Celtics actually not 'good enough' with Rondo and Green

[YoungOne87]

rondo playing back into form without any pressure and getting a nice pick in one season is exactly what we need this year

[mmmmm]

Man... everything with you just goes back to 2012.  It's hilarious.  Heat took care of us when they needed to.  Our path to the ECF was cake.  WHen in doubt, you just go back to Rondo's 2012 playoff performance.  Our success had more to do with KG anyways... if you want to call beating the Horford-less Hawks and 8th seed 76ers "success".

Also, you create hypothetical upsets.  You're completely convinced that the 2013 Celtics were a Rondo away from upsetting the Knicks.  The Knicks won 50+ last season... we were on pace to miss the playoffs with a healthy Rondo.  There's absolutely no basis for idea the we would have upset the Knicks other than fantasyland homerism. 

We only ever went as far as KG and Paul took us.  Now that we are gone... we are the 4th worst team in the league.  2-11  with Rondo in charge.  It's bleak.  But it's ok cuz Rondo helped us take the 8th seed 76ers to 7 games in 2012, right?

  2012 was the last time Rondo was in the playoffs. And yes, I'm fairly convinced the Celts would have beat the Knicks with Rondo. If you watched the games his play was the main thing they were missing. Also, the fact that they'd struggle and how they'd struggle was very predictable. If you want to look for hypotheticals, go with the claim that KG and PP were carrying the team when Rondo was healthy and playing well, only not when he wasn't.

Hard to see us doing much better vs New York with Rondo because of KG's injury and Pierce's horrible form (injury was it?).

Uh?   KG was one of our only players (along with Green, Terry and Bass) who played like a beast in last year's playoff series against NY.

What are you talking about?

All of our other players shot like crap and that's why we lost, but KG was fantastic.  He averaged 12.7 pts & a ridiculous 13.7 rebounds while shooting a healthy .500 eFG.   My god, KG grabbed an other-worldly 37.9% of his defensive rebound chances!!!!!  He looked like he was 28 again.

The four guys I mentioned shot very well but EVERYONE else on the team totally struggled not only with miserable shooting but also with turnovers.    NY was also miserable offensively in that series, but the Celtics pretty much gave them the series by being inept on offense.   In particular, we were terrible at getting open looks out of our half court offense.

I think it is totally easy to see that a healthy Rondo would have made a huge difference in that series and folks waiving that notion off look pretty disingenuous.

Too hard to say what Rondo could've done because Pierce and KG carried so much of the load it really beat their old legs up. Rondo obviously makes us much better but I doubt we beat them- they were on a serious hot streak shooting. If we are using injury to Rondo as a 'what if', well what if they didn't have
$22 million of their cap wound up in Amare Stoudemire? If he wasn't injured they could have killed us even more. Coulda, shoulda, woulda.
Hard to see Pierce stopping Carmelo as the league's leading scorer too.

Except that NYK didn't beat us with 'hot shooting'.  They sucked offensively.  Just not as suck as the Celtics did.

All you are doing after that is tacking on additional 'what ifs'.  Each one is a separate argument that has nothing to do with the other.

I have no problem conceding that a healthy Amare (or the absence of his cap hit) probably would have made a significant impact. 

You should have no problem conceding that a healthy Rondo probably would have had a significant impact.  It's not hard.  It doesn't hurt.

I said he may have gotten us an extra win but other circumstances like KG's feet and Pierce's lack of form played a huge part too.
There are too many 'what if's'. If Rondo is healthy but KG+Pierce are the same do we win another game or two? I don't know. Probably.
If all three are healthy around 90% then we probably do win at least one or two more games.

You agree that KG was hurting now right?
I noticed you skipped that part of the discussion.
http://nba.si.com/2013/03/25/kevin-garnett-ankle-injury-update-danny-ainge-doc-rivers/

Yes, I remember now about that.  But I still disagree with your implication that it was relevant.  KG played so well during all that series (shooting, rebounding, everything), it is hard to believe that the injury impacted his game.

If you concede that RR's presence may have gotten the Celtics "an extra win", then that's probably flipping the outcome of the series.

[D.o.s.]

Do you guys think that "Playoff Rondo" is ever coming back?

[mmmmm]

Do you guys think that "Playoff Rondo" is ever coming back?

Not this year.

[D.o.s.]

Do you guys think that "Playoff Rondo" is ever coming back?

Not this year.

Ok, assuming he makes the playoffs as a member of the Celtics in 2014-2015. Would you say that his "playoff Rondo" numbers and level of play are expected?

[chambers]

Man... everything with you just goes back to 2012.  It's hilarious.  Heat took care of us when they needed to.  Our path to the ECF was cake.  WHen in doubt, you just go back to Rondo's 2012 playoff performance.  Our success had more to do with KG anyways... if you want to call beating the Horford-less Hawks and 8th seed 76ers "success".

Also, you create hypothetical upsets.  You're completely convinced that the 2013 Celtics were a Rondo away from upsetting the Knicks.  The Knicks won 50+ last season... we were on pace to miss the playoffs with a healthy Rondo.  There's absolutely no basis for idea the we would have upset the Knicks other than fantasyland homerism. 

We only ever went as far as KG and Paul took us.  Now that we are gone... we are the 4th worst team in the league.  2-11  with Rondo in charge.  It's bleak.  But it's ok cuz Rondo helped us take the 8th seed 76ers to 7 games in 2012, right?

  2012 was the last time Rondo was in the playoffs. And yes, I'm fairly convinced the Celts would have beat the Knicks with Rondo. If you watched the games his play was the main thing they were missing. Also, the fact that they'd struggle and how they'd struggle was very predictable. If you want to look for hypotheticals, go with the claim that KG and PP were carrying the team when Rondo was healthy and playing well, only not when he wasn't.

Hard to see us doing much better vs New York with Rondo because of KG's injury and Pierce's horrible form (injury was it?).

Uh?   KG was one of our only players (along with Green, Terry and Bass) who played like a beast in last year's playoff series against NY.

What are you talking about?

All of our other players shot like crap and that's why we lost, but KG was fantastic.  He averaged 12.7 pts & a ridiculous 13.7 rebounds while shooting a healthy .500 eFG.   My god, KG grabbed an other-worldly 37.9% of his defensive rebound chances!!!!!  He looked like he was 28 again.

The four guys I mentioned shot very well but EVERYONE else on the team totally struggled not only with miserable shooting but also with turnovers.    NY was also miserable offensively in that series, but the Celtics pretty much gave them the series by being inept on offense.   In particular, we were terrible at getting open looks out of our half court offense.

I think it is totally easy to see that a healthy Rondo would have made a huge difference in that series and folks waiving that notion off look pretty disingenuous.

Too hard to say what Rondo could've done because Pierce and KG carried so much of the load it really beat their old legs up. Rondo obviously makes us much better but I doubt we beat them- they were on a serious hot streak shooting. If we are using injury to Rondo as a 'what if', well what if they didn't have
$22 million of their cap wound up in Amare Stoudemire? If he wasn't injured they could have killed us even more. Coulda, shoulda, woulda.
Hard to see Pierce stopping Carmelo as the league's leading scorer too.

Except that NYK didn't beat us with 'hot shooting'.  They sucked offensively.  Just not as suck as the Celtics did.

All you are doing after that is tacking on additional 'what ifs'.  Each one is a separate argument that has nothing to do with the other.

I have no problem conceding that a healthy Amare (or the absence of his cap hit) probably would have made a significant impact. 

You should have no problem conceding that a healthy Rondo probably would have had a significant impact.  It's not hard.  It doesn't hurt.

I said he may have gotten us an extra win but other circumstances like KG's feet and Pierce's lack of form played a huge part too.
There are too many 'what if's'. If Rondo is healthy but KG+Pierce are the same do we win another game or two? I don't know. Probably.
If all three are healthy around 90% then we probably do win at least one or two more games.

You agree that KG was hurting now right?
I noticed you skipped that part of the discussion.
http://nba.si.com/2013/03/25/kevin-garnett-ankle-injury-update-danny-ainge-doc-rivers/

Yes, I remember now about that.  But I still disagree with your implication that it was relevant.  KG played so well during all that series (shooting, rebounding, everything), it is hard to believe that the injury impacted his game.

If you concede that RR's presence may have gotten the Celtics "an extra win", then that's probably flipping the outcome of the series.

KG was okay but nothing compared to 2012.
I guess we'll agree to disagree. I love both KG and Rondo, I just think the only way we beat that Knicks team is with a fully healthy squad. Wasn't our year.