LarBrd33's Optimism Thread

[LarBrd33]

lb, in all honestly, it is not really whether you are optimistic or pessimistic. you, as you often do, miss the points that people are making about your posts. indeed, that you seem to intentionally not address people's criticisms and shift the focus (e.g. this thread) is one of the critiques about you.

most recently, your refusal to take responsibility for your earlier statements about the nets winning 35 to 40 games this season is another case in point. in a specific point you state that the injuries to the nets are cause of their bad record, and that without such injuries the nets would win 35-40 games.

subsequent posters clearly and emphatically point out your avoidance of being seen as wrong as well as the obvious absurdity of your statement. you come off as being dishonest in such moments.

the general consensus on this board, if i may hazard to speak for many here, is that too often you refuse to own up to repeatedly over the top statements that turn out to be incorrect.

others may chime in, this overly long list of "optimism" misses the clearly stated points of other posters. i have asked you before to reflect upon your posting, i hope you do so since you have much to offer to the board.

I agree. Very well said.

I still think it's mildly hilarious that people want me to apologize for suggesting that Brooklyn could win 35-40 games if they stayed healthy.  They probably could have.   Even now, we're less than half of the way through the season, Brooklyn has been hit hard with injuries, and their success or failure over the next 44 games will either make or break our entire season... it's all very much still an unresolved situation with a worst-case scenario still very much in play... and yet there's a small group of people who want to hold my head into a toilet while screaming, "SAY YOU'RE SORRY!!! SAY YOU'RE SORRY!!!" because I didn't show up at a Celtics/Brooklyn game arrogantly chanting "BRooooklyn Draaaaaaft Piiiick" with them or pre-order my Ben Simmons Celtic Jersey.  The "Apologize for tempering your expectations about the Nets!!!" movement seems completely asinine. 

But fwiw, over a month ago when Hollis-Jefferson got hurt I admitted that Brooklyn was in much worse shape than I anticipated, that their current lack of depth was glaring, and that I was starting to get very excited about the potential of landing a top 5 pick out of them.   We'll see what happens.  If we get a top 5 pick, you guys can go to town at my expense.  If that's what it takes for the basketball gods to bless us with a potential franchise player, so be it.  I'll gleefully take my toilet flushing.   



If we land Ben Simmons, I'll personally send each and every one of the people my words hurt an apology card. 

[oldtype]

If you didn't deliberately express your opinions in a way that's extremely dismissive of anyone who thinks otherwise, nobody would be on your case when you're wrong.

Most people wouldn't even remember. That's clearly not what you want, I suppose.

[HomerSapien]

I feel like there are way too many posters on here that take LarBrd33 dissenting, often pessimistic opinions as a personal afront to them, and subsequently make him the center of attention in a lot of threads.

I personally think that he generally articulates the premise of his posts clearly, and even if I ultimately don't agree with where he's coming from, or find some of his predictions absurd I still find them interesting to read as an alternative viewpoint on what might happen in the future.

[LarBrd33]

If you didn't deliberately express your opinions in a way that's extremely dismissive of anyone who thinks otherwise, nobody would be on your case when you're wrong. Most people wouldn't even remember.

That's mostly just my writing style... I suck at word makings.

That and I can't take people seriously when I express an opinion at Point A and they want to declare me wrong before we even get to Point B...  I'm waiting to see us get to Point Z first.   This is something a lot of people have trouble grasping.  If I make a thread suggesting that Nik Stauskas might have more potential than the guy we are ending up with at #16... you can't then show up 2 months later and say "hahaha... Stauskas is terrible... LB33 is dumb!" and then misrepresent that opinion in dozens of threads as "LarBrd33 thought Nik Stauskas would be a superstar... he wanted to trade our entire team for him... his opinions aren't valid".  You do that often enough and I feel compelled to make a thread like this.  Also...  How does Nik Stauskas averaging 7 points, 2.4 rebounds, 1.7 assists with 35%/31%/65% shooting compared to Rozier averaging 1.7 points, 1 rebound, 0.6 assists with 26%/18%/100% shooting 37 games after my question was posed somehow prove that trading #16 pick for Nik Stauskas was a horrible idea worthy of scorn?   My entire point was about Stauskas' potential compared to the potential of the guys available at #16.  At least get back to me 5 years from now to see how they look.     Likewise, how does Philly intentionally losing games during a tank season somehow prove that I was wrong to be intrigued by their long-term potential?  Let's at least see them try to win before declaring their master plan a bust.     

If I come across dismissive, it's because a lot of times to counterpoints being expressed aren't really worth talking about yet.  So many of my opinions are based on the big picture and long-view.  If you want to dump on me for being wrong about something, dump on me for thinking it would have been a decent idea to trade Paul Pierce for Luol Deng and Ty Thomas... the time to dump is now... not early 2007 when the future was still uncertain.  The other issue is that a lot of the people expressing those counterpoints are just being disingenuous, because they think I'm being disingenuous.

[walker834]

I'm also not that hard on Sully.  I think he is our best rebounder. He needs to knock down shots though. he's really in the same position KO is.  Just different assets and strengths and weaknesses.

My frustration with Sully is that from what I've seen the past three seasons, his limitations are ultimately all mental, and all things that could be improved upon if he had the will to do it.

Ultimately the only thing holding him back from being a really good player, is him.

Sully has a LOT of talent.  He could be really good starter, possibly even a borderline All-Star.  He's got the talent to get there.  But he is horribly lacking in discipline.

- He can't keep in shape
- He seems to completely lack all respect for authority
- His motor fluctuations from great to nonexistent on a day by day basis
- His shot selection (and general decision making on the court) is frustratingly poor

Sully's most productive season in the league was his rookie year - a season in which I was utterly convinced he had All-Star potential. 

Since that time he has fallen further and further off the cliff on a year-by-year basis, to the point where I just can't accept anymore excuses.  He apparently started this season in the best shape of his career, he was given the starting role for an extended period of time, he's in a contract year, and he STILL can't keep it together. 

The only way I can make sense of all this is that in his rookie year, Sully had Doc Rivers, Paul Pierce and Kevin Garnett around him.  All guys who were known for their tireless work ethics, and for their "take no crap from anybody" attitudes.  When surrounded by these guys, Sully clearly excelled, which leaves me thinking that he must be the type of guy who needs to have a permanent babysitter - a stern veteran to constantly yell at him and keep his butt in line. 

For Sully's sake, I hope Danny finds a way to trade him to San Antonio.  I think if he's going to excel anywhere, it's going to be there.  Because if he doesn't get off his butt, Popovich will kick it so hard that he won't be sitting for weeks 

As he is now though, in all honesty, I would have no hesitation trading Sully to the Lakers in return for Brandon Bass.  For all his faults and limitations, Bass gave his all every single night, and you always knew what to expect from him. 

I'll take a guy who uses good effort to make the most of minimal talent, over a guy who wastes good talent with minimal effort, any day.

As great a coach as Brad Stevens is, he's a "nice guy" coach.  I don't think he's has the type of personality to get through to a guy like Sully.

Good points and I definately agree with you there.  If there is one thing that bothers me about this team, it's thats we seem almost too content just going through the motions and aren't really held up to a higher standard.    A lot of that is on Brad and his style of coaching, and more just the state of the team and trying to develop these guys.  If this team misses one thing it's a guy like Tom Brady who really holds these players up to higher standards.

What I don't like about fans is there is a double standard. They hype up guys like Mickey, but Rozier gets trashed when they are basically doing the same things.  Same with KO and Sully. Everyone just likes to beat up on Sully because it's cool to do that.

The years before last for example everyone gave Sully a free pass. He was our savior. For the last several years, while other players got called out for their lack of hustle, Sully could do no wrong.  I disagreed there too.

As long as this team is in this development stage, and people keep going back and forth on whether we should tank or not, it's the same thing.  There's just a lack of consistency in all of it.

I don't believe in tanking unless we are completely out of it and it's absolutely necessary.  I think this team should be out there trying to improve every game and trying to win games at this point.  We have Brooklyn's pick and all these draft picks for that reason, where we can just focus on getting better as a team.

At some point Brad needs to put his foot down imo.  We don't have Tom Brady right now where it really falls on the coach to do that. Brad is too nice sometimes.

[PhoSita]

I think in general people get too personally invested in agreeing or disagree with one another on here, like it's a competition or something and there's a scoreboard somewhere.

Disagreement is not a personal attack.  Agreement is not an expression of approval of everything a person has ever said.

We can all do a better job of adding to the conversation, in a way that invites and challenges others to do so too.

[Celtics18]

I think in general people get too personally invested in agreeing or disagree with one another on here, like it's a competition or something and there's a scoreboard somewhere.

Disagreement is not a personal attack.  Agreement is not an expression of approval of everything a person has ever said.

We can all do a better job of adding to the conversation, in a way that invites and challenges others to do so too.

Aww!  That's heart warming.

[footey]

TP to LB for this thread. It cheered me up, given our recent woes.

[moiso]

Who else would create a thread title in the 3rd person?  Not moiso.

[celticsclay]

I think in general people get too personally invested in agreeing or disagree with one another on here, like it's a competition or something and there's a scoreboard somewhere.

Disagreement is not a personal attack.  Agreement is not an expression of approval of everything a person has ever said.

We can all do a better job of adding to the conversation, in a way that invites and challenges others to do so too.

Phosita  there is kind of a difference between posters disagreeing with each other and what is happening here. We both post a lot, and we have some pretty different views on things, but overwhelmingly I would say we have a fairly productive dialogue. At least a decent amount of our debate concludes with "that is a pretty good point." (ie our discussion on the playoff thread) I feel like it is that way with just about everyone on these forums. However, time and time again you see one posters getting in battles with multiple posters, creating a thread with their username in the title and sidetracking conversations into the same debates over and over again. This is different behavior and creates controversy and anger for a lot of people. While I think it is a fair counter point to say that people (myself included) could do a better job of not taking the bait, I also think it is a fair question to ask why one person is repeatedly trying to stir the pot and bait other posters.

[spikelovetheCelts]

I will say this

His post are more entertaining than the Celtics basketball

Ha, TP for the laugh. And I agree, at least recently.

There is always a Bull in a China store that thinks he is an Elephant.

[PhoSita]

I think in general people get too personally invested in agreeing or disagree with one another on here, like it's a competition or something and there's a scoreboard somewhere.

Disagreement is not a personal attack.  Agreement is not an expression of approval of everything a person has ever said.

We can all do a better job of adding to the conversation, in a way that invites and challenges others to do so too.

Phosita  there is kind of a difference between posters disagreeing with each other and what is happening here. We both post a lot, and we have some pretty different views on things, but overwhelmingly I would say we have a fairly productive dialogue. At least a decent amount of our debate concludes with "that is a pretty good point." (ie our discussion on the playoff thread) I feel like it is that way with just about everyone on these forums. However, time and time again you see one posters getting in battles with multiple posters, creating a thread with their username in the title and sidetracking conversations into the same debates over and over again. This is different behavior and creates controversy and anger for a lot of people. While I think it is a fair counter point to say that people (myself included) could do a better job of not taking the bait, I also think it is a fair question to ask why one person is repeatedly trying to stir the pot and bait other posters.

I tend to agree with you on a lot of what you said here, which is why in my first response to this thread I said that my biggest problem with LarBrd is not his "pessimism" but that discussions involving him tend to become about him -- whether that's his fault or not -- as opposed to the Celtics or NBA basketball in general.

[LarBrd33]

I think in general people get too personally invested in agreeing or disagree with one another on here, like it's a competition or something and there's a scoreboard somewhere.

Disagreement is not a personal attack.  Agreement is not an expression of approval of everything a person has ever said.

We can all do a better job of adding to the conversation, in a way that invites and challenges others to do so too.

Phosita  there is kind of a difference between posters disagreeing with each other and what is happening here. We both post a lot, and we have some pretty different views on things, but overwhelmingly I would say we have a fairly productive dialogue. At least a decent amount of our debate concludes with "that is a pretty good point." (ie our discussion on the playoff thread) I feel like it is that way with just about everyone on these forums. However, time and time again you see one posters getting in battles with multiple posters, creating a thread with their username in the title and sidetracking conversations into the same debates over and over again. This is different behavior and creates controversy and anger for a lot of people. While I think it is a fair counter point to say that people (myself included) could do a better job of not taking the bait, I also think it is a fair question to ask why one person is repeatedly trying to stir the pot and bait other posters.

I tend to agree with you on a lot of what you said here, which is why in my first response to this thread I said that my biggest problem with LarBrd is not his "pessimism" but that discussions involving him tend to become about him -- whether that's his fault or not -- as opposed to the Celtics or NBA basketball in general.

I was going to title this "General Optimism thread"... I dont' think I have a major history of creating threads with my name in it.  As I said in the previous page, I mostly just wanted one place where people following me from thread to thread baiting me into arguments would see that I have some broad optimism about this team as well.   I think it did it's job, judging by the amount of my detractors who have crawled out of the flooring to comment in this thread.   

Hopefully this puts to rest the daily occurrences of people derailing threads to comment about how LarBrd33's "underrating of our players and overrrating of other team's players is out of control" or suggesting that I'm obscenely biased against the Celtics.   It's silly.   There's a few things that I'm very pleased with about this team... I listed them in this thread.   Hopefully that helps cut down on the riffraff being perpetuated by a small clique of instigators. 

[footey]

Regardless of what one's views are on LB's assessment of Celtic players, particularly their relative worth vs. Philly players, his OP here is very well drafted and reasoned. Not to mention very optimistic!!  Let's give him credit!!

[LarBrd33]

Who else would create a thread title in the 3rd person?  Not moiso.

Speaking of Moiso...

We drafted him in 2000 with the #11 pick. 
We eventually traded him in 2001 for Philly's 2003 1st rounder.
That Philly pick ended up #20 and we selected Dahntay Jones, but we traded Jones to Memphis for Kendrick Perkins.   
We later traded Kendrick Perkins for Jeff Green.   
Then last year we traded Jeff Green for Tayshawn Prince, Austin Rivers and a future 1st rounder

We flipped Prince for Jerebko.   We flipped Rivers for a 2017 2nd round pick. 

So the legend of Moiso continues... we currently have Jerebko, The Clippers 2017 2nd round pick and protected Memphis 1st we aren't going to see until 2018 at the earliest. 

That's something to feel optimistic about... considering what a bust Moiso turned out to be.