What if…?
Without Amari Williams, Boston Celtics were 3.1 points per game better
21 games with him · 60 without, in 2025-26
3.1
points per game
The question
What would have changed if Amari Williams had not played?
The evidence
Without Amari Williams, Boston Celtics were 3.1 points per game better
The fact
What actually happened, game by game, in 2025-26. None of this is an estimate.
With Amari Williams in the box score
+5.48 points per game
21 games · 14-7 · 111.8 – 106.3
Without him
+8.62 points per game
60 games · 42-18 · 115.9 – 107.3
The assumptions
What we decided in order to answer. If an assumption does not hold for you, neither does the answer.
- That the 60 games without him represent a whole season without him.
- That opponent quality is spread evenly across both groups. We have not controlled for it.
- That other absences do not systematically coincide with his.
The estimated result
Arithmetic on the two figures above, nothing else: the per-game difference carried over a 82-game season.
- points of margin per game+3.14
- Across 82 games that is +257 points of accumulated margin.
FactDerivedAssumption
What this does not prove
- This does not say he is the cause. A team without its best player also changes rotation, opponent and schedule at the same time.
- It rests on 60 games without him. At that sample size, a couple of odd games move the number.
- It is not a forecast for next season: it is what happened in the one already played.
From here
Where it comes from
Source
2026-04-12
Model input
not stated
Computation
not stated
This answer
2026-11-06
Where this comes from