Does Brad run a bad offense?

[Tr1boy]

It's working but not a fan 100 percent. Used to be better when IT came off the bench imo

Overall team passing was more encouraged and better

[Chief]

When players take high % shots for them, I like our offense.

I don't like:

Amir 3 pointers
Turner 3 pointers
Marcus 3 pointers
Sully out of the post too much
Zeller

[pearljammer10]

No.

Brad has proven that he is running one of the best systems in the NBA. With him to have the role players we have playing the way they do, that's very impressive and it is a huge part coaching and a huge part system.

[Yoki_IsTheName]

When players take high % shots for them, I like our offense.

I don't like:

Amir 3 pointers
Turner 3 pointers
Marcus 3 pointers
Sully out of the post too much
Zeller

I agree.

Being 11th in Offensive Efficiency suggest were actually good on offense, but it could be improved if we are making (or in some cases, not taking) 3's. We have a solid offense by the numbers, but we need to make our threes (we are 27th in the league in 3PT%) to make us even more deadly. 

[DesertDweller]

Running a bad offense, are you kidding??? Stevens has squeezed more juice out of this team than any other coach could consider. the only way we could be better is if the up and comers Rozier, Hunter and Young had developed the way they were suppose to but their shooting is abysmal.
Danny has got to give Brad more to work with at this point. but the way things look now that's not going to happen until next year!!! 

[loco_91]

Running a bad offense, are you kidding??? Stevens has squeezed more juice out of this team than any other coach could consider. the only way we could be better is if the up and comers Rozier, Hunter and Young had developed the way they were suppose to but their shooting is abysmal.
Danny has got to give Brad more to work with at this point. but the way things look now that's not going to happen until next year!!!

+1. It's crazy how good our offense is considering the level of talent that we have. Isaiah is talented, but before he came to the C's would anybody have considered him a top-15 offensive player, or even top-30? Who's our second-best half court scorer, Kelly Olynyk? Jae Crowder? Avery Bradley? Evan Turner?

I can't dig up this stat, but I heard a couple weeks ago that the C's were 1st in the league according to SportsVu in percentage of shots that were "open", and like 25th in the league at making those shots. To me, that stat embodies this team: Brad runs great plays to get guys good looks, we just don't knock them down consistently.

[PhoSita]

I think the key question is; do guys get open looks?

The answer is "YES".   Then, it is on the players.

I think this is pretty much spot on.


I'd love it if our offense tended to generate more looks in the paint, but we don't have enough guys with that skillset.

They play up-tempo, they're constantly moving, they get plenty of open looks, and they somehow manage to be solidly above average despite the below average offensive talent on the team.  Can't complain about what Brad's done in that regard.

[nickagneta]

For Isaiah and a bunch of role players, this offense works. It doesn't put the ball in one player's hand who handles the ball the entire 24 seconds. It keeps all 5 players moving and passing and gives all players the ability to shoot the open shot, which is really all you can ask for. Don't forget that this team's defense is also a large part of it's offense. fast break points and points after turnovers are huge for this team.

My question is if the Celtics land a couple of stars in the off season, will Stevens alter the offense slightly to put those stars in the best position to maximize their respective offensive capabilities. This offense wouldn't work for a Lebron type superstar but would probably be huge for a Kevin Love type superstar. How Stevens handles the offense when he has stars is what is going to be what I am really interested in.

[PhoSita]

For Isaiah and a bunch of role players, this offense works. It doesn't put the ball in one player's hand who handles the ball the entire 24 seconds. It keeps all 5 players moving and passing and gives all players the ability to shoot the open shot, which is really all you can ask for. Don't forget that this team's defense is also a large part of it's offense. fast break points and points after turnovers are huge for this team.

My question is if the Celtics land a couple of stars in the off season, will Stevens alter the offense slightly to put those stars in the best position to maximize their respective offensive capabilities. This offense wouldn't work for a Lebron type superstar but would probably be huge for a Kevin Love type superstar. How Stevens handles the offense when he has stars is what is going to be what I am really interested in.

Good points.

In some ways, that may be the biggest challenge yet for Stevens.  He came into the NBA with a lot of experience cobbling together surprisingly competitive teams from underrated role player types.

What he hasn't really done is build an offense around a core group of offensive stars.  Yes, when he first came to the Celtics, he had to manage Rondo, but I don't think Rondo could really be counted as a "star" at that point.  Certainly not a scorer.

[mmmmm]

We have the 11th rated offense in the NBA.  I don't think our offensive talent is close to 11th overall.  I think it's asking a lot to squeeze more out of this team offensively.

It's amazing they're even rated 11th given that their only scorer is Isaiah Thomas.

When Isaiah is on the bench, we have the 29th rated offense.

That's the problem.

[mmmmm]

And we are third in pace. Don't forget, that makes our offensive impact even better because we are getting up more shots than the other team.

That's not really how it works.  Playing at a higher pace doesn't mean you will put up more shots than the other team.  You will both have the same number of possessions so all things being equal you would have the same number of shots, regardless of pace.

We ARE getting slightly more scoring attempts off (99.6 per game compared to 96.7 for our opponents) due purely to our edge in turnovers.

[PhoSita]

We ARE getting slightly more scoring attempts off (99.6 per game compared to 96.7 for our opponents) due purely to our edge in turnovers.

Right -- I think that's the advantage of playing at a fast pace for this team, it creates more opportunities to force turnovers and get easy scores.

This is a team that's built to succeed in a faster paced, looser game.  These Celts have struggled this year when bigger teams force the game to slow down and it becomes about who can execute better in the half-court.


So yes, when you increase the pace, in theory it works out the same for both teams.  Each team gets the same number of possessions as the pace changes.

Some teams are better suited to playing slow or faster -- i.e. making the most of the possessions they get -- than others. 

Not every team is going to get a good shot 7 seconds into the shot clock.  Many other teams are pretty much screwed if they're still trying to make something happen with 5 seconds remaining on the shot clock.

[mmmmm]

It's working but not a fan 100 percent. Used to be better when IT came off the bench imo

Overall team passing was more encouraged and better

Sigh ... The "Isaiah should be coming off the bench!" meme is like a zombie.  No matter how much overwhelming evidence there are that this is complete nonsense, it just won't die.

Fact:  Our offense is not and never has been "better when IT came off the bench."   This is not something that is subject to debate.  Our points per possession, our efficiency -- pretty much every offensive metric you can name -- is dramatically better with Isaiah on the floor and starting him puts him on the floor more often.

Where is there any evidence to support your assertion that, "Overall team passing was more encouraged and better"?   In fact, whether Isaiah is on the floor or not, we have the exact same percentage of shots being assisted: 60%.   

The difference is, when Isaiah is on the floor, we _make_ those shots more often, with a 50% eFG and 54.1% TS compared to a miserable 46% eFG & 49.7% TS when he is not.

When we have another guard who is better at creating points and/or has a bigger positive net impact for the team, then it will be time to bring Isaiah off the bench. 

We don't have such a player on this roster.

Please.  Let this baseless meme rest in peace.

[hwangjini_1]

For Isaiah and a bunch of role players, this offense works. It doesn't put the ball in one player's hand who handles the ball the entire 24 seconds. It keeps all 5 players moving and passing and gives all players the ability to shoot the open shot, which is really all you can ask for. Don't forget that this team's defense is also a large part of it's offense. fast break points and points after turnovers are huge for this team.

My question is if the Celtics land a couple of stars in the off season, will Stevens alter the offense slightly to put those stars in the best position to maximize their respective offensive capabilities. This offense wouldn't work for a Lebron type superstar but would probably be huge for a Kevin Love type superstar. How Stevens handles the offense when he has stars is what is going to be what I am really interested in.

Good points.

In some ways, that may be the biggest challenge yet for Stevens.  He came into the NBA with a lot of experience cobbling together surprisingly competitive teams from underrated role player types.

What he hasn't really done is build an offense around a core group of offensive stars.  Yes, when he first came to the Celtics, he had to manage Rondo, but I don't think Rondo could really be counted as a "star" at that point.  Certainly not a scorer.

good points by both nick and pho. the closest we can see in terms of handling a star, or stars, in CBS's short history would be haywood at butler. he averaged 15.5 points a game with shelvin mack being the second leading scorer with 14.4 pts/game.

shelving has averaged 5.8 points/game in his nba career.

so, in a very relative sense, CBS had two "stars" at butler and seemed to handle them rather well. but even given all this, i consider it to be a weak sauce and not a powerful argument. but the best i could make. 

[mmmmm]

For Isaiah and a bunch of role players, this offense works. It doesn't put the ball in one player's hand who handles the ball the entire 24 seconds. It keeps all 5 players moving and passing and gives all players the ability to shoot the open shot, which is really all you can ask for. Don't forget that this team's defense is also a large part of it's offense. fast break points and points after turnovers are huge for this team.

I don't know if that is completely accurate.   I mean, it sounds nice to suggest an 'equal opportunity offense', but that's not necessarily the most efficient offense and it isn't necessarily what is working best here.

Consider these points:

1) The moment Isaiah was added to the team, the offense has been massively better when he has been on the floor than when it was without him, before or after.   Isaiah did not come here, pre-trained in Brad's offensive system.  Brad and Isaiah both confirmed that it was basically a case of IT being allowed to free-style, using his pick & roll skills and his transition skills.

2) A year later, the performance of the offense is still the same:  Great with Isaiah on the floor.  Lousy without him.  If the "system" was working for the other players, shouldn't they have shown improvement?  Or is the problem the players?

3) Consider the Marcus Smart / Evan Turner paradox.  By every individual stat, Marcus has been a "sub par" offensive player -- and in particular far inferior to Evan Turner.   But, lineups that feature Isaiah plus Marcus w/o Evan, perform FAR better offensively (116.4 points per 100) than lineups that feature Isiah plus Evan w/o Marcus (108.9 points per 100).   How can that be?   When you look closer, the reason the IT+MS combination performs better is because in that combination Isaiah is doing MORE. His USG% is about the same in both combinations, but his AST% is MUCH higher (27.4% compared to 18.6%) in the IT+MS combo.  It is important to note that Marcus does less (USG% & AST&) in this combo than Evan does in the other combo.   This is resulting in a slightly higher overall assist rate for the team (60% vs 54%) and a higher scoring efficiency (55.5% TS vs 53.2%).

Basically, the IT+MS combo works better because Marcus defers more than Evan does to the far superior offensive player.   So more of the ball handling / play making is done by the superior ball handler/playmaker. 

And this comes at no cost on defense because the IT+MS combo ends up MUCH better on defense as well (due to having Marcus on the floor) with a defensive rating of 100.5 points per 100 compared to 106.3 points per 100 for the IT+ET combo.

So those are just some observations to ponder.

My question is if the Celtics land a couple of stars in the off season, will Stevens alter the offense slightly to put those stars in the best position to maximize their respective offensive capabilities. This offense wouldn't work for a Lebron type superstar but would probably be huge for a Kevin Love type superstar. How Stevens handles the offense when he has stars is what is going to be what I am really interested in.

Yes.  I think it is a critical quality of a good coach to adjust his system to fit his players.  If we get a star player, the system should be setup to maximize use of their best skills.