could be the best celtics team ever..

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

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    ...nice article about the Celtics in a summer that high lights the Heat and the Lakers. -

    http://network.yardbarker.com/nba/article_external/10_reasons_why_the_boston_celtics_will_win_the_2011_nba_championship/3150472
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from GlasgowRangers. Show GlasgowRangers's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever..:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever.. : NO, it isn't.  Here's why.  The lakers were one half game out of first place when Bynum got hurt.  AFTER he got hurt, they traded for Gasol and went on a tear.  If Bynum didn't get hurt, no Gasol trade!
    Posted by BirdandCowens[/QUOTE]

    And this lie doesn't become true even if you repeat it 93949455 times.

    There is no reason to believe that the Lakers, at the time of the trade merely a 5th seed in the west (nice to mislead that they are only 1/2 game out of first place in the division), would not go for a trade to drastically improve the team.

    That's the usual stunt the  Celtic fans play: the Celtics fans claim that they would be 1/2 game out of first, no need to improve had Bynum not hurt, which is totally against common sense.

    Simple fact: the Celtics have never beaten the Lakers with Bynum, KB and Gasol in the line up.

    Simple fact: the Lakers have beaten the Celtics with the 3 HOFers in the lineup.


     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from GlasgowRangers. Show GlasgowRangers's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever..:
    [QUOTE]Wilt was a giant......but Big Bill held his own.....stats don't tell the whole story.....in one of Wilt's 50 point games Russell didn't even bother defending him....Wilt thought he had a great game....only problem was that his team was losing to Boston by over 30 points in the fourth quarter.....also, Russell wasn't concerned with scoring....Wilt was obsessed with it.....that is why he was traded at mid season by his last place team (San Francisco)....this was the year he averaged 50 PPG...the team couldn't win with him.....he even had a young Nate Thurmond starting next to him......Russ would block shots and control the ball giving his team the advantage....[/QUOTE]

    Oh,so this is how Russ played. Let Wilt score at will while his team was winning by 30 points.

    If Russ played today, will he be playing for team LeBron? is that the only way he could play? let the other center score at will while his team is leading by 30 points?

    Imagine Russ is playing for the Wizard/Clippers/Nets of today, that his role is not to control the game only with his defense but to do a lot more. I mean, his defense is not needed that much today as teams are winning games 81-77 while shooting 30%. Can he supply a low post offensive spark like Karl Malone? Can his 6'9" body dominate the paint like Shaq or Dwight? Name me a 6'9" 220 lb that dominates the paint today.

    You are just confessing that Russ would have a hard time in today's league, unless he plays on a team that consistently winning by 30 points. In other words, Russ needs to be Lebron's sidekick...


     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Nice link.....I read some of the Laker fans' comments.....one even posted that the West was the stronger conference beginning in 1980....he/she is either very young or in denial.....I'm sure he never heard the term coined during the Bird/Magic era..."The Big Four".......the four teams that were unquestionably the best in the league....of course that referred to the Celtics, Sixers, and Bucks in the East and the Lakers out West.....surely it is easier to move on to the Finals when you are clearly the best team in your conference.....the Celtics had much tougher competition.....I give the Lakers credit for winning 5 titles to our 3....I just think they had better odds of getting there...I won't even bring up the injury issues.....
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever..:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever.. : Kobe got 5 and soon to be 6. Ohh thats right Vitaly, this is where you do you're rant on ' as a man he's etc etc etc' speech. Talk about double standards.  Stick with those celts kid, 1st loser aint so bad for the boston mob.
    Posted by KB24RULZ[/QUOTE]

    No one could handle Wilt.  That includes his former coaches as well.  Russ was a much better teammate.

    Wilt set the now famous lakers standard on respect for women, too.  Wilt, Kareem, Magic, Worthy, koME, Jackson, Bynum and now Barnes........his legend lives on!

    Anyone who knows Vitaly Potapenko played for us is a closet Celtics fan..................but we don't WANT you


    Such is life-  you are a miserable human being!
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from KB24RULZ. Show KB24RULZ's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    The west has been undeniably stronger for years. Last year you had to win 50 games in the west to make the playoffs where as in the east it was pathetic. If one looks who has won the championship since 2000.....who da daddy?!

    This season in the east it's Miami or Orlando.

    In the west its the back to back reigning world champion Lakers, Portland, Dallas, Denver, San Antonio and at a pinch Utah.

    I wonder what scrub of a team from the east bats .500 or less to make the playoffs? Wild wild west for sure!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Excuse me but that list you just put up has one great team on it.....the Lakers....Denver? Dallas? Portland? Utah? Championship calibre? Hell NO!
    Still waiting for you to tell us when you started following the NBA......
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever..:
    [QUOTE]Excuse me but that list you just put up has one great team on it.....the Lakers....Denver? Dallas? Portland? Utah? Championship calibre? Hell NO! Still waiting for you to tell us when you started following the NBA......
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Duke,
    Anyone who remembers the immortal Vitaly Potapenko is a closet Celtics fan, anyway!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    You're probably right BC!
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from EliasB. Show EliasB's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    "Nice link.....I read some of the Laker fans' comments.....one even posted that the West was the stronger conference beginning in 1980....he/she is either very young or in denial.....I'm sure he never heard the term coined during the Bird/Magic era...'The Big Four'....

    ....
    the four teams that were unquestionably the best in the league of course that referred to the

    Celtics, Sixers, and Bucks in the East and the Lakers out West

    .....surely it is easier to move on to the Finals when you are clearly the best team in your conference.....the Celtics had much tougher competition.....I give the Lakers credit for winning 5 titles to our 3....I just think they had better odds of getting there...I won't even bring up the injury issues.....
    THE DUKE"


    Here you go again Duke!

    I know you like telling yourself and Celtics fans that the Lakers had an easier time winning championships in the 80's because they had an "easier" conference so that you can feel better about your team but I must speak to those impressionable minds out there who might be tempted to followed this flawed argument.

    The bottom line to your argument is that the Lakers owned your so-called "tougher" conference and namely "the big four." Your so-called 80's "big-four" is an Eastcoast claim that means absolutely nothing to the West. And by the way, why you would think that the Milwaukee Bucks, who never even made it to the finals, was according to you "unquestionably" one of the four best teams in the 80's is beyond me and perhaps most people who read your post. Lakers owned the Celtics in the 80's just like they owned the 76ers. 4-2 against both.

    Let me simplify this for you: Specifically where you say "surely it is easier to move on to the Finals when you re clearly the best team in your conference" does not mean the West had a weak conference. Those teams were simply victims of having the superior basketball dynasty Lakers of the 80's in their conference which is similar to the Eastern conference when they had the superior Dynasty Bulls team beat everyone in their conference in the 90's. No one says that the Knicks weren't a tough team or that the Eastern Conference was a weak conference because the Bulls were always in the finals. It's just that teams in the East had the unfortunate reality of having a far superior team in their conference during the Bulls dynasty as did the West during the Lakers dynasty.

    It is not about whether the Lakers had a weak conference it's simply that the Lakers owned the NBA in the 80's plain and simple. They had a far superior team than any team in that era. So when you say the Lakers had "better odds of getting there" makes no sense to me and every NBA fan that followed basketball back then. 

    And one more thing: please stop placing the 80's Milwaukee Bucks in the same sentence as the 80's Lakers, it takes away from your credibility as a baskeball lecturer.
     


    Cool
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Elias.....just to sum up.....I didn't put Milwaukee in the mix of the Big Four......the national media did......

    as for being the far superior team and dominating the East......you beat us twice when #1 Bird and Max were injured (Max, a former Finals MVP and the MVP of game 7 against your Lakers was reduced to a cameo role) and #2 our team was a walking mash unit in '87....

    Your totally dominant team lost to the Sixers in a sweep and lost to us....also the Pistons....5-3 is not dominant pal......9-3 is dominant......by the way, in '86 we didn't get to beat the Lakers thanks to Sampson's fluke shot....if you recall in the regular season the Celtics dominated the Lakers in both games (I still have the SI magazines by the way)....

    ....and that last point is very telling....the best team does not make it to the finals every year (see Houston 1986)...the Celtics had to battle against the Sixers who were their equal.....if the Celts meet the Lakers who knows who wins?

    Lastly......this is all speculation and opinion....yours won't change....neither will mine....I am discussing history on a Celtic forum not a Laker forum.....you are the one who is invading our territory buddy....
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Elias, let me put this another way......the Celtics lost three chances at the finals because they lost to teams of equal talent (Philly twice and Milwaukee once)...what teams were equal out West to the Lakers? .....really, no one...the Rockets got there twice (once on Sampsons fluke shot....that year Boston had dominated the Lakers during the regular season so they would have been the prohibitive favorites)....but seriously.....you don't think playing in the tougher conference in the '80s was detrimental to Boston's odds?  ......and the Lakers clearly being the top seed in the West didn't enhance their odds? ....c'mon my friend....at least meet me half way...
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from KB24RULZ. Show KB24RULZ's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Elias- you just owned duke BAD.

    That's what I call a knock-out.....boom!
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever..:
    [QUOTE]Elias, let me put this another way......the Celtics lost three chances at the finals because they lost to teams of equal talent (Philly twice and Milwaukee once)...what teams were equal out West to the Lakers? .....really, no one...the Rockets got there twice (once on Sampsons fluke shot....that year Boston had dominated the Lakers during the regular season so they would have been the prohibitive favorites)....but seriously.....you don't think playing in the tougher conference in the '80s was detrimental to Boston's odds?  ......and the Lakers clearly being the top seed in the West didn't enhance their odds? ....c'mon my friend....at least meet me half way...
    Posted by Duke4[/QUOTE]

    Duke - nice comeback.  Don't worry, though ........Elijah thinks Jerry West played for the MN lakers......also, how many times did we play the lakers in the Finals in the 80's?  Seems to me, it was 2-1 lakers...hardly OWNING wouldn't you agree?
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Yep......and in 1987 it was a miracle that we went as far as we did with the injuries....just think...Parish, McHale, Walton, Wedman.....am I missing any of the walking wounded?  ......having Max basically a spot player in '85 along with Bird's injuries hurt as well....hell, Max was a finals MVP.....detractors will say injuries are part of the game....they would be correct.....my point is, when completely healthy, I believe Boston was the better team.....but, hey.....I'm a Celtic fan right?

    I can admit when one of my teams wasn't considered the best (think '88 Dodgers)...on the other hand, one of my closest friends is a Laker fan and is absolutely convinced, year in and year out, that the Lakers are absolutely the best team in the league.....every freakin year.....
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from GlasgowRangers. Show GlasgowRangers's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..



    In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever..:
    [QUOTE]Elias.....just to sum up.....I didn't put Milwaukee in the mix of the Big Four......the national media did...... [/QUOTE]

    Boy, you don't think you can get away with this one, do you?

    The national media did? I was there in the 80s too. I can easily say "the national media did NOT". It's always the 76ers and the Celtics in the east. There was no Milwaukee Bucks in the mix. In fact, the Bucks were a "west" team in 1979-80 and how far did they go? Not even to the conference finals.

    So, don't ever think you can put up lies here and get unchallenged.

    [QUOTE]
    as for being the far superior team and dominating the East......you beat us twice when #1 Bird and Max were injured (Max, a former Finals MVP and the MVP of game 7 against your Lakers was reduced to a cameo role) and #2 our team was a walking mash unit in '87.... Your totally dominant team lost to the Sixers in a sweep and lost to us....also the Pistons....5-3 is not dominant pal......9-3 is dominant......[/QUOTE]
    Yeah, so injury was the reason that the Celtics lost to the Lakers? Glad that you finally gave credit to the Lakers. Afterall, their lost to the 76ers in 83, Pistons in 89, Bulls in 91, Pistons in 04 and Celtics in 08 were all due to the injury bug. Glad that you finally recognized the Celtics championship was tainted...

     But the more astounding finding from this is, you are really a crybaby. You don't think or debate like an adult. Afterall, 25 years after the loss, you still can't accept it like a man. INJURY IS PART OF THE GAME. You really have to move on. It's evident that the past Celtic glory in the 60s weren't giving you an ease of mind...

    If you say 9-3 is dominant, then what about 10-4? Glad that you finally confessed, the Celtics were totally dominated in the big-time NBA era, or if you don't like that term, the "modern NBA" era. You'll be roasted by this conclusion from now on...

    [QUOTE]
    by the way, in '86 we didn't get to beat the Lakers thanks to Sampson's fluke shot....if you recall in the regular season the Celtics dominated the Lakers in both games (I still have the SI magazines by the way).... ....[/QUOTE]
    Yeah? talk to your alter-ego BirdisCoward. Regular season don't mean jack.  This is really the fun part of picking apart your arguments. They are not consistent...


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

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    In Response to Re: could be the best celtics team ever..:
    [QUOTE]Elias, let me put this another way......the Celtics lost three chances at the finals because they lost to teams of equal talent (Philly twice and Milwaukee once)...what teams were equal out West to the Lakers? .....really, no one...the Rockets got there twice (once on Sampsons fluke shot....
    [/QUOTE]
    Let's see. The Rockets were not the Lakers' equal because of a fluke shot (albeit the series was 4-1), yet the Bucks were the Celtics equal. Name me a Buck player in the HOF while his HOF credentials was earned IN MILWAUKEE, NOT IN DETROIT. Go ahead, I dare you.

    A team with 3-5 HOfers vs a team with a washed up HOFer. And the Bucks are the Celtics' equal. Yes, I am debunking this lie in a Celtic forum. Now what?

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from BaileyPowe. Show BaileyPowe's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    duke, if i can barge in here w/ a bit of nitpicking:

    houston eliminated the lakers in a mere 5 games in '86. the better team won that series with ease. let's not give the lakers even the slightest bit more credit than they deserve. what we all missed that year was the opportunity to see a great celtics team pound a pedestrian lakers team, including walton going head to head w/ jabbar.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from EliasB. Show EliasB's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Duke, since you enjoy extrapulating injuries that the Celtics had sustained back in the 80's in order to claim that as a result, missed their chance of winning a championship, perhaps you might appreciate the fact that 2 of the 3 losses the Lakers had in the 80's in the finals they had injuries to their starters. For example in their 1982 loss to Philly, James Worthy was out with a broken leg. In 1989, the Lakers could not three-peat because of the injuries to Byron Scott and Magic Johnson. So for someone who enjoyed dreaming of what might have been, do these injuries to the Lakers help you see what a dominating team they were back then? Should Laker fans extrapolate like you and say "wow, had the Lakers not been injured they could have won 2 more titles! We could have had 7 championships out of 8 appearances! Wow!"

    To me this exercise is a futile attempt to elevate our team needlessly. We don't have to make our fans feel better with "what if's." We won 5 championships in 8 finals appearances - an amazing accoplishment all on its own.


    Cool
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    You are absolutly right my friend......I will point out that when Philly won the title Worthy was a rookie....and the Sixers won in a sweep......our squads were hurt (in '85) and decimated ('87)...if Isaiah was healthy I believe the Lakers would have lost that series....but you are right.....speculation and opinions....we will continue to agree to disagree.....still, the conversations are stimulating....where would either team be without the other.....that is what makes their history so special!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    BP.......good point!
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Elias.....just one correction.....Houston won the series 4-1....it was not a best of five series....otherwise you make a good case for your team....take care budddy!
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from EliasB. Show EliasB's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    Your right Duke, my bad!

    Frown
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Duke4. Show Duke4's posts

    Re: could be the best celtics team ever..

    No problem......I catch myself too.......it's part of growing older i guess.....
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share