If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

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

    If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    Rondo was a no show. In his post game interview, Doc admitted that we played too much one on one and didn't pass the ball. It seems to me that Doc may have paid some attention to the fact that Rondo wasn't doing his job facilitating by taking leaving Dooling in for so long in the second half. I don't know why Rondo wasn't giving it 100%, but it was clear to me that he wasn't. There is a lot of empty BB commentary out there, but thats one thing they get right. As goes Rondo, so goes the Celtics.

    Step it up!
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    There's never just one reason a team wins or loses.   Best reason we lost was that Philly played a great game and next would be that Bass and Pierce couldn't throw the ball in the ocean.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from aciemvp. Show aciemvp's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    In Response to Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost:
    There's never just one reason a team wins or loses.   Best reason we lost was that Philly played a great game and next would be that Bass and Pierce couldn't throw the ball in the ocean.
    Posted by Celtsfan4life


    No, Philly did not play a great game.  they played a great SMALL STRETCH of the fourth quarter.  Other than that they were as miserable as we were. 

    But you're right that there is never one reason.  We had many.....

    I didn't see KG in the post until the fourth quarter...

    Pierce was awful, and possibly also awfully hurt.  A couple of his jumps to go into a shot or go after a rebound were noticably wobbly and off kilter

    Rondo was non-aggressive.  EVERY GAME he has angles to the basket where he could drive for a layup or free throws and he generally passes on those opportunities to dispense the ball to others.  When it gets down to darn near 100% of the time that he's not shooting at all, Rondo makes our team worse by far because it's very predictable.  If Rondo drives it to the hole then he'll suck the defense INTO the lane to some extent- once he blows by his man someone will need to cover the hole = makes it easier for us to get open outside shots.

    Basically you have to work inside-out to have a chance at success.  The Celts avoided that theory like it was a disease for over 3 quarters of the game.

    DOC FAILED to get the ship pointed the right way.  fully ONE HALF of this game was played in a stinko malaise of low effort, no intensity, going through the motions.  what was at stake?  giving away home court advantage!  but we played like it was a tired boring west coast trip game that you just decide to mail in.  How that can happen in the playoffs is not just an indictment of the players but also the coach.

    And i realize that we're injured but  you stil lhave to try your hardest.  maybe the best place for pierce is in the post for some moves.  heck, he even shot a jump hook shot earlier this year that i never knew he had.  well go down there and try it- guarantee it'll be easier on your knees than trying to drive into traffic and then jump.

    Steamer and Hollins played over 20 minutes combined, and got 2 rebounds.  that is horrific.  these are too "energy" guys.  Hollins'' defense in general really bothers me, he gets lost easier than Bass does.  Steamer seems to be more "ON" all the time as far as defense goes, but these 7 footers have to rebound more.  muggsy bogues got more rebounds per minute played than these two jamokes did in game 1.

    Bass was awful.  he's really being exposed.  if he doesn't have an open jumper or a point blank put back then he has nothing.  he has no post game.  his defense is also poor to fair.  once you start clanging the J's brandon, go down to the block and try to draw a foul for cripe sakes, instead of firing 6 blanks in a row from range.  you're good at the foul line.  so go do something to get there.  Doc, anyone there to help brandon out?  Bueller?

    many many many many many reasons why we lost.  yes, they are all the same general flavor of under achieving but everyone made you feel like throwing up a little bit differently out there.  including doc
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from kyceltic. Show kyceltic's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    In Response to Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost:
    There's never just one reason a team wins or loses.   Best reason we lost was that Philly played a great game and next would be that Bass and Pierce couldn't throw the ball in the ocean.
    Posted by Celtsfan4life


     If Philly had only played a good game, they would have won by 20!!  Thet played terrible,we played worse. Rondo was a no show, that's why i would trade him, if given the chance, and Pierce helped them more then he helped us!!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    Bass did try to draw fouls.... but when his shot was blocked he was throwing his hands in the air in useless attempts to get the refs to blow a whistle... when really he should've been going for the loose ball his defender created.

    2-3 times he could have recovered from being blocked and gotten the ball, maybe a layup or at least been actually fouled under the hoop, and did the fake hands in the air bull.

    I am fine with him taking open 18-20 footers, thats his game. But not at the expense of KG on the block. Do not post him against anyone taller or more atheletic. They really should play him with the 2nd unit more to take advantage of his scoring on lesser quality players and let Hollins play with KG more, since KG has such a high +/- and Collins seems to have a low one despite all that energy.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from SFBostonFan. Show SFBostonFan's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    As lousy as Philly played, we only outshot them 41.8% to 40.8%, +1%, which is not enough when we lose the rebound battle 47-36  and they get 11 extra chances !!!
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from jam757. Show jam757's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    Rondo needs to STOP passing up wide open lay ups and short jumpers. There should be no hesitation. It was quite clear that Paul wasn't able to give us much and we needed other scoring. I expect an explosive Rondo in game 3. We also need Bass to stop this 5-15 stuff. I don't have a problem with the 15 shots because they were rediculously wide open. He should have hit at least 10 of them. Maybe he needs a shot of whiskey before the game to calm his nerves "IDIOTS" style!
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from jam757. Show jam757's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    I'm not sure I understand the criticism of Hollins. He picked up a nice charge and was a factor on D. Also a sweet ally-oop dunk on the break. Hollins runs the floor hard, let's cut him some slack!
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from JamLock. Show JamLock's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    In Response to If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost:
    Rondo was a no show. In his post game interview, Doc admitted that we played too much one on one and didn't pass the ball. It seems to me that Doc may have paid some attention to the fact that Rondo wasn't doing his job facilitating by taking leaving Dooling in for so long in the second half. I don't know why Rondo wasn't giving it 100%, but it was clear to me that he wasn't. There is a lot of empty BB commentary out there, but thats one thing they get right. As goes Rondo, so goes the Celtics. Step it up!
    Posted by KGBeast


    Talk about a rally killer, an obviously injured Paul Pierce is subbed in for a hot Pietrus who had, in less than a minute, hit two three pointers for the final few minutes of the fourth.  Then for several possessions thereafter in crunch time, an obviously injured Paul Pierce is bringing the ball up the court and getting the Celtics into slow motion half court offense.  However, it's obviously all Rondo's fault.  It obviously did not have anything to do with Bass or Pierce missing a plethora of shots which could have had Rondo well over 20 assists from his penetration efforts.  Nah, it was all Rondo's fault.  Congratulations for such succinct, balanced analysis.  Let's all give the thread's author an Oscar (Meyer Wiener).

    As Always,
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGBeast. Show KGBeast's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    See, what did I tell ya'll. Rondo makes us or breaks us (well not 100% true, we do have PP and KG who can take over if he's a no show).

    But Rondo stepped up tonight. He's taking advantage of the match-up with Holiday who is turning into a great scorer, but does not have the defensive power to shut down Rondo. Rondo is pushing it. Scoring. Making himself a scoring threat and now is putting the pressure on Philly. And so now he can do what he was built to do: MAKE EVERYONE AROUND HIM BETTER!

    This game is far from over, but its hard not to feel good at the half. KEEP IT UP RONDO!
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGBeast. Show KGBeast's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    Jammy Locks - I don't know why you and the illiterate squad of secret Celtics bashers on this board spread so much hate. I'm talking about reducing it to one thing. Obviously multiple factors go into every game. But if I had to change one thing in game 2, it would have been a fully engaged Rondo. Yes, Bass missed, a lot. I place a lot of blame on Doc's lack of in-game adjustments. But I stand by my analysis. So you can suck it britch!
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Celtsfan4life. Show Celtsfan4life's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    In Response to Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost:
    In Response to Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost :  If Philly had only played a good game, they would have won by 20!!  Thet played terrible,we played worse. Rondo was a no show, that's why i would trade him, if given the chance, and Pierce helped them more then he helped us!!
    Posted by kyceltic


    Wow - tough assessment, man.  Name more than 2 or 3 players who play well EVERY game.   Everyone has good and bad games.  I worry that people get too down on the C's when they lose and too high on them when they play like tonight.   

    Its the NBA - on any given night, ANY team can be hot or cold.  Games can be ugly but the Sixers played a game where they hung in there in Game 2 and they won ugly.  I consider that playing well.   

    Don't get too down on Rondo and trade a guy who's one of our best 3 players just because he has a bad game every few games.   We are where we are because he, Garnett, Pierce, etc have enough great games to carry us.   You must have forgotten what it was like before we had Rondo and the Big 3!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGBeast. Show KGBeast's posts

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    In Response to Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost:
    In Response to Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost : Wow - tough assessment, man.  Name more than 2 or 3 players who play well EVERY game.   Everyone has good and bad games.  I worry that people get too down on the C's when they lose and too high on them when they play like tonight.    Its the NBA - on any given night, ANY team can be hot or cold.  Games can be ugly but the Sixers played a game where they hung in there in Game 2 and they won ugly.  I consider that playing well.    Don't get too down on Rondo and trade a guy who's one of our best 3 players just because he has a bad game every few games.   We are where we are because he, Garnett, Pierce, etc have enough great games to carry us.   You must have forgotten what it was like before we had Rondo and the Big 3!
    Posted by Celtsfan4life



    This. I totally agree with you. I hate those who are trigger happy on trading Rondo. I still stand by my assessment that we lost due to Rondo, but no way do I trade him because of a bad game. Rondo, usually plays on a different level when he needs to, when his team needs him to. Yes consistency matters, but when you have a superstar (yes, Rondo is a superstar, no doubt) you can't expect the guy to play to their full potential every single game. Rondo's game is special. And, I'll take superstar talent over consistent mediocrity any day of the week.

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

    Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost

    In Response to Re: If you want to reduce it to one thing, why we lost:
    Jammy Locks - I don't know why you and the illiterate squad of secret Celtics bashers on this board spread so much hate. I'm talking about reducing it to one thing. Obviously multiple factors go into every game. But if I had to change one thing in game 2, it would have been a fully engaged Rondo. Yes, Bass missed, a lot. I place a lot of blame on Doc's lack of in-game adjustments. But I stand by my analysis. So you can suck it britch!
    Posted by KGBeast


    You can hang onto your pacifier baby doll because it is quite obvious I was informing such ignorance that one cannot reduce a lost game to one player, which is entirely unfair.  You must be quite the ho ho ho to take it in the rear so often.  Congrats!


    As Always,


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share