Celtics Regular Season News

[ozgod]

How will they manage to play the knockouts before Dec 9 without putting extra games on for teams that happen to make the elimination rounds, but might only play each other once or twice a season and may have already done so? Are they going to manipulate the schedule?

Not quite sure your question, but next week 28 teams will play two games and 2 teams will play three games, as follows:

If you do not make the elimination rounds, you will play a home game against a fellow team that did not make it, and an away game against another such team.  They will prioritize matching up teams that only play each other three times, but there will be some inter conference third games or maybe some divisional fifth games.

If you make the quarterfinals and are eliminated, you’ll play an extra game against the other quarterfinalist from your conference. 

If you make the semis, you play one game in Vegas.

If you make the finals, you play two games in Vegas and the second counts only for the in-season tournament and not the regular season.

I think you kind of answered my question, but just to clarify...I was wondering how they would set the schedule such that teams who have to play each other in the quarters and semis end up doing so before Dec 9, when the regular season game schedule is already set. Like if you look at our schedule:



So let's say we somehow end up making the QF. Will they change our matchup against Chicago or Philly, currently set for Dec 1 and Dec 12? Or is that why there are only 80 games scheduled so far? So they can put in games in between Dec 1 and Dec 12?

So for the sake of argument, let's say we had to play Philly who are in Group A (we are in Group C). So they will add a game vs Philly to our schedule, meaning we could end up playing them 5 times this season?

This is the part that's a little confusing, because they're trying to double up regular season games and tournament games, so as not to add to the workload...in soccer the cup/tournament games are all separate, in addition to regular season games. I guess it will make more sense when it actually happens and I can see what they do.

[Surferdad]

As for this IST....I hope Boston misses it. They need the rest and not two extra games for a meaningless made up marketing ploy.

There’s no rest for missing it.  A team that doesn’t make it to the next round will play two regular season games against other teams who don’t make it during the same week as the tournament quarters and semis.

Teams that make the finals play one extra game, right?  Everybody else sticks at 82?

Correct.  The one extra game doesn't count in the standings.

Do the stats count for the players or is this completely an exhibition game?  This might end up being closer to an All-Star game level of intensity than a playoff game level.  For a regular season game, if a player is banged up at all, they keep him out  where if it was a playoff game, maybe they play.  I don't see any player being pushed to play in this game by the team, even less than a run of the mill regular season game.

Yeah, it's going to be interesting to see how seriously teams take it. 

Prizing and League Honors

For the 2023-24 season, the In-Season Tournament prize pool will be allocated to the players on the teams that participate in the Knockout Rounds, with allocations increasing depending on how far a team progresses in the tournament.

At the conclusion of the In-Season Tournament, the NBA will name the Most Valuable Player of the competition and the All-Tournament Team. Selection will be based on the players’ performance in both Group Play and the Knockout Rounds.

What do players get for winning? The players on the winning team will each get $500,000, while the runners-up will get $200,000. The losing players of the semifinals will each get $100,000, and the losing players of the quarterfinals will each get $50,000.

I guess it depends mostly on how serious players are about that extra $300,000 for winning (or extra $100,000 - $400,000 for making the Finals).

That's a lot of money if you are Dalano Banton or Lamar Stevens so they would be motivated to play. I don't see why KP or any other highly paid player wants to win (KP said that). I would play players 8 through 15. In other words, make this joke of tournament into a laughing stock. That's how I feel about the IST.

[Goldstar88]

Bobby Manning: Joe Mazzulla said Kristaps Porzingis (calf) is taking it day-by-day and is feeling better. His absence isn’t over an abundance of caution, but Joe thinks Porzingis will be ok.– via Twitter RealBobManning

[SCeltic34]

Celts are down to 18th in the league in 3-point shooting %, but remain 2nd in 3-point attempts per game.  We haven't played particularly well since the Toronto game on the road (at least IMO, we're playing below our capabilities).  Since that game, or the past 6 games, we're one of the worst 3-point shooting teams in the league at 26th, shooting just 33% from 3.  Our key players aren't shooting the 3 particularly well recently.

KP's 3-point shooting % over his past 10 games is only 25%.  His season % is down to 32.4%, even after a hot start to the season.
JB is only 33% in his last 10 games.  Season % is down to 34.2%.
White is only 32.7% in his last 10 games.  Season % is down to 38%, which is obviously still good after an unsustainable start.
Holiday is only at 33.8% for the season.
Horford is not shooting the 3 well.  31.5% for the season.
PP seems to have found his shooting stroke, but only up to 32.2%

The only person who is shooting well is Hauser, and to a lesser extent Tatum.  Hence I feel fortunate that we still have the best record in the league give how many 3's we take per game. 

Reminds me a bit of last season when we got off to a really good start, then our shooting numbers regressed.  But we shouldn't continue to shoot the ball this poorly.  And I see a lot of areas for improvement beyond our 3 point shooting.

[Celtics2021]

How will they manage to play the knockouts before Dec 9 without putting extra games on for teams that happen to make the elimination rounds, but might only play each other once or twice a season and may have already done so? Are they going to manipulate the schedule?

Not quite sure your question, but next week 28 teams will play two games and 2 teams will play three games, as follows:

If you do not make the elimination rounds, you will play a home game against a fellow team that did not make it, and an away game against another such team.  They will prioritize matching up teams that only play each other three times, but there will be some inter conference third games or maybe some divisional fifth games.

If you make the quarterfinals and are eliminated, you’ll play an extra game against the other quarterfinalist from your conference. 

If you make the semis, you play one game in Vegas.

If you make the finals, you play two games in Vegas and the second counts only for the in-season tournament and not the regular season.

I think you kind of answered my question, but just to clarify...I was wondering how they would set the schedule such that teams who have to play each other in the quarters and semis end up doing so before Dec 9, when the regular season game schedule is already set. Like if you look at our schedule:



So let's say we somehow end up making the QF. Will they change our matchup against Chicago or Philly, currently set for Dec 1 and Dec 12? Or is that why there are only 80 games scheduled so far? So they can put in games in between Dec 1 and Dec 12?

So for the sake of argument, let's say we had to play Philly who are in Group A (we are in Group C). So they will add a game vs Philly to our schedule, meaning we could end up playing them 5 times this season?

This is the part that's a little confusing, because they're trying to double up regular season games and tournament games, so as not to add to the workload...in soccer the cup/tournament games are all separate, in addition to regular season games. I guess it will make more sense when it actually happens and I can see what they do.

That’s why there are only 80 games scheduled so far.  There are no scheduled games for any team from December 3rd through 10th, so no one needs to shift their schedule around.  The quarters will be the 4th and 5th, the semis the 7th, and the finals the 9th.  So those not in the tournament will all play on the 6th and the 8th.

[ozgod]

How will they manage to play the knockouts before Dec 9 without putting extra games on for teams that happen to make the elimination rounds, but might only play each other once or twice a season and may have already done so? Are they going to manipulate the schedule?

Not quite sure your question, but next week 28 teams will play two games and 2 teams will play three games, as follows:

If you do not make the elimination rounds, you will play a home game against a fellow team that did not make it, and an away game against another such team.  They will prioritize matching up teams that only play each other three times, but there will be some inter conference third games or maybe some divisional fifth games.

If you make the quarterfinals and are eliminated, you’ll play an extra game against the other quarterfinalist from your conference. 

If you make the semis, you play one game in Vegas.

If you make the finals, you play two games in Vegas and the second counts only for the in-season tournament and not the regular season.

I think you kind of answered my question, but just to clarify...I was wondering how they would set the schedule such that teams who have to play each other in the quarters and semis end up doing so before Dec 9, when the regular season game schedule is already set. Like if you look at our schedule:



So let's say we somehow end up making the QF. Will they change our matchup against Chicago or Philly, currently set for Dec 1 and Dec 12? Or is that why there are only 80 games scheduled so far? So they can put in games in between Dec 1 and Dec 12?

So for the sake of argument, let's say we had to play Philly who are in Group A (we are in Group C). So they will add a game vs Philly to our schedule, meaning we could end up playing them 5 times this season?

This is the part that's a little confusing, because they're trying to double up regular season games and tournament games, so as not to add to the workload...in soccer the cup/tournament games are all separate, in addition to regular season games. I guess it will make more sense when it actually happens and I can see what they do.

That’s why there are only 80 games scheduled so far.  There are no scheduled games for any team from December 3rd through 10th, so no one needs to shift their schedule around.  The quarters will be the 4th and 5th, the semis the 7th, and the finals the 9th.  So those not in the tournament will all play on the 6th and the 8th.

Thanks, TP for the great explanation!

[Goldstar88]

Bobby Manning: Joe Mazzulla said he decided to go for the #InSeasonTournament when they were on the verge of winning by the needed margin. The players told him they wanted to go for it. – via Twitter RealBobManning
 
Jared Weiss: Celtics players are cheering in the locker room as they clinch the IST berth with the Nets win. – via Twitter JaredWeissNBA

[Vermont Green]

So 18 games in (22% of season) and we are 14-4 (on pace for 64 wins).  I would say that our new star players, Porzingis and Holiday, are both smashing successes.  The added bench guys (Brissett, Stevens, Mykhailiuk, Banton), not so much.

On the outgoing players, RWill is hurt again, Smart has been hurt most of the season, Brogdon is playing well but has missed a fair amount, and Grant started strong but has cooled off.

Overall, things are great, we have the best record, the best point differential, and are the favorite to win the title per Vegas.  But there are a couple of things that are concerning.  The lack of a decent 3rd big is one but still time to address this.  I don't like that we are 1st in team 3PA but only 16th in 3P%.  We are 4th in EFG% and TS% so we are still scoring efficiently, but I also don't like that we are 21st in FTA.  Bottom line, we are living and dying by the 3 again even though we are not one of the better 3PT shooting teams.

I also have some concern with ORebs.  We are giving up more (10.8 ORebs) than we are getting (10.3).  We are missing an average of 49 shots per game while our opponents are missing 51 shots per game.  I am not all that concerned, I think this is a byproduct of playing small.  So if this is the magnitude of the rebounding penalty, that is OK but there have been more games lately where we have been loosing the OReb battle by bigger margins.

[BitterJim]

So 18 games in (22% of season) and we are 14-4 (on pace for 64 wins).  I would say that our new star players, Porzingis and Holiday, are both smashing successes.  The added bench guys (Brissett, Stevens, Mykhailiuk, Banton), not so much.

On the outgoing players, RWill is hurt again, Smart has been hurt most of the season, Brogdon is playing well but has missed a fair amount, and Grant started strong but has cooled off.

Overall, things are great, we have the best record, the best point differential, and are the favorite to win the title per Vegas.  But there are a couple of things that are concerning.  The lack of a decent 3rd big is one but still time to address this.  I don't like that we are 1st in team 3PA but only 16th in 3P%.  We are 4th in EFG% and TS% so we are still scoring efficiently, but I also don't like that we are 21st in FTA.  Bottom line, we are living and dying by the 3 again even though we are not one of the better 3PT shooting teams.

I also have some concern with ORebs.  We are giving up more (10.8 ORebs) than we are getting (10.3).  We are missing an average of 49 shots per game while our opponents are missing 51 shots per game.  I am not all that concerned, I think this is a byproduct of playing small.  So if this is the magnitude of the rebounding penalty, that is OK but there have been more games lately where we have been loosing the OReb battle by bigger margins.

Are we, though? If we are 4th in EFG% and TS% despite being slightly below average in 3P% and FTrate, then that means we're extremely efficient inside the arc. We should probably move some of those 3s to 2s, but it's also possible that the threat of our 3 point shooting is what is making us so efficient in the paint (and overall).

I'd be concerned if we were up in efficiency only because of unsustainable 3 point shooting, but this seems pretty sustainable. My biggest concern is how effective/efficient our offense is if teams collapse in and ignore the threat of our 3 point shooters, can we hit enough 3s to make them pay?

[Vermont Green]

So 18 games in (22% of season) and we are 14-4 (on pace for 64 wins).  I would say that our new star players, Porzingis and Holiday, are both smashing successes.  The added bench guys (Brissett, Stevens, Mykhailiuk, Banton), not so much.

On the outgoing players, RWill is hurt again, Smart has been hurt most of the season, Brogdon is playing well but has missed a fair amount, and Grant started strong but has cooled off.

Overall, things are great, we have the best record, the best point differential, and are the favorite to win the title per Vegas.  But there are a couple of things that are concerning.  The lack of a decent 3rd big is one but still time to address this.  I don't like that we are 1st in team 3PA but only 16th in 3P%.  We are 4th in EFG% and TS% so we are still scoring efficiently, but I also don't like that we are 21st in FTA.  Bottom line, we are living and dying by the 3 again even though we are not one of the better 3PT shooting teams.

I also have some concern with ORebs.  We are giving up more (10.8 ORebs) than we are getting (10.3).  We are missing an average of 49 shots per game while our opponents are missing 51 shots per game.  I am not all that concerned, I think this is a byproduct of playing small.  So if this is the magnitude of the rebounding penalty, that is OK but there have been more games lately where we have been loosing the OReb battle by bigger margins.

Are we, though? If we are 4th in EFG% and TS% despite being slightly below average in 3P% and FTrate, then that means we're extremely efficient inside the arc. We should probably move some of those 3s to 2s, but it's also possible that the threat of our 3 point shooting is what is making us so efficient in the paint (and overall).

I'd be concerned if we were up in efficiency only because of unsustainable 3 point shooting, but this seems pretty sustainable. My biggest concern is how effective/efficient our offense is if teams collapse in and ignore the threat of our 3 point shooters, can we hit enough 3s to make them pay?

That is my point, we are still taking too many 3s.  We should still take the higher percentage 3s but pass on some of the lower percentage 3s.  Better to take more, higher percentage 2s and get to the line more.  I am talking about 10% of the shots, not something drastic.  Porzingis is probably helping with our 2-point shot percentage.

[BitterJim]

So 18 games in (22% of season) and we are 14-4 (on pace for 64 wins).  I would say that our new star players, Porzingis and Holiday, are both smashing successes.  The added bench guys (Brissett, Stevens, Mykhailiuk, Banton), not so much.

On the outgoing players, RWill is hurt again, Smart has been hurt most of the season, Brogdon is playing well but has missed a fair amount, and Grant started strong but has cooled off.

Overall, things are great, we have the best record, the best point differential, and are the favorite to win the title per Vegas.  But there are a couple of things that are concerning.  The lack of a decent 3rd big is one but still time to address this.  I don't like that we are 1st in team 3PA but only 16th in 3P%.  We are 4th in EFG% and TS% so we are still scoring efficiently, but I also don't like that we are 21st in FTA.  Bottom line, we are living and dying by the 3 again even though we are not one of the better 3PT shooting teams.

I also have some concern with ORebs.  We are giving up more (10.8 ORebs) than we are getting (10.3).  We are missing an average of 49 shots per game while our opponents are missing 51 shots per game.  I am not all that concerned, I think this is a byproduct of playing small.  So if this is the magnitude of the rebounding penalty, that is OK but there have been more games lately where we have been loosing the OReb battle by bigger margins.

Are we, though? If we are 4th in EFG% and TS% despite being slightly below average in 3P% and FTrate, then that means we're extremely efficient inside the arc. We should probably move some of those 3s to 2s, but it's also possible that the threat of our 3 point shooting is what is making us so efficient in the paint (and overall).

I'd be concerned if we were up in efficiency only because of unsustainable 3 point shooting, but this seems pretty sustainable. My biggest concern is how effective/efficient our offense is if teams collapse in and ignore the threat of our 3 point shooters, can we hit enough 3s to make them pay?

That is my point, we are still taking too many 3s.  We should still take the higher percentage 3s but pass on some of the lower percentage 3s.  Better to take more, higher percentage 2s and get to the line more.  I am talking about 10% of the shots, not something drastic.  Porzingis is probably helping with our 2-point shot percentage.

But if we stop taking less efficient 3s (say, above the break), how much would that impact how teams defended us? If they start cheating off of their man for above the break 3s, that would hurt our defense pretty significantly. It like running in football: you need to do it enough to keep the defenses honest and help your passing game. That amount might not be where passing and running are equally efficient.

Overall,though. I think a small change would be good, maybe 10% is that number (it would still have us in the top ~8 for 3PA/game). As long as that comes from a focus on making the extra pass to a better shot (or driving to draw in other defenders and create a better shot), and not just passing up a "okay" shots without a better sht available.

[Vermont Green]

So 18 games in (22% of season) and we are 14-4 (on pace for 64 wins).  I would say that our new star players, Porzingis and Holiday, are both smashing successes.  The added bench guys (Brissett, Stevens, Mykhailiuk, Banton), not so much.

On the outgoing players, RWill is hurt again, Smart has been hurt most of the season, Brogdon is playing well but has missed a fair amount, and Grant started strong but has cooled off.

Overall, things are great, we have the best record, the best point differential, and are the favorite to win the title per Vegas.  But there are a couple of things that are concerning.  The lack of a decent 3rd big is one but still time to address this.  I don't like that we are 1st in team 3PA but only 16th in 3P%.  We are 4th in EFG% and TS% so we are still scoring efficiently, but I also don't like that we are 21st in FTA.  Bottom line, we are living and dying by the 3 again even though we are not one of the better 3PT shooting teams.

I also have some concern with ORebs.  We are giving up more (10.8 ORebs) than we are getting (10.3).  We are missing an average of 49 shots per game while our opponents are missing 51 shots per game.  I am not all that concerned, I think this is a byproduct of playing small.  So if this is the magnitude of the rebounding penalty, that is OK but there have been more games lately where we have been loosing the OReb battle by bigger margins.

Are we, though? If we are 4th in EFG% and TS% despite being slightly below average in 3P% and FTrate, then that means we're extremely efficient inside the arc. We should probably move some of those 3s to 2s, but it's also possible that the threat of our 3 point shooting is what is making us so efficient in the paint (and overall).

I'd be concerned if we were up in efficiency only because of unsustainable 3 point shooting, but this seems pretty sustainable. My biggest concern is how effective/efficient our offense is if teams collapse in and ignore the threat of our 3 point shooters, can we hit enough 3s to make them pay?

That is my point, we are still taking too many 3s.  We should still take the higher percentage 3s but pass on some of the lower percentage 3s.  Better to take more, higher percentage 2s and get to the line more.  I am talking about 10% of the shots, not something drastic.  Porzingis is probably helping with our 2-point shot percentage.

But if we stop taking less efficient 3s (say, above the break), how much would that impact how teams defended us? If they start cheating off of their man for above the break 3s, that would hurt our defense pretty significantly. It like running in football: you need to do it enough to keep the defenses honest and help your passing game. That amount might not be where passing and running are equally efficient.

Overall,though. I think a small change would be good, maybe 10% is that number (it would still have us in the top ~8 for 3PA/game). As long as that comes from a focus on making the extra pass to a better shot (or driving to draw in other defenders and create a better shot), and not just passing up a "okay" shots without a better sht available.

I think you contradicted your point or proved the counter point.  To go with the football analogy, you don't need to lead the league in rushing attempts to "keep the defense honest".  And you definitely don't want to lead the league in rushing attempts if you are in the lower half of the league in yards per rush.

The Celtics are leading the league in 3PA.  Is that really necessary?  Is that good?  Just because a football team leads the league in rushing attempts, would that necessarily be good?  Football teams that are good at rushing the ball are generally consistently good.  No team is consistently good at making 3s.  The very nature of the shot means that you will have good nights and off nights, especially if you are counting on 3s at the end of the game.

3s are fine; as you say, it is part of the balance that you need to keep the defense guessing or keeping them honest.  But over reliance on 3s is going to lead to variability.  You are going to have nights where you shoot 30% and some where you shot 45%.  When you are taking 43+ 3PA per game, that is about a 20 point swing.  That is how you end up losing games to lesser teams.

[ozgod]

One good thing that Joe has done - try and get former Celtics involved in the team and organization again. From Jerry Sichting to Evan Turner to Rajon Rondo to Paul Pierce to even players still playing with other teams, he has been inviting former Celtics to visit with the team, to try and get the past players and champions involved to show them they're still valued, to really make it a "Celtics Brotherhood", to show the current players how important the Celtics tradition is.

Former Celtics star Rajon Rondo’s phone started buzzing around 3 a.m. one day a few months ago, and he was surprised to see an incoming call from former teammate Paul Pierce. Given the hour, it was fair to wonder whether something was wrong. But when Rondo answered the phone, all he heard was excitement.

“They want us back,” Pierce told him.

The Hall of Famer was referring to the Celtics, the franchise he and Rondo helped guide to the 2007-08 NBA championship.

This summer, Mazzulla thought about how often NBA players return to their college campuses for offseason workouts or big games. He loved that family feel and was hoping to recreate it in some form in Boston.

“Sometimes, it doesn’t happen because you don’t ask people to,” Mazzulla said. “So, sometimes it’s important to create that environment of, ‘Hey, you’re welcome any time.’ “

Mazzulla told Celtics vice president of media and alumni relations Jeff Twiss and director of team operations Kara Keena that he wanted to formulate a homecoming plan. Yes, former players had always been welcome around the franchise. But Mazzulla wanted more.

“He said, ‘Let’s take some real action and get these guys back,’ ” Twiss said.

They crafted an email, and after Twiss updated the alumni database as best he could, they sent a blast out to about 225 former Celtics. It included players from 1960s championship teams as well as those who have been gone for just a few months, such as Marcus Smart and Robert Williams.

The enthusiasm on the thread was evident quickly, with excited reply-all messages popping up from Celtics from various eras, from Evan Turner to Jerry Sichting.

At training camp in October, the results of Mazzulla’s push were visible. Eight-time NBA champion Satch Sanders and two-time champ Mal Graham stopped by the practice facility to chat with Mazzulla and sit in on a session. Sam Vincent, who spent his first two pro seasons in Boston and was a reserve on the 1985-86 championship team, paid a visit.

“I think the Celtics are trying to be a leader in the space in terms of connecting guys and keeping them a part of these new teams,” Vincent said. “When an organization appreciates what the former guys have meant to the club and the community, it just goes a long way. I think it’s special.”

“It kind of continues the brotherhood,” Pierce said. “It’s all part of our culture and that is something that the Celtics have always been about.”

Pierce and Rondo each came to Boston for extended visits and a more immersive experience. They helped out at practices, sat in on coaches’ meetings, and had one-on-one chats with players.

“You see former players in town in other places and they’re up in the rafters, but here they’re on the court,” Cassell said. “Joe wants guys to come back, eat breakfast with us, eat lunch with us, go to meetings and be a part of this.”

The reunions are helpful to Mazzulla, too. He has been a head coach for a little more than a year and is still trying to gather information wherever he can. He has asked the former Celtics about their experiences playing for different coaches. He has wondered what worked well and what did not, and stored intelligence that might eventually benefit the current squad.

“We can learn a lot from what those guys did to move the organization and the tradition and the legacy forward,” Mazzulla said. “I think that’s important. Guys always want to go back to where they had memories, where they had great times, where they did good things. It’s like, why don’t we create that here where guys can come back and we share that experience together?”

Full article at https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/12/02/sports/lets-take-action-get-these-guys-back-how-joe-mazzullas-homecoming-push-has-reconnected-celtics-past-present/

[Goldstar88]

Adrian Wojnarowski: ESPN Sources: There’s optimism Boston Celtics C Kristaps Porzingis (calf strain) will return to lineup this week. Porzingis is out for In Season Tourney quarters vs. Indiana Monday, but there’s increasing confidence he’ll be back in Vegas for IST Final 4 should Celtics advance. – via Twitter wojespn

[Donoghus]

Awesome news!

NBA Communications
@NBAPR
Denver Nuggets center Nikola Jokić and Boston Celtics forward Jayson Tatum have been named the Kia NBA Western and Eastern Conference Players of the Month, respectively, for games played in October/November.