"We might win the Atlantic!"... (looks at schedule)... N/M

[LarBrd33]

Just out of curiosity is there any correlation between the team that wins it all and their record against contenders that year?

Basically none, title teams don't generally overperform against other contenders relative to their expected record in such games.

What are you basing that statement on?   Pretty much every champion you can find over the past 15 years won at least 52 games (63% win percentage).  It was clear with all of them that they were good in the regular season.  Find me a team that just limped into the playoffs with a .500 record and took the whole thing.

The two underlined statements are very different things. Record versus contender in the first statement and overall record in the second statement.

Our overall record is not indicative of us being a contender, but the last lockout season had the Knicks make the Finals and this current group made a big run from the 4 seed after winning 50 games in 09-10.

So while I think its unlikely I'm not going to give up on this team. If you'd rather talk about how much they suck, well however you enjoy rooting for your team.

Well I'm not sure how such a stat would be available since "contender" is subjective and a matter of opinion.  Like for example, I see Chicago, MIami, OKC, Lakers and Dallas as being the only contenders this year.  You might find the Spurs to be a serious threat... and clearly some people on this forum see the "contender" list 16 teams deep (since they are including the Celtics).  In the early 00s when teams like the Nets were making the finals (and Boston was playing in the ECF) there was no point in time when I (or most rational fans) EVER considered them to be legitimate title contenders.  We all knew whoever coming out of the East was fodder for the Lakers and Spurs.  So it might be difficult to determine if record vs "contender" correlates to championship.  However, with that said... I'd LOVE for someone to find me an example of a team who outright failed in EVERY matchup against "contenders" during the regular season and then won the title.  Like, for example... I'm looking at the 2010 Lakers and checking their regular season history.  In 2010 I (and most NBA fans at the time) felt the only real contenders were Orlando, Cleveland, Boston and the Lakers.  The lakers lost both regular season games to the Cavs.  They split their matchups with Orlando and Boston.  That's 2 for 6.  But then again, that's kinda a moot point since the Lakers were seen as a regular season contender themself and finished the season with 57 wins and the 1st seed in the West.   What were talking about with this Celtics team is a squad that will finish anywhere between the 4th and 9th spots, is currently 0-9 against contenders and looks to be on pace for a .500 record.  Clear difference, if you ask me.

Somebody is backtracking!!!!

How?  Lol.  If Boston was 2 for 6 against "contenders" this year, 1st in the East and on pace to win 57 games (70% win percentage), I'd conceed that we did in fact have a shot at a title.

Unfortunately, we are 0 for 9 against contenders (0-6 if you want to exclude the games where members of the Big 4 were out), 7th in the East and currently on pace for a .500 record if you take look at our next 16 games. 

We are more likely to miss the playoffs than win a championship.  True story.

I'm still waiting for someone to provide me with an example of a team this bad in the regular season that ended up winning the championship. 

Frankly, I'm disappointed in you guys.  There's an obvious answer I'm waiting for someone to bring up.  I already have a sweet rebuttal already in mind and everything. 

LarBrd33, you're an arrogant self-centered egomaniac.  I'm sick of listening to your constant negativity.  If you hate this team so much, stop following them and spare us your blabbering nonsense.  "Delusional"... "Crazy"... I find your allegations personally offensive.  I hope a mod deals with you swiftly and harshly.  Does anyone know if there's a way to just prevent someone's posts from showing up?  I'd like to just block LarBrd33 so I don't have to read this fool's posts.

To answer your question... your "example" of a team that was this bad in the regular season and still won the title... the 94-95 Rockets.  They "limped" into the playoffs with 47 wins (57% win percentage... that's worst than us right now), were terrible in the regular season against contenders and still managed to win a title.  Never underestimate the heart of a champion. 

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

LarBrd33, I normally wouldn't apologize for "offending" someone.  See this clip by Steve Hughes:  http://www.boreme.com/posting.php?id=29555 ...  You'll live.  But I respect you as a poster and a fellow Celtic fan... so sorry man.  It wasn't personal.  Just having some healthy debate.  No hard feelings.  Please don't block me.  I'll try to tone it down.

To your point on the Rockets... they were a DEFENDING champion who had won 58 games the year before.  They happened to have the best player (post MJ) and most dominant center in the entire league.  Hakeem is the reason why I still consider the Lakers a contender this year... any time you have a dominant 7 footer like that, you have to be included.  The Lakers have 2 of the top 5 big men in the game currently and both of them are over 7 feet.  Combined I see them equaling Hakeem.  Anyhow, it's  important to note that the 95 Rockets traded for Clyde Drexler with only 35 games remaining in the season which partially explains their poor regular-season finish (they were adjusting). Clyde ended up averaging like 20+ points, 7+ assists and 5+ rebounds in the playoffs.  Everything finally just "clicked" for them come playoff time.  Too bad the CEltics didn't go out and add a hall-of-famer at the deadline or I'd be more apt to make the comparison.  And yes, you're right... the Rockets stunk in the regular season.  The contenders that year were Orlando, NY, San Antonio and Utah.  They were 0-2 against Orlando, 0-2 against the Knicks, 1-6 against the Spurs and 2-4 against Utah.  Still a better percentage than our 0-9, but maybe that changes over the final 16 games. 

For what it's worth, I'm rooting for a title.  Hope we can turn it around and actually prove we have ability during the home stretch.  The team will surely have plenty of opportunity to change my mind. 

Thanks for your time. 

Somebody is backtracking!!!!

Doesn't KG qualify as your dominant "7 footer"?  If you had been watching the games recently you'd notice these things.

eh... I guess so.  Fine.  Fine.  Maybe a KG-lead Celtic team shocks the world in the playoffs.  Anything is possible...   Heh.  Anyhow, I'm done with this debate. I concede.  You win, LarBrd33.  You win. 

[Who]

There are only two title contenders in the East - Miami and Chicago

If Derrick Rose can't get healthy, that will open things up for the rest of the teams filling out the six remaining playoff spots in the East. Not much separation between any of those six sides (including Boston). Miami would still be the frontrunner but things would be wide open beyond them.

[LarBrd33]

Just out of curiosity is there any correlation between the team that wins it all and their record against contenders that year?

Basically none, title teams don't generally overperform against other contenders relative to their expected record in such games.

What are you basing that statement on?   Pretty much every champion you can find over the past 15 years won at least 52 games (63% win percentage).  It was clear with all of them that they were good in the regular season.  Find me a team that just limped into the playoffs with a .500 record and took the whole thing.

The two underlined statements are very different things. Record versus contender in the first statement and overall record in the second statement.

Our overall record is not indicative of us being a contender, but the last lockout season had the Knicks make the Finals and this current group made a big run from the 4 seed after winning 50 games in 09-10.

So while I think its unlikely I'm not going to give up on this team. If you'd rather talk about how much they suck, well however you enjoy rooting for your team.

Well I'm not sure how such a stat would be available since "contender" is subjective and a matter of opinion.  Like for example, I see Chicago, MIami, OKC, Lakers and Dallas as being the only contenders this year.  You might find the Spurs to be a serious threat... and clearly some people on this forum see the "contender" list 16 teams deep (since they are including the Celtics).  In the early 00s when teams like the Nets were making the finals (and Boston was playing in the ECF) there was no point in time when I (or most rational fans) EVER considered them to be legitimate title contenders.  We all knew whoever coming out of the East was fodder for the Lakers and Spurs.  So it might be difficult to determine if record vs "contender" correlates to championship.  However, with that said... I'd LOVE for someone to find me an example of a team who outright failed in EVERY matchup against "contenders" during the regular season and then won the title.  Like, for example... I'm looking at the 2010 Lakers and checking their regular season history.  In 2010 I (and most NBA fans at the time) felt the only real contenders were Orlando, Cleveland, Boston and the Lakers.  The lakers lost both regular season games to the Cavs.  They split their matchups with Orlando and Boston.  That's 2 for 6.  But then again, that's kinda a moot point since the Lakers were seen as a regular season contender themself and finished the season with 57 wins and the 1st seed in the West.   What were talking about with this Celtics team is a squad that will finish anywhere between the 4th and 9th spots, is currently 0-9 against contenders and looks to be on pace for a .500 record.  Clear difference, if you ask me.

Somebody is backtracking!!!!

How?  Lol.  If Boston was 2 for 6 against "contenders" this year, 1st in the East and on pace to win 57 games (70% win percentage), I'd conceed that we did in fact have a shot at a title.

Unfortunately, we are 0 for 9 against contenders (0-6 if you want to exclude the games where members of the Big 4 were out), 7th in the East and currently on pace for a .500 record if you take look at our next 16 games. 

We are more likely to miss the playoffs than win a championship.  True story.

I'm still waiting for someone to provide me with an example of a team this bad in the regular season that ended up winning the championship. 

Frankly, I'm disappointed in you guys.  There's an obvious answer I'm waiting for someone to bring up.  I already have a sweet rebuttal already in mind and everything. 

LarBrd33, you're an arrogant self-centered egomaniac.  I'm sick of listening to your constant negativity.  If you hate this team so much, stop following them and spare us your blabbering nonsense.  "Delusional"... "Crazy"... I find your allegations personally offensive.  I hope a mod deals with you swiftly and harshly.  Does anyone know if there's a way to just prevent someone's posts from showing up?  I'd like to just block LarBrd33 so I don't have to read this fool's posts.

To answer your question... your "example" of a team that was this bad in the regular season and still won the title... the 94-95 Rockets.  They "limped" into the playoffs with 47 wins (57% win percentage... that's worst than us right now), were terrible in the regular season against contenders and still managed to win a title.  Never underestimate the heart of a champion. 

Good riddance to bad rubbish.

LarBrd33, I normally wouldn't apologize for "offending" someone.  See this clip by Steve Hughes:  http://www.boreme.com/posting.php?id=29555 ...  You'll live.  But I respect you as a poster and a fellow Celtic fan... so sorry man.  It wasn't personal.  Just having some healthy debate.  No hard feelings.  Please don't block me.  I'll try to tone it down.

To your point on the Rockets... they were a DEFENDING champion who had won 58 games the year before.  They happened to have the best player (post MJ) and most dominant center in the entire league.  Hakeem is the reason why I still consider the Lakers a contender this year... any time you have a dominant 7 footer like that, you have to be included.  The Lakers have 2 of the top 5 big men in the game currently and both of them are over 7 feet.  Combined I see them equaling Hakeem.  Anyhow, it's  important to note that the 95 Rockets traded for Clyde Drexler with only 35 games remaining in the season which partially explains their poor regular-season finish (they were adjusting). Clyde ended up averaging like 20+ points, 7+ assists and 5+ rebounds in the playoffs.  Everything finally just "clicked" for them come playoff time.  Too bad the CEltics didn't go out and add a hall-of-famer at the deadline or I'd be more apt to make the comparison.  And yes, you're right... the Rockets stunk in the regular season.  The contenders that year were Orlando, NY, San Antonio and Utah.  They were 0-2 against Orlando, 0-2 against the Knicks, 1-6 against the Spurs and 2-4 against Utah.  Still a better percentage than our 0-9, but maybe that changes over the final 16 games. 

For what it's worth, I'm rooting for a title.  Hope we can turn it around and actually prove we have ability during the home stretch.  The team will surely have plenty of opportunity to change my mind. 

Thanks for your time. 

Somebody is backtracking!!!!

Doesn't KG qualify as your dominant "7 footer"?  If you had been watching the games recently you'd notice these things.

eh... I guess so.  Fine.  Fine.  Maybe a KG-lead Celtic team shocks the world in the playoffs.  Anything is possible...   Heh.  Anyhow, I'm done with this debate. I concede.  You win, LarBrd33.  You win. 

Scumbag Celtic fan.  Doesn't want to lose argument.  Invents split personality so he can lose to himself.

Apology not accepted, LarBrd33.

[Mr October]

slow day at work larbrd33? 

[snively]

11 games in 15 days with Pietrus on the shelf and Stiemsma gimpy is a very dangerous stretch.  We'll be heavily reliant on our bench to spare our starters the minutes grind, and that means big minutes for Dooling, Sasha, Hollins and maybe JJJ. 

Yeah, I don't think we have much of a shot at the 4 seed.  We just need to do just enough to stay ahead of Milwaukee (or hope that the Knicks rediscover their dysfunction). 

[LarBrd33]

slow day at work larbrd33? 

very

[indeedproceed]

Locking the thread. Any opposition can be directed to me via PM