Author Topic: Hawks (23-13) at Celtics (26-9) 1/11  (Read 126238 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Hawks (23-13) at Celtics (26-9) 1/11
« Reply #675 on: January 12, 2010, 02:29:41 PM »

Offline Bahku

  • CB HOF Editor
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19771
  • Tommy Points: 3632
  • Oe ma krr pamtseotu
Guess I'm a glutton for punishment ... this was even MORE painful the second time ... somehow I didn't think that was possible, like I'd glean something more positive from it this time ... NOT!  :P
2010 PAPOUG, 2012 & 2017 PAPTYG CHAMP, HD BOT

* BAHKU MUSIC *

Re: Hawks (23-13) at Celtics (26-9) 1/11
« Reply #676 on: January 12, 2010, 08:37:06 PM »

Offline Chief

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21217
  • Tommy Points: 2450
if people think boston hasnt struggled in the third quarter of games this season then they havent been watching them

We're talking about THIS GAME, homey, and that's not what happened tonight.  If you want to talk about the fourth quarter tonight, fine, but then you'd actually have to make an argument based on evidence and not some pre-existing narrative you roll out whenever you feel like it.

get over yourself professor....tell me what was the boston lead to start the 3rd? what was it at the end? go back and look at the third quarters of philly, atlanta (all 3 times), GS, the Clippers....most of the games boston has lost this season there have given up big leads or had poor 3rd quarters...and what is your argument again? and who are you again?

Hrm...did we play Philly tonight?  Did we play Atlanta 3 times tonight?  Did we play Golden State tonight?

It's not my argument that the Celtics have OMG NEVER PLAYED A BAD THIRD QUARTER.  It's my argument that it wasn't what happened tonight (They started the 3rd with a 9 pt lead, ended with a 3, but considering the ft's and momentum that's not 'terrible,' as you claimed).  And guess what--lots of us have league pass and lots of us are perfectly willing to talk about what *actually happened* in a game.

It's also my argument that it's bogus to rehearse the same old claims about the team when the evidence doesn't stack up.  If you wanted to say the celtics lost because of their terrible turnovers, that's fine--there's evidence for that.  But you can't pin tonight on the third because that's not where the game was lost.  

I'm a dude who registered to yell at people who can't make a decent argument because I've been reading it all year from some of you chicken littles and I can't take it any longer.

The game was obviously lost in the 3rd quarter as evidenced by the C's shooting over 80% and losing 2/3 of their lead.  Doc and Hill overreacted on a legitimate flagrant foul could changing the momentum.  

Again those of us who constantly post about turnovers, blowing big leads, failing to execute down the stretch after "every" loss === that's because it's precisely what happens in most every loss that is the entire point ----...

Please stop the name calling - Redz
Part of people's problems with you is not your post game criticisms, which in some cases are valid.

It is the constant negative, not objective, but down right negative outlook you have and contribute every game no matter the score, no matter the situation no matter the play. I mean after the Rondo alley oop the other night your first post was a doomsday outlook of the team having Rasheed out, Ray with 5 fouls and having ANOTHER TURNOVER!!

Come on. The single most exciting play for the Celtics in a couple of years and your first reaction is:

Rasheed is out and Ray with 5 fouls.  Going to be a tough overtime especially starting it with ANOTHER turnover...

It's not like we don't have evidence of this negativity. We can all go back and read every single post you ever posted right here:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?action=profile;u=6913;sa=showPosts;start=0

32 pages of posts, almost entirely in game threads and 99% of which discusses a negative view of the moment or the team, even during wins.

You're a fan, then you're a fan. But you show a propensity for possibly being the single most negative fan ever to visit this site. And that's saying something.

BTW I don't want to hear about this being name calling from anyone. Read through jadams posts. Negative is just an honest adjective describing his type of fandom and not name calling.

I definitely agree with the 99% portion of your post but in a slightly different way --- 99% of the posts I have made here are based on facts.  1% of the time I have posted something random without thinking it through carefully which is a pretty good ratio.

Everyone has their way of watching games and/or reacting to them.  Some posters on here are blind optimists rooting for the Celtics and cheering them on without any objectivity.  There is a definite place for that as I love listening to Tommy Heinsohn even though at times his homerism is mind boggling.  Some posters are stat driven but add nothing else other than quoting those stats.  Some like to keep things positive no matter what the situation or how poorly the team is playing.

A small minority of posters watch the games intently and post reactions to those observations.  They are backed up by stats when necessary but also include insight that can only be gained from being an astute and keen observer.  When the team is playing bad as they have done for a large part of the past couple weeks those posts will be more negative.  

It is wise not to question whether someone is a true fan that is not fair to do to anyone.  I don't say that to anyone else and expect the same in return.  Being a Celtic fan for the past 30 years, attending numerous games, having more knowledge of the Celtics and their history than most of the world's population hopefully qualifies as being a fan.

Rest assured fellow posters I will continue to watch the games and along with a few others, make astute observations based on those games.  There are enough blind optimists here that need to be balanced out by more critical, logical observations.

GO CELTICS!

I read this earlier today and wanted to give you a TP. I 100% agree with this. Very well done, please keep up the good work. :)
Once you are labeled 'the best' you want to stay up there, and you can't do it by loafing around.
 
Larry Bird

Re: Hawks (23-13) at Celtics (26-9) 1/11
« Reply #677 on: January 12, 2010, 09:59:45 PM »

Offline Bahku

  • CB HOF Editor
  • Bill Sharman
  • *******************
  • Posts: 19771
  • Tommy Points: 3632
  • Oe ma krr pamtseotu
if people think boston hasnt struggled in the third quarter of games this season then they havent been watching them

We're talking about THIS GAME, homey, and that's not what happened tonight.  If you want to talk about the fourth quarter tonight, fine, but then you'd actually have to make an argument based on evidence and not some pre-existing narrative you roll out whenever you feel like it.

get over yourself professor....tell me what was the boston lead to start the 3rd? what was it at the end? go back and look at the third quarters of philly, atlanta (all 3 times), GS, the Clippers....most of the games boston has lost this season there have given up big leads or had poor 3rd quarters...and what is your argument again? and who are you again?

Hrm...did we play Philly tonight?  Did we play Atlanta 3 times tonight?  Did we play Golden State tonight?

It's not my argument that the Celtics have OMG NEVER PLAYED A BAD THIRD QUARTER.  It's my argument that it wasn't what happened tonight (They started the 3rd with a 9 pt lead, ended with a 3, but considering the ft's and momentum that's not 'terrible,' as you claimed).  And guess what--lots of us have league pass and lots of us are perfectly willing to talk about what *actually happened* in a game.

It's also my argument that it's bogus to rehearse the same old claims about the team when the evidence doesn't stack up.  If you wanted to say the celtics lost because of their terrible turnovers, that's fine--there's evidence for that.  But you can't pin tonight on the third because that's not where the game was lost.  

I'm a dude who registered to yell at people who can't make a decent argument because I've been reading it all year from some of you chicken littles and I can't take it any longer.

The game was obviously lost in the 3rd quarter as evidenced by the C's shooting over 80% and losing 2/3 of their lead.  Doc and Hill overreacted on a legitimate flagrant foul could changing the momentum.  

Again those of us who constantly post about turnovers, blowing big leads, failing to execute down the stretch after "every" loss === that's because it's precisely what happens in most every loss that is the entire point ----...

Please stop the name calling - Redz
Part of people's problems with you is not your post game criticisms, which in some cases are valid.

It is the constant negative, not objective, but down right negative outlook you have and contribute every game no matter the score, no matter the situation no matter the play. I mean after the Rondo alley oop the other night your first post was a doomsday outlook of the team having Rasheed out, Ray with 5 fouls and having ANOTHER TURNOVER!!

Come on. The single most exciting play for the Celtics in a couple of years and your first reaction is:

Rasheed is out and Ray with 5 fouls.  Going to be a tough overtime especially starting it with ANOTHER turnover...

It's not like we don't have evidence of this negativity. We can all go back and read every single post you ever posted right here:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?action=profile;u=6913;sa=showPosts;start=0

32 pages of posts, almost entirely in game threads and 99% of which discusses a negative view of the moment or the team, even during wins.

You're a fan, then you're a fan. But you show a propensity for possibly being the single most negative fan ever to visit this site. And that's saying something.

BTW I don't want to hear about this being name calling from anyone. Read through jadams posts. Negative is just an honest adjective describing his type of fandom and not name calling.

I definitely agree with the 99% portion of your post but in a slightly different way --- 99% of the posts I have made here are based on facts.  1% of the time I have posted something random without thinking it through carefully which is a pretty good ratio.

Everyone has their way of watching games and/or reacting to them.  Some posters on here are blind optimists rooting for the Celtics and cheering them on without any objectivity.  There is a definite place for that as I love listening to Tommy Heinsohn even though at times his homerism is mind boggling.  Some posters are stat driven but add nothing else other than quoting those stats.  Some like to keep things positive no matter what the situation or how poorly the team is playing.

A small minority of posters watch the games intently and post reactions to those observations.  They are backed up by stats when necessary but also include insight that can only be gained from being an astute and keen observer.  When the team is playing bad as they have done for a large part of the past couple weeks those posts will be more negative.  

It is wise not to question whether someone is a true fan that is not fair to do to anyone.  I don't say that to anyone else and expect the same in return.  Being a Celtic fan for the past 30 years, attending numerous games, having more knowledge of the Celtics and their history than most of the world's population hopefully qualifies as being a fan.

Rest assured fellow posters I will continue to watch the games and along with a few others, make astute observations based on those games.  There are enough blind optimists here that need to be balanced out by more critical, logical observations.

GO CELTICS!

I read this earlier today and wanted to give you a TP. I 100% agree with this. Very well done, please keep up the good work. :)

I have to agree with Chief ... while I consistently try to be as optimistic as possible, probably to a fault, (as most here will attest to), good objective discussion is made up of all different kinds of input, from people with very different views and perspectives, positive, negative, neutral ... whatever.

A blog is a melting pot of sorts, and to get a true consensus of this game's impact on every fan, there should be no limtations placed on people as far as their opinions and views, as long as everyone stays within the boundaries of mutual respect and decency.

While I disagree with many of the bloggers here, I still respect most of them, because they are intelligent, articulate, and their opinion, while different from mine, is as important to them as mine is to me, and I may just learn something if I consider their view. But some people have something to prove when they blog, and with those people the truth gets lost in bravado.

While most of us believe our views to be the correct ones when we post them, we have to remember at times that just because we believe we're right, doesn't make it so. I personally have learned far more while in heated discussions with people I disagree with, than I have just following the lead of someone else, or agreeing/backing up someone I know feels the same as I do about a particular topic.

I'm not trying to say that that's not a good thing, because mutual support is important, too, and sharing similar views can be enligtening as well, and is a healthy part of a blogging community ... it encourages friendship and alliances that make this place seem more hospitable. It also reminds us that no matter how different, we are all connected by our love for the Celtics.

While you may get complaints about your overly-negative opinions, and while it may not be the kind I prefer, or the popular stance to take, you are being honest to who you are and how you see the game, and your views are just as important and vital to this distillation of thoughts called a blog, as anyone else's.

Again, I personally favor the optimistic, or at least positively realistic view of the Celtics, because I feel there's plenty negative in this world to go around. But I also have a great deal of respect for you and your honest declaration of seeing things the way you do, and I admire your courage for standing up for what you believe in.

As long as you are open to discussion and change and consideration of alternate views, and as long as you approach discourse with an open mind and mutual respect for other posters, then you will always be a welcome addition to this site, whether you're consistently negative or not ... or whether or not people agree with you. Besides, if we all felt the same here and all had similar views, there would be very little to talk about.

I am admittedly one of the least perfect people on the face of this earth, and I probably make more mistakes and irritate more people on this blog than any other three people put together, but I do my best to keep an open mind and be malleable to the outcome of discussions, to sometimes consider the other side, and hopefully learn something in the process.

I know it's tacky, but if nothing else, you're being YOU, and whatever your viewpoint, no one can fault you for being true to yourself. Great post, Jadam ... really good to have you onboard. (TP)

               --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------               

PS - While I am usually an optimist, I don't believe I'm a blind one ... not all positive people are that way because of naivete' or ignorance ... some of us choose to be optimists. Please try to not paint us with too wide a brush. ;)
« Last Edit: January 13, 2010, 02:24:51 AM by Bahku »
2010 PAPOUG, 2012 & 2017 PAPTYG CHAMP, HD BOT

* BAHKU MUSIC *