Very often when I see a thread that has persisted for reasons that are not obvious to me from the heading, when I finally click on it, it turns out to be quite interesting. Such is definitely not the case here.
Very often when I see a thread that has persisted for reasons that are not obvious to me from the heading, when I finally click on it, it turns out to be quite interesting. Such is definitely not the case here.
OldXCguy wrote:
Very often when I see a thread that has persisted for reasons that are not obvious to me from the heading, when I finally click on it, it turns out to be quite interesting. Such is definitely not the case here.
True, thankfully like a "Kobe snarl" this too will pass. I probably shouldn't even post this, just wanted to pile on to that fools totally fake display of emotion, please.
Added perspective wrote:
There are a LOT more men playing organized competitive basketball than there were 40 years ago.
Nope. Do you think high schools, colleges, adult leagues, summer leagues, etc. started playing hoop in the last 10 years? What are you, 12? Hahahahaha....
Added perspective wrote:
There are a LOT more men playing organized competitive basketball than there were 40 years ago.
u r wrong wrote:
Nope. Do you think high schools, colleges, adult leagues, summer leagues, etc. started playing hoop in the last 10 years?
It looks like math isn't one of your strong points.
Added perspective wrote:
It looks like math isn't one of your strong points.
Actually it is. Looks like history is not yours.
u r wrong wrote:
Actually it is. Looks like history is not yours.
Actually, it is.
As others have already pointed out, Phil has won more titles than Red in fewer seasons as a head coach. He also has a higher all-time winning percentage in both the regular season AND the playoffs. His teams also established the all-time best single season records during the regular season (72-10) and the playoffs (15-1). All this has been accomplished in a league that was much larger and presented much more competition than Red's Celtics ever faced.
Not really a difficult concept, although I have little doubt that it will be for YOU.
Added perspective wrote:
All this has been accomplished in a league that was much larger and presented much more competition than Red's Celtics ever faced.
Not really a difficult concept, although I have little doubt that it will be for YOU.
You seem to be unable to grasp the simple concept that more teams and players dilutes the competition. It's a different league now.
u r wrong wrote:
Added perspective wrote:All this has been accomplished in a league that was much larger and presented much more competition than Red's Celtics ever faced.
Not really a difficult concept, although I have little doubt that it will be for YOU.
You seem to be unable to grasp the simple concept that more teams and players dilutes the competition. It's a different league now.
It is a different league. No longer can you tell a player, as Red did, 'Fifteen thousand a year???? I can't pay you that much. I'm only paying Russell twelve thousand and he's our best player. Sign here.....'
And they did.
The start of a new NBA season has arrived once again, so this thread is worth reviving to help remind the ignorant Celtics fans that they should not get their hopes up this season!
BFD. Pro players come from all over the country and the world. There's no "local" pro players. Every team in the NBA is the same cookie cutter franchise as the next one. Don't get attached to a Pro team. It's silly.
Lamar L.A. wrote:
The start of a new NBA season has arrived once again, so this thread is worth reviving to help remind the ignorant Celtics fans that they should not get their hopes up this season!
Who looks better? Like it or not, the Celtics have improved dramatically.
Last season's injury to KG marked the end of any hopes for back-to-back titles. But now he's back and healthy and the bench is much stronger. They took it to King Lebron on his own turf last night. They're scary good.
Celtics sit atop the league after back-to-back wins. Could this team actually go undefeated?
Yes, they came back very nicely against the vaunted Cavs. Apparently they are so talented that after such a disheartening defeat they came back the next night to just CRUSH the Toronto Rap... wait, what? The overrated Cavs lost to the Raptors? What happened to pride? That win over the Cavs for the Celtics is not what it would have been last year... the Cavs are a step below this year. They will win in the low 50's this year.
Asparagus makes my pee smell wrote:
Celtics sit atop the league after back-to-back wins. Could this team actually go undefeated?
If the season were to end today, the answer is yes, otherwise, no.
hmmmm wrote:
Yes, they came back very nicely against the vaunted Cavs. Apparently they are so talented that after such a disheartening defeat they came back the next night to just CRUSH the Toronto Rap... wait, what? The overrated Cavs lost to the Raptors? What happened to pride? That win over the Cavs for the Celtics is not what it would have been last year... the Cavs are a step below this year. They will win in the low 50's this year.
The Cavs are better with Shaq. They lost to the Raptors because they were still stunned from the beat down the Celtics gave them.
Shaq wrote:
The Cavs are better with Shaq. They lost to the Raptors because they were still stunned from the beat down the Celtics gave them.
It's probably far too early to draw any conclusions on whether or not the Cavs have improved, but they looked horrendous against Bosh and the Raptors, and I sincerely doubt that it was because of any lingering psychological scars from the Celtics game! Right now, I will agree with Charles' assessment from Tuesday night: the Celtics and the Magic look like the favorites for the Eastern Conference Finals.
I'll go you one better and say the Celtics are the favorite for the whole enchilada. They could seriously challenge the Bulls' 72 win season record. It's early, but who's better?
R.E.Peat wrote:
I'll go you one better and say the Celtics are the favorite for the whole enchilada. They could seriously challenge the Bulls' 72 win season record. It's early, but who's better?
As you can see within the earliest pages of this thread, that's what some of the belligerent Celtics fans were saying last year. How did that work out for them?
(and for the record, Garnett was healthy during all of those Pacific time zone losses)