Author Topic: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal  (Read 6385 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #105 on: February 01, 2013, 02:26:57 PM »

Offline Who

  • Bill Russell
  • ******************************
  • Posts: 30573
  • Tommy Points: 1287
I don't understand why Rondo is on too high a pedestal just because many people (myself included) believe this team cannot win a title without him.

How many title contenders can afford to lose an All-Star caliber player and still be capable of winning an NBA Championship?

It's not like Boston had a big margin for error to begin with.

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #106 on: February 01, 2013, 02:41:49 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10993
  • Tommy Points: 664
I don't understand why Rondo is on too high a pedestal just because many people (myself included) believe this team cannot win a title without him.

How many title contenders can afford to lose an All-Star caliber player and still be capable of winning an NBA Championship?

It's not like Boston had a big margin for error to begin with.
We aren't winning at title one way or the other.  And a team with Rondo as the best player will never win a title.  This is a scoring man's league.  I can't think of a team who ever won a title, because their best player passed super well. If you combined Rondo was a dominant inside scoring threat like Dwight Howard... you might contend.  It would have to be a superstar who would find Rondo's passing skills complimentary to his dominance.

We haven't been a serious contender to even threaten for a title since Shaq and Perk were on the roster. 

But with the current roster we have right now... losing Rondo might not make us all that much worse.  It's just about the kind of players we have here.  If we were loaded up with shooters who needed a playmaker... then losing Rondo would be catastrophic.  But it just so happens this iteration of the Celtics has several undersized shooting guards who are most effective creating their own offense.  Losing Rondo and freeing up another 43 minutes a night for them to gobble up has the potential to actually help a bit.  We'll have addition by subtraction that will offset our subtraction by subtraction.  Our net loss might not be as bad as people assume.

We will not be able to play the same way without Rondo.  But the way I think we'll end up playing... it wouldn't be possible WITH Rondo.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 02:47:09 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #107 on: February 01, 2013, 02:45:49 PM »

Offline Fafnir

  • Global Moderator
  • Bob Cousy
  • **************************
  • Posts: 26342
  • Tommy Points: 1000
I don't understand why Rondo is on too high a pedestal just because many people (myself included) believe this team cannot win a title without him.

How many title contenders can afford to lose an All-Star caliber player and still be capable of winning an NBA Championship?

It's not like Boston had a big margin for error to begin with.
Based on some poster's expectations that the C's will improve without his play (for a variety of reasons ranging from defense, Rondo dominating the ball too much, and improved transition), I think they don't view him as an all-star caliber player.

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #108 on: February 01, 2013, 02:50:05 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10993
  • Tommy Points: 664
I don't understand why Rondo is on too high a pedestal just because many people (myself included) believe this team cannot win a title without him.

How many title contenders can afford to lose an All-Star caliber player and still be capable of winning an NBA Championship?

It's not like Boston had a big margin for error to begin with.
Based on some poster's expectations that the C's will improve without his play (for a variety of reasons ranging from defense, Rondo dominating the ball too much, and improved transition), I think they don't view him as an all-star caliber player.

Rondo's an all-star caliber player.  He is.  His skill is passing.  IF you have great shooters or a dominant inside guy who needs lobs, you could use ROndo's passing.   Rondo isn't an all-up star like a Chris Paul or Kevin Durant.  He's an all-star in the same way Tyson Chandler is an all-star.  Chandler's skill is defense.  Chandler absolutely is an all-star player, but he's got a very specific skill.  You couldn't build a team around Chandler just due to the fact he was an all-star.  Granted, you might build your defense around his specific skillset.  No team will ever win a title with Tyson Chandler as the best player, though.  But if you combine all-star Tyson Chandler with a superstar like DIrk, you have a chance.    Rondo's in that category. 
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 02:55:31 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #109 on: February 01, 2013, 02:55:15 PM »

Offline scaryjerry

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1628
  • Tommy Points: 72
Danny Ainge pretty much nailed it on weei yesterday

“He single-handedly carried us many nights, and I don’t see how people don’t see that,” said Ainge. “When people say we’re going to be better without Rondo or the team’s going to do better without him, it’s silly. He’s a great, great player, and he’s proven that time and time again. The guy’s been MVP of probably four or five series over the last five years — not just individual games here and there or triple-doubles on national TV. He’s been the best player in a series against LeBron James. He’s been the best player in a series against Derrick Rose. He’s been the best player in three games of an NBA Finals.”

SOOOO in other words he's earned his pedestal...moreso even then your infallible chris paul

for those of you thinking we will be better without him....danny thinks youre silly

nuff said

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #110 on: February 01, 2013, 02:56:01 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22674
  • Tommy Points: 1042
The rest of this season will be fascinating.  There's a solid chance we play better without him.  I imagine Ray Allen is giddy right now... the tail end of this season could completely vindicate him and prove him right about Rajon.   

I'd hope Ray would have enough tact to not be "giddy" over a season ending injury to a past teammate.

It sure seems like that's the mentality around here though.

Well said.

I cannot seem to fathom why some would be happy we just lost our most talented player.  It's disturbing.
I still think our two most talented players are Pierce and KG.  Hence why the rest of this season will be so fascinating.  I'm not happy we lost Rondo.  I love Rondo.  Plus, Rondo actually had a bit of trade value before the injury and now we're likely going to be stuck in mediocrity for years.

I do think Rondo is supremely overrated on this forum, though.  And I do think Ray bailed on this team at least in part, because he didn't feel Rondo's skill set warranted his growing role.  There's a lot of smoke surrounding this concept that the team doesn't necessarily enjoy the Rondo-centric offense... so I'm fascinated to see how they react without him.  That's not to say I'd prefer this scenario to one with a healthy Rondo on board.

One of my biggest complaints about this season is that the roster was completely dysfunctional.  I had preferred a pipedream scenario where we used a collection of some undersized SG's,  underwhelming PF's, and draft picks to land a big man who could fix the roster logic.  But in a way, Rondo's injury solves many of the issues this Roster had.  There's no longer 4 undersized shooting guards splitting 50 minutes.  Rondo's injury pushes the PG-sized Bradley to PG... it pushes our biggest guard, Lee, into a permanent starting role.  It ensures that Terry remains as a 6th man where he belongs.  And it makes it so that one of our most talented players, Barbosa, doesn't unfairly get stuck with random DNP's due to guard-clog (these guys now have an additional 43 minutes of playing time that they can all gobble up).  It frees up our 4th best player, Jeff Green, to actually use his talents instead of trying to conform into something he's not.  It will give us the option of actually trying to post-up once in a while without the concern of taking the ball out of Rondo's hands, clogging up the middle for a Rondo drive... or watching as Rondo's defenders slack off him and double the dude trying to post up.   What that means is... Rondo's injury will go a long way to defining roles.  This team might actually stand a chance of maximizing their talents.  Our best two defensive guards will be starting with very little chance of them getting stuck with awkward size mismatches (like Bradley being stuck guarding Joe JOhnson or something).    All of these things weren't possible when your 3rd best player happens to be an all-star whose best attribute is "passing" and worst attribute is "shooting".   We loaded up on scorers (not shooters) in the offseason... now we get to actually USE those scorers as they should be used.

Would I prefer trading all the underperformers for something like Josh Smith, Marcin Gortat, Demarcus Cousins, Pau Gasol, etc... and rolling through the rest of the season with a Rondo-lead offense now featuring a influx of legit starting big man talent?.... Absolutely.  But this might be interesting too.

 Now we need a similar explanation about why Rondo (and the offense) excelled when Perk was in the middle. Was he a special case as well?

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #111 on: February 01, 2013, 02:56:47 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10993
  • Tommy Points: 664
Danny Ainge pretty much nailed it on weei yesterday

“He single-handedly carried us many nights, and I don’t see how people don’t see that,” said Ainge. “When people say we’re going to be better without Rondo or the team’s going to do better without him, it’s silly. He’s a great, great player, and he’s proven that time and time again. The guy’s been MVP of probably four or five series over the last five years — not just individual games here and there or triple-doubles on national TV. He’s been the best player in a series against LeBron James. He’s been the best player in a series against Derrick Rose. He’s been the best player in three games of an NBA Finals.”

to those of you thinking we will be better without danny....he thinks youre silly

nuff said
And then Ainge promptly called ever GM in the league and tried to see if anyone was willing to trade for the "MVP". 

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #112 on: February 01, 2013, 02:59:33 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10993
  • Tommy Points: 664
The rest of this season will be fascinating.  There's a solid chance we play better without him.  I imagine Ray Allen is giddy right now... the tail end of this season could completely vindicate him and prove him right about Rajon.   

I'd hope Ray would have enough tact to not be "giddy" over a season ending injury to a past teammate.

It sure seems like that's the mentality around here though.

Well said.

I cannot seem to fathom why some would be happy we just lost our most talented player.  It's disturbing.
I still think our two most talented players are Pierce and KG.  Hence why the rest of this season will be so fascinating.  I'm not happy we lost Rondo.  I love Rondo.  Plus, Rondo actually had a bit of trade value before the injury and now we're likely going to be stuck in mediocrity for years.

I do think Rondo is supremely overrated on this forum, though.  And I do think Ray bailed on this team at least in part, because he didn't feel Rondo's skill set warranted his growing role.  There's a lot of smoke surrounding this concept that the team doesn't necessarily enjoy the Rondo-centric offense... so I'm fascinated to see how they react without him.  That's not to say I'd prefer this scenario to one with a healthy Rondo on board.

One of my biggest complaints about this season is that the roster was completely dysfunctional.  I had preferred a pipedream scenario where we used a collection of some undersized SG's,  underwhelming PF's, and draft picks to land a big man who could fix the roster logic.  But in a way, Rondo's injury solves many of the issues this Roster had.  There's no longer 4 undersized shooting guards splitting 50 minutes.  Rondo's injury pushes the PG-sized Bradley to PG... it pushes our biggest guard, Lee, into a permanent starting role.  It ensures that Terry remains as a 6th man where he belongs.  And it makes it so that one of our most talented players, Barbosa, doesn't unfairly get stuck with random DNP's due to guard-clog (these guys now have an additional 43 minutes of playing time that they can all gobble up).  It frees up our 4th best player, Jeff Green, to actually use his talents instead of trying to conform into something he's not.  It will give us the option of actually trying to post-up once in a while without the concern of taking the ball out of Rondo's hands, clogging up the middle for a Rondo drive... or watching as Rondo's defenders slack off him and double the dude trying to post up.   What that means is... Rondo's injury will go a long way to defining roles.  This team might actually stand a chance of maximizing their talents.  Our best two defensive guards will be starting with very little chance of them getting stuck with awkward size mismatches (like Bradley being stuck guarding Joe JOhnson or something).    All of these things weren't possible when your 3rd best player happens to be an all-star whose best attribute is "passing" and worst attribute is "shooting".   We loaded up on scorers (not shooters) in the offseason... now we get to actually USE those scorers as they should be used.

Would I prefer trading all the underperformers for something like Josh Smith, Marcin Gortat, Demarcus Cousins, Pau Gasol, etc... and rolling through the rest of the season with a Rondo-lead offense now featuring a influx of legit starting big man talent?.... Absolutely.  But this might be interesting too.

 Now we need a similar explanation about why Rondo (and the offense) excelled when Perk was in the middle. Was he a special case as well?
...
You mean 2008, 2010?

Here... read these... they might help explain it for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Garnett
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_pierce
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Allen

... Little known fact that when Kendrick Perkins was playing for the Boston Celtics, they also had three guys towards the tail end of Hall-of-Fame careers.  The most prominent member, Kevin Garnett, was arguably the greatest player of his generation.  They also use to have a guy by the name of Ray Allen who was widely known as the most dangerous "pure shooter" in the league.  His shooting skills and floor-spreading ability negated Rondo's weaknesses.


Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #113 on: February 01, 2013, 03:01:13 PM »

Offline scaryjerry

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1628
  • Tommy Points: 72
Danny Ainge pretty much nailed it on weei yesterday

“He single-handedly carried us many nights, and I don’t see how people don’t see that,” said Ainge. “When people say we’re going to be better without Rondo or the team’s going to do better without him, it’s silly. He’s a great, great player, and he’s proven that time and time again. The guy’s been MVP of probably four or five series over the last five years — not just individual games here and there or triple-doubles on national TV. He’s been the best player in a series against LeBron James. He’s been the best player in a series against Derrick Rose. He’s been the best player in three games of an NBA Finals.”

to those of you thinking we will be better without danny....he thinks youre silly

nuff said
And then Ainge promptly called ever GM in the league and tried to see if anyone was willing to trade for the "MVP".

Highly doubt it....there was no motive behind what he said in this case its just a fact...he knows no one will take him when hes injured.....the best card he couldve played would be we have a great chance to be better...raising the value of the actual players who are assets now

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #114 on: February 01, 2013, 03:01:29 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22674
  • Tommy Points: 1042
I don't understand why Rondo is on too high a pedestal just because many people (myself included) believe this team cannot win a title without him.

How many title contenders can afford to lose an All-Star caliber player and still be capable of winning an NBA Championship?

It's not like Boston had a big margin for error to begin with.
Based on some poster's expectations that the C's will improve without his play (for a variety of reasons ranging from defense, Rondo dominating the ball too much, and improved transition), I think they don't view him as an all-star caliber player.

Rondo's an all-star caliber player.  He is.  His skill is passing.  IF you have great shooters or a dominant inside guy who needs lobs, you could use ROndo's passing.   Rondo isn't an all-up star like a Chris Paul or Kevin Durant.  He's an all-star in the same way Tyson Chandler is an all-star.  Chandler's skill is defense.  Chandler absolutely is an all-star player, but he's got a very specific skill.  You couldn't build a team around Chandler just due to the fact he was an all-star.  Granted, you might build your defense around his specific skillset.  No team will ever win a title with Tyson Chandler as the best player, though.  But if you combine all-star Tyson Chandler with a superstar like DIrk, you have a chance.    Rondo's in that category.

  This is really a non-issue. If the Celts win a title with Rondo as their best player (like they almost did in 2010), you'll spend the following year or two regularly posting that Rondo wasn't really their best player. Problem solved.

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #115 on: February 01, 2013, 03:02:38 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10993
  • Tommy Points: 664
I don't understand why Rondo is on too high a pedestal just because many people (myself included) believe this team cannot win a title without him.

How many title contenders can afford to lose an All-Star caliber player and still be capable of winning an NBA Championship?

It's not like Boston had a big margin for error to begin with.
Based on some poster's expectations that the C's will improve without his play (for a variety of reasons ranging from defense, Rondo dominating the ball too much, and improved transition), I think they don't view him as an all-star caliber player.

Rondo's an all-star caliber player.  He is.  His skill is passing.  IF you have great shooters or a dominant inside guy who needs lobs, you could use ROndo's passing.   Rondo isn't an all-up star like a Chris Paul or Kevin Durant.  He's an all-star in the same way Tyson Chandler is an all-star.  Chandler's skill is defense.  Chandler absolutely is an all-star player, but he's got a very specific skill.  You couldn't build a team around Chandler just due to the fact he was an all-star.  Granted, you might build your defense around his specific skillset.  No team will ever win a title with Tyson Chandler as the best player, though.  But if you combine all-star Tyson Chandler with a superstar like DIrk, you have a chance.    Rondo's in that category.

  This is really a non-issue. If the Celts win a title with Rondo as their best player (like they almost did in 2010), you'll spend the following year or two regularly posting that Rondo wasn't really their best player. Problem solved.
Rondo wasn't our best player in 2010.  Kevin Garnett was.

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #116 on: February 01, 2013, 03:03:59 PM »

Offline scaryjerry

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1628
  • Tommy Points: 72
I don't understand why Rondo is on too high a pedestal just because many people (myself included) believe this team cannot win a title without him.

How many title contenders can afford to lose an All-Star caliber player and still be capable of winning an NBA Championship?

It's not like Boston had a big margin for error to begin with.
Based on some poster's expectations that the C's will improve without his play (for a variety of reasons ranging from defense, Rondo dominating the ball too much, and improved transition), I think they don't view him as an all-star caliber player.

Rondo's an all-star caliber player.  He is.  His skill is passing.  IF you have great shooters or a dominant inside guy who needs lobs, you could use ROndo's passing.   Rondo isn't an all-up star like a Chris Paul or Kevin Durant.  He's an all-star in the same way Tyson Chandler is an all-star.  Chandler's skill is defense.  Chandler absolutely is an all-star player, but he's got a very specific skill.  You couldn't build a team around Chandler just due to the fact he was an all-star.  Granted, you might build your defense around his specific skillset.  No team will ever win a title with Tyson Chandler as the best player, though.  But if you combine all-star Tyson Chandler with a superstar like DIrk, you have a chance.    Rondo's in that category.

  This is really a non-issue. If the Celts win a title with Rondo as their best player (like they almost did in 2010), you'll spend the following year or two regularly posting that Rondo wasn't really their best player. Problem solved.
Rondo wasn't our best player in 2010.  Kevin Garnett was.

Wrong. KG sucked in 2010...probably his worst year as a celtic..

Game 7 finals
Gasol 18 rebounds
KG: 3

Rondo...the best celtic in that game and those playoffs...KG the reason we lost that game 7. deal with it.

He limped around most of that year and I thought he was done....which makes what he has done since all the more remarkable
« Last Edit: February 01, 2013, 03:12:26 PM by scaryjerry »

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #117 on: February 01, 2013, 03:05:37 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22674
  • Tommy Points: 1042
The rest of this season will be fascinating.  There's a solid chance we play better without him.  I imagine Ray Allen is giddy right now... the tail end of this season could completely vindicate him and prove him right about Rajon.   

I'd hope Ray would have enough tact to not be "giddy" over a season ending injury to a past teammate.

It sure seems like that's the mentality around here though.

Well said.

I cannot seem to fathom why some would be happy we just lost our most talented player.  It's disturbing.
I still think our two most talented players are Pierce and KG.  Hence why the rest of this season will be so fascinating.  I'm not happy we lost Rondo.  I love Rondo.  Plus, Rondo actually had a bit of trade value before the injury and now we're likely going to be stuck in mediocrity for years.

I do think Rondo is supremely overrated on this forum, though.  And I do think Ray bailed on this team at least in part, because he didn't feel Rondo's skill set warranted his growing role.  There's a lot of smoke surrounding this concept that the team doesn't necessarily enjoy the Rondo-centric offense... so I'm fascinated to see how they react without him.  That's not to say I'd prefer this scenario to one with a healthy Rondo on board.

One of my biggest complaints about this season is that the roster was completely dysfunctional.  I had preferred a pipedream scenario where we used a collection of some undersized SG's,  underwhelming PF's, and draft picks to land a big man who could fix the roster logic.  But in a way, Rondo's injury solves many of the issues this Roster had.  There's no longer 4 undersized shooting guards splitting 50 minutes.  Rondo's injury pushes the PG-sized Bradley to PG... it pushes our biggest guard, Lee, into a permanent starting role.  It ensures that Terry remains as a 6th man where he belongs.  And it makes it so that one of our most talented players, Barbosa, doesn't unfairly get stuck with random DNP's due to guard-clog (these guys now have an additional 43 minutes of playing time that they can all gobble up).  It frees up our 4th best player, Jeff Green, to actually use his talents instead of trying to conform into something he's not.  It will give us the option of actually trying to post-up once in a while without the concern of taking the ball out of Rondo's hands, clogging up the middle for a Rondo drive... or watching as Rondo's defenders slack off him and double the dude trying to post up.   What that means is... Rondo's injury will go a long way to defining roles.  This team might actually stand a chance of maximizing their talents.  Our best two defensive guards will be starting with very little chance of them getting stuck with awkward size mismatches (like Bradley being stuck guarding Joe JOhnson or something).    All of these things weren't possible when your 3rd best player happens to be an all-star whose best attribute is "passing" and worst attribute is "shooting".   We loaded up on scorers (not shooters) in the offseason... now we get to actually USE those scorers as they should be used.

Would I prefer trading all the underperformers for something like Josh Smith, Marcin Gortat, Demarcus Cousins, Pau Gasol, etc... and rolling through the rest of the season with a Rondo-lead offense now featuring a influx of legit starting big man talent?.... Absolutely.  But this might be interesting too.

 Now we need a similar explanation about why Rondo (and the offense) excelled when Perk was in the middle. Was he a special case as well?
...
You mean 2008, 2010?

Here... read these... they might help explain it for you:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kevin_Garnett
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_pierce
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ray_Allen

... Little known fact that when Kendrick Perkins was playing for the Boston Celtics, they also had three guys towards the tail end of Hall-of-Fame careers.  The most prominent member, Kevin Garnett, was arguably the greatest player of his generation.

  Don't forget 2009. And it's a little known fact (at least to some people) that KG being arguably the greatest player of his generation doesn't mean that he didn't spend 2010 playing pretty poorly because his knee was so bad. Too bad Danny doesn't have your insight, we could have kept Ray and won games by showing opponents wiki pages instead of playing the games.

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #118 on: February 01, 2013, 03:16:58 PM »

Online droopdog7

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1972
  • Tommy Points: 133
Here is the definitive commentary on Rondo, after which you can go ahead and lock this thread.

I am on record as one that thinks Rondo is overrated.  That for every guady statistic associated with his name, there are also some negative linked to Rondo that aren't captured by stats.  The bias in how many view Rondo is associated with the habits of many to counts the obvious stats while ignoring what isn't captured as conclusively.

Would I say that this team is better without Rondo?  I would not go that far.  Afterall, he IS a talent that can do many things that others on the team simply cannot do.  His plus stats absolutely mean something.  But I don't think the void he has left will be as large as some would think.

What I would say with some degree of certainty is that this team would be better if they were able to secure a big man for Rondo in a trade.  That is, that is a third option down the line. 

Obviously it might depend on what comes in return.  I feel like most fans feel it has to be a star.  The reality, unfortunately, is that I don't think many GM's around the league view Rondo that highly.  DA knows this.  He has been trying to sell high for the last few years but nobody is biting. 

If any of the trade rumors are true, how many other true stars would receive seemingly a little interest as Rondo has?  If the best ten players in the league were put on the market, teams would be lining up to trade for them.  But not for Rondo.

So in the end, I am not saying we are better without Rondo.  I just think the Celts would be significantly better if they could pick up a another talent in return for him.

Re: Rondo is being put too high on a pedestal
« Reply #119 on: February 01, 2013, 04:18:38 PM »

Offline BballTim

  • Sam Jones
  • **********************
  • Posts: 22674
  • Tommy Points: 1042
Here is the definitive commentary on Rondo, after which you can go ahead and lock this thread.

I am on record as one that thinks Rondo is overrated.  That for every guady statistic associated with his name, there are also some negative linked to Rondo that aren't captured by stats.  The bias in how many view Rondo is associated with the habits of many to counts the obvious stats while ignoring what isn't captured as conclusively.

  If you think this is somehow more definitive than any other posts in the thread you're using a new definition of the word.

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsBlog Forums.

Welcome to CelticsBlog