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

[hwangjini_1]

As I watched the celtics fail to score possession after possession, it was clear that...

1. Pierce and KG are old. They simply cannot carry this teams's scoring over the course of a game consistently.

2. Knicks are playing good defense, which shuts down Bradley, bass, et al. This also puts more pressure on pierce and makes the celtics offense more predictable and easier to defend.

3. The celtics play a passing game in the first half and then they get away from it in the second half. They revert to taking early shots that are low percentage shots instead of making the extra pass. This was a bad habit through out the season and is biting them in the butt in the payoffs.

4. The celtics lack a consistent, proven bench scorer to take up the scoring when pierce sits. People talk about how the celtics need defense. Their defense is fine, look at the Knicks scores this series. The problem is the celtics offense, not defense.

5. Green is STILL not fully integrated into the offense. The celtics are not using him well and his too often timid to boot.

The end product is a team making poor decisions and running a predictable offense. The first halves show that the celtics CAN score, but the second halves show how they get away from what they need to do.

[mr. dee]

The shoot that Pierce took in the last seconds in the regulation was just stupid. Jeff Green is open and asking for the ball.

[BballTim]

deleted

[Celtics4ever]

The shoot that Pierce took in the last seconds in the regulation was just stupid. Jeff Green is open and asking for the ball.

I too thought it was hero ball, thing is PP has been the hero for so long.   The fact he took it over a seven footer and was challenged.  I thought he should have kicked it to KG who was guarded by Kidd to his left.  But to his credit he has nailed that shot so many times in the past.

[pearljammer10]

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.

 

The C's were struggling to be a .500 team with that lineup for the first half of the season.

  And they were struggling to be a .500 team for the first half of 2011 when they went to game 7 of the ecf, and they were struggling to be a .500 team for the last 2/3 of the 2010 season and they went to game 7 of the finals. It's not like Celts fans haven't seen the exact same thing we saw this year multiple times before.

Don't know why people constantly forget this

Dont people realize that this argument really makes zero sense?

I too cant understand why people continually forget this.

[BballTim]

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.

 

The C's were struggling to be a .500 team with that lineup for the first half of the season.

  And they were struggling to be a .500 team for the first half of 2011 when they went to game 7 of the ecf, and they were struggling to be a .500 team for the last 2/3 of the 2010 season and they went to game 7 of the finals. It's not like Celts fans haven't seen the exact same thing we saw this year multiple times before.

Don't know why people constantly forget this

Dont people realize that this argument really makes zero sense?

I too cant understand why people continually forget this.

  It's all they've got.



  Take the leading scorer off of the team that had to fight tooth and nail to avoid a first round sweep and what are you left with?

  Roughly the same group Rondo carried to game 7 of the ecf last year.

 

[Celtics18]

The shoot that Pierce took in the last seconds in the regulation was just stupid. Jeff Green is open and asking for the ball.

I totally disagree.  In that situation, game tied--final possession, I always want the play to be Paul Pierce isolation.

In that situation you want to make sure you get a shot off, and, just as importantly, you want to make sure that it's a last second shot.  Paul Pierce is the man for that job. 

Now, if we are down by one, two, or three points in that situation, then I can see wanting to run something a little more creative, something involving some screens and some passes, but that was the shot that I wanted to see last night. 

[lightspeed5]

As I watched the celtics fail to score possession after possession, it was clear that...

1. Pierce and KG are old. They simply cannot carry this teams's scoring over the course of a game consistently.

2. Knicks are playing good defense, which shuts down Bradley, bass, et al. This also puts more pressure on pierce and makes the celtics offense more predictable and easier to defend.

3. The celtics play a passing game in the first half and then they get away from it in the second half. They revert to taking early shots that are low percentage shots instead of making the extra pass. This was a bad habit through out the season and is biting them in the butt in the payoffs.

4. The celtics lack a consistent, proven bench scorer to take up the scoring when pierce sits. People talk about how the celtics need defense. Their defense is fine, look at the Knicks scores this series. The problem is the celtics offense, not defense.

5. Green is STILL not fully integrated into the offense. The celtics are not using him well and his too often timid to boot.

The end product is a team making poor decisions and running a predictable offense. The first halves show that the celtics CAN score, but the second halves show how they get away from what they need to do.

even though pierce and KG are old, rondo extends their careers with open looks and playmaking ability.

[PhoSita]

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.

Yes, this gets at the heart of it.

It's actually quite remarkable that the Celtics manage to have a functioning offense at all since their offensive game plan emphasizes, almost to the utter exclusion of everything else, mid-range jumpshots.

With a healthy and productive Rondo -- or any decent passing point guard, really -- the Celtics could be a much better offensive team if they had any sort of inside presence and more reliable spot-up outside shooters.


If you don't get very many possessions (poor rebounding, turnovers) and you don't make the most of the possessions you do get (taking low % shots), you're not going to score very many points at all. 

Unfortunately, a big part of the Celtics' identity in recent years has been poor possession creation / usage.

[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.

Yes, this gets at the heart of it.

It's actually quite remarkable that the Celtics manage to have a functioning offense at all since their offensive game plan emphasizes, almost to the utter exclusion of everything else, mid-range jumpshots.

  It's not the game plan so much as the roster. We went to the inside quite a bit when we had Shaq, we took more threes when Ray was playing big minutes.

[PhoSita]

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.

Yes, this gets at the heart of it.

It's actually quite remarkable that the Celtics manage to have a functioning offense at all since their offensive game plan emphasizes, almost to the utter exclusion of everything else, mid-range jumpshots.

  It's not the game plan so much as the roster. We went to the inside quite a bit when we had Shaq, we took more threes when Ray was playing big minutes.

That's definitely true.

But it's hard not to characterize it as a game plan when the team could have made roster moves to address it since the two players you mentioned left and yet it hasn't.  It's not like capable 3 point shooters and rebounding specialists are so impossible to find out there.

I just think the team has prioritized defense and the ability to hit a mid-range jumper.  Which is not necessarily a bad thing to do, but it does have consequences on the offensive side of the ball.

I know that part of the lack of outside shooting this year is just player's not performing up to expectations.  Courtney Lee and Terry were expected to be reliable outside shooters, but they've been very streaky. 

When I talk about adjusting the gameplan or system, though, I'm thinking of what San Antonio has done to transform themselves into a much more efficient offensive team.  They've prioritized outside shooting and put less emphasis on post-ups, and made good moves to add personnel that fits with that plan. 

I think Danny tried to transition the Celtics' gameplan and roster a bit in recent seasons by prioritizing youth, athleticism, and versatility, probably in the hopes that those players would fit well with Rondo.  It didn't work out that way this season, though, for whatever reason. 

My opinion is that Doc and the players still see it as Pierce and KG's team, so the team defers to them and plays their style.  Which keeps us bogged down in the half-court, taking mid-range jumpers.

[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.

Yes, this gets at the heart of it.

It's actually quite remarkable that the Celtics manage to have a functioning offense at all since their offensive game plan emphasizes, almost to the utter exclusion of everything else, mid-range jumpshots.

  It's not the game plan so much as the roster. We went to the inside quite a bit when we had Shaq, we took more threes when Ray was playing big minutes.

That's definitely true.

But it's hard not to characterize it as a game plan when the team could have made roster moves to address it since the two players you mentioned left and yet it hasn't.  It's not like capable 3 point shooters and rebounding specialists are so impossible to find out there.

I just think the team has prioritized defense and the ability to hit a mid-range jumper.  Which is not necessarily a bad thing to do, but it does have consequences on the offensive side of the ball.

  I agree they prioritize defense, not mid-range jump shooting. I don't think good low post scorers are that plentiful.

[PhoSita]

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.

Yes, this gets at the heart of it.

It's actually quite remarkable that the Celtics manage to have a functioning offense at all since their offensive game plan emphasizes, almost to the utter exclusion of everything else, mid-range jumpshots.

  It's not the game plan so much as the roster. We went to the inside quite a bit when we had Shaq, we took more threes when Ray was playing big minutes.

That's definitely true.

But it's hard not to characterize it as a game plan when the team could have made roster moves to address it since the two players you mentioned left and yet it hasn't.  It's not like capable 3 point shooters and rebounding specialists are so impossible to find out there.

I just think the team has prioritized defense and the ability to hit a mid-range jumper.  Which is not necessarily a bad thing to do, but it does have consequences on the offensive side of the ball.

  I agree they prioritize defense, not mid-range jump shooting. I don't think good low post scorers are that plentiful.

Low post scorers definitely aren't that plentiful.

It's not as hard to find "garbage men" though.  I mean, we picked up a halfway serviceable one from China in the middle of the season.  The challenge is finding a "garbage man" who can also play defense.

If you added somebody like Nick Collison, for example, to the Celtics, I think that'd make an enormous impact.

[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.

Yes, this gets at the heart of it.

It's actually quite remarkable that the Celtics manage to have a functioning offense at all since their offensive game plan emphasizes, almost to the utter exclusion of everything else, mid-range jumpshots.

  It's not the game plan so much as the roster. We went to the inside quite a bit when we had Shaq, we took more threes when Ray was playing big minutes.

That's definitely true.

But it's hard not to characterize it as a game plan when the team could have made roster moves to address it since the two players you mentioned left and yet it hasn't.  It's not like capable 3 point shooters and rebounding specialists are so impossible to find out there.

I just think the team has prioritized defense and the ability to hit a mid-range jumper.  Which is not necessarily a bad thing to do, but it does have consequences on the offensive side of the ball.

  I agree they prioritize defense, not mid-range jump shooting. I don't think good low post scorers are that plentiful.

Low post scorers definitely aren't that plentiful.

It's not as hard to find "garbage men" though.  I mean, we picked up a halfway serviceable one from China in the middle of the season.  The challenge is finding a "garbage man" who can also play defense.

If you added somebody like Nick Collison, for example, to the Celtics, I think that'd make an enormous impact.

  I think so too. I that if we had someone like that who could split time 50/50 or so with KG and had (hopefully) healthy Rondo/PP/Green/Sully then we'd be in good shape. It wouldn't be that hard to augment that group because of the versatility of PP and Green, any of a sg/sf/pf could fit into the rotation.

[Celtics18]

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.

Yes, this gets at the heart of it.

It's actually quite remarkable that the Celtics manage to have a functioning offense at all since their offensive game plan emphasizes, almost to the utter exclusion of everything else, mid-range jumpshots.

  It's not the game plan so much as the roster. We went to the inside quite a bit when we had Shaq, we took more threes when Ray was playing big minutes.

That's definitely true.

But it's hard not to characterize it as a game plan when the team could have made roster moves to address it since the two players you mentioned left and yet it hasn't.  It's not like capable 3 point shooters and rebounding specialists are so impossible to find out there.

I just think the team has prioritized defense and the ability to hit a mid-range jumper.  Which is not necessarily a bad thing to do, but it does have consequences on the offensive side of the ball.

  I agree they prioritize defense, not mid-range jump shooting. I don't think good low post scorers are that plentiful.

Low post scorers definitely aren't that plentiful.

It's not as hard to find "garbage men" though.  I mean, we picked up a halfway serviceable one from China in the middle of the season.  The challenge is finding a "garbage man" who can also play defense.

If you added somebody like Nick Collison, for example, to the Celtics, I think that'd make an enormous impact.

Or someone like Jared Sullinger.