IMAGINE Lebron as A Celtic

[Spilling Green Dye]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

[Meadowlark_Scal]

Once again...some find it impossible to just say their opinion, with out stepping on someone else...it doesn't make you look better.....LAME.   all i said was, i don't want lbj on my team....the C's aren't my team.  I mean i don't own them, or have any say in it. So drop that "patients junk" don't talk down to people like that unless there are...more near you.

[Meadowlark_Scal]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

The C's already had a "one ball" problem, Kobe and Shaq...some stars don't play well together over time...I don't see LBJ getting along with stars used to equal billing.

[tenn_smoothie]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

The C's already had a "one ball" problem, Kobe and Shaq...some stars don't play well together over time...I don't see LBJ getting along with stars used to equal billing.

agreed - look at your nba history - every time a team has put together a lineup of superstars, they fail - more than any other game, basketball depends on teamwork and chemistry.

to wit:  1960's lakers, 1977 sixers, 2004 lakers, any year mavericks, etc.

[Roy Hobbs]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

The C's already had a "one ball" problem, Kobe and Shaq...some stars don't play well together over time...I don't see LBJ getting along with stars used to equal billing.

agreed - look at your nba history - every time a team has put together a lineup of superstars, they fail - more than any other game, basketball depends on teamwork and chemistry.

to wit:  1960's lakers, 1977 sixers, 2004 lakers, any year mavericks, etc.

2008, 2010 Celtics? 

[misha]

I'd rather imagine Kevin Durant in green in a few years.

[tenn_smoothie]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

The C's already had a "one ball" problem, Kobe and Shaq...some stars don't play well together over time...I don't see LBJ getting along with stars used to equal billing.

agreed - look at your nba history - every time a team has put together a lineup of superstars, they fail - more than any other game, basketball depends on teamwork and chemistry.

to wit:  1960's lakers, 1977 sixers, 2004 lakers, any year mavericks, etc.

2008, 2010 Celtics? 

2010 Celtics, yes ......... apparently due to Rondo being a bit of a headcase and wanting to assume the alpha dog position on this team - either the other guys have allowed him some power or they have all put it aside in pursuit of a greater goal - banner #18.

Rondo could have waited his turn ........ you didn't see Havlicek bucking Russell and Sam back in the late 60's when he became the team's biggest weapon. oh well, the times, they are a changin'.

speaking of head cases - why does Sheed do something as stupid as wear a Flyers cap to practice after the Bruins devastating loss in Game 7 - what's the point Sheed - why irritate a hurting fan base that is your own ??

[Spilling Green Dye]

Once again...some find it impossible to just say their opinion, with out stepping on someone else...it doesn't make you look better.....LAME.   all i said was, i don't want lbj on my team....the C's aren't my team.  I mean i don't own them, or have any say in it. So drop that "patients junk" don't talk down to people like that unless there are...more near you.

Um.. I was bringing up patience b/c almost every other day someone brings up some scenario of bringing LBJ here that does not fit under the salary cap rules.  It's not the idea, but the method.  And every thread Roy is there to politely explain that it is not possible given that method.  It's great to dream, and trust me I dream of the Celtics signing a star player sometime in the next few years.  I just admire Roy's patience in the matter for the newbies who haven't seen his great salary cap thread or any other on the matter.

I would love Durant too.  It's tough for me to put the players in exact order, but I'd have to go Lebron #1 and Durant #2.  Lebron, if given the right leadership and types of players around him, can be more successful than Durant in my opinion.  They're both great though

[D Dub]

ick.  wouldn't want someone in green who gives up on his teammates so easily.

Lebron is anti-ubuntu

[Spilling Green Dye]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

The C's already had a "one ball" problem, Kobe and Shaq...some stars don't play well together over time...I don't see LBJ getting along with stars used to equal billing.

agreed - look at your nba history - every time a team has put together a lineup of superstars, they fail - more than any other game, basketball depends on teamwork and chemistry.

to wit:  1960's lakers, 1977 sixers, 2004 lakers, any year mavericks, etc.

2008, 2010 Celtics? 

2010 Celtics, yes ......... apparently due to Rondo being a bit of a headcase and wanting to assume the alpha dog position on this team - either the other guys have allowed him some power or they have all put it aside in pursuit of a greater goal - banner #18.

Rondo could have waited his turn ........ you didn't see Havlicek bucking Russell and Sam back in the late 60's when he became the team's biggest weapon. oh well, the times, they are a changin'.

So you're saying the 2008 team was not a "collection of stars" thrown together?  It was my understanding that that was exactly what it was... and it worked b/c of the right coach, team mentality, and player sacrifices.  You're right in that it isn't a recipe for success, but it can be successful.

[indeedproceed]

Is it weird that I have an easier time envisioning myself rooting for Joakim Noah or Andersen Varejao than LeBron James?

[Reyquila]

Almost everybody here has never liked Lebrón. Why would we want him now to play for us? He is a proven loser; no heart. The proof is in the pudding. He has some ability, but he is no Ray nor PP. Forget it. Kobe, even less. Kobe's rings dont count; Stern made sure he got them. Lets stay with what we have; at least we got chemistry in our team. If we can get Possey and that other guy back, we will be fine.

[xmuscularghandix]

Don't want him. I'd rather watch banners get raised than watch Celtics dunks on the ESPN top 10.

[tenn_smoothie]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

The C's already had a "one ball" problem, Kobe and Shaq...some stars don't play well together over time...I don't see LBJ getting along with stars used to equal billing.

agreed - look at your nba history - every time a team has put together a lineup of superstars, they fail - more than any other game, basketball depends on teamwork and chemistry.

to wit:  1960's lakers, 1977 sixers, 2004 lakers, any year mavericks, etc.

2008, 2010 Celtics? 

2010 Celtics, yes ......... apparently due to Rondo being a bit of a headcase and wanting to assume the alpha dog position on this team - either the other guys have allowed him some power or they have all put it aside in pursuit of a greater goal - banner #18.

Rondo could have waited his turn ........ you didn't see Havlicek bucking Russell and Sam back in the late 60's when he became the team's biggest weapon. oh well, the times, they are a changin'.

So you're saying the 2008 team was not a "collection of stars" thrown together?  It was my understanding that that was exactly what it was... and it worked b/c of the right coach, team mentality, and player sacrifices.  You're right in that it isn't a recipe for success, but it can be successful.

2008 Celtics were a special case because as they said themselves, they came together at the right time in their careers when they were ready to put team first - in '08, the Big 3 wanted a title more than anything else - so being the star was less important for them.


always an exception.

[indeedproceed]

Someone always comes back with a number.......okay........the real point is, the chemistry...you actually think it would work....we already had a chemistry problem...there is only 1 ball out there...!

Which is why if it were possible to add the player with the highest net on-court statistical benefit, you do it. 

The C's already had a "one ball" problem, Kobe and Shaq...some stars don't play well together over time...I don't see LBJ getting along with stars used to equal billing.

agreed - look at your nba history - every time a team has put together a lineup of superstars, they fail - more than any other game, basketball depends on teamwork and chemistry.

to wit:  1960's lakers, 1977 sixers, 2004 lakers, any year mavericks, etc.

2008, 2010 Celtics? 

2010 Celtics, yes ......... apparently due to Rondo being a bit of a headcase and wanting to assume the alpha dog position on this team - either the other guys have allowed him some power or they have all put it aside in pursuit of a greater goal - banner #18.

Rondo could have waited his turn ........ you didn't see Havlicek bucking Russell and Sam back in the late 60's when he became the team's biggest weapon. oh well, the times, they are a changin'.

So you're saying the 2008 team was not a "collection of stars" thrown together?  It was my understanding that that was exactly what it was... and it worked b/c of the right coach, team mentality, and player sacrifices.  You're right in that it isn't a recipe for success, but it can be successful.

2008 Celtics were a special case because as they said themselves, they came together at the right time in their careers when they were ready to put team first - in '08, the Big 3 wanted a title more than anything else - so being the star was less important for them.


always an exception.

You forgot to add "If they play for our team." Notice I said our...I agree.