation time.

After 48 minutes, the Mavs had a two-conversion edge (44-42), worth an expected four points. But the C’s 13 treys against four missed FT’s earns nine “stripes” against the Mavs’ (7 minus 3) four, a gain of five points for the good guys.

The outcome would appear to affirm Rasheed’s favorite phrase, eh?

Abacus Reveals 11/21/2017 03:43:00 PM Edit
_________________________________________________________________________
« Prev Post Next Post »

Recent Posts
_______________________________________________________________________________________

comments powered by Disqus