Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

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

    Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    But since that is what Danny has done, here's my thoughts...

    Jeff Green should have the same plays as Pierce.

    Nenad should have the same plays as K.G.

    Troy should run the plays we had for Sheed also K.G.

    Pavlov's dog should run Ray Allen's plays.
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from caesarthecat. Show caesarthecat's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    yes
    but compared to 2 weeks ago what did we loose defensively ? "only" perkins
    krstic defensively can be worth at, say, 60% perkins

    but jeff green vs marquis ? pavlovic vs nate ? harangody vs murphy ?

    from last year, yes we lost tony allen & perkins that's much defensively I agree
    let's say that we've lost some defensive boost from the bench by tony allen, yes that's not been replaced

    offensively we're better by far I believe
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    Our defense has been pretty good all year without Perk... hard to explain that away.

    Also, we've done that missing many, many other players in the lineup.

    So, how good does our D become if/when Shaq, JON and the new guys get back in the lineup??

    To me, its pretty clear that KG is what makes the defense click.  Without him healthy, we couldnt control the frontline vs the Lakers last year (with PERK)

    Now KG is back and our defense has been near the top of the league all season...without PERK. Kinda makes a case of who really makes it happen.

    OK, before you go nuts about Perk this & that, we're gonna miss the things he did do well, like taking on DH etc.  However, the more I look at this, the more I think we're not going to miss Perk as much as I thought. In fact, I think we're better off the way things turned out.  BOth Green & Kristic add tremendously to our offense compared to what Perk gave us.

    Way better off.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from concord27. Show concord27's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    Jeff Green can play defense.  Watching Troy Murphy last night I hope he can still  play offense.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from CHEisCHE. Show CHEisCHE's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    your'e wrong..........

    I will take a balance team than
        offensive or defensive team....
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from scubber. Show scubber's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    Aside for Orlando, I think we are better off defensively in the playoff.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from PACelt. Show PACelt's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    25-3 when we score 100 pts.  And 20-12 when we don't.  Which odds would you rather play???

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

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    In Response to Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics:
    Our defense has been pretty good all year without Perk... hard to explain that away. Also, we've done that missing many, many other players in the lineup. So, how good does our D become if/when Shaq, JON and the new guys get back in the lineup?? To me, its pretty clear that KG is what makes the defense click.  Without him healthy, we couldnt control the frontline vs the Lakers last year (with PERK) Now KG is back and our defense has been near the top of the league all season...without PERK. Kinda makes a case of who really makes it happen. OK, before you go nuts about Perk this & that, we're gonna miss the things he did do well, like taking on DH etc.  However, the more I look at this, the more I think we're not going to miss Perk as much as I thought. In fact, I think we're better off the way things turned out.  BOth Green & Kristic add tremendously to our offense compared to what Perk gave us. Way better off.
    Posted by Karllost

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

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    In Response to Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics:
    yes but compared to 2 weeks ago what did we loose defensively ? "only" perkins krstic defensively can be worth at, say, 60% perkins but jeff green vs marquis ? pavlovic vs nate ? harangody vs murphy ? from last year, yes we lost tony allen & perkins that's much defensively I agree let's say that we've lost some defensive boost from the bench by tony allen, yes that's not been replaced offensively we're better by far I believe
    Posted by caesarthecat

    Would be very difficult to win #18 when a offensive game was 3 against five.Have you noticed the spacing on the offensive end? Rondo will have a ball with assists  penetration scoring.I,m happy got his money.Good lucky Perky.D,ont forget to come and get your ring after the seasson.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    I think the fact that Perk was a big log limbering up the court was a bigger problem than I noticed, but he is always the last one up the floor, they disguised this or adjusted to this by having him set the high screen as he approached the top of the key.

    Now contrast that to either baby or Kristic running the floor now, and you see much more scoring in transition cuz the 5 is beating his man up the floor which will either a.) give him a layup, or B.) give someone else a layup by beating people up the court

    To be honest only thing I will miss is his toughness, and his ability to get the outlet pass out quick...other than that, its an upgrade IMO....our offense has been flowing nicely
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Getzo. Show Getzo's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    Perk played 12 games, and Celts are number 1 defense....

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

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    In Response to Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics:
    But since that is what Danny has done, here's my thoughts... Jeff Green should have the same plays as Pierce. Nenad should have the same plays as K.G. Troy should run the plays we had for Sheed also K.G. Pavlov's dog should run Ray Allen's plays.
    Posted by DaCeltics


    Step 1 - do I have brown eyes?

    Step 2 - if I answer yes to step 1, check to see where head is located

    Step 3 - is head in bum?

    Step 4 - if yes, pull head out......

    The Cs scored 79 points in game 7 last year and two thirds of the league scores more than them.  When the Cs play a good defensive team the offense is terrible, stagnant, and it points to Rondo but that is another story.

    Last time they played the Bulls 70 points, last time they played the Lakers less than 90, last couple of times they played the Heat less than 90.  The only time that I can remember them playing a team that I would consider a contender and they scored more than a 100 was Dallas.

    The team has traditionally played 3 against 5 with Perk and Rondo in the starting 5 and the explanation has been that they don't need them to score as long as they play their roles, well unless of course you score 79 points and lose a title.

    It was imperative to add some scoring especially since Rondo has done absolutely nothing to improve his scoring ability.

    When they brought the big 3 together everyone said other teams will have "to pick their poison", the reality of it is they didn't need to guard two of the starting 5 and it took Posey, House, and PJ Brown to keep them close in a lot of games in the playoffs. 

    The point guard cannot be on the floor in the 4th quarter and D West would have solved that problem but he has not been able to stay healthy.

    As they progress through the rest of the season and into the playoffs there will actually be a scorer off the bench (Green) and a starting center or two that can actually participate in the offense (Shaq and Krstic).

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    The Celtics rebounding also improved after Perk was traded. Go figure.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from TeamUmbutu. Show TeamUmbutu's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    ... and the reality is somewhere in between.

    We will not know if Perkins will be missed until after the play-offs. Where he may be missed, is against big powerful front courts, like Orlando, and LA.

    Statistics lie when not taken in the right context.

    It was the defensive rebounding more than anything, that hurt the Celtics in game seven. With a healthy Perk and KG, the game is different. The Celtics won three game in the finals with Perk playing, just as many as the Lakers, before he was injured. This year, KG is back so I won't worry about Gasol, lets hope that Bynum is not the series MVP if we play the Lakers.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from TheDUDDER. Show TheDUDDER's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    In Response to Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics:
    ... and the reality is somewhere in between. We will not know if Perkins will be missed until after the play-offs. Where he may be missed, is against big powerful front courts, like Orlando, and LA. Statistics lie when not taken in the right context. It was the defensive rebounding more than anything, that hurt the Celtics in game seven. With a healthy Perk and KG, the game is different. The Celtics won three game in the finals with Perk playing, just as many as the Lakers, before he was injured. This year, KG is back so I won't worry about Gasol, lets hope that Bynum is not the series MVP if we play the Lakers.
    Posted by TeamUmbutu



    In game one Bynum was not 100% but had 21 points, 14 boards, and 7 blocks and was obviously nowhere near himself after that.  He was probably at 30% after game 1.  If he were anywhere near 100% during the series there would have been no game 6 or game 7.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Trading Defense for Offense is wrong for these Celtics

    Against the Lakers this season, when the Celts were scoring and playing well on offense the Celts won in LA. But when the Celts struggled on offense in the rematch at Boston the Celts lost. Just like in Game 7 of the 2010 Finals, when the Celtics couldn't score in the 4th qtr. If the Celts are going to beat the Lakers they need to beat the Lakers on the offensive end. No defense is going to stop the Lakers because they have Kobe. 
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share