Author Topic: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17  (Read 42640 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #375 on: March 07, 2017, 01:32:11 AM »

Offline tankcity!

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1903
  • Tommy Points: 129
Also, one fair complaint on Ainge is are we ever going to get a rim protector? It's like we prefer soft bigs. I don't get. I really don't understand how Ainge expects us to compete with players like Draymond Green and Tristan Thompson.
Its a bit confusing. Smart and Crowder are basically iron men on the perimeter, but down low we have Kelly Horford and Amir.

Zizic and Yabu fit the bill physically, but you cant count on them to come over and be NBA players.

Ainge does need to find some toughness down low before this team really competes.

Im still down to sign Sully. Hes tough and hes strong down low.

I agree, sully was a tough player. I'm hopeful of Zizic. So sick of Olynk and Jerebko lol

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #376 on: March 07, 2017, 01:33:23 AM »

Offline MVPPierceNoJoke

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1862
  • Tommy Points: 106
Also, one fair complaint on Ainge is are we ever going to get a rim protector? It's like we prefer soft bigs. I don't get. I really don't understand how Ainge expects us to compete with players like Draymond Green and Tristan Thompson.

He just wants it to fit into Brad's usual system, or somewhere along those lines. By getting soft bigs.
Ya, Ainge pooped his pants by letting Toronto get Ibaka for basically nothing

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #377 on: March 07, 2017, 01:33:27 AM »

Offline Clench123

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3055
  • Tommy Points: 251
We're not winning a championship this year.

We could've won one.  I said that with no shred of doubt.  With all the misfortunes that Cleveland and the Warriors are faced with, Banner 18 would've been sure fire.

But no...Danny's apologist never fails.  The puppets who, forever, marginalize their inteligence for some know-it-all GM.  It's funny how the same critics forever question the worst GMs in the league but their own.

Smh.  Danny screwed up big time.  I never backed away from that and I'm glad few smart people around here agrees. 

Yea, draft Balls or Fultz (however tha **** his name is spelled), then what?  What happens to IT and all others guys whose contracts are due?

Reality is going to kick in soon enough for these people around here, if it hasn't already.  1st round bounce.  2nd at best.
if you think banner 18 was sure fire you are stupid.

Unless you are too ****ing dumb to think that trading for Cousins (whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks), Jimmy or George wouldn't topple depleted Cavs or Warriors. 

****ing moron.
lol

Theres two things you cant fully evaluate

1. How much of a moron/negative personality is Cousins. Is he actually that toxic? I dont know. I wanted to trade for him. I think Ainge has a better evaluation of that and frankly just how low the price was makes me more confident that Cousins is really that toxic.

2. The prices for Butler/George

Prices could have easily been prohibitive for Butler and George and Cousins is the only one of those guys likely to make us favorites over Cleveland.

To say any player out there save Lebron James makes banner 18 a sure thing is to demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of sports.

The 07 Patriots didnt win the superbowl, the 73-9 Warriors lost last years finals.

dont call me a ****ing moron for not having emotional overreactions.

Yea, compare football to basketball.  Here's where it would've been advisable for me to cut off this ridiculous back-and-fourth.  How is comparing, fundamentally, two completely different sports in an effort to bolster the empty points you're trying to make?  How about we compare compare basketball to boxing?  As long as the two are sports, why not?

Stop the nonsense.  I didn't say a player.  I mentioned 2 to 3 names.  MORONS always twist situations to fit their ridiculous assertions. 

Read what I said, and post your **** again.  How about that? 

I always said when I left the Celtics, I could not go to heaven, because that would
 be a step down. I am pure 100 percent Celtic. I think if you slashed my wrists, my
 blood would’ve been green.  -  Bill "Greatest of All Time" Russell

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #378 on: March 07, 2017, 01:33:34 AM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
Smart with a 21 point night on efficient shooting, of course along with stellar defense, too. Just more and more signs of development from this kid.

EDIT: And as I say that, he makes a stellar defensive play on Griffin.

I think you've touched on what will be the ultimate takeaway from this season—the improvement of Smart and Brown—because the team is likely not going beyond the second round.

Eh, it'll depend on the matchup. I think we have a pretty large edge on Washington, but I could certainly see Toronto beating us, even with homecourt advantage.
luckily a Toronto-Boston matchup seems unlikely at the moment .

I dont see us pulling into the 1 seed and I dont see Toronto getting 3rd without Lowry.

Yeah, I don't see us getting the one seed either, even though Cleveland has been giving us EVERY opportunity to do so. Ultimately, it won't matter anyways. We're not beating Cleveland even with homecourt advantage. But still, I do wonder if that would give us a bit more pull with free agents, along with giving us a chance to make it a closer series with Cleveland, if we even make it that far.

But like I said, I still like our chances of a HEALTHY C's squad against Washington in the second round. We swept them for a reason last year, and we haven't been healthy at all when facing them this year. But I feel MUCH, MUCH more confident about our chances with them with homecourt advantage rather than not having homecourt advantage.

Then again, we have to get past the first found first. Chicago could make things difficult for us, but I don't anticipate serious issues with any of the other potential opponents.

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #379 on: March 07, 2017, 01:35:34 AM »

Offline Clench123

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3055
  • Tommy Points: 251
And I'm tipsy.  So, please, pardon the grammatical errors, but as long as you understand what I'm trying to say, it's all good.  A drunk man never tell tales. 

I always said when I left the Celtics, I could not go to heaven, because that would
 be a step down. I am pure 100 percent Celtic. I think if you slashed my wrists, my
 blood would’ve been green.  -  Bill "Greatest of All Time" Russell

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #380 on: March 07, 2017, 01:37:55 AM »

Online SparzWizard

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16069
  • Tommy Points: 990
Smart with a 21 point night on efficient shooting, of course along with stellar defense, too. Just more and more signs of development from this kid.

EDIT: And as I say that, he makes a stellar defensive play on Griffin.

I think you've touched on what will be the ultimate takeaway from this season—the improvement of Smart and Brown—because the team is likely not going beyond the second round.

Eh, it'll depend on the matchup. I think we have a pretty large edge on Washington, but I could certainly see Toronto beating us, even with homecourt advantage.
luckily a Toronto-Boston matchup seems unlikely at the moment .

I dont see us pulling into the 1 seed and I dont see Toronto getting 3rd without Lowry.

Yeah, I don't see us getting the one seed either, even though Cleveland has been giving us EVERY opportunity to do so. Ultimately, it won't matter anyways. We're not beating Cleveland even with homecourt advantage. But still, I do wonder if that would give us a bit more pull with free agents, along with giving us a chance to make it a closer series with Cleveland, if we even make it that far.

But like I said, I still like our chances of a HEALTHY C's squad against Washington in the second round. We swept them for a reason last year, and we haven't been healthy at all when facing them this year. But I feel MUCH, MUCH more confident about our chances with them with homecourt advantage rather than not having homecourt advantage.

Then again, we have to get past the first found first. Chicago could make things difficult for us, but I don't anticipate serious issues with any of the other potential opponents.

Indeed. Let's not get too ahead of ourselves and talk about Washington. Focus on first-round opponents first. Chicago is always tough whether it's in TD Garden or in United Center.


#JTJB (Just Trade Jaylen Brown)
#JFJM (Just Fire Joe Mazzulla)

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #381 on: March 07, 2017, 01:38:43 AM »

Offline tankcity!

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1903
  • Tommy Points: 129
Smart with a 21 point night on efficient shooting, of course along with stellar defense, too. Just more and more signs of development from this kid.

EDIT: And as I say that, he makes a stellar defensive play on Griffin.

I think you've touched on what will be the ultimate takeaway from this season—the improvement of Smart and Brown—because the team is likely not going beyond the second round.

Eh, it'll depend on the matchup. I think we have a pretty large edge on Washington, but I could certainly see Toronto beating us, even with homecourt advantage.
luckily a Toronto-Boston matchup seems unlikely at the moment .

I dont see us pulling into the 1 seed and I dont see Toronto getting 3rd without Lowry.

Yeah, I don't see us getting the one seed either, even though Cleveland has been giving us EVERY opportunity to do so. Ultimately, it won't matter anyways. We're not beating Cleveland even with homecourt advantage. But still, I do wonder if that would give us a bit more pull with free agents, along with giving us a chance to make it a closer series with Cleveland, if we even make it that far.

But like I said, I still like our chances of a HEALTHY C's squad against Washington in the second round. We swept them for a reason last year, and we haven't been healthy at all when facing them this year. But I feel MUCH, MUCH more confident about our chances with them with homecourt advantage rather than not having homecourt advantage.

Then again, we have to get past the first found first. Chicago could make things difficult for us, but I don't anticipate serious issues with any of the other potential opponents.

Horford makes a huge difference imo because it's less minutes for jerebko and Olynk. Hard to make a judgement on the team without Horford playing. I think we have the coach and players to get to the ECF too. Just not going to get too high or low from the results.

Hopefully Stevens shortens the rotation and plays Brown more instead of JJ. Seriously, that guy has the slowest release in the world. I'm also worried about Crowder. He's been bad at 3s since February

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #382 on: March 07, 2017, 01:44:34 AM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
We're not winning a championship this year.

We could've won one.  I said that with no shred of doubt.  With all the misfortunes that Cleveland and the Warriors are faced with, Banner 18 would've been sure fire.

But no...Danny's apologist never fails.  The puppets who, forever, marginalize their inteligence for some know-it-all GM.  It's funny how the same critics forever question the worst GMs in the league but their own.

Smh.  Danny screwed up big time.  I never backed away from that and I'm glad few smart people around here agrees. 

Yea, draft Balls or Fultz (however tha **** his name is spelled), then what?  What happens to IT and all others guys whose contracts are due?

Reality is going to kick in soon enough for these people around here, if it hasn't already.  1st round bounce.  2nd at best.
if you think banner 18 was sure fire you are stupid.

Unless you are too ****ing dumb to think that trading for Cousins (whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks), Jimmy or George wouldn't topple depleted Cavs or Warriors. 

****ing moron.
lol

Theres two things you cant fully evaluate

1. How much of a moron/negative personality is Cousins. Is he actually that toxic? I dont know. I wanted to trade for him. I think Ainge has a better evaluation of that and frankly just how low the price was makes me more confident that Cousins is really that toxic.

2. The prices for Butler/George

Prices could have easily been prohibitive for Butler and George and Cousins is the only one of those guys likely to make us favorites over Cleveland.

To say any player out there save Lebron James makes banner 18 a sure thing is to demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of sports.

The 07 Patriots didnt win the superbowl, the 73-9 Warriors lost last years finals.

dont call me a ****ing moron for not having emotional overreactions.

Yea, compare football to basketball.  Here's where it would've been advisable for me to cut off this ridiculous back-and-fourth.  How is comparing, fundamentally, two completely two different sports in an effort to bolster the empty points you're trying to make?  How about we compare compare basketball to boxing?  As long as the two are sports, why not?

Stop the nonsense.  I didn't say a player.  I mentioned 2 to 3 names.  MORONS always twist situations to fit their ridiculous assertions. 

Read what I said, and post your **** again.  How about that?
Quote
We could've won one.  I said that with no shred of doubt.  With all the misfortunes that Cleveland and the Warriors are faced with, Banner 18 would've been sure fire.
by definition you claim that a championship would have been guaranteed beyond all doubt. Meaning effectively there is a 0% chance we do not win a championship. In sports, even basketball, this is never true. Thats my main objective, but Ill move past that for now.

You go on to list the conditions at which we could win a championship.
Quote
Unless you are too ****ing dumb to think that trading for Cousins (whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks), Jimmy or George wouldn't topple depleted Cavs or Warriors. 
trading for a, b or c means trading for one of the three.

had you said Cousins AND Jimmy or George the debate would be slightly different.

As such, I am left to evaluate 3 players.

I dont believe that the addition Butler or George would immediately make us favorites over Cleveland. Perhaps with the Love injury it makes it a toss-up. Cousins, assuming his sanity (which is something just about every NBA GM decided not to do) probably makes us favorites over the Cavs and potentially even favorites over the Durantless Warriors. Probably a toss-up vs. the Warriors if KD is healthy (those are some very optimistic projections).

All that said, even the most green eyed Celtic homer would concede that there would still be non-trivial chance that we win a championship. Thus a ring would not be surefire.
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #383 on: March 07, 2017, 01:46:27 AM »

Offline Ilikesports17

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8595
  • Tommy Points: 842
And I'm tipsy.  So, please, pardon the grammatical errors, but as long as you understand what I'm trying to say, it's all good.  A drunk man never tell tales.
no but they say illogical things like saying a championship is "surefire"
Quote from: George W. Bush
Too often, we judge other groups by their worst examples while judging ourselves by our best intentions.

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #384 on: March 07, 2017, 01:47:37 AM »

Offline Dannys Chipotle Guy

  • Derrick White
  • Posts: 279
  • Tommy Points: 48
We're not winning a championship this year.

We could've won one.  I said that with no shred of doubt.  With all the misfortunes that Cleveland and the Warriors are faced with, Banner 18 would've been sure fire.

But no...Danny's apologist never fails.  The puppets who, forever, marginalize their inteligence for some know-it-all GM.  It's funny how the same critics forever question the worst GMs in the league but their own.

Smh.  Danny screwed up big time.  I never backed away from that and I'm glad few smart people around here agrees. 

Yea, draft Balls or Fultz (however tha **** his name is spelled), then what?  What happens to IT and all others guys whose contracts are due?

Reality is going to kick in soon enough for these people around here, if it hasn't already.  1st round bounce.  2nd at best.
if you think banner 18 was sure fire you are stupid.

Unless you are too ****ing dumb to think that trading for Cousins (whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks), Jimmy or George wouldn't topple depleted Cavs or Warriors. 

****ing moron.
lol

Theres two things you cant fully evaluate

1. How much of a moron/negative personality is Cousins. Is he actually that toxic? I dont know. I wanted to trade for him. I think Ainge has a better evaluation of that and frankly just how low the price was makes me more confident that Cousins is really that toxic.

2. The prices for Butler/George

Prices could have easily been prohibitive for Butler and George and Cousins is the only one of those guys likely to make us favorites over Cleveland.

To say any player out there save Lebron James makes banner 18 a sure thing is to demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of sports.

The 07 Patriots didnt win the superbowl, the 73-9 Warriors lost last years finals.

dont call me a ****ing moron for not having emotional overreactions.

Yea, compare football to basketball.  Here's where it would've been advisable for me to cut off this ridiculous back-and-fourth.  How is comparing, fundamentally, two completely two different sports in an effort to bolster the empty points you're trying to make?  How about we compare compare basketball to boxing?  As long as the two are sports, why not?

Stop the nonsense.  I didn't say a player.  I mentioned 2 to 3 names.  MORONS always twist situations to fit their ridiculous assertions. 

Read what I said, and post your **** again.  How about that?
Quote
We could've won one.  I said that with no shred of doubt.  With all the misfortunes that Cleveland and the Warriors are faced with, Banner 18 would've been sure fire.
by definition you claim that a championship would have been guaranteed beyond all doubt. Meaning effectively there is a 0% chance we do not win a championship. In sports, even basketball, this is never true. Thats my main objective, but Ill move past that for now.

You go on to list the conditions at which we could win a championship.
Quote
Unless you are too ****ing dumb to think that trading for Cousins (whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks), Jimmy or George wouldn't topple depleted Cavs or Warriors. 
trading for a, b or c means trading for one of the three.

had you said Cousins AND Jimmy or George the debate would be slightly different.

As such, I am left to evaluate 3 players.

I dont believe that the addition Butler or George would immediately make us favorites over Cleveland. Perhaps with the Love injury it makes it a toss-up. Cousins, assuming his sanity (which is something just about every NBA GM decided not to do) probably makes us favorites over the Cavs and potentially even favorites over the Durantless Warriors. Probably a toss-up vs. the Warriors if KD is healthy (those are some very optimistic projections).

All that said, even the most green eyed Celtic homer would concede that there would still be non-trivial chance that we win a championship. Thus a ring would not be surefire.
I think we had a real opportunity at a ring this year, but you are correct. To call it a surefire banner is foolhardy.

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #385 on: March 07, 2017, 01:48:50 AM »

Offline iadera

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 959
  • Tommy Points: 74
  • CroCeltics
We were +13 in 3rd and again terrible 4th quarter! We need a shrink!

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #386 on: March 07, 2017, 01:52:40 AM »

Offline Clench123

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3055
  • Tommy Points: 251
We're not winning a championship this year.

We could've won one.  I said that with no shred of doubt.  With all the misfortunes that Cleveland and the Warriors are faced with, Banner 18 would've been sure fire.

But no...Danny's apologist never fails.  The puppets who, forever, marginalize their inteligence for some know-it-all GM.  It's funny how the same critics forever question the worst GMs in the league but their own.

Smh.  Danny screwed up big time.  I never backed away from that and I'm glad few smart people around here agrees. 

Yea, draft Balls or Fultz (however tha **** his name is spelled), then what?  What happens to IT and all others guys whose contracts are due?

Reality is going to kick in soon enough for these people around here, if it hasn't already.  1st round bounce.  2nd at best.
if you think banner 18 was sure fire you are stupid.

Unless you are too ****ing dumb to think that trading for Cousins (whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks), Jimmy or George wouldn't topple depleted Cavs or Warriors. 

****ing moron.
lol

Theres two things you cant fully evaluate

1. How much of a moron/negative personality is Cousins. Is he actually that toxic? I dont know. I wanted to trade for him. I think Ainge has a better evaluation of that and frankly just how low the price was makes me more confident that Cousins is really that toxic.

2. The prices for Butler/George

Prices could have easily been prohibitive for Butler and George and Cousins is the only one of those guys likely to make us favorites over Cleveland.

To say any player out there save Lebron James makes banner 18 a sure thing is to demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of sports.

The 07 Patriots didnt win the superbowl, the 73-9 Warriors lost last years finals.

dont call me a ****ing moron for not having emotional overreactions.

Yea, compare football to basketball.  Here's where it would've been advisable for me to cut off this ridiculous back-and-fourth.  How is comparing, fundamentally, two completely two different sports in an effort to bolster the empty points you're trying to make?  How about we compare compare basketball to boxing?  As long as the two are sports, why not?

Stop the nonsense.  I didn't say a player.  I mentioned 2 to 3 names.  MORONS always twist situations to fit their ridiculous assertions. 

Read what I said, and post your **** again.  How about that?
Quote
We could've won one.  I said that with no shred of doubt.  With all the misfortunes that Cleveland and the Warriors are faced with, Banner 18 would've been sure fire.
by definition you claim that a championship would have been guaranteed beyond all doubt. Meaning effectively there is a 0% chance we do not win a championship. In sports, even basketball, this is never true. Thats my main objective, but Ill move past that for now.

You go on to list the conditions at which we could win a championship.
Quote
Unless you are too ****ing dumb to think that trading for Cousins (whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks), Jimmy or George wouldn't topple depleted Cavs or Warriors. 
trading for a, b or c means trading for one of the three.

had you said Cousins AND Jimmy or George the debate would be slightly different.

As such, I am left to evaluate 3 players.

I dont believe that the addition Butler or George would immediately make us favorites over Cleveland. Perhaps with the Love injury it makes it a toss-up. Cousins, assuming his sanity (which is something just about every NBA GM decided not to do) probably makes us favorites over the Cavs and potentially even favorites over the Durantless Warriors. Probably a toss-up vs. the Warriors if KD is healthy (those are some very optimistic projections).

All that said, even the most green eyed Celtic homer would concede that there would still be non-trivial chance that we win a championship. Thus a ring would not be surefire.

Are you this stupid?  Don't try and be technical when I'm too impaired for it even though I know that you know what I"m talking about.  I wouldn't have put in parenthesis "whom we would've gotten without having to give up any major picks" if I only meant one player.  I would've just named Cousins and that would've been it.  I put that sentence in parenthesis with the knowledge that we would still be the highest bidder for either George or Butler or both had we traded for Cousins, whose trade alone would've made us competitive and on par with the Cavs.

Cut the BS.  I'm not here to argue semantics.  I said what I said and what I said is what I said.  Don't try twisting my words.

I always said when I left the Celtics, I could not go to heaven, because that would
 be a step down. I am pure 100 percent Celtic. I think if you slashed my wrists, my
 blood would’ve been green.  -  Bill "Greatest of All Time" Russell

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #387 on: March 07, 2017, 01:53:41 AM »

Offline mr. dee

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7828
  • Tommy Points: 597
This team is annoying to watch. I don't feel like they have maximized the talent this year.

They have been maximizing talent/over achieving ever since hiring Stevens.  We are expecting them to keep building on that, but this team doesn't have enough talent to contend no matter how good the coaching is.  I like this team and its direction, maximizing talent isn't the issue.  Elite talent is.


It doesn't need to be an elite talent, a.k.a. superstars. We just need solid players who can sustain production without our starters. It was a lineup of Young, Olynyk and Rozier that started to lay an pile of dung on the court and Steven's super small line up was the nail in the coffin.

How about this team makes it past the first round before you say we only need better bench players to win a ring. I totally disagree. I'm not sure we can beat Toronto or the Wizards in the playoffs. The playoffs are a completely different game. It's a halfcourt game. So hold your horse man. Let's see how these guys perform in the playoffs first. I personally think we need another star while keeping the core roster intact.

Did 2004 Pistons have MVP calibre players? How about the 2014 Spurs? Duncan is far from his former MVP caliber self and Kawhi was just starting to tap the potential within him that year, just close but not quite the superstar yet. 2002 Kings who was arguably the real champs didn't have superstars either. I'd say that if we manage to make it far in this year's playoffs, depth will be a huge factor for this team. If you mean All-Star calibre player, we can just produce them as signing or trading one in the market will be expensive.

But yes, I agree that we should look first how this current team will go to determine who's to stay and who's to go.

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #388 on: March 07, 2017, 01:54:49 AM »

Offline Clench123

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3055
  • Tommy Points: 251
And I'm tipsy.  So, please, pardon the grammatical errors, but as long as you understand what I'm trying to say, it's all good.  A drunk man never tell tales.
no but they say illogical things like saying a championship is "surefire"

Like making a surefire prediction that the Warriors are the favorites to win the championship had everything gone their way?

I always said when I left the Celtics, I could not go to heaven, because that would
 be a step down. I am pure 100 percent Celtic. I think if you slashed my wrists, my
 blood would’ve been green.  -  Bill "Greatest of All Time" Russell

Re: Celtics (40-23) at Clippers (37-25) Game #64 3/6/17
« Reply #389 on: March 07, 2017, 02:05:05 AM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 47948
  • Tommy Points: 2906
Smart with a 21 point night on efficient shooting, of course along with stellar defense, too. Just more and more signs of development from this kid.

EDIT: And as I say that, he makes a stellar defensive play on Griffin.

I think you've touched on what will be the ultimate takeaway from this season—the improvement of Smart and Brown—because the team is likely not going beyond the second round.

Eh, it'll depend on the matchup. I think we have a pretty large edge on Washington, but I could certainly see Toronto beating us, even with homecourt advantage.
luckily a Toronto-Boston matchup seems unlikely at the moment .

I dont see us pulling into the 1 seed and I dont see Toronto getting 3rd without Lowry.

Yeah, I don't see us getting the one seed either, even though Cleveland has been giving us EVERY opportunity to do so. Ultimately, it won't matter anyways. We're not beating Cleveland even with homecourt advantage. But still, I do wonder if that would give us a bit more pull with free agents, along with giving us a chance to make it a closer series with Cleveland, if we even make it that far.

But like I said, I still like our chances of a HEALTHY C's squad against Washington in the second round. We swept them for a reason last year, and we haven't been healthy at all when facing them this year. But I feel MUCH, MUCH more confident about our chances with them with homecourt advantage rather than not having homecourt advantage.

Then again, we have to get past the first found first. Chicago could make things difficult for us, but I don't anticipate serious issues with any of the other potential opponents.

Horford makes a huge difference imo because it's less minutes for jerebko and Olynk. Hard to make a judgement on the team without Horford playing. I think we have the coach and players to get to the ECF too. Just not going to get too high or low from the results.

Hopefully Stevens shortens the rotation and plays Brown more instead of JJ. Seriously, that guy has the slowest release in the world. I'm also worried about Crowder. He's been bad at 3s since February

Yep. Nothing you can really take away from tonight. The fact that we were even in the game and leading for most of the game on the second night of a back to back with several injuries to key rotation players says more than anything.

Further, with regard to Washington, we haven't played them with our full starting five yet, missing two starters in two of the games. And every game they were virtually fully healthy, too, so fully healthy, I think we have their number.

Game 1 - No Al or Jae; they were healthy
Game 2 - No Amir, Bradley, or Brown; they were healthy outside of end of the bench players
Game 3 - No Bradley ; they were healthy