There are no moral victories in the NBA, but the Cleveland Cavaliers can draw plenty of optimism from their 120-117 loss to the Boston Celtics on Tuesday, which brought their 15-game win streak to start the season to an end.
With all the things going in Boston’s favor in this game, and everything that was working against the Cavs, to be within two points on five different occasions and lose by just three says a lot about how formidable a full-strength Cleveland team can be in a potential playoff matchup with the Celtics, or anyone else for that matter.
Here are three reasons the Cavs can feel good about the fight they put up in this game knowing these factors could swing in their favor next time.
Cleveland’s wings were clipped
Cleveland was without the services of three key wings in Isaac Okoro, Caris LeVert and Dean Wade. Never mind that Okoro and LeVert are both making north of 44% of their 3s this season; this is a matchup that requires a stable of perimeter defenders to combat Boston’s relentless 3-point pressure.
Okoro is a primary star scorer defender. Individually, he was missed tremendously in this game. Wade and LeVert go 6-foot-9 and 6-6, respectively, and that kind of positional size is a must to be able to build a real shell against Boston’s drive-and-kicks and effectively switch and scramble to shooters.
Without these three wings, Cleveland’s defensive lineups become very extreme with two really big guys in Jarrett Allen and Evan Mobley and two really small guys in Darius Garland and Donovan Mitchell.
The Celtics, as saturated with intermediate size and skill as any team in history, were able to manipulate the matchups they wanted with simple ball screens in the half court, and there were plenty of advantageous cross-matches available in transition with 6-5 Ty Jerome (that’s generous), 6-4 Sam Merrill and 6-1 Craig Porter Jr. logging a combined 72 minutes.
Everywhere you looked, the Celtics had a one-on-one advantage, and they used it to drive and kick their way into 41 3-point attempts. This dynamic was on display on Boston’s first 3 of the game.
Garland was matched up on Jaylen Brown, who backs the mouse into the house until Mitchell is forced off off Jrue Holiday in the corner to come over and double Brown, who simply kicks out to Derrick White, who is open because Merrill now has to split the difference between him and the abandoned Holiday. Holiday then gets the ball on the swing for a corner 3. Bang.
A few possessions later, it was Jayson Tatum isolated in the middle of the floor against Merrill. Mitchell knows Merrill can’t contain that matchup on his own, so he sucks down to the elbow to provide help in Tatum’s driving lane. That leaves Brown open on the wing. Tatum swings it. Bang.
The Celtics prey relentlessly on these perimeter advantages to create open 3s against teams too leveraged in help to make it back to shooters in time. That’s how they made 22 3-pointers at a 54% clip. Which brings us to …
Massive 3-point disparity
Yes, Boston routinely empties the clip from 3, taking over 50 and making over 19 per game. Both those marks lead the league by a considerable margin. Which is to say, Cleveland losing the 3-point battle to Boston is not a surprise, but the margin by which they lost is the important factor.
Cleveland is no slouch from 3. On the season, the Cavs are making over 15 a game. But they only made 10 on Tuesday. Do the math, and that’s a 36-point 3-point discrepancy between Boston’s 66 points from 3 and Cleveland’s 30.
Simply put, to lose the 3-point battle by 36 points and only lose the actual game by three is an extremely positive statistical sign — especially when the Cavs were without two deadeye 3-point shooters in LeVert (45.8%) and Okoro (44.4%).
Now, don’t fall for the bait that this was just some random off shooting night for the Cavaliers that will just magically regress to the mean next time. Boston’s defense is incredible, and it had a lot to do with Mitchell and Garland, in particular, shanking 14 of their 17 triples.
Cleveland has created over 20 wide-open 3s per game this season, per NBA.com tracking (which defines wide-open shots as those that come with the closest defender at least six feet away), and Cleveland was making those shots at an unbelievable 49% clip. That number is going to come down eventually, whether Boston or any other team is on the other side.
Having said that, Mitchell and Garland, to my memory, didn’t get a single wide-open 3 on Tuesday, and there were very few to go around for anyone in a Cleveland uniform. That’s not likely to change. For the Cavs to beat the Celtics in a playoff series, Mitchell and Garland are going to have to knock down lots, and I mean lots, of contested shots.
But they’re capable. Mitchell is one of the deadliest pull-up shooters in the league, and Garland came into Tuesday making almost 42% of his off-the-dribble 3s, per Synergy. These are bonafide scoring studs who combined to make just 14 of their 50 total shots on Tuesday. If a few more shots go down, just a few, the Cavs, even without their three defensive wings and even with Boston shooting the lights out, probably win this game.
Speaking of Darius Garland…
Garland was atrocious on Tuesday. He missed 18 of his 21 shots and all six of his 3s. Again, it would be irresponsible to suggest this was just a random bad game. Garland has feasted this year when he’s been unguarded, which is not something he can rely on against Boston. You saw the struggles that come with strong contests. His floaters were squeezed. His 3s were contested. His space was minimal.
That said, Garland could have the entire state of Massachusetts guarding him and he’s not likely to go 3-for-21 and 0-for-6 from 3 again.
And so, to recap: The Cavs got nine points on 14% shooting from Garland, who is averaging almost 21 points on 49/43/93 shooting splits. They lost the 3-point battle by 36 points while the Celtics shot 54%, which is smoking hot even by their standards, from beyond the arc. Okoro, Wade and LeVert were all out. And Cleveland still only lost by three points, on the road, to the best team in the league?
Yeah, that’s a pretty good sign.