Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : You need to go to counseling. We did have injuries but did not overcome them. If KG would have had maybe 7 rebounds instead of 3 in game 7 we probably would have won.
    Posted by TommyRules[/QUOTE]

    YOU did win, you're a lakers fan!!
     
  4. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    NBA experts are quick to point out LA escaped an injury ravaged Celtics team in '10 all the time, so are most posters ont his board... they don't talk about rebounding

    and you were shown how Bosh, Bynum and Pierce do not compare at all to what the C's went thru so that is the weakest sauce yet

    back to my initial 'agree to disagree' you will not change my mind and I will not change yours but the intelligent Celtic fan on this board know that injury issues trump rebounding ones as to why Boston didn't pull off the title in 2010
     
  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

    Can you just answer some of my questions?

    1. If KG never got hurt in 2009 do you think the Celtics win another championship?

    2. If KG was healthy enough to average the 10.5 boards he did in the '08 finals do we lose the specific 2010 series to the Lakers?

    3. If Ray Allen never got hurt by Artest does he go 0-8 in game 3? Do the C's lose a game that was within a point with 2 minutes to go?

    4. Do we get outrebounded as badly in game 7 if Perk wasn't hurt?

    5. Find me the NBA team that won a title dealing with worse injuries than the Celtics?

    If injuries are 'part of the game' then they can be the reason a club can't put the type of competitive team out there to win titles. Every team with an injury you mentioned had a minor enough one to not cost them a championship or even the player from the series. Put 2 of those injuries on the same club and then remove a 3rd player completely from two deciding games and tell me who overcomes that...

    Give Wade the bone-spurs or leg bruise that Ray had and then just take Haslem or Battier out of 2 finals games when the series is tied or OKC is up 1-0 and see how the Heat overcome that.

    It is absurd to think anyone would think there was a bigger concern with that team that fell in game 7 than the injuries that hit it HARD.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    Anytime you see a team with injuries like that it becomes the #1 reason they lost

    Doc himself said OVER and OVER 'No team has beat this starting 5 when healthy' for 2 years in a row, the team believed and fed off that. They knew they were robbed by injuries in '09-'10 and were the best team in the NBA if they were at full strength, the rebounding stat be d@mned...
     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    I'm not whining, just stating the obvious... injuries killed the team more than an inability to rebound, it is so clearly true that ur insistance otherwise is bizarre, one thing actually led to the other in addition to multiple other problems.

    If you asked me a question the way I asked you several, such as "Would the Celtics have won a championship if they averaged 42 rebounds a game in the '10 regular season" well if they still faced 3 injured starters in the finals then the answer would be 'NO'

    How many times have you heard it said or written that those great Celtics teams 'would have won 10 titles in a row if Russell didn't hurt his foot in game 3 and miss the rest of the playoffs in '58' C's went 1-3 with him out. What about Havlicek's shoulder in '73, or McHale's broken foot in '87 that ruined his career?

    Those teams lost b/c of injuries... so did the 2010 Celtics. Nobody points to a statistical concern or disparity in what the winning team did well when the losing team was missing its best player or had their 2nd best player playing at 50%.

    And as for last years games vs. LA, the C's didn't hit their stride and start playing well until a month after the final game with LA, you know this, they were a .500 team of out of shape bums until the all-star game, you wrongly called for them to be blown up, but the two games with LA were close nontheless.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from kyceltic. Show kyceltic's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]What IF the Celts got Tim Duncan in 1997 when Rick Pitino was coach. Is it a guarantee that Duncan would still get 4 rings with the Celts? What IF Len Bias didn't die. Is it a guarantee that the Celts would have beaten the Lakers in 1987 with a healthy Len Bias? What IF the Celts got Durant in 2007. Would the Celts have won banner #17 in 2008 with Durant? There are an infinite number of "what ifs". But we have to live in the present moment. We don't have the ability to change what happened in the past nor are we capable of seeing the future. What IF we can do that? H A H A H A
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

     That my friend, is the knock out punch!!
     
  16. This post has been removed.

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    When I watched Game 7 of the 2010 Finals, I kept yelling "box out" at the screen.  Giving up those offensive rebounds in the first quarter really hurt us.  I'm sure we were doing the best we could, but the lakers were a better rebounding team.  Then we got up by 13 or so, and I was smiling a wee bit.  IF Rondo stole that inbounds pass that he got his fingertips on, that was a 15 pt lead, and game over.  Without Perk in that game, we had really no other rebounders.


    Playing defense is more tiring than playing offense, and we were on D a lot in that game.  We ran out of gas.   So, yes, not having Perk, or not having KG and Sheed and Davis step it up on the rebounding hurt us.  BUT, it also hurt that we were tired, and "old".  We didn't have enough left to finish them.
    This year, we will be younger and friskier.  If we can rebound the ball while KG is out, that means he can be a beast when he comes in AND play fewer minutes.

    This is my opinion on our rebounding woes of the past few years.  I think we will be better this year, due to youth, but we have to stay healthy for that to work.

    Time for you two to bury the hatchet and let's get to some real Celtics talk!!
     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from hedleylamarr. Show hedleylamarr's posts

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]I just find it hilarious that when the Celts beat Lebron and the Cavs in 2010, there was no complain about KG being injured. I mean the Cavs were the only team in 2010 to win 60 games. Meaning the Cavs were the best team in the NBA that year. When the Lakers beat the Celtics in the Finals, it was because KG was injured? Seriously, the Celts beat the #1 and #2 team in the east, the Cavs and Magic, and there were no complains about KG being injured. But when the Celts lost to the Lakers in the Finals, KG was suddenly injured. Ha Ha Andrew Bynum played hurt, had a partially torn meniscus that needed injections every game, even at halftime. But that's a minor injury compared to Ray's bruised leg? hahahahahahahaha
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Not taking sides here, but Ray's game is dependent on his lift.  He's a shooter.  Slow and lumbering Bynum could play with a huge cast on one leg and it wouldn't matter.  I don't recall KG being hurt that year, but I could be wrong.  I know Ray and Perk were hurt............again, not taking sides!
     
  22. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : Like I said, that excuse has been proven to be not accurate.  How? When the Celts went back to Boston for Games 3, 4, and 5, Ray never made a single 3-pointer in those 3 games. But the Celts won 2 out of 3 in Boston. And every time the Celts won the Celts also won the rebounding battle. Also, did Ray have surgery after the Finals for a bruised leg? Saying that a partially torn meniscus is just a minor injury is ludicrous!
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]


    Hey, man, you know me.  I don't make excuses.  If a team beats you four times, they are better than you, end of story.  Our lack of rebounding killed us in that series.  Not saying Ray would have made a difference, but Perk MAY have.
    And, I want to move on and talk about this year's team......I think that between Green, Terry, Lee, Wilcox and Sully we should be able to get an addtional 3 rebounds..............ALL defensive...ha ha..........and that gets us to your magic number of 40!
     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction

    In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Rebounding: Addition by Subtraction : Like I said, that excuse has been proven to be not accurate.  How? When the Celts went back to Boston for Games 3, 4, and 5, Ray never made a single 3-pointer in those 3 games. But the Celts won 2 out of 3 in Boston. And every time the Celts won the Celts also won the rebounding battle. Also, did Ray have surgery after the Finals for a bruised leg? Saying that a partially torn meniscus is just a minor injury is ludicrous!
    Posted by Fiercest34[/QUOTE]

    Sure sounds like your saying that you have to have surgery in order for a injury to affect your play.  That is not the case.  There are all sorts of injuries that are serious and effect peoples play and they don't have to have surgery.  They only need to rest that part of the body.

    How you guys got off on all this is unreal.  This thread was about rebounding.  I don't particularly agree about the 40 rebound magic number, as we have already been thru that, (you and I) and I don't intend to go there again. Like I said then and now was we shot among the least amount of shots each game, I am sure the other team probably shot under their normal as well since we play a slow game. I still stand by we need to get a better percentage of rebounds for the game were playing, not a magic number. If there are only 78 rebounds a game we need to get 37-39 of them.
    Others have pointed out and I agree that rebounds are just part of it.  We have done  pretty well the last few seasons with our rebounding wouldn't you say?  That is because we do other things well. While don't rebound well, other teams don't play defense as well, or shoot as well.  All of the parts of a game come together and its not just one things that costs you the championship.

    With that being said I agree we need to improve our rebounding since it is our weak area.
     

Share