This team seems to have a real tough time with playing down to their opponents. This and Toronto (with the players out in both games) were really pathetic opponents. The C's should have been able to walk over them and get some starters some rest.
The Wizards are a weird team because they have now beaten the Celtics, Heat, Sixers, and Nuggets, and I certainly wouldn't call the Raptors a "pathetic" opponent even with injuries - Lowry and FVV were integral pieces of a championship team and Ibaka is a very solid player as well. Not that that really explains the Celtics' performance last night but it does suggest trying to draw much from 1-2 games over the course of an NBA season is generally a fool's errand.This team seems to have a real tough time with playing down to their opponents. This and Toronto (with the players out in both games) were really pathetic opponents. The C's should have been able to walk over them and get some starters some rest.
I mean, the real explanation is that but simpler: the Celtics have been a great offensive team with Kemba on the floor, and a bad one with him off, and that has continued with him hurt.Something John Karalis has mentioned recently--since the Celtics seem to start slow, lately Kemba had been more aggressive in the first quarter, allowing the team to stay even early then letting GH, JT, and JB to take over. With him missing the last 3 games, the Celtics have continued to start slow and haven't had Kemba there to help out.
I haven't seen the numbers on this, but he's mentioned it a few places.
This isn't the first time, though. There have been a few other nail biting wins against really awful teams.Not that that really explains the Celtics' performance last night but it does suggest trying to draw much from 1-2 games over the course of an NBA season is generally a fool's errand.
That's what I see too FWIW. Kemba has been aggressive in Q1 and also in Q4 when they need a killshot and kinda conceding Q2 and Q3 to the Js.Something John Karalis has mentioned recently--since the Celtics seem to start slow, lately Kemba had been more aggressive in the first quarter, allowing the team to stay even early then letting GH, JT, and JB to take over. With him missing the last 3 games, the Celtics have continued to start slow and haven't had Kemba there to help out.
I haven't seen the numbers on this, but he's mentioned it a few places.
Their point differential is 2nd best in the league so unless it can be shown they are any worse in this regard than any other team, I don't think there is a real problem. Nobody shows up for all 82.This isn't the first time, though. There have been a few other nail biting wins against really awful teams.
Well, they did “rest” one starter (Kemba) and played another who is still working back into form (Smart). Of course, Washington played without Beal.This team seems to have a real tough time with playing down to their opponents. This and Toronto (with the players out in both games) were really pathetic opponents. The C's should have been able to walk over them and get some starters some rest.
I guess, but they are 2-1 (admittedly against bad teams) on this recent Kemba-less stretch (and 3-1 overall when Kemba hasn't played), and I'm not sure it's particularly surprising that the team's performance declines when one of its best players is not playing. That is like saying the Clippers "have work to do" when Kawhi doesn't play because the Clippers are 5-5 when Kawhi hasn't played, including losses to the Pelicans and Bulls.Clearly this team has some work to do, especially when Kemba is not available.
Yeah, I think Kemba’s impact is/was underestimated by many here, myself included, because he doesn’t put up the video game numbers that a lot of superstars are now. But he’s an utterly critical offensive piece because of the space he creates even when he’s not the guy who ultimately receives the DHO.I guess, but they are 2-1 (admittedly against bad teams) on this recent Kemba-less stretch (and 3-1 overall when Kemba hasn't played), and I'm not sure it's particularly surprising that the team's performance declines when one of its best players is not playing. That is like saying the Clippers "have work to do" when Kawhi doesn't play because the Clippers are 5-5 when Kawhi hasn't played, including losses to the Pelicans and Bulls.
As everyone knows, single game outcomes are fluky and production varies, even over larger sample sizes. Reacting to how the team looks without its primary ball handler in Walker or how the team looks with or without Hayward, who is still working his way back or how Marcus Smart looks five games back from what was a pretty significant eye condition seems a bit rushed in terms of analysis. That doesn't mean that there aren't issues or that some of the flaws we are seeing aren't worth highlighting. Its just more of a game-thread type observation than a - "hey this is an issue as highlighted by this set of data and it could hurt the team down the road".Their point differential is 2nd best in the league so unless it can be shown they are any worse in this regard than any other team, I don't think there is a real problem. Nobody shows up for all 82.
Yeah -- I think a lot of the recent close game stretch could be summed up as "they missed open shots." They're obviously going to be a better offensive team with Kemba on the floor, but probably not as dramatic as it's looked.As everyone knows, single game outcomes are fluky and production varies, even over larger sample sizes. Reacting to how the team looks without its primary ball handler in Walker or how the team looks with or without Hayward, who is still working his way back or how Marcus Smart looks five games back from what was a pretty significant eye condition seems a bit rushed in terms of analysis. That doesn't mean that there aren't issues or that some of the flaws we are seeing aren't worth highlighting. Its just more of a game-thread type observation than a - "hey this is an issue as highlighted by this set of data and it could hurt the team down the road".
I would simply suggest that it may make sense to give it time - the C's are playing really well on balance and as you note, they are doing so in impressive fashion statistically. Drawing conclusions from "last night's game" (in the generic sense) is unlikely to yield any real insights beyond "x happened in this single sequence/game etc."
He's on pace for about 115 3s, which would mean would need to hit 38 of them to average 33% for the year. He would need to shoot about 43% the rest of the way (30/70) to hit that mark. Got a long way to go.Tommy made a comment a few nights before Williams finally hit his 1st 3pt shot.
Something like "I will bet money he shoots 33% from 3 for the season!"
I like Williams but at the time (0-21 or something the night of the comment) I laughed hysterically.
Since that shot heard round the Bench, Williams is at 40%! (7/20) But still only 17.8 for the season.
I might eat my hat, laughing the whole time, if Tommy is proved correct.
The NBA, like soccer, badly needs a penalty-box concept a la hockey. You there! Go chill out for 5 minutes, think about what you've done / said, then let's get back to it.That was completely insane. I honestly just stopped watching the game after that--what's the point?
The NBA needs to get a handle on these dudes: a first year ref completely ruined an entertaining game in the span of 20 seconds because someone said a mean wordsie.
That’s a neat idea, but will there only be two refs out there during that time, or is there a replacement ref that gets to put on a whistle until the offender is back on the court?The NBA, like soccer, badly needs a penalty-box concept a la hockey. You there! Go chill out for 5 minutes, think about what you've done / said, then let's get back to it.
Um, I think he’s referring the players...That’s a neat idea, but will there only be two refs out there during that time, or is there a replacement ref that gets to put on a whistle until the offender is back on the court?
Yes. It is a decent idea I think. You get a technical, you sit out 5 minutes or until the next scheduled TV timeout, or something. No arguing allowed or you are tossed. But you get that first fuck off to the ref in return for a 5 minute penaltyUm, I think he’s referring the players...
Or the refs could, you know, not be incredibly thin-skinned dipshits. It's almost like Adam Silver could fix this if he wanted to...The NBA, like soccer, badly needs a penalty-box concept a la hockey. You there! Go chill out for 5 minutes, think about what you've done / said, then let's get back to it.
Just like NFL coaches, find us better refs somewhere
Or the refs could, you know, not be incredibly thin-skinned dipshits. It's almost like Adam Silver could fix this if he wanted to...
Its good in theory, but with teams having somewhat regular rotations, a player knowing he's about to come out anyway could turn into a Reg Dunlap - Hanrahan dustup with no real consequence.Yes. It is a decent idea I think. You get a technical, you sit out 5 minutes or until the next scheduled TV timeout, or something. No arguing allowed or you are tossed. But you get that first fuck off to the ref in return for a 5 minute penalty
Duh. I was being facetious and playing off the idea that in this instance it had very little to do with a player needing to calm down and everything to do with a ref needing to.Um, I think he’s referring the players...
How about modifying behavior through incentives? If this guys got suspended for a couple weeks or so, maybe he wouldn’t have a hair trigger next time. Even if we accept the idea that these are the best refs in the world, there can still be improvements to the system.Just like NFL coaches, find us better refs somewhere
Luckily most basketball players are not some English Pig with No Brains. But that is where you would definitely need draconian level suspensions for instigating much like hockey has.Dunlap - Hanrahan
agreed. The 2nd tech on Kemba was incredibly quick, rookie ref. Sucks. Live and learn with this guy (irrational trigger), would rather experience this now, in a January game, than a playoff game.I typically have no problem with the officials ringing up a player with a technical. Rules are rules, and the officials do need to keep things under control and have to make the decisions in real time. Scream profanities at the official a-la Kemba, and you get the T.
Typically, 30 seconds later and the player is still ticked off, but usually realizes there's still a game to be played and subsequently cools down. If the player is still confronting the official a minute later, then, fine, it's time to go to the locker room; that's on the player.
Too many starters taking possessions off at the defensive end, especially Hayward (to my eyes). May as well do more load management, if guys are halfassing it, and give the kids some pt.Since the Cs haven't seemed to be playing very hard the last two games, I hope they have extra effort tonight!
There's no perfect balancing between the needs to let the players compete and if needed vent in a high pressure environment, vs to have an entertainment spectacle that's professional, clean and not farcical, with both the game and the officials respected. If you don't give wide error bars to your officials who are trying to balance all that in real time, you're not going to have any officials.Or the refs could, you know, not be incredibly thin-skinned dipshits. It's almost like Adam Silver could fix this if he wanted to...
That's just not how human psychology works, nevermind the psychology of extreme humans who are as revved up and intense as possible. They're not thinking of the consequences 5 seconds later in that moment, nevermind the next 3 weeks. It's like why criminal deterrence (as a motivating goal of a justice system) doesn't work for crimes of passion.How about modifying behavior through incentives? If this guys got suspended for a couple weeks or so, maybe he wouldn’t have a hair trigger next time. Even if we accept the idea that these are the best refs in the world, there can still be improvements to the system.
This seems like a fairly absolute statement for a subject that has a lot of research on it. I’m far from an expert but my understanding of deterrence is that it correlates somewhat with the certainty of punishment (and less so with the nature of the punishment).That's just not how human psychology works, nevermind the psychology of extreme humans who are as revved up and intense as possible. They're not thinking of the consequences 5 seconds later in that moment, nevermind the next 3 weeks. It's like why criminal deterrence (as a motivating goal of a justice system) doesn't work for crimes of passion.
Yeah, I guess my disagreement is that very few refs seem to have trouble walking that particular line. The "two techs within 5 seconds" is very rare. This was "Crawford ejecting Duncan" levels of bad. I'm fine to T up a guy for using profanity, but if you're an NBA ref and you're going to just lose it at the word "fuck", this probably isn't the job for you.There's no perfect balancing between the needs to let the players compete and if needed vent in a high pressure environment, vs to have an entertainment spectacle that's professional, clean and not farcical, with both the game and the officials respected. If you don't give wide error bars to your officials who are trying to balance all that in real time, you're not going to have any officials.
I'm just saying they need a tool to employ that's in between "walking away" and "ejecting the player". Right now all they got is techs, and a second one is an automatic ejection. They can only work with what they're given.
The Celtics are one of only 3 teams in the Eastern Conference that have a better than .500 record against teams over .500. The Heat and Bucks are the other 2. Only 7 teams in the NBA win more than they lose against over .500 teams.I was high on this Celtics team to begin the year but I am cooling for a couple of reasons. From an unbiased viewer they seem like paper tigers who have feasted on the leagues easiest schedule up to this point.
Thanks. I was too lazy to look the numbers up, but the assertion that the C's have faced the NBA's easiest schedule didn't ring true.The Celtics are one of only 3 teams in the Eastern Conference that have a better than .500 record against teams over .500. The Heat and Bucks are the other 2. Only 7 teams in the NBA win more than they lose against over .500 teams.
Contrast that with the Raptors, who are 5-12 against those teams and 20-1 against below .500 teams.
That is a really good idea.As there are 3 officials on the court, one thing that could be done is that the league privately instructs their officials to avoid situations where a single official issues back-to-back T's. For example, if official 1 T's up a player, he or she should generally let the other 2 officials decide if and when to issue a 2nd technical. The other officials are not "in the moment", if you will, and would hopefully give the player more leeway to cool down.
It cannot be a hard and fast rule; there are going to be cases where an immediate double T is warranted. For example, any attempt to bump the official should be dealt with quickly.
From having now read several of these articles, a lot of them distinguish between "crimes of passion" where the actor is not thinking rationally and has no opportunity to consider likelihood and severity of consequence, vs say economic crimes like burglary and theft. That's the distinction I'm talking about too. We're talking about situations where the "Certainty of apprehension" is 100%, because they're on TV and the refs are looking right at them. If the players don't have an opportunity to first calm down before making a cooler-headed decision on whether to continue complaining or not, then a second tech is just capriciously adjusting the extent to which they're punished for the same impulsive acts of whining or making a scene.This seems like a fairly absolute statement for a subject that has a lot of research on it. I’m far from an expert but my understanding of deterrence is that it correlates somewhat with the certainty of punishment (and less so with the nature of the punishment).
I realize you're joking - again, after having explained the same joke the first time you made it - but the issue is not in "refs keeping their cool" but in players not letting it go and keeping up the hissy fits long after most of us would have calmed down. I'm saying this is normal for the emotional state they're in. I agree that maybe there should be a rule that a ref can't give a second tech within (say) a minute of giving the first one to a player, no matter what they do, unless it's something insta-ejectable like punching someone or physically harming an official. But I still think giving a timeout to someone who's behaving like a toddler would solve a large class of these incidents right now in a fairly elegant way.I’m also not sure I agree with the characterization of refs as “extreme humans who are as revved up and intense as possible.” Being able to keep their cool should be a selected for trait in refs, far more so than for players.
Yes, there are immediately-ejectable acts, but I think every NBA player knows that complaining, screaming and potty mouth are not among them.It cannot be a hard and fast rule; there are going to be cases where an immediate double T is warranted. For example, any attempt to bump the official should be dealt with quickly.
ESPN currently has the Celtics as having faced the second easiest schedule so far, ahead of only Charlotte. Tankathon has the forward looking schedule ranked as 9th hardest. Denver is the only good team with a tougher schedule the rest of the way.Thanks. I was too lazy to look the numbers up, but the assertion that the C's have faced the NBA's easiest schedule didn't ring true.
I mean, what in the world?Here’s another Evan Scott clip:
View: https://twitter.com/MickstapeShow/status/1184996581659029504?s=20
He’s pretty obviously hilariously bad at his job, and the NBA is too busy planning mid-season tournaments no one asked for to control the quality of its product.
your proof accepted on this count...He’s pretty obviously hilariously bad at his job...
whoa whoa. No one asked for Naismith to nail a hoop to the wall of his gym, either. No one asked for the ABA to invent a 3-point line, they just did it because they thought it'd be more exciting. But having seen it proposed, I'm damn excited to see a single-elimination NBA tournament come to life and become another part of the awesome sequence of NBA stuff....and the NBA is too busy planning mid-season tournaments no one asked for to control the quality of its product.
http://powerrankingsguru.com/nba/strength-of-schedule.phpThanks. I was too lazy to look the numbers up, but the assertion that the C's have faced the NBA's easiest schedule didn't ring true.
One theory for the Celtics success vs >.500 teams could be the easy schedule allowing them to get up for the tougher games.......the Bucks SOS is one notch above Boston in these rankings at 29 and Miami is at 23.The Celtics are one of only 3 teams in the Eastern Conference that have a better than .500 record against teams over .500. The Heat and Bucks are the other 2. Only 7 teams in the NBA win more than they lose against over .500 teams.
Contrast that with the Raptors, who are 5-12 against those teams and 20-1 against below .500 teams.