43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

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

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : Rondo is a great player, but Rose is better.
    Posted by Kirk6[/QUOTE]

    ok, and my main point is, with all of this b-itchhing about davis getting abused tonight and lo and behold, rondo is the one who got systematically and universally torched out there tonight, the tune of -23 points in his matchup. 

    it's awfully hard for a team to recover from that kind of tarring and feathering in one given matchup when they are missing a KG type figure.

    that (rose bludgeoning rondo) has MUCH MORE to do with tonight's L than davis' problems with boozer that did not amount to an over 20 point difference in the matchup.  that's all.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from edcap99. Show edcap99's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    That's definitely a disappointing statistic, but let's not blame BBD for the loss. It was an off night for him and the entire second unit as well. That happens every now and then. Admittedly, it was an ugly loss where the team played below its potential. However, we can't reasonably expect to win every single game. Chill out guys.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : He has 8 boards in his last 4 games.  And everyone keeps yelling at me for pointing it out.
    Posted by Icon11[/QUOTE]

    Ike- what you say we stop going for the low hanging fruit that may not be contributing to losses (haven't we won 3 of the 4 of those miserable davis rebounding games?), and look at tonight.  rose wiped his @ss with rondo all night long.  36 points vs. rondo's 13. 

    bad play and all, davis did not go out and give way 23 points in his matchup, right?  i mean let's look at the crux of the matter in this loss and not get giddy over one stat of one player that is inarguably bad.

    shall we have the audacity to look at one whole matchup and further fine tune the static out to arrive at the ONE MATCHUP that absolutely killed us tonight?

    final answer: it weren't boozer v. davis or davis' 3 rebounds.  it was rose walking all over rondo top to bottom.  so what's the value in lamenting 3 rebounds by davis when rondo was giving away the whole freggin store?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Waynestarr. Show Waynestarr's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : ok, and my main point is, with all of this b-itchhing about davis getting abused tonight and lo and behold, rondo is the one who got systematically and universally torched out there tonight, the tune of -23 points in his matchup.  it's awfully hard for a team to recover from that kind of tarring and feathering in one given matchup when they are missing a KG type figure. that (rose bludgeoning rondo) has MUCH MORE to do with tonight's L than davis' problems with boozer that did not amount to an over 20 point difference in the matchup.  that's all.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    Ace,

    I agree 100%! But watch Bias make 100 threads today saying how much he hates BBD and how the Celtics are better off with Mikki Moore instead.

    Pathetic.

    I didn't see this game, I was watching the NFL playoffs.

    GO PATRIOTS!!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BiasLewis. Show BiasLewis's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    Waynestarr,

    I missed the game. Had a company function to attend. As soon as I saw the boxscore and it said 4-17 for BBD and Rose had 36 pts with a ton of FTs I knew what kind of game it was.

    Think about this. Harangody may be able to do exactly what BBD does right now with more time and experience. BBD falls into the other teams trap of continuing to take jumpers. They want a PF taking jumpers with no inside presence. If BBD were smarter he would work inside out, like KG. BBD rarely gets the other teams PF in foul trouble. I bet Boozer's points didn't come from mostly jumpers!

    I've already stated my position on BBD many times. I'm not crazy about his game but he fits a good role vs 2nd teamers. I just don't think he matches up well with frontline NBA PFs.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]I couldn't understand why Rivers didn't put Shaq, Semi, or JO on Boozer. He's a post up player, so put a big on him.
    Posted by Kirk6[/QUOTE]

    One reason DOc didnt put Shaq, JO or Semi on Boozed in the post is cause they all were in foul trouble early.. putting them on Boozer, who the Bulls were feeding in the post, would have fouled them out real quick.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from futbal. Show futbal's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    Chicago played with much more heart in both halves. Boozer and Rose were the best players on the floor last night. Free throw differential was typical of the NBA. Yes, BBD had a bad game, but he's won a lot of games, too. What bothers me, however, was the reboudning differential. Harangody is a rebounding hog, he goes to the spot were the ball is going to be and gets it; I don't know if coach Rivers understands (fully) how valuable that is, especially on a rebound challenged team like the Celtics. And  I know DOc doesn't understand how valuable offensive rebounds are because he doesn't coach the team to go after them, but to get back on defense. Yes, no one wants to get run on, or lose in the transition, but on a night when the team is out of rythm and missing shots (last night), plan B is CRASH THE BOARDS and get ugly second chance points. Luke, so far at least, has not had that instinct bred out of him.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from maryngary. Show maryngary's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    Davis is shooting a good % and THEY ALL ALL HAVE BAD NIGHTS, i MEAN ALL OF THEM. 
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from maryngary. Show maryngary's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    Rondo shut down Rose, right?

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]it makes me crazy when rondo, arguably the fastest guy in the league, can't keep d-rose in front of him and gets smoked for 30+.  we gave away more in that matchup than anything davis did tonight. he had a bad shooting night, has been in a rebounding rut after having 11 in a game, and will snap out of it. i wish we had clifford ray still on the staff.  based on all accounts that i have read, that was a bumbling idiotic mess that led to him being let go.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    Not surprising to me Rondo couldnt keep Rose in front of him. Ive been saying for a long time, Rondo is not a good defender... always gets sweep away on picks, has hard time fighting through them.

    No matter how fast Rondo may be, nobody can stay 1on1 with Rose or most any other top tier player..thats just not gonna happen.  Team defense and stay forcing players to a direction etc is whats important... when you lose a guy like Rose through a pick or cross over... ur in trouble. Rondo needed to force him into our defense and the times he did...Rose got every call.

    I dont care about the -23 point discrepancy... Rose is counted on to be the Bulls high scorer... Rondo isnt for the Celts, so normally Rose should easily outscore Rondo..

    The big discrepancy last night was that Rose controlled & dominated the flow of the game...not Rondo.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]Chicago played with much more heart in both halves. Boozer and Rose were the best players on the floor last night. Free throw differential was typical of the NBA. Yes, BBD had a bad game, but he's won a lot of games, too. What bothers me, however, was the reboudning differential. Harangody is a rebounding hog, he goes to the spot were the ball is going to be and gets it; I don't know if coach Rivers understands (fully) how valuable that is, especially on a rebound challenged team like the Celtics. And  I know DOc doesn't understand how valuable offensive rebounds are because he doesn't coach the team to go after them, but to get back on defense. Yes, no one wants to get run on, or lose in the transition, but on a night when the team is out of rythm and missing shots (last night), plan B is CRASH THE BOARDS and get ugly second chance points. Luke, so far at least, has not had that instinct bred out of him.
    Posted by futbal[/QUOTE]

    I really like this post.  Good job
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    Let's not get carried away. The Bulls packed it down and the Celtics were cold. How many missed layups were there? Davis was in the place in the offense he was supposed to be. The Bulls were giving that shot to us. Normal night and this is the C's game.

    This game is a good example of why we don't have one game eliminations in the playoffs.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]it makes me crazy when rondo, arguably the fastest guy in the league, can't keep d-rose in front of him and gets smoked for 30+.  we gave away more in that matchup than anything davis did tonight. he had a bad shooting night, has been in a rebounding rut after having 11 in a game, and will snap out of it. i wish we had clifford ray still on the staff.  based on all accounts that i have read, that was a bumbling idiotic mess that led to him being let go.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]


    You are at it again. There is no one in the league who keeps Rose in "front" of him. Just like there is no one in the league who can keep Rondo in front of him. Defending Rose is a team effort. I'll take the way the C's played Rose last night anytime. The refs bailed out Rose several times and he made some prayers. Rose didn't beat them...the Celtics beat themselves with poor shooting and rebounding.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from greenkillme. Show greenkillme's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : Rondo is a great player, but Rose is better.
    Posted by Kirk6[/QUOTE]

    Rose is a highlight film gunner and will not win a championship unless he changes his game. He is very much like Allan Iverson...when he starts with the ball everyone else stood around.

    It is ridiculous to sing the Rose praises for a game that the C's lost more than the Bulls won.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Icon11. Show Icon11's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : Ike- what you say we stop going for the low hanging fruit that may not be contributing to losses (haven't we won 3 of the 4 of those miserable davis rebounding games?), and look at tonight.  rose wiped his @ss with rondo all night long.  36 points vs. rondo's 13.  bad play and all, davis did not go out and give way 23 points in his matchup, right?  i mean let's look at the crux of the matter in this loss and not get giddy over one stat of one player that is inarguably bad. shall we have the audacity to look at one whole matchup and further fine tune the static out to arrive at the ONE MATCHUP that absolutely killed us tonight? final answer: it weren't boozer v. davis or davis' 3 rebounds.  it was rose walking all over rondo top to bottom.  so what's the value in lamenting 3 rebounds by davis when rondo was giving away the whole freggin store?
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]


    This thread is about Davis man.  There are other threads about Rondo.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : So you can say it but no one else can?... Why do people think just because there is a post about someone it is HATE criticism and HATE are two different things.  You expect JO to be horrible, but not BBD... also don't think Paul or Ray played bad...they were defended well but still managed to impact parts of the game. Its called an opinion... like as-holes everybody has 1 
    Posted by KGLove[/QUOTE]

    First, you can say whatever you want.  I never told you not to say what you feel.  I'm just explaining why I disagree.

    Second, its hate because of the number of threads that focus on BBD each time we lose.  Just check out how often Bias and CelticsBoy want to trade away BBD and how much focus there is on his rebounds and not others' rebounding.   I'm explaining that the WHOLE TEAM has a rebounding problem and perhaps its our schemes rather than lack of capability.   

    Third, get over it and stop taking things personal.  Its a posting board and EVERYONE has an opinion and a right to express it.....and disagree with others.   Don't take someone who disagrees with you as a personal attack.

    I stand by my points - our rebounding problem doesn't center around BBD.  It is a team problem that causes us some losses.....the most glaring of which was Game 7 of last year's playoffs.  Want to blame THAT on BBD as well?  
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    Yes, this thread is supposed to be about Davis.  But for the Rondo bashers out there - in 33 mins, he was a -1.  True, he did not have a great night, but NATE was abused by Rose.  Nate was a -10, and didn't score.  I would like to see the stats for how many Rose scored on Nate vs Rondo - it may surprise us!!

    Anyway - reading a lot this past week, and hearing about unhappy people, teams that want to save money, expiring contracts, etc.   And, just because it's FUN, I have come up with a four team deal, which I think puts us truly over the top (it is a little far-fetched, but not totally out there, IMO)

    Hou gets - Dalambert and Bradley (or draft pick)
    Sac gets - Perkins and Jarred Jeffries
    Was gets - Davis and Daniels (draft pick)
    Bos gets - Battier and Blachte
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]Boozer schooled Baby tonite. But this loss was a team loss.  No use pinning it on one C. Outrebounded 48 - 27 35 freethrows to our 22. Points in the paint 35 to our 30. Our inside game didn't show up tonite. BBD works best when he's complementing our bigs, not acting like he's our only big. We need KG and Perk back, no doubt about it. Our point guard didn't bring his A game either.
    Posted by breaktime[/QUOTE]

    Amen.  Perfectly said!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : Not surprising to me Rondo couldnt keep Rose in front of him. Ive been saying for a long time, Rondo is not a good defender... always gets sweep away on picks,Posted by Karllost[/QUOTE]

    and there you have it- if the gamble-for-steals racket is coming up empty, then all too often (and i'm talking 90% of the time, folks), rondo sticks to a pick like velcro and is happy to do that.  no fighting through, over or under.

    so that turns an ecstatic d-rose or any PG with a coach smart enough to run these schemes for him v. rondo LOOSE on the lane and we are not exactly stacked with shot blockers.

    the result is the sort of havoc on us that rondo is supposed to be inflicting on our opponents.

    some day, maybe after the big 3 are gone, people will realize that fancy ball tricks, a load of assist statistics when mixed with non-existent shooting skills and mediocre overall defense (AT BEST) does not a great point guard make.

    but for now, we'll keep up with the character assassination routine on glen davis, a guy who has already over-achieved in his career as a second round pick and will no matter what make someone a fine 6-7th man for the next 7 years or so.  let's keep on this guy, ride him down, ride him out of town, all while the most important young player on the team continues to play helen keller style defense whenever he gets near pick and roll. 
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : You are at it again. There is no one in the league who keeps Rose in "front" of him. Just like there is no one in the league who can keep Rondo in front of him. Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    ok, so that really starts making sense now.  the best we can do is 1) hold rose to ten+ over his season average and/or 2) give away 23 points on the head on matchup of two guys who "no one can stay in front of"?

    either way, your homer rondo is shockingly deficient one way or another.  we can do better than rose netting 36 to rondo's 13 if they are both unstoppable forces.  problem is, rondo stops himself.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : This thread is about Davis man.  There are other threads about Rondo.
    Posted by Icon11[/QUOTE]

    cool.  we'll stay focused like a laser then on the non-game-determining things that davis does.  particularly individual stat tidbits.
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Icon11. Show Icon11's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : cool.  we'll stay focused like a laser then on the non-game-determining things that davis does.  particularly individual stat tidbits.
    Posted by aciemvp[/QUOTE]

    I honestly think that people get way defensive about their favorite players on here.  I put up one post about Davis getting owned on the boards and people keep coming at me about it.  Me having a bit of the alpha dog in me...well I don't let it go either.  But let me try again and see if you can accept this.

    Davis is having a very good year. Not only that but he has improved every year. He plays solid D, plays within himself, and has a very good and varied offensive game.  He does the little things, like drawing charges, good defensive rotations, he plays good D on guys much bigger than him and pushes them out of their spots.  So glad he is on our team.

    I was simply trying to make the point that he is rebounding very badly as of late.  Averaging 2 boards a game over the last four when you are a starting PF is not going to cut it.  His yearly average is on line with something Mark Blount would do.  I do think that rebounds determine games.  In fact I know they do.  I also know that these last 4 games are an aberration and that Davis can and will do better.  All i did was put up a post that said that Davis got destroyed on the boards against the Twolves and people got all freaked out.

    I am kind of a purist in a sense and maybe that is limiting to me.  I expect bigs to rebound, play D and block shots.  Davis is an EXCELLENT back up.  One of the best in the NBA.  As a starter he gets a little exposed is all.


     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : You are at it again. There is no one in the league who keeps Rose in "front" of him. Just like there is no one in the league who can keep Rondo in front of him. Defending Rose is a team effort. I'll take the way the C's played Rose last night anytime. The refs bailed out Rose several times and he made some prayers. Rose didn't beat them...the Celtics beat themselves with poor shooting and rebounding.
    Posted by greenkillme[/QUOTE]

    Greenkillme, no way.  With respect, I totally disagree.  Rose had it TOO EASY.  You're right, nobody can truly stay in front of him but Rondo has GOT to make it tough for him.  I would expect the first team all-defensive PG to challenge Rose at least.  Rondo simply gave up most times and tried that poke steal attempt.  That might look good on the stat sheet that he got 5 steals but at what price?  While Rondo got 5 steals, on too many other occasions, Rose had an easy path to the hoop where he put pressure on the bigs and got them ALL in foul trouble.

    Rose is expected to score and everybody in the building knows that.  However, that doesn't mean just give up and let the guy score 36.  I excuse Nate but my expectation of Rondo is so much higher.  If you call youself the best PG in the game, step up and play like it.  Not just against Devin Harris, Jose Calderon and Tony Parker.  Do it against who's perceived as the best like you, and that's Derrick Rose.  Last night, he did not do that.

    When Rondo gets 22 assists and a triple double against the Spurs, this board is blowing up with praise of he's the best.  It's just one game.  However, I don't care what Rondo's job is on the Celtics versus Rose's job on the Bulls, last night, Rondo could not carry Rose's jock.  Rose did his job so much better than Rondo last night.
     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13

    In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: 43 mins four for seventeen 3 rebounds -13 : Then why single BBD out?
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]Well, he seems to want to elevate his game, but his performances do not indicate that.  If you're not shooting well, do something else.  If you're not scoring and you're not rebounding, and you're getting dismatled defensively by a superior player - what are you doing on the floor?  He had no assists, so he wasn't setting anyone up.  I like GD as a player, but when he does nothing on the floor at all, but miss jump shots - come on.  Chicago adjusted and contested his shots which he wasn't used to - so hopefully the reality check will set in and he'll think a little less about shooting and more on all the other aspects of the game that he's actually very good at.  Doc is correct when he says GD sometimes forgets who he is and what he's actually capable of that helps the team.
     

Share