Bucks (0-0) at Celtics (0-0) Game #1 12/23/20

[jambr380]

So, to those that scream about Brad Stevens and his timeouts, tonight with around 9:00 left on the clock Milwaukee was starting a run and instead of calling a timeout, Stevens saved it because the TV timeout was coming up.

Some were complaining about this as they usually do. But it's a good thing he saved it because he needed one with 8.9 seconds remaining so took his last timeout. He told JT go make it happen with confidence and Tatum hits his shot.

You can't constantly call timeouts early in the game because you'll need them late. You especially don't do it if a TV timeout is coming up quickly.

I am not one to complain about timeouts, but that shot was absolute garbage. Don't get me wrong, I love that it went in, but that type of shot is why we lost the MIA series. I really hope he can learn to generate better looks than off-balance bank 3s.

I'm all aboard the Brown train, though. Choo-choo!! 

I'm the engineer on that train!!!

BTW, just looked at tix for the C's game in Tampa against Toronto. They're asking Boston/NY/LA/SF prices for anything not in the third deck. Still think I'm grabbing some tickets though.

Yeah, I just got the notification yesterday. They are all resale tickets - I'll probably do it, but likely will wait until the last minute. Kinda bummed they aren't playing in Orlando in this 1st half of the season set up. It'll be really interesting to see what it's like to be in a socially distanced stadium.

[nickagneta]

Jaylen heard he was in trade rumors.

His response:

33 points
4 assists
5 rebounds
2 steals
1 block
54.5/37.5/100 shooting splits
Better handle
Better court vision.
Better passing.
Better free throw shooting.
Amazing defense.

Okay, Jaylen. You have been heard. No more trade rumors for you.

[slamtheking]

Glad to have Thompson on the team, i didn't like him to much when he played for Cavaliers...                 

he makes a huge difference .....other teams can't pick on us inside box out  Theis all the time .   Theis looked so happy not to have three bigs hanging on him ,  he was moving freely looking for boards and shots .   Also Rob Williams makes a huge diff.....these guys protect the lane for  no easy buckets .   

If Theis , Timelord , Thompson can stay healthy and continue to play like they did tonight Celtics will have a look they have not had since KG days

they looked like they played well overall but need some improvement with the rebounding.  got beat on the boards by 52-37.  amazed we won despite that disadvantage and Milwaukee shooting over 50% for the game and C's only taking 11 FTs

we missed Kemba and his foul drawing abilities.   

The team just did a great job on defense against a super long team , not giving up tons of easy inside buckets .

no doubt we missed Kemba. 

I think the defense, particularly against Giannis, was fairly effective.  while the second chance buckets were frustrating as always, it did seem like there was less of them and not as many as it typically seems down the stretch of games.

[nickagneta]

So, to those that scream about Brad Stevens and his timeouts, tonight with around 9:00 left on the clock Milwaukee was starting a run and instead of calling a timeout, Stevens saved it because the TV timeout was coming up.

Some were complaining about this as they usually do. But it's a good thing he saved it because he needed one with 8.9 seconds remaining so took his last timeout. He told JT go make it happen with confidence and Tatum hits his shot.

You can't constantly call timeouts early in the game because you'll need them late. You especially don't do it if a TV timeout is coming up quickly.

I am not one to complain about timeouts, but that shot was absolute garbage. Don't get me wrong, I love that it went in, but that type of shot is why we lost the MIA series. I really hope he can learn to generate better looks than off-balance bank 3s.

I'm all aboard the Brown train, though. Choo-choo!! 

I'm the engineer on that train!!!

BTW, just looked at tix for the C's game in Tampa against Toronto. They're asking Boston/NY/LA/SF prices for anything not in the third deck. Still think I'm grabbing some tickets though.

Yeah, I just got the notification yesterday. They are all resale tickets - I'll probably do it, but likely will wait until the last minute. Kinda bummed they aren't playing in Orlando in this 1st half of the season set up. It'll be really interesting to see what it's like to be in a socially distanced stadium.

Thinking the same thing. They'll get cheaper late if no one is buying. I'm probably going to an Orlando game too. I want to see the Jay's up close this year.

[Atzar]

Jaylen heard he was in trade rumors.

His response:

33 points
4 assists
5 rebounds
2 steals
1 block
54.5/37.5/100 shooting splits
Better handle
Better court vision.
Better passing.
Better free throw shooting.
Amazing defense.

Okay, Jaylen. You have been heard. No more trade rumors for you.

This was the best I've ever seen Jaylen run the offense.  He's capable of putting up some big scoring nights, but in the past those nights have come when he is hot from three or getting out in transition.  Tonight, he was actually operating the half-court offense and shredding the Bucks with it.  That pick-and-roll with Brown and Thompson was deadly, and my hope is that it will only improve as Brown and Thompson develop chemistry. 

[footey]

Great win.

Jaylen put team on his back.

Teague a huge boost off bench

JT came through in the clutch.

Marcus excelled defensively.

Loved the starting lineup with two bigs. Brad showed open mind.

[nickagneta]

I think Stevens may have found something with that Thompson/Semi/Brown/Smart/Teague combo. Amazing defense and really good intelligent ball, with the only bad shot being the 27 footer Brown took. But he made it and then was en fuego. That shot got him going.

Semi was amazing. A freaking EUROSTEP lay in and a behind the back assist. Wow!!! Smart drawing multiple charges on Giannis. Teague with great shooting and offense. Had a great difference making defensive play late.

Thompson seemed to have good chemistry with everyone on this group. A Brown/Thompson PnR with Jaylen following Thompson in, is going to get deadly, like Tatum was with Theis last year.

[Ogaju]

Jaylen heard he was in trade rumors.

His response:

33 points
4 assists
5 rebounds
2 steals
1 block
54.5/37.5/100 shooting splits
Better handle
Better court vision.
Better passing.
Better free throw shooting.
Amazing defense.

Okay, Jaylen. You have been heard. No more trade rumors for you.

you make a good case to sell high on him.. <running>   I still dont know why Jalen does not have a UPS commerical 'ask what Brown can do for you' !!!!

[jpotter33]

So, to those that scream about Brad Stevens and his timeouts, tonight with around 9:00 left on the clock Milwaukee was starting a run and instead of calling a timeout, Stevens saved it because the TV timeout was coming up.

Some were complaining about this as they usually do. But it's a good thing he saved it because he needed one with 8.9 seconds remaining so took his last timeout. He told JT go make it happen with confidence and Tatum hits his shot.

You can't constantly call timeouts early in the game because you'll need them late. You especially don't do it if a TV timeout is coming up quickly.

Uh, except the fact that it likely would have not been that close at that point had Brad effectively used the timeouts earlier, thus obviating the need for the extra timeout anyways. This is revisionist history. The fact that we won *despite* the bad judgment made at that time does not make it any less bad of a call. If we would have better managed that run and not let them get momentum in that way it's likely that there's more distance between us in the final minutes.

Defend him all you want, but that's a consistent weak spot of Brad's that *regularly* loses us games because we're not always lucky enough for Tatum to bank in a last-second three and Giannis to miss a go-ahead free throw for us to win it.

Massively clutching at straws here, lol

I mean, it's not though. If anything this argument about the usefulness of the timeout given what happened tonight is.

Nick's position is based on the supposition that if we had used the timeout the game would've gone *exactly* as it did tonight when we didn't use the timeout originally, which in itself is unrealistic based on pure probability and causality.

An effective use of the timeout to manage the Bucks' run there very well could've changed the flow and course of the game, leading to a larger lead and less close game down the stretch. That's the entire argument I'm making. You call the timeout to stop the run, settle your guys down, and then set something up to try and get your guys going again.

Sure, maybe it wouldn't have worked out, but it's illogical to posit that the game would've occurred the exact way it did with or without the timeout there. That's just poor logic.

Or you're just giving TNT ad revenue in between getting your ass kicked. 

Why is your assumption that a timeout will definitely - or even probably - end a run?  Is there any statistical evidence that supports that idea?  I've seen timeouts 'stop' runs, but I've also seen occasions when teams called a timeout just to keep on getting pasted when play resumed. 

A quick google search didn't turn up much except for a D'Antoni quote that said timeouts aren't necessarily effective run-stoppers, but I didn't find anything concrete either way.

Good question. I've done a bit of research on this before, but it's something I'm interested and continuously reading about. The statistical and economical evidence is mixed on this, and it's further complicated by some other deeper statistical/economical questions and conflicts within the game that impact upon this question.

The most difficult one in particular is whether there is such a thing as "momentum" or a "hot streak" in sports like this, particularly basketball. One side says that, no, there is no such a thing as "momentum" or a "hot streak"; rather, these are just statistical anomalies of chance with several shots, defensive stops, plays, etc. just happening by chance to occur in a positive direction for the team in a short amount of time. The other side (which I am in agreement with) argues that there is such a thing as "momentum" and "hot streaks", which are likely psychological phenomena leading to increased performance that serve as catalysts for the "momentum" and "hot streaks".

Naturally, the former group is generally on the side that things like timeouts are not effective at stopping "runs", because these are really just statistical anomalies that will revert back to normalcy on their own without any conscious efforts by the opposition. The latter group is generally on the side that things like timeouts can be effective to stop "runs", as the runs are primarily based on other psychological, emotional, or other factors rather than just statistical anomalies.

That's a really basic and rough interpretation (lol), but that's one part of the issue that makes this a difficult thing to truly assess. So I do admit that some of this is based upon basketball philosophy, and I - along with many other coaches in the league and people on here - hold a different philosophy when it comes to this issue. But I've seen Brad blow enough games with this decision to forego timeouts in these scenarios that I'm firmly entrenched in this camp. (The same goes for the timeout prior to a game-winning or game-tying end of game offensive scenario. I'm all for the timeout in that scenario, especially with someone as good at drawing up ATO plays as Brad. Yet Brad holds the "let them play" philosophy and prioritizes the iso play and not letting the defense set over drawing up an efficient, set play. I find this very aggravating lol)

[nickagneta]

Jaylen heard he was in trade rumors.

His response:

33 points
4 assists
5 rebounds
2 steals
1 block
54.5/37.5/100 shooting splits
Better handle
Better court vision.
Better passing.
Better free throw shooting.
Amazing defense.

Okay, Jaylen. You have been heard. No more trade rumors for you.

you make a good case to sell high on him.. <running>   I still dont know why Jalen does not have a UPS commerical 'ask what Brown can do for you' !!!!

Here's the thing. You might be selling low!

[gouki88]

So, to those that scream about Brad Stevens and his timeouts, tonight with around 9:00 left on the clock Milwaukee was starting a run and instead of calling a timeout, Stevens saved it because the TV timeout was coming up.

Some were complaining about this as they usually do. But it's a good thing he saved it because he needed one with 8.9 seconds remaining so took his last timeout. He told JT go make it happen with confidence and Tatum hits his shot.

You can't constantly call timeouts early in the game because you'll need them late. You especially don't do it if a TV timeout is coming up quickly.

Uh, except the fact that it likely would have not been that close at that point had Brad effectively used the timeouts earlier, thus obviating the need for the extra timeout anyways. This is revisionist history. The fact that we won *despite* the bad judgment made at that time does not make it any less bad of a call. If we would have better managed that run and not let them get momentum in that way it's likely that there's more distance between us in the final minutes.

Defend him all you want, but that's a consistent weak spot of Brad's that *regularly* loses us games because we're not always lucky enough for Tatum to bank in a last-second three and Giannis to miss a go-ahead free throw for us to win it.

Massively clutching at straws here, lol

I mean, it's not though. If anything this argument about the usefulness of the timeout given what happened tonight is.

Nick's position is based on the supposition that if we had used the timeout the game would've gone *exactly* as it did tonight when we didn't use the timeout originally, which in itself is unrealistic based on pure probability and causality.

An effective use of the timeout to manage the Bucks' run there very well could've changed the flow and course of the game, leading to a larger lead and less close game down the stretch. That's the entire argument I'm making. You call the timeout to stop the run, settle your guys down, and then set something up to try and get your guys going again.

Sure, maybe it wouldn't have worked out, but it's illogical to posit that the game would've occurred the exact way it did with or without the timeout there. That's poor logic, and thus is hardly evidence that Brad made the right call to let them continue on that major run that made this a game down the stretch in the first place.

There’s literally no way you can prove the calling of a timeout would have stymied the Bucks. You’re guilty of the exact same things you’re criticising Nick for

[jpotter33]

So, to those that scream about Brad Stevens and his timeouts, tonight with around 9:00 left on the clock Milwaukee was starting a run and instead of calling a timeout, Stevens saved it because the TV timeout was coming up.

Some were complaining about this as they usually do. But it's a good thing he saved it because he needed one with 8.9 seconds remaining so took his last timeout. He told JT go make it happen with confidence and Tatum hits his shot.

You can't constantly call timeouts early in the game because you'll need them late. You especially don't do it if a TV timeout is coming up quickly.

Uh, except the fact that it likely would have not been that close at that point had Brad effectively used the timeouts earlier, thus obviating the need for the extra timeout anyways. This is revisionist history. The fact that we won *despite* the bad judgment made at that time does not make it any less bad of a call. If we would have better managed that run and not let them get momentum in that way it's likely that there's more distance between us in the final minutes.

Defend him all you want, but that's a consistent weak spot of Brad's that *regularly* loses us games because we're not always lucky enough for Tatum to bank in a last-second three and Giannis to miss a go-ahead free throw for us to win it.

Massively clutching at straws here, lol

I mean, it's not though. If anything this argument about the usefulness of the timeout given what happened tonight is.

Nick's position is based on the supposition that if we had used the timeout the game would've gone *exactly* as it did tonight when we didn't use the timeout originally, which in itself is unrealistic based on pure probability and causality.

An effective use of the timeout to manage the Bucks' run there very well could've changed the flow and course of the game, leading to a larger lead and less close game down the stretch. That's the entire argument I'm making. You call the timeout to stop the run, settle your guys down, and then set something up to try and get your guys going again.

Sure, maybe it wouldn't have worked out, but it's illogical to posit that the game would've occurred the exact way it did with or without the timeout there. That's poor logic, and thus is hardly evidence that Brad made the right call to let them continue on that major run that made this a game down the stretch in the first place.

There’s literally no way you can prove the calling of a timeout would have stymied the Bucks. You’re guilty of the exact same things you’re criticising Nick for

Dang, bro, I know it was long but at least read the whole post!  I did say exactly that lol Yeah, it may not have worked - or, hell, perhaps it could have even perhaps made things worse somehow - but what it wouldn't have done is have led to the exact same set of occurences that did occur.

Sure, maybe it wouldn't have worked out, but it's illogical to posit that the game would've occurred the exact way it did with or without the timeout there.

[Atzar]

Good question. I've done a bit of research on this before, but it's something I'm interested and continuously reading about. The statistical and economical evidence is mixed on this, and it's further complicated by some other deeper statistical/economical questions and conflicts within the game that impact upon this question.

The most difficult one in particular is whether there is such a thing as "momentum" or a "hot streak" in sports like this, particularly basketball. One side says that, no, there is no such a thing as "momentum" or a "hot streak"; rather, these are just statistical anomalies of chance with several shots, defensive stops, plays, etc. just happening by chance to occur in a positive direction for the team in a short amount of time. The other side (which I am in agreement with) argues that there is such a thing as "momentum" and "hot streaks", which are likely psychological phenomena leading to increased performance that serve as catalysts for the "momentum" and "hot streaks".

Naturally, the former group is generally on the side that things like timeouts are not effective at stopping "runs", because these are really just statistical anomalies that will revert back to normalcy on their own without any conscious efforts by the opposition. The latter group is generally on the side that things like timeouts can be effective to stop "runs", as the runs are primarily based on other psychological, emotional, or other factors rather than just statistical anomalies.

That's a really basic and rough interpretation (lol), but that's one part of the issue that makes this a difficult thing to truly assess. So I do admit that some of this is based upon basketball philosophy, and I - along with many other coaches in the league and people on here - hold a different philosophy when it comes to this issue. But I've seen Brad blow enough games with this decision to forego timeouts in these scenarios that I'm firmly entrenched in this camp. (The same goes for the timeout prior to a game-winning or game-tying end of game offensive scenario. I'm all for the timeout in that scenario, especially with someone as good at drawing up ATO plays as Brad. Yet Brad holds the "let them play" philosophy and prioritizes the iso play and not letting the defense set over drawing up an efficient, set play. I find this very aggravating lol)

I appreciate the thoughtful response, TP for that.  And further reading supported the philosophical split that you mentioned here.  I read one study on timeout usage in the NCAA that claimed an improvement of 1.5-2.2 points over the five minutes following a timeout, and then a read another study on usage in the NBA that stated such timeouts had no meaningful effect. 

At the very least, it appears fair to say that there are multiple schools of thought and no definitive answer to the question. 

[Indocelts]

I think the players are NBA ready!

CBS, though, still needs to improve his time out and substitution management, especially when the Celts are holding big leads.

[jpotter33]

Good question. I've done a bit of research on this before, but it's something I'm interested and continuously reading about. The statistical and economical evidence is mixed on this, and it's further complicated by some other deeper statistical/economical questions and conflicts within the game that impact upon this question.

The most difficult one in particular is whether there is such a thing as "momentum" or a "hot streak" in sports like this, particularly basketball. One side says that, no, there is no such a thing as "momentum" or a "hot streak"; rather, these are just statistical anomalies of chance with several shots, defensive stops, plays, etc. just happening by chance to occur in a positive direction for the team in a short amount of time. The other side (which I am in agreement with) argues that there is such a thing as "momentum" and "hot streaks", which are likely psychological phenomena leading to increased performance that serve as catalysts for the "momentum" and "hot streaks".

Naturally, the former group is generally on the side that things like timeouts are not effective at stopping "runs", because these are really just statistical anomalies that will revert back to normalcy on their own without any conscious efforts by the opposition. The latter group is generally on the side that things like timeouts can be effective to stop "runs", as the runs are primarily based on other psychological, emotional, or other factors rather than just statistical anomalies.

That's a really basic and rough interpretation (lol), but that's one part of the issue that makes this a difficult thing to truly assess. So I do admit that some of this is based upon basketball philosophy, and I - along with many other coaches in the league and people on here - hold a different philosophy when it comes to this issue. But I've seen Brad blow enough games with this decision to forego timeouts in these scenarios that I'm firmly entrenched in this camp. (The same goes for the timeout prior to a game-winning or game-tying end of game offensive scenario. I'm all for the timeout in that scenario, especially with someone as good at drawing up ATO plays as Brad. Yet Brad holds the "let them play" philosophy and prioritizes the iso play and not letting the defense set over drawing up an efficient, set play. I find this very aggravating lol)

I appreciate the thoughtful response.  And further reading supported the philosophical split that you mentioned here.  I read one study on timeout usage in the NCAA that claimed an improvement of 1.5-2.2 points over the five minutes following a timeout, and then a read another study on usage in the NBA that stated such timeouts had no meaningful effect. 

At the very least, it appears fair to say that there are multiple schools of thought and no definitive answer to the question.

TP. Definitely a contentious area.

I'm most interested in the question around whether there is such a thing as "momentum" or having the "hot hand" in basketball. As someone who has played a lot of basketball at multiple levels (a lot of times not that well either lol), I firmly believe that there is such a thing as the "hot hand", as something feels different when you get in those zones and are hitting everything in the building. What are your thoughts on this? Would be interested to know how others feel on this issue, too.