Re: Celtics Post-Game Thread (Collection of past threads)

[bobheckler]

BobH,

Taunting. I heard the headlines in all the L.A. papers read: "Rondo Speaks!!!"

Sam

sam,

Thanks.

He did speak. 14 points, 11 assists, 5 steals and a W is pretty loud.

bob

[jeb]

The Celtics were very aggressive with their mouths and their bodies last night.

I am a student of body language and it was clear to me early that they thought they were going to win.

I was delighted to see EFFORT and HEART and a serious MEAN STREAK

[jeb]

espn doodes just ragging on the celts...old old old Kobe kobe kobe the mamba was not there. The game didnt mean anything.

Well i think somebody forgot to tell the players on both sides last night.

[jeb]

seriously you should hear this guy...sounds like martini lover. wow some serious hate.

[Sam]

Jeb,

ESPN is a prime example of media tools who are only interested in the commercial glamor of the sport. They couldn't care less about small increments of improvement in a team. They would laugh until their gold teeth glisten at our glimmer thread. They only care about the big spash because the big splash is news.

And, if the small increments should ultimately add up to something major (such as a championship that they swore would never happen), they turn the "upset" into a big splash. Anything to create news that can sell.

They are among the chief catalysts that have turned pro basketball primarily into an entertainment form. They couldn't care less about the inherent beauty of the game because they're not well enough informed to parlay it into something of commercial value. It's so much more simple to latch onto "easy news"—the sensational. Give them a juicy rape any day over a well-played game. They'll get a month or two of "easy news" out of the juicy rape.

The main value they have, in my estimation, is that they can get close to the "action." If one can sift through the superficiality and biases in their reporting, the carefully filtered insights can occasionally be revealing. Their conclusions, though, are seldom revealing as far as I'm concerned.

Sam

[sinus007]

Jeb,

ESPN is a prime example of media tools who are only interested in the commercial glamor of the sport. They couldn't care less about small increments of improvement in a team. They would laugh until their gold teeth glisten at our glimmer thread. They only care about the big spash because the big splash is news.

And, if the small increments should ultimately add up to something major (such as a championship that they swore would never happen), they turn the "upset" into a big splash. Anything to create news that can sell.

They are among the chief catalysts that have turned pro basketball primarily into an entertainment form. They couldn't care less about the inherent beauty of the game because they're not well enough informed to parlay it into something of commercial value. It's so much more simple to latch onto "easy news"—the sensational. Give them a juicy rape any day over a well-played game. They'll get a month or two of "easy news" out of the juicy rape.

The main value they have, in my estimation, is that they can get close to the "action." If one can sift through the superficiality and biases in their reporting, the carefully filtered insights can occasionally be revealing. Their conclusions, though, are seldom revealing as far as I'm concerned.

Sam

Sam,
Couldn't agree with you more. Thanks.

AK

[bobheckler]

Jeb,

ESPN is a prime example of media tools who are only interested in the commercial glamor of the sport. They couldn't care less about small increments of improvement in a team. They would laugh until their gold teeth glisten at our glimmer thread. They only care about the big spash because the big splash is news.

And, if the small increments should ultimately add up to something major (such as a championship that they swore would never happen), they turn the "upset" into a big splash. Anything to create news that can sell.

They are among the chief catalysts that have turned pro basketball primarily into an entertainment form. They couldn't care less about the inherent beauty of the game because they're not well enough informed to parlay it into something of commercial value. It's so much more simple to latch onto "easy news"—the sensational. Give them a juicy rape any day over a well-played game. They'll get a month or two of "easy news" out of the juicy rape.

The main value they have, in my estimation, is that they can get close to the "action." If one can sift through the superficiality and biases in their reporting, the carefully filtered insights can occasionally be revealing. Their conclusions, though, are seldom revealing as far as I'm concerned.

Sam

sam,

"Laugh until their gold teeth glisten". Oh, that is classic prose. You can't write stuff that good. Oh wait a second, you just did.

bob

[steve3344]

espn doodes just ragging on the celts...old old old Kobe kobe kobe the mamba was not there. The game didnt mean anything.

Well i think somebody forgot to tell the players on both sides last night.

ESPN "doodes" didn't rag on the celts. Kenny Smith still predicted they would go to the Finals. Barkley disagreed.

[steve3344]

Sheed is an every other game player at this stage. He played great against Sacramento, badly last night.

His technical was PURE BS....that is either a double technical or nothing. NBA refs continue to show how god awful they are.

Big Win....I'll take it.

Now lets go to Portland and take one without Brandon Roy on the court and head home 3-1.

According to the Herald, you will probably be seeing Roy tonight:

"The Blazers are listing Roy as questionable, but he’ll likely play. It will be a tough one for the Celts on the second night of a back-to-back. Hitting the glass and keeping Portland from extra chances will be key."

Also, I have been reading contradicting things about whether Nate will even be with the team tonight. One says yes, one says no. If we have no Nate (and obviously no Eddie) and now TA is hurt for a few days at least, we will be VERY thin at back-up guard. Quis will have to play a lot.

[jeb]

steve33


I was listening to a smarmy podcast and the guy was subbing for Hollinger and trust me they didnt just rag on the team it seemed of a personal nature.

Guy was getting a serious kick from our misfortune.

I heard Kenny say that...

[jeb]

Sam

I agree and I dont just think that happens in sporting news...take the concept high and wide. Very well said as always.

[jeb]

Man it would be nice to prove them all wrong with good old celtic team ball.

[babyskyhook]

seriously you should hear this guy...sounds like martini lover. wow some serious hate.

If the podcast was done from the basement of his mom's house it probably was him. were there any pots and pans clanking in the background ?

[Pumpsie Green]

There are lots of kudos for the players for not only last night's game but also the game before when they clawed their way to victory. Just refused to lose.
One thing that sticks in my craw is the rebounding. We have a poor rebounding team-but we have a very good rebounder who has not seen ANY playing time for the past 13 games-Sheldon Williams. Why do we have to put up with Rasheed Wallace's horrible play, or Glen Davis' inconsistent play, or Brian Scalabrine at all, when we have available to us a guy whose numbers are very similar to those of our starting center per 48 minutes? What is Doc thinking? Why isn't it Williams out there more often to give Garnett a blow? I think this is a huge mistake.

[bobheckler]

There are lots of kudos for the players for not only last night's game but also the game before when they clawed their way to victory. Just refused to lose.
One thing that sticks in my craw is the rebounding. We have a poor rebounding team-but we have a very good rebounder who has not seen ANY playing time for the past 13 games-Sheldon Williams. Why do we have to put up with Rasheed Wallace's horrible play, or Glen Davis' inconsistent play, or Brian Scalabrine at all, when we have available to us a guy whose numbers are very similar to those of our starting center per 48 minutes? What is Doc thinking? Why isn't it Williams out there more often to give Garnett a blow? I think this is a huge mistake.

pumpsie,

I'm not down on Scal like you are (in fact, I value what he does) but I've been wondering about the disappearance of Shelden Williams for a while now.

As Alice said "curiouser and curiouser".

bob

[jeb]

Pumpsie

what's shaking? i concur. Shelden can board. We need rebounding. Whisky tango foxtrot? Maybe he will play tonight due to us being stretched so thin.

I was very encouraged by ticket's rebounding last night specialy in traffic. Perk too.

[Pumpsie Green]

Pumpsie

what's shaking? i concur. Shelden can board. We need rebounding. Whisky tango foxtrot? Maybe he will play tonight due to us being stretched so thin.

I was very encouraged by ticket's rebounding last night specialy in traffic. Perk too.

Yup. Agree on both counts. Watching the game it didn't seem to me that Perk was playing well until well into the fourth quarter. But when I looked at the stat sheet, here he is with 13 points and 14 rebounds.
Seems that when Davis came back Williams lost all of his minutes. I don't think he is hurt.....and we need rebounding. What gives Doc?

[jeb]

Perk just ate Gasol last night. (in the 4th)

I hope we see Shelden tonight. I also hope this landry kid can board a bit. KG looked way better last night and was grabbing rebounds in traffic with great confidence. That to me was the best part of a great game for the c's. Man we needed that.

[Jerry Tarkanian]

Jeb,

I'm with you in that. Believe lack of rebounding to be our biggest concern, and amazes me with the roster we have.

Have always felt the boards are a direct reflection of intensity.

A healthy KG would aid in that aspect.

[cowens/oldschool]

Alot of glimmers,we would have won bigger as many of our key pieces played hardnosed and well,Sheed did everything he could do to keep Lakers in the game.Was anyone as annoyed as I was watching us go through a terrible offensive stretch in 4th leading Lakers to take lead and Doc refused to call a timeout?Thankfully we prevailed in a great overall game,but what was that,he should have stopped that run and regrouped way earlier,whole team was confused......any thoughts?

Watching Magic vs Mavs,Haywood cannot keep up with Dwight Howard,whos so much more athletic and quicker jumper,surprising thought Haywood was a better defender than I'm seeing.Makes me appreciate what Perk can do to Howard,it takes more than just a big body,love the Beast!!!Games not over Dallas making a run.

[Sam]

I'll give you the answer I have. Whether you like the answer may be another story.

I've been wondering about Williams too. But my theory is that is taking the longer view in giving Davis Williams' minutes. Glen's a more well-rounded player. Williams rebounds, but so does Glen. In fact, he's one of the Celtics' leading offensive rebounders since he returned (possibly the overall leader during that period). Glen also created more well-rounded offense, both from the outside and bulling his way into the basket. Glen's also got a better defensive identity, in that he's an expert in taking charges and pushing taller opponents away from the basket. Glen's also a vastly better ballhandler than Williams, who sometimes gets fumblitis, whereas Glen has really good hands.

I think Doc feels there's more upside in giving Glen every chance to regain the chemistry he had in the playoffs last season because we've probably seen the best Williams can be with this team.

Also, I think Doc wants to limit the rotation to 10 players, which is a lot when the team needs to get back into sync.

As for Scal, either one "gets" him or not, so I'm not going to bother going into that again. Suffice it to say that Brian and Williams now represent two viable emergency bigs, which is not a bad thing.

Sam

[cowens/oldschool]

Spoke too soon,even though Howard had some great blocks and put up good stats,he couldn't carry Magic,who got outexecuted in 4th led by Kidd.

[Sam]

So much for Las Vegas odds. Three-point underdogs according to the self-appointed pundits. Second night of a really tough back-to-back. Shorthanded in the backcourt. Pierce no better than 50-50 to play. Tony Allen missing the previous game. KG’s knee still a question mark. Arrived in Portland at 3:00 a.m.

What can a team do in a situation like that? Get out to a quick start; never look back; make the opponent play constant catchup; mount runs of 9-1 in the second quarter and 15-2 in the fourth quarter; put the defensive clamps on in the final quarter; be so disruptive defensively that the opponents record only 7 assists the entire game; exert the killer instinct; conserve the starters’ minutes; and win by 20.

The game got a little sloppy late, and the Celts wound up with 14 turnovers. But, when the issue was seriously in doubt, their first half turnover total was only three. Another indication of offensive smoothness is my favorite stat: assists as a ratio to made field goals; and it was a very high 69% in this one. The ball movement was far better than it has been. But, while the made the extra pass and availed themselves of second and third options, they didn’t over-pass in this one.

This was really a team effort, with various players contributing in different areas. KG was 7-9 from the field and recorded all seven of his rebounds in the first half. (He didn’t play a heck of a lot in the second half, but he looked pretty fluid and energetic at both ends.) Perk had nine boards, Rondo recorded 11 assists. Paul was hampered by his bandaged sore thumb, but he played very solid defense. In the third quarter, Glen Davis personally blunted a Blazers comeback (they had whittled the Celts’ lead down from 22 to 9) by taking two consecutive charges. Tony and Marquis alternated in taking the ball to the hoop. Sheed was immense on defense and really helped to lubricate the offense with his four assists.

But the game ball once again goes to Old Man Ray, who scored 21. He shot 9-14, including 3-7 from the arc. But it wasn’t the number of buckets he scored as much as their timing, which just kept taking the air out of the Blazers’ sails whenever they seemed to be getting a second wind.

Last night, the will to win crystallized. Tonight, the Celts displayed sustained aggressiveness. And, most important (in my estimation), they’re obviously developing a much better “feel” for one another and, as a result, they’re beginning to execute more like a well-coordinated team at both ends of the floor. The coaches will have plenty of areas for improvement; but things are definitely beginning to move in the right direction since the all-star break. Gawwwwly gee, this is me being astounded. Heinsohn says the swagger is back. Marshall says the passion is back. Whatever the case, it's all pretty good right now.

Sam

[steve3344]

Enjoy this one tonight guys. The men in green deserve all our accolades. It was a dominating effort, first time in a long time (especially on the road). But beating Denver in Denver on Sunday will be a monumental task. Don't know if we could have done what the Nugs did in Cleveland the other night, beating a Cavs team that even had Lebron turning in a 43-15-13 performance, first time since Pete Maravich in 1974 that anyone had 40-15-10.

And on a side note (even though it has nothing to do with Sam's Blazer post-game thread) we all thought we could make up some ground on the Cavs when, in back-to-back games a month ago, they lost both their point guards, Mo Williams and Delonte West, to fairly serious injuries. All they did in that time was go 11-0 (!) and leave us in the dust for best record in the East. Lebron's averaged 11.4 assists per game his last 10 games. Taking over the PG duties like that when both those guys went down cinched another MVP award for him.

But I still think if we can get healthy and have Nate be the explosive back-up PG I've seen him be as a Knick (and keep his head on straight), we can beat anyone in the playoffs, including the Cavs.

Things are indeed looking up as Sam predicted they would with that well-timed All-Star break rest. Hope 36 hours is enough time for PP to treat his various ailments. We're definitely going to need a big effort from him if we're going to beat Denver. A 4-0 trip would be beyond sweet.

[Sam]

Correction. My mantra was "See me in April." Meaning not that I was predicting great things come April but that it made sense to give this team an opportunity to regroup and not make such hasty and prematurely dire predictions in the meantime. It just seemed common sense, given the psychology of players, that the all-star break might be a perfect opportunity to refocus. So far so good, but you'll never catch me making outright predictions. I'm a hoper, not a predicter. I think predictions are ill-advised.

Sam

[Sponsored content]