Author Topic: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16  (Read 98898 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #330 on: February 16, 2010, 11:53:55 PM »

Offline jadams5214

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1021
  • Tommy Points: 82
Kings are missing shots but the Celtics can't score right now.  

Eddie House had a great second quarter and finally gets in the game here with 1 minute left in the 3rd.  

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #331 on: February 16, 2010, 11:54:03 PM »

Offline jdpapa3

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3884
  • Tommy Points: 85
In case anyone hasn't noticed, we are up 7 and have missed about 20 layups.

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #332 on: February 16, 2010, 11:54:58 PM »

Offline jdpapa3

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3884
  • Tommy Points: 85
Kings are missing shots but the Celtics can't score right now.  

Eddie House had a great second quarter and finally gets in the game here with 1 minute left in the 3rd.  

Kings hit shots and you go after the Celtics d and then when they miss it is the Kings' fault.  ;D

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #333 on: February 16, 2010, 11:55:21 PM »

Offline celticinorlando

  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32877
  • Tommy Points: 843
  • Larry Bird for President
In case anyone hasn't noticed, we are up 7 and have missed about 20 layups.

and a ton of FTs...kings have missed everything also

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #334 on: February 16, 2010, 11:55:29 PM »

Offline Kuberski33

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7375
  • Tommy Points: 570
5 for 18 from floor in 3Q, but at least they defended for change....

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #335 on: February 16, 2010, 11:55:35 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32611
  • Tommy Points: 1730
  • What a Pub Should Be
In case anyone hasn't noticed, we are up 7 and have missed about 20 layups.

Seems like the lead part is being neglected.  ::)


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #336 on: February 16, 2010, 11:55:42 PM »

Offline PLamb

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1569
  • Tommy Points: 1
C's increased the halftime lead
Pick 2 Knicks

PG: George Hill, Ty Lawson
SG: Ray Allen, Anthony Parker, Quentin Richardson
SF: Grant Hill, Matt Barnes, D
PF: Zach Randolph, Kenyon Martin, Jon Brockman, Dante Cunningham
C:  Nene Hilario,   Own rights: Nikola Pekovic IR: Kyle Weaver

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #337 on: February 16, 2010, 11:55:47 PM »

Offline mzepol

  • Jrue Holiday
  • Posts: 308
  • Tommy Points: 56
There's the rebounding KG we all know and love.

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #338 on: February 16, 2010, 11:55:55 PM »

Offline vinnie

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8654
  • Tommy Points: 429
unreal. they added to the lead in the third. let's finish this one off, men.

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #339 on: February 16, 2010, 11:56:07 PM »

Offline ejk3489

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2233
  • Tommy Points: 215
In case anyone hasn't noticed, we are up 7 and have missed about 20 layups.

Also...the Lakers are just up 3 on the Warriors at half.

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #340 on: February 16, 2010, 11:56:16 PM »

Offline celticinorlando

  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32877
  • Tommy Points: 843
  • Larry Bird for President
boston should be up about 15 right now. kings missing everything and boston cannot capitalize

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #341 on: February 16, 2010, 11:56:56 PM »

Offline Thruthelookingglass

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2687
  • Tommy Points: 133
I just noticed the Thunder now have 31 wins.  That's right.  In a short time (5-6 games) a team that won fewer than 30 games last year could have a better record than us.

reality of how average this team really is

Or maybe OKC is just that good?

Seems to me the C's had an even more phenomenal turnaround just a couple of years ago.  But really, I'm not sure whether this comparison means anything.

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #342 on: February 16, 2010, 11:57:02 PM »

Offline jadams5214

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1021
  • Tommy Points: 82
The good is that the Celtics added 2 points to their lead instead of blowing it.

The bad is that the Kings were ice cold from the field but the C's could not get any separation.  They should easily be up 15 against a terrible Kings team.  Unfortunately missing at least 10 layups and blowing numerous fast break opportunities has allowed the Kings to hang around for a late push.

So far this game looks eerily similar to most recent Celtic games.  Maybe the bench will build the lead early in the 4th before the starters come back in...

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #343 on: February 16, 2010, 11:57:37 PM »

Offline Kuberski33

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7375
  • Tommy Points: 570
Trivia question answer...the deal was Danny going to Sac for Ed Pinkney and Joe Klein.  Who was the 4th player involved?

I think it was a 2 for 2 swap....

Re: Celtics (32-18) at Kings (18-34) 2/16
« Reply #344 on: February 16, 2010, 11:58:26 PM »

Offline celticinorlando

  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32877
  • Tommy Points: 843
  • Larry Bird for President
i refuse to believe that the thunder are better than the celtics.just shows me how poorly these guys have played lately