Give Walker and/or Giddens some minutes

[BillfromBoston]

Again, having seen Walker's college career up close, the one thing he'll do is at least play with a moderate degree of basketball intelligence. On that alone - which is an improvement over Tony - he has to get minutes right now.

It is indeed true that management has totally spit the bit at the wing position. They spit it this summer, and they spit it last week.

But we can't change that now. Someone's got to cut down Pierce's minutes. That someone should be Walker, IMHO. Let's take a look and see if we don't find out we can live without Tony Allen - forever.

This isn't "indeed true" it is "indeed opinion" that ignores a great many factors:

- Available veteran wings
- cost per year
- number of years
- opportunity cost of signing (who is left off the roster)
- minutes and production of player

What is true is that Pierce and Allen have played relatively the same amount of minutes that they did last year and when you look the situation month-by-month they've both gotten plenty or rest when this CURRENT roster has been healthy - Scalabrine, Tony Allen, and Eddie House have provided the team effective minutes that have kept Pierce and Allen below 36 mpg consistently.

Stars on all teams will play heavier minutes on average in big games against top competition and that's happened. Doc has also clearly been more liberal with their minutes this month - which is justified by the light schedule.

At this point in the season there are a few truths:

- This team is 45-12 and on pace for 60+ wins
- Cleveland, Orlando, and LAL are all also on pace for 60+ wins
- The NBA hasn't had 4 60+ win teams in years

The Celtics defense has been excellent this year, the stars minutes have been well managed, and the team is enjoying an excellent season offensively as well. Its seen its starting 5 grow and dramatically improve as a unit and has gotten plus production from 4 of its bench players.

The team is now on the verge of adding a taller veteran big man and a veteran PG to the roster, per everyone's acknowledged need - including Ainge since the beginning of the season, where he said those would be areas to monitor throughout the course of the year.

Now the team has some injuries and we've been discussing CURRENT minutes usage of Pierce and Allen. But I fail to see how this has been a year-long problem given the level of success this team has had and its ability to NOT over-extend their starters to do so.

Unless you are hell-bent on THEORIZING that this team absolutely needs a "long 3" for defensive purposes to ensure victory over Cleveland, I don't see much point belaboring the lack of a veteran 3. IMO Bill Walker can help fill this role with help from Brian Scalabrine and Ray Allen.

Ray has been FANTASTIC at the 3 this year - essentially being Pierce's back up. This has allowed TA and House to take the extra minutes at the 2 in order to keep Ray's minutes under control.

Going through the game-log, Ray and Paul have gotten plenty of rest throughout this year and their heavy minutes have come at intelligent times - nobody is being burned out, and that is consistent with their level of play this late in the year.

Once the team adds their long vet 4/5 and their vet PG they'll have completed their roster, just as I expected them to do - by using the trade deadline and the waiver process to pick up players of an EQUAL or HIGHER caliber than what was on the FA market last summer...clearly it has not hurt the teams record to do so, and in any normal year a 45-12 record would likely have a 3-4 game cushion saddled to it.

This team is in perfect position for the playoffs and should have a rested and veteran-laden team come first round...

Perfect position for the playoffs?

Whatever you say, Eric.

 

How are they not in a perfect position for the playoffs if they add both a long, jump-shooting backup F/C and a dribble-penetration, playmaking, scoring PG?

I'm just curious. The team is on pace for 65 wins, which is a remarkable number. Their team defense is stout and their team offense is dramatically improved.

Winning the home court will be tough this year, but Cleveland is on pace for around a 20+ game improvement and its hard to argue fault in not expecting them to best a 65 win season.

How are they not in a solid position entering the playoffs if they have their health and have added quality depth at their two key need positions?

I have no idea what your logic is at this point...the team is playing very well - had two statistically improbable losses to LAL and SA, and is bolstering their lineup with more vets....unless you are making the veteran wing THE linchpin hole that will cause defeat, I just don't get it...

[Roy Hobbs]

How are they not in a perfect position for the playoffs if they add both a long, jump-shooting backup F/C and a dribble-penetration, playmaking, scoring PG?

I'm just curious. The team is on pace for 65 wins, which is a remarkable number. Their team defense is stout and their team offense is dramatically improved.

Winning the home court will be tough this year, but Cleveland is on pace for around a 20+ game improvement and its hard to argue fault in not expecting them to best a 65 win season.

How are they not in a solid position entering the playoffs if they have their health and have added quality depth at their two key need positions?

I have no idea what your logic is at this point...the team is playing very well - had two statistically improbable losses to LAL and SA, and is bolstering their lineup with more vets....unless you are making the veteran wing THE linchpin hole that will cause defeat, I just don't get it...

Not to speak for CoachBo, but he's probably looking at the fact that Cleveland came within minutes of beating us in last year's playoffs.  Since that time, they have upgraded their team significantly, and we have replaced Posey, Brown, and Cassell with Mikki Moore and two rookies that don't play. 

Based on that, I think it's fair to say that our team isn't "perfectly" positioned.  Perfectly positioned would be entering the playoffs with a roster upgraded from last season.

[BudweiserCeltic]

Did you forget that we gave away most of our team last year in order to acquire Ray and Garnett? Cleveland improved this year via trades, and they had pieces to make that happen... we didn't have the assets. Not only that, we had quite a few free-agents to take care of this offseason.

[CelticsWhat35]

How are they not in a perfect position for the playoffs if they add both a long, jump-shooting backup F/C and a dribble-penetration, playmaking, scoring PG?

I'm just curious. The team is on pace for 65 wins, which is a remarkable number. Their team defense is stout and their team offense is dramatically improved.

Winning the home court will be tough this year, but Cleveland is on pace for around a 20+ game improvement and its hard to argue fault in not expecting them to best a 65 win season.

How are they not in a solid position entering the playoffs if they have their health and have added quality depth at their two key need positions?

I have no idea what your logic is at this point...the team is playing very well - had two statistically improbable losses to LAL and SA, and is bolstering their lineup with more vets....unless you are making the veteran wing THE linchpin hole that will cause defeat, I just don't get it...

Not to speak for CoachBo, but he's probably looking at the fact that Cleveland came within minutes of beating us in last year's playoffs.  Since that time, they have upgraded their team significantly, and we have replaced Posey, Brown, and Cassell with Mikki Moore and two rookies that don't play. 

Based on that, I think it's fair to say that our team isn't "perfectly" positioned.  Perfectly positioned would be entering the playoffs with a roster upgraded from last season.

I'm not sure you can definitively say that our roster isn't or at least won't be on par or better than the team last year.  True, we lost Posey, Brown and Cassell.  Now while Brown came up with a couple big moments, and played some tough defense, I don't think it's out of the question to believe that Moore/Smith and Marbury could replace their contributions in the playoffs (Brown and Cassell).

The loss of Posey is harder to make up, but we can't discount the added year of playing together for the team, especially the comfort level of Ray, as well as the improvement of the younger guys, especially Rondo on the road.  It's not a coincidence that when Rondo played poorly on the road in the playoffs, the Celtics lost.  If he can continue the consistent play he's done throughout the season into the playoffs, it will make the team that much more dangerous.

[BillfromBoston]

How are they not in a perfect position for the playoffs if they add both a long, jump-shooting backup F/C and a dribble-penetration, playmaking, scoring PG?

I'm just curious. The team is on pace for 65 wins, which is a remarkable number. Their team defense is stout and their team offense is dramatically improved.

Winning the home court will be tough this year, but Cleveland is on pace for around a 20+ game improvement and its hard to argue fault in not expecting them to best a 65 win season.

How are they not in a solid position entering the playoffs if they have their health and have added quality depth at their two key need positions?

I have no idea what your logic is at this point...the team is playing very well - had two statistically improbable losses to LAL and SA, and is bolstering their lineup with more vets....unless you are making the veteran wing THE linchpin hole that will cause defeat, I just don't get it...

Not to speak for CoachBo, but he's probably looking at the fact that Cleveland came within minutes of beating us in last year's playoffs.  Since that time, they have upgraded their team significantly, and we have replaced Posey, Brown, and Cassell with Mikki Moore and two rookies that don't play. 

Based on that, I think it's fair to say that our team isn't "perfectly" positioned.  Perfectly positioned would be entering the playoffs with a roster upgraded from last season.

I'm not sure you can definitively say that our roster isn't or at least won't be on par or better than the team last year.  True, we lost Posey, Brown and Cassell.  Now while Brown came up with a couple big moments, and played some tough defense, I don't think it's out of the question to believe that Moore/Smith and Marbury could replace their contributions in the playoffs (Brown and Cassell).

The loss of Posey is harder to make up, but we can't discount the added year of playing together for the team, especially the comfort level of Ray, as well as the improvement of the younger guys, especially Rondo on the road.  It's not a coincidence that when Rondo played poorly on the road in the playoffs, the Celtics lost.  If he can continue the consistent play he's done throughout the season into the playoffs, it will make the team that much more dangerous.

Excactly...

I am highly skeptical that retaining Posey or adding a Matt Barnes or Michael Finley would have off-set Cleveland's addition of Mo Williams.

Further, I think Moore is about as good a big man addition as there was available in the off-season. True, they could have paid Joe Smith nearly 4 million a year themselves over 2 years, but I don't think he's worth it - especially when Rasheed Wallace or another player of greater impact may have had to be bypassed in order to do so.

Finally, I think its extremely presumptuous to say with certainly that this team is "worse" than last year when their are so many factors playing into the perceived narrowing of the gap between LAL/CLE and BOS.

I don't think a couple of losses to those teams constitutes a definitive proof of anything for one. In the playoffs both Cleveland and LA had games against us where they were equally as good as the two recent regular season losses.

I also think its quite obvious that the Celtics starting unit is much better than last year - they are more diverse in their attack offensive and have seen substantial improvement from 3 out of 5 players.

Considering the record of the team is very similar if not identical, I think much of this "we're worse" stuff comes only from the losses to SA/LAL/CLE and has little to do with anything else.

Roy, as the stats guy, could you please find out what the average offensive and defensive production was from last year's bench relative to this years?

I don't think the team is producing fewer points or giving up many more in all actuality - i'm fairly certain that the bench has been nearly as productive as it was last year.

I'm going to throw it out there - I think that Boston is BETTER than last year right now...and will only continue to improve as they incorporate 2 new players to their rotation.

I believe that what we'e seen is a Laker team more dedicated to defense and a Cleveland team that added an All Star to their team. Boston was never going to get better in these two areas - unless you count Rondo's improvement as "adding an All Star."

So, I think we're a stronger team and that our chief competition is also stronger...what transpires in a series is anyone's guess, but I don't think there is any reason to doubt our ability to repeat as champions...we were a hairs-breath away from losing last year in the playoffs - that's usually how late-round series go.

[winsomme]

we were a hairs-breath away from losing last year in the playoffs - that's usually how late-round series go.

yeah, but like we were saying in the other thread, what did those series turn on?

whose gonna make those added plays this year? Is it going to be Moore? Marbury?

[papa shuttlesworth]

I remember seeing a graphic recently that this year's bench averages 3 ppg less than last year's.  I was pretty surprised.  Adding the improvements of Ray and Rondo to that, and Ainge's plan for internal growth does not seem like a huge failure after all.

What's more, all of our bench players (excluding rookies) now have exactly the same number of rings that Posey did when he came to the Celtics.

[Cman]

I am highly skeptical that retaining Posey or adding a Matt Barnes or Michael Finley would have off-set Cleveland's addition of Mo Williams.

Further, I think Moore is about as good a big man addition as there was available in the off-season. True, they could have paid Joe Smith nearly 4 million a year themselves over 2 years, but I don't think he's worth it - especially when Rasheed Wallace or another player of greater impact may have had to be bypassed in order to do so.

Finally, I think its extremely presumptuous to say with certainly that this team is "worse" than last year when their are so many factors playing into the perceived narrowing of the gap between LAL/CLE and BOS.

I don't think a couple of losses to those teams constitutes a definitive proof of anything for one. In the playoffs both Cleveland and LA had games against us where they were equally as good as the two recent regular season losses.

I also think its quite obvious that the Celtics starting unit is much better than last year - they are more diverse in their attack offensive and have seen substantial improvement from 3 out of 5 players.

Considering the record of the team is very similar if not identical, I think much of this "we're worse" stuff comes only from the losses to SA/LAL/CLE and has little to do with anything else.

Roy, as the stats guy, could you please find out what the average offensive and defensive production was from last year's bench relative to this years?

I don't think the team is producing fewer points or giving up many more in all actuality - i'm fairly certain that the bench has been nearly as productive as it was last year.

I'm going to throw it out there - I think that Boston is BETTER than last year right now...and will only continue to improve as they incorporate 2 new players to their rotation.

I believe that what we'e seen is a Laker team more dedicated to defense and a Cleveland team that added an All Star to their team. Boston was never going to get better in these two areas - unless you count Rondo's improvement as "adding an All Star."

So, I think we're a stronger team and that our chief competition is also stronger...what transpires in a series is anyone's guess, but I don't think there is any reason to doubt our ability to repeat as champions...we were a hairs-breath away from losing last year in the playoffs - that's usually how late-round series go.

Bill, some very interesting points. 
Another angle to consider is that Ray's shots were just not falling for him in the Atlanta and Cleveland series, as I recall.  While the Cs were "a hair's breath away" from losing, one could argue that if Ray Allen was playing as Ray Allen, it wouldn't have been that close.

Why do I bring this up?  Because it seems to me that a lot has to do with how the team is playing at any given time.  There are times when a team seems out-of synch, times when a team seems in-synch.  The GSW, entering the playoffs against Dallas a couple years ago, is a good example of a team "in-synch" at the right time.  If a team is deep enough, it can weather a slump from one of its main players.  It seems to me that this year, like last year, different players have been stepping up when a key player is in a slump or out with injury.  If the Cs can do this in the playoffs, then they have a shot.

[BillfromBoston]

I am highly skeptical that retaining Posey or adding a Matt Barnes or Michael Finley would have off-set Cleveland's addition of Mo Williams.

Further, I think Moore is about as good a big man addition as there was available in the off-season. True, they could have paid Joe Smith nearly 4 million a year themselves over 2 years, but I don't think he's worth it - especially when Rasheed Wallace or another player of greater impact may have had to be bypassed in order to do so.

Finally, I think its extremely presumptuous to say with certainly that this team is "worse" than last year when their are so many factors playing into the perceived narrowing of the gap between LAL/CLE and BOS.

I don't think a couple of losses to those teams constitutes a definitive proof of anything for one. In the playoffs both Cleveland and LA had games against us where they were equally as good as the two recent regular season losses.

I also think its quite obvious that the Celtics starting unit is much better than last year - they are more diverse in their attack offensive and have seen substantial improvement from 3 out of 5 players.

Considering the record of the team is very similar if not identical, I think much of this "we're worse" stuff comes only from the losses to SA/LAL/CLE and has little to do with anything else.

Roy, as the stats guy, could you please find out what the average offensive and defensive production was from last year's bench relative to this years?

I don't think the team is producing fewer points or giving up many more in all actuality - i'm fairly certain that the bench has been nearly as productive as it was last year.

I'm going to throw it out there - I think that Boston is BETTER than last year right now...and will only continue to improve as they incorporate 2 new players to their rotation.

I believe that what we'e seen is a Laker team more dedicated to defense and a Cleveland team that added an All Star to their team. Boston was never going to get better in these two areas - unless you count Rondo's improvement as "adding an All Star."

So, I think we're a stronger team and that our chief competition is also stronger...what transpires in a series is anyone's guess, but I don't think there is any reason to doubt our ability to repeat as champions...we were a hairs-breath away from losing last year in the playoffs - that's usually how late-round series go.

Bill, some very interesting points. 
Another angle to consider is that Ray's shots were just not falling for him in the Atlanta and Cleveland series, as I recall.  While the Cs were "a hair's breath away" from losing, one could argue that if Ray Allen was playing as Ray Allen, it wouldn't have been that close.

Why do I bring this up?  Because it seems to me that a lot has to do with how the team is playing at any given time.  There are times when a team seems out-of synch, times when a team seems in-synch.  The GSW, entering the playoffs against Dallas a couple years ago, is a good example of a team "in-synch" at the right time.  If a team is deep enough, it can weather a slump from one of its main players.  It seems to me that this year, like last year, different players have been stepping up when a key player is in a slump or out with injury.  If the Cs can do this in the playoffs, then they have a shot.

Absolutely - the infamous "momentum" shall inevitably rear its head come June....health as always  will also play its part...

As for "who makes up those extra plays" I will stand up and state right now that Rondo, Ray, and Perk are going to make more plays than they did last year - I would put good money on those three making up for the big plays that Posey and PJ contributed.

The notion that its a one-for-one exchange with starter/bench is also a misnomer...the starters can and will be utilized differently with the bench group to factor in for the differences in roster...so its not like the "downgrades" to Posey and PJ will have to mirror the contributions of those two exactly to make up for their loss...sometimes it seems like people think like this...

Our best players are better and the bench may be getting a big time X-Factor to boot...this team is the only team in the NBA with 4 All Stars and certainly the only one with 4 first-option, team-leader types, (i'm counting Rondo in that group now.)

I just see a lot more emotion than logic in regards to this "we're worse" argument and I think a lot of the arguments are based on logic that assumes a great many things that are up for debate or opinion.

[cordobes]

You see, Doc played the kids on garbage time yesterday.

In the Phoenix game it wouldn't make sense, different circunstances: it was necessary to secure the win and the Suns can easily come back from 15 in 3 minutes, let alone 5.

Nevertheless, I doubt Walker or Giddens will be serious playoffs contributors. Can anyone see one of them blossoming so fast in these couple of months? Imagine Pierce getting 2 quick fouls in a game. Are we going to count 1 of these kids to play 20 minutes in an elimination game of the ECF or something? It can happen, but to me it screams more "Hollywood" than "smart personnel decisions".

If there's the slighest sign of trouble with Allen's rehabilitation, Ainge must add a new wing. House and Scal can't defend the kind of players we're going to face and the idea that we'll only need to matchup them with backups is a pipedream.

[BillfromBoston]

You see, Doc played the kids on garbage time yesterday.

In the Phoenix game it wouldn't make sense, different circunstances: it was necessary to secure the win and the Suns can easily come back from 15 in 3 minutes, let alone 5.

Nevertheless, I doubt Walker or Giddens will be serious playoffs contributors. Can anyone see one of them blossoming so fast in these couple of months? Imagine Pierce getting 2 quick fouls in a game. Are we going to count 1 of these kids to play 20 minutes in an elimination game of the ECF or something? It can happen, but to me it screams more "Hollywood" than "smart personnel decisions".

If there's the slighest sign of trouble with Allen's rehabilitation, Ainge must add a new wing. House and Scal can't defend the kind of players we're going to face and the idea that we'll only need to matchup them with backups is a pipedream.

The historical law of averages with rookies of course makes it improbable - but i'd certainly like to see Walker get the same opportunity that Pruitt has received thus far, and I think we will.

What Walker does with it is up to him, but there is a need for another wing to step up with TA out and i'd rather see Walker get a shot than increase House/Pruitt's minutes at the wing and use Ray Allen as the main backup 3, which is what they did last night until garbage time.

There are enough late round rookies contributing to playoff teams that I think Walker deserves a look-see...the worst he can do is fail...but if he doesn't, you've just added a very prodigious talent into the mix, who may lack in polish, but is capable of the spectacular...

[winsomme]

I am highly skeptical that retaining Posey or adding a Matt Barnes or Michael Finley would have off-set Cleveland's addition of Mo Williams.

Further, I think Moore is about as good a big man addition as there was available in the off-season. True, they could have paid Joe Smith nearly 4 million a year themselves over 2 years, but I don't think he's worth it - especially when Rasheed Wallace or another player of greater impact may have had to be bypassed in order to do so.

Finally, I think its extremely presumptuous to say with certainly that this team is "worse" than last year when their are so many factors playing into the perceived narrowing of the gap between LAL/CLE and BOS.

I don't think a couple of losses to those teams constitutes a definitive proof of anything for one. In the playoffs both Cleveland and LA had games against us where they were equally as good as the two recent regular season losses.

I also think its quite obvious that the Celtics starting unit is much better than last year - they are more diverse in their attack offensive and have seen substantial improvement from 3 out of 5 players.

Considering the record of the team is very similar if not identical, I think much of this "we're worse" stuff comes only from the losses to SA/LAL/CLE and has little to do with anything else.

Roy, as the stats guy, could you please find out what the average offensive and defensive production was from last year's bench relative to this years?

I don't think the team is producing fewer points or giving up many more in all actuality - i'm fairly certain that the bench has been nearly as productive as it was last year.

I'm going to throw it out there - I think that Boston is BETTER than last year right now...and will only continue to improve as they incorporate 2 new players to their rotation.

I believe that what we'e seen is a Laker team more dedicated to defense and a Cleveland team that added an All Star to their team. Boston was never going to get better in these two areas - unless you count Rondo's improvement as "adding an All Star."

So, I think we're a stronger team and that our chief competition is also stronger...what transpires in a series is anyone's guess, but I don't think there is any reason to doubt our ability to repeat as champions...we were a hairs-breath away from losing last year in the playoffs - that's usually how late-round series go.

Bill, some very interesting points. 
Another angle to consider is that Ray's shots were just not falling for him in the Atlanta and Cleveland series, as I recall.  While the Cs were "a hair's breath away" from losing, one could argue that if Ray Allen was playing as Ray Allen, it wouldn't have been that close.

Why do I bring this up?  Because it seems to me that a lot has to do with how the team is playing at any given time.  There are times when a team seems out-of synch, times when a team seems in-synch.  The GSW, entering the playoffs against Dallas a couple years ago, is a good example of a team "in-synch" at the right time.  If a team is deep enough, it can weather a slump from one of its main players.  It seems to me that this year, like last year, different players have been stepping up when a key player is in a slump or out with injury.  If the Cs can do this in the playoffs, then they have a shot.

Absolutely - the infamous "momentum" shall inevitably rear its head come June....health as always  will also play its part...

As for "who makes up those extra plays" I will stand up and state right now that Rondo, Ray, and Perk are going to make more plays than they did last year - I would put good money on those three making up for the big plays that Posey and PJ contributed.

The notion that its a one-for-one exchange with starter/bench is also a misnomer...the starters can and will be utilized differently with the bench group to factor in for the differences in roster...so its not like the "downgrades" to Posey and PJ will have to mirror the contributions of those two exactly to make up for their loss...sometimes it seems like people think like this...

Our best players are better and the bench may be getting a big time X-Factor to boot...this team is the only team in the NBA with 4 All Stars and certainly the only one with 4 first-option, team-leader types, (i'm counting Rondo in that group now.)

I just see a lot more emotion than logic in regards to this "we're worse" argument and I think a lot of the arguments are based on logic that assumes a great many things that are up for debate or opinion.

I feel like of all the major leagues, the NBA Champ is most often the best team. certainly injury can rear its head, but momentum is less of a factor.

If you win an NBA TItle, you are almost certainly the better team.

[BballTim]

How are they not in a perfect position for the playoffs if they add both a long, jump-shooting backup F/C and a dribble-penetration, playmaking, scoring PG?

I'm just curious. The team is on pace for 65 wins, which is a remarkable number. Their team defense is stout and their team offense is dramatically improved.

Winning the home court will be tough this year, but Cleveland is on pace for around a 20+ game improvement and its hard to argue fault in not expecting them to best a 65 win season.

How are they not in a solid position entering the playoffs if they have their health and have added quality depth at their two key need positions?

I have no idea what your logic is at this point...the team is playing very well - had two statistically improbable losses to LAL and SA, and is bolstering their lineup with more vets....unless you are making the veteran wing THE linchpin hole that will cause defeat, I just don't get it...

Not to speak for CoachBo, but he's probably looking at the fact that Cleveland came within minutes of beating us in last year's playoffs.  Since that time, they have upgraded their team significantly, and we have replaced Posey, Brown, and Cassell with Mikki Moore and two rookies that don't play. 

  The team grew/improved as the playoffs went on. We were a better team against Detroit than we were against Cleveland and a better team against LA than we were against Detroit. Atlanta took us to 7 games. If we'd replayed that series after the LA series we might have blown them out 7 times in a row. The team's more used to playing together than they were last year. They have the confidence and experience of nba champions. Rondo has improved significantly and is still improving. These are arguably as significant as any upgrades Cleveland or LA made.
 
  Note: While I meant what I said I do realize you were stating someone else's point of view...

[winsomme]

How are they not in a perfect position for the playoffs if they add both a long, jump-shooting backup F/C and a dribble-penetration, playmaking, scoring PG?

I'm just curious. The team is on pace for 65 wins, which is a remarkable number. Their team defense is stout and their team offense is dramatically improved.

Winning the home court will be tough this year, but Cleveland is on pace for around a 20+ game improvement and its hard to argue fault in not expecting them to best a 65 win season.

How are they not in a solid position entering the playoffs if they have their health and have added quality depth at their two key need positions?

I have no idea what your logic is at this point...the team is playing very well - had two statistically improbable losses to LAL and SA, and is bolstering their lineup with more vets....unless you are making the veteran wing THE linchpin hole that will cause defeat, I just don't get it...

Not to speak for CoachBo, but he's probably looking at the fact that Cleveland came within minutes of beating us in last year's playoffs.  Since that time, they have upgraded their team significantly, and we have replaced Posey, Brown, and Cassell with Mikki Moore and two rookies that don't play. 

  The team grew/improved as the playoffs went on. We were a better team against Detroit than we were against Cleveland and a better team against LA than we were against Detroit. Atlanta took us to 7 games. If we'd replayed that series after the LA series we might have blown them out 7 times in a row. The team's more used to playing together than they were last year. They have the confidence and experience of nba champions. Rondo has improved significantly and is still improving. These are arguably as significant as any upgrades Cleveland or LA made.
 

That's hard to really say conclusively IMO regarding our improvement over the course of the playoffs.

to me, CLE was the second best team last year. did we really improve that much or were DET and LA inferior to CLE?

[winsomme]

also, don't forget about Lebron's improvement.

and what about DWest's improvement? There seems to be a big jump there.