The Algebra of the Game: Horford’s near triple-double ruffles Hawks’ feathers
Summative Equation:
Bos – 49 Conversions + [+10 “Stripes”] {14 treys “minus” 4 missed FT’s “equals” 10 stripes}
Atl – 47 Conversions + [+9 “Stripes”] {13 treys “minus” 4 missed FT’s “equals” 9 stripes}
Expected Outcome -- +2 Conversions + [+1 Stripes] = C’s win by 5 points
Actual Score: Boston 110, Atlanta 107
Summative Equation (Season-to-date):
Bos – 518 Conversions + [+65 “Stripes”] {126 treys “minus” 61 missed FT’s “equals” 65 stripes}
Opp – 479 Conversions + [+41 “Stripes”] {91 treys “minus” 50 missed FT’s “equals” 41 stripes}
Expected Outcome -- +39 Conversions + [+24 Stripes] = C’s win by (78 + 24) 102 points
Actual Score: Boston 1139, Opponents 1039
In the original blueprint for Brad Stevens’s 2017-18 squad, the Caped Crusaders were to be portrayed by Kyrie and Gordon – Hayward’s baby-face does resemble Burt Ward’s, and I doubt many would be surprised to learn that Adam West secretly believed the Earth was flat.
While the Producers continue rotating through a series of promising stand-ins for “Robin” in the early going, their Al-ford keeps coming through.
Holy Horford, Batman!
A Fourth Quarter on a Second Night
Boston entered Q4 with a 7-point edge. The teams played even (13-13) through eight trips up and down the floor. But over the next half-dozen possessions, Atlanta laid a 10-4 run on the C’s, briefly capturing the lead.
From that point, the Hawks were able to register neither back-to-back conversions nor back-to-back stops. The Celtics won the last eight possessions 11-9.
Incidentally, both teams were playing the second night of a back-to-back, the sixth time that has occurred in 21 days. (The teams shot a combined 58% from the field in Q2.)
The Algebra of the Game
1st Quarter
FG: C’s – 9-23, .391 / Atl – 9-20, .450
3FG: C’s – 3-10, .300 / Atl – 2-7, .286
FT: C’s – 5-7, .714 [3] / Atl – 5-7, .714 [2]
TO: C’s – 4 / Atl – 6
OR: C’s – 3 + 1 (team) / Atl – 1 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 26 / Atl – 27
V%: C’s – 12 / 26, .462 / Atl – 11 / 27, .407
2nd Quarter
FG: C’s – 9-18, .500 / Atl – 13-20, .650
3FG: C’s – 3-5, .600 / Atl – 1-3, .333
FT: C’s – 7-7, 1.000 [3] / Atl – 2-2, 1.000 [1]
TO: C’s – 4 / Atl – 4
OR: C’s – 0 + 1 (team) / Atl – 1 + 1 (team)
Poss: C’s – 24 / Atl – 23
CV%: C’s – 12 / 24, .500 / Atl – 14 / 23, .609
FG: C’s – 11-20, .550 / Atl – 7-21, .333
3FG: C’s – 4-9, .444 / Atl – 5-9, .556
FT: C’s – 2-2, 1.000 [1] / Atl – 2-2, 1.000 [1]
TO: C’s – 6 / Atl – 1
OR: C’s – 2 + 2 (team) / Atl – 1 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 22 / Atl – 22
CV%: C’s – 12 / 22, .545 / Atl – 8 / 22, .364
4th Quarter
FG: C’s – 10-20, .500 / Atl – 10-20, .500
FG: C’s – 4-12, .333 / Atl – 5-7, .714
FT: C’s – 4-6, .667 [3] / Atl – 7-9, .778 [4]
TO: C’s – 2 / Atl – 3
OR: C’s – 2 + 1 (team) / Atl – 2 + 2 (team)
Poss: C’s – 22 / Atl – 23
CV%: C’s – 13 / 22, .591 / Atl – 14 / 23, .609
Full Game
FG: C’s – 39-81, .481 / Atl – 39-81, .481
3FG: C’s – 14-36, .389 / Atl – 13-26, .500
FT: C’s – 18-22, .818 [10] / Atl – 16-20, .800 [8]
TO: C’s – 14 / Atl – 14
OR: C’s – 7 + 4 (team) / Atl – 5 + 3 (team)
Poss: C’s – 94 / Atl – 95
CV%: C’s – 49 / 94, .521 / Atl – 47 / 95, .495
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
If we consider team turnovers, then both the Hawks and C’s each had 14 “Errors.” Each team also made exactly 39 FG’s in 81 attempts.
These two teams are getting a reputation for this type of statistical proximity.
