Boston legitimately 4th seed

[vjcsmoke]

As of right now, Boston's 12-14 record legitimately is the 4th best record in the Eastern Conference.  It's not just some flukey Atlantic Division nonsense.   2 games under .500 is legitimate 4th seed worthy right now.

How does 2 games under .500 and legitimate 4th seed enter into the same sentence?  Just because everyone else sucks right now, doesn't make the Celtics a good team.  This team as currently composed would get eaten alive in the West, and wouldn't make it past the 1st round of the playoffs.

I'm sorry but Asik isn't all that and by no means is he worth trading for except Wallace, Bogans or Humphries.  Hes a career back up, goofy, white skinny center.

That's what most people thought about Gortat until he was given a chance to become a starter.  I think Asik would be a solid 5 for the Celtics.  No world-beater, but we don't need one.

It's the Brad Stevens effect.  Same thing he did with Butler he is doing with the Celtics.  He has these guys overachieving bigtime.  That means we end up with more regular season wins, but ultimately I don't think we have the talent to matchup against the real elite teams in the playoffs.

[Jailan34]

As of right now, Boston's 12-14 record legitimately is the 4th best record in the Eastern Conference.  It's not just some flukey Atlantic Division nonsense.   2 games under .500 is legitimate 4th seed worthy right now.

How does 2 games under .500 and legitimate 4th seed enter into the same sentence?  Just because everyone else sucks right now, doesn't make the Celtics a good team.  This team as currently composed would get eaten alive in the West, and wouldn't make it past the 1st round of the playoffs.

TP for seeing the truth and not letting your fandom skew your view on this teams talent level and future with its currently assembled roster.

[kozlodoev]

As of right now, Boston's 12-14 record legitimately is the 4th best record in the Eastern Conference.  It's not just some flukey Atlantic Division nonsense.   2 games under .500 is legitimate 4th seed worthy right now.

How does 2 games under .500 and legitimate 4th seed enter into the same sentence?  Just because everyone else sucks right now, doesn't make the Celtics a good team.  This team as currently composed would get eaten alive in the West, and wouldn't make it past the 1st round of the playoffs.

"Legitimate 4th seed" in this context means having the 4th best record in the conference, as opposed to making the playoffs as the division leader. Division leaders are always seeded top 4, regardless of  their record. We were the 4th seed for a while with the 9th and 10th best record in the East.

[vjcsmoke]

"Legitimate 4th seed" in this context means having the 4th best record in the conference, as opposed to making the playoffs as the division leader. Division leaders are always seeded top 4, regardless of  their record.

And do you really believe a sub .500 team will be the 4th seed by the time all 82 games are completed?  I think it's a statistical anomaly.  It's entirely possible the C's could win the Atlantic at .500 just because of how sucky the division is.  But I don't believe the entire conference will stay that sucky.

[kozlodoev]

And do you really believe a sub .500 team will be the 4th seed by the time all 82 games are completed?

I'm sorry, but how is it relevant to the fact that we're currently the 4th in the Eastern standings?

We may win the Atlantic with a sub-.500 record. We may qualify for the playoffs with a sub-.500 records (heck, the 03-04 team did it with 36 wins). Or we may not even have a sub-.500 record at all.

The Celtics don't have to "stay that sucky" either.

Not sure what your point is.

[vjcsmoke]

And do you really believe a sub .500 team will be the 4th seed by the time all 82 games are completed?

I'm sorry, but how is it relevant to the fact that we're currently the 4th in the Eastern standings?

We may win the Atlantic with a sub-.500 record. We may qualify for the playoffs with a sub-.500 records (heck, the 03-04 team did it with 36 wins). Or we may not even have a sub-.500 record at all.

The Celtics don't have to "stay that sucky" either.

Not sure what your point is.

The point is that it's a statistical fluke that a sub .500 team is ranked 4th in the conference right now.  It is very relevant if you don't believe a sub .500 record will be 4th by the time all the games are played.  Using simpler words that you can understand, it ain't legit.

I respect that Brad Stevens is managing to get this team to overachieve right now but he's using smoke and mirrors.  Don't be fooled.  This team does not match up with any elite talent and is poised for a first round knockout.

[kozlodoev]

And do you really believe a sub .500 team will be the 4th seed by the time all 82 games are completed?

I'm sorry, but how is it relevant to the fact that we're currently the 4th in the Eastern standings?

We may win the Atlantic with a sub-.500 record. We may qualify for the playoffs with a sub-.500 records (heck, the 03-04 team did it with 36 wins). Or we may not even have a sub-.500 record at all.

The Celtics don't have to "stay that sucky" either.

Not sure what your point is.

The point is that it's a statistical fluke that a sub .500 team is ranked 4th in the conference right now.  It is very relevant if you don't believe a sub .500 record will be 4th by the time all the games are played.  Using simpler words that you can understand, it ain't legit.

I respect that Brad Stevens is managing to get this team to overachieve right now but he's using smoke and mirrors.  Don't be fooled.  This team does not match up with any elite talent and is poised for a first round knockout.

You clearly don't understand what "statistical fluke" means. The 13th worst record winning the draft lottery is a statistical fluke.

Thanks for trying to be cute. It's entertaining. Your effort, however, is better spend trying to read and internalize what I wrote.

[nickagneta]

Its actually a rather common occurrence for sub .500 teams to make the playoffs and ,500 teams to be as high as a 6th seed in a conference.

heck 2 times in the last decade a team with just 38 wins have made the playoffs.

Given this data I am not sure what constitutes a "legitimate" __________(fill in the blank) seed. Some years conferences have a lot of strong teams and just a couple really bad team and other years conferences have a couple of excellent teams and then a bunch of really bad ones and then teams with sub .500 records make the playoffs. They still legitimately made the playoffs so I am not sure what needs to happen to give any seeded team legitimacy.

[chambers]

Why are so many people hating on being a "middling team"?

I just don't get it. I want someone to find me the stats on the teams who won the championship that weren't "middling"... it seems to me that you don't go from bad(constantly missing playoffs) to great (champ), you go from good (playoffs/contender) to great (champ)!

Last I checked the 2008 Celtics went from worst to first.  Middling is not where we want to be.

Yeah, and we were mediocre to average for many years before that.

Also, being "worst" didn't help us all that much -- we had the 5th pick in a draft that was not particularly deep, and  caught lightning in a bottle when two teams were interested in unloading their stars at the same time.

Here's the opposing perspective to your argument.
You're saying we were mediocre before the lottery pick with Green and Ray trade and you're also saying the Green pick didn't help all that much.

We were mediocre, stuck in a rutt with bad management until Ainge came along.
Not until we became terrible did we get the league to see our 15th pick (Jefferson),show his true potential.

Ainge parlayed that 15th pick into Kevin Garnett after being terrible  (with some injuries) and showcasing Jefferson and some other young pieces.

Whilst being terrible and showcasing Big Al, we managed to get a top 5 pick in a decent draft.

Now you're saying that pick and trading it for Ray Allen didn't do much for us?
How does that work?
Does KG even look at Boston without Ray coming? 2 months earlier he wanted to be a Laker.

Take KG out of the equation. How do we get Ray? We give them Big Al?
So now what?
Pierce,Ray and Rondo. Great core. Playoff team.
contender? Nah.

It's the combination of high picks and assets that's so great because it gives you flexibility making moves.

[kozlodoev]

Not until we became terrible did we get the league to see our 15th pick (Jefferson),show his true potential.

There is a solid argument to be made about what the causality is there. That team wasn't supposed to be that bad, and didn't tank (most of) the season on purpose. Jefferson had earned his spot in the rotation with solid rookie and sophomore campaigns. But he played, posted his stats and the team was horrible -- which is, coincidentally, the story of most of Jefferson's career...

In other words, it wasn't that we were bad and thus showcased Jefferson for the whole NBA to see -- we played Jefferson because we thought he was the real thing.

[BballTim]

Why are so many people hating on being a "middling team"?

I just don't get it. I want someone to find me the stats on the teams who won the championship that weren't "middling"... it seems to me that you don't go from bad(constantly missing playoffs) to great (champ), you go from good (playoffs/contender) to great (champ)!

Last I checked the 2008 Celtics went from worst to first.  Middling is not where we want to be.

Yeah, and we were mediocre to average for many years before that.

Also, being "worst" didn't help us all that much -- we had the 5th pick in a draft that was not particularly deep, and  caught lightning in a bottle when two teams were interested in unloading their stars at the same time.

Here's the opposing perspective to your argument.
You're saying we were mediocre before the lottery pick with Green and Ray trade and you're also saying the Green pick didn't help all that much.

We were mediocre, stuck in a rutt with bad management until Ainge came along.
Not until we became terrible did we get the league to see our 15th pick (Jefferson),show his true potential.

Ainge parlayed that 15th pick into Kevin Garnett after being terrible  (with some injuries) and showcasing Jefferson and some other young pieces.

Whilst being terrible and showcasing Big Al, we managed to get a top 5 pick in a decent draft.

  Shortly before PP left the lineup in 2007 we had a 5 game win streak. Al averaged 20/12 in those games. We didn't need to be bad to showcase Al. In fact his numbers that year (IIRC) were much better with PP in the lineup than without him.

[ImShakHeIsShaq]

Why are so many people hating on being a "middling team"?

I just don't get it. I want someone to find me the stats on the teams who won the championship that weren't "middling"... it seems to me that you don't go from bad(constantly missing playoffs) to great (champ), you go from good (playoffs/contender) to great (champ)!

Last I checked the 2008 Celtics went from worst to first.  Middling is not where we want to be.

Soooo, ONCE? Even then it was through TRADES. Yes I'm aware that the 5th pick came b/c of being bad but was that the only way to obtain said pick? Is being bad the only way to get a good lotto pick. Yea? No.

Now even more to my point, did DA strip the team of it's best talent in 07-08? NO! Without PP there is nothing for KG to come for, no matter if Ray was here or not (a fact that people ignore just so you can say getting Ray was the only way to bring in KG as if he was the ONLY reason KG came). Get rid of PP in the equation and you don't get Ray (what would be the point) or KG! Now, get rid of RR and who are we going to get to come? What are we waiting 7 years for the lotto pick to become someone to carry us to the chip? One star wont get you a chip in this league, who w/o RR will we have? Ask guys like Love, who have to wait years b4 their teammates (or themselves) grow into great players or who have good players but still constantly miss the playoffs! RR is already great, it is much easier to get FA to come here, while the draft pick is an unknown  and it's already gonna be hard convincing FA to come to Boston (exciting 0.0).

[vjcsmoke]

And do you really believe a sub .500 team will be the 4th seed by the time all 82 games are completed?

I'm sorry, but how is it relevant to the fact that we're currently the 4th in the Eastern standings?

We may win the Atlantic with a sub-.500 record. We may qualify for the playoffs with a sub-.500 records (heck, the 03-04 team did it with 36 wins). Or we may not even have a sub-.500 record at all.

The Celtics don't have to "stay that sucky" either.

Not sure what your point is.

The point is that it's a statistical fluke that a sub .500 team is ranked 4th in the conference right now.  It is very relevant if you don't believe a sub .500 record will be 4th by the time all the games are played.  Using simpler words that you can understand, it ain't legit.

I respect that Brad Stevens is managing to get this team to overachieve right now but he's using smoke and mirrors.  Don't be fooled.  This team does not match up with any elite talent and is poised for a first round knockout.

You clearly don't understand what "statistical fluke" means. The 13th worst record winning the draft lottery is a statistical fluke.

Thanks for trying to be cute. It's entertaining. Your effort, however, is better spend trying to read and internalize what I wrote.

LOL, try reading a dictionary next time.  A fluke is a fluke.  Sub .500 does not get 4th in the East when all the games are played.  The current positioning is a statistical fluke.  Please learn to understand basic English.  But if it's your second language, well then you're forgiven.


fluke
2   [flook]  Show IPA 

noun 
1.
an accidental advantage; stroke of good luck: He got the job by a fluke. 

2.
an accident or chance happening.

3.
an accidentally successful stroke, as in billiards.

[vjcsmoke]

Not until we became terrible did we get the league to see our 15th pick (Jefferson),show his true potential.

There is a solid argument to be made about what the causality is there. That team wasn't supposed to be that bad, and didn't tank (most of) the season on purpose. Jefferson had earned his spot in the rotation with solid rookie and sophomore campaigns. But he played, posted his stats and the team was horrible -- which is, coincidentally, the story of most of Jefferson's career...

In other words, it wasn't that we were bad and thus showcased Jefferson for the whole NBA to see -- we played Jefferson because we thought he was the real thing.

No, we played Jefferson because we didn't have much of a choice.  Big Al was our most talented big at the time.  He was also our best post option.  That also happened to showcase him.  And then the Ray Allen trade happened, and then the KG trade happened.  The rest is history.

[wdleehi]

Legitimate 4th seed in the same way someone legitimately volunteers because everyone else in the line takes a step back.