Author Topic: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28  (Read 125763 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #405 on: March 28, 2011, 09:39:15 PM »

Offline celticinorlando

  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32877
  • Tommy Points: 843
  • Larry Bird for President
This team is finished. They will go out quick in the playoffs. They have nothing ...so.glad that trade got us more offenses....I am tired of the tired legs excuse of back to backs...this team loses to the bulls ..spurs and heat in the next ten games.

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #406 on: March 28, 2011, 09:39:43 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 62688
  • Tommy Points: -25472
  • Bo Knows: Joe Don't Know Diddley

It's incredible that everybody keeps putting the blame on the trade while this would have still been a loss with Perk.

If we never made the trade, the team wouldn't look like the hot mess that it does now.  The deal messed with the team's psyche, as well as their execution.  I know I'm not going to convince anybody of that who isn't already predisposed to the argument, but I refuse to believe this is just a coincidence.


I'M THE SILVERBACK GORILLA IN THIS MOTHER——— AND DON'T NONE OF YA'LL EVER FORGET IT!@ 34 minutes

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #407 on: March 28, 2011, 09:39:46 PM »

Offline GrandTheftRondo

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1952
  • Tommy Points: 167
Tired legs, second night of a road back to back.  This is not a surprise at all.  I am glad they seemed to care about this game though.  That's an improvement.

Thursday is going to be interesting though.  They have a couple nights off to get their legs back, and they should be up to play the Spurs.  That could be a real measuring-stick, even if Shaq isn't playing yet.

The Spurs should be playing without Duncan and Ginobili.  In other words, they should only beat us by 15.   :D

lol!! TP.

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #408 on: March 28, 2011, 09:40:16 PM »

Offline Chris

  • Global Moderator
  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18008
  • Tommy Points: 642
Tired legs, second night of a road back to back.  This is not a surprise at all.  I am glad they seemed to care about this game though.  That's an improvement.

Thursday is going to be interesting though.  They have a couple nights off to get their legs back, and they should be up to play the Spurs.  That could be a real measuring-stick, even if Shaq isn't playing yet.

The Spurs should be playing without Duncan and Ginobili.  In other words, they should only beat us by 15.   :D

Ah [dang].  OK, on to the Bulls game then.  


Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #409 on: March 28, 2011, 09:40:28 PM »

Offline YouCantHandleTheTruth!

  • Jaylen Brown
  • Posts: 676
  • Tommy Points: 31
The Celtics have won games the whole season through injuries and without key players. Tonight they've been too short on the frontcourt, Baby and KG are great, but you need someone to play C. Krstic was out because of fouls. Even if he could play, at some point being shorthanded will catch up with your team.

I'm not worried about HCA, last year some of the most horrible officiating took place in the Garden. I'm worried about the Celtics having enough healthy bodies to play hard through the playoffs.

Good night, I feel like we can't play worse basketball, so it's all getting better from here on.

Go Celtics!!!

Right, good night to the Celtics.
The Celtic in me.

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #410 on: March 28, 2011, 09:40:36 PM »

Offline Casperian

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3501
  • Tommy Points: 545
It's sad because you can tell people on this board care more about winning than some of the guys on the floor.

Who do you mean? Krstic and BBD?
In the summer of 2017, I predicted this team would not win a championship for the next 10 years.

3 down, 7 to go.

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #411 on: March 28, 2011, 09:40:49 PM »

Offline Juneauz

  • Payton Pritchard
  • Posts: 105
  • Tommy Points: 19
I'm new here so I probably should shut up... but this forum has an attitude problem.

Rondo sucks, Davis sucks, Kristic sucks... Bla bla bla
And guys really sucking like Allen and Green are hardly mentioned.
I don't get it

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #412 on: March 28, 2011, 09:41:10 PM »

Offline PosImpos

  • NCE
  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12383
  • Tommy Points: 903
  • Rondo = Good
Tired legs, second night of a road back to back.  This is not a surprise at all.  I am glad they seemed to care about this game though.  That's an improvement.

Thursday is going to be interesting though.  They have a couple nights off to get their legs back, and they should be up to play the Spurs.  That could be a real measuring-stick, even if Shaq isn't playing yet.

The Spurs should be playing without Duncan and Ginobili.  In other words, they should only beat us by 15.   :D

Win or lose, it doesn't really matter.  We should stop assigning importance to Win or Loss at this point, because there's no way to get the seed we'll need anyway. 

We're probably looking at the 3rd seed and 55 or 56 wins.  Second round exit, maybe lose in the conference finals if the team really guts it out.  Maybe we can at least be the team that prevents the Heat from winning a title this year.
Never forget the Champs of '08, or the gutsy warriors of '10.

"I know you all wanna win, but you gotta do it TOGETHER!"
- Doc Rivers

Re: You guys didnt really expect to win tonight did you?
« Reply #413 on: March 28, 2011, 09:41:11 PM »

Offline Drucci

  • Global Moderator
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7223
  • Tommy Points: 439

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #414 on: March 28, 2011, 09:41:43 PM »

Offline LilRip

  • Paul Silas
  • ******
  • Posts: 6987
  • Tommy Points: 411
Tired legs, second night of a road back to back.  This is not a surprise at all.  I am glad they seemed to care about this game though.  That's an improvement.

Thursday is going to be interesting though.  They have a couple nights off to get their legs back, and they should be up to play the Spurs.  That could be a real measuring-stick, even if Shaq isn't playing yet.

aren't Duncan and GInobili injured?
- LilRip

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #415 on: March 28, 2011, 09:41:55 PM »

Offline letsgoblue86

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3763
  • Tommy Points: 292
Those early fouls on KG and Kristic really did us in, as well as the lack of intensity in the 4th quarter.  We should have left Jeff Green in, he was getting to the hoop and drawing fouls for us.

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #416 on: March 28, 2011, 09:42:03 PM »

Offline Green Hell

  • Al Horford
  • Posts: 419
  • Tommy Points: 58
Well guys, at least they tried. Isn't that the most important thing?
Never stop believing baby~

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #417 on: March 28, 2011, 09:42:40 PM »

Offline Bankshot

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7540
  • Tommy Points: 632
I'm not worried, yet.  We just need the O'Neal brothers back.  But if we don't get them back, we're done. :-X
"If somebody would have told you when he was playing with the Knicks that Nate Robinson was going to change a big time game and he was going to do it mostly because of his defense, somebody would have got slapped."  Mark Jackson

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #418 on: March 28, 2011, 09:42:53 PM »

Offline letsgoblue86

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3763
  • Tommy Points: 292
Tired legs, second night of a road back to back.  This is not a surprise at all.  I am glad they seemed to care about this game though.  That's an improvement.

Thursday is going to be interesting though.  They have a couple nights off to get their legs back, and they should be up to play the Spurs.  That could be a real measuring-stick, even if Shaq isn't playing yet.

The Spurs should be playing without Duncan and Ginobili.  In other words, they should only beat us by 15.   :D

Win or lose, it doesn't really matter.  We should stop assigning importance to Win or Loss at this point, because there's no way to get the seed we'll need anyway. 

We're probably looking at the 3rd seed and 55 or 56 wins.  Second round exit, maybe lose in the conference finals if the team really guts it out.  Maybe we can at least be the team that prevents the Heat from winning a title this year.
C'mon man, have a little faith in this team.

Re: Celtics (51-21) at Pacers (32-42) 3/28
« Reply #419 on: March 28, 2011, 09:42:57 PM »

Offline Drucci

  • Global Moderator
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7223
  • Tommy Points: 439
Tired legs, second night of a road back to back.  This is not a surprise at all.  I am glad they seemed to care about this game though.  That's an improvement.

Thursday is going to be interesting though.  They have a couple nights off to get their legs back, and they should be up to play the Spurs.  That could be a real measuring-stick, even if Shaq isn't playing yet.

The Spurs should be playing without Duncan and Ginobili.  In other words, they should only beat us by 15.   :D

Win or lose, it doesn't really matter.  We should stop assigning importance to Win or Loss at this point, because there's no way to get the seed we'll need anyway.  

We're probably looking at the 3rd seed and 55 or 56 wins.  Second round exit, maybe lose in the conference finals if the team really guts it out.  Maybe we can at least be the team that prevents the Heat from winning a title this year.

Yes, because we all know that losing to the Pacers on a back to back in March is a good prediction of playoffs success and it's a given we will lose in the second round because we lost to the Pacers on March 28th. How foolish of us to assume otherwise.