Celtics on-off numbers

maufman

Anderson Cooper x Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
You keep saying this and it's been shown to be false. For instance, here's this season: https://www.basketball-reference.com/players/i/irvinky01/on-off/2019

At some point will folks in charge here ask this poster to support this with evidence? Or do we have to watch him post the same things over and over?
I hadn’t seen these numbers before.

Here’s the net on-off for the eight guys who played at least 45% of the team’s minutes. (This excludes guys like Baynes, Theis, and Wanamaker who put up good numbers but either missed loads of time to injury or were used very selectively.)

Tatum +4.8
Kyrie +2.8
Al +2.4
Smart +0.1
Hayward -0.2
Jaylen -3.2
MaMo -4.5
Rozier -9.5

A few observations:

— Kyrie wasn’t obviously our best player.

— SoSH’s griping about MaMo was justified.

— Smart wasn’t as good as I thought, but that could be a product of who he played with.

— Hayward’s numbers are surprisingly good for a guy who was working his way back into shape for much of the season and played a lot of minutes with the second unit.

— You would expect Terry’s number to be negative because he played so many second-unit minutes, but damn, he was apparently even worse than he looked. Certainly seems to vindicate those of us who thought trading him for essentially nothing would be addition by subtraction.

Link to full team numbers.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2019/on-off/

Thought this might be worth a thread.
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,263
deep inside Guido territory
I hadn’t seen these numbers before.

Here’s the net on-off for the eight guys who played at least 45% of the team’s minutes. (This excludes guys like Baynes, Theis, and Wanamaker who put up good numbers but either missed loads of time to injury or were used very selectively.)

Tatum +4.8
Kyrie +2.8
Al +2.4
Smart +0.1
Hayward -0.2
Jaylen -3.2
MaMo -4.5
Rozier -9.5

A few observations:

— Kyrie wasn’t obviously our best player.

— SoSH’s griping about MaMo was justified.

— Smart wasn’t as good as I thought, but that could be a product of who he played with.

— Hayward’s numbers are surprisingly good for a guy who was working his way back into shape for much of the season and played a lot of minutes with the second unit.

— You would expect Terry’s number to be negative because he played so many second-unit minutes, but damn, he was apparently even worse than he looked. Certainly seems to vindicate those of us who thought trading him for essentially nothing would be addition by subtraction.

Link to full team numbers.

https://www.basketball-reference.com/teams/BOS/2019/on-off/

Thought this might be worth a thread.
These numbers would also indicate that the people who have been claiming that the Brown/Tatum debate was swinging towards Brown are wrong.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
34,106
These numbers would also indicate that the people who have been claiming that the Brown/Tatum debate was swinging towards Brown are wrong.
You have to tease more info out though--Tatum played more with Irving, Brown more with Rozier, etc. That overlap has something to do with it---if Brown is off the floor, then Kyrie is on a lot of the time. That isn't 100% obviously but it does have some bearing.

There were links in a thread earlier this year where each player had numbers showing what different players did while they were on the floor, and it showed that pretty much every player shot better when Kyrie was on the floor with them, and the opposite when Rozier was on the floor with them. That's similar to these on/off numbers, but it's different enough to be something that should be looked at. Was Brown's rating just killed by playing lots of time with Rozier?
 

RedOctober3829

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
38,263
deep inside Guido territory
You have to tease more info out though--Tatum played more with Irving, Brown more with Rozier, etc. That overlap has something to do with it---if Brown is off the floor, then Kyrie is on a lot of the time. That isn't 100% obviously but it does have some bearing.

There were links in a thread earlier this year where each player had numbers showing what different players did while they were on the floor, and it showed that pretty much every player shot better when Kyrie was on the floor with them, and the opposite when Rozier was on the floor with them. That's similar to these on/off numbers, but it's different enough to be something that should be looked at. Was Brown's rating just killed by playing lots of time with Rozier?
That's fair, but Tatum's rating is so far above Brown's that I'd think the time with Ky/Rozier would have had to be so far skewed in Tatum's favor for that to be a big factor.
 

DrewDawg

Dorito Dink
SoSH Member
Dec 16, 2010
34,106
For reference:

Brown played 1000 minutes with Rozier this year, and 900 with Irving. He was +2.3 in points with Rozier, and +1.4 with Irving.

Tatum played 800 minutes with Rozier this year, 1500 with Irving. He was +8.0 in points with Irving, and -0.2 with Rozier. Tatum and Rozier did not mesh well.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,230
Santa Monica
Good stuff maufman. thank you. a full season should give us enough sample size to make some conclusions

I wouldn't disregard Baynes (+4.3)/Theis (+4) since they played higher leverage/more minutes then BW's mop up minutes. They should have been given the chance to play more.
 
Last edited:

Nick Kaufman

protector of human kind from spoilers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2003
10,053
A Lost Time
The major takeaway from those numbers is that to the extent they are accurate Tatum is way better than I thought, while Brown is overrated.
 

chilidawg

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 22, 2015
1,432
By RPM, which in theory accounts for who they're playing with/against:

Irving 4.20
Horford 3.97
Brown -.85
Tatum 1.27
Baynes .78
Smart 2.71
Rozier -1.36
Theis 1.81
Morris -1.39

Playoff On-off:
Irving -4.2
Horford +19.4!!!
Tatum 3.7
Brown -16.7!!!
Hayward -4.9
Morris +21.1
Rozier +9.6
Baynes -19.2
Theis -2.9
Smart -22.2 (2 games)

Hard to know what to make of the playoff numbers. I never would have guessed JB was so bad, because to my eye test he was one of our best. Nor would I have thought Horford or Morris so good, although both obviously played pretty well. Best to remember it's a 9 game small sample.
 

maufman

Anderson Cooper x Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
Gold Supporter
I'll add Baynes/Theis since they played higher leverage/more minutes then BW's mop up minutes. They should have been given the chance to play more.
Baynes +4.3
Theis +4
Agree that the numbers confirm the emerging SoSH consensus that Baynes is underrated. (Yes, you’ve won us over!)

My eyes tell me Theis has some glaring deficiencies but can be used productively against opponents/lineups that aren’t equipped to exploit those deficiencies. These numbers don’t necessarily refute that hypothesis, so I’m not convinced that Brad erred in not giving Theis more playing time.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,230
Santa Monica
Agree that the numbers confirm the emerging SoSH consensus that Baynes is underrated. (Yes, you’ve won us over!)

My eyes tell me Theis has some glaring deficiencies but can be used productively against opponents/lineups that aren’t equipped to exploit those deficiencies. These numbers don’t necessarily refute that hypothesis, so I’m not convinced that Brad erred in not giving Theis more playing time.
I promise this is my final 2018-19 BIG rant.

Aron Baynes is a good role player. BUT the real Celtic efficiency sauce is Al Horford at the 4. We didn't see enough of Al at the 4 in the regular season. Brad should have played a BIG with Al more often (esp. when Baynes was injured during the regular season). In the playoffs, Baynes was running around on 1 leg, unfortunately, Stevens had not developed another BIG to play with Al. It was a glaring regular season mistake by Brad.

Al + Baynes/Theis/TL (195 mins) 106.6 / 88.3 / +18.3
Al + MaMo (1158 mins) 109.8 / 107.1 / +2.7

In addition to that, MaMo was Al's worst partner in the starting unit.

So my bigger point is it wouldn't shock me to see Danny gamble and go after AD even if Kyrie walks. An AD/Horford combo would be extremely efficient.

https://stats.nba.com/lineups/advanced/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular Season&TeamID=1610612738&GroupQuantity=2&sort=GROUP_NAME&dir=-1
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,303
I will say that I thought the Cs would have won game 4 if Smart didn't play. He really killed them that game.
It should be noted that there are reports Smart was screaming in agony in the locker room taking off his wrap or whatever it was after Game 5. Not surprising that he was less effective.

I promise this is my final 2018-19 BIG rant.

Aron Baynes is a good role player. BUT the real Celtic efficiency sauce is Al Horford at the 4. We didn't see enough of Al at the 4 in the regular season. Brad should have played a BIG with Al more often (esp. when Baynes was injured during the regular season). In the playoffs, Baynes was running around on 1 leg, unfortunately, Stevens had not developed another BIG to play with Al. It was a glaring regular season mistake by Brad.

Al + Baynes/Theis/TL (195 mins) 106.6 / 88.3 / +18.3
Al + MaMo (1158 mins) 109.8 / 107.1 / +2.7

In addition to that, MaMo was Al's worst partner in the starting unit.

So my bigger point is it wouldn't shock me to see Danny gamble and go after AD even if Kyrie walks. An AD/Horford combo would be extremely efficient.

https://stats.nba.com/lineups/advanced/?Season=2018-19&SeasonType=Regular Season&TeamID=1610612738&GroupQuantity=2&sort=GROUP_NAME&dir=-1
The problem was that there wasn't necessarily a viable BIG on the roster. Theis is best used in limited duty; he hasn't shown any more. And Time Lord, despite his thundering blocks, was clearly not ready to take on much more of role outside of garbage time. One area where we can give Stevens the benefit of the doubt is that he does see these guys in practice a lot more than we do.

It's also difficult to project much from the small sample that represents 10% of Horford's minutes. That +18.3 likely has a large noise bar around it.

Don't disagree with the bolded at all. I'm sure it's one of many options Ainge will pursue.
 

luckiestman

Son of the Harpy
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
11,284
The major takeaway from those numbers is that to the extent they are accurate Tatum is way better than I thought, while Brown is overrated.

I’m the biggest Tatum fanboy I know so it is strange to me when others are not high on him. I may be overrating him but it’s hard for me to see what others are seeing when they think he isn’t very good.

What is he doing out there that makes you not like him? He needs to work on his handle and his strength but those seem like (relatively) easy things to improve.

I don’t know much about hoops beyond being a fan so I am asking this genuinely.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,713
around the way
I’m the biggest Tatum fanboy I know so it is strange to me when others are not high on him. I may be overrating him but it’s hard for me to see what others are seeing when they think he isn’t very good.

What is he doing out there that makes you not like him? He needs to work on his handle and his strength but those seem like (relatively) easy things to improve.

I don’t know much about hoops beyond being a fan so I am asking this genuinely.
Two types of people are down on him. 1. PPG uber alles types--he didn't go up, and 2. 3s and layups only types--he takes too many long 2s.

There's something to be said about taking too many 2s, but he's still a kid. They're overreacting. The first group are fools.
 

nighthob

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
7,557
Yeah, in year two NBA defenses focused on running him off the line and he doesn't yet have the strength to finish through contact consistently. And he doesn't yet get enough respect from the refs to draw calls whenever he gets hacked. He will need to adjust to NBA defenses taking away his spot jumpers (i.e. improve his pull up shooting), he'll need to get stronger. Both are doable.
 

slamminsammya

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2006
2,822
Palo Alto
If Tatum made more of those long 2s he probably wouldnt shoot so many, since at a certain point defenses would be more aggressive about not conceding those shots.
 

Nick Kaufman

protector of human kind from spoilers
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2003
10,053
A Lost Time
I’m the biggest Tatum fanboy I know so it is strange to me when others are not high on him. I may be overrating him but it’s hard for me to see what others are seeing when they think he isn’t very good.

What is he doing out there that makes you not like him? He needs to work on his handle and his strength but those seem like (relatively) easy things to improve.

I don’t know much about hoops beyond being a fan so I am asking this genuinely.
I never said he wasn't good. I said he was better than I thought. I said that because his on/off numbers were better than Kyrie's and I didn't think that Tatum was more effective than Kyrie! It's still unliklely that Tatum was better than Kyrie; the RPM numbers posted after my original post are way closer to my impression of each player's ability .
 

DeJesus Built My Hotrod

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 24, 2002
28,060
Yeah, in year two NBA defenses focused on running him off the line and he doesn't yet have the strength to finish through contact consistently. And he doesn't yet get enough respect from the refs to draw calls whenever he gets hacked. He will need to adjust to NBA defenses taking away his spot jumpers (i.e. improve his pull up shooting), he'll need to get stronger. Both are doable.
This seems right to me. I think people who were unhappy with Tatum's development had unrealistic expectations from his spectacular rookie season which was fueled, in part, by being an unknown in terms of how he functioned in an NBA offense. The opposition caught up to him this year but despite that, his numbers were decent.

That said, he as to get stronger and adjust his game to what the defenses are throwing at him. Gentry has some work to do this summer.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,367
Hindsight is always 20/20. And things like this happen when in desperation mode against a significantly more talented team.
I thought hindsight is 50/50.

They were only down 2-1. They pay doctors a bazillion dollars every year. It's the playoffs. Sports is becoming an information business and if Smart was really screaming in agony after Game 5, and given the way he played in Game 4, it's hard not to conclude that an organizational failure occurred and - most importantly - the organization should put something in place to make sure it doesn't happen again.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,713
around the way
I thought hindsight is 50/50.

They were only down 2-1. They pay doctors a bazillion dollars every year. It's the playoffs. Sports is becoming an information business and if Smart was really screaming in agony after Game 5, and given the way he played in Game 4, it's hard not to conclude that an organizational failure occurred and - most importantly - the organization should put something in place to make sure it doesn't happen again.
I don't want to see them risk Smart's health or anyone else's. That said, if you watched that series, that 2-1 lead may as well been 22-1. If I were Wyc, I would have considered fired the catering staff and parking attendants, just to mix shit up. Absent CBS having a significant adjustment in pocket--which he clearly didn't--any change at all was good. This is of course assuming that no long-term risk to Smart's health was in play, and "screaming in pain" is not per se evidence of any risk whatsoever.

The team has a rep post-IT4, so I get where you're coming from though.
 

wade boggs chicken dinner

Member
SoSH Member
Mar 26, 2005
16,367
I don't want to see them risk Smart's health or anyone else's. That said, if you watched that series, that 2-1 lead may as well been 22-1. If I were Wyc, I would have considered fired the catering staff and parking attendants, just to mix shit up. Absent CBS having a significant adjustment in pocket--which he clearly didn't--any change at all was good. This is of course assuming that no long-term risk to Smart's health was in play, and "screaming in pain" is not per se evidence of any risk whatsoever.

The team has a rep post-IT4, so I get where you're coming from though.
It's easy to look back and see that MIL is a juggernaut and the Cs probably would have lost anyways but if the Cs won game 4, it would have been 2-2 and the series at least looks different at that point.

But my point is more that a player who is screaming in pain after a game probably isn't going to help the team and probably shouldn't be playing, unless that guy is LBJ or someone like that.
 

benhogan

Baynes Hogan (pending trade)
SoSH Member
Nov 2, 2007
6,230
Santa Monica
It's easy to look back and see that MIL is a juggernaut and the Cs probably would have lost anyways but if the Cs won game 4, it would have been 2-2 and the series at least looks different at that point.

But my point is more that a player who is screaming in pain after a game probably isn't going to help the team and probably shouldn't be playing, unless that guy is LBJ or someone like that.
Smart launching 7 3PA, 2nd most on the team that night, in 15 minutes after not playing for a month was also a head-scratcher. Just checked, that was, by far, Smart's highest 3PA/minutes played in a game all season.

Milwaukee's side must have been very happy with that shot selection in a pivotal Game 4.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,303
I thought hindsight is 50/50.

They were only down 2-1. They pay doctors a bazillion dollars every year. It's the playoffs. Sports is becoming an information business and if Smart was really screaming in agony after Game 5, and given the way he played in Game 4, it's hard not to conclude that an organizational failure occurred and - most importantly - the organization should put something in place to make sure it doesn't happen again.
I don't want to see them risk Smart's health or anyone else's. That said, if you watched that series, that 2-1 lead may as well been 22-1. If I were Wyc, I would have considered fired the catering staff and parking attendants, just to mix shit up. Absent CBS having a significant adjustment in pocket--which he clearly didn't--any change at all was good. This is of course assuming that no long-term risk to Smart's health was in play, and "screaming in pain" is not per se evidence of any risk whatsoever.

The team has a rep post-IT4, so I get where you're coming from though.
It's important to keep in mind that sports medicine is never an exact science, no matter how much money is thrown at the problem. Especially when it comes to soft tissue injuries. The medical and training staff can make a highly educated judgment call whether Smart would be risking long term complications by playing. However, it's much harder to determine in advance whether a player is recovered enough to be 50%, 75%, or 95% effective. Stevens watched him practice. If he made the determination that Smart would likely be 75%, and that Smart at 75% would still be useful to the team, I'm not convinced that decision was flawed given the information available at the time. It's a decision that didn't work out, but I have trouble believing that the Celtics would have won with Smart in street clothes either. The RPM over 2 games is too noisy to be used in that manner.

I should also note, as the one that admittedly brought up the "sreaming in agony", that I was referring to a Globe reporter's one line description. Who really knows what actually happened when Smart got undressed after playing 2 games with a torn oblique.

Finally, is the bolded really a thing? I thought it was just IT4 and some low information pseudo-journalists peddling that line.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
7,303
Well, AD's father literally brought it up in the media. Hard to say how much of a thing, but not nothing.
I had forgotten about that. Thanks.

Weird that the team did nothing wrong, or at least nothing different than 29 other teams in the NBA do on a regular and ongoing basis. But is somehow being blamed for a player's arthritic hip.
 

Jimbodandy

Member
SoSH Member
Jan 31, 2006
2,713
around the way
I had forgotten about that. Thanks.

Weird that the team did nothing wrong, or at least nothing different than 29 other teams in the NBA do on a regular and ongoing basis. But is somehow being blamed for a player's arthritic hip.
More smoke/fire perception than a direct accusation of wrongdoing and seems to have been mitigated substantially in the last year.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
21,054
Melrose, MA
By RPM, which in theory accounts for who they're playing with/against:

Irving 4.20
Horford 3.97
Brown -.85
Tatum 1.27
Baynes .78
Smart 2.71
Rozier -1.36
Theis 1.81
Morris -1.39
I wonder how much of Irving's number there relates to Rozier's (ie, Iriving's primary backup's) suckitude.

Playoff On-off:
Irving -4.2
Horford +19.4!!!
Tatum 3.7
Brown -16.7!!!
Hayward -4.9
Morris +21.1
Rozier +9.6
Baynes -19.2
Theis -2.9
Smart -22.2 (2 games)

Hard to know what to make of the playoff numbers. I never would have guessed JB was so bad, because to my eye test he was one of our best. Nor would I have thought Horford or Morris so good, although both obviously played pretty well. Best to remember it's a 9 game small sample.
I think the main thing to make of this is SSS. Also, Marcus was hurt.