View Full Version : Did anyone notice that the old Celtics destroyed the young, spry Bulls last n0ght?
In case you missed the box score or Sportscenter, the Celtics with such front line relics as Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Rasheed Wallace beat down the Chicago Bulls by 28 points.
Why mention it? Because the Celtics are every bit as "old" as the Spurs and yet they pounded the young, athletic Bulls. Funny how the "athletic" and "young" Bulls couldn't out energize the Celtics. Maybe they were outrebounded, and out defended because they (Bulls) were playing the second game of a back to back or maybe they didn't have the adrenaline of playing in the home opener. Once the Spurs have their regular season legs, I expect them to dominate in the regular season and play very well in the playoffs.
Also, why are people complaining about Bonner and Finley starting? Isn't that the same lineup that was tied for 2nd in the Western Conference last year? Maybe Pop is playing the players with the best experience and understanding of the system to try and win early games while allowing the newcomers to learn the system in reserve roles. If Antonio deserves to start by midseason, he will be. And maybe if Pop does want to trade Bonner/Finley, he has to play them to get any value (I'm sure Golden State is just dying to trade Stephen Jackson so they can get Finley and Bonner on their roster).
ace3g
10-31-2009, 02:27 PM
Spurs playing a back to back game, Bulls first game of the season
then Celtics who had a couple of days rest, played the Bulls who were on the 2nd game of a B2B
Spursfan092120
10-31-2009, 02:28 PM
I take a lot into effect that it was the Bulls first game of the season..they were pumped, excited, and ready for the new season...
EmptyMan
10-31-2009, 02:34 PM
Celtics top 5 can all dominate 1 on 1 against their defender.
Sick sick team.
DPG21920
10-31-2009, 02:41 PM
Guys, this is another troll.
Amuseddaysleeper
10-31-2009, 03:09 PM
The Celtics are a million light years ahead of the Spurs defensively right now.
But still, we're only 2 games into the season.
TIMMYD!
10-31-2009, 03:30 PM
they weren't playing a back to back and the bulls were.
DPG21920
10-31-2009, 03:48 PM
they weren't playing a back to back and the bulls were.
Quit responding to the troll like it is a real person, you will learn to regret it.
daslicer
10-31-2009, 04:21 PM
Easy answer to that question which is Perkins,Ray Allen>Finley,Bonner. They have two legit starters while the spurs have two legit bench players playing as starters.
TIMMYD!
10-31-2009, 04:23 PM
so he's really a troll
bbarry
10-31-2009, 05:08 PM
moron.... celtics played at home in their home-opener... against a bulls that was on a 2nd game of a b2b
bulls played on their home-opener... against a spurs team that was on a 2nd game of a b2b.
that's the difference here. most teams aren't good on 2nd games of b2b
DPG21920
10-31-2009, 05:09 PM
so he's really a troll
Yes. You can tell bc there has already been numerous threads like this and it is being done just to rile people up.
td4mvp21
10-31-2009, 05:10 PM
Celtics are better than the Spurs.
easy7
10-31-2009, 05:11 PM
Like someone who said something similar in the start of another thread... I thought the Bulls were good. :lmao
HarlemHeat37
10-31-2009, 06:29 PM
I'm not responding to the troll, but to the Spurs fans that will panic..
-Celtics got outrebounded on the offensive glass by a significant margin, just like we did..
-Celtics held the Bulls to a similar shooting % that we held them to the same game..
-Celtics shot the same amount of FTs that we did..
-Chicago was on a back-to-back..
Celtics lived and died by the 3, and they succeeded by it, just like we do a lot of the time..
With that being said, Boston is obviously the better team right now, but they also only added 1 or 2 players to the team, while we added 5 new players and have to account for the increase of minutes for Manu(since he was out) and Hill this season..
peskypesky
10-31-2009, 06:34 PM
troll
I'm not responding to the troll, but to the Spurs fans that will panic..
-Celtics got outrebounded on the offensive glass by a significant margin, just like we did..
-Celtics held the Bulls to a similar shooting % that we held them to the same game..
-Celtics shot the same amount of FTs that we did..
-Chicago was on a back-to-back..
Celtics lived and died by the 3, and they succeeded by it, just like we do a lot of the time..
With that being said, Boston is obviously the better team right now, but they also only added 1 or 2 players to the team, while we added 5 new players and have to account for the increase of minutes for Manu(since he was out) and Hill this season..
The #1 difference wasn't the three point shooting %; that was the result of the difference. The #1 difference was the assists. Rondo alone had more assists against Chicago than the entire Spurs team did. Overall they moved the ball for 33 assists. (They also outrebounded the Bulls.)
Also in response to one of the posts above, it wasn't the Celtics home opener. That was against Charlotte in the second night of a back to back for Boston who held the Bobcats to 59 points.
Agloco
10-31-2009, 10:15 PM
In case you missed the box score or Sportscenter, the Celtics with such front line relics as Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, and Rasheed Wallace beat down the Chicago Bulls by 28 points.
Why mention it? Because the Celtics are every bit as "old" as the Spurs and yet they pounded the young, athletic Bulls. Funny how the "athletic" and "young" Bulls couldn't out energize the Celtics. Maybe they were outrebounded, and out defended because they (Bulls) were playing the second game of a back to back or maybe they didn't have the adrenaline of playing in the home opener. Once the Spurs have their regular season legs, I expect them to dominate in the regular season and play very well in the playoffs.
Also, why are people complaining about Bonner and Finley starting? Isn't that the same lineup that was tied for 2nd in the Western Conference last year? Maybe Pop is playing the players with the best experience and understanding of the system to try and win early games while allowing the newcomers to learn the system in reserve roles. If Antonio deserves to start by midseason, he will be. And maybe if Pop does want to trade Bonner/Finley, he has to play them to get any value (I'm sure Golden State is just dying to trade Stephen Jackson so they can get Finley and Bonner on their roster).
You mention it because you didn't consider the circumstances surrounding each game. A wonderfully shallow analysis. :rolleyes
Agloco
10-31-2009, 10:17 PM
The #1 difference wasn't the three point shooting %; that was the result of the difference. The #1 difference was the assists. Rondo alone had more assists against Chicago than the entire Spurs team did. Overall they moved the ball for 33 assists. (They also outrebounded the Bulls.)
Also in response to one of the posts above, it wasn't the Celtics home opener. That was against Charlotte in the second night of a back to back for Boston who held the Bobcats to 59 points.
You have a "chicken and the egg" problem with your logic here. In order to get an assist, you must first do what?
BillMc
11-01-2009, 07:05 AM
Celtics ARE better than the Spurs right now, but will they be by the end of the season? I don't believe so, but we'll see...
You have a "chicken and the egg" problem with your logic here. In order to get an assist, you must first do what?
The chicken came first. The Celtics moved the ball crisply, hit guys in their sweet spots (and had the luxury of throwing the ball to Ray Allen instead of Michael Finley).
They're not gong to shoot 50% from 3 regularly, but they tore the Bulls up everywhere except giving up offensive boards. The Spurs had an abnormally rough night and had troubles in lots of places- passing, shooting, and rebounding on both ends. Another big difference was Parker had a sub par game (in part because of the Bulls scheme) and Rondo was terrific.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.