CelticsStrong
Celtics Basketball => Celtics Talk => Topic started by: syfy9 on February 03, 2013, 03:45:16 PM
-
You don't necessarily need a STAR to win a championship - you need a CLOSER. Someone you can go to at the end of games when the defense tightens.
Pierce is a top 5 closer in this league, and Terry is very very good as well.
I hope we don't trade Pierce - we will not be able to get his true value to this team.
As long as we play suffocating defense (props to Bradley's game changing defensive play), we have the ability to do some damage.
-
At least there is one who has come to join us on the optimistic side. Now come on who is going to follow? Great win for the C's today.
-
At least there is one who has come to join us on the optimistic side. Now come on who is going to follow? Great win for the C's today.
I don't understand this team... 6 win streak, 6 loss streak, 4 wins now and counting... im really at a loss of what the best course of action is with this team
-
Man I hate being right ;D
All joking aside, I couldn't agree more.
All these threads about how the Celtics were lost without Rondo just confused me beyond belief and I never understood them.
Paul and KG have always been the heart of this team.
If you replace Rondo with an effective trio of Terry/Lee/Barbosa and if Green continues to step up, then I STILL REALLY like our chances this year.
And if Danny can swing a deal for a decent big, look out!
In closing, I really hope all this KG/Clippers stuff is nothing more than hot air because trading our franchise player for a couple scrubs would be absurd.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Pierce
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Pierce
You don't think he's gotten worse since 08?
-
Agreed. We are just as good as NY, Indiana, Brooklyn, Milwaukee, and Atlanta when we play balanced ball.
I don't think we are as good as a healthy Bull's team. And the presence of LeBron James gives the heat the advantage over everyone in the east.
If some how we could stay away from the Bulls and Heat until the ECF then I think we can be in a position to make some noise and a run.
This is the most balance I have seen our team display.
-
Quite possibly, east is pretty weak other then the heat and this team is starting to gel under a different identity
-
If we could get our hands on someone who can really rebound the ball. Than yes. I say we are more of a threat. I would love Sam Dalembert from the bucks. He could rebound and block some shots, and is expiring after this year. But for us to be a little more we need someone who can really board. But yes I agree the with the heart this team has they we always be a threat.
-
Man I hate being right ;D
All joking aside, I couldn't agree more.
All these threads about how the Celtics were lost without Rondo just confused me beyond belief and I never understood them.
Paul and KG have always been the heart of this team.
If you replace Rondo with an effective trio of Terry/Lee/Barbosa and if Green continues to step up, then I STILL REALLY like our chances this year.
And if Danny can swing a deal for a decent big, look out!
In closing, I really hope all this KG/Clippers stuff is nothing more than hot air because trading our franchise player for a couple scrubs would be absurd.
What were you right about? I'm happy with the 4 game winning streak too but lets not act like we weren't just on a 6 game winning streak not long ago just to turn around and lose 6 straight.
-
Also to the OP you seem like one of those people that changes your mind easily and often. If we lose 3 in a row will you stick by what you said in this thread? I doubt it.
-
Quite possibly, east is pretty weak other then the heat and this team is starting to gel under a different identity
I'm more scared of the bulls *With rose* than the heat. I think we will lose to either team.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
All of those teams had a legit closer; at their time, one of the best in the league. Pierce is one of the best closers in the league right now (plus we have Terry).
Also, all those teams had great defense, like we do right now.
-
Rondo's ball-handling will be really missed in the playoffs. Playoff Rondo is what the C's needed most every night. He just chooses to show up when he feels like it.
-
Before Rondo and Sully went down, this team was a threat to give anyone a serious series, but not likely to come out of the East.
Now, they are at most an irritating out. I wouldn't want to play the C's in the 1st round if I were the Heat -- only because they'll need to expend some energy. I can see the C's playing the Heat close in a number of games but can't see winning more than a game. Same with Chicago.
-
Before Rondo and Sully went down, this team was a threat to give anyone a serious series, but not likely to come out of the East.
Now, they are at most an irritating out. I wouldn't want to play the C's in the 1st round if I were the Heat -- only because they'll need to expend some energy. I can see the C's playing the Heat close in a number of games but can't see winning more than a game. Same with Chicago.
I'd like the C's to play the Knicks. I think they can beat them even without Rondo and Sully.
-
What were you right about? I'm happy with the 4 game winning streak too but lets not act like we weren't just on a 6 game winning streak not long ago just to turn around and lose 6 straight.
[/quote]
I was just referring to the fact that I thought and still think we play better without Rondo, that's all.
-
What were you right about? I'm happy with the 4 game winning streak too but lets not act like we weren't just on a 6 game winning streak not long ago just to turn around and lose 6 straight.
[/b]
I was just referring to the fact that I thought and still think we play better without Rondo, that's all.
[/quote]
Oh ok
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
All of those teams had a legit closer; at their time, one of the best in the league. Pierce is one of the best closers in the league right now (plus we have Terry).
Also, all those teams had great defense, like we do right now.
Stars are needed. Talent is needed. I'm sorry I disagree with you to no end. lol
-
Agreed. We are just as good as NY, Indiana, Brooklyn, Milwaukee, and Atlanta when we play balanced ball.
I don't think we are as good as a healthy Bull's team. And the presence of LeBron James gives the heat the advantage over everyone in the east.
If some how we could stay away from the Bulls and Heat until the ECF then I think we can be in a position to make some noise and a run.
This is the most balance I have seen our team display.
I agree. Chicago actually scares me more than Miami. We know we can at the very least give Miami a series. For some reason, I just want no part of Chicago because of their size, defense and jump shooting.
And imagine if they get back a healthy, effective D-Rose.
If we can catch another break last year and if another team in the East can knock Chicago, then we could go really deep in the playoffs.
-
What were you right about? I'm happy with the 4 game winning streak too but lets not act like we weren't just on a 6 game winning streak not long ago just to turn around and lose 6 straight.
[/b]
I was just referring to the fact that I thought and still think we play better without Rondo, that's all.
Oh ok
[/quote]
But you are right. Nothing is settled yet. I just hope Danny doesn't trade away all our good players for the "future." I hope our guys get one more chance at a title.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Present day Pierce MIGHT be close in talent to Billups when he was Finals MVP.
Unfortunately, we have no Ben Wallace (I would compare KG to Sheed).
Also: The top level teams in today's NBA are way better than when Detroit won in 2004.
-
What were you right about? I'm happy with the 4 game winning streak too but lets not act like we weren't just on a 6 game winning streak not long ago just to turn around and lose 6 straight.
[/b]
I was just referring to the fact that I thought and still think we play better without Rondo, that's all.
[/quote]
oh no doubt so far with our guards and ball movement. why can we not get that when rondo is in? at any rate i still think we are a ticking time bomb without the boards from sully. we HAVE to get a big man or two. we needed one before sully got hurt. now we really are in deep need. too much on KG and Bass. wilcox? LOL. collins? sigh.
-
We play Miami, New York, Chicago, Indiana, Brooklyn, and Philly 10 more times before the season is over. If we can go 8-2 in those games, I'll agree with you.
-
Before Rondo and Sully went down, this team was a threat to give anyone a serious series, but not likely to come out of the East.
Now, they are at most an irritating out. I wouldn't want to play the C's in the 1st round if I were the Heat -- only because they'll need to expend some energy. I can see the C's playing the Heat close in a number of games but can't see winning more than a game. Same with Chicago.
This
-
I agree because, in my mind, that's what the best of fans do. They never give up hope. Even when you know there's no chance, you still hope... and find reasons to believe you can somehow pull it off...
I don't understand how others comment, every single day, over and over, that we have no chance. Rationality says we don't have a chance. But this is a blog of fans. We wanna win. So, to the naysayers: find some way to rationalize reasons we can win, to yourself, to make the ride more fun. Or just pleaseee stop sharing your negativity every single day.
Maybe we should just punt down the middle and agree to stop speculating for a few weeks.
-
I agree because, in my mind, that's what the best of fans do. They never give up hope. Even when you know there's no chance, you still hope... and find reasons to believe you can somehow pull it off...
I don't understand how others comment, every single day, over and over, that we have no chance. Rationality says we don't have a chance. But this is a blog of fans. We wanna win. So, to the naysayers: find some way to rationalize reasons we can win, to yourself, to make the ride more fun. Or just pleaseee stop sharing your negativity every single day.
Maybe we should just punt down the middle and agree to stop speculating for a few weeks.
There is nothing wrong with fans who don't view things with green goggles on. I'm a fan and admitted homer, but at some point you have to be realistic.
-
I agree because, in my mind, that's what the best of fans do. They never give up hope. Even when you know there's no chance, you still hope... and find reasons to believe you can somehow pull it off...
I don't understand how others comment, every single day, over and over, that we have no chance. Rationality says we don't have a chance. But this is a blog of fans. We wanna win. So, to the naysayers: find some way to rationalize reasons we can win, to yourself, to make the ride more fun. Or just pleaseee stop sharing your negativity every single day.
Maybe we should just punt down the middle and agree to stop speculating for a few weeks.
There is nothing wrong with fans who don't view things with green goggles on. I'm a fan and admitted homer, but at some point you have to be realistic.
The problem with being negative is the assumption that it's automatically considered realistic.
An inaccurate assessment whether positive or negative, is not realistic.
-
Its easy to look good when teams aren't playing any defense against you. Once teams start looking at film and focusing on ways to shut these guys down, their half court offense weaknesses will become very apparent.
That all said, I like they way they've been playing.
-
I agree because, in my mind, that's what the best of fans do. They never give up hope. Even when you know there's no chance, you still hope... and find reasons to believe you can somehow pull it off...
I don't understand how others comment, every single day, over and over, that we have no chance. Rationality says we don't have a chance. But this is a blog of fans. We wanna win. So, to the naysayers: find some way to rationalize reasons we can win, to yourself, to make the ride more fun. Or just pleaseee stop sharing your negativity every single day.
Maybe we should just punt down the middle and agree to stop speculating for a few weeks.
There is nothing wrong with fans who don't view things with green goggles on. I'm a fan and admitted homer, but at some point you have to be realistic.
The problem with being negative is that the assumption that it's automatically considered realistic.
An inaccurate assessment whether positive or negative, is not realistic.
Well when I look at the history of the NBA, how title teams have looked, and how we look. I think fans who don't consider us contenders is perfectly realistic.
-
If the team gets into playoffs,that's when we will miss Rondo I think, when the defenses are closed.
By the way,anyone know how the Celtics were last year at this time?,now we're 24-23, last year?
My opinion is that we need a big man to help KG clearly,and then one more player to complete the roster.
I do not know who will be traded,Bass,Lee,Pierce(would be a crime) depending on this, we will see the final roster.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Present day Pierce MIGHT be close in talent to Billups when he was Finals MVP.
Unfortunately, we have no Ben Wallace (I would compare KG to Sheed).
Also: The top level teams in today's NBA are way better than when Detroit won in 2004.
Disagree about that Detroit team. They played incredible team ball on offense, stifling defense, and easily beat a team with prime Kobe and late prime Shaq. They should have won more titles, but they got kind of arrogant...or lazy or I don't know. I blame Sheed and Richard Hamilton.
-
I agree because, in my mind, that's what the best of fans do. They never give up hope. Even when you know there's no chance, you still hope... and find reasons to believe you can somehow pull it off...
I don't understand how others comment, every single day, over and over, that we have no chance. Rationality says we don't have a chance. But this is a blog of fans. We wanna win. So, to the naysayers: find some way to rationalize reasons we can win, to yourself, to make the ride more fun. Or just pleaseee stop sharing your negativity every single day.
Maybe we should just punt down the middle and agree to stop speculating for a few weeks.
There is nothing wrong with fans who don't view things with green goggles on. I'm a fan and admitted homer, but at some point you have to be realistic.
The problem with being negative is the assumption that it's automatically considered realistic.
An inaccurate assessment whether positive or negative, is not realistic.
I'll agree with this. The vast majority of posts are simply opinion. Opinion is nothing more than an individual's perception. Perception always seems "real" in the eye of the beholder.
-
I agree because, in my mind, that's what the best of fans do. They never give up hope. Even when you know there's no chance, you still hope... and find reasons to believe you can somehow pull it off...
I don't understand how others comment, every single day, over and over, that we have no chance. Rationality says we don't have a chance. But this is a blog of fans. We wanna win. So, to the naysayers: find some way to rationalize reasons we can win, to yourself, to make the ride more fun. Or just pleaseee stop sharing your negativity every single day.
Maybe we should just punt down the middle and agree to stop speculating for a few weeks.
There is nothing wrong with fans who don't view things with green goggles on. I'm a fan and admitted homer, but at some point you have to be realistic.
The problem with being negative is that the assumption that it's automatically considered realistic.
An inaccurate assessment whether positive or negative, is not realistic.
Well when I look at the history of the NBA, how title teams have looked, and how we look. I think fans who don't consider us contenders is perfectly realistic.
"Contenders" is the most overused and nonsensical label in sports analysis.
-
Honestly if we can get into the 6th or 7th seed and Chicago ends up as the 4th seed i could see us making it through Brooklyn and New York to get to the ECF and then we take our chances in either Chicago or Miami after they get done with their dogfight. Alot of pieces have to fall in place for that to happen, but it's not an unrealistic scenario.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Present day Pierce MIGHT be close in talent to Billups when he was Finals MVP.
Unfortunately, we have no Ben Wallace (I would compare KG to Sheed).
Also: The top level teams in today's NBA are way better than when Detroit won in 2004.
Disagree about that Detroit team. They played incredible team ball on offense, stifling defense, and easily beat a team with prime Kobe and late prime Shaq. They should have won more titles, but they got kind of arrogant...or lazy or I don't know. I blame Sheed and Richard Hamilton.
Except that Lakers team was really only talented on paper. 2004 was the hiegth of their disfunction. Shaq and Kobe hated each other.
I'd say Minny was probably the best team in the West that year. KG's 2004 season might have been the best individual season any player has ever had. Had it not been for injuries, I suspect Minny would have won it all that year, and they were basically KG and a bunch of role players.
Detroit was good, and one of the few example of a team being greater than the sum of its parts. Overall, they weren't really that good. The East was just that terrible.
-
Also to the OP you seem like one of those people that changes your mind easily and often. If we lose 3 in a row will you stick by what you said in this thread? I doubt it.
I thought we were still a threat in the playoffs up until Rondo got injured, despite our record.
I believed that playoff Rondo was a vital part of our future playoff run (I still think so). But now, I also believe that this team is still dangerous even without playoff Rondo.
-
At least there is one who has come to join us on the optimistic side. Now come on who is going to follow? Great win for the C's today.
I don't understand this team... 6 win streak, 6 loss streak, 4 wins now and counting... im really at a loss of what the best course of action is with this team
Cant be making Danny's job easy at all.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
All of those guys except for Billups are superstars and not simply all-stars. Rondo is not a superstar and never will be. Rondo cannot be the best player on a championship team.
-
I don't understand how others comment, every single day, over and over, that we have no chance. Rationality says we don't have a chance.
People don't understand that there is a difference between "no chance" and "a small chance". Maybe it is the influence of ESPN talking heads, but a lot of people seem to talk about sports as if there is nothing between having no chance and being practically ordained, so that only freak injury or rigged officiating or a blatant choke job can prevent the predicted result.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
All of those guys except for Billups are superstars and not simply all-stars. Rondo is not a superstar and never will be. Rondo cannot be the best player on a championship team.
He almost was. Look at the list above, Billups/PP/Dirk/Parker are all well below the level of those other players. Remember Rondo's younger than most of those players were before they started winning titles, he should be capable of playing at that level in a couple of years if he isn't now.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
apart from the fact we already beat Miami...?
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
apart from the fact we already beat Miami...?
yes they beat them at home in the middle of January. They can probably take 2 against Miami in a 7 game series where Miami has home court .
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
apart from the fact we already beat Miami...?
yes they beat them at home in the middle of January. They can probably take 2 against Miami in a 7 game series where Miami has home court .
4.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
apart from the fact we already beat Miami...?
All of our wins don't count, since it's the regular season
All of our losses are signs that we should blow it up, since if we can't beat the teams we lost to, we're never gonna beat the Heat, not even gonna win a single game cuz they're a-mazing!
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
Bingo!! I was going to post the same thing
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
Bingo!! I was going to post the same thing
someone conveniently skipped the Heat from that list...
Not to mention that the Kings wupped us earlier this year when we had Rondo, and the Clippers with Bledsoe instead of CP3 are still a very good team.
What are you guys going to say when we beat the lakers on thursday? Who do we have to beat to actually look good?
-
This team, our guards in particular, look like they were just let out of prison since Rondo went down. None of them are going to say it, but it's pretty obvious they are playing much more free and to their strengths without Rondo.
Terry finally looks like the Jason Terry I thought we were getting when we signed him. That's because he's allowed to create and be himself instead of trying to be Ray Allen. Lee gets to shoot the ball and take it to the hole now as well, same for Jeff Green. This makes everyone run and move the ball much better.
Bass is playing more free because he knows Sullinger is not going to take his spot this year.
Rondo is a great player, but no one likes to get ordered around by a guy who is always angry and pouting, even at his teammates, coaches, and the refs, and then he dominates the ball on offense and starts the play with 12 seconds left on the shot clock.
We have a deep team this year, and the depth is coming in handy now.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
Bingo!! I was going to post the same thing
someone conveniently skipped the Heat from that list...
Not to mention that the Kings wupped us earlier this year when we had Rondo, and the Clippers with Bledsoe instead of CP3 are still a very good team.
What are you guys going to say when we beat the lakers on thursday? Who do we have to beat to actually look good?
Haven't the lakers been bad, though? Not that I'm not with you because I love this roster.
-
This team, our guards in particular, look like they were just let out of prison since Rondo went down. None of them are going to say it, but it's pretty obvious they are playing much more free and to their strengths without Rondo.
Terry finally looks like the Jason Terry I thought we were getting when we signed him. That's because he's allowed to create and be himself instead of trying to be Ray Allen. Lee gets to shoot the ball and take it to the hole now as well, same for Jeff Green. This makes everyone run and move the ball much better.
Bass is playing more free because he knows Sullinger is not going to take his spot this year.
Rondo is a great player, but no one likes to get ordered around by a guy who is always angry and pouting, even at his teammates, coaches, and the refs, and then he dominates the ball on offense and starts the play with 12 seconds left on the shot clock.
We have a deep team this year, and the depth is coming in handy now.
Exactly this - TP.
When he went down and the blow it up threads posted, I figured our path to 18 just became clear: trade Rondo for #18 by swapping him for a super-big, or even a Rondo for Gortat+Dragic deal. I think we could dominate by playing every piece of our deep, talented roster in his best role.
I mean, a read/react tor motion-ype of offense should work with a group with this level of talent: Two HOFers, two recent 6POYrs, Green (who started on a WCF team at PF and averaged 15ppg), spot-shooters like Bass and Lee, and a big slasher like Wilcox. We probably SHOULD be better if we let the ball flow through a group like that, rather than be kept in the hands of one player.
Even if that one player is the best passer.
The whole is greater than even the best. It's why Russell beat Chamberlain.
And we can have addition by subtraction by trading Rondo for a big like Gortat plus Dragic for insurance.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
apart from the fact we already beat Miami...?
yes they beat them at home in the middle of January. They can probably take 2 against Miami in a 7 game series where Miami has home court .
4.
1.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
Bingo!! I was going to post the same thing
someone conveniently skipped the Heat from that list...
Not to mention that the Kings wupped us earlier this year when we had Rondo, and the Clippers with Bledsoe instead of CP3 are still a very good team.
What are you guys going to say when we beat the lakers on thursday? Who do we have to beat to actually look good?
A decent team (or two) in the playoffs.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
But Pierce had some otherworldly games during that title run. The 40+ point showdown with Lebron that year was certainly the best he has ever been, IMO.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
You do know if we play the Clippers in the finals, with or without CP3, Garnett won't be coming out of the game every five minutes for Jason Collins and Pierce won't sit the first half of the 4th quarter while our 19pt lead gets whittled away to single digits.
We have been playing the entire season with about half of a Garnett and Pierce.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
But Pierce had some otherworldly games during that title run. The 40+ point showdown with Lebron that year was certainly the best he has ever been, IMO.
Yeah totally agree, Pierce was a bonafide superstar in 2008... But now, he's sub-star, and stats good enough to win a title
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
But Pierce had some otherworldly games during that title run. The 40+ point showdown with Lebron that year was certainly the best he has ever been, IMO.
Yeah totally agree, Pierce was a bonafide superstar in 2008... But now, he's sub-star, and stats good enough to win a title
I think Pierce is still a star, one level below a super-star. KG is still a star too, and RR was on the borderline of superstar. Terry is no longer a sub-star.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
But Pierce had some otherworldly games during that title run. The 40+ point showdown with Lebron that year was certainly the best he has ever been, IMO.
Yeah totally agree, Pierce was a bonafide superstar in 2008... But now, he's sub-star, and stats good enough to win a title
I think Pierce is still a star, one level below a super-star. KG is still a star too, and RR was on the borderline of superstar. Terry is no longer a sub-star.
And if we can trade our injured borderline-superstar PG for a star C, we're set this year, IMO.
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
But Pierce had some otherworldly games during that title run. The 40+ point showdown with Lebron that year was certainly the best he has ever been, IMO.
Yeah totally agree, Pierce was a bonafide superstar in 2008... But now, he's sub-star, and stats good enough to win a title
I think Pierce is still a star, one level below a super-star. KG is still a star too, and RR was on the borderline of superstar. Terry is no longer a sub-star.
And if we can trade our injured borderline-superstar PG for a star C, we're set this year, IMO.
File that one under "there's no way to know either way". When's the last time a team traded a star center for a pg that just went down with a knee injury?
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
But Pierce had some otherworldly games during that title run. The 40+ point showdown with Lebron that year was certainly the best he has ever been, IMO.
Yeah totally agree, Pierce was a bonafide superstar in 2008... But now, he's sub-star, and stats good enough to win a title
I think Pierce is still a star, one level below a super-star. KG is still a star too, and RR was on the borderline of superstar. Terry is no longer a sub-star.
And if we can trade our injured borderline-superstar PG for a star C, we're set this year, IMO.
File that one under "there's no way to know either way". When's the last time a team traded a star center for a pg that just went down with a knee injury?
The only places I can think of a team trading a good Center for an injured PG would be.... Orlando/Minnesota?
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
Bingo!! I was going to post the same thing
someone conveniently skipped the Heat from that list...
Not to mention that the Kings wupped us earlier this year when we had Rondo, and the Clippers with Bledsoe instead of CP3 are still a very good team.
What are you guys going to say when we beat the lakers on thursday? Who do we have to beat to actually look good?
Yeah. And also, a team can only beat the team's on its schedule.
-
Bleed Green Ubuntu Mofos!! ;D
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Parker and Billups are sub-stars, one level below a star. And Pierce is that at this stage of his career
But Pierce had some otherworldly games during that title run. The 40+ point showdown with Lebron that year was certainly the best he has ever been, IMO.
Yeah totally agree, Pierce was a bonafide superstar in 2008... But now, he's sub-star, and stats good enough to win a title
I think Pierce is still a star, one level below a super-star. KG is still a star too, and RR was on the borderline of superstar. Terry is no longer a sub-star.
And if we can trade our injured borderline-superstar PG for a star C, we're set this year, IMO.
File that one under "there's no way to know either way". When's the last time a team traded a star center for a pg that just went down with a knee injury?
The only places I can think of a team trading a good Center for an injured PG would be.... Orlando/Minnesota?
T-Wolves have Rubio. Unless we're dealing for him too.
Utah? Derrick Favors would be awesome.
-
You don't necessarily need a STAR to win a championship - you need a CLOSER. Someone you can go to at the end of games when the defense tightens.
Pierce is a top 5 closer in this league, and Terry is very very good as well.
I hope we don't trade Pierce - we will not be able to get his true value to this team.
As long as we play suffocating defense (props to Bradley's game changing defensive play), we have the ability to do some damage.
Oh and because YOU change your mind, now suddenly it matters? Garbage post
-
You don't necessarily need a STAR to win a championship - you need a CLOSER. Someone you can go to at the end of games when the defense tightens.
Pierce is a top 5 closer in this league, and Terry is very very good as well.
I hope we don't trade Pierce - we will not be able to get his true value to this team.
As long as we play suffocating defense (props to Bradley's game changing defensive play), we have the ability to do some damage.
You don't need a "closer". You need a good enough team. If you are good enough, someone will hit the shots when needed, and then people will call whoever happened to hit the shot a "closer".
-
You don't necessarily need a STAR to win a championship - you need a CLOSER. Someone you can go to at the end of games when the defense tightens.
Pierce is a top 5 closer in this league, and Terry is very very good as well.
I hope we don't trade Pierce - we will not be able to get his true value to this team.
As long as we play suffocating defense (props to Bradley's game changing defensive play), we have the ability to do some damage.
You don't need a "closer". You need a good enough team. If you are good enough, someone will hit the shots when needed, and then people will call whoever happened to hit the shot a "closer".
So the takeaway from this is...the better team wins.
Not knocking it. Nothing wrong at all. All this controversial, elaborate, highly abstract crap about having enough "star power", tiers of players...
The team that's built better, that can deal with the situations they need to deal with, that has fitting pieces, with a coach that runs a system that fits those players...that team wins.
And I do see that in the C's.
-
You don't necessarily need a STAR to win a championship - you need a CLOSER. Someone you can go to at the end of games when the defense tightens.
Pierce is a top 5 closer in this league, and Terry is very very good as well.
I hope we don't trade Pierce - we will not be able to get his true value to this team.
As long as we play suffocating defense (props to Bradley's game changing defensive play), we have the ability to do some damage.
You don't need a "closer". You need a good enough team. If you are good enough, someone will hit the shots when needed, and then people will call whoever happened to hit the shot a "closer".
So the takeaway from this is...the better team wins.
Not knocking it. Nothing wrong at all. All this controversial, elaborate, highly abstract crap about having enough "star power", tiers of players...
The team that's built better, that can deal with the situations they need to deal with, that has fitting pieces, with a coach that runs a system that fits those players...that team wins.
And I do see that in the C's.
No that's not CRAP that's FACT. Learn the difference. Stars win championships rather you wanna accept that reality or not is up to you.
-
Let me elaborate on my last post. A championship team needs at least 2-3 legitimate stars to be serious contenders and have a shot at a title. Go back and look at history.
I agree the best team will win a 7 game series. That being said who has the best 10-12 guys is irrelevant. Once the playoffs start it will be your best 7-8 guys vs the other teams.
Keep in mind as good as we were in 2008 it took a superstar like performance from pierce to get past the cavs. It took him going point for point against lebron to survive that game 7. If pierce has a bad game we lose. I could go on and on but you get my point. Stars win championships not role players.
-
Hmmm... let's see.
Championship teams that don't have superstars:
1978 Bullets
1979 Sonics
2004 Pistons
Those team have all-stars but not a superstar.
True, a contender needs to have a star but not necessary superstars. I could name some role players who won or at least have a great impact on their championships.
Robert Horry?
Sam Cassell?
Derek Fisher?
Sean Elliot?
And who could forget James Posey?
What we need is a role players that will fit in the system. If we have deep bench, they could use it as an advantage. And what if Lebron goes down? The heat's chance will drastically drop.
-
You don't necessarily need a STAR to win a championship - you need a CLOSER. Someone you can go to at the end of games when the defense tightens.
Pierce is a top 5 closer in this league, and Terry is very very good as well.
I hope we don't trade Pierce - we will not be able to get his true value to this team.
As long as we play suffocating defense (props to Bradley's game changing defensive play), we have the ability to do some damage.
You don't need a "closer". You need a good enough team. If you are good enough, someone will hit the shots when needed, and then people will call whoever happened to hit the shot a "closer".
So the takeaway from this is...the better team wins.
Not knocking it. Nothing wrong at all. All this controversial, elaborate, highly abstract crap about having enough "star power", tiers of players...
The team that's built better, that can deal with the situations they need to deal with, that has fitting pieces, with a coach that runs a system that fits those players...that team wins.
And I do see that in the C's.
No that's not CRAP that's FACT. Learn the difference. Stars win championships rather you wanna accept that reality or not is up to you.
The team with the better player certainly has the advantage.
But, like a guy said in another thread, there's no absolutes. "A team ABSOLUTELY can't win with a "superstar"". That's ESPN fluff. The bottom line is the better team wins.
Obviously the teams with amazing players who can do superb things have huge advantages.
But stars are pretty much defined subjectively and loosely as well. "Stars" may emerge from different situations and some "stars" end up flopping in the playoffs. Is Deron Williams still a "superstar"? Rudy Gay is looking great. The terms "star", "superstar" and other such terms are so elusive. Some players thrive in a fitting system, some players just click...
Bottom line: good players, good fit, good coaching...etc.
Hopefully the Grizzlies and/or the Spurs do something this year. That'll stick it to the Hollywood superstar stuff that Jordan started and ESPN is profiting off of. And, of course, I hope our C's upset a few teams (might be 1 to 50, 100, 200 chance of us making the finals...BUT NOT ZERO).
-
Just quickly looking at past Finals MVPs...
Lebron, Dirk, Kobe, Kobe, Pierce, Parker, Wade, Duncan, Billups, Duncan, Shaq, Shaq, Shaq, Duncan, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan, Hakeem, Hakeem, Jordan, Jordan, Jordan.
I believe you need stars.
Pierce
Agree. All these stars are closers.
And I agree with this thread.
I don't know why people think we need a 'star' player who doesn't close games with scoring or even legitimate plays to win the play offs. lol.
I've steered away from the forums because I don't want to be labeled a Rondo hater, but this absence is exposing A LOT in coaching and in Rondo. I just hope adjustments will be made with his return.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
apart from the fact we already beat Miami...?
and the Bulls? lol...we're 1-1 with both.
-
C's are playing better , but we have played Sac, Orlando and Clippers without cp3, let's not get carried away.
I will always root for the c's to win, but just don't see the c's beating a healthy bulls team or Miami.
You do know if we play the Clippers in the finals, with or without CP3, Garnett won't be coming out of the game every five minutes for Jason Collins and Pierce won't sit the first half of the 4th quarter while our 19pt lead gets whittled away to single digits.
We have been playing the entire season with about half of a Garnett and Pierce.
I like this because for some odd reason everyone feels like we're going to play the exact same way in the play offs. I've said it, Doc is MUCH better in playoffs than regular season. He's obviously worried about health and legs and such. In playoffs none of that matters and everyone will turn up.
I guess we will just wait and see.
-
Let me elaborate on my last post. A championship team needs at least 2-3 legitimate stars to be serious contenders and have a shot at a title. Go back and look at history.
I agree the best team will win a 7 game series. That being said who has the best 10-12 guys is irrelevant. Once the playoffs start it will be your best 7-8 guys vs the other teams.
Keep in mind as good as we were in 2008 it took a superstar like performance from pierce to get past the cavs. It took him going point for point against lebron to survive that game 7. If pierce has a bad game we lose. I could go on and on but you get my point. Stars win championships not role players.
Dallas two seasons ago?
-
Let me elaborate on my last post. A championship team needs at least 2-3 legitimate stars to be serious contenders and have a shot at a title. Go back and look at history.
I agree the best team will win a 7 game series. That being said who has the best 10-12 guys is irrelevant. Once the playoffs start it will be your best 7-8 guys vs the other teams.
Keep in mind as good as we were in 2008 it took a superstar like performance from pierce to get past the cavs. It took him going point for point against lebron to survive that game 7. If pierce has a bad game we lose. I could go on and on but you get my point. Stars win championships not role players.
Dallas two seasons ago?
Tbh, you need minimum one, and Pierce can still fit in that mold in the playoffs.
-
Everyone on this blog is so certain of what a team needs to be a contender, I'm amazed that you aren't all filthily wealthy from being able to predict the champions every season and betting all your money on that team.
Let's be real. There are many luxuries that teams would love to have going into the playoffs. And there are many weaknesses that teams would love to plug before the playoffs. But teams have still won titles without some of those luxuries. Teams have still won titles despite having very specific and known weaknesses.
This pistons beat the lakers on 2004. The warriors beat the mavs in 2007. The knicks beat the heat in 1999. The mavs beat the heat in 2010. Upsets happen in the NBA that you would not normally expect, the outcomes aren't as predictable as people think they oughtta be. For a team to win a title, things just have to come together and go right. The celtics have a lot of talent on this roster.
If the celtics take a 1 game at a time approach, I think anything is possible. Is there any one single game that if the celtics are going into, you can say definitively that the celtics have no chance to win? If not, then anything is possible.