Jaylen Brown appreciation thread

[Vermont Green]

People still look at the ON/OFF +/- stat (per 100 Poss).  That somehow the team is better when Brown is off the court.  It played out that way in Game 1 also:

with Brown     +16.4 per 100 Possessions
w/out Brown   +30.0 per 100 Possessions

It is hard to understand how you can be +16.4 but somehow that is viewed as an indication that the team is better without you.  I haven't been able to figure out this one.  When I watch Brown play, I see a player who is really good and contributes to winning in a number of ways.  And is both a primary scorer and kind of a glue guy leader.

[Roy H.]

People still look at the ON/OFF +/- stat (per 100 Poss).  That somehow the team is better when Brown is off the court.  It played out that way in Game 1 also:

with Brown     +16.4 per 100 Possessions
w/out Brown   +30.0 per 100 Possessions

It is hard to understand how you can be +16.4 but somehow that is viewed as an indication that the team is better without you.  I haven't been able to figure out this one.  When I watch Brown play, I see a player who is really good and contributes to winning in a number of ways.  And is both a primary scorer and kind of a glue guy leader.

I think it's a nonsense argument.  Anybody who watched last night knows how important he was to winning.  Replace him with a league average starter and I think we either lose or win by a small margin.  He was that important.

[Who]

Brown was +12 in 37 minutes, team +6 in the 11 minutes he was on the bench. In other words, the team was again better when he was on the bench.

Tatum was +19 in 42 minutes and the team was -1 in the 6 minutes he was on the bench.

Brown has played very well (including in game 1), but it doesn't really matter to the team's actual success.

Tatum played very well. I do not understand the lack of appreciation he is getting right now. He carved up Dallas' defense and created easy offense for everyone else. He is the reason everyone else played so well.

You could see it when Tatum was in the game. You could see it when he was out the game. The flow of the offense dropped off. He was having a huge impact out there.

[Roy H.]

A very easy, simplistic example of why +/- is flawed.

Last night, Sam Hauser easily led the team in +/- per possession. 

Would anybody argue that Hauser was the key to the game?  That he was the driver of us winning? 

[perks-a-beast]

A very easy, simplistic example of why +/- is flawed.

Last night, Sam Hauser easily led the team in +/- per possession. 

Would anybody argue that Hauser was the key to the game?  That he was the driver of us winning?

No, but [dang] it felt good to see those threes go in   

[Roy H.]

Brown was +12 in 37 minutes, team +6 in the 11 minutes he was on the bench. In other words, the team was again better when he was on the bench.

Tatum was +19 in 42 minutes and the team was -1 in the 6 minutes he was on the bench.

Brown has played very well (including in game 1), but it doesn't really matter to the team's actual success.

Tatum played very well. I do not understand the lack of appreciation he is getting right now. He carved up Dallas' defense and created easy offense for everyone else. He is the reason everyone else played so well.

You could see it when Tatum was in the game. You could see it when he was out the game. The flow of the offense dropped off. He was having a huge impact out there.

I think that two things can be true:  Tatum's presence helped the team, but he didn't have a great game individually.  He commanded a lot of defensive attention, and other than a couple of horrid possessions at the end of the first half, he didn't take a lot of bad shots.  On the other hand, he had 6 turnovers (to 5 assists), didn't shoot particularly well (.469 eFG%, .474 TS%), and only shot two FTs. 

[Kernewek]

A very easy, simplistic example of why +/- is flawed.

Last night, Sam Hauser easily led the team in +/- per possession. 

Would anybody argue that Hauser was the key to the game?  That he was the driver of us winning?

Hauser might look like he's about to sell you cut-rate car insurance, but even Jrue Holiday recognised his game in the after-interview:
https://x.com/NBCSCeltics/status/1798932556290691394

[Donoghus]

People still look at the ON/OFF +/- stat (per 100 Poss).  That somehow the team is better when Brown is off the court.  It played out that way in Game 1 also:

with Brown     +16.4 per 100 Possessions
w/out Brown   +30.0 per 100 Possessions

It is hard to understand how you can be +16.4 but somehow that is viewed as an indication that the team is better without you.  I haven't been able to figure out this one.  When I watch Brown play, I see a player who is really good and contributes to winning in a number of ways.  And is both a primary scorer and kind of a glue guy leader.

I think it's a nonsense argument.  Anybody who watched last night knows how important he was to winning.  Replace him with a league average starter and I think we either lose or win by a small margin.  He was that important.

Preach brother

[keevsnick]

People still look at the ON/OFF +/- stat (per 100 Poss).  That somehow the team is better when Brown is off the court.  It played out that way in Game 1 also:

with Brown     +16.4 per 100 Possessions
w/out Brown   +30.0 per 100 Possessions

It is hard to understand how you can be +16.4 but somehow that is viewed as an indication that the team is better without you.  I haven't been able to figure out this one.  When I watch Brown play, I see a player who is really good and contributes to winning in a number of ways.  And is both a primary scorer and kind of a glue guy leader.

On/Off numbers get overblown because nobody ever remembers the context. Like last night for examples, the entire difference came in the 2:30 minutes at the end of the first. Boston outscored Dallas 9-2 where Boston hit like three straight insane threes after both Brown and Luka went to the bench. It was a combo of shooting luck and the other teams offensive engine leaving the game. Then Brown cam back in to start the second with both Tatum and KP out but Luka and Kyrie on and the C's played the Mavs even for three minutes until Tatum came back. Playing a team even when your best player is off and there's is on is A GOOD THING, but because of those first quarter rotations it penalizes Brown's on/off.

I imagine the Celtics will try to match Brown's minutes to Luka's very closely this series, since he's probably their best option on him. But that means his on/off will look funky because the Dallas offense will likely struggle when Luka, and hence Brown, is off the floor.

[Roy H.]

A very easy, simplistic example of why +/- is flawed.

Last night, Sam Hauser easily led the team in +/- per possession. 

Would anybody argue that Hauser was the key to the game?  That he was the driver of us winning?

Hauser might look like he's about to sell you cut-rate car insurance, but even Jrue Holiday recognised his game in the after-interview:
https://x.com/NBCSCeltics/status/1798932556290691394

I have no beef with Hauser.  My complaint would be people who look at his net rating last night and then argue that he was the biggest contributor to winning last night's game.

[Moranis]

A very easy, simplistic example of why +/- is flawed.

Last night, Sam Hauser easily led the team in +/- per possession. 

Would anybody argue that Hauser was the key to the game?  That he was the driver of us winning?

Hauser might look like he's about to sell you cut-rate car insurance, but even Jrue Holiday recognised his game in the after-interview:
https://x.com/NBCSCeltics/status/1798932556290691394

I have no beef with Hauser.  My complaint would be people who look at his net rating last night and then argue that he was the biggest contributor to winning last night's game.

No one argued that.

[Moranis]

People still look at the ON/OFF +/- stat (per 100 Poss).  That somehow the team is better when Brown is off the court.  It played out that way in Game 1 also:

with Brown     +16.4 per 100 Possessions
w/out Brown   +30.0 per 100 Possessions

It is hard to understand how you can be +16.4 but somehow that is viewed as an indication that the team is better without you.  I haven't been able to figure out this one.  When I watch Brown play, I see a player who is really good and contributes to winning in a number of ways.  And is both a primary scorer and kind of a glue guy leader.

your numbers actually show you the team was better when Brown wasn't in the game (which doesn't mean the team was bad with Brown in the game, just they were better when he wasn't). You can choose to ignore the numbers if you want, but the numbers tell you that.

[BitterJim]

People still look at the ON/OFF +/- stat (per 100 Poss).  That somehow the team is better when Brown is off the court.  It played out that way in Game 1 also:

with Brown     +16.4 per 100 Possessions
w/out Brown   +30.0 per 100 Possessions

It is hard to understand how you can be +16.4 but somehow that is viewed as an indication that the team is better without you.  I haven't been able to figure out this one.  When I watch Brown play, I see a player who is really good and contributes to winning in a number of ways.  And is both a primary scorer and kind of a glue guy leader.

your numbers actually show you the team was better when Brown wasn't in the game (which doesn't mean the team was bad with Brown in the game, just they were better when he wasn't). You can choose to ignore the numbers if you want, but the numbers tell you that.

The problem isn't the numbers, it's the conclusions reached from those numbers (and how their context is ignored)

[Moranis]

People still look at the ON/OFF +/- stat (per 100 Poss).  That somehow the team is better when Brown is off the court.  It played out that way in Game 1 also:

with Brown     +16.4 per 100 Possessions
w/out Brown   +30.0 per 100 Possessions

It is hard to understand how you can be +16.4 but somehow that is viewed as an indication that the team is better without you.  I haven't been able to figure out this one.  When I watch Brown play, I see a player who is really good and contributes to winning in a number of ways.  And is both a primary scorer and kind of a glue guy leader.

On/Off numbers get overblown because nobody ever remembers the context. Like last night for examples, the entire difference came in the 2:30 minutes at the end of the first. Boston outscored Dallas 9-2 where Boston hit like three straight insane threes after both Brown and Luka went to the bench. It was a combo of shooting luck and the other teams offensive engine leaving the game. Then Brown cam back in to start the second with both Tatum and KP out but Luka and Kyrie on and the C's played the Mavs even for three minutes until Tatum came back. Playing a team even when your best player is off and there's is on is A GOOD THING, but because of those first quarter rotations it penalizes Brown's on/off.

I imagine the Celtics will try to match Brown's minutes to Luka's very closely this series, since he's probably their best option on him. But that means his on/off will look funky because the Dallas offense will likely struggle when Luka, and hence Brown, is off the floor.

Brown sat out about 4 and a half minutes early in the 4th and Luka was on the floor the entire time for Dallas. 

[cman88]

This using stats to  discredit brown is getting old.

My eyes showed me him being aggressive on offense and blocking shots/stealing balls on defense. He was a monster last game and this playoffs.

Yet some here still think we should’ve traded him for average role players 

This team is not 1-0 in the finals or even IN the finals without brown.