Joel Embiid aside, the Sixers’ Game 2 win wasn’t a fluke. But is it repeatable?
Of course, the big question now is what it always seems to be: Will Embiid play? If he does, how much will he play? The important answer is the Sixers have shown they can be competitive without him.
Know this: Game 2 wasn’t a fluke.
That’s a dangerous thing to say, but following the evidence can lead you to some dangerous places.
The 76ers didn’t beat the Boston Celtics because they hit a bunch of shots they normally miss, or because Boston missed a bunch of shots they normally make. The Sixers won Game 2 because they outplayed the Celtics for three quarters, especially on the defensive end of the court. It was an honest, well-deserved victory. That is why the best-of-seven series is even heading into Game 3.
Was Game 2 a harbinger? Let’s not go that far. It has been 10 years since a team lost Game 1 of a playoff series by 32 points or more and recovered to win a series. Then again, it has been 10 years since such a team won Game 2.
» READ MORE: Paul George was the third star in a playoff game. It just didn’t happen how the Sixers envisioned.
The new wrinkle in this series is that the Sixers showed they can defend the Celtics. It was a remarkable achievement, given how Game 2 began. Trailing 26-13 with four minutes left in the first quarter, the Sixers had allowed Boston to score 149 points in the first 56 minutes of the series. Something changed. Over the next three-plus quarters, the Sixers held Boston to 71 points in 40 minutes. Essentially, they cut the Celtics’ point production in half.
Nurse attributed the improved defense to playing harder. But the Sixers also seemed to have more success using big men Andre Drummond and Aden Bona as first- or second-level defenders against Jayson Tatum and Jaylen Brown. Drummond was particularly active, contesting three-point shots and obstructing dribble drives in the high-post area. Whatever the Sixers did, it prevented the Celtics from abusing them on switches and on straight-line drives to the basket.
The elimination of Boston’s drive-and-kick game was glaring. In the first five quarters of the series, the Celtics had 33 wide-open looks from three-point range. They connected on 17 of them. In the last three quarters of Game 2, they had 15 wide-open looks and hit just two.
On one hand, the Celtics won’t have many stretches where they go 2-for-15 on wide-open looks. On the other hand, even a 7-for-15 clip would have given Boston an additional 15 points in a game it lost by 14.
Not a fluke, not a harbinger.
» READ MORE: Joel Embiid participates in parts of Sixers’ Thursday practice, listed as doubtful for Game 3 vs. Celtics
Look at it this way. In Game 1, the Sixers somehow managed to go 0-for-12 on wide-open looks, per NBA.com. If we normalize both that rate and the Celtics’ rate over the final three quarters of Game 2, the range of game result outcomes goes from Celtics plus-12 and Sixers plus-1 rather than Celtics plus-32 and Sixers plus-14. That’s at least a narrow enough band for hope.
Of course, the big question now is what it always seems to be: Will Joel Embiid play? If he does, how much will he play? How big of a difference can he make, given his physical condition?
“We’re obviously really hopeful and I think he’s really hopeful,” Sixers coach Nick Nurse said after practice on Thursday. ”He wants to play and we want him to play. I don’t know how close we are to that at this point, but I think there’s some progress being made. Let’s hope it keeps going that way.”
Series tied 1-1
Game 1: Celtics 123, Sixers 91 | Murphy: Early offseason?
Game 2: Sixers 111, Celtics 97 | Murphy: Edgecombe steps up
Game 3: Celtics at Sixers, 7 p.m. Friday, Prime Video
Game 4: Celtics at Sixers, 7 p.m. Sunday, NBC/Peacock
*Game 5: Sixers at Celtics, TBD Tuesday
*Game 6: Celtics at Sixers, TBD April 30
*Game 7: Sixers at Celtics, TBD May 2
* If necessary
Embiid’s potential return from appendicitis is a significant enough variable to render most analysis moot. The ideal scenario is that Embiid further fortifies the Sixers’ defense and gives them another primary scoring option without clunking up the flow that VJ Edgecombe and Tyrese Maxey showed throughout Game 2.
The numbers are clear. The Sixers were a much better team with Embiid than without him. They outscored opponents by an average of 121.0-115.9 when he was on the court (per 100 possessions). They were outscored 116-113.5 when he was off the court. That’s a net difference of 7.6 points per 100 possessions: 25% lower than it has been over the course of his career, but still significant. None of the Sixers’ other starters has anything close to that split.
We haven’t seen much of Embiid, Maxey, Edgecombe and Paul George at the same time. The four of them played together for just 360 minutes over 20 games during the regular season. The results weren’t great. They posted a solid 112.8 defensive rating, but had a well-below average offensive rating of 111.6. In other words, when the four of them were on the court together, the Sixers were a net negative. Opponents outscored them by an average of 112.8 to 111.6 points per 100 possessions. And Embiid’s impact on the defensive end wasn’t nearly as large as it has been throughout his career.
David Murphy alerts
None of that is necessarily a reflection on Embiid. Maxey and Edgecombe were better with him than George, though neither trio was much better or worse than league average. Regardless, the sample size is small and skewed to an extent that they may not even be applicable. Embiid, Maxey and George combined to play just 12 games in the month of March due to an oblique injury, a thumb injury and a suspension, respectively. They’ve been on the court together just four games since March 7.
The notable thing is that the Sixers showed that they can at least be competitive without Embiid. That was real. It remains to be seen how often they can do it.
