GAME 1 : Celtics vs Hawks - Sunday, April 20th

SeizeCoup · Post #281 » by **SeizeCoup** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:04 pm

Well played ParicleMan, I couldn't have said it better myself.

JoshB914 · Post #282 » by **JoshB914** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:32 pm

Who cares if the C's "bought" anyone. You have to pay the bucks if you want to win titles.

I've seen you guys play one playoff game, and I am almost certain that you will be NBA Champions.

IonSen88 · Post #283 » by **IonSen88** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:45 pm

cfan79 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

We didn't buy a title. We traded Big Al Jefferson (who is better then anyone on their roster), picks, cap space and a solid roleplayer (Gomes). He must have mistaken us for the Lakers. Who bought shaq and later traded next to nothing for Gasol.

I didn't say you bought a title. In fact, I don't even have a problem with someone buying a championship. I want a championship so bad I don't care if the Hawks stole it! What I was saying is that we could've jumped the gun but we're taking the slower approach and I think we'll be better later on because of it.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #284 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 7:52 pm

^^Exactly. It is the rare team that doesn't pay big bucks that can win it all or even compete.

IonSen88 · Post #285 » by **IonSen88** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:15 pm

Joebiscuit wrote:How long can you hold on to the "We are in better shape for the future argument?" You have no idea how well these players will continue to play and you have no idea if these people will end up being stars. They could be traded, end up being busts, or resign elsewhere. Just look at the bulls, they have been stockpiling players in the draft for years yet they are still not even close to being a contender.

So in other words you're saying I can't make the assumption that Boston will be due for a rebuilding process after the departure of Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce because anything can happen? If so, you can't assume you'll win another playoff game because Garnett can get ran over by a Peterbilt and Paul Pierce may drink a soda laced with cyanide.

Your assumption that you'll continue to kick our ass is based on this season's performance (which is fair), and my assumption is based on their ages and the typical transition period that takes place after stars leave.

IonSen88 · Post #286 » by **IonSen88** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:17 pm

MyInsatiableOne wrote:^^Exactly. It is the rare team that doesn't pay big bucks that can win it all or even compete.

I agree, and in addition to that (as I said before), it takes some very good coaching to even mesh that talent into a cohesive unit.

TommyPoints · Post #287 » by **TommyPoints** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:45 pm

You can't buy a title in sports if there is a salary cap.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #288 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 8:47 pm

CelticGamecock wrote:You can't buy a title in sports if there is a salary cap.

True...although there have been some rumblings of "creative accounting" or the league looking the other way with some teams (I seem to remember the 2000-era Lakers getting away with some **** like this).

But baseball is the only sport you can really *BUY* a title, and even then, the players have to go out and play, don't they? (Case in the point, the Yankees, who haven't won **** in 8 years and counting!)

TommyPoints · Post #289 » by **TommyPoints** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:15 pm

MyInsatiableOne wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

True...although there have been some rumblings of "creative accounting" or the league looking the other way with some teams (I seem to remember the 2000-era Lakers getting away with some **** like this).

But baseball is the only sport you can really *BUY* a title, and even then, the players have to go out and play, don't they? (Case in the point, the Yankees, who haven't won **** in 8 years and counting!)

Yeah, you definitely have to have the right players/coaches and can't just win by throwing money around, but even as a Sox fan I have to admit that is an advantage. At least with a salary cap you are on a fairly even playing field though. It is difficult to build a championship level team in the NBA and a lot of factors go into it. I think the big 3 and C's period have a bigger window than people have been giving them. Rosters will change and young players will improve.

eris · Post #290 » by **eris** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 9:50 pm

What happened on the bench near the end of the game? It looked like Perk was mad at Rondo for something. He stood up and was giving Rondo that look he has. Then later in the after game interview KG was commenting that everything wasn't "peaches and cream" all the time and that Pierce and Allen were having a "disagreement" on the bench during the game.

Does anyone know what was going on?

Post #291 » by **SuperDeluxe** » Mon Apr 21, 2008 11:41 pm

IonSen88 wrote:So in other words you're saying I can't make the assumption that Boston will be due for a rebuilding process after the departure of Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce because anything can happen?

Have you ever heard of the concept "huge expiring contract"? The contracts of Allen, Pierce and Garnett expire one per year (take a look here). If the player doesn't have any more gas in the tank, you trade him to a rebuilding team right before the All Star break. If he still has something in the tank, you resign him to a more friendly contract. Worst case scenario: the three deals expire one by one and the Celtics get cap space to sign three top free agents.

Joebiscuit · Post #292 » by **Joebiscuit** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:39 am

IonSen88 wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

So in other words you're saying I can't make the assumption that Boston will be due for a rebuilding process after the departure of Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce because anything can happen? If so, you can't assume you'll win another playoff game because Garnett can get ran over by a Peterbilt and Paul Pierce may drink a soda laced with cyanide.

You can go by that assumption if you would like just as I can go under the assumption that you guys will continue to rebuild because:

Your draft picks will not bring your team to the next level.
You draft picks will leave once their contract is up.
The hawks owners continue to make poor draft picks.

You can be happy with your continuing rebuilding process that may not work and I can be happy with where the Celtics are right now.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #293 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Tue Apr 22, 2008 12:50 pm

CelticGamecock wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

Yeah, you definitely have to have the right players/coaches and can't just win by throwing money around, but even as a Sox fan I have to admit that is an advantage. At least with a salary cap you are on a fairly even playing field though. It is difficult to build a championship level team in the NBA and a lot of factors go into it. I think the big 3 and C's period have a bigger window than people have been giving them. Rosters will change and young players will improve.

Also, free agents will probably be more likely to come to Boston to play with Pierce, Allen, and Garnett, and can then replace them when these guys retire/leave. Once a culture of excellence and winning is established (like it was back in the day), everyone will want to come to Boston to play.