The bubble bursts. Celtics air of invincibility gone.

[USG]

They shot better than 50 percent from 3, we shot worse than 30. They had about 8 more FTs, we hit only half of ours. We missed tons of layups.

And we lost by 7.

I'm feeling OK.

[Jon]

The bubble is burst until they blow out some team by 30 points again, which will likely happen sometime over the next few games. 

[nickagneta]

People must love reading titles and ignoring the posts because if people read the OP they would see that the comment was more based on commenting about some of the over the top predictions made about this team. Sorry, but com to grips with it, they are not the MJ Bulls. They aren't nearly that good.

Did last night prove anything? Sure it proved we couldn't win last night. But it also showed a lot of flaws with this team that were there last year, were there in 2007-08 and will be responsible for a bunch more losses than ten. They can still be a great, great team. I admitted as such and would be surprised if they didn't win the title.

I just think those of us who were jumping to all-time best status based on the pre-season and the early season. Last night proved nothing but it did illustrate that this team has a bunch of weak points that teams can and will exploit and that we should expect more nights like last night.

[Witch-King]

Well, our winning streak is over, but there is still hope for the NJ Nets to 'continue their own streak' if they suffer another demoralizing loss tonight against the Celtics. I caught some of the Lakers game last night because I've always been a fan of Allen Iverson, however the chances of the Grizzlies to take games off of the Lakers, especially with A.I. on the bench is comparable to those of a camel trying to enter "the eye of a needle".

What was worse was that Kobe Bryant surpassed A.I.'s all-time scoring numbers last night during the same game he scored his 24,000th point, and Pau Gasol wasn't even playing, so one could never make the whole "Lakers frountcourt vs Grizzlies frountcourt is like whooping up on your 'lil brother" argument whence experiencing how soft Marc Gasol was last night.

Lately, watching Allen Iverson play NBA basketball has been similar to watching, say, a thug stealing an old lady's purse, over and over again. By the time he regains a role within a team's starting lineup (if he ever does) Kobe Bryant will be long gone as far as overall points are concerned, and A.I.'s ppg will continue to suffer, likely for the rest of his career. However, his assists per game are high enough to where he could just re-invent himself as a scoring point guard and instantly become marketable again. He tends to play that position often during the all-star game, so who knows -- this may just be a transition phase in his career. Regardless of these setbacks I still feel it's way too early for someone of his ability to call it quits - he just needs to be implemented within the right roster.

Anyways, back to the Celtics. They shouldn't allow the Nets' new Russian Billionaire owner, or even Jay-z/New York's eagerness to lure LeBron James to the eastcoast (or the New Jersey Nets to Brooklyn) to trick them into forgetting that the current NJ squad hasn't won a game yet this season. We wouldn't want to start building upon a losing streak of our own, now would we??

[CoachBo]

Well, proclaiming this team one of the best of all-time is as premature as declaring Rondo's shooting woes over.

[Roy Hobbs]

All the talk -- both last year and this year -- about the team being better than the '86 Celts just seems crazy to me.  It's vastly premature to crown any team before they win a championship.

That being said, this team is better than they showed last night.  I fully expect 60+ wins and a championship this year.

[KCattheStripe]

If they go 6 and 1 the rest of the season they could still win 70 games.

[Rondo_is_better]

If they go 6 and 1 the rest of the season they could still win 70 games.

*dipsnap dipsnap dipsnap*

[Drucci]

Great thread, TP Nick.

I know this team is great, but I didn't think at first that it was the greatest of all-time. It hurts to lose, especially at home, but yeah, it's a wake up call, and it was necessary in my opinion (otherwise we would have been totally "blinded" by the success of this team until a loss). Plus, it's OK since it was against the Suns (but it still hurts to see the poor defense of last night).

[Brickowski]

I think it would be a mistake to rationalize this loss by concluding that Phoenix played a "great game", hitting their treys while the Celtics were not, and that after all, we're still 6-1.

In fact, last night almost all of the Celtics' three point attempts were contested; most of the Suns' attempts were not.  Many of them were taken with no Celtic within 10 feet of the shooter, especially in the first half.  The Suns hustled. The Celtics didn't, with the lone exception of Marquis Daniels.

The Celtics played like a team that had been reading its own press clippings, and figured that all it had to do to win at home was show up.  Wrong.

[star18]

Just because the 1995-96 Bulls went 72-10 doesn't mean they were the best basketball team of all-time.   They won the most games, but there was expansion and a superstar on basically every team in the 1990's, the talent was spread out over the league.   There was no Big 3(besides MJ, Pippen & Rodman) and no other team in the NBA during the mid to late 90's was that great.  The only other great teams during that era were the Rockets w/Olajowon Drexler and other mid-range stars, and Utah w/Malone Stockton and other mid-ranger stars.   Nobody during that era had a stacked roster. 

Were the 07-08 Celtics better than the 95-96 Bulls yes I believe so, and I think this 09-10 team is better as well. They have to not have games like the Phoenix game last night though.  They were averaging 81 points going in and gave up 110.  That is not acceptable.   If they play how they are supposed to they can be up there with the greatest teams of all-time.

[drza44]

I guess I don't see what losing to the Suns has to do with whether or not this team will win 72 games.  I just went and looked...the 96 Bulls lost their 6th game of the season to a Magic team that was missing Shaq.  Every great team has off nights.  It happens.

It's early.  This team's goal isn't to win 73 games, it's to win #18.  But that doesn't mean that they can't or shouldn't approach or surpass that mark.  This team won 66 games 2 seasons ago, was well on-pace to win 66 games last year before KG went down, and improved their bench noticably this offseason.  70+ definitely isn't out of reach, and I don't see why one close loss to a good team would change that.

[Jon]

People must love reading titles and ignoring the posts because if people read the OP they would see that the comment was more based on commenting about some of the over the top predictions made about this team. Sorry, but com to grips with it, they are not the MJ Bulls. They aren't nearly that good.

Did last night prove anything? Sure it proved we couldn't win last night. But it also showed a lot of flaws with this team that were there last year, were there in 2007-08 and will be responsible for a bunch more losses than ten. They can still be a great, great team. I admitted as such and would be surprised if they didn't win the title.

I just think those of us who were jumping to all-time best status based on the pre-season and the early season. Last night proved nothing but it did illustrate that this team has a bunch of weak points that teams can and will exploit and that we should expect more nights like last night.

I don't agree with that either.  Last night proved nothing in terms of flaws.  There's a lot of adjustments still going on.  Rondo made a lot of strides in last year's playoffs, but that was without KG.  Let's see how their chemistry gets better.  And we haven't fully intergrated Daniels and Wallace. 

As for the Bulls, it's not like they were perfect.  Luc Longley couldn't crack this rotation, let alone start on this team and the same might be said about Ron Harper.