Celtics are legit contenders

[spanishninja]

No one has ever won a championship peaking in early March.

With the way teams ebb and flow throughout the season (wasn't there a time where Celtics fans were calling for a coaching change in early January?), don't be a bit surprised to see the Celtics stumble to the regular season finish line.

to the contrary, post-allstar is exactly the right time to be peaking. it's hard for any team in the east to see the celtics as an easy out.

Sent from my SM-G781U using RealGM mobile app

[liquidswords]

They are on a roll but I still find it extremely hard to believe they will beat the MIA, MIL, BKN, PHI or even CHI of the world 4/7 times.

[ajones9219]

No one has ever won a championship peaking in early March.

With the way teams ebb and flow throughout the season (wasn't there a time where Celtics fans were calling for a coaching change in early January?), don't be a bit surprised to see the Celtics stumble to the regular season finish line.

Just last year the Bucks were 16-13 in mid February and went on a roll to end the season. Most teams who win the championship start to peak right before the playoffs. That's literally the ideal time to be at your best.

[ajones9219]

At this point if you don't think Boston is right up with the best in the conference you are just sleeping on them. They have statistically the best starting 5 of all time for the entire season, the best defense in the league for almost half the season, the best net rating for almost half the season, and 2 star wings with one being a superstar. Not to mention one of the most improved players in the league in Rob Williams.

The majority of their struggles to start weren't even a talent issue but due to injuries/covid and a new head coach/scheme.

[stretch]

At this point if you don't think Boston is right up with the best in the conference you are just sleeping on them. They have statistically the best starting 5 of all time for the entire season, the best defense in the league for almost half the season, the best net rating for almost half the season, and 2 star wings with one being a superstar. Not to mention one of the most improved players in the league in Rob Williams.

The majority of their struggles to start weren't even a talent issue but due to injuries/covid and a new head coach/scheme.

[TheBounceIsReal]

Since January 1st the Celtics are:

#1 in Net Rating
#1 in Defensive Rating
#7 in Offensive Rating (#3 in East)
#3 record (#1 in East)

They are contenders

[Triple M]

No one has ever won a championship peaking in early March.

With the way teams ebb and flow throughout the season (wasn't there a time where Celtics fans were calling for a coaching change in early January?), don't be a bit surprised to see the Celtics stumble to the regular season finish line.

I don't think it is about peaking too early and instead about a team finding answers. The celtics had a lot of flaws earlier in the year but they sort of found answers along the way.

They were a team that played down to their opposition in Nov/Dec, blowing leads, and we're very stagnant on offence.

This team is almost the exact opposite of that, getting up for the marquee games, blowing out the bad team's by 25-30, and the offense has been near the top 5 in O rating the last 2 month

I don't know what that will mean in the playoffs, but I think I'm going to back it because we are boarding on 30 games and they are playing at an elite level

[Statlanta]

I'm kinda confused whether to take their net rating seriously. If you played/scouted the Celtics with their new additions and camraderie the same way you played them in November with their chemistry in shambles you're bound to get blown out.

I wouldn't be surprised if they made the ECF, but I also wouldn't be surprised if they get beat 4-1 in the first round.

Does that make them contenders? I'm not sure even Celtics fans know the answer to that question.

[Curmudgeon]

Certainly on paper Miami and Milwaukee are better than the Celtics. Maybe Philadelphia too. But no team is going to enjoy facing the Celtics in the playoffs. They're like those "grindhouse" teams in Memphis. You have to work for everything you get. And they've got two guys who can go off for 40-50 points on any given night.

[Jadoogar]

The East is crazy deep with contenders

Yup the East is so strong. i would not be surprised if Bucks, Sixers, Heat or Celtics came out of the east
Brooklyn is too low of a seed, even if they all get healthy, i can't see them winning 4 playoff series on the road all while integrating Ben Simmons.

[Asian Celtic]

I see the Celtics as contenders but not within top 5.

An "I don't want to face team" but might be underdogs the rest of the playoffs.

[Waider]

As a Celtics fan I do think they can win the East. But obviously I don't think they are favourites to do so, just that they can. The East playoffs will be really good with 6 legitimate winning chances. Perhaps I'm biased but I have them at #3 behind the Bucks & Philly.

[zeebneeb]

I mean they don’t have holes on defense, so I take it you mean offense?

Essentially yes. The Celtics really lack a floor general that can dictate pace, and set players up when things get super tight in the playoffs.

Think Paul, Holiday, Irving, Lowery, Harden, Garland, Young, Ball, Curry, e.t.c.

That is a huge problem, and will only get magnified in the playoffs.

I also don't like the reliance on 35 year old Horford to play that many games, and minutes to even get to the finals.

The Celtics bench is also pretty brutal and if memory serves, it is bottom 5 in terms of scoring. The Celtics basically have two damn good players, +2 good players, surrounded by marginal players. The burden Tatum/Brown carry on offense is massive.

I appreciate your response, you're like the only person who pooed on the C's but actually gave reasons for it.

To take your thoughts in reverse order... Yeah the C's lack a ton of depth. They go 9 deep. The starters plus White, Pritchard, Grant W, and Theis. None of those guys are big scorers but they are all smart quality players. Then we have Nesmith and some other random dudes but they rarely play. Honestly I'm not concerned about depth in the postseason as long as they stay relatively healthy. Rotations are shortened in the postseason so if it was going to hurt us it would be hurting us more in the RS.

Horford looks super spry and energized. That's not a concern for me.

The thing about needing a "floor general"... I've seen people say this about the C's all season and wondered about it myself and a few C's fans still think it's an issue. But I don't think it's an issue. For the last 10 weeks the C's have been near the top of the league in passes per game and assist per game. It's not been about one guy dominating the ball, it's a whole team effort with ball movement, player movement, zipping the ball around and making the extra pass. And it's working.

Honestly I think unless you have an elite tier pass first PG like Chris Paul, depending on one guy to make plays is actually more predictable and easier to guard than a whole team picking you apart. And you named guys like Holiday, Irving, etc, but with their teams the ballhandling and playmaking duties often fall to Giannis and Durant when it matters. So who's the real "floor general" on those teams?

And all that said, Smart is a much better PG than people give him credit for. Advanced stats are very kind to him as a playmaker and he's playing some terrific basketball. Going from Schroder to White improved the team's playmaking ability a ton. Guys like Brown and Horford are able to rip off the rebound and take the ball down the court and initiate offense.

And we've officially gotten to the point in Tatum's career where he's out there Lebronning teams with the ball in his hands and making the right play every time down the court. He's been our primary ball handler in crunch time and he's absolutely killing it.

So, I'm not so concerned about your Celtics concerns, is what I'm trying to say.

Thanks for an actual reply/rebuttal. It's refreshing instead of some of the thoughtless "someone disagrees with me so they're stupid" post's.

My thoughts are almost entirely aimed at the playoffs, and if they(Celtics)can do everything they have displayed recently, in an actual title run. What any team does in the regular season, while a hell of a lot of fun to watch, and get excited for, tends to mean very little when defenses become tighter, full-court pressure goes up, and gameplans change.

I want to jump right into Marcus Smart. I love the guy. He plays at 100% all the time, and will always be the guy doing whatever it takes to get the win. He plays with an energy I wish all NBA players had.(imagine Drummond with Smarts drive for example)My main issue with him is can he do it in the playoffs, night in, and night out in a 7 game series? Facing intense ball pressure all the time, while playing his style of defense at 100%, and run the team? That is going to dictate just how far the Celtics can get.

I also am still concerned about Horfords minutes. The reliance on him is going to be even greater in the playoffs with his deep playoff experience, and will he hold up? He seems to be in great shape, but at his age, it can become a concern.

I have zero issue with Tatum/Brown. Tatum has been amazing.

I essentially have trouble imagining this Celtics team getting thru the teams they need to in the East, and then taking on PHX, or GS in the finals. (Maybe Memphis or Jazz but I have sincere doubts of that happening)

If they do, ill be very surprised.

[ajones9219]

Celtics are not legit contenders. Unless the teams they play have a slew of injuries, they cannot beat the top teams in the league in a 7 game series.

To many holes.

I mean they don’t have holes on defense, so I take it you mean offense?

Essentially yes. The Celtics really lack a floor general that can dictate pace, and set players up when things get super tight in the playoffs.

Think Paul, Holiday, Irving, Lowery, Harden, Garland, Young, Ball, Curry, e.t.c.

That is a huge problem, and will only get magnified in the playoffs.

I also don't like the reliance on 35 year old Horford to play that many games, and minutes to even get to the finals.

The Celtics bench is also pretty brutal and if memory serves, it is bottom 5 in terms of scoring. The Celtics basically have two damn good players, +2 good players, surrounded by marginal players. The burden Tatum/Brown carry on offense is massive.

The only thing i'll say....Horford is 2 years older than KD with far less injury history. It's weird that people act like Horford is old as hell and nobody seems to do that with players like Lowry, KD, Curry, ect. Unless the argument is those guys are going to fall off in the next 2 years.

[BostonCouchGM]

I know this makes me a "hater" or "troll" and I'm alone in this, but our recent two month hot streak has come against either bad/tanking teams or good teams missing key starter(s), usually at home, while we've mostly been healthy.

Let's look at some of these wins:

*denotes bad/tanking teams
@ denotes home games

12/31 Suns-No Ayton, Crowder @
1/2 Orlando-No Isaac, Suggs, Fultz, Anthony, Okeke * @
1/8 Knicks-No Rose, Walker, Fournier * @
1/10 Pacers-No Brogdon, Levert, Jackson * @
1/12 Pacers*
1/15 Bulls-No Ball, Williams, Caruso @
1/17 Pelicans-No Zion, Hayes @
1/23 Wizards
1/25 Kings-No Fox * @
1/29 Pelicans-No Ingram, Zion, Valuncianus, Hayes
1/31 Heat-No Butler, Lowry, Tucker @
2/2 Hornets-No Hayward, McDaniels @
2/4 Pistons-No Cunningham, Jackson *
2/6 Magic-No Isaac, Fultz, Hampton*
2/8 Nets-No Durant, Harden, Kyrie
2/11 Nuggets-No Murray, MPJ, Morris @
2/13 Hawks-No Collins @
2/15 Sixers-No Simmons, Curry
2/24 Nets-No Harden, Durant, Kyrie
2/26 Pistons *
3/1 Hawks-No Collins @
3/3 Grizzlies-No Brooks @
3/6 Nets-No Simmons @

take off your homer glasses and tell me which one of these wins is supposed to be impressive? And since you can't find any, though I'm sure you'll do your best to spin a few as such, then how impressive really have we been? Aren't the stats skewed? I mean, you're goign to have better looking stats individually and as a team when you're beating up easy competition right?

[ajones9219]

I know this makes me a "hater" or "troll" and I'm alone in this, but our recent two month hot streak has come against either bad/tanking teams or good teams missing key starter(s), usually at home, while we've mostly been healthy.

Let's look at some of these wins:

*denotes bad/tanking teams
@ denotes home games

12/31 Suns-No Ayton, Crowder @
1/2 Orlando-No Isaac, Suggs, Fultz, Anthony, Okeke * @
1/8 Knicks-No Rose, Walker, Fournier * @
1/10 Pacers-No Brogdon, Levert, Jackson * @
1/12 Pacers*
1/15 Bulls-No Ball, Williams, Caruso @
1/17 Pelicans-No Zion, Hayes @
1/23 Wizards
1/25 Kings-No Fox * @
1/29 Pelicans-No Ingram, Zion, Valuncianus, Hayes
1/31 Heat-No Butler, Lowry, Tucker @
2/2 Hornets-No Hayward, McDaniels @
2/4 Pistons-No Cunningham, Jackson *
2/6 Magic-No Isaac, Fultz, Hampton*
2/8 Nets-No Durant, Harden, Kyrie
2/11 Nuggets-No Murray, MPJ, Morris @
2/13 Hawks-No Collins @
2/15 Sixers-No Simmons, Curry
2/24 Nets-No Harden, Durant, Kyrie
2/26 Pistons *
3/1 Hawks-No Collins @
3/3 Grizzlies-No Brooks @
3/6 Nets-No Simmons @

take off your homer glasses and tell me which one of these wins is supposed to be impressive? And since you can't find any, though I'm sure you'll do your best to spin a few as such, then how impressive really have we been? Aren't the stats skewed? I mean, you're goign to have better looking stats individually and as a team when you're beating up easy competition right?

dumb take. every team deals with injuries. The Celtics have played the schedule in front of them and have had the best net rating for over half the season. Winning is hard in the NBA, regardless of who you're playing. And the Celts have gone against KD, Trae, Jokic, Embiid, Morant, Derozen, Booker, and CP3 in that span. Miss me with the talk of "oh this team was missing one of their role players." Saying the Nets win doesn't count because no Simmons just shows you are biased. Nobody even knows if the Nets will be improved with Simmons. Their defense will be for sure but imo he kills their offensive spacing.

Also you act as if teams won't be facing injuries in the playoffs. You can't literally be trying to dismiss 2 months of wins. GTFOH

[Fencer reregistered]

I know this makes me a "hater" or "troll" and I'm alone in this, but our recent two month hot streak has come against either bad/tanking teams or good teams missing key starter(s), usually at home, while we've mostly been healthy.

Let's look at some of these wins:

*denotes bad/tanking teams
@ denotes home games

12/31 Suns-No Ayton, Crowder @
1/2 Orlando-No Isaac, Suggs, Fultz, Anthony, Okeke * @
1/8 Knicks-No Rose, Walker, Fournier * @
1/10 Pacers-No Brogdon, Levert, Jackson * @
1/12 Pacers*
1/15 Bulls-No Ball, Williams, Caruso @
1/17 Pelicans-No Zion, Hayes @
1/23 Wizards
1/25 Kings-No Fox * @
1/29 Pelicans-No Ingram, Zion, Valuncianus, Hayes
1/31 Heat-No Butler, Lowry, Tucker @
2/2 Hornets-No Hayward, McDaniels @
2/4 Pistons-No Cunningham, Jackson *
2/6 Magic-No Isaac, Fultz, Hampton*
2/8 Nets-No Durant, Harden, Kyrie
2/11 Nuggets-No Murray, MPJ, Morris @
2/13 Hawks-No Collins @
2/15 Sixers-No Simmons, Curry
2/24 Nets-No Harden, Durant, Kyrie
2/26 Pistons *
3/1 Hawks-No Collins @
3/3 Grizzlies-No Brooks @
3/6 Nets-No Simmons @

take off your homer glasses and tell me which one of these wins is supposed to be impressive? And since you can't find any, though I'm sure you'll do your best to spin a few as such, then how impressive really have we been? Aren't the stats skewed? I mean, you're goign to have better looking stats individually and as a team when you're beating up easy competition right?

I'll call you a troll for including other teams' players who are out for the season, and for not mentioning who was out for the Celtics.

[Theocy]

I know this makes me a "hater" or "troll" and I'm alone in this, but our recent two month hot streak has come against either bad/tanking teams or good teams missing key starter(s), usually at home, while we've mostly been healthy.

Let's look at some of these wins:

*denotes bad/tanking teams
@ denotes home games

12/31 Suns-No Ayton, Crowder @
1/2 Orlando-No Isaac, Suggs, Fultz, Anthony, Okeke * @
1/8 Knicks-No Rose, Walker, Fournier * @
1/10 Pacers-No Brogdon, Levert, Jackson * @
1/12 Pacers*
1/15 Bulls-No Ball, Williams, Caruso @
1/17 Pelicans-No Zion, Hayes @
1/23 Wizards
1/25 Kings-No Fox * @
1/29 Pelicans-No Ingram, Zion, Valuncianus, Hayes
1/31 Heat-No Butler, Lowry, Tucker @
2/2 Hornets-No Hayward, McDaniels @
2/4 Pistons-No Cunningham, Jackson *
2/6 Magic-No Isaac, Fultz, Hampton*
2/8 Nets-No Durant, Harden, Kyrie
2/11 Nuggets-No Murray, MPJ, Morris @
2/13 Hawks-No Collins @
2/15 Sixers-No Simmons, Curry
2/24 Nets-No Harden, Durant, Kyrie
2/26 Pistons *
3/1 Hawks-No Collins @
3/3 Grizzlies-No Brooks @
3/6 Nets-No Simmons @

take off your homer glasses and tell me which one of these wins is supposed to be impressive? And since you can't find any, though I'm sure you'll do your best to spin a few as such, then how impressive really have we been? Aren't the stats skewed? I mean, you're goign to have better looking stats individually and as a team when you're beating up easy competition right?

I'll call you a troll for including other teams' players who are out for the season, and for not mentioning who was out for the Celtics.

I dont think the C’s are world-beaters but you need to be a special kind of animal to include players like those I’m highlighting as ‘missing’ or key what has lucky done to you really??

[Wilfried]

It's about how they match up against other teams.
I feel they match up very well against the Nets or Sixers (Horford can slow down Embiid) but than again they don't really match-up great against the Heat or Bucks (I feel).

It will depend on the teams they face, but they are for sure a top 4 team in the East atm

[Fencer reregistered]

It's about how they match up against other teams.
I feel they match up very well against the Nets or Sixers (Horford can slow down Embiid) but than again they don't really match-up great against the Heat or Bucks (I feel).

It will depend on the teams they face, but they are for sure a top 4 team in the East atm

If you count the Nets as contenders, then the only easy conclusion about the East is that the Celtics are top 5.

That said, I don't see why the Heat are a bad matchup at this point.