GuyClinch wrote:Your sample size is too small - thus your harping on statistical anomalies out of convience. You flit about from this negative statistic to that one to 'prove' your point. Basically whatever statistics that might be "bad" you focus on.
The real truth is that the C's are among the elite NBA teams. We have the 11th best offense and the 3rd best defense. Will we improve from that? I think so. KG isn't back too full strength yet. BBD isn't playing again yet. This team will take some time to gel with the new additions.
Don't think that the fans here don't see your real goal - to dishearten them with reams of negative "information". This is why people don't like negative posters of course. They aren't really about pointing out some 'issue' with the team. Its about trying to spread this aura of doom and gloom. This is why people like you show no focus with your attacks. Its whatever negative crap you can get your hands on.
This is why you focus on say our "drop" in 3 point shooting - rather then how our offense ranking has remained about the same. Or our bad rebounding instead of our league leading points given up (91.9) and so on and so forth. Today its adjusted +/- and tommorow its 3 point shooting. Whatever "works" right? Its a lost cause though. The C's are still contenders. And I for one won't be writing them off until they actually lose in the playoffs..
Hell I am going to write it. Even in if the C's miss out on a championship its still fun watching them play with a good chance of winning each and every game. Try to find some joy in your life rather then "blessing" us with your inane negativing rantings. And if that's how you find joy do it on another board..
Pete
You make it seem as if the Celtics had played say 5 games and I was making conclusions. 17 games is over 1/5 of the season. 21% to be precise. I agree its not a big enough sample to reach conclusions with high confidence. But it does concern me.
You say the Celtics are among the elite teams on offense an defense. Thats precisely why I analyzed the quality of our opponents. The teams we have beat have a combined 79 wins and 140 losses. Our offensive and defensive efficiency stats are overstated because we have played such a weak schedule.
When played teams with records over .500, we have 3 wins and 3 losses. Not elite!!
You say my goal is to dishearten the readers of this forum. Why? What does that matter? Its not as if celtics players, team officials, family and friends all got their team news from here and I can affect the outcome of games, if I had a nefarious motives.
I'm merely presenting the truth. I say again, the Celtics could improve their performance. Nothing is written in stone. Even if the team stumbled into the playoffs, I still have some hope in "rising to the occasion" as Bill Russell's team in 1969 did, when they were 4th in the East and still beat a Lakers team with Baylor, West and Chamberlain for the championship.
I say again, things like "offensive & defensive ranking" are not meaningful when the teams we have beat are a combined 79 wins and 140 losses. We are complacent because we are 13 & 4. If we were say 10 & 7 people would be much more concerned. We could easily have lost a few more games, even to the likes of the Wolves who played us even a whole game. If we had played a tougher schedule, we could easily have more losses.
I've presented factual information for the boards use. Rather than thanking me, you criticize me for blemishing your fantasy.
This is an older team, that is not nearly as good as the one 2 years ago, or the first half of last season, at least so far. On paper they should be better than the one last year especially. The Celtics have to find new ways to win.
The effort to drive more and find cutters rather than totally relying on three point shots is a smart move in that regard. They will need good health and more such "smart thinking" if we are to hang #18 at the end of the season.
