The Problem (aside from rebounding) is our Offense

[yoursweatersux]

Take a look at some stats:

http://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2010.html

While you'll notice that we're #1 in defensive rating (which is great after considering the injuries we've had, and that KG is only going to get better and better for the remainder of the season), you'll also notice that our offensive rating is 13th in the league. That's right, THIRTEENTH.

To put this number in perspective, take a look at the stats of past NBA championship teams. Almost every single championship team has had a top 10 offensive rating.

So what I'm saying is this: our offense simply isn't getting it done. Turnovers need to be reduced, the paint needs to be attacked more, we need more easy buckets, and shooters need to hit shots (or, we need to get new shooters).

Here's how I'd fix the problem:
-Personally, I think Rasheed is a putrid offensive player and he's killing us with his shot selection. He should either take better shots or be benched. I'd be okay with him being benched since Shelden Williams is a better rebounder anyway.
-Ray is just spent. We need to trade him now for some real talent that can defend and hit 3 point shots.
-KG needs to get deep in the post more. It's as if Doc has completely forgotten that KG DRAWS DOUBLE TEAMS, AND IS A WILLING PASSER. For this reason alone KG needs to catch the ball down low. Plus, he's deadly with his dream shake (assuming he still remembers how to do it... I feel like he never uses this move anymore).
-Paul need to take it all the way to the hoop more. It might be asking a lot for somebody his age, but it's the best way to get high percentage buckets and free throws.
-Rondo and Perk are doing just fine.
-Eddie, like Ray, either needs to start hitting shots or get traded.
-Turnovers NEED to be reduced. They absolutely kill the offensive rating!


Doc needs to do something, anything, to get this team to play championship-level offense. If these guys can't start scoring more efficiently, it's curtains.

[ManUp]

Definitely, I blame it all on our shooting at this point. Pierce is the only Celtic who has consistently knocked down the open Three. So much of our offense is predicated on taking and making open jump shot, but our guys just aren't shooting well.

Ray isn't the shooter he once was and he isn't converting the looks that he should. It's obvious to me that the legs are going(and halfway gone). I don't know what's going on with House, maybe age is creeping on him too. I think we're all familiar with the theory that SG's loose their legs at 32 and House is 31. He's been the best shooter on this team the last 3 years (better than Ray) and he simply can't find his stroke.  Sheed has been terrible from 3 and him taking 3s should not be part of our gameplan. All our so called shooters are basically letting us down.

[Who]

The Celtics are third in the league in eFG%.

The problems offensively are (1) turnovers (2) offensive efficiency includes offensive rebounding as part of the offense, so that too. The Celtics rank 29th and 28th in the league respectively in those two categories. They're the two areas that are bogging the Celtics offense down.

[yoursweatersux]

The Celtics are third in the league in eFG%.

The problems offensively are (1) turnovers (2) offensive efficiency includes offensive rebounding as part of the offense, so that too. The Celtics rank 29th and 28th in the league respectively in those two categories. They're the two areas that are bogging the Celtics offense down.

While I'd agree that those are the two biggest problem areas, you shouldn't be so dismissive about the other issues such as a lack of aggressiveness in attacking the paint and our shooters shooting poorly.

I understand that we're 3rd in EFG%, but that doesn't mean we still can't improve drastically. Just think: if Ray Allen and Eddie started hitting shots and Sheed stopped taking 3's, we'd probably be #1 in EFG%. And with our offensive rating being what it is, I think the C's should take any kind of offensive improvement they can get.

[scoop]

The Celtics are third in the league in eFG%.

The problems offensively are (1) turnovers (2) offensive efficiency includes offensive rebounding as part of the offense, so that too. The Celtics rank 29th and 28th in the league respectively in those two categories. They're the two areas that are bogging the Celtics offense down.

While I'd agree that those are the two biggest problem areas, you shouldn't be so dismissive about the other issues such as a lack of aggressiveness in attacking the paint and our shooters shooting poorly.

I understand that we're 3rd in EFG%, but that doesn't mean we still can't improve drastically. Just think: if Ray Allen and Eddie started hitting shots and Sheed stopped taking 3's, we'd probably be #1 in EFG%. And with our offensive rating being what it is, I think the C's should take any kind of offensive improvement they can get.

Of course it means that. The room for drastic improvement simply isn't there. Plus, Ray's FG% is still the 4th higher in his career and he's getting older. It should be much easier to improve in terms of turnovers and rebounding than shooting the ball even better when they're already elite.

[snively]

The Celtics are third in the league in eFG%.

The problems offensively are (1) turnovers (2) offensive efficiency includes offensive rebounding as part of the offense, so that too. The Celtics rank 29th and 28th in the league respectively in those two categories. They're the two areas that are bogging the Celtics offense down.

Our team eFG% teeter-totters from the starters to the bench, as well.  Our starters, while still impotent on the boards, are crushing it offensively.  All the starters and TA are well above 50eFG%, but those number plunge once we get to our "scorers" off the bench.  Eddie, Sheed and Baby have been stinking it up, shooting well below the league average as a unit despite being paid primarily for their offensive contributions.

I wonder how much of our turnover problems would go away if we traded Kendrick Perkins and Tony Allen (not saying that I want to).  The two of them are combining for 4.2 a game, and I think that's understated, especially in Perk's case, by the amount of dropped passes that are counted against the passer.

Rondo and Pierce are going to be high turnover players because of the amount of offense they have to create, but having 2 of our main role players coughing it up on 20+% of their possessions is driving the team over the edge.

[KungPoweChicken]

A huge problem is Pierce is the only Celtic who can consistently create his own shot.

[scoop]

Yes, Tony Allen's and Perkins' turnover rates are extremely high considering their kind of offensive production (and they're actually better, I remember that at one point during last season Perkins was leading the league in turnovers per possession for players with +20mpg). The negative effect of turnovers tends to be underappreciated.  

[yoursweatersux]

The Celtics are third in the league in eFG%.

The problems offensively are (1) turnovers (2) offensive efficiency includes offensive rebounding as part of the offense, so that too. The Celtics rank 29th and 28th in the league respectively in those two categories. They're the two areas that are bogging the Celtics offense down.

While I'd agree that those are the two biggest problem areas, you shouldn't be so dismissive about the other issues such as a lack of aggressiveness in attacking the paint and our shooters shooting poorly.

I understand that we're 3rd in EFG%, but that doesn't mean we still can't improve drastically. Just think: if Ray Allen and Eddie started hitting shots and Sheed stopped taking 3's, we'd probably be #1 in EFG%. And with our offensive rating being what it is, I think the C's should take any kind of offensive improvement they can get.

Of course it means that. The room for drastic improvement simply isn't there. Plus, Ray's FG% is still the 4th higher in his career and he's getting older. It should be much easier to improve in terms of turnovers and rebounding than shooting the ball even better when they're already elite.

I'm sorry, but I didn't know that shooting
-35% (Ray Allen)
-30% (Rasheed)
-36% (Eddie)
from 3 was elite. Especially when those numbers are all WAY below career averages.

Obviously, you're wrong. Shooting like this is definitely hurting the team (especially considering that those 3 players combine for over 13 3pa per game), and fixing it would have a substantial impact on the offensive rating.

As I stated in the title to the thread though, rebounding is clearly the biggest issue. But I'd argue that shooting is having a bigger impact than turnovers.

[Rtpas11]

I said this a while back when I created a thread called "Too Much D and Not Enough O". Celtics problem this year and the end of last year's season was there offense. #'s are extremely deceiving so I won't go by statistics, because a team (Celtics) can attempt 10 shots and make 6 and finish with a percentage of 60%, while turning over the ball 20 times to an opposing team that has taking more attempts resulting in making more with a lower percentage. All the c's need is a "HEAD CASE" type player, or a Jarret Jack type of back-up pg.

[scoop]

The Celtics are third in the league in eFG%.

The problems offensively are (1) turnovers (2) offensive efficiency includes offensive rebounding as part of the offense, so that too. The Celtics rank 29th and 28th in the league respectively in those two categories. They're the two areas that are bogging the Celtics offense down.

While I'd agree that those are the two biggest problem areas, you shouldn't be so dismissive about the other issues such as a lack of aggressiveness in attacking the paint and our shooters shooting poorly.

I understand that we're 3rd in EFG%, but that doesn't mean we still can't improve drastically. Just think: if Ray Allen and Eddie started hitting shots and Sheed stopped taking 3's, we'd probably be #1 in EFG%. And with our offensive rating being what it is, I think the C's should take any kind of offensive improvement they can get.

Of course it means that. The room for drastic improvement simply isn't there. Plus, Ray's FG% is still the 4th higher in his career and he's getting older. It should be much easier to improve in terms of turnovers and rebounding than shooting the ball even better when they're already elite.

I'm sorry, but I didn't know that shooting
-35% (Ray Allen)
-30% (Rasheed)
-36% (Eddie)
from 3 was elite. Especially when those numbers are all WAY below career averages.

Obviously, you're wrong. Shooting like this is definitely hurting the team (especially considering that those 3 players combine for over 13 3pa per game), and fixing it would have a substantial impact on the offensive rating.

As I stated in the title to the thread though, rebounding is clearly the biggest issue. But I'd argue that shooting is having a bigger impact than turnovers.

What's elite is being 3rd in the league in terms of eFG%. You don't agree?

One shouldn't expect the team to outperform their current production in terms of eFG% by a significant margin. Some guys are having down years, Pierce is leading the league in 3ptFG%. It happens, what matters is the whole picture. The team is 0.1% down from their last season number. They are up from their championship year! Very difficult to say that the eFG% is a liability or a weakness when it's already so good - if the team had the potential to be much better, why weren't they in the last 2 seasons? More: why in the history of the NBA, no team has been really that much better? Simply because the margin to improve from a 52.7eFG% is very small.

Turnovers have a very big impact.

But the team also employs what the general manager, Danny Ainge, calls his “secret weapon,” a 32-year-old named Mike Zarren, who seems to know every data point about every N.B.A. player, past and present. Garnett calls him Numbers, the Celtics Dancers call him Stats and Paul Pierce, the team’s longtime standout, calls him M.I.T.

What’s one of the most misused, misinterpreted statistics? “Turnovers are way more expensive than people think,” Zarren says. That’s because most teams focus on the points a defense scores from the turnover but don’t correctly value the offense’s opportunity cost — that is, the points it might have scored had the turnover not occurred.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/04/magazine/04wwln-freakonomics-t.html?_r=3&scp=1&sq=celtics+freakonomics&st=nyt&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[Gomesfan]

I hate to say it .....but we need to trade Ray well he is ...well his expirinf contract if valuable and then sign him after the season w/ the mle. He know sit is a biz!

[Junkyard Dawg]

I agree we need offense but it's not just the shooting.  our best players go through stretches of games where they just disappear completely!  every game we build a lead and blow it away, which feels like almost every game these days, we see our offense just go stagnant.

that should never happen on a team with KG, PP, ray ray..