Lebron to play against C's tonight

[SHAQATTACK]

I kind of figured he'd play tonight at home instead of at Boston on Sunday. Didn't expect him to miss both games, so of course he picked to play at home vs at Boston. Hopefully Detroit and Washington can do us a favor tonight and beat the Pacers and Nets.

John Wall sitting tonight for Wizards...lol.

Crap lol we can't catch a break here 

Yup.......I figured .......lEQueenie and thug Wade are not on he same team , but they still have a hate that won't quit for the Celtics.   

I 'm just hoping we don't get blown out by 30 points again by the ALL STAR CLUB ,   Just a close game would be fun at least.

Celtics are on the bullseye ......no resting players against the no star studded Celtics ......let's pound em .

[KeepRondo]

Good.  If the Celtics need the best players on the other teams to sit out in order to make it into the postseason, they don't belong there anyway.

agreed.

This is a little silly and not what is actually happening. We could make arguments like this if every team was playing each other without healthy scratches, but that is not the case. I think it is very fair to want the Celtics to get the same advantages that other teams the Celtics are competing against are receiving. For example, the Nets picked up a relatively easy win this week because Portland left their top players in Oregon on a road trip. Tonight they apparently get to play the Wizards without their best player as a scratch for rest. Wanting the Celtics to have a level playing feel where they catch some breaks with healthy scratches just the teams they are competing against is more than fair. If you want to make the argument that you want the Celtics to be so far superior to these other teams that they should catch breaks, the Celtics shouldn't, and the Celtics should still make it... well that is a whole different animal...

To clarify: The point (for me, I won't speak for Pho) has very little to do with the standings insofar as the particulars of our record against Brooklyn/Washington/Charlotte/etc. are concerned and much more to do with the quality of the Celtics play in securing wins.

I don't really care if we make the playoffs or not -- I like watching the Celtics, and I prefer to watch them win, but I harbor no illusions about this squad being in serious contention for a championship, or even an appearance in the second round. Beating a LeBron-less Cleveland team to help secure a playoff spot moves the needle very little for me.

I would think if you enjoy watching the Celtics play getting to see an additional 4 or 5 games on national television and seeing what kinds of adjustments Brad Stevens makes when playing the same team 4 or 5 times in a row would have a lot of appeal.

That would have some appeal. But if the Celtics get into the playoffs because other teams rested their starters, then I would rather have the better draft pick to improve our chances next year.

Everyone is resting their starters against every team around the NBA. The Nets are getting breaks left and right.... that was kind of the whole point. Just to have a level playing field.

The Celtics are a sub 500 team so right there I already don't feel like they should be in the playoffs. However, if they win some tough games against a healthy Cavs team or just finish strong, then I'll accept it. But if they get in from a bunch of DNPs, then I will consider making the playoffs a mistake.

[BudweiserCeltic]

The last time Cleveland stomped us we didn't have Isaiah right? I don't remember, if we did he was just coming back from his injury

No, Thomas was healthy.

We didn't have Olynyk or Sullinger though.

I thought he played but was coming back from his injury

Unless there was a different injury, this game was prior to the Heats game.

[celticsclay]

Again, is playing .600 ball for more than a third of the season (19-12 I think off hand) after redoing their roster not enough? Yes in the beginning the season they were a terrible team, but trotting out the tired under .500 argument is really just highlighting that they were really bad with Rondo and Green in the beginning of the season. Is that what you want to do?

[KeepRondo]

Again, is playing .600 ball for more than a third of the season (19-12 I think off hand) after redoing their roster not enough? Yes in the beginning the season they were a terrible team, but trotting out the tired under .500 argument is really just highlighting that they were really bad with Rondo and Green in the beginning of the season. Is that what you want to do?

Strength of schedule has something to do with the record. I do think we are closer to an even 500 team with IT4 on the roster. But we are not a 600 win percentage team if you played our roster out for the whole season.  Thanks for the 

Edit - 600 would make us 47-31 right now. There's no way you can possibly think we are a 47-31 team.

[D.o.s.]

If I wanted to watch overmatched teams lose over and over again I'd watch the NCAA more regularly.

Your comments don't add up then. You just said you enjoying watching the Celtics and they have been overmatched for years. At least be consistent.

If by "years" you mean the Brad Stevens era, then sure, even though we're not all the way through a second season yet.

The Celtics never finished under .500 when Doc Rivers was the head coach, and they always had enough talent on the roster to have a shot (even an outside shot) at winning any given playoff series. That has not been true since Stevens was hired, and was cemented when we traded Rondo and Jeff Green -- who are, inarguably, the two most talented players to have played for the Celtics this year. Those two players have the potential to be the best player on the floor in any given playoff series. No one on our team has a similar ceiling right now.

There's a reason why everyone with an ounce of basketball intellect is looking at our team right now and saying things like (to paraphrase) "there might be some guys who could play well enough to maybe earn a spot on a championship roster." And it's not because they're plucky young upstarts with a bright future: it's because, as far as the requisite level of NBA talent needed to win a ring, they're decidedly lacking.

[SparzWizard]

I predict the Cavs will win by 36 points tonight

[celticsclay]

If I wanted to watch overmatched teams lose over and over again I'd watch the NCAA more regularly.

Your comments don't add up then. You just said you enjoying watching the Celtics and they have been overmatched for years. At least be consistent.

If by "years" you mean the Brad Stevens era, then sure, even though we're not all the way through a second season yet.

The Celtics never finished under .500 when Doc Rivers was the head coach, and they always had enough talent on the roster to have a shot (even an outside shot) at winning any given playoff series. That has not been true since Stevens was hired, and was cemented when we traded Rondo and Jeff Green -- who are, inarguably, the two most talented players to have played for the Celtics this year. Those two players have the potential to be the best player on the floor in any given playoff series. No one on our team has a similar ceiling right now.

There's a reason why everyone with an ounce of basketball intellect is looking at our team right now and saying things like (to paraphrase) "there might be some guys who could play well enough to maybe earn a spot on a championship roster." And it's not because they're plucky young upstarts with a bright future: it's because, as far as the requisite level of NBA talent needed to win a ring, they're decidedly lacking.

So do you enjoy watching them or not?

[Celtics18]

If I wanted to watch overmatched teams lose over and over again I'd watch the NCAA more regularly.

Your comments don't add up then. You just said you enjoying watching the Celtics and they have been overmatched for years. At least be consistent.

If by "years" you mean the Brad Stevens era, then sure, even though we're not all the way through a second season yet.

The Celtics never finished under .500 when Doc Rivers was the head coach, and they always had enough talent on the roster to have a shot (even an outside shot) at winning any given playoff series. That has not been true since Stevens was hired, and was cemented when we traded Rondo and Jeff Green -- who are, inarguably, the two most talented players to have played for the Celtics this year. Those two players have the potential to be the best player on the floor in any given playoff series. No one on our team has a similar ceiling right now.

There's a reason why everyone with an ounce of basketball intellect is looking at our team right now and saying things like (to paraphrase) "there might be some guys who could play well enough to maybe earn a spot on a championship roster." And it's not because they're plucky young upstarts with a bright future: it's because, as far as the requisite level of NBA talent needed to win a ring, they're decidedly lacking.

Ceilings get higher as players get better.  It happens all the time. 

[celticsclay]

Again, is playing .600 ball for more than a third of the season (19-12 I think off hand) after redoing their roster not enough? Yes in the beginning the season they were a terrible team, but trotting out the tired under .500 argument is really just highlighting that they were really bad with Rondo and Green in the beginning of the season. Is that what you want to do?

Strength of schedule has something to do with the record. I do think we are closer to an even 500 team with IT4 on the roster. But we are not a 600 win percentage team if you played our roster out for the whole season.  Thanks for the 

Edit - 600 would make us 47-31 right now. There's no way you can possibly think we are a 47-31 team.

I mean in the East who knows? I do agree our earlier season schedule had some tougher and a few more games against the western conference. However, I will point out in December when were still playing Rondo and Green we were losing to Orlando, Charlotte, the Knicks and Brooklyn. We had a couple of more losses in early January to those same clubs. We have been really good for the most part at being the bad teams in the second half of the season so it is certainly reasonable to think we would not have lost all those games if we had this squad the whole year.

Couple that with the fact that we were losing some really close games (we are something like 3-6 in overtime this year) and are now playing better and it is not laughable to think we win 5 or 6 more games if we had this roster the whole season. Since we are probably going to end up at 38 or 39 wins that takes us to 45. That makes the playoffs just about any year in the East. Even in the all powerful west the 8th seed is going to end up with 45 wins.

[celticsclay]

When did you stop beating your wife?

You've already had threads get multiple posts deleted very recently cause of your wife beating humor and jokes.  Lets not get back into that. Find a better way to make your points. It is not appropriate for the board.

[D.o.s.]

When did you stop beating your wife?

You've already had threads get multiple posts deleted very recently cause of your wife beating humor and jokes.  Lets not get back into that. Find a better way to make your points. It is not appropriate for the board.

That's not a joke or humor. And, in fact, I think you'll find that particular phrase is CB appropriate, or at least relevant:
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=56998.5
Thanks for the moral shakedown, though.

If I wanted to watch overmatched teams lose over and over again I'd watch the NCAA more regularly.

Your comments don't add up then. You just said you enjoying watching the Celtics and they have been overmatched for years. At least be consistent.

If by "years" you mean the Brad Stevens era, then sure, even though we're not all the way through a second season yet.

The Celtics never finished under .500 when Doc Rivers was the head coach, and they always had enough talent on the roster to have a shot (even an outside shot) at winning any given playoff series. That has not been true since Stevens was hired, and was cemented when we traded Rondo and Jeff Green -- who are, inarguably, the two most talented players to have played for the Celtics this year. Those two players have the potential to be the best player on the floor in any given playoff series. No one on our team has a similar ceiling right now.

There's a reason why everyone with an ounce of basketball intellect is looking at our team right now and saying things like (to paraphrase) "there might be some guys who could play well enough to maybe earn a spot on a championship roster." And it's not because they're plucky young upstarts with a bright future: it's because, as far as the requisite level of NBA talent needed to win a ring, they're decidedly lacking.

Ceilings get higher as players get better.  It happens all the time. 

I'd contend that ceilings don't change -- players just reach them or not, but your point is taken.

[GratefulCs]

When did you stop beating your wife?

Is this a david stern/jim rome joke?



If so, bravo

[D.o.s.]

When did you stop beating your wife?

Is this a david stern/jim rome joke?



If so, bravo

At least my efforts aren't wasted entirely.

[Celtics18]

When did you stop beating your wife?

You've already had threads get multiple posts deleted very recently cause of your wife beating humor and jokes.  Lets not get back into that. Find a better way to make your points. It is not appropriate for the board.

That's not a joke or humor. And, in fact, I think you'll find that particular phrase is CB appropriate, or at least relevant:
http://forums.celticsblog.com/index.php?topic=56998.5
Thanks for the moral shakedown, though.

If I wanted to watch overmatched teams lose over and over again I'd watch the NCAA more regularly.

Your comments don't add up then. You just said you enjoying watching the Celtics and they have been overmatched for years. At least be consistent.

If by "years" you mean the Brad Stevens era, then sure, even though we're not all the way through a second season yet.

The Celtics never finished under .500 when Doc Rivers was the head coach, and they always had enough talent on the roster to have a shot (even an outside shot) at winning any given playoff series. That has not been true since Stevens was hired, and was cemented when we traded Rondo and Jeff Green -- who are, inarguably, the two most talented players to have played for the Celtics this year. Those two players have the potential to be the best player on the floor in any given playoff series. No one on our team has a similar ceiling right now.

There's a reason why everyone with an ounce of basketball intellect is looking at our team right now and saying things like (to paraphrase) "there might be some guys who could play well enough to maybe earn a spot on a championship roster." And it's not because they're plucky young upstarts with a bright future: it's because, as far as the requisite level of NBA talent needed to win a ring, they're decidedly lacking.

Ceilings get higher as players get better.  It happens all the time. 

I'd contend that ceilings don't change -- players just reach them or not, but your point is taken.

I guess I should say players' ceilings are frequently underestimated when they are young players just starting out.