Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    You think its funny that a player stumbled around on 3 legs for the last 40 mins of that game, went 0-8 from 3, when he'd have hit 3 of those 3's (at least) based on career #'s, and the game was a 1 possession game with 2 mins to go but the C's just couldn't get over the hump

    you think it is a laughing matter and that we can't say that Allen would have won the C's that game if he went 3-8 and wasn't hurt. Yes it isn't a fact, he could've been healthy and missed all 8 as well, but your rebounding #'s are a worse excuse than injuries as a whole.

    A team with Allen ineffective from 3 the last 5 games, Perk out the last 90 mins of games 6 and 7 and KG not close to his '08 or '12 self was still the 4th quarter FT disparity joke away from winning a title.

    The rebounding, a weakness the team dealt with all season, was made worse BECAUSE OF INJURIES.... clearly the injuries were a bigger factor

    but, you will never change your mind, you think that all champion teams must be perfect, in 66 years no title winner had a flaw, and that injuries, even those to 3 of your 5 starters, are just to be shrugged off and can't be considered the main reason you lost

    hahahaha

    I am done with this
     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. This post has been removed.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    Nah, you're not listening... obviously the injured Celtics were not good enough to rise to the occasion and win... BECAUSE THEY WERE INJURED. Your whole theory of why the refs gave LA the 4th quarter supports this, the league simply couldn't allow a team so ravaged by injuries and lopsided (on paper) to win a game 7 in LA. Bynum, Bosh, Pierce in '08, all minor injuries to one player, don't compare.

    When 3 of your starters are injured and you are a 4th quarter away from winning you point to the injuries, not the fact that a team missing its starting C (and its PF was still affected by a leg injury) couldn't get rebounds.

    All the injuries taken as a whole cost us a title and was a much bigger reason we didn't pull it off in '10 then rebounding. A bad rebounding team was so close to winning that it is laughable you say that stat/weakness was a bigger issue than injuries.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    The C's made it through Pierce's minor injury and LA made it through Bynum's to win titles, as I already said (several times) the miniscus tears (an injury I played through with a soft brace and some swelling) were not the kind that stole a title from the clubs.

    If LA was up 3-2, then was MISSING Bynum for 80% of game 6 and all of game 7, while Odom was a shadow of his former self dragging his leg around all series and Fisher was smashed in the leg by Tony Allen on a dirty play and shot 4-28 on 3's from then on... and LA was still a quarter away from winning, everyone would blame injuries and not a specific stat

    (we all know the purple and gold would have folded easier than Celtic pride if the situations were reversed, a healthy KoME at home was choking all game 7, but that is neither here nor there)
     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    my God pay attention... I said the Celtics injuries were far worse and you come back with the same line, other teams won while deadling with minor injuries?

    if you want to claim that the '10 lakers with Bynum having some knee swelling and the '12 Heat, who played their last 8 games with Bosh in the lineup and faced a Celtic team with WAY WORSE INJURIES, 'rose above the challenge' by all means, go down fighting with that one. How about you find me a club that won a title the season after their best player had major surgery and wasn't recovered, their best shooter went 4-28 after a leg injury and one of their starters went down on the road in game 6.

    wow, I can't believe you are still trying to defend yourself with that weak sauce
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    and yes, the injury ray suffered was worse for him than the miniscus was to the others b/c his game is entirely based on lift that allows him to have the perfect jumper, and the lift was gone so his shot was as well. Pierce and Bynum did everything they always did just with a little less explosiveness.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    If the '10 Lakers played stronger healthy clubs maybe they lose b/c of Bynum being a bit gimpy.

    If the '12 Heat played the Bulls (if the Bulls were 100% healthy and had homecourt) and Bosh was out the first 4 games then they are not champions right now. The Bulls have just as much a right to cry foul about their season as the C's do... of course they were not one quarter away, but if they were, the fan are not going to say 'man we were a bad FT shooting team all year, if we just made a few more foul shots...' no I think they would say Rose and Noah were hurt...
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    weak sauce is pointing to a stat the team wasn't very good in all year and saying that was why we didn't win a title as the team still took the floor in a game 7 despite it, only now it was without their starting center (a rebounder BTW) and 2 players dragging legs around.

    Sorry, maybe you think you sound more like a man with this 'real champions rise above injuries stuff'. Realistic people know how it really went down, the C's were not deserving of the '10 title b/c they were so badly injured... your rebounding gripe comes farther down the line. Get over it.
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    Well if Ray and Perk were healthy that team would have been the first

    and If KG was never hurt they would have avg'd over 40 reb's in the reg season

    injuries /> boards

    truth
     
  19. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    and realistic people know you can spin the argument into as many secondary convo's as you want and pick those apart... but the main point is that injuries hurt the '10 C's chances more than being a poor rebounding team, which they were all year, and it is just obvious, realistic truth...
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]This guy rameakap seems like a whiner and a baby. We lost in 2010. It's over. It was a long and painful series but it is history. We couldn't rebound in game 7. Stop the excuses.
    Posted by TommyRules[/QUOTE]

    ha

    you're such a Laker troll

    the debate is injuries vs. rebounds, they are both excuses, it is just clear injuries hurt the team more.
     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    the C's survived one season-long injury that reduced KG to a shadow of his former self and helped cause the >40 reb #'s to begin with

    They still made it to the finals game 7, but likely would have won in 5 with a healthy Ray (while Perk was still healthy as well).

    They couldn't recover from three injured starters that series... one yes... two maybe... not three... and despite poor rebounding itself being a factor caused by the injuries in the first place (making injuries clearly the bigger issue) the team was still leading in the 3rd quarter, had a chance to win a game, and had to watch a FT parade on no contact/questionable calls secure it for LA

    and rebounding was the #1 issue?

    Not a chance
     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    Sorry Fierce, pointing to the multiple injuries as the reason we lost just makes me realistic and correct.

    Using the rebounding statistic just makes it clear you can't see the big picture

    How many title winners survived injuries to 3 starters? The team Boston put on the floor in games 1 and 2 would have deserved to be a champion. The teams from games 3-5 would have deserved it as well, but LA would've had to choke a bit at home to give it to a team that was worse on paper and dealing with two leg injuries (to Bynum's 1)... and after Perk went down the team simply wasn't in LA's class anymore, so the league couldn't justify letting it win so when Kobe couldn't finish us the refs did.

    It had FAR less to do with rebounding, but a lineup missing a starter and with 2 others hobbling around. The results are in the stats. Look at Pierce and Bynum with the meniscus injuries... did it crush their stats and teams? Nope. Look at Ray? What was worse? I know from personal experience.

    And I'll leave it at that. Obvious and realistic... not ignoring the big picture and harping on a detail that happened to be a direct result of the bigger picture problem.

    End of story
     

Share