Is everyone ready for the massive overreaction from game 1?

[iadera]

This seemed the easiest game offensively for us in playoffs so far...When we started the run, we just couldn't stop, even if we wanted to. 

[Vermont Green]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

[footey]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played one decent quarter (2nd) and one historically phenomenal quarter (4th).    We outscored the Warriors in those 2 quarters. 

[Celtics2021]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played one decent quarter (2nd) and one historically phenomenal quarter (4th).    We outscored the Warriors in those 2 quarters.

Yeah.  We outscored the Warriors in both halves, also.  We played a bad third quarter, and more than made up for it in the 4th.  Every game has runs, and while the 4th quarter run was historically good, we could have still won the game had it been quite a bit smaller.

[Roy H.]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played okay in the second quarter as well, didn't we?  We outscored then 28-22, which is a very good quarter.

Even in the first we put up 28 points, but gave up an unacceptable 32.

If the Warriors (Draymond) and the media want to run with the narrative of "the Celtics only played well one quarter", I'll take it.  I just don't think it's true.  We beat them in the first half, and we beat them in the 4th.  We just had a lousy third quarter, as has often been the case.

I do agree that this series is susceptible to huge swings, even moreso than the Miami series.

[Phantom255x]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played okay in the second quarter as well, didn't we?  We outscored then 28-22, which is a very good quarter.

Even in the first we put up 28 points, but gave up an unacceptable 32.

If the Warriors (Draymond) and the media want to run with the narrative of "the Celtics only played well one quarter", I'll take it.  I just don't think it's true.  We beat them in the first half, and we beat them in the 4th.  We just had a lousy third quarter, as has often been the case.

I do agree that this series is susceptible to huge swings, even moreso than the Miami series.

Also, Curry scored 21 points in the 1st quarter and was lights out from 3... and GSW was only up 4 at the end of the quarter. GSW had a great 3rd but they definitely didn't "dominate" most of the game lol

[aefgogreen]

No point in following the sport if we can't watch the overreactions, to be honest.

It's true. It's sports.

Tommy Point.  It's like when people say "there are more important things in the world" after a loss.  I know that.  I like sports because I can be irrational.  Was it Bob Ryan that said something like "Sports are the most important thing that don't matter?"

[Moranis]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played okay in the second quarter as well, didn't we?  We outscored then 28-22, which is a very good quarter.

Even in the first we put up 28 points, but gave up an unacceptable 32.

If the Warriors (Draymond) and the media want to run with the narrative of "the Celtics only played well one quarter", I'll take it.  I just don't think it's true.  We beat them in the first half, and we beat them in the 4th.  We just had a lousy third quarter, as has often been the case.

I do agree that this series is susceptible to huge swings, even moreso than the Miami series.

It wasn't even the whole 3rd quarter.  It was 60-61 with 9:43 left in the 3rd.  They increased the lead by 14 more points at 2:10, but Boston closed the 15 point deficit to 12 at the end of the quarter.  So that 7.5 minute stretch was really bad, but the other 4.5 minutes of the 3rd it was even play. 

[boscel33]

LOL, was going to be an over reaction no matter which way it went, because that's what we do.

Now, did Draymond over react after the game "We pretty much dominated the game for the first 41, 42 minutes"?  Yeah, I think a bit much since GSW trailed at half.  But then Perk steps into it as well "That was a whole lot of lying for the simple fact ... 'we'll be fine,' no you won't".

That said, if Al keeps playing the way, the C's might be difficult to beat.

[Vermont Green]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played okay in the second quarter as well, didn't we?  We outscored then 28-22, which is a very good quarter.

Even in the first we put up 28 points, but gave up an unacceptable 32.

If the Warriors (Draymond) and the media want to run with the narrative of "the Celtics only played well one quarter", I'll take it.  I just don't think it's true.  We beat them in the first half, and we beat them in the 4th.  We just had a lousy third quarter, as has often been the case.

I do agree that this series is susceptible to huge swings, even moreso than the Miami series.

It wasn't even the whole 3rd quarter.  It was 60-61 with 9:43 left in the 3rd.  They increased the lead by 14 more points at 2:10, but Boston closed the 15 point deficit to 12 at the end of the quarter.  So that 7.5 minute stretch was really bad, but the other 4.5 minutes of the 3rd it was even play.

I agree with all of this but if we had played in the 4th like we did in the 2nd, and won a close game, would there be people talking about a sweep (well, actually, I suppose there probably would)?  That I guess is my point.  The fourth quarter was its own thing but the rest of the game was just the expected back and forth between two evenly matched teams that take a lot of 3s.  One team is more hot one quarter, the other team the next.  The play in those quarters says a tough seven game series, not anything close to a sweep.  At least that is what I saw.

I have said all along that I did not think GSW are any better than MIL or MIA.  What concerned me from the previous series is that we had a pattern of playing well, then regressing.  Fighting hard when we had to, then playing tentative and letting MIL or MIA take control.  Not unexpected for a young team that is deeper in the playoffs than anyone expected at the start of the season.  If that pattern continues against GSW or is amplified due to the pressure of the finals, we give them an opportunity and they are a team that could take advantage of it more than MIL or MIA did.  I think Celtics as a team are good enough to play better/more consistently than we did the last couple of rounds.  Further, I think we need to.

[Moranis]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played okay in the second quarter as well, didn't we?  We outscored then 28-22, which is a very good quarter.

Even in the first we put up 28 points, but gave up an unacceptable 32.

If the Warriors (Draymond) and the media want to run with the narrative of "the Celtics only played well one quarter", I'll take it.  I just don't think it's true.  We beat them in the first half, and we beat them in the 4th.  We just had a lousy third quarter, as has often been the case.

I do agree that this series is susceptible to huge swings, even moreso than the Miami series.

It wasn't even the whole 3rd quarter.  It was 60-61 with 9:43 left in the 3rd.  They increased the lead by 14 more points at 2:10, but Boston closed the 15 point deficit to 12 at the end of the quarter.  So that 7.5 minute stretch was really bad, but the other 4.5 minutes of the 3rd it was even play.

I agree with all of this but if we had played in the 4th like we did in the 2nd, and won a close game, would there be people talking about a sweep (well, actually, I suppose there probably would)?  That I guess is my point.  The fourth quarter was its own thing but the rest of the game was just the expected back and forth between two evenly matched teams that take a lot of 3s.  One team is more hot one quarter, the other team the next.  The play in those quarters says a tough seven game series, not anything close to a sweep.  At least that is what I saw.

I have said all along that I did not think GSW are any better than MIL or MIA.  What concerned me from the previous series is that we had a pattern of playing well, then regressing.  Fighting hard when we had to, then playing tentative and letting MIL or MIA take control.  Not unexpected for a young team that is deeper in the playoffs than anyone expected at the start of the season.  If that pattern continues against GSW or is amplified due to the pressure of the finals, we give them an opportunity and they are a team that could take advantage of it more than MIL or MIA did.  I think Celtics as a team are good enough to play better/more consistently than we did the last couple of rounds.  Further, I think we need to.

well I picked Boston in 5 before the series started, so nothing I saw changed me from that.  Boston just matches up very well with Golden State so I expect them to win.

The fact that Boston won a game by 12 that Tatum was 3 of 17 from the field in, pretty solidly confirms that Boston is in fact the better team.  Obviously Boston isn't going to shoot over 50% from 3 again, though I'm not so sure Golden State will shoot 42% from 3 again either. 

[ConnerHenry]

Overreactions?: on the internet in the year 2022?

Not gonna happen

[Roy H.]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played okay in the second quarter as well, didn't we?  We outscored then 28-22, which is a very good quarter.

Even in the first we put up 28 points, but gave up an unacceptable 32.

If the Warriors (Draymond) and the media want to run with the narrative of "the Celtics only played well one quarter", I'll take it.  I just don't think it's true.  We beat them in the first half, and we beat them in the 4th.  We just had a lousy third quarter, as has often been the case.

I do agree that this series is susceptible to huge swings, even moreso than the Miami series.

It wasn't even the whole 3rd quarter.  It was 60-61 with 9:43 left in the 3rd.  They increased the lead by 14 more points at 2:10, but Boston closed the 15 point deficit to 12 at the end of the quarter.  So that 7.5 minute stretch was really bad, but the other 4.5 minutes of the 3rd it was even play.

I agree with all of this but if we had played in the 4th like we did in the 2nd, and won a close game, would there be people talking about a sweep (well, actually, I suppose there probably would)?  That I guess is my point.  The fourth quarter was its own thing but the rest of the game was just the expected back and forth between two evenly matched teams that take a lot of 3s.  One team is more hot one quarter, the other team the next.  The play in those quarters says a tough seven game series, not anything close to a sweep.  At least that is what I saw.

I have said all along that I did not think GSW are any better than MIL or MIA.  What concerned me from the previous series is that we had a pattern of playing well, then regressing.  Fighting hard when we had to, then playing tentative and letting MIL or MIA take control.  Not unexpected for a young team that is deeper in the playoffs than anyone expected at the start of the season.  If that pattern continues against GSW or is amplified due to the pressure of the finals, we give them an opportunity and they are a team that could take advantage of it more than MIL or MIA did.  I think Celtics as a team are good enough to play better/more consistently than we did the last couple of rounds.  Further, I think we need to.

For clarification, my particular predictions of a sweep in three games are in line with the "massive overreaction" sentiment of the thread.  I pretty much agree with what you've said here.

[Vermont Green]

We played one good quarter.  That one quarter was really really good, historically good, but still just one quarter.  Miami had some good quarters that led to wins early in the series too.

I know the stats say that GSW are a better defensive team than MIA and MIL but I don't see it.  They are well coached defensively and execute their doubles and rotations at a very high level.  They are quick and athletic but lack the size and strength of MIA and MIL.  That isn't to say they are a bad defensive team or that defense is a weakness.  I see solid defense with good effort, just not MIL or MIA defense.

But they can shoot.  So I predict big runs, big swings.  They may get hot and blow us out in the next game.  Both teams take tons of 3s.  That means highly variable scoring.   Hit a couple, miss 5, hit couple more.  So really hard to sweep.  Right now, it is like a no-hitter in the 3rd inning or something.  Talk to me when the no-hit game is still going in the 8th inning.

We played okay in the second quarter as well, didn't we?  We outscored then 28-22, which is a very good quarter.

Even in the first we put up 28 points, but gave up an unacceptable 32.

If the Warriors (Draymond) and the media want to run with the narrative of "the Celtics only played well one quarter", I'll take it.  I just don't think it's true.  We beat them in the first half, and we beat them in the 4th.  We just had a lousy third quarter, as has often been the case.

I do agree that this series is susceptible to huge swings, even moreso than the Miami series.

It wasn't even the whole 3rd quarter.  It was 60-61 with 9:43 left in the 3rd.  They increased the lead by 14 more points at 2:10, but Boston closed the 15 point deficit to 12 at the end of the quarter.  So that 7.5 minute stretch was really bad, but the other 4.5 minutes of the 3rd it was even play.

I agree with all of this but if we had played in the 4th like we did in the 2nd, and won a close game, would there be people talking about a sweep (well, actually, I suppose there probably would)?  That I guess is my point.  The fourth quarter was its own thing but the rest of the game was just the expected back and forth between two evenly matched teams that take a lot of 3s.  One team is more hot one quarter, the other team the next.  The play in those quarters says a tough seven game series, not anything close to a sweep.  At least that is what I saw.

I have said all along that I did not think GSW are any better than MIL or MIA.  What concerned me from the previous series is that we had a pattern of playing well, then regressing.  Fighting hard when we had to, then playing tentative and letting MIL or MIA take control.  Not unexpected for a young team that is deeper in the playoffs than anyone expected at the start of the season.  If that pattern continues against GSW or is amplified due to the pressure of the finals, we give them an opportunity and they are a team that could take advantage of it more than MIL or MIA did.  I think Celtics as a team are good enough to play better/more consistently than we did the last couple of rounds.  Further, I think we need to.

well I picked Boston in 5 before the series started, so nothing I saw changed me from that.  Boston just matches up very well with Golden State so I expect them to win.

The fact that Boston won a game by 12 that Tatum was 3 of 17 from the field in, pretty solidly confirms that Boston is in fact the better team.  Obviously Boston isn't going to shoot over 50% from 3 again, though I'm not so sure Golden State will shoot 42% from 3 again either.

Your prediction may hold up.  Like I said, it is like a baseball game where we have a 1 run lead in the 3rd inning or something like that.  But in order to win this in 5, we are going to have to play better, or specifically more consistently, than we did in the previous two series, which I think we can.

We do match up well against GSW but they have more offensive punch than MIL or MIA.  As you said, even in a loss, they shoot 42% from 3.  That isn't so different than their overall playoff average of 38%.  If we let up and allow them to have a run, the run is probably going to be a bigger run than either MIL or MIA was able to do.  They take more and make more 3s than MIL or MIA.

[kraidstar]

I think Boston has another gear that they can ratch things up to physically. Suddenly Rob and Al are stuffing shots left and right, we're clogging every passing lane, snatching every loose ball.

Generating easy looks on the break.

Golden State does not have this same gear anymore. They are wily, they are skilled, but when we get going it is like a bunch of rampaging tigers out there.

All the great teams have this extra gear. The Russell Celtics were famous for it. The Showtime Lakers. The Jordan Bulls, the LeBron Heat. Golden State used to have it. It's hard to win without it.