I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    Well, where is it... we were held under 90 3rd straight game
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    Who said anything about trading defense for offense? The Celts are still #1 in the NBA in points allowed and tonight the Nets also failed to score 90 points. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    other members of the board, if it wasn't you, no need to comment...
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]other members of the board, if it wasn't you, no need to comment...
    Posted by KGLove[/QUOTE]

    Why? My comments are more realistic than saying, "I thought we traded defense for offense?"
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]other members of the board, if it wasn't you, no need to comment...
    Posted by KGLove[/QUOTE]

    I hate to say it but you're starting to sound like Stan Van Gundy, "The Master of Panic".
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from OneOnOne. Show OneOnOne's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    Well there was one poster here who had us labeled as a "offensive juggernaut" after two games into the trade.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Karllost. Show Karllost's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    We're definitely a better team imo./

    We picked up better players for what we gave away.

    The problem is some of the players we already had arent performing... thats not the new players fault
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from teh-n00b. Show teh-n00b's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    perk wouldn't have helped offensively these last couple of games.

    defensively, krstic has been better than I (and just about everyone) expected.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]We're definitely a better team imo./ We picked up better players for what we gave away. The problem is some of the players we already had arent performing... thats not the new players fault
    Posted by Karllost[/QUOTE]
    ON POINT Karllost.  It's funny how some folks believe our recent struggles has to do with the guys we brought in.  That does factor in to some degree (a very small degree).  But, like you mention, the problem is that some of the players we already had are not performing and that is the most important.

    To a very small degree it's the backups.  It's the guys who have been in green all season.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense? : ON POINT Karllost.  It's funny how some folks believe our recent struggles has to do with the guys we brought in.  That does factor in to some degree (a very small degree).  But, like you mention, the problem is that some of the players we already had are not performing and that is the most important. To a very small degree it's the backups.  It's the guys who have been in green all season.
    Posted by Petey62[/QUOTE]

    The Celts were leading the Nets 23-14 until the new players started coming in. By the middle of the 2nd qtr. it was already a close game.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    P34, there will be times when the backups don't maintain a lead and there will be times like the previous night against Milwaukee, when they maintain or extend the lead.  But it starts with the starting unit.  They are the players who are supposed to lead us, not the bench.

    It is more important for the starters to play well now as the bench gets integrated more.  The starters have less of an excuse for their play of late than the backups.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from kyceltic. Show kyceltic's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?



     when you have 2 starters score a total of 9 points, it has a tendency to hurt the offense!!
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]P34, there will be times when the backups don't maintain a lead and there will be times like the previous night against Milwaukee, when they maintain or extend the lead.  But it starts with the starting unit.  They are the players who are supposed to lead us, not the bench. It is more important for the starters to play well now as the bench gets integrated more.  The starters have less of an excuse for their play of late than the backups.
    Posted by Petey62[/QUOTE]

    That's true but we all know since KG got hurt in 2009 the starters were never the same. Proof of this is last season and their measly 50 wins. 

    I'm not expecting big things from the starters in the regular season anymore. Beating good teams and losing to bad teams is an indication that they're not taking the bad teams seriously.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    This team has been decimated by injuries and they're trying to incorporate a bunch of new guys at the same time.  And the new guys are better than the guys they gave up I might add, although the Perk trade is hurting them in the short term.l  I'd rather the C's iron out all the wrinkles now and be better off for it come playoff time. 

    And to the Rondo hater crowd, not for nothing, the guy has been the only legit PG this team has had for most of the season.  He's battling nagging injuries and all he does is play serious minutes every game.  When Arroyo is here for a bit and when West is back the guy will get a well deserved break.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    P34, I agree about KG, but he's so much better NOW than he was last season and it shows by our record compared to last seasons.  Also going 27 and 27 in the final 54 games like last season is alot different from what's going on this season.  Why wait until there are less than 19 games to "take the foot off the gas" and with so much at stake?  At a time when we can either mail games in or dig deeper and fight for that #1 seed with fewer then 20 games remaining, we resort to "mailing some games in".

    I think it's dangerous to "not expect big things from the starters in the regular season anymore".  I hope the players don't have that mentality.  That approach is what causes you to expend so much more energy in the playoffs dealing with Miami as opposed to Orlando or Atlanta in the second round.  It is so vital for this team to face either Chicago OR Miami in the Eastern Conference Finals (not one in the second round and the other in the ECF).  It seems to be worth reducing the number of playoff games by digging deep now and winning some extremely winnable games (Clips, Sixers, Nets).

    Most of the other elite teams are "turning it on" right about now, not taking their foot off the pedal.  It's "home-stretch" time and we are struggling against inferior teams.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    Petey, until Shaq returns the only inside game the Celts have is KG. Against the Suns KG had an ax to grind, it resulted in 28 pts and 11 rebs. The Celts need KG to play like that.
     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    P34, I hear you but is that really true, about Shaq as the inside game?  I mean, we're getting more production out of the center position now than we've gotten this entire season AND the past 7 years.  I'm not talking just about points.  Krstic is very active and provides energy.  He can play "decent" defense, can rebound and he's a very skilled offensive player.

    Our defensive numbers overall have gotten better (91.2 pts per game) so he's not a liability defensively and we're getting so much more offensive production so I really don't know why there is this belief that our "inside" game is suffering.

    He is doing so much more than Shaq has ever done this season when he was playing.
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from nick_weston. Show nick_weston's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]perk wouldn't have helped offensively these last couple of games. defensively, krstic has been better than I (and just about everyone) expected.
    Posted by teh-n00b[/QUOTE]
    His defence is better that I've expected, I knew he is skilled offensive player, he was on a verge of All-start selection before his ALC injury, few years ago
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    I agree w/ Petey...Shaq qas fun to watch but half the time he barely got off the ground and missed too many bunnies that he usually throws down..His hands are too big to try to get cute around the basket.  Lets hope he comes back with some lift.  Otherwise he is a just a Big Body that can change shots and get rebounds....I will say though if he has the energy to sprint around like he did earlier he will be effective...but Kristic has obviusly upgraded the position offensively....   I still like losing 79-88 rather than losing 122-115....Atleast it shows we are getting some sort of stops...and not running in a track meet.

    I'm 34, and ever since I turned 30, I have a hard time playing b-ball on back to back nights...H ell, I like to play once a week like football players...If this team is ever able to rest, you will see the team we saw earlier in the year...
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from Petey62. Show Petey62's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    Shizzle, that would be a huge lift, having Shaq return renewed and energized.  If we could get him back playing like he played for that short stretch, we'll be fine.  I heard reports that he has lost weight and has really been working to be in shape.  We'll see.

    So now that you're 34, are you saying you can't run 4 or 5 games back to back if you keeping winning?  That's too funny.....play once a week like football players....
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from KGLove. Show KGLove's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense? : That's true but we all know since KG got hurt in 2009 the starters were never the same. Proof of this is last season and their measly 50 wins.  I'm not expecting big things from the starters in the regular season anymore. Beating good teams and losing to bad teams is an indication that they're not taking the bad teams seriously.
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    But remember, as long as they beat the Lakers and Heat we shouldn't care about them losing to lower teams right?
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from capecodwilly. Show capecodwilly's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense? : WRONG AGAIN son. get your facts streight before you post and make your self ridiculous in front of everybody. Celtics are 2 behind the East leading Bulls. Here educate your self: http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/team-comparison-per-game/sort/avgPointsOpponent
    Posted by RicoCeltic[/QUOTE]

    I haven't posted in ages as I don't feel like dealing with all the ignorant LA trolls (pimply faced highschoolers is my guess) that inundate this board, but I thought I'd make a quick exception here. I hate smug, self-righteous fools. You were correct in that the Bulls are better defensively by a whole 1/10th of a point. However, apparently not only is English your problem, but so is SIMPLE math. We are currently one game behind the Bulls in the win column, ergo only 1/2 game behind. You were off by 1 1/2 games. So, really, who's the one who looks ridiculous in front of everybody and needs to educate themselves?
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: I thought we traded Defense for Offense?

    Petey, Na thats not what I meant....When I play ball, I go hard.  I can put in about 5- 7 good games, albiet  the last couple I wouldnt be playing that much defense..but No, Im not talking one game....I like to get in a good run, but my tendinitis usually acts up the day after requiring me to chill out for a couple days.....Ultimately though if you gave me a million dollar contract I may suck it up and be able to give you 10 minutes the 2nd night...lol

    Keep I mind I used to be an avid smoker, and not of tobbaco...
     

Share