The Official "I Think We Can Beat the Cavs In a 7 Game Series" Thread

[davemonsterband]

Nobody is listening to what I am saying.   Go find another example of a "blowout" game in the NBA where the team who won played two consecutive quarters not including the 4th and only won those 2 quarters by 4 points or less.  I can't find one, so if you can find it , post it and then maybe you can prove my statements false.  The Celtics just clinched their playoff spot, sunday's game was the first meaningless game they have played all year.  And the 1st quarter was the first meaningless quarter they have played all year.  And you want them to come out all pumped up and exert their energy.  Had they gone down another 10 points in the 2nd & 3rd I would call it a blowout but they didn't.

Like the Spurs and Pistons of yesteryear, a large portion of the season for the defending champs is meaningless. Every game for every team against them is so huge and they're so amped the C's proved to be uninterested for handfuls of games, which is always the case. KG and Paul weren't up and jumping around in blowouts like last year, the Cavs are that team this year. Regular season wins losses have meant nothing, there's been nothing to prove, there's no reason to prove anything, that can only be done in the playoffs for this squad. This season's been a waste of time, especially with KG out for 20 games. C's are 7 games out of best record in the league without KG for 20 plus games. IMO, when he's back, and with last year's success, that still makes the C's the best team in the league going into the playoffs.

[GroverTheClover]

Nobody is listening to what I am saying.   Go find another example of a "blowout" game in the NBA where the team who won played two consecutive quarters not including the 4th and only won those 2 quarters by 4 points or less.  I can't find one, so if you can find it , post it and then maybe you can prove my statements false.  The Celtics just clinched their playoff spot, sunday's game was the first meaningless game they have played all year.  And the 1st quarter was the first meaningless quarter they have played all year.  And you want them to come out all pumped up and exert their energy.  Had they gone down another 10 points in the 2nd & 3rd I would call it a blowout but they didn't.

I think you are being a tad bit unreasonable. You've basically created your own arbitrary definition of a "blowout" knowing very well that the term you've constructed defines a narrow set of circumstances. So when others fail to provide data to meet these random set of factors, you can feel good about being right?

Word.

[TonyAllenisbest]

That's not true.  Obviously if you can't find another NBA game called a blowout where the stats don't measure out the same as in this game then I am correct.   What did the Cavs do after the 1st quarter?  Absolutely nothing.  The 4th Qtr was garbage time. And if you are going to say Cavs had nothing to prove after the 1st Qtr, then what did Boston have to prove the entire game?

[Redz]

That's not true.  Obviously if you can't find another NBA game called a blowout where the stats don't measure out the same as in this game then I am correct.   What did the Cavs do after the 1st quarter?  Absolutely nothing.  The 4th Qtr was garbage time. And if you are going to say Cavs had nothing to prove after the 1st Qtr, then what did Boston have to prove the entire game?

http://www.nba.com/games/20090413/OKCPOR/gameinfo.html

Yesterday.  Blazers won by 30 but were outscored in the 2nd half.  This isn't the old CBA where you get points for winning quarters.

That the C's played even, but were never able to break into the big lead, shows that the Cavs never let up with a big lead,

[TonyAllenisbest]

That Blazers game doesn't show me anything.  They outscored the Thunder big 1st and 2nd Qtrs.   4th Qtr is garbage time.  So it was only 1 Qtr of competitive basketball for the Thunder.   Not the case in the Celtics game.  So keep trying to show me a similiar example.  The thing is I come up with all these Celtics stats all the time that nobody talks about.  How about this one.  Our best 12 players are supposed to be ready for the playoffs.  We haven't even played with more than 9 of them since Jan 4, and haven't played with more than 10 all season. Last game we played with our best 12 players was Game 6 of Finals.

[greg683x]

participating in this thread would go against superstitious beliefs of mine.  when it comes to teams i love, i never come out and say that theyre gonna win, i think its a jinx.  i know its crazy, but im serious. a perfect example was last year a friend of mine asked us if we'd sweep the hawks in the first round and eventually he was able to get me to say "it was a good possibility."  im suprised i didnt end up with grey hair after that series.

in the end though, im still doing my duty as a celtics fan in this situation.  so go C's! 

[Rondo_is_better]

participating in this thread would go against superstitious beliefs of mine.  when it comes to teams i love, i never come out and say that theyre gonna win, i think its a jinx.  i know its crazy, but im serious. a perfect example was last year a friend of mine asked us if we'd sweep the hawks in the first round and eventually he was able to get me to say "it was a good possibility."  im suprised i didnt end up with grey hair after that series.

in the end though, im still doing my duty as a celtics fan in this situation.  so go C's! 

Interesting. I think you and Cordobes are reading into the statement I created differently than I intended. I wasn't trying to say that the Celtics WILL win, gauranteed, 100%. I was saying that I have the faith they will, somehow, someway. That I have a gut feeling. That I believe we will pull out a series that is, in reality, a 50-50 crap shoot. Does that makes sense? Its not that I believe we are a vastly superior team and we will win it 100%, no problem, but that I believe we will happen to win the Celtics-Cavs "coin flip" series because the stars will align just right for the C's.

[greg683x]

participating in this thread would go against superstitious beliefs of mine.  when it comes to teams i love, i never come out and say that theyre gonna win, i think its a jinx.  i know its crazy, but im serious. a perfect example was last year a friend of mine asked us if we'd sweep the hawks in the first round and eventually he was able to get me to say "it was a good possibility."  im suprised i didnt end up with grey hair after that series.

in the end though, im still doing my duty as a celtics fan in this situation.  so go C's! 

Interesting. I think you and Cordobes are reading into the statement I created differently than I intended. I wasn't trying to say that the Celtics WILL win, gauranteed, 100%. I was saying that I have the faith they will, somehow, someway. That I have a gut feeling. That I believe we will pull out a series that is, in reality, a 50-50 crap shoot. Does that makes sense? Its not that I believe we are a vastly superior team and we will win it 100%, no problem, but that I believe we will happen to win the Celtics-Cavs "coin flip" series because the stars will align just right for the C's.

I gotcha, man. In that case, yes I do honestly believe that if the Celtics are healthy they are just as capable of beating the Cavs as they are of beating us. 

I know we got blown out on Sunday, and it was bad.  Seriously though, we man handled them pretty good on our homecourt not too long ago as well.  It wasnt as bad as they beat us on Sunday, but then again, we did it without Garnett.

[CoachBo]

The only thing I can say about this thread is "wow."

Can anyone seriously watch the brand of lazy, stupid basketball this club is playing and even remotely entertain the notion of winning a series from Cleveland?

Tonight, I'm not sure we even get to Cleveland, so the question may be moot.

[Rondo_is_better]

The only thing I can say about this thread is "wow."

Can anyone seriously watch the brand of lazy, stupid basketball this club is playing and even remotely entertain the notion of winning a series from Cleveland?

Tonight, I'm not sure we even get to Cleveland, so the question may be moot.

Maybe you shouldn't post in a thread called "I Believe We Can Beat the Cavs In a 7 Game Series" if you don't believe we can beat the Cavs in a seven game series. Instead, you can take your disdain for those of us who still believe in this team elsewhere.

[Redz]

That Blazers game doesn't show me anything.  They outscored the Thunder big 1st and 2nd Qtrs.   4th Qtr is garbage time.  So it was only 1 Qtr of competitive basketball for the Thunder.   Not the case in the Celtics game.  So keep trying to show me a similiar example.  The thing is I come up with all these Celtics stats all the time that nobody talks about.  How about this one.  Our best 12 players are supposed to be ready for the playoffs.  We haven't even played with more than 9 of them since Jan 4, and haven't played with more than 10 all season. Last game we played with our best 12 players was Game 6 of Finals.

I'm not going to look through every game of the season, but I found on the first day I looked that was pretty close.  My guess is it's not as rare as you suggest. 

It's sort of like Dan Duquette's "most days in first" statement.  Being competitive for 2 quarters, doesn't mean the game was competitive.

Let's say the game was competitive for the 2nd & 3rd quarters.  Doesn't this just make the fact that Cavs held a Celtics team that hadn't thrown in the towel in check, all the more impressive?  After building a big lead, they had no let down.

[TonyAllenisbest]

You want to see what overrated means and stats you never see by the media.  Check out cavs last 14 games. @IND w/o Marquis Daniels, BOS w/o KG & Powe, @PHI w/o Thaddeus Young, WAS w/o Gilbert Arenas, SA played with Ginobli but he was out for season next day so clearly was no where near 100%, @ORL lost by 29, @WAS lost by 8, DET w/o AI but Pistons are probably better without him now, DAL w/o Josh Howard, MIN w/o Big Al, NJ w/o Devin Harris, @NJ w/o Devin Harris, ATL w/o Marvin Williams, POR w/o Lamarcus Aldridge.  That is 14 games in a row playing an opponent, only 6 games playing a team with their top 3 players in which includes DET w/o AI & SA w hurt Ginobli. Considering Marquis Daniels is IND 4th best player and Marvin Williams is ATL 4th best player that is 2 wins in 14 games playing a team with its best 4 players playing, and those 2 games are DET and SA, so if you count AI as Detroit's top 3 player and count Ginobli as hurt, its 0. 0 wins in their last 14 games against teams with thier top 4 players in.  You think you would find that anywhere in the media?

[TonyAllenisbest]

If you can't find a game like I was talking about it is rare, and the POR/OKC game isn't close.

[Redz]

If you can't find a game like I was talking about it is rare, and the POR/OKC game isn't close.

I only looked for one day's games...What is your definition of "competitive basketball"?

[Steve Weinman]

If you can't find a game like I was talking about it is rare, and the POR/OKC game isn't close.

I only looked for one day's games...What is your definition of "competitive basketball"?

(Crash).

That was my head banging off my computer screen.

-sw