Does Brad run a bad offense?

[mmmmm]

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.

Well, you make it sound like "playing at a fast pace ... creates more opportunities to force turnovers."   I think that is reversed.

Our defense creates turnovers.  The turnovers very often result in extremely quick scoring attempts.    Most of the time either a fast-break layup or a spot-up, un-contested 3.  THAT is what in turn results in a faster pace number.

Consider that we have average about a net of +2.5 TOs per game.  That's about 2.5 possessions that probably all result in shots within the first few seconds of each possession.   So there is a big chunk of our +3-above average 'pace' number right there.

[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.

Well, you make it sound like "playing at a fast pace ... creates more opportunities to force turnovers."   I think that is reversed.

Our defense creates turnovers.  The turnovers very often result in extremely quick scoring attempts.    Most of the time either a fast-break layup or a spot-up, un-contested 3.  THAT is what in turn results in a faster pace number.

Consider that we have average about a net of +2.5 TOs per game.  That's about 2.5 possessions that probably all result in shots within the first few seconds of each possession.   So there is a big chunk of our +3-above average 'pace' number right there.

I think they feed into one another.  Forcing turnovers creates quick scoring opportunities.

At the same time, if you have a team that's better than average at forcing turnovers, it's to your advantage to increase the number of possessions, because that increases the number of times that you're likely to force turnovers and get easy baskets. 

On a more basic level, it seems to me that playing faster is going to give a ball-hawking team more chances to force turnovers, especially if the opponent isn't accustomed to playing that quickly.

Conversely, an opponent who slows things way down and plays a safe, controlled, low-turnover style, while scoring with good efficiency in the half-court, should do well against a team like the Celts.

[Moranis]

Why do people say we only have one scorer in Thomas?  Most of the team is offensively oriented, they just aren't very good.  Sullinger, Olynyk, Turner, Zeller, Jerekbo not to mention Young, Rozier, and Hunter.  All offensive players.  Bradley has yet to find a shot he hasn't liked as well. 

The problem with the team is quite simply the lack of talent. 

[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.

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.

I think you are reading a little to much into what I said. This offense works for Isaiah and the role players meaning the team as a whole, not just when Isaiah is on the court and not when he is off the court. As a whole, every minute and player included, it works.

Regarding the whole, equal opportunity offense, it is still very much that type of offense as a system, especially when the Celtics best offensive players are on the bench. It is less so that type of system when IT is on the floor because as you mention, IT freelances outside the system. Once Stevens has two or three offensive stars, I am hoping the system and Stevens rotations change so as to maximize the offense as a whole.

[Evantime34]

Why do people say we only have one scorer in Thomas?  Most of the team is offensively oriented, they just aren't very good.  Sullinger, Olynyk, Turner, Zeller, Jerekbo not to mention Young, Rozier, and Hunter.  All offensive players.  Bradley has yet to find a shot he hasn't liked as well. 

The problem with the team is quite simply the lack of talent.

Of those guys how many people create their own shot with a defender on them? Only Turner and Thomas. Anyone who says we only have one scorer is wrong, but if they say we only have 2 shot creators that is 100% correct.

Jerebko, Olynyk, and Zeller score if space is created for them via ball movement, or the pick and roll. Sullinger gets most of his opportunities in the pick and roll as well as the occasional bucket off the offensive glass.

This is why Brad's offense is perfect for this team. It uses ball movement and screens to create shots because they can't rely on their players to break down the defense and create offense on their own. The system maximizes the offensive talents of its players and until we add more shot creation it makes no sense to trade the offense.

[jambr380]

Why do people say we only have one scorer in Thomas?  Most of the team is offensively oriented, they just aren't very good.  Sullinger, Olynyk, Turner, Zeller, Jerekbo not to mention Young, Rozier, and Hunter.  All offensive players.  Bradley has yet to find a shot he hasn't liked as well. 

The problem with the team is quite simply the lack of talent.

Of those guys how many people create their own shot with a defender on them? Only Turner and Thomas. Anyone who says we only have one scorer is wrong, but if they say we only have 2 shot creators that is 100% correct.

Jerebko, Olynyk, and Zeller score if space is created for them via ball movement, or the pick and roll. Sullinger gets most of his opportunities in the pick and roll as well as the occasional bucket off the offensive glass.

This is why Brad's offense is perfect for this team. It uses ball movement and screens to create shots because they can't rely on their players to break down the defense and create offense on their own. The system maximizes the offensive talents of its players and until we add more shot creation it makes no sense to trade the offense.

Are we pretending Crowder isn't on the team anymore? He may not be IT or even ET in the shot creation department, but he is certainly more than just a spot up shooter. He was even showing flashes of off the dribble pull-up jumpers. I think a lot of people are forgetting just how much more smoothly our offense runs with Jae out there; never mind our defense.

With Jae here, it also pushes ET back to the bench where he doesn't need to share as much court time with IT. And, as mmmmm pointed out, our offense seems to be a bit more potent that way.

[LooseCannon]

It'll be fun if Stevens gets an offensive talent like Durant to work with and runs almost zero isos for him for the entire season.

[Evantime34]

Why do people say we only have one scorer in Thomas?  Most of the team is offensively oriented, they just aren't very good.  Sullinger, Olynyk, Turner, Zeller, Jerekbo not to mention Young, Rozier, and Hunter.  All offensive players.  Bradley has yet to find a shot he hasn't liked as well. 

The problem with the team is quite simply the lack of talent.

Of those guys how many people create their own shot with a defender on them? Only Turner and Thomas. Anyone who says we only have one scorer is wrong, but if they say we only have 2 shot creators that is 100% correct.

Jerebko, Olynyk, and Zeller score if space is created for them via ball movement, or the pick and roll. Sullinger gets most of his opportunities in the pick and roll as well as the occasional bucket off the offensive glass.

This is why Brad's offense is perfect for this team. It uses ball movement and screens to create shots because they can't rely on their players to break down the defense and create offense on their own. The system maximizes the offensive talents of its players and until we add more shot creation it makes no sense to trade the offense.

Are we pretending Crowder isn't on the team anymore? He may not be IT or even ET in the shot creation department, but he is certainly more than just a spot up shooter. He was even showing flashes of off the dribble pull-up jumpers. I think a lot of people are forgetting just how much more smoothly our offense runs with Jae out there; never mind our defense.

With Jae here, it also pushes ET back to the bench where he doesn't need to share as much court time with IT. And, as mmmmm pointed out, our offense seems to be a bit more potent that way.

I forgot to mention Crowder He drives closeouts better than anyone on the team but he absolutely doesn't create shots. My point was that we don't have any shot creators on the team besides ET/IT and I stand by that.

The space needed to get Crowder open for all of his shots comes off of ball movement or screens. He is not the type of player to create space for himself off the dribble unless the defender is already scrambling off ball movement.

We have less players on our team that can create shots off the dribble than most teams in the league. That our offense is as good as it is, is a tribute to Stevens.

[SHAQATTACK]

If you are a slack baby like Zeller .....does it even matter what he runs?

[gamehead36]

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.

Well eff me! I've been spouting this for like an entire year and was wrong the whole time lol convincing friends while talking about basketball and everything. Thanks for the correction.

[Ilikesports17]

It'll be fun if Stevens gets an offensive talent like Durant to work with and runs almost zero isos for him for the entire season.

There is very little evidence that he would do this.

He puts the ball in ET and ITs hands all the time. He doesnt run a lot of ISOs or Pick and Rolls with anyone else cus no one else is any good in those situation.

I mean before we got IT, we pretty much never ran pick and roll.

[slamtheking]

I have always been worried about our half-court offense because of the slow-down style of the playoffs. We are amazing at creating turnovers and scoring off of those turnovers; we also do take a lot of shots. But, if teams start slowing down the pace and taking care of the ball, we are going to need to rely quite a bit on IT taking it to the hoop and AB getting open on screens. Hopefully KO can continue to make his impact and Crowder can come back healthy.

^this

so far, we have relied on a guerrilla approach to scoring. Without Crowder, who made lots of steals +had a decent 3p%, our weakness at half court offense was exposed.

playing against a more experienced team like Atlanta or Miami will be an interesting test.

I think this is a fair assessment but I'd also add that with the typical slowdown in play in the playoffs, the offensive style we play of jacking up a lot of quick shots and 3's will bite us in the butt when we score less because of the lower volume of shots.  the number of ill-advised shots becomes more detrimental when taken in smaller volume of total shots. 

[mmmmm]

Why do people say we only have one scorer in Thomas?  Most of the team is offensively oriented, they just aren't very good.  Sullinger, Olynyk, Turner, Zeller, Jerekbo not to mention Young, Rozier, and Hunter.  All offensive players.  Bradley has yet to find a shot he hasn't liked as well. 

The problem with the team is quite simply the lack of talent.

Of those guys how many people create their own shot with a defender on them? Only Turner and Thomas. Anyone who says we only have one scorer is wrong, but if they say we only have 2 shot creators that is 100% correct.

Jerebko, Olynyk, and Zeller score if space is created for them via ball movement, or the pick and roll. Sullinger gets most of his opportunities in the pick and roll as well as the occasional bucket off the offensive glass.

This is why Brad's offense is perfect for this team. It uses ball movement and screens to create shots because they can't rely on their players to break down the defense and create offense on their own. The system maximizes the offensive talents of its players and until we add more shot creation it makes no sense to trade the offense.

Are we pretending Crowder isn't on the team anymore? He may not be IT or even ET in the shot creation department, but he is certainly more than just a spot up shooter. He was even showing flashes of off the dribble pull-up jumpers. I think a lot of people are forgetting just how much more smoothly our offense runs with Jae out there; never mind our defense.

With Jae here, it also pushes ET back to the bench where he doesn't need to share as much court time with IT. And, as mmmmm pointed out, our offense seems to be a bit more potent that way.

Jae has become a very potent offensive weapon, but he is primarily a finisher.  82.9% of his shots are assisted by others (primarily Isaiah).  That's the highest percentage by far of the main rotation players.

I totally concur that having him back in the starting lineup has a big, positive effect for both the starters and the bench.

[LooseCannon]

It'll be fun if Stevens gets an offensive talent like Durant to work with and runs almost zero isos for him for the entire season.

There is very little evidence that he would do this.

He puts the ball in ET and ITs hands all the time. He doesnt run a lot of ISOs or Pick and Rolls with anyone else cus no one else is any good in those situation.

I mean before we got IT, we pretty much never ran pick and roll.

An isolation is a low-efficiency play.  I expect Stevens to eschew low-efficiency plays.  Almost zero isos is an exaggeration, but a player such as Durant coming to Boston would almost certainly see the percentage of his plays that are isolations go down significantly.

[mmmmm]

It'll be fun if Stevens gets an offensive talent like Durant to work with and runs almost zero isos for him for the entire season.

There is very little evidence that he would do this.

He puts the ball in ET and ITs hands all the time. He doesnt run a lot of ISOs or Pick and Rolls with anyone else cus no one else is any good in those situation.

I mean before we got IT, we pretty much never ran pick and roll.

An isolation is a low-efficiency play.  I expect Stevens to eschew low-efficiency plays.  Almost zero isos is an exaggeration, but a player such as Durant coming to Boston would almost certainly see the percentage of his plays that are isolations go down significantly.

This is a bit of a mis-conception.  It depends on how you are delineating "plays".  If you use the common synergy break-downs of play types like "transition" and "p&r roller" and "p&r handler" and "put back" and such, then sure, an ISO play doesn't look as efficient as a transition play or a back door cut.

But you can't draw-up a "put back" or a "transition" play out of a time-out.  A cut requires other actions to have occurred before it can happen.  A roll to the basket isn't a play unless the ball is tossed to him as he rolls. 

If you included all the steps that needed to happen as preamble prior to all those other "plays" occurring, then their efficiency numbers would plummet.

An ISO is a play you can decide to run without preamble.   The comparable play-types are p&r handler, dribble-hand-offs and post-ups -- and those have comparable, "low efficiency".

When you have a player who is good at ISOs, that's a powerful tool to have in the arsenal.  A skilled iso player is one that can create points off the iso in multiple ways, whether by directly scoring, passing or getting to the FT line.

Boston as a team runs very, very few ISOs -- second lowest as percentage of plays among all teams.  But that's mainly because most of our players absolutely suck at it.   Isaiah and Evan are both pretty good at it and individually, Brad has had them both used on a fair number of ISO plays.  ISO plays make up over 10% of Evan's plays and almost 8% of Isaiah's.  Isaiah is actually one of the most efficient players on ISOs, ranking 22nd in scoring efficiency on that play and he's ranked 34th in raw number of ISO plays used so far this season.

None of our other players is any good at ISOs so other than a few token plays by Sully, we run almost no such plays for the rest of the team.  Hence our usage by that play as a team is so low.  But as I indicated, our usage of ISO for the two individuals who are good at is not.

I would be shocked if Brad had a player like Durant that was as good as he is at ISOs that he would not use him in that fashion.  It would be absolutely foolish to not use him that way.   Durant is way more efficient at that play than Evan is and Brad already lets Evan use ISOs on 10% of his plays.  Durant currently ISOs 15% of the time.  I expect that would continue under Stevens.

All that is, of course, idle speculation since the chances that Durant sign here are probably slim.  But it's fun to dream!