Are you guys serious?
Celtics team would get man-handled by the US team.. Chemistry is nice and all, but give me the 10x more talent on the US team.. This IS the same Celtic team that got taken to 7 games by a less than spectacular Hawks team who has 0 chemistry right? lol, 4 outta 5 games
Rondo/Cassell vs. Kidd/Paul/Williams
Allen/House/Allen vs. Kobe/Wade/Redd
Pierce/Posey vs. Melo/Prince
Garnett/Powe/Davis vs. LeBron/Bosh
Perkins/Brown vs. Dwight/Boozer
Make your choice..
Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
Moderators: Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77, zimpy27, infinite11285
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
-
Inc
- Senior
- Posts: 749
- And1: 58
- Joined: Jul 02, 2008
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
-
Parasite
- Starter
- Posts: 2,489
- And1: 2,911
- Joined: May 06, 2005
-
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
Sorry, but your point is no longer valid. Witness the last few American teams in International competition. The Americans' talent was 10X the other teams yet they didn't win BECAUSE of team chemistry. The Boston Celtics would have a better chance to win the olympics than the American team.
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
-
Apollo64
- Starter
- Posts: 2,148
- And1: 726
- Joined: Sep 16, 2007
- Location: Greece
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
It's not just team chemistry, if i have to pinpoint it, it's lack of defense that killed the failing US teams, a lot of teams were allowed to go wild against them. The Celtics play some really good defense that would probably translate very well in the international level.
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
-
NetsForce
- Banned User
- Posts: 20,711
- And1: 29
- Joined: Dec 27, 2006
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
No.
1. Guys like Rondo, Powe, and Perkins would be exposed.
2. Ray Allen would wear down from the physical play.
Well actually...
1. Pierce's acting would fit right in with the Euroflop style of play.
2. So would KG"s perimeter oriented game.
3. I also think Eddie House could do some nice things as a zone buster.
And as everyone mentioned the Celtics defense is good. It would be interesting to say the least... I think Doc Rivers would have to step down as coach in order to give the Celtics a legitimate chance though.
1. Guys like Rondo, Powe, and Perkins would be exposed.
2. Ray Allen would wear down from the physical play.
Well actually...
1. Pierce's acting would fit right in with the Euroflop style of play.
2. So would KG"s perimeter oriented game.
3. I also think Eddie House could do some nice things as a zone buster.
And as everyone mentioned the Celtics defense is good. It would be interesting to say the least... I think Doc Rivers would have to step down as coach in order to give the Celtics a legitimate chance though.
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
-
Ern III
- Bench Warmer
- Posts: 1,274
- And1: 1
- Joined: Mar 12, 2007
- Contact:
Re: Would the Boston Celtics win the Gold?
Let me begin with:
The (not so) original question seems to emanate from the text of some bright spark on an annual basis, though the answer has almost always been the same since the globe caught up to the Americans sometime in the very late 90s-early 00s. Nonetheless, the 2008 edition of NBA champion makes this year’s negative answer one of the easiest to disseminate, and I’m going to provide the relevant clues so that those advocating the Boston Celtics achieving actual world champion status (especially those without a stated argument) can quickly return to sitting on their own necks.
Being the Olympics, the only assumption to make in this hypothetical contest is that the rules of FIBA international basketball will be enforced, on a court of FIBA dimension, by FIBA officialdom. With that established, here are several reasons why the answer is a categorical “no”:
- In the international context, the nexus of team success is the competence of the point-guard, and therein lies the first problem. Rajon Rondo is not close to a reliable jump-shooter (unlike any international PG), has yet to eradicate silly errors from his play-making, and isn’t strong enough to physically compete with international ‘ones’. See: Jason Kidd’s international record and thus imperative Beijing inclusion. (And, yes, Kidd makes wide open jumpers, particularly in the clutch. Unfortunately, the Nets over-employ Flinch Carter in such situations… another debate.)
- What would Kendrick Perkins offer in the international format? Other than rebounding and the occassional block, very little. Unless you’re forgetting fouls aplenty, along with its loyal companion; limited playing time. Of the NBAers whom average as many playing minutes as Perkins (6.1 fouls per 48 minutes in 24.5 minutes per game), only Shaq O’Neal (6.3 in 28.7), Mikki Moore (6.2 in 29.1) and Andris Biedrins (6.1 in 27.3) foul at a similar/greater rate. As the rules permit only four fouls before disqualification, that’s especially important.
- Ray Allen's deadly outside shooting is an huge asset in the FIBA format, but his inability to handle the ball under pressure, make solid decisions with the ball (especially in transition) and, generally, plays for anyone other than himself, mean that he’d have to rely almost exclusively on team-mates to create his looks, particularly against the level of cohesive zone defense exercised by international teams. His aging defense and unwillingness to physically mix it up would make his offensive contributions negligible. Although Reggie was 36 years aged when part of USA’s 6th-placed, 2002 World Championships squad, I see a similar effectiveness to Allen (33 today) in international play. James Posey would be a far more useful wing in international hoops than Allen at this stage of his career, purely on the strength of his defense and rebounding.
- The Celtics were 7th worst at controlling the ball (14.4 TOPG) this NBA season. In a game predicated on primo ball movement to create scoring opportunities, this is a significant hindrance.
- Team and technical fouls. Only four teams (Uta, Ind, Min, GSW) fouled more frequently per outing than Boston last NBA season. Even with an eight minute overall reduction in game time, that's not an immaterial handicap. Again, five fouls exceeds the limit permissible, technical fouls tooted by the far more authoritative FIBA refs count as personal fouls, and there are few international representatives whom are as dreadful at the line as so many of the powerful NBA bigs. You get in the penalty; you’ll be punished.
- Paul Pierce would certainly excel to some extent – he’s too talented a ‘baller not to – but anybody who’s carefully observed the international game knows that the isolation-based element of his play would be largely ineffective against savvy international defense, unless it is accompanied by snappy ball movement.
- Kevin Garnett would be the best big not named Dirk Nowitzki at any globally inclusive FIBA tournament. That’s an easy concession on my part. He’s more athletic than just about any other big on Earth, passes very well, rebounds very well, and shoots accurately from near and far.
In summary, two and a half players whose talents are well suited to the FIBA format. And, although a superb defensive unit, the Celtics are exactly such in a league that allows an extra foul (plus a tech) for every man, and generally exhibits a fraction of the ball movement and mid-range shooting exhibited by the best international squads.
If a collection of the world’s greatest talents with a reasonable period of preparation and an unrivalled coaching staff – such was the case for the USA in the 2006 World Championships – couldn’t triumph, what would convince anybody that the Boston Celtics would be the best team to grace a FIBA court? So the squad has shared a few charter flights, a couple of hundred meals, their handshakes exhibit 100 games’ worth of military precision and they possess the ability to recognise when their playbook has failed and apply the appropriate reactions. That simply doesn’t qualify them as world-beaters. It qualifies them as NBA champions. In a culture whereby the national title holder is championed as the world’s best, I’m not surprised some fail to differentiate.
To answer the original question differently: On an NBA floor with NBA rules; they probably would. But then, they wouldn't be gold medallists, would they? They'd be 'NBA Champions'.
Muzzleshot wrote:Some NBA players play for an NBA championship. Most, for personal accolades and millions of dollars and the lifestyle that comes with it.
fixed
The (not so) original question seems to emanate from the text of some bright spark on an annual basis, though the answer has almost always been the same since the globe caught up to the Americans sometime in the very late 90s-early 00s. Nonetheless, the 2008 edition of NBA champion makes this year’s negative answer one of the easiest to disseminate, and I’m going to provide the relevant clues so that those advocating the Boston Celtics achieving actual world champion status (especially those without a stated argument) can quickly return to sitting on their own necks.
Being the Olympics, the only assumption to make in this hypothetical contest is that the rules of FIBA international basketball will be enforced, on a court of FIBA dimension, by FIBA officialdom. With that established, here are several reasons why the answer is a categorical “no”:
- In the international context, the nexus of team success is the competence of the point-guard, and therein lies the first problem. Rajon Rondo is not close to a reliable jump-shooter (unlike any international PG), has yet to eradicate silly errors from his play-making, and isn’t strong enough to physically compete with international ‘ones’. See: Jason Kidd’s international record and thus imperative Beijing inclusion. (And, yes, Kidd makes wide open jumpers, particularly in the clutch. Unfortunately, the Nets over-employ Flinch Carter in such situations… another debate.)
- What would Kendrick Perkins offer in the international format? Other than rebounding and the occassional block, very little. Unless you’re forgetting fouls aplenty, along with its loyal companion; limited playing time. Of the NBAers whom average as many playing minutes as Perkins (6.1 fouls per 48 minutes in 24.5 minutes per game), only Shaq O’Neal (6.3 in 28.7), Mikki Moore (6.2 in 29.1) and Andris Biedrins (6.1 in 27.3) foul at a similar/greater rate. As the rules permit only four fouls before disqualification, that’s especially important.
- Ray Allen's deadly outside shooting is an huge asset in the FIBA format, but his inability to handle the ball under pressure, make solid decisions with the ball (especially in transition) and, generally, plays for anyone other than himself, mean that he’d have to rely almost exclusively on team-mates to create his looks, particularly against the level of cohesive zone defense exercised by international teams. His aging defense and unwillingness to physically mix it up would make his offensive contributions negligible. Although Reggie was 36 years aged when part of USA’s 6th-placed, 2002 World Championships squad, I see a similar effectiveness to Allen (33 today) in international play. James Posey would be a far more useful wing in international hoops than Allen at this stage of his career, purely on the strength of his defense and rebounding.
- The Celtics were 7th worst at controlling the ball (14.4 TOPG) this NBA season. In a game predicated on primo ball movement to create scoring opportunities, this is a significant hindrance.
- Team and technical fouls. Only four teams (Uta, Ind, Min, GSW) fouled more frequently per outing than Boston last NBA season. Even with an eight minute overall reduction in game time, that's not an immaterial handicap. Again, five fouls exceeds the limit permissible, technical fouls tooted by the far more authoritative FIBA refs count as personal fouls, and there are few international representatives whom are as dreadful at the line as so many of the powerful NBA bigs. You get in the penalty; you’ll be punished.
- Paul Pierce would certainly excel to some extent – he’s too talented a ‘baller not to – but anybody who’s carefully observed the international game knows that the isolation-based element of his play would be largely ineffective against savvy international defense, unless it is accompanied by snappy ball movement.
- Kevin Garnett would be the best big not named Dirk Nowitzki at any globally inclusive FIBA tournament. That’s an easy concession on my part. He’s more athletic than just about any other big on Earth, passes very well, rebounds very well, and shoots accurately from near and far.
In summary, two and a half players whose talents are well suited to the FIBA format. And, although a superb defensive unit, the Celtics are exactly such in a league that allows an extra foul (plus a tech) for every man, and generally exhibits a fraction of the ball movement and mid-range shooting exhibited by the best international squads.
If a collection of the world’s greatest talents with a reasonable period of preparation and an unrivalled coaching staff – such was the case for the USA in the 2006 World Championships – couldn’t triumph, what would convince anybody that the Boston Celtics would be the best team to grace a FIBA court? So the squad has shared a few charter flights, a couple of hundred meals, their handshakes exhibit 100 games’ worth of military precision and they possess the ability to recognise when their playbook has failed and apply the appropriate reactions. That simply doesn’t qualify them as world-beaters. It qualifies them as NBA champions. In a culture whereby the national title holder is championed as the world’s best, I’m not surprised some fail to differentiate.
To answer the original question differently: On an NBA floor with NBA rules; they probably would. But then, they wouldn't be gold medallists, would they? They'd be 'NBA Champions'.