Too Much "D" and Not Enough "O"

[Rtpas11]

I believe there is a bit too much emphasis for the Celtics defensively. I keep stressing that the fact the celtics lose games or play poorly is because of their offensive relapses. Actually tonight's game wasn't as bad as most of you make it seem to be. The celts could've of won this game if they had only one type of player in uniform, and thats a SCORER!!!. If we go by the #'s the celts played better than the suns... just look @ this BOX SCORE. http://www.nba.com/games/20091230/BOSPHX/gameinfo.html?ls=gt2hp0020900466

We failed in tonights game and the previous games also, because of the same exact problem "lack of having a legit scoring threat". Now when i say score, i don't mean someone that is going to get us points, but someone that is going to be a threat whether off the ball, or handling the ball, which in return will free up the shooters (who we have lots of) and slashers. Anthony Parker of the Cleveland Cavaliers is not the best 3 point shooter in the league because he is, he's the best because all the attention is being paid to Lebron James (the scoring threat) who's finding him wide open. The C's suck offensively, but defensively we're great. When we play offensively poor it makes us look defensively poor (long rebounds, transition baskets, guys aren't set on defense etc...). WE NEED SCORERS!!! Hell; trade Ray Allen for T-MAC. Ray  Allen (pure shooter) is useless with no Paul Pierce (scoring threat), sign Nate Robinson for heaven's sake, and last DOC will you please start mixing the young guys with the old guys. JR., Walker and Hudson should've played the entire 4th quarter instead risking another injury to a vet in a blow out game. Bottom line is this.... Paul Pierce is the key to this team doing anything. Not K.G. Nor, Ray Allen.

[Tai]

Buddy, our D isn't the only problem, I'll give you that, but giving up 100 points in the last two games = bad defense, no matter how you twist it.

In the last three games, we've scored at least 90 points. That should be enough for us to win most of the time when our D is on.

[Rtpas11]

Buddy, our D isn't the only problem, I'll give you that, but giving up 100 points in the last two games = bad defense, no matter how you twist it.

In the last three games, we've scored at least 90 points. That should be enough for us to win most of the time when our D is on.

The west is full of offense. you can't totally stop them from scoring defensively, and don't counter attack with good offense yourself. Basically in order to beat those teams you have play great defense (which means they'll still get a lot of their points), and have good offense. The celtics = Great defense, and have poor offense. Eventually the poor offense will start to affect you defensively, and teams will run up the score to 100+.

[Rtpas11]

I have the perfect trade....

http://www.realgm.com/src_checktrade.php?tradeid=5354705

[rav123]

OP, you nailed it when you mentioned we have Paul Pierce. Everything will be alright once he comes back.

I do think we should get Nate, I just don't know if he'll fit with the chemistry we have, or how we'll get him anyway.

[scoop]

We're 4th in the league in eFG% and 3rd in eFG% allowed.

The problems with this team are:

- rebounding
- turnovers

(if they were good in these 2 things, they'd probably be the best offensive and defensive team in the league right now).

[Bahku]

I have to disagree, respectfully. To simplify what could be a long explanation, (because it's late and I'm copping out ), I've seen good defense create good offense, in fact, it's almost assured that when you play solid defensively, you're going to create easy baskets ... but I have rarely seen good offense create good defense, if ever. Tonight was a horrible game on both ends of the floor, and the little sometimes "unseen" things that players like KG and Pierce supply, (beyond the obvious), were painfully obvious.