AInge says Rondo will miss first 20- 30 games. What's our win record now?

[Celtics18]

By the way, Chambers, hysterical thread title.  I listened to those clips you posted, and I guess I must have missed something.  I certainly didn't hear him say anything remotely claiming that Rondo will miss the first 20 to 30 games. 

Basically, we are back to where we always were.  We have no idea when Rondo will return, but we'd be very surprised if it was on opening night.

Huh? They both said he's out till at least December. That's at least 20 games. We don't know when in December.

I'll take a bet on his return month if youre so confident it's earlier?
You are right though, I should have put 41+ wins option too.

I'm being 100% serious on the December return. You probably know Ainge's angle in these scenarios and when he'd be 'shocked' to see Rondo play opening night and all states he doesn't think he'll be ready till at least December...this backed up by Stevens' statement about December and Ainge's history of injury return dates....
He's missing at least 19 games lol.
I'll bet on it.

I don't know why, but the irresponsibility of sports journalism is a huge pet peeve of mine.  I think it was Chris Forsberg who was the nexus of misinformation when he tweeted that "Ainge suggests Rondo will be out until December."

When I listened to the tape, I never heard neither Ainge nor coach Stevens say anything about December or give any specific number of missed games estimate.

Rondo may well be out until December, but I just can't stand when misinformation gets spread as fact.  It happens all the time, not just in sports journalism.  It's really annoying.

You'll have to save your sermon for another occasion because Ainge said early December on Toucher and Rich.  Forsberg only reported the facts this time.

Fair enough.  I just listened to that radio interview where Ainge said "I'm anticipating some time in early December, but I don't know.  I hate to put dates on it."

Anyway, if we are meant to take that comment as representing a specific timetable (which I'm not--and it doesn't sound like Danny meant us to), 19 to 25 games would be the accurate estimation of games missed as opposed to 20 to 30 games missed. 

[Celtics18]

Great breakdown, 4m.

I could live with 36 wins.  As a matter of fact, I've long held 35 to be my watermark for this season.  My position is that anything less than 35 would be a disappointment. 

If we can realistically get to 36, then I think that if everything breaks well that we can possibly get up into the low forties and make a run at the playoffs. 

[D.o.s.]

Great breakdown, 4m.

I could live with 36 wins.  As a matter of fact, I've long held 35 to be my watermark for this season.  My position is that anything less than 35 would be a disappointment. 

If we can realistically get to 36, then I think that if everything breaks well that we can possibly get up into the low forties and make a run at the playoffs.

With most of the East getting better, and with the Celtics getting decidedly worse, I doubt that we'll finish with a better record than we had last year.

[Celtics18]

Great breakdown, 4m.

I could live with 36 wins.  As a matter of fact, I've long held 35 to be my watermark for this season.  My position is that anything less than 35 would be a disappointment. 

If we can realistically get to 36, then I think that if everything breaks well that we can possibly get up into the low forties and make a run at the playoffs.

With most of the East getting better, and with the Celtics getting decidedly worse, I doubt that we'll finish with a better record than we had last year.

Let's shoot for 40 wins, then. 

[D.o.s.]

I mean, I want them to win 98.

[Celtics18]

I mean, I want them to win 98.

Me too, but I'm trying to stay realistic here. 

[D.o.s.]

I mean, I want them to win 98.

Me too, but I'm trying to stay realistic here.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."



 

[xmuscularghandix]

I don't care if they win 10 games. I don't care if they completely tank. As long as the young guys can improve throughout the year and get named to Rookie/Sophomore games, and All-Rookie teams, and whatever else can increase value.... I'll be alright.

[Celtics18]

I mean, I want them to win 98.

Me too, but I'm trying to stay realistic here.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."



 

TP for the chuckle, Inigo.

We`ll find out if I know what the word means in due time.

[Neurotic Guy]

I have no idea or opinion with regard to # of wins.  This team's performance is a mystery waiting to unfold and I am pretty psyched about watching this team.  If they surprise with a .500 performance without Rondo, things may actually get exciting here -- especially around trade deadline with the prospect of trading high with some of our assets.   If they look like a young inexperienced team and lose a lot, I'll be psyched to see development over the year and will get jazzed for the lottery as we compile ping-pong balls.

With the Lakers looking pretty bad on paper and no threat to win anything this year, I'll use one of my least favorite expressions to describe my feelings about the upcoming year -- "It's all good."

[mmmmm]

Great breakdown, 4m.

I could live with 36 wins.  As a matter of fact, I've long held 35 to be my watermark for this season.  My position is that anything less than 35 would be a disappointment. 

If we can realistically get to 36, then I think that if everything breaks well that we can possibly get up into the low forties and make a run at the playoffs.

With most of the East getting better, and with the Celtics getting decidedly worse, I doubt that we'll finish with a better record than we had last year.

Not sure most East teams got, "better".

Nets definitely got better.

Heat got better IF Oden is healthy and returns to form and some of the old guys like Battier & Allen don't decline.

Cleveland looks better on paper, but Bynum and Varejao are notoriously fragile and if they go down (again), they look worse.

Milwaukee looks slightly better or slightly worse, depending on your view of the Jennings trade.

Sixers got (purposely) worse.

Most of the rest of the East teams look like status quo.   Mostly modest moves that net out to treading water.

'Not saying that most of the east isn't looking 'better' than the Celtics. 

But I don't really think most of the teams actually made much in the way of upgrades over last year.

[Kane3387]

Great breakdown, 4m.

I could live with 36 wins.  As a matter of fact, I've long held 35 to be my watermark for this season.  My position is that anything less than 35 would be a disappointment. 

If we can realistically get to 36, then I think that if everything breaks well that we can possibly get up into the low forties and make a run at the playoffs.

With most of the East getting better, and with the Celtics getting decidedly worse, I doubt that we'll finish with a better record than we had last year.

Not sure most East teams got, "better".

Nets definitely got better.

Heat got better IF Oden is healthy and returns to form and some of the old guys like Battier & Allen don't decline.

Cleveland looks better on paper, but Bynum and Varejao are notoriously fragile and if they go down (again), they look worse.

Milwaukee looks slightly better or slightly worse, depending on your view of the Jennings trade.

Sixers got (purposely) worse.

Most of the rest of the East teams look like status quo.   Mostly modest moves that net out to treading water.

'Not saying that most of the east isn't looking 'better' than the Celtics. 

But I don't really think most of the teams actually made much in the way of upgrades over last year.

Granger makes Indiana better.

Rose makes Chicago better. Much better.

Knicks traded old beat up players for younger guys. They're a little better .

Washington is much better if they can ever be healthy together.

Atlanta likely broke even.

[D.o.s.]

Great breakdown, 4m.

I could live with 36 wins.  As a matter of fact, I've long held 35 to be my watermark for this season.  My position is that anything less than 35 would be a disappointment. 

If we can realistically get to 36, then I think that if everything breaks well that we can possibly get up into the low forties and make a run at the playoffs.

With most of the East getting better, and with the Celtics getting decidedly worse, I doubt that we'll finish with a better record than we had last year.

Not sure most East teams got, "better".

Nets definitely got better.

Heat got better IF Oden is healthy and returns to form and some of the old guys like Battier & Allen don't decline.

Cleveland looks better on paper, but Bynum and Varejao are notoriously fragile and if they go down (again), they look worse.

Milwaukee looks slightly better or slightly worse, depending on your view of the Jennings trade.

Sixers got (purposely) worse.

Most of the rest of the East teams look like status quo.   Mostly modest moves that net out to treading water.

'Not saying that most of the east isn't looking 'better' than the Celtics. 

But I don't really think most of the teams actually made much in the way of upgrades over last year.

An arguable point, but I'd say that treading water stands as better than the Celtics, who certainly got worse.

Also, the Pistons got better.

[fantankerous]

Charlotte improved.  Cleveland has also improved, even with discounting the health of Bynum and Varejao. 

[gpap]

I don't care if they win 10 games. I don't care if they completely tank. As long as the young guys can improve throughout the year and get named to Rookie/Sophomore games, and All-Rookie teams, and whatever else can increase value.... I'll be alright.

And risk hearing crickets during games at the Garden? Tanking never leads to anything good. Not to mention basketball and the Celtics are 4th on the totem pole of Boston sports fans. Further turning people off by putting out a 10 win team is not a good idea.

Once you lose fans, it's very hard to get them back.

Ask Red Sox ownership.