Celtics 4th best defensive team in the NBA-toughness and physicality working.

[chambers]

I'd say we have the best perimeter defensive rotation in the NBA in Smart, Bradley and Crowder.
I think when Avery gets back to full speed, IT will go back to the bench to maintain this defensive factor.

I for one thought we'd get better with Amir, and I knew Crowder might get a bit better, but I never thought we'd be this good. Crowder and Smart would have to be All defense candidates this year if they keep this up.

When watching the OKC and Atlanta games I found myself thinking...
'We have a team of defensive thugs and we are a physical, intimidating team'.

Can we keep this physicality and defensive assertion for 82 games?

http://stats.nba.com/league/team/#!/advanced/?sort=DEF_RATING&dir=-1

http://www.masslive.com/celtics/index.ssf/2015/11/boston_celtics_emerging_as_def.html

[KingofDaPlayazBall]

When watching the OKC and Atlanta games I found myself thinking...
'We have a team of defensive thugs and we are a physical, intimidating team'.

Right on.  Without superstars on the team we got to shape our identity into the superstar killers like the bad boy pistons type that took down the likes of Jordan.

I see the celtics are playing to their strength as an attacking basketball team being among the  league leaders in defense and in pace, with the philosophy being attacking and making the opponents uncomfortable at all times:
Just imagine how much an opponent would hate play against the celtics after getting bodied up by defensive juggernauts like smart and crowder, and then hurrying up back to defense and see imediately see isaiah thomas attacking right at you at the blink of an eye going 100miles an hour. 

[PhoSita]

As was noted on the "Dunc'd On" Podcast by Nate Duncan and Danny Leroux noted that the Celts are currently forcing almost 19 turnovers a game, which is almost 2 turnovers ahead of the next best team.  That doesn't seem sustainable.


The schedule has been mixed so far -- the Celts have played some quality offensive opponents like the Raptors, Hawks, and Spurs (and the Thunder, though without Durant), but also played some really poor opponents like the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets.

I'm interested to see if the Celts can keep forcing lots of turnovers, and how they'll do as they face more quality offensive teams.

[manl_lui]

I want to note that, yesterday's game, Stevens deploying the zone defense REALLY threw OKC out of their game...

[Celtics18]

As was noted on the "Dunc'd On" Podcast by Nate Duncan and Danny Leroux noted that the Celts are currently forcing almost 19 turnovers a game, which is almost 2 turnovers ahead of the next best team.  That doesn't seem sustainable.


The schedule has been mixed so far -- the Celts have played some quality offensive opponents like the Raptors, Hawks, and Spurs (and the Thunder, though without Durant), but also played some really poor opponents like the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets.

I'm interested to see if the Celts can keep forcing lots of turnovers, and how they'll do as they face more quality offensive teams.

We haven't played the Nets.  The Sixers were our only cupcake.

[crimson_stallion]

I think one aspect that is being grossly underrated with this team is that it's not necessarily the outright quality of players we added that makes the biggest impact, but the number of quality players.

The key thing is that our guys are not only great defenders, but the fact that we have so much quality depth means that none of those guys really need to play ridiculous minutes.  That means that those great defenders we have are to stay fairly well rested, which in turn means that they can play defense with the greatest possible intensity every time they are the court.

Opposing teams don't have that luxury.  They might still have great defensive players, but they don't have the same amount of depth.  This means that their top players need to play big minutes so they need to pace themselves, and so even their best defensive players can only ever really play at 80% intensity.

Our depth allows every man on the court to play defense with 100% intensity for 48 minutes, and that's why we are so difficult to handle.

[crimson_stallion]

The schedule has been mixed so far -- the Celts have played some quality offensive opponents like the Raptors, Hawks, and Spurs (and the Thunder, though without Durant), but also played some really poor opponents like the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets.

Here are the teams we've played, along with their current win record, seed and point differential:

- PHI (0-10 / 15th / -13.5)
- TOR (7-4 / 5th / +4.9)
- SAS (7-2 / 2nd /+10.5)
- IND (6-4 / 6th / +0.4)
- WAS (4-4 / 8th / -3.7)
- MIL (5-5 / 9th / -6.0)
- IND (6-4 / 6th / +0.4)
- ATL 8-4 / 2nd / +2.5)
- OKC (6-4 / 3rd / +6.4)

That's a pretty tough schedule.  With the exception of the Sixers (obviously) every one of those games has been against competitive teams with win records of 0.500 or better and seeded 9th or higher.

The only had three games against opponents with negative win differentials (against Philly, Washington and Milwaukee) and we won those three games by blowout margins of 17, 20 and 16 respectively.

We have been really, really good.

[Celtics18]

I think one aspect that is being grossly underrated with this team is that it's not necessarily the outright quality of players we added that makes the biggest impact, but the number of quality players.

The key thing is that our guys are not only great defenders, but the fact that we have so much quality depth means that none of those guys really need to play ridiculous minutes.  That means that those great defenders we have are to stay fairly well rested, which in turn means that they can play defense with the greatest possible intensity every time they are the court.

Opposing teams don't have that luxury.  They might still have great defensive players, but they don't have the same amount of depth.  This means that their top players need to play big minutes so they need to pace themselves, and so even their best defensive players can only ever really play at 80% intensity.

Our depth allows every man on the court to play defense with 100% intensity for 48 minutes, and that's why we are so difficult to handle.

Great point.  Agreed and TP.

[Neurotic Guy]

I think one aspect that is being grossly underrated with this team is that it's not necessarily the outright quality of players we added that makes the biggest impact, but the number of quality players.

The key thing is that our guys are not only great defenders, but the fact that we have so much quality depth means that none of those guys really need to play ridiculous minutes.  That means that those great defenders we have are to stay fairly well rested, which in turn means that they can play defense with the greatest possible intensity every time they are the court.

Opposing teams don't have that luxury.  They might still have great defensive players, but they don't have the same amount of depth.  This means that their top players need to play big minutes so they need to pace themselves, and so even their best defensive players can only ever really play at 80% intensity.

Our depth allows every man on the court to play defense with 100% intensity for 48 minutes, and that's why we are so difficult to handle.

Seems to really be playing out this way in the last couple of games.  Really strong finishes.  Stay with them for 3 quarters then run them ragged in the 4th.

[CelticSooner]

As was noted on the "Dunc'd On" Podcast by Nate Duncan and Danny Leroux noted that the Celts are currently forcing almost 19 turnovers a game, which is almost 2 turnovers ahead of the next best team.  That doesn't seem sustainable.


The schedule has been mixed so far -- the Celts have played some quality offensive opponents like the Raptors, Hawks, and Spurs (and the Thunder, though without Durant), but also played some really poor opponents like the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets.

I'm interested to see if the Celts can keep forcing lots of turnovers, and how they'll do as they face more quality offensive teams.

Considering the depth on the team I don't see how it's not sustainable. What will be a bigger problem late in the year is getting buckets when the other teams really turn it up.

[Neurotic Guy]

The good defensive ranking also playing out in power rankings.   NBA.com has the C's #6 in the NBA, calling them "legit".

Edit:  Oops, old news -- I should have known.  Didn't see the How Good is this Team Thread.

[crimson_stallion]

I think one aspect that is being grossly underrated with this team is that it's not necessarily the outright quality of players we added that makes the biggest impact, but the number of quality players.

The key thing is that our guys are not only great defenders, but the fact that we have so much quality depth means that none of those guys really need to play ridiculous minutes.  That means that those great defenders we have are to stay fairly well rested, which in turn means that they can play defense with the greatest possible intensity every time they are the court.

Opposing teams don't have that luxury.  They might still have great defensive players, but they don't have the same amount of depth.  This means that their top players need to play big minutes so they need to pace themselves, and so even their best defensive players can only ever really play at 80% intensity.

Our depth allows every man on the court to play defense with 100% intensity for 48 minutes, and that's why we are so difficult to handle.

Seems to really be playing out this way in the last couple of games.  Really strong finishes.  Stay with them for 3 quarters then run them ragged in the 4th.

Yeah, I've noticed that too.

I think we're just wearing teams down - once they get to the 4th their starters are so worn our from our constant intensity that they have had to either:

1) Play their key players while fatigued

or

2) Reest their key players and give more minutes to their reserves

Either one of those scenarios puts them at a huge disadvantage against us, because we can put our best players back in the game, well rested, and annihilate the opponent.

[crimson_stallion]

As was noted on the "Dunc'd On" Podcast by Nate Duncan and Danny Leroux noted that the Celts are currently forcing almost 19 turnovers a game, which is almost 2 turnovers ahead of the next best team.  That doesn't seem sustainable.


The schedule has been mixed so far -- the Celts have played some quality offensive opponents like the Raptors, Hawks, and Spurs (and the Thunder, though without Durant), but also played some really poor opponents like the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets.

I'm interested to see if the Celts can keep forcing lots of turnovers, and how they'll do as they face more quality offensive teams.

Considering the depth on the team I don't see how it's not sustainable. What will be a bigger problem late in the year is getting buckets when the other teams really turn it up.

If anything I think this will only work to our advantage.

As the season goes on opposing teams will be dealing with fatigue (from their stars playing huge minutes all season), injuries, minutes restrictions on players, etc.

In theory our depth should allow us to stay fresh throughout the season, limiting the risk of injuries and ensuring that (even if a couple of guys do get hurt) we can still continue to to produce at a similar level.

I expect post all-star break this team will hit another gear.

[tazzmaniac]

The schedule has been mixed so far -- the Celts have played some quality offensive opponents like the Raptors, Hawks, and Spurs (and the Thunder, though without Durant), but also played some really poor opponents like the Pacers, Sixers, and Nets.

Here are the teams we've played, along with their current win record, seed and point differential:

- PHI (0-10 / 15th / -13.5)
- TOR (7-4 / 5th / +4.9)
- SAS (7-2 / 2nd /+10.5)
- IND (6-4 / 6th / +0.4)
- WAS (4-4 / 8th / -3.7)
- MIL (5-5 / 9th / -6.0)
- IND (6-4 / 6th / +0.4)
- ATL 8-4 / 2nd / +2.5)
- OKC (6-4 / 3rd / +6.4)

That's a pretty tough schedule.  With the exception of the Sixers (obviously) every one of those games has been against competitive teams with win records of 0.500 or better and seeded 9th or higher.

The only had three games against opponents with negative win differentials (against Philly, Washington and Milwaukee) and we won those three games by blowout margins of 17, 20 and 16 respectively.

We have been really, really good.

That's pretty tough but the start of last year was tougher.  11 of the 1st 15 games were against teams that made the playoffs and 3 of the other 4 were against teams that just missed out.   

[PhoSita]

Considering the depth on the team I don't see how it's not sustainable. What will be a bigger problem late in the year is getting buckets when the other teams really turn it up.

I'm not sure what depth has to do with forcing turnovers.  Perhaps it shows up in the energy guys have to get into passing lanes.  That's plausible.

Still, it's a little hard to believe the Celts will keep forcing almost 19 TOs a game.