You can't even make this stuff up.
The layups were nice, but they did get the Celtics away from what they do best. They took 26 3-pointers, their second-lowest total over the last two years. ďI donít think 26 3s is a recipe for our success as a team," Mazzulla said.
We lost last night because... we didn't shoot enough threes!
Not the 16 turnovers, not the atrocious defense. In spite of the 58.7% shooting and easy layups, it's the lack of threes that cost us the game.
I swear, if I was Wyc I'd fire him today.
This quote does seem strange. It is true that PHI had 38 3PA to our 26. PHI made 45%, we made 38.5%. That is 51 points to 30 points from 3. That is a big difference. Joe didn't say this very well but it is a point of strategy. We need to defend so that they get fewer 3s and attack so we get more 3s, at least more than the ratio in this game. I am OK with that.
More concerning to me though is the 89 overall shot attempts by PHI to 75 by BOS. Those 14 extra shots for PHI, many of them turning out to be 3s, is where the meat is. Most of these extra shots are due to turnovers (16 to 6). FTs/fouls (18 FTA to 12) was a factor also, we had more possessions that resulted in FTs, reducing our FGAs, which is OK, the good side of attacking. To me, this is where the main coaching focus should be, take care of the ball! Attacking to draw fouls is good too, but many of our "attacks" resulted in sloppy turnovers. Executing the offense to get a few more 3s is a secondary (to reducing TOs) focus, at best. But I would rather jack a 3 than dribble into a crowd that results in a TO. I think that is Mazzulla's point. Hopefully he can communicate this better to the players than he sounded in the quote to the reporter.