Game 2: +/- Statistic Discussion

[Spilling Green Dye]

In order of highest to lowest +/- for the Celtics:

Rasheed:   +15
Rondo & Ray Allen: +12
Pierce, Perkins, Davis, Tony Allen:  +3
Garnett:  +1
Nate:  -3
Sheldon:  -4

Clearly Ray & Rondo carried this team tonight, as well as Pierce's defense, etc.  But the combination of KG/Perk playing awful and Rasheed playing well should make it obvious that Rasheed needs more minutes.  He also really helped stretch the floor for Ray Allen, and opened up the lane for Rondo.  Not to mention his Defense & Rebounding (6 in 18 minutes).

I was real happy with Tony & Davis' 2nd half play too.  Nate and Sheldon, the two lowest +/-, did what they are asked, so you can't complain there.

Oh, and it should be mentioned that the two lowest Laker starters?  Gasol @ -12 and Kobe @ -9   

[Roy Hobbs]

I loved what Rasheed brought tonight.  I'm not sure why he sat so long in the fourth; maybe his back was stiffening up?

[The Walker Wiggle]

Nate and Sheldon, the two lowest +/-, did what they are asked, so you can't complain there.

Here's the trouble with single game +/- stats. I'd argue Nate played exceptionally (again) under pressure, in the crucial minutes of a one possession game at the start of the 4th. Hit a 3, drew a foul on Bynum, hit his free throws, protected the ball. I want Rivers to find him first half minutes from here on out.

While Shelden looked lost with the Celtics up 12 at the end of the half, an MIA dunk, failure to hit the floor, sloppy momentum killing turnovers and a blocked attempt. His per36, to throw out another (semi-)advanced metric, 0-9, 9 Rebounds, 18 TOs, 18 Fouls. I'm not sure I want to see Williams in meaningful minutes again this series. (And I didn't want to see him in the first place. Phil let Kobe close out the half with four fouls and look what happened...)

EDIT - Second guessing myself on hammering our 13th man, let's say, maybe tomorrow I can forgive him for not falling on a 50-50 ball and that SECOND turnover - since we won.

[Roy Hobbs]

Nate and Sheldon, the two lowest +/-, did what they are asked, so you can't complain there.

Here's the trouble with single game +/- stats. I'd argue Nate played exceptionally (again) under pressure, in the crucial minutes of a one possession game at the start of the 4th. Hit a 3, drew a foul on Bynum, hit his free throws, protected the ball.

While Shelden - who shouldn't even have been in - looked lost with the Celtics up 12 at the end of the half, an MIA dunk, failure to hit the floor, sloppy momentum killing turnovers and and a blocked attempt. His per36, to throw out another (semi-)advanced metric, 0-9, 9 Rebounds, 18 TOs, 18 Fouls...

TP.

[CoachBo]

Yes, as I've said many times before, I pay no attention to single game plus-minus numbers.

[nickagneta]

I thought Shelden was awful. His two turnovers cost the team 5 crucial points and the momentum before the end of the half. He was obviously not mentally prepared to be in the game.

Nate was fantastic. Absolutely fantastic. After Ray and Rondo he was this team's third star.

Nate's +/- is deceiving and not a good indicator of what he did for this team and how well he played. Shelden's +/- is a bad indicator because it doesn't tell just how bad he played.

[Thruthelookingglass]

Nate's +/- was unduly influenced by Shelden's unfortunate closeout.  Even up until the last few plays, Shelden did play effectively.  On the other hand, Ray stacked his stats by himself.

+/- is helpful as an interpretive tool, but it isn't the end all/be all of the game.  We got to see a thrilling game where we had all sorts of wierd contributions -- like KG becoming a rebound vacuum at the end of the game.  Thanks once again for an exciting team effort!