What do we need to do to get the first team offense going?!

[crownsy]

Them to start hitting shots.

They've been getting the good looks, but haven't been knocking them down.

In the case of Rondo he hasn't used his jumper, and in the case of Pierce he's been using it a bit too much.

Pierce is favroing that wrist, thats for sure. rondo needs to take a jumper or too, to keep people honest, but i still prefer him driving and scoring/ dishing over taking jumpers.

[Big Ticket]

Get blown out early a couple more times, only the other team maintains the blowout throughout the game.

No easier way to show what can happen with a sluggish start than a firm beat down or two.

Regular season losses every now and then are definitely a good thing in my opinion.

[SportsCapNative]

What do we need to do to get the first team offense going?!

This:

[Redz]

Get blown out early a couple more times, only the only team maintains the blowout throughout the game.

The Celts were a Danny Granger away from getting run off the court last night.

[2short]

Actually just listen to tommy on this one.
Establish inside out game, we are settling for jumpers and not as much ball movement.  Rondo needs to break down the defense if they play up on him.  Our defense is truly amazing, if we were hitting some shots to start games we'd be looking like the lakers blowout last year!

[moiso]

I agree with the cruise control theory.  It's not as easy to play with extreme effort and enthusiasm when on the wrong side of 30, either.  I guess I'm fine with it as long as we are winning games.  Save those old legs for the playoffs and important games.
I would like to see Perk and Rondo bring it every night however.

[BudweiserCeltic]

They're not in cruise control. They would be in cruise control if they were playing good, as they're supposed to, but with little effort. What the Spurs have been doing for the past couple of seasons... that was cruise control.

What we have is a disfunctional offense (and at times defense) that has been constantly bailed out by the second unit this early in the season.

I for one am not worried about all these problems since it's early, but to chug it up to them being in cruise control I find it very hard to believe.

[crownsy]

They're not in cruise control. They would be in cruise control if they were playing good, as they're supposed to, but with little effort. What the Spurs have been doing for the past couple of seasons... that was cruise control.

What we have is a disfunctional offense (and at times defense) that has been constantly bailed out by the second unit this early in the season.

I for one am not worried about all these problems since it's early, but to chug it up to them being in cruise control I find it very hard to believe.

and yet we've beaten the bad teams and turned it up to beat 3 playoff contenders, 2 of them on the road. (4 if you cont the pistons)

Beating bad teams with as little effort as possable and playing extremly tough against tougher matchups was THE DEFINTATION of those spurs squads.

We are 7-1, with quality wins over 4 playoff bound teams. dysfunctional indeed.

That's not bad for a dysfunctional offense.

[Hoyo de Monterrey]

I'm with crownsy... I can't really get worried yet. Offense comes, offense goes but they've played quality defense (for more then the most part) against a couple good teams. The shots will fall. Tonight should be fun as well.

They'll be fine. I actually think 7-1 is fine already.

[BudweiserCeltic]

They're not in cruise control. They would be in cruise control if they were playing good, as they're supposed to, but with little effort. What the Spurs have been doing for the past couple of seasons... that was cruise control.

What we have is a disfunctional offense (and at times defense) that has been constantly bailed out by the second unit this early in the season.

I for one am not worried about all these problems since it's early, but to chug it up to them being in cruise control I find it very hard to believe.

and yet we've beaten the bad teams and turned it up to beat 3 playoff contenders, 2 of them on the road. (4 if you cont the pistons)

Beating bad teams with as little effort as possable and playing extremly tough against tougher matchups was THE DEFINTATION of those spurs squads.

We are 7-1, with quality wins over 4 playoff bound teams. dysfunctional indeed.

That's not bad for a dysfunctional offense.

Yet this thread was about focusing on the starters... I guess you missed the point of being bailed out constantly through the season by our bench.

The difference between those Spurs that you mention, was that their starters were playing great while in cruise control. Our starters are leaving a lot to be desired from to simply chug it up to "cruise control". The Spurs system ran smoothly, while in cruise control, the Celtics' isn't running smoothly.

Whatever, I can see it now... everytime we play bad "meh, we were simply in cruise control". I guess it'll make little sense arguing this.

If we're putting little effort as some people claim... I wonder why our defense has been quite good for the most part? I thought we weren't putting the effort.

[crownsy]

They're not in cruise control. They would be in cruise control if they were playing good, as they're supposed to, but with little effort. What the Spurs have been doing for the past couple of seasons... that was cruise control.

What we have is a disfunctional offense (and at times defense) that has been constantly bailed out by the second unit this early in the season.

I for one am not worried about all these problems since it's early, but to chug it up to them being in cruise control I find it very hard to believe.

and yet we've beaten the bad teams and turned it up to beat 3 playoff contenders, 2 of them on the road. (4 if you cont the pistons)

Beating bad teams with as little effort as possable and playing extremly tough against tougher matchups was THE DEFINTATION of those spurs squads.

We are 7-1, with quality wins over 4 playoff bound teams. dysfunctional indeed.

That's not bad for a dysfunctional offense.

Yet this thread was about focusing on the starters... I guess you missed the point of being bailed out constantly through the season by our bench.

The difference between those Spurs that you mention, was that their starters were playing great while in cruise control. Our starters are leaving a lot to be desired from to simply chug it up to "cruise control". The Spurs system ran smoothly, while in cruise control, the Celtics' isn't running smoothly.

Whatever, I can see it now... everytime we play bad "meh, we were simply in cruise control". I guess it'll make little sense arguing this.

If we're putting little effort as some people claim... I wonder why our defense has been quite good for the most part? I thought we weren't putting the effort.

I didn't "miss it" i don't agree with you, that's all, i thought that was what we do around here at times  .

and your reasons for dismissing me can be flipped right around can't they?

"whatever, whenever they win, i guess it's because the bench played well. I guess It'll make little differance to argue with this."

[cordobes]

That's not bad for a dysfunctional offense.

I don't know if the offense is dysfunctional, but it's certainly been very bellow average so far.

[BudweiserCeltic]

They're not in cruise control. They would be in cruise control if they were playing good, as they're supposed to, but with little effort. What the Spurs have been doing for the past couple of seasons... that was cruise control.

What we have is a disfunctional offense (and at times defense) that has been constantly bailed out by the second unit this early in the season.

I for one am not worried about all these problems since it's early, but to chug it up to them being in cruise control I find it very hard to believe.

and yet we've beaten the bad teams and turned it up to beat 3 playoff contenders, 2 of them on the road. (4 if you cont the pistons)

Beating bad teams with as little effort as possable and playing extremly tough against tougher matchups was THE DEFINTATION of those spurs squads.

We are 7-1, with quality wins over 4 playoff bound teams. dysfunctional indeed.

That's not bad for a dysfunctional offense.

Yet this thread was about focusing on the starters... I guess you missed the point of being bailed out constantly through the season by our bench.

The difference between those Spurs that you mention, was that their starters were playing great while in cruise control. Our starters are leaving a lot to be desired from to simply chug it up to "cruise control". The Spurs system ran smoothly, while in cruise control, the Celtics' isn't running smoothly.

Whatever, I can see it now... everytime we play bad "meh, we were simply in cruise control". I guess it'll make little sense arguing this.

If we're putting little effort as some people claim... I wonder why our defense has been quite good for the most part? I thought we weren't putting the effort.

I didn't "miss it" i don't agree with you, that's all, i thought that was what we do around here at times  .

and your reasons for dismissing me can be flipped right around can't they?

"whatever, whenever they win, i guess it's because the bench played well. I guess It'll make little differance to argue with this."

The point was that wether or not, as a team, we have beaten some competition is no evidence of a first unit in "cruise control" as you apparently tried to suggest. Wins come in every form and flavor, and the for the most part, that flavor has been our bench play with a side order of defense. So that we have won tells me nothing about how "in control" the first unit is, specifically offensively.

This is not a new issue. The team has been underperforming offensively since last season. I guess we were in cruise control then too and throughout the playoffs too? This is really not a new issue.

[Fan from VT]

i think they've just been bad.

1. kg hasn't shot well. he's going inside even less than last year, but he is also missing his usual money 12-18 footers. i expect those to come around

2. rondo has not been scoring well. he's been doing too much dipsy do stuff inside. he needs to shoot more good shots; he often gets to the basket, decides not to try to lay it in, then gets stuck making a bad pass or a worse shot. he needs to have an attack to score mentality sometimes, instead of constant fancy mode.

3. pierce is often the one that stops the ball movement, but then again he's been playing the best of the starters and has far and away the best +/- on the team.

4. ray isn't shooting well. some of this will come around, but then some of this was hinted at by his under-reported drop in production last year with no real increase in efficiency; he just dropped a bit and at his age, will continue to. i must say, he's also one of the worst good players at running a fast break. it's always surprising.

[crownsy]

4. ray isn't shooting well. some of this will come around, but then some of this was hinted at by his under-reported drop in production last year with no real increase in efficiency; he just dropped a bit and at his age, will continue to.

The rest i agree with, this isn't true.

He's shooting at a point below his career average (less than a point if you want to nit pick), 44%. thats a really good percentage for a 2 guard.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/players/profile?playerId=0009

his three point shooting is down early, but his shooting from inside the arc is great, so they're currently evening out.

Im always amazed at how people crap all over ray Allen regardless of facts. He could be shooting something absurd like 55% from the field and people would still go "ray's not shooting well."

I honestly think it stems from people thinking if he's not hitting every open three, he's not doing his job.

I mean, what do you people want him to shoot from the floor? 50% good enough? 55%?