Robert Williams, aka "Timelord"

[sam_I_am]

The Lakers are a horrid comparison lol. The difference is we saw the team be dominant without Rob, just a bit less dominant than with him. He’s obviously an excellent player, but it’s factually accurate that they have been awesome without him.

This was/is just you not giving the team enough credit. It’s okay, just acknowledge it.

I think the reason why you underestimate the Nets so much is because you don't like the Nets and Kyrie.

Only Celtic fans think the Celts will 100% beat the Nets without Robert Williams.

If you listen to NBA analysts, most of them also think the Nets will beat the Celts without Robert Williams.

I mean, if you evaluate the relative performance of each team down the stretch independent of reputations, you would conclude that this would be an easy sweep by #2 team. It is only out of great respect to Durant that there has been so much anxiety about this matchup in the first place.

[BeanTownBrawler]

https://mikereinold.com/meniscus-repair-or-meniscectomy/

Surprised there wasn’t more discussion around the decision on how to approach Williams surgery. Removal seems long term risky vs repair.

[Hal14]

The Lakers are a horrid comparison lol. The difference is we saw the team be dominant without Rob, just a bit less dominant than with him. He’s obviously an excellent player, but it’s factually accurate that they have been awesome without him.

This was/is just you not giving the team enough credit. It’s okay, just acknowledge it.

I think the reason why you underestimate the Nets so much is because you don't like the Nets and Kyrie.

Only Celtic fans think the Celts will 100% beat the Nets without Robert Williams.

If you listen to NBA analysts, most of them also think the Nets will beat the Celts without Robert Williams.

90% of NBA analysts always hate / underestimate the celtics.

You really think people like skip bayless, shannon sharpe and nick wright know what they're talking about?

Pretty much every NBA analyst out there today is talking out of their a^^.

Hell, Shaq said on national TV earlier this season that he didn't know who robert williams was

[Slax]

https://mikereinold.com/meniscus-repair-or-meniscectomy/

Surprised there wasn’t more discussion around the decision on how to approach Williams surgery. Removal seems long term risky vs repair.

There was a ton of discussion about it here. The general consensus is that there is not enough publicly available information for us to compare which made more sense for Rob in particular, but that he has very good doctors so they would be up to date on all the research and were in a much better position than random internet board posters to make the right choice based on information available to them about what is best for him and his long term NBA career.

[peachbucket]

The Lakers are a horrid comparison lol. The difference is we saw the team be dominant without Rob, just a bit less dominant than with him. He’s obviously an excellent player, but it’s factually accurate that they have been awesome without him.

This was/is just you not giving the team enough credit. It’s okay, just acknowledge it.

I think the reason why you underestimate the Nets so much is because you don't like the Nets and Kyrie.

Only Celtic fans think the Celts will 100% beat the Nets without Robert Williams.

If you listen to NBA analysts, most of them also think the Nets will beat the Celts without Robert Williams.

The Celtics were -145 favorites in this series with the expectation that Rob Williams would not be back….I thought they should ben at least -300 which is why I bet them. Despite the fact that this series could easily be tied 1-1, nothing that I’ve witnessed in this series tells me I was wrong.

The fact the nets have shot 47% from 3 in this series compared to 35% from the Celtics is an anomoly that should reverse as the series continues….considering the respective defenses and quality of attempts. Without that disparity both of the first two games would have been blowouts.

[SuperDeluxe]

The Lakers are also not a horrid comparison because your argument is the Celts have a 1st team All-NBA guy, a DPOY, and an All-Star.

You're referring to individual achievements.

If it's about individual achievements then the Lakers should be contenders this season.

Another example is you really think the Golden State Warriors would've won 3 championships if they didn't have Draymond Green?

I just don't think the Celts can beat Philly, Brooklyn, and Milwaukee if Rob is not available.

Celtics in 5.
If not, then in 4.

My original prediction was Celtics in 6, but now that's where I am too. If we do lose a game, I think it'll be tonight's.

[Fierce1]

Or just admit you were wrong, and it was a bad take to have Nets in 6. It’s ok, honestly, we’ve all been wrong. Instead of saying that you’re more willing to say the Nets could win 4 in a row, and then wondering why people point out your wrong takes and let others go without mention. It’s because they admit when they were wrong and don’t double down instead.

That's because you don't know the whole story.

Before the series started, I said Nets in 6 if Rob TOTALLY does not play the whole series.

I said Celts in 6 if Rob is able to play in the series.

You can check, it's in the Game 1 thread.

So where did I end up being wrong?

[zoyathedestroya]

Read on Twitter

Win game 4 so everyone gets some rest/recovery.

Read on Twitter

[shackles10]

Or just admit you were wrong, and it was a bad take to have Nets in 6. It’s ok, honestly, we’ve all been wrong. Instead of saying that you’re more willing to say the Nets could win 4 in a row, and then wondering why people point out your wrong takes and let others go without mention. It’s because they admit when they were wrong and don’t double down instead.

That's because you don't know the whole story.

Before the series started, I said Nets in 6 if Rob TOTALLY does not play the whole series.

I said Celts in 6 if Rob is able to play in the series.

You can check, it's in the Game 1 thread.

So where did I end up being wrong?[/quote

I’ve seen the story just because I didn’t comment on it before. I’ve been on this board a looooong time, I just don’t post much anymore. If you think Nets are winning two in a row then I guess you didn’t end up being wrong. You asked so many if they’d be man enough to admit they were wrong in here though while still hanging on to freezing cold bad takes with attempts to cover all bases as well.

[KamikazeK]

https://mikereinold.com/meniscus-repair-or-meniscectomy/

Surprised there wasn’t more discussion around the decision on how to approach Williams surgery. Removal seems long term risky vs repair.

It's because nobody wants to talk about negative **** when the team is doing awesome in the playoffs. I'm still not sure why so many of you insist on being debbie downers and talking about worst-case scenarios all the time.

[Fierce1]

I’ve seen the story just because I didn’t comment on it before. I’ve been on this board a looooong time, I just don’t post much anymore. If you think Nets are winning two in a row then I guess you didn’t end up being wrong. You asked so many if they’d be man enough to admit they were wrong in here though while still hanging on to freezing cold bad takes with attempts to cover all bases as well.

Like I said, the prediction was made before the series started.

It's simple, all I said was if Rob plays, Celts win series.

If Rob does not play at all, Celts lose series.

[KamikazeK]

I’ve seen the story just because I didn’t comment on it before. I’ve been on this board a looooong time, I just don’t post much anymore. If you think Nets are winning two in a row then I guess you didn’t end up being wrong. You asked so many if they’d be man enough to admit they were wrong in here though while still hanging on to freezing cold bad takes with attempts to cover all bases as well.

Like I said, the prediction was made before the series started.

It's simple, all I said was if Rob plays, Celts win series.

If Rob does not play at all, Celts lose series.

c'mon man you can't still be on that ****.

You've been here saying for days that "Celtics fans should admit they were wrong." Well, when are you going to do that?

[Fierce1]

I’ve seen the story just because I didn’t comment on it before. I’ve been on this board a looooong time, I just don’t post much anymore. If you think Nets are winning two in a row then I guess you didn’t end up being wrong. You asked so many if they’d be man enough to admit they were wrong in here though while still hanging on to freezing cold bad takes with attempts to cover all bases as well.

Like I said, the prediction was made before the series started.

It's simple, all I said was if Rob plays, Celts win series.

If Rob does not play at all, Celts lose series.

c'mon man you can't still be on that ****.

You've been here saying for days that "Celtics fans should admit they were wrong." Well, when are you going to do that?

Wrong about what?

Celts are about to win the series and Rob is playing.

So where did I go wrong?

[KamikazeK]

Like I said, the prediction was made before the series started.

It's simple, all I said was if Rob plays, Celts win series.

If Rob does not play at all, Celts lose series.

c'mon man you can't still be on that ****.

You've been here saying for days that "Celtics fans should admit they were wrong." Well, when are you going to do that?

Wrong about what?

Celts are about to win the series and Rob is playing.

So where did I go wrong?

There is zero evidence that Boston loses this series without Rob, and TONS of evidence that they win. You know damn well Rob is not the reason why they won that game last night.

It's time to admit you were wrong or get the **** out of here. If you can't admit you were wrong, then you've been arguing in bad faith this entire time, and frankly I think you're a troll. In which case get lost.

[Fierce1]

c'mon man you can't still be on that ****.

You've been here saying for days that "Celtics fans should admit they were wrong." Well, when are you going to do that?

Wrong about what?

Celts are about to win the series and Rob is playing.

So where did I go wrong?

There is zero evidence that Boston loses this series without Rob, and TONS of evidence that they win. You know damn well Rob is not the reason why they won that game last night.

It's time to admit you were wrong or get the **** out of here. If you can't admit you were wrong, then you've been arguing in bad faith this entire time, and frankly I think you're a troll. In which case get lost.

You just can't accept the fact that I did not get it wrong.

It's time you man up, man.

You were talking a lot of smack when I made that prediction.

There were reports that Rob was going to play in this series.

I just didn't think the Celts would beat the Nets without Rob.

[KamikazeK]

Wrong about what?

Celts are about to win the series and Rob is playing.

So where did I go wrong?

There is zero evidence that Boston loses this series without Rob, and TONS of evidence that they win. You know damn well Rob is not the reason why they won that game last night.

It's time to admit you were wrong or get the **** out of here. If you can't admit you were wrong, then you've been arguing in bad faith this entire time, and frankly I think you're a troll. In which case get lost.

I just didn't think the Celts would beat the Nets without Rob.

And you were wrong.

[Fierce1]

There is zero evidence that Boston loses this series without Rob, and TONS of evidence that they win. You know damn well Rob is not the reason why they won that game last night.

It's time to admit you were wrong or get the **** out of here. If you can't admit you were wrong, then you've been arguing in bad faith this entire time, and frankly I think you're a troll. In which case get lost.

I just didn't think the Celts would beat the Nets without Rob.

And you were wrong.

No, I was not because that can never be proven.

[Fierce1]

If the Nets don't win 2 games then I was wrong about how many games, but not about the Celts winning with Rob.

[Feed Your Head]

I just didn't think the Celts would beat the Nets without Rob.

And you were wrong.

No, I was not because that can never be proven.

Everyone knew you’d pull this, and it’s still shockingly lame.

[Fierce1]

And you were wrong.

No, I was not because that can never be proven.

Everyone knew you’d pull this, and it’s still shockingly lame.

You have to call a spade a spade.

I didn't think the Celts would beat the Nets without Rob.

But Rob played, so we'll never know for sure.

Hindsight is always 20-20.