Celtics starters are Jeckyl & Hyde in wins & losses

[nickagneta]

Having watched as the starters laid another horrible display of bsketball upon us, I couldn't help but wonder just how different these players were in their wins as opposed to their losses. So I took a look at the stats of each starter in their wins versus their losses, figuring that would tell me where the problem lies and where some blame could be laid.

Here's the stats:

Player                FG%     3PT%       REB       AST      TO      PTS

Pierce-win      .460        .340           4.4          4.5       3.9     25.0
Pierce-loss    .394        .368           4.4          4.5       3.4     17.1 

Garnett-win     .522        1.00           9.5          5.1       1.6     25.1
Garnett-loss    .504        0.00           9.5          2.8       2.3     21.4 

Perkins-win     .550        0.00           8.9          0.6        1.6     7.0   
Perkins-loss   .618        0.00           5.1          0.8        1.1     7.9       

Allen-win         .345       .333           6.9           3.5        0.6     14.1
Allen-loss       .426       .268           4.0           3.0        0.6     13.6 

Rondo-win        .500      .167          9.0         10.3       2.3      15.3
Rondo-loss      .352      .167          3.8           5.3        2.1       8.8

So let's look at the obvious that we already knew:

- the starters average 17.7 points less per game in losses as compared to wins
- the starters average 12.7 rebounds less per game in losses as compared to wins
- the starters average 7.6 assists less per game in losses as compared to wins
- as a group the starters are 201-468 in field goals made/attempted for a % of .442 during losses
- as a group the starters are 269-559 in field goals made/attempted for a % of .469 during wins
- the starters have taken 91 more shots in wins as opposed to losses
- the only
- except for his rebounding, which is why he is in there, Perkins is the only consistent starter but he plays the least amount of minutes in the group


So why? Why is this group such a different entity in their wins versus their losses?

I have a couple of theories.

1.) The Celtics are just not reacting well to the hostile environment that is the road in the playoffs. It has been especially tough for anyone to do it as road teams as a whole in the playoffs. Road teams are 18-57 for a winning percentage of .25. That's tough.

The amount of games that the Celtics are playing is finally catching up to them as except for about 3 stretches(first 2 wins Atlanta, last win Atlanta and 2 wins to start Cleveland, last Cleveland win and first Detroit win) it seems to take four days four this team to recover. They win, two days later the lose, two days later they win. They have now played 15 games in 30 days. Could it really take 4 days to recover to be able to give a winning effort for this team?

2.) Doc isn't making any adjustments after wins. I mean except for the occasional Eddie/Sam, Leon/BBD switcheroo he's not making all that many adjustments at all. What I have seen is adjustments such as:

-not looking to involve Allen that much in the offense to at points forcing it into Allen' hands with only mixed results.
-in the Atlanta series he went away for the lost post feed and ran more high pick and rolls. Good results
-he switched Pierce onto LeBron as an almost exclusive defender after Posey got burnt way to much at the hands of Bron.

Doc needs to be more aware that the opposition will be making adjustments after a loss and prepare his players for that change. Even if it's to let them know that they will have to give even more effort after a win. Perhaps he's doing it but I just haven't seen evidence of it from the players. Of course, the players just may not be doing what they are told.

3.) The starters are getting no boost from their bench when they aren't playing well. I don't remember a single loss where the bench played well but the starters sucked. If the bench produced when the starters were faltering it might just reinvigorate the starters. But when you know that things aren't going well as a starter and then you leave the game and come back into the game at the same point differential or even worse it can demoralize you a little bit. Maybe not but it's just a theory.

Well, that's what I can think of. If anyone else has any theories as to why this is happening, please, share it because I'm baffled all to hell.
 

[clover]

Of course a small sample of mostly offensive #'s, but interesting. 

What stands out to me is that KG and Perk have been fairly consistent (with some variation in Perk's rebounding), and Paul and Ray actually have some better stats when they lose.  It's really been how Rondo goes as how the C's go: when his #'s are on they win, and so you see the up-and-down difference in his stats between winning and losing.

[wdleehi]

It is missing the most important part, defense.




Would be interesting to see what their counterparts do in such a breakdown. 

[nickagneta]

Of course a small sample of mostly offensive #'s, but interesting. 

What stands out to me is that KG and Perk have been fairly consistent (with some variation in Perk's rebounding), and Paul and Ray actually have some better stats when they lose.  It's really been how Rondo goes as how the C's go: when his #'s are on they win, and so you see the up-and-down difference in his stats between winning and losing.

Pierce and Allen may shoot better in losses but overall their game is poorer when they lose. Rondo is the key as you said. Many wondered if the Celtics could win in the playoffs with a young unexperienced PG who isn't really the best outside shooter. I think that's been answered. Yes, they they can but not consistently.

The offensive lack of production has been bad, as the stats above have shown. On the defensive side these guys aren't doing the job either. The numbers have been shown at ESPN.com and on the networks during the games. They are staggeringly bad, especially the FG% allowed and points allowed in wins versus loses.

[jay_jay54]

Nick i was thinking the same thing earlier today,the Jeckyl & Hyde thing with our team.Mike Gorman,(postgame)stated that the team pre-game approach seemed to lacksidasical to his liking.He felt,they didn't come to Detroit with a focus of a team who wanted to win last night.Also,Tommy,has said on many occasions,about the team not taking enough shots in a game to win.In order to win,their has to be a certain amount of shots taken/made.Sometimes it seems hard to find anyone who really wants to take shots of the starters.Its almost like,(they are afraid to fail),to take shots,because something or someone will jump on them if they miss...and i quote from a few famous people,"you always pass failure on your way to success",Mickey Rooney,and another one i like is,"you can't have any successes unless you can accept failure",George Cukor.