Author Topic: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25  (Read 17380 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #375 on: March 12, 2025, 10:12:46 PM »

Offline SparzWizard

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18839
  • Tommy Points: 1119
If we do play OKC, it'll be in the Finals. We can worry about them then if we get there.

Cleveland is still the focus.

Just stay healthy and go into the playoffs with hopefully some consistency. Our remaining schedule honestly isn't that bad either, I think I saw going into today we only had 5 games left against playoff teams (now 4 after playing OKC)

Right. This game meant absolutely nothing?just isn?t a good look when they clearly wanted it and the thunder have been better then them all season and blew them out on Oklahoma City. Means nothing in the standings, will mean nothing if they meet in the finals. My guess is if the Celtics somehow get past the Cavs it won?t be the thunder waiting for them.

Maybe it'll be the Lakers waiting for them  8)


#FireJoe
#JTJB (Just Trade Jaylen Brown) 2022 - 2025
I am the Master of Panic.

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #376 on: March 12, 2025, 10:13:32 PM »

Offline scaryjerry

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3836
  • Tommy Points: 232
OKC was the better team today.  The Celtics deserved to lose with that 4th quarter performance.

As much as I'd like to blame the refs - and they were beyond terrible - OKC deserved to win.  Joe was outcoached easily.  And their team simply played better today.

35-12 ....not better but lucky having the refs on your side.

Are you expecting the Celtics to get to the line a lot when they did nothing but shoot 3s?

They drove the ball a lot and got no calls. Tatum got that fake travel to basically end the game and you're saying the refs had no effect. Goodnight, Mr Magoo.

I mean the refs have been in the bag for the thunder all season, comes with the territory?yes that travel call was weak but also likely a travel?weird time to call it

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #377 on: March 12, 2025, 10:14:04 PM »

Offline goCeltics

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1922
  • Tommy Points: 71
35 free throws, total ref show, gonna kill the ratings and the league, say what you what about stern but he kept on top of this

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #378 on: March 12, 2025, 10:15:20 PM »

Offline scaryjerry

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3836
  • Tommy Points: 232
If we do play OKC, it'll be in the Finals. We can worry about them then if we get there.

Cleveland is still the focus.

Just stay healthy and go into the playoffs with hopefully some consistency. Our remaining schedule honestly isn't that bad either, I think I saw going into today we only had 5 games left against playoff teams (now 4 after playing OKC)

Right. This game meant absolutely nothing?just isn?t a good look when they clearly wanted it and the thunder have been better then them all season and blew them out on Oklahoma City. Means nothing in the standings, will mean nothing if they meet in the finals. My guess is if the Celtics somehow get past the Cavs it won?t be the thunder waiting for them.

Maybe it'll be the Lakers waiting for them  8)

Wouldn?t surprise me?a fat injured Luka carried that crappy mavs team there last season

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #379 on: March 12, 2025, 10:16:26 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 51955
  • Tommy Points: 3186
The fear of the bench is showing. In some of these bigger games they are not getting it done whatsoever.

4th quarters are a real issue. Losing big leads and not showing up when it counts it killing.


The injuries are a big part of this. When we're down 1 or 2 starters, that puts more of a load on the other guys, particularly the Jays. And you start seeing that fatigue show up down the stretch.

I don't think people realize how unhealthy we've been this year to our main rotation, particularly the starters. A lot of the issues are resolved with health, but that's just not guaranteed given who our main guys are.
Recovering Joe Skeptic, but inching towards a relapse.

Check out my Youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@Yakin_Bassin/shorts

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #380 on: March 12, 2025, 10:18:36 PM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37076
  • Tommy Points: 3380
  • On To Banner 19!
Bad news guys.

Celtics couldn't clinch a playoff spot tonight. The champagne will have to wait
"Tough times never last, but tough people do." - Robert H. Schuller

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #381 on: March 12, 2025, 10:21:41 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Tommy Heinsohn
  • *************************
  • Posts: 25549
  • Tommy Points: 2720
Cs lost because OKC was better tonight. They were better all the way through. They?d get a nice lead, Cs battled back, OKC turned on the jets and got comfortably up again.  All night long till the Cs couldn?t match the last run.  Cs can play better - and can beat them. Totally agree that the focus is on Cleveland - a very big barrier standing in the way of the Finals. 

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #382 on: March 12, 2025, 10:23:26 PM »

Offline Phantom255x

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37076
  • Tommy Points: 3380
  • On To Banner 19!
If we do play OKC, it'll be in the Finals. We can worry about them then if we get there.

Cleveland is still the focus.

Just stay healthy and go into the playoffs with hopefully some consistency. Our remaining schedule honestly isn't that bad either, I think I saw going into today we only had 5 games left against playoff teams (now 4 after playing OKC)

Right. This game meant absolutely nothing?just isn?t a good look when they clearly wanted it and the thunder have been better then them all season and blew them out on Oklahoma City. Means nothing in the standings, will mean nothing if they meet in the finals. My guess is if the Celtics somehow get past the Cavs it won?t be the thunder waiting for them.

Maybe it'll be the Lakers waiting for them  8)

If LAL plays OKC in a series, who gets the whistle? SGA and OKC? Or Lebron and Lakers? Will each team take 50 FTs a game  :P
"Tough times never last, but tough people do." - Robert H. Schuller

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #383 on: March 12, 2025, 10:24:57 PM »

Offline scaryjerry

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3836
  • Tommy Points: 232
Cs lost because OKC was better tonight. They were better all the way through. They?d get a nice lead, Cs battled back, OKC turned on the jets and got comfortably up again.  All night long till the Cs couldn?t match the last run.  Cs can play better - and can beat them. Totally agree that the focus is on Cleveland - a very big barrier standing in the way of the Finals.

Well said and agreed.
The east is going to be a war, particularly Cleveland who I fear is better then us this season?OKC and the west is irrelevant

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #384 on: March 12, 2025, 10:26:35 PM »

Offline 0003323344

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 424
  • Tommy Points: 44
If we do play OKC, it'll be in the Finals. We can worry about them then if we get there.

Cleveland is still the focus.

Just stay healthy and go into the playoffs with hopefully some consistency. Our remaining schedule honestly isn't that bad either, I think I saw going into today we only had 5 games left against playoff teams (now 4 after playing OKC)

Right. This game meant absolutely nothing?just isn?t a good look when they clearly wanted it and the thunder have been better then them all season and blew them out on Oklahoma City. Means nothing in the standings, will mean nothing if they meet in the finals. My guess is if the Celtics somehow get past the Cavs it won?t be the thunder waiting for them.

Maybe it'll be the Lakers waiting for them  8)

You know it will be a Celtics Lakers rematch.

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #385 on: March 12, 2025, 10:33:39 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52807
  • Tommy Points: 2568
Honestly, I really can't stand this OKC team. Whether it's their "AAU" vibe, flopping, or their entitlement and media narrative despite winning a single playoff series as a team, they just rub me the wrong way.

I don't like all their small ball / small guard lineups. That rubs me the wrong way. I find that hard to root for. I like it when they get beat.

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #386 on: March 12, 2025, 10:49:17 PM »

Offline Who

  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 52807
  • Tommy Points: 2568
I wonder when OKC play those ultra-small perimeter lineups, should NBA team just chuck their modern day offenses and play old school basketball?

One ball-handler. Four guys below 15 feet, pin downs. Curl around the elbows. Not 18-20 feet out. Or spinning out to three point line. And beat up guys off the catch from 14-15 feet.

Those little 6-5 190lb guards cannot handle guys like Jaylen Brown or Jayson Tatum down there. Why play 25 feet from the basket and try beatin them off the dribble all the time?

Screw three point spacing. Just start inside. They want you to play with spacing. That is why they play with all that defensive quicknes. Quick footed guards who can sprint out to the three point line and contest or deny 3 point shots. You are playing into their defense by playing this modern style.

I wonder if teams need to develop an answer to this OKC defense which was rated as one of the toughest defenses of all time based on relative defensive efficiency. How much better their def eff was compared to the rest of the league. And say this is a defense built for the modern three point style of play. But it is not built for any other style of offense. So why not go back in time. Play old school basketball. That defense cannot handle old school basketball. They can only play perimeter defense 25 feet from the basket. You can feast inside against those small guards.

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #387 on: March 12, 2025, 11:16:34 PM »

Offline 86MaxwellSmart

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3995
  • Tommy Points: 395
 >:(
35 free throws, total ref show, gonna kill the ratings and the league, say what you what about stern but he kept on top of this

Agreed and multiple bad calls against the C's too.
Torrey Craig got all ball on that 3 point "Foul"
SGA Flopping to end the 1st half cost us 6 points (Tatum's Tech, plus offensive rebound on the missed SGA FT)
That over and back call was wrong too---OKC player knocked it out of Tatum's hands, so no possession---he called Over and Back and gave the ball to OKC, when he was behind JT and couldn't actually see the play.
Larry Bird was Greater than you think.

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #388 on: March 12, 2025, 11:58:57 PM »

Offline rocknrollforyoursoul

  • Danny Ainge
  • **********
  • Posts: 10147
  • Tommy Points: 347
Didn?t see this one, but the box score says Tatum, Brown, and Holiday combined to go 5-for-25 on threes. ? Not gonna win many games with that kind of shooting.

Now 0-2 against OKC this season.

Prob?ly just playin? possum. Got the Sonics right where we want ?em.
There are two kinds of people: those who say to God, 'Thy will be done,' and those to whom God says, 'All right, then, have it your way.'

You don't have a soul. You are a Soul. You have a body.

C.S. Lewis

Re: Thunder (53-12) at Celtics (47-18) Game #66 3/12/25
« Reply #389 on: March 13, 2025, 12:04:58 AM »

Offline 86MaxwellSmart

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3995
  • Tommy Points: 395
Torrey Craig got all ball on that "Foul"

481255415-10162611367182349-2786429217382798524-n" border="0
Larry Bird was Greater than you think.