NBA Playoffs Season 2014-2015

[PhoSita]

I would think this series has shown that we are probably closer than the casual fan thought.

Judging by the sample of "casual fans" I know, or have encountered on here, the Celtics heading into this series were a decent bet to take this to 6 games.

I've seen nothing so far to vindicate that position.

The Celts have been in these games a little more than I expected.  The first quarters have been nice, and they had it within one possession at one point in Game 2.  That's pretty cool.  Neither Game 1 or Game 2 ever felt like it was in jeopardy for the Cavs, though. 

As close as Game 2 was at times, when it got down to the last couple of minutes, the Cavs got a few offensive rebounds in a row, and they just ran the patented "pull everything back and let LeBron attack the basket from 40 feet out" play, and it worked flawlessly.  No resistance.


Heading into this series I expected that it would be over in 4 or 5 games and that the average margin of victory for the Cavs would be in the 8-12 range -- similar to what usually happens when a contender meets a 40ish win team in the playoffs.  Through 2 games, the margin of victory is 10.5 even though the Celts have played about as well as they could and the Cavs have gotten very little from their supporting cast aside from Thompson and Mozgov.

[SCeltic34]

I don't think the Bulls will fare all that well against Cleveland.

I think Cleveland defend the post fairly well. Their problem is defending against ball movement. Chicago have good passers but do not get enough dribble penetration to get opposing defenses scrambling. Cleveland can stick Mozgov on Pau Gasol and out-muscle him in the low post. LeBron will take Jimmy Butler. Both are strong defensive situations for Cleveland. That leaves D-Rose but he has been highly inconsistent, and frankly, I do not think Rose has what it takes to be that guy anymore.

I think the Cavs offense will fare well. Chicago's defense hasn't been as strong this season. I think Kyrie will destroy Derrick Rose. Rose's defense has been lousy this season. I think Pau's inability to defend far away from the basket is a major negative in defending K-Love and in team defense against dribble drives of LeBron and Kyrie. So I think Cleveland's offense will do well against Chicago.

I think Mirotic is very important to Chicago's hopes. He is a pivotal player. They need his offense to exploit Cleveland's defense and his quickness defensively to contain Cleveland's offense. He needs to play a lot of minutes to give Chicago any hope.

How about the Hawks I think they can take Cleveland to 7 and anything can happen. I still lean toward Cleveland.

I really like how Atlanta matches up with Cleveland.

I think they have the type of offense that causes Cleveland a lot of problems. I mean, even vs Boston you can see the Cavs defense struggling by the 3rd/4th defensive rotation. They struggle against ball movement and Atlanta are one of the best passing teams in the league.

Atlanta gets a lot of dribble penetration from Teague & Schroeder. They have loads of shooting. All five guys can stretch the floor out. They have one of the most skilled big man duos in the league in Millsap and Horford. Lots of shooting from the wing with Korver and Carroll. Very much the type of team that can exploit Cleveland's defensive vulnerabilities.

I agree with these assessments.  I think the big question for both teams is "Who is going to guard LeBron?"

For the Bulls, the immediate answer is obvious: Jimmy Butler.  But what happens when he gets in foul trouble?  You can't stick Dunleavy on him.  Can't put Mirotic on him either.  Snell isn't going to fare well for long stretches.  Taj Gibson maybe?

Atlanta has the same problem.  Not a lot of depth behind Carroll.  It's too bad Sefalosha is out for the year.

[PhoSita]

I really like how Atlanta matches up with Cleveland.

I think they have the type of offense that causes Cleveland a lot of problems. I mean, even vs Boston you can see the Cavs defense struggling by the 3rd/4th defensive rotation. They struggle against ball movement and Atlanta are one of the best passing teams in the league.

Exactly.  Completely agree.  The Celtics have come out strong and built early leads because they move the ball around and get shots against this Cavs team.  The Hawks can execute that style of offense much better than the Celts, and have guys who can actually hit shots. 

On the other end, the Hawks can actually hope to prevent the Cavs from dominating the boards and scoring easily inside.

[celticsclay]

I would think this series has shown that we are probably closer than the casual fan thought.

Judging by the sample of "casual fans" I know, or have encountered on here, the Celtics heading into this series were a decent bet to take this to 6 games.

I've seen nothing so far to vindicate that position.

The Celts have been in these games a little more than I expected.  The first quarters have been nice, and they had it within one possession at one point in Game 2.  That's pretty cool.  Neither Game 1 or Game 2 ever felt like it was in jeopardy for the Cavs, though. 

As close as Game 2 was at times, when it got down to the last couple of minutes, the Cavs got a few offensive rebounds in a row, and they just ran the patented "pull everything back and let LeBron attack the basket from 40 feet out" play, and it worked flawlessly.  No resistance.


Heading into this series I expected that it would be over in 4 or 5 games and that the average margin of victory for the Cavs would be in the 8-12 range -- similar to what usually happens when a contender meets a 40ish win team in the playoffs.  Through 2 games, the margin of victory is 10.5 even though the Celts have played about as well as they could and the Cavs have gotten very little from their supporting cast aside from Thompson and Mozgov.

I can't speak for the collective fan base, but I think the people saying 6 were saying what they hoped would happen not what they actually believed. I do think people were saying 6 more seriously for a match up with the hawks.

I will also add that we were within 2 points in the 4th quarter on two separate occasions and still within 4 with 3 minutes left. I would actually point to the end of the 3rd quarter and first minute of the 4th quarter as when the Celtics lost their best chance to win. We held them without a point for over 3 minutes but only yielded 2 points during this period on 6 possessions. We missed a few good looks there including a wide open 3 by Jerekbro. I think if we had just gotten a few drops to score there it could have been a different game.

Overall, we lost two games on the Road. Even if we were even teams that would be the expected result. If we lose tonight that would be the first really disappointing loss for me personally as I think we have a legitimate chance of beating them at home and I would really appreciate it.

[Celtics18]

Not working on this fan.  I enjoy rooting for these scrappy underdogs.  "Starless team"?  They're all stars in my book.

In all seriousness, though, I like watching this team, too.  There really aren't any guys on this team I don't like, although I can't get too attached to any of them because none of them is particularly good and they'll probably mostly be gone in a few years.


Still, it's not hyperbole -- the sentiment has been expressed around here that the team making the playoffs is proof that they have a competitive group and that the team only needs to make a couple of moves this summer and suddenly we'll be in business, or that all we have to do is wait for a couple of high picks from Brooklyn over the next two years and suddenly we'll be set.  Contender nucleus formed!


Making the playoffs this year is a bonus.  It's a nice story.  But it really makes very little difference, in my eyes.  The Celtics are further away from contention than at least half the teams that failed to make the playoffs.

I hope they manage to take a game off the Cavs.  That'd be cool.

How will we ever learn our lesson then?

[PhoSita]

How will we ever learn our lesson then?

I doubt it will happen regardless.  I said before, it was a silly hope from the start. Green Teamers gonna Green Team.

 

[kraidstar]

Can any team in the East beat the Cavs?

I think Chicago can give them a challenge but won't have enough to beat them in a series.

I picked Atlanta to knock off the Cleveland in the Eastern Finals.  Boston has had some success on offense despite our lack of outside shooting and lack of playmaking ability outside of IT and ET.
- Jeff Teague is better than any player on our team.  So is Horford.  Paul Milsap is better than any of our big men.
- Instead of Crowder launching up long 2's and 3's early in the shot clock, you have Demare Carrol and Kyle Korver.  Succinctly put, the Hawks are a far superior shooting team overall than the C's.
- The Hawks are a better defensive team than we are.
- Cleveland has holes defensively, which the Hawks will be able to exploit far better than we are able to.

If we learned anything from last year's finals, chemistry and teamwork can overcome great talent, even if it's not as common as superstars leading their team to championships. 

I'd love to see the Hawks advance to the Finals.

IMO the hawks won't get past the wizards in the second round. wiz will control the pace, and will outscore them in the half court.

the wiz dogged it in the regular season, and are a much better team than they showed. they are very deep.

they have 2 elite slashers in beal and wall, two very good starting big men in nene and gortat, and two solid backup big men in hump and seraphin.
add a clutch vet in pierce, a good PG in sessions, and an athletic SF phenom in otto porter, and you have a strong, well-balanced team that can field 5 good players at all times.

they should be able to exploit the cavs' mediocre defense, and have enough athletes to give lebron and co some headaches on offense. my biggest question about the wiz is their mental state, they absolutely collapsed against indiana, even though they looked like the superior team.

all 4 of the top eastern teams are solid but flawed. not sure i'd say any team is a sure-fire favorite, but the cavs (in a fairly officiated series) will really have their hands full beating the bulls and then the wiz/hawks.

[Celtics18]

How will we ever learn our lesson then?

I doubt it will happen regardless.  I said before, it was a silly hope from the start. Green Teamers gonna Green Team.

 

I can't believe it was actually a goal of yours to reform all of us homers and fanboys and girls.

Now look who's not being realistic. 

[Celtics18]

Still, it's not hyperbole -- the sentiment has been expressed around here that the team making the playoffs is proof that they have a competitive group and that the team only needs to make a couple of moves this summer and suddenly we'll be in business, or that all we have to do is wait for a couple of high picks from Brooklyn over the next two years and suddenly we'll be set.  Contender nucleus formed!


Making the playoffs this year is a bonus.  It's a nice story.  But it really makes very little difference, in my eyes. The Celtics are further away from contention than at least half the teams that failed to make the playoffs.

I seriously doubt that.  If for no other reason than the fact that we have better ownership, better management, and better coaching than most of the other non-playoff teams.

It doesn't hurt that we have one of the most storied franchises in all of sports. 

[jpotter33]

I would think this series has shown that we are probably closer than the casual fan thought.

Judging by the sample of "casual fans" I know, or have encountered on here, the Celtics heading into this series were a decent bet to take this to 6 games.

I've seen nothing so far to vindicate that position.

The Celts have been in these games a little more than I expected.  The first quarters have been nice, and they had it within one possession at one point in Game 2.  That's pretty cool.  Neither Game 1 or Game 2 ever felt like it was in jeopardy for the Cavs, though. 

As close as Game 2 was at times, when it got down to the last couple of minutes, the Cavs got a few offensive rebounds in a row, and they just ran the patented "pull everything back and let LeBron attack the basket from 40 feet out" play, and it worked flawlessly.  No resistance.


Heading into this series I expected that it would be over in 4 or 5 games and that the average margin of victory for the Cavs would be in the 8-12 range -- similar to what usually happens when a contender meets a 40ish win team in the playoffs.  Through 2 games, the margin of victory is 10.5 even though the Celts have played about as well as they could and the Cavs have gotten very little from their supporting cast aside from Thompson and Mozgov.

I see the login name Phosita, but all I hear is LarBrd33. Weird 

[celticsclay]

Still, it's not hyperbole -- the sentiment has been expressed around here that the team making the playoffs is proof that they have a competitive group and that the team only needs to make a couple of moves this summer and suddenly we'll be in business, or that all we have to do is wait for a couple of high picks from Brooklyn over the next two years and suddenly we'll be set.  Contender nucleus formed!


Making the playoffs this year is a bonus.  It's a nice story.  But it really makes very little difference, in my eyes. The Celtics are further away from contention than at least half the teams that failed to make the playoffs.

This is so over the top. We own multiple picks from Brooklyn, our own and also have a first round pick from Dallas that seemingly has really gained value over the last couple of weeks with rondo implosion and Dirk threatening retirement.

[Celtics18]

Oh, forget it.

 

[Ilikesports17]

You can make the argument that half the teams not in the playoffs are closer to contention than us but it really has very little to do with draft position

There is a difference between being able to formulate a reasonable argument and actually being correct

[inverselock]

I would think this series has shown that we are probably closer than the casual fan thought.

Judging by the sample of "casual fans" I know, or have encountered on here, the Celtics heading into this series were a decent bet to take this to 6 games.

I've seen nothing so far to vindicate that position.

The Celts have been in these games a little more than I expected.  The first quarters have been nice, and they had it within one possession at one point in Game 2.  That's pretty cool.  Neither Game 1 or Game 2 ever felt like it was in jeopardy for the Cavs, though. 

As close as Game 2 was at times, when it got down to the last couple of minutes, the Cavs got a few offensive rebounds in a row, and they just ran the patented "pull everything back and let LeBron attack the basket from 40 feet out" play, and it worked flawlessly.  No resistance.


Heading into this series I expected that it would be over in 4 or 5 games and that the average margin of victory for the Cavs would be in the 8-12 range -- similar to what usually happens when a contender meets a 40ish win team in the playoffs.  Through 2 games, the margin of victory is 10.5 even though the Celts have played about as well as they could and the Cavs have gotten very little from their supporting cast aside from Thompson and Mozgov.

I see the login name Phosita, but all I hear is LarBrd33. Weird 

Oh no, its multiplying.    Until we get a superstar, we'll have to put up with "every achievement is completely meaningless"  posts.    Scrubs, blowout, stars, top 5 picks, tanks.   I win the internet.

[PhoSita]

  The Celtics are further away from contention than at least half the teams that failed to make the playoffs.

Well, judging by the reaction, that was clearly a sore spot.   



OK, I'm willing to concede that the above might be an exaggeration, but I don't think it's so hard to make the case.

So, as Sean Grande says, the playoffs are all about who has the better 1, 2, 3.  With that in mind, compare Thomas, Bradley, and Zeller (or Evan Turner, if you like) to the following:

1. Durant, Westbrook, Ibaka
2. Hayward, Favors, Gobert
3. Paul George, George Hill, Hibbert
4. Bosh, Wade, Dragic
5. Bledsoe, Knight, Morris
6. Cousins, Gay, Collison

That's 6, so all you need to get to 7 (i.e. half of the non-playoff teams) is to include one of the following teams that has some combination of a current star, superstar prospect, top 5 pick, or a top free agent destination city with cap space:

Embiid, Noel, Top 5 pick
Wiggins, Top 5 Pick
Kobe, Randle, Top 5 pick
Carmelo, Top 5 pick


It's not so absurd or sensational to make the claim, is all I'm saying.  Yeah, the Celts have Brad Stevens, and the franchise history.  But NBA players by and large don't care about the history of a franchise prior to roughly 8-10 years ago, and elite talent is always better to have than great coaching.

Oh, forget it.

 

Anyway, C18, you always fight the good fight, and I appreciate that.  You sees things differently than I do.  You are audaciously, persistently optimistic and positive.  I respect that.  Keep on keepin' on.