Are they as good as their record??

I am really tired of this question. We heard it all last year. Now we have a completely different team, minus one big component, and we are hearing this question again. There is something about a Brad Stevens coached team. Special, that is the word I am going to use. How many times are they going to have to answer this question. And, my question is, Is Cleveland as bad as they look and will they just turn it on at the end of the season???? Sorry, the statement by Ty Lue, saying he did not care where they came in as long as they made the playoffs. Gee, does his owner think that? Coast all season, and think you can pour it on in post season and win big? Mentally, this is a terrible way to approach the season.

I just am tired of having to sit there and listen to people tell me they are waiting for it all to fall apart for the Celtics. As far as I am concerned, YES THEY ARE THIS GOOD>

Who says we’re not that good Rosie? Hoops guys I talk to think we’re great and are jealous.

Even the notorious Stephen A Smith said on his radio show that Cavs are not a lock to get to Finals this year. He said he’s not sure they can get past Washington or Toronto and then if they do, this Boston team is coming and he talked of our #1 defense and that even though we have Kyrie and Al, the heart and soul of the team is Brown and Tatum, he called them 2 gifted wings that love to defend as much as play offense.

Cleveland is not as bad as they look because of their playoff experience. However, they are looking stale and close to put a fork in them time. LeBron could abandon Cleveland. Isaiah could be poached by the Nets or who knows. They are probably the caliber of either Pierce/KG their last Boston year or the one before.

I think LeBron has been to seven straight finals, so he's still the king of good job, good effort second places. Love at center is a joke. Everyone is supposed to forget that he is injury prone and never known for defense or that Crowder has turned into a scrub.

That's the Peter Principle. The Celtics are cooking because Tatum and Brown are innately qualified to become champions. Irving and Horford could be great in the playoffs, as good as anyone. Pierce went off.

Rosalie is correct on another thread. You compare and contrast 2008 to this year's model and it's fairly close. So it's just a matter if the youngins blossom a bit more, Rozier, Smart, Theis, Baynes and Morris have the potential to fill specialty roles to back up the pure talent just like P.J., Leon, Eddie and Tony did. I get what she means. Heck yeah, the Celtics are very good with a stacked roster and a shrewd gm/coach tandem.

Otherwise, let's all concede Golden State is our daddy. Because the Celtics are as legitimate a #2 threat behind them as any other team.

the Celtics play better than the individual parts because of Stevens.

we've seen it since his second year here.

how do you like that? for some reason I left Morris out, and he is beginning to prove that he is an integral part of this team and it's success going forward. Maybe I would put him where I put Baynes. Leon...........boy, we all loved Leon, it is a shame he had all those knee problems, he was a keeper if health. So, I still say, after watching LeBron explode a few times in the last week, that Cleveland is vulnerable

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I am really tired of this question. We heard it all last year. Now we have a completely different team, minus one big component, and we are hearing this question again.  There is something about a Brad Stevens coached team. Special, that is the word I am going to use.  How many times are they going to have to answer this question.    And, my question is, Is Cleveland as bad as they look and will they just turn it on at the end of the season???? Sorry, the statement by Ty Lue, saying he did not care where they came in as long as they made the playoffs. Gee, does his owner think that?  Coast all season, and think you can pour it on in post season and win big?  Mentally, this is a terrible way to approach the season.  

I just am tired of having to sit there and listen to people tell me they are waiting for it all to fall apart for the Celtics. As far as I am concerned, YES THEY ARE THIS GOOD>

True that what you say about the C's . . .  lest we forget that the 69' C's were an old and tired team that ended up in 4th place in the East, yet they won the championship against the heavily favored Lakers, Russ' final victory. Now, I'm not trying to compare the current Cavs to that Celtic team, but when you're an aging and tired team, your mindset and game-plan to compete (survive) for your championship quest is different . . . a "last man standing" survival mantra. That's how Lue and the Cavs have to perceive their situation. IMHO

That said, there's been frustration and discontent demonstrated on the sidelines by the Cavs and LeBron. They appear to be on the downside, but you can't count a team out when they have LeBron. I'd say that barring injury, the C's are better equipped than last year to contend with the Cavs. They'll still need to get by the Raptors though, who are a tough match-up. Who knows, the Raptors could get eliminated before their potential meeting with the C's . . . possibly by the Cavs. It all depends on the final standings for the match-ups. Nothing is a cakewalk or a done deal come playoffs.

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I am really tired of this question. We heard it all last year. Now we have a completely different team, minus one big component, and we are hearing this question again.  There is something about a Brad Stevens coached team. Special, that is the word I am going to use.  How many times are they going to have to answer this question.    And, my question is, Is Cleveland as bad as they look and will they just turn it on at the end of the season???? Sorry, the statement by Ty Lue, saying he did not care where they came in as long as they made the playoffs. Gee, does his owner think that?  Coast all season, and think you can pour it on in post season and win big?  Mentally, this is a terrible way to approach the season.  

I just am tired of having to sit there and listen to people tell me they are waiting for it all to fall apart for the Celtics. As far as I am concerned, YES THEY ARE THIS GOOD>

Rosalie the Celtics are definitely as good as their record. With wins over Golden State, San Antonio, Houston, OKC, Minnesota, Denver, Toronto, Cleveland, Miami, Detroit, Milwaukee and Indiana, the resume of wins with only a loss to Washington is very impressive. They have to still play N.O. and Portland.

The difficult thing to wrap your head around is the fact that Boston did a 180 in the off season and came back this year with 4 new starters, 7 rookies and 11 new players. Then they lose Allstar Gordon Hayward 5 minutes into the first game and then go on an unprecedented 16-0 run. With so much accomplished already, coach Stevens says we have to be better. I always enjoy reading the comments from the other side. They have become predictable. They usually start off with we are going beat the Celtics down and end up with, they are a really good team with a great defense and a great coach. Gee if he was coaching our team we would win. And of course the ongoing and escalating realization that Boston has a pair of very young studs.

In regards to the Cavs, I think that Lue is trying to cover for his team. But they have come out of the EC each of the last 3 years and they have the best player in the East to lean on. However their formula to start playing great basketball in the playoffs has gotten old just like the team. I watched them squander a 22 point lead to the Pacers last night because they are a heavy weight boxer with no knock out punch. There is a sense around the league that Cleveland can be had. Teams smell blood and Cleveland is the wounded animal. Cleveland will usually get the other team's best game because they are the defending EC champion. In the end a realization will set in that the Cavs cannot win without Kyrie Irving and trading him to rival Boston was not worth the questionable compensation derived. Go Nets! Clam chowder tastes best in Boston and lightning already struck once with IT.

dboss

Too far into the season for it to be a fluke.

They really are that good.

Also, IMO;

Cleveland is far better than they've looked.

Look out for Toronto if they can stay healthy.

dboss wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I am really tired of this question. We heard it all last year. Now we have a completely different team, minus one big component, and we are hearing this question again.  There is something about a Brad Stevens coached team. Special, that is the word I am going to use.  How many times are they going to have to answer this question.    And, my question is, Is Cleveland as bad as they look and will they just turn it on at the end of the season???? Sorry, the statement by Ty Lue, saying he did not care where they came in as long as they made the playoffs. Gee, does his owner think that?  Coast all season, and think you can pour it on in post season and win big?  Mentally, this is a terrible way to approach the season.  

I just am tired of having to sit there and listen to people tell me they are waiting for it all to fall apart for the Celtics. As far as I am concerned, YES THEY ARE THIS GOOD>

Rosalie the Celtics are definitely as good as their record.  With wins over Golden State, San Antonio, Houston, OKC, Minnesota, Denver,  Toronto, Cleveland, Miami, Detroit, Milwaukee and Indiana, the resume of wins with only a loss to Washington is very impressive.  They have to still play N.O. and Portland.

The difficult thing to wrap your head around is the fact that Boston did a 180 in the off season and came back this year with 4 new starters, 7 rookies and 11 new players.  Then they lose Allstar Gordon Hayward 5 minutes into the first game and then go on an unprecedented 16-0 run.  With so much accomplished already, coach Stevens says we have to be better.  I always enjoy reading the comments from the other side.  They have become predictable.  They usually start off with we are going beat the Celtics down and end up with, they are a really good team with a great defense and a great coach.  Gee if he was coaching our team we would win.  And of course the ongoing and escalating realization that Boston has a pair of very young studs.

In regards to the Cavs, I think that Lue is trying to cover for his team.  But they have come out of the EC each of the last 3 years and they have the best player in the East to lean on.  However their formula to start playing great basketball in the playoffs has gotten old just like the team.  I watched them squander a  22 point lead to the Pacers last night because they are a heavy weight boxer with no knock out punch.  There is a sense around the league that Cleveland can be had.  Teams smell blood and Cleveland is the wounded animal.  Cleveland will usually get the other team's best game because they are the defending EC champion.    In the end a realization will set in that the Cavs cannot win without Kyrie Irving and trading him to rival Boston was not worth the questionable compensation derived.  Go Nets!  Clam chowder tastes best in Boston and lightning already struck once with IT.

dboss

dboss,

I recall not long ago in another thread you maintained that the C's were not legitimate contenders . . . have you been converted, or at least modified your outlook? Just kidding, as we're all entitled to change our opinion as things change or evolve. Or maybe you really haven't, yet.

Best,

I do believe we have overachieved to a degree.  I realize too that we have won many games that we underachieved for a good portion off.  

We can win in any number of ways.  But at the end of the game the W doesn’t come with an asterisk.  

These guys are still getting use to each other.  Roles are getting more clearly defined.  We are not sneaking up on anyone anymore.  

Pretty sure there are many teams would love to have our ‘problems.”

As exciting as this season has been the future is so very very bright.


Great time to be a C’s fan.


beat

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I am really tired of this question. We heard it all last year. Now we have a completely different team, minus one big component, and we are hearing this question again.  There is something about a Brad Stevens coached team. Special, that is the word I am going to use.  How many times are they going to have to answer this question.    And, my question is, Is Cleveland as bad as they look and will they just turn it on at the end of the season???? Sorry, the statement by Ty Lue, saying he did not care where they came in as long as they made the playoffs. Gee, does his owner think that?  Coast all season, and think you can pour it on in post season and win big?  Mentally, this is a terrible way to approach the season.  

I just am tired of having to sit there and listen to people tell me they are waiting for it all to fall apart for the Celtics. As far as I am concerned, YES THEY ARE THIS GOOD>

Rosalie the Celtics are definitely as good as their record.  With wins over Golden State, San Antonio, Houston, OKC, Minnesota, Denver,  Toronto, Cleveland, Miami, Detroit, Milwaukee and Indiana, the resume of wins with only a loss to Washington is very impressive.  They have to still play N.O. and Portland.

The difficult thing to wrap your head around is the fact that Boston did a 180 in the off season and came back this year with 4 new starters, 7 rookies and 11 new players.  Then they lose Allstar Gordon Hayward 5 minutes into the first game and then go on an unprecedented 16-0 run.  With so much accomplished already, coach Stevens says we have to be better.  I always enjoy reading the comments from the other side.  They have become predictable.  They usually start off with we are going beat the Celtics down and end up with, they are a really good team with a great defense and a great coach.  Gee if he was coaching our team we would win.  And of course the ongoing and escalating realization that Boston has a pair of very young studs.

In regards to the Cavs, I think that Lue is trying to cover for his team.  But they have come out of the EC each of the last 3 years and they have the best player in the East to lean on.  However their formula to start playing great basketball in the playoffs has gotten old just like the team.  I watched them squander a  22 point lead to the Pacers last night because they are a heavy weight boxer with no knock out punch.  There is a sense around the league that Cleveland can be had.  Teams smell blood and Cleveland is the wounded animal.  Cleveland will usually get the other team's best game because they are the defending EC champion.    In the end a realization will set in that the Cavs cannot win without Kyrie Irving and trading him to rival Boston was not worth the questionable compensation derived.  Go Nets!  Clam chowder tastes best in Boston and lightning already struck once with IT.

dboss

dboss,

I recall not long ago in another thread you maintained that the C's were not legitimate contenders . . . have you been converted, or at least modified your outlook? Just kidding, as we're all entitled to change our opinion as things change or evolve. Or maybe you really haven't, yet.

Best,

Beat

I think they are a contender but I do not think they are good enough to beat Golden State.  I think any matchup with Washington, Toronto or Cleveland will be vexing.  Yes I think they are as good as their record.  But I have not been converted.  I think posters may confuse hope with expectation.  So If I state that i think they are not a legit contender to win the championship what I am really saying is that I think Golden State is the best team in the NBA.  I think Boston could get to the finals but I also think one of the 3 EC teams mentioned could knock them off.  The one thing that the Celtics do not do well is running the fast break.  They have an elite defense but their offense is compromised because they do not know how to run.  So if they are able to come out of the east and Golden State comes out of the West I think Golden state would win a 7 game series because they can play defense and they are an elite offensive team.  Golden state is #1 in scoring, fast break points, 2 point FG%, 3 point field goal % and Free throw percentage.  

dboss

While the C's cleared out nine guys, the four that remain are all big parts of the rotation including the unique assist machine Horford.

Any kind of injuries will hurt. Having Semi, Larkin, Yabusele and Nader as players 10-14 is not very inspiring. They don't seem very close to what Leon Powe or Tony Allen provided for young players. On the flip side, all those "scrubs" seem much better than former projects such as RJ Hunter, James Young and Jordan Mickey.

I think Danny should add two more vets and at least one. This team is too good to not fortify the end of the rotation.

I'm not giving up on those guys except for perhaps Nader. He seems the worst prospect of the four. Semi provides above average defense and is a good shooter. Younger players seem to all go through the yips stage. Bradley and Rozier come to mind. Those guys could shoot as rookies, but it just wasn't happening. Tatum is a rare find to have already mastered shooting in his first year.

Morris as healthy is a big lift. He is a ball hog, but in his defense, he is very good at it.

So I am basically confident in nine guys with the next four for deep bench as crap shoots roll the dice, play them if you must, but don't expect playoff upsets relying on them.

Danny needs to find a PJ Brown or Leon Powe or both, that kind of lift, to really make the Celtics a serious threat to Golden State. Or I think the C's will need GS and say Toronto to not be at their full strength. I'm not going to guarantee the Celtics as is can steamroll to the finals. I'd call it more that there are three teams who could very well make it out of the Eastern Conference. I think Washington is a pretender.

A shrewd move or two by Danny, just a bit of pruning, if he replaces the raw talent at the end of the rotation with more proven players, then the C's should make it to Golden State with better than a puncher's chance.

Right now I think the C's have mastered the puncher's chance and a move or two will solidify the Celtics for decent odds at winning it all this year.

It's all about health. We never got to see a full strength Celtics the last couple years. If everyone was healthy last year for early Spring, they could have made it to the finals. This team has much more raw talent than last year, not just Isaiah. Theis, Morris and Baynes aren't spectacular and neither are Smart or Rozier. But they might be good enough to add to the greats Kyrie and Horford and the emerging great players Tatum and Brown.

Every team not called Golden State can easily be spun as a pretender. It doesn't make it true. There is too much season left. Things can change for the better. If the C's can improve from a 34-10 start, as all Brad teams have improved as seasons move along, then that will mean the 2017-18 Celtics are in it to win it. It's not even about wins and losses because to improve on 34-10 could be an outrageous expectation. But it's about playing the right way. I still see a lot of room for Kyrie to tighten his game with more assists and less turnovers. If that happens, then buckle your seats, for #18 might be arriving much earlier than expected.

dboss wrote:

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I am really tired of this question. We heard it all last year. Now we have a completely different team, minus one big component, and we are hearing this question again.  There is something about a Brad Stevens coached team. Special, that is the word I am going to use.  How many times are they going to have to answer this question.    And, my question is, Is Cleveland as bad as they look and will they just turn it on at the end of the season???? Sorry, the statement by Ty Lue, saying he did not care where they came in as long as they made the playoffs. Gee, does his owner think that?  Coast all season, and think you can pour it on in post season and win big?  Mentally, this is a terrible way to approach the season.  

I just am tired of having to sit there and listen to people tell me they are waiting for it all to fall apart for the Celtics. As far as I am concerned, YES THEY ARE THIS GOOD>

Rosalie the Celtics are definitely as good as their record.  With wins over Golden State, San Antonio, Houston, OKC, Minnesota, Denver,  Toronto, Cleveland, Miami, Detroit, Milwaukee and Indiana, the resume of wins with only a loss to Washington is very impressive.  They have to still play N.O. and Portland.

The difficult thing to wrap your head around is the fact that Boston did a 180 in the off season and came back this year with 4 new starters, 7 rookies and 11 new players.  Then they lose Allstar Gordon Hayward 5 minutes into the first game and then go on an unprecedented 16-0 run.  With so much accomplished already, coach Stevens says we have to be better.  I always enjoy reading the comments from the other side.  They have become predictable.  They usually start off with we are going beat the Celtics down and end up with, they are a really good team with a great defense and a great coach.  Gee if he was coaching our team we would win.  And of course the ongoing and escalating realization that Boston has a pair of very young studs.

In regards to the Cavs, I think that Lue is trying to cover for his team.  But they have come out of the EC each of the last 3 years and they have the best player in the East to lean on.  However their formula to start playing great basketball in the playoffs has gotten old just like the team.  I watched them squander a  22 point lead to the Pacers last night because they are a heavy weight boxer with no knock out punch.  There is a sense around the league that Cleveland can be had.  Teams smell blood and Cleveland is the wounded animal.  Cleveland will usually get the other team's best game because they are the defending EC champion.    In the end a realization will set in that the Cavs cannot win without Kyrie Irving and trading him to rival Boston was not worth the questionable compensation derived.  Go Nets!  Clam chowder tastes best in Boston and lightning already struck once with IT.

dboss

dboss,

I recall not long ago in another thread you maintained that the C's were not legitimate contenders . . . have you been converted, or at least modified your outlook? Just kidding, as we're all entitled to change our opinion as things change or evolve. Or maybe you really haven't, yet.

Best,

Beat

I think they are a contender but I do not think they are good enough to beat Golden State.  I think any matchup with Washington, Toronto or Cleveland will be vexing.  Yes I think they are as good as their record.  But I have not been converted.  I think posters may confuse hope with expectation.  So If I state that i think they are not a legit contender to win the championship what I am really saying is that I think Golden State is the best team in the NBA.  I think Boston could get to the finals but I also think one of the 3 EC teams mentioned could knock them off.  The one thing that the Celtics do not do well is running the fast break.  They have an elite defense but their offense is compromised because they do not know how to run.  So if they are able to come out of the east and Golden State comes out of the West I think Golden state would win a 7 game series because they can play defense and they are an elite offensive team.  Golden state is #1 in scoring, fast break points, 2 point FG%, 3 point field goal % and Free throw percentage.  

dboss

dboss.  That was not from me.  

Sand said it and added best at the end


beat

beat wrote:

dboss wrote:

Sandpd wrote:

dboss wrote:

RosalieTCeltics wrote:I am really tired of this question. We heard it all last year. Now we have a completely different team, minus one big component, and we are hearing this question again.  There is something about a Brad Stevens coached team. Special, that is the word I am going to use.  How many times are they going to have to answer this question.    And, my question is, Is Cleveland as bad as they look and will they just turn it on at the end of the season???? Sorry, the statement by Ty Lue, saying he did not care where they came in as long as they made the playoffs. Gee, does his owner think that?  Coast all season, and think you can pour it on in post season and win big?  Mentally, this is a terrible way to approach the season.  

I just am tired of having to sit there and listen to people tell me they are waiting for it all to fall apart for the Celtics. As far as I am concerned, YES THEY ARE THIS GOOD>

Rosalie the Celtics are definitely as good as their record.  With wins over Golden State, San Antonio, Houston, OKC, Minnesota, Denver,  Toronto, Cleveland, Miami, Detroit, Milwaukee and Indiana, the resume of wins with only a loss to Washington is very impressive.  They have to still play N.O. and Portland.

The difficult thing to wrap your head around is the fact that Boston did a 180 in the off season and came back this year with 4 new starters, 7 rookies and 11 new players.  Then they lose Allstar Gordon Hayward 5 minutes into the first game and then go on an unprecedented 16-0 run.  With so much accomplished already, coach Stevens says we have to be better.  I always enjoy reading the comments from the other side.  They have become predictable.  They usually start off with we are going beat the Celtics down and end up with, they are a really good team with a great defense and a great coach.  Gee if he was coaching our team we would win.  And of course the ongoing and escalating realization that Boston has a pair of very young studs.

In regards to the Cavs, I think that Lue is trying to cover for his team.  But they have come out of the EC each of the last 3 years and they have the best player in the East to lean on.  However their formula to start playing great basketball in the playoffs has gotten old just like the team.  I watched them squander a  22 point lead to the Pacers last night because they are a heavy weight boxer with no knock out punch.  There is a sense around the league that Cleveland can be had.  Teams smell blood and Cleveland is the wounded animal.  Cleveland will usually get the other team's best game because they are the defending EC champion.    In the end a realization will set in that the Cavs cannot win without Kyrie Irving and trading him to rival Boston was not worth the questionable compensation derived.  Go Nets!  Clam chowder tastes best in Boston and lightning already struck once with IT.

dboss

dboss,

I recall not long ago in another thread you maintained that the C's were not legitimate contenders . . . have you been converted, or at least modified your outlook? Just kidding, as we're all entitled to change our opinion as things change or evolve. Or maybe you really haven't, yet.

Best,

Beat

I think they are a contender but I do not think they are good enough to beat Golden State.  I think any matchup with Washington, Toronto or Cleveland will be vexing.  Yes I think they are as good as their record.  But I have not been converted.  I think posters may confuse hope with expectation.  So If I state that i think they are not a legit contender to win the championship what I am really saying is that I think Golden State is the best team in the NBA.  I think Boston could get to the finals but I also think one of the 3 EC teams mentioned could knock them off.  The one thing that the Celtics do not do well is running the fast break.  They have an elite defense but their offense is compromised because they do not know how to run.  So if they are able to come out of the east and Golden State comes out of the West I think Golden state would win a 7 game series because they can play defense and they are an elite offensive team.  Golden state is #1 in scoring, fast break points, 2 point FG%, 3 point field goal % and Free throw percentage.  

dboss

dboss.  That was not from me.  

Sand said it and added best at the end


beat

Oh boy sorry for that.