Author Topic: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?  (Read 14629 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #15 on: July 24, 2015, 04:53:00 PM »

Offline Denis998

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3308
  • Tommy Points: 388
  • Rutgers '17
I would say this guy should get fired, but he isn't even an accredited journalist. BR lets any random write.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #16 on: July 24, 2015, 05:14:48 PM »

Online sahara

  • Jayson Tatum
  • Posts: 860
  • Tommy Points: 84
So the young team that made playoffs and got better is the third worst team in the league next season?



Vitun spede.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #17 on: July 24, 2015, 05:24:52 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
Yep, that's Bleacher Report for ya.

No explanation given to support the conclusion aside form the entirely subjective opinion of the author, and very little even at that.


The Celts have way too much depth to fall that far.  To end up with the 3rd worst record they'd have to be put in a position where they are relying on rookies or washed up vets for big minutes.  I just don't see how that could happen, unless the team jet crashes or something.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #18 on: July 24, 2015, 05:46:56 PM »

Offline LGC88

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1500
  • Tommy Points: 167
28th? That's too optimistic, that means we have a chance at the top 3 draft pick? Wow, so much for trying to tank in 2014 and get the 6th pick. No need to try so hard, just let BR guide you  ;D
On another note, you should know KG Living Legend better. You know his titles and how he makes everybody answer each post he creates.
There is a translation to be made underneath his excitement.
I read the title as "Hey, this Celtics team has a chance to win 50 games next season".
Don't be too harsh on semantic.  ;D

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #19 on: July 24, 2015, 05:47:52 PM »

Offline dreamgreen

  • NCE
  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3558
  • Tommy Points: 182
Honestly with the depth of this team it would be almost impossible to finish that bad.  ::)

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #20 on: July 24, 2015, 05:53:40 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • NCE
  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20090
  • Tommy Points: 1331
Ought to show folks how little our guys are respected outside of Boston though to some degree.  Folks think we had a bad offseason too, and a crap draft outside of Boston.

I think Ainge did what he could, I like our picks, I do not think they are all world.   But I think three of them are NBA quality players.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #21 on: July 24, 2015, 05:59:02 PM »

Offline Chief Macho

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1247
  • Tommy Points: 84
Sounds more realistic than most of you homers.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #22 on: July 24, 2015, 06:00:16 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
Friendly.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #23 on: July 24, 2015, 06:02:55 PM »

Offline MBunge

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4661
  • Tommy Points: 471
To put it in further perspective, this guy is saying Boston is going to go from winning 40 games last season to no more than 22 or 23 next season.  Has any team ever done that without...

A.  Serious injuries to more than one player?

B.  Blowing up a team and trading away its best talent?

Mike

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #24 on: July 24, 2015, 06:08:37 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16178
  • Tommy Points: 1407
Sounds more realistic than most of you homers.

great post, value added

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #25 on: July 24, 2015, 06:10:20 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1239
To put it in further perspective, this guy is saying Boston is going to go from winning 40 games last season to no more than 22 or 23 next season.  Has any team ever done that without...

A.  Serious injuries to more than one player?

B.  Blowing up a team and trading away its best talent?

Mike

I know the Kings did it in from 2008 to 2009, when they went from 37 to 18 wins or something like that, but I can't remember the details.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #26 on: July 24, 2015, 06:10:29 PM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8676
  • Tommy Points: 1138
Sounds more realistic than most of you homers.



 Can't out of here with that crap. 22 wins is upsurd.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #27 on: July 24, 2015, 06:12:15 PM »

Offline Big333223

  • NCE
  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7837
  • Tommy Points: 770
It's hard to imagine the Celtics finishing with a worse record than the Timberwolves and Portland (if only for playing in the West) or the Magic and Nets, who (I think) have clearly inferior talent. Adding in Denver and Philly as the article does, I'd say Boston's worst case scenario this season is 24th worst in the league.
1957, 1959, 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968, 1969, 1974, 1976, 1981, 1984, 1986, 2008, 2024

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #28 on: July 24, 2015, 06:12:47 PM »

Offline KG Living Legend

  • Don Nelson
  • ********
  • Posts: 8676
  • Tommy Points: 1138
28th? That's too optimistic, that means we have a chance at the top 3 draft pick? Wow, so much for trying to tank in 2014 and get the 6th pick. No need to try so hard, just let BR guide you  ;D
On another note, you should know KG Living Legend better. You know his titles and how he makes everybody answer each post he creates.
There is a translation to be made underneath his excitement.
I read the title as "Hey, this Celtics team has a chance to win 50 games next season".
Don't be too harsh on semantic.  ;D
.





 What are you trying to say man.

Re: Celtics ranked 28th? Seriously?
« Reply #29 on: July 24, 2015, 06:16:03 PM »

Offline PhoSita

  • NCE
  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21835
  • Tommy Points: 2182
To put it in further perspective, this guy is saying Boston is going to go from winning 40 games last season to no more than 22 or 23 next season.  Has any team ever done that without...

A.  Serious injuries to more than one player?

B.  Blowing up a team and trading away its best talent?

Mike


The Bucks won 38 games in 2013 and 15 games the next year.  To accomplish that, they:

- Traded Brandon Jennings for Brandon Knight & Khris Middleton
- Traded Tobias Harris for JJ Redick and then traded Redick for Caron Butler and little else
- Trade Luc Richard Mbah a Moute for nothing
- Let Monta Ellis and Sam Dalembert walk in free agency
- Signed OJ Mayo, who played only 50 games or so
- Lost Ilyasova, Pachulia, and Caron Butler for around 30 games each
- Lost Larry Sanders for all but 20 games



So, they let a lot of key guys go either by trade or in free agency and the younger players and free agents who were meant to replace them were either not ready to contribute or were injured for almost half the season.

The biggest part was that they were a team predicated on defense and they replaced Larry Sanders and Samuel Dalembert with a combination of Zaza Pachulia, John Henson, Jeff Adrien, and Ekpe Udoh.
You’ll have to excuse my lengthiness—the reason I dread writing letters is because I am so apt to get to slinging wisdom & forget to let up. Thus much precious time is lost.
- Mark Twain