CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: ctrey on December 16, 2012, 01:25:23 AM
-
That is it. This team is mediocre. We will not be getting any better. Pierce is old, Courtney Lee and Jason Terry are bad fits with the team, Jeff Green may be getting a little better but who really knows. Right now as our record stands we would be in the lottery if the season ended today. We are 23 games in folks, things are what they are. We are not winning squat this year. Hopefully we can see if Sullinger can be any good. There is no reason not to play him at this point.
I am now officially hoping we miss the playoffs. Let the rebuild begin.
-
maybe its time to apologize to those of us that called this early on in the season. Oh and those who thought it was wise not to play the bigs we had on the roster.
-
The fact we could have had OJ Mayo but it sounds like Danny caved in to the players really kills me right now. We are getting nothing from the shooting guard position right now. Nothing. Lee and Terry play horrid defense and do not score enough to offset that. Guess it is time to start getting ready for Red Sox season.
-
Lee's defence has actually been a highlight of him being here so far. He has been active on some hustle plays in the last couple of games. Jet has never been that good of a defender so its bound to happen.
-
That is it. This team is mediocre. We will not be getting any better.
I haven't been particularly happy with the season to this point but I believe this team can get better. Getting Bradley back should help tighten the perimeter defense up. Need another big that can man the paint once KG hits the bench as well. Hopefully Ainge is able to find a suitable trade.
-
I dont even know what to say anymore. I really thought this team had all the pieces to be up there with Miami, but nothing is working. And I still say part of the problem is that we have a stubborn coach, a PG thats too hot/cold and a group of other player that are outta place and seem lost. The only one actually playing consistently seems to be Sully becasue he's where he's supposed to be. WE NEED AN athletic Big!
-
bradley will definitely help our D, his on the ball defense will help stop dribble penetration and keep our bigs from having to rotate off their man all the time, his intensity will help shore up our D when kg sits. but, watching last nights game i couldn't help but think we need to reassess this teams potential and make some uncomfortable decisions about the future.
We need another impact big to take the load off KG, we need better wing defense, we need less turn overs. if we can't unload spare parts to grab the impact player we need to compete for a championship, we need to think about trading core players and rebuild for the future...
compete now options:
trade any body but KG, PP, RR, AB for one of cousins, gortat, AV, al jefferson, josh smith
blow it up:
trade Rondo (ouch) or bradley (ouch) etc. for a franchise big like lamarcus Aldrich or ?
oh well...
-
That is it. This team is mediocre. We will not be getting any better. Pierce is old, Courtney Lee and Jason Terry are bad fits with the team, Jeff Green may be getting a little better but who really knows. Right now as our record stands we would be in the lottery if the season ended today. We are 23 games in folks, things are what they are. We are not winning squat this year. Hopefully we can see if Sullinger can be any good. There is no reason not to play him at this point.
I am now officially hoping we miss the playoffs. Let the rebuild begin.
Just want to quote this because there were about 1000 of these same posts last year.
-
it's amusing we can't call it for what it is. The slow demise of a very short lived very good team. Akin this team to a trading chart that has been dropping for years then has a pullback with success short lived then the bottom drops out. We are headed for the bottom as Pierce and KG run out of Miracles. With tongue in cheek I say thanks Celtic Management for the crumbs.
-
23 games in and 6 games behind the Knicks. What was the biggest gap between the Celts and Philly last year? 23 games and the defense still stinks most nights. 23 games and it is even more clear to me that this is a team of mismatched parts with no inside presence.23 games and Pierce looks really old, while Garnett gets older. Cannot wait for Danny to start making moves.
I thought after 20 games that this team would be rolling?
-
Why are people's memory spans so short? Do you guys really not remember last season, or 2010?
-
maybe its time to apologize to those of us that called this early on in the season. Oh and those who thought it was wise not to play the bigs we had on the roster.
Haha. Yes, you're totally right. Now that 1/4 of the season is over, it is officially time for everyone who had hope for the 2012-2013 Celtics to kiss your ***. I'm so glad you're here.
-
That is it. This team is mediocre. We will not be getting any better. Pierce is old, Courtney Lee and Jason Terry are bad fits with the team, Jeff Green may be getting a little better but who really knows. Right now as our record stands we would be in the lottery if the season ended today. We are 23 games in folks, things are what they are. We are not winning squat this year. Hopefully we can see if Sullinger can be any good. There is no reason not to play him at this point.
I am now officially hoping we miss the playoffs. Let the rebuild begin.
Just want to quote this because there were about 1000 of these same posts last year.
TP for truth.
-
Slightly off topic, but how are the Bulls 13-9 missing their best player who is also one of the best players in the NBA? And how do he Knicks have one of the best records in the league missing one of its best players? And how does Minnesota have a better record than the Celts missing one of its best players? And how all of a sudden has Golden State become better than th Celts? And so on.
-
Slightly off topic, but how are the Bulls 13-9 missing their best player who is also one of the best players in the NBA?
1)Coach who I belive is a better true coach than Doc, but DOc is more of a Phil JAckson people pleaser.
2) Noah they have a really good Big who loves to battle in the paint....IF we had Varejao we would play tons better.
-
Why are people's memory spans so short? Do you guys really not remember last season, or 2010?
This isn't last year and it isn't 2010. The only reason i have hope left is the fact we don't have AB out there yet.
-
Doc's rotations and lack of a decent center who can rebound are the real issues here. if i see Bass/Sully or Green/Bass or Green/Sully lineups again i'm going to throw up...
Can't believe how much i miss Steamer.
-
Why are people's memory spans so short? Do you guys really not remember last season, or 2010?
This isn't last year and it isn't 2010. The only reason i have hope left is the fact we don't have AB out there yet.
2010? PP was playing at all-star level and KG was two years younger. Oh and I hate to mention, but that Ray Allen guy was pretty good that year too.
2011? That Ray Allen guy was still here shooting treys in a career best %, PP when healthy still played very well, KG had more bounce to his steps.
In this league where winning is so dependent on having star power, when your core players get old and can't play like how they use to, you unfortunately have a very mediocre team.
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
-
We need more ball movement.
-
Slightly off topic, but how are the Bulls 13-9 missing their best player who is also one of the best players in the NBA? And how do he Knicks have one of the best records in the league missing one of its best players? And how does Minnesota have a better record than the Celts missing one of its best players? And how all of a sudden has Golden State become better than th Celts? And so on.
They have bigs who rebound.
-
Slightly off topic, but how are the Bulls 13-9 missing their best player who is also one of the best players in the NBA? And how do he Knicks have one of the best records in the league missing one of its best players? And how does Minnesota have a better record than the Celts missing one of its best players? And how all of a sudden has Golden State become better than th Celts? And so on.
They have bigs who rebound.
And they have a lot of talent and are very deep. The Bulls have always played well without Rose, but they will not make a deep playoff run without him.
-
Slightly off topic, but how are the Bulls 13-9 missing their best player who is also one of the best players in the NBA? And how do he Knicks have one of the best records in the league missing one of its best players? And how does Minnesota have a better record than the Celts missing one of its best players? And how all of a sudden has Golden State become better than th Celts? And so on.
They have bigs who rebound.
And they have a lot of talent and are very deep. The Bulls have always played well without Rose, but they will not make a deep playoff run without him.
True with CHicago and the Dubs. Especially the Dubs, that team is deep as heck.
Not Minny though. They have rebounders with Pek and Love, and AK47 to some extent. Giving more possesions for their team keeps them close in games.
-
Slightly off topic, but how are the Bulls 13-9 missing their best player who is also one of the best players in the NBA? And how do he Knicks have one of the best records in the league missing one of its best players? And how does Minnesota have a better record than the Celts missing one of its best players? And how all of a sudden has Golden State become better than th Celts? And so on.
They have bigs who rebound.
And they have a lot of talent and are very deep. The Bulls have always played well without Rose, but they will not make a deep playoff run without him.
True with CHicago and the Dubs. Especially the Dubs, that team is deep as heck.
Not Minny though. They have rebounders with Pek and Love, and AK47 to some extent. Giving more possesions for their team keeps them close in games.
Minnesota is also a very deep team when they get healthy. They have a lot of interchangeable parts. Now granted they have yet to be fully healthy and won't be for at least another month or so (until Budinger is back). I mean Derrick Williams the #2 pick a couple of years ago is barely playing for them now after starting and getting big minutes early in the season. Minnesota is poised to make a deep run if they can get and stay healthy for the playoffs.
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
-
maybe its time to apologize to those of us that called this early on in the season. Oh and those who thought it was wise not to play the bigs we had on the roster.
Haha, an apology on an online forum? That's happening.
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
That's how we knew, from 12 or so years of history, that Dirk was never going to lead a team to a title. As for your question, why do they have to be 35 and not 32? Why do they need to be jumpshooters? It's needlessly specific.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
Let's be honest, at the time we were eliminated last year he'd made as many big shots down the stretch in big playoff games as almost anyone else in the league.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
What's Terry ever done in a Celtics uniform that shows you that he can do that? It's not that I have more faith on less evidence than you, I just don't limit that faith as arbitrarily as you do.
-
This team is mediocre right not. That is undeniable.
I do disagree that there is no chance they can't be better than mediocre by the end of the year though. I think there is still room for growth on the current roster.
But, even if there isn't, at the moment, I prefer mediocre over terrible. I am not ready for them to bottom out yet. I think they have done a good job with what they have had to work with.
-
maybe its time to apologize to those of us that called this early on in the season. Oh and those who thought it was wise not to play the bigs we had on the roster.
Haha. Yes, you're totally right. Now that 1/4 of the season is over, it is officially time for everyone who had hope for the 2012-2013 Celtics to kiss your ***. I'm so glad you're here.
hahaha that made me laugh out loud. tp for you!
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
That's how we knew, from 12 or so years of history, that Dirk was never going to lead a team to a title. As for your question, why do they have to be 35 and not 32? Why do they need to be jumpshooters? It's needlessly specific.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
Let's be honest, at the time we were eliminated last year he'd made as many big shots down the stretch in big playoff games as almost anyone else in the league.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
What's Terry ever done in a Celtics uniform that shows you that he can do that? It's not that I have more faith on less evidence than you, I just don't limit that faith as arbitrarily as you do.
Age is pretty important. There is a big difference between 32-35. Give me a 32 yr old Pierce.
As good as Rondo was last postseason, can we expect a pg who's known to be a shaky shooter to repeat that performance? Not to mention he needs help, which leads me back to not thinking his old, over the hill, jumpshooting teammates can play well enough.
-
thats about it , I can live with it a while, just don't want this team to be "LOST" , set adrift as a so -so team for the next 20 years. :-X
-
thats about it , I can live with it a while, just don't want this team to be "LOST" , set adrift as a so -so team for the next 20 years. :-X
Agreed. I think we, as a fan base, have a bit of an irrational fear of mediocrity, due to the extreme success, followed by the 20 year drought.
In reality, a couple years of mediocrity, is not the same as 20 years of it. There was a LOT of mismanagement in those 20 years, and it wasn't a simple case of them waiting too long to blow it up.
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
That's how we knew, from 12 or so years of history, that Dirk was never going to lead a team to a title. As for your question, why do they have to be 35 and not 32? Why do they need to be jumpshooters? It's needlessly specific.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
Let's be honest, at the time we were eliminated last year he'd made as many big shots down the stretch in big playoff games as almost anyone else in the league.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
What's Terry ever done in a Celtics uniform that shows you that he can do that? It's not that I have more faith on less evidence than you, I just don't limit that faith as arbitrarily as you do.
Age is pretty important. There is a big difference between 32-35. Give me a 32 yr old Pierce.
As good as Rondo was last postseason, can we expect a pg who's known to be a shaky shooter to repeat that performance? Not to mention he needs help, which leads me back to not thinking his old, over the hill, jumpshooting teammates can play well enough.
When healthy Rondo's generally better in the playoffs than the regular season and usually better than the year before. What are your expectations for him?
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
That's how we knew, from 12 or so years of history, that Dirk was never going to lead a team to a title. As for your question, why do they have to be 35 and not 32? Why do they need to be jumpshooters? It's needlessly specific.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
Let's be honest, at the time we were eliminated last year he'd made as many big shots down the stretch in big playoff games as almost anyone else in the league.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
What's Terry ever done in a Celtics uniform that shows you that he can do that? It's not that I have more faith on less evidence than you, I just don't limit that faith as arbitrarily as you do.
Age is pretty important. There is a big difference between 32-35. Give me a 32 yr old Pierce.
As good as Rondo was last postseason, can we expect a pg who's known to be a shaky shooter to repeat that performance? Not to mention he needs help, which leads me back to not thinking his old, over the hill, jumpshooting teammates can play well enough.
When healthy Rondo's generally better in the playoffs than the regular season and usually better than the year before. What are your expectations for him?
Even if he was to play that good again, his teammates aren't good enough. I know you think that 35 yr old, past their prime, jump shooters will cut it, but I don't. History shows you need more.
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
That's how we knew, from 12 or so years of history, that Dirk was never going to lead a team to a title. As for your question, why do they have to be 35 and not 32? Why do they need to be jumpshooters? It's needlessly specific.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
Let's be honest, at the time we were eliminated last year he'd made as many big shots down the stretch in big playoff games as almost anyone else in the league.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
What's Terry ever done in a Celtics uniform that shows you that he can do that? It's not that I have more faith on less evidence than you, I just don't limit that faith as arbitrarily as you do.
Age is pretty important. There is a big difference between 32-35. Give me a 32 yr old Pierce.
As good as Rondo was last postseason, can we expect a pg who's known to be a shaky shooter to repeat that performance? Not to mention he needs help, which leads me back to not thinking his old, over the hill, jumpshooting teammates can play well enough.
When healthy Rondo's generally better in the playoffs than the regular season and usually better than the year before. What are your expectations for him?
Even if he was to play that good again, his teammates aren't good enough. I know you think that 35 yr old, past their prime, jump shooters will cut it, but I don't. History shows you need more.
First they can't be the top 3 scorers because of their age, now they can't even be among your top players? I guess the only way to contend is to just purge the roster of over 30 year olds...
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
That's how we knew, from 12 or so years of history, that Dirk was never going to lead a team to a title. As for your question, why do they have to be 35 and not 32? Why do they need to be jumpshooters? It's needlessly specific.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
Let's be honest, at the time we were eliminated last year he'd made as many big shots down the stretch in big playoff games as almost anyone else in the league.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
What's Terry ever done in a Celtics uniform that shows you that he can do that? It's not that I have more faith on less evidence than you, I just don't limit that faith as arbitrarily as you do.
Age is pretty important. There is a big difference between 32-35. Give me a 32 yr old Pierce.
As good as Rondo was last postseason, can we expect a pg who's known to be a shaky shooter to repeat that performance? Not to mention he needs help, which leads me back to not thinking his old, over the hill, jumpshooting teammates can play well enough.
When healthy Rondo's generally better in the playoffs than the regular season and usually better than the year before. What are your expectations for him?
Even if he was to play that good again, his teammates aren't good enough. I know you think that 35 yr old, past their prime, jump shooters will cut it, but I don't. History shows you need more.
First they can't be the top 3 scorers because of their age, now they can't even be among your top players? I guess the only way to contend is to just purge the roster of over 30 year olds...
Where did I say that? I said I'd take a 32 year old Pierce. I'm not quite sure where this debate can go anymore since you discount history and ignore the fact that if the Celtics won this year they would probably be the oldest, if not close, top two scoring threats(Pierce, KG) in NBA history for a champion.
Not to mention thinking that Green and Bradley are going to somehow do things they've yet to ever do.
If that's how it goes I'd like to change it too....
Rondo is going to avg 30ppg 15apg 7rpg while Sully is going to avg 20 and 10. I don't have any proof they can/will do it, but I believe it will happen.
-
I think this should of been the obvious, but a 35 year old sf, 35 year old c, 35 year old bench sg are our 3 best scorers, all of which are jumpshooters.
If we take an average amount of shots at the rim and make a better than average amount of them is that a real problem?
So you don't think this is a problem? What team has ever won a title with their 3 best scorers past their prime at age 35, and all are jumpshooters?
First of all, "when has this exact combination of circumstances happened" is a silly way to decide how likely something is. Secondly it's pretty likely that Rondo will be among our top 3 scorers in the playoffs, and it's not inconceivable that Green or Bradley will be as well.
I don't think it's a bad way to look at it at all. How can we predict the future? Look to the past.
That's how we knew, from 12 or so years of history, that Dirk was never going to lead a team to a title. As for your question, why do they have to be 35 and not 32? Why do they need to be jumpshooters? It's needlessly specific.
As far as Rondo, he could very well be a top 3 scorer, but let's be honest, he's not going to be the one taking big shots down the stretch of big playoff games. Those plays will be drawn up for KG, PP, and Jet.
Let's be honest, at the time we were eliminated last year he'd made as many big shots down the stretch in big playoff games as almost anyone else in the league.
And I have 0 confidence that Green or Bradley can be a top 3 scorer for us in the postseason. What have they ever done in a Celtic uniform that shows you they can do that? That's a lot of faith with little evidence.
What's Terry ever done in a Celtics uniform that shows you that he can do that? It's not that I have more faith on less evidence than you, I just don't limit that faith as arbitrarily as you do.
Age is pretty important. There is a big difference between 32-35. Give me a 32 yr old Pierce.
As good as Rondo was last postseason, can we expect a pg who's known to be a shaky shooter to repeat that performance? Not to mention he needs help, which leads me back to not thinking his old, over the hill, jumpshooting teammates can play well enough.
When healthy Rondo's generally better in the playoffs than the regular season and usually better than the year before. What are your expectations for him?
Even if he was to play that good again, his teammates aren't good enough. I know you think that 35 yr old, past their prime, jump shooters will cut it, but I don't. History shows you need more.
First they can't be the top 3 scorers because of their age, now they can't even be among your top players? I guess the only way to contend is to just purge the roster of over 30 year olds...
Where did I say that? I said I'd take a 32 year old Pierce. I'm not quite sure where this debate can go anymore since you discount history and ignore the fact that if the Celtics won this year they would probably be the oldest, if not close, top two scoring threats(Pierce, KG) in NBA history for a champion.
Your original claim was that our top 3 scorers were going to be over 35. Now it's that two of our top scorers will be that old. I don't think that you've definitively shown that two players in their mid-late 30s can't be among the better players on a title team, and even if you had you'd need a reason that makes it an unlikely occurrence. Again, look at the Mavs team from 2 years ago. Can you find other cases where the best scorer was a pf or c and took as many threes as Dirk? If you can't, does history tell you that the Mavs couldn't have won that title?
-
This team is mediocre right not. That is undeniable.
I do disagree that there is no chance they can't be better than mediocre by the end of the year though. I think there is still room for growth on the current roster.
But, even if there isn't, at the moment, I prefer mediocre over terrible. I am not ready for them to bottom out yet. I think they have done a good job with what they have had to work with.
But there are very clear reasons for the team's current mediocre play. It's not some abstract condition that we simply have to live with. It's the result of decisions that were somewhat misguided, but correctable if acknowledged.
If you look at the players that Danny added to this roster or moved into more important roles, they are downgrades defensively (either as an individual or team defender or both).
last year we had:
Dooling
Bradley
Quisey
Pavlovic
Pietrus
Stiemsma
Hollins
this year (thus far) we have:
Terry
Barbosa
Lee
Green
Sully
Wilcox
These are downgrades defensively. The perimeter players have been either overmatched speed or size-wise, and the low post guys have definitely been overmatched size-wise.
This can be addressed, however, and my feeling is that Danny will move to do so because the problem is so glaring. We need more physically capable defensive players. I wish Danny had picked up Pietrus because I think the addition of him and Bradley would have solidified the perimeter defense and would have freed up Green to be moved for a center (like Gortat or Varejao) but I'm still feeling that Danny will make moves to make the Cs as dangerous as they were last year.
-
Ask yourself this. Look at the Knicks and then go, hmmm do I want a tired starting KG over Sheed Wallace coming off of bench in the playoffs? Now do that with EVERY SINGLE PLAYER ON EACH TEAM. BOOM! Guess who's going to win these matchups. I don't even want to imagine Melo and Pierce match up right now, its a nightmare. Celtics won't even sniff Knicks butt this year. This team is seriously misshapen and completely mismanaged.
The only conciliation I can offer is if your misplaced hope and faith in this team doesn't upset you too much down the road, then this team is doing just fine.
I am slowly learning not to wear the Celtics on my sleeve as I tend to do. An issue I have, yea I know, shut up.
I do like this post as a counterpoint to my C's are bad thread.
-
Ask yourself this. Look at the Knicks and then go, hmmm do I want a tired starting KG over Sheed Wallace coming off of bench in the playoffs? Now do that with EVERY SINGLE PLAYER ON EACH TEAM. BOOM! Guess who's going to win these matchups. I don't even want to imagine Melo and Pierce match up right now, its a nightmare. Celtics won't even sniff Knicks butt this year. This team is seriously misshapen and completely mismanaged.
If Bradley comes back playing like he did last year then we're probably better at both guard spots and at center, and we don't know how Amare and Melo will look together since they haven't lit the world on fire in the past. If we're playing well and we get them in the playoffs I'd say it's at worst a 50/50 series.
-
23 games in and 6 games behind the Knicks. What was the biggest gap between the Celts and Philly last year? 23 games and the defense still stinks most nights. 23 games and it is even more clear to me that this is a team of mismatched parts with no inside presence.23 games and Pierce looks really old, while Garnett gets older. Cannot wait for Danny to start making moves.
I thought after 20 games that this team would be rolling?
Oohhhhh it's rolling, look out below.
-
Slightly off topic, but how are the Bulls 13-9 missing their best player who is also one of the best players in the NBA? And how do he Knicks have one of the best records in the league missing one of its best players? And how does Minnesota have a better record than the Celts missing one of its best players? And how all of a sudden has Golden State become better than th Celts? And so on.
They have bigs who rebound.
And they have a lot of talent and are very deep. The Bulls have always played well without Rose, but they will not make a deep playoff run without him.
True with CHicago and the Dubs. Especially the Dubs, that team is deep as heck.
Not Minny though. They have rebounders with Pek and Love, and AK47 to some extent. Giving more possesions for their team keeps them close in games.
Not true on golden state. who on their bench is as good as JG on our bench. the dude was a top option on a playoff team and gonna be vying for 6th man by the end of this year.
-
Celtics team mottos:
2008 - Ubuntu!
2012 - I am a Celtic
2013 - Less from More
-
How about ...SMall BALL SUCKs Eggs