Has the Cs championship window already closed?

[PosImpos]

Here's the bottom line:

We are 2nd in the conference and 3rd in the league, and within 3 losses of both teams ahead of us. If that is not a contender, I don't know what is.

Have we struggled recently? Yes, but so have 2 of the other top 3 teams in the east (hawks and magic also 7-8) and 2 of the top 3 teams in the west (Denver and Dallas are both 8-7 for the past 15).

Have we had issues with injuries this season? Yes, but so do the lakers and nuggets, who, by the way, are playing their starters more than we are playing ours.

Are we old? Yes, but so are the lakers.

Do the injuries sometimes lead to depth issues? Sure. But you can't honestly say that an Odom/Farmar/Jordan bench (or a Farmar/Brown/Powell bench when Gasol is out) is significantly better than ours. Or that a Varejao/West/Ilgauskas is significantly better than ours.

Point being, no team is perfect. And any team that has an advantage over us in one area also has a weakness against us in another.

You make a good point.  One thing to take comfort in is the fact that a lot of the other good teams are hitting a rough patch right now.  My worry is that as an older team with lingering injury concerns it won't be as easy for us to get ourselves out of a rut as we like to think.

[dlpin]

Here's the bottom line:

We are 2nd in the conference and 3rd in the league, and within 3 losses of both teams ahead of us. If that is not a contender, I don't know what is.

Have we struggled recently? Yes, but so have 2 of the other top 3 teams in the east (hawks and magic also 7-8) and 2 of the top 3 teams in the west (Denver and Dallas are both 8-7 for the past 15).

Have we had issues with injuries this season? Yes, but so do the lakers and nuggets, who, by the way, are playing their starters more than we are playing ours.

Are we old? Yes, but so are the lakers.

Do the injuries sometimes lead to depth issues? Sure. But you can't honestly say that an Odom/Farmar/Jordan bench (or a Farmar/Brown/Powell bench when Gasol is out) is significantly better than ours. Or that a Varejao/West/Ilgauskas is significantly better than ours.

Point being, no team is perfect. And any team that has an advantage over us in one area also has a weakness against us in another.

You make a good point.  One thing to take comfort in is the fact that a lot of the other good teams are hitting a rough patch right now.  My worry is that as an older team with lingering injury concerns it won't be as easy for us to get ourselves out of a rut as we like to think.

I completely agree with that, and I am not in any way saying we will get ourselves out of this slump easily.

My point is that we are not that much older than our rivals who are also having injury problems. Kobe is younger than our big 3, but he has played more career minutes than they have. And back problems don't go away on their own when you are over 30 and playing almost 40 minutes a night. He is breaking down in front of our eyes even as the toughest part of their schedule hasn't even started. Look at his numbers in january: 22ppg, 39%fg, only 5 free throws a game, all in 38 mpg. And from here on out, he only has 15 home games and 26 road ones.

[ssspence]

Here's the bottom line:

We are 2nd in the conference and 3rd in the league, and within 3 losses of both teams ahead of us. If that is not a contender, I don't know what is.

Have we struggled recently? Yes, but so have 2 of the other top 3 teams in the east (hawks and magic also 7-8) and 2 of the top 3 teams in the west (Denver and Dallas are both 8-7 for the past 15).

Have we had issues with injuries this season? Yes, but so do the lakers and nuggets, who, by the way, are playing their starters more than we are playing ours.

Are we old? Yes, but so are the lakers.

Do the injuries sometimes lead to depth issues? Sure. But you can't honestly say that an Odom/Farmar/Jordan bench (or a Farmar/Brown/Powell bench when Gasol is out) is significantly better than ours. Or that a Varejao/West/Ilgauskas is significantly better than ours.

Point being, no team is perfect. And any team that has an advantage over us in one area also has a weakness against us in another.

Sure, all fair points. I just don't take comfort in the perils of other teams in the league enough to feel that the Cs can't or shouldn't improve the team.

When I started this thread, I did so not with the belief that Cs couldn't win this year, but out of concern for the thin ice that seems to exist for them with fatigue and injury. I stand by that, regardless of Kobe's back. Here's to hoping for continued struggles elsewhere, but counting on it is pointless.

If the Cs poor play over the last month is a function of coasting, then coast -- take some burden off of pierce and ray, don't play rondo extended minutes against new jersey when we're up by 36 at the half, and so on. If it's a function of a team that is already wearing, then I the Cs should seriously consider a creative move to add bench energy.

[housecall]

Lakers vs Atlanta in the NBA finals.

Lakers win 4-2.

If Atlanta is ready to win the east then why couldn't they beat OKC on MLK day?TheThunder beat them convincingly even though the score was close in the end. They had control of that game from start to finish...so that means OKC will take the west?No,that means these are regular season games and it doesn't make a big difference come playoff time.
   The 2007-08 season the Wizard beat the Celtics 4times in the regular season...how did that season turn out?

[Roy Hobbs]

All the negativity in this town sucks. It sucks, and it stinks, and it sucks

[vinnie]

Which teams can lose a starter of KG's caliber and still contend?

The magic are struggling as much as we are and they are fully healthy. Can the lakers compete without Gasol and/or Kobe? Because their health is as much in the air as our's is. Can the cavs compete without Mo Williams? Can the hawks compete without Horford, Smith, Johnson or Crawford?

Hasn't Gasol missed like 15-20 games this year? Don't the Lakers have the best record and fewest losses in the league?

[Drucci]

Which teams can lose a starter of KG's caliber and still contend?

The magic are struggling as much as we are and they are fully healthy. Can the lakers compete without Gasol and/or Kobe? Because their health is as much in the air as our's is. Can the cavs compete without Mo Williams? Can the hawks compete without Horford, Smith, Johnson or Crawford?

Hasn't Gasol missled like 15-20 games this year? Don't the Lakers have the best record and fewest losses in the league?

It helps to deal with the absence of Gasol when you're playing all your games at home. They only hit the road for a long stretch starting Thursday in Cleveland.

Plus, the Lakers have won many games in OT or with buzzer beaters, which means they struggled without (or even with by the way) Gasol.

[GreenFaith1819]

Lakers vs Atlanta in the NBA finals.

Lakers win 4-2.

If Atlanta is ready to win the east then why couldn't they beat OKC on MLK day?TheThunder beat them convincingly even though the score was close in the end. They had control of that game from start to finish...so that means OKC will take the west?No,that means these are regular season games and it doesn't make a big difference come playoff time.
   The 2007-08 season the Wizard beat the Celtics 4times in the regular season...how did that season turn out?

TP.

And just like the 1986 Championship Season (going back a bit). Lost only two games that year at home - one to Portland. Boston was completely healthy, too. Game was a true shocker.

Just goes to show you..reg season means a lot, but the playoffs are what makes or breaks you.

[dlpin]

Which teams can lose a starter of KG's caliber and still contend?

The magic are struggling as much as we are and they are fully healthy. Can the lakers compete without Gasol and/or Kobe? Because their health is as much in the air as our's is. Can the cavs compete without Mo Williams? Can the hawks compete without Horford, Smith, Johnson or Crawford?

Hasn't Gasol missed like 15-20 games this year? Don't the Lakers have the best record and fewest losses in the league?

And they've played 26 games at home and only 15 on the road (facing only 7 teams with winning records on the road, by the way). Even with that, they have only 3 fewer losses than we do.

[BballTim]

Which teams can lose a starter of KG's caliber and still contend?

The magic are struggling as much as we are and they are fully healthy. Can the lakers compete without Gasol and/or Kobe? Because their health is as much in the air as our's is. Can the cavs compete without Mo Williams? Can the hawks compete without Horford, Smith, Johnson or Crawford?

Hasn't Gasol missed like 15-20 games this year? Don't the Lakers have the best record and fewest losses in the league?

  They've also played 11 more home games than road games. They're 23-3 at home and 9-6 on the road.

[Brickowski]

Who cares what the Lakers are doing? The Celtics' problems have to do with the Celtics, not the Lakers.

[Roy Hobbs]

Who cares what the Lakers are doing? The Celtics' problems have to do with the Celtics, not the Lakers.

Well, you can't determine whether the Celtics are a contender without comparing them to the teams they're contending against, right?

If the Celtics are flawed, but every other team is too, they're not doing too badly in relative terms.

[More Banners]

Whew...good thing there are no firearms allowed on the blog.  We'd have quite a shoot-'em-up going on here....

Trying to make sense of the arguments, they seem to fall into two lines of thinking:

A) There are certain qualities of championship teams.  Let's call that "the ideal championship team".  We should be trying to create that, says argument A.  In that case, regular season records really truly don't matter, nor do matchups.  We're not lining up against an opponent, but trying to fulfill a certain ideal team.

B) The other idea seems to follow the thinking that we're not in an ideal world:  we have to beat other teams.  In this case, we don't compare ourselves to an ideal, but to the competition.  These folks don't seem to think the regular season matters, either, but it might matter more than the folks in thinking group A, perhaps?  These are also the folks who argue that nobody can beat us in a 7-game series (more on that below).

The premise of these different opinions is so different that there will be no agreement on whether our window has closed or not.

My thoughts are these:  Both are correct.  We are certainly contenders with our starting 5, so the window is open, but are surely a piece or two away from having the players to fill out the "ideal championship team", and can consequently be beat.

I think it is quite telling that it has been often mentioned in this thread that "nobody can beat us in 7", but few are looking at our team and seeing the "4-4-4-4" team, like Moses Malone promised back in the early '80's, a team that lost only one game enroute to the title ('82?).  That team was dominant.  4-0 in the playoffs is dominant.  Point differential in the regular season, especially in the weaker conference, is irrelevant.  Overall record is irrelevant.

Moreover, I think that the more games we play in a series, the less I like our chances, as tired legs hurt us, an Doc's limited ability to make adjustments tilts the advantage toward our opponent.  We won several 7-game series before, but I think that is getting harder and harder as the minutes pile on.

So, count me among those that would like to see something happen this year before the deadline.  I'm not very confident we make it to the finish line without reinforcements.  We might not make it out of the East.  We could easily fall in the first round, as we nearly did the last two years (Sidebar:  anybody like the Crawford/House matchup?  Me either).

***Let me add that I've been watching Celtics basketball since we all got on Max's back in '81, and have since watched the grainy, black and white DVD's of Russ and Cousy.  That has nothing to do with this thread or post, but I think makes me younger than Brick?

[dlpin]

Whew...good thing there are no firearms allowed on the blog.  We'd have quite a shoot-'em-up going on here....

Trying to make sense of the arguments, they seem to fall into two lines of thinking:

A) There are certain qualities of championship teams.  Let's call that "the ideal championship team".  We should be trying to create that, says argument A.  In that case, regular season records really truly don't matter, nor do matchups.  We're not lining up against an opponent, but trying to fulfill a certain ideal team.

B) The other idea seems to follow the thinking that we're not in an ideal world:  we have to beat other teams.  In this case, we don't compare ourselves to an ideal, but to the competition.  These folks don't seem to think the regular season matters, either, but it might matter more than the folks in thinking group A, perhaps?  These are also the folks who argue that nobody can beat us in a 7-game series (more on that below).

The premise of these different opinions is so different that there will be no agreement on whether our window has closed or not.

My thoughts are these:  Both are correct.  We are certainly contenders with our starting 5, so the window is open, but are surely a piece or two away from having the players to fill out the "ideal championship team", and can consequently be beat.

I think it is quite telling that it has been often mentioned in this thread that "nobody can beat us in 7", but few are looking at our team and seeing the "4-4-4-4" team, like Moses Malone promised back in the early '80's, a team that lost only one game enroute to the title ('82?).  That team was dominant.  4-0 in the playoffs is dominant.  Point differential in the regular season, especially in the weaker conference, is irrelevant.  Overall record is irrelevant.

Moreover, I think that the more games we play in a series, the less I like our chances, as tired legs hurt us, an Doc's limited ability to make adjustments tilts the advantage toward our opponent.  We won several 7-game series before, but I think that is getting harder and harder as the minutes pile on.

So, count me among those that would like to see something happen this year before the deadline.  I'm not very confident we make it to the finish line without reinforcements.  We might not make it out of the East.  We could easily fall in the first round, as we nearly did the last two years (Sidebar:  anybody like the Crawford/House matchup?  Me either).

***Let me add that I've been watching Celtics basketball since we all got on Max's back in '81, and have since watched the grainy, black and white DVD's of Russ and Cousy.  That has nothing to do with this thread or post, but I think makes me younger than Brick?

While that is a nice way to put the differences, the question wasn't "is this an ideal championship team?," it was "is this team's window open?"

I really, absolutely, cannot see how can anyone say that this window is closed. I really, absolutely, cannot see how anyone can say that we have no shot. We might fall in the first round? Sure. But we might also win it all. And in that case comparing ourselves to the lakers, magic and so really matters, because our goal is not to win 70 games and sweep the playoffs, just to win a title. We don't need to be the best ever, just the best this year.

And the question being asked is relevant because it determines your answer. If our team has a shot, but is not an ideal championship team, it means that at most it tinker with it around the edges. If this team has no shot, as so many in this thread seem to believe, than the only option is to blow it all up and start over.

At the end of the day, I really don't understand why anyone would think that blowing it all up is the way to go forward.

[Brickowski]

Every team that makes the playoffs theoretically has a shot at the championship, and the Celtics will certainly do that.

But do the Celtics have a realistic shot? I don't think so.