(likely) No Rondo and KG (and Marquis) for Wednesday against the Heat

[scoop]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

[Bahku]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

[scoop]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

I also disagree with that. What would be the point? Besides, the CBA doesn't allow it, you need to have 13 players under contract.

[Bahku]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

I also disagree with that. What would be the point? Besides, the CBA doesn't allow it, you need to have 13 players under contract.

I wasn't being serious ... it was irony. Sorry, I should have put a smiley there.

[Edgar]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

ok now as i know youre being pretty sarcastical here

heres something to analize that backups what scoop is saying
June 17 2008

this is a real game

5 starters and

But there were no excuses, and just as they had while winning 66 games during the regular season, the Celtics got plenty of help from their bench as House, P.J. Brown, James Posey, Leon Powe and rookie Glen "Big Baby'' Davis came in and contributed.

It was a group effort by this gang in green, which bonded behind Rivers, who borrowed an African word ubuntu (pronounced Ooh-BOON-too) and roughly means "I am, because we are'' in English, as the Celtics' unifying team motto.

The Celtics gave the Lakers a 12-minute crash course of ubuntu in the second quarter.

Boston outscored Los Angeles 34-19, getting 11 field goals on 11 assists. The Celtics toyed with the Lakers, outworking the Western Conference's best inside and out and showing the same kind of heart that made Boston the center of pro basketball's universe in the '60s.

House and Posey made 3-pointers to put the Celtics ahead by 12 points and baskets by Pierce, Garnett and Rondo put Boston ahead by 18.

In the final minute, Garnett floated in the lane, banked in a one-handed runner and was fouled. His free throw made it 56-35, and after Perkins scored, the Celtics ran to the locker room leading by 23.

On his way off the floor, Garnett screamed, "That's that.''

And so it was.

10 players is what your rotation will be during playoffs
I can remember Scal waiving the towel pretty well during that run
hell I cant even remember who else whas in this team

ohh yeah sam i dont play cassell
and a pleasant surprise in BBD that was a all about up and downs that year.

[scoop]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

I also disagree with that. What would be the point? Besides, the CBA doesn't allow it, you need to have 13 players under contract.

I wasn't being serious ... it was irony. Sorry, I should have put a smiley there.

Sorry, I didn't get the irony. It's like a black fly in the chardonnay, I guess.

[Edgar]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

ok now as i know youre being pretty sarcastical here

heres something to analize that backups what scoop is saying
June 17 2008

this is a real game

5 starters and

But there were no excuses, and just as they had while winning 66 games during the regular season, the Celtics got plenty of help from their bench as House, P.J. Brown, James Posey, Leon Powe and rookie Glen "Big Baby'' Davis came in and contributed.

It was a group effort by this gang in green, which bonded behind Rivers, who borrowed an African word ubuntu (pronounced Ooh-BOON-too) and roughly means "I am, because we are'' in English, as the Celtics' unifying team motto.

The Celtics gave the Lakers a 12-minute crash course of ubuntu in the second quarter.

Boston outscored Los Angeles 34-19, getting 11 field goals on 11 assists. The Celtics toyed with the Lakers, outworking the Western Conference's best inside and out and showing the same kind of heart that made Boston the center of pro basketball's universe in the '60s.

House and Posey made 3-pointers to put the Celtics ahead by 12 points and baskets by Pierce, Garnett and Rondo put Boston ahead by 18.

In the final minute, Garnett floated in the lane, banked in a one-handed runner and was fouled. His free throw made it 56-35, and after Perkins scored, the Celtics ran to the locker room leading by 23.

On his way off the floor, Garnett screamed, "That's that.''

And so it was.

10 players is what your rotation will be during playoffs
I can remember Scal waiving the towel pretty well during that run
hell I cant even remember who else whas in this team

ohh yeah sam i dont play cassell
and a pleasant surprise in BBD that was a all about up and downs that year.

playing time

P.Pierce  F 38:35 4-13 2-7 7-8 +35 1 2 3 10 2 2 2 0 0 17
K.Garnett  F 35:39 10-18 0-1 6-7 +32 3 11 14 4 2 3 0 1 0 26
K.Perkins  C 13:25 1-3 0-0 0-0 +11 2 2 4 0 5 0 2 1 0 2
R.Allen  G 32:23 8-12 7-9 3-3 +23 1 3 4 2 0 3 1 0 0 26
R.Rondo  G 31:52 8-20 0-1 5-7 +24 2 5 7 8 3 6 1 0 0 21
E.House   16:08 2-6 1-5 4-4 +15 0 2 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 9
L.Powe   09:18 3-5 0-0 2-2 +5 1 3 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 8
P.Brown   16:11 1-2 0-0 4-4 +9 1 2 3 2 4 1 0 1 0 6
J.Posey   26:07 4-4 3-3 0-0 +20 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 0 11
G.Davis   14:34 1-2 0-0 1-2 +15 2 2 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
T.Allen   05:48 1-2 0-0 0-0 +6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2

[Edgar]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

ok now as i know youre being pretty sarcastical here

heres something to analize that backups what scoop is saying
June 17 2008

this is a real game

5 starters and

But there were no excuses, and just as they had while winning 66 games during the regular season, the Celtics got plenty of help from their bench as House, P.J. Brown, James Posey, Leon Powe and rookie Glen "Big Baby'' Davis came in and contributed.

It was a group effort by this gang in green, which bonded behind Rivers, who borrowed an African word ubuntu (pronounced Ooh-BOON-too) and roughly means "I am, because we are'' in English, as the Celtics' unifying team motto.

The Celtics gave the Lakers a 12-minute crash course of ubuntu in the second quarter.

Boston outscored Los Angeles 34-19, getting 11 field goals on 11 assists. The Celtics toyed with the Lakers, outworking the Western Conference's best inside and out and showing the same kind of heart that made Boston the center of pro basketball's universe in the '60s.

House and Posey made 3-pointers to put the Celtics ahead by 12 points and baskets by Pierce, Garnett and Rondo put Boston ahead by 18.

In the final minute, Garnett floated in the lane, banked in a one-handed runner and was fouled. His free throw made it 56-35, and after Perkins scored, the Celtics ran to the locker room leading by 23.

On his way off the floor, Garnett screamed, "That's that.''

And so it was.

10 players is what your rotation will be during playoffs
I can remember Scal waiving the towel pretty well during that run
hell I cant even remember who else whas in this team

ohh yeah sam i dont play cassell
and a pleasant surprise in BBD that was a all about up and downs that year.

playing time

P.Pierce  F 38:35 4-13 2-7 7-8 +35 1 2 3 10 2 2 2 0 0 17
K.Garnett  F 35:39 10-18 0-1 6-7 +32 3 11 14 4 2 3 0 1 0 26
K.Perkins  C 13:25 1-3 0-0 0-0 +11 2 2 4 0 5 0 2 1 0 2
R.Allen  G 32:23 8-12 7-9 3-3 +23 1 3 4 2 0 3 1 0 0 26
R.Rondo  G 31:52 8-20 0-1 5-7 +24 2 5 7 8 3 6 1 0 0 21
E.House   16:08 2-6 1-5 4-4 +15 0 2 2 5 0 0 0 0 0 9
L.Powe   09:18 3-5 0-0 2-2 +5 1 3 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 8
P.Brown   16:11 1-2 0-0 4-4 +9 1 2 3 2 4 1 0 1 0 6
J.Posey   26:07 4-4 3-3 0-0 +20 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 1 0 11
G.Davis   14:34 1-2 0-0 1-2 +15 2 2 4 0 2 0 0 0 0 3
T.Allen   05:48 1-2 0-0 0-0 +6 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2

In a closer game those playoffs against Cleveland

P.Pierce  F 43:42 13-23 4-6 11-12 +10 1 3 4 5 4 2 4 0 2 41
K.Garnett  F 41:54 5-13 0-0 3-4 +8 2 11 13 3 4 1 0 0 0 13
K.Perkins  C 20:22 3-4 0-0 2-4 +7 1 0 1 0 4 0 2 1 0 8
R.Allen  G 29:32 1-6 0-2 2-2 +3 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 4
R.Rondo  G 36:30 4-11 0-1 0-0 -8 2 6 8 8 4 1 2 1 0 8
E.House   14:58 1-5 0-2 2-2 +13 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 4
J.Posey   26:10 1-1 1-1 2-2 -5 1 5 6 1 3 1 0 0 0 5
L.Powe   06:37 0-0 0-0 4-6 -3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
P.Brown   20:16 4-4 0-0 2-2 0 3 3 6 1 5 1 0 0 0 10

Only 9 players.
8 if you realize leo had only 6 minutes.

[Bahku]

Extra playing time for guys who don't cut it is simply extra playing time for guys who don't cut it. These guys, except maybe for Hudson, will be nowhere to be found when the playoffs come around.

I hope you're right, I really do ... unfortunately, NO ONE has a crystal ball, and no one can guarantee that we won't need these guys later on. That's the reality, whether we like it or not.

We won't need them. If Marquis Daniels, Tony Allen and Scalabrine get simultaneous season ending injuries in March (obviously this won't happen), do you think you'd see some guy like Walker backing up the starting wings and playing 20mpg in a playoff series?

Ainge would find a way of trading/signing someone who can play a bit.

In any case, it's not playing 45 minutes or whatever now that will make them significantly better players in May. It's pretty irrelevant. If these guys were high-end prospects, then yeah, these times would be interesting...  chance to see what they could do with a bigger role... they're 3rd stringers, so it doesn't really matter.

Yup, you're right ... they should cut the team to 10 players, or even 8 ... save a TON of money!

I also disagree with that. What would be the point? Besides, the CBA doesn't allow it, you need to have 13 players under contract.

I wasn't being serious ... it was irony. Sorry, I should have put a smiley there.

Sorry, I didn't get the irony. It's like a black fly in the chardonnay, I guess.

No, my bad, (TP) ... as Don points out, the rotation is only ten players in the playoffs anyway ... if we lost our two guys with (present) health issues, we'd be a very sad eight. Whether retaining home court or not, I think health and rest is the priority, especially for Paul and KG.

[Fafnir]

and the very least  they should get is support from the fans,

What? I'm confused, do you think those of us who aren't enthused about playing the kids are booing them from our seats or homes while we watch the games?

First of all, is that what I said ... that people are "booing them from the stands"? Did I even infer that? Please don't exaggerate my comments or twist them to make absurd comments out of them ... that's where good discussion ends, not begins. Secondly, did I put you in that category? I said "some here", and if you'll take a moment to read some of the other threads, you'll see that there are those who feel that giving the bench extra playing time serves "no purpose" ... does that sound at all like they're supporting them?!? I don't know what you're confused about, but I was very clear with my statements ... perhaps misinterpreting them is where the confusion lies.

So who were you talking about? What did you mean by it? If you're not going to identify whom your talking about expect in and indefinite manner of "some" don't get upset when others have to fill in the blanks. Frankly I don't think there is a lot that will be gained by limited minutes dictated by injury to the our 13th, 14th, and 15th men on the roster. I am "some".

You said:

I agree, Drucci, (TP) but there are many here who feel that giving extra experience to the "bench-warmers" is a waste of time, (see "Injuries ... Blessing In Disguise?) ... kinda sad, because the fact is that they are going to get extra time due to injuries whether people like it or not, and the very least they should get is support from the fans, (a consideration we would all hope for ourselves, in the same situation), since they certainly get it from the other players and the coaches. Well said, D.

How is discussing the future potential and value of Bill Walker, Lester Hudson, and J.R. Giddens, and taking a negative outlook, not supporting them? Are we not to discuss the team critically?

Unless "some here" are booing them at the games or rooting for their failure I fail to see how they're not supporting them. I haven't seen anyone do that, feel free to point out any who have.

I'm not twisting your statements at all you rail against "some here" for not "supporting" particular players. Just because people don't view J.R. as the next Andre Igudola, Bill Walker as the next Paul Pierce, and Lester Hudson as the next Darrell Armstrong doesn't mean we don't support the team. You don't have to have a positive outlook to support your team.

I knew the Celtics weren't going to win a championship without KG. I knew BBD wasn't going to cut it as a replacement. I still went crazy in the playoffs like I always do. Support does not equal rose colored glasses on a discussion board.

"Rail" against? Huh?!? You claimed I was saying people here are "booing" these players from the stands, your words, not MINE ... if that's not an exaggeration or misinterpretation, then I don't know what IS. If you want to comment on what I SAID, fine, but don't put words in my mouth. I didn't state who said unsupportive things about the bench out of courtesy ... I don't see that as a bad thing, but you may. But since you're quoting me from other threads, I think it can be assumed that you know what I'm talking about, and that it wasn't YOU ... so please don't feign surprise or confusion. If you HAVE read it, then you know what was said there is not remotely supportive of our bench or them getting extra playing time, so I have to conclude that you're in this discussion for other reasons. Fact is, extra experience and time on the court is always good, no matter who gets it, and an argument to the contrary just holds no water ... unless it's just for argument's sake.

I was quoting you from this thread. The quote was a shot at those who weren't supportive of your positive point of view. I never put words in your mouth, I merely took issue with your view of what Celtic's fans should do.

[Bahku]

and the very least  they should get is support from the fans,

What? I'm confused, do you think those of us who aren't enthused about playing the kids are booing them from our seats or homes while we watch the games?

First of all, is that what I said ... that people are "booing them from the stands"? Did I even infer that? Please don't exaggerate my comments or twist them to make absurd comments out of them ... that's where good discussion ends, not begins. Secondly, did I put you in that category? I said "some here", and if you'll take a moment to read some of the other threads, you'll see that there are those who feel that giving the bench extra playing time serves "no purpose" ... does that sound at all like they're supporting them?!? I don't know what you're confused about, but I was very clear with my statements ... perhaps misinterpreting them is where the confusion lies.

So who were you talking about? What did you mean by it? If you're not going to identify whom your talking about expect in and indefinite manner of "some" don't get upset when others have to fill in the blanks. Frankly I don't think there is a lot that will be gained by limited minutes dictated by injury to the our 13th, 14th, and 15th men on the roster. I am "some".

You said:

I agree, Drucci, (TP) but there are many here who feel that giving extra experience to the "bench-warmers" is a waste of time, (see "Injuries ... Blessing In Disguise?) ... kinda sad, because the fact is that they are going to get extra time due to injuries whether people like it or not, and the very least they should get is support from the fans, (a consideration we would all hope for ourselves, in the same situation), since they certainly get it from the other players and the coaches. Well said, D.

How is discussing the future potential and value of Bill Walker, Lester Hudson, and J.R. Giddens, and taking a negative outlook, not supporting them? Are we not to discuss the team critically?

Unless "some here" are booing them at the games or rooting for their failure I fail to see how they're not supporting them. I haven't seen anyone do that, feel free to point out any who have.

I'm not twisting your statements at all you rail against "some here" for not "supporting" particular players. Just because people don't view J.R. as the next Andre Igudola, Bill Walker as the next Paul Pierce, and Lester Hudson as the next Darrell Armstrong doesn't mean we don't support the team. You don't have to have a positive outlook to support your team.

I knew the Celtics weren't going to win a championship without KG. I knew BBD wasn't going to cut it as a replacement. I still went crazy in the playoffs like I always do. Support does not equal rose colored glasses on a discussion board.

"Rail" against? Huh?!? You claimed I was saying people here are "booing" these players from the stands, your words, not MINE ... if that's not an exaggeration or misinterpretation, then I don't know what IS. If you want to comment on what I SAID, fine, but don't put words in my mouth. I didn't state who said unsupportive things about the bench out of courtesy ... I don't see that as a bad thing, but you may. But since you're quoting me from other threads, I think it can be assumed that you know what I'm talking about, and that it wasn't YOU ... so please don't feign surprise or confusion. If you HAVE read it, then you know what was said there is not remotely supportive of our bench or them getting extra playing time, so I have to conclude that you're in this discussion for other reasons. Fact is, extra experience and time on the court is always good, no matter who gets it, and an argument to the contrary just holds no water ... unless it's just for argument's sake.

I was quoting you from this thread. The quote was a shot at those who weren't supportive of your positive point of view. I never put words in your mouth, I merely took issue with your view of what Celtic's fans should do.

So Celtics fans shouldn't be supportive of the bench players? Well, I'll put it this way, then: I would hope Celtics fans would be supportive of the bench players, as they are part of the team, for good or bad.

[Fafnir]

So Celtics fans shouldn't be supportive of the bench players? Well, I'll put it this way, then: I would hope Celtics fans would be supportive of the bench players, as they are part of the team, for good or bad.

This is where I have the problem Bakhu, why in the world does "being positive about playing time for the kids" = "supportive".

I root for them during the games, I still don't want them on the court. Injuries forced their hand, but I still don't see much value in it. That's being supportive of the Celtics in my view.

I dislike it when fans start defining what other fans should do. Everyone roots in their own way, some are pessimists, some go on message boards, and others just follow the boxscores and watch the playoffs.

[Chris]

So Celtics fans shouldn't be supportive of the bench players? Well, I'll put it this way, then: I would hope Celtics fans would be supportive of the bench players, as they are part of the team, for good or bad.

This is where I have the problem Bakhu, why in the world does "being positive about playing time for the kids" = "supportive".

I root for them during the games, I still don't want them on the court. Injuries forced their hand, but I still don't see much value in it. That's being supportive of the Celtics in my view.

I dislike it when fans start defining what other fans should do. Everyone roots in their own way, some are pessimists, some go on message boards, and others just follow the boxscores and watch the playoffs.

I agree.  We are not cheerleaders, we are fans.  We support our team unconditionally, and we support the players on it.  But we are not required to have certain opinions of players (or pretend that they do).  These are not 6 year old's playing in a league where score is not allowed to be kept, and everyone is required to get in the game, in order to not hurt feelings.  This is the NBA. 

If I think a player does not deserve to play, or deserves to play less than someone else, I will say it.  It doesn't make me any less of a fan.  It just means that I care about the team actually winning games.

[slamtheking]

"Giddens doesn't play the same role that Scal does"
You're absolutely right.  Yet Giddens, as a SG/SF still outproduced SF/PF Scal on the boards and points in the paint.  You've unintentionally emphasized my point.

Um okay. I was pointing out that Giddens fulfills a different role on the court, he's not competing against Scal for playing time. Giddens is competing against Tony Allen, Ray Allen, and Marquis Daniels.

Speaks volumes?  We must be hearing different things.  What I'm hearing is the same old tune---Doc prefers to play vets over youth and only plays youth when given no option.  Not everyone agrees with that.  Personally, having seen Scal play for this team for the past 5 years, I have an extreme difficulty believing that Walker can't play at the same level of Scal or more importantly, a higher level.

Doc has a very good record of developing talent and having productive players get minutes early in their career. He doesn't play most rookies right away, but if they can play they end up getting the minutes.

Bill Walker hasn't played well for the NBDL team this year, hasn't looked good in practice according to Ainge/Doc, and was worse than Scal last year when he had his shot at playing time.

I was pointing out that Giddens fulfills a different role on the court, he's not competing against Scal for playing time. Again, you're emphasizing my point.  Giddens is doing a better job of delivering what we need from Scal and from a position it's not needed from.  

"worse than Scal last year when he had his shot at playing
time."  this is a matter of perspective.  I disagree.  I also think comparing Scal's performance last year to this year and using it to evaluate Walker is comparing apples to oranges.  Last year, Scal was not completely putrid in his performance.  This year he's absolutely putrid.  No way Walker can't produce a complete lack of rebounds, points, steals and assists like Scal.  

[nickagneta]

WHAT??? Calling your allegiance to the team into question?!? YOU said that extra playing time and experience serves no purpose, not ME ... I NEVER said ANYTHING about your allegiance to this team! Do NOT quote rules to me or twist my words to fit your purpose ... I take EXTREME exception to that, OK? ALL I said was that saying these guys should get no extra time is NOT supportive ... and it's NOT. You have said worse about them, your words:

May I ask what you think they're actual worth is? personally, I hope they don't show their actual worth but show something a whole lot more because I really don't think they are worth all that much. They are basic 13th-15th players on the end of an NBA bench with some NBA skills but probably a very short NBA career, like 2-4 years tops.

That's supportive? PLEASE do NOT make accusations about me breaking rules or inventing negativity to suit my purpose, and do NOT infer I'm making "passive aggressive attacks"  that is slanderous and beyond the "rules" that you seem to be touting. Give me a break.

You called in my allegiance to the team the second you wrote that I don't support it's players.

This is a blog for open discussion, criticism, praise and love and hate for our beloved Celtics. just because someone doesn't like a player on a team or think that they are doing poorly does not mean they don't support that player when they are playing for their team or does it mean they support the team as a whole any less.

It is not "sad" to think that extra experience for players that will have virtually nothing to do with this team's chances of winning a championship is not beneficial to the team as a whole. It is an opinion, one many here have, nothing more, nothing less. It is not "sad" to have that opinion and it doesn't mean we support those players or the team any less.

I thought this was a place to discuss differences of opinion not question someone's support of certain players or teams or to use terms like "do I need to translate for you" or "I think you're smarter than that". These are passive aggressive attacks and what I was talking about.