Game 1: Just the numbers

[nickagneta]

I think the numbers that tell the real difference in this game are the second half numbers:

Pts:   Celtics 52, Lakers 37
Rebs:  Celtics 26, Lakers 18
FTM:   Celtics 19, Lakers 10
FTA:   Celtics 24, Lakers 14
FG%:   Celtics 39% Lakers 33%

Lakers Bench: 6 Pts, 4 Rebs, 1 Ast, 7 PFs, 1-8 FGM-A, 4-5 FTM-A
Celtic Bench: 7 Pts, 7 Rebs, 2 Ast, 4 PFs, 2-9 FGM-A, 2-2 FTM-A

This game was decided by a more energetic, more aggressive, more determined Celtic squad that out scored, out rebounded, and out shot the Lakers in the second half. Also, the Celtics bench held the Laker bench to a standstill in the second half. If the Lakers are to win their bench MUST be a factor in the game. Otherwise, they are doomed.

There is simply no other explanation than what our eyes witnessed and what the stats say and that is that the Celtics defense returned to their previous playoff excellence in the seond half and the Lakers had no answer for it on Thursday night. Will they adjust and willthe Celtics counter? That's to be determined.

[BballTim]

Totally irrelevant numbers.

The Lakers got their butts beat - bad - on the backboards and they offered up no inside defense whatsoever.

If that doesn't change soon, it will be a short series.

Period.

Actually, just by the number, Lakers always lost on the backboard, that is expected. If you want to, check out their stat against the Jazz. It is totally one sided in favor of the Jazz. Having a rebounding edge is nothing unusual about the Celtics. They always have that edge.

A few days ago, I spend a little bit of time looking at Celtics' playoff number. It was very clear to me, the greatest strength of the Celtis team is rebounding. Most of you (the Celtics fan) believe Celtics's greatest stength is in defense. It is not necessary the case especially in scoring defense, which does not accounted for rebounding, steal and turnover.

So we have 2 teams, one strong in rebound, one weak in rebound, it is the biggest Celtics advantage.

  First of all, I think you're placing too much emphasis on our playoff numbers. We're not playing like the team that lost 3 in Atlanta. Also, while you discount the regular season, the numbers for the Lakers look a lot more like their regular season numbers vs the Celts than their postseason numbers, where 2/3 of their games were played against teams that are much worse defensively than we are. Having said that, though, we're leading the league in the playoffs in both points against and defensive efficiency. How is that not a strength for us?

[seccom]

Totally irrelevant numbers.

The Lakers got their butts beat - bad - on the backboards and they offered up no inside defense whatsoever.

If that doesn't change soon, it will be a short series.

Period.

Actually, just by the number, Lakers always lost on the backboard, that is expected. If you want to, check out their stat against the Jazz. It is totally one sided in favor of the Jazz. Having a rebounding edge is nothing unusual about the Celtics. They always have that edge.

A few days ago, I spend a little bit of time looking at Celtics' playoff number. It was very clear to me, the greatest strength of the Celtis team is rebounding. Most of you (the Celtics fan) believe Celtics's greatest stength is in defense. It is not necessary the case especially in scoring defense, which does not accounted for rebounding, steal and turnover.

So we have 2 teams, one strong in rebound, one weak in rebound, it is the biggest Celtics advantage.

Yes, the Celtics biggest advantage over the Lakers may indeed be their rebounding, but overall their biggest strength is their defense.  The Celtics don't shoot the ball much at all, and yet they outscore their opponents by a silly amount.  That means they make a lot of stops (and hit their 3's at a pretty good rate on offense). 

What you saw in the 4th quarter of Game 1 - the lock down, give `em nothing, defense - was the type of thing we have become quite accustomed to from this years Celtics. 

So, yes, there is a big advantage over the Lakers in rebounding, but the overall defense is this team's mantra, and it is what beat the Lakers into submission in Game 1.

Redz, I try not to get too emotional about my team's winning or losing. However, the game log does not support what are saying. The game log told me the game is still in doubt with a few minutes to go. The closest lead for the Celtics is 4 points after Gasol missed one of two free throws.

[seccom]

I think the numbers that tell the real difference in this game are the second half numbers:

Pts:   Celtics 52, Lakers 37
Rebs:  Celtics 26, Lakers 18
FTM:   Celtics 19, Lakers 10
FTA:   Celtics 24, Lakers 14
FG%:   Celtics 39% Lakers 33%

Lakers Bench: 6 Pts, 4 Rebs, 1 Ast, 7 PFs, 1-8 FGM-A, 4-5 FTM-A
Celtic Bench: 7 Pts, 7 Rebs, 2 Ast, 4 PFs, 2-9 FGM-A, 2-2 FTM-A

This game was decided by a more energetic, more aggressive, more determined Celtic squad that out scored, out rebounded, and out shot the Lakers in the second half. Also, the Celtics bench held the Laker bench to a standstill in the second half. If the Lakers are to win their bench MUST be a factor in the game. Otherwise, they are doomed.

There is simply no other explanation than what our eyes witnessed and what the stats say and that is that the Celtics defense returned to their previous playoff excellence in the seond half and the Lakers had no answer for it on Thursday night. Will they adjust and willthe Celtics counter? That's to be determined.

What is the best website to get your stat? I want to see Qtr by Qtr stat, as well as turnover, steal, blocks etc.

[Roy Hobbs]

I think the numbers that tell the real difference in this game are the second half numbers:

Pts:   Celtics 52, Lakers 37
Rebs:  Celtics 26, Lakers 18
FTM:   Celtics 19, Lakers 10
FTA:   Celtics 24, Lakers 14
FG%:   Celtics 39% Lakers 33%

Lakers Bench: 6 Pts, 4 Rebs, 1 Ast, 7 PFs, 1-8 FGM-A, 4-5 FTM-A
Celtic Bench: 7 Pts, 7 Rebs, 2 Ast, 4 PFs, 2-9 FGM-A, 2-2 FTM-A

This game was decided by a more energetic, more aggressive, more determined Celtic squad that out scored, out rebounded, and out shot the Lakers in the second half. Also, the Celtics bench held the Laker bench to a standstill in the second half. If the Lakers are to win their bench MUST be a factor in the game. Otherwise, they are doomed.

There is simply no other explanation than what our eyes witnessed and what the stats say and that is that the Celtics defense returned to their previous playoff excellence in the seond half and the Lakers had no answer for it on Thursday night. Will they adjust and willthe Celtics counter? That's to be determined.

What is the best website to get your stat? I want to see Qtr by Qtr stat, as well as turnover, steal, blocks etc.

http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/boxscore.cgi?date=20080605&game=LALBOS

http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/gameflow.cgi?date=20080605&game=LALBOS

[Redz]

Redz, I try not to get too emotional about my team's winning or losing. However, the game log does not support what are saying. The game log told me the game is still in doubt with a few minutes to go. The closest lead for the Celtics is 4 points after Gasol missed one of two free throws.

The Lakers had one field goal in the final 6:53 of the game (1-for-14 if I counted right).  Yes, the score was "within range", but the outcome was never in doubt, because the Celtics were not allowing the Lakers to score.

I guess I've seen the Celtics playing D at that level enough times to know that they were not going to lose at that point.  I remember seeing  Pedro Martinez have some 1-0 leads for the Red Sox that may as well have been 100-0 - same deal. 

I suppose that's a bit emotional, but I know it when I see it.  The outcome was not in doubt despite the score.

[seccom]

I think the numbers that tell the real difference in this game are the second half numbers:

Pts:   Celtics 52, Lakers 37
Rebs:  Celtics 26, Lakers 18
FTM:   Celtics 19, Lakers 10
FTA:   Celtics 24, Lakers 14
FG%:   Celtics 39% Lakers 33%

Lakers Bench: 6 Pts, 4 Rebs, 1 Ast, 7 PFs, 1-8 FGM-A, 4-5 FTM-A
Celtic Bench: 7 Pts, 7 Rebs, 2 Ast, 4 PFs, 2-9 FGM-A, 2-2 FTM-A

This game was decided by a more energetic, more aggressive, more determined Celtic squad that out scored, out rebounded, and out shot the Lakers in the second half. Also, the Celtics bench held the Laker bench to a standstill in the second half. If the Lakers are to win their bench MUST be a factor in the game. Otherwise, they are doomed.

There is simply no other explanation than what our eyes witnessed and what the stats say and that is that the Celtics defense returned to their previous playoff excellence in the seond half and the Lakers had no answer for it on Thursday night. Will they adjust and willthe Celtics counter? That's to be determined.

What is the best website to get your stat? I want to see Qtr by Qtr stat, as well as turnover, steal, blocks etc.

http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/boxscore.cgi?date=20080605&game=LALBOS

http://popcornmachine.net/cgi-bin/gameflow.cgi?date=20080605&game=LALBOS

When Nick first posted those number, I asked myself, what keep the Lakers close until the last few minutes?

So here is the last strange stat: Lakers had 4 offensive rebound to the Celtics' 2. I never expected that. How much do I know?

Roy, thank you for the link.

[BballTim]

I think the numbers that tell the real difference in this game are the second half numbers:

Pts:   Celtics 52, Lakers 37
Rebs:  Celtics 26, Lakers 18
FTM:   Celtics 19, Lakers 10
FTA:   Celtics 24, Lakers 14
FG%:   Celtics 39% Lakers 33%

Lakers Bench: 6 Pts, 4 Rebs, 1 Ast, 7 PFs, 1-8 FGM-A, 4-5 FTM-A
Celtic Bench: 7 Pts, 7 Rebs, 2 Ast, 4 PFs, 2-9 FGM-A, 2-2 FTM-A

This game was decided by a more energetic, more aggressive, more determined Celtic squad that out scored, out rebounded, and out shot the Lakers in the second half. Also, the Celtics bench held the Laker bench to a standstill in the second half. If the Lakers are to win their bench MUST be a factor in the game. Otherwise, they are doomed.

There is simply no other explanation than what our eyes witnessed and what the stats say and that is that the Celtics defense returned to their previous playoff excellence in the seond half and the Lakers had no answer for it on Thursday night. Will they adjust and willthe Celtics counter? That's to be determined.

  The Lakers had a good stretch (or we had a bad stretch defensively) over the last 9 minutes of the 2nd quarter. The Lakers scored 27 points in that time (61 in the other 39 minutes) and took 10 FT (18 in the other 39 minutes).

[paintitgreen]

Although seccom didn't see the game, he is right, the game was close right up to the last minute. (And incidentally, the Lakers only sent the Celtics to the line intentionally once.) I have a feeling most of the games will be like that. Both teams are very good and very different. The Lakers are young, quick, outstanding at ball movement, good at outside shooting and rarely turn the ball over, with decent team defense and subpar rebounding. The Celtics are pretty good at ball movement, good at outside shooting and turnover-prone, with outstanding team defense and very good rebounding. Neither team has really played a team like the other in the playoffs. Save me the Spurs arguments - they only had two offensive weapons with Ginobli out, their team defense is not as good as the Celtics' and they only have one rebounder - Duncan. Considering the Lakers had to come back from big deficits twice against the Spurs, if you add in better rebounding, defense, and more guys who can create offense, that's not a 4-1 series victory for LA. (On the other side, the Celtics haven't played in nearly as many high pressure playoff games together as the Spurs have.)

Game 1 didn't decide much, other than that the Celtics have to win 3 of the next 6 and the Lakers need 4. This will be a good competitive series. If the Celtics can consistently keep Kobe from penetrating, maintain control of the glass and get good ball movement of their own, they will win the series. If the Lakers can get their ball movement going and get Kobe into the paint with consistency, they will win the series. There's no way of telling how it will go. Phil and the Lakers are good at making adjustments - the Celtics need to stay consistent and get a few more of their shots going down. I thought both teams missed a lot of makeable (I won't say easy or "bunny" shots) shots in the 4th quarter, but  the Celtics D was outstanding and just makes a team have to take its shots quicker. That said, there were more than a few Lakers misses that will probably go down in future games.

Each team has good trends to take from that game, but neither played the best it's going to play in this series. Which is good for all of us, I think.