We were the 2nd best team in the NBA

[LarBrd33]

OKC was the 2nd best team in the NBA.

Actually... I don't know.  Might have been the Spurs.  I am a little surprise that King James massacred the Thunder like that.  IT's more a credit to LeBron turning it up a notch than a knock on the Thunder.  Had we somehow managed to defeat the Heat, I am not sure we would have had the same level of success against the Thunder as Miami did.  That team is very dangerous and we didn't match up well with them.

EDIT:  I'm still sticking with the Thunder here.  They swept the defending champions in round 1.  In round 2, they made quick work of the Los Angeles Lakers... a team that had Kobe Bryant playing at an elite level and two twin tower 7 foot all-stars.  Defeating a 2 time NBA champion with that kind of talent can't be discredited.   In round three, they go up against a world-beating Spurs team in the midst of a 20 win streak... widely thought to be the best team in basketball... and a team with oodles of championship experience.  They were no match for Durant and the Thunder... who ripped them open after falling down 0-2 to win 4 in a row.   

In the Finals, Durant averaged 31 points, on 55% shooting, 40% from three and 84% from the line while getting guarded by LeBron (a player who utilized his defensive ability to render our very own Paul Pierce essentially irrelevant).  That's impressive.  Westbrook averaged 27 points, 7 assists and 6 rebounds.  They played well... just not well enough to beat a zoned-in LeBron and the Heat. 

Alternatively, the Celtics struggled a bit against Atlanta (especially when Horford came back after a 6 month layoff) and were pushed to 7 games by a lowly Philly team.  If pushing the Heat to 7 games makes Boston the "2nd best team" then I guess we're saying Philly pushing the Celtics to 7 games makes them the 3rd best team. 

[aporel#18]

They don't hand any 2nd best team trophy.

The cold fact is the Celtics couldn't overcome too much adversity (injuries, refs, age...) and fell short of a title. Just like in 2010, a good opponent + injuries + bad officiating was just too much for them.

In the end, as Celtic fans, we know the Celtics deserved better luck, better refs and the trophy. Just like in 2010.

Lots of fans criticize Doc's rotations, but the fact is our bench was never, due to injuries, reliable in this 4 last seasons. He had to start projected bench players in 2009 (Baby), 2010 (Sheed), 2011 (O'Neals/Krstic) and 2012 (Bass and in the end, Ray) when it mattered most. Our bench was weaker when we lost our starters.

That lack of a bench (Doc playing his starters to exhaustion) was killer for our offense. When the Celtics have good legs, they move the ball and move themselves through the court, creating opportunities for easy baskets either in transition or halfcourt. We've had zero offense at the end of games, being unable to finish the opponents. Orlando in 2009, Lakers in 2010, cHeat in 2012.

Still, this team has only lost to the Eastern Champions (Orlando 2009, Miami 2011) and to the NBA Champions (Lakers 2010, Miami 2012). If it wasn't for injuries, this team wins 3 or 4 championships instead of only one. But even with all the injuries, bad officiating and aging, this team is, alongside the Spurs, the best TEAM in the NBA.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

We were tied for the 3rd (or 4th, depending on how you measure such things) best team in the NBA. Taking the Heat to 7 games in the conference Finals is not how this works.

Or were the Hawks and Cavs better than the Lakers in 2008?

It is much more than taking the heat 7 games. We played the heat way better than this bunch from OKC. You have to look deeper than stats and boxscores. I agree with the OP and said as much the other day in another thread. We could have beaten OKC. This was a pathetic finals showing. It was obvious the Celtics-Heat conference final was for all the marbles. I feel the celtics would have beaten the spurs also. Sure we do not match up greatly with OKC like we do with the spurs but OKC does not know how to play defense at least in these finals.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

  If pushing the Heat to 7 games makes Boston the "2nd best team" then I guess we're saying Philly pushing the Celtics to 7 games makes them the 3rd best team. 

You think because both games went 7 all things are the same??? You really think Philly was as close to Boston as Boston was to Miami?

Boston played much better against Miami than they did Philly. Did you even watch the games?

Boston shoulda beat Philly in 5 as well as the Heat. Did it really look like Philly or the Heat shoulda beat us in 5? NO.

If we would have destroyed the heat in 5 like we should have then the sixer fans would have an argument as to their chances to beat them just like celtics fans are doing now with the thunder. This was addressed in the other thread as well.

I do not understand why you cannot comprehend this. Mind boggling.

Were you not the one who subscribed to the loser mentality that "well i am glad we lost to the heat because OKC would have drubbed us anyway"?

I think that was you who stated that. After watching these finals I really do not think your statement is true at all....especially with the empirical evidence before us we all just witnessed last night.

No Personal Attacks.

[Boston Garden Leprechaun]

No calling out other posters.

[indeedproceed]

We were tied for the 3rd (or 4th, depending on how you measure such things) best team in the NBA. Taking the Heat to 7 games in the conference Finals is not how this works.

Or were the Hawks and Cavs better than the Lakers in 2008?

It is much more than taking the heat 7 games. We played the heat way better than this bunch from OKC. You have to look deeper than stats and boxscores. I agree with the OP and said as much the other day in another thread. We could have beaten OKC. This was a pathetic finals showing. It was obvious the Celtics-Heat conference final was for all the marbles. I feel the celtics would have beaten the spurs also. Sure we do not match up greatly with OKC like we do with the spurs but OKC does not know how to play defense at least in these finals.

Maybe you're right. But what you've got is speculation, gut feeling, and not very much empirical evidence.

Whether or not the Celtics would've played the heat better in a Finals is irrelevant. They didn't get to the Finals. The Thunder did. Would the Celtics have beaten the Thunder in a series? I don't know, neither do you, or anyone else.

We don't know if the Celtics could've beaten the Lakers or Spurs either.

But we do know that we got farther than anyone outside the Finals teams and the Spurs. We're tied with the Spurs.

[jgod213]

OKC was the 2nd best team in the NBA.

Actually... I don't know.  Might have been the Spurs.  I am a little surprise that King James massacred the Thunder like that.  IT's more a credit to LeBron turning it up a notch than a knock on the Thunder.  Had we somehow managed to defeat the Heat, I am not sure we would have had the same level of success against the Thunder as Miami did.  That team is very dangerous and we didn't match up well with them.

EDIT:  I'm still sticking with the Thunder here.  They swept the defending champions in round 1.  In round 2, they made quick work of the Los Angeles Lakers... a team that had Kobe Bryant playing at an elite level and two twin tower 7 foot all-stars.  Defeating a 2 time NBA champion with that kind of talent can't be discredited.   In round three, they go up against a world-beating Spurs team in the midst of a 20 win streak... widely thought to be the best team in basketball... and a team with oodles of championship experience.  They were no match for Durant and the Thunder... who ripped them open after falling down 0-2 to win 4 in a row.   

In the Finals, Durant averaged 31 points, on 55% shooting, 40% from three and 84% from the line while getting guarded by LeBron (a player who utilized his defensive ability to render our very own Paul Pierce essentially irrelevant).  That's impressive.  Westbrook averaged 27 points, 7 assists and 6 rebounds.  They played well... just not well enough to beat a zoned-in LeBron and the Heat. 

Alternatively, the Celtics struggled a bit against Atlanta (especially when Horford came back after a 6 month layoff) and were pushed to 7 games by a lowly Philly team.  If pushing the Heat to 7 games makes Boston the "2nd best team" then I guess we're saying Philly pushing the Celtics to 7 games makes them the 3rd best team. 

Well let's make sure we put some of the credit where it is due - the Heat role players.

Battier - 61% from 3.
Miller - 64% from 3.
Cole - 43% from 3.  Hadn't hit 1 3 pt shot before the finals
Chalmers (last 2 games) - 57% from the field

Obviously much credit to LeBron for ball movement and finding those guys, but those are some nutty shooting numbers.  As Doc always says, it's a "make/miss league" and Miami's role players got hot when it mattered.

[BballTim]

We were tied for the 3rd (or 4th, depending on how you measure such things) best team in the NBA. Taking the Heat to 7 games in the conference Finals is not how this works.

Or were the Hawks and Cavs better than the Lakers in 2008?

  I think a Lakers/Cavs series would have been fairly interesting. Walton/Sasha guarding LeBron? Lock up the women and children...

[Tgro]

I think OKC embarrassed itself during that series. They looked like a scrub team out there against Miami. I honestly think Miami was thankful they played us beforehand because we took everything they had to beat and when they got to OKC, they were just easy. Those guys just didn't show up. Perhaps they were overrated. Perhaps they need to learn more about playing TEAM ball. And perhaps Harden would want to shave his beard, because he stunk it up so bad, I would think if I was him, I wouldn't want people to recognize me.

The Celtics were more worthy of being in the NBA finals than OKC was. If we weren't the 2nd best team, we were the team nobody wanted to play because we were going to grind you the whole way.

Miami thought OKC was easy after they survived us.

[chambers]

OKC was the 2nd best team in the NBA.
 IT's more a credit to LeBron turning it up a notch than a knock on the Thunder.  

You're not giving Spoelstra or their perimter players enough credit. Lebron was the #%*&^ man the entire playoffs,but the outside shooting and Spoelstra exploiting Brooks' pathetic reactions to his line ups all series were just as important.

This series has shown me how poor a coach Scott Brooks really is. His rotations, his reactions to the Heats strengths and his inability to exploit their weaknesses.

It's almost as though he'd decided that the Thunder could simply outscore everyone and that the three point shooting that Miami had been utilizing so much during the playoffs wouldn't matter.
His match ups with Harden on Lebron, getting soul destroyed on the low block. (at the same time while Sefalosha was on the floor guarding Wade-Edited.  Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline.?).
Battier and Chalmers hitting an ungodly amount of threes completely uncontested.
I can't count on both hands how many times they ran pick and pop or screen for IBAKA when Durant and/or Harden were on the floor.
Don't get me started on how bleeding obvious Russell Westbrooks inability to control an offense was- they guy was a nightmare and missed Durant and Harden on sooooo many wide open looks, particularly on transition.

Hopefully OKC will watch some tape of Chicago and their close out defense with two bigs roaming the paint.
Miami was lucky there was no Rose this year- as were we.
The Bulls are coming out with a vengeance once Rose is back, they'll probably be improved too.

I do concur we are the 3rd or 4th best team. I think San Antonio beat up on some scrubs to get to the WCF but it's still the WCF.

OKC are the 2nd best team, but their offense wasn't enough for Miamis monstrous defense and three point shooting- oh, and the King.

[celtsfan84]

We were tied for the 3rd (or 4th, depending on how you measure such things) best team in the NBA. Taking the Heat to 7 games in the conference Finals is not how this works.

Or were the Hawks and Cavs better than the Lakers in 2008?

  I think a Lakers/Cavs series would have been fairly interesting. Walton/Sasha guarding LeBron? Lock up the women and children...

True, but the 2008 Lakers would've easily upended the 2008 Hawks, even though the Hawks took us to 7 and the Lakers took us to 6.  As your post points out, things like this point more to matchups than anything, so us taking the HEAT to 7 in itself doesn't make us better than the Thunder (who only took them to 5) or Spurs.  Matchups don't work that way.

That said, I think if any team has an "I wish we were healthy" gripe this year, it is Chicago, not us.  Let's remember than an unhealthy Bulls team finished at the top of the East standings.

[Neurotic Guy]

While it's a futile exercise to speculate who is the 2nd best team, one thing we can probably agree on is that the C's came very close to getting to the Finals and possibly could have given OKC a good series.  I'm not convinced we would have won the championship but the ease at which Miami beat the Thunder certainly raises the thought that we might have beaten them.   Bottom line though is that we were fortunate to get 5 games with no (or limited) Bosh. Once Bosh was added to the mix we didn't stand much of a chance against Miami.   Also, can't forget the good fortune of avoiding the Bulls.  Bulls with Rose may have beaten Miami in 4 without Bosh in the ECF.

[Fafnir]

We were tied for the 3rd (or 4th, depending on how you measure such things) best team in the NBA. Taking the Heat to 7 games in the conference Finals is not how this works.

Or were the Hawks and Cavs better than the Lakers in 2008?

  I think a Lakers/Cavs series would have been fairly interesting. Walton/Sasha guarding LeBron? Lock up the women and children...

LBJ also has eaten Kobe alive when Kobe has had to defend him.

Radmonovic/Walton were in foul trouble versus Pierce frequently in 07-08, the question would have been could the Cavs controlled Odom/Gasol.

[Redz]

Or we were just one of 29 other teams that didn't win the championship.

[mctyson]

Think about it, we were able to take the heat to 7 games, while OKC couldnt even get past 5. no team has taken this heat team to 7 except us.

We took the heat to 7 games without green, wilcox, bradley, jermaine o'neal. Half of our starters played injured, with Pierce who had a sprained MCL and ray allen had bone spurs, while stiemsma had plantar fascietis.  literally half our team was injured or out in some way.

if we were healthy, we were easily the best team in the nba.

I think the 70% winning percentage after the All Star break convinced everyone of this anyways.  Going up 3-2 against Miami with a depleted roster simply convince Miami and Lebron of this, which forced Game 7.