ECSF: P1 | (2) Boston Celtics vs Philadelphia 76ers (3) | BOS 1-0

[har13]

I'd take the Simmons of the last 3-4 months or so over Kyrie. Kyrie's a fantastic player but Simmons is just otherworldly right now, on both ends.

Well Its not exactly like that, i mean if you are the Bucks and you must add one of them next year then you go a 100% with Kyrie, we don't have the shooters to help Simmons play his game and we add a great one with Kyrie on the other hand.

But does a ball-dominant point guard really help your shooters? It was painful last night to watch how you almost gave away the game. The Celtics force teams into turnovers. But last night seemed to be as much unforced errors as Celtics defense.

We don't have shooters except Khris and please, i know you don't but we can't compare Bledsoe with Kyrie. Simmons is great for you guys because you have very good shooters , great ball movement and spacing, we have nothing.
I can imagine Simmons and Gianni playing together in Philly caause even your C can shoot but i can't believe this is a good idea for the Bucks.(i mean if they can add another all star player like Kyrie of course)

[GeorgeMarcus]

The Hayward/Saric debate is dead because when someone points out facts showing why there's a sizable gap between Hayward last season and Saric this season, you no longer have any legit responses. All-Star / lead dog / WC playoff series winner vs. 4th option on the Sixers. If you want to agree to disagree following that exchange, that's fine with me.

I'm not confused re: Saric and Covington. If the Celtics and Sixers weren't playing at the same time this season, I would tune into the Sixers because they're an exciting team that's fun to watch. Covington was more of a go-to player than Saric earlier in the season. Here are some facts to back up my claim:

October USG%: Embiid 35, Simmons 24.5, Redick 17.9, Covington 17.9, Saric 17.8 (source: https://on.nba.com/2HCBShL)
November USG%: Embiid 33.7, Simmons 25, Redick 19.3, Covington 18.7, Saric 18.3 (source: https://on.nba.com/2vU3fCo)

October FGA/G: Embiid 15, Simmons 14.1, Redick 11.8, Covington 10.7, Saric 8.4 (source: https://on.nba.com/2vQZ8Hg)
November FGA/G: Embiid 17.5, Simmons 15.6, Redick 13.5, Covington 11.6, Saric 11 (source: https://on.nba.com/2Hzgbil)

October PTS/G: Embiid 20.8, Simmons 18.4, Redick 13.2, Covington 13.6, Saric 7.7 (source: https://on.nba.com/2vQZ8Hg)
November PTS/G: Embiid 24, Simmons 18.6, Redick 16.2, Covington 15.3, Saric 12.9 (source: https://on.nba.com/2Hzgbil)
--
Thus, your statement that "Saric was never the 5th option behind Covington at any point in the season" was incorrect. In October and November, Covington was a higher usage option and had more production.

Klay Thompson shot more FGA's than KD last season. Does that mean KD was a 3rd option for the Warriors? No. Saric/Covington's usage percentage were nearly identical for the 2 months BB was deciding how to integrate Dario's skill set but that doesn't change the fact that Covington is a catch and shoot guy while Dario is/has always been the more diverse/dependable scorer that can create for himself. Dario is a much better player than Reddick as well, regardless of how you view what # option they are on offense.

Regarding the Hayward/Saric debate I presented counter arguments for all of your "facts." Is Donovan Mitchell the best player on the Jazz right now? Not even close. They were well below .500 until Gobert returned from injury and that's when they turned their season around. Hayward being the leading scorer on a team with nobody else to score just isn't that impressive. Dario would put up ~20ppg on that team.

LOL! Random irrelevant analogy for $2000, Alex. KD was injured for almost 20 games last season. Not even remotely comparable to look at their respective total FGAs as an analogy to this. You're just embarrassing yourself with that nonsense.

I showed facts. Covington's USG% and production was higher for the first two months. Whatever that reason might have been - Brown figuring out lineups, Saric coming off the bench - your statement that "Saric was never the 5th option behind Covington at any point in the season" and your subsequent statement that "Dario was always the higher usage option dating back to last year" were incorrect. Keep digging...

FGAs per game! Not total. KD missing 20 games is completely irrelevant, coming from the guy harping on irrelevance. Hilarious. I'm done here. Some people are impervious to logic.

[theFireBlanket]

Simmons leads the NBA in possessions, so 3.4 turnovers per game is nothing.
Nash averaged 3.5 turnovers per game when he won MVP.

But your team is averaging more turnovers collectively, in the bottom 8 & this Bucks team gets steals.

Another thing to note is that Milwaukee managed a high ortg in a slow paced series. This isn't the same team that Philly blew out to end the series. With Delly & Parker playing the ball is moving around. The Bucks are nearly equal with Phila in assist ratio & slightly better in ast-turnover ratio.

[commentatorer]

Simmons leads the NBA in possessions, so 3.4 turnovers per game is nothing.
Nash averaged 3.5 turnovers per game when he won MVP.

But your team is averaging more turnovers collectively, in the bottom 8 & this Bucks team gets steals.

Another thing to note is that Milwaukee managed a high ortg in a slow paced series. This isn't the same team that Philly blew out to end the series. With Delly & Parker playing the ball is moving around. The Bucks are nearly equal with Phila in assist ratio & slightly better in ast-turnover ratio.

Yeah I know, I was replying to the comment about Simmons specifically.
Its not easy to get the ball out of his hands.
His turnovers are more likely to be risky lobs.
And I've noticed Simmons doesn't turn the ball over in 4th quarters, so its a risk-reward thing, he doesn't throw the riskiest passes late in games.
Anyway, 3.4 turnovers per game is nothing bad, like I said earlier.

[ric munchn]

What's with you? I'm not criticizing your players. I believe Horford is a very good player, but he's overpaid at $30 mil. Hayward is an excellent player. But is he worth $31 mil? Between the two of them, they eat up 55% of next year's cap.

But the bigger picture, you don't have a big. Horford is a savvy, extremely skilled stretch-4. He averages slightly more than seven rebounds per game and one block.

Your payroll's close to the cap at $107 mil. You're going to have to pay Baynes, who's an unrestricted free agent, $10 mil after the season he's had. Smart will get a similar payday to Robert Covington - $10-$15 mil/year. You'll have to match or lose him. And unless you get the Lakers pick - a 2.9% chance - you'll be drafting 27 this year. There are some good center prospects lower in the draft, but most of the better ones are in the top 10.

Next season will be a test. I have no doubt that you're loaded at two and three and have an all-star caliber point guard. But Ainge has rolled the dice and you'll have to play small ball. You're locked in. At least that's how I see it. Danny has done it before - pulled a rabbit out of the hat - and if anyone can win with a small lineup it's Brad Stevens.

If you play the Sixers, it's going to give a lot of insight into both teams' strengths and weaknesses. It will essentially be one of the best if not best small-ball teams against potentially the best tall-ball team.

Here's your payroll - your best seven players without a center:

Hayward: $31 mil
Horford: $30 mil
Kyrie: $20 mil
Three-player total: $81 mil

Tatum, Morris, Jaylen Brown & Rozier: $20 mil.

Seven-player total: $101 mil

The arithmetic is what it is.

Why do you think I’m saying you are criticizing anything? I’m just saying projecting basketball futures is a guess at best. Trades, injuries, draft picks, players improving and declining is extremely fluid. Look at the Celtics last year to this year. It’s a totally different team. I’m sure the same thing won’t happen this year but every year is different.Cant they just go over the cap? The tickets are among he most expensive in the league and they sell out every game. All I was saying is I don’t wanna argue about who will be Better next year because it’s so unpredictable

You said (1) "This is exactly the reason why a lot of people hate philly. You have two unbelievable young players. They both act like they are magic and Kareem though despite just recently winning their only playoff series and routinely blowing giant leads all year. More likely next year we beat you if you make it to us and you say wait til embiid comes back.

2) Next: "Boston if healthy will compete for a title next year. Probably lose but they will compete. Philly will be right in the mix as well if healthy."

3) And then: "If you wanna say embiid and Simmons are better than kyrie and Hayward(which remains to be seen) it’s not by that margin and the rest is clearly better for the Celtics."


As has been pointed out, no one has ever compared Embiid to Kareem. Olajuywon, if he stays healthy, yes. People on the C's board think Tatum has potential to be a future Pierce. He's an excellent prospect, but do keep in mind that Pierce is/will be a Hall of Famer.

Second, I think my question about a team structural problem is fair. I assume key players will be healthy. How can you get a center when you're at or near the cap. You don't have a Brooklyn caliber pick to trade unless you get lucky with this year's LA pick. Half a dozen teams over the past 25 years have beaten the 2.9% odds.

Third, you've taken Kyrie and Hayward off the table. I presume you've taken Embiid and Simmons off the table as well. Who is the "rest that is clearly better for the Celtics"?

Horford is under contract. So is Saric. Smart is not. Covington and Anderson are under contract. So are Rozier, Morris and Brown. Tatum and Fultz are under contract. Theis is under contract. Baines is not.

While Redick, Ilyasova, Belenelli and/or Amir Johnson are not under contract, the Sixers have $30-$35 million of cap space for two or three $10-$15 mil players. In other words, they could probably bring back Ilyasova, Belenelli and Amir Johnson and still be under the cap. Redick is more problematic.

You posted that "the rest is clearly better for the Celtics" on the general board. I'm responding.


BTW: I think a Horford-Saric comparison is more germane when comparing our teams this year and next.

You are freakin insane if you think philly beats Boston if Simmons and embiid went down today and we start the next round. That’s why they are clearly better.I like the team but despite a bunch of decent/good players they are not very good without those two. it doesn’t really matter because those two are there and they are great. I’m not saying people compare embiid to Kareem I’m saying those two act like they are the greatest players ever. It’s fine they are young and talented and full of confidence but you can’t say that doesn’t rub people the wrong way.
Saric better be most improved player next year and Al must fall off a cliff If you think they’ve are comparable. That’s outrageous. Saric is a decent young player. Al is an allstar and all around very good player. He is almost averaging 20/10 in the playoffs, plays good D and moves the ball extremely well. Good day sir

[cl2117]

Deflecting and deflecting and... more deflecting This is what happens when people don't want to refute the points being made. Logic is not your strong suit.

YES HE CAN!!!

You've been proven wrong time and again. You made a claim that Hayward was suddenly regarded as a transcendent talent. Something that literally no one claimed. That's a strawman by definition. Keep digging though baby.

Yes, I made that claim and gave specific examples about why I made it. Yet nobody responded to argue why Hayward is greater than Jokic or Lillard because... wait for it... he isn't! Not even close. If he was then he would be a transcendent talent, and yet that was the point made by a Celtics fan in this thread. NOW do you understand or you gonna deflect some more?

You're reaching so hard you might actually be able to grab the top of that hole you've been digging (but I doubt it).

Firstly Lillard and Jokic were ever barometer that's what you scrambled to after getting called out for making stuff up (I don't consider either player to be transcendent either for what it's worth) and secondly that's your inference that they then think that Hayward is transcendent but still not something anyone said. So A for effort, but you still fail.

Dig SuperDario dig! If you keep digging maybe the definition of strawman will change? Probably not though. But you keep going! It's endearing (and pathetic).

I'm not deflecting kid, I'm cheering you on. I believe in you. You CAN be the best hole digger this thread has ever seen. TRANCENDENT even.

[bebopdeluxe]

I think you need to check into his injury. Not saying this isn't signs of an issue that will continue, but to say something like "we may have seen the last of Uncle Drew" doesn't mesh with the actual facts. His knee is structurally sound, this surgery changes nothing about that.

Totally fair to suggest that he might struggle to play at least 70 games a season, but in those games he does play he'll be the same old Uncle Drew (at least that's what the doctors are saying).

That's not what Danny Ainge is saying.

https://celticswire.usatoday.com/2018/03/08/danny-ainge-kyrie-irving-will-have-to-manage-knee-soreness-his-whole-career/

There is a difference between being an All-Star and being Uncle Drew. Right?

This is one of the key issues. If Irving's career is impacted - even a little - by having to manage a balky knee for the rest of his career, then Ainge has basically hitched his wagon, in essence, to two max contracts for Top 20-to-25-level players. If Kyrie is not the same player that he was 2-3 years ago, IT MATTERS.

We will have a MUCH better sense of the 3-to-5-year outlook for the Celtics next March - 65 to 70 games into the season. If both Irving and Hayward are back playing at the top of their respective games, then the Celtics are in good shape. Given that both are home right now on their respective couches eating cheese puffs, I do not think it is unreasonable to wait and see where these guys are next spring before declaring that all is well.

I think that's exactly what Ainge is saying. He's saying he doesn't mind if Kyrie misses games as long as he's the same level of player:

“I think that it’s something that he’ll have to manage the rest of his career,” Ainge said Thursday morning. “I don’t think it’s anything serious, but we want Kyrie healthy and fresh. He carries a heavy burden [with] the offensive load that he carries. So we’re okay with him missing some games.”

I don't see where you're getting the idea that he'll be a lesser player. Maybe I'm missing something. Where are you getting that he won't be the same player? Again I get that he won't be able to play the full slate and it'll have to be managed, but everything I've read says that it won't affect his on court production, just the frequency with which he might miss games to manage the soreness.

The best ability is AVAILability. At the very least, if Ainge and Stevens have to go into the season knowing that Kyrie will likely have to miss 10-15 games to manage his knee, he is in the same place as the "injury risk" that Embiid has - yes?

Second, if you are going into the season knowing that your best player may miss 10-15 games, it is hard to imagine that that won't have ANY impact on the team's record/seeding...which is no small thing.

Lastly, if Ainge is already stating that Kyrie may have to miss games to manage his knee issues, it seems a stretch to assume that the 65-70 games he plays that he will be "Uncle Drew". He may wind up being that player - just like Hayward may come back and be the same player he was in Utah. I just choose to wait until what i see in March/April 2019 before I am ready to say that will be the case. Given that both guys are home eating Cheetos right now, I really don't think you can argue against that (although you are welcome to do so).

[bebopdeluxe]

I think it is a bit ridiculous to assume that the Sixers are going to walk all over EITHER of these teams. Yes - they will be favored, but they still have to do it.

I think a series with either of them goes at least 6 games.

[cl2117]

That's not what Danny Ainge is saying.

https://celticswire.usatoday.com/2018/03/08/danny-ainge-kyrie-irving-will-have-to-manage-knee-soreness-his-whole-career/

There is a difference between being an All-Star and being Uncle Drew. Right?

This is one of the key issues. If Irving's career is impacted - even a little - by having to manage a balky knee for the rest of his career, then Ainge has basically hitched his wagon, in essence, to two max contracts for Top 20-to-25-level players. If Kyrie is not the same player that he was 2-3 years ago, IT MATTERS.

We will have a MUCH better sense of the 3-to-5-year outlook for the Celtics next March - 65 to 70 games into the season. If both Irving and Hayward are back playing at the top of their respective games, then the Celtics are in good shape. Given that both are home right now on their respective couches eating cheese puffs, I do not think it is unreasonable to wait and see where these guys are next spring before declaring that all is well.

I think that's exactly what Ainge is saying. He's saying he doesn't mind if Kyrie misses games as long as he's the same level of player:

“I think that it’s something that he’ll have to manage the rest of his career,” Ainge said Thursday morning. “I don’t think it’s anything serious, but we want Kyrie healthy and fresh. He carries a heavy burden [with] the offensive load that he carries. So we’re okay with him missing some games.”

I don't see where you're getting the idea that he'll be a lesser player. Maybe I'm missing something. Where are you getting that he won't be the same player? Again I get that he won't be able to play the full slate and it'll have to be managed, but everything I've read says that it won't affect his on court production, just the frequency with which he might miss games to manage the soreness.

The best ability is AVAILability. At the very least, if Ainge and Stevens have to go into the season knowing that Kyrie will likely have to miss 10-15 games to manage his knee, he is in the same place as the "injury risk" that Embiid has - yes?

Second, if you are going into the season knowing that your best player may miss 10-15 games, it is hard to imagine that that won't have ANY impact on the team's record/seeding...which is no small thing.

Lastly, if Ainge is already stating that Kyrie may have to miss games to manage his knee issues, it seems a stretch to assume that the 65-70 games he plays that he will be "Uncle Drew". He may wind up being that player - just like Hayward may come back and be the same player he was in Utah. I just choose to wait until what i see in March/April 2019 before I am ready to say that will be the case. Given that both guys are home eating Cheetos right now, I really don't think you can argue against that (although you are welcome to do so).

So you think that because they are going to hold him out to make sure he's fresh and healthy that its a stretch to say that in the games he does play he will be the same player? Not sure there is any logic there.

Yup I'd put him in a similar injury bracket as Embiid, but that's beside the point of his on court impact when he is out there.

Not saying that there wouldn't be impact to the team and/or their record, but again that's besides the point.

I've still seen nothing to suggest that he will be a lesser player when he returns other than your argument that he's not playing now so we can't tell, but that's speculative and flies in the face of the doctors and the Ainge report you quoted yourself.

[GeorgeMarcus]

YES HE CAN!!!

You've been proven wrong time and again. You made a claim that Hayward was suddenly regarded as a transcendent talent. Something that literally no one claimed. That's a strawman by definition. Keep digging though baby.

Yes, I made that claim and gave specific examples about why I made it. Yet nobody responded to argue why Hayward is greater than Jokic or Lillard because... wait for it... he isn't! Not even close. If he was then he would be a transcendent talent, and yet that was the point made by a Celtics fan in this thread. NOW do you understand or you gonna deflect some more?

You're reaching so hard you might actually be able to grab the top of that hole you've been digging (but I doubt it).

Firstly Lillard and Jokic were ever barometer that's what you scrambled to after getting called out for making stuff up (I don't consider either player to be transcendent either for what it's worth) and secondly that's your inference that they then think that Hayward is transcendent but still not something anyone said. So A for effort, but you still fail.

Dig SuperDario dig! If you keep digging maybe the definition of strawman will change? Probably not though. But you keep going! It's endearing (and pathetic).

I'm not deflecting kid, I'm cheering you on. I believe in you. You CAN be the best hole digger this thread has ever seen. TRANCENDENT even.

Lillard and Jokic are the barometer because they (among others) were ranked behind Hayward. Which gave way to the viewpoint that he was a top 20 player. This is not "what I scrambled for," it's what we've been arguing about this whole time For christ sake. Keep up man.

Your disagreement on what defines transcendent is further evidence of the subjective nature, and thus... Not a straw man argument! Simply something we disagree on. Your mental gymnastics are amusing though, as is your reluctance to engage in real debate versus ad hominem attacks.

[cl2117]

Yes, I made that claim and gave specific examples about why I made it. Yet nobody responded to argue why Hayward is greater than Jokic or Lillard because... wait for it... he isn't! Not even close. If he was then he would be a transcendent talent, and yet that was the point made by a Celtics fan in this thread. NOW do you understand or you gonna deflect some more?

You're reaching so hard you might actually be able to grab the top of that hole you've been digging (but I doubt it).

Firstly Lillard and Jokic were ever barometer that's what you scrambled to after getting called out for making stuff up (I don't consider either player to be transcendent either for what it's worth) and secondly that's your inference that they then think that Hayward is transcendent but still not something anyone said. So A for effort, but you still fail.

Dig SuperDario dig! If you keep digging maybe the definition of strawman will change? Probably not though. But you keep going! It's endearing (and pathetic).

I'm not deflecting kid, I'm cheering you on. I believe in you. You CAN be the best hole digger this thread has ever seen. TRANCENDENT even.

Lillard and Jokic are the barometer because they (among others) were ranked behind Hayward. Which gave way to the viewpoint that he was a top 20 player. This is not "what I scrambled for," it's what we've been arguing about this whole time For christ sake. Keep up man.

Your disagreement on what defines transcendent is further evidence of the subjective nature, and thus... Not a straw man argument! Simply something we disagree on. Your mental gymnastics are amusing though, as is your reluctance to engage in real debate versus ad hominem attacks.

Subjective to you, objective to everyone else, which is why you're digging on your own little island with literally no one else agreeing with you.

We haven't been arguing, I've been playing with you ever since you started digging. My mental gymnastics? Show me where someone considered Hayward transcendent? Ranking him above Lillard and Jokic isn't that (I agree it's wrong for what it's worth). Unless because you've watched such bad basketball during the process you actually think those guys are transcendent (but they're not).

OOOOO ad hominem attacks. Did I huwt your feewings? I call em as I seem SuperDario, sorry. There ain't no real debate here, there's you digging and me watching. I'm happy to watch and see how far you get. Keep going.

[ITYSL]

Klay Thompson shot more FGA's than KD last season. Does that mean KD was a 3rd option for the Warriors? No. Saric/Covington's usage percentage were nearly identical for the 2 months BB was deciding how to integrate Dario's skill set but that doesn't change the fact that Covington is a catch and shoot guy while Dario is/has always been the more diverse/dependable scorer that can create for himself. Dario is a much better player than Reddick as well, regardless of how you view what # option they are on offense.

Regarding the Hayward/Saric debate I presented counter arguments for all of your "facts." Is Donovan Mitchell the best player on the Jazz right now? Not even close. They were well below .500 until Gobert returned from injury and that's when they turned their season around. Hayward being the leading scorer on a team with nobody else to score just isn't that impressive. Dario would put up ~20ppg on that team.

LOL! Random irrelevant analogy for $2000, Alex. KD was injured for almost 20 games last season. Not even remotely comparable to look at their respective total FGAs as an analogy to this. You're just embarrassing yourself with that nonsense.

I showed facts. Covington's USG% and production was higher for the first two months. Whatever that reason might have been - Brown figuring out lineups, Saric coming off the bench - your statement that "Saric was never the 5th option behind Covington at any point in the season" and your subsequent statement that "Dario was always the higher usage option dating back to last year" were incorrect. Keep digging...

FGAs per game! Not total. KD missing 20 games is completely irrelevant, coming from the guy harping on irrelevance. Hilarious. I'm done here. Some people are impervious to logic.

Wow, the irony. Comparing FGAs per game between players who played the same number of games in October and November is sound logic and a sound comparison when discussing who was the bigger option. Trying to compare that to total FGAs between two players who played vastly different number games is not. Holy cow.

Seriously, I don't know what numbers you'd accept if not those. RoCo's USG% was higher in October and November. MPG and total minutes were higher. FGA per game and total FGAs were higher. PPG and total points were higher. FG%, eFG%, and TS% were higher. The NBA's Player Impact Estimate (PIE) was higher.

What numbers do you have to support your claim that Dario was the 4th option over RoCo in October and November? I doubt you have any. You literally said Dario was the higher usage option going back to last season, and I gave you USG% for October and November showing RoCo's was higher. The denial is strong with this one.

I am glad you're done while you're behind.

[GeorgeMarcus]

You're reaching so hard you might actually be able to grab the top of that hole you've been digging (but I doubt it).

Firstly Lillard and Jokic were ever barometer that's what you scrambled to after getting called out for making stuff up (I don't consider either player to be transcendent either for what it's worth) and secondly that's your inference that they then think that Hayward is transcendent but still not something anyone said. So A for effort, but you still fail.

Dig SuperDario dig! If you keep digging maybe the definition of strawman will change? Probably not though. But you keep going! It's endearing (and pathetic).

I'm not deflecting kid, I'm cheering you on. I believe in you. You CAN be the best hole digger this thread has ever seen. TRANCENDENT even.

Lillard and Jokic are the barometer because they (among others) were ranked behind Hayward. Which gave way to the viewpoint that he was a top 20 player. This is not "what I scrambled for," it's what we've been arguing about this whole time For christ sake. Keep up man.

Your disagreement on what defines transcendent is further evidence of the subjective nature, and thus... Not a straw man argument! Simply something we disagree on. Your mental gymnastics are amusing though, as is your reluctance to engage in real debate versus ad hominem attacks.

Subjective to you, objective to everyone else, which is why you're digging on your own little island with literally no one else agreeing with you.

We haven't been arguing, I've been playing with you ever since you started digging. My mental gymnastics? Show me where someone considered Hayward transcendent? Ranking him above Lillard and Jokic isn't that (I agree it's wrong for what it's worth). Unless because you've watched such bad basketball during the process you actually think those guys are transcendent (but they're not).

OOOOO ad hominem attacks. Did I huwt your feewings? I call em as I seem SuperDario, sorry. There ain't no real debate here, there's you digging and me watching. I'm happy to watch and see how far you get. Keep going.

Objective to everyone else, really? Please share with me these "objective" parameters for being a transcendent player. I'll wait...

Mental gymnastics would be refuting a claim because "nobody used those exact words!" No **** they didn't and that was never my argument. You think I'm on an island because you have 2 Celtics fans agreeing with you Does that mean I get to call dorkestra to the stand for And-1'ing my post about why it's clearly not a straw man argument? Or do you only acknowledge people that agree with you?

Logical fallacy #249: ad hominem attacks must hurt someone's feelings in order to be ad hominem attacks. That's a new one

Go on though... Deflect some more! You can do it. I believe in you.

[cl2117]

Lillard and Jokic are the barometer because they (among others) were ranked behind Hayward. Which gave way to the viewpoint that he was a top 20 player. This is not "what I scrambled for," it's what we've been arguing about this whole time For christ sake. Keep up man.

Your disagreement on what defines transcendent is further evidence of the subjective nature, and thus... Not a straw man argument! Simply something we disagree on. Your mental gymnastics are amusing though, as is your reluctance to engage in real debate versus ad hominem attacks.

Subjective to you, objective to everyone else, which is why you're digging on your own little island with literally no one else agreeing with you.

We haven't been arguing, I've been playing with you ever since you started digging. My mental gymnastics? Show me where someone considered Hayward transcendent? Ranking him above Lillard and Jokic isn't that (I agree it's wrong for what it's worth). Unless because you've watched such bad basketball during the process you actually think those guys are transcendent (but they're not).

OOOOO ad hominem attacks. Did I huwt your feewings? I call em as I seem SuperDario, sorry. There ain't no real debate here, there's you digging and me watching. I'm happy to watch and see how far you get. Keep going.

Objective to everyone else, really? Please share with me these "objective" parameters for being a transcendent player. I'll wait...

Mental gymnastics would be refuting a claim because "nobody used those exact words!" No **** they didn't and that was never my argument. You think I'm on an island because you have 2 Celtics fans agreeing with you Does that mean I get to call dorkestra to the stand for And-1'ing my post about why it's clearly not a straw man argument? Or do you only acknowledge people that agree with you?

Logical fallacy #249: ad hominem attacks must hurt someone's feelings in order to be ad hominem attacks. That's a new one

Go on though... Deflect some more! You can do it. I believe in you.

Well it sure as **** isn't top 20 in the NBA in a current year. Otherwise it'd lose it's meaning real quick wouldn't it? Are you saying that there are at least 20 transcendent talents in the league right now? Anyone better than Lillard is also transcendent? You're one step removed from saying an all-star bid makes you transcendent (Jokic still doesn't have one actually so that'd be too stringent a definition....and would also make Hayward transcendent....).

No one used those words, no one made that argument, you still haven't provided ANYTHING other than Jokic/Lillard from some poster and that's still NOTHING. It's made up by YOU. That's a strawman. Call dorsktra to the stand and have him bring up some evidence since you have NONE.

Keep digging baby keep on digging. You can try and turn it around on me, but you're only further embarrassing yourself. Dig Dario Dig!

Edit: I'm also starting to worry that in addition to transcendent and strawman you don't know what deflect means... It's not a good day for you mate, maybe just call it and come back fresh tomorrow?

[GeorgeMarcus]

Subjective to you, objective to everyone else, which is why you're digging on your own little island with literally no one else agreeing with you.

We haven't been arguing, I've been playing with you ever since you started digging. My mental gymnastics? Show me where someone considered Hayward transcendent? Ranking him above Lillard and Jokic isn't that (I agree it's wrong for what it's worth). Unless because you've watched such bad basketball during the process you actually think those guys are transcendent (but they're not).

OOOOO ad hominem attacks. Did I huwt your feewings? I call em as I seem SuperDario, sorry. There ain't no real debate here, there's you digging and me watching. I'm happy to watch and see how far you get. Keep going.

Objective to everyone else, really? Please share with me these "objective" parameters for being a transcendent player. I'll wait...

Mental gymnastics would be refuting a claim because "nobody used those exact words!" No **** they didn't and that was never my argument. You think I'm on an island because you have 2 Celtics fans agreeing with you Does that mean I get to call dorkestra to the stand for And-1'ing my post about why it's clearly not a straw man argument? Or do you only acknowledge people that agree with you?

Logical fallacy #249: ad hominem attacks must hurt someone's feelings in order to be ad hominem attacks. That's a new one

Go on though... Deflect some more! You can do it. I believe in you.

Well it sure as **** isn't top 20 in the NBA in a current year. Otherwise it'd lose it's meaning real quick wouldn't it? Are you saying that there are at least 20 transcendent talents in the league right now? Anyone better than Lillard is also transcendant? You're one step removed from saying an all-star bid makes your transcendant (Jokic still doesn't have one actually so that'd be too stringent a definition).

No one made used those words, no one made that argument, you still haven't provided ANYTHING other than Jokic/Lillard from some poster and that's still NOTHING. It's made up by YOU. That's a strawman. Call dorsktra to the stand and have him bring up some evidence since you have NONE.

Keep digging baby keep on digging. You can try and turn it around on me, but you're only further embarrassing yourself. Dig Dario Dig!

I haven't provided anything other than Jokic/Lillard? Even though the 1st point I made (one that you quoted me on/the basis for the entire discussion) was about how it's inconceivable that Saric would be 'a little worse than Hayward'? OK buddy

Edit: I'm also starting to worry that in addition to transcendent and strawman you don't know what deflect means... It's not a good day for you mate, maybe just call it and come back fresh tomorrow?

Actually I was being facetious because rather than make valid points you elected to post memes about straw men and digging. It's child's play but 2 can play that game.

[hookshot199]

Well Its not exactly like that, i mean if you are the Bucks and you must add one of them next year then you go a 100% with Kyrie, we don't have the shooters to help Simmons play his game and we add a great one with Kyrie on the other hand.

But does a ball-dominant point guard really help your shooters? It was painful last night to watch how you almost gave away the game. The Celtics force teams into turnovers. But last night seemed to be as much unforced errors as Celtics defense.

We don't have shooters except Khris and please, i know you don't but we can't compare Bledsoe with Kyrie. Simmons is great for you guys because you have very good shooters , great ball movement and spacing, we have nothing.
I can imagine Simmons and Gianni playing together in Philly caause even your C can shoot but i can't believe this is a good idea for the Bucks.(i mean if they can add another all star player like Kyrie of course)

I realized it was kind of stupid after right I posted it. The thing is, your 3-point shooters are fairly efficient if you just look at the raw numbers. But the more relevant questions is: How would you add someone like Kyrie? You might be able to clear up enough cap space to take a flier on IT. But I don't see any $5 mil or $10 mil team options on next year's payroll. And point guards better than Bledsoe (I don't know if any are available) won't come cheap. Matthew Delladedova needs to up his game. My opinion. Good luck in the series.

Or another option: Bring Jon McGlocklin out of retirement.

[hookshot199]

Why do you think I’m saying you are criticizing anything? I’m just saying projecting basketball futures is a guess at best. Trades, injuries, draft picks, players improving and declining is extremely fluid. Look at the Celtics last year to this year. It’s a totally different team. I’m sure the same thing won’t happen this year but every year is different.Cant they just go over the cap? The tickets are among he most expensive in the league and they sell out every game. All I was saying is I don’t wanna argue about who will be Better next year because it’s so unpredictable

You said (1) "This is exactly the reason why a lot of people hate philly. You have two unbelievable young players. They both act like they are magic and Kareem though despite just recently winning their only playoff series and routinely blowing giant leads all year. More likely next year we beat you if you make it to us and you say wait til embiid comes back.

2) Next: "Boston if healthy will compete for a title next year. Probably lose but they will compete. Philly will be right in the mix as well if healthy."

3) And then: "If you wanna say embiid and Simmons are better than kyrie and Hayward(which remains to be seen) it’s not by that margin and the rest is clearly better for the Celtics."

As has been pointed out, no one has ever compared Embiid to Kareem. Olajuywon, if he stays healthy, yes. People on the C's board think Tatum has potential to be a future Pierce. He's an excellent prospect, but do keep in mind that Pierce is/will be a Hall of Famer.

Second, I think my question about a team structural problem is fair. I assume key players will be healthy. How can you get a center when you're at or near the cap. You don't have a Brooklyn caliber pick to trade unless you get lucky with this year's LA pick. Half a dozen teams over the past 25 years have beaten the 2.9% odds.

Third, you've taken Kyrie and Hayward off the table. I presume you've taken Embiid and Simmons off the table as well. Who is the "rest that is clearly better for the Celtics"?

Horford is under contract. So is Saric. Smart is not. Covington and Anderson are under contract. So are Rozier, Morris and Brown. Tatum and Fultz are under contract. Theis is under contract. Baines is not.

While Redick, Ilyasova, Belenelli and/or Amir Johnson are not under contract, the Sixers have $30-$35 million of cap space for two or three $10-$15 mil players. In other words, they could probably bring back Ilyasova, Belenelli and Amir Johnson and still be under the cap. Redick is more problematic.

You posted that "the rest is clearly better for the Celtics" on the general board. I'm responding.


BTW: I think a Horford-Saric comparison is more germane when comparing our teams this year and next.

You are freakin insane if you think philly beats Boston if Simmons and embiid went down today and we start the next round. That’s why they are clearly better.I like the team but despite a bunch of decent/good players they are not very good without those two. it doesn’t really matter because those two are there and they are great. I’m not saying people compare embiid to Kareem I’m saying those two act like they are the greatest players ever. It’s fine they are young and talented and full of confidence but you can’t say that doesn’t rub people the wrong way.
Saric better be most improved player next year and Al must fall off a cliff If you think they’ve are comparable. That’s outrageous. Saric is a decent young player. Al is an allstar and all around very good player. He is almost averaging 20/10 in the playoffs, plays good D and moves the ball extremely well. Good day sir

Listen, sonny. I don't know what your problem is. But when somebody gives you a compliment and you call him insane, perhaps you should see your doctor about upping your meds. Al Horford has always been a very good player and marginal all star. He's made the all star team four or five times, but never started. He's a really good player. He makes players around him play better. He's unselfish. He's a good passer. He's a glue guy. He's also not worth $30 million. I said that if Saric, who shouldn't be compared with Hayward because they play different positions, can put together numbers like Horford over a 10-year period, he will be special. His raw stats this year aren't so far behind Horford's. He's still not there. Okay? Kapeesh?

[commentatorer]

I think it is a bit ridiculous to assume that the Sixers are going to walk all over EITHER of these teams. Yes - they will be favored, but they still have to do it.

I think a series with either of them goes at least 6 games.

Philly play like a team with ice in their veins, so you can rely on them to live up to their potential.
I've never seen a more confident team.
Boston have nothing they can do to stop Simmons.
They can foul him if they want, he's making .714 of his free-throws in the playoffs (and 7 attempts per game).
Boston will need to score at least 115ppg, because I don't see them stopping Philly.

[rzzzzz]

It’s fine they are young and talented and full of confidence but you can’t say that doesn’t rub people the wrong way.

not LeBron and DWade, obviously. THEY rubbed some people the wrong way too. i'm sure that keeps them up at night.

[ric munchn]

It’s fine they are young and talented and full of confidence but you can’t say that doesn’t rub people the wrong way.

not LeBron and DWade, obviously. THEY rubbed some people the wrong way too. i'm sure that keeps them up at night.

I’m not quite sure what you are saying. Why should the players care? It’s just something that makes fans not like them(except their fans of course)