Define "building around". Why do they keep saying we can't build around Rondo?

[BballTim]

To BballTim,

The roster pre-trade was 3-0 against the Heat. They had no answer for Rondo nor our size and physicality in the paint.We would have beat them in 6 with a completely healthy beginning if the season roster.

  I think we'd have done the same with the playoff roster and they might not have gotten to game 6 if JO wasn't playing with a broken hand.

[BballTim]

The roster pre-trade was 3-0 against the Heat. They had no answer for Rondo nor our size and physicality in the paint.We would have beat them in 6 with a completely healthy beginning if the season roster.

I completely agree with this.  The problem was that we were screwed once Quisy went down and the 4-headed center position was a walking-wounded parade.

I also believe that those blaming the series loss on Rondo's injury are fooling themselves.  We lost the first 2 games with a as-healthy-as-he-could-be Rondo.  That elbow injury affected him a bit but it wasn't the difference maker in that series.  We were just plain outplayed in that series.  An unfortunate truth but the still the truth.

  Aside from the fact that Rondo was never as-healthy-as-he-could-be in that series, his injury made a big difference in games 4 and 5. If we'd won game 4 by a decent amount and had a bigger lead in game 5 they'd have folded like they did in the finals.

  If the Heat were as confident about their chances as people here are they wouldn't have taken another shot at Rondo's elbow in game 5.

[indeedproceed]

The better team won in round 2. This woulda coulda stuff is so pointless. If Greg Oden was 100% healthy and Brandon Roy had cartilage in his knee, the blazers would've beaten the mavericks.

[BballTim]

The better team won in round 2. This woulda coulda stuff is so pointless.

  It is and it isn't. Some people claim that the Celts, no matter what their health, had very little chance against the Heat. Some people feel that if Rondo was healthy it's anybody's series. Falling one one end of the spectrum will significantly alter your opinion of the future of the team and what type of moves they should be making.

[Moranis]

The better team won in round 2. This woulda coulda stuff is so pointless.

  It is and it isn't. Some people claim that the Celts, no matter what their health, had very little chance against the Heat. Some people feel that if Rondo was healthy it's anybody's series. Falling one one end of the spectrum will significantly alter your opinion of the future of the team and what type of moves they should be making.

Even if we would have beaten the Heat last year, the Heat will be much better next year (if there is a season) and we will be worse without making signficant moves.  The Celtics are an old team and it showed down the stretch against the Heat.  The C's just flat out faded in the 4th quarter of virtually every game because the old guys just didn't have the legs to play playoff basketball at a high rate night in and night out.  That will only get worse next year.

The way I see it (if there is a season) the C's have 3 options.

1.  Go all in this year.  They need to make moves to seriously increase the teams chances this year even at the expense of cap room in 2012.  That would be utilizing the full MLE (if it exists), trading future draft picks, and upgrading as many positions as possible.

2.  Start rebuilding now.  Utilize KG's and Allen's expiring deals to get younger players who can help the team much more going forward, but will likely end all shot at the title this year.  This may involve some risks (like say KG for Brandon Roy and Greg Oden or something like that) or it may be more standard trades, like Ray Allen for Rudy Gay (or something like that).  This would also include extensions for Jeff Green and Glen Davis if the team feels they are a part of the future.

3.  Do virtually nothing.  Only sign players to one year contracts.  Try to improve the team if possible doing that and play it out and wait for free agency in 2012. 

The one real caveat here is if the C's could somehow trade Rondo and pieces (Green?) and get Chris Paul, I think they could upgrade while still leaving the cap room open, but that really is about the only move they could make that would fall into multiple categories.

[bfrombleacher]

The roster pre-trade was 3-0 against the Heat. They had no answer for Rondo nor our size and physicality in the paint.We would have beat them in 6 with a completely healthy beginning if the season roster.

I completely agree with this.  The problem was that we were screwed once Quisy went down and the 4-headed center position was a walking-wounded parade.

I also believe that those blaming the series loss on Rondo's injury are fooling themselves.  We lost the first 2 games with a as-healthy-as-he-could-be Rondo.  That elbow injury affected him a bit but it wasn't the difference maker in that series.  We were just plain outplayed in that series.  An unfortunate truth but the still the truth.

I remember snickering goofy at the beginning of the season. The team looked so darned good and Perk wasn't even back. The four centers thing was such a blast.

[BballTim]

]Even if we would have beaten the Heat last year, the Heat will be much better next year (if there is a season) and we will be worse without making signficant moves.  The Celtics are an old team and it showed down the stretch against the Heat.  The C's just flat out faded in the 4th quarter of virtually every game because the old guys just didn't have the legs to play playoff basketball at a high rate night in and night out.  That will only get worse next year.

  The only way the Heat will be significantly better next year is if Wade or LeBron start shooting like Ray, or at least like PP. They dominate the game too much for role players to have a big impact. The old guys on the Celts don't have the legs to play every night without a healthy Rondo or a healthy center. They didn't look appreciably older last year than in 2010 when they went to the finals.

[PosImpos]

To Posimpos,

The whole post is assuming that both teams are healthy with their beginning of the season rosters.

Unfortunately in the playoffs you play with what you have.  I don't see much point in debating what the opening day rosters would have done.

It's not like Dallas didn't change / improve as the year went on.

[PosImpos]

The better team won in round 2. This woulda coulda stuff is so pointless. If Greg Oden was 100% healthy and Brandon Roy had cartilage in his knee, the blazers would've beaten the mavericks.

I feel the same way about the Game 7 thing in 2010.  If Perk had been healthy, if Ray hadn't gotten kneed in the quad by Artest, if KG had been fully recovered, if, if, if.

You can call it ridiculous, but I see a team that fell short as a team that wasn't quite good enough to win a championship. 

The 2010 Celtics were a great defensive team that was below average on offense.  As long as the Celtics offense is inconsistent and prone to collapse in crunch time, without any go-to scorer who can find a way to score regardless of the situation, I can't see the Celtics as a true contender.

[mgent]

To Posimpos,

The whole post is assuming that both teams are healthy with their beginning of the season rosters.

Unfortunately in the playoffs you play with what you have.  I don't see much point in debating what the opening day rosters would have done.

It's not like Dallas didn't change / improve as the year went on.

Give me Butler over Corey Brewer and Peja any day.

[mgent]

The better team won in round 2. This woulda coulda stuff is so pointless. If Greg Oden was 100% healthy and Brandon Roy had cartilage in his knee, the blazers would've beaten the mavericks.

I feel the same way about the Game 7 thing in 2010.  If Perk had been healthy, if Ray hadn't gotten kneed in the quad by Artest, if KG had been fully recovered, if, if, if.

You can call it ridiculous, but I see a team that fell short as a team that wasn't quite good enough to win a championship. 

The 2010 Celtics were a great defensive team that was below average on offense.  As long as the Celtics offense is inconsistent and prone to collapse in crunch time, without any go-to scorer who can find a way to score regardless of the situation, I can't see the Celtics as a true contender.

A "below average" offense that lead the league in FG% the entire year.  Right.

What makes you think we'd be better off with a guy that can create his shot every night?  We've got multiple guys who can take over on any night.  True, when they're off we struggle, but when they're on and playing our style of ball, we're unstoppable.  I wouldn't dream of trading an efficient well-rounded offense for a chucker like Kobe.

[indeedproceed]

The better team won in round 2. This woulda coulda stuff is so pointless. If Greg Oden was 100% healthy and Brandon Roy had cartilage in his knee, the blazers would've beaten the mavericks.

I feel the same way about the Game 7 thing in 2010.  If Perk had been healthy, if Ray hadn't gotten kneed in the quad by Artest, if KG had been fully recovered, if, if, if.

You can call it ridiculous, but I see a team that fell short as a team that wasn't quite good enough to win a championship.  

The 2010 Celtics were a great defensive team that was below average on offense.  As long as the Celtics offense is inconsistent and prone to collapse in crunch time, without any go-to scorer who can find a way to score regardless of the situation, I can't see the Celtics as a true contender.

Well, you fall a bit more on the negative scale than I do, but I do think that "assuming opening day rosters and full health" is just kind of silly if you're looking back on a season and cherry picking your hypotheticals.

I mean, I've played this game too, sure.

Assume for instance that

A) Perkins was not traded.

B) SHaq's health was still crappy.

Well, then you have no Jeff Green, no Nenad, and a hobbled Perkins who still never really got healthy. Okay, you do have BBD, but now Jermaine O'Neal has to play more.

3) Okay, so also assume we don't trade Gody and Semih.

OKay, so now we have a center who was also not really healthy and in a lot of pain, still no Jeff Green to back up the still injured Quis, Delonte still isn't healthy for most of the season, and Nate Robinson still gets hurt, so we have no backup point guard.

4) Right...so Shaq's healthy, we still sign Arroyo and Pavlovic, and Quis is never injured.

Answer: Just stop...this is ridiculous.

[Kane3387]

The better team won in round 2. This woulda coulda stuff is so pointless. If Greg Oden was 100% healthy and Brandon Roy had cartilage in his knee, the blazers would've beaten the mavericks.

I feel the same way about the Game 7 thing in 2010.  If Perk had been healthy, if Ray hadn't gotten kneed in the quad by Artest, if KG had been fully recovered, if, if, if.

You can call it ridiculous, but I see a team that fell short as a team that wasn't quite good enough to win a championship.  

The 2010 Celtics were a great defensive team that was below average on offense.  As long as the Celtics offense is inconsistent and prone to collapse in crunch time, without any go-to scorer who can find a way to score regardless of the situation, I can't see the Celtics as a true contender.

Well, you fall a bit more on the negative scale than I do, but I do think that "assuming opening day rosters and full health" is just kind of silly if you're looking back on a season and cherry picking your hypotheticals.

I mean, I've played this game too, sure.

Assume for instance that

A) Perkins was not traded.

B) SHaq's health was still crappy.

Well, then you have no Jeff Green, no Nenad, and a hobbled Perkins who still never really got healthy. Okay, you do have BBD, but now Jermaine O'Neal has to play more.

3) Okay, so also assume we don't trade Gody and Semih.

OKay, so now we have a center who was also not really healthy and in a lot of pain, still no Jeff Green to back up the still injured Quis, Delonte still isn't healthy for most of the season, and Nate Robinson still gets hurt, so we have no backup point guard.

4) Right...so Shaq's healthy, we still sign Arroyo and Pavlovic, and Quis is never injured.

Answer: Just stop...this is ridiculous.

Ok now you're getting too far into it. I agree with what everyone says about it being ridiculous. It is, but what am I saying is this. In the first two months of the season the Celtics along with the Spurs and Mavs were playing the best ball in the league. All of the teams were like 22-5. The Celtics were the only team of the three battling health at the time but forget that.

This is simply for debate because I feel the teams were so even on paper.

Take both teams when they were destroying the league (For us it's pre-trade, and for them it's before Butler's injury) and give the team a full bill of health excluding Perk who was never 100% and wouldn't be. Now assuming all of this who wins in a 7 game series (2-3-2 format) with Dallas having HCA? If you think it's silly or dumb I understand, but just ignore the post. Not hard.

Shaq V Chandler
KG V Dirk
Pierce V Butler
Ray V Stevenson
Rondo V Kidd

JO & Perk V Haywood & Mahinmi
Big Baby V Marion
Quise V Peja
Delonte V Brewer/Beaboius
Nate V Barea

Teams are even on paper. Very even and would have made for a great series. That being said when this team was together and pretty healthy Rondo was breaking records. The team was playing great defense and its off court camaraderie was spectacular. Compile that with the fact the Mavs were predominately inexperienced on that big stage and I think they choke in big moments before we do.

I think we win in 5 or 6 games on either teams floor.

The reason I bring this up is that speculation is kind of fun but also because I feel DA put together the best team and roster going into the season. I don't think anyone could take that team out in 7 games.

[BballTim]

You can call it ridiculous, but I see a team that fell short as a team that wasn't quite good enough to win a championship. 

  Agreed that the team fell short and wasn't quite good enough to win the title. Same with the 07-08 Lakers, same with last year's Heat. That's not ridiculous. Claiming that teams like these weren't contenders because they didn't win the title, possibly another story.

The 2010 Celtics were a great defensive team that was below average on offense.  As long as the Celtics offense is inconsistent and prone to collapse in crunch time, without any go-to scorer who can find a way to score regardless of the situation, I can't see the Celtics as a true contender.

  Clearly the Celts don't fit your preconceived notion of what a contending team should look like. But they're contenders nonetheless. And the Celts died down the stretch in that game 7, but collapses in crunch time wasn't really a recurring theme during the 2010 playoffs.

[indeedproceed]

Yeah, in the early part of the season the Celtics looked like the best team out there, no question.

But the biggest reason why the Celtics lost is because they relied upon older players who have become injury risks. Kind of like I said, walking into the season, a lineup of:

Miller/Roy/Fernandez
Brandon Roy (healthy)/Wes Matthews
Nic Batum/Matthews
Aldridge/Cunningham/Camby
Camby/Oden(healthy)/Pryzbilla(healthy)

That's gotta be the best team in the league on paper, right?