Quote from my friend on FB re. Celtics, Lakers, Heat. Are we just like them?

[Ogaju]

Mike Brown is in over his head on this team. If the Lakers dont win it all next year Mark Brown is Mark Gonzo.

[action781]

The four Laker All-Stars are all at least top 7 at their position and they compliment each other incredibly well. Their starting five has the chance to be the greatest starting five ever.

Ever.

Bold. I guess we'll see how this all plays out. Are you thinking 70 wins?

No. I do feel they have a chance, but I don't think so. I keep forgetting Mike Brown is the coach. Howard has to be healthy obviously, but looking at how much Nash can do with Kobe, Dwight, and Pau forces me to admit that this team has a chance at being all time great this season.

Mike Brown is an excellent defensive coach.  He now has the best defensive player in the NBA, 3 other players who can be labeled no worse than "good" at their current positions, and their single defensive liability is at a position that is incredibly difficult for even decent defenders to guard.

On offense, he has two players that are very efficient if you just give them the ball and clear out.  He also has a top playmaker in the game who even if isn't utilized properly, still will post great efficiency numbers.  Oh, and they have Kobe Bryant too.

[kozlodoev]

We're not any different from them except for the laundry.  That might sting but I believe it to be true for the most part.

And I really don't care.  I'd rather be a "Have" than a "Have Not" in the NBA.

Sorry, what do you mean by "the laundry?"

He means we are basically the same as them except we wear green and they wear purple (Lakers) or red (HEAT) or orange (Knicks).

When you form the list of "Haves" and "Have Nots", we are definitely on the list of "Haves".

The Lakers are clearly at the very top of the list of "Haves" but Boston is definitely on that list.

No, not really. We traded for our players fair and square. So did the Lakers for that matter. Our teams doesn't consist of a bunch of guys who huddled up and decided it's going to be fun to play together.

[celtsfan84]

We're not any different from them except for the laundry.  That might sting but I believe it to be true for the most part.

And I really don't care.  I'd rather be a "Have" than a "Have Not" in the NBA.

Sorry, what do you mean by "the laundry?"

He means we are basically the same as them except we wear green and they wear purple (Lakers) or red (HEAT) or orange (Knicks).

When you form the list of "Haves" and "Have Nots", we are definitely on the list of "Haves".

The Lakers are clearly at the very top of the list of "Haves" but Boston is definitely on that list.

No, not really. We traded for our players fair and square. So did the Lakers for that matter. Our teams doesn't consist of a bunch of guys who huddled up and decided it's going to be fun to play together.

How does that determine whether we are a "Have" or "Have Not"?  Some other teams wouldn't have even been allowed by ownership to acquire KG and Ray even if they could because their owner wouldn't have wanted to pay the luxury tax.

The financials of the NBA and the reputations of certain teams and the market size of certain cities is a lot more complex than the Decision.

[kozlodoev]

How does that determine whether we are a "Have" or "Have Not"?  Some other teams wouldn't have even been allowed by ownership to acquire KG and Ray even if they could because their owner wouldn't have wanted to pay the luxury tax.

I don't buy this at all. The NBA is not the MLB.

[celtsfan84]

How does that determine whether we are a "Have" or "Have Not"?  Some other teams wouldn't have even been allowed by ownership to acquire KG and Ray even if they could because their owner wouldn't have wanted to pay the luxury tax.

I don't buy this at all. The NBA is not the MLB.

So you think the Suns trading Kurt Thomas and three 1st Round picks for one 2nd Round pick was a basketball trade and not a financial one?

Would the Celtics have ever traded away three 1st Round picks to cut salary? You know we got Rondo from the Suns because they wanted to cut Brian Grant's salary right?

[manl_lui]

The four Laker All-Stars are all at least top 7 at their position and they compliment each other incredibly well. Their starting five has the chance to be the greatest starting five ever.

Ever.

Bold. I guess we'll see how this all plays out. Are you thinking 70 wins?

They don't have any young legs (besides Dwight), have some injury concerns, and have poor depth.

This isn't a team built for back-to-backs and long road trips and things of that nature.

This is more of a playoff built roster than a regular season built roster.

I think OKC might outpace them in the regular season.

to be fair, Kobe, Shaq, Payton, and Malone were supposed to be a great team, but then lost to the Pistons

let's see how this pans out. Kobe is getting old, Pau is definitely losing a step or two, his playoff production declines every year. Also, we don't know if any of those people will have any sorts of injuries.

[celtsfan84]

The four Laker All-Stars are all at least top 7 at their position and they compliment each other incredibly well. Their starting five has the chance to be the greatest starting five ever.

Ever.

Bold. I guess we'll see how this all plays out. Are you thinking 70 wins?

They don't have any young legs (besides Dwight), have some injury concerns, and have poor depth.

This isn't a team built for back-to-backs and long road trips and things of that nature.

This is more of a playoff built roster than a regular season built roster.

I think OKC might outpace them in the regular season.

to be fair, Kobe, Shaq, Payton, and Malone were supposed to be a great team, but then lost to the Pistons

let's see how this pans out. Kobe is getting old, Pau is definitely losing a step or two, his playoff production declines every year. Also, we don't know if any of those people will have any sorts of injuries.

Also to be fair, KG, Pierce, and Allen were supposed to be a great team, and immediately won the NBA title.

OKC, Miami, and Boston could all have injuries too.

[AB_Celtic]

The four Laker All-Stars are all at least top 7 at their position and they compliment each other incredibly well. Their starting five has the chance to be the greatest starting five ever.

Ever.

Bold. I guess we'll see how this all plays out. Are you thinking 70 wins?

They don't have any young legs (besides Dwight), have some injury concerns, and have poor depth.

This isn't a team built for back-to-backs and long road trips and things of that nature.

This is more of a playoff built roster than a regular season built roster.

I think OKC might outpace them in the regular season.

to be fair, Kobe, Shaq, Payton, and Malone were supposed to be a great team, but then lost to the Pistons

let's see how this pans out. Kobe is getting old, Pau is definitely losing a step or two, his playoff production declines every year. Also, we don't know if any of those people will have any sorts of injuries.

Plus, the difference between Bynum and Howard is not that huge. Expect 4-5 more ppg and 1-2 more rpg.

[BRC-14]

The four Laker All-Stars are all at least top 7 at their position and they compliment each other incredibly well. Their starting five has the chance to be the greatest starting five ever.

Ever.

Bold. I guess we'll see how this all plays out. Are you thinking 70 wins?

They don't have any young legs (besides Dwight), have some injury concerns, and have poor depth.

This isn't a team built for back-to-backs and long road trips and things of that nature.

This is more of a playoff built roster than a regular season built roster.

I think OKC might outpace them in the regular season.

to be fair, Kobe, Shaq, Payton, and Malone were supposed to be a great team, but then lost to the Pistons

let's see how this pans out. Kobe is getting old, Pau is definitely losing a step or two, his playoff production declines every year. Also, we don't know if any of those people will have any sorts of injuries.

Also to be fair, KG, Pierce, and Allen were supposed to be a great team, and immediately won the NBA title.

OKC, Miami, and Boston could all have injuries too.

If we have another injury riddled season I do not know what I would do... It seems to happen every year now. 

[Lightskinsmurf]

The four Laker All-Stars are all at least top 7 at their position and they compliment each other incredibly well. Their starting five has the chance to be the greatest starting five ever.

Ever.

Bold. I guess we'll see how this all plays out. Are you thinking 70 wins?

They don't have any young legs (besides Dwight), have some injury concerns, and have poor depth.

This isn't a team built for back-to-backs and long road trips and things of that nature.

This is more of a playoff built roster than a regular season built roster.

I think OKC might outpace them in the regular season.

to be fair, Kobe, Shaq, Payton, and Malone were supposed to be a great team, but then lost to the Pistons

let's see how this pans out. Kobe is getting old, Pau is definitely losing a step or two, his playoff production declines every year. Also, we don't know if any of those people will have any sorts of injuries.

Plus, the difference between Bynum and Howard is not that huge. Expect 4-5 more ppg and 1-2 more rpg.

THIS ^ people are acting like the lakers are gonna average 10 more points per game now and give up 15 less. They traded ARGUABLY the best center in the league for arguably the best center in the league. I think DW is an ugrade but is he a HUGE upgrade no.

[AB_Celtic]

If we have another injury riddled season I do not know what I would do... It seems to happen every year now. 

DA built this team to deal specifically with that. If Pierce needs a few days off, we bring in Green. Same with Rondo and Terry, KG and Wilcox. Hopefully by resting those three (mainly Pierce and KG) the injury issues won't arise.

Any major injuries to those three, though, and we're done.

[BballTim]

We're not any different from them except for the laundry.  That might sting but I believe it to be true for the most part.

And I really don't care.  I'd rather be a "Have" than a "Have Not" in the NBA.

Sorry, what do you mean by "the laundry?"

He means we are basically the same as them except we wear green and they wear purple (Lakers) or red (HEAT) or orange (Knicks).

When you form the list of "Haves" and "Have Nots", we are definitely on the list of "Haves".

The Lakers are clearly at the very top of the list of "Haves" but Boston is definitely on that list.

  So before the KG trade when was the last time the Celts were on the "haves" list? 1989?

[celtsfan84]

We're not any different from them except for the laundry.  That might sting but I believe it to be true for the most part.

And I really don't care.  I'd rather be a "Have" than a "Have Not" in the NBA.

Sorry, what do you mean by "the laundry?"

He means we are basically the same as them except we wear green and they wear purple (Lakers) or red (HEAT) or orange (Knicks).

When you form the list of "Haves" and "Have Nots", we are definitely on the list of "Haves".

The Lakers are clearly at the very top of the list of "Haves" but Boston is definitely on that list.

  So before the KG trade when was the last time the Celts were on the "haves" list? 1989?

You can be rich and manage money poorly.  Or have poor ownership.  Reference the Knicks.  As an example, we took on the enormous Vin Baker contract.  Not a lot of teams would've taken on a huge contract given to an alcoholic.  We've always been on the "Haves" list.  Incompetent ownership and incompetent management wreaks havoc on rich and poor teams alike.

I ask again, would we trade away 3 1st Round picks just to cut salary?

Also, are you saying the Knicks haven't been on the "Haves" list since the mid-90s?  Be realistic here.  The Knicks weren't poor for the last decade.  They just made a litany of dumb moves.  If you would like me to list some dumb Chris Wallace / ML Carr / Rick Pitino moves, I'd be glad to.  You really think the Celtics have the same opportunities as the Kings?

[BballTim]

We're not any different from them except for the laundry.  That might sting but I believe it to be true for the most part.

And I really don't care.  I'd rather be a "Have" than a "Have Not" in the NBA.

Sorry, what do you mean by "the laundry?"

He means we are basically the same as them except we wear green and they wear purple (Lakers) or red (HEAT) or orange (Knicks).

When you form the list of "Haves" and "Have Nots", we are definitely on the list of "Haves".

The Lakers are clearly at the very top of the list of "Haves" but Boston is definitely on that list.

  So before the KG trade when was the last time the Celts were on the "haves" list? 1989?

You can be rich and manage money poorly.  Or have poor ownership.  Reference the Knicks.  As an example, we took on the enormous Vin Baker contract.  Not a lot of teams would've taken on a huge contract given to an alcoholic.  We've always been on the "Haves" list.  Incompetent ownership and incompetent management wreaks havoc on rich and poor teams alike.

I ask again, would we trade away 3 1st Round picks just to cut salary?

Also, are you saying the Knicks haven't been on the "Haves" list since the mid-90s?  Be realistic here.  The Knicks weren't poor for the last decade.  They just made a litany of dumb moves.  If you would like me to list some dumb Chris Wallace / ML Carr / Rick Pitino moves, I'd be glad to.  You really think the Celtics have the same opportunities as the Kings?

  Teams like the Knicks and some of the teams in the south can attract players based on their location. The Celts can't. They aren't the same kind of "haves" as the Knicks and Lakers.