Team Offense Advanced Stats

[DefenseWinsChamps]

When you look at the team shot tracking stats on NBA.com, two things become obvious: 1) Our system is very similar too the Hawks, Spurs, and Warriors, and 2) With more efficient scorers, we would be one of the best offenses in the NBA.

FGAPG    87.5 FGA (1st)    44.3% (20th)
3FGAPG   24.6 3FGA (13th) 32.7% (27th)

Passing   24.5 APG (4th)    
      311 Passes PG (9th)
      2.3 FreeThrowAPG (16th)
      5.8 SecondaryAPG (10th)
      49.9 AssistOpportunitiesPG (2nd)
      57.1 PointsCreatedByA (5th)
      320.2 TouchesPG (10th)
      17.9 CloseTouchesPG (13th)
      17.1 ElbowTouchesPG (19th)

The two glaring stats are Assist opportunities and Field Goal attempts. We really do not play at the fastest pace in the NBA, but we do take a lot of shots in the secondary break, before the defense is completely set up. This is backed up by these stats.

Shot Clock
22-24 - 4.9 FGA (9th) 51.6% (28th)
18-22 - 12.7 FGA (6th) 50.7% (24th)
15-18 - 13.8 FGA (5th) 45.1% (18th)
7-15 - 41.9 FGA (2nd) 44.3% (16th)
4-7 - 6.8 FGA (30th)    39.3% (24th)
0-4 - 4.3 FGA (29th)   30.9% (29th)
Off - 2.8 FGA (8th) 32.2% (18th)

It becomes clear from these stats that CBS wants to shoot before seven seconds on the shot clock. That means that he wants a shot from the primary or secondary option. He does not want isos or hero ball. The only problem, as you can see, is that although this creates more possessions for them, the are terribly inefficient at all times on the shot clocks.

This is also backed up by our assist opportunities which shows often, if a player had made a basket, there would have been an assist on the play. This clearly shows that our offense is one of the best in the league in terms of ball movement, and that is confirmed by the following stats.

Number of Dribbles before the player shoots
0 Dribbles - 44.9 FGA (2nd)    47.2% (16th)
1 Dribble - 13.4 FGA (9th) 40.4% (30th)
2 Dribbles - 10.0 FGA (6th)   42.6% (13th)
3-6 Dribbles - 13.2 FGA (12th) 41% (19th)
7+ Dribbles - 6.1 FGA (22nd) 41.4% (17th)
(Cavs were first by a lot)

I love that our offense is like that. It is beautiful. On the other side of the spectrum, the Cavs are first in 7+ dribbles by quite bit, which means that there is a lot of Lebron James and Irving iso. I don't think an ISO offense can win a championship, but we will see.

Amount of time a player has the ball before he shoots
<2 seconds   53 FGA (2nd)       46.2% (23rd)
2-6 seconds   27.2 FGA (13th)    41.5% (18th)
6+ seconds    7.2 FGA (23rd)   41.2% (16th)
(Cavs were first by a lot)

Again, I love this about our Celtics. They simply do not hold the ball for long, but instead they pop it around the court. That's beautiful, and I believe our young players will become more efficient at this.

Closest Defender
0-2 feet   15.8 FGA (15th) 45.2% (16th)
2-4 feet   30.5 FGA (12th) 46.2% (20th)
4-6 feet    26.4 FGA (1st) 41.6% (21th)
6+ feet    14.7 FGA (12th) 44.4% (13th)

While the Hawks were 1st at getting shots where a defender is 6+ feet away, it is a really good sign that we are first at getting shots when a defender is 4-6 feet away. That means we are getting quality looks, better than most teams in the league.

I really like our offense. I think that with another year of development, Olynyk, Zeller, Sullinger, Thomas, Smart, and Young would all become more efficient. If the offense maintains the same flow, we could be a top 8 offensive team in the league next year.

From the sounds of it, we may be aiming for a great scorer or two in free agency, which would elevate the entire team offensively.    

[jambr380]

TP - Another really solid, informative post. You are going to give Kevin O'Connor a run for his [analytic] money. Stevens clearly has a system he is trying to run and it is proving to be successful with our 'starless' roster. I'd imagine that Rondo/Thomas skewed helped skew these stats in the wrong direction, but you also need players who can create.

[Who]

Great work on the stats. Interesting read. TP.

[Lucky17]

I think any sort of analysis like this has to be broken down into discreet periods: early season, after the Rondo and Green trades, and after the Isaiah Thomas acquisition.

It's really the last one that most interests me. The earlier stuff seems like it'd be noise.

[DefenseWinsChamps]

Lucky17 "I think any sort of analysis like this has to be broken down into discreet periods: early season, after the Rondo and Green trades, and after the Isaiah Thomas acquisition.

It's really the last one that most interests me. The earlier stuff seems like it'd be noise."

A good point, but not something I am interested in digging through right now. I was really trying to evaluate Stevens' offense as a whole.

I did, however, do a quick run through of the stats for the time period after the Rondo trade until the end of the year. Not much changed-a littler here or there. Here are my notes.

1. Post Rondo (especially post-Thomas): smaller number of FGAs with a defender within 2 feet and increased numbers of FGAs with defenders 2-4 feet, 4-6 feet (post Thomas by almost 2 FGAP), and 6+ feet. In other words, we got more open looks after Rondo left.
2. Post-Rondo resulted in a drop in FG% across the board, even though win% went up.

[Lucky17]

Lucky17 "I think any sort of analysis like this has to be broken down into discreet periods: early season, after the Rondo and Green trades, and after the Isaiah Thomas acquisition.

It's really the last one that most interests me. The earlier stuff seems like it'd be noise."

A good point, but not something I am interested in digging through right now. I was really trying to evaluate Stevens' offense as a whole.

I did, however, do a quick run through of the stats for the time period after the Rondo trade until the end of the year. Not much changed-a littler here or there. Here are my notes.

1. Post Rondo (especially post-Thomas): smaller number of FGAs with a defender within 2 feet and increased numbers of FGAs with defenders 2-4 feet, 4-6 feet (post Thomas by almost 2 FGAP), and 6+ feet. In other words, we got more open looks after Rondo left.
2. Post-Rondo resulted in a drop in FG% across the board, even though win% went up.

TP for the effort, DWC. I know that crunching and sifting that data is hard work.

[GetLucky]

TP for the excellent post. I started a thread earlier in the season that called for the Celtics to run a more fast-paced, team offense a la the Adelman Kings, and I found it interesting that you mentioned the staple of it- quick shots in semi-transition. With the below-average percentages on open shots, the team has almost nowhere to go but up. It looks like the team is well on its way towards becoming an entertaining offensive juggernaut!

[colincb]

Lucky17 "I think any sort of analysis like this has to be broken down into discreet periods: early season, after the Rondo and Green trades, and after the Isaiah Thomas acquisition.

It's really the last one that most interests me. The earlier stuff seems like it'd be noise."

A good point, but not something I am interested in digging through right now. I was really trying to evaluate Stevens' offense as a whole.

I did, however, do a quick run through of the stats for the time period after the Rondo trade until the end of the year. Not much changed-a littler here or there. Here are my notes.

1. Post Rondo (especially post-Thomas): smaller number of FGAs with a defender within 2 feet and increased numbers of FGAs with defenders 2-4 feet, 4-6 feet (post Thomas by almost 2 FGAP), and 6+ feet. In other words, we got more open looks after Rondo left.
2. Post-Rondo resulted in a drop in FG% across the board, even though win% went up.

TP for the effort, DWC. I know that crunching and sifting that data is hard work.

Agree and TP for the OP. Nice job.