Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

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

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    Watch the games.  Your eyes and brains do not lie.  There is a difference, at least this year, in the way the team plays.  I am not going to say Rondo is the bad player here, but they have to figure out how to play better as a team when Rondo comes back.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to scubber's comment:

    Watch the games.  Your eyes and brains do not lie.  There is a difference, at least this year, in the way the team plays.  I am not going to say Rondo is the bad player here, but they have to figure out how to play better as a team when Rondo comes back.



    1. A good post talking about Rondo.  The Bobcat announcers were even saying tonight when the ball was moving around that this wouldn't happen if Rondo was playing.  They also said guys could get in a rythm  by touching the ball when Rondo has it all the time..  You are right, they have to play different when Rondo returns,  he should be more rested by not handling the ball all the time, could focus on his defense which has gotten bad the last two years.  He is better than that.  It pretty easy how to play better with Rondo.  Rondo has to move the ball and quit having it stick in his hands.  He will have to learn to take the open jumper and LOOK for it as well.  We can be so much better with Rondo but not if he continues to play the way he has been playing.  Hopefully that is what happens.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from breaktime. Show breaktime's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to kyceltic's comment:

    The Rondo worshippers won't be happy until we lose!!  The longer the streak goes, the louder, their cries become!!  I almost feel sorry for them.




    As kyceltic has just illustrated, the insanity posted on this board is not limited to laker trolls

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

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    Whoever started this thread is ignorant.. His own posts contridict one another or are nonsensical.

    I think DBC should administer a minimum IQ test before allowing people to post. That will filter out this garbage

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to jtkl's comment:

    In response to tomobo's comment:

     

    In response to jtkl's comment:

     

    In response to kyceltic's comment:

     

    The Rondo worshippers won't be happy until we lose!!  The longer the streak goes, the louder, their cries become!!  I almost feel sorry for them.

     



    what are you talking about? I hope the streak goes 30 games. and even if does I'll still feel we are better with Rondo. You are the ones who blame every win and every loss on the actions of one player. 

     

     




    Wow. Quite frankly the most moronic post of this or any century. First you cry out the importance of statistical sampling and then follow it up w/ throwing out the same if it proves the haters' correct. Everything you write after this nonsensical point is basically worthless.

     

     

     

    Uhm, your post is remarkably dumb and poorly reasoned. See, here's the thing. I personally don't just look at one stat when trying determine the validity of something regarding this team. So when looking at Rondo's impact on the game I don't just look at what the team's record is when he goes down. I think there are other factors that come into play that determine whether he is impacting the game positively or not. So I have no problem disregarding just one stat if I don't think it shows the full picture.  

    HOWEVER if you are someone Who only LOOKS at one stat like the win loss record since Rondo went down. And if you ignore every other stat, Then at least be smart enough to Use a valid sample size for the ONE STAT you use.  

    So no, I didn't contradict myself and if you had half a brain you'd realize that. the problem is I don't think you do. 

     

     

      



    You should be nicer to Tomobo. It's the first post that he has put up in months without writing the words "cup sniffers".  He put on his big boy pants.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to OneOnOne's comment:

    I got a very fair question for the Rondo Supporters.  If we had this same exact scenario and it was Pierce that was missing how many of you guys would be running Pierce out on a rail? Be honest here.   I can tell when I read a lot of guys posts,  especially during the game threads. Quite a few guys here would be the very same about Paul if the scenarios were switch.

    This I guarantee.



    I wouldn't say any one player was to blame for  a 20-23 record nor would I say that any one player being removed fromt the team would be the cause of a 7 game winning streak.

    Just even writing that makes me laugh. I am not a Rondo supporter, just a "using ones brain" supporter.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from tomobo. Show tomobo's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    In response to jtkl's comment:

     

    In response to tomobo's comment:

     

    In response to jtkl's comment:

     

    In response to kyceltic's comment:

     

    The Rondo worshippers won't be happy until we lose!!  The longer the streak goes, the louder, their cries become!!  I almost feel sorry for them.

     



    what are you talking about? I hope the streak goes 30 games. and even if does I'll still feel we are better with Rondo. You are the ones who blame every win and every loss on the actions of one player. 

     

     




    Wow. Quite frankly the most moronic post of this or any century. First you cry out the importance of statistical sampling and then follow it up w/ throwing out the same if it proves the haters' correct. Everything you write after this nonsensical point is basically worthless.

     

     

     

    Uhm, your post is remarkably dumb and poorly reasoned. See, here's the thing. I personally don't just look at one stat when trying determine the validity of something regarding this team. So when looking at Rondo's impact on the game I don't just look at what the team's record is when he goes down. I think there are other factors that come into play that determine whether he is impacting the game positively or not. So I have no problem disregarding just one stat if I don't think it shows the full picture.  

    HOWEVER if you are someone Who only LOOKS at one stat like the win loss record since Rondo went down. And if you ignore every other stat, Then at least be smart enough to Use a valid sample size for the ONE STAT you use.  

    So no, I didn't contradict myself and if you had half a brain you'd realize that. the problem is I don't think you do. 

     

     

      

     



    You should be nicer to Tomobo. It's the first post that he has put up in months without writing the words "cup sniffers".  He put on his big boy pants.

     



    LOL! One leg @ a time...

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    Aww. Tomobo almost made it through an entire thread without talking about rondo's testicles or desiring them.

    Maybe next time he can do it.

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

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    Aww. Tomobo almost made it through an entire thread without talking about rondo's testicles or desiring them.

    Maybe next time he can do it.




    They don't let me out much. The best I can hope for is if they let me walk the grounds. Such pretty grounds...

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from snakeoil123. Show snakeoil123's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    Ha. 

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to tomobo's comment:

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

     

    Aww. Tomobo almost made it through an entire thread without talking about rondo's testicles or desiring them.

    Maybe next time he can do it.

     

     



    They don't let me out much. The best I can hope for is if they let me walk the grounds. Such pretty grounds...

     



    I know i am not spelling this correctly,  but here goes,  

    Have you tried them with fava beans and kianti?

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to snakeoil123's comment:

    In response to OneOnOne's comment:

     

    I got a very fair question for the Rondo Supporters.  If we had this same exact scenario and it was Pierce that was missing how many of you guys would be running Pierce out on a rail? Be honest here.   I can tell when I read a lot of guys posts,  especially during the game threads. Quite a few guys here would be the very same about Paul if the scenarios were switch.

    This I guarantee.

     



    I wouldn't say any one player was to blame for  a 20-23 record nor would I say that any one player being removed fromt the team would be the cause of a 7 game winning streak.

     

    Just even writing that makes me laugh. I am not a Rondo supporter, just a "using ones brain" supporter.



    I wasn't saying that Rondo was solely responsible for the record.  I don't think you were one of the ones I were referring to anyway.  It i pretty obvious to me though RR needs to adjust his game and not be so one dimensional.  Before  you guys go beserk,   I mean RR focusing so much on assists.   Its funny only about 1-2 of the ones I was referring to addressed my post.  That as well says volumnes.  Anyway they know as well as myself who I was talking about without naming names.  Funny that they can't be honest about it.

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

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to scubber's comment:

    Watch the games.  Your eyes and brains do not lie.  There is a difference, at least this year, in the way the team plays.  I am not going to say Rondo is the bad player here, but they have to figure out how to play better as a team when Rondo comes back.




    And that's the key! I think they SHOULD be better with Rondo in than out. It will be up to Rondo and Doc to make sure that they will be.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to basketbert's comment:

    In response to scubber's comment:

     

    Watch the games.  Your eyes and brains do not lie.  There is a difference, at least this year, in the way the team plays.  I am not going to say Rondo is the bad player here, but they have to figure out how to play better as a team when Rondo comes back.



    And that's the key! I think they SHOULD be better with Rondo in than out. It will be up to Rondo and Doc to make sure that they will be.

     




    When Doc came to the C's he had to get Pierce to play the right way.  Take some of the individualism out of  him so to speak.  Same needs to be done with RR.  There is no doubt they should be better with Rondo, but statitiscally speaking for over a half a year without him shows they are not.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from CubanPete. Show CubanPete's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    I assume you're refering to the 2008-09 team?


    If so, that team was better than the current version.

    Leon Powe > Brandon Bass

    Ray Allen > Courtney Lee

    Eddie House > Leandro Barbosa

    Tony Allen > Jason Terry

    Paul Pierce '09 > Paul Pierce '13

    Kendrick Perkins > Chris Wilcox

    Rondo '09 > Rondo '13

    Glen Davis > Jason Collins

     

    That team could absorb the hit of losing KG. They took the Magic to 7 games in the ECF.

    This current Cs team is likely to get a lower half seed and get bounced in the 1st round. Sans KG they would tank. That fact that this team is better without Rondo speaks volumes.

     

     

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

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to Karllost's comment:

    Whoever started this thread is ignorant.. His own posts contridict one another or are nonsensical.

    I think DBC should administer a minimum IQ test before allowing people to post. That will filter out this garbage



     

    You mean they are over your head. 

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from CubanPete. Show CubanPete's posts

    Re: Celtics 18-7 without Garnett in 2009

    In response to jtkl's comment:

    Just want to address the idiotic post by RallyC that the Celtics are 36-17 without Rondo.  in 2009 when Garnett went down with a knee injury the Celtics were 18-7 without him. So clearly the Celtics are better without Garnett.

    Who doesn't wish we had started 18-7 out of the gate this year?  Wait,  those teams had Pierce, Allen, and Rondo so uhm, they might win a few games. And when Rnodo went down most of those teams still had KG, Pierce and Ray Allen.

    As I pointed out in my previous post, the 2008-09 team was MUCH better than the current squad.

    In response to jtkl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Maybe that is why their record has mostly been good without Rondo. It's mostly been good period. No matter who is out.

    This year has been different as we have mosly been mediocre. last year at this point we were mediocre. We turned it on the second half of last year. with Rondo, but the worst bench in the league. [/QUOTE]

    Replacing Ray Allen with Lee has been a disaster. That said, last year's team benefited from playing in a weak Eastern Conference and a Miami team that had been missing Bosh. Once Bosh returned to playing 30+/g, they crushed the Cs in Games 6 & 7. Building up hope that the Cs were only 1 game away from the finals, was investing in fool's gold.

    In response to jtkl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This year without Rondo, Barbosa. Green and Terry, All much better than Dooling Pietrius, and Daniels have stepped up. We are playing well, but let's not get crazy. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Green's improved productivity has nothing to do with Rondo. He needs to play starter's minutes to be effective. The loss of Sullinger and Bass' poor play has allowed Green to play 30/g at both 3 and 4 spots.

     

    Bottom Line: Ownership didn't want to rebuild with a big TV contract on the line. That's why we have a trainwreck of a team this season.

     

     

Share