martin wrote:

NYKMentality wrote:Boston Celtics got rid of two Atrocious scrubs.

Kemba Walker.
Evan Fournier.

It's as simple as that (black and white).

Trading Kemba for Al Horford was key and so was the trade for White and getting rid of Schröder while taking back Daniel Theis.

Don’t leave out Ime Udoka. Guy has been as important as anybody

Chandler wrote:

martin wrote:

NYKMentality wrote:Boston Celtics got rid of two Atrocious scrubs.

Kemba Walker.
Evan Fournier.

It's as simple as that (black and white).

Trading Kemba for Al Horford was key and so was the trade for White and getting rid of Schröder while taking back Daniel Theis.

Don’t leave out Ime Udoka. Guy has been as important as anybody

Oh for sure.

I think just under the 50 game mark for the season, both the Knicks and Celtics had similar'ish records. 23-24. Something like that.

Jmpasq wrote:Good news for the Knicks is the Celtics aren't all that good. Make a couple good moves the team can be right there. The East isn't great. Lots of similar quality teams

We're not just a couple of good moves away from being in the Finals. LOL

SergioNYK wrote:

Jmpasq wrote:Good news for the Knicks is the Celtics aren't all that good. Make a couple good moves the team can be right there. The East isn't great. Lots of similar quality teams

We're not just a couple of good moves away from being in the Finals. LOL

I agree- but I think this FO has pulled some neat things out of the draft - Simms, Robinson, IQ all look like really good contributing players.

Mix on the FA signings.

Is it likely that any transaction or set of transactions this FO executes in the next 2-3 years that puts us into the finals? Probably not.

Is it 0? No.

HoustonSprewell84 wrote:The Celtics bigs explain the exact reason why so many people say the Knicks need stretch bigs.

And why so many are not keen on keeping Mitch, Randle needs to shoot better from the outside, Mitch needs to develop a mid range jumper at least or he’s not a winning big in this league.

If sims is capable, having him and mitch is a lot of non offensive talent to carry. If Mitch gets more than what we could pay him, its his decision?
Simms might be able to carry that load.
WE blame Randle for all our problems but a part of the magical COY and Randle all pro miracle was Nolens offensive and defensive play.

Second, there are a couple of teams in the east that are already ahead of us, that are going to improve from within next year, before they dip into Free Agency. The Bucks get a fully healthy Middleton back next year (if he didn't get injured, maybe the Celtics/Bucks series has a different ending?) Kyrie will be available from day one and regardless of how anyone feels about Simmons, he will help that team, especially on the defensive end.

There are'nt many impact free agents available for us to sign when you consider that we do not have the cap space. The only avenue we have to improve or change the direction of this team is through trade. We will see...

Uptown wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Celtics are better than the warriors. Bigger better

The one glaring weakness of the Celtics is the lack of a legit pg/ball-handler. They have stretches where they get unsettled and throw the ball all over the gym. They also struggle getting off good shots down the stretch in tight games.

Boy were they loose with the ball

franco12 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Uptown wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Celtics are better than the warriors. Bigger better

The one glaring weakness of the Celtics is the lack of a legit pg/ball-handler. They have stretches where they get unsettled and throw the ball all over the gym. They also struggle getting off good shots down the stretch in tight games.

Boy were they loose with the ball

I don't think they are better than the warriors- I think they might be hungrier. That helped in the first game. We'll see in game 3. There was a stat that the Celts are like the only team with a winning record against the Warriors over this great stretch of being in the finals, winning championships. Wow- 88 points.

I think the Celts also got hot- and that wasn't going to last.

The Dubs rotation have more Depth than Celtics in this 7 Game FINALS.
Both teams can play Bigs or Small ball well, but Dubs experience has the edge in the series.
However, at the start of the midseason games the Celtics dynamic defense/Offense became the top ball-movement team in the NBA, making the Dubs the 2nd best ball-movement team in regular season games.

BRIGGS wrote:Celtic line up for playoffs

6-9 225 tatum
6-9 260 williams
6-10 245 horford
6-7 225 brown
6-3 225 smart
6-7 205 white
6-8 245 G williams
6-1 190 pritchard

essentially 7 big dudes other than Pritchard(who still is close to 200

where did you get White's height? That is way off.

From basketball reference, he is 6'4".

The bigger issue, as they somehow have ruined watching basketball for me - is there a more arrogant fan base or franchise?

The bigger issue for me is how young they are - and where they were taken in the draft.

Their average years experience, with the very veteran Al Horford's 14- is 5!

Average draft position is 15 - but their top performers were basically all picked at 3 (3x) or 6.

Tatum- 4 years - 3rd pick - series average - 22.0 Points
Williams- 3 years - 27th pick
Horford - 14 years - 3rd pick- series average - 13 Points
Brown - 5 years - 3rd pick- series average - 22.7 Points
Smart - 7 years - 6th pick- series average - 14.7 Points
White - 4 years - 29th pick- series average - 13.3 Points
G Williams - 2 years - 22nd Pick
Pritchard - 1 year - 26th pick.

So if we want to replicate the model, we got a whole lot of work to do, and it starts with sucking better and not beating Washington down the stretch.

This is why I wanted to keep Mike Miller (sorry Fish!) because while we had talent, we just don't have enough to compete on the big stage and we really needed a couple more years of playing rookies like McBride rather than having a roster with Fournier and Alec Burks- and having another year or two of 20 wins or so just so we could land talent.

If the Celtics win, it's going to be incredibly depressing for any number of reasons.

First- I hate the franchise. But look how young they are? They have what, another 5 years of being really really good - and they are in our division!

So if we were smart and thinking long term, we'd trade RJ and anyone else with value and try to find talent in the top of the draft.

martin wrote:

franco12 wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:Celtic line up for playoffs

6-9 225 tatum
6-9 260 williams
6-10 245 horford
6-7 225 brown
6-3 225 smart
6-7 205 white
6-8 245 G williams
6-1 190 pritchard

essentially 7 big dudes other than Pritchard(who still is close to 200

where did you get White's height? That is way off.

From basketball reference, he is 6'4".

The bigger issue, as they somehow have ruined watching basketball for me - is there a more arrogant fan base or franchise?

The bigger issue for me is how young they are - and where they were taken in the draft.

Their average years experience, with the very veteran Al Horford's 14- is 5!

Average draft position is 15 - but their top performers were basically all picked at 3 (3x) or 6.

Tatum- 4 years - 3rd pick - series average - 22.0 Points
Williams- 3 years - 27th pick
Horford - 14 years - 3rd pick- series average - 13 Points
Brown - 5 years - 3rd pick- series average - 22.7 Points
Smart - 7 years - 6th pick- series average - 14.7 Points
White - 4 years - 29th pick- series average - 13.3 Points
G Williams - 2 years - 22nd Pick
Pritchard - 1 year - 26th pick.

So if we want to replicate the model, we got a whole lot of work to do, and it starts with sucking better and not beating Washington down the stretch.

This is why I wanted to keep Mike Miller (sorry Fish!) because while we had talent, we just don't have enough to compete on the big stage and we really needed a couple more years of playing rookies like McBride rather than having a roster with Fournier and Alec Burks- and having another year or two of 20 wins or so just so we could land talent.

If the Celtics win, it's going to be incredibly depressing for any number of reasons.

First- I hate the franchise. But look how young they are? They have what, another 5 years of being really really good - and they are in our division!

So if we were smart and thinking long term, we'd trade RJ and anyone else with value and try to find talent in the top of the draft.

Don't get caught up in small sample sizes. Last year Milwaukee main players were drafted #15, 17, 39. And their ages were 26, 29, 30.

Every team has their own story.

And where are they? And who eliminated them.

I don't want to see or think this, but this Celtics team could be right there every year in the finals for the next five.

They are younger than the other eastern teams - Milwaukee, Miami and the Sixers.

So every team has their own story - what was Larry Brown's Detroit? One and Done! MJ's Bulls? Birds Celtics, Magic's/Kobe's Lakers? They were there every year - kinda like Golden State - and what happened to those dynasties when they got old? They were defeated by the new kid on the block.

And that new kid is the Tatum & Brown's Celtics.

And I think we will see them back next year, barring injury. Meaning, we have no chance. We're just fighting for scraps, but that is ok, it's what we all do in our day to day lives anywhy.