The Celtics and the Four Factors

[PhoSita]

What this Celtics team sorely lacks, and has lacked since trading Pierce, is a guy who can get to the line regularly to slow down he pace, break offensive droughts, and get the opposing team in foul trouble. At the start of the year I was hoping Smart would be that guy, but he's not there, at least not yet. We need a guy who can get to the basket and draw fouls consistently.

IT was 8th in the NBA in free throw attempts, and 4th at free throws made.  It would be nice to have a second player who can do that at least sometimes, however, as IT got to the line more than Crowder and Turner, our 2nd and 3rd most frequent FT shooters, did combined. 

Still, the team got to the line at about a league-average rate, so while it's not a strength, it isn't really a deficit.

The bolded statement is incorrect; the Celts were 20th in the league in Free Throws per Field Goal Attempt.


Regardless, IT and Crowder do very well in a lot of areas that contribute to the "Four Factors."

They get to the line, have high EFG%, high steal percentage.


What the team is lacking is a dominant rebounder and finisher inside, ideally somebody who also gets to the line a fair amount and doesn't turn the ball over a ton.

Essentially the Celts need Tyson Chandler circa 2011.

And then, of course, they need some better shooters.

[saltlover]

What this Celtics team sorely lacks, and has lacked since trading Pierce, is a guy who can get to the line regularly to slow down he pace, break offensive droughts, and get the opposing team in foul trouble. At the start of the year I was hoping Smart would be that guy, but he's not there, at least not yet. We need a guy who can get to the basket and draw fouls consistently.

IT was 8th in the NBA in free throw attempts, and 4th at free throws made.  It would be nice to have a second player who can do that at least sometimes, however, as IT got to the line more than Crowder and Turner, our 2nd and 3rd most frequent FT shooters, did combined. 

Still, the team got to the line at about a league-average rate, so while it's not a strength, it isn't really a deficit.

The bolded statement is incorrect; the Celts were 20th in the league in Free Throws per Field Goal Attempt.


Regardless, IT and Crowder do very well in a lot of areas that contribute to the "Four Factors."

They get to the line, have high EFG%, high steal percentage.


What the team is lacking is a dominant rebounder and finisher inside, ideally somebody who also gets to the line a fair amount and doesn't turn the ball over a ton.

Essentially the Celts need Tyson Chandler circa 2011.

And then, of course, they need some better shooters.

According to basketball reference, the Celtics were 14th in FT rate, taking .208 free throws per field goal attempt.  The league averaged .209 free throws per FGA, so the median was below the mean.  The Celtics were "about average" as I said in any case.  I'm not sure where Hardwood Paroxysm got 20th from.  The Celtics also attempted the 8th most free throws.  I haven't been able to find free throws per 100 possessions to see if the difference between total free throws and FT/FGA come from pace or offensive rebounds.  But I'm sticking with my original statement regardless.

[PhoSita]

I'm not sure where Hardwood Paroxysm got 20th from. 

According to Basketball-Reference, the Celtics attempted 7318 field goals and 1929 free throws.

If you divide 1929 free throws by 7318 field goals, you get .2635, or approximately 26.4%.


According to TeamRankings.com, this placed the Celtics 20th in the league, below Dallas (26.5%) and above Washington (26.3%).

https://www.teamrankings.com/nba/stat/fta-per-fga

I'm not sure how Basketball-Reference calculates their "Free Throws Per Field Goal Attempt" in their "Offense Four Factors" team stats category.


For what it's worth, the Celtics were ranked 8th in MADE free throws this season (they were 12th in free throws attempted).  Like you, I'm not sure where that would rank them if you adjusted for pace.