Around the NBA '17-'18 Season (Non-Celtics Talk)

[London2Boston]

Wizards are terrible.

What? Everyone tells me they are Cleveland's main completion though..

[Darth Celtic]

well, if the cavs were afraid to face the wiz, the heat sure arent

[Darth Celtic]

Austin Rivers is just terrible at basketball. He should try customer service, maybe telemarketing instead.

[Jakeopp]

Wall with a goose egg after 3 quarters

[Slax]

I'm not really sure where to write this, but here goes...

Does anyone else feel like we as NBA fans have unlearned the lessons of the 2004 Pistons and the 2014 Spurs, two teams with balanced rosters and incredible defenses that brought down two of the most prominent superteams since the turn of the century? There seems to be a widespread presumption that the concentration of talent on the Warriors represents a sort of fundamental discontinuity between 2014 and today that made it impossible to build a contender with a well-balanced defense-oriented roster, because it's impossible to defend more than one or two great players at a time, and that the only way to win now is to acquire more star players to outscore the Warriors much like the Rockets and Thunder tried to do over the offseason. But what if that analysis is fundamentally flawed? What if the Warriors, even with all their talent, can still be consistently slowed down by a great defense, and the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that nobody has put together the right mix of talent and coaching to do it? Now, I don't think the Celtics are yet at a point where they have a realistic shot of beating the Warriors in a seven-game series; in fact, I'm struggling to even come to grips with the idea that they might be among the top three teams in the league without Hayward. But at the same time, I also wonder if I'm being overly narrow-minded about that. Nobody really thought the Pistons were in position to win a championship even after the Sheed trade. Why can't the Celtics be like the Pistons or Spurs - perhaps with the help of some development from Brown and Tatum over the course of the season, and with a small trade or buyout acquisition to bolster their roster? This is obviously super premature with such a small sample size, and in actuality I expect our defense to slide a bit back toward the pack in a way that could make this discussion moot. But if the Celtics do end the season with 60+ wins and the second or third best point differential in the league on the basis of a historically great defense and an improved offense, do we still say there's no way they can get lucky and knock off whoever comes out of the western conference?

[LarryBirdsFingr]

I'm not really sure where to write this, but here goes...

Does anyone else feel like we as NBA fans have unlearned the lessons of the 2004 Pistons and the 2014 Spurs, two teams with balanced rosters and incredible defenses that brought down two of the most prominent superteams since the turn of the century? There seems to be a widespread presumption that the concentration of talent on the Warriors represents a sort of fundamental discontinuity between 2014 and today that made it impossible to build a contender with a well-balanced defense-oriented roster, because it's impossible to defend more than one or two great players at a time, and that the only way to win now is to acquire more star players to outscore the Warriors much like the Rockets and Thunder tried to do over the offseason. But what if that analysis is fundamentally flawed? What if the Warriors, even with all their talent, can still be consistently slowed down by a great defense, and the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that nobody has put together the right mix of talent and coaching to do it? Now, I don't think the Celtics are yet at a point where they have a realistic shot of beating the Warriors in a seven-game series; in fact, I'm struggling to even come to grips with the idea that they might be among the top three teams in the league without Hayward. But at the same time, I also wonder if I'm being overly narrow-minded about that. Nobody really thought the Pistons were in position to win a championship even after the Sheed trade. Why can't the Celtics be like the Pistons or Spurs - perhaps with the help of some development from Brown and Tatum over the course of the season, and with a small trade or buyout acquisition to bolster their roster? This is obviously super premature with such a small sample size, and in actuality I expect our defense to slide a bit back toward the pack in a way that could make this discussion moot. But if the Celtics do end the season with 60+ wins and the second or third best point differential in the league on the basis of a historically great defense and an improved offense, do we still say there's no way they can get lucky and knock off whoever comes out of the western conference?

This is the best thing I've read in weeks

[ViperGTS]

Cavs tied with with 20secs to go.

[ViperGTS]

Blake with the choke job.

[Slax]

Cavs-Clippers going to OT.

[BigTrade92]

I get that Tommy's officiating complaints may be too "homer-ific" for non-Celtics fans, but the Cavs announce team is absolutely brutal to listen to....

Their play-by-play guy goes absolutely nuts every time someone makes even the slightest of plays and the color guy just mumbles the whole time and repeats the play-by-play guy's cheesy lines....woof.....I'd go crazy having to listen to them for 82 games.....

Thank god for Mike and Tommy.

[ViperGTS]

Cavs win another one they should have lost. Team is a joke.

[3D Chess]

Some BS going down at the end of this Spurs OKC game.

[Darth Celtic]

Wall with a goose egg after 3 quarters

best gaurd in the east

[ParticleMan]

I'm not really sure where to write this, but here goes...

Does anyone else feel like we as NBA fans have unlearned the lessons of the 2004 Pistons and the 2014 Spurs, two teams with balanced rosters and incredible defenses that brought down two of the most prominent superteams since the turn of the century? There seems to be a widespread presumption that the concentration of talent on the Warriors represents a sort of fundamental discontinuity between 2014 and today that made it impossible to build a contender with a well-balanced defense-oriented roster, because it's impossible to defend more than one or two great players at a time, and that the only way to win now is to acquire more star players to outscore the Warriors much like the Rockets and Thunder tried to do over the offseason. But what if that analysis is fundamentally flawed? What if the Warriors, even with all their talent, can still be consistently slowed down by a great defense, and the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that nobody has put together the right mix of talent and coaching to do it? Now, I don't think the Celtics are yet at a point where they have a realistic shot of beating the Warriors in a seven-game series; in fact, I'm struggling to even come to grips with the idea that they might be among the top three teams in the league without Hayward. But at the same time, I also wonder if I'm being overly narrow-minded about that. Nobody really thought the Pistons were in position to win a championship even after the Sheed trade. Why can't the Celtics be like the Pistons or Spurs - perhaps with the help of some development from Brown and Tatum over the course of the season, and with a small trade or buyout acquisition to bolster their roster? This is obviously super premature with such a small sample size, and in actuality I expect our defense to slide a bit back toward the pack in a way that could make this discussion moot. But if the Celtics do end the season with 60+ wins and the second or third best point differential in the league on the basis of a historically great defense and an improved offense, do we still say there's no way they can get lucky and knock off whoever comes out of the western conference?

way to channel your inner ainge! this is spot on.

this is what danny has been setting up all along... a tall, athletic defensive-minded team where there is maybe only 1 superstar but everyone on the floor can score and they share the ball.

i'm kind of stunned how quickly we've achieved the first part of that. now we just need to improve our offensive flow, and maybe phase out guys who simply can't score *cough*marcus*cough*. also getting GH back will dramatically improve our flow.

this may not be our year but next year, with hayward replacing morris, i definitely think we have a shot. even if the W's/cavs/whoever don't regress.

[76ciology]

I'm not really sure where to write this, but here goes...

Does anyone else feel like we as NBA fans have unlearned the lessons of the 2004 Pistons and the 2014 Spurs, two teams with balanced rosters and incredible defenses that brought down two of the most prominent superteams since the turn of the century? There seems to be a widespread presumption that the concentration of talent on the Warriors represents a sort of fundamental discontinuity between 2014 and today that made it impossible to build a contender with a well-balanced defense-oriented roster, because it's impossible to defend more than one or two great players at a time, and that the only way to win now is to acquire more star players to outscore the Warriors much like the Rockets and Thunder tried to do over the offseason. But what if that analysis is fundamentally flawed? What if the Warriors, even with all their talent, can still be consistently slowed down by a great defense, and the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that nobody has put together the right mix of talent and coaching to do it? Now, I don't think the Celtics are yet at a point where they have a realistic shot of beating the Warriors in a seven-game series; in fact, I'm struggling to even come to grips with the idea that they might be among the top three teams in the league without Hayward. But at the same time, I also wonder if I'm being overly narrow-minded about that. Nobody really thought the Pistons were in position to win a championship even after the Sheed trade. Why can't the Celtics be like the Pistons or Spurs - perhaps with the help of some development from Brown and Tatum over the course of the season, and with a small trade or buyout acquisition to bolster their roster? This is obviously super premature with such a small sample size, and in actuality I expect our defense to slide a bit back toward the pack in a way that could make this discussion moot. But if the Celtics do end the season with 60+ wins and the second or third best point differential in the league on the basis of a historically great defense and an improved offense, do we still say there's no way they can get lucky and knock off whoever comes out of the western conference?

way to channel your inner ainge! this is spot on.

this is what danny has been setting up all along... a tall, athletic defensive-minded team where there is maybe only 1 superstar but everyone on the floor can score and they share the ball.

i'm kind of stunned how quickly we've achieved the first part of that. now we just need to improve our offensive flow, and maybe phase out guys who simply can't score *cough*marcus*cough*. also getting GH back will dramatically improve our flow.

this may not be our year but next year, with hayward replacing morris, i definitely think we have a shot. even if the W's/cavs/whoever don't regress.

Not saying it cant be done. Defending used to be close to impossible when this era of pace and space was starting out. Teams are slowly trending to play multiposition D with heavy switching. I think Celts are on top of that with Warriors in this regard. There's a window to execute it similar to how Pistons and Spurs did it before.

Man.. Ainge is a genius. He got assets to mold the team into a team that embodies all the things Celts learned in the play-offs. Very good 3pt shooting matters.. Good offensive system matters.. ISO scoring matters.. Ability to defend multiple position matters.. Right now Celts are playing the right way. The amount of time it took to get chemistry was impressive

[Hybrid Shadow]

Watch on YouTube

Didn't see this posted anywhere. I know he's no longer playing for the Cs and I'm fully in love with our team now with Kyrie at the helm, but man I will never stop having love for that man. He's got so much heart and the things he did for this team the last few years were so damn special. Celtic for life.

[BannerStatus]

Watch on YouTube

Didn't see this posted anywhere. I know he's no longer playing for the Cs and I'm fully in love with our team now with Kyrie at the helm, but man I will never stop having love for that man. He's got so much heart and the things he did for this team the last few years were so damn special. Celtic for life.

I'll always love the guy, but I've had just about enough of IT for a while. I need a break from all things IT. We'll see you in the spring, bro.

[BRUNiNHO91]

I get that Tommy's officiating complaints may be too "homer-ific" for non-Celtics fans, but the Cavs announce team is absolutely brutal to listen to....

Their play-by-play guy goes absolutely nuts every time someone makes even the slightest of plays and the color guy just mumbles the whole time and repeats the play-by-play guy's cheesy lines....woof.....I'd go crazy having to listen to them for 82 games.....

Thank god for Mike and Tommy.

'Ohh LeBron James deeeeep in the Q'...

[SMTBSI]

Lakers quietly 1-5 in their last 6. Tied for the 8th worst record, and a half game up from the 5th worse.

[sam_I_am]

I'm not really sure where to write this, but here goes...

Does anyone else feel like we as NBA fans have unlearned the lessons of the 2004 Pistons and the 2014 Spurs, two teams with balanced rosters and incredible defenses that brought down two of the most prominent superteams since the turn of the century? There seems to be a widespread presumption that the concentration of talent on the Warriors represents a sort of fundamental discontinuity between 2014 and today that made it impossible to build a contender with a well-balanced defense-oriented roster, because it's impossible to defend more than one or two great players at a time, and that the only way to win now is to acquire more star players to outscore the Warriors much like the Rockets and Thunder tried to do over the offseason. But what if that analysis is fundamentally flawed? What if the Warriors, even with all their talent, can still be consistently slowed down by a great defense, and the only reason it hasn't happened yet is that nobody has put together the right mix of talent and coaching to do it? Now, I don't think the Celtics are yet at a point where they have a realistic shot of beating the Warriors in a seven-game series; in fact, I'm struggling to even come to grips with the idea that they might be among the top three teams in the league without Hayward. But at the same time, I also wonder if I'm being overly narrow-minded about that. Nobody really thought the Pistons were in position to win a championship even after the Sheed trade. Why can't the Celtics be like the Pistons or Spurs - perhaps with the help of some development from Brown and Tatum over the course of the season, and with a small trade or buyout acquisition to bolster their roster? This is obviously super premature with such a small sample size, and in actuality I expect our defense to slide a bit back toward the pack in a way that could make this discussion moot. But if the Celtics do end the season with 60+ wins and the second or third best point differential in the league on the basis of a historically great defense and an improved offense, do we still say there's no way they can get lucky and knock off whoever comes out of the western conference?

This is the best thing I've read in weeks

Unfortunately, the GSW are more balanced, deeper and defensively versatile than even those Pistons and Spurs teams. The 2004 Pistons had 5 very good occasional all stars who complimented each other and were faced with a Laker team with 2 all time greats and a supporting cast. Today’s challenge is much greater.

The GSW have two of the top 3 players in the game who also just happen to be perfect fits for a versatile, unselfish team approach. They also have 2 other top 15 in the NBA players starting and two former franchise stars past their prime coming off the bench. Even the great Bulls teams who nobody could beat would be envious even if they did have MJ.