Smithers wrote:celtics beat the Wiz in 7, so it's not like it was an overly convincing series win...& honestly Washington should've won that series. Boston added Hayward who's obviously a nice piece but we don't know how he's going to fit in there & the loss of Bradley is huge. Washington is a better put together team & I think their guys are still young enough but mature enough to take the next step. Boston is still a few years away.
Celtics: beat wizards with an injured thomas.
Wizards: lost in 7 games against celtics.
Game 1: celtics win, celtics deserved it
Game 2: celtics win, wizards deserved it.
Game 3: wizards win, wizards deserved it
Game 4: wizards win, wizards deserved it
Game 5: celtics win, celtics deserved it.
Game 6: wizards win: celtics deserved it.
Game 7: celtics win, celtics deserved it.
Celtics was better in 4 games. So no, wizards should not have won the series. Celtics deserved the win.
Young and Mature thing
The main celtics players have a similar age to wizards's. Just check it.
Celtics: are rather better unless thomas's injury makes him rather worse.
Wizards: are slightly better, they got some decent bench players, the lack of depth was one of their main weaknesses.
So how can you say something like "Boston is still a few years away"? Makes no sense. I can understand if you say celtics and wizards are still in the same tier, but "Boston is still a few years away"? WTH.