Boston Celtics 2011-2012 Season Thread

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

They have cap space.

 

And there are no second-tier centers on the market. Except for Tim Duncan, who has said he's not signing elsewhere, and Roy Hibbert, who's a restricted free agent and the only way he leaves Indiana is if someone gratuitously overpays him.

 

What you're suggesting is that you want the Celtics to be a bottom 5 team for two plus years. What you don't seem to realize is that unless they come away with TWO top 3 picks on good draft years, they're going to be locked into mediocrity anyway.

 

Dirk Nowitzki, Paul Pierce, Amare Stoudemire, Vince Carter, Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, Brandon Roy, Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook.

 

Want to tell me what they all have in common, aside from the all-NBA selections?

 

Either way we can easily get a couple of top 3 picks.

 

What do you think will happen if they get one good player from the draft? It will make them a better team, and they won't pick that low again. And who knows, maybe the NBA will just hand the best draft picks to other teams anyway like they did with the Hornets.

 

Oh lottery conspiracy theories...

 

A good drafter can get value out of a late first round pick. Anyone can succeed with a top 3 pick-- just look at the list of the top overall players.

 

Then why don't they? In at least half the drafts in the new millenium, someone has whiffed on a top 3 pick.

 

My point is, it is a lose-lose situation. The Celtics organization is not going to throw away millions of dollars to build a mediocre team that might someday get lucky. They're better off keeping the pieces they have now, and hope they might someday get lucky with a trade or draft pick. They did in 2007.

 

So you want to count on luck, but at the same time do nothing to better our odds. That doesn't make sense. If you're waiting for a gold nugget to fall out of your ass, why not take some laxatives to help the process along?

 

And throwing away millions of dollars? If you're talking about attendance, ever since the early 90s attendance has been remarkably stable, despite it being the worst stretch in Celtic history up until the KG era. Plenty of cellar dwellers, but also more than a few mediocre fringe playoff teams similar to the one we'd turn into if Rondo became our centerpiece.

 

We've only dropped below 20th in the league once (24th in 2004-05, a year where we were comfortably in the playoffs), and on the average hover right around 17ish. Even in the KG era we were only above 9th in the league just once (4th this year). And those figures are actually underrated if anything, since the rankings were based on total attendance, not percentage, and it's well known that the Garden is one of the smaller venues in the league. Boston shows up for the Celtics. It's been proven. It's documented. Given how much we'll save on salaries if we do blow it up I don't know what you're so worried for the owners about.

 

I don't think you people understand this - you have to get bad to get good, unless you're the Lakers and everyone always wants to play for you. Boston has a stable situation, competent management, and a good coach, so we're not comparable to perennial lottery shitshows like Golden State, Charlotte, and Toronto, among others, who explicitly lack stability and direction.

[ellsburyforMVP]

http://m.bleacherreport.com/articles/1212178-rajon-rondo-can-boston-celtics-build-a-future-around-star-point-guard

 

What is your hang-up about rondo?? It seems everyone knows that he has entered another level of stardom but you? He had a 44-8-10 gm in the playoffs ( only person in history with those kind of numbers )? And I love the fact that you think when lebron gets a triple-double , it's a big deal, but when a point guard is racking them up, it's no big deal?

 

And don't give me this s*** about he's playing with 3 future hall of famers, ( I couldn't find the page ) but there's a stat out there about rondo playing without the big 3 and he had a few 20+ pt 10+ assist gms? You want to trade a sure thing, a guy that averaged 12-12-5-2 (stl) per game this season for what? Kidd-gilchrest from ky?? Who won't amount to anything for a couple yrs and in no way is a "sure-thing"?

 

But hey, this is coming from the guy that thinks the heat should trade wade:dunno:

 

Or I guess we could "blow-it-up" and lose as many gms as Charlotte did, in hopes the only supposed "sure-thing" this yr ( Davis ) ...... How'd that work out for Charlotte??

[Emmz]

Bleacher Report is full of homer fans. Anyone can write that s***, saw one on the best pitches in baseball history and Heath Bell's fastball was on the list. I have a hard time believing that since 1876, a 95 mph fastball is a top-100 pitch, and out of the bullpen as well.

 

So this bleacherreport link holds like no value. Just letting you know.

[ellsburyforMVP]

Bleacher Report is full of homer fans. Anyone can write that s***, saw one on the best pitches in baseball history and Heath Bell's fastball was on the list. I have a hard time believing that since 1876, a 95 mph fastball is a top-100 pitch, and out of the bullpen as well.

 

So this bleacherreport link holds like no value. Just letting you know.

 

The point is, you can hardly find anything or anyone that has anything bad to say about rondo besides his jump-shot.... And to add to that, I can list sour e after source of guys that say rondo would be a top 3 player IF he had a respectable jumper... I'm not in that boat, but who knows? If he can start consistently hitting from 17 ft, he's a completely different player..

 

And this saying " his skill set is set in stone after 6 yrs in the league" is ridiculous ... Anyone can work to get better, it just requires dedication and I've already stated that if rondo worked as hard as Allen does, he will get better...

[Emmz]

Well yeah, but he isn't hitting jumpers. He plays great D and he's quick, fast, and passes/handles well. He has ass for shooting ability though and it holds him back.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

The point is' date=' you can hardly find anything or anyone that has anything bad to say about rondo besides his jump-shot.... And to add to that, I can list sour e after source of guys that say rondo would be a top 3 player IF he had a respectable jumper... I'm not in that boat, but who knows? If he can start consistently hitting from 17 ft, he's a completely different player..[/quote']

 

So that's your argument? Guys saying stuff?

 

And this saying " his skill set is set in stone after 6 yrs in the league" is ridiculous ... Anyone can work to get better, it just requires dedication and I've already stated that if rondo worked as hard as Allen does, he will get better...

 

Yeah, because the habits of a multi-millionaire basketball player with questionable work ethic will so easily and magically change after six years in the pros with just about everyone in the media riding his dick like a cracked-out porn star. Wow, how could I not have seen it.

[ellsburyforMVP]

So that's your argument? Guys saying stuff?

 

 

 

Yeah, because the habits of a multi-millionaire basketball player with questionable work ethic will so easily and magically change after six years in the pros with just about everyone in the media riding his dick like a cracked-out porn star. Wow, how could I not have seen it.

 

Are you just hating cause rondo has a ring and your beloved lebron doesn't?? I really don't know why else you would hate on rondo so much? The fact is there's no one in the draft that is better than rondo ( at this point )... There is no one in the draft that can defend like Bradley ( besides Davis ) but yet you want to trade them both for possible draft picks that may or may not amount to anything ? Rondo made the all-NBA 3rd team and for the fourth year in a row he's been named to the all-NBA defensive team... To trade him for a draft pick would be ridiculous

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Are you just hating cause rondo has a ring and your beloved lebron doesn't??

No, that's the kind of thing a rabid Boston homer like you would do.

 

I really don't know why else you would hate on rondo so much?

Because he's a deeply flawed player who won't work as the cornerstone of a franchise.

 

The fact is there's no one in the draft that is better than rondo ( at this point )... There is no one in the draft that can defend like Bradley ( besides Davis ) but yet you want to trade them both for possible draft picks that may or may not amount to anything ?

Well let's see... option A may or may not amount to nothing, and option B most definitely will amount to nothing.

 

I vote option A.

 

Rondo made the all-NBA 3rd team and for the fourth year in a row he's been named to the all-NBA defensive team

So now you're trying to make your point based on 'awards' he was given based on the opinions of other people. http://i53.tinypic.com/284f82.gif You are a joke.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

It's sad how being realistic in this day and age just causes people to cry and call you a hater.

[ellsburyforMVP]

Yeah, awards don't mean anything..... So I guess these guy's opinions are only accurate when they vote lebron MVP?? So the whole history of all the major sports as it pertains to "the greatest players of all time " is flawed because they only got their accolades from guys with opinions?

 

Please explain how if, awards, hall of fame players opinions, stats don't define a player, then what does? Your obviously biased opinion? Your smarter than Danny ainge? Doc rivers? Bill Russell? Magic johnson?

 

Rondo doesn't work on his game? Seriously? His jump-shot was remarkably Better the 2nd half of the season and his playoff ft% was on par with league avg? His assist average has risen every yr since his rookie season? He plays excellent defense, averages 12 assists a game, can grab you 5-6 rebounds every night and averages a steady 2 steals a gm, and on occasion can and does lead the team in scoring ( on a team with 3 hall of fame players )

 

Your just an idiot.... Stop talking kid

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Yeah' date=' awards don't mean anything..... So I guess these guy's opinions are only accurate when they vote lebron MVP?? So the whole history of all the major sports as it pertains to "the greatest players of all time " is flawed because they only got their accolades from guys with opinions?[/quote']

 

When have I talked up LeBron's MVP awards? They're meaningless.

 

Any award that is given based on the opinions of a bunch of random people is flawed and should never cited as evidence of anything. That's pretty basic logic unless you're a complete and utter deadshit.

 

Please explain how if, awards, hall of fame players opinions, stats don't define a player, then what does? Your obviously biased opinion? Your smarter than Danny ainge? Doc rivers? Bill Russell? Magic johnson?

 

When did I say stats don't define a player? Why do you keep throwing out blatant strawmen? Awards are fine if they're based on tangible evidence, because that would mean that player indisputably earned it. I don't give a s*** about other people's opinions. Only sheep like you buy into that. Michael Jordan's pathetic job as an executive in Washington and Charlotte single-handedly undermine any faith one should have in what HOF players think.

 

Rondo doesn't work on his game? Seriously? His jump-shot was remarkably Better the 2nd half of the season

 

Prove it.

 

and his playoff ft% was on par with league avg?

 

Small sample size.

 

His assist average has risen every yr since his rookie season?

 

Oh, assists. A stat that is entirely contingent on your teammates hitting their shots. Brilliant.

 

He plays excellent defense, averages 12 assists a game, can grab you 5-6 rebounds every night and averages a steady 2 steals a gm, and on occasion can and does lead the team in scoring ( on a team with 3 hall of fame players )

 

So he's a poor man's Jason Kidd, who barely qualified as a franchise player in his prime. Yay.

 

Your just an idiot.... Stop talking kid

 

*You're

[Palodios]

Dirk Nowitzki, Paul Pierce, Amare Stoudemire, Vince Carter, Chris Bosh, Dwyane Wade, Chris Paul, Brandon Roy, Kevin Love, Russell Westbrook.

So you handpicked a couple of guys that came out of those picks, so what. Look at all these drafts, how many all-start players came between 6-10? Not many.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NBA_Draft

 

Either way we can easily get a couple of top 3 picks.

 

A couple top three picks. How do you think that will happen? You said yourself that Rondo won't get a top 3 pick, so there is only one way for the Celtics to get top three picks. What you want is to be consistently bad for 2-4 years?

 

What about the scenario I mentioned earlier, where the first pick you get is good enough to push you into the 5-10th pick range? Or what if one or two of the first top picks turn into complete busts, and we see nothing but garbage for a decade?

 

 

 

So you want to count on luck, but at the same time do nothing to better our odds. That doesn't make sense. If you're waiting for a gold nugget to fall out of your ass, why not take some laxatives to help the process along?

I have no problem letting the team see what trades are available for them, and doing what they have to do. There are other ways to improve a team than completely gutting it of all talent in order to suck so badly they get a top draft pick.

 

 

And throwing away millions of dollars? If you're talking about attendance, ever since the early 90s attendance has been remarkably stable, despite it being the worst stretch in Celtic history up until the KG era. Plenty of cellar dwellers, but also more than a few mediocre fringe playoff teams similar to the one we'd turn into if Rondo became our centerpiece.

 

It is more than just about attendance. TV rights, merchandise, and to a lesser extent radio will suffer. Look what happened to the Red Sox-- they had to compete with three other elite franchises that made significant progress in the playoffs, and their revenue streams have been plummeting. The sports landscape in Boston is more competitive than it has ever been, while in the middle of a recession.

 

 

I don't think you people understand this - you have to get bad to get good, unless you're the Lakers and everyone always wants to play for you.

 

In all fairness, Boston is f***ing miserable for most of the NBA season. Every time I've ever gone to bank north garden it has been frigid, snowing, and completely and utterly dark. Players don't want to go to Minnesota. For the earlier years of the big three era, the Celtics didnt have the cap space to add more players, and for the later years, everyone saw that they were getting older.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

So you handpicked a couple of guys that came out of those picks, so what. Look at all these drafts, how many all-start players came between 6-10? Not many.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_NBA_Draft

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_NBA_Draft

 

Don't really care. I just proved is that you can find all-NBA caliber players in the 4-10 range (though the higher up the better). Especially with a deep, strong draft in 2013. 2006 and 2007 were terrible drafts, depth wise.

 

A couple top three picks. How do you think that will happen? You said yourself that Rondo won't get a top 3 pick, so there is only one way for the Celtics to get top three picks. What you want is to be consistently bad for 2-4 years?

 

Um, yeah. You have to be bad before you can get good. I already said that. I'd much rather be bad for 2-4 years than mediocre-teetering-on-bad for 5 plus.

 

What about the scenario I mentioned earlier, where the first pick you get is good enough to push you into the 5-10th pick range?

 

Well if he's that good, we might have something.

 

Or what if one or two of the first top picks turn into complete busts, and we see nothing but garbage for a decade?

 

How's that any different from trying to build around Rondo.

 

I have no problem letting the team see what trades are available for them, and doing what they have to do. There are other ways to improve a team than completely gutting it of all talent in order to suck so badly they get a top draft pick.

 

And none of these improvements you're talking about will amount to a damn thing.

 

It is more than just about attendance. TV rights, merchandise, and to a lesser extent radio will suffer. Look what happened to the Red Sox-- they had to compete with three other elite franchises that made significant progress in the playoffs, and their revenue streams have been plummeting. The sports landscape in Boston is more competitive than it has ever been, while in the middle of a recession.

 

These revenue streams you're talking about will plummet anyway if we try to build around Rondo and end up making sporadic playoff appearances as the 8 seed, before ownership decides to blow it up anyway.

 

In all fairness, Boston is f***ing miserable for most of the NBA season. Every time I've ever gone to bank north garden it has been frigid, snowing, and completely and utterly dark. Players don't want to go to Minnesota. For the earlier years of the big three era, the Celtics didnt have the cap space to add more players, and for the later years, everyone saw that they were getting older.

 

'In all fairness', cap space is far from a given.

[youmetaxidermy]

Since you're so against using Rondo in any capacity, why not entertain the idea of using him as trade bait for some new pieces already in the league? Trading away your best player that will still be under contract for the possibility of some good draft picks is too risky of an idea. You may be comfortable with it, but I'm sure any FO in their right mind wouldn't be. If you're going to trade the player you have built your team around (whether you believe he deserves it or not), they want to see some value coming back right away, not in five years. You may be 'realistic,' but you're not being smart in a team management sense. No one wants to be terrible and out of contention for years on one giant maybe of a signing.

[SoxFan9876]

Good Run, looks like the end of the big 3

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Since you're so against using Rondo in any capacity' date=' why not entertain the idea of using him as trade bait for some new pieces already in the league?[/quote']

 

Such as...

[youmetaxidermy]

Well, if you get rid of Rondo then you need someone productive at the 1. Nash? He has a few years left in which he'll continue putting together great stats and that would give time for a draft pick to develop and learn from one of the best ever.

[ellsburyforMVP]

lebron is now 2-9 in the finals with 2 entirely different teams.... guess after he fails to win again this yr, everyone can just blame it on his "supporting class"...

 

He was outplayed by Dirk last yr, and after gm 1, he was clearly outplayed by Durant in the 4th

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Well' date=' if you get rid of Rondo then you need someone productive at the 1. Nash? He has a few years left in which he'll continue putting together great stats and that would give time for a draft pick to develop and learn from one of the best ever.[/quote']

 

You do not f***ing get it.

 

lebron is now 2-9 in the finals with 2 entirely different teams.... guess after he fails to win again this yr, everyone can just blame it on his "supporting class"...

 

He was outplayed by Dirk last yr, and after gm 1, he was clearly outplayed by Durant in the 4th

 

And neither do you (what a shock). Why should LeBron be blamed for putting up 30 and 9, when Wade had an inefficient 19 points, and Bosh had 10 points on terrible shooting and worse shot selection? The guy put up three shots from downtown for god knows what reason. Why should LeBron be blamed for his team s***ing the bed?

 

God you are a dolt of such unbelievable proportions. I don't know whether to laugh at you or feel sorry for you.

[ellsburyforMVP]

Biggest lebron homer that ever existed......^^^^^^^^^^

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

What a reasoned, insightful rebuttal.

[Emmz]

Is ellsburyforMVP suns by any chance?

[Palodios]

Um, yeah. You have to be bad before you can get good. I already said that. I'd much rather be bad for 2-4 years than mediocre-teetering-on-bad for 5 plus.

So you'd rather be absolutely terrible for 4 years, than be decent for 5 years? I don't think there is anything left for me to say at this point.

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

If by 'decent' you mean exactly where the Rockets are now, then no I don't want any part of that. Neither does any sane person.

[Palodios]

If by 'decent' you mean exactly where the Rockets are now' date=' then no I don't want any part of that. Neither does any sane person.[/quote']

 

Any sane person will prefer this team to be 40-42 for the next five years than 10-72.

[Palodios]

Let me ask you something. When Pierce went down, and the Celtics had that historically bad season... How many games did you watch? Did you suffer through the blowouts, and all the shitshows? Did you feel the heartbreaking crush of when they picked up the f***ing fifth seed after the worst season in franchise history?

 

Or did you throw in the towel and start rooting for the Lakers?

 

Only true fans should be allowed to make a call like "Let's be the worst team in the NBA for four straight years in order to be good". Are you a true fan? How many blowout losses did you sit through?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

Let me ask you something. When Pierce went down' date=' and the Celtics had that historically bad season... How many games did you watch? Did you suffer through the blowouts, and all the shitshows? Did you feel the heartbreaking crush of when they picked up the f***ing fifth seed after the worst season in franchise history?[/quote']

 

Almost all of them. And yes I watched the lottery live. What difference does it make?

 

Only true fans should be allowed to make a call like "Let's be the worst team in the NBA for four straight years in order to be good". Are you a true fan? How many blowout losses did you sit through?

 

Plenty. And stow this cheesy 'true fan' ********. It doesn't mean anything. It doesn't matter how deep your allegiances run or to whom they run when it comes to making an objective call about what's best for a franchise. You just have to know what you're talking about. Which I do.

 

This is really sad. I expect fluff garbage like this from tardsburyforMVP or one of the old spastics polluting the Red Sox GTs, but not from you.

 

And only a pink hat would prefer years of 40-42 for the forseeable future with no chance to improve barring a substantial break, than a much worse record in the short term with many more chances to improve. And I mean actually improve, not just same-s***-different-day with spare parts tossed around a makeshift cornerstone like Rondo. But implying that we'd be 10-72 for five seasons is pretty funny regardless.

[ellsburyforMVP]

You can talk trash about me all you, if it makes you feel better about yourself-have at it bub....

 

But to get on here and downgrade rondo over and over and to say to " blow up " the entire team, is blasphemous .... Idc what you say, but the ONLY weakness to rondos game is his jump-shot and ft%?? He plays stellar defense, has arguably the best court-vision in the league, against 27 or so of the teams in the league he is the clear-cut best pg in the gm for that matchup, you get on here and say triple-double's mean nothing, but yet all lebron's " hype " is that he avg's 28-8-7, but when rondo avg's 12-12-6 and is the 3rd option ( sometimes 4th on scoring ) his stats mean nothing?

 

Your so far up lebron's ass, and want to differ your idiocracy to any other player, that you can't even see that lebron is going to cost himself another championship....lebron was a 1st team all-nba defensive selection, tell me why he wasn't guarding durant in gm 1? You say wade was inefficient, but lebron missed 13 shots and had 4 turnovers while wade missed 12 shots and had 3... The heat were -11 with lebron on the court and -6 with wade? Lebron was 1-7 on jumpers in the first half ( made shot was off the backboard ) 2-12 in the gm,durant had 17!!! In the 4th quarter, how come lebron didn't check him? When durant clearly came out and said he wanted to guard lebron?

[Jacoby_Ellsbury]

But to get on here and downgrade rondo over and over and to say to " blow up " the entire team' date=' is blasphemous .... Idc what you say, but the ONLY weakness to rondos game is his jump-shot and ft%?? He plays stellar defense, has arguably the best court-vision in the league, against 27 or so of the teams in the league he is the clear-cut best pg in the gm for that matchup, you get on here and say triple-double's mean nothing, but yet all lebron's " hype " is that he avg's 28-8-7, but when rondo avg's 12-12-6 and is the 3rd option ( sometimes 4th on scoring ) his stats mean nothing?[/quote']

 

That jump shot is really big hole, because defenses don't have to respect him. He's not a franchise player or anything close. And I don't know why you keep putting words in my mouth. Shows how terrible your argument is if nothing else.

 

Your so far up lebron's ass, and want to differ your idiocracy to any other player, that you can't even see that lebron is going to cost himself another championship....lebron was a 1st team all-nba defensive selection, tell me why he wasn't guarding durant in gm 1? You say wade was inefficient, but lebron missed 13 shots and had 4 turnovers while wade missed 12 shots and had 3... The heat were -11 with lebron on the court and -6 with wade? Lebron was 1-7 on jumpers in the first half ( made shot was off the backboard ) 2-12 in the gm,durant had 17!!! In the 4th quarter, how come lebron didn't check him? When durant clearly came out and said he wanted to guard lebron?

 

He wasn't guarding Durant because anyone who does is going to have to expend a s*** ton of energy. Why have LeBron wear down guarding Durant when you need his scoring on his other end, and you have Shane Battier on your roster? Doesn't make sense.

 

LeBron's -11 means nothing, since he played 46 minutes. You play 46 of 48 minutes, your +/- is going to be pretty much the same as your team's for better or worse. There's no way to tell exactly what transpired to give Wade -6 (which is why +/- is a garbage individual stat), but what's inarguable is that Wade was a lot less efficient than LeBron, and inefficient in general.

 

LeBron was 11 of 24 from the field. That's 46%. Not quite up to his averages, but still efficient by league standards. Wade was 7 of 19 from the field. 37%. Inefficient by any NBA standards. LeBron also got to the line more.

 

I don't really give a s*** what Durant does or who he wants to guard. LeBron did fine in the fourth quarter and had his usual great game overall. The only thing he did wrong in that game was not get to the line enough. You accuse me of making excuses for LeBron, but you're on the other side placing all the blame on him for everything while defending dog s*** performances by his teammates. You're a hypocrite, and a f***ing fool, and shouldn't be allowed to talk about basketball, or any subject that requires at least a double-digit IQ to understand.

[ellsburyforMVP]

He wasn't guarding Durant because anyone who does is going to have to expend a s*** ton of energy. Why have LeBron wear down guarding Durant when you need his scoring on his other end, and you have Shane Battier on your roster? Doesn't make sense.

 

 

funny......durant guarded lebron, but still had 36??? and to bring up battier's name knowing that durant had 17 in the 4th ??

 

seems to me that most teams "best player" guard the opposing teams " best player" ( aslong as they are a logical size matchup ) except for lebron? 1st team defensive all-nba????