Are the Celtics capable of winning 72 or more games?

[Jon]

You made some very valid points and for the most part I agree with you. The Bulls did have some very weak players on that team. They did, however, also have some of the best the league has seen as well. Obviously Jordan is the first that comes to mind. Pippen was also an outstanding player. He and Michael Cooper are the two players I can think of who could have guarded Jordan one on one.

Dennis Rodman was also on that team. It's not by chance that he has five rings either. He was the best rebounder the league has seen in a long while and a premier defensive player in his own right. Beyond those three it was pretty much a lot of role players that made up the rest of that team, but they knew their roles and excelled in them. I like your argument though and hope you are right. I do think this team has a shot at 70 wins but there are just so many things that need to fall into place that statically speaking it's unlikely. Time will tell, let the season begin.

I don't doubt that Jordan and Pippen were great.  While I don't necessarily buy this argument, I also don't think it's crazy to say that Pippen was the second best player in the league that year.  Rodman was also a great role player. 

Still, the league was very weak during that stretch.  That's no fault of Jordan's or the Bulls'.  But the plain fact of the matter is that the team's depth was terrible, and not just on the bench.  As I stated before, Luc Longley wouldn't make the roster of the '86 team and would likely only displace Shelden Williams on the current team's depth chart.  And Ron Harper at that stage of his career couldn't have started on this team. 

Still, we obviously can't prove any of this...

[Cman]

No, not going to happen.

I'll tell you why: Doc will overplay the vets in the first 30 games and there will be some injuries.  What will follow will be a bunch of games lost because the bench guys are starting.

Sorry, sounds negative, but I am back to a "I don't trust that Doc knows what he is doing" way of thinking.
 

[Jon]

No, not going to happen.

I'll tell you why: Doc will overplay the vets in the first 30 games and there will be some injuries.  What will follow will be a bunch of games lost because the bench guys are starting.

Sorry, sounds negative, but I am back to a "I don't trust that Doc knows what he is doing" way of thinking.
 

You may be right about it not happening, but I don't see Doc overplaying the vets.  With Wallace, House, Daniels, and Baby on board, he has the bench players to keep the Big Three's minutes reasonable.  Doesn't mean they'll play 30 mpg and it doesn't mean they won't get hurt, but it won't be from playing 40+ mpg. 

[snively]

It all depends on KG and Rondo, IMHO.  If those two are healthy and engaged, respectively, for the full season, then we have the best shot of anyone in the league.  Those two are the biggest keys to our defense, rebounding and hustle play.  Their contributions made 27-2 possible.  When you have that level of intensity and hustle, it makes the game fun and important for the whole roster and smooths over the inevitable rough shooting nights and butterfinger follies that would doom more lackadaisical teams. 

I'm optimistic about KG's health and Rondo's focus this year.  The team's depth will allow the team to maintain intensity without as much burnout, while the presence of Sheed and Daniels off the bench alongside Scal, House and Tony anchors the team with more gray hairs to minimize distractions and help keep the younger guys like Rondo from isolating and pursuing separate agendas.

[LooseCannon]

It's unlikely, but of course it is possible.  If KG was 100% healthy with no concerns about holding up, we'd be talking about 72+ wins with a lot more enthusiasm.

This is a squad that has a legitimate chance to break the team record for wins and a season.  Is anyone denying that?  If the Celtics remain healthy and no one falls off a cliff performance-wise due to age, this team should have no problem getting to 65+ wins.  It would be a disappointment if they didn't.  If they do that and a few things break right, then 72 is within reach.

People have brought up schedule strength.  The 72-73 team that had 68 wins had a very bad 76ers team to beat up on.  The Western Conference had five teams with fewer than 25 wins, while the East had only one (the Wizards).  So one thing that would help the Celtics would be some of the teams in the division imploding due to injury.

[Bankshot]

Sorry this is off topic, but I didn't want to start a thread just to say:  A whole week until the season starts! .. well 5 days anyway.  Let this season start already.

Oh, and I doubt they win 72 games, but I do think they'll win enough to get home court advantage in the East.

[Rondo2287]

Doubtful, I think after last year, they are more concerned with keeping everybody healthy for the playoffs than winning every possible game this year. I dunno, just my take.