chris sheridan of espn writes on celtics

[GKC]

I remember reading and hearing former Auerbach players, saying that one of the reasons many of them entered the coaching business was because Red used to encourage them to design plays and give input, even during games.

The Celtics are 26th in the league in ORB% - this has no relation with FG%, as its the percentage of available rebounding opportunities. For every 100 shots they miss, they only board 23.9 of them. The Hawks, for example, rebound 30 for each of their own 100 misses.

The correlation (an inverse one) exists between offensive rebounding and transition defence - if you're not crashing the glass with 2 or 3 guys, you have them available to get back quicker (that was always Popovich priority, especially when facing the Suns). However, the Celtics used to be able to do both at an acceptable level - last season they ranked 8th in ORB%. This season they aren't doing none of them well.

To be fair, 8 out of the 14 games we played were against "running" teams.

[Fafnir]

I remember reading and hearing former Auerbach players, saying that one of the reasons many of them entered the coaching business was because Red used to encourage them to design plays and give input, even during games.

The Celtics are 26th in the league in ORB% - this has no relation with FG%, as its the percentage of available rebounding opportunities. For every 100 shots they miss, they only board 23.9 of them. The Hawks, for example, rebound 30 for each of their own 100 misses.

The correlation (an inverse one) exists between offensive rebounding and transition defence - if you're not crashing the glass with 2 or 3 guys, you have them available to get back quicker (that was always Popovich priority, especially when facing the Suns). However, the Celtics used to be able to do both at an acceptable level - last season they ranked 8th in ORB%. This season they aren't doing none of them well.

To be fair, 8 out of the 14 games we played were against "running" teams.

The issue is that our backup 4 used to grab offensive rebounds. Sheed doesn't hit the offensive glass.

I don't view that as a huge problem, as long as we're a strong defensive rebounding team.

[CelticG1]

I thought the article was pretty spot on except for his last point. Even the quote that he has from Doc doesn't even sound like he is not listening to him. Sounded more like he listened and offered up another option, an option that ended up being pretty successful. The team might not be listening to Doc at times this season but I think this is about the worst example he could have came up with. He probably could have just said that they aren't moving the ball like Doc wants, aren't playing enough D, aren't grabbing rebounds, are settling for jump shots. I think these things would have illustrated Sheridan's point better than that stupid conclusion.

[scoop]

To be fair, 8 out of the 14 games we played were against "running" teams.

What do you define as a "running" team? Most teams in the league either play slow or slower.

ORB% is important. It's the most important factor to explain why the Celtics, even though they are 2nd in the league in eFG%, are only an average offensive team at this point.  

[scoop]

I don't view that as a huge problem, as long as we're a strong defensive rebounding team.

That we aren't either. This teams needs to improve rebounding quite a bit if they want to have the change of fighting for the title.

[Fafnir]

I don't view that as a huge problem, as long as we're a strong defensive rebounding team.

That we aren't either. This teams needs to improve rebounding quite a bit if they want to have the change of fighting for the title.

Yeah I'm aware of that too unfortunately.

This team needs to pick it up in a lot of areas if we expect to raise another banner.

[guava_wrench]

I remember reading and hearing former Auerbach players, saying that one of the reasons many of them entered the coaching business was because Red used to encourage them to design plays and give input, even during games.

The Celtics are 26th in the league in ORB% - this has no relation with FG%, as its the percentage of available rebounding opportunities. For every 100 shots they miss, they only board 23.9 of them. The Hawks, for example, rebound 30 for each of their own 100 misses.

The correlation (an inverse one) exists between offensive rebounding and transition defence - if you're not crashing the glass with 2 or 3 guys, you have them available to get back quicker (that was always Popovich priority, especially when facing the Suns). However, the Celtics used to be able to do both at an acceptable level - last season they ranked 8th in ORB%. This season they aren't doing none of them well.

To be fair, 8 out of the 14 games we played were against "running" teams.

The issue is that our backup 4 used to grab offensive rebounds. Sheed doesn't hit the offensive glass.

I don't view that as a huge problem, as long as we're a strong defensive rebounding team.

Why are you mentioning Sheed? Shelden is the one who hits the glass.

[guava_wrench]

I have to agree with everything in that article.

I would co-sign except for his last bullet point regarding Doc.  The same thing happened last year, on multiple occasions I think, though there was at least one specific end-of-game basket that comes to mind - if memory serves, it was Ray's corner three to beat Philly on the road in February - where Doc said something similar after the game: that his players came to him in the huddle and asked that they run something else.  That sounds like a discussion between players and coach to me - the type of discussion that, from everything I read, Red Auerbach also encouraged his players to instigate as well (albeit perhaps more in practices than late-game spots, though I can't remember if his attitude about that was different in-game). 

A team that quits on his coach and goes out and ignores his play-calls on the floor is one thing.  This sounds like something considerably less problematic to me.

What irks me about the inclusion of this point in Sheridan's article is that I think he is right on in every other spot (namely his KG paragraph, as hero shot aside, KG was horrific today - about as bad as it got on the floor for the Celtics, and that may include the efforts of Mr. Wallace), so I really don't see the need of throwing in a stretch point at the end.  Why muddy up a piece that already includes several other good points?

-sw

I agree that his example for why the players aren't listening to Doc was weak at best.

On the other hand, I do agree that it seems as if the team isn't really listening to Doc.  Considering how the team has been playing lately, I have to assume either a) the team isn't listening to the things Doc tells them they need to work on or b) Doc is so inept that he hasn't been able to properly direct his team in doing things differently. 

I really don't think it's "b" because in recent interviews Doc has listed many things the team is doing wrong.  I can only conclude the team isn't really listening to him - at least not as much as they ought to.

What makes you think a coach can make much of a difference in this situation?

[LarBrd33]

its not the only reason, but holy crap is Sheed in a slump or what?

In his last 8 games he's 5-41 from three.  12%.   BRUTAL.

[pearljammer10]

Theres no point about the offensive ball movement or lack of cutting and slashing in the offensive rotation? The celts have been so flat and doing way too much dribbling...Or the lack of inside presence, the whole game is all jump shooting...

And KG is clearly not 100% like its been said... The biggest notice was in the Magic game when KG let White Chocolate just lay the ball in the basket without even attempting to block the shot (which should have been an easy shot block). Also his numerous dunk attempts have scared me. I wonder if its physical or all mental.

[Roy Hobbs]

My main problem was his offensive rebounding point. He says that nobody talks about how little the offensive rebounding and second chance points the Celtics get because they have the highest FG%.

He needs to know that those things are CORRELATED.

If you make the most shots, you obviously have less chances to GET an offensive rebound. Also, against many teams, NOT going for offensive rebounds make you better defensively. Popovich's advice to the Spurs when going against the Suns and the Nets in the playoffs was specifically to not attempt any offensive rebounds and run back on D.

But to prove my point on the offensive rebounding stat?

09-10 (to date): Celtics 1st in FG%, 29th in ORB
08-09: Suns 1st in FG%, 16th in ORB
07-08: Suns 1st in FG%, 30th in ORB
06-07: Suns 1st in FG%, 30th in ORB
05-06: Suns 1st in FG%, 30th in ORB

Now it may not be a correlation since these are just 2 teams, but it is mathematically obvious that better offensive teams have less ORB. In fact, there's a reason why teams have HIGHER ORB's than the Celtics; because they miss more shots.

When the Celtics give up more ORBs, I'm never worried if we made more shots. Because that makes sense. It's when give up offensive rebounds and shoot more poorly than our competition, that's when I worry.

Good points, but note that the Celtics also are near the bottom of the league in offensive rebounding percentage, i.e., the percentage of boards they get from all available offensive rebounds.  This adjusts for raw number of shots taken and missed.  The Celtics rank 26th in that category.  Phoenix -- which now leads the league in FG% -- is 10th.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/leagues/NBA_2010.html

EDIT:  Or, what scoop said.

[LB3533]

Why would we be a good offensive rebounding team when we as a team assuming the shots are going to go in?

None of the starting players, save Rondo, try extra hard to go after offensive rebound. Perk does go hard sometimes, but he doesn't go out of his way for them.

Now, Baby and Powe have done this in the past.

Sheldon can only do so much in limited minutes.

And despite the low ORB% for the C's, there just aren't that many available to grab.

The Suns also shoot more FG's and get to the line more than the C's...more chances to grab the boards.

Also, minutes. If Perk, KG, Sheldon played more minutes, our offensive rebound percentage may increase.

[Fafnir]

I remember reading and hearing former Auerbach players, saying that one of the reasons many of them entered the coaching business was because Red used to encourage them to design plays and give input, even during games.

The Celtics are 26th in the league in ORB% - this has no relation with FG%, as its the percentage of available rebounding opportunities. For every 100 shots they miss, they only board 23.9 of them. The Hawks, for example, rebound 30 for each of their own 100 misses.

The correlation (an inverse one) exists between offensive rebounding and transition defence - if you're not crashing the glass with 2 or 3 guys, you have them available to get back quicker (that was always Popovich priority, especially when facing the Suns). However, the Celtics used to be able to do both at an acceptable level - last season they ranked 8th in ORB%. This season they aren't doing none of them well.

To be fair, 8 out of the 14 games we played were against "running" teams.

The issue is that our backup 4 used to grab offensive rebounds. Sheed doesn't hit the offensive glass.

I don't view that as a huge problem, as long as we're a strong defensive rebounding team.

Why are you mentioning Sheed? Shelden is the one who hits the glass.

I meant compared to last year. BBD/Powe used to be getting offensive boards, now we have KG coming back from his surgery and Sheed so our offensive rebounding has taken a big hit.

[nickagneta]

I've said this a lot this summer. Defense and rebounding wins championships.

The Celtics are doing neither very well recently. Is it any wonder they have been struggling since the beginning of the month.

[ssspence]

I've said this a lot this summer. Defense and rebounding wins championships.

The Celtics are doing neither very well recently. Is it any wonder they have been struggling since the beginning of the month.

I agree, it's pretty straight forward. Sheridan makes fine points in his article.