POST GAME BROOKLYN

Steve,

Interesting article. This is basically the point I was making at the end of last night's Game On! thread.

While we're watching and worrying about what's wrong with the team, the fact that the Knicks and Nets could legitimately be on the upswing seems to have been overlooked.

The Nets were pushing us around last night the way we used to push others around. We've got some work to do and I think it starts with our most important player not getting himself suspended yet again. If we're no longer going to be tougher, we've got to have our collection of fairly talented players be smarter.

Regards

NYCelt wrote:Steve,

Interesting article. This is basically the point I was making at the end of last night's Game On! thread.

While we're watching and worrying about what's wrong with the team, the fact that the Knicks and Nets could legitimately be on the upswing seems to have been overlooked.

The Nets were pushing us around last night the way we used to push others around. We've got some work to do and I think it starts with our most important player not getting himself suspended yet again. If we're no longer going to be tougher, we've got to have our collection of fairly talented players be smarter.

Regards

One telling point the article made was the line "the bench is shaky." There was one preseason article (I forget where I read it) that compared every team's bench and proclaimed Boston's reserves the best bench in the NBA, with the Clippers a close second. So what happened in one month? Our guys are seriously underperforming. Jeff Green has, for the most part, played tentative or unproductive. Maybe he's not all the way back from his heart surgery. I'll give him the benefit of a doubt for another month or two. Courtney Lee has forgotten how to make a three-pointer. He's better than Paul Pierce lifetime at just under 40% and just can't make 'em so far. Where did his stroke go? He's made five ALL YEAR, shooting under 25%. We expected solid back-up center play (at least on the defensive end and rebounding) from Darko and he's taken his (limited) talents to South Yugoslavia. Chris Wilcox needs more minutes - he's gotta play at least 20 a night and only getting about 13. He's the only legit back-up big we have. Jason Collins is a zero. Barbosa's been a breath of fresh air and is a real offensive weapon. Too bad he's not a point guard. And Bradley's at least a month away from contributing. So "the best bench in the NBA" is now a "shaky" bench. Boy is that a surprise.

NY,

Regardless of the Knicks or Nets or any team on the up swing...if we cannot beat better teams....that means we are not very good.

We are 4-6 against 500+ record teams.

We have more then work......we need a legit #5....KG does not have the physical body to get pounded for 82 games......and we need more height so we can throw KG and another 7 footer on the court at the same time.

Time and record will tell........but there are too many 100+ games opponents are racking up against us.

112288

I agree with 112288.

We must get a legit big.

We are getting pushed around the court and pounded on the glass.

Dboss

Someone (Mike or Scal) asked Tommy if he was ever on or coached a team that added so many players during the off-season, and Tommy said,

NEVER!!

We have 9 "new" players that did not finish with the team last season and 6 of the new players are in the 10-man rotation. I expect it to be painful to watch at times. This game was one of those nights.

Who's Next!?!

gyso

It is true that chemistry willl take more time. However that does not change the fact that we are weak in the paint.

With Darko gone we need to make a move and why not make a big splash.

Dboss

Gyso

2007 - 2008 BOSTON CELTIC TEAM - NEW PLAYERS ADDED - I COUNT 9
OUR RECORD - 66 - 16 - NBA CHAMPIONS!

1) KEVIN GARNETT
2) RAY ALLEN
3) JAMES POSSEY
4) PJ BROWN
5) GREG PRUITT
6) SCOT POLLARD
7) EDDIE HOUSE
GLEN DAVIS
9) SAM CASSELL

SOMETHING IS MISSING IN 2012 - 2013!

112288

112288 wrote:Gyso

2007 - 2008 BOSTON CELTIC TEAM - NEW PLAYERS ADDED - I COUNT 9
OUR RECORD - 66 - 16 - NBA CHAMPIONS!

1) KEVIN GARNETT
2) RAY ALLEN
3) JAMES POSSEY
4) PJ BROWN
5) GREG PRUITT
6) SCOT POLLARD
7) EDDIE HOUSE
8.) GLEN DAVIS
9) SAM CASSELL

112288,

Yes, but that year, we caught lightning in a bottle. A perfect storm, if you will. That team had some size and brought it almost every game (except against the Bobcats, who I think we lost to twice in one week - LOL)

Now, we have to ration the minutes of two of our most important players and we are lacking size. With Darko gone, we will need a replacement at some point. We can not add enough salary to make that much of a difference, since we are really close to the self-imposed hard cap. We can only use the vet minimum to add a player at this time, so who is out there? Usually, when aquiring a good player in a trade, a team has to add some salary. We cannot do that.

I don't see anything happening until after Jan 15th or at the trading deadline. We will have to wait until then and live with the results for now.

gyso

112288,

While you may be correct that the 2007-08 team has as many new faces as this year's team, that 2007-08 team is by far the exception to the rule when it comes to how quickly they came together into a cohesive unit. The vast majority of the time, it just doesn't work that way.

Yes, they could certainly use a center. Jason Collins and Darko were supposed to help in that area, and now Darko is gone and Collins is practically invisible. Danny and Doc are fully aware of this, and I expect them to do their best to add a center as the season goes along. Until then -- heck, even after that -- you have to give the team time to come together. The current incarnation of the Heat took time to figure it out. The Lakers are having obvious difficulties. To expect the Celtics to be great out of the gate because it happened once in 2007-08 is folly.

Did you not learn anything from Sam's previous "see me in April" pleas? Instead of looking at 2007-08 as the model, why not look at last year as the model? When despite being 15-17 at the all-star break, they took the Heat to seven games and some people here said they were bad refereeing or a healthy Avery Bradley away from being in the finals.

I'll tell you what's missing in 2012-13 -- patience. Trust. Faith. Forbearance. Whatever you want to call it.

You've talked about how you've been successful in business. Were those ventures instantly successful? Didn't you need patience to see things come to fruition?

I'm not claiming that this team will win the title, but I see no reason to doubt that they will be far more imposing than they are today and will be one of the better teams in the East when all is said and done. Brooklyn is a pretty good team, and they just gave Boston a whupping, but it was just one game early in an 82-game season. Instead of being the Celtics' personal sandbox, the Atlantic division is now the best in the East, if not the entire league. The Celtics are going to have to fight for their position in the pecking order, and basketball wrestling match excuses for fights notwithstanding, I fully expect that the C's will show some grit before all is said and done.

Outside wrote:
I'm not claiming that this team will win the title, but I see no reason to doubt that they will be far more imposing than they are today and will be one of the better teams in the East when all is said and done. Brooklyn is a pretty good team, and they just gave Boston a whupping, but it was just one game early in an 82-game season. Instead of being the Celtics' personal sandbox, the Atlantic division is now the best in the East, if not the entire league. The Celtics are going to have to fight for their position in the pecking order, and basketball wrestling match excuses for fights notwithstanding, I fully expect that the C's will show some grit before all is said and done.

Very well said. totally agree.

Gyro,

That is my point, Danny built a flawed team and try to sell it on the surface as a team that can show different looks i.e. Big/Small/Run....and on the surface that we have a strong bench. The NBA, no matter what, is a physical league down low and Danny tried to be cute and land a back up to Pierce in Green which was ok....but his thinking was flawed in assuming he could pay cheap and get an above average to upper player.

This strategy by him was seen by bringing in Shack $1M and JON for about 6M
who I thought was always soft and never motivated. So now we sit and beat up on sub 500 teams and get our butt kicked with 500+ teams

Problem with Danny and his strategy is you cannot be half pregnant. You either get great players and go over the cap or just rebuild from scratch.

It may be that Danny must blows it up by building and getting some real top draft spots or young players who were chosen top 10.

I tell you what.....if either LA teams had any great young players or holds top 3-5 spots....trade KG to them.....KG lives there so he would not mind it nor the weather and we can start a quick rebuild.

The 2007 - 2008 team was built correctly and yes we got some luck in getting Possey and Brown........

112288

dboss wrote:It is true that chemistry willl take more time. However that does not change the fact that we are weak in the paint.

With Darko gone we need to make a move and why not make a big splash.

Dboss

Dboss, I agree 100% about the paint and big guys. I was one of the ones that thought Darko would help us, just being a big that could block shots. You think the reason he left was because Doc didn't give him any time? I don't understand Doc a lot of the time. I agree with whoever it was that said Wilcox should get 20 minutes a game. I have been harping on that for a while. The bigs we have we don't play. Sure Collins is nothing great, but shutting down the layup line he could help do. Wilcox has shown me that he can help when he plays, it just he never gets enough time. I would like to see a upgrade at those positions, but would also like to see what we have and if it would work. Doc has said numerous times that the league is getting away from the big lineups, center, etc. He sures plays the rotations like he wants a small lineup. JMO

I have no problem with playing "small" but the concept usually mean you run your tails off as that is your advantage............. and we don't.

beat

I sure agree with that. If you play small you sure better be in the attack mode, both offensively and defensively. And no, we sure don't.

mrkleen09 wrote:Gents. Please try not to all jump ship at once......it will throw off the balance and make the rest of us capsize. Form an orderly line and kindly walk the plank at a steady pace.

For the rest of us......clearly the Nets are playing at a different level and the Celtics did not meet their intensity on the court.

As for the fight. That was DIRECTLY attributable to the refs allowing the Nets to play dirty and get away with it...and it finally bubbled over. They gave the Nets 17 FT to 5 for the Celtics in the first half...and that clown Kane Fitzgerald gave Doc a T for nothing....which further curtailed his ability to advocate for his team. It is not surprise this thing boiled over.

Reggie Evans is a real asshole. He pushes and shoves and pulls and tugs all night, and as soon as you meet him with any kind of resistance...he flops and gets the call. He will be the first player this season suspended for a game for flopping. He is a strong man and a hustler, but the NBA needs to make an example of him.

Kris Humphries has one skill - being a punk. He should have been called for 3 or 4 fouls in the first half and should have been assessed a flagrant foul for throwing down KG. Once again the three blind mice missed it all...and then wonder why the players take matters into their own hands.

As for the rest...not much to say.

Even with all the rough play the Celtics had their chances at the start of the 4th quarter.

The sky isnt falling and it isnt time to bring up Feb Melo. Just another game along the way to learning who this team is - and a mean nothing loss in November.

NEXT.

kleen,

You made such a big deal of the Humphries/Garnett play and said that what Humphries did should have been called a flagrant.
You don't like the rules on hard fouls when it was committed by Collins but when Humphries committed a hard foul, you wanted a flagrant called?

tjmakz wrote:kleen,

You made such a big deal of the Humphries/Garnett play and said that what Humphries did should have been called a flagrant.
You don't like the rules on hard fouls when it was committed by Collins but when Humphries committed a hard foul, you wanted a flagrant called?

TJ....now THIS is the definition of a TROLL.

You are searching (i.e. trolling) threads that are 20 days old to bring up again?

I along with many others remember what was said about the Kris Humphries foul against KG. Some have an obvious double standard toward the conduct of Celtics players and that of others in the league. The discussion about Humphries and the Collins fouls shows the double standard. Ok, go down that road of calling me a Troll. Those that can look at discussions objectively know that I am not a Troll.

A troll is someone on an internet forum who looks for posts from a particular person or on a particular point - simply to agitate or inflame a discussion. This is the M.O. here, period. If you are trying to win man of the year on this board, your contributions over the last 24 hours are certainly not helping.

The only thing the two incidents have in common is they were both called fouls - and people disagreed about them.

Humphries hit KG in the chest, when he was already up in the air and off balance. Collins hit THE BALL FIRST and then hit Thompson. Clearly you cant see the different through those Laker's colored glasses....so I am moving on.

mrkleen09 wrote:A troll is someone on an internet forum who looks for posts from a particular person or on a particular point - simply to agitate or inflame a discussion. This is the M.O. here, period. If you are trying to win man of the year on this board, your contributions over the last 24 hours are certainly not helping.

The only thing the two incidents have in common is they were both called fouls - and people disagreed about them.

Humphries hit KG in the chest, when he was already up in the air and off balance. Collins hit THE BALL FIRST and then hit Thompson. Clearly you cant see the different through those Laker's colored glasses....so I am moving on.

A comment was made in the Postgame Brooklyn thread from three weeks ago and it applied as a comparison to Collins flagrant foul.
Trying to win Man of the Year here? Not so much...
It is hard to imagine that any reasonably objective person would have a problem with my comments and from the way I have backed up my points over the last 24 hours.
I provide facts and a reasonable discussion while others don't and I am the one that get called Intellectually Dishonest and a Troll?
If Sam, NYCelt, gyso, Outside or one of the other reasonable people here feel that I endeavor to be intellectually dishonest, a Troll or who is here simply to agitate or inflame a discussion, I would love to hear from them.

Yeah TJ....everyone is out to get you out here.

The point is, we had a debate about the foul called on Collins in the APPROPRIATE thread - it has nothing to do with the Humphries foul from nearly a month ago. Your attempt to prove your point by bringing in an completely unrelated post was nothing more than trolling.

I wonder what % of your posts our here are purely inflammatory toward the Celtics, or that take the contrary point of view just for the sake of arguing? Seems to be your regular MO to come in late to a discussion and inflame things...and then when you are backed into a corner, you play the "oh woe is me" "everyone is being dishonest but me" card. Give me a break.

I am done with this....and pretty much over chatting with you period.

Wow, that is a funny post. There is a double standard in the way the Humphries and Collins fouls are viewed. Why won't you address the double standard you have shown? It is really comical that you think I am backed into a corner. I am sorry that when I don't agree in the threads with your 100 percent celtics can't do wrong mentality. So, do you just want me to agree with you even when you are wrong? Your MO is to bash anyone that you disagree with. That could be me, Stern, refs, etc. I invite you to show me where I was wrong in the post game Cleveland thread over the last 24 hours.

TJ

What is your problem.........You are starting to sound irrational and as one of the board moderators I think we have had enough on this topic. Let's move on and keep the spirit of the board to a friendly debate.......not over kill to where it is becoming fanatical.

Thank you,

112288

So, you think it is ok as a moderator to call me Intellectually Dishonest? How is the way that you wrote to me in the Cleveland thread a friendly debate?

Intellectually dishonest is not a slur. It's used every day in life, business and intellectual discussions. It was even used by the President in the debates!

The definition is as follows:

"An argument which is misused to advance an agenda or to reinforce one's deeply held beliefs in the face of overwhelming evidence contrary."

If you did not see the replay (over and over) from several angles which was verified by others on the board, and you are only relying on one still photograph to support your argument, then how do you know your are absolutely right! Maybe your compass is off....maybe not.

The more intellectual approach would have been to just say that we agree that we disagree which I did. I also wished you a happy holiday.......

Some times we all need hugs....so my hugs go out to you....peace!

112288

Sigh...

Take the same foul committed twice, and the one committed on a Celtic is a flagrant, borderline suspendable offense, the one committed by a Celtic is a good, hard play that is an accepted part of basketball, and the inability of referees to call it that way is proof of league-wide bias and corruption. I think it's natural for some fans of any team to feel that way (as any disinterested observer of a first grade tee-ball or peewee basketball game can attest), and it seems to be more pronounced in the fanbase of Boston sports teams (and whether that is a good thing or a bad thing also depends on your point of view).

So, TJ, while I basically agree with your points, you're ignoring the most important point of all in these types of arguments, which is that this board is full of passionate Celtic fans who see these things through green-colored glasses and that's okay. I still get caught up in it sometimes, as I did in the Kris Humphries-KG-Rondo thing, but I have to remind myself to shrug it off as a fact of life and admire the passion of those who have the Celtic-based selective vision gene. This is one tiger that isn't about to change its stripes and will do its best to bite your head off if you try.