Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    42 rebounds per game. If the Celtics can get that number I think the Celtics will be playing in June. 

    Last season the Celtics only averaged 38.6 rebounds per game. Making the Celtics the 2nd worst rebounding team in the league in 2009-10. In the NBA if you can't rebound there's no way you're going to win a championship. 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]I should think Shaq and JO will make a difference there.  Agree?
    Posted by mustangbullitbri[/QUOTE]

    Agree.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from RondoIsHustle. Show RondoIsHustle's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    Just for curiosity with 42 rebounds where would we rank in the top rebounders?
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from EliasB. Show EliasB's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    WOW 2nd to last - what an interesting stat.

    "In the NBA if you can't rebound there's no way you're going to win a championship."

    The C's sure came close didn't they!


    Cool
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]Just for curiosity with 42 rebounds where would we rank in the top rebounders?
    Posted by RondoIsHustle[/QUOTE]

    If last season is the basis for comparison then that would only put the Celtics in the top 12. But since KG and Ray arrived the Celtics were always averaging 42 rebounds per game, 42.0 in 2008 and 42.1 in 2009.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]WOW 2nd to last - what an interesting stat. "In the NBA if you can't rebound there's no way you're going to win a championship." The C's sure came close didn't they!
    Posted by EliasB[/QUOTE]

    You bet they did! 

    And you know for a fact that if Perk was not injured the Celtics would have beaten the Lakers in Game 7. 
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from EliasB. Show EliasB's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    I'll agree with that if you agree that had the Lakers had a healthy Bynum in '08 they would have beaten the Celtics.


    Cool

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUMcHale. Show RUMcHale's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]42 rebounds per game. If the Celtics can get that number I think the Celtics will be playing in June.  Last season the Celtics only averaged 38.6 rebounds per game. Making the Celtics the 2nd worst rebounding team in the league in 2009-10. In the NBA if you can't rebound there's no way you're going to win a championship. 
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    Muahahaha according to your other posts it was the refs fault.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]I'll agree with that if you agree that had the Lakers had a healthy Bynum in '08 they would have beaten the Celtics.
    Posted by EliasB[/QUOTE]

    The evidence is clear, back in 2008 the Celtics dominated the Lakers. There was not a single moment in that series where the Celtics were threatened. When the Celtics took a 2-0 lead it was basically over. Then when it shifted to LA the Celtics still led 3-1 before closing it out with a 39-point humiliation of the Lakers in Game 6. 

    In 2010 you could never claim that the Lakers dominated the Celtics. Heading back to LA for Game 6 and 7 the Celtics were leading the series 3-2. And when the Lakers finally won it was just by 4 points. Cool
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]I'll agree with that if you agree that had the Lakers had a healthy Bynum in '08 they would have beaten the Celtics.
    Posted by EliasB[/QUOTE]

    A healthy Bynum means no Gasol.
    If Gasol stayed in Memphis, Phoenix would have made the Finals in 08.
    So, again, if Bynum didn't get hurt, you would not have Gasol.
    Fierce knows this and would never agree.............but Jerry West played in MN, right?
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11 : Muahahaha according to your other posts it was the refs fault.
    Posted by RUMcHale[/QUOTE]

    That one too! 

    If the officials called it tight on both ends then the Celtics would have beaten the Lakers easily in Game 7. Cool

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mployee8. Show Mployee8's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    So where ya gonna get 42 rebounds? Depending on the O'Neil boys? What happened to the irreplaceable/untradeable Glen Davis? His 4 rebound per game doesn't cut it?
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]So where ya gonna get 42 rebounds? Depending on the O'Neil boys? What happened to the irreplaceable/untradeable Glen Davis? His 4 rebound per game doesn't cut it?
    Posted by Mployee8[/QUOTE]

    It's called collective team effort. Again, Glen Davis will be part of a very deep bench. Davis only averaged 4 rebounds per game but that doesn't include the many loose balls that he kept alive. His value can't be measured by stats alone. He's a high-energy guy that knows the Celtics system very well. 

    I won't be surprised if Glen Davis will be better than Anthony Tolliver this season. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mployee8. Show Mployee8's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    Hahaha ... 1st we can't live without him with no other worthy PF behind KG and now we have JON, right?

    That's what I said months ago which is why he's expendable! You have made my case after complaining all summer how important he was to rebounding and now your post is "the key stat is rebounding" and the O'Neils will make the difference.

    You just threw your boy under the bus for not getting the job done as back-up PF ... thanks for agreeing with me.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]Hahaha ... 1st we can't live without him with no other worthy PF behind KG and now we have JON, right? That's what I said months ago which is why he's expendable! You have made my case after complaining all summer how important he was to rebounding and now your post is "the key stat is rebounding" and the O'Neils will make the difference. You just threw your boy under the bus for not getting the job done as back-up PF ... thanks for agreeing with me.
    Posted by Mployee8[/QUOTE]

    Are you high? I never said anything about JO becoming the backup PF. What did I say that gave you the idea that I was talking about JO being the backup PF? 

    You're making things up. Read what I posted, it never said anything about Davis being expendable because JO will be the backup PF. And I thought you could comprehend!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUMcHale. Show RUMcHale's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11 : That one too!  If the officials called it tight on both ends then the Celtics would have beaten the Lakers easily in Game 7. 
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]

    Sure they would have. On the same day Lindsay Lohan would have given up her drugs, Paris Hilton would have qualified as a brain surgeon and pink pigs would have flown circles around Staples Center in celebration.

    Embarassed
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]Hahaha ... 1st we can't live without him with no other worthy PF behind KG and now we have JON, right? That's what I said months ago which is why he's expendable! You have made my case after complaining all summer how important he was to rebounding and now your post is "the key stat is rebounding" and the O'Neils will make the difference. You just threw your boy under the bus for not getting the job done as back-up PF ... thanks for agreeing with me.
    Posted by Mployee8[/QUOTE]

    Davis only averaged 4 rebounds per game but that doesn't include the many loose balls that he kept alive. His value can't be measured by stats alone. He's a high-energy guy that knows the Celtics system very well. 

    Is there something wrong with your comprehension? From what I wrote I don't think I threw Glen Davis under the bus. 

    I think it's either you're delusional or just plain confused. I never said anything about JO being the backup PF. 


     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mployee8. Show Mployee8's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    Last season the Celtics only averaged 38.6 rebounds per game. Making the Celtics the 2nd worst rebounding team in the league in 2009-10. In the NBA if you can't rebound there's no way you're going to win a championship.

    Your argument against trading him all summer has been that he was the only rebounder behind Perk & KG and we couldn't live w/o him .. remember?

    Now we can't win w/o rebounding and the O'Neils will solve that problem. So whose fault was it? Perk? Only one O'Neil can play at a time unless JON plays PF. And who plays back-up to KG? Will the C's move JON to PF and bring Shaq in at C or will Davis retain his spot? Too early to tell ... Davis could be the third option at both PF and C.

    Essentially you've identified Davis has the weak link!

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]Last season the Celtics only averaged 38.6 rebounds per game. Making the Celtics the 2nd worst rebounding team in the league in 2009-10. In the NBA if you can't rebound there's no way you're going to win a championship. Your argument against trading him all summer has been that he was the only rebounder behind Perk & KG and we couldn't live w/o him .. remember? Now we can't win w/o rebounding and the O'Neils will solve that problem. So whose fault was it? Perk? Only one O'Neil can play at a time unless JON plays PF. And who plays back-up to KG? Will the C's move JON to PF and bring Shaq in at C or will Davis retain his spot? Too early to tell ... Davis could be the third option at both PF and C. Essentially you've identified Davis has the weak link!
    Posted by Mployee8[/QUOTE]

    How can Davis be the weak link when we're not even sure if Shaq will live up to expectations? Don't forget that Shaq is already 38 years old. The only good thing about Shaq coming to Boston is because he agreed to come for the vet's minimum and didn't choose to go to Atlanta instead.

    Don't make things up. I never said anything about Glen Davis being the weak link or expendable. I still say that Glen Davis will be one of the most important bench players for the Celtics this season. JO is not 100% anymore, Shaq is old, Perk is out until February or March, and we don't know if KG still has it anymore. If there's an opportunity to shine for Glen Davis this is it!
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mployee8. Show Mployee8's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11 : How can Davis be the weak link when we're not even sure if Shaq will live up to expectations? Don't forget that Shaq is already 38 years old. The only good thing about Shaq coming to Boston is because he agreed to come for the vet's minimum and didn't choose to go to Atlanta instead. Don't make things up. I never said anything about Glen Davis being the weak link or expendable. I still say that Glen Davis will be one of the most important bench players for the Celtics this season. JO is not 100% anymore, Shaq is old, Perk is out until February or March, and we don't know if KG still has it anymore. If there's an opportunity to shine for Glen Davis this is it!
    Posted by P34[/QUOTE]


    If we have so many question marks and must rely on Davis then we are in deep trouble ... the more you post the worse we get. I disagree ...

     I think KG will be himself, JON will play PF and C and Shaq will be fine as JON's backup and earm his keep in the playoffs. I like what Davis brings to the table but not in love with him the way you are even after throwing him under the bus, haha. He's just too small to score down low and can't out rebound bigger PF's and C's ... with KG and Davis as the only options at PF last year, that's where the blame for the rebounding deficiency belongs. And with Perk and Davis at C (Perk went down hill after the 1st half season) there's a common link to the rebounding ... no doubt Perk & KG had their worse years at the same time but they didn't get much help from yup, you guessed it!
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from P34. Show P34's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11 : If we have so many question marks and must rely on Davis then we are in deep trouble ... the more you post the worse we get. I disagree ...  I think KG will be himself, JON will play PF and C and Shaq will be fine as JON's backup and earm his keep in the playoffs. I like what Davis brings to the table but not in love with him the way you are even after throwing him under the bus, haha. He's just too small to score down low and can't out rebound bigger PF's and C's ... with KG and Davis as the only options at PF last year, that's where the blame for the rebounding deficiency belongs. And with Perk and Davis at C (Perk went down hill after the 1st half season) there's a common link to the rebounding ... no doubt Perk & KG had their worse years at the same time but they didn't get much help from yup, you guessed it!
    Posted by Mployee8[/QUOTE]

    You're missing the point. The reason why the Celtics will be tough to beat is because they have a lot of bigs that can explode on any given night. Gone are the days that the Celtics need to rely on KG and Perk to deliver every night. This season it could be JO, Shaq, KG, Davis, or Perk carrying the team on a given night. That's why it's called depth.

    It's unfair to say that Davis didn't do much. The guy only averaged 17 minutes per game during the regular season. Anyway, I'm not going to try to convince you to like Glen Davis. Whether you like it or not you're going to see a lot of him this season. Laughing

    Let's see if Anthony Tolliver will be better than Glen Davis this season. Cool

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from mem17. Show mem17's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    I'm sorry to interupt one of your arguments Mployee8, but claiming Big Baby only averages 4 rebounds per game doesn't tell the real story. He only averages about 18 minutes or so per game. Per minute he's a good rebounder, not great but good. Per 35 minutes, he's probably a 7 to 8 rebound per game average.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from BirdandCowens. Show BirdandCowens's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    His inabilty to score down low against bigger players has always worried me.  However, if he could develop a 15-20 foot shot with consistency, and a couple of quick moves (all the commentators mention his quick feet), then he could be a lot more effective. He does have a couple of nice low post moves, but on an offensive rebound, he may as well just kick it back out if he is going against Howard or Bynum.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from RUMcHale. Show RUMcHale's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]Last season the Celtics only averaged 38.6 rebounds per game. Making the Celtics the 2nd worst rebounding team in the league in 2009-10. In the NBA if you can't rebound there's no way you're going to win a championship. Your argument against trading him all summer has been that he was the only rebounder behind Perk & KG and we couldn't live w/o him .. remember? Now we can't win w/o rebounding and the O'Neils will solve that problem. So whose fault was it? Perk? Only one O'Neil can play at a time unless JON plays PF. And who plays back-up to KG? Will the C's move JON to PF and bring Shaq in at C or will Davis retain his spot? Too early to tell ... Davis could be the third option at both PF and C. Essentially you've identified Davis has the weak link!
    Posted by Mployee8[/QUOTE]

    You just schooled P34!
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mployee8. Show Mployee8's posts

    Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11

    In Response to Re: Key Stat for the Celtics in 2010-11:
    [QUOTE]I'm sorry to interupt one of your arguments Mployee8, but claiming Big Baby only averages 4 rebounds per game doesn't tell the real story. He only averages about 18 minutes or so per game. Per minute he's a good rebounder, not great but good. Per 35 minutes, he's probably a 7 to 8 rebound per game average.
    Posted by mem17[/QUOTE]

    Hey, I like the guy ... effort, heart and skilled but undersized. I anticipated your comment but expected Fierce to make it. I just don't think he can play those kind of minutes ... otherwise we'd see more of him. My guess is the coaching staff doesn't quite trust him to be out there any longer for fear of him tiring or too much exposure to his low post weakness. You can't assume that cause he gets 4 rebounds in 18 minutes that he will be twice as good in 35 minutes. That's what I'm talking about - conditioning and exposure if played too long. I think he's fine as the third option at PF and C or against certain matchups but don't want him as my primary reliever for KG, that's all.
     

Share