Printable View
Of course their 5-0 or whatever winning streak looks good, but look how far that got Phx and Dallas last year with their 17 game streaks. Plus that was in the West too. I doubt Boston sustains this for long...no doubt they have major talent, but they have yet to go against a "contender" and I think once teams see more of them, it will be easier to see how to beat them.
Also, every single team in the NBA hits a snag during the year. I want to see how the Celtics respond to the inevitable snag that they hit later on.
Also I always find that the most hyped team never wins (i.e. Phx, Dallas last year). We will continue to be behind the scenes, que all the "getting old" "never repeated" talks, but in the end, it will be spurs 07.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ludda
Umm, both teams won at least 61 games last year.
The question is not if they will win the championship....that is absurd. The question is if they will break a record that I thought the Spurs would hold for a very long time, and I love that record and do not want it broken.Quote:
Originally Posted by ludda
BTW, the Spurs held that record until 98 in TD's rookie year when his Spurs team broke DRob and his Spurs team's record of 35 games improved in DRob's rookie year.
Premature ejaculation forum.
Both of those teams also have a core of players that have been together for a while, too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimcs50
I would also remind peeps that in spite of it being an easy conference, no team won even 55 games in the EC last year. You still have to play 30 games, home and home, against the West. A quick look to last year has Detroit, the 1 seed, at 36-16 in the EC but only 17-13 against the West.
Quote:
Originally Posted by exstatic
Detroit was not good at all last year...bad example.
exstatic, the West is not deep this year, there are at least 8-10 teams that Boston can sweep without any problems. Boston already stomped a Denver team that some picked to win their division in preseason. Also remember Boston spit with SA last year and almost swept us, as we had to win in last minute.
I am not a Boston fan, but their offense is unstoppable. They are shooting almost 53% from the field and they defense is much improved. KG is playing like an MVP and Ray Allen is shooting the ball better than anyone in the league. I think it will be close.
I don't think Boston's offense is unstoppable. They didn't play good defense teams yet. Actually, I think their offense is disorganized. Most is about individual ability.
Do you guys pay attention to their play MIN? I doubt they can insist it for the whole season.
R.Allen G 48:00 7-17 4-8 9-10 +11 2 8 10 5 1 0 3 0 1 27
K.Garnett F 42:50 5-14 0-0 8-8 +10 2 12 14 6 3 3 2 1 2 18
P.Pierce F 40:08 9-19 4-7 6-8 +16 0 3 3 4 2 2 2 0 1 28
The only reason why they look so good is because they're in a crappy conference. If they were in the west they wouldn't get into the top 3 spots, they're just not that good. And even for being in the east, they won't get 61 wins, I'll give them 58.
Yeah, but in all honesty, DRob's is the better turnaround, considering the Spurs tanked because of Admiral only playing 6 games before TD came onto the scene. At that point getting Admiral back was worth 28-30 games in itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimcs50
Don't the Spurs also have the record slide for that year Robinson was out?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve-O-Matic
61 wins is not out of reach at all for Boston.
While Ray Allen playing the whole game is a bit over the top, I don't think minutes will be that much of a problem for any of them. The one I'd be most concerned with would be KG because he'll take the most banging on his body being the main low post guy. But, KG has always been in great condition to handle big minutes. And, all three of them are used to playing big minutes. Plus, they will have plenty of games where they blow out teams and rest their three stars for much of the fourth quarter. And, with those three stars, they aren't facing the double and triple teams that they're used to facing, and they don't need to dominate the ball offensively, so their minutes aren't as stressful. It's like a pitcher in baseball where 100 pitches with only about 15 high stress pitches for a starting pitcher isn't nearly as hard on the arm as 85 pitches with 40 high stress pitches are.Quote:
Originally Posted by meta2007
Doc should definitely start to monitor their minutes as the season gets into the grind, but I don't think it will be that much of an issue. I'm sure Doc and Ainge and the players all want to get to the best start they can. So when they rack up a few losses and also incorporate some of the younger guys more, I would expect their minutes to go down a bit.
ITA. This honeymoon will end at some point and that's what is going to speak volumes about whether or not this team is the real deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by SRJ
As far as the record goes, if I had to make a bet at this moment I'll say no. And I'll freely admit that it has as much to do with how little I like Ray Allen as anything else.
Not a chance to make it. They will start off hot, then will hit a huge snag mid season. People will figure out how to play this team and all 3 will be burned out mid season.
maybe 50-55 and thats giving way to much credit.
Could they? Sure. They could conceivably hit 61 games. They've got some major talent on that team. There are a lot of ifs out there, health, snags, etc. But it's absolutely in the realm of probability.
Now, the real question to me - if they break the record, is it more impressive than the Spurs turnover or not?
On one hand, there is wide-spread belief the Spurs tanked the season in order to try for Tim Duncan. And of course, regardless of Tim Duncan - getting DRob back in good health was automatically going to make them a better team.
On the other hand, it is taking the import of 2 players plus the guy who performed previously for Boston to make the same impact made by 1 new player and 1 returning player. And there are the potential arguments of conference advantage.
All I know for certain is that I am looking forward to playing the Celtics, and would not mind (in theory) a Spurs/Celtics finals.
everything is happy right now in boston they are winning
what happens when they go out west and lose 2 -3 straight games
does paul start demanding the ball
I think it will come very close but no cigar
Hell, I think Boston will win 70 games. They look dominant. Nobody can get within 12 pts of them, much less beat them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimcs50
come on now, they play in the east.
I thought Tim Cowlishaw's quote about Boston was funny: "The Celtics would be the fourth best team in Texas."
The Boston Celtics are tied for the best six-game stretch in sports history.
With their biggest win coming against a 5-3 Nuggets team that was coming off of a back-to-back.Quote:
Originally Posted by Extra Stout
Seriously, Boston would be what, a #5 seed in the West? A 6 if Utah can keep playing like they're playing?
if that boston team fails to win at least 60 games then they fail as a team, they play against eastern teams 4 times each in a weak east conference compared to western teams who be happy just to win a game against the powerhouse teams in the west....
even if they win 60 games, i hope they get trashed in the first round and get sweep out of the playoffs