The Celtics will win the Title IMO

JordansBulls · Post #1 » by **JordansBulls** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:28 pm

No one has the collection of defense and go to guys that you guys have. Also you are a tremendous home team but also even if you lost a game at home in the playoffs, I feel you would easily be able to win and get that game back on the road. I just can't see anyone stopping you guys.
This is not saying you will totally dominate but you guys I feel will win it all.

dwestside · Post #2 » by **dwestside** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:44 pm

JordansBulls wrote:This is not saying you will totally dominate but you guys I feel will win it all.

I would consider a championship total dominance.

Let's hope you're right.

TheCelticTruth · Post #3 » by **TheCelticTruth** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 10:49 pm

hey, appreciate the support. we feel similarly, but it obviously remains to be seen. LBJ can be unstoppable at times, detroit is too savvy to count out and whoever comes out of the west may be tired, but will be a great team.

heres hoping you are right

Truthiracy · Post #4 » by **Truthiracy** » Sun Mar 30, 2008 11:14 pm

I know we will win the title, just give it to us now.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #5 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 12:57 pm

I don't want to be overconfident, but I feel REALLY good about our chances this year...

MaxwellSmart · Post #6 » by **MaxwellSmart** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 4:44 pm

no un-hatched Chicken counting for me.

Gant · Post #7 » by **Gant** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:07 pm

I'd phrase it: The Celtics are bona fide title contenders. They probably have a better chance than any other single team, but that doesn't mean they're huge favorites.

They will have to defeat some very strong teams to win a championship. Detroit is experienced and very good. Orlando and Howard are a tough match up. Whoever emerges from the West will be powerful. The second round opponent will likely be a team that's defeated Boston twice in the regular season.

So the Celtics could very well win this thing, but they'll have to earn it.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #8 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 6:11 pm

But doesn't having to earn it make it so much sweeter?

bruno sundov · Post #9 » by **bruno sundov** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:10 pm

They will do it. I will be there this year when they do. I don't care if the Finals are played in Alaska somehow I will be there.

francishsu · Post #10 » by **francishsu** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:28 pm

We have a reasonable chance, which is all you can ask for. And fortunately, one loss will not mean the end like we saw with the Patriots. :-?

Fencer reregistered · Post #11 » by **Fencer reregistered** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:35 pm

I see it as I saw the Patriots' streak. I'll go into every series expecting a victory. But do I think the probability of winning 4 straight series exceeds 50%? Frankly, no.

E.g., in most potential matchups for most series, the opposing coach will be a lot more experienced in coaching the playoffs and making adjustments than Doc Rivers is. That's grounds for worry right there.

francishsu · Post #12 » by **francishsu** » Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:37 pm

Fencer reregistered wrote:I see it as I saw the Patriots' streak. I'll go into every series expecting a victory. But do I think the probability of winning 4 straight series exceeds 50%? Frankly, no.

So you had the probability of the Patriots winning it all to be less than 50% at the start of the playoffs? I had them at as close to 100% as one could get.

Fencer reregistered · Post #13 » by **Fencer reregistered** » Tue Apr 1, 2008 1:26 am

francishsu wrote:-= original quote snipped =-

So you had the probability of the Patriots winning it all to be less than 50% at the start of the playoffs? I had them at as close to 100% as one could get.

I was probably last under 50% a little before the end of the regular season. Something like 20% loss chance for the AFCC game (which I thought would be vs. Indy), and 10% for each of the other playoff games.

But at other times I would have said only 2/3 chance of winning the AFCC.

And as the Super Bowl approached I would have put it over 10%, albeit no more than 15-20%. After all, the Giants did play the Pats close in Game 16, and did get some players back, and Brady was a bit nicked up.

bruno sundov · Post #14 » by **bruno sundov** » Tue Apr 1, 2008 10:47 am

Think of the Patriots season. They peaked in mid december. The Celtics I don't think, have peaked yet. That is my opinoin anyways.

GuyClinch · Post #15 » by **GuyClinch** » Tue Apr 1, 2008 4:58 pm

The Pats lost in part though because it's single game elimination. I am not saying the Giants don't deserve the win but vastly different dynamics happen in a seven game series.

You can't compare playoff situations across sports because of this. Teams that summon the courage to rise up just ONCE like the Giants did can win a championship. It doesn't work that way in NBA ball.

Pete

MyInsatiableOne · Post #16 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Tue Apr 1, 2008 5:07 pm

GuyClinch wrote:The Pats lost in part though because it's single game elimination. I am not saying the Giants don't deserve the win but vastly different dynamics happen in a seven game series.

You can't compare playoff situations across sports because of this. Teams that summon the courage to rise up just ONCE like the Giants did can win a championship. It doesn't work that way in NBA ball.

Pete

Well, you're right. Regardless of the fact that the Giants won, no one can say with a straight face that they are a better team than the Pats. I guarantee if that game is played 7 times, the Pats win at least 4 of them. But single elimination leaves no room for error. Still, the Pats blew it.

But Pete is right, playoff situations cannot be compared. In baseball and basketball you can shake off a bad game and still be very much in it (to a point).

bruno sundov · Post #17 » by **bruno sundov** » Tue Apr 1, 2008 8:02 pm

OK, so say the pats 1 bad game is equal to 3 bad celtics games. Take your pic.

The team has this window to get it done. It is up to them if they do or don't. Sometimes like what happened to the Pats you just your ass kicked that day.

celtxman · Post #18 » by **celtxman** » Wed Apr 2, 2008 10:24 am

The best way I can put this, is that only when the 1985/6 Celtics hit the floor did I feel close to 100% they would win it all. This current team has to prove some things in the playoffs, both collectively and individually. It doesn't mean that they can't do it, but historically worst to first teams don't go on to win it all. This is a unique situation and I would have to say that in Las Vegas they are correctly listed as the team with the best chance, but it won't be easy.

MyInsatiableOne · Post #19 » by **MyInsatiableOne** » Wed Apr 2, 2008 1:23 pm

bruno sundov wrote:OK, so say the pats 1 bad game is equal to 3 bad celtics games. Take your pic.

The team has this window to get it done. It is up to them if they do or don't. Sometimes like what happened to the Pats you just your ass kicked that day.

A fair enough analogy. I don't see this C's team getting their ass kicked too badly in the playoffs. Not saying they won't lose, but if and when, it should be close. Remember, they only have two double-digit losses ALL SEASON. And both to inferior teams (CHA and WAS).

Man_Up · Post #20 » by **Man_Up** » Wed Apr 2, 2008 2:10 pm

The only thing holding me back from feeling 100% confident is Doc. Doc has shown that he can be a great regular season coach, but whether he's a great play-off coach remains to be seen. I'm not completely sold on Doc decision making in tight games, and definitely not expecting to out coach someone like Popovich in a 7 game series.