You just saw the 2009 NBA Champions

[waltzero]

There just crazy deep, and they can score, and with bynum back, they have alot of height and length to clog up the paint.

The Lakers are way too weak defensively to beat Boston, Cleveland, or Orlando. The best teams will clash this year in the ECF.

Bynum is talented but he just doesn't know the job yet; Perk/Howard/Z all know the job and that matters the most at that position. Bynum is not consistent at all and will give up more than he gets LA.

LA is just not deep compared to the the East's teams...people just say that because of all the brain washing from the gushing announcers during all those nationally televised LA games. LA players are always overrated. Their roster is so much more limited in talent than even Cleveland. Gasol and Odom are the wimpiest "stars" in the league.

I have a funny feeling it won't even be LA in the finals with the C's. Portland could beat LA in a series even, I hope LA has to play them. Although currently it means Houston won't, and that's another team that could beat LA in a playoff series.

[cordobes]

Meh... I'll quote my posts from 3 months ago. My position hasn't changed a bit:

Not to especially call you out EJ Playa (I agree that the Cavs have an outstanding team after the addition of Mo Willians and I've been saying since the start of the season that I don't like how we matchup with them as currently constructed a little bit), but this kind of threads (Fire Doc! Trade Ray! We're done! We can't beat X!) will look as foolish in a few months as the "We're better than last year", "Tony Allen >>> Posey", "All our youngster are SO MUCH BETTER!", "Perkins an All-Star?", "Walker, Giddens are lottery talent!" threads look now.

Things are a lot closer than you're assuming.

They're playing very well, we're playing atrociously - you'll seem some regression to the mean. Our 3rd best player is still better than their 2nd best player. Didn't we beat them just a couple of months ago?

I think our chances of beating them are very slim without more size and quality at the wing and at the post. But this I've been saying since the off-season. Bring Mutombo (sigh) and Delfino to this roster and it's a 50/50 series.

Nobody really knows what's going to happen - it's just too close to call and we'll need them to play the games. There are the pessimistics who don't seem to understand that a team that won 60 games is obviously good enough to beat anyone and can't really be called underdog in any set of circumstances. Then,  there are the blind homers here who don't really like basketball, just the Celtics, and believe TA>JP, Moore is a better fit than Smith "for our needs", Perkins is better than Bynum, POB was a steal, Bill Walker is NBA ready, HCA is completely irrelevant, we can beat Orlando easily, the Lakers are a fabrication of the press, etc, etc, just to stay within this season.

The truth, as almost always, is somewhere in the middle.

[Chris]

Nobody really knows what's going to happen - it's just too close to call and we'll need them to play the games. There are the pessimistics who don't seem to understand that a team that won 60 games is obviously good enough to beat anyone and can't really be called underdog in any set of circumstances. Then,  there are the blind homers here who don't really like basketball, just the Celtics, and believe TA>JP, Moore is a better fit than Smith "for our needs", Perkins is better than Bynum, POB was a steal, Bill Walker is NBA ready, HCA is completely irrelevant, we can beat Orlando easily, the Lakers are a fabrication of the press, etc, etc, just to stay within this season.

The truth, as almost always, is somewhere in the middle.

Well said.  And I would recommend anyone with a bad heart to not watch the C's/Cavs series (should they both make it that far).  It will almost certainly be incredibly close, and insanely intense.  I am getting giddy just thinking about how much fun this is going to be.

[Neurotic Guy]

Nobody really knows what's going to happen - it's just too close to call and we'll need them to play the games. There are the pessimistics who don't seem to understand that a team that won 60 games is obviously good enough to beat anyone and can't really be called underdog in any set of circumstances. Then,  there are the blind homers here who don't really like basketball, just the Celtics, and believe TA>JP, Moore is a better fit than Smith "for our needs", Perkins is better than Bynum, POB was a steal, Bill Walker is NBA ready, HCA is completely irrelevant, we can beat Orlando easily, the Lakers are a fabrication of the press, etc, etc, just to stay within this season.

The truth, as almost always, is somewhere in the middle.

Well said.  And I would recommend anyone with a bad heart to not watch the C's/Cavs series (should they both make it that far).  It will almost certainly be incredibly close, and insanely intense.  I am getting giddy just thinking about how much fun this is going to be.

And if, by some miracle, the Lakers are knocked off before the Cs/Cavs series, all the better.  That scenario would leave me thoroughly content to enjoy the C/C series without any thought to who might be better against LA (which might just be the Cavs).  Sadly, for me the only thing in sports that rivals (nearly) the joy of a Celtics win, is a Lakers loss.  I can't stomach the notion of the Lakers beating the Cs in the Finals -- it hurt too much 20 years ago for me to want any risk of that happening again. I suffered through last year's Finals to a joyful ending, but I'd be grateful to the B-ball gods if somehow the Lakers end up ousted in the West.

[TonyAllenisbest]

Cavs aren't winning anything this year.   Their playing the Pistons or Bulls in the first round and D-Wade in the 2nd round.  Ben Wallace is out.  C's will get 76ers in 1st round and banged up Orlando or Chi/Det in 2nd.  Yesterday's game was takin way out of proportion.   Cavs outscored the Celtics by 4 points in the 2nd & 3rd Qtr combined.  How is that a blowout? A blowout is beating your opponent by 10 points every Qtr.   a 9 minute stretch when you go 27-5 is not a blowout by any means.  Lebron's flex move is gay. Tony Allen doesn't like it.  Don't mess with Tony Allen.

[Rondo_is_better]

Cavs aren't winning anything this year.   Their playing the Pistons or Bulls in the first round and D-Wade in the 2nd round.  Ben Wallace is out.  C's will get 76ers in 1st round and banged up Orlando or Chi/Det in 2nd.  Yesterday's game was takin way out of proportion.   Cavs outscored the Celtics by 4 points in the 2nd & 3rd Qtr combined.  How is that a blowout? A blowout is beating your opponent by 10 points every Qtr.   a 9 minute stretch when you go 27-5 is not a blowout by any means.  Lebron's flex move is gay. Tony Allen doesn't like it.  Don't mess with Tony Allen.

I'm not gonna address the rest of your post, but....

losing by 31 points is a blowout any way you cut it. Its the final score that matters, not the runs or quarters in between.

[TonyAllenisbest]

No its not a blowout.  A blowout is outplaying your opponent in every Qtr.  Boston came out of the gate like it was a meaningless regular season game which it was.  Cavs came out of the gate like it was a playoff game.  Thus the 27-5 run in the opening minutes.  Then after realizing Boston had to play harder by the way the Cavs were playing they played basically 2 even qtrs in the 2nd and 3rd. 

[Rondo_is_better]

No its not a blowout.  A blowout is outplaying your opponent in every Qtr.  Boston came out of the gate like it was a meaningless regular season game which it was.  Cavs came out of the gate like it was a playoff game.  Thus the 27-5 run in the opening minutes.  Then after realizing Boston had to play harder by the way the Cavs were playing they played basically 2 even qtrs in the 2nd and 3rd. 

I know what happened--I watched the game. A blowout is losing by more than 20 points. I will be shocked if you can find anyone who agrees with your definition.

Game 6 against the Lakers was a blowout, wasn't it?

Yet, it was close through the second quarter. According to your definition, our 39 point Laker beat down was not a blowout. That doesn't make any sense.

[TonyAllenisbest]

In Game 6 of the Finals Celtics outscored Lakers in every QTR by 4, by 19, by 6 & by 10.   If the Cavs Celtics game was such a blowout Cavs would have won 2nd & 3rd Qts by 10 points each going up 40 at the end of the 3rd like the Magic did to them.  Also, when you are playing in a regular season game after your playoff spot is already determined the game is not the blowout everybody is making it to be. 

[BballTim]

Meh... I'll quote my posts from 3 months ago. My position hasn't changed a bit:

  Maybe it's just the way it reads, but I don't know that "I think our chances of beating them are very slim without more size and quality at the wing and at the post." and "Nobody really knows what's going to happen - it's just too close to call and we'll need them to play the games." are really the same position.

[Cman]

I'd be grateful to the B-ball gods if somehow the Lakers end up ousted in the West.

Yeah, me too.  I can't stand the Lakers.

[D Dub]

Meh... I'll quote my posts from 3 months ago. My position hasn't changed a bit:

Not to especially call you out EJ Playa (I agree that the Cavs have an outstanding team after the addition of Mo Willians and I've been saying since the start of the season that I don't like how we matchup with them as currently constructed a little bit), but this kind of threads (Fire Doc! Trade Ray! We're done! We can't beat X!) will look as foolish in a few months as the "We're better than last year", "Tony Allen >>> Posey", "All our youngster are SO MUCH BETTER!", "Perkins an All-Star?", "Walker, Giddens are lottery talent!" threads look now.

Things are a lot closer than you're assuming.

They're playing very well, we're playing atrociously - you'll seem some regression to the mean. Our 3rd best player is still better than their 2nd best player. Didn't we beat them just a couple of months ago?

I think our chances of beating them are very slim without more size and quality at the wing and at the post. But this I've been saying since the off-season. Bring Mutombo (sigh) and Delfino to this roster and it's a 50/50 series.

Nobody really knows what's going to happen - it's just too close to call and we'll need them to play the games. There are the pessimistics who don't seem to understand that a team that won 60 games is obviously good enough to beat anyone and can't really be called underdog in any set of circumstances. Then,  there are the blind homers here who don't really like basketball, just the Celtics, and believe TA>JP, Moore is a better fit than Smith "for our needs", Perkins is better than Bynum, POB was a steal, Bill Walker is NBA ready, HCA is completely irrelevant, we can beat Orlando easily, the Lakers are a fabrication of the press, etc, etc, just to stay within this season.

The truth, as almost always, is somewhere in the middle.

So, is it that you just enjoy talking to yourself, or that you truly believe you have never been wrong?  The arrogance you post with is a bit much sometimes.

[cordobes]

Meh... I'll quote my posts from 3 months ago. My position hasn't changed a bit:

Not to especially call you out EJ Playa (I agree that the Cavs have an outstanding team after the addition of Mo Willians and I've been saying since the start of the season that I don't like how we matchup with them as currently constructed a little bit), but this kind of threads (Fire Doc! Trade Ray! We're done! We can't beat X!) will look as foolish in a few months as the "We're better than last year", "Tony Allen >>> Posey", "All our youngster are SO MUCH BETTER!", "Perkins an All-Star?", "Walker, Giddens are lottery talent!" threads look now.

Things are a lot closer than you're assuming.

They're playing very well, we're playing atrociously - you'll seem some regression to the mean. Our 3rd best player is still better than their 2nd best player. Didn't we beat them just a couple of months ago?

I think our chances of beating them are very slim without more size and quality at the wing and at the post. But this I've been saying since the off-season. Bring Mutombo (sigh) and Delfino to this roster and it's a 50/50 series.

Nobody really knows what's going to happen - it's just too close to call and we'll need them to play the games. There are the pessimistics who don't seem to understand that a team that won 60 games is obviously good enough to beat anyone and can't really be called underdog in any set of circumstances. Then,  there are the blind homers here who don't really like basketball, just the Celtics, and believe TA>JP, Moore is a better fit than Smith "for our needs", Perkins is better than Bynum, POB was a steal, Bill Walker is NBA ready, HCA is completely irrelevant, we can beat Orlando easily, the Lakers are a fabrication of the press, etc, etc, just to stay within this season.

The truth, as almost always, is somewhere in the middle.

So, is it that you just enjoy talking to yourself, or that you truly believe you have never been wrong?  The arrogance you post with is a bit much sometimes.

I won't answer to your customary ad hominem attacks. If you find my posts arrogant, just don't read them. I can understand your bitterness though. I wonder who was right on this discussion:

http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=26049.msg437143#msg437143

Funny, I'm not feeling the need to do any backpedalling at all. What about you?

[D Dub]

hahaha, good memory.  as for my customary attack in question, i still think Moore is a better fit at 3rd string center than Smith (a career pf).  And it turns out Danny made the right move b/c Joe said publicly afterwards he wasn't coming here anyways.  I am much happier with a vet back there than say, watching Billy Walker try and play C - which is what we would have ended up with if the Celts brass had shared your opinion and waited it out for Smith.

I think the difference, cordobes, is that I come here to read posts by all the diehards that offer insight that just can't be found anywhere else.  You seem to only be interested in your own opinions, or at least that is what I gather from the handful of your posts that I have read.

[cornbreadsmart]

i'm sayig the lakers will go 12 and 0 in the playoffs before the finals. hard to say who's best for me. i think the cavs have PLAYED the best. i think the lakers SHOULD be the best. i think if all teams were in top health and bynum was never injured this year the lakers would be the best by now. if kg is say...80 percent i'd say c's pull an upset and win it again.