This team looks to have quit on Joe

[SHAQATTACK]

I’m not EVEN going outside today

Chicken Little

[ozgod]

I’m not EVEN going outside today

Chicken Little

That way the sky won't fall on your head at least 

[Roy H.]

The sky isn't falling, but we've lost 7 of our last 12.  That run of sustained mediocrity is worrisome.

As I've said elsewhere this just seems like regression to the mean.  Boston wasn't as good as it started the year, it was only natural it would come back to where it should be.

I think I've mentioned this before, but regression to the mean doesn't mean a wildly successful sequence, followed by a very poor (as in worst offense in the NBA) portion of the season over a lengthy period.

Regression to the mean simply means that if there is an extreme outcome, future outcomes are more likely to be less extreme, more in line with a team's expected outcomes. 

This team is susceptible to wild swings in performance for sustained periods of time.  They play extremely well for 20 games, and then poorly for 12.  That's not how regression statistics work.  Something else is at play, whether it be coaching, injuries, focus, strength of schedule, fatigue, effort, etc., etc.

[bopna]

Our team is so bad right now its not even funny anymore.

A 5-7 win loss record since Dec 11 loss to the Warriors. Which mean we are not even sniffing the play in if the season started then.

For reference the Magic are 8-4 during the same period and the Nets are plowing everyone in their path having not lost for a month now.

Mazulla just has not changed his stupid style of letting the team figure it out when oppsing teams start to pull away.

If we do not produce a single win on this road trip i bet we would be seeded 4th or worst 5th by the end of January

[Moranis]

The sky isn't falling, but we've lost 7 of our last 12.  That run of sustained mediocrity is worrisome.

As I've said elsewhere this just seems like regression to the mean.  Boston wasn't as good as it started the year, it was only natural it would come back to where it should be.

I think I've mentioned this before, but regression to the mean doesn't mean a wildly successful sequence, followed by a very poor (as in worst offense in the NBA) portion of the season over a lengthy period.

Regression to the mean simply means that if there is an extreme outcome, future outcomes are more likely to be less extreme, more in line with a team's expected outcomes. 

This team is susceptible to wild swings in performance for sustained periods of time.  They play extremely well for 20 games, and then poorly for 12.  That's not how regression statistics work.  Something else is at play, whether it be coaching, injuries, focus, strength of schedule, fatigue, effort, etc., etc.

But that is how sports often work.  I mean you see teams go on 15 game win streaks all of the time, and they often aren't the teams that you could reasonably expect that from.  I mean we saw that in 18-19 when the C's lost the first 2 games and then reeled off 16 straight wins.  They were 34-10 at one point that season as well before finishing 19-17 (and they were 6-9 in the 15 games after the 34-10 start). 

Sports aren't like normal mathematical regression because players really do get into hot streaks and cold streaks.  It happens all of the time in every sport.  So a regression to the mean in sports is not the same thing as most mathematical regression to the means.  It really does mean if a team starts off super hot and plays well above its baseline status, it will at some point go cold and play well below its baseline status. 

[ozgod]

The sky isn't falling, but we've lost 7 of our last 12.  That run of sustained mediocrity is worrisome.

As I've said elsewhere this just seems like regression to the mean.  Boston wasn't as good as it started the year, it was only natural it would come back to where it should be.

I think I've mentioned this before, but regression to the mean doesn't mean a wildly successful sequence, followed by a very poor (as in worst offense in the NBA) portion of the season over a lengthy period.

Regression to the mean simply means that if there is an extreme outcome, future outcomes are more likely to be less extreme, more in line with a team's expected outcomes. 

This team is susceptible to wild swings in performance for sustained periods of time.  They play extremely well for 20 games, and then poorly for 12.  That's not how regression statistics work.  Something else is at play, whether it be coaching, injuries, focus, strength of schedule, fatigue, effort, etc., etc.

What it is, is the standard deviation in their performances is quite high. They don't have that level of consistency of performance. Some days they are awesome, others they are terrible. I think it's just a reflection of the fact that barring a couple of our guys, the rest aren't quite at that level where they have a consistently high level of performance. Al and GWill are good examples - some days Al is Amazing Al, he gives us 18 points 10 rebounds and a high level of defense, then the next he scores 2 points on 1 shot and has 2 rebounds. Same with Gwill. With Al it's probably age, with GWill it's probably youth and specific situations he's put in in games, but that's why we have those deviations. I think overall the team's ceiling is still pretty high though. It's playing the regular season and going through those ups and downs that will (hopefully) let them figure out how to put that effort in consistently as a team.

[Goldstar88]

John Karalis: Mazzulla: “May not be the most popular thing to say, but you gotta go through some Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline. if you want to get to where you want to get to, whether it’s good or bad, and that’s just how it is. And so we have to go through it and we’ll be judged by how we handle it”  – via Twitter John_Karalis

[Goldstar88]

I’m not EVEN going outside today

Chicken Little

TP. I was waiting on this from you. 

[ozgod]

John Karalis: Mazzulla: “May not be the most popular thing to say, but you gotta go through some Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline. if you want to get to where you want to get to, whether it’s good or bad, and that’s just how it is. And so we have to go through it and we’ll be judged by how we handle it”  – via Twitter John_Karalis

Fans always handle adversity worse than coaches and players  but that's why we're called fans 

[bdm860]

The sky isn't falling, but we've lost 7 of our last 12.  That run of sustained mediocrity is worrisome.

If I really wanted to hate on Joe, I'd point out he wasn't even there for 2 of the wins, so his record is even worse during this stretch.

But I don't want to hate on Joe, so I'll point out a lot of champs go through bad stretches.

'22 Warriors last year had a 2-9 stretch (w/o Draymond) and a 1-7 stretch (w/o Steph) as part of a larger 7-16 stretch.

'21 Bucks had an 2-4 stretch (healthy), an 0-5 stretch (w/o Holiday), a 6-8 stretch (healthy).

Skipping Bubble year

'19 Raptors had 6-7 and 5-6 stretches (w/o Lowry for half of each).

'18 Warriors had 1-3 stretch (healthy) and finished the season with a 7-10 stretch (not healthy).


Not going to lie and say I'm not concerned, but the sky isn't falling either.  It's an 82 game season, bad stretches happen.  I just hope the losses aren't in vain and somehow help the team get back on track.

[keevsnick]

I see no evidence of that.

The team was 7th in defense coming into OKC despite playing most of the year without their all-defense center. They were 2nd in offense despite shooting under 33% from three over the last 16ish games. The fundamentals are still there.

The most important issue right now is the three point shooting, its just completely fallen off a cliff. How many time's during these games has Scal gone "Okay, that was a good look. I'll take that" after a miss? like 3 times a game. The C's are still getting good shots, its just everybody has decided to start missing at the same time. I consider that mostly freakishly bad luck. I think the shooting will level out to somewhere between the first 22 and last 15 games.

Record when shooting <34% from 3: 5-9
Record when shooting >34% from 3: 21-3

All you have to do is not be terrible, league average is like 36% from three. Just shoot average and don't turn the ball over and the team will win.

[Vermont Green]

I see no evidence of that.

The team was 7th in defense coming into OKC despite playing most of the year without their all-defense center. They were 2nd in offense despite shooting under 33% from three over the last 16ish games. The fundamentals are still there.

The most important issue right now is the three point shooting, its just completely fallen off a cliff. How many time's during these games has Scal gone "Okay, that was a good look. I'll take that" after a miss? like 3 times a game. The C's are still getting good shots, its just everybody has decided to start missing at the same time. I consider that mostly freakishly bad luck. I think the shooting will level out to somewhere between the first 22 and last 15 games.

Record when shooting <34% from 3: 5-9
Record when shooting >34% from 3: 21-3

All you have to do is not be terrible, league average is like 36% from three. Just shoot average and don't turn the ball over and the team will win.

That is how it goes when you live and die by the 3.  I would like to see the Celtics take less 3s (they are second behind GSW in 3PA).  Go to the hoop more, you get to the line more.  The Celtics are 22nd in FTA.  FTA lead to more consistent scoring, less fluctuation, less subject to chance.  I think this stems from not having any real inside presence, especially without RWill.  We are always going to be a team that takes a lot of 3s, that is fine, but you can do other things too.

[Roy H.]

I see no evidence of that.

The team was 7th in defense coming into OKC despite playing most of the year without their all-defense center. They were 2nd in offense despite shooting under 33% from three over the last 16ish games. The fundamentals are still there.

The most important issue right now is the three point shooting, its just completely fallen off a cliff. How many time's during these games has Scal gone "Okay, that was a good look. I'll take that" after a miss? like 3 times a game. The C's are still getting good shots, its just everybody has decided to start missing at the same time. I consider that mostly freakishly bad luck. I think the shooting will level out to somewhere between the first 22 and last 15 games.

Record when shooting <34% from 3: 5-9
Record when shooting >34% from 3: 21-3

All you have to do is not be terrible, league average is like 36% from three. Just shoot average and don't turn the ball over and the team will win.

That is how it goes when you live and die by the 3.  I would like to see the Celtics take less 3s (they are second behind GSW in 3PA).  Go to the hoop more, you get to the line more.  The Celtics are 22nd in FTA.  FTA lead to more consistent scoring, less fluctuation, less subject to chance.  I think this stems from not having any real inside presence, especially without RWill.  We are always going to be a team that takes a lot of 3s, that is fine, but you can do other things too.

Yeah, more defense and more high-percentage plays.  Those are the adjustments that we need to make. 

[keevsnick]

I see no evidence of that.

The team was 7th in defense coming into OKC despite playing most of the year without their all-defense center. They were 2nd in offense despite shooting under 33% from three over the last 16ish games. The fundamentals are still there.

The most important issue right now is the three point shooting, its just completely fallen off a cliff. How many time's during these games has Scal gone "Okay, that was a good look. I'll take that" after a miss? like 3 times a game. The C's are still getting good shots, its just everybody has decided to start missing at the same time. I consider that mostly freakishly bad luck. I think the shooting will level out to somewhere between the first 22 and last 15 games.

Record when shooting <34% from 3: 5-9
Record when shooting >34% from 3: 21-3

All you have to do is not be terrible, league average is like 36% from three. Just shoot average and don't turn the ball over and the team will win.

That is how it goes when you live and die by the 3.  I would like to see the Celtics take less 3s (they are second behind GSW in 3PA).  Go to the hoop more, you get to the line more.  The Celtics are 22nd in FTA.  FTA lead to more consistent scoring, less fluctuation, less subject to chance.  I think this stems from not having any real inside presence, especially without RWill.  We are always going to be a team that takes a lot of 3s, that is fine, but you can do other things too.

Yes, this the refrain you hear quite often. But I think you sort of hit the point here. They don't really have the personnel to be a "punish the rim" team.

If it was just a matter of willing yourself to do it, every team would do it. those things are hard, they require a skill set that Boston doesn't have a lot of. They have one guy who gets to the line a lot in Tatum, one guy a moderate amount in Brown and almost nobody else who really does. Those two and Brogdon a little are the only guys who routinely beat people off the dribble at all.

The could put more pressure on the rim, its not clear to me that would lead to better outcomes given the personnel they have. They have a team designed to generate 3 point looks and guys who can hit that shot. They aren't hitting that shot. I know its boring but my analysis is this: They need to hit shots.

[footey]

You aren't going to win many games when the other team shoots 38 of 58 from 2 and 20 of 40 from 3.

When your defense gives up multiple wide open layups and dunks, the field goal percentage of your opponent tends to be pretty good.