Our offense needs to move faster.

[Celtics2021]

Looking at the "four factors" of offense:

eFG%:  5th (tied)
TO%: 5th (tied)
ORB%:  16th (tied)
FT/FGA:  15th

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2024.html

(Defensively, we ranked 2nd, 27th, 7th and 1st)

So we make a high percentage of shots (or, more precisely, our shot attempts have a higher expected value based on how frequently we make them and how frequently they’re worth 3 points) and our stagnant offense helps prevent turnovers, but because we’re on the perimeter taking jump shots we don’t excel at offensive rebounding or drawing free throws.  Is that a reasonable conclusion from looking at four numbers?

[tenn_smoothie]

Been saying this for 3 seasons. We play so slow.

Just boggles my mind how a few fundamental changes in playing style would make a good team significantly better.
Obvious, glaring tendencies that cost us games (and more importantly, titles).
The guy I point to most responsible for this issue is Brad. He's always been a small-ball college guy who loves 3-point shooting and ignores our habit of bad shot selection. He coached that way and has now endorsed a head coach who is worse about bad offensive habits than he was.

Do you think Mazzulla(and Stevens, by extension) would endorse the same offensive strategies for the Celtics if their best players were Karl Anthony Towns, Rudy Gobert, and Anthony Edwards?

Really interesting question.

I'm gonna say, yes, Mazzulla would still stress a 3-point heavy offense, even though though Minny's players are not as well suited for that style as the Celtics might be. Remember Joe stating in a post-game presser last season that he believed the number of 3-point attempts was the most important stat in basketball. The Celtics do so much better when they balance the perimeter shooting with driving to the rim and entering the ball inside to create at least some low-post offense, even if that is an 8 ft. fallaway. They also need to be shooting more free throws. I believe our one-dimensional offense that often stagnates in the playoffs is the main reason this group has yet to win a title. The game 4 loss vs Golden State in the finals when we had them on the ropes and playing at home is the perfect example.

[ozgod]

Been saying this for 3 seasons. We play so slow.

Just boggles my mind how a few fundamental changes in playing style would make a good team significantly better.
Obvious, glaring tendencies that cost us games (and more importantly, titles).
The guy I point to most responsible for this issue is Brad. He's always been a small-ball college guy who loves 3-point shooting and ignores our habit of bad shot selection. He coached that way and has now endorsed a head coach who is worse about bad offensive habits than he was.

Do you think Mazzulla(and Stevens, by extension) would endorse the same offensive strategies for the Celtics if their best players were Karl Anthony Towns, Rudy Gobert, and Anthony Edwards?

Really interesting question.

I'm gonna say, yes, Mazzulla would still stress a 3-point heavy offense, even though though Minny's players are not as well suited for that style as the Celtics might be. Remember Joe stating in a post-game presser last season that he believed the number of 3-point attempts was the most important stat in basketball. The Celtics do so much better when they balance the perimeter shooting with driving to the rim and entering the ball inside to create at least some low-post offense, even if that is an 8 ft. fallaway. They also need to be shooting more free throws. I believe our one-dimensional offense that often stagnates in the playoffs is the main reason this group has yet to win a title. The game 4 loss vs Golden State in the finals when we had them on the ropes and playing at home is the perfect example.

Interesting question for sure. I don't think he is that dogmatic that he would force a strategy that his team is ill-suited to execute. What I do think he would do is push hard to trade for the type of players that would allow him to execute the philosophy better - players that can allow them to have spacing, which is his No.1 thing, and players that can hit those shots. I do feel that he thinks that having players that create spacing and allow them to take a lot of perimeter shots, be it from high pick and rolls or from drive and kicks, is one of his guiding principles (along with creating mismatches and taking advantage via iso or post up plays).

Though...if you look at Minny's roster and ours and compare our % from 3 they are quite similar (with the exception of Gobert) so yes, he probably would use the same strategy with them as with us:




Kat would probably take on the KP role, Edwards the Tatum role, Conley would be Jrue, NAW would be Derrick White and McDaniels would be a poor man's Jaylen. Gobert would be a non-shooting Horford.

What's ironic about the whole "we have to play faster" is that Joe tends to bring that up a lot in post game interviews that when we win it's because our pace is high and we're pushing the ball up, instead of walking it up. And that happens when we have guys like Jrue or Derrick bringing the ball up. Obviously pace is quicker when our defense is better because you can push the ball after the opposition misses, less so when you have to inbounds it...but what I feel affects us more is because players like JT and JB tend to be more deliberate, they hold the ball longer and dribble it longer in the halfcourt. It's something that I think the team has been working to get out of them but old habits die hard.

Also, as a final observation I feel Joe was saying (and does say) a lot of things glibly to the media because he tends to react to an undesirable line of questioning in a sarcastic and immature way by exaggerating things. Less so this year (I think they made him go through a PR course) but you see it now and then. I believe that that exchange you mention came after Gary Washburn was pressing Joe on why his team took a lot of 3s when they were missing and he said "well Gary the 3 point shot is the most important shot in basketball". Just like when Gary asked him about Tatum's missed layup during the Denver loss and he replied by saying "but Gary I thought you thought we took too many 3s and wanted us to take more layups". Silly stuff but at least he hasn't done as much of it this year (probably because we've not lost as much this year - it's when we lose and he gets grilled that that habit of his tends to pop up). That's why I tend not to pay as much attention to what the coach is saying and more on what the team is actually doing 

[BitterJim]

Looking at the "four factors" of offense:

eFG%:  5th (tied)
TO%: 5th (tied)
ORB%:  16th (tied)
FT/FGA:  15th

https://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2024.html

(Defensively, we ranked 2nd, 27th, 7th and 1st)

So we make a high percentage of shots (or, more precisely, our shot attempts have a higher expected value based on how frequently we make them and how frequently they’re worth 3 points) and our stagnant offense helps prevent turnovers, but because we’re on the perimeter taking jump shots we don’t excel at offensive rebounding or drawing free throws.  Is that a reasonable conclusion from looking at four numbers?

I wouldn't attribute the ORBs to just our spread offense, we're a good defensive team which typically means getting back to set the defense instead of crashing the offensive glass. Honestly, middle-of-the-pack is way better than I expected our ORB% to be

[footey]

Been saying this for 3 seasons. We play so slow.

Just boggles my mind how a few fundamental changes in playing style would make a good team significantly better.
Obvious, glaring tendencies that cost us games (and more importantly, titles).
The guy I point to most responsible for this issue is Brad. He's always been a small-ball college guy who loves 3-point shooting and ignores our habit of bad shot selection. He coached that way and has now endorsed a head coach who is worse about bad offensive habits than he was.

Do you think Mazzulla(and Stevens, by extension) would endorse the same offensive strategies for the Celtics if their best players were Karl Anthony Towns, Rudy Gobert, and Anthony Edwards?

Really interesting question.

I'm gonna say, yes, Mazzulla would still stress a 3-point heavy offense, even though though Minny's players are not as well suited for that style as the Celtics might be. Remember Joe stating in a post-game presser last season that he believed the number of 3-point attempts was the most important stat in basketball. The Celtics do so much better when they balance the perimeter shooting with driving to the rim and entering the ball inside to create at least some low-post offense, even if that is an 8 ft. fallaway. They also need to be shooting more free throws. I believe our one-dimensional offense that often stagnates in the playoffs is the main reason this group has yet to win a title. The game 4 loss vs Golden State in the finals when we had them on the ropes and playing at home is the perfect example.

game 4 loss to Rockets is on Ime, not Joe.
Isn't that why Brad traded for Porzingis? To give our offense more post presence? (He has said as much). 
Every team is shooting more 3s today vs a couple of years ago.  It is why the offensive team records keep getting broken.
We are on a pace to win 64 games this season, without factoring strength of schedule. Which would be the most since 07/08 and 2nd most since 85/86 (both championship seasons).
Why is everyone crying here? Enjoy how well this team is playing in the context of this 3-happy era. 

[liam]

Been saying this for 3 seasons. We play so slow.

Just boggles my mind how a few fundamental changes in playing style would make a good team significantly better.
Obvious, glaring tendencies that cost us games (and more importantly, titles).
The guy I point to most responsible for this issue is Brad. He's always been a small-ball college guy who loves 3-point shooting and ignores our habit of bad shot selection. He coached that way and has now endorsed a head coach who is worse about bad offensive habits than he was.

Do you think Mazzulla(and Stevens, by extension) would endorse the same offensive strategies for the Celtics if their best players were Karl Anthony Towns, Rudy Gobert, and Anthony Edwards?

Really interesting question.

I'm gonna say, yes, Mazzulla would still stress a 3-point heavy offense, even though though Minny's players are not as well suited for that style as the Celtics might be. Remember Joe stating in a post-game presser last season that he believed the number of 3-point attempts was the most important stat in basketball. The Celtics do so much better when they balance the perimeter shooting with driving to the rim and entering the ball inside to create at least some low-post offense, even if that is an 8 ft. fallaway. They also need to be shooting more free throws. I believe our one-dimensional offense that often stagnates in the playoffs is the main reason this group has yet to win a title. The game 4 loss vs Golden State in the finals when we had them on the ropes and playing at home is the perfect example.

game 4 loss to Rockets is on Ime, not Joe.
Isn't that why Brad traded for Porzingis? To give our offense more post presence? (He has said as much). 
Every team is shooting more 3s today vs a couple of years ago.  It is why the offensive team records keep getting broken.
We are on a pace to win 64 games this season, without factoring strength of schedule. Which would be the most since 07/08 and 2nd most since 85/86 (both championship seasons).
Why is everyone crying here? Enjoy how well this team is playing in the context of this 3-happy era.

I'm ecstatic about the way we are playing this year. I really like it when we play fast and we run deep into the bench. But with 10 losses so far there is very little to nitpick about.

[GetLucky]

You know your coach is doing well when people have to think about his hypothetical response to coaching a hypothetical team of completely different players to complain.

[Big333223]

I think the most recent Miami game is a good example of how the offense looks when it speeds up a little. The ball moved and the C's were unstoppable. I'd love to see them play like that every night.

[Roy H.]

I think the most recent Miami game is a good example of how the offense looks when it speeds up a little. The ball moved and the C's were unstoppable. I'd love to see them play like that every night.

I don't think shooting like that is sustainable.  I don't think it was due to speed, or great decision making, or an amazing scheme.  We just had one of the best shooting nights in the history of the franchise.

[Yuckabuck33]

I think the most recent Miami game is a good example of how the offense looks when it speeds up a little. The ball moved and the C's were unstoppable. I'd love to see them play like that every night.

I don't think shooting like that is sustainable.  I don't think it was due to speed, or great decision making, or an amazing scheme.  We just had one of the best shooting nights in the history of the franchise.

The point of the comparison is that we don't necessarily need to shoot as we did against Miami as long as we're creating the same kind of shots. When we play faster and move the ball, we get good shots and even if we shoot a lower percentage than the Miami game we should win. Against the Clippers it didn't even look like the team was running the same offense as the previous game.

[Roy H.]

I think the most recent Miami game is a good example of how the offense looks when it speeds up a little. The ball moved and the C's were unstoppable. I'd love to see them play like that every night.

I don't think shooting like that is sustainable.  I don't think it was due to speed, or great decision making, or an amazing scheme.  We just had one of the best shooting nights in the history of the franchise.

The point of the comparison is that we don't necessarily need to shoot as we did against Miami as long as we're creating the same kind of shots. When we play faster and move the ball, we get good shots and even if we shoot a lower percentage than the Miami game we should win. Against the Clippers it didn't even look like the team was running the same offense as the previous game.

Eh.  I think our team usually gets "good" outside shots.  The problem generally is that outside shots made are highly variable and less reliable.

[tenn_smoothie]

You know your coach is doing well when people have to think about his hypothetical response to coaching a hypothetical team of completely different players to complain.

The hypothetical question was not mine.
But here is a non-hypothetical - Mazzulla would be an incompetent head coach for any NBA team.

[Kernewek]

You know your coach is doing well when people have to think about his hypothetical response to coaching a hypothetical team of completely different players to complain.

It's not a complaint though.

Let me give you some more context. When I think of inflexible coaching strategies, I think of Kurt Rambis.

If we all dust the cobwebs off a bit, we should be able to remember when Kurt Rambis came back to coach the Timberwolves from '09-'11 and tried to run the Triangle offense with a team that was absolutely ill-equipped to run it. The Wolves proceeded to go 32-132. He followed Phil Jackson to New York, tried to implement the triangle again in '15-'16, went 9-19, and has subsequently never coached an NBA team again.

Some of the best blogs from the time have gone under, but you can still read some of the coverage here  or here or here- in short, Rambis obviously didn't think that the triangle was the problem. I doubt he does today, either.

The glaring problem, obvious to mostly everyone else, was (and is) that the triangle requires players with a particular skill set and an NBA with a particular rule set to be as good as it can be. Rambis trying to run the triangle with Jonny Flynn and Kevin Love is the definition of a square peg round hole - surely if you have a great pick-and-roll point guard and a great pick-and-roll power forward you want to run a PnR-focused offense.

But Rambis's inflexibility absolutely hampered that team (and arguably did a serious number on Flynn's career). I wonder if posters here think Joe is that dogmatic about his offensive approach.

[Roy H.]

I wonder if posters here think Joe is that dogmatic about his offensive approach.

As in, would Joe run a 3PT centric offense if his best players weren't good outside shooters?

I suspect he would.  Last year our top three volume 3PT shooters shot .350, .335, and .336.   

Or, would he have his players concentrate on 3PTs when they have other elite skills?  KP might be an example of that.

[Kernewek]

I wonder if posters here think Joe is that dogmatic about his offensive approach.

As in, would Joe run a 3PT centric offense if his best players weren't good outside shooters?

I suspect he would.  Last year our top three volume 3PT shooters shot .350, .335, and .336.   

Or, would he have his players concentrate on 3PTs when they have other elite skills?  KP might be an example of that.

The bolded is something of a textbook example of the stats not telling the full story, though, given that the Celtics shot .377 as a team from deep last year - good for sixth in the league overall and second among "3PT-centric" teams (teams that shot 'a lot' of threes, wherever you define that cutoff).

In that context, it would be pretty difficult to say that the Celtics roster was not (and is not) good at shooting from deep.

However, when I thought of the question I was more focused on thinking about how the offence might look if our most talented players weren't a pair of wings. Are there players who are not playing as best as they possibly could because of Mazzula's offensive philosophy? That sort of thing.