Celtics Defense Looks Fine to Me

[Celtics18]

The Celtics play at a pretty slow pace, here are the defensive ratings for those recent games you highlight:

Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our season average is 99.9, these six games average out to 96.61. But that rating is hugely pulled down by the Bucks game where we set several records for defense. Take it out and you have 103.02. Now that's censoring the data, but I think its justified, the lowest scoring total in the shot clock era is an outlier.

If you expand the sample to the post trade set of games you get this:

Denver 95.8
LAC    102.5
Utah   105.5
Suns   109.8
GSW    115.3
Bucks  95.2
LAC    118.5
Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our average is 101.7 for the entire sample, that's not schedule adjusted but the number does show a noticable decline.

I'm confused by these numbers.  According to HoopsData, our defensive rating for the year is 97.5. That puts us second in the league just behind Chicago.  During the Krstic and Green era we have regressed slightly averaging a defensive rating of 98.4. However, that would still put us second in the league.  

I know that defensive ratings vary according to variations in formulas used.  I would love to know which site you used so I can compare.  

I'm guessing that no matter where we looked, we might find a slight decline from our overall season numbers over the past 13 games, but we'd still be statistically right near the top of the league defensively from a statistical standpoint.

I'm using basketball reference's offense/defensive rating numbers. Individual games are from their advanced boxscores, from there I just averaged.

Thanks.  I looked on basketball reference, and as I suspected, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would still put us only behind Chicago's overall defensive rating. What I'm saying is that if we were at 101.7 for the season, we'd be the second best defensive team in the league. At 99.9, we're tied for first. Even if we decided to throw out our best defensive game to fit your hypothesis, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would be slightly ahead of Miami's overall rating who sit at 5th with a defensive rating of 103.2. 

A little perspective is always nice.

[winsomme]

Our defense looks fine to me, too. Sure, we allow opponents to score more generally since the trade but it has more to do with a lack of effort in my opinion. We've seen in the Hornets and Knicks games that the Celtics can still play great, suffocating D when it matters most to close out games and come back to win.

Krstic usually doesn't play in these stretches, and Green neither but they've been okay individually on D, although Krstic's D has been questionable in the last games. Anyway I'm not worried about our defense come playoffs time, I'm confident having Shaq and JO back (yes, I'm confident JO will be back and effective) will help fill whatever weakness we may have exposed in the middle recently.

I think people have chosen their sides on this topic and really aren't open to the other side's points at this stage.

But I do believe that Danny and Doc know that our defense right now is not strong enough in the middle to go deep into the playoffs and have expressed as much...

Time will tell. and as far as I'm concerned Shaq better get his fanny back on the floor pronto.

[yagru]

cmon now havent you ever heard the phrase "stats are for loosers". Watch the games. Watch how curly gets smoked by big men and by penetrators. Look at the way his teamates look at him after botched switches. Thats all you need to know. Again, I like the guy as a backup center but he sucks at D.

Why are people still mentioning JO? There is zero indication he will even be back for the playoffs. The fate of this team right now lays in Shaqs ability to comeback, Greens/Wests ability to make a postivie contribution on both ends of the ball.. and maybe a couple good efforts from Troy.

[Fafnir]

The Celtics play at a pretty slow pace, here are the defensive ratings for those recent games you highlight:

Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our season average is 99.9, these six games average out to 96.61. But that rating is hugely pulled down by the Bucks game where we set several records for defense. Take it out and you have 103.02. Now that's censoring the data, but I think its justified, the lowest scoring total in the shot clock era is an outlier.

If you expand the sample to the post trade set of games you get this:

Denver 95.8
LAC    102.5
Utah   105.5
Suns   109.8
GSW    115.3
Bucks  95.2
LAC    118.5
Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our average is 101.7 for the entire sample, that's not schedule adjusted but the number does show a noticable decline.

I'm confused by these numbers.  According to HoopsData, our defensive rating for the year is 97.5. That puts us second in the league just behind Chicago.  During the Krstic and Green era we have regressed slightly averaging a defensive rating of 98.4. However, that would still put us second in the league.  

I know that defensive ratings vary according to variations in formulas used.  I would love to know which site you used so I can compare.  

I'm guessing that no matter where we looked, we might find a slight decline from our overall season numbers over the past 13 games, but we'd still be statistically right near the top of the league defensively from a statistical standpoint.

I'm using basketball reference's offense/defensive rating numbers. Individual games are from their advanced boxscores, from there I just averaged.

Thanks.  I looked on basketball reference, and as I suspected, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would still put us only behind Chicago's overall defensive rating. What I'm saying is that if we were at 101.7 for the season, we'd be the second best defensive team in the league. At 99.9, we're tied for first. Even if we decided to throw out our best defensive game to fit your hypothesis, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would be slightly ahead of Miami's overall rating who sit at 5th with a defensive rating of 103.2.

A little perspective is always nice.

Consider that there is a clear outlier on the list, the Bucks game of 64.6. If you use the x-hilo average to throw out two outliers our defensive rating goes to 103.5, an even bigger drop.

That might only drop the C’s from tied for the league lead to top 5, but that’s still a big decline in defensive play.  That truly concerns me, because the C’s offense is average. To win a title this year we can’t just be a good defensive team, we have to be a lights out defensive team.

[kozlodoev]

cmon now havent you ever heard the phrase "stats are for loosers". Watch the games. Watch how curly gets smoked by big men and by penetrators. Look at the way his teamates look at him after botched switches. Thats all you need to know. Again, I like the guy as a backup center but he sucks at D.

Why are people still mentioning JO? There is zero indication he will even be back for the playoffs. The fate of this team right now lays in Shaqs ability to comeback, Greens/Wests ability to make a postivie contribution on both ends of the ball.. and maybe a couple good efforts from Troy.

I've heard the phrase "Generalizations are for lOsers"...

And here is your indication why people are mentioning Jermaine O'Neal.

http://www.bostonherald.com/blogs/sports/celtics/index.php/2011/03/23/jermaine-oneal-may-be-ready-by-next-week/

[Fafnir]

cmon now havent you ever heard the phrase "stats are for loosers". Watch the games. Watch how curly gets smoked by big men and by penetrators. Look at the way his teamates look at him after botched switches. Thats all you need to know. Again, I like the guy as a backup center but he sucks at D.

Why are people still mentioning JO? There is zero indication he will even be back for the playoffs. The fate of this team right now lays in Shaqs ability to comeback, Greens/Wests ability to make a postivie contribution on both ends of the ball.. and maybe a couple good efforts from Troy.

If by zero indication you mean several statements from DA, and the initial prognosis giving him a timetable of April

I mean its one thing to say you don't think he'll be back, but you can't just pretend there aren't signs he'll come back and play.

[Tai]

cmon now havent you ever heard the phrase "stats are for loosers". Watch the games. Watch how curly gets smoked by big men and by penetrators. Look at the way his teamates look at him after botched switches. Thats all you need to know. Again, I like the guy as a backup center but he sucks at D.

Why are people still mentioning JO? There is zero indication he will even be back for the playoffs. The fate of this team right now lays in Shaqs ability to comeback, Greens/Wests ability to make a postivie contribution on both ends of the ball.. and maybe a couple good efforts from Troy.

If by zero indication you mean several statements from DA, and the initial prognosis giving him a timetable of April

I mean its one thing to say you don't think he'll be back, but you can't just pretend there aren't signs he'll come back and play.

Seriously...I still remember that topic about Danny being called a liar for thinking that JO might be back. I mean, really?

[Celtics18]

The Celtics play at a pretty slow pace, here are the defensive ratings for those recent games you highlight:

Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our season average is 99.9, these six games average out to 96.61. But that rating is hugely pulled down by the Bucks game where we set several records for defense. Take it out and you have 103.02. Now that's censoring the data, but I think its justified, the lowest scoring total in the shot clock era is an outlier.

If you expand the sample to the post trade set of games you get this:

Denver 95.8
LAC    102.5
Utah   105.5
Suns   109.8
GSW    115.3
Bucks  95.2
LAC    118.5
Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our average is 101.7 for the entire sample, that's not schedule adjusted but the number does show a noticable decline.

I'm confused by these numbers.  According to HoopsData, our defensive rating for the year is 97.5. That puts us second in the league just behind Chicago.  During the Krstic and Green era we have regressed slightly averaging a defensive rating of 98.4. However, that would still put us second in the league.  

I know that defensive ratings vary according to variations in formulas used.  I would love to know which site you used so I can compare.  

I'm guessing that no matter where we looked, we might find a slight decline from our overall season numbers over the past 13 games, but we'd still be statistically right near the top of the league defensively from a statistical standpoint.

I'm using basketball reference's offense/defensive rating numbers. Individual games are from their advanced boxscores, from there I just averaged.

Thanks.  I looked on basketball reference, and as I suspected, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would still put us only behind Chicago's overall defensive rating. What I'm saying is that if we were at 101.7 for the season, we'd be the second best defensive team in the league. At 99.9, we're tied for first. Even if we decided to throw out our best defensive game to fit your hypothesis, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would be slightly ahead of Miami's overall rating who sit at 5th with a defensive rating of 103.2.

A little perspective is always nice.

Consider that there is a clear outlier on the list, the Bucks game of 64.6. If you use the x-hilo average to throw out two outliers our defensive rating goes to 103.5, an even bigger drop.

That might only drop the C’s from tied for the league lead to top 5, but that’s still a big decline in defensive play.  That truly concerns me, because the C’s offense is average. To win a title this year we can’t just be a good defensive team, we have to be a lights out defensive team.

I don't know what the x-hilo average is, but does that mean that you now throw out the 2 best defensive games that we've played over a 13 game stretch to try to prove how much our defense has regressed?

[wdleehi]

The Celtics play at a pretty slow pace, here are the defensive ratings for those recent games you highlight:

Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our season average is 99.9, these six games average out to 96.61. But that rating is hugely pulled down by the Bucks game where we set several records for defense. Take it out and you have 103.02. Now that's censoring the data, but I think its justified, the lowest scoring total in the shot clock era is an outlier.

If you expand the sample to the post trade set of games you get this:

Denver 95.8
LAC    102.5
Utah   105.5
Suns   109.8
GSW    115.3
Bucks  95.2
LAC    118.5
Philly  99.1
Bucks   64.6
NJ      103.9
Houston 106.7
NO      106.9
NY      98.5

Our average is 101.7 for the entire sample, that's not schedule adjusted but the number does show a noticable decline.

I'm confused by these numbers.  According to HoopsData, our defensive rating for the year is 97.5. That puts us second in the league just behind Chicago.  During the Krstic and Green era we have regressed slightly averaging a defensive rating of 98.4. However, that would still put us second in the league.  

I know that defensive ratings vary according to variations in formulas used.  I would love to know which site you used so I can compare.  

I'm guessing that no matter where we looked, we might find a slight decline from our overall season numbers over the past 13 games, but we'd still be statistically right near the top of the league defensively from a statistical standpoint.

I'm using basketball reference's offense/defensive rating numbers. Individual games are from their advanced boxscores, from there I just averaged.

Thanks.  I looked on basketball reference, and as I suspected, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would still put us only behind Chicago's overall defensive rating. What I'm saying is that if we were at 101.7 for the season, we'd be the second best defensive team in the league. At 99.9, we're tied for first. Even if we decided to throw out our best defensive game to fit your hypothesis, our defensive rating over the last 13 games would be slightly ahead of Miami's overall rating who sit at 5th with a defensive rating of 103.2.

A little perspective is always nice.

Consider that there is a clear outlier on the list, the Bucks game of 64.6. If you use the x-hilo average to throw out two outliers our defensive rating goes to 103.5, an even bigger drop.

That might only drop the C’s from tied for the league lead to top 5, but that’s still a big decline in defensive play.  That truly concerns me, because the C’s offense is average. To win a title this year we can’t just be a good defensive team, we have to be a lights out defensive team.

I don't know what the x-hilo average is, but does that mean that you now throw out the 2 best defensive games that we've played over a 13 game stretch to try to prove how much our defense has regressed?

It means you throw out the highest number and the lowest number. 

[Jon]

Well, if Jermaine O'Neal is truly going to be back, that could go a long way in helping our defense. 

[bucknersrevenge]

The defense has played well in stretches, but Krstic is a major liability in the middle.  He's been terrible -- I mean, legitimately horrendous -- at rotating / switching and cutting off penetration.  He looks lost regarding when to help, etc., and he's too slow to recover or to slide over to pick up opponents driving to the hoop.
If Shaq comes back, that hopefully won't be a huge issue.  Shaq has some of the same issues (but to a lesser extent), but he's a big, imposing figure in the lane who makes opponents pay with hard fouls.  Krstic just plays soft.

However, if Shaq can't come back, here's why Krstic's play is important:  our defense is built around our big men, from the inside out.  The tough play of KG + Perk or Shaq has allowed our perimeter defenders to play tighter defense on the outside, without having to worry as much that their defensive assignment will blow by them.  The team has been successful at sealing off penetration, in other words, which further allows Rondo to gamble more, etc.  If one of our bigs -- i.e., Krstic, but really any of them -- starts playing matador defense, that not only allows the opposing center to go off (like Ronny Turiaf), but also leads to the other team running layup drills against us (like Carmelo did several times).

So, let's get Shaq back in there, and if JO can contribute as well, fantastic.  Without either (or both) of them, I worry that we're in trouble.

Now I haven't noticed this at all. I actually went to the game last Sunday against Milwaukee and I watched Krstic specifically. He made the correct rotation every single time he was supposed to make it and on time. He was not late with help. He hedged perfectly on the pick n roll in that game and got back to his man quickly. He's not Perk but I just haven't seen what's being described above.

Even in the Clippers game that everyone likes to throw at Krstic's doormat, Krstic made all the proper rotations to help in that game. The reason why his man scored 21 was because Randy Foye treated Rondo and more specifically Ray Allen like a turnstile and Krstic had to step up and make the correct rotation to cut off the penetration leaving his man open. I'd say the real issue with this team lately has NOT been in the middle but the inordinate amount of penetration by guards that our starters have allowed. Watching Ray and Rondo play defense the last week plus has been an unmitigated disaster.

Will all due respect, I think your grasp of the Cs defense is superficial at best, and that doesn't put you in a very good position as a fan to determine whether Krstic is making the proper rotation or not.  The Cs defense is built on making the right read at the right time, selling out physically to make the rotation, and then having the knowledge to know EXACTLY where to rotate to.  I think Krstic struggles in all three areas.

I guy like Krstic--somebody with limited athleticism--needs to have a firm grasp on the defense in order to be a decent defender.  His understanding--right now--is lacking, and that makes his physical limitations that much more impossible to overcome.  There's a reason our defense is much much better with a 6'7" Glen Davis at center--he knows the defense and he makes the right rotation almost every time, and he does it ON TIME.

There was a play last night where Krstic was out of position by a half step (about 2 feet).  He was trying to position himself outside of the lane as a 2nd defender behind Anthony, but he overcommitted himself by that half step and it opened up a lane to make the pass to the man he was supposed to be guarding and forced Ray Allen to drop back and make the foul, leading to an And-1.  And even before the ball went through the hoop, Ray Allen was in Krstic's face showing him exactly where he needed to be to stop that pass AND still provide backside support for the potential dribble penetration.

Krstic has the potential to be a DECENT defender once he completely understands when and where he needs to be at all times.  He's not there yet and I don't think there's enough of the season to get him there. 

Translation: "With all due respect, you're stupid. Luckily you have me to clear things up"

LOL Thank you sir for teaching me the error of my ways. How about "you're grasp of the Celtics defense needs work". See, two can play this game. I just don't think we get anywhere by it.

[tenn_smoothie]

the Celtics defense looks OK to you ??   

let me clue you in on an amazing stat since "The Trade"  -  all of the sudden, OKC is allowing less "points in the paint" per game and the Celtics are giving up more, as in a 2-to-1 margin in the loss to Memphis tonite.

i can't imagine why that would be ??

[Bankshot]

the Celtics defense looks OK to you ??   

let me clue you in on an amazing stat since "The Trade"  -  all of the sudden, OKC is allowing less "points in the paint" per game and the Celtics are giving up more, as in a 2-to-1 margin in the loss to Memphis tonite.

i can't imagine why that would be ??

Yes, the defense only gave up 90 points.  The offense is sputtering and Rondo's decision making isn't helping.

[winsomme]

the Celtics defense looks OK to you ??   

let me clue you in on an amazing stat since "The Trade"  -  all of the sudden, OKC is allowing less "points in the paint" per game and the Celtics are giving up more, as in a 2-to-1 margin in the loss to Memphis tonite.

i can't imagine why that would be ??

Yes, the defense only gave up 90 points.  The offense is sputtering and Rondo's decision making isn't helping.

C'Mon Bank. We have little to no interior play on offense or defense. KG is gonna get burnt out and Baby needs to move back into his bench role.

the number of points is really not relevant. we just are not controlling the paint and it's killing us. 11 offensive rebounds for MEM doesn't help.

[Bankshot]

the Celtics defense looks OK to you ??   

let me clue you in on an amazing stat since "The Trade"  -  all of the sudden, OKC is allowing less "points in the paint" per game and the Celtics are giving up more, as in a 2-to-1 margin in the loss to Memphis tonite.

i can't imagine why that would be ??

Yes, the defense only gave up 90 points.  The offense is sputtering and Rondo's decision making isn't helping.

C'Mon Bank. We have little to no interior play on offense or defense. KG is gonna get burnt out and Baby needs to move back into his bench role.

the number of points is really not relevant. we just are not controlling the paint and it's killing us. 11 offensive rebounds for MEM doesn't help.

Yes, we're missing one of the O'Neals, but they still only gave up 90 points.  KG didn't do enough and got owned in the paint and Krstic was horrible and didn't give anything (that's where one of the O'Neals come in) and Rondo killed us with his decision making and jumpshots.