ESPN "experts" underestimating the C's...again!

[action781]

Also, interesting to note --

100% (10/10) analysts chose NYK; 0% (0/10) analysts chose Boston

Lines from sportsbook:  NYK -350 odds; Boston +250 odds.


Meanwhile, in the 2-7 Lakers-Spurs (Spurs -700, Lakers +1000) matchup across the Mississippi...  There was one analyst who chose the Kobe-less Lakers to win that series.

Is it still so unsurprising that 0/10 took Boston?

[CelticD]

celtic fans need to stop gassin themselves. jus cuz the name on the front of the jersey says CELTICS, it doesnt mean they cant lose to any team except miami. i dont think espn experts are underestimating the c's, the celtics truly havent shown the consistency to contend wit the top teams in the nba.

do i think they can win? yep. will they? doubt it.

[CelticG1]

What have the Knicks proved over the years except 1 good regular season?

They've been an embarrasment in the playoffs.

Theu are going to be heavily relying on J kidd, Copeland, kenyn martin and JR smith ib these playoffs... oooooo no

[PhoSita]

Have they earned the right this year to be selected to beat anyone?

They have been a .500 team all year. They are 17-24 against teams that have made the playoffs. They are 14-27 on the road. For the first time since 2007 they have a negative point differential. Their vaunted team defense has taken a step backwards this year while the offense hasn't improved.

Rondo and Sullinger are out for the playoffs. KG has been on a gimpy leg for weeks. None of the guards have stepped up their game considerably and we have a bad rebounding team outside of KG. And on top of all that our bench consists of an NBDL call up center who might be one of the worst players in the league, currently, 3 Chinese league castoffs that weren't good enough to make NBA rosters before the season, a guard cast aside by the Wizards because he has an attitude and horrible shot selection, two guys recovering from heart surgery and a 35 year old combo guard that has been playing pitifully lately and unfortunately is very streaky so he could be playing poorly for a while.

I'm the hugest of huge Celtics fans and I can see that. What are national broadcasters supposed to see differently that would give them any indication the Celtics will do anything in these playoffs?

Preach, man.  All of that was gospel.

[CelticG1]

Have they earned the right this year to be selected to beat anyone?

They have been a .500 team all year. They are 17-24 against teams that have made the playoffs. They are 14-27 on the road. For the first time since 2007 they have a negative point differential. Their vaunted team defense has taken a step backwards this year while the offense hasn't improved.

Rondo and Sullinger are out for the playoffs. KG has been on a gimpy leg for weeks. None of the guards have stepped up their game considerably and we have a bad rebounding team outside of KG. And on top of all that our bench consists of an NBDL call up center who might be one of the worst players in the league, currently, 3 Chinese league castoffs that weren't good enough to make NBA rosters before the season, a guard cast aside by the Wizards because he has an attitude and horrible shot selection, two guys recovering from heart surgery and a 35 year old combo guard that has been playing pitifully lately and unfortunately is very streaky so he could be playing poorly for a while.

I'm the hugest of huge Celtics fans and I can see that. What are national broadcasters supposed to see differently that would give them any indication the Celtics will do anything in these playoffs?

Preach, man.  All of that was gospel.

I love how you can say that but favor the knicks who are throwing a parade for having one decent regular season after peeing down their leg over the past several years.

If your argument is looking at records than have fun with that.

If you've seen the way guys like KG and Pierce have played in the playoffs over the last 15 years and counting well than you should be expecting something a little more

[CelticConcourse]

What's ESPN? Boston in 6.

[D.o.s.]

What have the Knicks proved over the years except 1 good regular season?

They've been an embarrasment in the playoffs.

Theu are going to be heavily relying on J kidd, Copeland, kenyn martin and JR smith ib these playoffs... oooooo no

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

What have we done in the regular season that inspires any real confidence--aside from the loyalty we all feel as Celtics fans?

We're going to be heavily reliant on Chris Wilcox, Shav, Terrence Williams and Jordan Crawford... ooooooo no.

[CelticConcourse]

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

Disagree.

[D.o.s.]

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

Disagree.

Fair, that was underexplained.

What a team accomplishes in a prior season's playoffs has little reflection on it's performance in the next season's playoffs... with the added caveat that the team's roster would have to stay largely the same, since otherwise you could just bring up the 06-07 Celtics and say "no man! no!"

For example, I'd bring up the Grizzlies bouncing the Spurs two years ago, then bringing the Thunder to seven games. Based on that, there's no way you'd expect them to be beaten by the Clips in the first round... but it happened.

[CelticConcourse]

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

Disagree.

Fair, that was underexplained.

What a team accomplishes in a prior season's playoffs has little reflection on it's performance in the next season's playoffs... with the added caveat that the team's roster would have to stay largely the same, since otherwise you could just bring up the 06-07 Celtics and say "no man! no!"

For example, I'd bring up the Grizzlies bouncing the Spurs two years ago, then bringing the Thunder to seven games. Based on that, there's no way you'd expect them to be beaten by the Clips in the first round... but it happened.

Well, you could look at the Celtics who have gotten to at least the ECSF five years in a row. (four before last year) I'd expect them to get to at least the ECSF this year as well.

In five years, Atlanta has never gotten past the ECSF, and one would expect them to get out in the First or Second round again.

LeBron's teams have reached at least the ECSF, for six straight years and I wouldn't be surprised if that happened again.

New York has lost in four first rounds, including two consecutive first-round losses in the two past years. One would expect them to lose in the first-round again.

Maybe this is superstition, but it looks to me like Miami will win round 1, Boston will win round 1, Atlanta will lose in rounds 1 or 2, and New York will lose in round 1. But then again, "analysts" are picking the Knicks to beat the Celtics. I'll trust the men in green.

PS: I know how dumb this sounds, but...

[igorsure]

Celtics can win, Celtics can lose, both of them are real.
The only things I hope and want - It could be real fight!

Remember 2009-2010 playoff without KG? Remember 10 OT Chicago series and 7th game lose to Orlando? I'll buy this kind of playoff even if we'll lose.

[nickagneta]

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

Disagree.

Fair, that was underexplained.

What a team accomplishes in a prior season's playoffs has little reflection on it's performance in the next season's playoffs... with the added caveat that the team's roster would have to stay largely the same, since otherwise you could just bring up the 06-07 Celtics and say "no man! no!"

For example, I'd bring up the Grizzlies bouncing the Spurs two years ago, then bringing the Thunder to seven games. Based on that, there's no way you'd expect them to be beaten by the Clips in the first round... but it happened.

Well, you could look at the Celtics who have gotten to at least the ECSF five years in a row. (four before last year) I'd expect them to get to at least the ECSF this year as well.

In five years, Atlanta has never gotten past the ECSF, and one would expect them to get out in the First or Second round again.

LeBron's teams have reached at least the ECSF, for six straight years and I wouldn't be surprised if that happened again.

New York has lost in four first rounds, including two consecutive first-round losses in the two past years. One would expect them to lose in the first-round again.

Maybe this is superstition, but it looks to me like Miami will win round 1, Boston will win round 1, Atlanta will lose in rounds 1 or 2, and New York will lose in round 1. But then again, "analysts" are picking the Knicks to beat the Celtics. I'll trust the men in green.

This is the equivalent of "it rained yesterday and rained the day before so obviously it will rain today." Too many variables to think like that. For instance if you look at Miami as a team, there is a fairly obvious change in their playoff performance pre and post Lebron. The Clippers, I am sure, will have a different playoff expectation and performance pre and post Chris Paul.

The experts and the bookmakers don't look at what these teams did in previous playoff years because it doesn't matter. What matters is the here and now of each team and that is what playoff predictions and outside objective predictions are based on.

[CelticConcourse]

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

Disagree.

Fair, that was underexplained.

What a team accomplishes in a prior season's playoffs has little reflection on it's performance in the next season's playoffs... with the added caveat that the team's roster would have to stay largely the same, since otherwise you could just bring up the 06-07 Celtics and say "no man! no!"

For example, I'd bring up the Grizzlies bouncing the Spurs two years ago, then bringing the Thunder to seven games. Based on that, there's no way you'd expect them to be beaten by the Clips in the first round... but it happened.

Well, you could look at the Celtics who have gotten to at least the ECSF five years in a row. (four before last year) I'd expect them to get to at least the ECSF this year as well.

In five years, Atlanta has never gotten past the ECSF, and one would expect them to get out in the First or Second round again.

LeBron's teams have reached at least the ECSF, for six straight years and I wouldn't be surprised if that happened again.

New York has lost in four first rounds, including two consecutive first-round losses in the two past years. One would expect them to lose in the first-round again.

Maybe this is superstition, but it looks to me like Miami will win round 1, Boston will win round 1, Atlanta will lose in rounds 1 or 2, and New York will lose in round 1. But then again, "analysts" are picking the Knicks to beat the Celtics. I'll trust the men in green.

This is the equivalent of "it rained yesterday and rained the day before so obviously it will rain today." Too many variables to think like that. For instance if you look at Miami as a team, there is a fairly obvious change in their playoff performance pre and post Lebron. The Clippers, I am sure, will have a different playoff expectation and performance pre and post Chris Paul.

The experts and the bookmakers don't look at what these teams did in previous playoff years because it doesn't matter. What matters is the here and now of each team and that is what playoff predictions and outside objective predictions are based on.

Well then, how does one predict an "upset", when a clearly inferior team beats a clearly superior team?

[Lightskinsmurf]

What have the Knicks proved over the years except 1 good regular season?

They've been an embarrasment in the playoffs.

Theu are going to be heavily relying on J kidd, Copeland, kenyn martin and JR smith ib these playoffs... oooooo no

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

What have we done in the regular season that inspires any real confidence--aside from the loyalty we all feel as Celtics fans?

We're going to be heavily reliant on Chris Wilcox, Shav, Terrence Williams and Jordan Crawford... ooooooo no.

Its not based on the regular season either. This team has always shown that it raises its level of play during the playoffs. Even with new faces coming in and out. As long as KG and Pierce are here it continues to happen. Why should I expect this year to be any different, celtics in 6.

 Also let me clarify the opponent we're facing has alot to do with my prediction. Not at all a believer in the knicks. If I thought they were the real deal then I might be singing a different tune.

[D.o.s.]

Performance in the playoffs is not based on past success.

Disagree.

Fair, that was underexplained.

What a team accomplishes in a prior season's playoffs has little reflection on it's performance in the next season's playoffs... with the added caveat that the team's roster would have to stay largely the same, since otherwise you could just bring up the 06-07 Celtics and say "no man! no!"

For example, I'd bring up the Grizzlies bouncing the Spurs two years ago, then bringing the Thunder to seven games. Based on that, there's no way you'd expect them to be beaten by the Clips in the first round... but it happened.

Well, you could look at the Celtics who have gotten to at least the ECSF five years in a row. (four before last year) I'd expect them to get to at least the ECSF this year as well.

In five years, Atlanta has never gotten past the ECSF, and one would expect them to get out in the First or Second round again.

LeBron's teams have reached at least the ECSF, for six straight years and I wouldn't be surprised if that happened again.

New York has lost in four first rounds, including two consecutive first-round losses in the two past years. One would expect them to lose in the first-round again.

Maybe this is superstition, but it looks to me like Miami will win round 1, Boston will win round 1, Atlanta will lose in rounds 1 or 2, and New York will lose in round 1. But then again, "analysts" are picking the Knicks to beat the Celtics. I'll trust the men in green.

This is the equivalent of "it rained yesterday and rained the day before so obviously it will rain today." Too many variables to think like that. For instance if you look at Miami as a team, there is a fairly obvious change in their playoff performance pre and post Lebron. The Clippers, I am sure, will have a different playoff expectation and performance pre and post Chris Paul.

The experts and the bookmakers don't look at what these teams did in previous playoff years because it doesn't matter. What matters is the here and now of each team and that is what playoff predictions and outside objective predictions are based on.

Well then, how does one predict an "upset", when a clearly inferior team beats a clearly superior team?

Part of what makes it an upset is that you couldn't have seen it coming. The more-favored team was, dare I say, "upset" by the lower seed.


re: smurf

I will absolutely agree that the Celtics definitely play harder during the playoffs. I think New York has show that they're the real deal during this season, though.