Celtics have been fortunate and Cavs are better!

[JR Giddens]

This guy is smart so all you homers take out your pens and pads and take notes!





Broseff (Denver, CO): In your opinion, will the Celtics extend their winning streak to 20 games on Christmas Day, when they play the Lakers?

 John Hollinger: Yes, I think it gets to 20 -- they have three fairly easy home games between now and then. But I don't think it gets past 20 -- too much pride at stake for L.A., and too many distractions with Christmas on the road.

Tacoma, WA: Do you really think that the Cavs are a better team than the Celtics?

 John Hollinger: I think the Cavs have played better than the Celtics. Whether they're a better team or just had a really hot 25 games is still to be determined. However, if I'm in Boston they're the one team that I'm deathly afraid of -- if they're this good with LBJ playing 35 minutes, what will they be like when he plays 48?

Bob (Boston, Mass): I am fine with your point that one 5-point home win is not the difference. But how about losing twice as many games, while playing a weaker schedule?

 John Hollinger: Because the other data doesn't back up the W-L differential. Celtics are 7-0 in games decided by five or less, with two of those in overtime -- that isn't going to continue, historically even the best teams are around .500 in those games. Meanwhile, Cavs have only had seven games all season that they didn't win by double digits. That's the difference between being great and being fortunate.

Mike (Denver): Wow. Did you just call 24-2 fortunate???

 John Hollinger: Boston has been awesome, but they have the scoring margin of a team that's 22-4, which isn't quite as awesome-looking as 24-2. They're ahead of Cleveland in the standings because they've played great AND been fortunate. But that doesn't mean they've played better than the Cavs.

[Roy Hobbs]

Locked.  The purpose of this thread is clearly to bait Celticsblog members.  I would suggest that you review the following three rules:

• Do not “lure” or “bait” others towards rule-breaking behavior.  This prohibition applies site-wide.  Responding to such “bait” in a manner that violates Celticsblog rules is equally inappropriate, and is subject to the same level of punishment.
• No “trolling”.  Commenting in a thread in a manner that is likely to provoke an angry response from others is not permitted.   Posters should appreciate that in many instances, commentary that would otherwise be appropriate may not be appropriate in a specific thread (i.e., bringing up rumors of alleged cocaine use by a beloved player in a tribute thread dedicated to the memory of that player, etc.)
• Do not label fellow posters in a way that is likely to provoke a negative response.  Dependent upon context, examples include, but are not limited to, "fake fan", "bandwagon fan", "not a real fan", "hater", "koolaid drinker", etc.

Attacking out members as "homers" is not conducive to intelligent conversation.  Don't do it again.