# Celtics gettin underrated?



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

i still think you can take atlantic division, you lost Antoine Walker, but hes not anything amazing, just taking away from your cap. you guys did better then any other team in the draft for one of the top teams in the year and im sure the GM and Owners know what they're doin. I dont think you'll contend for a title but i think the celtics will contend for 8 seed or 3 seed by winnin atlantic.


----------



## Rebounders_Rule! (Aug 18, 2005)

Thanks for the props, BenGordon. I just wish more Celtics fans saw it your way. You might be surprised how many posters to this and other C's boards think the loss of Antoine condemns us to being under .500 next year, a sentiment I find ridiculous.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

im sorry but the nets will have a record that is at least 10 games better than the celtics next year...lets not be ridiculous people...jason kidd vince carter richard jefferson...or paul pierce paul pierce and paul pierce...the nets will be disgusting next year and win the division


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Rebounders_Rule! said:


> Thanks for the props, BenGordon. I just wish more Celtics fans saw it your way. You might be surprised how many posters to this and other C's boards think the loss of Antoine condemns us to being under .500 next year, a sentiment I find ridiculous.


Amen. It really is ridiculous. The argument I'm seeing most is oh, everyone else has improved in the East. Well guess what fellas, we are in the Atlantic Division, where no one has really improved all that much. Unless you want to consider New York adding Quentin Richardson a major upgrade. SAR is an upgrade for New Jersey, but he isn't someone that's going to put them over the top. The team that has improved the most is Miami, and they were already #1 in the East so not much has really changed. 

The Boston fans that really think we are going to be THAT bad this year are really pessimistic. It's sickening how little faith our fans have in the team.


----------



## Lynx (Mar 6, 2004)

If I were a C's fan, I would be more excited about not only upcoming season but 5-6 years down the road. Danny piled up young prospect one after the other. You gotta give him props for all the heat he took by trading 'Toine. 

It's a shame that C's are being underrated by their own fans.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

our whole roster other than pierce and blount and lafrentz is under 25 years old...if you think we can win an ncaa championship then maybe ur right...if you think we can contend for anything in the nba you are wrong...at least for the next 2 or 3 years...draft picks dont win you games unless their name is lebron or amare


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

ya and what great players did u have last year? and u still beat the nets record. the nets have been havin that lineup and barely got 8 seed, it aint a good combination. Star PGs and Star SGs are a bad combination. you need a PG-SG and a C-PF. Stockton-malone.
Kobe-Shaq.West-Wilt.Cousy-Russell.Magic-Kareem.Dr J-Moses.Oscar-Kareem.Panny-Shaq. u get the point. its the no 1 way to win an NBA title and 90% of NBA titles have come from that combination. u put two star Guards together and each wants his numbers to be better. Celtics might win Atlantic, or Nets might win it also even with their bad combination of guards. either way, i dont see a drop off comin without walker. You at least replaced his talent with just the draft picks.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

We will hover around .500 this year like last year because our competition has increased (which cancels out the improvements of the rookies).


----------



## BostonBasketball (Jan 10, 2005)

> We will hover around .500 this year like last year because our competition has increased (which cancels out the improvements of the rookies).


That pretty much sums it up. However .500 will likely get us into the playoffs again, probably the 8th seed. I think if Jefferson really is the biggest question on the team. How much will he have improved on defense? Is he ready to handle 20-30 mpg and play well? If he can prove that hes improved significantly since the end of last year than I think that the Celtics can contend for the Atlantic division. Yet if he is the same player as he was last year than the Celtics will struggle to win as their only true scorers on the team will be Pierce and Davis.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

BenGordon said:


> ya and what great players did u have last year? and u still beat the nets record. the nets have been havin that lineup and barely got 8 seed.




ur kidding right...the nets started out last year 4-12 before they got carter and ended the season 38-28 with him and most of the games without jefferson...they havent had that lineup at all because rj was hurt the whole year...check the facts man


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

I doubt we make the playoffs.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> ur kidding right...the nets started out last year 4-12 before they got carter and ended the season 38-28 with him and most of the games without jefferson...they havent had that lineup at all because rj was hurt the whole year...check the facts man


the bulls started out 0-9. and we had late season injuries, and still ended up as 3rd best record in the east. so whats the reason why nets did so bad? even Indiana did better then them and went without JO and Ron Artest half the season.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

BenGordon said:


> the bulls started out 0-9. and we had late season injuries, and still ended up as 3rd best record in the east. so whats the reason why nets did so bad? even Indiana did better then them and went without JO and Ron Artest half the season.




fist of all we are talkin about who will win the atlantic so neither of those teams really matter...i get ur point tho but u said that the nets have been having that lineup and they still only got the 8th seed...the nets had they lineup of kidd jefferson carter for like 15 games...you give them a full season and they win 50 games easily


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

a lot of teams had it a lot worse last year then nets and finished a lot better. but few of those teams are expected to get 50 wins, so why is it the nets are supposed to do so well?


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> SAR is an upgrade *for New Jersey,* but he isn't someone that's going to put them over the top.


Is that a joke?










Where you been?



> ya and what great players did u have last year?


Guy named Paul Pierce. Heard of him? That Walker dude wasn't that bad, either.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

I don't think anyone is being pessimistic, people are being realistic. We lost Antoine, we ALSO lost Gary Payton and that is a bigger key than a lot of people realized also because he was a true vet and a leader, he was solid at the point and he's a future hall of famer. We added 3 more rookies and some other guys who may or may not stick who are also young. This is a YOUNG team, talented yes, but sooooo sooooo young. When the season starts we'll have 3 guys who can't even buy a drink legally (Perkins, Jefferson, Green) who were all drafted out of high school. We have no leader (Paul is the star not the leader). This team is in trouble this season, it's a fact. They will be fun to watch but they are not going to win an impressive amount of games. 

The competition has gotten a LOT better.....Miami, New Jersey, Cleveland and Milwaukee will be a lot better than last year. I don't see us making the playoffs with this roster. 
Heat
Pistons
Pacers
Nets
Cavaliers
Bucks
Wizards
Bulls
I expect to see those 8 teams in the playoffs (not in that order), I think Boston, Philly, & Orlando will be the closest teams looking in from the outside come playoff time.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

whiterhino said:


> I don't think anyone is being pessimistic, people are being realistic. We lost Antoine, we ALSO lost Gary Payton and that is a bigger key than a lot of people realized also because he was a true vet and a leader, he was solid at the point and he's a future hall of famer. We added 3 more rookies and some other guys who may or may not stick who are also young. This is a YOUNG team, talented yes, but sooooo sooooo young. When the season starts we'll have 3 guys who can't even buy a drink legally (Perkins, Jefferson, Green) who were all drafted out of high school. We have no leader (Paul is the star not the leader). This team is in trouble this season, it's a fact. They will be fun to watch but they are not going to win an impressive amount of games.
> 
> The competition has gotten a LOT better.....Miami, New Jersey, Cleveland and Milwaukee will be a lot better than last year. I don't see us making the playoffs with this roster.
> Heat
> ...




yea...what he said ^^^


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

P-Dub34 said:


> That Walker dude wasn't that bad, either.


*Blasphemy!

:clown:
*


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

I don't really think the Celtics are getting underrated at this point. Though I am not ready to declaire the Bucks as a playoff team. The Celtics, 76ers, Magic, and Bucks will be competing for the 8th.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

i dont think wizards are gonna hang in there this year. people overrate larry hughes and cleveland as gonna be dominatin, but they say nothin bout the wizards losin this ''incredible player'' whose gonna change cleveland into a 50 win team???
Who'd they get Caron Butler? With the wizards, its a bunch of young semi-allstars tryin to build stats and playin very badly together even this year. Hughes is better then Caron, but i also think Caron is overrated. a very cheap form of lamar odom without the defensive talent. Celtics at worst i see as a 8 seed.


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

BenGordon said:


> i dont think wizards are gonna hang in there this year. people overrate larry hughes and cleveland as gonna be dominatin, but they say nothin bout the wizards losin this ''incredible player'' whose gonna change cleveland into a 50 win team???
> Who'd they get Caron Butler? With the wizards, its a bunch of young semi-allstars tryin to build stats and playin very badly together even this year. Hughes is better then Caron, but i also think Caron is overrated. a very cheap form of lamar odom without the defensive talent. Celtics at worst i see as a 8 seed.


Amen. The Cavs weren't even that good last year. Adding Hughes might give them an extra 5-10 wins, tops. The Wizards got worse this off-season. And how did Orlando become a playoff team now? They didn't add jack ****. And how do the Bucks become a playoff team? Because of Bogut? Sorry but a rookie doesn't automatically push you into the playoffs.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

Lanteri said:


> Amen. The Cavs weren't even that good last year. Adding Hughes might give them an extra 5-10 wins, tops. The Wizards got worse this off-season. And how did Orlando become a playoff team now? They didn't add jack ****. And how do the Bucks become a playoff team? Because of Bogut? Sorry but a rookie doesn't automatically push you into the playoffs.



the cavs added hughes AND marshall...this probably gives them another 8-10 wins which would put them at at least 50....thats a playoff team


the bucks added bogut AND bobby simmons...along with redd and mason this gives them another 10 wins which would put them around .500 and fighting for a playoff seed


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

An improved LeBron (better at defense), Larry Hughes, and Donyell Marshall will only add five wins?


----------



## mjm1 (Aug 22, 2005)

when will u learn that hughes was in a contract year and wanted to get out of washington. He is overrated, is Marshall really an improvement over Gooden who puts up 15 and 10?


----------



## bigbabyjesus (Mar 1, 2003)

mjm1 said:


> when will u learn that hughes was in a contract year and wanted to get out of washington. He is overrated, is Marshall really an improvement over Gooden who puts up 15 and 10?


Hughes might be overrated (more on the defensive end, if anything), but he is still a very, very good player that is a nice compliment next to LeBron. And Marshall is a _huge_ improvement over Gooden. Gooden is a good rebounder, thats it. He is a black hole on offense. Donyell can rebound the ball just as good, plays better post defense, and brings the *much* needed three point shooting.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Whats wrong with having two good players for one position?


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

BenGordon said:


> i still think you can take atlantic division, you lost Antoine Walker, but hes not anything amazing, just taking away from your cap. you guys did better then any other team in the draft for one of the top teams in the year and im sure the GM and Owners know what they're doin. I dont think you'll contend for a title but i think the celtics will contend for 8 seed or 3 seed by winnin atlantic.


We barely made the playoffs pre-Walker trade last year, add a 18 year old, 2nd rounders, one undrafted guy and all of a sudden we're better off while losing our best PF?

I'm sure that Danny and the owners know what they're doing...3/4 years from now.



Lanteri said:


> Amen. It really is ridiculous. The argument I'm seeing most is oh, everyone else has improved in the East. *Well guess what fellas, we are in the Atlantic Division, where no one has really improved all that much.* Unless you want to consider New York adding Quentin Richardson a major upgrade. SAR is an upgrade for New Jersey, but he isn't someone that's going to put them over the top. The team that has improved the most is Miami, and they were already #1 in the East so not much has really changed.
> 
> The Boston fans that really think we are going to be THAT bad this year are really pessimistic. It's sickening how little faith our fans have in the team.


What in the world are you takling about? The Nets were twice the team we were last year, the year before that, and ever since Kidd came there. Kidd was injured last year, Jefferson carried the team, once they traded for Carter, RJ got injured for the whole season. They had their only PF playing only 20 minutes _off the bench_, they had the worst bench in the league, and had never-before-heard-of-guys in their starting line up. Krstic has a year under his belt, they got their other Center from Europe, they added a PF, got a nice player in the draft, and added a very good PG to back up Kidd.

Also, keep a close eye on the Raptors.



BenGordon said:


> ya and what great players did u have last year? and u still beat the nets record. the nets have been havin that lineup and barely got 8 seed, it aint a good combination. Star PGs and Star SGs are a bad combination.


Read above.



BenGordon said:


> the bulls started out 0-9. and we had late season injuries, and still ended up as 3rd best record in the east. so whats the reason why nets did so bad? even Indiana did better then them and went without JO and Ron Artest half the season.


The Nets had the _worst bench_ in the entire league, heck NBDL teams could beat them out.



#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> the cavs added hughes AND marshall...this probably gives them another 8-10 wins which would put them at at least 50....thats a playoff team
> 
> 
> the bucks added bogut AND bobby simmons...along with redd and mason this gives them another 10 wins which would put them around .500 and fighting for a playoff seed


2 extra wins for the Cavs gives them a playoff birth...even if they don't get those 8-10 wins, they're still a playoff team.

Also, add TJ Ford coming back to the Bucks to that list.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Lanteri said:


> Amen. The Cavs weren't even that good last year. Adding Hughes might give them an extra 5-10 wins, tops. The Wizards got worse this off-season. And how did Orlando become a playoff team now? They didn't add jack ****. And how do the Bucks become a playoff team? Because of Bogut? Sorry but a rookie doesn't automatically push you into the playoffs.


Lant have you been keeping track of transactions??????!!!!

The Wizards lost Hughes but they added not only Caron Butler but also Antonio Daniels and Chucky Atkins. They are AT LEAST as good as last year, but I think they are better.

The Cavaliers added not only Hughes but ALSO Donyell Marshall, which is HUGE for them. They also have Andriewskevitz, who surprised some in Summer league, remember this kid was originally a top 3 pick....he may not do much this year but you never know. On top of that they have a Verejo with a season under his belt, a more confident Pavlovic and a healthy Luke Jackson. They also resigned Ilgauskas and still have Gooden.

The Bucks not only added Bogut, they ALSO added Bobby Simmons AND got TJ FORD back which is HUGE HUGE HUGE for them. On top of that they resigned Gadzuric & Redd and still have Mason, Smith, and Mo Williams. 

I have not read anywhere where anyone said that Orlando is a playoff team, however, a Dwight Howard & Jameer Nelson with 1 year of experience under their belts automatically makes them better. I don't not see them in the playoffs though.

The Celtics lost their starting PF and starting PG and added a bunch of rookies, how can anyone not see the writing on the wall.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

whiterhino said:


> The Wizards lost Hughes but they added not only Caron Butler but also Antonio Daniels and Chucky Atkins. They are AT LEAST as good as last year, but I think they are better.


No, they are not. Caron Butler does not make up for Larry Hughes defense and we don't know if Antwan Jaminson can match his early-season sucess. Kwame Brown is also gone.



> The Cavaliers added not only Hughes but ALSO Donyell Marshall, which is HUGE for them. They also have Andriewskevitz, who surprised some in Summer league, remember this kid was originally a top 3 pick....he may not do much this year but you never know. On top of that they have a Verejo with a season under his belt, a more confident Pavlovic and a healthy Luke Jackson. They also resigned Ilgauskas and still have Gooden.


Martynas Andriuskevicius is far from ready. Anderson Varejao will only repeat his production from last year times the increase in minutes. Aleksandar Pavlovic isn't anything special and Luke Jackson was horrible last year. The additions of Marshall and Hughes are the sole reasons why they will be good next year.


----------



## MJG (Jun 29, 2003)

Lanteri said:


> Amen. The Cavs weren't even that good last year. Adding Hughes might give them an extra 5-10 wins, tops.


Um, what? Cleveland was tied for the 8th seed record-wise and three games back from winning the division. No, they weren't on the verge of being title contenders, but a couple of different bounces throughout the season and they're division winners with homecourt in the first round. If their offseason additions add "an extra 5-10 wins, tops," they'll be at worst second in the division and contend for homecourt. Heck, if their offseason additions add only 2-3 wins, they're still in the playoffs.

And this is coming from someone who doesn't especially like Cleveland and definitely doesn't like Larry Hughes.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Premier said:


> An improved LeBron (better at defense), Larry Hughes, and Donyell Marshall will only add five wins?


Even if that's all they added that makes them two games better than the Celtics were last year, and the Celtics downgraded at two positions. Losing Hughes isn't as devastating to Washington because they're replacing Kwame Brown at the 4 with Antawn and spreading Hughes offense out among Antonio Daniels & Caron Butler, who should fit better with Gilbert Arenas. Right now the Celtics are no better than 9-12 in the East.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Which should be just under .500 in a deeper Eastern Conference.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

Right, hence my predictions that Boston will be 39-43 this year with Pierce. Without him they'll be picking in the top six next draft. Of course, they should finally be able to get a point guard.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

Hey we are always underrated, that is not even a worry let the games be played and we will see, but this is my take on the East, 

2 Elite Teams
Miami
Indy

2 Next Tier Teams
Detroit
NJ

Crapshoot for the next four positions between: in this order
Celtics
Cavs
Washington
Chicago
Knicks
Philly

No chance of making playoffs this year:
Orlando
Milwaukee
Toronto
Charlotte
Atlanta


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Milwaukee will make the playoffs.

I like Charlotte and Orlando's chances before Boston's.

The Cavs are a lock.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

Premier said:


> Milwaukee will make the playoffs.
> 
> I like Charlotte and Orlando's chances before Boston's.
> 
> The Cavs are a lock.


Well if you like Charlotte's and Orlando's chances before Boston's you don't know much about basketball but like I said we will see.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

I guess I don't.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

vandyke said:


> Well if you like Charlotte's and Orlando's chances before Boston's you don't know much about basketball but like I said we will see.


I might say the same of someone that thought Boston better than Cleveland, Chicago, and Washington.


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> I might say the same of someone that thought Boston better than Cleveland, Chicago, and Washington.


Not appropriate.


- Premier


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

Awww, I missed it...it's always something good when posts get edited.


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

ehmunro said:


> Of course, they should finally be able to get a point guard.


We have had a PG thats good 4 the past 2 years. I'm really tired of people overlooking Banks. The man is incredible. If West doesn't play the 2 then he is also a great PG so if we do pick that ealry in next years draft we should get a center, which is needed for big Al to do his best.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> We have had a PG thats good 4 the past 2 years. I'm really tired of people overlooking Banks. The man is incredible.


Career totals of 15.6mpg, 40% FG, 33% 3FG, 5.3ppg, 1.6rpg, 2.0apg. Yes, he really is incredible.



> If West doesn't play the 2 then he is also a great PG


He was 4/2/1 last year. Far from "great PG" numbers.


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

Dont give me that stat bull****. You have to give them time to develop.Banks has incredible potential and athletic ability, he will be great. West has a great brain in his head and an all around game, capable of doing GREAT things. Im so sick of stats from the 1st year or 2 of a young players career. Damn It!

West also missed ALOT of his 1st year...So don't try to slam him from stats cuz it's all **** as far as I care.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Marcus Banks and Delonte West are far from incredible.

Banks, at full potential, is an above-average starting point guard.

West, at full potential, is a versatile shooter that teams keep around as a sixth man.


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

Premier said:


> Marcus Banks and Delonte West are far from incredible.


I have said this before, Im not talking about now, Im saying ounce they have time to develope...Damn


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

They won't be incredible *once* they *develop*.



> Banks, at full potential, is an above-average starting point guard.
> 
> West, at full potential, is a versatile shooter that teams keep around as a sixth man.


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

Maybe I did miss that point.

But I just do not agree with you. Banks will be a 3 time all star and West will be about an 8 time all star teams fight for because he is a top 5 guard in the leauge. Banks would they guy teams acquire to run an up-tempo offense.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Let's hope they live up to your expectations.

Sadly, I don't see it.


----------



## thetruth556 (Aug 3, 2005)

I mean, I would say I'm pretty high on banks but I would doubt that he'd ever be an all star. I could definately see banks becoming a starter in this league when and if he learns to use his natural ability. I guess all star status is somewhat attainable because of his athleticism, but I mean how much potential does delonte west really have? West's a decent player to be a leader on the floor, but an 8 time all star seems a biiiiiig stretch.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Good point. Banks may be capable of becoming an all-star, but I doubt it.

West doesn't seem like he has all-star potential at all.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> Dont give me that stat bull****.


What kind of bullcrap do you want, then? More proof that you're factually incorrect?



> You have to give them time to develop.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## DWest Superstar (Jun 30, 2005)

So P-Dub who is better. You seem not to like either


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Gerald Green said:


> So P-Dub who is better. You seem not to like either


Neither is great, nor will they ever be. Maybe one of them (Banks) will become a good starter...maybe not.


----------



## DWest Superstar (Jun 30, 2005)

aquaitious said:


> Neither is great, nor will they ever be. Maybe one of them (Banks) will become a good starter...maybe not.


I say the same thing but replace Banks with West


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

Nothin you said had any impact to pursuade anyone to think otherwise. West im sure would own you off the dribble and the brain in your head im sure has no wear near the basketball iq of West.Stop wasting my time with your "narrow minded homer-ish views" wtf is that? while I keep it real.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

You guys disagree.

This happens a lot in messageboards.

No need to make a big deal out of it.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

I prefer Banks because the athletic skills are there. You can develop a head for the game. By contrast, you cannot develop the athletic gifts. Why do you think MLB teams will draft a guy with a 95mph fastball who can't pitch to save his life over a guy who has peaked out at 88mph but is savvy? Because you can't teach a guy with an 88mph arm to throw 95mph. But you can teach a guy to use his dome.

The same is applicable for basketball. Banks has all the physical gifts. If he ever gets his head straight, he'll be a solid player in this league. I just watched the Det/Bos game the other day and that hesitation crossover that left Arroyo ten feet in his dust was absolutely sickening. West can use his head, but you can't teach physical gifts.

I'm not a huge fan of either, but I'll take Banks over West any day.



> Nothin you said had any impact to pursuade anyone to think otherwise.


Okay. That's certainly within your rights.



> West im sure would own you off the dribble and the brain in your head im sure has no wear near the basketball iq of West.


I'm exaggerating, of course. I thought even you could understand that.



> Stop wasting my time with your "narrow minded homer-ish views" wtf is that? while I keep it real.


The only person wasting your time is you if you take the time to read what I have to say. I refrained from commenting on your ludicrous PP prediction because you're a good Celtic fan and there's no shame in that. If you want me to go further in depth, I can. *But I won't as my comments were previously censored*. You think your team is great, absolutely unbelieveable, and make wild and unrealistic predictions at will. Come on: 8 time All-Star? So West is going to double Pierce's ASG appearances? :laugh: If West is lucky someday he'll be a quarter of the player Paul Pierce is. *EDIT: If this wasn't allowed before, it sure isn't now*



> P-Dub, please do not edit a post that a mod has edited. If you disagree with the edit, PM that mod.
> 
> - Premier


Right you are, I know better than that. Apologies.


----------



## Rebounders_Rule! (Aug 18, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> I prefer Banks because the athletic skills are there. You can develop a head for the game. By contrast, you cannot develop the athletic gifts.


Excuse me, but how "athletic" was Larry Bird? Polite answer, not very. How smart was he? Despite the hick accent, very. 

I'm not saying Delonte is going to be as good as Larry Bird. Or Paul Silas, another not particularly athletic type who still managed to get himself a ring. Or even Don Chaney, yet another Celtic who was more notable for smarts (and unusually long arms for his height) than athleticism. Just that his athletic shortcomings may not matter as much as you're implying they will. 

PS: In case you haven't already gathered as much, I'm inclined to rate West ahead of Banks precisely because he does have the smarts, which aren't always that easy to develop.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Premier said:


> No, they are not. Caron Butler does not make up for Larry Hughes defense and we don't know if Antwan Jaminson can match his early-season sucess. Kwame Brown is also gone.
> 
> 
> Martynas Andriuskevicius is far from ready. Anderson Varejao will only repeat his production from last year times the increase in minutes. Aleksandar Pavlovic isn't anything special and Luke Jackson was horrible last year. The additions of Marshall and Hughes are the sole reasons why they will be good next year.


Ah who cares about stupid Caron Butler, Antonio Daniels is a better player than Hughes all by himself and they have Caron & Chucky on top of him. Kwame Brown?!? You do realize he didn't play 80% of the season last year and that this was a good thing.

Verejo is a beast, he will be awsome for Cleveland. Luke Jackson was INJURED IN TRAINING CAMP last season, no one has seen him play without injury in the NBA yet (not that I think he's anything special). Pavlovic will be in his 3rd season this season and he's a sharp shooter that finally got his confindence at the end of last season. That's all he does but he does it very well.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Larry Bird was a great player because he was skilled.

Delonte West is not.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Premier said:


> Larry Bird was a great player because he was skilled.
> 
> Delonte West is not.


This is fact :biggrin:


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> Excuse me, but how "athletic" was Larry Bird?


The fact is, you can't teach Delonte West to be as skilled as Marcus Banks. But you can teach Marcus Banks to be as smart as Delonte West.

Larry Bird? No skill whatsoever...all smarts...

...

Worst analogy ever.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> I might say the same of someone that thought Boston better than Cleveland, Chicago, and Washington.


Like I said EH we will see but when we win the Atlantic again with the #3 seed you will be the first person I am looking for.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

vandyke said:


> Like I said EH we will see but when we win the Atlantic again with the #3 seed you will be the first person I am looking for.


How about we do a predictions thread right after preseason so we can look back at our intial thoughts on the upcoming season?


----------



## LX (Oct 14, 2004)

Premier said:


> How about we do a predictions thread right after preseason so we can look back at our intial thoughts on the upcoming season?


So many predictions. 

I'd love to see some of you guys eat some serious crow.


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

I'd love to eat crow.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

Let's do it, there is going to be some serious crow eating going on. I'm making my list.


----------



## Clutch777 (Aug 22, 2005)

I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet, but there's a good chance Paul Pierce will be traded this season. He was uncomfortable being the leader for the Celtics for one and a half seasons, and there was a noticible increase in his attitude when Toine came back.

Now that Toine is gone again, Pierce could be next.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

Yes people keep saying that Pierce will or could be traded but until that actually happens why don't we go with the assumption that he will still be here-ok


----------



## Rebounders_Rule! (Aug 18, 2005)

P-Dub34 said:


> The fact is, you can't teach Delonte West to be as skilled as Marcus Banks. But you can teach Marcus Banks to be as smart as Delonte West.


Man, do I ever wish it was as easy to teach a player to be smart as you seem to think it is, P-Dub34. :sigh: 

In actual fact it's usually easier to teach skills to a smart player than to work around a not-so-smart player's intellectual shortcomings. How else does one explain (randomly picking a name off of a list with a *lot* of names in it) Kwame Brown's failure to make better use of his enviable physical abilities?


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

How do you teach Delonte West to be a point guard when he shys away from the ball. He's not assertive at all and sadly, he doesn't have the skills to make up for this. Delonte may be a smart player (a la Scalabrine), but that doesn't mean he will be anything special.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Back to the original topic, what win prediction would be considered "underrating the Celtics" and what is considered "being a realist"?

I think anything below 39 wins, is underrating the Celtics.

Anything between 39-42 wins is a realistic prediction.

Your thoughts?


----------



## P-Dub34 (May 19, 2005)

> In actual fact it's usually easier to teach skills to a smart player than to work around a not-so-smart player's intellectual shortcomings.


No, you're incorrect. You could teach Jamie Moyer to throw a 95mph fastball? Do you think you could teach Marcus Banks' physical gifts to West? Hell no. 

Nobody's saying it's easy to teach smarts. I don't know where you got that from, but everybody seems to be putting words in my mouth for the sake of argument today, so it's all good. But it's easier than teaching a guy ability, because you can't teach ability. If I'm wrong, please tell me why guys are drafted based on potential, skill, and athleticism every single year? Tell my why guys who throw 95mph in baseball are automatic draft picks? Tell me why every scout in Major League Baseball will tell you that they'll take a kid who can't pitch his way out of a paper bag but throws gas ahead of a guy who's smarter but throws 88? Because you can develop smarts. Banks stands more of a chance of developing West's smarts than West does developing Banks' natural gifts, and if you disagree with me there, I'm finished with you because I might as well knock myself out against a brick wall.


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

Anything below 38 is close to underating. 
Anything above 53 is overrating.


I predict 48-34


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

You are in need of a serious reality check.

The same squad was .500 before they traded for Walker (about).

The Eastern Conference has improved. They will be .500 again.

48 wins?


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

I guess I'll get my reality check when the season is over then huh?


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Hopefully, you will be right and I will be wrong, but realistically, it won't happen.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

Sorry Mindz, but that's hilarious. There's no way this team wins 48 games...not for another 2/3 years at least.

We have 1 all star, and about 2 good starters (Ricky and Raef) and a decent bench guy (Blount) the others are all developing.


----------



## vandyke (Jan 8, 2004)

Anything under 40 wins I think would be underating
40-45 sounds about right
45-48 is what I am predicting (hoping)
49-over is pretty much a pipe dream


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

ok...im gonna say one thing abotu this and thats it...let me start off by saying im one of the biggest celtic fans there could be...i work my schedule around the games...but this team will be similar to last years lakers...one star (kobe, pierce)...1 very good 2nd option (odom, ricky)...and decent other options (butler and atkins, raef and al)...the rest of both of the teams are almost insignificant....and the lakers won how many games last yr??? 34???...i know ppl are gonna say ooo the lakers are in the west...forget that now the east has caught up with the west...this is not a case of the celtics being underrated...its a case of celtic fans overrating the celtics...i love the c's but im realistic now...we may have the brightest future out of any nba team...but right now people like green and bynum and west and greene....as much potential as they might have...are probably going to have little or no impact on the season THIS year...in 3 or so years we may be contending for something...for now we are not and lets just accept that...if kobe whos arguably the best player in the world cant bring his team past 34 wins then pierce cant bring the c's past that mark as well


ps...i HOPE im wrong...i know im not

~#1AWF


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

#1AntoineWalkerFan said:


> ok...im gonna say one thing abotu this and thats it...let me start off by saying im one of the biggest celtic fans there could be...i work my schedule around the games...but this team will be similar to last years lakers...one star (kobe, pierce)...1 very good 2nd option (odom, ricky)...and decent other options (butler and atkins, raef and al)...the rest of both of the teams are almost insignificant....and the lakers won how many games last yr??? 34???...i know ppl are gonna say ooo the lakers are in the west...forget that now the east has caught up with the west...this is not a case of the celtics being underrated...its a case of celtic fans overrating the celtics...i love the c's but im realistic now...we may have the brightest future out of any nba team...but right now people like green and bynum and west and greene....as much potential as they might have...are probably going to have little or no impact on the season THIS year...in 3 or so years we may be contending for something...for now we are not and lets just accept that...if kobe whos arguably the best player in the world cant bring his team past 34 wins then pierce cant bring the c's past that mark as well
> 
> 
> ps...i HOPE im wrong...i know im not
> ...


I completely agree with you AWF! I can't see how anyone can't see this. At this point we are not all that much better than young upstart teams like New Orleans, Charlotte & Atlanta (we are better but not by a lot)...we have Pierce but those of you who actually think he's going to be happy in this situation are kidding yourselves.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Don't kid _youself_.

We are much better than New Orleans and Atlanta.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

whiterhino said:


> I completely agree with you AWF! I can't see how anyone can't see this. At this point we are not all that much better than young upstart teams like New Orleans, Charlotte & Atlanta (we are better but not by a lot)...we have Pierce but those of you who actually think he's going to be happy in this situation are kidding yourselves.




:cheers:


----------



## KingHandles (Mar 19, 2005)

Premier said:


> Don't kid _youself_.
> 
> We are much better than New Orleans and Atlanta.


OT-Is there any word on New Orleans NBA season situation?


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

I don't know.

In my opinion, they should play in St. Louis.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Premier said:


> Don't kid _youself_.
> 
> We are much better than New Orleans and Atlanta.


No, actually we are not MUCH better, I said we are better, we are NOT much better.

New Orleans
PG Chris Paul
SG JR Smith
SF David West
PF PJ Brown
C Jamal Magliore


Atlanta
PG Joe Johnson
SG Josh Smith
SF Josh Childress
PF Al Harrington
C Zaur Pachulia

They don't have a guy like Pierce, that is really the only difference. They have just as much young talent as we do. The Hornets also have a former all-star young center in Magliore. They are not on our level, no, but we are not 20 wins better, we may be 10 wins better. If we end up trading Paul, and don't get an all-star back, then we'd really not have much that they don't have. I don't mean to be a pessimist, I love my Celtics, but I am prepared to see a LOT of losses this season and I think others need to be prepared for it as well. Our team is a bunch of no-names.


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Ten wins is _a lot_.


----------



## whiterhino (Jun 15, 2003)

Premier said:


> Ten wins is _a lot_.


Not when you are talking 10 wins more than the cellar dwellers of the league, then no, 10 wins is not a lot....it's quite sad actually.


----------



## #1AntoineWalkerFan (Mar 10, 2005)

whiterhino said:


> Not when you are talking 10 wins more than the cellar dwellers of the league, then no, 10 wins is not a lot....it's quite sad actually.




yeeeeeeeep....if you say we are 10 wins better then atlanta goes 24-58 and the celts go 34-48...i could really see that happening...again i love my celts as well but our team is not as good as many are making it out to be...some ppl saying 40 or 45 wins??? cmon now


----------



## Premier (Oct 30, 2003)

Atlanta will finish with atleast 30 wins this year. New Orleans, not so much.


----------



## agoo (Jun 1, 2003)

Atlanta is going to take a lot of losses, but no one is going to enjoy playing them at all. The same cannot be said for New Orleans at all.


----------



## Deke (Jul 27, 2005)

Premier said:


> I don't know.
> 
> In my opinion, they should play in St. Louis.


 they need to be in baltimore, we won the first NBA title,2nd Superbowl,35th Superbowl, and 3 World Series. I dont know if Hornets will move, but we should have an NBA team.


----------



## aquaitious (Jun 11, 2002)

BenGordon said:


> they need to be in baltimore, we won the first NBA title,2nd Superbowl,35th Superbowl, and 3 World Series. I dont know if Hornets will move, but we should have an NBA team.


If the Hornets are moved and/or located for the season, they'll probably go to Las Vegas.


----------

