Remember who really believed when the stories change

[RAcker]

Total media blackout for the Celtics. No one is talking about them. I think they are no sure if the postseason Celtics are for real yet and don't want to go out on a limb.

In general I think the attitude is "easy to do that against Miami...let's see how they do against the Cavs"

All the stories I see about Heat vs Celtics are about Wade. If he'll stay or go. If he can get any help. Nothing about us shutting them down. We have played great this series. The Heat have been playing out of there minds at the end of the season and now they've hit a brick wall.

I'm glad you pointed this out, but shhhhhh.  We are still flying under the radar. 

Even if we sweep this series or otherwise win it convincingly, don't for one second think that Cleveland is not wanting a piece of us.  We just have to keep up this level of defense and we will always give ourselves a great chance.

[indeedproceed]

Yeah this series only matters to the rest of the nation if we lose it.

Sometimes i feel like the celtics only matter to ESPN when they lose. We're easy to hate but the same authors are reluctant to pat the boys on teh back after a solid win.

[Chris]

Yeah this series only matters to the rest of the nation if we lose it.

Sometimes i feel like the celtics only matter to ESPN when they lose. We're easy to hate but the same authors are reluctant to pat the boys on teh back after a solid win.

Eh, not sure about online, but on TV, I heard plenty of C's love.

I think the problem is that they have now won two games, and played about 5 1/2 quarters at anything close to the level they should have been playing the entire season at.  So its tough to give them too much credit yet.  Basically, they have done what they are supposed to do/

I think if they sweep this series, and more importantly, if they take one of the first couple games at Cleveland, then you are going to see everyone jumping on the bandwagon.

[drza44]

Yeah this series only matters to the rest of the nation if we lose it.

Sometimes i feel like the celtics only matter to ESPN when they lose. We're easy to hate but the same authors are reluctant to pat the boys on teh back after a solid win.

I was watching PTI yesterday, and Cornheiser and Wilbon were discussing which was bigger news: Wade being unhappy or the Celtics winning.  They ended the segment with Cornheiser sarcastically asking "But how far do they go?  Do they beat the Cavs?  Do they beat the Cavs?" as his way of writing them off and pointing out why them winning against Miami wasn't news.  We'll see.

[Roy Hobbs]

I was watching PTI yesterday, and Cornheiser and Wilbon were discussing which was bigger news: Wade being unhappy or the Celtics winning.  They ended the segment with Cornheiser sarcastically asking "But how far do they go?  Do they beat the Cavs?  Do they beat the Cavs?" as his way of writing them off and pointing out why them winning against Miami wasn't news.  We'll see.

In fairness to Tony, isn't that the big question?  If, at the beginning of the season, somebody had told all of us Celtics fans that we won in the first round, our reaction would have been "so what?"  If we beat Miami -- even if it's in four games -- it's not much of an accomplishment, in my mind.  For this season to mean anything, we've got to beat Cleveland.

[Chris]

I was watching PTI yesterday, and Cornheiser and Wilbon were discussing which was bigger news: Wade being unhappy or the Celtics winning.  They ended the segment with Cornheiser sarcastically asking "But how far do they go?  Do they beat the Cavs?  Do they beat the Cavs?" as his way of writing them off and pointing out why them winning against Miami wasn't news.  We'll see.

In fairness to Tony, isn't that the big question?  If, at the beginning of the season, somebody had told all of us Celtics fans that we won in the first round, our reaction would have been "so what?"  If we beat Miami -- even if it's in four games -- it's not much of an accomplishment, in my mind.  For this season to mean anything, we've got to beat Cleveland.

Agreed.  And I think the C's would agree as well.  Beating Miami is not an accomplishment.  If they lose to Miami it would be a HUGE disappointment.  Generally, we don't give teams too much credit for not being a huge disappointment. 

[drza44]

I was watching PTI yesterday, and Cornheiser and Wilbon were discussing which was bigger news: Wade being unhappy or the Celtics winning.  They ended the segment with Cornheiser sarcastically asking "But how far do they go?  Do they beat the Cavs?  Do they beat the Cavs?" as his way of writing them off and pointing out why them winning against Miami wasn't news.  We'll see.

In fairness to Tony, isn't that the big question?  If, at the beginning of the season, somebody had told all of us Celtics fans that we won in the first round, our reaction would have been "so what?"  If we beat Miami -- even if it's in four games -- it's not much of an accomplishment, in my mind.  For this season to mean anything, we've got to beat Cleveland.

Agreed.  And I think the C's would agree as well.  Beating Miami is not an accomplishment.  If they lose to Miami it would be a HUGE disappointment.  Generally, we don't give teams too much credit for not being a huge disappointment. 

I agree with both of your sentiments.  I've been pretty consistent that I think the Cs are going to win the title, and (at least in my opinion) I've supported that opinion with enough facts that it's not purely a homer pick.  I think there's enough logical information out there to suggest why this season has gone like it has, and that this team is still a legit contender.  Ironically, the only team in the NBA that legitimately worries me in a series IS the Cavs (with the Lakers/Spurs secondary), so it sucks that if all goes right we'd be seeing them so early.

That said, my point on the PTI commentary was that Tony wasn't really asking a question.  He was saying that the Celtics had absolutely no chance to beat the Cavs, and was only phrasing it as a question as a means to sarcastically browbeat Wilbon, who was suggesting that the Celts winning was news.

I got no issue with him having that opinion.  I just think it's incorrect, and I look forward to tuning into the show in a couple weeks when they actually have to discuss the impossible possibility that maybe the Celts really CAN beat the Cavs.

[Chris]

I was watching PTI yesterday, and Cornheiser and Wilbon were discussing which was bigger news: Wade being unhappy or the Celtics winning.  They ended the segment with Cornheiser sarcastically asking "But how far do they go?  Do they beat the Cavs?  Do they beat the Cavs?" as his way of writing them off and pointing out why them winning against Miami wasn't news.  We'll see.

In fairness to Tony, isn't that the big question?  If, at the beginning of the season, somebody had told all of us Celtics fans that we won in the first round, our reaction would have been "so what?"  If we beat Miami -- even if it's in four games -- it's not much of an accomplishment, in my mind.  For this season to mean anything, we've got to beat Cleveland.

Agreed.  And I think the C's would agree as well.  Beating Miami is not an accomplishment.  If they lose to Miami it would be a HUGE disappointment.  Generally, we don't give teams too much credit for not being a huge disappointment. 

I agree with both of your sentiments.  I've been pretty consistent that I think the Cs are going to win the title, and (at least in my opinion) I've supported that opinion with enough facts that it's not purely a homer pick.  I think there's enough logical information out there to suggest why this season has gone like it has, and that this team is still a legit contender.  Ironically, the only team in the NBA that legitimately worries me in a series IS the Cavs (with the Lakers/Spurs secondary), so it sucks that if all goes right we'd be seeing them so early.

That said, my point on the PTI commentary was that Tony wasn't really asking a question.  He was saying that the Celtics had absolutely no chance to beat the Cavs, and was only phrasing it as a question as a means to sarcastically browbeat Wilbon, who was suggesting that the Celts winning was news.

I got no issue with him having that opinion.  I just think it's incorrect, and I look forward to tuning into the show in a couple weeks when they actually have to discuss the impossible possibility that maybe the Celts really CAN beat the Cavs.

Can you really believe them for thinking the Cavs will destroy the C's though?  The Cavs have put together one of the better seasons in the history of the NBA, and got significantly better at the trade deadline, while the C's fell WAY below expectations, and really have given little hard evidence that they will beat a team as good as the Cavs in a 7 game series.

I happen to think the C's have a very good chance about the Cavs (I personally think they match up better against them than some other contenders), but I really cannot argue with someone who does not see it the same way, since there is so much evidence that points that way.

[drza44]

I was watching PTI yesterday, and Cornheiser and Wilbon were discussing which was bigger news: Wade being unhappy or the Celtics winning.  They ended the segment with Cornheiser sarcastically asking "But how far do they go?  Do they beat the Cavs?  Do they beat the Cavs?" as his way of writing them off and pointing out why them winning against Miami wasn't news.  We'll see.

In fairness to Tony, isn't that the big question?  If, at the beginning of the season, somebody had told all of us Celtics fans that we won in the first round, our reaction would have been "so what?"  If we beat Miami -- even if it's in four games -- it's not much of an accomplishment, in my mind.  For this season to mean anything, we've got to beat Cleveland.

Agreed.  And I think the C's would agree as well.  Beating Miami is not an accomplishment.  If they lose to Miami it would be a HUGE disappointment.  Generally, we don't give teams too much credit for not being a huge disappointment. 

I agree with both of your sentiments.  I've been pretty consistent that I think the Cs are going to win the title, and (at least in my opinion) I've supported that opinion with enough facts that it's not purely a homer pick.  I think there's enough logical information out there to suggest why this season has gone like it has, and that this team is still a legit contender.  Ironically, the only team in the NBA that legitimately worries me in a series IS the Cavs (with the Lakers/Spurs secondary), so it sucks that if all goes right we'd be seeing them so early.

That said, my point on the PTI commentary was that Tony wasn't really asking a question.  He was saying that the Celtics had absolutely no chance to beat the Cavs, and was only phrasing it as a question as a means to sarcastically browbeat Wilbon, who was suggesting that the Celts winning was news.

I got no issue with him having that opinion.  I just think it's incorrect, and I look forward to tuning into the show in a couple weeks when they actually have to discuss the impossible possibility that maybe the Celts really CAN beat the Cavs.

Can you really believe them for thinking the Cavs will destroy the C's though?  The Cavs have put together one of the better seasons in the history of the NBA, and got significantly better at the trade deadline, while the C's fell WAY below expectations, and really have given little hard evidence that they will beat a team as good as the Cavs in a 7 game series.

I happen to think the C's have a very good chance about the Cavs (I personally think they match up better against them than some other contenders), but I really cannot argue with someone who does not see it the same way, since there is so much evidence that points that way.

Like I said, I've got no issue with him having the opinion.  I just think it's wrong and look forward to hearing the surprise in his voice when he has to acknowledge the possibility.

[drza44]

I haven't updated this since the start of the last round.  This Cs/Cavs series still has a loooong way to go...it's essentially just a best-of-5 now instead of a best-of-7.  So definitely no gloating.  Just continuing to put some things out there for posterity's sake that we can look back upon after this all plays out.

ESPN: Obviously I have to post the clean-sweep of ESPN analysts that predicted the Cavs would win.  



http://espn.go.com/nba/playoffs/2010/matchup/_/teams/celtics-cavaliers

CNNSI: The graphic is a bit more convoluted and the picks were made before the first round, but all 5 CNNSI analysts also picked the Cavs to win: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/basketball/nba/04/16/expert.picks.playoffs/index.html

Various former NBA players I have no link except for where it was discussed on this board, but Barkley was absolutely adamant that the Cavs would beat the Celtics easily, saying that he would bet everything that he owns on it ( http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=37099.0 ).

Jalen Rose and Bruce Bowen had similar, if not as emphatic, sentiments when I heard them on various radio/TV interviews.  Their essential take home was that LeBron was too good and the Celtics too old to beat the Cavs.

Cavs blog: Not a shock that they pick the Cavs.  Fairly in-depth analysis/opinion on the various matchups: http://www.mtrmedia.com/cavaliers/2010/04/an-indepth-breakdown-of-the-cleveland-cavaliersboston-celtics-series-who-has-the-edge.html

Dan Shaughnessy: In a surprising move, Shaugnessy picked the Cs to take out the Cavs. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/dan_shaughnessy/04/25/celtics/index.html?eref=si_writers

Benjamin cox (Cavs blog): In a not surprising at all response, this Cavs blogger thinks Shaughnessy is an idiot for his prediction: http://benjamincox.blogspot.com/2010/04/dan-shaughnessy-is-idiot.html

Brit Robson, CNNSI: Thinks Cavs will win, but did notice that the Cs look better and hedged his bet from Cavs in 5 to Cavs in 7.  http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/britt_robson/04/29/semifinal.cavaliers.celtics/index.html

My take: I picked a hard-fought win for the Celtics in 6.  I think the Cavs really are that good...I just think the Celtics are better. http://www.celticsblog.com/2010/4/30/1452306/where-are-we-right-now-and-what

[afflatus]

I had stopped believing. I remember posting something after the Lakers loss in December, that I had to stop watching since it was too painful and the Celtics were consuming my life.

I want to believe now and deep inside, Maybe I'd do.

But i am not ready to go back to my over passionate self until we get passed this series.

[Greenbean]

I had stopped believing. I remember posting something after the Lakers loss in December, that I had to stop watching since it was too painful and the Celtics were consuming my life.

I want to believe now and deep inside, Maybe I'd do.

But i am not ready to go back to my over passionate self until we get passed this series.

I remember that post! Dont go back to that dark place but certainly welcome back!

Here's a TP.

[thirstyboots18]

I got shaky for about a day and a half this season...other than that I have been solid in my belief in the Celtics this year.  I have always felt that if they could be healthy at the end of the season they would be a power to be reconned with, and that other teams could not count on being healthier...Looks like Doc had the right formula for getting the team to the post season after all....

Go Celts!!!

[nickagneta]

Gotta say drza, I was one of those guys saying you might have to admit you were wrong because of the horrible last 4 months of the season so if the C's win this series, you might have to add me to that list of people. really never expected they could just flip a switch but appears they could and did.

[lJesterl]

there not going to lose but who cares if they do? there still a great team and a great group of guys who gave us alot, we owe it to them to not stop believing even if there down 40 points with 30 seconds left in game 7 of the finals