I hate to admit it but getting Howard means trading Rondo for Chris Paul

[nickagneta]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

[wdleehi]

There are three PGs in the league I would trade Rondo for:  Paul, Williams and Rose.


All three will make the Celtics better.  

  I don't think it's as clear that Williams or Rose make us better as people think. You'll get more production from the pg spot, you'll likely get less production from everywhere else.

Or even Paul. Rondo is tough as nails. Chris Paul sits out a sprained ankle for 1-2 weeks. Rondo plays a season with a broken foot. Rondo brings intangibles.

Rondo has 3 Hall of Famers....who are largely reduced to great jump shooters. His supporting cast is probably one of the weaker ones in the top teams (Rose has a serviceable center and younger guys to work with. Our bench was amazing until injury forced us to trade it all away.) A decent inside scorer (whether it be a slasher or a low post banger) would make Rondo amazing. Just look at what Rondo did with Shaq (or the half Shaq really). Shaq was having trouble scoring in Cleveland just a season ago and Rondo resurrected the man.

Did you just call Pierce, Ray and KG as the weakest teammates of all of these PGs?

I think Rondo has one of the less reliable teammates on the offensive end out of all the top teams.

Rose has Noah, who can get offensive rebounds, and Deng, who can finish at the rim better then any Celtic not named Rondo. Miami is Miami. The Lakers have Bynum and Pau Gasol.

They are what they are. They are three great players who are past their prime who play wonderful defense. They rely a lot on their jump shot now, which is really hard to land when the times are tough, causing offensive stagnation. The other top teams have a lot of different looks, Boston has a lot of jump shooting.

Wow. 


That's all I can say.



I don't think I have seen anyone undervalue Pierce, Ray and KG on here this much. 

Noah, Deng and Boozer offensively > Pierce, Ray and KG offensively??


Color me really confused with that idea.   

The Celtics were the best team before Quis got hurt. The Celtics went into the playoffs with, effectively, the Big Three and Rondo. At least the Bulls had a center, some scoring on the inside and bench players.

Rondo had the big three, who were playing almost 40 minutes a pop and were exhausted, Jeff Green, who had no idea what was going on, and Jermaine O'Neal, playing one of his first games this year going into the playoffs.

I think offensively, yes, the Big Three can be unreliable when the offense isn't 'flowing' as they rely on their jumpers, which is really hard to hit when there is no rhythm. Getting fouled and going to the line helps the team's rhythm, which the Big Three can not do so well anymore. I remember so many games where there was a grind out with nobody hitting anything.

I guess what I wanted to say was it frustrates me when haters talk about how Rondo is so amazing only because he has three Hall of Famers and then turn around and write off the Celtics because "they're too old and should be playing wheelchair basketball". I think Rondo has a huge part in the Big Three's production offensively and people are constantly undermining him. Hopefully he learns to hit a jump shot and ends this debate once and for all.

Who is saying he is only good because of his teammates?  


I missed that part.  


I also missed the "haters".   Labeling "haters" is one of the weakest arguments out there.  (it is also against the site rules)




Rondo, top 5 PG.


Paul, top 5 player.  Top PG.



As for Chandler, he has played really well twice in his career.  When he played with Paul and when he played with Kidd.  Two strong passing PGs.  


No one wants a PG that has to do it all.  No one player can do it all in the NBA and win.  


The Celtics has not won a title the past three seasons.  If they can upgrade a starting spot and improve their chance to win, do it.

If it also means the team becomes more attractive to top FA, so much the better for the teams future.  



This is not a "trade Rondo for anything" thread.


This is a "trade Rondo for a better player who is unhappy in his current team"

[wdleehi]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

There was one main difference.


Celtics put together a team that fit together perfectly.


Miami and NY did not.




With that said, a team can be built around Paul with great fits just like they did in 2007.  And, there is nothing about his game that says he will not fit into Rondo slot just well.

He is a match for Rondo in terms of passing and defense.  He is better shooter and scorer that adds another dimension to the team that could push them to a new level. 

[BballTim]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

  Haha. Again you ignore the part about how well the pieces you collect fit together, and then top it off by claiming that people who disagree with you are ignoring reality. Miami was a team whose performance as a team was less than the sum of it's individual talent in spite of "the reality of the situation".

[ScoobyDoo]

Major TP for this - which equals real vision IMHO.

And when I see Rondo play, what I see is an admittedly flawed player who seems to have a unique vision and passion for the game of basketball.  I see someone who can affect games in ways that other players wouldn't even think of.  I see someone who can be the heart of this team for a decade.  I don't see that in Chris Paul, or Dwight Howard, even though they are great talents.
I see in Rondo  a guy you build around.  I see a guy with a different fire in his eyes, a guy with a Russell, a Cowens, a Bird, a KG quality in his eyes.  I think it would be basketball madness to trade this kid.  I think Ainge ought to commit to Rondo, make him untouchable, and start to build around him, consulting with him about what direction he'd like to see the team go in.

While I would "consider" trading Rondo straight up for Rose or Paul - I wouldn't even consider a conversation about trading Rondo for Williams.
* Rose and Williams can score but aren't "incredible" play makers
* Paul is a good play maker but not at Rondo's level. He also has a balky knee and with a game that is so predicated on intense herkey jerkey moves, that doesn't bode well over the years.

But more importantly, as paulcowens put it very well, Rondo has qualities you can't teach and that are very rare.

1. He can dominate you without scoring (assists/rebounds, steals)
2. He can dominate you without passing (scoring 20/rebounds/steals)
3. He can dominate you without rebounding, scoring or steals(20+ assist nights)
4. He can dominates you without scoring, rebounding or passing - just with his D.

He has intangible qualities as well:
* Toughness
* He reminds of guys like DJ and Fisher - who just make a lot of big plays somewhere on the court when you need them.

If you put young, good talent around Rondo, he will dissect you every night. He is in a league of a very small group of point guards over the years who have this level of ability to just destroy you with their play making ability, that group consists of Magic, Kidd, Cousy, Bird and yes, Rajon Rondo. He is that good, he has those types of intangibles as a point guard and as a guy who drives wins.

Put a good, young run and gun team around Rondo and we will tear up the league. It will be sick

The main reason is that like Magic, Bird, Cousy and Kidd, they all look for their teammates first, then themselves. This elevates the whole team.

Rose, Paul and especially Williams - even with decent assist numbers, are more me first points. Huge difference.      

[nickagneta]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

There was one main difference.


Celtics put together a team that fit together perfectly.


Miami and NY did not.

Yet. Don't forget the yet.

That Danny did it in one year and that the players fell in line with the team philosophy in one year was a minor miracle that I don't think Danny Ainge even thought was going to happen. He had quotes(remember them but am not going to look then up) saying something like 2009 and 2010 would be their best opportunities for championships and didn't expect it to happen that first year.

If Miami had won it all last year, I would have been very surprised even if ESPN and ABC wouldn't have. New York is still in the process and as soon as they learn D'Antoni's all offense no defense system is all wrong for that team, they will also start to play better.

I would expect Miami to win at least one and maybe more titles and for NY to be one of their biggest competitors in the East in the years ahead.

[wdleehi]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

There was one main difference.


Celtics put together a team that fit together perfectly.


Miami and NY did not.

Yet. Don't forget the yet.

That Danny did it in one year and that the players fell in line with the team philosophy in one year was a minor miracle that I don't think Danny Ainge even thought was going to happen. He had quotes(remember them but am not going to look then up) saying something like 2009 and 2010 would be their best opportunities for championships and didn't expect it to happen that first year.

If Miami had won it all last year, I would have been very surprised even if ESPN and ABC wouldn't have. New York is still in the process and as soon as they learn D'Antoni's all offense no defense system is all wrong for that team, they will also start to play better.

I would expect Miami to win at least one and maybe more titles and for NY to be one of their biggest competitors in the East in the years ahead.

I agree both of these teams will get better.  (as well as Chicago)


I think the Celtics need to be aggressive to keep up with these teams for more then just next season. 

[Roy H.]

Major TP for this - which equals real vision IMHO.

And when I see Rondo play, what I see is an admittedly flawed player who seems to have a unique vision and passion for the game of basketball.  I see someone who can affect games in ways that other players wouldn't even think of.  I see someone who can be the heart of this team for a decade.  I don't see that in Chris Paul, or Dwight Howard, even though they are great talents.
I see in Rondo  a guy you build around.  I see a guy with a different fire in his eyes, a guy with a Russell, a Cowens, a Bird, a KG quality in his eyes.  I think it would be basketball madness to trade this kid.  I think Ainge ought to commit to Rondo, make him untouchable, and start to build around him, consulting with him about what direction he'd like to see the team go in.

While I would "consider" trading Rondo straight up for Rose or Paul - I wouldn't even consider a conversation about trading Rondo for Williams.
* Rose and Williams can score but aren't "incredible" play makers
* Paul is a good play maker but not at Rondo's level. He also has a balky knee and with a game that is so predicated on intense herkey jerkey moves, that doesn't bode well over the years.

But more importantly, as paulcowens put it very well, Rondo has qualities you can't teach and that are very rare.

1. He can dominate you without scoring (assists/rebounds, steals)
2. He can dominate you without passing (scoring 20/rebounds/steals)
3. He can dominate you without rebounding, scoring or steals(20+ assist nights)
4. He can dominates you without scoring, rebounding or passing - just with his D.

He has intangible qualities as well:
* Toughness
* He reminds of guys like DJ and Fisher - who just make a lot of big plays somewhere on the court when you need them.

If you put young, good talent around Rondo, he will dissect you every night. He is in a league of a very small group of point guards over the years who have this level of ability to just destroy you with their play making ability, that group consists of Magic, Kidd, Cousy, Bird and yes, Rajon Rondo. He is that good, he has those types of intangibles as a point guard and as a guy who drives wins.

Put a good, young run and gun team around Rondo and we will tear up the league. It will be sick

The main reason is that like Magic, Bird, Cousy and Kidd, they all look for their teammates first, then themselves. This elevates the whole team.

Rose, Paul and especially Williams - even with decent assist numbers, are more me first points. Huge difference.      

I agree with a lot of this, probably most of it.  However, I don't see how Chris Paul (or Deron Williams) are "me first" point guards. 

Paul averaged almost as many assists as Rondo (1 less per game), while having significantly fewer turnovers (1 less per game).  He averaged about as many steals (slightly more), and about as many rebounds (slightly fewer).  Paul does the same little things that Rondo does, while adding more scoring, shooting, and getting to the line.  The "me first" PG only averaged about 2 more shot attempts than the "pass first" PG last year, despite playing with much weaker teammates.

I feel that sometimes people see 82 games of Rondo being an excellent passer, and forget that there are other guys on his level.  Nash, Paul, and Deron all belong right there with him in that regard.  There are reasons not to favor Paul (contract, health, etc.), but being a "me first" PG doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

[nickagneta]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

  Haha. Again you ignore the part about how well the pieces you collect fit together, and then top it off by claiming that people who disagree with you are ignoring reality. Miami was a team whose performance as a team was less than the sum of it's individual talent in spite of "the reality of the situation".

No I am not ignoring it. The Celtics of 2007-08 got lucky to have everything fall in place like it did by collecting as many stars at one time like they did. Its never happened before or since in one year.

Miami went to the Finals beating Boston and Chicago. Exactly how poorly did their pieces fit together. Boston had no injuries in 2007-08. They were basically injury free except for the scrub Pollard. Miami lost Miller and Haslem for almost the entire year yet still went all the way to the Finals.

[BballTim]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

There was one main difference.


Celtics put together a team that fit together perfectly.


Miami and NY did not.




With that said, a team can be built around Paul with great fits just like they did in 2007.  And, there is nothing about his game that says he will not fit into Rondo slot just well.

He is a match for Rondo in terms of passing and defense.  He is better shooter and scorer that adds another dimension to the team that could push them to a new level. 

  I would disagree that he's a match in terms of passing and defense, but he's probably as close as you'll get. He is a better shooter and does add another dimension but we also edge that much closer to being a team comprised entirely of jump shooters.

[wdleehi]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

There was one main difference.


Celtics put together a team that fit together perfectly.


Miami and NY did not.




With that said, a team can be built around Paul with great fits just like they did in 2007.  And, there is nothing about his game that says he will not fit into Rondo slot just well.

He is a match for Rondo in terms of passing and defense.  He is better shooter and scorer that adds another dimension to the team that could push them to a new level. 

  I would disagree that he's a match in terms of passing and defense, but he's probably as close as you'll get. He is a better shooter and does add another dimension but we also edge that much closer to being a team comprised entirely of jump shooters.

Better assist to turnover ratio.


1 time 1st team defense.
2 time 2nd team defense.


The Celtics would not lose anything in terms of defense and passing. 

[BballTim]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

  Haha. Again you ignore the part about how well the pieces you collect fit together, and then top it off by claiming that people who disagree with you are ignoring reality. Miami was a team whose performance as a team was less than the sum of it's individual talent in spite of "the reality of the situation".

No I am not ignoring it. The Celtics of 2007-08 got lucky to have everything fall in place like it did by collecting as many stars at one time like they did. Its never happened before or since in one year.

Miami went to the Finals beating Boston and Chicago. Exactly how poorly did their pieces fit together. Boston had no injuries in 2007-08. They were basically injury free except for the scrub Pollard. Miami lost Miller and Haslem for almost the entire year yet still went all the way to the Finals.

  They collected stars whose games fit well together whether you want to admit it or not. Miami had arguably the best player in the game and (arguably) two of the top 3 yet didn't achieve as much as the Celts not because the players didn't buy in, but because they didn't fit well together.

[nickagneta]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

  Haha. Again you ignore the part about how well the pieces you collect fit together, and then top it off by claiming that people who disagree with you are ignoring reality. Miami was a team whose performance as a team was less than the sum of it's individual talent in spite of "the reality of the situation".

No I am not ignoring it. The Celtics of 2007-08 got lucky to have everything fall in place like it did by collecting as many stars at one time like they did. Its never happened before or since in one year.

Miami went to the Finals beating Boston and Chicago. Exactly how poorly did their pieces fit together. Boston had no injuries in 2007-08. They were basically injury free except for the scrub Pollard. Miami lost Miller and Haslem for almost the entire year yet still went all the way to the Finals.

  They collected stars whose games fit well together whether you want to admit it or not. Miami had arguably the best player in the game and (arguably) two of the top 3 yet didn't achieve as much as the Celts not because the players didn't buy in, but because they didn't fit well together.

Completely disagree with your assessment of Miami so I will end our discussion there since we will have to agree to disagree. They fit great together, they just will take more time to gel. That the Big Three in Boston gelled in one year is again, a minor miracle. It's almost never happened before if ever.

[wdleehi]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

  Haha. Again you ignore the part about how well the pieces you collect fit together, and then top it off by claiming that people who disagree with you are ignoring reality. Miami was a team whose performance as a team was less than the sum of it's individual talent in spite of "the reality of the situation".

No I am not ignoring it. The Celtics of 2007-08 got lucky to have everything fall in place like it did by collecting as many stars at one time like they did. Its never happened before or since in one year.

Miami went to the Finals beating Boston and Chicago. Exactly how poorly did their pieces fit together. Boston had no injuries in 2007-08. They were basically injury free except for the scrub Pollard. Miami lost Miller and Haslem for almost the entire year yet still went all the way to the Finals.

  They collected stars whose games fit well together whether you want to admit it or not. Miami had arguably the best player in the game and (arguably) two of the top 3 yet didn't achieve as much as the Celts not because the players didn't buy in, but because they didn't fit well together.

Celtics had some other advantages.


One, they didn't have caps space so they still had the MLE to use.

Two, they did a better job drafting to have pieces (while unknown) in place. 




And Miami, with the issues they had, beat the Celtics in the playoffs last year. 

[Roy H.]

We became a team that collected stars.

We got Pierce, Allen and KG in their primes and added them to unproven players Rondo, Perkins, T Allen, Powe and rookies Davis and Pruitt and then signed vet minimum type players Eddie House, James Posey, and Scott Pollard to add to a vet minimum player that Ainge had overcompensated by millions, Brian Scalabrine.

Before that season started pundits, including Bob Ryan were killing Ainge for what they considered a horrible 4-15 thinking we had collected three star players and a bunch of nobodies.

But GMs don't do that. They collect the stars and add young bodies in hopes to develop around those stars and sign some cheap vets to fill in roles. Its not mindless adding of players without any thought.

What Miami did was brilliant last year as is what the Celtics did in 2007-08 and what the Knicks are trying to do now. This is a star driven league and having star players will make your team better and if the other parts click, you can have championship aspirations.

Sorry if you and Yogi don't like the reality of the situation but in the summer of 2007 we became a team that collected stars. Why? Because it works. 

  Haha. Again you ignore the part about how well the pieces you collect fit together, and then top it off by claiming that people who disagree with you are ignoring reality. Miami was a team whose performance as a team was less than the sum of it's individual talent in spite of "the reality of the situation".

No I am not ignoring it. The Celtics of 2007-08 got lucky to have everything fall in place like it did by collecting as many stars at one time like they did. Its never happened before or since in one year.

Miami went to the Finals beating Boston and Chicago. Exactly how poorly did their pieces fit together. Boston had no injuries in 2007-08. They were basically injury free except for the scrub Pollard. Miami lost Miller and Haslem for almost the entire year yet still went all the way to the Finals.

  They collected stars whose games fit well together whether you want to admit it or not. Miami had arguably the best player in the game and (arguably) two of the top 3 yet didn't achieve as much as the Celts not because the players didn't buy in, but because they didn't fit well together.

Completely disagree with your assessment of Miami so I will end our discussion there since we will have to agree to disagree. They fit great together, they just will take more time to gel. That the Big Three in Boston gelled in one year is again, a minor miracle. It's almost never happened before if ever.

I think you're both partially right.  The "fit" wasn't perfect, and caused a lot of growing pains on that team.  However, the talent was there, and because of that talent the team made the Finals, and was an overwhelming success.  Had Lebron not choked, playing far below his normal standards, the Heat would be champions right now.