not good: 2nd half in both games were the 2 worst scoring halves ever

[SHAQATTACK]

Celtics rely or are built around Pierce and KG.   Aging , they are probally giving it all they got. 

KG seems hurt or has finally hit the wall and can't force his body to play like he did year past.

Ray Allen would have been some help , but probably been hurt too had he stayed from having to play to much and too hard to help the C's.   It would have been about the same as JET , another oldie .   

NY has a a few nice players in the prime plus a Superstar cal player in his prime THAT CAN SCORE.

I don't think the Knicks are all that good , the Celtics stars are old and needing to retire I guess.

[BballTim]

Celtics rely or are built around Pierce and KG.   Aging , they are probally giving it all they got. 

KG seems hurt or has finally hit the wall and can't force his body to play like he did year past.

Ray Allen would have been some help , but probably been hurt too had he stayed from having to play to much and too hard to help the C's.   It would have been about the same as JET , another oldie .   

NY has a a few nice players in the prime plus a Superstar cal player in his prime THAT CAN SCORE.

I don't think the Knicks are all that good , the Celtics stars are old and needing to retire I guess.

  While he didn't show up in your analysis the Celts are missing the player who scored or assisted a higher percentage of his team's points than anyone else in the league in last year's playoffs.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

In franchise history for the Celtics. Are the Knicks outcoaching us with their 2nd half adjustments?

couldn't be!
Doc is the 2nd best coach in the league right now!!

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[Chris]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down. 

[BballTim]

Celtics- 1st team in shot-clock era (1954–55 season) to score 25 or fewer 2nd half points in consecutive games, regular or postseason

  The worst part of it is the Knicks are a below average defensive team. If we manage to get by them things the offense won't get any easier.

[MBunge]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down.

It's probably true that Boston had little to no chance without Rondo, but the plain truth is that the Celtic offense has been getting worse and worse the last few years.  Even with Rondo, this team has been prone to truly awful offensive performances.

Doc's offense is too rigid, too predictable and too focused on running half-court plays for Pierce and Garnett.  Iman Shumpert had as many shots last night in 18 minutes and Bass did in 34.  That was ridiculous.

Mike

[celticslove]

In franchise history for the Celtics. Are the Knicks outcoaching us with their 2nd half adjustments?

couldn't be!
Doc is the 2nd best coach in the league right now!!

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^THIS^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

lol it's gonna be hard outcoaching a HoF genius.

[Chris]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down.

It's probably true that Boston had little to no chance without Rondo, but the plain truth is that the Celtic offense has been getting worse and worse the last few years.  Even with Rondo, this team has been prone to truly awful offensive performances.

Doc's offense is too rigid, too predictable and too focused on running half-court plays for Pierce and Garnett.  Iman Shumpert had as many shots last night in 18 minutes and Bass did in 34.  That was ridiculous.

Mike

I don't disagree that the offense has been bad the last few years.  Although I think there could be a strong argument that the problem with the offense before Rondo went down was not that they went to Pierce and Garnett too much, but it consisted too much of Rondo pounding the ball in the halfcourt waiting for something to happen.

[BballTim]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down.

It's probably true that Boston had little to no chance without Rondo, but the plain truth is that the Celtic offense has been getting worse and worse the last few years.  Even with Rondo, this team has been prone to truly awful offensive performances.

Doc's offense is too rigid, too predictable and too focused on running half-court plays for Pierce and Garnett.  Iman Shumpert had as many shots last night in 18 minutes and Bass did in 34.  That was ridiculous.

Mike

I don't disagree that the offense has been bad the last few years.  Although I think there could be a strong argument that the problem with the offense before Rondo went down was not that they went to Pierce and Garnett too much, but it consisted too much of Rondo pounding the ball in the halfcourt waiting for something to happen.

  We generally score efficiently with Rondo controlling the offense. We're a poor offensive rebounding team and a lack of inside scorers hurts our shot selection but those are separate issues. We do better with our scoring chances than most teams do with similar scoring chances.

[Drucci]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down.

It's probably true that Boston had little to no chance without Rondo, but the plain truth is that the Celtic offense has been getting worse and worse the last few years.  Even with Rondo, this team has been prone to truly awful offensive performances.

Doc's offense is too rigid, too predictable and too focused on running half-court plays for Pierce and Garnett.  Iman Shumpert had as many shots last night in 18 minutes and Bass did in 34.  That was ridiculous.

Mike

I don't disagree that the offense has been bad the last few years.  Although I think there could be a strong argument that the problem with the offense before Rondo went down was not that they went to Pierce and Garnett too much, but it consisted too much of Rondo pounding the ball in the halfcourt waiting for something to happen.

Which means that in both cases Doc is to blame : he has never complained about Rondo's pounding the ball "strategy" and he seems perfectly fine with it. I think even Rondo would like to generate offense in a different way.

[Chris]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down.

It's probably true that Boston had little to no chance without Rondo, but the plain truth is that the Celtic offense has been getting worse and worse the last few years.  Even with Rondo, this team has been prone to truly awful offensive performances.

Doc's offense is too rigid, too predictable and too focused on running half-court plays for Pierce and Garnett.  Iman Shumpert had as many shots last night in 18 minutes and Bass did in 34.  That was ridiculous.

Mike

I don't disagree that the offense has been bad the last few years.  Although I think there could be a strong argument that the problem with the offense before Rondo went down was not that they went to Pierce and Garnett too much, but it consisted too much of Rondo pounding the ball in the halfcourt waiting for something to happen.

  We generally score efficiently with Rondo controlling the offense. We're a poor offensive rebounding team and a lack of inside scorers hurts our shot selection but those are separate issues. We do better with our scoring chances than most teams do with similar scoring chances.

Overall, you may be right (I am not sure, haven't looked at the stats).  But I do know the C's have had some really bad scoring droughts over the last few years, even with Rondo in there. 

Now, I don't think it is because of Rondo.  I think it is because Rondo isn't a scorer, and the other scorers have all been really old, and with the age, more streaky.  Their legs get tired, and the shots stop falling.

The teams that avoid scoring droughts like that the most, have younger guys who can create (and finish) their own shots consistently. 

[lightspeed5]

[BballTim]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down.

It's probably true that Boston had little to no chance without Rondo, but the plain truth is that the Celtic offense has been getting worse and worse the last few years.  Even with Rondo, this team has been prone to truly awful offensive performances.

Doc's offense is too rigid, too predictable and too focused on running half-court plays for Pierce and Garnett.  Iman Shumpert had as many shots last night in 18 minutes and Bass did in 34.  That was ridiculous.

Mike

I don't disagree that the offense has been bad the last few years.  Although I think there could be a strong argument that the problem with the offense before Rondo went down was not that they went to Pierce and Garnett too much, but it consisted too much of Rondo pounding the ball in the halfcourt waiting for something to happen.

  We generally score efficiently with Rondo controlling the offense. We're a poor offensive rebounding team and a lack of inside scorers hurts our shot selection but those are separate issues. We do better with our scoring chances than most teams do with similar scoring chances.

Overall, you may be right (I am not sure, haven't looked at the stats).  But I do know the C's have had some really bad scoring droughts over the last few years, even with Rondo in there. 

Now, I don't think it is because of Rondo.  I think it is because Rondo isn't a scorer, and the other scorers have all been really old, and with the age, more streaky.  Their legs get tired, and the shots stop falling.

The teams that avoid scoring droughts like that the most, have younger guys who can create (and finish) their own shots consistently.

  I don't disagree that the Celts have scoring droughts and, while I think it's related to not having a great scorer or strong inside presense on the team, I don't know that it's as unusual as we'd imagine. Do other playoff teams with weakish offenses (the Bulls, Bucks, Pacers, Griz or Hawks this year) go on scoring droughts? I would assume so, even though we probably don't see them play often enough to notice.

[j804]

I think tired old legs has more to do with it, without Rondo facilitating and getting guys open or taking over offensively for stretches we just don't have enough to keep up with them.

  Stick a healthy Rondo out there and we're heading for a showdown with the Heat. He'd be single-handedly  putting up better stats than all the guards combined, KG and Bass would be more productive and we wouldn't be averaging more turnovers than assists.

 

I agree completely got some friends that are Knicks fans and even they agree if we had Rondo, they would have no answer for him and this series is probably knotted up. You throw in Sully who pushed Chandler around before and this series isn't even close.

[BballTim]

I think we are seeing the effect of having no PG against a very good team playing second half playoff defense (AKA, locking it down). 

You can get away with no PG in the regular season, by running, and taking advantage of defenses that aren't really locked in.  But, in the playoffs, you need someone to break down defenses and create shots, and the C's just don't have that. 

Unfortunately, the C's season ended when Rondo went down.

It's probably true that Boston had little to no chance without Rondo, but the plain truth is that the Celtic offense has been getting worse and worse the last few years.  Even with Rondo, this team has been prone to truly awful offensive performances.

Doc's offense is too rigid, too predictable and too focused on running half-court plays for Pierce and Garnett.  Iman Shumpert had as many shots last night in 18 minutes and Bass did in 34.  That was ridiculous.

Mike

I don't disagree that the offense has been bad the last few years.  Although I think there could be a strong argument that the problem with the offense before Rondo went down was not that they went to Pierce and Garnett too much, but it consisted too much of Rondo pounding the ball in the halfcourt waiting for something to happen.

Which means that in both cases Doc is to blame : he has never complained about Rondo's pounding the ball "strategy" and he seems perfectly fine with it. I think even Rondo would like to generate offense in a different way.

  I think Rondo would love it if the other players bolted up court when he was playing the way they did when he was injured, but as much as people dislike it when Rondo controls the ball it's clearly our best option in the half court. The title of the thread is a testament to that.