OUTCOACHED versus the Lakers today....?

[Celtics4ever]

Doc can't make the shots for us as he wasn't playing.   We lost because we did not get crucial boards and could not score in the last two minutes.   If either of these happened I think we would have won.   Closing games has been an issue for us several years I think if your honest about our team. 

We simply do not have the answers for LA.   Two good bigs expose us and our lack of bigs.  Kobe took over and we did not answer or stop him.  Metta sure does make PP look human down the stretch.

[RockinRyA]

Im sorry, stiemsma didnt shut down bynum. in fact he allowed gasol tons of rebounds when he guarded him. and i do not trust a guy who went 0-9 on an easy win (portland) to play in crunchtime against the fakers (who has the best frontcourt imo in the nba)

Our best chance was if PP and Rondo both had their A game, sadly pp was held in check by metta.

[MBunge]

Doc can't make the shots for us as he wasn't playing.   

I don't think Doc was to blame for Sunday's loss, which would never have even been close if the Lakers hadn't played awful themselves in the 1st half.  If LA doesn't turn the ball over like crazy, Boston's probably down 20 at halftime.

Let's see what Doc does tonight, though.  After the Houston/Philly back-to-back, he'd better recognized early if the team is struggling with tired legs and not wait until the very end of the 1st half to try and adjust to it.  And if we don't see JJJ tonight, we'll have to conclude that Doc's just been lying about how good he is.

Mike

[looseball]

When the big three all play big minutes, and the game comes down to crunch time, they are running on empty.  Against the good teams they need to be able to turn it up a notch in crunch time, to make the real aggressive plays, like making stops and getting key rebounds.  They are still capable of doing this when they still have a little gas in the tank.

It's the coach's responsibility not to over-play them during the first three periods.  You just have to trust your bench and play them for longer stretches, even when they are struggling.  After all, the starters are allowed to struggle for 40 minutes sometimes. 

[LarBrd33]

nothing to do with the coaching.  We're undersized.  We've been without a real starting center the entire season.  0-9 against contenders.  Nuff said.

I have us at 1 and 4 against contenders.  Could you explain that 0-9?

Sure... In the 9 games we have played against Miami, Chicago, Dallas, okc and the lakers.... We have lost all 9.   1-10 if you count the game we beat Chicago without Rose... Which I don't.

We aren't very good this year.  No size.  Bottom line end of story

[scottwedman]

Lakers are too big.

Shoulda never dealt Perk.

[flybono]

When the big three all play big minutes, and the game comes down to crunch time, they are running on empty. 


Finally, someone got it right!

I'll add NO DEFENSE   4th qtr DFisher throws up a 3, short, Bass standing three ft from the rim, fisher gets his own rebound.
No box outs all day!

Blow it up!   

[LarBrd33]

Lakers are too big.

Shoulda never dealt Perk.

Really I can't argue with that... except but to say that if we had given Perk the money he wanted, he'd be on the books for 8 million next year and another 18 million the 2 years after that.  It's a lot of money to pay for a role playing big man who is averaging 4 points and 6 rebounds...

Perk is a great fit for a title contender like OKC.  A couple years from now we will presumably be in full-on "rebuild" mode toiling in the lottery... and I don't expect we'd want to be paying Perk 9 million dollars.  That's like paying Bruce Bowen (in his prime) 9 million a year to come off the bench for a 25 win team.... waste of money.

The other thing, if we had Perk on the books right now... we'd only be looking at roughly 14 million in cap space this offseason... which isn't even enough to HAVE a pipe dream of Dwight Howard (he'll command a contract starting at 19 million)... so any flexibility we had would have been toast (FYI that 14 million only is obtained by renouncing the rights to KG and Ray... tell me a star is going to take a pay cut to sign for 14 million so he can play with Rondo, 35 year old Pierce and Perk... not happening)

So... had we actually been able to see Jeff Green and Krstik on the team this year, I'd say the Perk trade was 100% defensible.  Unfortunately it really really didn't work out.  Green is out all year and presumably not coming back (we need to renounce him to have any cap space), Krstik never came back to the States after the lockout... and we're stuck with no center.  You can't underestimate how badly the Shaq thing turned out, either.  At the start of 2010-11 season, Shaq looks fantastic.  Our team was dominant.  Clearly Ainge believed that Shaq was coming back and that was enough security to trade Perk.   Well... Shaq's retired, Krstik isn't coming back and Jeff Green may never play another game for the Celtics.  Not to mention, our big attempt to land a big man (David West) fell through.  WHat you're stuck starting at center is Jermaine O'Neal... our 6th string big man last year.

Oh, what?... Jermaine O'Neal isn't playing for us?  Ooh... so wait... who is our starting center then?... the kid from the d-league?  Not him either, you say?  Going small-ball, you say?  Against a team with two of the league's top 5 big men (legit 7 footers at that), you say?.... 

Oh laudy....

[Celtics18]

nothing to do with the coaching.  We're undersized.  We've been without a real starting center the entire season.  0-9 against contenders.  Nuff said.

I have us at 1 and 4 against contenders.  Could you explain that 0-9?

Sure... In the 9 games we have played against Miami, Chicago, Dallas, okc and the lakers.... We have lost all 9.   1-10 if you count the game we beat Chicago without Rose... Which I don't.

We aren't very good this year.  No size.  Bottom line end of story

I was just counting MIA, OKC, and CHI as top contenders.  I don't consider Dallas or LA to be any more contenders than teams we've beaten like Orlando, Memphis, and Indiana.

And, of course, our win against Chicago counts, Rose or no Rose.  I love how fans always say no excuses when their own team loses, but are quick to make excuses for the competition. 

Thanks for clarifying your, "bottom line, end of story" proclamation, though.

[Celtics4ever]

Shoulda never dealt Perk.

Perk isn't playing that well this year.  Half the man he used to be.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gzT8AoOau1Y

We aren't very good this year.  No size.  Bottom line end of story

TP for brutal honesty.

[nickagneta]

OUTplayed? Yes.

OUTlasted? Yes.

OUTcoahced? Don't think so.

[MBunge]

Lakers are too big.

Shoulda never dealt Perk.

Really I can't argue with that... except but to say that if we had given Perk the money he wanted, he'd be on the books for 8 million next year and another 18 million the 2 years after that.  It's a lot of money to pay for a role playing big man who is averaging 4 points and 6 rebounds...

Perk is a great fit for a title contender like OKC.  A couple years from now we will presumably be in full-on "rebuild" mode toiling in the lottery... and I don't expect we'd want to be paying Perk 9 million dollars.  That's like paying Bruce Bowen (in his prime) 9 million a year to come off the bench for a 25 win team.... waste of money.

The other thing, if we had Perk on the books right now... we'd only be looking at roughly 14 million in cap space this offseason... which isn't even enough to HAVE a pipe dream of Dwight Howard (he'll command a contract starting at 19 million)... so any flexibility we had would have been toast (FYI that 14 million only is obtained by renouncing the rights to KG and Ray... tell me a star is going to take a pay cut to sign for 14 million so he can play with Rondo, 35 year old Pierce and Perk... not happening)

So... had we actually been able to see Jeff Green and Krstik on the team this year, I'd say the Perk trade was 100% defensible.  Unfortunately it really really didn't work out.  Green is out all year and presumably not coming back (we need to renounce him to have any cap space), Krstik never came back to the States after the lockout... and we're stuck with no center.  You can't underestimate how badly the Shaq thing turned out, either.  At the start of 2010-11 season, Shaq looks fantastic.  Our team was dominant.  Clearly Ainge believed that Shaq was coming back and that was enough security to trade Perk.   Well... Shaq's retired, Krstik isn't coming back and Jeff Green may never play another game for the Celtics.  Not to mention, our big attempt to land a big man (David West) fell through.  WHat you're stuck starting at center is Jermaine O'Neal... our 6th string big man last year.

Oh, what?... Jermaine O'Neal isn't playing for us?  Ooh... so wait... who is our starting center then?... the kid from the d-league?  Not him either, you say?  Going small-ball, you say?  Against a team with two of the league's top 5 big men (legit 7 footers at that), you say?.... 

Oh laudy....

Great analysis.  Ainge made a bet that having Perk wasn't going to make the difference between winning a title last year or not and decided to set the team up for the best possible chance to avoid some extended stint in mediocrity.  If he can't get something big done this offseason, it'll turn out to be a bad bet but it's equally likely that resigning Perk woudln't have led to another title and this team would now be looking at salary cap purgatory where it doesn't have enough space for a 1st rate free agent but doesn't have enough assets to make a trade.

Mike