2023 NBA Playoffs Thread

[Matches]

“White didn’t finish running to the bench before the clock hit zero so that doesn’t count.” - Lee Cassell, probably.

[Bluedog]

I know it's moot now, but was the original call that Jimmy Butler's shot was a 2 pointer and 2 free throws, then the Celtics challenged the foul, and the refs awarded three free throws after the review? Or was that review by the refs necessitated by the rules and not a challenge review? At the time I thought the Celtics challenged the foul call and it was only then that the refs saw their error and awarded the three free throws.

Original call was 2 pointer, but I believe they can review the foot and if it was a 3 regardless of if the Celtics challenged or not. So I don't think it was the Celtics challenge that changed it to a 3 as they can go to monitor to look at foot placement (but not fouls) in that situation without a challenge.

[Faustus]

Yep. That’s why I am amazed they aren’t more careful with clock stoppage throughout the game!
I’ll see it run an extra second here and there … probably 10+ seconds off easily by games end. Same in college. They only get careful at the end. During most of first and second half extra seconds tick off all the time. That decides games

Same in football, where officials generally toss the ball around and place after a play anywhere within a foot or so of where it was last downed. Then when it comes down to deciding whether there was a 1st down or not they measure with a micrometer. Huh?

[budwom]

Same in football, where officials generally toss the ball around and place after a play anywhere within a foot or so of where it was last downed. Then when it comes down to deciding whether there was a 1st down or not they measure with a micrometer. Huh?

fond memories of a Duke freshman football game in which there was an offsides penalty (5 yards marched off), an incomplete pass, and another offsides penalty. They measured for the first down, and decided they didn't make it. Hilarity.

[SavDukeGrad]

Y'all have some pretty high expectations. Agreed that Tatum does not yet have the stone cold killer mentality of Kobe or MJ. But to be ragging on a guy who in the last three wins for the Celts put up these numbers--33/11/7, 21/8/11, 31/12/5--seems petty. Without JT, the Celts are out 0-4, and Jimmy B is playing the Joker.

BTW, Spoelstra, the best bench coach in the NBA, disagrees with you. Who did the Heat double-team on the last play?

Totally agree with this. And in his post game press conference, when Spoelstra was asked about his defense on the last play, he said it was to keep the ball away from Tatum.

[bluedevilwildcats]

Y'all have some pretty high expectations. Agreed that Tatum does not yet have the stone cold killer mentality of Kobe or MJ. But to be ragging on a guy who in the last three wins for the Celts put up these numbers--33/11/7, 21/8/11, 31/12/5--seems petty. Without JT, the Celts are out 0-4, and Jimmy B is playing the Joker.

BTW, Spoelstra, the best bench coach in the NBA, disagrees with you. Who did the Heat double-team on the last play?

Won't speak for the other posters but how Tatum does during Celtics' wins isn't relevant to "How does Jayson perform under pressure in tight games?"

My anecdotal observations about Jayson - including during his time at Duke - is that he may have the "stone cold killer" mentality but doesn't come through in the clutch. I imagine there's stats to show "clutchness" but at least during this series, my eye test says that letting Jayson get the ball, 30 ft from the basket and with 3 seconds left, might have been a winning play for the Heat.

[jgehtland]

My anecdotal observations about Jayson - including during his time at Duke - is that he may have the "stone cold killer" mentality but doesn't come through in the clutch. I imagine there's stats to show "clutchness" but at least during this series, my eye test says that letting Jayson get the ball, 30 ft from the basket and with 3 seconds left, might have been a winning play for the Heat.

“Tatum’s used to this. According to NBA.com, he is the only player in NBA history to shoot at least 50 percent on game-tying or go-ahead shots with less than 24 seconds remaining in the fourth quarter among players with at least 25 such attempts. His shot against the 76ers made him 13-of-26 on such shots — 15-of-29 including the playoffs.”

https://www.sportscasting.com/is-jayson-tatum-the-most-clutch-player-in-nba-history-the-stats-say-so/

[bluedevilwildcats]

“Tatum’s used to this. According to NBA.com, he is the only player in NBA history to shoot at least 50 percent on game-tying or go-ahead shots with less than 24 seconds remaining in the fourth quarter among players with at least 25 such attempts. His shot against the 76ers made him 13-of-26 on such shots — 15-of-29 including the playoffs.”

https://www.sportscasting.com/is-jay...-stats-say-so/

That's really interesting, thanks for tracking that down. I'm curious if something more granular exists that takes into account possession or plays initiated, as clutch includes more than shooting - turnovers, etc. But anyway, good example of potential confirmation bias.

[Skydog]

I wasn’t aware of his efficiency stats on tying/winning shots. Impressive. But even before seeing that I liked Jayson taking the last shot if he is open. I just don’t trust him to dribble and create the shot when the opposing defense is keyed on him. He has a high dribble that is vulnerable to swipes and deflections and just plain lost handles.

He also often waits too long to initiate and has to take a forced contested shot. But the 50% success rate presumably included those so I guess it makes no sense to be critical of those.

By the way Kobe’s stats were the opposite. IIRC “Mr. Clutch” had a poor conversion rate for game tying/winning shots. Confirmation bias ensured that his fans only remembered the ones that went in.

[DukieInBrasil]

Miami feeling like they have been robbed.

Maybe, but they were gifted foul after foul in the last 3 minutes, while Boston was denied foul after foul. Miami's perpetual march to the FT line is what allowed them to shrink, and then take, the lead.

Boston survived. They don’t finish worth a damn.
7 for 35 on 3’s . White saved their season. Tatum is a mystery how he can’t convert critical points.

As far as Boston desperately trying to give the game away last night it was almost an exact repeat of last year’s game 7 vs Miami in Boston. The Celtics led 98-85 with 3 min to go and then missed shot after shot and had turnover after turnover and suddenly Miami was only down 98-96 and Jimmy Butler is taking a 3-pointer with 16 seconds to go that might well have won the game, considering how Boston’s offense had completely fallen apart at that point. Thankfully, he missed (barely).
Monday is Memorial Day. I’m sports-praying that we don’t have to build a memorial on Tuesday to Boston’s dead season.

I was watching with a casual fan of bball, who kept commenting "...but Boston's up 10, it's over right?" I mentioned that Boston had blown leads like this twice in this series already, so no. They ended up blowing a 4th quarter lead for the 3rd time in the series, only to be saved by Derrick The Legend White.

[Phredd3]

Won't speak for the other posters but how Tatum does during Celtics' wins isn't relevant to "How does Jayson perform under pressure in tight games?"

My anecdotal observations about Jayson - including during his time at Duke - is that he may have the "stone cold killer" mentality but doesn't come through in the clutch. I imagine there's stats to show "clutchness" but at least during this series, my eye test says that letting Jayson get the ball, 30 ft from the basket and with 3 seconds left, might have been a winning play for the Heat.

There are stats in pretty much every sport that are alleged to show "clutchiness". What none of them show, however, is that prior "clutchiness" has any predictive value for showing whether or not a player will be "clutch" in the future. Or in other words, I question whether or not the concept of a "clutchy" player is actually real. There is just very little evidence that so-called "clutch players" actually exist. Give your good players the ball because they are good players, not because they are "clutch".

[BigZ]

Should of know the comeback was on when ARod and Jeter showed up to game 4

[rsvman]

There are stats in pretty much every sport that are alleged to show "clutchiness". What none of them show, however, is that prior "clutchiness" has any predictive value for showing whether or not a player will be "clutch" in the future. Or in other words, I question whether or not the concept of a "clutchy" player is actually real. There is just very little evidence that so-called "clutch players" actually exist. Give your good players the ball because they are good players, not because they are "clutch".

I wonder if there are players whose shooting percentage was actually considerably higher in important situations than it was in regular game play. Or, and probably easier to quantify, I h there were players whose free throw shooting percentages were higher when the game was in the balance than they were at other times. To me, that would be as close to a definition of clutch as one could come up with.

I wonder, for example, if Robert Horry shot better in end game situations? It wouldn't surprise me if he did.

Maybe, for some people, having the game on the line leads to them focusing more, and therefore, shooting better, whereas for others, maybe it makes them doubt themselves and therefore to under perform?

The more I think about it, the more I am pretty sure that, if there aren't that many athletes who are really 'clutch' performers, there are almost certainly athletes who are 'anti-clutch.'

[Skydog]

I wonder if there are players whose shooting percentage was actually considerably higher in important situations than it was in regular game play. Or, and probably easier to quantify, I h there were players whose free throw shooting percentages were higher when the game was in the balance than they were at other times. To me, that would be as close to a definition of clutch as one could come up with.

I wonder, for example, if Robert Horry shot better in end game situations? It wouldn't surprise me if he did.

Maybe, for some people, having the game on the line leads to them focusing more, and therefore, shooting better, whereas for others, maybe it makes them doubt themselves and therefore to under perform?

The more I think about it, the more I am pretty sure that, if there aren't that many athletes who are really 'clutch' performers, there are almost certainly athletes who are 'anti-clutch.'

It’s hard to answer statistically because clutch situation sample sizes tend to be small. Shooting 25% vs 50% over just 50 shots can be explained by chance. If we had 200 or 500 shots then shooting % would be more stable and we could infer player characteristics. But who gets to take 300 “clutch shots” in their career? No one.

[rsvman]

It’s hard to answer statistically because clutch situation sample sizes tend to be small. Shooting 25% vs 50% over just 50 shots can be explained by chance. If we had 200 or 500 shots then shooting % would be more stable and we could infer player characteristics. But who gets to take 300 “clutch shots” in their career? No one.

I hear you. I would be interested in free throw percentages, comparing overall percentage with the percentage made in the last two minutes of games that were within 3 or 4 points. It would be hard to do, but there are undoubtedly guys who have been in the league for a long time that might have a decent enough sample size to at least get an idea.

[DukieInBrasil]

There are stats in pretty much every sport that are alleged to show "clutchiness". What none of them show, however, is that prior "clutchiness" has any predictive value for showing whether or not a player will be "clutch" in the future. Or in other words, I question whether or not the concept of a "clutchy" player is actually real. There is just very little evidence that so-called "clutch players" actually exist. Give your good players the ball because they are good players, not because they are "clutch".

I think Robert Horry defies your point here. Dude was a perfectly good player throughout his career, but not particularly outstanding. Except when it mattered. He hit multiple championship winning shots, something other "better" players as defined by day in, day out performance could not do, like James Harden. Harden is a an excellent player by any statistical metric, but he falls apart in high-pressure games, like this year's Playoffs.

[tommy]

Celtics started out as 9.5 point favorites in Game 7. It's now down to 7.5.

[Phredd3]

I wonder if there are players whose shooting percentage was actually considerably higher in important situations than it was in regular game play. Or, and probably easier to quantify, I h there were players whose free throw shooting percentages were higher when the game was in the balance than they were at other times. To me, that would be as close to a definition of clutch as one could come up with.

I wonder, for example, if Robert Horry shot better in end game situations? It wouldn't surprise me if he did.

Maybe, for some people, having the game on the line leads to them focusing more, and therefore, shooting better, whereas for others, maybe it makes them doubt themselves and therefore to under perform?

The more I think about it, the more I am pretty sure that, if there aren't that many athletes who are really 'clutch' performers, there are almost certainly athletes who are 'anti-clutch.'

Of course there are people who perform better than average in "late and close" situations (or however you choose to define "clutch"), and there will be people who perform worse than their average. But that's true of any random data sample. Because that's true of any random sample, that's the wrong question. The real question is does this data sample (i.e. prior "clutchy" performance) better predict what a player will do in the next such situation than an arbitrary data sample? For the most part, statisticians have not been able to demonstrate any extra predictive value (despite many studies and years of trying). So realistically, "clutch" players can't be shown to exist. Better players perform better in the clutch than worse players, and the best predictor of whether or not a player will perform well in the clutch is career data.

Mind you, just because you can't statistically prove an effect doesn't conclusively prove that clutch players don't exist. All it shows is that you can't accurately find those players. So handing the ball to a "clutch" player who isn't already the best player on the team is an act of faith, not of reason.

[ClemmonsDevil]

I feel like being clutch is a real phenomenon. My thoughts on people who don't think it's real never played high level sports or had high stress/high leverage jobs. I made and missed game winners in basketball on a really good high school team (2 state championship appearances in 4 years/1 stste title/2 conference regular championships/2 conference tournament titles). I also worked 15 years in the NICU/PICU/ECMO and I definitely saw who was clutch in emergencies and who wasn't. The issue is that the best player is going to get the ball in high leverage situations. And the D is set up to stop them (throwing double or triple teams at them). So of course their shooting percentage is going to be lower. This is unproveable, but lesser players would fare much worse in those situations than great player IF they faced the same level of defense. Horry, Paxon, Kerr are remembered as clutch for hitting a shot or two. But they were wide open because the insanely talented player(s) on their teams were absolutely swamped with 2-3 players running at them. They did their jobs in those situations, but those were wide open practice jumpers. I would also argue they benefit from the small sample size.

[Steven43]

Well, here we go once more unto the breach, dear Celtics fans, once more. I’m probably misusing that phrase, but the C’s need all the help they can get, no matter how trivial.

Tonight beginning at 8:30 EST Boston will either advance to the NBA Finals to face the Denver juggernaut or they’ll break up the team and fire their coach. 😉

It’s can’t-miss television, folks!