Tonight's game proved something....

[greensquirrel]

I have the solution. Anyone thought of cloning Rajon Rondo. That way there will always be a Rondo on the floor. Brilliant idea isn't.




But wait cloning Rondo means Rondo 2.0 would be a baby. God#@#$%

This is a brilliant idea. I just posted that he should have played 52 min. You solved the problem.

TP

[SHAQATTACK]

We lose games when Dooling plays ...PERIOD...he is a TERRIBLE ball handler. I hoped he would stay injuried a LONG TIME.

If Dooling plays ..WE LOSE>  pure and simple..

The Celtics need to hire Rondo a SPecial SHOOTING COACH , to tutor him , like Steve Kerr , IF they keep him in the off season.

[slamtheking]

I think it along with many other games proves we need:

1) a great rebounding center, with a post game, who loves to run

2) a great shooter, who loves to run

3) at least two players that can just ball, one on one. Just clear out and turn him loose.(ala Kobe, LBJ, etc. Actually Marshon Brooks comes to mind as a young player with that kind of ability.

They all must be young players.  Then together with Rondo, JJ, maybe CW(because he seems to be RR new favorite big),AB, ET, and a resigned JGreen, you might have a nice nucleus of a team that could win, and be exciting to watch!

If you can resign the Big 3 at drastically reduced $ next year fine. If not get what you can for them, either now or during the off season.

That's my story, and I'm sticking with it!!

Oh is that all they need? 

Every team needs those kinds of players.  those players are all-stars.

[Marcus13]

You have this ass backwards.  We have great roleplayers on this team that perform extremely well when we get good point guard play.  Rondo didn't play that role last night and we lost to one of the best teams in the league.  Go figure.

[birdbrady]

no one game proves anything.  We have yet to beat a single contender all season with or without the big 3.  This team is what it is...  Without a starting center they will not compete.  Not good enough to win a title... too good to tank.

I mean we did beat the bulls, pacers, magic, knicks, etc...

But I do agree with that though its been more than one game. It just happened again tonight. But you're right we need a more effective center. So trade a member of the big 3 and pieces like JO or Dooling and get someone like Al Jefferson (if possible) or see if a team tries moving one in the next few weeks. That would improve the team far more than trading someone like Rondo

Magic, Pacers and Knicks aren't contenders.  Even if we're calling the Pacers a contender, they still are up 2-1 this year.

Beating the Bulls without Rose doesn't count.

We're 0-5 against the Thunder, Mavs, Heat, Lakers and Bulls (with Rose).

We're also-rans.

Not that I think that we are contenders but this is a terrible argument and a terrible post.  What was the Celtics record against contenders in 2010 in the regular season, particularly after Christmas (which is what we thought the team was heading into the playoffs, not the team that started 23-5?)

We were 1-2 against Cleveland with two blowout losses, and that one win we had a 20+ pt 4th quarter lead at home and actually lost the lead entirely and somehow won it back.

0-2 against Orlando

1-1 against the Lakers (with that one win against the Lakers w/o Kobe)

0-2 v Suns (WCF that year)

0-4 against Atlanta (who were the 3 seed in the East that year)


I mean, just a ridiculous argument to talk about the regular season.

We aren't contenders for two reason - we have two fatal flaws that won't allow us to win come playoff time.  We can't rebound, and we can't execute offensively when it matters (close fourth quarter.)

That's why we aren't contenders.  Not because of our regular season head to head matchups against Oklahoma City.


Edit: and for fun, what was our record against contenders in 2011? It was exceptional.

2-0 v San Antonio
1-1 v LA
3-1 v Miami
2-1 v Chicago
4-0 v NY
2-1 v Orlando
0-2 v Dallas
1-1 v OKC

Just can't have regular season records as your be-all-end-all arguments.

[BballTim]

no one game proves anything.  We have yet to beat a single contender all season with or without the big 3.  This team is what it is...  Without a starting center they will not compete.  Not good enough to win a title... too good to tank.

I mean we did beat the bulls, pacers, magic, knicks, etc...

But I do agree with that though its been more than one game. It just happened again tonight. But you're right we need a more effective center. So trade a member of the big 3 and pieces like JO or Dooling and get someone like Al Jefferson (if possible) or see if a team tries moving one in the next few weeks. That would improve the team far more than trading someone like Rondo

Magic, Pacers and Knicks aren't contenders.  Even if we're calling the Pacers a contender, they still are up 2-1 this year.

Beating the Bulls without Rose doesn't count.

We're 0-5 against the Thunder, Mavs, Heat, Lakers and Bulls (with Rose).

We're also-rans.

  If the Lakers are contenders, even the Mavs, you have to put the Pacers and Magic and Bulls in that group. You're deciding whether teams are contenders or not based on whether or not they beat the Celts.

[dtrader]

I'd say it proves that this team still only goes as far as the big 3 take them.  Rondo can play out of his mind, but it's not enough to beat even the worst teams if he doesnt have at least 1 of the big 3 helping him.

Ray had an off shooting night, but its not like he was 4-15.  He was 1-5.  He just missed 4 shots.  Meanwhile, he rebounded well, and came up with 2 steals and 2 blocks while getting to the line 9 times.  He definitely wasnt the reason they lost.

I'd say we lost because we got absolutely NOTHING from the center position, and they dominated us down low with Monroe and Wallace bringing in every board and giving them too many second chances.

[BballTim]

I'd say it proves that this team still only goes as far as the big 3 take them.  Rondo can play out of his mind, but it's not enough to beat even the worst teams if he doesnt have at least 1 of the big 3 helping him.

  It's amazing how people can twist things. Sure, if you get practically zero contribution from the big three, you lose. Nobody in the league today is going to win games when the next three best players on the team are either out of the lineup or playing but doing nothing.

Ray had an off shooting night, but its not like he was 4-15.  He was 1-5.  He just missed 4 shots.  Meanwhile, he rebounded well, and came up with 2 steals and 2 blocks while getting to the line 9 times.  He definitely wasnt the reason they lost.

  Yes, it had to be completely unrelated to Ray doing nothing while Stuckey (who was being guarded mostly by, uh, Ray) was killing us on the other end.