So we aren't as good as Golden State?

by **beat** Fri Nov 17, 2017 10:49 am

Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.

by **KyleCleric** Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:21 am

Celtics just wore them down. They've got to be tough to play against. Every time you make a run they come back. Physical on both ends. High effort on both ends. Good size, length, athleticism and depth. Stevens is able to pace his key offensive players by bringing tough defensive players off the bench.

by **red16russ11** Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:33 am

I thought Kerr played his starters too much against us. When they got that big lead, he perhaps should have kept Livingston, Young, Casspi, McGee and West in the game. It's tough playing 35 minutes against our defense.
Just an observation.

by **kdp59** Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:42 am

Ainge built this team to at least compete with GS for sure.

I am not ready to say we can beat them in a playoff series, we are a pretty young team still.

but we can hang at least and all the GS players complaints about this and that tells me they must have some concern about us. I mean if you KNOW you are that much better, you just give the other team credit for a win and know that you will get them back the next time.

by **cowens/oldschool** Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:02 pm

beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.

by **beat** Fri Nov 17, 2017 12:28 pm

cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.

Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

by **wideclyde** Fri Nov 17, 2017 4:18 pm

Last night the Cs were the better team. Next time they play it should be a good game again.

Both teams are very good and could face each other in the playoffs.

by **swish** Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:02 pm

Somebody always wins - last night was a 1950's shooting display by both sides - ugh.

swish

by **k_j_88** Fri Nov 17, 2017 7:48 pm

I'll take a signature win with ZERO asterisks (Durant, Curry, Thompson, and Green all played, plus GSW had their full roster to throw against us).

Golden State is still the team I'd give the edge to. Two titles in 3 years and incredible offensive firepower makes them hard to bet against. If you're asking me now if I think the Celtics could win a 7 game series against the Warriors, I'd say it's not very likely but not impossible.

Boston, unlike most teams, has the defenders to challenge Golden State. We can neutralize their offensive prowess by sheer effort and determination. Plus, our length helps. After scoring 28 in the 1st QTR, GSW never scored more than 21 points in any of the 3 remaining QTRs. Draymond was 3-11. Curry was 3-14. Klay was 5-18. I've said it before and I'll say it again: defense is not a fluke! We held a team averaging 119 to just 88, and 88 is even better than our average OPP PPG of 94.

And it also seems like every player in the rotation is motivated to impact the game on the defensive end. Usually guys on most teams are looking for their shot. But the Celtics seem to not only take pride in, but relish the challenge of inflicting defensive pressure.

KJ

by **cowens/oldschool** Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:34 am

k_j_88 wrote:I'll take a signature win with ZERO asterisks (Durant, Curry, Thompson, and Green all played, plus GSW had their full roster to throw against us).

Golden State is still the team I'd give the edge to. Two titles in 3 years and incredible offensive firepower makes them hard to bet against. If you're asking me now if I think the Celtics could win a 7 game series against the Warriors, I'd say it's not very likely but not impossible.

Boston, unlike most teams, has the defenders to challenge Golden State. We can neutralize their offensive prowess by sheer effort and determination. Plus, our length helps. After scoring 28 in the 1st QTR, GSW never scored more than 21 points in any of the 3 remaining QTRs. Draymond was 3-11. Curry was 3-14. Klay was 5-18. I've said it before and I'll say it again: defense is not a fluke! We held a team averaging 119 to just 88, and 88 is even better than our average OPP PPG of 94.

And it also seems like every player in the rotation is motivated to impact the game on the defensive end. Usually guys on most teams are looking for their shot. But the Celtics seem to not only take pride in, but relish the challenge of inflicting defensive pressure.

KJ

True and it sure is great to see, we've brought defensive force back in vogue!!

by **Phil Pressey** Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:34 am

There are videos that claim Golden State makes a lot of illegal picks. There are question marks about Steph Curry as a clutch player. Irving is known for beating them in the Finals. I don't understand why Cleveland traded Kyrie to us. That was pretty dumb. Up there with No No Nannette for Babe Ruth. That's the first universal law for GM'S. Be very careful trading within the division.

Maybe Brown and Tatum can alternate Big Three type games. Horford has somehow become a legend in real time. Irving is clearly a Big Three check mark.

I'd hold off on using the Hayward exemption if there's any way he can return for the playoffs.

I've come around to thinking Smart is indispensable for this year's chances. If he walks, he walks.

Maybe Danny can trim the edges and bring in one good final piece.

We need a shooter, although Larkin looks like a mini-Delonte. I am drinking green kool-aid. Golden State doesn't look as invincible as last year. Durant scares me. He's a form of LeBron. Curry, Thompson and Green don't scare me anymore.

The Celtics have the edge in coach and team cohesion. Durant is busy having a metaphysical crisis. He just wants to be loved. Smart, Brown and Tatum are legit for defense.

Our offense should get a nice bump once Kyrie heals his face. I'm still mad at Baynes.

We're clearly not as good as Golden State. We are better. We won't shoot that bad again if I had to guess. We have quality depth they can't match. They have no money left. They can only go downhill. Granted, they did look invincible.

by **cowens/oldschool** Sat Nov 18, 2017 11:37 am

beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

by **bobheckler** Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:05 pm

cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

Others miss more but not with such regularity and predictability (19.2% last 5 games, 26.8% season-to-date, 35.1% career-to-date).

He was 0-7 in the GSW game. It's hard to say nice things about 0-7 and I would be remiss if I didn't notice it and mention it. He also had 3 assists and 3 TOs. Neither of those numbers, for a point guard playing 31 minutes, is noteworthy. I give full credit to his defensive impact (we held the #1 offensive team in the league, averaging 119ppg, to 88 points) and his emotional leadership, it's his shooting that the 0-7 number goes to.

In my opinion, people who are suggesting that I am unfairly harping on his shooting woes are deliberately trying to ignore the 800# gorilla in the room. He is an abysmal shooter of Biblical proportions, and always has been. We can appreciate all the other things he brings to the team, and I do and we do, but talking about those things and omitting 0-7 after he went 1-8 the game before that, 3-10 the game before that, 3-16 the game before that and 3-11 the game before that is hard for me to justify. When 3-10 is the best you've shot after 167 minutes in 5 games, and with 52fgas, that's a slump worth mentioning.

bob

.

by **cowens/oldschool** Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:11 pm

bob plus 1

and its amazing that our teams chemistry and defense is so good that somehow we have overcome his historic shooting woes and still kept this streak alive.

by **Shamrock1000** Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:20 pm

bobheckler wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

Others miss more but not with such regularity and predictability (19.2% last 5 games, 26.8% season-to-date, 35.1% career-to-date).

He was 0-7 in the GSW game. It's hard to say nice things about 0-7 and I would be remiss if I didn't notice it and mention it. He also had 3 assists and 3 TOs. Neither of those numbers, for a point guard, is noteworthy. I give full credit to his defensive impact (we held the #1 offensive team in the league, averaging 119ppg, to 88 points) and his emotional leadership, it's his shooting that the 0-7 number goes to.

In my opinion, people who are suggesting that I am unfairly harping on his shooting woes are deliberately trying to ignore the 800# gorilla in the room. He is an abysmal shooter of Biblical proportions, and always has been. We can appreciate all the other things he brings to the team, and I do and we do, but talking about those things and omitting 0-7 after he went 1-8 the game before that, 3-10 the game before that, 3-16 the game before that and 3-11 the game before that is hard for me to justify. When 3-10 is the best you've shot after 167 minutes in 5 games, and with 52fgas, that's a slump worth mentioning.

bob

.

Will be interesting to see if people's willingness to overlook Smart's bad shooting continues once we have our first losing streak

by **beat** Sat Nov 18, 2017 12:43 pm

Shamrock1000 wrote:
bobheckler wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

Others miss more but not with such regularity and predictability (19.2% last 5 games, 26.8% season-to-date, 35.1% career-to-date).

He was 0-7 in the GSW game. It's hard to say nice things about 0-7 and I would be remiss if I didn't notice it and mention it. He also had 3 assists and 3 TOs. Neither of those numbers, for a point guard, is noteworthy. I give full credit to his defensive impact (we held the #1 offensive team in the league, averaging 119ppg, to 88 points) and his emotional leadership, it's his shooting that the 0-7 number goes to.

In my opinion, people who are suggesting that I am unfairly harping on his shooting woes are deliberately trying to ignore the 800# gorilla in the room. He is an abysmal shooter of Biblical proportions, and always has been. We can appreciate all the other things he brings to the team, and I do and we do, but talking about those things and omitting 0-7 after he went 1-8 the game before that, 3-10 the game before that, 3-16 the game before that and 3-11 the game before that is hard for me to justify. When 3-10 is the best you've shot after 167 minutes in 5 games, and with 52fgas, that's a slump worth mentioning.

bob

.

Will be interesting to see if people's willingness to overlook Smart's bad shooting continues once we have our first losing streak

So here it is....

Anticipating a loss and going to blame it on Smart?

We shall see just what factors cause the loss when it happens. We win as a team and if and when we loose same goes. I don't think anyone is overlooking his poor shooting but it is obvious when he is on the court we are a better team statistically overall than when he is not and there are plenty of stats that confirm that.

beat

by **Shamrock1000** Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:00 pm

beat wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
bobheckler wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

Others miss more but not with such regularity and predictability (19.2% last 5 games, 26.8% season-to-date, 35.1% career-to-date).

He was 0-7 in the GSW game. It's hard to say nice things about 0-7 and I would be remiss if I didn't notice it and mention it. He also had 3 assists and 3 TOs. Neither of those numbers, for a point guard, is noteworthy. I give full credit to his defensive impact (we held the #1 offensive team in the league, averaging 119ppg, to 88 points) and his emotional leadership, it's his shooting that the 0-7 number goes to.

In my opinion, people who are suggesting that I am unfairly harping on his shooting woes are deliberately trying to ignore the 800# gorilla in the room. He is an abysmal shooter of Biblical proportions, and always has been. We can appreciate all the other things he brings to the team, and I do and we do, but talking about those things and omitting 0-7 after he went 1-8 the game before that, 3-10 the game before that, 3-16 the game before that and 3-11 the game before that is hard for me to justify. When 3-10 is the best you've shot after 167 minutes in 5 games, and with 52fgas, that's a slump worth mentioning.

bob

.

Will be interesting to see if people's willingness to overlook Smart's bad shooting continues once we have our first losing streak
So here it is....

Anticipating a loss and going to blame it on Smart?

We shall see just what factors cause the loss when it happens. We win as a team and if and when we loose same goes. I don't think anyone is overlooking his poor shooting but it is obvious when he is on the court we are a better team statistically overall than when he is not and there are plenty of stats that confirm that.

beat

Wasn't meant as a knock on Smart, but rather as a comment on how we as fans view things, i.e. that winning cures all ills.

by **Shamrock1000** Sat Nov 18, 2017 1:30 pm

Shamrock1000 wrote:
beat wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
bobheckler wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

Others miss more but not with such regularity and predictability (19.2% last 5 games, 26.8% season-to-date, 35.1% career-to-date).

He was 0-7 in the GSW game. It's hard to say nice things about 0-7 and I would be remiss if I didn't notice it and mention it. He also had 3 assists and 3 TOs. Neither of those numbers, for a point guard, is noteworthy. I give full credit to his defensive impact (we held the #1 offensive team in the league, averaging 119ppg, to 88 points) and his emotional leadership, it's his shooting that the 0-7 number goes to.

In my opinion, people who are suggesting that I am unfairly harping on his shooting woes are deliberately trying to ignore the 800# gorilla in the room. He is an abysmal shooter of Biblical proportions, and always has been. We can appreciate all the other things he brings to the team, and I do and we do, but talking about those things and omitting 0-7 after he went 1-8 the game before that, 3-10 the game before that, 3-16 the game before that and 3-11 the game before that is hard for me to justify. When 3-10 is the best you've shot after 167 minutes in 5 games, and with 52fgas, that's a slump worth mentioning.

bob

.

Will be interesting to see if people's willingness to overlook Smart's bad shooting continues once we have our first losing streak
So here it is....

Anticipating a loss and going to blame it on Smart?

We shall see just what factors cause the loss when it happens. We win as a team and if and when we loose same goes. I don't think anyone is overlooking his poor shooting but it is obvious when he is on the court we are a better team statistically overall than when he is not and there are plenty of stats that confirm that.

beat

Wasn't meant as a knock on Smart, but rather as a comment on how we as fans view things, i.e. that winning cures all ills.

Actually Beat, despite his shooting woes, I am a smart fan. I dont think i have ever posted anything listing or focusing on his wesknesses, as many other posters have. So I dont get why you're calling me out. For the record though, I do respect the opinions of those who have commented on Smart's shooting - if you can't call out an nba player shooting 26% on 3 and 27% on 3, with an efg% of 32%, then who can you call out?

by **beat** Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:11 pm

Shamrock1000 wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
beat wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
bobheckler wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

Others miss more but not with such regularity and predictability (19.2% last 5 games, 26.8% season-to-date, 35.1% career-to-date).

He was 0-7 in the GSW game. It's hard to say nice things about 0-7 and I would be remiss if I didn't notice it and mention it. He also had 3 assists and 3 TOs. Neither of those numbers, for a point guard, is noteworthy. I give full credit to his defensive impact (we held the #1 offensive team in the league, averaging 119ppg, to 88 points) and his emotional leadership, it's his shooting that the 0-7 number goes to.

In my opinion, people who are suggesting that I am unfairly harping on his shooting woes are deliberately trying to ignore the 800# gorilla in the room. He is an abysmal shooter of Biblical proportions, and always has been. We can appreciate all the other things he brings to the team, and I do and we do, but talking about those things and omitting 0-7 after he went 1-8 the game before that, 3-10 the game before that, 3-16 the game before that and 3-11 the game before that is hard for me to justify. When 3-10 is the best you've shot after 167 minutes in 5 games, and with 52fgas, that's a slump worth mentioning.

bob

.

Will be interesting to see if people's willingness to overlook Smart's bad shooting continues once we have our first losing streak
So here it is....

Anticipating a loss and going to blame it on Smart?

We shall see just what factors cause the loss when it happens. We win as a team and if and when we loose same goes. I don't think anyone is overlooking his poor shooting but it is obvious when he is on the court we are a better team statistically overall than when he is not and there are plenty of stats that confirm that.

beat

Wasn't meant as a knock on Smart, but rather as a comment on how we as fans view things, i.e. that winning cures all ills.

Actually Beat, despite his shooting woes, I am a smart fan. I dont think i have ever posted anything listing or focusing on his wesknesses, as many other posters have. So I dont get why you're calling me out. For the record though, I do respect the opinions of those who have commented on Smart's shooting - if you can't call out an nba player shooting 26% on 3 and 27% on 3, with an efg% of 32%, then who can you call out?

I have to admit I read it right but interpreted it wrong.

So actually in rereading it I "see the point"

Thing is another "fan" on here pointed out how many of Smarts poor shots and turnovers led to the other team scoring an easy basket. ( yet he was a plus 15 when on the court )

I'm not sure but that seems a bit nitpicking.
Personally unless we take every missed shot by every player and critique it as much as his misses and see what happens because of that miss seems a rather unsubstantiated claim. If we are back and set up on defense doesn't matter to me who missed in our prior possession.

So I apologize for seeming to call you out.

beat

by **Shamrock1000** Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:44 pm

beat wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
beat wrote:
Shamrock1000 wrote:
bobheckler wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:
cowens/oldschool wrote:
beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

speaking of offensive woes, imagine if Smart only shot 25% last night, that would have been huge, is that too much to wish for? Last night a lot of his bad misses or turnovers led to real quick points for Warriors running game.
Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.
Sure. Nobody not another damn player put up a bad shot or had a turnover that led to a GS hoop

I saw the entire game as did all of us that watched.

Can't understand why he is the only one picked on when others miss more or turn it over more?

beat

I'm not really a stat guy, but its obvious by the eye test and his stats that on this team nobody misses more, I will agree that his defense is impactful, right now hes TA with a better handle and vision and even worse shooting....guess it can only go up from here, it can't get any worse I hope.

Others miss more but not with such regularity and predictability (19.2% last 5 games, 26.8% season-to-date, 35.1% career-to-date).

He was 0-7 in the GSW game. It's hard to say nice things about 0-7 and I would be remiss if I didn't notice it and mention it. He also had 3 assists and 3 TOs. Neither of those numbers, for a point guard, is noteworthy. I give full credit to his defensive impact (we held the #1 offensive team in the league, averaging 119ppg, to 88 points) and his emotional leadership, it's his shooting that the 0-7 number goes to.

In my opinion, people who are suggesting that I am unfairly harping on his shooting woes are deliberately trying to ignore the 800# gorilla in the room. He is an abysmal shooter of Biblical proportions, and always has been. We can appreciate all the other things he brings to the team, and I do and we do, but talking about those things and omitting 0-7 after he went 1-8 the game before that, 3-10 the game before that, 3-16 the game before that and 3-11 the game before that is hard for me to justify. When 3-10 is the best you've shot after 167 minutes in 5 games, and with 52fgas, that's a slump worth mentioning.

bob

.

Will be interesting to see if people's willingness to overlook Smart's bad shooting continues once we have our first losing streak
So here it is....

Anticipating a loss and going to blame it on Smart?

We shall see just what factors cause the loss when it happens. We win as a team and if and when we loose same goes. I don't think anyone is overlooking his poor shooting but it is obvious when he is on the court we are a better team statistically overall than when he is not and there are plenty of stats that confirm that.

beat

Wasn't meant as a knock on Smart, but rather as a comment on how we as fans view things, i.e. that winning cures all ills.

Actually Beat, despite his shooting woes, I am a smart fan. I dont think i have ever posted anything listing or focusing on his wesknesses, as many other posters have. So I dont get why you're calling me out. For the record though, I do respect the opinions of those who have commented on Smart's shooting - if you can't call out an nba player shooting 26% on 3 and 27% on 3, with an efg% of 32%, then who can you call out?
I have to admit I read it right but interpreted it wrong.

So actually in rereading it I "see the point"

Thing is another "fan" on here pointed out how many of Smarts poor shots and turnovers led to the other team scoring an easy basket. ( yet he was a plus 15 when on the court )

I'm not sure but that seems a bit nitpicking.
Personally unless we take every missed shot by every player and critique it as much as his misses and see what happens because of that miss seems a rather unsubstantiated claim. If we are back and set up on defense doesn't matter to me who missed in our prior possession.

So I apologize for seeming to call you out.

beat

Thanks Beat, and worries Beat. No shame in standing up for a player you like.

by **Phil Pressey** Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:49 pm

I like Smart. I like that this guy Beat has been sticking up for him. He also changed my mind quite a bit on Morris.

Why Marcus Smart may shoot 0/7 and still have plus-15 in the game?

by **Sandpd** Sat Nov 18, 2017 5:08 pm

Phil Pressey wrote:There are videos that claim Golden State makes a lot of illegal picks. There are question marks about Steph Curry as a clutch player. Irving is known for beating them in the Finals. I don't understand why Cleveland traded Kyrie to us. That was pretty dumb. Up there with No No Nannette for Babe Ruth. That's the first universal law for GM'S. Be very careful trading within the division.

Maybe Brown and Tatum can alternate Big Three type games. Horford has somehow become a legend in real time. Irving is clearly a Big Three check mark.

I'd hold off on using the Hayward exemption if there's any way he can return for the playoffs.

I've come around to thinking Smart is indispensable for this year's chances. If he walks, he walks.

Maybe Danny can trim the edges and bring in one good final piece.

We need a shooter, although Larkin looks like a mini-Delonte. I am drinking green kool-aid. Golden State doesn't look as invincible as last year. Durant scares me. He's a form of LeBron. Curry, Thompson and Green don't scare me anymore.

The Celtics have the edge in coach and team cohesion. Durant is busy having a metaphysical crisis. He just wants to be loved. Smart, Brown and Tatum are legit for defense.

Our offense should get a nice bump once Kyrie heals his face. I'm still mad at Baynes.

We're clearly not as good as Golden State. We are better. We won't shoot that bad again if I had to guess. We have quality depth they can't match. They have no money left. They can only go downhill. Granted, they did look invincible.

My thoughts on some of your post:

" I don't understand why Cleveland traded Kyrie to us. That was pretty dumb. Up there with No No Nannette for Babe Ruth. That's the first universal law for GM'S. Be very careful trading within the division."

I remember listening to Shaq postulating about the trade on the Inside the NBA show with Ernie, Shaq, Kenny, and Charles about a month ago. Kyrie was leary of LBJ not committing (still uncommitted) to re-signing long term since he and the Cavs were left out to dry when LBJ bolted on them before. This time around, as contract talks started up, Kyrie spoke with the Cav's front office, which he thought was in confidence, for reassurances that there wouldn't be a deja vous before he would sign another contract. That didn't happen and leaks, most likely by the front office, made Kyrie out as the disgruntled party who was unreasonable. It wasn't until after those leaks, which distorted the truth and made Kyrie look like the heavy, that he wanted out and demanded a trade. He felt betrayed by the Cavs.

Faced with having an unhappy player who would most likely bolt after his contract expired, and with LBJ's status still up in the air, the Cavs made the deal with the C's. From their perspective, regardless of being in the same division, it looked to be a dual purpose opportunity for them. With, at the time a very desirable asset, the Nets' pick, they got some insurance for the future in case LBJ bolts again. They also got, albeit an injured IT, but who had played on a par with Kyrie, Crowder, Zizic, Boston’s 2018 first-round pick, and the Miami Heat’s 2020 second-round pick. Would there have been better deals in the offering from other teams? Maybe, but what Ainge dangled in front of them was enticing enough for them to bite. Other teams don't have the bargaining chips that Ainge had. So, I would not say that it was dumb of them to make the trade as they got (salvaged) a pretty good deal after "shooting themselves in the foot" by messing up during contract talks with Kyrie. Not until after IT returns and knowing what materializes from the Nets pick, can we fully evaluate the trade. Some pundits thought the Cavs got the better end of the deal.

"I'd hold off on using the Hayward exemption if there's any way he can return for the playoffs."

Whether Hayward can return for the playoffs, the exemption is there to use. If Hayward was able to return for the playoffs, which I don't think will happen, the only issue the C's would have to deal with, is to find room on the roster. They can use that exemption w/o worrying about Haywood's return to playing status, regardless.

"Maybe Danny can trim the edges and bring in one good final piece.

We need a shooter, although Larkin looks like a mini-Delonte."

When Ainge decides to make a move, it will be interesting to see which way he'll opt to go. From my perspective, the two biggest and desirable needs for the C's are 1. another sniper or someone who can consistently put the ball in the hoop and 2. another big. Depending where they're at when playoffs come around (unforeseen injuries) and who's available, the 1st option might create a logjam (duplication) if/when Hayward returns. Then again, anticipating a fully recovered Hayward returning by next season at the latest, Ainge will likely consider the exemption as just a 1 year rental a la Rasheed Wallace to better their chances now. Who knows, whoever it is may fill both of those needs. Trading future draft picks, a player, or a combination of both, and not to forget that exemption may land an even bigger fish. It's a delicate balance - attending to the current needs of the team, but also keeping an eye out for the future, which is getting closer to being now.

"I've come around to thinking Smart is indispensable for this year's chances. If he walks, he walks."

I still haven't given up on Smart. Even with his bottom of the NBA FG shooting. In my view, the pluses far outweigh the minuses. He fills an important role, actually two - usually taking on the toughest defensive assignment, whether it'd be at the 1, 2, or 3 spot, and running the offense while he's on the court. He's the pit bull who has no fear and keeps on attacking. He's not a primary player to go to for hoops and whatever points he gets should be considered a bonus. As mentioned in other posts, there have been many other players who couldn't shoot, but were still an integral part of the team, e.g., KC Jones, Satch Sanders, and Jim Loscutoff, to name a few. I know, they played in a past era, but the keys to winning basketball hasn't changed. If I took the time, I'm sure I could come up with some more contemporary players who fit that role player description, oh yeah, Dennis Rodman just came to mind. To make it such a big deal is rather bemusing since the C's are on a 14 game winning tear in spite of Smart's shooting or lack thereof. Can anyone deny that he is also a part of the reason why the C's have been winning?

From the onset of the season, I felt that it would be another year or two before the C's were legitimate contenders. But the silver lining from the Hayward injury has been the added playing time afforded to the development of their young players, particularly, Brown and Tatum. They have answered the call and what I had thought would be another step up into the next tier for the C's, is now a more possible, but not probable shot at the title this year. They are for real and legitimate contenders now.

Onward and forward in the quest for the Holy Grail!

by **dboss** Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:18 pm

The title of this thread poised the question where the Celtics stand vs Golden State. We can compete with Golden State and any other team in the NBA.

Are the Celtics a better team than Golden State? Absolutely not. At least not yet. But the Celtics are closing the gap.

Dboss

by **beat** Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:42 pm

dboss wrote:The title of this thread poised the question where the Celtics stand vs Golden State. We can compete with Golden State and any other team in the NBA.

Are the Celtics a better team than Golden State? Absolutely not. At least not yet. But the Celtics are closing the gap.

Dboss

Not buying it. We are as good.

And the last game we were better!

beat

by **dboss** Sat Nov 18, 2017 6:53 pm

beat wrote:Updating this one...

GOLDEN STATE (Last four years)

Vs. BOSTON 4-3 +1.3 differential
Vs. Rest of the NBA 214-40 +11.1 differential

Seems over the past 7 games against them we have been quite competitive.

This season the rest of the NBA is 14-89 (.136) when scoring 96 points or fewer points.

The Celtics are now 5-0.

As for the game.

With 5 minutes to go in the third we were down 17 points. I was about to the point of seeing if my Marcus was ready to go as I had a long drive home ahead.

At the 1:33 to go Mark in the third Smart scores his only point on a foul shot to tie it at 66 and a few moments later Tatum scores to give us the lead. Smart was on the court the entire time of this run.

Bash him all you want.

But if he's not out there period we don't win that game. There are a few reasons why Golden State shot poorly during that time. And Smart was a huge factor.

Great game to be at. Well worth the money although there was a stretch when I had my doubts.

Imagine what we could be if we could overcome some offensive woes?
14 in a row just ain't worth bitchin about in any way shape or form IMHO

beat

Ps. Can't wait to read the comments from the other side.

Many people watch games and different people see different things. I thought we do not win the game without Jaylen Brown.

As for your beloved Marcus, he stunk the place up with a foul level of play that is shameful.   Did he contribute to the win? Absolutely but it would be an extreme notion to believe that he was anything other than a minor actor in this award winning play.

Who is to say that if Marcus played less that somebody else could have stepped up and made a difference?

I see that you never criticize how poorly Marcus plays because you like him so much. When it come to Marcus Smart I think that you lack objectivity.

Marcus almost lost the game. That is not bashing. That is being honest about what actually happened. In spite of one's leaning towards a particular player each deserves due praise and due criticism.

Marcus will not be with the Celtics next year based on his play over the past 3 years and 16 games. I hope that is not the case but if it is I move on to the next guy.

Dboss

by Sponsored content

So we aren't as good as Golden State?

So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?

Re: So we aren't as good as Golden State?