Bombastic bombardiering disguises “Fundamental” flaws
In their last three games, the Boston Celtics have attempted 264 shots, exactly half of which (132) have been three-pointers, 44 per game … they’ve knocked down a more than respectable 39 percent of them.
Through six games, the Green Gang had been taking 10 fewer treys a game, making exactly one in three.
That’s what’s been getting all the attention …
… but here’s the real story, and it’s even uglier than all the hair-brained heaving.
In their last three games, Boston has surrendered 55 points off 41 Turnovers – 18.3 points per game. In their first six games, they yielded 67 points on 83 Turnovers – 11.2 points per game.
In both stretches, the C’s committed just under 14 TO’s per game.
(The Celts average about 13 ppg off an equivalent number of opponent errors.)
Unfortunately, a similarly troubling trend is revealing itself on the backboards.
During their first half-dozen games, the Celtics averaged exactly 11 Offensive Rebounds (plus about two Team OR’s), good for 11.8 “Follow-Up” points per game.
The past three outings have produced only 6.3 F-U points per game on 8.7 OR’s (plus 2.7 Team OR’s).
By contrast, the other guys have increased their per-game F-U points from 11.7 to 13.7 over the past three contests.
So – while our heroes were flaunting a downright D’Antonian style of play – the Celtics were losing 5.5 points worth of production per game on the offensive glass, 2.0 ppg on the defensive glass, and a whopping 7.1 ppg off their own TO’s. (The C’s did score 1.2 ppg more off the opposition’s TO’s.)
My simple counting machine calculates that to a 13-and-a-half-point swing on the basis of boxing out and floor balance/transition – every game.
How many times does “three” have to be greater than “two” in order to compensate for such inefficiency?
Through six games, the Green Gang had been taking 10 fewer treys a game, making exactly one in three.
That’s what’s been getting all the attention …
… but here’s the real story, and it’s even uglier than all the hair-brained heaving.
In their last three games, Boston has surrendered 55 points off 41 Turnovers – 18.3 points per game. In their first six games, they yielded 67 points on 83 Turnovers – 11.2 points per game.
In both stretches, the C’s committed just under 14 TO’s per game.
(The Celts average about 13 ppg off an equivalent number of opponent errors.)
Unfortunately, a similarly troubling trend is revealing itself on the backboards.
During their first half-dozen games, the Celtics averaged exactly 11 Offensive Rebounds (plus about two Team OR’s), good for 11.8 “Follow-Up” points per game.
The past three outings have produced only 6.3 F-U points per game on 8.7 OR’s (plus 2.7 Team OR’s).
By contrast, the other guys have increased their per-game F-U points from 11.7 to 13.7 over the past three contests.
So – while our heroes were flaunting a downright D’Antonian style of play – the Celtics were losing 5.5 points worth of production per game on the offensive glass, 2.0 ppg on the defensive glass, and a whopping 7.1 ppg off their own TO’s. (The C’s did score 1.2 ppg more off the opposition’s TO’s.)
My simple counting machine calculates that to a 13-and-a-half-point swing on the basis of boxing out and floor balance/transition – every game.
How many times does “three” have to be greater than “two” in order to compensate for such inefficiency?