1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    The Pacers were not a championship quality team and the Celtics were without Avery, Wilcox, Green and O'Neal, while Pierce, Allen and Pietrus were all injured.

    Man do you ever come back with anything I don't pick to shreds?

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    In Response to Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average:
    [QUOTE]Until you can prove to me beyond a doubt that a heathy Ray not messed up by the dirty Arest play still somehow goes 0-8 in game 3 (after entering red hot) or that having our starting Center doesn't somehow change the rebounding situation (as well as morale, and many other aspects of the game like making those around him fresher, better, etc.) I already proved to you that last season the Celts still lost to the Lakers twice even when Ray was healthy. You just said the Celts didn't hit their stride yet. hahaha 
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    now you are reduced to saying the 'proof' as to why the 2010 Celtics inability to overcome an 0-8 performance by an injured Ray Allen and win in 2010 is to be found 19 months later in the close losses to the '12 Lakers after the lockout when a completely different lineup and mindset was in place????

    Wow

    The idiocy and grasping at straws never ceases to amaze me... but that is what those who lose arguments are reduced to doing
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    In Response to Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average : "I thought the lack of size was the difference in the game," Rivers said. "I thought our guys battled down there, but 23-8 on offensive rebounds, and then the 37-17 discrepancy in free throws, that makes it almost impossible to overcome." http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nba/columns/story?columnist=may_peter&id=5300419 CELTICS CAN'T FINISH Last 6 Minutes (After Game Was Tied At 64) Lakers Celtics Possessions 14 15 Points 19 15 FGM-FGA 3-6 5-13<< FTM-FTA 12-14 2-2 />>1-4 FG within 5 feet of basket
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    so the difference in the game was the 'lack of size' based on our starting Center being out

    thanks for proving my popint as most of your joke responses do
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    In Response to Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average:
    [QUOTE]Aggression and assertiveness are usually rewarded in the NBA and the Lakers were easily the more aggressive, assertive and determined bunch on this particular night. They kept pounding on the door all night and finally broke it down in the fourth quarter. On this night, they were the deserving winner. http://sports.espn.go.com/boston/nba/columns/story?columnist=may_peter&id=5300419
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    of course they were the deserving winner

    They were the better team put out on the court

    The Celtics who were demoralized and unable to compete on the boards... because of their injured starting center (who also completely altered the outcome of game 6) put up a good fight, but in the end were too weakened and not at their best to compete...

    They were crushed by some unfair calls of course, but as you once saif Fierce, road teams missing a starter are not allowed to win game 7's in Stern's NBA. The very idea that you blame the loss on rebounds when injuries directly and more significantly led to 3 losses is absurd.
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    In Response to Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average : I never denied that Perk's injury was not a factor. What I don't agree with is you saying Ray getting hurt caused the Celts to lose in the 2010 Finals.
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    slowly starting to see the light... Perk's injury 'may' have been a bigger issue than the reounding in disparity in the actual games? Becuase Perk, a very good rebounder/rim presence was not in the games???

    I was at games 3 and 5 in those finals... I did not see Ray Allen in those games... He was so hot and then boom, it was gone. He was 0-8 and -11 in the game his leg got messed up in. I personally know a miniscus can be played through. The quotes are endless that Ray's legs get altered a bit and the shot is gone. He was +8 the rest of the series.

    If you insist the quotes from Doc were lies and he just had a bad game,went 0-8 from 3, tough luck, maybe he had a minor bruise no real athlete couldn't just play through, well then there is no way I can reason with you.

    Going 2-8 actually doesn't guarantee a win, but as I said I was there, I knew 1-2 big buckets were all that game needed to push the C's to victory, one hustle play/rebound Ray couldn't make b/c of his bloated black and blue leg...2-8 and 1 Ray rebound makes that game 83-82 with 2 mins to go instead of 82-80l, the overall rebounding #'s 39-38 instead of 42-35 and the Gsarden is jumping instead of confused as to how their Ray Allen bricked shot after shot...

    tou want to say Artest's dirty play and Ray being hurt didn't lose that game... be my guest... I was there, I'll NEVER believe it

    and you are already saying Perk could have, you know, MAYBE altered the outcome of a game that was tied w/ 5 to go and the C's led for the first 30 mins

    so please, enough with the rebounding farce... it was a shame they got 38-39 instead of 42.... it didn't make them unable to be champions
     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. This post has been removed.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    Obviously I am not discrediting the stats in the box score or the effort of the series actual MVP, Pau Gasol, or saying the C's didn't need to rebound better to win that game....

    I have even said over and over that the better team won

    But that is b/c, as Doc is quoted as saying, the C's were missing a starter, one who happened to be a very good rebounder. So the main issue was an injury, the numbers would not have been the way they were if Perk played and the game was tied late.

    Then when you go back to game 3 it was what Artest did to Ray that kept the C's from closing out that game, 0-8 with multiple missed 3's in a close 4th quarter that just needed 1-2 to drop to give C's the momentum to take it.

    Injuries directly led to:

    A. The 38.4 stat instead of 40 (KG)
    B. The game 3 loss (Ray)
    C. The games 6 and 7 losses (Perk)
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    Your insistance on pointing to a stat over an injury is also in DIRECT conflict with what you have said about the Celtics series vs. the Heat. The Celtics were 'undeserving' of making it to a game 7 vs. Miami, let alone winning it, because Chris Bosh was hurt the first 4 games.

    I'm sure I can find some stats that Mimai did pretty poorly in for their 3 losses... would any of them, like shooting 29% from 3, be more significant than not having Bosh in the game?

    If Bosh NEVER returned and the C's made it to the finals you would have led the parade of 'c'mon guys, we didn't beat the Heat at full strength'. Yet when one of our 2 best rebounders is out of the final 2 games on the road, and we get pounded on the boards, it is more the fault off our backups being unable to better Gasol/Bynum and NOT the fault of the injury? And the way you 'proove' this is a regular season +/- 40 stat, that somehow is able to leapfrog the Perk injury as the determining factor for going 0-2 in LA. Sorry but that is baloney.

    Add in Ray's injury marred 0-8 game 3, where had he been healthy we likely close the series in 5, and injuries played a significantly larger role than rebounds in why the C's lost the '10 finals.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    excuses as excuses

    they are alle xcuses

    rebounding is an excuse as well

    In juries are just the superior one b/c they directly led to the stats being worse and 'never knowing' the outcomes if the players were healthy or suited up

    you are spinning in circles, nothing you say hasn't been said before, I rest my case, rebounding in gmaes 6/7 were worse b/c Perk wasn't out there and the absurd idea you can trace a title loss back to being 1.6 reb's under a specific number in the regular season is weak and any notion that Ray Allen wasn't hurt in game 3 is just blind and shameful

    the injuries were the biggest obstacle to winning it all in 2010
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from BynumizaHERO. Show BynumizaHERO's posts

    Re: 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average

    In Response to 1972-73 Knicks nba champs despite lowly rebound average:
    [QUOTE]   The NBA champ New york knicks of 1972-73 were able to claim the title with a lowly rebound per game average of 47.34 vs a league average of 50.61. The 2009-10 Celtics averaged less than 40 rebounds per game but that was against a league average of only 41.7 rebounds per game. The 1972-73 ratio placed it well below the neccessary 39.9 rebounds to qualify as a sub 40 rebound champ. Of course all of the above is subject to my having made a correct mathematical calculation. Im sure you posters will let me know if I need to go back to school at age 80.    seems
    Posted by SeemsToMe[/QUOTE]

    1972-73

    ROFLMAO!!!!

    This was right after the peach basket days where the majority of NBA players were not even real athletes and had other jobs that they worked during the season. Also, how many teams were even in the league at that time? Had Spain and Argentina even heard of basketball back then? 

    Cool
     

Share