Brad’s “matadors” keep Bulls at safe distance with superior execution

Greg M. Cooper-USA Today Sports

Bad Omen: Nearly half (6 points out of 14) of Chicago’s Q1 offensive output was the direct result of a Boston Turnover – on three consecutive trips down the floor, and within the game’s first three minutes … and counter-intuitively, none of the triggering miscues was a “live-ball” TO.

The C’s were four-for-four from the floor with four TO’s after just eight possessions.

Interestingly, Coach Stevens chose to let his starting unit ride out that little storm – wisely, as it turned out, since that little “running of the Bulls” produced the game’s only ties (3) and lead changes (2). A couple of Jaylen Brown FT’s at the 7:11 mark – ironically off a Chicago TO – put the Celtics in the lead for the remaining 85 possessions.

Basic Statistical Dominance

In Monday’s game, Boston posted a superior FG%, more total rebounds and fewer Turnovers … the last time a team lost under those conditions, a center-jump followed every successful shot and the TO had yet to be invented.

The C’s have shown such across-the-board dominance on seven other occasions in this nearly half-season, including three times on the road. They’ve suffered this indignity but once – alas, last week against the Embiid-less Sixers.




Boston 113

FG: C’s – 39-83, .470
3FG: C’s – 9-23, .391
FT: C’s – 26-29, .897 [13 conversions]
TS%: C’s – .590
OR: C’s – 10 + 2 (team) [minus 1 FT rebound]
DR: C’s – 33 + 3 (team) [minus 1 FT rebound]
TO: C’s – 12 + 0 (team)
Poss: C’s – 96 {44 “Empty”}
PPP: C’s – 1.177
CV%: C’s – 52 / 96, .542
Stripes: C’s – 6 [3 conversions]
Adjusted CV%: C’s – 55 / 96, .573 {expected production, 110 points}


Chicago 101

FG: Chi – 37-81, .457
3FG: Chi – 6-25, .240
FT: Chi – 21-26, .808 [11 conversions]
TS%: Chi – .546
OR: Chi – 7 + 1 (team) [minus 0 FT rebounds]
DR: Chi – 31 + 2 (team) [minus 0 FT rebounds]
TO: Chi – 14 + 0 (team)
Poss: Chi – 98 {50 “Empty”}
PPP: Chi – 1.031
CV%: Chi – 48 / 98, .490
Stripes: Chi – 1 [0.5 conversions]
Adjusted CV%: Chi – 48.5 / 98, .495 {expected production, 97 points}


Note re Calculation & Notation:

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) – FT OR’s

“Conversions” calculation: FG’s + FT conversions

“Stripes” calculation: 3FG’s – missed FTA’s

TS% = True Shooting Percentage

PPP = Points per Possession

CV% = Conversion Percentage

Dale Zanine-USA TODAY Sports

Abacus Revelation for the Road

As the 2019-20 season eases into its mid-point, we can expect discussions regarding player mobility (i.e. deadline trades, buy-outs, and such) to accelerate – “Where Goeth Iggy?” likely the steamiest pot on the NBA’s Hot Stove.

Maybe one of Mr. Iguodala’s former Philly mates from the pre-Process days – a guy Ainge etal got a peek at last night (Hint, hint!!) – ought to be on the “Whereunto?” list as well … assuming the price is right, might not the veteran presence of Thaddeus Young be a useful addition to the C’s frontcourt rotation for this season’s stretch run?